Lynne's Parliament and Haringey diary

Leadership hustings at the RSA (Royal Society of Arts) with Chris Huhne and Nick Clegg going head to head. Both were good - obviously - but! Nick started really well with his speech - doing what he does best - and trying to charm the birds right out of the streets with homely examples of real life Nick experiences. Very good stuff. Chris's speech was tougher and more real - and he delivered it with gusto. Full of real experience and good personal examples himself.

Needless to say there was a lot of common ground and agreement - but differences occurred. Before I get onto those however, I noted that Nick was claiming credit for the Freedom Bill or The Great Repeal Act. But actually - that was one of Chris's four big ideas during the last leadership contest. Credit to Nick for being willing to run with the idea so well, but credit where credit's due for the original idea!

But it was the questions - that in my opinion - separated the men from the boys - so to speak. There were two key areas where I felt Chris outshone Nick. One was in overall tone and content of response. Chris is clearly able to think on his feet and come up with really brilliant answers and not waffle. Nick reverts to the safety zone of talking about things like Home Affairs (his brief) when he isn't sure of what answer to give. Nick was more touchy-feely - without question - but Chris is learning feely-touchy - but with steel and with substance.

The real test came just at the end when the boys were asked about Trident. Nick spoke first and nonsensically in my view as he said he wouldn't for one moment consider a unilateralist point of view - he was a multilateralist. But he was trying to imply that Chris was unilateralist - which he isn't. So a bit of edginess there.

Nick then takes the straight party line and tries to rubbish Chris (whose stand on Trident had been covered in the press a lot). Chris then speaks and sets out exactly, clearly and coherently what position he takes on Trident which is that in the end, and dependent on the outcome of the multi-lateral disarmament talks in 2010, it is inconceivable that we would need to replace Trident in exact form and at the gargantuan cost of billions and billions.

Chris's argument is that Trident was developed before 1989 in a world where the name of the game was nuclear and the stand off between the super powers ruled the world. Since the end of the Cold War and the advent of rogue states and terrorism - the rules of the game have changed.

Anyway - then it got heated as Nick interrupted and tried to attack Chris's position. Well - bet he wished he hadn't as Chris's response to the attacks showed the steel of which he is made - not only absolutely confident in content but delivered with absolute authority. That was an excellent joust!

Labels: chris huhne, lib dem leadership contest, nick clegg

My latest column for Asian Voice picks up on my experience at a recent Youth Question Time in Haringey:

One of the Labour panellists was talking about ‘ethnic minorities’ and a young black boy (name of Justin I believe) shot up his hand and said he was fed up with being labelled; fed up with being always thought of as ethnic minority; felt it put him in a box. He wanted to be taken as him – as a person.

You can read the full piece here.

So - we launched Chris Huhne's Manifesto for Leadership at noon today. It went really, really, well! And it was radical and called 'The Liberal Revolution' - which is exactly what is needed!

Chris excelled at questions - and the media as ever were naughty. They seemed to want to trap Chris into saying things about Nick - derogatory things - but Chris neatly sidestepped. He was very gung ho responding to questions on his Trident position, on his People's Veto; on being marched off to prison for refusing to have an ID card and so on. Exciting stuff!

Labels: chris huhne, lib dem leadership contest

I notice that the Government has backed down from its dreadful proposal to take back 5% of school surpluses. A victory - led by David Laws, the Lib Dem schools spokesperson. Well done David!

Labels: david laws, haringey schools

Today's Daily Mail has picked up on figures I've unearthed about the huge numbers of uninsured cars on the roads.

As they quoted me saying: "[The Government's] policies for pursuing uninsured drivers have been a total failure and it is about time they accepted the facts and took action. As with most crime, it is inevitably the law-abiding public that end up footing the bill with uninsured drivers costing us on average £30 more in premiums. I get really, really angry that it is always the good guys who are the fall guys."

I went together with Mark Lancaster (Tory No 2 in International Development and a serving soldier) to the Chinese Embassy to have a meeting with Professor Zhao Yongren, Counsellor Political Section and Parliamentary Affairs Officer and Dr. Zhang Lirong, Chief Political Section.

We were presenting a letter signed by 100 MPs asking China to help further with ending the genocide in Darfur.

China has clearly been instrumental in promoting modest progress over Darfur but it must continue to use its considerable influence in Sudan to promote the cause of peace and development. It particular, it could send clearer messages to the Sudanese Government by using its diplomatic, military, humanitarian, and economic ties to greater effect.

So the good news so far: the Chinese Government joined in the unanimous UN Security Council (UNSC) vote to authorise, under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, deployment of 26,000 peacekeeping troops and civilian police to Darfur (the joint African Union-United Nations Peacekeeping force). China’s appointment of a Government Special Representative on the Darfur issue, Liu Guijin, played a key role in gaining the Government of Sudan’s acceptance to the peacekeeping force – breaking a long held deadlock. China has sent some 300 engineers to Darfur to back up the UNAMID peacekeeping mission as part of the heavy support package.

But not everything in the garden is rosy and there are still mixed messages coming out of China. Reports indicate that China worked behind the scenes to significantly weaken the terms of UNSC Resolution 1769 (e.g. removing the ‘ability to disarm militia’ mandate for the peacekeeping force). China hasn't been pressing properly for those indicted by the International Criminal Court to be handed over. Also, two recently released studies by well-respected organizations have fuelled concerns that weapons from China are being used against the people of Darfur, and that China is not doing enough to prevent such usage. Further, in the spring of 2007, China indicated its desire to further its military relationship with Sudan “in every sphere.”

China has extended some humanitarian aid to the people of Darfur in 2007 but such aid has been far less than the new support it has provided to the government of Sudan. A striking example was provided during President Hu’s February visit to Khartoum, during which he announced several new economic aid packages to Sudan, including an interest-free loan to construct a Presidential Palace. The sums involved were dramatically larger than the modest amount of new humanitarian aid provided.

Trade between the two countries more than doubled in the first half of 2007. China also continues to sign new accords, such as oil development agreements, that strengthen economic ties between the two countries.

The words of Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing in March are rather worrying in fact: “Our assistance is free of any political pressure and helps resolve specific problems, a good demonstration of China’s peaceful development road and constructive role in the world”; in other words, 'we're not going to exert as much pressure as we could'. Not good!

The specific asks we put forward at the meeting today were that China should:

• Use its position as a leading member of both the Security Council and the G-77 to push for the swift recruitment and deployment of the peacekeeping mission authorized by UNSCR 1769.
• Contribute helicopters and heavy transport vehicles to the UNAMID mission to help fill the gaps in these areas (this applies to whole international community).
• Review the sale of arms and military cooperation with Sudan until atrocities have stopped, and a stable peace has been built; and encourage the Government of Sudan to disarm militias and hold the perpetrators of war crimes to account.
• Continue to work harmoniously with other countries to strengthen the political peace process led by the African Union and United Nations envoys, and to pressure all parties to participate fully and unconditionally in peace talks.
• Provide greater humanitarian assistance to Darfuri civilians.
• Make clear to Sudan that if it obstructs progress towards peace or peacekeeping, this will damage Chinese-Sudanese relations— possibly including trade and investment ties.

The meeting was a little frosty. The Chinese were unhappy that the media had got hold of the story that we were doing this today. But as I explained - in a democracy this is a positive thing. When one hundred MPs feel strongly enough to take this action and China is willing as at this meeting to enter a dialogue - that is news - and it is good news.

So - a start has been made of engagement. China is so hugely influential with Khartoum and such an important superpower it has to be right to try and form partnerships and engagement. In terms of the meeting - views were exchanged - and that in itself is progress. I am optimistic that at our next meeting - we will make progress. It is important to start the journey - but the destination is still zillions of miles away.

Last stop of the day - 18 Doughty Street TV a good robust debate around Saudi, Scotland and Immigration!

Labels: 18 doughty street, darfur

Hurrah for Vince! Vince Cable, our Acting Leader, is boycotting King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia's State visit. Quite right. Saudi's record on human rights is abysmal - and whilst yes, we have to have business relations with Saudi - there is no need for them to be accorded the honour of a state visit.

Coming so soon on the back of the dropping of the Serious Fraud Office investigation into BAE and corruption at the behest of Saudi Arabia - this is not a very edifying part of our ethical dimension to foreign policy.

Labels: vince cable

As if it isn't bad enough that our kids in Haringey are getting £736 less per head than kids in neighbouring boroughs for schooling, this week we found out that our schools are in financial crisis - with questioning from Lib Dem councillors bringing to light figures figures showing that 19 Haringey schools will end the year in debt totalling over £1.5m.

To add insult to injury - the Government is about to try and claw back 5% of any school's surplus (so any that aren't in debt will be hammered anyway for prudence). David Laws, Lib Dem Schools Spokesperson, was on to this like ton of bricks. And in usual copycat fashion - D Cameron went on it at Prime Minister's Questions. I think he just goes through our LibDem releases and borrows everything!

The good news is that I think Brown will get cold feet and retract from this claw back - which he bloody well should - as schools will have already earmarked the funding for use.

Labels: david laws, haringey schools

Got an email from the police who want to amplify the call to be careful about thefts from vehicle. Apparently at the moment Haringey is experiencing an increase in theft from vehicles and Sat Nav theft is still a huge problem, with people leaving their cradles visible.

Advice on sensible precautions to take is available from the Home Office's website.

Be safe - not sorry - that's my tag line!

Chris Huhne et al presented our nominations to the Returning Officer at Cowley Street this afternoon. So - Chris is now officially candidate!

Over a hundred constituencies formed the base of the nominations. More to follow I guess as we are way ahead of the deadline of 31st.

Momentum is gathering and we are getting phenomenal support across the land. The media make much of the number of MPs supporting each candidate and Nick is ahead on those numbers - but hey - this is the Lib Dems! One member one vote - and they are all equally important. And outside of the Westminster bubble - there are also other key members of the Lib Dems - the Welsh and London Assemblies, the MEPs and the Scottish Parliament.

Labels: chris huhne, lib dem leadership contest

Did a program for Sky that I had never done before - but that may be because I think it is only a few weeks old. It's really the web news and what the movers are - judged by clicks - and the web discussion topic of the day.

The discussion topic is WAGS and whether they are good role models. The WAG on the panel (in a different studio) was lovely - but when I was asked if I would be telling my daughters to emulate WAGS I had to say no.

I don't want my daughters to be known or rated because of who they married. I don't want them to think that looks and shopping are the be all of life (although I expect this is more media than WAG) and I want them to know that you have to work hard to get where you want to get. Forget this instant fame business.

And as for role models - I chose Shirley Williams - but I'm not sure my daughters would agree with me!

Yesterday, Labour Home Secretary Jacqui Smith admitted to the Home Affairs Select Committee that there hasn't been a terrorist case yet where there was a need for detention without charge beyond the current 28 days!

Yes - well that's the point I and other Lib Dem colleagues have been making since the Labour proposal for 90 days (to come back again next session) reared its ugly head. Jacqui Smith's admission is at least a step forward from the previous attempts to provide "examples" of when 90 days detention would have been useful - examples which fell apart when examined closely (see, for example, my previous blog posting about one of the debates in Parliament on detention without trial).

As I have said, time and time and time again - if the police can show me evidence that a further extension is necessary - then am not immutable. But the whole point is the balance between security and liberty - and if the police are simply wanting more time to make their life easier - then that is exactly when Parliament has to stand up on behalf of people and say no - because it isn't a cost-free policy.

Longer detention without trial means some innocent people will be locked up for longer - and will also rack up more costs that we end up having to pay. So it should only be introduced if there is a good reason.

Labels: jacqui smith

On the leadership trail - the Independent gave Chris a quizzing today with their "You ask the questions" profile of Chris Huhne

Labels: chris huhne, lib dem leadership contest

Earlier this year I wrote a piece previewing how Gordon Brown might turn out as Prime Minister. One issue I picked up on was just how long-running and deeply rooted in the Labour Party is the internal fighting and bickering around Gordon Brown himself:

This dates much further back than Blair announcing he would not fight another election. As Philip Gould has recounted, it even goes back before the 1992 general election:

"The whole thing was so debilitating because every time Gordon appeared on TV, someone in John [Smith]'s camp would say, 'Look, it's another bid for the leadership', Patricia [Hewitt] remembers."

Someone I can’t quite see fifteen plus years of squabbling stop overnight at the leadership election.

And lo ... it has come to pass with already there being a series of accusations of Blairites trying to undermine Brown. The latest comes in today's Sunday Times:

Sources close to the prime minister reportedly accused Blair allies of trying to use Seldon’s book as a “crude attempt” to undermine the government.

Some things never change!

Labels: gordon brown, tony blair

Watched Chris Huhne and Nick Clegg on the Andy Marr show this morning. Both on good form.

Then read the newspaper coverage. Pretty clear that the Times et al are weighing in for Nick 'the bookies favourite'. However, in the Liberal Democrats, that might not be the signal the party is waiting for. We're an ornery lot and don't like being bounced.

We were bonced into Ming really - and had Chris been better known and had he been in Parliamnet more than six months, I think he probably would have won. He went an awful long way from a real standing start.

What we clear this morning, though, was that we have two really excellent options. You almost wish that you could bang them into one. Indeed, the good news is, whoever wins, that we will have both of these first class polticians right at the forefront of the Lib Dems.

Labels: andrew marr, chris huhne, lib dem leadership contest, ming campbell, nick clegg

I was really chuffed by the posting and the comments on the Haringey Blog: Lynne for Lib Dem leader? which is run by the Haringey Independent newspaper.

I love it that people even put my name in the frame - but the reality of leadership is gruelling - and right now I would not be ready for such a role. But it warmed the cockles and it's always nice to have your cockles warmed.

Labels: lib dem leadership contest

I haven't really blogged much about the dreadful time the tenants of the Chocolate Factory - the wonderful artist colony - have been having (though see previous posting here). I won't lay out the whole story - but the long and the short of it currently is that the tenants have been issued with new licenses for their tenancy which must be signed within seven days. If not they will be booted out.

I don't know if this is the result of a panic because of the workshop with the London Development Agency scheduled for November 8th being almost upon us. It is almost as if Collage Arts don't want the tenants to talk to the LDA whilst the contracts are not signed. Given that the meeting is partly to provide the tenants with an opportunity to inform the LDA of their unhappiness with the events at the Chocolate Factory - this seems very strange to me.

I have advised them to contact their solicitors as to whether it is legal and whether they can be bounced into signing by threats.

Labels: chocolate factory, london development agency

So - Nick Clegg has announced his candidacy for the leadership. I didn't really think he was likely to be overcome by an attack of modesty and not put his name forward - so the battle (friendly and positive) is joined.

At the same time, we get great news today that some of Charles Kennedy's core team is coming to help our campaign! Chris Huhne today confirmed that Dick Newby and Anna Werrin would be playing key roles in his leadership campaign team. Lord Newby will serve as the campaign’s Treasurer and Anna Werrin will be Campaign Manager. Both previously worked for Charles Kennedy when he was Leader of the Liberal Democrats – Dick Newby as Chief of Staff and Anna Werrin as Head of Office.

Labels: charles kennedy, dick newby, lib dem leadership contest, nick clegg

Last night it was off to Wycombe. Wycombe really is (as far as politics are concerned) Hornsey & Wood Green twelve years ago - except Labour and Tory positions are swapped. But they have got the beginnings of what you need - some talented and keen people, Wendy and Steve Guy and their agent, as the core of a campaign team and lots of energy and commitment. That's what it takes - and it will be interesting to watch Wycombe over the next few years and see how it goes.

Yesterday, having spent the hours between 6am and 9am writing, emailing etc about the leadership contest - as it is all an add on and not instead of my day job - I catch up on emails, letters etc from residents before going to West Green Learning Centre for 'Politicians' Question Time' organised by Haringey Youth Council (Adam and Shayan).

As ever, the young people who come to this sort of event are as bright as buttons. I absolutely love hearing what they say - and particularly this time as one of the girls made several comments of phenomenal depth, with well-observed views made with passion.

I have suggested to her and her school friends who were there that they come up to Parliament to see me to take the discussions on. I am already tabling Parliamentary Written Questions based on those submitted through Adam and the Youth Council.

But as my young friend said - she doesn't want to be a tick box for politicians to make them feel good about having 'engaged' with young people and she wants the issues for debate to be what she wants - not what politicians decide they want to discuss! Very impressive!

The standard of questions and comments from everyone else was pretty high. Issues the came up included the balance between punishment for young people behaving badly and alternatives and the 'labelisation' of young people with the 'ethnic minority' tag (very interesting discussion!). Much food for thought.

I've also agreed to go again to Hornsey Girls School - as the Headmaster thought that there would be about 100 students interested enough to come to a similar event there.

Labels: haringey youth council

Time for some variation on the Lib Dem leadership election postings - so here's a quick round-up of some of the other issues exercising myself and my colleagues in Haringey:

• Haringey is one of the worst areas in the UK for fly-tipping
• Labour say they're not bothered about reports of falling recycling levels in Haringey (I mean - really!)
• ... and there are questions over the future of Spurs football club

Well, probably not ... but I've got two articles out today about the Lib Dem leadership contest - over in the New Statesman and on Comment is Free. And I do like one response to the New Statesman one!

I also raised a smile at some of the comments posted in response to the New Statesman poll - I think there are some Americans out there who don't realise that there's a world outside their borders :-)

Labels: chris huhne, lib dem leadership contest

These nasty pieces of work were one of the things I attacked in my conference speech on international development issues - and since then I've been plugging away further at the issue, witness the latest coverage in The Guardian.

Labels: vulture funds

Finally ended up at our Annual General Meeting for the local Lib Dem party. Loads of new faces - always welcome and old faces - equally so.

Martin Hay took us through the events at the High Court that saw the Labour Council damned over their failure to conduct the Alexandra Palace sale properly.

We had the Tottenham hustings for our prospective Parliamentary candidate - won by David Schmitz - who gave a brilliant speech (and lives in the same street as Tottenham MP David Lammy)!

Labels: david schmitz

I went with Chris Huhne, as chair of his campaign, to the launch of his candidacy for Liberal Democrat leader.

It is always bizarre when you suddenly find yourself in a media storm (even by proxy). Herds of men walking backwards taking photos from every angle. Coming down the grand sweep of stairs, pause and talk on second step down, proceed to second step from bottom - where Chris delivers his statement to a gallery of media. His statement was brief - simply to say he will stand and he said: "Today I am reiterating my commitment to lead a Party that is radical; green; honest and angry about the gross unfairness in Britain."

Of course - that's the agenda I want and I believe Chris is the guy to deliver it. Everyone keeps asking me to say or write why I am backing Chris. And the answer really is that I don't want more of the same old same old.

I want someone who will do what we say we will do - that is, 'rattle the cages' of the other two. Chris can do that. He has the guts for it. Last time when Charles fell - I rang Chris and Nick to run as I didn't believe Ming would be right for leader, as brilliant as he is. Chris went for it. That showed guts. That showed he was prepared to take on the establishment - and I think taking on the establishment in our party is crucial.

The establishment have already moved to support Nick Clegg the same way as last time they all moved to support Ming. Well - I don't do establishment. I think that is the last thing our party needs.

I don't want to play the same game the busted flush of Tory and Labour politics are playing. I don't want to join in. I want our party to stand up to that cosy consensus. Chris is the man with the cojones to do it. Ergo - I'm backing Chris.

And we need someone tough and experienced and tested in the real world. Leadership is bloody difficult - as all three leaders have found out in just the last couple of months. Chris will take on Gordon on his own favourite territory of the economy - and beat him. Chris has already won the battle of ideas - it is his vision that gave us the tax switch and carbon neutral by 2050 goal. He also makes a clean break with the Cameron / Blair charm school type of politics. And he is the man who can.

Of course, both Chris and Nick would be good leaders - so we are in a win / win position. But I want the radical, fighting, politics changing agenda that I believe only Chris can deliver.

Labels: chris huhne, lib dem leadership contest, ming campbell, nick clegg

Went to the unveiling of the plaque on the house where Oliver Tambo lived in Hornsey & Wood Green in Alexandra Park Road.

Oliver Tambo was the president of the African National Congress from 1977 to 1991 and lived at this address during his years of exile. The family made its historic return to South Africa in 1990. Later ceremonies included the unveiling of his statue in Albert Recreation Ground and then a luncheon at Alexandra Palace. High ranking diplomats from South Africa had flown in and her Excellency, Ms Lindiwe Mabuza, the High Commissioner of South Africa hosted the luncheon (which I couldn't stay for). All in all, a great scheme - as I'd hoped - for remembering his time here in our midst.

It was a fantastic occasion - and we are lucky to have that history in our midst - for it was Oliver Tambo who kept the belief and the campaign going all those long years of exile. His granddaughter gave a little speech at the plaque unveiling and told a wonderful tale of how they always referred to their house here as 'Muswell'. Meet you at Muswell tea-time etc. When they moved back to South Africa, they wanted to name their new house - and in the end - called it 'Muswell' as they decided that 'Muswell' meant home!

Labels: oliver tambo

A day of weighing up thoughts on the Lib Dem leadership contest. First - many thanks to everyone who has been lobbying me to run for the leadership. It's flattering - but sorry, I'm not in the running.

Instead, I am sticking with Chris Huhne. You know he had real balls last time - took the risk - gave the party a real choice. And in the campaign - it was Chris who had the big ideas - so much so that the other leadership contenders followed his agenda. I want the person who sets agendas - that is leadership.

Outside of loads of media interviews - it has been a day of Lib Dem huddles. Who will support who? Who's the media backing? And so on ... but perhaps at last there is a chink of light in the media being (a little!) interested in what the policy choices there may be behind different candidates and what our party's approach is rather than obsessed with what socks Ming is wearing.

But I'll give you one firm prediction: whoever runs and whoever wins - their best policies will be nicked by the Tories without hesitation, then nicked by Labour and then the Tories will complain about Labour doing the nicking - as if they were really their policies in the first place!

Labels: chris huhne, lib dem leadership contest, ming campbell

Of course I have spoken to both Chris and Nick about the leadership contest. I often joked with friends that when the time came (and who was to know it would be this soon) I would have to run myself to avoid choosing between them!

Having gone for Chris Huhne last time (indeed, done a lot to actually get him to run in the first place) and then worked closely with Nick Clegg for a year and a half in the Home Affairs team before I was promoted to the Lib Dem Shadow Cabinet with the International Development brief - it is a bit of the judgement of Soloman.

Labels: chris huhne, lib dem leadership contest, nick clegg

I interrupt the current frenzy around the blogs about the Lib Dem leadership to bring you news from China - promising news from President Hu Jintao's opening speech to the Communist Party's congress.

He talked about the need for China to "promote a conservation culture" and "energy and resource-efficient and environment-friendly industries". Of course words in speeches come more easily than action - but it's good to see him setting out the need for China to become more green - and that should mean good news for our one, shared global climate.

Labels: climate change

So - five minutes is a long time in politics!

Yes - I knew there were rumblings from those in seats under threat. No - I had no idea that Ming would go. But he is a man of integrity - and as the media leaks and damage escalated - he did (as you would expect) the honourable thing.

Whilst I didn't support Ming for the leadership, since he was elected I thought he did a good job with the mess he inherited after Charles's departure. But the external world is unforgiving.

So the Huhne-Clegg battle will commence. We do seem to be rather blessed with talent to choose from. On with the show!

Labels: chris huhne, lib dem leadership contest, ming campbell, nick clegg

Well - it seems to be the coming thing! There's now a cross-party campaign to introduce fixed-term Parliaments: www.fixedterm.org.uk

If you've read my blog before - you won't be surprised to know I think this is a very good idea! And of course it's always nice to see people from other parties - and none - take up a long-standing Lib Dem policy and suddenly say how wonderful it is! But in the spirit of cross-party campaigning I promise not to tease some of the recent converts too often when they forget to mention it was a Lib Dem policy in the first place!

Sunday night - so did my stint on Radio 4's The Westminster Hour again. It was reasonably lively tonight. No prizes for guessing the main topic - leadership! Both Brown at PMQs and Ming.

I am so fed up with this Prime Minister's Question Time (PMQs) rubbish. The House loves it. The media loves it. It is a great spectator sport (blood sport that is) but it is not the way to judge leadership or to hold the PM to account - at least, not if you are a grown up. It's boys behaving like boys do - and I don't mean that as a compliment!

Can you imagine anyone in the real world behaving like that? Can you imagine in your workplace that sort of shouting and disorder passing for normal at meetings where the manager answers questions from staff or the directors answer to shareholders? I think not! Yet in the majesty of Parliament - we have the behaviour of the playground. And our political system is meant to rest on this sort of behavour. Not impressed!

Anyway - my verdict on this week was that I thought Brown did his best (following his delivery of his own mortal blow in terms of bad judgement) and Cameron just appeared like an upper class bully boy - famed of public school films.

As for Ming - yes Simon Hughes said what he said. But the way it was portrayed in the media was OTT. It was a statement of the bleeding obvious for any party - you always want to do better. So - pooh to all of that!

Labels: ming campbell, pmqs, the westminster hour

This week's historic court judgement on Alexandra Palace (courts blocked the planned sell-off) is a damning indictment of the behaviour of the Labour councillors who rammed through the deal on Ally Pally with Firoz Kassam's Firoka group. It is justice being done and seen to be done (see Hornsey Journal here and here and Ham & High coverage).

A real local hero, Jacob O'Calloghan (who is a local historian), is the David who took on the giant of the Labour establishment over their now found to be much wanting 'sale' of Alexandra Palace. Throughout the process Labour steamrollered through an inadequate consultation process in which they refused to let anyone know the terms of the contract. Yes - they were told. Time and time again local campaigners and Liberal Democrat councillors raised these issues - but Labour ignored voices that contradicted their plans.

And the Charity Commission, tasked with the proper conduct of charities such as Ally Pally, showed itself to not only be toothless but in my view negligent in their duties.

The judge was clearly appalled by what has gone on and had no qualms about saying so. During Friday's hearing Mr Justice Jeremy Sullivan attacked the Charity Commission for being "completely unreasonable and wholly unrealistic" in its treatment of residents' concerns.

He suggested that a fresh consultation process be launched and the lease be made available for people to see so they could make an informed decision about whether they agree with it.

But where are we now? Well Matt Cooke (the Labour Chair of the Ally Pally board) has refused to take any responsibility for this stinging judicial rebuke. He should resign without question - but he has instead spent his time writing to the local papers to churn out the sort of rubbish his quote in the Ham & High demonstrates:

"Our priority throughout has been to restore the palace for future generations of Londoners whilst removing the financial burden of running the palace and servicing its debts from the shoulders of Haringey taxpayers. We have no reason to assume achieving this objective is no longer possible and every reason to consider fulfilment is just a few short months away despite the temporary delay caused by the High Court."

Haringey taxpayers have suffered long and hard and expensively - but only because of Labour's incompetence over decades. Getting this judgement simply demonstrates why Matt Cooke and Labour need to get booted out altogether. They don't even admit it when they are exposed as incompetents who freeze out meaningful public consultation - as with this example from last year:

Imagine the scene. A group of residents want to lobby Haringey Council about the plans to hand over Alexandra Palace to the Firoka group.

What does Labour do? They say, no - you can't lobby the full council meeting, you must go to the Palace Board meeting. And when is the next Board meeting they can go to ... not until after the decision will have been made about whether to give Firoka the site!

You can have your say, but only when it's too late with Haringey Labour!

And the real issue is that the Palace could be a wonderful resource for local people and the wider population - but with Labour's handling that opportunity is being wasted, yet again.

Labels: alexandra palace, firoz kassam, matt cooke

Today was the meeting I had squeezed out of the Foreign Secretary about the death of Alexander Litvinenko (Pollonium 210 radiation poisoning case). This was so that Marina Litvinenko could get an update on efforts to extradite suspect Andrew Lugovoi from Russia to stand trial for killing her husband.

David Miliband had come to the House of Commons to make a statement on the situation previously - including the expulsion of the Russian diplomats - and I had managed to catch Mr Speaker's eye. Given the opportunity, I asked David M if he would meet with Marina as she had so many questions to ask that were unanswered. So - today was the day.

As it was a private meeting, I won't go into the details of what took place, other than to say that during the meeting a vote in Parliament was unexpectedly called. So - David M and I ran, jumped into his car and ran again to get to the Chamber to vote.

We were voting opposite ways - and I reached the door from the Chamber to the voting lobby (MPs vote by physically walking through the yes or no lobby) as the shout went up 'lock the doors'.

The officer of the house actually closed the door on me as I scooted through and really hurt my hand. I understand that you have to have a cut-off point for voting and close the doors - but I would have thought it inappropriate to push it closed with me in it. That is tradition turned sadistic!

Anyway - back we jumped into the car and back to the meeting. Too much excitement for one day.

Labels: alexander litvinenko, andrew lugovoi, david miliband

I had meant to write more on my trip to South Africa last month - but with an election in prospect, there was not much time available so to do. However, I did want to round up a few more points.

One of the things that was clear at every turn - whether through briefings or site visits - was that local delivery is the main problem. There is no real comprehensive coverage or network to deliver AIDS and HIV programmes across the country. There is patchy provision - more holes than patches. Even in Alexandra, the shanty town we visited, various projects led by the Government were capturing some of the people, some were being helped by NGOs and some through their workplaces - but there seemed no surety of pathway into proper care. And this was in a town right next to a rich white area in Johannesburg - let alone out in a poor rural area.

And I guess that was why we were there - to observe how patchy healthcare is - and equally to observe the capability and capacity of these mega corporations who - through trying to ensure a health workforce (and therefore healthy profits) - had developed pretty comprehensive coverage for their own employees and were now extending their care chain to families and down their supply chain.

As far as I could make out (as the South African Government was missing from our briefings), the Government - having denied AIDS / HIV for years - was, despite launching a National Strategy while we were there, still pretty recalcitrant in terms of working with partners and meeting with the business organisations. They seemed only to see them as cash cows - rather than experienced health deliverers with capacity and desire to help.

The second evening we dined with the British High Commissioner, Paul Boetang, at his residence - about twenty invitees. Amongst whom were two kids: AIDS orphans who headed their families and had great dreams - the girl of being a lawyer and the boy a footballer. I was much moved by their bravery. But they were lucky, in that they were picked out by one of the hospices and helped and looked out for.

Anyway, at dinner Paul was asking what we would do when we returned to London to advance the cause. I said that as an opposition politician my role will be to prod our own Government to pressure the South African Government to move forward on their strategy and to work with business parners etc. It was clear, though, that there was some anxiety about me being in any way critical of the South African Government. But I am critical - a critical friend. This South African black government represents the realisation of what we believed in - through all the years of apartheid - and