Lynne's Parliament and Haringey diary

Last visit of the day is to the Wightman Road Mosque. Excellent conversation with the President, Secretary and Treasurer of the Trust which runs the mosque.

We sit in a meeting room upstairs and range our discussion across the obvious issues of the day. We all agree that more engagement is necessary to offset the suspicion that has fallen on the Muslim population so unfairly in almost all cases. Clearly Iraq looms large in the causes of bombing coming to our shores. I think Tony Blair's early denial that the war was anything to do with the bombings was just the most stupid thing he could say. Not a direct and solitary cause of course – but to say it played no part - ridiculous.

However, we are all solidly agreed that bombing and violence have no place in a democratic society. From which we move to the fact that so many of the community did not vote and do not believe in engaging in the democratic process. I suggest that along with coming to the mosque so that young people have the opportunity to question and talk with me (an MP) directly, that in addition if there are groups of youngsters (or anyone) who would like to come to tour Parliament and meet myself and a few other MPs I would be happy to arrange such a visit. I think engagement in the political life and process of the country is vital.

This is a well run mosque who have banned some of the organisations the media give so much time to. They are worried that T Blair's proposals will drive such groups underground and that no one will know any longer where danger lurks - because even the Muslim community won't know.

They are upset at the deportations and we talk about the pros and cons. I suggest that if they found the need to ban groups from the Mosque - then you could see the potential need to ban certain groups and to deport certain people. I think the difference is that the offending groups were given the opportunity under warning to stop what they were doing or they would be banned. Perhaps that would be a better proposal then just banning and creating an underground and martyrs.

These are difficult and challenging times. I generally find being myself and sticking to my guns steers me well through most situations regardless of what those challenges are. It is never any use saying something you don't believe and agreeing with something just because you know that someone wants you to. You just have to say what you really think whilst being sensitive to how other people feel from their perspectives. It's not rocket science.

And then I trudge homewards. I am actually still working until next Tuesday - but in terms of blogging - I will be taking my usual mid-year break and will be back around mid-September. So - see you then - in what will undoubtedly be a lively period in British politics.

Surgery all morning. (One blog reader asked if all the surgeries I do mean I’m a doctor. In case you don’t know – I’m not at the operating table, but rather it’s an advice session people come to, so they can talk to me in person, face-to-face about an issue they need help with).

I cannot count the number of people who come with housing misery stories - too many people in one room, appalling conditions, etc - and the points they need to qualify for re-housing always seem to change just as they are about to achieve the required number.

Today was no exception. One couple had been in private accommodation which got flooded so they had to move out to stay with the woman's mother. Two children later and sleeping all four in one room, they got within six points of being re-housed - when the goalposts moved. Years later they are still there

I asked if they had thought of renting in the private market - but they said it was too expensive and their daughter was at a local school and the mother helped with childcare - all very valid of course.

However, as I said to them, if the Council were to tell you that realistically you are unlikely to get re-housed for another ten years - might you then decide to move further out where it is cheaper, even though you have to change your daughter's school and lose the easy and convenient help being with your mother brings? Yes - they said. And therein lies a huge problem - people are not able to make informed decisions about what to do as they live in a world of ever-shifting, non-delivered promises.

Of course, some do eventually get there - which leads me to another conclusion about the system we have: the system itself creates problems. For example - you get more points if you have extra criteria that count. One that whisks across my surgery desk regularly is a doctor's letter confirming depression or asthma or whatever - and the more illnesses and the more severe the more points! Now of course this is right in a way because need increases - but as with all the systems it seems to encourage people to be less able and discourages people from battling for better health.

Conversely, it leaves people who manage through adversity worse off. I saw one woman, a single mother bringing up four children in inappropriate accommodation for 18 years, but with no qualifying 'extras' and doing a great job keeping all their heads above water. She will probably never get re-housed because she is determined to cope with it all regardless. Perverse incentives all over the place!

Visit the Mental Health Trust on the St Ann's Hospital site. Haringey has the longest inpatient stays in London but it does a very low re-admission rate compared to other authorities. So - what I take from that is that the Government needs to be very careful about its push to shove people out of in-patient facilities towards care in the community. While I am sure that being at home and not institutionalised is a laudable t aim, if the patient isn't ready and the support networks are not adequate then we will see more and more problems on street or left for the police to deal with.

The other issue that struck me was the number (and cost) of secure beds that we pay for and that extraordinary numbers of people with mental health problems who end up in prison (also expensive) as opposed to getting preventative care prior to getting hospitalised or imprisoned. This resonates with my experience of warning after warning to the council or police that a local person is threatening neighbours etc. The authorities are always saying they cannot do anything until something happens. Eventually, the person assaults someone. Then they are put in prison and/or evicted. When they come out - they are found accommodation (if they are lucky) and the whole cycle starts all over again with new neighbours.

So - more early intervention and prevention needed. Otherwise we are just going to be creating more arrests, more problems, more misery.

I also have an appointment with the Primary Care Trust (PCT). Main issue on the agenda for me is the news (known for some time but not released to us mere mortals) that the future plans for the redevelopment of the Hornsey Central site are in jeopardy. Haringey Council has pulled the plug on their part of the proposals for the site and has, in the most ad hoc of fashions, decided not to proceed with the care home facilities. This leaves the PCT up the creek as they need the funding from that to fund the other community health services to be offered.

They have come up with a possible way of funding it. I’m not supposed to say publicly what it is yet (though can’t quite see why) – it is quite controversial and supposedly 'commercially sensitive'. I think they need to be bolder and work with the community on this funding problem.

Local campaigners, myself and others have been at this for years and years. We campaigned against closure originally. Continued through the wilderness years. But when the PCT was set up relations improved with campaigners. Now Haringey Council has jeopardised all of this by pulling the rug out.

The PCT was planning to present the options to their board in September. I suggested to them that rather than go to the board and then to a public meeting thereafter when their possibly controversial proposals were a 'fait accompli' it would be much better to share with the key stakeholders the challenges they faced and the options available and then go to a public meeting to genuinely consult. The acting Chief Exec, Geoff Sandford, said he would give that suggestion serious consideration. I hope he does!

Labels: hornsey central hospital

I am on a mini-mission to explore the mental health arena in Hornsey & Wood Green. Quite a high percentage of people who come to my surgery are in difficulties - whether with housing issues, neighbour disputes, benefits or whatever – and it seems to me that they have wandered into these difficulties because of mental health issues and been caught in a downward spiral. A commonish one - for example - would be someone who has lost their home because of falling into arrears through being hospitalised for a mental health problem who cannot then be discharged from the hospital because there is nowhere to go.

So today I visited Mind. Seemed to be an excellent facility - but clearly lacking adequate funding for treatment which involved talking to people: long waits for therapists etc. In fact, that was a repeating theme across all mental health services - that the Government was clearly keener on funding drug therapies rather than talking therapies. The other issue that struck me was the lack of knowledge about how to access them amongst the general public.

Event of the day was going to meet the new temporary Chief Executive hired by Haringey to replace the hastily removed (although the public version is “early retired”) now former Chief Exec, David Warwick. It’s Max Caller – the retired ex-Chief Exec of Hackney. He said he was focusing on two key priorities whilst in Haringey. One is to make sure officers understood that they were there to execute the will of the council. I took this to mean that he had been briefed by the Labour administration as to their reasons for Warwick's “early retirement” which I have always believed was because he wouldn't do what Labour told him to do and persevered with his duty to the council rather than to Labour.

Realistically, I don't expect him to do much more than a holding job. Who would? And that's part of the stupidity of this whole event - at great cost to the public purse we are now, inevitably, in a holding pattern until the new Chief Exec is appointed. Even more stupidly - it looks as if Labour are going to make that appointment a few months prior to the local elections next May - which means if Lib Dems take over the council as we plan - they will have a Chief Exec chosen by Labour to carry out their new administration. Of course - we are in the realm of ifs and buts - but it's not great timing and could mean, I assume, a clause in any contract that states it needs to be ratified by the new administration (whomever that is) in due course. Oh - well - can't deal with every eventuality!

Working an ordinary nine-hour day feels like absolute luxury. Now parliament is not sitting I am not starting at 6am and finishing after 10pm - but just working roughly 9 to 5; it's a doddle. Today - apart from paperwork etc - I went into Parliament to have lunch with my staff. They are all new and I wanted to spend a bit of time with them before I depart for my break on the 16th August.

I prepared for media interviews on Blair's blurtings – i.e. the proposed new terror laws. However, the shocking news of Robin Cook's death bumps me off all the scheduled slots - appropriately.

The terror laws proposals will be around for quite a while but the untimely departure of Robin Cook needs proper respect. I am absolutely shocked by the news. Partly because I had suddenly joined his world - a world I had observed him in for years and he sat roughly opposite me in the Commons. Partly because he was not much older than me.

Partly because he looked slim and reasonably fit. Partly because I had been really looking forward to hearing his legendary oratory skills firsthand. But mostly because we needed his voice from the Labour benches - a voice which commanded respect and which rang out as Labour's conscience - an echo from a bygone era when principles meant something.

Not a whole lot to report as largely confined to sick bed, with much time spent watching the news. I observed Hazel Blears, whom I shadow in Parliament - she was starting a round of visits to hard to reach Muslims (as opposed to the usual spokespersons) in towns across the country. Good idea - but why have we waited so long? So much air time has been given to the extremist views of groups that most Muslims have scant regard for. This emphasis has contributed to the fevered atmosphere and probably encouraged them even more. I get into trouble with our press office as I couldn't go to do interviews on the weekend and missed calls to do the Today program - separated from my phone which unhelpfully was set on silent downstairs in the kitchen - where I wasn't.

Terrorism on the TV news is interwoven with man floating around the heavens with DIY tools trying to repair a spaceship. I so wouldn't like to be one of those astronauts. I would be convinced I was going to die on re-entry and even more shaky about making makeshift repairs on the hoof. I wish them well on their return. I know it's expensive - but I love space exploration. It's a frontier - and we don't have that many - and it's so good to lift your eyes above the daily grind - and the horrors of how to deal with terror in our midst.

Al Qaeda's No 2 appears in a video broadcast by Al Jazeera saying basically that we in London are targets because Tony went to war in Iraq. Well - there are many reasons I believe Tony should go - and indeed Iraq is one of them. However, it cannot come at the behest of an enemy. And - he has just been re-elected to government by the people of this country (a democracy, however flawed the voting system). Opportunism by Al Qaeda is no way to decide our country’s governance.

I am more concerned by the proposals Tony came forward with yesterday - the new terror laws are draconian but more importantly may be unworkable. We British (and that includes everyone!) pride ourselves on our tolerance and fair play and many feel that our tolerance has spawned monsters - or allowed them to spawn.

And so we face one of the greatest challenges of our time - how can we tolerate the intolerant? We clearly feel our good nature has been abused – so the conundrum: how do we retain our essence of free speech and fair play when others don't abide by the rules of that particular game?

I am not automatically against any new laws on terror – but I do feel we generally have enough laws.

On incitement to terrorism - define terrorism. On deportation - Charles Clarke to be the deciding factor? Arbiter of who stays and who goes? And let us assume we currently (for the most part and giving them the benefit of the doubt) have a benign government - but... And what are the criteria? And why should we ban those who are banned in the US? We are a different country and what the US finds unacceptable we should examine very carefully - not automatically jump to their tune.

And as for our 'arrangements' with countries where human rights are an issue – and so raising problems with us deporting people to those countries - who will monitor those 'agreements'? Countries with poor records on human rights are not going to change because of a piece of paper.

One break from this issue - on Thursday evening I leapt from my sick-bed to go to a CPZ (controlled parking zone) meeting. This one came off the back of a petition from residents asking for one in three or four roads in the very west of Haringey, affected significantly by the introduction of a CPZ on the Barnet side of the border in East Finchley.

The Labour Executive member is there and the senior council officer. Everyone has their say. There are the usual rants about Haringey Council using CPZs as a milch cow. Not often I stand up for the council - but Haringey's charges at GBP25 per annum for a resident permit are the cheapest in London. But overall the meeting is very positive - and the outcome is an agreement to proceed next year to a two-zone consultation.

There was a huge area consulted on in 2003 - and as with all large CPZ consultations, those few with the existing problem wanted one but the vast tract of people in the rest of the consultation who did not have a problem did not. Anyway - a successful meeting and we will see how that one proceeds.

One bloke raised the issue of roads where lots of people have off-street parking and therefore not needing to park would vote 'no' to a proposal and therefore unbalance the result unfairly. I used a - what I believe (!) - is a really good example of how they might approach such an issue.

I have just had the consultation on the proposed extension to the Highgate Village CPZ. Most of our road (including me) has off-street parking - and there are only very limited on-street parking available for those residents without anyway. One resident of the street called meeting to discuss the consultation. I couldn't go - but he posted the minutes. Firstly - they agreed to get the council officer down to see if the on-street parking spaces could be increased by slightly altering the design etc - and that could happen. Secondly - those residents in the street who were desperate for the extension (because everyone parks in our road) made their case to us, their neighbours, to all vote for the CPZ as their lives would be impossible without a CPZ as they were not luck (as the rest of us were) to have off-street parking. As good neighbours - we all supported those in need. Good community spirit and lack of selfishness!

On Friday I did my surgery at Wood Green library until lunchtime as usual - and then went off to meet Haringey Alzheimer's Society who wanted to introduce themselves to me. Strangely - Haringey Council and Haringey Primary Care Trust don't fund them - whereas that is how most local branches are funded and needless to say they need funding after next year.

Then I meet Bob Cottingham of the Highgate and Muswell Hill pensioners group. I think Bob is fantastic and whilst he himself says that age is slowing him down (I was too polite to ask his!), his mind is still as sharp as a razor. Apart from discussing the new Pensioners' Charter (which he will send to me) we have an intense discussion about the Middle East, Jenny Tonge and terrorism.

As ever with the Middle East - my view has always been right down the middle - a homeland for Palestine and security and safety for Israel. My views generally make me no friends with either lobby as both have strangely enough a kind of Bush approach - that you’re with 'em or against 'em. I will continue to listen to all arguments - but to date remain convinced that the rights and wrongs of history deliver us nowhere - and any solution will have to deliver enough of what each side wants to have a flying chance of success.

I then dash off to 'Working Links', an organisation involved in helping the long-term unemployed back into work. I have to say - fabulous organisation. This one is a private/public partnership - I know, wash my mouth out with soap given my past comments about other private/public partnerships. But if it works - use it. I am not ideologically committed to absolutes - except in the case of particular public services - but this seems a good place to bring in private expertise.

As you walk through the door - the environment sings optimism and enthusiasm - upbeat, modern, clean and bright. But as in all things (at least that's my view) the success of such projects rests entirely with the staff. It's people - it's always people. And the young consultants' who ran each section were all absolute stars. Their two directors were equally enthusiastic and had clearly been responsible for creating this beneficial atmosphere.

They basically take people from a number of sources and spend 26 weeks supporting a tailor made individual package to help them back to work. Hurrah! Ten out of ten to them. I cannot bear seeing people who have just become so dependent on the state to sort their life that they no longer even think of doing things for themselves or getting out of the forlorn situations that have become their lives.

Labels: charles clarke, controlled parking zones, hazel blears