Monthly Archives: July 2009

What I will be doing over the recess

An organisation I’ve never previously heard of, 38 Degrees (it’s apparently the angle at which standing snow turns into an avalanche – and I’m frankly still none the wiser), has decided to launch a postcard / e-mail campaign aimed at revealing what MPs are getting up to during their “summer holidays”, a.k.a. recess, which starts today.

What a wizard wheeze! It’s already got 38 Degrees some much-needed publicity, covered in the Telegraph, Independent, Mail and Mirror, among other dailies.  Its “executive director”, one David Babbs, who has transferred to the organisation after fulfilling the no doubt immensely useful and important role of Head of Capacity Building with Friends of the Earth, has even written a piece for the Guardian explaining earnestly why 38 Degrees is carrying out the exercise (all very worthy stuff and nothing, of course, to do with getting the pressure group onto the radar screen of British politics).

I am therefore bracing myself for an avalanche, or maybe a trickle, of postcards and e-mails demanding what I am up to during my eleven weeks in the Bahamas (or perhaps Bognor – I must keep you guessing).  So, to save time and make sure that I don’t have to break into all that partying, I thought I’d write this post, to which all enquirers will be referred.

So here is the full lowdown on the Jones recess (probably fairly similar to many other MPs’ recesses, certainly those of Conservative colleagues):

  1. To begin with, the recess is indeed considerably too long;  the longest in living memory, in fact.  It wasn’t what I or the opposition wanted; indeed, we voted against it.  However, the Government prefers Parliament to be as deserted as possible, to ensure that, so far as may be, its meltdown is a private affair, away from the glare of Parliamentary scrutiny.
  2. Nevertheless, we do need a holiday because most of us are very tired.  We don’t need eleven weeks, but we do need a break.  Parliamentary life is incredibly intense and taxing and we need some time off.  I know Mr Babbs’s ascetic eyebrows will probably be elevating skywards at this point, but, frankly, I don’t care.  So I’m taking a few days off at home next week and maybe a week away later in the recess.  And that, leisurewise, will be it.
  3. Apart from the holiday bit, recess isn’t a holiday.  I will be in the constituency office most days to deal with correspondence, answer the phone and see constituents, whose problems don’t go away because Parliament is in recess.  I may, however, take the odd day off to be with my long-suffering wife and family. I may also work somewhat shorter hours than the  15 or so per day I often put in during term time.  Because, no doubt to Mr Babbs’s intense displeasure, I feel I am entitled to an approximation of a family life.  Sorry about that. 
  4. I will also be getting out and about.  There is a host of agricultural shows, village fêtes, public meetings and other community events that take place during recess.  Indeed, I’ll be making a start with the Royal Welsh Show tomorrow.  I’ll also be visiting hospitals, schools, colleges and workplaces.  All this activity puts me in touch with real people and their concerns, which I think is a really good thing.  I would hope that even Mr Babbs would agree with that, but perhaps not.
  5. I will be continuing my politicking.   The party conferences take place over the recess, so there will be a lot of activity even though Parliament will not be sitting.  I am particularly looking forward to our own conference, to be held for the first time in Manchester.
  6. And finally (or perhaps not, because a lot of other stuff happens during recess), I will be writing my blog.

So that, pretty much, will be the Jones recess.  If you’re a Clwyd West resident, I look forward to seeing you.  Come up and have a chat.  But please don’t take photos, as 38 Degrees are apparently urging, without asking first.  Because that’s not really a nice thing to do and I’m a bit surprised that they seem to think it’s OK.

Oh, and if you happen to sight Mr Babbs over the summer, please write in and let me know what he’s getting up to.  All reports will be published.  

I’m sure he won’t mind at all.

Milestone

My dashboard informs me that the last was my 1,000th blog post - something  of a milestone.

This blog started tentatively in  August, 2006, almost three years ago.  The frequency of posting has gone up from an average of one a day in early 2007 – when I began blogging in earnest – to over two a day last month.

Sometimes I feel I’ve made something of a rod for my own back, but mostly it’s enjoyable occupational therapy.   I still don’t know precisely how many people read me, but I’m frequently surprised when the most unlikely individuals tell me they do.

Here’s to the next 1,000; I hope you’ll stick with me.

Swine flu – no time for dogma

The Health Secretary, Andy Burnham, today told the Commons that the national pandemic flu service will go live later this week, with a dedicated telephone number and a website.

The service will, however, operate only in England; Wales will not benefit from it, “because the demand there is not so great”.

The Welsh health minister, Edwina Hart, says that Wales will not participate because “it is well behind the curve compared to areas of England”.  I take it that she means that there are proportionally fewer cases of swine flu in Wales than in England, which is true, although new Welsh cases are being reported at the rate of 300 a day.

However, there seems, frankly, little good reason for Mrs Hart to opt out of the new service and much potentially to be gained by opting in.

I do hope it’s not simply  a case of not signing up because she wants stubbornly and dogmatically to pursue her notorious, discredited “in-country” approach to healthcare.  The Walton episode should have cured her of that.

Swine flu fiasco

Yesterday’s conflicting advice to pregnant women as to what action they should take during the swine flu epidemic has led, at last, to the posting of an advice note on the Department of Health’s website.

The episode was a further illustration of the Government’s frankly chaotic response to the outbreak.  The new Health Secretary, Andy Burnham, will apparently make a statement later today, urging the public not to panic and saying that the virus can be avoided by making “commonsense adjustments” to their lives.

This, however,  is somewhat at odds with the alarming view expressed by the Home Secretary, Alan Johnson, yesterday, when he  informed Andrew Marr that swine flu is a greater threat to Britain than terrorism, a warning somewhat diluted when he went on to say:

“In the vast majority of cases it is a mild illness. We have got stocks of anti-virals to cover over 50% of the population and a vaccine on the way.”

The Government really should get its act together by putting up one spokesman on the issue, getting its FluLine up and running, and asking everyone else to pipe down.

Extraordinarily, though the illness appears to be raging everywhere, I have yet to meet or hear of a single individual in North Wales who has been affected by it.  It’s not just a personal impression, either; this graph, from the Health Protection Agency, shows that Wales, for some reason, is the least affected part of the country:

_46076369_swine_flu_rates_17_07_09

I am intrigued to know why the Welsh, uniquely,  should be enjoying this apparent immunity.  Sensible suggestions are invited.

The indispensability of Peter Mandelson

MandelsonMartin Ivens, in today’s Sunday Times, indulges in what can best be described as an extended, free-form riff on the theme of the centrality of Peter Mandelson to the futures of Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, Europe and, ultimately, the world.

Mandelson, until his wider objectives are realised, is  central to the Labour party, too;  but, implies Ivens, only in a temporary shoring-up capacity, “the last prop holding up this ramshackle government”:

The former Prince of Darkness, now Gordon’s Good Angel, persuaded the last Blairites not to quit. Now he even pops into No 10 and tells the PM to stop e-mailing and go to bed.

Ivens’s analysis of Mandelson’s indispensability is compelling and probably, in large part, correct.  There is no doubt that, since his recall from Brussels last year, Mandelson’s assumption of power has been progressive, relentless and seemingly unstoppable.  He has now, it appears, even convinced Brown of the suicidal folly of his crude “Labour investment v. Tory cuts” stance, finessing the argument to the subtler and more credible one of prioritisation:

His is a rare voice of sanity. Brown, seduced by the notion he could rerun his favourite campaign of “Beware the Tory cuts”, has been stubbornly denying that a re-elected Labour government would have to make cuts too. In poll after poll the voters say they don’t believe him. Last Wednesday Mandelson finally called a halt to this nonsense. “There will be spending choices and a growing need for greater efficiency across the board, and less spending in some programmes,” he purred.

But, says Ivens, Peter Mandelson’s real ambitions extend well beyond the immediate and perhaps impossible task of saving Gordon from himself.  They reach out beyond these shores, back to Europe and to the campaign, formally declared last week, to install Tony Blair as EU president.  When the recalcitrant, muddle-headed Irish and Poles have finally seen sense and ratified the Lisbon treaty, the way will be clear for Blair to be promoted as the “Big Man” candidate for the presidency, poised to bestride the world stage, look Barack Obama in the eye and call the shots to Vladimir Putin.   Another good reason, by the way, for postponing as long as possible a general election that could see the referendum-pledged Tories returned to power before the treaty is ratified.

And where would that leave Peter Mandelson and Gordon Brown?  Ivens proffers his own hypothesis:

Perhaps it’s all a pipe dream. But if Tony got to Brussels, favours could be returned. Mandelson would make a fine presidential chef de cabinet. And when Gordon lost the election, his chums could fix up a big international job for him, too. We might be stuck with the three of them for another decade or so. This psycho-drama could run and run.

Pray God it doesn’t; but yes, it could.  Ivens’s article is one well worth reading, bookmarking and revisiting in, say, 18 months’ time, to assess how the “pipe dream” has panned out.

Backfire

Jack StrawJack Straw’s Constitutional Renewal Bill, due to be published tomorrow, appears already to have run into unforeseen difficulty.

The Bill will seek to prevent the funding of political parties by individuals who do not pay UK tax on all income from abroad – a measure nakedly aimed at the Conservative donor, Lord Ashcroft.

However, today’s Observer reports that two big Labour non-dom donors, Lord Swraj Paul and Sir Gulam Noon, have said that they will stop giving money to the party if the Bill goes through.  The steel magnate, Lakshmi Mittal, who has given more than £1 million to Labour, has “declined to comment” as to what he will do.

A perplexed Noon mildly commented:

“It is very surprising the government is introducing a law like this at a time when they are in dire need of money to win an election.”

Well, quite.

Best event of the year

Rose Bowl

Last night was the annual exhibition of Denbighshire Art Society at their Gallery in Penrhyn Road, Colwyn Bay.

This is easily my favourite event of the year, because:

  1. the standards are so high and the exhibits so good;
  2. the members of the society have such a rattlingly good time; and (most importantly)
  3. it always falls on the weekend before the summer recess, so I feel particularly cheerful.

This year, the two principal prizes, the Rose Bowl and the Award for Originality, were won by Rene Davies (pictured above receiving the Rose Bowl).  Carl Hodgson, who has won the Originality Award for more years than anyone can remember, hopes he will regain it next time around.

I have opened the exhibition for the last five years; I sincerely hope I’ll be around to open it next year.

Constituency day

Jack and Jill 1

One day, two churches.  First, a coffee morning at St John’s, Old Colwyn (after Abergele surgery), where Dilys Thomas was launching her book on Old Colwyn, Past and Present.

Then, this afternoon, to the summer fête at St George’s, Colwyn Bay, where the stewards were all dressed as nursery rhyme characters.  I was given the unenviable task of judging the best costume.  Little Bo Peep was in with a very strong chance until it was pointed out that, unable to find a sheep, she had come equipped with a unicorn, so I had to disqualify her for lack of authenticity.

I am pictured with the winners, Jack and Jill.

Basic honesty called for

Yesterday, I saw a lady at my constituency office whose son, serving with the military, is about to be deployed to Afghanistan.  She had asked to see me urgently.

When she arrived, she was quite distressed.  She was proud of her son, who, at the age of 26, had already served in the forces for some years.  She was, of course, concerned at the thought of his being sent to Afghanistan, but she fully understood the reasons for our being there and, indeed, approved of them. 

What she couldn’t accept, however, was the thought that her son and thousands like him were being sent to such a hostile theatre in insufficient numbers and without the best equipment in sufficient quantity. She wanted me to write to the Prime Minister expressing her concern, which, of course, I shall do.

If only at the presentational level, Gordon Brown’s handing of the troop and equipment issue has been a disaster.  In an embarrassingly stumbling performance at PMQs on Wednesday – all bluster and percentages – he asserted that:

“While the loss of life is tragic and sad, it is not to do with helicopters.”

That claim has been comprehensively rebutted by the Chief of the Defence Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, who said yesterday that he was “busting a gut” to get more helicopters into Afghanistan in order to give more protection to foot soldiers:

“In this situation where you have lots of improvised explosive devices, the more you can increase your tactical flexibility by moving people by helicopters then the more unpredictable your movements become to the enemy. Therefore it is quite patently the case that you could save casualties by doing that.”

General Sir Richard Dannatt, the Head of the Army, has in the meantime expressed concern over troop numbers.  His reward for doing so is to be snubbed by Downing Street; the general has, astonishingly enough, been excluded from top-level talks over the deployment of reinforcements. 

Dannatt apparently demanded 2,000 more troops on the ground, much to Gordon Brown’s displeasure.  Which brings me back to my constituent.  She had seen his appearance before the Commons liaison committee on Thursday and was appalled by his refusal to give the chairman, James Arbuthnot, a straight answer on the issue.

And I can entirely understand her concern.  Her son’s life is being put on the line.  The least she should be able to expect from the man who is sending him to Afghanistan is a basic degree of honesty.

In defence of Quentin Letts

This morning’s Today programme included a hugely entertaining confrontation between the former Basssetlaw MP, Joe Ashton, and the Mail’s Parliamentary sketch writer, Quentin Letts. 

Ashton is a big noise in the Association of Former Members of Parliament, whose summer 2009 newsletter, Order, Order!, contains a thoroughly vitriolic attack on Letts, personally penned by Ashton. 

It became obvious during the Today piece that Ashton harbours a deep personal loathing for Letts, a matter equally obvious from his Order, Order! article: 

Mr Letts thinks he is the cheeky diminutive jester from the Daily Mail, waving his cap and bells. He is not. His insults are sometimes no better than those of a football yobbo hurling spit from the shelter of the terraces.

 Now that’s nasty! 

 Furthermore, continued Ashton, Letts is a repugnant misogynist.  He quoted from his own article with some venom:

 Letts seems to relish and enjoy upsetting women MPs.

 As the House prepared for the Cabinet reshuffle he focused on Jacqui Smith, the then Home Secretary:

 “She popped dynamite down her cleavage, she knew she was doomed” he jeered.

“So she lit the fuse, popped in the cyanide down her cavernous cleavage and blew herself to smithereens. But her roly poly face was creamed with pleasure. You could have stored enough salt in her dimples to serve a couple of boiled eggs.”

The burden of Ashton’s argument was that Letts was an out-and-out bounder, a journalistic Flashman picking unfairly on poor, defenceless MPs such as Smith and the former Speaker, Michael Martin.  The new Parliamentary Standards Committee should be required to step in and put a stop to “the personal denigration and gratuitous abuse of MPs by the press”.  People such as Letts should even, after receiving a warning, be excluded from the House.

Letts, to his credit, took Ashton’s diatribe very much in his stride.  He didn’t feel particularly guilty, he said.  As for his attitude to women, he was highly amused to be lectured by Ashton, who had such an interesting taste in massage parlours.  And if Parliament did chuck him out of the press gallery, he’d simply carry on scribbling from the public gallery.

Ashton’s argument is, frankly, ludicrous.  It can’t be fun to be on the receiving end of one of Letts’s barbs, but, on the other hand, politicians are not exactly shrinking violets themselves.  If an MP hasn’t got a thick skin, or can’t develop one PDQ, then he (or she) has probably chosen the wrong métier.

And anyway, politicians themselves are perfectly capable of launching their own brickbats, today more than ever.

The advent of the internet and blogging means that politicians – and everyone else, for that matter – have unconfined access to a free medium with worldwide reach.  This amounts to a significant rebalancing of the once unassailable power of the Fourth Estate.

A few months ago, a political journalist of my acquaintance told me how much he yearned for a certain female opposition MP.

“That’s really interesting,” I said.  “I’ll write that one up in my blog.”

“But you can’t do that!” he spluttered in horror.

“I don’t see why not,” I replied.  “You’d have had no hesitation writing about me in your blog, if I had said that.”

I never did write it up, of course.

But, one day, I may. 

Dropping our defences?

One of the most important projects planned for anywhere in Wales is the defence training academy at St Athan in the Vale of Glamorgan.  When the £12 billion scheme was announced in January, 2007, it was enthusiastically welcomed by politicians of all parties (with the exception of Plaid Cymru). It is projected to open in 2014 and will train up to 25,000 students every year.

The academy will need the appropriate infrastructure to support it, most importantly road links.  This is what the local MP, John Smith, had to say at last May’s Welsh Grand Committee:

We must ensure that the infrastructure is right for the people of west Wales and mid-Wales, so that we have easy access to and from the site.

Consequently, one of the most important projects being considered right now is the airport link road from the M4 to Cardiff airport. It is absolutely critical that that project remains on track and is delivered. Following the Budget, I recognise that there will be pressure because of the constraints on public expenditure growth and the pressure to look at projects that may be viewed as providing easy savings. However, it would be a disaster if the airport link road was delayed any further, or shelved or dropped by the Welsh Assembly Government between now and 2014, when the college will open. If that road is not built, the college will still open and the job opportunities will still be there but they will not go to the people of Wales, or rather they will not go to the proportion of people in Wales to whom they should go.

John Smith will consequently be disappointed at yesterday’s announcement by the Welsh transport minister that the airport link road is to be abandoned, together with a long-planned improvement to the M4 in South Wales.  Indeed, John has gone further and called the decision “economic lunacy”.

The announcement will undoubtedly cause uncertainty over the future of the St Athan project.  Such uncertainty will not have been relieved by the following exchange at yesterday’s Welsh Questions:

Mrs. Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham) (Con): The defence training project at St. Athan would bring huge opportunities to Wales. Will the Minister confirm that the Secretary of State is co-ordinating with the Ministry of Defence and that the pre-contract agreement letter will be issued to the preferred bidder this week, on time on 17 July—or will the Government delay that? 

Mr. David: The hon. Lady is correct to stress the importance of that investment to Wales. It will be the largest single investment ever in the Welsh economy. The defence technical college will be of tremendous benefit, not only to the Welsh economy but obviously to the United Kingdom armed forces. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State fully recognises the importance of that; he has had discussions with the Secretary of State for Defence and they are going forward together. The hon. Lady can rest assured that we recognise the importance of the project for Wales. 

Wayne David’s answer was unsettlingly lengthy; I hope that it was not deliberately obfuscatory.   It could, and should, have been a simple: “Yes, it will be issued”. 

Recognising the importance of the project is one thing; issuing the pre-contract agreement letter is another.  The Wales Office should immediately clarify the position.  It would be extremely worrying if there were any doubt whatever over the Government’s commitment to St Athan.

Party at Gwydyr House

To the Wales Office summer reception at Gwydyr House, hosted by a remarkably ebullient Peter Hain. 

The assembled company consists mostly of the great and good of the Welsh media, leavened with the likes of the Manic Street Preachers, Terry Waite and a certain celeb weathergirl.

I am flattered to be told that this humble blog is read by both a senior bod from the BBC and a very nice lady from Golwg.  Whether for pleasure or out of a sense of duty isn’t made clear, but I form my own, realistic, opinion.

Mrs Hart may have to bite the bullet

The latest chapter in the unfortunate  recent history of neurosurgery in Wales was reported in yesterday’s Western Mail.   The neurosurgery unit at Morriston Hospital, Swansea, we are told, could close owing to a lack of middle-grade surgeons.  Morriston and Cardiff are now the only two neurosurgery units in Wales. 

It will be recalled that in July, 2007, the Welsh health minister, Edwina Hart, announced a plan whereby all elective neurosurgery generated in Wales wshuld be directed to the two South Wales units, thereby preserving their viability.  This provoked enormous opposition in North Wales, and a well-orchestrated campaign of protest resulted in a U-turn by Mrs Hart after she had commissioned a report on neurosurgery services by Mr James Steers.

It should be remembered, however, that Health Commission Wales (HCW) had, in 2007, produced a report which said, essentially, that there was insufficient capacity in South Wales for two neurosurgery units.  The indication was that Morriston should close.

Mrs Hart had been active in the campaign to preserve the Morriston unit prior to the 2007 Welsh Assembly elections.  It was she who, upon becoming health minister, overruled the HCW recommendations, which clearly did not meet with her approval,  and came up with the ludicrous “All Wales” plan.

Now it looks very much as if, at least in the short term, despite Mrs Hart’s endeavours, there will be a loss of complex neurosurgery at Morriston.

Mrs Hart may yet have to bite the bullet, dust off the HCW report, and accept its conclusion that there is no room for two neurosurgery units in South Wales.

The lonely goatherd

gordon-brownThe departure from government of Lord Darzi signals the virtual disintegration of Gordon Brown’s “government of all the talents”, established with such fanfare after his assumption of the Labour leadership two years ago.

Over the last few months, one by one, the “goats” have wandered off –Lords Digby Jones, Carter of Barnes and, most recently, Malloch-Brown – to seek pastures new; and now Lord Darzi is joining them.

I’m not entirely sure that Brown will miss them terribly.  While their departure does tend to imply a lack of confidence in the goatherd, at least he can replace them with ministers more constitutionally inclined to accept party discipline.

The only notable “goat” now remaining is Lord West of Spithead, the former First Sea Lord, who is still embedded as a junior minister in the Home Office, with responsibility for security.  He it was who displayed a lack of goatish sure-footedness when he told the Today programme that he was “not convinced” of the need for 42-day detention without trial; two hours later, after a swift visit to No 10, he announced that he was, in fact, entirely convinced of the soundness of the plan; as a “simple sailor” he just hadn’t chosen his words carefully enough.

It was probably around that time that Gordon Brown first started to doubt the wisdom of his “all the talents” policy.   

For a politician, it’s how you deal with the media that sorts the sheep from the goats.

Another ill-tempered outburst

Mr Rhodri Glyn Thomas, the Welsh Assembly member for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr, has launched what the Western Mail calls a “blistering attack” (attacks are always “blistering”, just as defences are always “spirited”) on the Welsh select committee over its report on the proposed Welsh language Legislative Competence Order (LCO).

Mr Thomas has clearly attended the Dafydd Elis-Thomas school of anger management, if the following is anything to go by:

“Who do these people think they are?

“Nobody seriously doubts that decisions about the Welsh language should be taken in Wales, yet this group of MPs is desperately trying to cling on to a right of veto.

“The Assembly Government has spent two years looking at this and consulting widely, only to have the Welsh Affairs Committee say that the LCO (Legislative Competence Order) should be fundamentally rewritten…

“For some reason it seems that the Westminster committee has decided to delay the LCO’s progress…”

And so, apoplectically, he goes on.  And on.

When he has calmed down a little, Mr Thomas might like to consider the following:

  1. The select committee was requested to carry out the scrutiny of the draft LCO by the Secretary of State; it didn’t simply wade in uninvited, as Mr Thomas seems to think;
  2. The committee has no “right of veto”, as Mr Thomas could have found out for himself if he had spent more time studying the process; that right resides with the Secretary of State for Wales.  The committee merely scrutinises and reports;
  3. The select committee, which is comprised of  MPs of all parties, including Mr Thomas’s own Plaid Cymru, was unanimously of the view that the draft LCO was deficient in many respects and needed redrafting.  It is up to the Secretary of State to decide whether he accepts that advice;
  4. The difficulties identified by the committee could have been avoided if more attention had been paid to the draftsmanship of the Order at the Assembly.  The fact that it was so poorly drawn is no  fault of the committee.

Mr Thomas should bear in mind that he is talking about a legislative process, which has to be got right.  The public expect, and deserve, nothing less.

Mr Thomas observes in the Western Mail that he was the Welsh Minister responsible for the draft LCO in its early stages of development.

Perhaps, therefore, rather than blaming the select committee for pointing out the Order’s deficiencies, he should instead be accepting his own share of responsibility for the fact that it was so poorly prepared and presented.