lord of the blog

Main | November 2003 »

Thursday, October 30, 2003

Well it's been an exciting few days with Labour MP's praying for the survival of IDS. Alas our prayers were not answered-a common experience for me!
It is always very tempting in politics to delight at your opponents problems and we wouldn't be human if we didn't but in the sober light of day we all know that an effective opposition is necessary in any democracy.
It has been a curious period with the Church of England ,the Monarchy and the Tory Party all going into free fall - there is only the fourth estate left as I told a worried journalist colleague recently! The Tory Party is likely to recover however and largely because the Liberals have not moved into their territory. Charles Kennedy moved his front bench to the right in a recent reshuffle but I don't think it's enough to occupy the Tory ground and win a majority in those marginal Tory seats where they are second. It is hard to be sure but they have probably lost an historic opportunity to push the Tory Party into third place. We had a narrow escape of the same type in 1983 when even I nearly lost my seat because people saw us as unelectable - I've been full circle now!
So much for my potted version of the strategic overview of British politics! Meanwhile you might like to know that the Constitutional Affairs Select Committee of which I'm a member is releasing it's latest report on legal aid for Immigration and Asylum tomorrow (Friday 31st. October). You should be able to access it through the Parliament web site. This is a very difficult area of policy where public money can be spent on poor standard legal representation. The issue does involve important basic rights for a vulnerable group of people and yet there is also serious abuse of the system which causes a lot of tension on the street and feeds racism. I may try and do a longer piece on this on another occasion.

Tuesday, October 28, 2003

The Joint Committee on the reform of the House of Lords met today and I'm relieved to say there was a narrow majority for a continuation of the reform process. The present committee will automatically come to an end in November but I am reasonably hopeful that in the New Year the two Houses will vote for another joint committee to continue the work of refom BUT there are no guarantees - democracy is inherently unpredictable and either of the two Houses could walk away from the problem leaving it to the Governmaent to find new ways forward.
I think that would be a serious mistake. Parliament should reform itself not ask the Government to do it - shades of Oliver Cromwell! Reform is not easy however. Some people asked me questions about reform on my Blog. It is a big question and I can only address it in outline here so if you want more detail go to the Parliament site or the department of Constitutional Affairs and look at the various reports and debates.
The two Houses did vote on reform. A majority of the Lords wanted to keep an appointed House and the Commons was seriously split and couldn't reach agreement.
Some MP's want a wholly elected House, some want a wholly appointed House and some (like me) want a hybrid House,that is part elected and part appointed.
Everyone agrees that a reformed House of Lords (shall we call it a Senate?) should not be dominated by one Party and that it should continue to examine legislation as now but not be able to permanently block the Commons.
If you want a wholly elected House you have to ask how would it be different to the Commons? Wouldn't it just become another Party dominated House which could also challenge the Commons? (remember in the 19th. century the Prime Minister was sometimes in the Lords and sometimes the Commons). Britain doesn't have a written constitution so unless you legislate to confine the powers of the second chamber there is no reason in principle why it couldn't replace the Commons. If the voting system was fair that might not matter but it could be even more chaotic then our Parliamentary democracy is normally!
If you have a wholly appointed House you have to ask who does the appointing? The Prime Minister has given up some of his powers in this respect and there is an appointments system but it still needs to be more transparent and clearly independent. You also have to ask is a wholly elected House democratic enough to be legitimate? Many would say no to that.
I like hybridity because it makes it clear that the second chamber cannot be more legitimate then the Commons. It would also enable us to do what one of my Blog questions suggested,that is represent the regions of Britain. With devolution already established in Scotland ,Wales and London it is in my view only a matter of time before we devolve power to the English regions.
So that's the bald outlines. One final point.Many people think that elections are the only democratic way of constructing a Parliament. In theory they are right but democracy and freedom are not the same thing although they are both vitally important. If a majority vote to hang all people with grey hair that's democratic - but it's not freedom! And I've got grey hair! (Some of my kinder friends tell me it's silver so maybe I'll be let off!)
We have a long way to go before we complete the reform but that's all very British and our messy but democratic system does sort of work!

Monday, October 27, 2003

Wow! I'm talking to real people after all!
I'm still getting the hang of this but thanks for the answers. Gavin - Ireland was cold and snowy and an aircraft got struck by lightning on the runway (no kidding but no casualties either!). Anthony - there are no Conservative bloggers yet. They have other things on their mind! There was a rather cruel comment by one Tory MP who said he didn't know about 25 signatures to start an election but it only took three signatures to Section IDS under the Mental Health Act! There is no mercy in politics especially on your own side!

Meanwhile on weighteir matters we have a meeting tomorrow of the Joint House of Lords/House of Commons committee on the reform of the Lords. It's touch and go as to whether there is the will to continue the reform process after the indecisive vote in the Commons. I hope there will be - watch this space! Any comments on the reform you would like to see? (A Labour MP once said the reform he wanted was "One Peer for every lampost". Ah! Gone are the days of red blooded revolution!)

Friday, October 24, 2003

Activities this week include chairing a session at the World News conference in Dublin. My session dealt with the question of impartial news reporting. One view suggests we don't need to worry about balance and impartiality because there are so many outlets available. My view is that news broadcasters should aim for balance because minority views get squeezed if the big companies dominate news production and distribution. So some effort should be made to give a range of views. It is also very difficult for people to trust some news outlets. We all need accurate news to inform us of events in the world. So the media does need to keep news reporting separate from opinion.

In the Acton part of my constituency I was very pleased to see the burglary and street robberies down by 500 in the last three months. Generally, targeting particular crimes by the police is working and it's nice to have 500 fewer victims. We still need to make better use of Anti Social Behaviour Orders (ASBO's). Anti social behaviour is still causing a lot of disteress in my patch. If you want details of how to use ASBOs or Acceptable Behaviour Contracts (ABC's) please let me know.

On Tuesday we had a very productive session on the Constituional Affairs Select Committee. We took evidence on the uses and abuses of legal aid for immigration and asylum cases. I questioned some of the legal groups about my dilemma which is a caseload of some 400 active cases at any one time and where the legal representation falls below standard on between a 1/4 and a 1/3. This doesn't just mean a waste of public money but also below standard representation for people many of whom are at risk of ill treatment if returned to a country with serious a human rights problem. For details go to the UK Parliament and follow the committee trail to the Constitutional Affairs Select Commttee.

Tuesday, October 14, 2003

First entry

This is the first entry on my Weblog. Please click "About" for details of my interests and past activities - or at least some of them!
This entry is about a seminar I chaired yesterday at the Institute of Civil Engineers on Aviation and Climate Change. The seminar was hosted by the British Airports Authority and the main speakers were Mike Clasper,Chief Executive of BAA; Tony McNulty MP UK Aviation Minister; Margot Wallstrom, EU Enviroment Commissioner; Roger Higman, Senior Climate and Transport Campaigner for Friends of the Earth; and Andrew Sentance,Chief Economist and Head of Enviromental Affairs for British Airways.
The seminar considered the possibility of integrating aviation into a credible emissions trading scheme. There is very real concern about climate change and we need policies that tackle that threat effectively but without major disruption of our economic systems.
Taxation policy has been considered as another option but BAA wanted to propose a credible alternative with emissions trading in line with Kyoto policies.
This is still early days in a complex but important debate. I hope there will be more opportunities to look for credible and effective solutions to one of the most important issues facing all of us.
I am sure BAA and Friends of the Earth will want to give more thought to the options available and their web sites might have further information.