Lynne's Parliament and Haringey diary

Since 2007, when her local Fortis Green clinic closed, Mrs. Audrey Kelly, 82, who suffers from severe foot problems that often leave her unable to walk, has been refused treatment or referral to an NHS chiropodist by her GP.

Mrs. Kelly, who is on income support, has been told that, as she is not considered a 'high risk' patient, the only way she can get foot care is to go private.

It is outrageous and completely unreasonable that the NHS will not treat her foot problem. Mrs. Kelly is in such severe pain, and being unable to get treatment on the NHS, she tried self treatment, which left her worse off with severely bleeding and infected feet.

Since the Fortis Green clinic closed, I have seen a real issue with elderly people being unable to get foot care on the NHS, despite NHS assurances that the service has not been cut. This is clearly not the case and Haringey PCT needs to deliver on its promises.

This is not the sort of NHS we should tolerate.

Labels: nhs

Speak to Equality and Diversity Forum today, wearing my hat of Liberal Democrat Equalities spokesperson.

What I am trying to persuade the world of, in regard to the Single Equalities Act, is threefold.

First - discrimination more difficult - and the particular suggestion I make today is for 'name blind' employment applications, i.e. keeping the names of applications hidden from those who process job applications.

Why? Well, to take personal experience as an example - two of my interns who had non-Anglo Saxon names applied to loads and loads of jobs - not even getting an interview. After they worked for me - and having worked for an MP on the CV - they both quickly got great jobs.

The problem is that having a non-Anglo Saxon name on your application form can mean being thrown on the reject pile because of low level discrimination. Once through to interview (or possessed of something extra on the CV to overcome this 'hurdle') - well the chemistry between humans then takes over - for better or worse. So - name blind employment application - probably using National Insurance numbers - is an idea we are looking at.

Second - strengthening legislation against discrimination. We have had enough legislation on crime to last well into the future from New Labour - and the legislative wand is clearly not the answer to everything. However, the courts do need a bit of muscle as currently they cannot award punitive damages. This can mean damage awards are far too small to really have an impact on changing behaviour.

And third - that anyone who wants to perpetuate discrimination has to have it explicitly as an exemption. If you want to discriminate - make your argument, and make it out in the open. That to my mind is the best way to address such issues - and I'm sure some powerful cases will be made for some exemptions - but let's have the debate and make a decision rather than let things slip through on the quiet or because that's how they've always been done.

And a parting shot for the CEHR. I think the Commission has the potential to be an incredibly powerful force for good. Trevor Phillips - its chair - is remarkable in the way he can and has shaped the nation's thinking with his accurate and memorable soundbites such as 'sleepwalking into segregation', the 'race cold war' and so on. But I would argue that the Commission should be given more resource so that it can drive through substantive change.

Labels: single equalities act, trevor phillips

Met with Cubic - the company who deliver Oyster - yesterday. I met them at Alexandra Park Station where they said that Oyster compatibility for such train services would be coming to in mid 2009. Hurrah! Having a joined up system will bring much benefit to local travellers!

But their bigger quest is to get Oyster-compatible ticketing across the nation. Their problem - it is low on the Government's priority list - and no one in the Government transport team seems to want to champion it, even though it would be cheaper and more effective in the long run to do it as a complete scheme now - rather than piecemeal as and when franchises come up.

Of course - Cubic have their own interests in seeing Oyster go national, but seeing the benefits it has brought to public transport use in London, it is in all our interests to see it spread.

After all the consultations, it has now announced the Weston Park, Ferme Park Road, Salisbury Road, Alexandra Park Road and Highgate Village Post Offices will all close. This is outrageous. The government promised it would listen after its drumming in the recent elections, but it is has proved itself completely deaf to the pleas from thousands of local residents and community activists. If Labour was listening, Labour would have stepped in and acted. The message from we the people was clear: we do not want these closures.

Labels: post offices

Not their best of predictions! Well - it made me smile seeing that still up there today!

At the weekend, I visited the Harrington Scheme in Highgate where those with learning disabilities and other challenges are trained in skills that will not only lead to employment - but also and being able to manage their lives themselves where possible.

Gardening is their main training program and what a wonderful place this is, both physically and emotionally. It is so beautiful - with well laid out training gardens, polythene tunnels for winter work and a fantastic walled garden. The buildings house a variety of functions including classrooms, kitchens for training in how to cook etc. There is a great need for a new building for more classrooms - but no capital funding available.

What struck me most, outside of the unbelievable dedication, commitment and untiring efforts of those involved like Leila Hodge and the Friends of Harringey and Joanna - one of the key staff members - was the amount of effort and time they all had to spend on fund-raising additional to trying to make this the best of training schemes available to move young people with difficulties into work.

One issue coming down the track is the transfer of their core funding - this part making up about 60% of their total funding - which will transfer from central government to the local authority in two years time. The fear is that Haringey will not passport that money through in its entirety to Harrington - because not all the young people come from Haringey itself but from several other boroughs.

So I will investigate further what safeguards the Government is going to put in place to ensure ongoing funding - as it applies not only to Harrington but to other groups who give benefits to people and are based in one local council area but who provide places for people coming from out of borough as well.

In the old days before central funding they used to cross bill from authority to authority - but that is burdensome and complicated. I would like to see if there is a means to protect the funding to remain for its intended use and to stop authorities re-directing it for their own purposes. Otherwise - groups like this will be in even more funding difficulties.

There were lots of other issues - mostly about funding - which I will pursue on their behalf. But mostly what I want people to take from this blog entry is the wonderful work that is going on to make the lives of those who have so many more challenges than most of us so fulfilled, useful and happy. And to get recognition for all those who are so utterly dedicated and have been over so many years - to carrying on this vital work.

Congrats to all involved with Harrington. I was well impressed!

On Friday went to the 'thank you' party for all those who worked on the London elections for the Liberal Democrats. Nice to see Dee Doocey and Mike Tuffrey who are two of our ongoing LibDem members on the GLA and get all the gossip about who was doing what with whom - in the sense of chairing committees and so on. All change again apparently as Liberal Democrats, Labour and Greens combine to try to make the Assembly work and really hold the Mayor to account.

However, the rules are stacked in favour of the Mayor when it comes to the budget - as it requires a two-thirds majority to reject the Mayor's budget. The Tories have over a third of the seats - so enough to rubber stamp whatever Boris wants. Nowhere else can a budget be passed on a minority vote. Ho hum!

What was either sad or sweet - depending how you look on it - was apparently Ken Livingstone was in the gallery watching the Assembly meeting as it made its first decisions after the elections - the ghost at the feast. I can't imagine what that felt like - to see the how going on without you - when you have been the sole proprietor for so many years. Poignant - maybe?

I've noticed a bit of speculation in cyberworld as to whether Ken will seek a parliamentary seat - perhaps mine or his old stomping ground in Brent. Can't imagine why he would want to go back into the Commons - as he is reputed to have hated it. Maybe he believes he is the Prime Minister Labour never had and wants to give them another chance. No - he's not that stupid!

Labels: dee doocey, ken livingstone, mike tuffrey

No prizes for guessing what my first newspaper column after the London elections is about...

This weekend eight years ago I was elected to the London Assembly – and Ken became London’s first Mayor. It was so exciting – a blank page on which to write the capital’s future. And now it’s Boris! Unbelievable...

What will Boris Johnson do to London? I have to ‘fess up immediately – I was upset by Boris even throwing his hat in the ring – let alone winning. To me he was not someone who had ever shown the slightest interest in London and its key issues prior to this opportunity knocking on his door.

Mind you – Ken had become arrogant from his years in office and really failed to tackle the issues of the sleaze and corruption allegations swirling around his advisers. Two of them had to quit in the end – but we are still left with a whole host of questions over what money went where and why, and Ken never looked like he was really interested in sorting out matters. The cheeky chappy of yesteryear had worn out our good will and we were clearly desperate for change. But will that change be for the better?

To continue reading the piece, visit my website.

Labels: boris johnson, brian paddick, ken livingstone

Perhaps one shouldn't interfere with private grief - but I am intrigued by the post-mortems being conducted by numerous people in the Labour Party on the lines of - Gordon Brown, what went wrong? I think there are two main political strategy dilemmas facing the party.

First, keep Gordon or ditch Gordon? Can he really recover from plunging to such depths of unpopularity? Given the increasing volatility of political opinion in recent years, there should be a degree of caution over "worst ratings since the 1930s" type headlines - but there's no doubt the situation is grim for Labour.

Second - whether with Gordon at the helm or not - should Labour move leftwards? And this is why coming across an old opinion poll recently caught my eye. Back in September 2004 (you know, in those far off days when Gordon Brown was popular, all football matches started at 3pm on a Saturday and there were only three TV channels), YouGov had a poll asking the public to rate various leading politicians on a left-right scale. Now, I'm not a huge fan of such scales - because they strip out other important dimensions, such as liberal vs authoritarian (increasingly important these days!) - but they do have a certain crude use.

And what did the YouGov poll find? Blair was viewed as slightly right of centre (+4), voters put themselves on average slightly left of centre (-2), Charles Kennedy and the Liberal Democrats a bit further left of centre (-15), Gordon Brown further left (-22) and Labour MPs overall at -25. Michael Howard and the Conservatives were way off to the right at +52

Issues like the 10p tax rate fiasco are hardly ones which have left Gordon Brown with a similar left-wing image now. So - does he try to regain that former reputation, which went along with much greater personal popularity back then, or does he doggedly try to stick to a middle ground which - under New Labour and Blair - has steadily drifted to the right? Not an easy choice to make!

Labels: gordon brown

So - at last - a question on the Order Paper in Parliament about the Single Equalities Act. I have, since becoming Equalities Spokesperson, been waiting to be able to raise the issue of how our rules about who gets to be monarch gives boys the advantage over girls.

As readers of this blog will know, have been having some success with raising and pushing this issue. The Sunday Times - who covered it on their front page a couple of weeks ago - helped up the ante as when Marie Woolf (journalist) rang Vera Baird (Solicitor General) - and the minister said of course these rules should be abolished - and threw in abolishing discrimination against Catholics too. You go girl.

It's obviously working as lots of members from all sides of the House raised the issue (for which the technical term is the dry as dust phrase 'male preference primogeniture'). But since the article the Government has been trying to back peddle on what Vera Baird said - and whilst the Tory front bench spokesperson seemed to be in favour of change - he tried to talk up problems - because any change has to be worked through the Commonwealth - suggesting that it was all so difficult that we might wish not to bother to pursue it.

This sidetracked me a bit. Faced with the usual Tory attitude that somehow it doesn't matter enough to be dealt with - I momentarily forgot that it is the Government that has to really push this. Reminded of my task my Mr Speaker - I then did pursue Labour - to try and get them to commit to actually walking the walk rather than just their usual talking the talk.

I am worried that this will be kicked into the long grass of too difficult and too much bother and the opportunity presented by the Single Equality Act going through Parliament to kill off this anachronism will be missed.

But it was very heartening to see so many members from all sides in favour of this long overdue change. So we'll see!

Labels: single equalities act

A busy burst of media coverage - did a pre-record with GMTV this morning for Sunday - talking about election results and also how to tackle crime amongst young people (6am on GMTV and then 7:25am on GMTV Digital). Doing LBC this evening at 6pm - so call in with your questions! On Sunday it's The Westminster Hour on Radio 4 at 10pm - and then next Friday, Any Questions, also on Radio 4. Fun, fun, fun!

Also feature in The Times Parliamentary sketch today (in which Ann Treneman treated me with a light touch - for which I am grateful!) and allegations of sexual harassment at the British Embassy in Iraq.