No 1373 • Vol 36 • February 7, 2011
Second comings
RETREADS OF THE 2010 PARLIAMENT
profile
Paul Burstow
media
policy
Regulation, online
and libel law
opinion
Commons diary
Pat McFadden
Priti Patel
Have you ever written
anything about Politics
or Government?
If you’ve written a book or had an
article published in a journal like
this one, the Authors’ Licensing &
Collecting Society could be holding
money owed to you.
Why would we be holding money owed to you?
The ALCS collects secondary royalties earned from, for example, payments for photocopying or
scanning books and articles in school, university libraries, businesses and public bodies.
But I am not a writer....
For the majority of our 78,000 Members, including representatives from both Houses, writing is not
their main job. Many of our Members are, like you, professionals who happen to also write about
their profession.
What do I need to do if I want to join and claim my money?
Lifetime membership costs £25. This is deducted from your rst royalty payment so that no-one is
out of pocket and you don’t pay anything up front. You won’t pay anything at all if we don’t collect
any money for you.
How to join
In order to claim your secondary royalties you will
need to register your published works and journal
and magazine articles. You can apply to join online
at www.alcs.co.uk or alternatively contact our
Membership Services Department on 020 7264
5700 or drop us an email at [email protected].
www.alcs.co.uk
opinion
a strange sense
of priorities
Pat McFadden is troubled by the granting of greater freedoms to terror suspects just as the
manufacturers which could help rebalance the British economy lose vital government grants
T
wo issues have caught my eye in particular over
the past couple of weeks – security, and of course
the ongoing economic debate.
On the counter terrorism review I believe the
government has exposed a flawed logic in its announcements. No-one will argue with stopping over-zealous local authorities from misusing powers, but the more serious announcements concerned the watering-down of the
control order regime.
The government accepted the need for exceptional measures when dealing
with suspects who cannot
be brought to trial, yet who
are believed to pose a serious risk to national security
– otherwise it would have
abolished the regime altogether – yet then said it will
water down the controls on
such people by increasing
their freedom of movement
and access to mobile phones and the internet.
The home secretary did not claim this loosening of
control orders was because the security threat has diminished. On the contrary, it remains as high as at any time
in recent years. She said it was because the government
believes the current laws don’t strike the right balance
between liberty and security. Yet it is not the current laws
which threaten our liberty – it is those who want to kill
innocent people. And Britain, of course, remains a country where people enjoy much-valued freedom of worship, speech and political organisation which is admired
throughout the world.
My colleague Hazel Blears summed it up best when
she read out a judge’s verdict on one suspect when renewing his control order: “He was and remains prepared to be
a martyr in an attack designed to take many lives. He remains highly trained, security-conscious and committed.”
I fervently hope no-one currently subject to tighter controls uses their new-found freedom to inflict harm
on innocent people.
On the economic front the GDP figures opened up
a renewed debate about the scale and pace of the spending cuts, and what the outgoing director general of the
CBI claimed was a lack of vision for our industrial future
from the government. Almost everyone in politics says
they want to “rebalance
the economy” – less financial engineering and more
real engineering. It seems
strange, to say the least
then, that the government
has quietly abolished the
Grants for Business Investment scheme, known previously as Regional Selective Assistance.
Over the past six years the £400m spent through
this programme has supported some 1,800 companies,
secured almost £4bn in private investment and created
or preserved around 77,000 jobs. It is only available in
assisted areas and most of the money goes to small and
medium-sized manufacturing companies.
It is hard to see how abolishing this targeted help
for manufacturing in our regions fits with rhetoric about
rebalancing the economy. Indeed, it does the opposite.
The death of UK manufacturing has been announced far too readily. We are still a country that
makes things and recent output figures have been encouraging. But this is a time for government to get behind manufacturing, not abolish the help it was receiving up until now.
Pat
McFadden
Business
minister 200710 and Labour
MP for Wolverhampton South
East
“It is hard to see how
abolishing targeted help for
manufacturing in our regions
fits with rhetoric about
rebalancing the economy”
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
3
No 1373 • Vol 36 • February 7, 2011
www.epolitix.com/house-magazine
contents
AGENDA
6 THE week in pictures
With the proposed News Corporation-BSkyB merger, the
ongoing story on phone-hacking and cuts to the World Service,
the media itself has become the story. This also raises the
question: who controls those who are meant to be in control?
Damian Tambini (p31) wants Jeremy Hunt to appoint a media
commission to review self regulation. Elsewhere, Pat McFadden
(p3) points out that loosening control orders and handing decisions to judges
will not diminish the security threat, far from it. And the renewed criticism
of Ipsa’s performance (p13) shows that MPs are deeply dissatisfied with their
independent regulator. Maybe it’s time for Parliament to remember that our
voters expect the buck to stop with us – their elected representatives.
GISELA STUART MP editor
11 pollwatch & bill briefing Media influence & Education Bill
12 commons gallery Egypt, forests sell-off, Ipsa
14 lords gallery AV bill, new Black Rod, Parliament Square clean-up
16 CONSTITUENCY POSTBAG Kris Hopkins on VAT relief
people
19 ministerial briefing Mark Prisk
20 commons diary Priti Patel
22 lords diary Baroness Parminter
23 new MP INTERVIEW Simon Reevell
cover story
24 profile Paul Burstow
A select band of MPs returned to the
Commons last year after a voter-enforced
absence – but Sam Macrory finds resilience
among the ‘retreads’
policy media
31 broadcasting regulation Damian Tambini
8
33 radio spectrum allocation Don Foster
34 children and the internet Victoria Nash
36 libel tourism Simon Singh
38 Blue Pages Guide to parliamentary proceedings
Constituency postbag
16
Profile: Paul Burstow
24
adjournment
43 youth engagement Lord Roberts of Llandudno
44 social work profession Hilton Dawson
44 schools it competition Alun Michael
47 book review Austin Mitchell on Missing Member
48 moncrieff’s masters Jack Diamond
49 competitions Speech bubble and quiz
Digital literacy
34
Jack Diamond remembered
48
50 2020 Vision Ian Swales on a green industrial revolution
Dods’ Parliamentary Researcher of the Year Awards 2011
Supported by
WEDNESDAY 16th FEBRUARY
To register your interest in attending, please visit www.epolitix.com/awards/researchersawards2011
Agenda
The week in pictures
Monday
Andy Coulson leaves his director of government communications
post. He is to be replaced by Craig Oliver
Defence secretary Liam Fox tells the Commons that Iran could have
a nuclear weapon by 2012
Tuesday
Pfizer announces the closure of its
research and development facility in
Kent, which employs 2,400 people
Home Office crime mapping website
crashes as 18 million people an hour
attempt to log on
6
The House Magazine • 7 FebrUARY 2011
Wednesday
A small rebellion over the government’s plans
to sell off Britain’s forests means that the 2010
Parliament has already seen more rebellions
than the whole of the 1997 Parliament,
according to research by revolts.co.uk
David Cameron and UN secretary general Ban
Ki-moon talk to reporters outside Number 10
about the developing political situation in Egypt
Thursday
“The Big Society has become subsumed by the cuts,” says Phil Redmond, on the day that Liverpool Council, one of four Big Society pilots, pulls out of the project
Commons leader Sir George Young publishes submission to Ipsa consultation, in which he says the new expenses system does not help MPs to do their job
The House Magazine • 7 FebrUARY 2011
7
Agenda
cover story
Retreading the boards
Sam Macrory interviews the five MPs who returned to the Commons in 2010 after a period of absence
Retread n. (r trd). A revision or reworking; a remake or
rehash.
himself the son of a retread MP in the late Bob Cryer, stayed
put in East London to complete his successful comeback.
As dictionary entries go, the definition for “retread” isn’t
glamorous. But in political circles, it is used to define a
member of a small and occasionally illustrious club. Tony
Benn was a retread. So was Michael Foot. Winston Churchill
managed it twice. More recent club members are Francis
Maude, Andrew Mitchell, and Sir Malcolm Rifkind – who
retrod the same Kensington and Chelsea seat once held by
fellow retreads Michael Portillo and Alan Clark.
Then there is the one Conservative retread. Jonathan Evans
managed to sit out his party’s 13 long years in opposition
before making his return to Westminster last May.
These are the politicians who, after being rejected by the
electorate, refuse to give up their parliamentary ambitions.
They move on from their defeats and prove their former
electors wrong, returning to Parliament after enforced or
chosen periods of absence, re-emerging a few years older
and a little wiser.
The 2010 election saw five retreads return to Parliament.
On the Labour side there are four. A triumvirate of former
ministers in Geraint Davies, Chris Leslie and Stephen Twigg
all relocated after being ousted in 2005, while John Cryer,
8
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
Losing hurts. As John Cryer puts it, there’s “nothing so ‘ex’
as an ex-MP”. For Stephen Twigg, the man whose victory
against the Conservative minister Michael Portillo became
the defining image of the 1997 election, the defeat left him
“shell-shocked”. Even a friendly text from Portillo – “May I
recommend a by-election” wrote Portillo in a nod to his own
1999 return to Parliament – failed to cheer the mood. But all
five were faced with the challenge of finding work and then
weighing up how they would plot their return to Westminster.
Now safely returned with the letters MP after their names,
the quintet discuss their defeats, the intervening years, and
the experience of returning to Westminster, first as an ex-MP
and then finally as a re-elected one. Heroic? Desperate?
Defiant? Ambitious? The term ‘retread’ holds rather more
meaning than you might think.
Above, left to right: John Cryer, Jonathan Evans, Geraint Davies,
Stephen Twigg, Chris Leslie. Photograph: Paul Heartfield
Did you expect to lose your seat?
Geraint Davies: I overturned a Conservative majority of 15,000 votes in
1997, so I was banking on losing in 2001, but I won with an increased
majority, only to lose in 2005 by 75 votes.
What did you do next?
GD: I saw defeat as an opportunity to move back to Wales with my family. I
was appointed by Environment Agency Wales and the Welsh Assembly to
head up the team to adapt Wales to climate change through investing in
flood defences.
Stephen Twigg: I thought I would scrape back in.
Jonathan Evans: I had a majority of 130, but I still thought there was a
chance I might get re-elected. My count was declared the next day, so I had
the opportunity of watching what had happened.
Chris Leslie: I overturned a 12,000 majority in 1997, so I kind of knew the
writing was on the wall at some point.
John Cryer: Hornchurch was one of those seats which we were surprised to
win in 1997. There was always the possibility that people would go back to
the Conservatives – and they did.
ST: I worked for the Aegis Trust and the Foreign Policy Centre. They weren’t
chosen to keep me close to this place, but they did, and they gave me
flexibility.
JE: There were no Conservative MPs in Wales, so William Hague, the Tory
leader, appointed me to be the party spokesman in Wales as we had the
referendum coming up. After that, I joined a law firm, but I didn’t want to
give up on political involvement altogether so I stood for the European
Parliament. A year after my election I stood against our leader, and
succeeded him.
CL: I worked for the New Local Government Network, and in 2007 I was
seconded to help Gordon Brown’s leadership campaign.
How did you react?
GD: Losing your seat is a bit like a bereavement in the family, and
losing by just 75 votes makes you think: if I’d switched the votes of 38
more people then I’d have won. You can easily ask if you should have
canvassed another road or attended another meeting, but obviously it’s
not healthy.
ST: It was a pretty horrible couple of weeks. The victory had been such a big
emblem of 1997, it was my home area, and I had grown used to being the
local MP. You have to clear out of the office and help the people who were
working for you.
JE: It wasn’t the greatest shock in the world. I had only been here five years,
which was helpful in establishing what I would do next. The first thing I did
was go on holiday for a week.
CL: It was obviously bitterly disappointing to lose my home constituency.
JC: It’s like having a limb lopped off – it’s a massive change. There was no
sympathy, but I don’t mind that – I’m not the first person to lose their job.
Were you certain you would stand again?
GD: There was the expectation that I should stick around and win back the
seat, but I didn’t fancy being the sad former MP at the back of the residents’
meeting.
JC: I worked as a political officer for Aslef and then the TGWU. I really landed
on my feet, as I stayed working in politics and the Labour movement.
How did you find returning to Parliament as an ex-MP?
GD: I didn’t come in very often. When you lose you are required to clear your
office and exit quite quickly.
ST: At first it was awful. I hated it. On the first time I came back I didn’t want
to see anyone I knew. It became easier, but it always felt a little strange.
JE: The atmosphere is not one which left me feeling terribly comfortable
about coming along as a former Member.
CL: A lot of people forget that you have lost, and they’re quite embarrassed
when they find out. If you had a fragile ego you wouldn’t want to go back to
the club that threw you out.
JC: I was back in constantly. The first couple of times it wasn’t too pleasant,
but I got used to it.
Do you think you were better off being out when you were?
GD: From outside, the coups and expenses stories underlined the insularity
of the Westminster village. If I had picked a time not to be here, then that
would have been it.
ST: On the Tuesday I had lunch with Oona King. She made it very clear
that she would not come back, but I knew that I wanted to. I had a strong
emotional attachment to my old seat, but I knew I needed to find a new
one.
ST: Realistically, if I had scraped by in 2005 then I would definitely have lost
in 2010. But despite the fact it was a very difficult Parliament for Labour, I
still wanted to be here.
JE: I had always wanted to be in the House of Commons, and I enjoyed it a
great deal – but I’m very much against the idea that this is the only thing
that you ever do in your life. I’m different from the other retreads. They’ve
embarked on a political career, they fell at a hurdle, and they’ve started
again on the same journey.
JE: It can be a debilitating experience being on the back benches in
opposition. I have a great deal of respect for my colleagues that have been
through that journey, but I had no ambition to be at Westminster during the
time that we were over 100 seats behind. From 1999 onwards I never really
missed sitting on the back benches.
CL: Just as I got to know how the system worked as a minister, I was cut
short. I always had a sort of feeling that I wasn’t quite finished. I was toying
with how and where, but you can’t afford to do that if you need to earn a
crust, so I focused on my day job.
JC: Obviously Parliament has gone through the mill, but I never thought
losing was a good idea.
JC: I didn’t think too much about the long term as I needed to make a
living, but in the back of my mind was the thought that I wanted to be
back here.
When did you see a clear route back?
GD: I had originally wanted to become an MP in Wales and in 2007, when
Alan Williams said he wouldn’t be standing again in Swansea West, I applied
for the candidacy.
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
9
Agenda
cover story
ST: I got selected as part of a de-selection – not necessarily
the route back in that I would have expected. The Lib Dems
selected a candidate with the surname Twigger. I became
utterly obsessed that voters would accidentally vote for him,
not me. I was less secure than I could have been.
Geraint
Davies
Member
for
Croydon Central
1997-2005, for
Swansea West
since 2010
general election
Stephen
Twigg
Member
for
Enfield Southgate
1997-2005, for
Liverpool West
Derby since 2010
general election
Jonathan
Evans
Member
for Brecon
and Radnor 199297, for Cardiff
North since 2010
general election
Chris
Leslie
Member
for
Shipley
1997-2005, for
Nottingham
East since 2010
general election
John
Cryer
Member
for
Hornchurch 19972005, for Leyton
and Wanstead
since 2010
general election
10
JE: When David Cameron became Conservative leader, he made
it clear that he did not want to continue the relationship that
the Conservative Party had with the European People’s Party
grouping. It was perfectly clear that our influence would be
diminished – and that led me to the conclusion that I was unlikely
to want to remain in the European Parliament. When events took
the turn that they did, it seemed to me that for me to try and win
a seat from the Labour Party was a good thing to do.
CL: There was so much ‘churn’ as the election approached, and it
occurred to me that there had to be an opportunity.
JC: My return was not necessarily what everyone in the upper
echelons of the Labour Party were so keen on, as I had voted
quite a lot against the government. It was only at the last
minute that Leyton and Wanstead came up.
How is Parliament different for you?
ST: One of the last votes I was involved in in 2005 was to
partially reverse the sitting hours. So this is the first time I have
had late votes on a Tuesday. I remember Oona saying: “If we
lose we won’t have those bloody late nights.”
CL: I was a sole traveller when I first came in, and now I have a
family. It’s not a family-friendly place, so it’s much more difficult
this time. There is also a lot less respect for the job than there
used to be since the problem with expenses.
JC: In 2005 not many people had emails. That’s probably the
biggest single difference.
How have you changed?
GD: It’s good to be out for a while as it’s easy to become
institutionalised. I enjoyed not being here and doing a job of
work in terms of helping Wales adapt to climate change, but it’s
good to be back with fresh insights and perspective.
ST: I have lots more experience – I hit the ground running.
JE: After my election in 1992 I probably went through the process
of being at every set of questions – you can already see it in those
people who are jumping up and down and asking pre-prepared
questions. I’m not likely to be in that sort of category.
CL: Before I felt part of a squad that was led: loyalty was very
much the driving factor. That is still the case, but now it’s about
“what ideas have I got and how can we make them work”, rather
than being a foot-soldier and not daring to make a suggestion. In
hindsight it might have been good for my soul to lose.
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
JC: You always learn something from losing, but my political
principles are the same.
Do you feel part of the Class of 2010?
GD: The advantage of being a recycled MP is that you can make
new friends with the new intake and reconnect with people
who were there before.
ST: There is a sense of having a bit in that camp and a bit in the
1997 camp, and of being in either. I suppose those distinctions
become less significant with time, but if you acquire a tag then
you tend not to lose it. People know me because of 1997 and
Portillo, and that win is associated with Tony Blair, but with the
passage of time these labels become irrelevant.
JE: I regard myself as part of the 1992 intake, but it’s hard to say
where I fit in. I’m not really sure where I am in the batting order,
but I have had a career as a minister already.
CL: A lot of my 1997 colleagues have gone, so it’s about making
new friends.
JC: I’ve got a lot of friends in the 2010 intake, but when you’re a
retread you’re not really part of it.
What are you hoping to achieve?
GD: I’m re-engaging in the areas I have experience in. If Ed
wants me to join his team in any way then I’m obviously very
happy to do so.
ST: Like Chris, I stood for the shadow cabinet and didn’t get in.
I’m now in the shadow foreign affairs team, and I’d like to gain a
reputation for seriousness on those issues.
JE: I have a range of issues in which I am very interested, and
I think there are a variety of ways I can contribute. I tried for
Cardiff North first time around, but they deemed me too young.
They can’t complain now that they have me at the age of 60.
CL: As an opposition MP I have the freedom to raise whatever
issue I like, and I have spent a lot of time getting it out of my
system. I’ve also got the shadow portfolio in the Treasury team
that I wanted. I would love to do that in government. I also
appreciate that you have a finite time now – when you’re in
government, you really ought to seize the day.
JC: I’m not interested in being on the front bench. I want to
focus on my constituency and being a backbench MP. I’m on
the Treasury select committee and back on the parliamentary
committee, the ruling body of the PLP. My constituency has
been hit by the cuts and it’s going to get a lot worse before it
gets better. No matter how hard you try, you feel as though
the prospects of stopping the devastation heading in our
direction are very limited. It’s the most depressing experience
I have ever had.
pollwatch professor paul whiteley, university of essex
Do newspapers influence voting behaviour?
The debate triggered by News International’s plan to take over
BSkyB has focused attention on the impact of the media on British
politics. How much truth is there in the claim that the media has a
powerful impact on voting behaviour? We can assess this with the
help of a natural experiment which took place between 1992 and
1997. In the 1992 election the Daily Mirror loyally supported Labour
while the Sun was very hostile to the party and to Neil Kinnock. By
1997 the Sun had changed its position and supported Tony Blair and
New Labour while the Daily Mirror remained loyal. Did the change
of editorial line have an influence on Sun readers?
The chart, which uses data from the British Election Study,
suggests that it did. Tony Blair’s landslide victory occurred in
1997 and so we would expect the predominantly working class
readerships of both newspapers to swing to Labour between the
two elections and the chart shows that this happened. The Labour
vote share increased by eight per cent among both Sun and Daily
Mirror readers, although it started from a much higher base for the
latter. There was, however, a marked difference in the swing away
from the Conservatives and also in turnout between the readers of
the two newspapers. The Conservative vote share fell by twice as
much among Sun readers as it did among Daily Mirror readers, and
How newspaper readers voted
1992 Vote
1997 Vote
Change
Sun Readers
Conservative
39
23
-16
Labour
30
38
+8
Liberal Democrat
12
9
-3
Did not Vote
20
31
+11
Daily Mirror Readers
Conservative
14
6
-8
Labour
63
71
+8
Liberal Democrat
10
8
-2
Did not Vote
12
16
+4
turnout fell by nearly three times as much. The implication is that
Conservative-inclined Sun readers were put off voting for their party
and so many of them stayed at home. They didn’t actually swing to
Labour in larger numbers than their Daily Mirror counterparts, but
the Sun’s change of line helped to undermine Conservative support.
The effect is subtle, but it suggests that newspapers have political
clout with their readers.
bill briefing philippa silverman, dods monitoring
Education Bill
Following on from the Academies Act 2010, the Education Bill
introduces provisions on teacher training, school discipline and
standards.
Education secretary Michael Gove (right) says plans to
overhaul England’s teaching system will “restore discipline and
reduce bureaucracy” in schools.
The bill contains measures that will hand beefed-up powers
to teachers to search or expel unruly pupils while also giving
them greater protection against false accusations. All new
teachers will be expected to undergo an induction period and
teachers failing to pass this will be barred from regular duties.
It removes the need for parents to sign a “behaviour and
attendance partnership” with schools.
Ofqual gains a new duty to measure qualifications against
those used in other parts of the world, while Ofsted inspections
are refocused to prioritise
quality of education. The
education secretary gains a new
power to intervene in underperforming schools.
The bill contains a number
of provisions to expand the
existing Academies regime and
allow the use of excess public
land for the creation of new
schools. And it includes a clause
to make higher-earning graduates pay a higher interest rate on
their student loans. The bill will have its second reading in the
Commons on February 8.
For full details of legislation at Westminster, visit:
ePolitix.com/legislation
The House Magazine • 7 february 2011
11
Agenda
the chamber
Conservative health minister Simon Burns outrages opposition MPs by lionising a Labour hero
quote of
the week
“It is the natural progression of the original vision to deliver the finest health care
for all our citizens, remaining true to the founding principles set out by Nye Bevan.”
commons gallery
Sam
Macrory
reports on
proceedings
in the
Commons
Middle east
support their demands for freedom and to encourage an
orderly transition to a more open, democratic and pluralist Egypt,” Twigg declared.
Then the big beasts waded in. Former foreign secAs pro-democracy demonstrations crept towards violence
tary Sir Malcolm Rifkind (C, Kensington) worried that a
in Egypt, MPs gathered in the chamber on Monday to
change of government in Egypt could see the removal of
hear the government’s update on the unfolding events.
one of the “most powerful forces for foreign policy modA meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council had kept
eration in the Middle East”.
William Hague overseas, so the
Jack Straw (L, Blackburn),
foreign secretary’s ministerial ally
a fellow ex-holder of the office, arAlistair Burt stepped in to talk the
gued that it was “far better, in the
House through President Mubarmedium term, for the stability of
ak’s attempts to cling to power.
the region and Egypt’s future that
“It is not for us to decide who
there be free and fair elections”.
governs Egypt,” Burt told MPs, beRichard Ottaway (C, Croyfore suggesting his favoured route
don S), chairman of the foreign
of “a process of political change that
affairs select committee, took the
reflects the wishes of the Egyptian
Rifkind line, worrying about the
people… that should include an Anti-Mubarak protesters in Cairo: how would
political reforms affect Middle East peace bid?
consequences of “a disorderly
orderly transition to a more demotransition” and the threat that posed to Egypt’s relations
cratic system”.
with Israel.
Stephen Twigg, Labour’s spokesman, gave a
Hague had returned to British shores in time for
breathless and largely supportive contribution. “The
the following day’s Foreign Office questions. The first
United Kingdom has a responsibility to those people to
Big beasts divide over
best way forward for egypt
Public Bodies Bill
woodlands split forest tories
The row over the Public Bodies Bill, and in particular
the government’s attempts to sell off England’s forests,
escalated during the course of last week.
Shadow environment secretary Mary Creagh used
an Opposition Day debate on Wednesday to label the
privatisation of England’s forests as “environmental
vandalism”. Creagh’s comments – part of a fiery debate
which saw deputy Speaker Dawn Primarolo forced to
angrily intervene on a number of occasions – were
dismissed by environment secretary Caroline Spelman
as part of Labour’s attempts at “sowing further
misinformation and fear”.
Sowing or otherwise, Creagh’s arguments weren’t
entirely ignored on the Conservative benches either.
Guy Opperman (C, Hexham) declared that he had “yet to
be satisfied that a good economic case has been made”,
12
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
while Julian Lewis (C, New Forest E) grumbled that the
government was acquiring “the reputation of being the
party of nasty surprises… this is a nasty surprise, and
we can do without it”. However, Lewis’ neighbouring MP
Desmond Swayne (C, New Forest W), who is also PPS to
David Cameron, argued that the proposals presented “an
opportunity… that we would be foolish to pass up”.
Liberal Democrat party president Tim Farron (LD,
Westmorland and Lonsdale) broke from the coalition
ranks to declare that “all national park woodlands
should be considered as heritage, and should not
be leased or sold”, later joining Lewis by voting in
support of the Labour motion. Tory MPs Caroline
Nokes (Romsey and Southampton North) and Zac
Goldsmith (Richmond Park) also filed through the Yes
lobby, but the motion was defeated by 310 to 260
as Tory backbench grumbling failed to convert into
meaningful rebellion.
Nick Clegg
good
week
Deputy PM praised for launch
of government’s mental health
strategy
question on Egypt came from Sharon Hodgson (L,
Washington & Sunderland W), another MP to worry
about how current events might shape future foreign
policy in the North African nation, while former Liberal
Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell (NE Fife) was similarly concerned about the dangers
posed to “the only success in the Middle East peace process” – namely the accord signed between Egypt, Jordan,
and Israel.
Hague stressed the need for Egypt to “play a positive
and moderating role in the Middle East – a positive role
towards achieving a wider peace in the Middle East”, but
his answers betrayed a glaring truth: all he can do is “urge”
and “engage”, with no promise he will be listened to.
Egypt also dominated the exchanges between
David Cameron and Ed Miliband at Wednesday’s
PMQs, but the hubbub in the chamber was such that the
leaders struggled to maintain MPs’ attention. (“It is clear
that people would prefer a bun fight,” Cameron later
admitted.) But the two leaders found little room to disagree, with Miliband nodding on as the prime minister
confirmed that “a more democratic future is… in their
interests as well as ours”.
It did not make for parliamentary entertainment,
but the seriousness of events in Egypt demanded no other
response. Parliament, and the world, watches closely.
Business questions
a rose by any other name
Last Thursday saw the latest publication of parliamentary
expenses. As journalists trawled for ugly claims, MPs took
the opportunity to once again express their indignation
over the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
(Ipsa). This time, however, they were joined by Sir George
Young, the leader of the House. At business questions, Sir
George warned MPs that they “must adhere to the principle of the independent setting of our allowances; we cannot
go back to the bad old days”.
However, he also issued a warning to Ipsa. “The
allowances are meant to support us in the job we were
sent here to do: fighting for our constituents, holding the
government to account, and scrutinising legislation…the
current administration and structure of allowances get in
Caroline Spelman
Tory backbenchers left
grumbling at government plans
to sell off forests
bad
week
Joan Walley q&A
Following up on her earlier PQ on health and safety in the
House of Commons, Joan Walley is hoping for a reaction
Why did you table this PQ?
There was a fire alarm test the other month in Portcullis House – I
happened to be in the building. All the doors closed, and the corridors
in Portcullis House make it easy to lose your sense of direction. It’s very
disorientating and difficult to find an exit and know where to go. When
the lights go out it’s easy to walk around in circles, and the stairway is
outside the corridor too.
What happens next?
There has been a site meeting about this. There could be something done
to put an arrow here or there. I hope that my question might act as a
nudge. I want to know what risk assessments are being done and what the
authorities are going to do about this.
Medicine
recycled: Hilary
Benn’s fun at
the expense of
senior ministers
later brought a
pointed rebuke
from Greg
Mulholland
the way of our doing that job,” argued Sir George. MPs
murmured their support – bashing the expenses system is
a dangerous game to play in public.
Shadow leader Hilary Benn felt emboldened to
wade in, welcoming Sir George’s comments and adding
that his “view is forcefully shared right across the House,
and we all hope that Ipsa will listen”.
So far, so good natured, but Benn couldn’t resist a
low jibe. Sir George groaned as his shadow announced
that he had been delving through the Commons leader’s
blog: “I predict that the Times list of the most popular
girls’ names in the year may include a new one – Austerity,” Benn quoted Sir George. He then looked ahead
to the coming year, predicting that “Dave, George and
Nick are not going to be very popular,” and suggesting
“Complacency, Incompetency and, for the deputy prime
minister… Duplicity!”
He earned a ticking-off from the Speaker for the
last one, and a rather personal rebuke from Greg Mulholland (LD, Leeds NW), who later asked: “How many boys
born this year would welcome their parents calling them
Hilary?”
Benn wasn’t amused. Perhaps he should have stuck
to the safer ground of parliamentary expenses.
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
13
Agenda
The chamber
Deputy Speaker Baroness Gibson of Market Rasen announces the news many peers had been waiting to hear
quote of
the week
“The committee of the whole House, to whom the Parliamentary Voting System and
Constituencies Bill was committed, have gone through the same and have directed me to report
it to your lordships with amendments.”
Lords gallery
Nicholas
Randall
rounds up
the latest
news from
the upper
chamber
Voting system bill
Rocky road ahead despite brief
respite from AV hostilities
Report stage of the Parliamentary Voting System and
Constituencies Bill is scheduled to begin this afternoon,
with peers having been warned by Lords leader Lord
Strathclyde that they must return it to the Commons by
the end of business a week today.
But following the brief lull in the stand-off between
the government and Labour that allowed the committee
stage to finish at 6.51pm on Wednesday – after 17 days,
113 hours, numerous late finishes and one all-night sitting
– this week’s schedule was published on Thursday without opposition agreement.
For the third week in a row, the list of forthcoming
business, which is usually produced every Wednesday by
the government whips, was delayed until Thursday and
when it eventually came out allocated three days, today
Black Rod
Viggers praised
as Leakey arrives
Lieutenant General David Leakey took over as
Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod on Tuesday as his
predecessor, Lieutenant General Sir Freddie Viggers,
was praised for the “outstanding service” he had given
the House.
Sir Freddie retired in October after suffering a
stroke on the day Parliament returned following May’s
general election.
Lords leader Lord Strathclyde said Sir Freddie
had had time for everyone. “To paraphrase, he could
walk with the Clerk of the Parliaments and not lose the
common touch,” he said.
And he added that he was “as firmly lodged in
the House’s affection and esteem as any of his equally
accomplished predecessors”.
Labour peers’ leader Baroness Royall of Blaisdon
said he had brought to his role an “impressive and
admirable mixture of decisiveness and consideration,
courteousness and care, wisdom and judgment,
great effort and good humour, not to mention that
14
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
until Wednesday, for the report stage and next Monday
for the third reading.
Without further concessions Labour could attempt
to prevent the report stage from starting, arguing that the
usual interval of 14 days between the end of committee
and start of report had not been observed. The normal
method of scheduling business in the upper House, which
involves cross-party agreement between whips, broke
down during the committee stage, with a deal to finish the
committee reached only on Monday.
Until that point the government had threatened to
attempt to impose a guillotine in the face of Labour delaying tactics. But Lord Strathclyde said on Monday that
the usual channels had returned to “effective functioning”
and the government would bring forward “a package of
concessions” at report following a series of discussions.
But Labour’s ex-lord chancellor Lord Falconer of
Thoroton warned that the bill’s future timetable dependwonderful twinkling in his eye”.
Lady Royall also paid tribute to the work of the
Yeoman Usher, Lieutenant Colonel Ted Lloyd-Jukes,
who has been acting as Black Rod.
“He will probably go down in history as having
the world record in introductions,” she said. He had
led more than 100 new peers into the chamber by the
time the new Black Rod took over the duty for the first
time when Labour’s Baroness Worthington took her
seat on Wednesday.
Eight other peers took their seats last week:
Labour’s Lord Noon and Baronesses King of Bow
and Lister of Burtersett; Lib Dems Lord Storey and
Baronesses Randerson and Tyler of Enfield; Tory Lord
Gold; and crossbencher Lord Stirrup.
• Lord Lexden, who made his maiden speech
on Tuesday in grand committee in the Moses Room,
is thought to be the first peer to make their debut
outside of the main chamber. He said he was liberated
to shed his name, Alistair Cooke, and a “lifetime’s sense
of inferiority”. “Long shadows have fallen on me, cast
first by the world-famous writer and broadcaster and
now by a fine England batsman,” he explained.
state of
the parties
labour: 241
conservative: 218
crossbench: 185
lib dem: 92
ed on “further agreement on substantive issues between
the parties”.
An initial concession came during committee when
advocate general Lord Wallace of Tankerness accepted
the principle of an amendment from crossbench peers’
convenor Baroness D’Souza which would have allowed
the Boundary Commission to hold inquiries in some disputed cases.
Lady D’Souza’s role in ending the stalemate has
echoes of that of a previous convener, former Commons
Speaker Lord Weatherill, in the Labour government’s
legislation to evict most of the hereditary peers from the
Lords. Amid rumours that the Tories would attempt to
disrupt government business, the so-called ‘Weatherill
amendment’ allowed 92 hereditaries to remain and enabled cross-party frontbench agreement on the House of
Lords Act 1999.
The present bill needs to become law by February
24, and more practically by the start of the Lords recess on
February 16, if the referendum on adopting the alternative vote is to be held on May 5. Lord Strathclyde said this
meant returning the bill to the Commons by February 14
and he felt “confident that the majority of Members from
all parts of the chamber share this aim”.
The bill arrived in the House of Lords on November 3 and, unusually, had a two-day second reading on
November 15 and 16 before starting its committee stage
on November 30.
bishops: 24
dup: 4
uup: 4
ukip: 2
Technology
iPad age reaches the Lords
Peers should be able to use ‘hand-held’ electronic devices in the chamber
and committees to access parliamentary papers and speaking notes, the
administration and works committee has recommended.
The committee’s report specifically rules out laptops but not other
devices such as iPads. However, the devices should not be used to send
or receive messages, or search the internet, in connection with ongoing
proceedings.
Members should, however, be able to use the devices for any other
purpose not related to the proceedings if they do not distract other
Members. But the committee would “discourage” their repeated use as a
“courtesy” to other peers.
• Lord Fyfe of Fairfield (L) died on Tuesday aged 69. The Bishop
of Lincoln retired on Monday and will be replaced by the Bishop of St
Edmundsbury and Ipswich.
Westminster
Plan to clear up
Parliament Square
A committee comprising all the authorities responsible for
Parliament Square would be authorised to clear the area
of tents and sleeping equipment between midnight and
6am every night under backbench legislation introduced
in the Lords on Tuesday.
Although the grassed area of the square has been
cleared of everyone apart from Brian Haw, some demonstrators remain camped on the pavements despite threats
of legal action from Westminster City Council.
The government has in the past cited the number
of authorities involved in the square and surrounding
others: 17
leave of absence: 20
disqualified: 16 Suspended: 3
total: 826 To come: 2C, 2LD,
1L, 2BP
Lord Marlesford:
Parliament
Square bill
area as a difficulty when attempting to clear it.
Lord Marlesford’s Parliament Square (Management) Bill, which has yet to be scheduled for a second
reading, would create a committee consisting of organisations including the city council, the Greater London Authority and the Metropolitan Police.
The Tory peer said his plans went further than proposals in the government’s Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill, which is going through the Commons.
Baroness Neville-Jones, the minister who would
have responsibility for piloting the police bill through the
Lords, has meanwhile come under fire for her failure to
answer a written question asked by Lord Hunt of Kings
Heath (L) on December 1 – the only pre-Christmas question that remains unanswered.
Lord Hunt and Lord Jopling (C) both asked written questions on Monday about the fate of the inquiry
into a definition of “frontline police services”, and Lord
Rosser (L) put the matter to the minister at oral questions
on Tuesday.
After the Labour frontbencher failed to get a response, Lord Rooker (L Ind) followed up by asking how
many Home Office “briefing meetings” Lady NevilleJones had had on the subject. She replied she was “at a loss
to know to what question” he was referring.
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
15
Agenda
local view
constituency postbag
The issue
Campaign to allow charitable healthcare
providers to reclaim VAT
S
Keighley
• A bellwether seat usually won
by the party which forms the
government
• A high level of household
owner-occupancy
• Textiles and engineering are
traditional, if declining, sources
of employment
Photograph courtesy of Keighley News
et in large gardens in Oxenhope in my constituency, Sue Ryder Care-Manorlands Hospice first
opened its doors in 1974 to provide specialist
palliative care for patients with cancer and other lifelimiting illnesses. Each year, around 640 patients and
their families from Keighley, Ilkley, Craven, Bradford
and surrounding areas benefit from the extensive range
at the hospice and in the community.
of services on offer and the professionalism and kindness
However, Manorlands has recently advised that
of the wonderful staff on site.
general donations are down more than £33,000 compared
As you might therefore imagine, Manorlands is
to last year, with donations from businesses down more
held very dear in the hearts and minds of local people
than £50,000. It is against this backdrop that the rise in
– quite simply, most of us know someone who has been
VAT to 20 per cent has been introduced, and it has blown
cared for there. A great many individuals also want to
an even bigger hole in Manorlands’ finances. Because –
do their bit to help.
unlike local authorities,
The most obvious
limited companies and
way is to assist with its fundsome parts of the NHS
raising efforts. For the last
– charitable healthcare
two years, I have miracuproviders cannot curlously transformed myself
rently reclaim VAT.
into ‘Cliff the Castle’ to take
Last year, Manorpart in the Mascot Gold Cup
lands lost almost £40,000
at Wetherby Racecourse in
in VAT and, had it been
aid of Manorlands. (Thankrun by the NHS, it could
fully, no prize money was
have recovered more
on offer, meaning my lowly
than half of that sum.
finishing positions were a Kris Hopkins with staff at Manorlands Hospice
I do not believe this is
source of amusement rather
right and, as the Member of Parliament so proud to have
than annoyance for Andrew Wood and his colleagues in
Manorlands on my patch, I decided to see what I could do
the fundraising team.)
to persuade the government to re-examine what I regard
I was also involved in founding the BIGK 10K
as an anomaly and allow charitable healthcare providers to
road race (sadly, the K stands for ‘Keighley’ rather than
reclaim VAT.
‘Kris’), now entering its fourth year, with all proceeds
First, I wrote to the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
going to support the hospice.
highlighting the problem and requesting that he considBut these, and the considerable efforts of so many
er making the necessary legislative changes. (The forthother volunteers, are still not enough to put Manorcoming Budget would seem to me to be an opportune
lands on the stable financial footing it should be able
moment although, as a lowly backbencher, I am obvito take for granted. It needs to raise around £1.1m in
ously prepared to leave the timing up to him.)
voluntary donations each year to continue its care both
Is there an
issue in
your constituency
which
deserves
wider
attention?
To take part
in Constituency
Postbag
please
email us at
editorial@
housemag.
co.uk
16
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
Kris Hopkins
Conservative MP for Keighley
This move won very welcome backing from the
highly respected Keighley News and Ilkley Gazette newspapers in my constituency, who asked readers to come
forward with active support.
And then, the first time I was fortunate enough to
get onto the order paper for prime minister’s questions, I
asked David Cameron to look into the matter. Responding, the prime minister paid a generous tribute to the
hospice movement and acknowledged that the issue was
one that MPs across the House care deeply about.
But he cautioned that, in considering a full VAT
exemption, “We have to look at the consequences both
for the state sector and the private sector, and their relationship with the voluntary sector, before we can take
such a step”. And it is an understandable point to make,
given the deep financial straits in which the nation’s finances continue to operate.
However, Sue Ryder themselves have since offered a partial solution to the problem, which I hope the
government will now take on board. In short, the NHS
is able to recover VAT on certain supplies that charities
are not, with the NHS VAT recovery rules written into
Section 41 of the 1994 VAT Act.
As Sue Ryder chief executive Paul Woodward
has argued and I obviously agree, there should be a
level playing field in this area between charities providing healthcare services and the NHS. And in order to achieve this, charitable providers of healthcare
services should be included in Section 41. It’s as simple
as that.
I hope this message now gets through, the argument is won and Manorlands Hospice can get on with
providing the quality of care its patients and their families cherish so much.
Coming up
Manufacturing Dialogue Roundtable
Tuesday 1st March, House of Commons
The inaugural roundtable in the year-long Dods UK Manufacturing Dialogue will examine the image and perception of
manufacturing, and the role government can play in supporting growth of this sector.
Briefing on the role of research in business success
Wednesday 2nd March, House of Commons
This briefing, supported by Research Councils UK, will discuss the contribution publicly funded research can make to the
growth, prosperity and wellbeing of the UK both now and in the future.
AQA Parliamentary Reception
Wednesday 9th March, Terrace Pavilion, House of Commons
This timely reception will take place at the beginning of a landmark year for education, which will see the passage of the
Education Bill through Parliament. Guests will have the opportunity to meet managers and the research team from the AQA,
and learn about their role in education reform.
For further information on our upcoming events, please contact Sarah Baldwin on 020 7593 5667 or at [email protected]
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
17
Open Letter, signed by UK Business Schools
Sirs,
We write to express our
deep concern about the government’s
proposed changes to student
immigration. While fully supporting the
objective of ending current abuses,
as MBA programme directors we
disagree profoundly with the proposal
that all overseas students, regardless
of level or course of study, should
lose the oppor tunity to apply to work
in the UK and instead be required to
leave as soon as they complete their
programme. If implemented, these
plans would have a serious impact
both on the competitiveness, finances
and reputation of UK business schools
but also on the wider economy. UK
business schools will suffer a serious
loss of fee income as overseas MBA
students switch to other countries, UK
businesses will find their recruitment
pool of highly skilled and experienced
individuals diminished and, over
the longer term, they will lose the
ambassadorial benefits that British
educated MBAs bring to international
business relationships.
MBA students have no recourse to
public funds for tuition fees, which
range up to £50,000 per year. The
entry qualifications and level of fees
involved ensure that MBA students
are not the type of migrants that the
Government is seeking to deter from
entering and abusing the student
immigration system. The individuals
who graduate with an MBA from
accredited UK business schools are
already on advanced career paths and
the evidence shows that those who
are initially recruited to work here stay
for only a few years before moving
on to other international positions.
In a globalizing world it is a serious
mistake to discourage future business
leaders from choosing to study in the
UK. We are confident that it is not the
intention of the government to stop
the brightest and best contributing
to the UK economy, and that a way
will be found to enable employers to
hire MBAs into the UK. We urge the
government to think again about the
wider and unintended consequences
of its proposals.
Sincerely,
Sharon Bamford
Chief Executive
Association of MBAs
Dr Stephen King
MBA Director
Leeds University Business School
Nicholas Perdikis
Director, School of Management and
Business
Aberystwyth University
Professor Simon Lilley
Head of the University
Leicester School of Management
Ilze Zandvoort
Associate MBA Director
Ashridge Business School
Dr. Brigitte Nicoulaud
MBA Programmes Director
Aston Business School
Steve Kempster
MBA Director
Birmingham Business School
Dr Bryan Lowe
Director of the MBA Programmes
Bradford University School of Management
Dr Peter Simpson
Director MBA & Executive Education
Bristol Business School
Professor Amir M. Sharif
Director, MBA Programmes
Brunel Business School
Professor Zahir Irani
Head of School
Brunel Business School
Karen Siegfried
MBA Executive Director
Cambridge Judge Business School
Richard Gillingwater
Dean
Cass Business School
Sean Rickard
Director of the Cranfield MBA
Cranfield School of Management
Professor Rob Dixon
Dean
Durham Business School
Professor Susan Miller
MBA Director
Hull University Business School
Ebrahim Mohamed
Director, Imperial Executive MBA
Imperial College Business School
Simon Stockley Director, Imperial Full-Time MBA Programme
Imperial College Business School
Tony Sims MBA Course Director
Kingston Business School
Rajendra S Shirolé
Director, MBA Programmes
Kent Business School
Jonathan Matheny, PhD Director of MBA Programmes Lancaster University Management School Chris Saunders
Full-time MBA Director
Lancaster University Management School
Stephen Chadwick
MBA Programme Director
London Business School
Elaine Ferneley
Director, MBA and MPA Programmes
Manchester Business School
Professor Patricia Rees
Director MBA Programmes
Manchester Metropolitan University Business School
Dr Julie Hodges
Director MBA Programmes
Newcastle University Business School
Jim Rowe
MBA Director
Portsmouth Business School
Allan Scott
MBA Director
Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen Business
School
Dr Alexander Reppel
MBA Director
School of Management at Royal Holloway,
University of London
Professor John Wilson
Head of School
Salford Business School
Dr Jonathan Reynolds
Associate Dean of Degree Programmes
Saïd Business School
Dr George Burt
MBA Programme Director
Strathclyde Business School
Professor Antonis C. Simintiras
MBA Director
Swansea University
Dr Inger Seiferheld
MBA Executive Director
University of Edinburgh Business School
Dr Malcolm Kirkup
Director of MBA Programmes
University of Exeter Business School
Professor Iain Docher ty
Director of MBA Programmes
University of Glasgow Business School
John Paul Kawalek
Director of MBA
University of Sheffield
Professor Terry Williams
Director, School of Management
University of Southampton
Jonathan Lees
Executive Director
Warwick Business School
Dr Sue Balint
Director of MBA Programmes
Westminster Business School
For more information about the Association of MBAs, go to www.mbaworld.com
people
ministerial briefing
mark prisk
business & enterprise
yes minister
Made a minister in May 2010
no minister
HE SAys
Fails to win the formerly safe
Tory seat of Wansdyke in the
1997 general election. Accused
of holding a ‘fictional’ post as
shadow minister for Cornwall
red box
“As someone who ran a
business, I like to get on and
make decisions”
The government’s local growth
white paper was introduced
last October. The crucial task of
delivering private sector growth
Q
uietly, competently and with limited fuss, Mark
Prisk has moved through the parliamentary
ranks and established himself as the owner of a
safe pair of ministerial hands.
His political training started early. Prisk was vice
chairman of the Confederation of Conservative Students
for a year in the early 1980s, as well as being a former
chairman of the Cornish Young Conservatives, but took
a pause before launching his political career proper. On
graduating from Reading University, Prisk trained as a
chartered surveyor before starting up his own communications and marketing firm.
At 30 years of age, he first stood for Parliament in
1992 and was comprehensively knocked out of contention in the safe Labour seat of Newham North West. Five
years later he tried again in the formerly safe Tory seat
of Wansdyke. However, boundary changes saw the Tory
grasp loosen, and Prisk was knocked into second place by
4,000 votes after a 14.4 per cent swing to Labour.
In 2001 his task was a little easier, with true-blue
Hertford and Stortford voting in their droves to elect
Prisk to Parliament. Posts in the shadow Treasury team
quickly followed, before Prisk – via a valuable experience in the whips’ office and a bizarre volunteered stint
as the shadow Cornwall minister – moved to shadow
the business and enterprise brief under the leadership of
David Cameron.
Having transferred from shadow to minister after the 2010 election, Prisk has acquired a vast portfolio
since moving into the Department for Business. Deregulation, industry and regional economic policy all form
part of his wide-ranging brief in addition to his main
task of business and enterprise policy.
Business hub: Prisk does much of the hard graft at BIS
Not surprisingly, the bulging in-tray has led some
observers to suggest that much of the hard graft at BIS is
performed by Prisk, where his media-friendly boss Vince
Cable, the secretary of state, performs more front-of-house
duties. There are also reports that Prisk is finding himself
reluctantly pitched into a turf war over his ministerial responsibilities, with a triumvirate of environment secretary
Caroline Spelman, local government secretary Eric Pickles
and deputy prime minister Nick Clegg all eying up – and
occasionally talking about – parts of Prisk’s brief.
However, despite criticising Vince Cable for aiming
a “kick in the teeth to entrepreneurs” during the election
campaign, Prisk now seems to have forged a competent
working relationship with him.
They will need to maintain it. Despite his low profile, Prisk is charged with breathing life into the private
sector and encouraging the growth of small businesses and
entrepreneurs which the government hopes will step in to
fill the gap created by a shrunken public sector. Those safe
hands will be under pressure not to wobble.
By Sam Macrory
Visit
dodspeople.com
for full ministerial
profiles
The House Magazine • 7 february 2011
19
people
commons diary
tears before bedtime
Priti Patel becomes a hero of the local press for her robust stance on Europe, and
teases fellow MPs with chocolate bars – but one constituent still throws a tantrum
Priti Patel
Conservative
MP for
Witham and
an associate
editor of
The House
Magazine
Thursday, January 27
The freezing temperatures experienced last month have
arrived again and I am feeling both cold and miserable at
the prospect of another period of sub-zero temperatures.
While we feel the chill, Egypt is burning with rioters and
protesters on the streets of Cairo – demonstrating, it would
seem, against their president. I am glued to the news for
now, as this situation looks set to escalate.
I head to the chamber for questions to the leader of
the House. I ask about the attempt by the Parliamentary
Assembly of the European Council to bully us into implementing the ECHR ruling on votes for prisoners immediately. This is outrageous in my view, and further proof that
Parliament needs to regain key powers from the EU.
The afternoon is packed with meeting new acquaintances and an enjoyable TV interview with Alistair
Stewart and fellow MPs Gavin Shuker and Julian Huppert for the weekly politics show on Anglia TV. Following votes, I head to the constituency.
Friday, January 28
First port of call this morning is St Nicholas C of E Primary School in the beautiful and peaceful village of Tolleshunt D’Arcy. I arrive early at 8.30 which gives me time to
speak to parents at the start of their coffee morning about
a number of local issues, including the county council’s
plan to remove escorts for children as young as four from
their journeys home. I meet with the headteacher, and
then join in the celebration assembly which is full of fun,
followed by a Q&A with Year 6. I enjoy visiting schools
and am always inspired by the ability of young children to
ask thought-provoking questions.
I then drive to Chelmsford for a meeting with the
soon-to-be-abolished PCT, only to hear that things are
‘challenging’, which is what they said under the last government! Next meeting is at the local hospital with the new
CEO, who enthusiastically discusses a number of issues as
well as the vision for the hospital going forward. I leave the
meeting feeling upbeat about the future for the hospital;
just as well, as the highly distinguished MP for Chelmsford,
the health minister Simon Burns, was also at the meeting.
20
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
I press on to Plume School in the neighbouring
Maldon constituency to talk to the politics group who
asked a range of questions about the current job. They
were particularly interested in the culture of Westminster,
whether it was all jobs for the boys (and girls), and “why
are we all public school-educated”. Coming from a humble background, I did enjoy challenging their views and
debunking some of the myths they had about this place. I
then head off to the village of Feering before going home
to Witham.
Saturday, January 29
This morning I have my surgery which is taking place
in Witham Library, by far my favourite surgery location.
This is a marathon session which today lasts four hours
due to the sheer volume of constituents demanding to see
me. I am always saddened by the majority of situations
that my constituents find themselves in, as more often
than not their problems are compounded by bureaucratic
officials out there making decisions which then have a
devastating impact upon the constituent. Monday morning will be busy making representations on behalf of those
I saw today. I drive home to find my husband trying hard
to pacify our two-year-old, who has been sobbing for most
of the morning, ‘I want mummy’.
Monday, January 31
It’s just another manic Monday. Having gone through every item of casework from the weekend, I then meet with
the Bahrain Human Rights Monitor. I have first-hand experience of Bahrain, having worked for the Bahrain Economic Development Board. I then meet an inspirational
constituent, Amelia Rope, who has a specialist chocolate
business and supplies her outstanding chocolate to a range
of stores including Selfridges. She has had a horrendous
time trying to secure finance for her business from the
banks. I am massively pro-business and have championed
her all the way. Nonetheless I am appalled by the behaviour of the banks, and her business is proof that we need
to do more to support up-and-coming businesses during
these difficult times.
Priti Patel
welcomes
students from
Thurstable
school, Tiptree
to Westminster
I then head off to the Speaker’s Apartments where
Mr Speaker kindly meets a group of students from Thurstable school in Tiptree who were prevented from visiting
Parliament late last year due to the Tube strike. We are
treated to a Q&A followed by a tour of the apartments.
The students are animated and grateful for the opportunity to meet the Speaker. The rest of the day includes a
meeting of the Conservative Party Board and a contribution to the second reading of the Health Bill.
Tuesday, February 1
I am woken at 3am with a pat on the head from my twoyear-old as he no longer wants to sleep in his bed. Although sleep-deprived I get in for 8am, to face a range of
emails from constituents who are infuriated with the EU
and the issue of prisoner votes.
My day swiftly moves on with a meeting of Conservative colleagues from Essex County Council, followed
by the editorial meeting of this very august publication. I
grab some lunch and then head to the chamber for FCO
questions. This is followed by day five of the committee
stage of the EU Bill, where I call for greater accountability
and transparency from the government on all decisions
related to the EU. I then head back to the office to face the
dreaded inbox.
Wednesday, February 2
I have been invited to the TUC UnionLearn parliamentary reception. Clearly my strong views on the unions have
yet to deter the TUC from inviting me to their functions.
I look forward to going to quiz them further about their
use of taxpayers’ money and facility time!
Busy day in the chamber as I attempt to get a PMQ
and fail. I do, however, manage to mention Amelia Rope
while holding her chocolate bars up in the chamber to
the business secretary during the Opposition Day debate.
The business secretary is helpful and agrees to meet to
discuss this matter further. The rest of the day is a mix-
ture of 1922 Committee, emails and replies to the ‘save
our forests’ lobby.
Thursday, February 3
In much later today as I visit a school for my son first
thing. The local paper has a screaming headline ‘Witham
MP opposes EU bullies’; can’t think what that story must
be about!
The rest of the day is spent on constituency matters, filled with calls and correspondence. I then turn my
attention to my evening speaking engagement at the Felton & Heston Conservative Annual Dinner. Roll on the
weekend...
Furnished or unfurnished one bedroom flat
for rent in Millbank Court - £1420 PCM
Apartment situated – within
Division Bell- on the 4th floor of
this popular purpose built block. The
block benefits from 24 hour porters
and a landscaped Roof Terrace with
panoramic views over Westminster
and the Thames.
Service Charges, heating and hot
water are included in the rent.
For details tel: 07989 970 391
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
21
people
lords diary
from lobbyist to lady
Baroness Parminter reflects on her six months in the House, and her new modus operandi
Friday, January 28
The day begins with walking our two daughters, Rose
and Grace, to their junior school in Godalming. Afterwards I head off to West Sussex to the headquarters of
the RSPCA. As a newly appointed vice-president I am
briefed on current issues and catch up with old friends
from when I worked there in the 1990s.
baroness
parminter
Liberal
Democrat peer
Saturday, January 29
Head into London for an all-day Liberal Democrat policy meeting. Our group is to map out the party policy
development programme up to the next general election,
for Federal Conference approval this September. William Wallace makes invaluable contributions as ever and
the meeting is expertly chaired by Norman Lamb. We
make good progress and finish an hour early, unheard of
for a group of Lib Dems discussing policy!
Sunday, January 30
Walk in brilliant sunshine along the still part-frozen River
Wey and reflect on an excellent sermon by Colin Semper
(ex-BBC religious affairs correspondent) at church this
morning – in silence one hears God’s will. Pack an overnight bag in case, like last Monday, I end up sleeping in the
office tomorrow, given Labour filibustering on the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill.
Monday, January 31
A deal is secured with the Labour Party to finish the
committee stage of the bill this week. We are back from
the brink of a threatened timetabling motion and the
mood lifts palpably. I discuss rescheduling lunch with
Labour friends across the chamber ‘once all this is over’.
Day five of the committee stage of the Energy Bill.
This is the first bill in the Lords I’m seeing through all
its stages. Having had a sympathetic response from evercheerful minister Jonathan Marland to my requests for a
consumer ombudsman and annual targets and parliamentary reporting for the Green Deal, I’m now enjoying listening to the thoughtful arguments from colleagues from
all sides of the House who want to see the government’s
Green Deal deliver.
22
The House Magazine • 7 february 2011
Meet with Sarah Jackson, chief executive of Working Families, to discuss an event I am hosting for them.
With two young children, this is a subject close to my
heart, which I raised in my maiden speech last July. She
flags up that their helpline is giving evidence of problems
with how employers are interpreting BIS guidance on issues affecting working families. It is listening to small, specialist charities like this that is going to help make a reality
of coalition commitments to support working families and
extend the right to request flexible working.
Tuesday, February 1
Attend a Centre Forum roundtable discussion with Michael
Gove on the pupil premium. As a former adviser to the
Every Child a Reader scheme I am heartened when several
headteachers make powerful interventions about schemes
that really work in closing the gap for lowest achievers, and
cite the Reading Recovery and Every Child Counts programmes. Coalition peers meet with Jim Paice to discuss
the Forestry Commission consultation. After raising my
concerns, I ponder on the new ways open to me of effecting change in government after formerly campaigning for
change through pressure groups on the outside.
Wednesday, February 2
The morning is taken up with hearing evidence at EU
Sub-Committee D (Environment & Agriculture) for
our inquiry into innovation in EU agriculture. Later, I
ask a question in the Chamber of Defra minister, Lord
Henley, on the government’s commitment to retain the
ban on commercial whaling. I am pleased with his positive response – and that two students from the Godalming Sixth Form College (where I spoke last week on
Lords reform) are in the Gallery to watch. They are far
more impressed that Shirley Williams talks to me.
Thursday, February 3
Catch up with correspondence whilst making tea for the
builders who are fixing our roof. This week has marked
my first six months in the House. Can you ever be sure
in life what you are letting yourself in for? Probably not,
but I’m starting to find my feet and am enjoying it.
People
new mp interview
the caine mutiny
career change
Simon Reevell’s dormant political interest was awakened by the fox-hunting ban
and an insight into armed forces policy under Labour which so energised him
that within 18 months he was an MP
Have you always been a Conservative?
I was a teenager when Margaret Thatcher came to power,
and the sort of things that the Conservative Party were
saying struck a chord with me. I don’t agree with everything they have done, but they feel a much more natural
place for me to be than the Labour Party. However, if you
go back two generations in my family I think you would
have found they were 100 per cent socialist. My mother’s
father was a big cheese in the NUM, and if my grandmother was still alive and knew I was a Tory then she
would be thinking about turning in her grave.
forgot to give you this!” It was all the instructions about
what to do. I turned up here, and just walked around until
I stopped getting lost.
Had you considered a political career?
No. I joined the Army after leaving school, but I hurt my
leg and had to find something else to do. So I qualified for
the Bar. I had no real interest in politics or politicians.
Are you a tribal politician?
I’m loyal to my party and I think the government is doing
a good job, but I’m perfectly happy to say if I think something is wrong. I try to be objective. In the 1980s we did a
huge amount for this country, but we didn’t look at individuals and families. A lot of people suffered, and you can
still see the legacy of that in lots of families in Yorkshire.
It’s important that we don’t make those mistakes again.
So how did your political interest begin?
My wife and I helped Graham Stuart in the 2005 campaign because we were angry about the fox-hunting ban.
That got me thinking, and I then got involved in the local association.
How did that develop?
At the end of 2004 I defended a guy who was being courtmartialed. He’d shot dead his sergeant in Iraq. It turned
out that he wasn’t qualified to go on a rifle range in England, let alone go to Iraq. He was among 3,500 TA soldiers
who had all been sent to war, even though they weren’t
trained. I was appalled that a country would be run by
people who were prepared to do that, and after a few
months my wife told me to either shut up or do something
about it. It was only 18 months before the election, and
Dewsbury was the only seat I went for.
After winning, what happened next?
As I was leaving the count someone ran up and said: “I
any thoughts on the coalition’s future?
There are lots of seats where it would be impossible for the
coalition to field a candidate because the Liberal Democrats are historically so very different to the Conservative
Party. But all these seats will change, there will be a polling day, there will be an arrangement, and there might be
joint candidates. This will all sort itself out.
What do you hope to achieve as an MP?
If you go to parts of my constituency you meet people who
feel they have been ignored and have no voice. If during
this Parliament, those people feel that someone is prepared
to listen and take them seriously, then I would regard that
as a real achievement.
What about ministerial ambitions?
The midwife did not say “Congratulations, it’s a politician”
when I was born, and if I had wanted a career in politics
then I would have started it ten years ago. I wanted to be an
MP because I didn’t want the people who were governing
our country to do it any more, and because I wanted to do
what I can for my constituency. I’m happy to come here
and do what I can for my constituents and enjoy the privilege of being here.
Interview by Sam Macrory
simon
reevell
Conservative
MP for
Dewsbury
BORN
2 March 1966
Education
Boston Spa
Comprehensive;
Manchester
Polytechnic
(Degree
Economics);
Polytechnic of
Central London
(Diploma Law);
Inns of Court
School of Law
(Bar Vocational
Course)
Career
Army officer;
barrister
parliamentary
career
Member,
Scottish affairs
select committee
2010recreations
Tennis, military
history
The House Magazine • 7 february 2011
23
people
profile
repeat
prescription
Paul Burstow has returned to a health brief which he
held before becoming Lib Dem chief whip – but this time
he is in government, and charged with steering a crucial
piece of reforming legislation through Parliament
24
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
Interview Sam Macrory
Photography Paul Heartfield
P
aul Burstow’s first six months as a Liberal Democrat coalition minister passed largely without notice to the outside world. For, having been handed
a policy brief to which he had devoted much of his parliamentary career, Burstow was proving himself to be a quietly effective junior minister at the Department of Health.
However, events – one scripted, one most definitely
not – have pushed him further into the spotlight. In December, Burstow was one of a number of Lib Dem ministers who mistook cunning Daily Telegraph hacks for honest
constituents, chatting candidly about the coalition – with
his recorded words appearing under the eye-catching headline: ‘I don’t want you to trust David Cameron.’ Burstow is
adamant that he was taken out of context. “I actually said
that David Cameron is not a cuddly liberal, and that he
and I don’t share all the same values. Is that really so shocking a thing to have said to someone who I thought was a
constituent and who wanted to be assured that I hadn’t
become a Conservative? I never said that David Cameron
wasn’t trustworthy, and I certainly never meant it.”
That storm has passed. Now he faces the scheduled,
but no less testing, challenge of steering the controversial
Health and Social Care Bill away from the rocks.
“This is not rushed – this is considered,” Burstow
responds to the suggestion that the bill was sprung on people. “The pace allows the system time to adjust to the new
arrangement. Standing still would be the way to wreck
the NHS: financial pressures make it absolutely necessary
to get the system working in the way our reforms will
achieve.”
However Lord Owen, a founder of the Social Democratic Party which a teenage Paul Burstow once joined,
recently argued that the bill risked leaving the Lib Dems
“no longer able to claim to be the heirs of Beveridge”.
Burstow is defiant. “We co-wrote the white paper
– it was very much a joint production,” he replies when
asked whether the reforms are largely the vision of Andrew Lansley, the Conservative health secretary. “This
is a blend of Lib Dem and Conservative ideas. We are
arguing that the system needs to be more personalised,
more local, and more accountable: these are very much
parts of the agenda which the Lib Dems set out and
Burstow on… coalition talks
“As party chief whip, I did some work on making sure that we had thought
through the different scenarios. We all felt it was important that we actively
pursued both possibilities, but I don’t think we had fully factored in the extent
to which the Labour government had been institutionalised as a majority
government. They were really not psychologically prepared to let go.”
Burstow on… Lib Dem poll ratings
“I’m pretty relaxed. I’ve been around a bit, and I remember the party
registering in the realms of statistical insignificance. There is a gulf
between what the polls say and what people do at the ballot box. These
polls don’t indicate our latent support.”
which we are now seeing put into legislation.”
When asked about his working relationship with
Lansley, Burstow laughs: “You’re not a constituent are
you?” he asks, but with the tape recorder in full view he
offers a frank assessment. “It works very well. We get on
in a business-like way. We are from two different political
positions, but we have a shared commitment to the principles of the NHS: free at the point of use, and there on the
basis of people’s need.”
That Burstow ended up working with Lansley was
initially seen as something of a surprise, given that for the
previous five years the Liberal Democrat health spokesman had been Norman Lamb, now chief political adviser
to party leader Nick Clegg.
“For those who knew me and my interests, it came
as less of a surprise – I was delighted, and I think many of
the sector were too,” says Burstow. Of Lamb, he adds: “Of
course we talk about health policy, but he’s also been very
good at getting on with his new role and leaving me to get
on with mine.”
Lansley and Lamb’s working relationship spectacularly collapsed with the breakdown of cross-party talks
over how to fund social care. Now Burstow must steer
the issue around the political buffers, a challenge which
he says he will meet by “coming to conclusions early, and
legislating within the first half of this Parliament: this is
not a leisurely sojourn around the issues”.
Both “starting points” – the Lib Dems have argued for a partnership funding arrangement and the Tories a voluntary insurance scheme – remain on the table,
Burstow explains, with “a white paper due in the summer
or autumn this year, and a bill to enact reforms published
in 2012”. “Time will tell,” he adds, when asked whether
the bill could be interpreted as a Lib Dem loss or gain depending on which option is pursued.
Given his tricky in-tray, Burstow seems remarkably calm. I ask whether the forthcoming referendum
on electoral reform – Lansley is against – may cause a
headache. “I’m a health minister. We don’t get too bogged
down with discussing the niceties of AV in our meetings,”
he deadpans in response.
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
25
people
profile
Burstow on… the next election
“The important difference is that there will be three parties who can
legitimately say that they have been in government.”
Perhaps Burstow is benefiting from long training in the art of coalition politics, having previously seen
through the SDP/Liberal merger, worked on a number
of cross-party select committees, and sat on a Labour
government taskforce to tackle online grooming.
Growing up in a “pretty apolitical family” – his father was a tailor and his mother a seamstress – Burstow’s
first political experiences came at college. “Through debating, I discovered that the people who took different
views to me were Conservative and Labour,” he recalls.
“I felt more comfortable with what was then the Social
Democratic point of view.”
So much so, that Burstow joined the SDP. “I
learned my craft from the grassroots up,” he recalls.
“I got involved in campaigning, and then I became a
councillor in 1986. I saw our options narrowed by central government, and I wanted to see more decisions
taken locally. So I thought that I’d have a crack at being
an MP.”
He experienced the “bumpiness” of the SDP/Liberal merger – “I suppose that was a precursor to coalition
government; it wasn’t particularly traumatic for me” –
and spent a pre-parliamentary career “buying and selling for a shoe and handbag company, doing some print
CV Paul Burstow
Date of Birth 13 May 1962
education Glastonbury High School For Boys; Carshalton College of Further
Education (Business Studies); South Bank Polytechnic (BA Business Studies)
career Buyer, Allied Shoe Repairs 1985-86; salesman, Kall Kwik Printers,
Chiswick 1986-87; Association of Social Democrat/Liberal Democrat
Councillors: organising secretary 1987-89, campaigns officer 1992-96, political
secretary 1996-97
Parliamentary career Member for Sutton and Cheam since 1997
general election; Liberal Democrat spokesperson for: disabled people 199798, social services and community care 1997-99, local government 1997-99,
older people 1999-2003; shadow Secretary of State for Health 2003-05,
spokesperson for London 2005-06; chief whip 2006-10; minister of state for
care services, Department of Health 2010Recreations Cooking, reading, cycling, walking, keeping fit
Visit dodspeople.com for biographical details of all MPs and peers
26
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
sale, and working for the Association of Liberal Democrat councillors”.
He first stood for Parliament in Sutton in 1992, narrowly losing after the “interesting experience” of fighting
the redoubtable Lady Olga Maitland, the Tory MP whom
he defeated five years later. Upon his election, Burstow
immediately joined the front bench. A string of roles followed, including shadow health secretary, before Burstow
became the party’s chief whip under Sir Menzies Campbell. “We are independently minded, so I saw the role as a
way of giving people a real sense that they were involved in
shaping decisions,” he explains. It sounds like a useful approach to coalition government, and Burstow stresses the
need to retain a clear Lib Dem identity.
“We will have the process of crafting and debating
our policy at party conference as we always do, and we will
be standing on our own separate manifestos,” Burstow insists when asked about the next election. Nor does he rule
anything out when it comes to the post-election political
landscape: “When it comes to forming coalition governments, it’s not the personalities that matter, but the policies
and the ability to implement the things you stood on.”
In this coalition government, few Liberal Democrat
ministers will have such an opportunity to clearly implement policies which their party can claim as their own.
Through defending the NHS reforms and fighting for
a new era of social care, Paul Burstow is facing the most
challenging years of his political career. Being impressively
quiet might not be enough in the months to come.
AQA Parliamentary Reception
hosted by Damian Hinds MP
Date: Wednesday 9th March 2011
Time: From 16:00 -18:00
Venue: Terrace Pavilion, House of Commons
This reception will provide an opportunity to meet
with senior managers and the research team from
the AQA to discuss their part in education reform,
and how research can inform policy decisions. AQA
would very much like to hear views of those attending
about specific areas of research which are of particular
interest to them.
Keynote speeches will also be delivered by senior
representatives from the AQA, who will outline its
research role and some of the conclusions it has found
as well as announcing the programme for 2011.
To attend this event please contact Mikhaila Fish at
Dods on 020 7593 5668 or at [email protected]
For further information about AQA please contact:
David Lloyd - AQA Public Affairs Manager
01483 477 807
07795 020763
[email protected]
The Library Campaign
Supporting Friends and Users of Libraries.
T
he Library Campaign is the only
national membership organisation
which
represents
library
users.
Established in 1984 we have been a
registered charity since 2004.
The Campaign’s aims and objectives are
“to advance the lifelong education of
the public by the promotion, support,
assistance and improvement of
libraries through the activities of
friends and user groups.”
We do this by providing help such as
our Handbook for Friends and User
groups and by advising people who
want to set up groups how to go about
it (The handbook contains a model
constitution) as well as collating views
from around the country to contribute to
national discussions. We are recognised
by DCMS and MLA and have met them
from time to time over many years.
Although we try to support all types of
libraries, our focus has been around the
public library service.
We believe that there are lots of good
things going on in public libraries
such as the vast range of activities
with and for children, the growth of
reading groups, and widespread
access to the internet. We want
to encourage those and see them
grow.
However we are very concerned
at the current threat to the public
library network as local authorities
implement financial savings. At
the time of writing up to 400 public
library branches across the UK are
proposed for closure. We also know
of at least two school library services
set to close.
The Library Campaign would like to
work with politicians at all levels to
protect and improve the invaluable
network that libraries of all sorts
provide to enable citizens to improve
their education, encourage their
children’s learning and abilities, find
out information etc.
“”
Although we try to
support all types of
libraries, our focus has
been around the public
library service.
Contact us:
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 08454509546
Mail: 22 Upper Woburn Place, London
WC1H OTB
Website www.librarycampaign.com
(To be relaunched February 2011)
Registered Charity (E&W) no. 1102634
policy focus
media
News Corp is circling. BSkyB watches on. Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary handed responsibility
for handling the attempted merger, seems unsure what to do. After all, no politician dares fall out
with News Corp’s owner, the all-powerful Rupert Murdoch. Hunt has said he is “minded” to push
the case towards the Competition Commission. That is not the outcome which Murdoch would have
wanted, and Hunt knows it: he also suggested that he would take time to consider if there were any
other possible “remedies” he could try before the Commission route is deemed unavoidable.
Meanwhile a leaked memo from the office of Labour communications chief Tom Baldwin suggests
his boss, party leader Ed Miliband, is a little worried about how to approach the media magnate.
“We must guard against anything which appears to be attacking a particular newspaper group
out of spite,” the memo warned, as Labour frontbenchers were urged to stay away from kicking
the Murdoch-owned News International over the ongoing row about whether phone-hacking was
repeatedly deployed by the News of the World.
If the Office of Fair Trading believes, as it does, that the News Corp bid merits investigation by the
Competition Commission, then clearly it thinks that major issues – such as media plurality – are at
stake. However, the prevarication by Hunt and the caution of Miliband make it clearer still that, in
politics, the biggest media player in town still calls the shots.
what the front benches say
Opinion
Jeremy Hunt, culture, media and sport secretary (below)
We are the largest creator of digital content in Europe – by some measures the largest in the world. Our digital
and ICT sectors now contribute 10 per cent of our GDP. Our creative industries are on track to grow at double the
rate of the wider economy in the years ahead. And when it comes to e-commerce,
we are the nation with the highest per capita spending online anywhere.
The biggest gains right now are going to companies that combine high
quality with global reach. But here’s the irony. Just as technology
drives globalisation, it also drives localisation. And consumers want
both. Our vision of a connected, big society is one in which we
really do value the local as much as the national or international.
And local television is one area – perhaps the only area – in which
our outstandingly successful media sector has been outstandingly
unsuccessful in responding to consumer needs.
31
Damian
Tambini
33
Don Foster
34
Victoria Nash
36
Simon Singh
Ivan Lewis, shadow culture, media and sport secretary
We have a revolution taking place in our global media environment.
Industry innovation, convergence and changing consumer demand are
resulting in exciting new opportunities and ask new questions of industry
and government. BBC iPlayer, Facebook, Twitter, Skype, Mumsnet,
YouTube – all platforms which are revolutionising the way people
communicate with each other and access content.
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
29
RADIO SPECTRUM
R
adio Spectrum supports diverse services in the public and private sectors, from
broadcasting to emergency services, to voice and data services, provided through mobile
telecommunications. Demand for this limited resource is rising , driven largely by the growing
use of smartphones and mobile data applications. Public policy needs to ensure that spectrum
is used efficiently, and in a way that continues to encourage competition and innovation.
Digital Dividend Spectrum
The switchover from analogue to digital television will
release low frequency spectrum - , the “Digital Dividend”
- some of which has been reserved for next generation
mobile broadband services. A report by Spectrum Value
Partners calculated that allocating low frequency
spectrum to mobile services could benefit the UK economy
by approximately £16.5bn (2008).
The “Digital Dividend” spectrum has favourable
transmission characteristics, and is one of the most cost
effective means of delivering mobile services. It provides
extensive coverage in rural areas, in-building coverage
in urban/suburban areas, and much needed additional
capacity for broadband / high-speed data services.
Following extensive debate Parliament agreed in
December 2010 the Statutory Instrument that will enable
the government to auction this new high quality spectrum.
Ofcom will shortly publish the proposed auction rules.
Innovation
Everything Everywhere, the joint venture between
Orange and T-Mobile, welcomes the availability of
“Digital Dividend” spectrum as it will allow new and
innovative products to be made available such as
‘mobile money’ and e-health.
...allocating low
frequency spectrum to
mobile services could
benefit the UK economy
by approximately
£16.5bn.
As a result of how mobile spectrum was originally
allocated, Orange, T-Mobile and 3 only have access to
higher frequency spectrum. This spectrum requires
significantly higher investment levels than lower
frequency spectrum, to offer a comparable customer
experience. The government’s ‘Broadband Strategy’
called for the deployment of mobile broadband and
access to the “Digital Dividend” spectrum will enable
Everything Everywhere to deploy high speed mobile
broadband around the country.
In other European countries, government and regulators
have attempted to level the playing field by reallocating
low frequency spectrum between existing operators.
Ofcom and the UK government attempted something
similar, but were derailed by dispute and litigation.
Competition
The UK is renowned for competition, investment and
innovation in the mobile communications sector. The
regulatory environment surrounding the auction of
the “Digital Dividend” spectrum needs to ensure fair
competition and access to this spectrum for all network
owners to justify the further investments in mobile
technology and innovation necessary for the UK economy
‘Growth Agenda’ and for consumer benefit.
www.everythingeverywhere.com
policy
media
a tighter mesh
for murdoch?
J
ust weeks after taking on the media policy brief,
Jeremy Hunt has indicated that he plans to refer
the proposed News Corporation-BSkyB merger
to the Competition Commission for advice on whether
it should be permitted, or if it will result in an unacceptable reduction in ‘media plurality’.
Many argue that it will be politically difficult for
the minister to do anything but refer to the Commission.
But given the exceptional circumstances, Hunt could
turn what many see as a poisoned chalice into an opportunity. The secretary of state could appoint a media
commission to review self-regulation, with the remit to
offer more detailed advice on potential undertakings –
i.e. ‘sweeteners’, to alleviate concern that the merger will
lessen media plurality.
“Guarantees of editorial
independence would have
to be genuinely independent
from News Corp, with a
majority lay membership,
published codes of conduct,
complaints data and minutes”
The minister may be able to persuade News Corp
to accept a new regulatory settlement that would raise
a higher impartiality bar for Sky – addressing agendasetting concerns noted in the recent Ofcom report on the
merger – and allay public and political concerns about
phone hacking.
The standard measures are unlikely to address the
plurality concerns raised by Ofcom’s report. Behavioural
remedies – such as guarantees of editorial independence,
new internal editorial boards, clauses of conscience in
journalists’ contracts, or separation of newsrooms – have
all been offered to get media mergers through in the past.
The business secretary’s off-the-record plans notwithstanding,
Damian Tambini examines the delicate regulatory challenge
facing the culture secretary over the proposed BSkyB takeover
None of these approaches are likely to be convincing,
which is what makes a more radical option attractive.
Most in the industry are quite sceptical about
boards to protect editorial integrity – the board set up
after the Sunday Times merger 30 years ago is supposed
to be an independent place where editors and journalists
can go if they feel their independence is compromised.
They have not been queuing at the door to do so, even
though there is general acceptance that journalists face
pressure from proprietors.
If News Corp controls access to journalists’ next
job as well as the one after that, journalists are not likely
to report to internal boards. It is difficult to see how such
a board structure could be made to work, but it is theoretically possible. A radically different structure, with
independence from News Corp, might convince the
minister, and more importantly, the public.
The logic is simple: if behavioural remedies are
to be considered, there would have to be cast-iron guarantees of impartiality, including editorial independence
guarantees to safeguard agenda-setting autonomy. This
would have to establish a higher bar than is currently
enforced by Ofcom.
Guarantees of editorial independence would have
to be genuinely independent from News Corp, with a
majority lay membership, published codes of conduct,
complaints data and minutes. Sky News could be retained, but perhaps with structural separation, and oversight from a publicly accountable and transparent selfregulatory body on the model of the BBC governors.
That might be too much for the Murdochs to bear.
It will be a missed opportunity if the government
fails to make a new deal for media standards. For a radical approach could address both of the pressing issues for
News Corp: an apparent collapse in standards around
phone hacking, and the question of whether the two
companies’ merger is in the public interest.
damian
tambini
Senior lecturer
at LSE and
editor of the
LSE Media
Policy Project
Blog
The House Magazine • 7 february 2011
31
The internet is mobile
During the last spectrum auction in 2000 the then Government reserved
a licence for a new entrant with the aim of stimulating competition
and innovation in the mobile sector. By ensuring that all five network
operators held roughly the same amount of 3G (2100MHz) spectrum
and requiring that 3G services operate on this and no other spectrum,
a level playing field was created. This stimulated competition between
operators resulting in increased 3G rollout, lower prices and innovation
and investment in new mobile services.
However, in January this year, Ofcom lifted the restriction on the use
of other spectrum for 3G services, thereby giving those networks
who were gifted 2G spectrum in the 1980s and 1990s, a significant
market advantage.
Mobile internet
Over the past two years internet traffic on mobile networks has
exploded, with Ofcom reporting a 2,200% increase in data traffic on
mobile networks in 2009 alone. Indeed, Morgan Stanley, Gartner
and Ovum all predict that mobile internet access will outstrip fixed
PC access during the lifetime of this Parliament. It is therefore
critical that Government and Regulatory policy foster a competitive
mobile market that supports the development of the UK’s mobile
infrastructure.
Spectrum policy
Central to a competitive mobile market is spectrum. There is a need
for additional spectrum to support the take up of mobile internet
services. But in addition, next year’s spectrum auction must ensure
the competition that existed prior to the decision to allow legacy 2G
spectrum to be used for 3G, is re-established. There is a real risk that
unless the auction addresses the advantage that the older mobile
networks gain from being permitted to use their legacy spectrum for
mobile broadband, competition will be distorted and the consumer
benefits that have flowed from a competitive market will be lost.
It is our belief that next year’s auction can be structured to rebalance
spectrum holdings, re-establish the level playing field and preserve
competition in the market.
Mobile networks can and will play a vital role in delivering universal
broadband but this will best be achieved though spectrum allocation
that preserves and enhances competition. As Ofcom turn their
attention to the auction design in the early part of 2011, it is critical that
Parliament gives a clear direction to Ofcom to rebalance competition
to ensure the continued expansion of the UK’s mobile broadband.
Kevin Russell is the CEO of Three
“
mobile
internet
access will
outstrip fixed
PC access
during this
Parliament
”
policy
media
a tighter mesh
for murdoch?
J
ust weeks after taking on the media policy brief,
Jeremy Hunt has indicated that he plans to refer
the proposed News Corporation-BSkyB merger
to the Competition Commission for advice on whether
it should be permitted, or if it will result in an unacceptable reduction in ‘media plurality’.
Many argue that it will be politically difficult for
the minister to do anything but refer to the Commission.
But given the exceptional circumstances, Hunt could
turn what many see as a poisoned chalice into an opportunity. The secretary of state could appoint a media
commission to review self-regulation, with the remit to
offer more detailed advice on potential undertakings –
i.e. ‘sweeteners’, to alleviate concern that the merger will
lessen media plurality.
The minister may be able to persuade News Corp
to accept a new regulatory settlement that would raise
a higher impartiality bar for Sky – addressing agendasetting concerns noted in the recent Ofcom report on the
merger – and allay public and political concerns about
phone hacking.
The standard measures are unlikely to address the
plurality concerns raised by Ofcom’s report. Behavioural
remedies – such as guarantees of editorial independence,
new internal editorial boards, clauses of conscience in
journalists’ contracts, or separation of newsrooms, have
all been offered to get media mergers through in the past.
None of these approaches are likely to be convincing,
which is what makes a more radical option attractive.
Most in the industry are quite sceptical about
boards to protect editorial integrity – the board set up
after the Sunday Times merger 30 years ago is supposed
to be an independent place where editors and journalists
can go if they feel their independence is compromised.
They have not been queuing at the door to do so, even
though there is general acceptance that journalists face
pressure from proprietors.
If News Corp controls access to journalists’ next
job as well as the one after that, journalists are not likely
to report to internal boards. It is difficult to see how such
a board structure could be made to work, but it is theo-
The business secretary’s off-the-record plans notwithstanding,
Damian Tambini examines the delicate regulatory challenge
facing the culture secretary over the proposed BSkyB takeover
retically possible. A radically different structure, with
independence from News Corp, might convince the
minister, and more importantly, the public.
The logic is simple: if behavioural remedies are
to be considered, there would have to be cast-iron guarantees of impartiality, including editorial independence
guarantees to safeguard agenda-setting autonomy. This
would have to establish a higher bar than is currently
enforced by Ofcom.
Guarantees of editorial independence would have
to be genuinely independent from News Corp, with a
majority lay membership, published codes of conduct,
complaints data and minutes. Sky News could be retained, but perhaps with structural separation, and oversight from a publicly accountable and transparent selfregulatory body on the model of the BBC governors.
That might be too much for the Murdochs to bear.
damian
tambini
Senior lecturer
at LSE and
editor of the
LSE Media
Policy Project
Blog
“Guarantees of editorial
independence would have
to be genuinely independent
from News Corp, with a
majority lay membership,
published codes of conduct,
complaints data and minutes”
It will be a missed opportunity if the government
fails to make a new deal for media standards. For a radical approach could address both of the pressing issues for
News Corp: an apparent collapse in standards around
phone hacking, and the question of whether the two
companies’ merger is in the public interest.
The House Magazine • 7 february 2011
31
policy
media
more enlightenment
than dark corners
Internet access at home is not without its dangers for children but
Victoria Nash has evidence to suggest they are heavily outweighed
by the benefits, especially as an adjunct to school lessons
A
dr victoria
nash
Policy and
research fellow,
Oxford Internet
Institute
large pan-European study published last month
confirmed what many parents already knew –
that internet use is firmly embedded in children’s
daily lives. According to the EU Kids Online Survey, 93
per cent of 9-16 year-olds go online at least weekly, whilst
59 per cent have a social networking profile.1
Given the high media profile of cases of online
grooming, ‘sexting’ or cyber-bullying, it would be very
easy to assume that these figures should be a source of
moral panic. In fact, the opposite is true. On the whole,
the benefits of internet use for children far outweigh the
risks. In that same survey, 85 per cent of children claimed
to use the internet for doing school work, whilst several
studies have shown that the internet is an ‘experience technology’ with increased use supporting the development of
digital literacy and safety skills as well as important life
skills such as creativity and information-seeking.
At the Oxford Internet Institute (OII), much of the
work on children’s use of the internet is focused on the potential for informal learning; namely learning that occurs
outside formal educational institutions. This is an impor-
Some Chinese primary schools turn over their computer lab
to pupils for weekend use to help conquer internet addiction
34
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
tant concept as the most common location for internet use
amongst children is their home rather than their school;
indeed, many have relatively private access in their own
bedroom or via a mobile phone.
The fact that such internet use is largely self-directed and therefore, almost by definition, likely to be undertaken for reasons of ‘fun’ or entertainment, does not mean
that it is educationally worthless. Studies of informal learning, such as those undertaken by Rebecca Eynon at OII,
have shown that everyday online activities such as looking
for information or participating in games and social networks can have important benefits for formal learning, for
example by developing skills of interpretation and evaluation, or understanding of different perspectives.
Of course, in reality, the potential benefits of internet use for children are not evenly spread. Just as several
studies have found that the children most at risk from exploitation online are those most at risk offline, the potential benefits of informal learning are most likely to accrue
to those who are already well-resourced. Having internet
access at home is a particularly important factor here; children who lack this have been shown to use the internet
less often, and with less intensity or confidence than their
better-resourced peers.
In this light, it is a great shame that the successful
Home Access programme has closed, as this aimed to ensure that every family with learners aged between 5 and
19 had access to a computer and the internet. Without this,
there is an even greater need to ensure that our education
system – the provider of formal learning – does as much as
it can to capitalise on the informal learning opportunities
provided by children’s home internet use.
This means broadening the scope of internet-related activities in schools to ensure that they can build on the
wide repertoire of skills displayed by children when they
go online at home, perhaps by enabling more genuine collaboration, creativity and self-direction in class internet
use. Something to aim for?
1
Livingstone, S., Haddon, L., Gorzig, A., and Olafsson, K. (2011) Risks
and Safety on the Internet: the Perspective of European children. Full
Findings. LSE, London: EU Kids Online

Dear Honourable Member,
Take My Dyslexia Challenge
in Your Constituency:
Every year around 200 children leave the schools in your constituency unable to read.
We all pay a heavy price for the difficulty these children have. But that makes it a great opportunity for you to make a
real impact on the lives of all your constituents.
The devastating facts are:
Fact 1:
One in five (20%) children cannot read by 11yrs old (source: DFCS)
Fact 2:
Each of them goes on to cost the country £20,000+ over the years
(source: Every Child A Reader Trust Report to Parliament 2009).
Fact 3:
My team will give the schools the technical support they need to help these
children for just £50 per child. And, if we fail… we never charge.
Make a BIG difference in your constituency
Take my challenge…
The improvements that are being made in the literacy processes in your schools will not help the children in Year 2 and
above. Help us to help those children.
PROOF OF PAST RESULTS
You may feel a little sceptical of my claims. It’s only natural. However, I can show you the data collected from the last
few years and put you in touch with a school near you already successfully using my online system, Easyread.
Like Clare Hiley of Maidenbower School, Crawley, who said:
“In 18 years teaching reading to children with difficulties,
I have never had such good results in such a short time.”
My unconditional refund guarantee is extended to every school and parent using Easyread. If I wasn’t delivering good
results, I would be out of business.
WHAT MAKES EASYREAD DIFFERENT?
There are many reading systems. Mine is different because it tackles each of the underlying causes of reading difficulty
for each child. Academic research has discovered the main causes of reading difficulty. Over the last 11 years I have
engineered practical solutions to each one.
It is that engineer’s approach that makes my system different and more effective than any other. You can read how on
our website: www.easyreadsystem.com.
HOW TO EXPLORE THIS FURTHER
Contact me: David Morgan, CEO Oxford Learning Solutions ([email protected]) or Carson Black
([email protected]) the coordinator of this project, on 0845 458 2642. Thank you for your time. I hope
together we can help thousands more children conquer their reading problems and be able to take part fully in society.
Yours faithfully
David Morgan
policy
media
Power to the pen
The rise of ‘libel tourism’ shows that UK libel law needs reform,
says Simon Singh – to redress the imbalance in favour of the rich
and powerful, and promote responsible investigative journalism
T
simon singh
Author,
journalist and
TV producer
36
hree years ago, few people seemed bothered about
libel law in England and Wales. Two years ago,
however, a series of disturbing libel cases (including British Chiropractic Association v Yours Truly) led
to the Libel Reform Campaign, backed by scientists,
authors and entertainers. One year ago, all three main
political parties made manifesto commitments to libel
reform.
This year, I am glad to report that reform is under
way, with justice minister Lord McNally due to publish
a draft defamation bill next month. This is a complex
area of the law, so here are some central points to look
out for in that draft.
First of all, it is important to note that the campaign defends the right of individual citizens who’ve
been damaged by false and irresponsible publications to
use libel actions to obtain justice. However, the current
balance in libel law is skewed far too heavily in favour of
rich and powerful claimants. It is hostile to authors and
publishers, and overly friendly towards those who wish
to silence debate and criticism.
For example, claimants currently do not have
to show they have suffered serious damage in order to
bring an action. This means it is too easy for the powerful to bring – or simply threaten – trivial claims against
anyone who dares to challenge them, from local newspapers to academic journals. Overseas claimants with
little connection to the UK can also exploit this loophole to bring cases to London, so-called libel tourism.
Requiring evidence of serious damage to reputation in
the UK before pursuing a libel action would halt such
bullying.
Furthermore, companies should seek redress for
dishonest and damaging publication under the law of
malicious falsehood, instead of libel. This would create
an environment where honest and responsible investigative journalism can flourish.
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
A second problem is that British authors and
publishers, unlike their colleagues in many democratic
countries, do not have access to a robust public interest
defence to protect discussion of vital social issues, such
as healthcare and human rights. It is generally accepted that the current judge-made ‘Reynolds Defence’ (in
which a judge upheld the right of a Times journalist to
re-publish a claim that Irish Taoiseach Albert Reynolds
had misled the Dáil) is too narrow and unreliable to be
of any practical use.
“The current balance in
libel law is skewed far too
heavily in favour of rich and
powerful claimants”
There are several other issues that need to be addressed, such as reforming libel to take account of internet publishing. Also, we lack clear definitions of the
defences of ‘justification’ and ‘fair comment’ (better
called ‘truth’ and ‘honest opinion’). This leads to uncertainty and disadvantages the weaker party in a libel case,
whether claimant or defendant, who cannot cope with
the risk of defeat as easily as a large corporation can.
Regardless of the detail, it is important to remember that there is widespread support for radical libel reform. The imminent draft bill is not just a response to
campaigners, or the hundreds of MPs of all parties who
backed the campaign, but also to the last government’s
Ministry of Justice working group report and last year’s
CMS select committee report on ‘Press standards, privacy and libel’ which called for major reform.
More MPs signed EDM 423, calling for radical
reform of our libel laws, in the last session of Parliament
than any other new EDM. Now we must all ensure that
this legislation, to quote the deputy prime minister, will
turn English libel laws ‘from a laughing stock to an international blueprint’.
“
Don’t be fooled by the media
W
hen I read Anthony Lester’s Bill back in
May my first thought was that this is a
Bill for Journalists. A Bill for the Media”. Those
are not my words but those of Senior BBC
Journalist, Kevin Marsh.
It’s not that surprising. Lester’s Bill was
conceived out of years of relentless
campaigning by media organisations. The
Government is now drafting its own Bill, using
this as the starting point.
Any reforms should only protect responsible
journalism and not let the media trash reputations or invade privacy,
without redress.
CFA costs are a big media target. CFAs enable lawyers to conduct a case
without charging their client any fees, recovering their costs from the losing
party only if the case is successful. According to the usual rule the loser
pays, and must pay the success fee.
But for CFAs many cases of media abuse (phone hacking being a good
example) would not have been exposed. Newspapers have a habit of
dragging out cases for years to deter individuals from pursuing claims,
taking advantage of the vast disparity in resources between the press and
the claimant. In the phone hacking scandal it took four years for the News
of the World to admit the scandal was not limited to just one rogue reporter.
It did so only when it was faced with overwhelming evidence gleaned from
civil court action. One of the myths the media peddle in their campaign to destroy the CFA
system is that it enables lawyers to charge double their fees. In my article
“Myth and Reality” (Law Society Gazette) I explain the true position. Success fees actually recovered rarely exceed 25% - little compensation for
undertaking work free of charge (often for years) before the lawyer knows if
he is going to be paid at all.
Lawyers are much better off acting for privately paying clients and take
enormous financial risks in CFA cases to allow clients access to justice.
There are strict controls on costs through the Courts and there is no
justification for abolition of, or huge reductions in, success fees. The only
result will be a loss of access to justice for the claimant of modest means
who bring the majority of libel and privacy claims. The Jackson proposals are
unworkable in media cases.
The MGN v UK (Campbell) European decision will inevitably mean a
reduction in the maximum recoverable success fee, perhaps to 50% instead
of 100%, but Jack Straw’s proposal last year (a maximum 10% success fee)
was disproportionate and would lead to a return to the bad old days when the
libel courts were the sole preserve of the wealthy.
”
There are strict controls
on costs through the
Courts and there is no
justification for abolition
of, or huge reductions
in, success fees. says Steven Heffer,
Head of Media at Collyer Bristow LLP
and Chair of Lawyers for Media Standards.
Lawyers for Media
Standards aims
to preserve and
promote access to
justice and a fair legal
balance in publication
proceedings.
Steven Heffer is Head
of Media at Collyer
Bristow LLP and Chair
of Lawyers for Media
Standards.
the
BLUE
february 7, 2011
PAGES
Sign up to receive the digital Blue Pages in your inbox
each Thursday, and daily updates of our comprehensive
parliamentary timetable planners.
Contact Bradley Rogers at
[email protected] or call on 020 7593 5621
westminster hall
commons chamber
Monday February 7
2.30pm: Education questions (topical questions
at 3.15pm).
Main business
Opposition day debate (unallotted day) (half
day) on an SNP and Plaid Cymru motion on
government policy on the cost of fuel.
Motions relating to the 10th report from the
Standards and Privileges Committee on the
registration of income from employment and
the 8th report of session 2008-09 from the
Standards and Privileges Committee on all party
groups.
Adjournment debate on Office of Fair Trading
and supermarket acquisitions in Birtley, Tyne
and Wear (David Anderson, Lab, Blaydon).
Tuesday February 8
2.30pm: Treasury questions (topical questions at
3.15pm).
Ten minute rule motion - BBC License Fee
Payers (Voting Rights) Bill (Robert Halfon, Con,
Harlow).
Main business
Second reading of the Education Bill.
Adjournment debate tbc.
Wednesday February 9
11.30am: Northern Ireland questions.
12 noon: Prime minister’s questions.
Ten minute rule motion - Former Metal Mines
Bill (Tom Blenkinsop, Lab, Middlesbrough
South and East Cleveland).
Main business
Motions relating to the Police Grant and Local
Government Finance reports.
Adjournment debate tbc.
Tuesday February 8
Main business
Backbench business committee debate on a
motion relating to voting by prisoners.
Adjournment debate tbc.
9:30am - 11:00am: Future funding of
independent debt service (Yvonne Fovargue,
Lab, Makerfield).
11:00am - 12:30 m: Economic regulation in
Wolverhampton and the Black country (Paul
Uppal, Con, Wolverhampton South West).
12:30pm - 1:00pm: Proposal for a National
Defence Medal (Denis MacShane, Lab,
Rotherham).
1:00pm - 1:30pm: Care for the elderly in Kent
(Charlie Elphicke, Con, Dover).
1:30pm - 2:00pm: Effects of changes to housing
benefit in Scotland (Gregg McClymont, Lab,
Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East).
Friday February 11
Wednesday February 9
Second reading of private members’ bills:
Legislation (Territorial Extent) Bill (Harriet
Baldwin, Con, West Worcestershire);
Planning (Opencast Mining Separation Zones)
Bill (Andrew Bridgen, Con, North West
Leicestershire);
Sex and Relationships Education Bill (Chris
Bryant, Lab, Rhondda);
Apprenticeships and Skills (Public Procurement
Contracts) Bill (Catherine McKinnell, Lab,
Newcastle upon Tyne North);
Contaminated Blood (Support For Infected
And Bereaved Persons) Bill (Tom Clarke, Lab,
Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill);
Council Housing (Local Financing Pathfinders)
Bill (Sarah Newton, Con, Truro and Falmouth).
Adjournment debate tbc.
9:30am - 11:00am: Neuromuscular care services
in the North West (Graham Evans, Con,
Weaver Vale).
11:00am - 11:30am: Government policy on
unscrupulous builders (Stephen Lloyd, Lib
Dem, Eastbourne).
2:30pm - 4:00pm: Funding for flood risk
management (Hugh Bayley, Lab, York Central).
4:00pm - 4:30pm: Future of the Citizens Advice
Bureaux in Birmingham (Jack Dromey, Lab,
Birmingham, Erdington).
4:30pm - 5:00pm: Reconfiguration of hospital
services in Shropshire (Daniel Kawczynski,
Con, Shrewsbury and Atcham).
Thursday February 10
10.30am: Energy and climate change questions
(topical questions at 11.15am).
Business statement.
Thursday February 10
2.30pm: Debate on onshore wind energy.
Keep up to date with parliamentary publications with TSO, the official publisher and the
distributor for legislation, Command and House Papers, Select Committee Reports, Hansard,
and the London, Edinburgh and Belfast Gazettes
www.tsoshop.co.uk/bluepages
5099_BluePages_v0_3.indd 1
7/12/07 15:03:07
commons committees
Monday February 7
Select Committees
Foreign Affairs Committee (2.00pm, Wilson
room).
Subject: The role of the FCO in UK
government.
Witnesses: Rt Hon William Hague MP, first
secretary of state and secretary of state for
foreign and commonwealth affairs, Simon
Fraser CMG, permanent under-secretary of
state, and Alex Ellis, director, strategy, Foreign
and Commonwealth Office.
Communities and Local Government (4.30pm,
Grimond room).
Subject: Audit and inspection of local
authorities.
Witnesses: David Walker, contributing
editor, Guardian Public, Professor David
Heald, professor of accountancy, University
of Aberdeen Business School, Professor
Steve Martin, professor of public policy and
management and director of the Centre for
Local and Regional Government Research,
Cardiff University.
Justice Committee (4.45pm, Thatcher room).
Subject: Access to Justice: Government’s
proposed reforms for legal aid.
Witnesses: Rt Hon Sir Nicholas Wall, president,
Family Division, Rt Hon Sir Anthony May,
president, Queen’s Bench Division, and His
Honour Judge Robert Martin, President, Social
Entitlement Chamber; Shelter (at 6.00pm).
Public Bill Committee
Wreck Removal Convention Bill Committee
(4.30pm, room 9).
To consider the Bill.
European Committee
European Committee B (4.30pm, room 10).
Subject: To consider European Union
Document No. 15282/10 and Addendum,
relating to a Commission Communication:
Taxation of the Financial Sector.
Tuesday February 8
Select Committees
Treasury Sub-Committee (10.00am, room 16).
Subject: Administration and effectiveness of
HM Revenue and Customs.
Witnesses: Low Incomes Tax Reform Group,
Institute of Directors, Institute of Chartered
Accountants in England and Wales, and
Association of Chartered Certified Accountants.
Energy and Climate Change Committee
(10.15am, room 19).
Subject: Electricity market reform.
Witnesses: Riverstone, Citigroup Global
Markets, Virgin Green Fund, Climate Change
Capital; RSPB, Greenpeace, WWF, and Friends
of the Earth (at 11.15am).
Transport Committee (10.15am, Grimond
room).
Subject: Maritime and Coastguard Agency.
Witnesses: Vice-Admiral Sir Alan Massey, chief
executive, Philip Naylor, director of maritime
services, and Sue Ketteridge, director of finances
and governance, Maritime and Coastguard
Agency.
Armed Forces Bill (10.30am, Thatcher room).
Subject: Armed Forces Bill.
Witnesses: Lt General Sir William Rollo, deputy
chief defence staff Personnel & Training, Vice
Admiral Charles Montgomery, second sea
lord, Lt General Mark Mans, adjutant general,
and Air Marshal Andy Pulford, Air Member
Personnel; Commander Tony West, Provost
Marshal (Navy), Brigadier Eddie ForsterKnight, Provost Marshal (Army), Group
Captain John Whitmell, Provost Marshal
(RAF), Chief Constable Steven Love QPM,
Chief Executive, Ministry of Defence Police and
Guarding Agency, and Humphrey Morrison,
Central Legal Service, Head Legislation (at
11.30am).
Health Committee (10.30am, room 17).
Subject: Commissioning: further issues.
Witnesses: Malcolm Alexander, chair, National
Association of LINks Members, Caroline Millar,
partner, Moore–Adamson–Craig Partnership
Ltd, and Professor Jonathan Tritter, Institute of
Governance and Public Management, Warwick
Business School; Dr Charles Alessi, Kingston
Pathfinder GP commissioning consortium,
Dr Clare Gerada, chair, Royal College of GPs,
Mike Sobanja, chief executive, NHS Alliance,
and Dr Peter Carter, general secretary and
chief executive, Royal College of Nursing (at
11.45am).
International Development Committee
(10.30am, room 20).
Subject: The future of DFID’s programme in
India.
Witnesses: Professor Lawrence Haddad,
director and Professor Robert Chambers,
research associate, Institute of Development
Studies; Save the Children UK, and UCL
Centre for International Health and
Development (at 11.30am).
Justice Committee (10.30am, room 18).
Subject: Access to Justice: Government’s
proposed reforms for legal aid.
Witnesses: Young Legal Aid Lawyers, Law
Society, Legal Action Group and the Bar
Association.
Public Accounts Committee (10.30am, room 15).
Subject: Banking support.
Witnesses: Sir Nicholas Macpherson, permanent
secretary, Tom Scholar, 2nd permanent
secretary, HM Treasury, and Andrew Bailey,
executive director of banking and chief cashier,
Bank of England.
Culture, Media and Sport Committee (10.45am,
Wilson room).
Subject: Football governance.
Witnesses: Professor Stefan Szymanski,
CASS Business School, Sean Hamil, Birkbeck
Sport Business Centre, University of London,
and Patrick Collins, Mail on Sunday; Lord
Triesman, Graham Kelly, and Lord Burns (at
11.45am).
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Committee (11.00am, room 5).
Subject: The impact of common agricultural
policy reform on UK agriculture.
Witness: Rt Hon James Paice MP, minister of
state, Department for Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs.
Home Affairs Committee (11.00am, room 8).
Subject: Student visas.
Witnesses: Martin Doel, chief executive and
John Mountford, International Director,
Association of Colleges; Dominic Scott, chief
executive, UKCISA, and Aaron Porter,
president, NUS (at 11.30am); Sir Andrew
Green, chief executive, and Alper Mehmet,
member, Advisory Council, MigrationWatch
UK (at 12noon); Damian Green MP, minister
of state for immigration, Home Office (at
12.30pm).
Business, Innovation and Skills Committee
(11.15am, room 6).
Subject: Rebalancing the economy: trade and
investment.
Witnesses: John McVay, chief executive, PACT,
Feargal Sharkey, chief executive Officer, UK
Music, Paul Redding, international managing
director, Beggars Group, and Richard Mollett,
chief executive officer, The Publishers
Association Ltd.
Backbench Business Committee (1.00pm, room
16).
Subject: Proposals for backbench debates.
Witnesses: Members of Parliament.
Scottish Affairs Committee (1.30pm, room 6).
Subject: The Scotland Bill.
Witnesses: Professor Anton Muscatelli,
principal, Glasgow University, and Professor
Michael Keating, professor of politics and ESRC
professorial fellow, University of Aberdeen;
Sarah Walker, director, PSN, and Pamela
Mulholland, head of devolved taxation, HMRC
(at 3.00pm).
Joint Committee
Human Rights Committee (2.30pm, room 4a).
Subject: Counter terrorism review.
Witnesses: Lord Macdonald of River Glaven
QC; Rt Hon Baroness Neville-Jones, minister of
state for security, Home Office (at 3.10pm).
European Committee
European Committee B (4.30pm, room 10).
commons committees continued
Subject: To consider European Documents No.
11048/10, relating to a Draft Agreement, No.
11172/10, relating to a Council Decision on the
conclusion of the Agreement, and No. 11173/10,
relating to a Council Decision on the signature
of the Agreement between the European
Union and the United States of America on the
Processing and Transfer of Financial Payment
Messaging Data from the European Union to
the United States of America for the purposes of
the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program.
Public Bill and General Committees
Localism Bill Committee (10.30am & 4.00pm,
room 12).
Subject: Further to consider the Bill.
Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill
Committee (10.30am & 4.00pm, room 9).
Subject: Further to consider the Bill.
First Delegated Legislation Committee
(10.30am, room 11).
Subject: To consider the draft Immigration and
Nationality (Fees) Order 2011.
Wednesday February 9
Select Committees
Science and Technology Committee (9.15am,
Thatcher room).
Subject: UK Centre for Medical Research and
Innovation.
Witnesses: Professor Malcolm Grant, president
and provost, University College London, Harpal
Kumar, chief executive, Cancer Research
UK, Professor Sir John Savill, chief executive,
Medical Research Council, and Sir Mark
Walport, chief executive, Wellcome Trust;
Natalie Bennett, chair, Rob Inglis, press officer,
and Frankie Biney, local resident, St Pancras
and Somers Town Planning Action (at 10.15am).
Education Committee (9.30am, Wilson room).
Subject: Services for young people.
Witnesses: YMCA England, The Scout
Association, and Salmon Youth Centre; Prince’s
Trust, Fairbridge, and Rugby Football Union (at
10.30am).
Work and Pensions Committee (9.30am,
Grimond room).
Subject: White paper on universal credit.
Witnesses: Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith MP, secretary
of state for work and pensions, and officials.
Energy and Climate Change Committee
(9.45am, room 16).
Subject: Shale gas.
Witnesses: Nigel Smith, British Geological
Survey, and Professor Richard Selley,
Imperial College London; WWF, and Tyndall
Manchester (at 10.45am).
Public Administration Committee (10.00am,
room 8).
Subject: Work of the ombudsman.
Witness: Ann Abraham, parliamentary and
health service ombudsman.
Defence Committee (10.30am, room 15).
Subject: The performance of the Ministry of
Defence 2009-10.
Witnesses: Ursula Brennan, permanent under
secretary, and Jon Thompson, director general
finance, Ministry of Defence.
Scottish Affairs Committee (2.30pm, room 6).
Subject: The Scotland Bill.
Witnesses: Terry Murden, business editor,
The Scotsman and Scotland on Sunday, Bill
Jamieson, executive editor, The Scotsman; Dave
Moxham, deputy general secretary, STUC.
Environment Audit Committee (2.45pm,
Thatcher room).
Subject: The impact of UK overseas aid on
environmental protection and climate change
adaptation and mitigation.
Witnesses: Institute of Development Studies,
International Institute for Environment and
Development, and Overseas Development
Institute.
Northern Ireland Affairs Committee (3.00pm,
room 5).
Subject: Northern Ireland as an enterprise zone.
Witnesses: Federation of Small Businesses and
Capitus.
Public Accounts Committee (3.30pm, room 15).
Subject: Comprehensive spending review:
Department business plans.
Witnesses: Rt Hon Oliver Letwin MP, minister
of state, Cabinet Office, and Rt Hon Danny
Alexander MP, chief secretary, HM Treasury.
What is their assessment of recent developments
in Sudan (Baroness Cox, CB).
Nationality (Fees) Order 2011.
Consideration of the Civil Procedure
(Amendment No. 4) Rules 2010 and the Rules
of the Court of Judicature (Northern Ireland)
(Amendment No. 3) 2010.
Thursday February 10
Select Committees
Political and Constitutional Reform Committee
(10.00am, Wilson room).
Subject: Parliamentary Voting System and
Constituencies Bill
Witnesses: Electoral Commission; Professor Ron
Johnston, Bristol University (at 11.00am).
Armed Forces Bill (2.10pm, room 14).
Subject: Formal consideration of the Bill.
General and Public Bill Committees
Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill
Committee (9.00am &1.00pm, room 9).
Subject: Further to consider the Bill.
Localism Bill Committee (9.30am & 1.00pm,
room 12).
Subject: Further to consider the Bill.
Friday February 11
There are no committees meeting today.
Lords Chamber
Monday February 7
2.30pm: Oral questions, to ask the government:
What assessment they have made of the impact
of the recent low prices for milk in the major
supermarkets on the United Kingdom dairy
industry and its long-term sustainability (Lord
Bishop of Wakefield, NA);
What action they are taking to focus
international development aid on fragile and
conflict-affected states (Lord Sheikh, Con);
Whether individuals currently receiving
Disability Living Allowance who have invested
money and payments in aids and adaptations
will be disadvantaged as a result of the
proposals in chapter two of the consultation
paper on Disability Living Allowance reform
published in December 2010 (Baroness Gardner
of Parkes, Con);
Main business
Budget Responsibility and National Audit Bill
[HL].
Grand Committee 3.30pm
Consideration of the European Union
(Definition of Treaties) (Stabilisation and
Association Agreement) (Republic of Serbia)
Order 2011.
Consideration of the Legislative Reform (Civil
Partnership) Order 2011.
Consideration of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971
(Amendment) Order 2011.
Consideration of the Immigration and
Tuesday February 8
2.30pm: Oral questions, to ask the government:
Whether they will review the rules for reporting
the arrest and questioning of individuals by the
police before they are charged with any criminal
offence (Lord Bishop of Chester, NA);
What is their policy regarding the growing gap
between the rich and the poor in the United
Kingdom (Lord Smith of Clifton, Lib Dem);
Whether they will exercise their right to opt out
of the police and justice provisions of the Lisbon
Lords Chamber continued
Treaty after 2014 (Lord Pearson of Rannoch,
UKIP).
Topical question.
Main business
Motion to approve the draft Police and Criminal
Evidence Act 1984 (Codes of Practice) (Revision
of Codes A, B and D) Order 2011.
Grand Committee 3.30pm:
Committee stage (day 6) of the Energy Bill
[HL].
Wednesday February 9
3.00pm: Oral questions, to ask the government:
What role they forecast small businesses will
play in the Big Society (Lord Harrison, Lab);
What plans they have to monitor the ratio of the
average total remuneration of a chief executive
of a FTSE company to the median wage (Lord
Donoughue, Lab);
What assistance they provided to the Northern
Ireland authorities during their recent
difficulties with water supplies (Lord Trefgarne,
Con).
Topical question.
Main business
Second reading of the Transport for London
Bill.
Thursday February 10
11am: Oral questions, to ask the government:
What steps they are taking to meet the aim
stated in their equality strategy to tackle
the commercialisation and sexualisation of
childhood (Lord Bishop of Ripon and Leeds,
NA);
What action they are taking to counter the
spread of Sudden Oak Death in trees (Lord
Greaves, Lib Dem);
What is their assessment of the constitutional
changes passed by the Democratic Republic
of the Congo’s lower house on 11 January that
eliminate a second round of voting in this
year’s presidential elections in the Congo (Lord
Chidgey, Lib Dem).
Topical question.
Main business
Balloted debate on the role of marriage and
marriage support in British society 12 years after
the report on Funding for Marriage Support by
Sir Graham Hart (Lord Bishop of Chester, NA).
Balloted debate on the future of NATO and
changing relations within its membership (Lord
Addington, Lib Dem).
Motion to take note of the report of the Science
and Technology Committee on radioactive
waste management.
Friday February 11
The House is not sitting.
Lords committees
Monday February 7
There are no committees meeting today.
Tuesday February 8
HIV and AIDS in the United Kingdom
Committee (10.15am, room 2).
Subject: HIV and aids in the UK.
Witnesses: Dr Ian Williams, chair, British HIV
Association, Dr Keith Radcliffe, president,
British Association for Sexual Health and
HIV (BASHH)/chair of the Joint Specialty
Committee in Genitourinary Medicine, Royal
College of Physicians, and Ruth Lowbury, chief
executive, Medical Foundation for AIDS &
Sexual Health (MedFASH).
Joint Committee on Human Rights (2.30pm,
room 4A).
Subject: Counter-terrorism review.
Witnesses: Lord Macdonald of River Glaven
and Baroness Neville Jones.
Science and Technology Sub-Committee I
(3.50pm, room 3).
Subject: Behaviour change.
Witnesses: John Dowie, director of the regional/
local transport directorate, Department for
Transport, Simon Houldsworth, transport policy
manager, Darlington Council, Peter Blake, head
of integrated transport, Worcestershire Council,
Lynn Sloman, director, Transport for Quality of
Life; Dr Rob Wall, Sustrans, Stephen Glaister,
director, RAC Foundation, Philip Darnton,
chair of Cycling England, Peter Nash, policy
director, Stagecoach UK Bus.
European Union Select Committee (4.10pm,
room 4).
Subject: EU strategy for economic growth and
the UK national reform programme.
Witnesses: Dr. David Baldock, executive
director, Institute for European Environmental
Policy, Mats Persson, director, Open Europe,
Stephen Tindale, associate research fellow,
Centre for European Reform; Janusz
Lewandowski, commissioner for financial
programming and budget, European
Commission.
Wednesday February 9
Home Affairs (EU Sub-Committee F) (11.00am,
room 3).
Subject: EU internal security strategy.
Witnesses: Sir Ian Andrews, chairman, and
David Armond, deputy director International,
SOCA.
Thursday February 10
Social Policies and Consumer Protection (EU
Sub-Committee G) (10.00am, room 2).
Subject: Grassroots sport and the EU.
Witnesses: Hugh Robertson MP, minister
for sport and the Olympics, Department for
Culture, Media and Sport.
Foreign Affairs, Defence and Development
Policy (EU Sub-Committee C) (10.05am, room
2A).
Subject: EU’s conflict prevention and peacebuilding role in Sudan.
Witnesses: Sarah Pantuliano, Overseas
Development Institute and Paul Murphy, head
of programmes, Saferworld.
Friday February 11
There are no committees meeting today.
All party groups
Monday February 7
9.30 CR13
APPG ON GLOBAL EDUCATION FOR
ALL is hosting a briefing for MPs on the work
of the Education for all Fast Track Initiative.
15.00 Rm P
ALL PARTY THAILAND GROUP visit of
Greg Watkins
15.30 Rm N
APPG FOR MICRO BUSINESS inaugural
election of officers.
17.00 CR 18
APPG ON EXCELLENCE IN THE BUILT
ENVIRONMENT Excellence in Construction
Procurement
17.00 CR 17
APPG FURNITURE INDUSTRY
Tuesday February 8
8.30 Cinnamon Club
APPG FOOD AND DRINK
MANUFACTURING Cinnamon Club, 30-32
Great Smith Street, London, SW1P 3BU
9.00 Paddington station
CROSSRAIL GROUP Tour of the Crossrail
route from Paddington station to Tottenham
Court Road station
10.30 Rm O
ASSOCIATE PARLIAMENTARY
MANUFACTURING GROUP Inaugural
AGM and Election of Officers
12.00 Rm W4
SLIMMING WORLD GROUP 12.00-14.00 for
Members and for Parliamentary staff, or open to
everyone from 13.00 -14.00.
12.30 Rm 525
ASSOCIATE PARLIAMENTARY DESIGN
AND INNOVATION GROUP Inaugural
Election of Officers
13.15 CR 7
APPG COASTAL AND MARINE
15.00 Rm M
APPG GREAT LAKES briefing with Reverend
Bernard Ntahoturi, Archbishop of Burundi
15.30 CPA Rm
TURKS & CAICOS ALL PARTY GROUP,
Discussion with Doug Parnell, Leader of the
People’s Democratic Movement
16.00 CR 6 APPG ON INFERTILITY inaugural election
of officers
16.00 Rm S
BRITISH OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS
INDUSTRY APPG Guest speaker: Hywel
Evans of Endeavour Energy – Achieving the
UK’s Transition Plan by Maximising Recovery
17.30 CR 2A
APPG PRO-CHOICE AND SEXUAL
HEALTH Developing the NHS workforce;
what does this mean for sexual health
professionals?
18.00 Boothroyd Room
APPG ON YOUTH AFFAIRS Guest speaker:
Tim Loughton MP
18.30 CR 7
BRITISH-BRAZIL APPG welcomes Michael
Reid, Americas Editor at The Economist, to
discuss the role of the new President, Dilma
Rousseff, and what this means for Brazilian
foreign policy and bilateral relations.
18.30 CR 10
PEAK OIL GROUP - ‘Shale Gas: An
Energy Revolution?’ - Speakers: Prof. Paul
Stevens, Nick Grealy. All welcome. To
register attendance, or for further info, contact
[email protected]
18.30 IPU Rm APPG for Wine and Spirit A Tasting with
Sipsmith Distillers
17.00 CR 17
APPG Food and Health Speakers: Professor
Jonathan Brostoff of King’s College London, the
international expert on food allergy and food
intolerance; and Jo Cummings, the Arthritis
Care Helplines Manager.
Wednesday February 9
8.30 Attlee Suite
ASSOCIATE PARLIAMENTARY HEALTH
GROUP
10.00 CR 6
NUCLEAR ENERGY ALL PARTY GROUP
MEETING Speakers: Tony Fountain, CEO
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority Russ
Mellor, Executive Director Decommissioning,
Sellafield Ltd
Neil Baldwin, Managing Director, Magnox Ltd
10.00 CR 7 ALL PARTY PRO-LIFE GROUP
10.00 CR 14
APPG ON AGRICULTURE AND FOR
FOOD DEVELOPMENT
13.30 Thatcher Room
APPG FOR YOUNG DISABLED PEOPLE
13.30 W1 APPG ON ME with Professor Stephen Holgate
14.00 Rm P
APPG FOR RUSSIA Guest Speaker: David
Lidington MP, Minister for Europe. RSVP:
[email protected]
15.00 Attlee Suite
APPG ON EXTRAORDINARY
RENDITION
16.00 CR4a
ZIMBABWE APPG - Meeting with Deputy
Prime Minister of Zimbabwe, Hon. Thokozani
Khupe MP, Vice-President of Movement for
Democratic Change
16.00 Rm M
APPG HEART DISEASE
16.00 CR 11
APPG ON SURE START CHILDREN’S
CENTRES
16.00 Rm U
APG ARCHIVES
17.00 W4
CHILD PROTECTION APPG Lynne
Featherstone, junior Home Office Minster will
address the group on the Vetting and Barring
Scheme review.
17.00 CR 17 APPG FOR BEER
18.00 CR
HOUSING APPG A range of other housing
experts, including APPG secretariat partners
Shelter, the Chartered Institute of Housing and
the National Housing Federation
18.15 Attlee Rm
APPG ON MANAGEMENT “New routes
into the profession: where next for Management
Apprenticeships?”
17.00 CR 3
APPG ON CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY
Speakers: Professor David Grayson of the
Cranfield Business School; Angela Baron, a
CIPD Adviser on Organisation Development
and Engagement; and Caroline Waters, Director
People & Policy at BT plc.
Thursday February 10
11.00 CR 7 APG ON GLOBAL SECURITY AND
NON-PROLIFERATION “French views on
disarmament and non-proliferation”
11.00 CR 13
APPG EUPEAN UNION METTING
Friday February 11
12.30 CR 1 HoL
APPG ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS - Gilgit and
Baltistan, The Emergence of China. RSVP to
[email protected]
adjournment
youth engagement
Insight and comment on current issues and events
The value
of voting
Lord Roberts
of Llandudno
on a new
initiative aimed
at bridging the gap
between young people
and representative
politics
It has been said that the
most precarious thing for
a politician is an informed
electorate. Yet, even more
dangerous is a lack of
interest within it. Sadly,
situations like the expenses
scandal have only resulted
in a rise in voter apathy to-
ward public affairs. Such
is the reality of the current
political scene, which
greatly undermines the
role of youth in politics.
Nevertheless, there
are people out there who
still believe in change and
want to satisfy the need
for youth participation.
Bite the Ballot (BtB)
is a grassroots campaign
created by and for young
people with the aim of
inspiring and encouraging others to engage and
be part of decisions that
directly affect them.
Since its establishment
in April 2010 the project,
which began in a class-
room, has expanded into
a national campaign with
hundreds of supporters
promoting engagement of
young people in politics.
More importantly, the
campaign shows the ways
in which the political
process affects everyone
and gives young people
the opportunity not only
to understand it but also
to ask the questions they
want answers to.
The campaign is free
of any party political bias
and, as such, not only
promotes unity through
politics but also creates the
space for young people to
develop their own idea of
politics and take a stand
on either side of the political spectrum.
Taking into account the
current political climate,
the lack of social interest
in public affairs, as well
as the widespread feeling
of disappointment and
frustration, it is hardly
surprising that the young
and bright leaders of tomorrow find it difficult to
find interest in the politics
of today. Bite the Ballot
is slowly but surely challenging this perception,
spreading the seeds of
knowledge and participation through its projects.
In a recent debate
p43
Youth
engagement
p44
Social work
profession
p44
IT
competition
Timeline
15th November
Nominations Open
22nd December
Nominations Close
16th February
Awards Ceremony
Dods’ Parliamentary Researcher of the Year Awards 2011
WEDNESDAY 16th FEBRUARY
Supported by
To register your interest in attending, please visit
www.epolitix.com/awards/researchersawards2011
The House Magazine • 7 february 2011
43
adjournment
social work profession
organised by BtB dozens
of young people came to
Westminster and participated in a lively discussion
with peers and MPs,
asking, for the first time,
questions they felt were
important yet previously
unanswered by those in
power. Bite the Ballot is
now working with the
Hansard Society to visit
schools across the country.
With a belief that
participation of youth in
politics is vital for any
democracy to succeed, the
campaign provides a starting point for those who
always felt they want to
get involved, but did not
know how. This project
sends the message for
young people to speak out
for their generation, to ask
for answers to their questions, to be democracy’s
future and, most importantly, to vote – because
opinions matter!
Bite the Ballot is challenging the common
perception of politics
as boring, useless and
broken and, instead makes
it simple, personal and
fun. This campaign is an
appeal to young people
to understand the value
of their votes. With one’s
basic contribution towards
the country being the vote,
it is possible to understand
our country’s progress as
a product of the contribution of individuals.
A new school
of thinking
The social
work
profession is
in a parlous
state, says Hilton
Dawson, and MPs can
do something to help
“Bite the
Ballot is
challenging
the common
perception
of politics
as boring,
useless, and
broken”
Lord Roberts of Llandudno
is a Liberal Democrat peer
44
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
Tony Benn famously said
he was leaving Parliament
to “get on with the real
business of politics”. I left
to go back to social work,
but am now involved
in campaigning with all
parties to ensure that
social workers are better
trained, better managed
and actually able to get on
with the job of supporting
the people whom you and
they serve.
Since 2009, I have had
the honour of leading
what until very recently
was known as the British
Association of Social
Workers (BASW). And
though it’s an honour, the
social work profession is in
a parlous state. In response
to the Baby P tragedy,
the Social Work Task
Force was set up in 2009,
and its report identified
many problems faced by
the workforce: including
problems with recruitment and retention, high
burnout rates, and long
working hours.
Its most striking conclusion, however, and an
idea that BASW has long
supported, was to set up
a College of Social Work,
much like many of the
other medical professions.
This would enable social
workers to have a genuine
body to represent their
interests and raise their
standards. Moreover, the
Task Force stipulated very
clearly that any college
must be independent from
government.
All well and good, you
might think. Unfortunately the reality is that
the last government put
in motion a series of
events that has the unelected Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE)
in charge of £5m of public
money to set up a ‘College’, whose membership
functions it has decided
would be undertaken by
Unison.
Please be clear, this isn’t
an attack on Unison or
any other trade union. It
simply is a fundamental
principle that if you want
to be independent, you
don’t cede your most important asset to an external
body with its own interests
to pursue. Actually, if you
really want to be independent, you shouldn’t
take money from any
government at all.
BASW owns the
company registration
and has now established
BASW – the College of
Social Work. Just like any
other college led by and
accountable to members
of its profession, we seek
no financial subsidy and
want nothing more from
government than fair
treatment and being prepared to listen.
At a time when every
MP must be particularly
keen to see the very best
value for public money,
I believe that your constituents would benefit
more from the services of
50 child-protection social
workers than the second
tranche of £2.5m due to
the SCIE from April 1.
Members who believe in
an independent college of
social work can pre-empt
the lobbying of your social
worker constituents by
signing EDM 1362.
Hilton Dawson was Labour
MP for Lancaster and Wyre
(1997-2005) and is chief
executive of BASW – the
College of Social Work
Getting
networked
Alun Michael
encourages
primary
schools to
‘Pass IT on’ in the
annual IT competition
In the digital age, there are
few aspects of education
that are more important
to a child’s future than
understanding IT – which
is why MPs have taken
the lead in opening up
this exciting new world to
primary school children.
The Parliamentary
Information Technology
Save 10% when you order both
or multiple Companion titles
Both available now
Our 2011 Companion titles
are made for each other!
“Dods Parliamentary Companion has always been the standard authority on
things parliamentary; now, with new Members representing over a third of the
House, it will be an indispensible guide for the insider as much as the outsider.”
Sir George Young MP
Dods Parliamentary Companion is the bible of UK politics.
This New Parliament issue contains full details of the new government and
opposition, including in-depth biographical and contact details of all MPs, Peers
and Members of the Devolved Assemblies. Dods Parliamentary Companion 2011
is the first place to look for definitive information on people and institutions across
the political spectrum.
Individual cost: £295
“The Civil Service has had a strong relationship with Dods for over a
century and it is as relevant today as when it first began. Dods Civil Service
Companion is a valuable publication which can assist Civil Servants in their
day to day work.”
Sir Gus O’Donnell KCB
Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Home Civil Service
Dods Civil Service Companion 2011 is the most respected Civil
Service reference source.
Providing the latest information on the key contacts in every Department of
State, NDPB, Executive Agency, Non-Ministerial Department and more. Plus 400
biographies including the ‘Top 200’ decision makers and agency chiefs. Dods
Civil Service Companion 2011 also helps you to find and identify the bodies
and organisations that these individuals work in, both within Whitehall and the
Devolved Assemblies.
Individual cost: £223
ORDER NOW – QUOTING COMP1010 – AND SAVE 10%
email: [email protected] call: 020 7593 5678 visit: www.dodsshop.co.uk
adjournment
IT competition
Committee (PITCOM)
and e-skills UK, the Sector
Skills Council for Business
and Information Technology, have launched the fifth
annual Make IT Happy
competition, a UK-wide
technology challenge for
primary school students
aged 9 to 11. This year’s
theme is ‘Pass IT on’, calling on schools to show off
the innovative ways their
pupils have used technology to reach out to the wider
community.
The competition allows
schools to share examples of how creative and
talented young people are
when it comes to technology. And it enables MPs
to connect with primary
schools in their constituency – which many have
done to good effect.
Last year’s theme, inspired by the Race Online
2012 campaign, called
on schools to share their
skills to help local people
learn about technology
and the internet. Winning
entries involved pupils
helping older people use
the internet to send emails,
research their ancestors
and shop online. Entries
were presented in a variety
of creative ways, including
websites, podcasts, news
reports and interviews.
This year’s contest calls
on schools to use IT to
connect with people to
make a positive impact on
their lives. Projects could
be as simple and local as
helping other members
46
of the school community,
such as younger children
or support staff, to use
IT. Equally, they could
involve children linking
up with schools or organisations in other parts of
the country to share skills
and experience. Projects
could even be international, since many schools
have close connections
with British forces serving
overseas, or with schools
in the developing world.
Make IT Happy also
gives students the opportunity to engage with their
wider communities to
make a positive impact on
the lives of others, while
at the same time enhancing their own knowledge
of IT.
One of the highlights of
Make IT Happy each year
is the awards ceremony at
the Houses of Parliament.
All of the winning schools
from the nine English
regions, Northern Ireland,
Scotland and Wales, are
invited to a ceremony and
afternoon tea with their
MP to celebrate their
successes and to find out
the three overall winning
schools.
Every year, I am impressed by how creative
and innovative young people can be in their use of
technology to reach their
wider community.
I am looking forward
to seeing the many imaginative entries that this
year’s competition will
attract, and to rewarding
the excellent work with
technology that is taking
place in schools across the
country.
Many MPs are already
supporting Make IT
Happy, helping to
promote it to their local
schools and media, and
I would encourage you
to join us. I am hoping
that we can get as many
MPs as possible to support
Make IT Happy 2011, so
schools in every area of
the country can have the
chance to take part in this
year’s competition.
It is a fantastic opportunity to make a
difference to people’s
lives with technology and
to celebrate the excellent work being done by
the schools in your local
constituency.
Alun Michael is Labour
MP for Cardiff South and
Penarth and chairman of
PITCOM
Competition details Projects must have been led by 9 to 11 yearold pupils; show how they have used technology to reach out to
the wider community; and be presented in a way which in itself
demonstrates an innovative use of technology. Winning schools
will be rewarded with cash prizes and will be invited to attend
an awards ceremony to be held at the Houses of Parliament
in October. Closing date for entries is 10 April 2011. MPs are
encouraged to contact [email protected] to find out
more. For further information, visit the Make IT Happy website
http://makeithappy.cc4g.net
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
Publisher
Gerry Murray
Managing Editor
Richard Hall
political Editor
Sam Macrory
Chief
Sub-editor
Andrew Schofield
Head of Production
John Levers
Design
Kaz Kapusniak
Charlotte O’Neill
Matt Titley
Special Projects
Editor
Sally Dawson
Advertising
Tim Burgess
Sue Reynolds
Dominic Slonecki
Advertising
Manager
Lenny Rolles
Advertising &
Sponsorship
Director
Rob Ellis
Commercial
Director
Philip Eisenhart
The House Magazine
21 Dartmouth Street,
London, SW1H 9BP
Editorial
editorial@housemag.
co.uk
Tel 020 7593 5664
Advertising
housemagazinesales2
@dods.co.uk
Tel 020 7593 5650
Subscriptions
[email protected]
Tel 020 7593 5683
Annual subscription £195
2-year subscription £351
The House Magazine is published by Dods
The House Magazine is printed by The Magazine
Printing Company.
www.magprint.co.uk
The publisher and editor are most grateful to the
Clerk of the Parliaments, the Clerk of the House and
other senior officers of both Houses for the support
and advice they readily give.
ISSN 0309-0426 © Dods
Reproduction in any form is prohibited without prior
written consent.
Editor Gisela Stuart MP
Associate Editors Graham Brady MP,
Charles Kennedy MP, Austin Mitchell MP,
Priti Patel MP, Jenny Willott MP
Life President Lord Cormack
Dods is widely respected for producing highly
authoritative and independent political publications.
Its policy is to accept advertisements representing
many sides of a debate from a variety of
organisations. Dods takes no political stance on
the messages contained within advertisements
but requires that all content is in strict accordance
with the law. Dods reserves the right to refuse
advertisements for good reason (for example if
it is libellous, defamatory, pornographic, socially
unacceptable, insensitive or otherwise contrary to
editorial policy).
Certified
circulation: 2341
adjournment
book review
sex-change rib-tickler
If you can get past the groan-inducing pun of its title,
Missing Member is a pacy parliamentary adventure in a
genre that has few quality exponents, finds Austin Mitchell
P
arliament is an exciting place. Yet mysteriously, the
Fun Factory has produced no great writing, no illuminating fiction since Trollope, and (forgive me,
Harold Macmillan) he’s boring because it takes a week to
read each volume. Disraeli wrote in the same period, as the
only prime minister ever to write novels (indeed, they kept
him afloat financially). They’re still readable today, but as
fascinating descriptions of the scene and the century rather
than as great literature.
Why is this? MPs talk (endlessly) but they can’t
write. A few, like Joe Ashton or Julian Critchley, didn’t do
too badly, but since the work burden is so heavy they never
get much time for it and the market is against them. Lobbyists are better able to put a few words together and much
of what they do write is fiction, but not the type we need
and they only see the sordid side of the business.
Whips suspect the worst, and know the dirt, but
aren’t articulate enough to write about it. The journalists
who frequent the place are better at writing, indeed some
of them do it brilliantly, but they’re so hostile and so determined to do MPs down that they’re best ignored. As for all
the brilliant kids who throng the place in their hundreds,
they’re so busy knifing and screwing each other in the jostle for pelf and place that they don’t have time to write. If
they do, it’s illegible to an older generation.
So the greatest gap in British literature is writing
about Parliament and its inmates by its inmates. Julian
Critchley tried to create a genre about a gentleman detective (aka Julian Critchley) but never lived long enough to
develop its enormous potential. Robert Kilroy-Silk and
Brian Sedgemore had a shot at novels but produced crap.
Since then no-one has dared. So the only parliamentary
novel of any standing in this century or the last is Wilfred
Fienburgh’s No Love For Johnny, which owes its success to
sex and the fact that it was turned into a much better film.
This is a great challenge. Family-friendly hours give
MPs more time to write. Journalists need to pay attention
only to the first hour of each day, so they have more opportunities to fill in the rest of their time by serious writing.
As for the lobbyists, there are now so many of them that
they must be able to produce something – apart from fears
austin
mitchell
Associate
editor, The
House
Magazine
that wealth, banks, hedge funds and Katie Price will quit
the country and go to Iceland if tax goes up. Their minds
should turn to thought.
Which is an excellent reason for welcoming Missing
Member. It’s written by Rodney Deitch, a former Lobby
correspondent. I welcome it, not because it’s great literature (I don’t think we’ll get that until my memoirs appear)
but because it’s a rattling good read.
It’s a Tom Sharpe novel about Parliament. Deitch
knows the place and the people. In my view he hypes up
our propensity for corruption, drugs and sex, though as a
member of an older generation, this may be because none
of it came my way. No attractive policewomen eager to
drag me into bed. No television producers dropping their
clothes at the earliest opportunity. No lobbyists eager to
supply drugs and a little heavy flagellation, and no whips
who were off their heads – no, correct that. Only a few.
“The greatest gap in British
literature is writing about
Parliament and its inmates
by its inmates”
Author:
Rodney
Deitch
Title:
Missing
Member
Publisher:
Ashgrove
Publishing
Pages: 287
But then I’m naïve, which may be why I enjoyed
the book so much. I won’t give away the plot with its descriptions of a murderous peer; a Labour whip who goes
mad, votes with the Tories and brings down the government; and a naked council leader being whipped with celery. All good, clean fun. Let’s just say it’s insane. But it’s
got real pace. Just let me reveal the story behind the title.
The missing member? Well it’s not just a missing MP doing a Stonehouse but one going for a sex-change operation
in Italy. So it’s really two missing members – him and his.
Which poses a dilemma I don’t see covered in Erskine May.
If an MP vanishes as a man then returns as a woman, can
she still vote as him? No doubt we should set up a committee to consider the issue. It’s bound to happen some time.
Deitch isn’t writing about the political world as we
know and love it. Yet. He’s describing a world which is
more exciting and much funnier. But he may only be anticipating reality by a few years, as the world gets madder
and we slowly follow suit.
The House Magazine • 7 february 2011
47
adjournment
moncrieff’s masters
refusenik of
the red benches
Despite plotting to prevent Harold Wilson from becoming leader,
Jack Diamond served in his government, before defecting to the SDP
only to rejoin Labour in the Blair years, remembers Chris Moncrieff
J
ack Diamond, a fervent Gaitskellite with a passion
for Europe, was a man who could ‘gut’ the most
complex Treasury document and present it to the
public and Parliament in a way which made it clear to all.
Lord Diamond, as he was to become, was chief secretary to the Treasury during many of the Harold Wilson
years in government, a post which John Major was later to
say was the most demanding of all in government, including being prime minister.
In the early 1980s Diamond, always a thorn in the
side of Labour’s left wing, defected to the Social Democratic Party and became their leader in the House of Lords.
But some 13 years later he quietly returned to the Labour
fold, soon after Tony Blair’s election to the party leadership. By then he was 87. He was also one of the dozen close
supporters of Gaitskell who gathered in Patrick Gordon
Walker’s Scarborough hotel room in October 1960, just
after their leader’s conference speech promising to “fight,
fight and fight again” for the party he loved, before being
defeated by Labour’s unilateralists.
But some years later, Diamond was distraught
when Gaitskell publicly expressed his distaste for the
Common Market and his love for the Commonwealth as
“part of a thousand years of history”.
After Gaitskell’s sudden death in 1963, Diamond
was a leading light in the unsuccessful campaign to defeat
Harold Wilson’s bid for the leadership. That campaign
operated under
the highly unofficial slogan,
‘Better George
Brown drunk
than
Harold
Wilson sober’.
(The bibulous
Harold Wilson with Jack Diamond (as
Brown
had
Treasury secretary) in 1969
briefly become
48
The House Magazine • 7 february 2011
“After
Gaitskell’s
sudden
death
in 1963,
Diamond
was a
leading
light in the
unsuccessful
campaign
to defeat
Harold
Wilson’s
bid for the
leadership”
Chris Moncrieff
was political
editor of
the Press
Association,
1980-94
acting Labour leader.)
John Diamond was born in Leeds on April 30,
1907 and died in April 2004 aged 96. He was educated
at Leeds Grammar School before qualifying as a chartered accountant. He represented the Blackley division
of Manchester at Westminster from 1945 to 1951 and for
Gloucester from 1957 to 1970 when, on losing his seat, he
was made a life peer.
Diamond was chief secretary to the Treasury from
1964 to 1970, and a cabinet member for the two final years
of that period. Harold Wilson, who was not prone to compliment his ministers, did however once say of Diamond:
“He is the greatest authority on public expenditure and
taxation any party could produce.” That was not an exaggeration. Earlier he was for many years a member of the
Speaker’s panel of chairmen and presided over the Commons committee which nationalised the gas industry in
1948 – its final 50-hour session was reputedly the longest
in the history of the House of Commons.
In the 1970s he was chairman of the long-running
Royal Commission on the Distribution of Income and
Wealth which found, according to a report in 1976, that
the rich were getting poorer and the poor richer.
That Commission was dissolved by the Tories soon
after Margaret Thatcher swept to power in 1979. Announcing its dissolution, the then James Prior, employment secretary at the time, told the Commons that it had
made “a valuable contribution to improved understanding
of the trends in the distribution of income and wealth”.
But it had cost the taxpayer some £1.5m.
Lord Diamond was still active and voluble in the
House of Lords in his late 80s. In March 1994, he unsuccessfully introduced a bill designed to change the law of
succession which gives eldest sons precedence over eldest
daughters. Peers with titles dating back to the 13th century blocked this measure which would give the right to
inherit a peerage to the eldest child regardless of gender.
Diamond had been a proficient golfer and skier,
and once broke his neck on the ski slopes. He was also
passionately fond of music and for many years was director of the Sadlers Wells Trust.
adjournment
competitions
guess the year
In which year
did Richard
Nixon defeat
George
McGovern
in the race
to the White
House?
In which year did the following
events take place?
• Britain joins the European Economic
Community
• Richard Nixon defeats George
McGovern in US presidential election
• The Duke of Windsor, who reigned
as Edward VIII, dies
win a bottle of
champagne
Email editorial@housemag.
co.uk with the correct
answer.
The winning entrant will be
drawn at random. Closing
date: Wednesday, Feb 9.
Previous answer: 1990
Winner:
Ewan Irvine
caption competition
win a bottle of champagne
Readers can enter this week’s competition – featuring Lord Prescott
– by emailing [email protected]
deadline for entries: Wednesday, February 9
Previous winner: Sean Graham
“A plan b, Mr osborne? Who needs one
of those when you’ve got 10 per cent
growth...”
The House Magazine • 7 February 2011
49
adjournment
2020 vision
If there was one way in which you could change Britain or the
world by 2020, what would it be and how would you go about
achieving it? Ian Swales offers his 2020 vision
the green revolution
starts with skills
I
n recent years there has been an increasing international consensus that action needs to be taken to
combat climate change, and it is sure to remain high
on the agenda in the years to come. Yet one side of the
green debate is often neglected – green industry.
The convergence of opinion has given the sector a real boost. Coupled with this is the fact that UK
manufacturing hit a 16-year high last year, having recovered well from recession while other sectors have
struggled. This combination of growth in demand for
environmental technology, and the revival of British
manufacturing, mean that there is a great deal of potential for the green energy sector in the UK over the
next decade and beyond.
Grabbing that potential will be the difficult part. I
personally believe that the UK is capable of becoming a
powerhouse for green industry, but that is by no means
guaranteed. On the positive side, there are many innovative companies producing green technology across the
country already.
In Teesside, where my Redcar constituency lies,
we have world-class companies making wind turbine
structures, wave technology, bio fuel producers, the
largest energy-from-waste facility in the UK and much
more. Teesside is just one area of the UK which has a
rich industrial heritage, and new green businesses are
recognising this when deciding where they can find the
best people for the job.
This expertise is a key reason why the UK is chosen
for green production by many companies over other countries which offer cheaper labour. However, to become a
centre of excellence for green industry we must remain at
the top of our game, and here there may be a stumbling
block. Without great homegrown scientists and engineers
50
The House Magazine • 7 february 2011
ian swales
Liberal
Democrat MP
for Redcar
these companies will move abroad to find them, and this
presents us with a major political challenge – investment
in education in science, technology, engineering and
mathematics (the so-called STEM subjects).
The expertise of British industry is dictated by the
quality of our STEM education. However, this is put in
jeopardy by the fact that many students, particularly in
disadvantaged areas, are denied the opportunity to study
a full range of science subjects.
Taking this into consideration, it is unsurprising
that in this country only five per cent of undergraduates
study engineering compared to 33 per cent in China. It
is imperative that all young people are not only given the
chance, but are also encouraged to study STEM subjects
so that they are able to enter the workforce with the
skills they need.
“Teesside is one area of
the UK which has a rich
industrial heritage, and
new green businesses
are recognising this when
deciding where they can find
the best people for the job”
It is essential in the coming years to encourage
STEM education to attract investment, provide jobs and
boost economic growth. This will help secure our place
as a powerhouse of green industry in the future, and
whether you’re a sandal-wearing environmentalist or a
stony-faced sceptic, when it comes to the climate-change
debate, you cannot deny that there is money to be made
from it.