The latest edition of Liberal Democrat News has an article from me summarising the Lib Dem position on Labour’s Violent Crime Reduction Bill.
Monthly Archives: Jan 2006
Holocaust Memorial Day
Holocaust Memorial Day ceremony in Haringey tonight at Bruce Castle Museum. I give a five minute speech (as do whole series of others) on the theme of what difference once person can make. I mention Schindler, Luther-King and Gandhi – but the real point is that each of us has to take responsibility for stopping any evil, discrimination or unfairness we counter in our own lives.
More important was the witness statement by a holocaust survivor – Eva Schloss. Every time I listen to a survivor tell their tale – I weep. No need to reiterate the particular story she told – all the stories from the holocaust break your heart. What I do know though is the importance of this day of remembrance for that Holocaust – and for all holocausts and genocides. As the stories are told – there is a small space in my life to remember and think about what happened and how that happened.
That is why this year’s theme is so important – because each of us is responsible for what happens in this world. And if we see evil and do nothing – then we are as guilty as those who do the act itself.
LibDem leadership rules
There’s been a bit of chatter over the fact that the party’s leadership election rules mean the candidates don’t get given copies of the party’s membership lists – this was a decision made by the party’s conference when it voted on the rules a few years ago. Ah democracy … !
All the leadership candidates are understandably wary about talking about the rules – as it can so easily sound like special pleading. But there is clearly widespread unhappiness with this rule. In public elections, candidates get to know who the electors are and their contact details (from the electoral register) – so why shouldn’t the same apply to Lib Dem internal elections? In fact – it does apply to many of our internal elections, such as for Parliamentary candidates, but not for leader. Giving the candidates the list of members would also mean we skip all the worries (and sometimes down right silliness) over what records different people can or can’t use. What’s a personal record that is ok to use and what is an official party record this is not ok to use? Is my address book on my computer at home ok to use, but not the one in the party’s office? Etc.
So – just a quick suggestion to anyone who thinks the rules don’t make sense. Doubtless there will be a review as ever afterwards as to how the rules went – so don’t forget to let the Acting Returning Officer (Chris Rennard) know your views, so they can feature in any review. In fact – why not tell him your views now, so you don’t forget afterwards? You can write to him at 4 Cowley St, London, SW1P 3NB or use the Lib Dem feedback form.
I’m sure Chris is very busy with both the leadership election and the very winnable Dunfermline by-election campaign – but sending in comments which don’t require an immediate reply but can instead be complied after the election is over would be a good move I think.
PS You can get details of all the leadership candidates – including websites etc – on the main Lib Dem website.
Local school success
Well – no surprise what the gossip at the Palace of Varieties is today. Members of the other parties and the media keep asking – did you know? I think the answer is that no-one knew – except apparently the News of the World. And I guess, after Mark had withdrawn from the leadership they had to get their story out before their hook for it with the leadership contest wasn’t headline news any more.
I am kicking myself because the odds are shortening on Chris – and when I first urged him to run he was on at 300-1 and fourth in line for the throne – and I haven’t had time to put a bet on. Now the odds have shortened faster than any other political odds in history and he is in second place.
I go over to Alexandra Park School later morning for a photo op with two of the sixth formers who have gained Oxbridge places – one at each Oxford and Cambridge. The head, Ros Hudson, rang me last week to tell me the good news – so this is to celebrate to have two kids in the first year of the new sixth form attain such places. We have a cup of tea and a chat about the interviews they have both been through to get their places – terrifying. The newspapers turn up to take the photo – and hopefully this ‘good news’ story will encourage others to reach for the stars too.
When I get to the Commons, I discover it is Questions to the Minister of the Defence Department – and decide I want to put a question to him. In order to get called (if you are not one of the MPs selected in the ballot for Questions on the Order Paper) you have to stand up each time anyone finishes speaking during this session. I sit quiet until Question 5 which is on Iraq – as the question I want to ask is on this subject.
This time I am lucky and I get called to ask my question – which is: ‘Has the Minster had any discussions about gradually replacing British troops in Iraq with troops from Muslim Countries?’ John Reid, I think, looked pretty pleased to get an opportunity to say who he had been speaking to and push this up the agenda as he had had a number of meetings on the issue. So that was good all round – as I do think the sooner we are replaced by troops better trusted than ourselves the better for all.
I have a short meeting with the man who has been the subject of the police trawl for Operation Minstead and who was asked to give a ‘voluntary’ DNA sample and refused. The deadline for Met to respond to the CRE call for extra information is 30 January – as is mine for a response from Met Commissioner Ian Blair to my enquiries on this matter.
In fact DNA is in the news for all sorts of reasons at the moment. I have had a bee in my bonnet about it for some time and my various Parliamentary Questions (written) have elicited some startling statistics including the disproportionate amount of DNA taken from black men and the fact that the DNA of around 134,000 innocent people who were never charged or cautioned is now on the record books.
This weekend the coverage is about the 24,000 of those who are juveniles. This is shaping up for a real battle at some point – as there is a national database being built by stealth. If the Government want this – then they should have the balls to put forward legislation and have the public debate. My simple question to those who defend what is happening is this: ‘if it’s so great and without any problems, why not be upfront and have an explicit debate and agreement (or not) to set-up such a database?’
I think it would be dreadful – but at least there would be a logic to it if the whole country was held. Randomly keeping the DNA records of people the police erroneously arrest is ludicrous. Doing it by default also means we don’t get the same safeguards in place as we would if there was a proper debate and decision.
Personally, and this is not necessarily the party view we will come to when we discuss it further, I think it will lead to all sorts of mischief. For instance – once DNA is the main arbiter of guilt or innocence – how easy it will be to set someone up! I can foresee absolute nightmare scenarios – and what is a phenomenal detection tool and confirmation of guilt – will be misused ultimately. And a million other issues – but the temptations will probably be too much for old authoritarians to resist. Let alone if we have a malign government who might misuse such a system.
This issue comes up at the emergency Home Affairs Team Meeting which Alistair Carmichael has called as he has stepped up to take Mark’s place until the leadership contest is decided and the new leader reshuffles us. It would be fair to say that there are a variety of views on the issue – and so we need a paper that brings us up to date on facts around DNA before we can make our judgements. Alistair seems to have it all under control.
We sit talking into the late night between and after votes – about the leadership contest. We may all have differing views on who should be crowned – but the spirit is good between our different camps – thank goodness!
Tech Refresh financial scandal at Haringey Council
Reading through emails over weekend – catch up with what my colleagues are doing on Haringey Council and there is a huge financial scandal unfolding – one that Labour seem to have been trying to cover up.
Basically – the Audit Commission has produced a damning report on the mishandling by Haringey Labour Council of an IT project called ‘Tech Refresh’. It was meant to have cost £9 million, but already is projected to cost around £20 million – an overspend of nearly £11 million
Local Council Tax payers are going to foot the bill for ‘slippage and overruns’ to the tune of 11% of the total amount charged by Haringey in Council Tax this year. And – Labour have been covering it up. Local residents will be apoplectic – as this sort of mess just totally confirms local residents’ worst fears about how Labour use and abuse them! Roll on the local elections…
Lib Dem leadership
Watch the rolling news as it turns into Sunday’s political programs. Anxiously watching as to the media handling of Mark Oaten’s fall from grace. My boy Chris is on Andrew Marr and does really well – and inevitably the Mark Oaten issue is first on the list of questions. What can you say? Except what Chris said – that the guy has apologised to his wife, apologised to his constituents and to the party.
I don’t know why he took such terrible risks. An affair – with a man or a woman – is no longer the end of the political road. But the three-in-a-bed with a rent boy combined with the shots of his leadership campaign launch showing him, his wife and their two children was a truly bad move. I just hope he gets the time and privacy he needs to put it back together for the sake of his family. The party will survive fine – but his home life is what matters now.
I phoned round some more key people in London for Chris Huhne’s leadership campaign. Everyone was wondering what next? Hopefully – policy ideas. Still finding a real hunger from people to know about Chris. My own view is that playing safe as a third party is a hiding to nothing and that with Chris we will have the best chance to move on to the next stage. Well – I would say that – wouldn’t I?
Toleration levels
Surgery all morning dealing with constituents’ problems followed by a home visit to a disabled gentleman who wanted me to pop round. I stayed about three quarters of an hour. Last appointment was to go over to the offices of the Howard League for Penal Reform.
As prison spokesperson – this was really interesting. There is a natural alliance between our position and the work they do. The Director said something really interesting during our long discussion. She said that we need to tolerate as a society. What she was referring to was the sort of zero-tolerance environment that was being created by the political battle between Labour and Tory as to who could be tougher on young people and the causes of young people. I think what she was saying was that we need to learn to tolerate a bit of noise, a bit of dirt – a bit of life. And that the pendulum was swinging (swingeing even) too far towards the punitive.
A lot of sense there. However, I said to her, that the other side of that coin was that in my view care in the community wasn’t working. And it’s the police and the prisons who bear the brunt of that.
So – I am thinking about tolerance levels. What should we tolerate? Weighty stuff for a Friday afternoon!
Finish day rounding up the info from the Huhne leadership campaign. All seems to be going incredibly well. Momentum is with us. More and more councillors, peers and supporters are climbing on board;. The funding limit of £35,000 for the campaign is already promised. We expect more MPs to come on board. And of course, Mark Oaten withdrew from the race yesterday – and the betting odds have now shortened on Chris to 5-1. So – all to play for!
LABOUR'S FINANCIAL CATASTROPHE – COUNCIL IN THE DOCK AS AUDIT COMMISSION SLAMS COUNCIL OVER £10 MILLION IT OVERSPEND
An astonishingly damning report by the Audit Commission on Haringey Council’s handling of its controversial Tech Refresh project has heavily criticised the Labour-run council.
The shocking report, sent to councillors this week, details a massive £10.6 million projected overspend on the ‘Tech Refresh’ IT project . The overspend alone amountsto some 11% of all the money Haringey charges in Council Tax this year. Tech Refresh was originally due to be completed by October 2004 at a cost of £9 million, and the Audit Commission has written to Haringey setting outits stinging criticism over the Council’s handling of the project.
The Audit Commission’s reportdescribes the failureof Labour-controlled Haringeyin many areasof the project’s development, commenting thatsome project board membersfailed to regularly attend meetings andthat there was inadequatemonitoring by Corporate Finance of either budget setting or budgetary control.
What has really alarmed the Lib Dem opposition is the criticism of the Labour-run Council for showing little evidence of ‘timely, transparent and accurate reporting of project slippages and overspends’ or ‘clear audit trails’.
Haringey’s ruling Labour councillors, supposedly in charge, did little or nothing to address the problems. Lib Dems also say that they have been giving misleading answers by Labour bosses about the scale of the disaster. In the most recent case, Cllr David Winskill, who is one of the Council’sOverview and Scrutiny Board members , requested details from the Executive Member for Organisational Development, Cllr Takki Sulaiman, at a scrutiny meeting last Octoberaboutthe original Tech Refresh budget, what the current budget is and how any “potential slippage” will impact the budget.
To Cllr Winskill’s amazement, Cllr Sulaiman claimed that the current budget was £5.5 million and the original budget was just £5 million. Yet, by then, Haringey Council knew of the scale of the problems. Cllr Neil Williams is writing to the Council and the Audit Commission to raise this and many other concerns.
Cllr Neil Williams (Highgate) comments:
“The staggering scale of the mismanagement of this project and its extraordinary cost, simply beggars belief. There is no doubt also that there has been a catalogue of attempts, at almost every level, to conceal the scale of this financial catastrophe for the Council. Costscould escalate further. Haringey Labour must be held to account for this utter shambles.”
Cllr David Winskill (Crouch End) adds.
“This whole project has been a fiasco and the Haringey Executive should hang its head in shame. I will be asking Overview and Scrutiny to demand that Cllr Sulaiman comes and explains his grossly misleading answers to my questions. I feel that there should be a full review of this project to see whether it is capable of delivering what it was originally intended to do. I wonder if we have passed the point where we are now throwing good money after bad.”
Positive role models
Morning went to the start of an all day event / seminar by Friendship Global – titled ‘Peace, Friendship and the 2012 Olympics’. This is a group started in Haringey by the suggestion of two little girls who after 9/11 wanted to do something to stop such terrible things happening again. So their father started this peace group – where the basic idea is that through friendship we can stop wars.
From there I went straight to make a speech and give out awards at the Haringey African and Afro-Caribbean Awards for excellence. A huge hall full of children and their proud families thronging the Alexandra Palace. Now, as much as they all obviously loved me – I can’t help thinking that myself and George Meehan (Labour councillor) were not the main attractions. Kwame and Lemar (spelling of both iffy) were the main event. After my speech – Kwame and myself gave out the first batch of around 30 awards. I felt the kids would feel cheated if they came up on stage for their award and they just got it from me rather than him – so made sure they all got to shake hands and have a quick word with him.
I had to leave before Lemar did his bit – but the screams and clapping when he came in were pretty impressive. I thought the whole event was fantastic. So much negative stuff about black under-achievement – and so great to have an occasion celebrating the positive. I am absolutely committed to aspiration and inspiration. If you are treated like a failure – you will fail. It isn’t rocket science – and this was positivism in action.
The evening took me to Holborn & St Pancras where I was a panel guest on a Question Time format for the University of London with students from London’s universities come to grill us. Slightly to my surprise, they didn’t ask about ID cards or civil liberties. They did ask about taxation. They did ask about cannabis. They didn’t ask that much about the environment. They did ask about the Lid Dem leadership. They did ask about smoking bans. They did laugh when I told them that I once went barefoot and wore flowers in my hair! What’s so funny?! Anyway – I had good fun as I took a bit of license and went way off message. Well – a bit of blue skies thinking is always good for the soul.
Violent Crime Reduction Bill
The Violent Crime Reduction Bill has been working its way through Parliament. Lynne Featherstone has led for the Liberal Democrats on the bill in the House of Commons. In this article she explains what the party’s line has been and why
There is a limit to what legislation can achieve – this Bill deals with the symptoms of the dreadful malaise that stalks (mainly) our young people – some of whom drink to oblivion and some of whom in believe that carrying a weapon makes you cool. So we should be realistic about the limits of legislation to change the world. But that said, the Liberal Democrats are right behind the Government on the overall aims of the Violent Crime Reduction Bill (not too often you can say that!). I may well have been very critical of some of the detail – and am very critical of the way they may use the new powers – but drink-fuelled problems and gun and knife crime need tackling.
Drink Banning Orders – introduced by the Bill – are a bit akin to parents grounding their children: a short sharp punishment which would stop them from being able to go to their favourite pub or club for a couple of months. Orders will enable the police and local authorities to stop an individual coming into a certain area because of their “criminal or disorderly behaviour”.
The trouble, as ever, with Labour legislation is that it is overweening and undefined – it could easily be abused. The bill uses the term “disorder”. One Labour MP seemed to think that running down a street and calling to a friend would be enough to constitute disorder! This is very broad and open to abuse. Labour has listened a little to critics – including a welcome concession that you can’t be jailed simply for breaking a drink banning order. Even this Labour Government realised that to end up with a five year prison sentence for skipping down the street drunk and shouting might be seen as a little over the top! But there are still plenty of other concerns left.
As for Alcohol Disorder Zones (ADZs) – these are areas that can be designated by a local authority and the police where there are large amounts of trouble from drinking establishments. The idea is that establishments within the zone to be designated have an opportunity to put forward a voluntary action plan, and if it works the zone isn’t imposed. But if it fails, it is – and imposition includes the power to charge establishments for extra policing or whatever.
Given we agree with the principle of the “polluter” pays this is ok in principle, but good landlords are treated the same as bad in the plans (and if the bad don’t play ball, the good have to pay the bill too), there are perverse incentives for local authorities to view this as a way of raising money, designating an area will stigmatise it (or even worse, glorifying it for some?), and many, many other arguments of detail.
The Government seem not to be interested in anything other than sloganeering that “we serve the lawful and that this legislation is targeted on the lawless”. Well yes – statement of the bleeding obvious in terms of what everyone wants as an outcome. But slogans aren’t the same as effective action. We already have so much legislation that the Government is not using properly regarding drinking and alcohol. It is already illegal to sell drink to the drunk (they virtually never prosecute). Local Authorities can revoke licenses (they rarely do). And there are the brand new powers for the police to shut down premises. But saying we want a new law gets cheap publicity points in a way that working to use existing laws properly don’t!
The other parts of the Bill are mainly about weapons. Basically the Bill, quite rightly, seeks to address the rise in knife crime and the use of imitation weapons along with some new limits on legal weapons.
During the course of the passage of the Bill we sought to address the rise in knife crime. We tabled an amendment that would have imposed an equal sentence on carrying a knife as a gun. You are equally dead if murdered by a knife as a gun – so we are seeking parity of sentence (and the increase in gun sentences does seem to have had an impact). Unfortunately, Labour voted against increasing the charge for carrying a knife – something to remind the public about in our leaflets!
Labour also have a measure in the Bill which raises the age from 16 to 18 for purchasing or selling a knife. But there is no description as to what sort of knife – which leaves the unsatisfactory position of being able to get married and have children at 16 but not buy cutlery!
So the Bill, supported by both Lib Dems and Tories, now goes on its way to the Lords. The measures will curb some of the excesses we all hope – but we all know that deep down this Bill just doesn’t begin to address what lies beneath: what is the root cause of the disaffection of our young people so that they drink themselves stupid and aspire to carrying weapons? That is the nut we have to really crack.
This article first appeared in Liberal Democrat News.
Lynne Featherstone 