lord of the blog

« August 2004 | Main | October 2004 »

Wednesday, September 29, 2004

Crossrail

I have had representations about Crossrail stopping more frequently at Acton. There was a fear that it would result in the closure of Acton Central but I think most people now accept that is very unlikely.

I had already confirmed that Acton will stay open but getting more frequent stops at that station is likely to be resisted by Crossrail on the basis that passenger numbers won’t justify it. I’m not sure they are right as I think usage will increase especially if we are able to keep going with the regeneration of Acton. I will raise it again.

Thank you Peter.

Fathers4justice

OK. So I am surprised. I expected more people saying Fathers4justice had lost the plot by staging what I believe to be rather dodgy stunts. Cleary my respondents generally think I have got this wrong.

I am not convinced but I will look carefully at the evidence that comes to the Constitutional Affairs Committee. I know there are problems as I have indicated but I am still concerned that if we get this wrong we could have more children put at risk

Meanwhile faced with the deadly taunt that I have Tory values on this I am struggling to scan about ten pages from a book called Rewriting the Sexual Contract edited by Geoff Dench and containing a contribution by me on the dangers of politicians moralising about sex. In case I fail in my technological endeavours it was published by Transaction in 1999. ISBN: 0-7658-0466-2.

Meanwhile any advice on how I scan separate pages and put them back together and then put them on my sidebar with the Fabian document and the blogging document would be gratefully received.

Tuesday, September 21, 2004

Responses

Conference.
Peter Kenyon. The reason that it might be better to discuss your proposals at Conference is that it doesn’t make interesting reading for people on this blog. I may be wrong and if so I’m sure I’ll be given that message!

Ever since I have been in the Labour Party some members have argued that the constitution had to be changed in order to get policies changed. It may occasionally be true but frankly if a majority of members are so frustrated that they want major policy change they are likely to get it. I certainly prefer the present system to what we had before.

Fathers4justice.
My Fathers 4justice entry produced some strong feelings! My point is this. If you bring one child into this world and have difficulties sustaining a working relationship with the other partner (regardless as to whether you are living together or not) then that’s the sort of difficulty any of us can experience. If you do it twice you ought to start thinking extra hard about whether you must carry some of the blame and whether you shouldn’t be a lot more careful before bringing children into this world. If you do it three times then it is time to seek serious counselling!

This is not about the morality of sexual relationships. It is about responsibility for children. The needs of the children must always come first and most parents do operate on that basis.

I accept that we need to do more to get conciliation and voluntary agreements working but ultimately they can only work if the adults make them work.

There has been a recent government report on this and a lot of consultation. The Constitutional Affairs Committee will be looking at it again soon. I think we have to look at the access question particularly when the mother refuses to co-operate but the needs of the child will always come first in my judgement.

Planning.
Iain Muir is right up to speed on planning in my patch! Housing is the most difficult one because the need is great but space is limited. Density of population doesn’t have to lead to problems. A lot depends on quality of design and as you say supporting facilities are crucial.

It is not directly relevant to new developments but it has always struck me as odd that Chelsea is very densely populated but people would kill to live there. I prefer Shepherds Bush!

Mary Seacole.
Please visit http://www.maryseacole.com for up to date information on how you can help the campaign.

Wednesday, September 15, 2004

Fathers4justice

Am I alone in thinking that the demonstrations by Fathers4justice show an incredible lack of responsible judgement? Would you really want a child to be in the care of a man who climbs onto a ledge of Buckingham Palace or throws powder in the House of Commons at times like this?

I am also worried about a man who can have four children by three women. Anybody told him about birth control? Consenting adults can have as many sexual relationships as they like in my view but children give you a very special responsibility.

These guys seem to have forgotten that.

Fox hunting

The fox hunting lobby were out in strength today although the numbers I saw in Parliament Square didn’t seem to reach the 20,000 they were talking about.

Then they invaded the Chamber of the House. I ‘m sure they must have had assistance in getting in not least because they came from two directions one of which would require either pretty good knowledge of the layout of the House or some helpful guidance.

It is a problem not least because most MP’s don’t want to make it any more difficult to gain access to Parliament but obviously the possibility of terrorism is real.

A small minority in Parliament Square got violent and some had been drinking.

As my memory goes back to the poll tax protests and the miners strike I couldn’t suppress a smile when I heard Tories trying to disown the behaviour but condemn the Government! In my experience you can’t win that argument!

Anyway, fox hunting is now on the way out and I am pleased about that. To put it in perspective however I went to the window of my house in Acton this morning and there was a very healthy looking fox. I took it as an omen. Then it calmly squatted over my favourite plant pot and peed all over it! “That’s it!” I shouted, “You’re dead meat”!

That’s the trouble with foxes – no sense of political timing!

Thursday, September 09, 2004

The Hitchikers Guide

I missed the BBC competition on the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy!

I could have told them the truth about the failure to demolish the Earth. It was because we are located too far out on the edge of the universe and the intergalactic highway (which was supposed to be the equivalent of the M25) was just too remote from the main centres of activity.

A bit like making the M25 go via Newport, Durham and Dieppe!

The Shuffle and other matters

Despite the in-fighting the reshuffle is in my view a good outcome. Alan Milburn is thinking hard about future directions. Ian McCartney should stay on - he is good value and understands the party.

Alan Johnson is also a creative thinker and has a clear view of the direction the Party needs to go after the next election.

Everyone’s comments come in so fast I can’t keep up but for those interested in the failing states argument it is worth reading Jack Straw’s speech to Chatham House a week or so ago. I can’t immediately access it but those of you more up to speed on searching will probably find it in minutes – I need a day or two!

Peter, you really do sound as though you have given up on the Party. What I’m trying to say is that if you feel the policy or structure is wrong then you need to put forward very specific motions which indicate clearly the changes you want. Don’t worry about your views of the leadership any more then I would worry about you if I wanted to change a policy/structure. Just fight on the issue.

I’m not sure if I understand your problem apart from your concern about the accuracy of membership numbers. The Annual conference is our AGM in effect and these issues can be raised there if only by reference back.

You are right to be concerned about falling membership although it is not unique to the British Labour Party. Recent policy conflicts are part of that but tell me the time when we haven’t had difficulties of this type.

This is not something we can sort out on a blog. If you are going to Conference you can corner me!

Responses

Thanks for all the various points and responses.

Dan, you make some good points but don’t put all the blame on the UK/US. This is a problem that is caused and shared by many countries including the ones who are struggling.

To Peter Kenyon I would say stick to the issue. When I read your resolution you can see what’s wrong with it. It is the innuendo that is unpleasant. You seem to be suggesting some devious and dishonest approach. If you think that is the case you ought to be brave enough to say so and put up the evidence. Otherwise you go right back to the claims of betrayal and class traitors that disfigured socialism for so long. I really do think you have to avoid that.

If you think the current structures are not the best ones then put forward a simple resolution saying what structure you do want – not just vague allegations which imply bad faith.

Similarly if you think an offence has been committed you should report it - but make sure you are not just trying to score political points.

If I can be blunt, I do think there is a lot of waffle in the resolution and I don’t think I will be the only one who reads it and thinks “Well, what was all that about then?”

Failing states

A statement in the House on Sudan gave me the opportunity to keep the issue of failing states on the agenda. Don't forget Kofi Annan's report in December!
----------------------------------------------------------
7.9.04 Hansard Col 622 http://www.parliament.uk

Mr. Clive Soley (Ealing, Acton and Shepherd's Bush) (Lab): Does my right hon. Friend accept that the frustration and anger felt by so many people and Governments about the ineffectiveness of the Sudanese Government in this situation reflect the much wider problem of failing states? When Kofi Annan's high-level panel reports, which I think it is due to do at the end of this year, will my right hon. Friend make that a major debate and matter of attention in this country and other countries around the world, through the international institutions, because the international community's failure to have a coherent policy towards failing states led to us wringing our hands and looking on in horror at Rwanda, intervening ineffectually in Somalia, intervening effectively in Kosovo and now, I fear, having only a marginal impact in Darfur? The international community really has to do better than that, and that high-level panel is vital to the future of foreign policy and defence for this country and for others for years to come.

Mr. Straw: I agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of this; it was the subject of an excellent pamphlet written by him recently with my hon. Friend the Member for Cynon Valley (Ann Clwyd). I offered some perhaps more modest thoughts about this subject in a speech to Chatham House last Thursday. It is crucial that, once we receive Kofi Annan's report, we really deal with this issue, and we should.
There are some structural organisational issues that we have got to handle for the UN, but the worst thing in the world for the future of the UN is to get drawn into organograms or rebranding the organisation and avoid the central conceptual issue, which is in what circumstances in the world we live in today—where the threats come from terrorists and failing states, and not normally from functioning states—the Security Council takes action and how it ensures the same resolve today to deal with these new threats as the international community had in 1945 when the UN was established.

Friday, September 03, 2004

Responses

Thanks for the various responses. Alas, poor Mr/s anonymous still fears the light of day! I’m not sure if it’s lack of confidence or lack of commitment but I hope I never have to hide behind anonymity on issues of this type.

On the question of mobile phone masts I would worry much more about holding mobiles to your ear then I would worry about masts. As we live longer and healthier lives then ever it might be wise to keep these matters in proportion. I think you are more likely to die of worry then you are from mobiles and if I’m wrong I’ll be dead soon!

Thanks to Iain Muir about Acton High. It did do well but did you see the school in East London where they offered all pupils who got more then 5 GCSE’s at A to C level £200? The success rate went up by 50%! Now there’s a middle class value for you!

Your desire to use local history for names Iain is something I agree with and as a politician I plead never name a block of flats after me! I would accept a tree!

Peter Kenyon asks if it brings the Labour Party into disrepute to put a conventional branch resolution on the web. Of course not! Why do you even ask?

On Sudan I don’t think I can say much more without repeating myself. Do note Jack Straws speech yesterday. It dealt with the UN and the need to find ways of intervening earlier with failed and failing states. That is my agenda.

Ingrid and Dan make some good points although I would say to Dan that although Iraq has damaged our credibility it is a mistake to think that Arab and particularly African states can’t see the positive side of British policy and attitudes. Africa gets more help on Aids from the UK and US then any other states. The organisation of African States got a lot of assistance from the UK to deploy the monitoring troops in Darfur. Many Africans and Arabs will praise Britain but that doesn't mean they agree with everything we do. They know that many of their problems are home grown.

It is also worth remembering the underlying factors. Mozambique and Angola joined the Commonwealth with full British support because they appreciated the British and Commonwealth role. And as I’ve pointed out before a significant number of Arab states accepted the deployment of British military in their countries.

This is not because they want Western intervention but because they know they have a problem and they were scared witless by Saddam Hussein. Why else would Syria have allowed us to fly RAF aircraft across their territory in the run up to the conflict?

The world is a bit of a mess and there are no simple answers but lots of contradictions.