Tag Archives: pmqs

John Prescott at PMQs

Posted on by

Early morning out filming for Sunday’s Politics Show. They will have David Davis in the studio – and the bit they wanted me for was to ruminate on any potential threat from the Tories now they hug hoodies. Not sure that Davis is all love and sunshine; however – you’ll have to wait for the program if you’re interested.

I then watched John Prescott in horror. I don’t know him really, as our political paths haven’t really crossed and he has only stepped into take the PM’s role at Prime Minister’s Questions a couple of times since I became an MP – but it seemed cruel sport.

I don’t rate PMQs as an exemplar way to conduct politics anyway. It is a blood sport and as such is quite compelling but actually pretty nasty stuff. However, just as with hunting, when the prey doesn’t even have a chance it is sheer cruelty. Whilst T Blair can take care of himself – Prescott clearly can’t. I don’t suppose they will let him go before the Blair Switch project is complete – but it would be kinder to leave him with a last vestige of pride.

Youth justice

Posted on by

Mad dash for Prime Minister’s Questions; I still haven’t been pulled out of the weekly ballot for a PMQ (that’s how most MPs get to ask the Prime Minister a question – names go in a hat and are pulled out at random). Then off to Cardiff to the Youth Justice Conference. I am part of a panel of experts speaking and answering questions as the last session of the day. It was a huge affair – and Blair (Tony) had sent a video message to the 800+ attendees and Cameron will be there tomorrow for a keynote speech – hopefully still hugging hoodies.

On the panel – the Lord Chief Justice, the Welsh Assembly Member, the Chief Constable and myself were all roughly singing from the same hymn sheet. We are all sick to death of this ‘tough’ versus ‘soft’ political environment where in reality – it’s what works that matters. It was clear from the panellists and the whole audience that those in the field are desperate to move away from the political rhetoric and get on with what works – which often is community sentencing or secure children’s units rather than crime school (prison). It has to be about changing behaviour not mouthing empty slogans. The Chief Justice was saying that the problem is that often people think community sentencing is a soft option – but it isn’t. There is a project in Chard where community sentencing has meant that the re-offending rate is just 5%. Compare that with the 70% for young males coming out of prison. No contest!

Iraq, ethical companies and post offices

Posted on by

PMQs – same old, same old. Bear pit behaviour – no score draw between Blair and Cameron – but Ming was really on form. It was on Iraq – and of course this is home territory for Ming and where he is at his best. Still – despite the barrage of suggestions that our military presence might be part of the problem rather than the solution – Blair is only conceding that ‘of course they want to bring the troops home as early as possible – but not until the job is done’. When is ‘done’?

The debate today is the second day of Modernising Company Law Bill and I sat in to listen to the part that I have had most correspondence from local constituents on – that is the section about regulation and audit for companies with regard to their ethical behaviour in purchase, behaviour and sales.

The Labour Government dropped some rules in this regard a little while back – and the amendments today are to try and introduce a wider remit for what is now called Business Review – a requirement to report on a variety of ethical behaviour issues.

The amendments widened that remit to include reporting and revealing things like the supply chain – for who a company buys from is just as important in terms of how ethical or not that company is as its own direct behaviour.

Sadly, the so-called Labour rebels withdrew their amendment on this before the vote. Our amendment was on bringing a formal audit to the Business Review – alone in the lobbies with the moral high ground as usual – we lost the vote. The debate continues.

Big lobby on Parliament today by the sub post office masters with the largest petition ever presented – something like four million. Not surprised – as per my entry on Monday it was down to the Lib Dems to bring a debate on the Post Office to the floor of the House of Commons as the Government won’t even give it debating time – let alone save the sub-post offices that remain after decimation under both Labour and Tory governments.

Prime Minister's Questions: is there a point?

Posted on by

Tony Blair at PMQsPrime Minister’s Questions – the bear pit of Parliament. What to say? I could just get sniffy and say what a load of rubbish and it has no bearing on the real world or indeed, the success of the party. William Hague was tip top at PMQs – but a flop everywhere else and as Conservative Leader. But this is the arena where the media get their kicks. They just love it – this macho test of testosterone. And as the media love it – this is the bit that gets the most coverage of all we do in Parliament – and so for many people “Parliament” pretty much equals PMQs.

So although it can make good entertainment, I doubt it helps politics (reputation and practice of) much. I have to say – when Blair is in full flow and horns are locked with the opposition – it does have that same excitement as a bull ring (not that I’ve ever been) or a heavyweight-boxing match (to which I have been and am totally ashamed of my liking for it).

However, after the general excitement and blood lust has worn off, I am now left totally unmoved by the theatrics. It has lost the thrill of the new – and when you hear Blair’s mantra – the mantra he uses in response to almost any question is to talk about £x being put into y public services, with a few other statistics thrown in, and he says we’re on the side of the clichés – oops, sorry – we’re on the side of the many, the law abiding and those who like apple pie. Whatever the issue – it comes down to Labour have spent money on it, so all must be ok.

Even where it may be the truth – it is soured by its frequent repetition and the tangential (if any) relationship it had to the question. And the questions are the one shot a backbencher gets at the Prime Minister – so the least he should do is have the courtesy to answer.

What never ceases to astonish me, however, is how many questioners come to grief because their question is too long. Mr Speaker’s tolerance for burbling on is strictly limited and he is wont to stand up and tell off the rambling questioner – who then sits down abruption with ruddy flushed and embarrassed face. You would think, would you not, that if you know that you are going to be called to ask a question because your name is on the Order Paper – you would have prepared for your 60 seconds in the limelight. You know the other members will start to jeer if you ramble on. You know Mr Speaker will cut you off. And you know that the Prime Minister will then cut you down to size because of your incompetence in questioning. And yet – time after time – I see really experienced members make this mistake – obviously carried away by the spotlight they forget how cruel the House is to those who stumble.

Boy Dave Cameron does the opposite. He over prepares. His soundbites are sometimes well worked out – but so studied that they fall flat. He has had some good moments – but to me – comes over as completely false – with no sense of belief behind his nifty nips at TB.

Does this all achieve anything other than the damage it does to the public standing of politics? The favourite answer of insiders is that it does have a big administrative effect – because everyone working in government knows that once a week, at PMQs, the Prime Minister may have to stand up and explain away their mistakes – and so in preparation for PMQs civil servants search out possible problem areas and demand explanations on behalf of the PM. Being put on your toes like this every week most of the year may help improve services at the front line, but I’m doubtful this is really the best way of doing things.

So can it change? Doubt it as long as the boys run the show. It is too close to their public school ya boo bullying for them to give it up. It obviously makes them feel like big boys with their ‘friends’ shouting them on from behind and jeering and making rude remarks about the other side. Some women join in – but to a much lesser extent. I think it is absolutely ludicrous. But as long as the media take their lead from this weekly ritual – it will persevere.

Being an MP: the verdict

Posted on by

Photo of Parliament
So – my first year (and a bit) as MP for Hornsey & Wood Green has come to an end. My conclusions thus far are that there aren’t enough hours in the day, days in the week or weeks in the year – and cloning humans would be helpful!

It also has to be one of the best jobs in the world. It is the sheer scope of what has to be dealt with over any week that keeps the interest at boiling point. Being thrown in the deep end in terms of front bench Home Affairs spokesperson for Police, Crime and Disorder (and a list of other responsibilities) was a baptism of fire – but the only way to learn. Over the year I have written a diary of many of the things that I have done or thought on the day – but with the summer break just thought I would like to try and summarise and collect some of my activities, thoughts and impressions over this first year.

At the constituency end, a lot of the work is about taking up individual casework, trying to help and campaigning with local people to improve things – which is pretty much what I have been doing since before I was first elected to Haringey Council. (And it is interesting to see how the political culture in Haringey has changed since then. When my colleagues and I first seriously got stuck into local campaigning, the other parties were very snooty about delivering leaflets, issuing press releases, doing loads of individual casework, having a freepost address, and on and on. Of course, over the years as they lost elections and we won them they have bit by bit copied all the things they used to so look down on. Though it hasn’t helped them much!).

So the constituency end of being an MP was somewhat familiar to me – although the intensity and severity of the issues that people bring to surgery in particular has been an eye opener.

At this point I should perhaps explain what “surgery” means – as one person did write to me (in all seriousness) wondering what sort of doctor I was and what I did with all my surgeries. It made me smile … but the serious point of course is that the political class has a whole set of insider vocabulary – and it is very easy to over-estimate how much of the jargon (House, floor of the House, surgery, chamber, PMQs, EDM, etc etc) the rest of the world understands. So – for the uninitiated – my “surgery” is when constituents come and see my and raise any sort of issue they want. I guess the name comes from doctors – as when GPs hold surgeries people turn up with any manner of complaint.

Anyway – my surgery has taught me so much about the real impact of the things we debate in Parliament. I could have told you that the Home Office wasn’t coping within my first month as an MP. The length of time to get an answer – let alone the years to get a decision on asylum and immigration matters. And too many other problems with visas, residency, naturalisation, lost documents – an endless stream of the victims of Home Office failure. Unbelievable. And housing – the issues around housing have given me such a good overview of, not only the shortage, but also the issues around allocation.

In fact, in the chapter I have written to be published in a book in the autumn called Britain after Blair, is based in part on this experience. For what I see is a mish-mash of decisions, with poor reasoning behind them, no transparency and often highly unsatisfactory rules. Thanks to this muddled approach, people can wait decade after decade waiting to be re-housed in a points system where they never reach the top. And then there is the threatening approach to anyone who doesn’t take what is offered, however absolutely dreadful it is. The threat is – take it, no matter how bad it is, or you lose your right to be offered again. Anyway – could go on and on – but you’ll just have to buy the book!

Certainly, my direction is heavily influenced by my experience of my local constituents’ problems – as indeed it should be – but I think most people think of an MP as someone at Parliament and see only that side – or the giving out prizes or the visiting things (the Queen Mum bit of the job). These are all important – but to me it’s still people’s lives that are the challenge. Of course – that challenge can then be expanded to lobby at the Parliamentary level to put the pressure on to change the way things are.

As for Parliament itself – that’s been an experience and a half. I’ve learned how to lead on a Bill and take it through committee – which at committee stage is akin to being a lawyer. I’ve learned how to get called to speak in a debate (be very nice to Mr Speaker and advise him in advance of my wish to speak and special reason why he should call me), put oral questions (including one to David Blunkett and he was gone the next day – be afraid, be very afraid) and literally hundreds of written questions. I haven’t been selected for a Westminster Hall debate (yet) or an oral question to the Prime Minister – but I’m putting in for the ballot and am determined to get lucky in the next session. (If you have any mystic seaweed I can waive to raise my chances in the ballot, just pop it in the post please).

I’ve taken school governors to meet the Ministers’ officials and met with hundreds of different lobbies who have come about one thing or another. I’ve put in written questions and done masses of media. I’ve sponsored local groups who have wanted to come to Parliament to have a room for a debate and talked to lots of local school groups who have come up to the House, had a tour and then get to grill me for half an hour. It’s quite different to the other levels of governance I have been elected to thus far – local council and London Assembly. They were more direct in a way whilst this is a legislature – and the immediacy and directness is less obvious.

I’ve witnessed and taken part in some of the great debates of the day on detention without charge, on ID cards, on religious hatred and so on. I have experience the Commons in sombre mode following 7/7. There is a lot of humour there too – some cruel but some just comradely. The formality and the format are not to my taste – but in the year I have tried to learn how best to use my time there.

Parliament is caught in a time warp in my view. They don’t even use tracking changes for legislation and amendments which I find astonishing. So each time you get a new pile of paperwork – there is no hint as to what has changed since last time. But my time there is not to fight the fight about the traditions or to worry about the so called ‘male’ environment – my time there is to represent my constituents and my conscience and my party.

Prime Minister's Questions

Posted on by

Prime Ministers Questions (PMQs) sees Cameron flounder for about the third week running while Ming does good. He goes on the dreadful situation in Palestine. Why oh why doesn’t Tony Blair roll up his sleeves and work at the Middle East situation the way he did for Northern Ireland? The political will of Blair and Bush just doesn’t seem to be there to sort this out. The people of both Palestine and Israel deserve peace. It is the people who have been completely let down by the rulers – now and before. If the USA and we have muscle – then for goodness sake use it to force the road map through to peace before more generations grow up in fear or poverty and hatred.

After PMQs I am leading on the front bench on a Statutory Instrument on the floor of the House. They are usually done in committees but this is about bringing into being detention without charge for 28 days. It’s the issue on which we defeated the government’s push for 90 days. There has been a delay until now because Dominic Grieve (a Tory) suggested that we needed a new code to cover the treatment of those being detained under this new order.

It has taken the Government all this time to come up with it. Considering the indecent rush with which they pushed to get the time without charge extended, it is a bit of a rum do.

We are all supporting the code, but I raise issues around how this is likely to affect a community (the Muslim community) which is already extremely tender from the mistaken crude associations that some people make that Muslim = terrorist. Anyway, the Minister acknowledges the points I raise – and the statute is made.

Dealing with Hamas?

Posted on by

Go to early Jewish Assembly at Highgate School where I am to talk briefly on being an MP and then take questions. As I have been told that the questions will be on the Israel / Palestine issue and other Jewish related matters, I try and set out the way an MP makes up their mind on an issue. I think it is always one of the confusions – do you represent the party you stand for, the people you represent or your conscience? Of course, it’s all three – with a range of variations on how strong each of those remits is on each issue.

I was explaining that you need to be very clear in your own mind – particularly on those dramatically split issues where both sides have enormous lobbies who are quite venomous if you don’t agree with their particular view. On Israel/Palestine I have always been quite clear that the two-state solution is the only way forward, they are both wrong when they do wrong, and the rights and wrongs of history and historic actions cannot be the arbiter of future solutions. It’s long and complicated and I do the best I can with a young audience and only a few minutes. I do tell them that an even-handed approach wins you no friends – on either side.

Anyway – we go on to questions. There is one young man who asks, as I have been discussing the difficulty caused to the western world by the election of Hamas, about relations with Hamas. We promote democracy as the fair and judicial way to select our administrations. Palestine has elected Hamas democratically. Previously, they were treated as a terrorist organization. So – the question was how do we deal them? I don’t think the young man liked my answer – which was that you have to negotiate. Yes – use all the powers that we in the West collectively have in terms of influence to insist that they recognise the state of Israel – but talk we must.

One of the things that always shocks me about the Middle Eastern situation is the lack of sustained drive and priority that Bush and Blair seem to give to it. I remember Blair literally rolling up his sleeves to get Northern Ireland on the road to peace – and the IRA were terrorists too.

As ever young audiences are always interesting – and I enjoy working with schools greatly. Have had lots of schools up to Parliament for a tour and then I will meet them generally if I am able to take half an hour’s questions. Last week – Coldfall and Highgate.

Off to surgery followed by a home visit to one of the audience from the Carer’s Conference I did last week. She had just been totally neglected by Haringey Council. As it is so difficult to even get out of the house if you are a sole carer – I said I would pop round to her house. She has a very disabled three-year-old daughter. Without going into details – physically cannot walk, feed herself etc There is an older daughter aged six and the mother has lupus.

She is still waiting, after two and a half years, for an assessment. She has no support. No respite. No social worker. No nothing. I do sometimes wonder what an earth is going on. Most of us who are well, able and in work do regard ourselves as lucky to be so and are glad to pay our taxes so that there is a welfare state there to help those who need assistance. We may get cross when our money is wasted or misused – but certainly we believe in the system and ideals. And when I encounter situations like this – I just want to scream. Do the powers that be have no idea what it is like to try and look after a severely disabled child 24/7 on your own? For goodness sake Haringey – this just isn’t on. We will see how quickly we can change this situation.

I had another carer that had spoken up at the conference who came to the surgery. Haringey Council supplied a commode – but it was too big for the accommodation so had to go back and be exchanged for one that was smaller. He is still waiting for the replacement years on. It isn’t rocket science for heaven’s sake.

Blair’s big speech on rebalancing the scales of justice was today. That’s all he has left in him – mouthing off about how bad things are. Well 50 pieces of legislation in the criminal justice and home affairs arenas under Labour mean that if things are wrong – there’s only one person and one party to blame – and that’s T Blair and Labour.

So tough on crime when it comes to talk – but such a catalogue of disasters in reality: porous borders, escaped prisoners, shortened sentences etc etc.

Last thing watch Cameron on Jonathan Ross. Jonathan is a class act – and Boy Dave is not. In fact he looked uncomfortable, wasn’t funny, tried to peddle his cuddly mantra (didn’t work) and I thought was pretty well exposed as having little understanding of the people. (Oh, and changed his mind on Iraq, again!). At least when Blair and Kennedy go on populist shows, they come over as human and likeable. Advice – stick to reading soundbites at PMQs.

Illegal immigration

Posted on by

Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) sees a spat between Blair and Cameron over who voted for what on sentencing. Completely ridiculous exchange between two grown men. Sentencing is too ridiculous at the moment. I think it is the automatic sweeping reductions that shock us all. I am all in favour of having a screw to turn to help an accused decide to plead guilty and save us all the time and money in having to go through the court palaver to prove the case if possible. But we seem to knock one third off every single criminal’s sentence if they plead guilty – even if the evidence has them 100% banged to rights. It’s a tool to use when the evidence is a bit less conclusive – not a discount for shopping at a store.

And then – we are shocked because the other sweeping reduction is for half the remaining sentence for good behaviour. Once again I am all in favour of a tool to keep prisoners sweet and well-behaved – but automatically knocking half the sentence off seems a bit blunt and somewhat over-generous. No doubt the knees are jerking all over the Home Office and we will hear imminently that ‘urgent reviews’ and tougher regimes will be in place in the blink of an eye.

I have to dash off at the end of PMQs to do an interview for the World at One on the proposed (or not) amnesty for illegal immigrants. The Government is deciding to call an amnesty because it has done such a poor job on policing our borders, deciding on applications to remain and finding illegal immigrants. So – the estimated half a million can only be coped with and brought into the light through an amnesty. It’s an admission of failure.

The danger of an amnesty is that it then encourages people to believe that if they come and disappear for long enough into our grey areas, eventually the Government will give in and call an amnesty. In Spain they had a one-off amnesty. They are now on their fifth one-off amnesty. We do already have in legislation the right for someone who has been here 14 years to apply for leave to remain to be granted – and at that stage it is. However, waiting in limbo and working illegally for 14 years is hardly a path to be recommended. We need to get people to work and paying taxes if they have a right to be here and deported if they don’t. An amnesty is just a stop-gap measure for regularising life for those who languish here unresolved. So a cautious welcome for a good look at the proposal – but no carte blanche for all illegals.

Foundation schools

Posted on by

My youngest daughter’s 17th birthday today. I have to get her up for presents and cards at 7.30am – poor thing. Finished her AS’s yesterday thank goodness. So dash off to work. Am studying the news very hard this week as I am on Question Time tomorrow and live in terror of not knowing about some issue that may come up.

Lib Dem Home Affairs Team first thing – and we thrash out our views on the terror raid in Forrest Gate, discuss trafficking and general crime issues. I have to leave early to go and meet the School Council from Fortsimere School who I have sponsored for a tour and who come up to see the exhibition of some of their work on display at the House. The new head is with them and I ask him for a meeting to discuss the school’s desire or otherwise to become a foundation school. I am against this on principle – but Haringey have screwed them financially to the point where I guess they feel it is Hobson’s choice. I will try and persuade them – but in the end – so long as there is a proper democratic process for making this decision – it has to be for the school, the students, the governors, the staff and the parents to decide.

I go to PMQs – and then stay both for the statement on the NHS and then the Opposition Debate on Tax Credits. What a mess – both of them!

Charles Clarke

Posted on by

Labour hits the skids. Timing immaculate. Already doing badly in the polls, slated on the doorstep by their own supporters – Charles Clarke, Patricia Hewitt and John Prescott decide to put the nail in the coffin of the local elections. How far they will fall – no idea.

But to the specifics. After PMQs, Charles Clarke comes to the Dispatch Box to make a Statement on the Deportation of Foreign Nationals. It was a pretty subdued performance really. I mean, what’s a man to say? He tried resigning – and Blair refused – tasking him with making everything all right. Poor sod. So he apologised and said he wanted to stay to sort out the mess. But I don’t think he should stay. Actually, I quite like Charles Clarke the person. He is intelligent and engaging. But – on his watch – this level of incompetence is so staggering (given the many warnings about it) that he has to go. If he were not to go – it would be like saying it doesn’t matter what happens in your department – even when as serious as this. And that continual degrading of standards is not acceptable. There are things that go wrong in any department, any office – and it is a matter of staff not doing something properly and no, I would not expect a Minister to go for run of the mill errors. But the warnings he received, the lack of action following them and the seriousness of the omissions make this a resigning matter.

It would seem, however, that Blair will only ‘let him go’ if public pressure mounts – so if you want to add to public pressure for Clarke to go – visit www.libdems.org.uk.

There are a number of areas that worry me about the substance of the matter in hand as well. I am less bothered about the ‘foreign’ bit. Yes – of course where a judge has said the criminal should be considered for deportation, then this consideration – and if decided so, deportation – should happen and in good time. And no doubt if one of those roaming our countryside murders or rapes – it will be a huge issue.

However, the bigger questions for me are the incompetence when this issue was flagged up; regardless of nationality – murderers are meant to be followed up on release and sex offenders are meant to be on a register – in other words, for both of these categories we should know where they are. How many released murderers or rapists are wandering around without the authorities keeping appropriate tabs on them? Is this endemic? And what is so complex about a foreign national coming for release. All the prison and the Home Office have to do is talk to each other. It’s not rocket science.

And on top and above, in some ways, all of this – is the exposure it gives to what I regard as one of the worst sides of this Labour Government – its proclivity for producing endless legislation when usually there is perfectly good legislation in place already – just not enforced. That is what this country needs – people doing their job properly using the laws that exist to enable them to do so. That’s why Charles Clarke has to go. If we accept him failing so badly in his job then we cannot expect everyone down the line to do their job properly. New legislation and new action-man headlines don’t change a thing!