Raving Mad

I don't know if East Anglia is the centre for Raves in Britain today but you'd be forgiven for thinking it. There is regular regional news coverage of huge police actions against dishevelled groups of party-goers. From the editorial the audience are clearly meant to be reassured by the sight of riot police surrounding a village hall, but often the impression I get is of a heavy-handed and disproportionate response to a pretty minor problem.


Michael 'the Blood Donor' Howard as Home Secretary brought in some pretty draconian laws under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 when the popularity of raves had already started to wane. They even tried to define rave music as "sounds wholly or predominantly characterised by the emission of a succession of repetitive beats" a classic from the HO lawyers. This legislation allows the seizing of equipment, generators etc and anyone refusing to leave can be arrested for public order offences, obstruction or trespass. More than enough police powers to poop the party you would have thought.

But one of our local MPs, Christopher Fraser (SW Norfolk) wants yet tougher laws and has his own Private Members Bill, the Criminal Justice (Raves) Bill. He addressed Parliament last week about "how devastating raves can be for farmers, local residents and the surrounding environment and wildlife". But then he offered hardly any evidence or examples.

He would like to introduce two new offences: "of organising a rave, and of transporting sound equipment for use at a rave". For a start, these Bills almost never make on to the statute book, secondly it would be impossible to bring these vague wishes into a from you could call legislation. If it were an offence to transport such equipment the police would be empowered to arrest anyone buying a new sound system from Currys. Nevertheless Mr Fraser's Bill gets its second reading on 6 June he was supported by another local MP Bob Russell.

The fact that the Government did not bother to send a Minister to respond shows this law is going nowhere.

Diego Garcia - A Thickening Plot

The plight of the Chagos Islanders may sound a little like the title of one those Ealing comedies with Terry Thomas and Dennis Price but it has proven to be a decidedly murky and shameful experience for the British Government.

You probably recall reading somewhere about the 2,000 or so Islanders of Diego Garcia (the Chagos people, or Ilois) who were forcibly pushed out of their remote Indian Island paradise in 1960s to make way for a US air base.

Of course in those days there was threat of nuclear war and less care taken with the human rights of the indigenous people's of Britain's minor territories. But now, we, as a nation, are able to face up to our responsibilities and right those colonial wrongs. Except in this case we aren't. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office are holding the same line on this matter they held in about 1965 which could be caricatured as the man in the white suit and pith helmet resting his boots on the local natives.

The Islanders, to their credit, have mounted a substantial campaign for compensation and rapatriation and won several rounds of legal battles in the High Court. The FCO lawyers maintain their "all along time ago, let sleeping dogs lie, etc ."

At the High Court, Sir Sydney Kentridge QC, for the Ilois, said there was no known precedent "for the lawful use of prerogative powers to remove or exclude an entire population of British subjects from their homes and place of birth" and described the treatment of the Chagossians as "outrageous, unlawful and a breach of accepted moral standards".

So to Foreign Office questions on Feb 19, Andrew Mackinlay (Thurrock) asked
FCO to "take account of the mood of the House" (i.o.w. we all know the game's up) in respect of the Chagos islanders and ensure "this wrong [is] remedied".

Junior Minister, Meg Munn gave a ghastly reply straight out of Sir Humphrey's handbook of Civil Service obfuscation. She referred to a "2002 feasibility study" which concluded "a lasting resettlement would be precarious ... and would entail substantial open-ended contingent liability". Ugh.

The Foreign Office had a way round these pesky court rulings. The British Indian Ocean Territory (Constitution) Order 2004 laid before Privy Council has effectively overidden the High Court decision and has again taken away all rights from the Chagos Islanders without even a whiff of consultation. The only hope appears to be when the US base shuts in 2016.

Then on Thursday, Foreign Sec 'Brains' Milliband gave a rare FCO Commons statement (Home Sec seems to do two a week). Apparently the relentless denial in the face of gathering evidence about US rendition flights over British airspace was not sustainable. Milliband had been tipped off by 'Condy' Rice the US had been using Diego Garcia to re-fuel on CIA rendition operations from somewhere to Guantanamo. All this had happened without British knowledge and was of terrible embarrassment to the Government underlining how very uneven the special relationship had become under Bush/Cheney.

If McCain wins in November we shouldn't expect the US military presence to be winding down anywhere. Although the Chagossians would be able to live alongside the base, it is doubtful the US relishes locals observing their clandestine comings and goings.

Brown's Stiff, Cameron's Cocky

I saw Gordon Brown's performance at PMQs on Wednesday and he has certainly improved but then again he started from such a low base. Labour MPs still grimace when they remember "I've only been in the job five days," Vince Cable's Mr Bean line plus the noticeable nervous hand-shaking of their PM.

Brown was unable to command the audience when it mattered most. Cameron found it pretty easy from their first encounter and won their contests several weeks in a row sometimes with a trouncing. Gordie was left to scowl in bitter embarrassment like the boy from the comprehensive whose unwordliness was uncovered by the clever-dick, urbane public schoolboy.

He was also not listening to colleagues about his 'stiff' manner. Something's changed, he's a bit more relaxed, less eager to prove he remembers that part of the brief.

On Wednesday Cameron first wished Gord a happy 57th birthday. We waited for the joke - 57 'varieties of excuse for failure' or something. But no gag. Dave used half his six questions on the loss of a DNA data disc sent by the Dutch police which had been serving as a coffee coaster somewhere in Home Office for a year. It was an easy goal for Cameron but he only just scambled the ball over the line. Brown having the last word was able to goad Dave about why he didn't raise Northern Rock.

Gord then made a bit of a joke himself. Neil Turner, member for Wigan referred to a recent investment from a Chinese firm in his constituency which would yield a thousand jobs. Gordy had been speaking to Premier Wen yesterday, and added off the cuff, "I must confess that I did not specifically raise the question of investment in Wigan; I now regret that." OK so it's not quite Russell Brand, not even Russell Harty but it gave the Labour side a welcome laugh. His backbenchers are a bit like the guests at a wedding who feel for the father of the bride who's speech is going pretty badly; one pretty average joke can bring the house down.

Dave came back on Northern Rock as predicted and asked why Freedom of Informantion Act would not apply. Even I (a self-confessed financial thickie) realised such commercial matters as a bank's financial plans cannot be divulged on request as easily as 'how many pencil sharpeners are there in the MOD'. Brown was able to revert to Iron Chancellor mode dismissing Cameron out-of-hand for 'indulging in student politics.'

The Governments Brown grew up with were Wilson and Heath, a time when we when we referred our party leaders as 'Mr' not so much out of deference but out of respect. He feels he is much the same - he constantly refers to ' getting on with the serious business of Government' and is frustrated by the fact that not everyone can see Cameron as he does, a toff playing to the crowd.

The Conservative Leader is never short of material after so many embarrasments from the Government but he rarely seems to make the most of them these days. William Hague regularly bested Blair when times were very hard for the Tories, he'd do well to take some advice from colleagues as well. Cameron does the arrogant mocking very well, over time it may wear a bit thin.

Parliamentary Contributions

Feb 18 -Northern Rock's nationalisation was the big event of the week. Of course, it's far too complex an issue for anyone not working in the 'sqaure mile' so I'm not going into the rights and wrongs. It is only a "temporary" situation be back in the private sector in no more than 20 or 30 years. The only other comment I have is William Hill have confirmed the odds on Alastair Darling losing the Chancellorship before end 2008 have been slashed to 7/4.

MPs returned from their half-term recess to put questions to the brand new and shiny, Work and Pensions Secretary, James Purnell. His tenure at Culture Media and Sport was only a matter of weeks and his shift (slightly up) was thanks to Peter Hain's poor accounting skills. Purnell handles his brief with consummate ease, almost languidly. Our East-Anglian interest was upheld by the almost ever-present Henry Bellingham (NW Norfolk) (pictured) who asked a bit of 'socialist' question about the plight of pensioners. Ever higher Council tax (and now hugely inflated fuel bills) are having a desperate impact on the half a million pensioners living on less than £10,000 a year opined our Henry. Mike O'Brien's "we take no lectures" response was cerainly inadequate. It was like pointing to a starving man and saying "if it were down to you, he'd probably have TB as well".

Simon 'Humbug' Burns (West Chelmsford) asked the Defence Secretary and the PM how much their offices spent on Christmas cards. Presumably his point was profligacy with public money although sending 'season's greetings' is not quite the same as a junket to Jamaica or 'grace and favour' houses. The answers provided were (a mere) £700 and £1,379. Parliamentary Questions cost up to £600 to answer - if anyone is wasting public money, it is Mr Burns for tabling such daft questions.

Henry Bellingham (again) asked Des Browne how many homes the MOD had sitting empty. The answer of 12,240 is an extra-ordinarily high figure and only adds to the scandal of the severe lack of investment in housing for the Armed Services in recent years. The Commons Defence Select Committee's last report described much of the accommodation as "appalling" and Gen Sir Michael Jackson called the situation "frankly shaming". The MOD spokesperson treated the issue of living conditions of thousands of families, with a combination of arrogance and disdain, saying it was "like painting the Forth bridge". In other words, in the face of such a huge task we should just hold up our hands in despair.

Profile Bob Russell MP - As English as Tuppence

Bob Russell (Colchester) may be one of the hardest working MPs outside of Government. He is one of those really old-fashioned types who are determined to represent his constituents as keenly as possible. Consequently he has developed a good rapport with the town and increased his majority in each election since he was elected in 1997. He has effectively turned a three-way marginal into a safe Lib-Dem seat. He is their Defence Spokesman and at last count he had laid well over 1,000 Parliamentary questions.

Bob's achievements are mostly on a micro scale for Westminster. He has championed the Sport of Darts finally recognised as such by UK Sports Council - unfortuntaely it looks now too late to get darts into the Olympics. Bob would, like us all, have been thrilled to see Eric Bristow carry the Olympic Torch.

Bob is utterly and unapologetically English - to capture the essence that is Bob Russell think, Morris Dancing, halves of bitter in the social club (wives permitted), a navy blazer with brown shoes. And Bob sports the mightiest 'Pudding Bowl' haircut in the whole House. He is earnest, dependable, dogged and even a bit fierce.

MPs on the whole try and moderate themsleves at all times in Parliament, they can do indignant, outraged and appalled but very rarely angry. I've seen saw Bob Russell lose it. It was the Committee stage of some Criminal Justice Bill in about 2000, discussing several tedious Road Traffic provisions. Of the three hours of debate, Bob was only allowed only about 50 seconds to speak. And he flipped. His mood was not helped by the fact the Minister Charles Clarke (Norwich South) and his oppo Jon Bercow (Buckingham) had spent much of their time in playful and inexplicable discussion about their own belly-buttons. At the end, Bob furiously grabbed his huge pile of papers, fringe clinging to sweaty forehead and shouted what a "bloody farce" it all was. He was, of course, entirely right and the episode took political navel-gazing to a new level.

Westminster needs MPs like Bob Russell because for all the superficiality and emphasis on presentation there still functions a process where constituents raise issues through their MP and (s)he in turn holds the Government to account, seeks to overturn injustices and alleviate suffering. In that way he is a bit like the Dennis Skinner of the Lib-Dems. I'm sure neither would enjoy the comparison.

Latest Parliamentary Contributions

One of the purposes of this blog is to publicise our local MPs' contributions to Parliament raising issues of local and national importance. I have got a bit behind but this will be a regular feature from now on.

7 Feb - I watched Richard Spring's (MP for Suffolk West) (pictured above) response to the Govt position on NHS staffing. He gave an excellent speech scoring a couple of good uppercuts on the Health Minister Ann Keen by very effective use of a few killer statistics . Despite massive overall national increases in NHS funding (from £35Bn to £90Bn from 1997 to 2008) Suffolk has not fared so well. Over the same period the numbers of beds in the county has decreased from 1,501 to 1,194 (20.4%) and numbers of those aged over 65 has increased by 11%. The average spend per person on NHS in Britain is £1,388 but in West Suffolk it is a mere £1,156 and only about half for those in Gordon Brown's constituency of Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath of £2,019!

Andrew Mackinlay (Thurrock) raised a question to the Solicitor General (Vera Baird) regarding extending detention for terrorist subjects from current 28 days. He pointed out the previous Attorney General (Lord Goldsmith), ex-Justice Minister (Charlie Falconer) and current Director for public prosecutions (Sir Ken MacDonald) see no compelling evidence on increasing the current limit. The Govt faces impending defeat on this issue when it comes to a vote expected either side of Easter.

Bob Spink (Castle Point) has been very busy of late laying vast numbers of Parliamentary questions as varied as the issuing of Blackberrys to MPs to the recently announced review on Member's expenses. Bob attracted considerable coverage in the Sundays on 3 Feb regarding his employing his ex-wife which listed amongst other 'dubious' placements like Peter Hain employing his 80-year old mum. The papers failed to mention it was Bob himself who had volnteered the information in an attempt to stimulate some debate. He was able to make his point more clearly on Newsnight on 4 Feb where he argued the whole system for MPs should be taken from MPs. Although a new huge Parlimentary office sorting out secretarial placements is not a very attractive prospect and smacks of centralisation which our free- marketing Bob should abhor. His fellow guest was the slayer of sleeze, Martin Bell who felt sure no real progress could be made with the current speaker. Of course no current MP could repeat that point on the record and hope to speak in Parliament again. Is this the Speaker who claimed over £4,000 for his wife's taxis?

Feb 6 - Bob Russell (Colchester) just back from Helmand Province learnt the local 16th Air Assault Brigade were off to Afghanistan. He asked the PM whether our NATO allies should be contributing more troops. Naturally the PM heartily concurred, the reluctance of some countries (France, Italy, Germany, Spain) to send their share of troops is causing extreme anxiety amongst the other key NATO countries of US, Canada and UK. The U.S. Secretary of State for Defence, Robert Gates recently told Senators the alliance was at risk. It may be Afghanistan and Iraq over time are being considered as essentially the same conflict when they are quite distinct in terms of moral justification. In any event you can expect a show-down at next NATO summit on 27 April in Bucharest (the Romanians are doing their bit incidentally).

John Gummer (Suffolk Coast) made a long speech on the Lisbon Treaty, his views can be described as pragmatically pro-business EU supporter. This is not the sort of thing most of the Conservative Party wants to hear anymore. But in the late 70s and early 80s such views dominated the party, they were the European Party and Labour was deemed anti-EEC, as it was. The Europsceptic wing of the Tory party came to the fore ironically after Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act in 1986 peaking shortly after Maastricht Treaty in 1993.

Feb 5 - Andrew Rosindell's (Romford) patriotism is not in doubt, his website is awash with red, white and blue. This week he introduced a ten-minute rule Bill to set out in law what you can and can't do with the Union Jack. Many other countries such as US have strict laws on these matters, where you can be imprisoned for letting the flag drag in the dirt or taking it down after sunset. It's the kind of legislation we just never get round to doing in this country and there is always something more important to do. So unlikely Andy's Flag Bill will get very far. Second reading is set for October 17.