Lynne's Parliament and Haringey diary

Well - happy new year everyone, and without further ado - here's what keeping you reading on this blog over the last three months.

10. Low Copy Number DNA - a recap of my concerns about Labour's plans for our DNA records, back in the news after this controversial new technique was criticised by the judge in the Omagh bomb case. I suspect I got a lot of traffic to this post as lots of people went searching for information on the topic after the news of the judge's comments broke.

9. Crimestoppers caught advertising on illegal radio station - still going strong much to my surprise as the story is quite old now (see also the update if you're new to the story).

8. Ian Blair should go - London's top cop keeps making mistakes, and the time's come for him to take direct personal responsibility for this record. As it turned out, only one Blair went in '07.

7. Shadow Cabinet reshuffle - not really a blog posting because - as the news came out on my birthday - I just bunged up the news release - but nice to know so many people wanted to know quickly what post I'd got!

4. Wikipedia and its limitations - a slightly different posting from me this time; lesson noted that you dear reader like this sort of stuff!

3. Britain turns its back on more than half our Iraqi interpreters - the ongoing scandal of Labour's refusal to protect those who worked for our armed forces in Iraq.

And of course the Lib Dem leadership contest featured - coming in at six, five, two and first in the list - no surprises there!

(Click here to see the previous top tens).

Labels: dna, ian blair, iraq, lib dem leadership contest, most popular blog postings, wikipedia

It's a while since I've written about Low Copy Number (LCN) DNA testing, but the news today that - as a result of the Omagh bomb trial - the use of this technique is to be reviewed (see BBC story for details) is welcome.

As I wrote previously, "LCN DNA should only be used cautiously – and only with corroborating evidence", and as I put it in an article on the dangers of DNA databases and the like, it is highly risky to place your faith in technology always working flawlessly: "As investment goes in, a commercial imperative is involved and as DNA increases its aura of infallibility – will the police (or the public, when the information is ‘conveniently’ leaked?) believe those who say they weren’t at the crime scene even though their DNA was? And how long before corroborative evidence becomes less necessary?" (read the rest of the article here).

Labels: dna

I've written before about the dangers in the government's rather cavalier attitude to innocent people's DNA records - and today's news from the Telegraph is a salutary warning that these are not just theoretical problems:

Thousands of people could be accused of a crime they did not commit as a result of errors in records on the national DNA database, it emerged last night.

In the past year, more than 100 possible inaccuracies in the documentation of DNA profiles have been discovered, and a further 1,500 administrative mistakes have been logged on the system.

The full article is over on their website.

Labels: crime, dna

Reading through last week's newspaper articles - at last - I find that finally the cavalry is joining my campaign to stop innocent people's DNA being stored in
perpetuity by the police on the national DNA database - and even The Sun has given the story a decent write-up. Hurrah!

And if you're wondering - "but what does an innocent person have to fear?" - then the answer is "plenty!" as I wrote in an article titled What do the innocent have to fear from a DNA database? on my website.

Labels: dna

So a high profile judge has come out and said that the whole country should be on the DNA database (and visitors to our country). Well - it's more logical than the serendipity we have at the moment where if the police arrest you, regardless of innocence or guilt - your DNA is taken and kept on record. However, it's nuts. Outside of the rights and wrongs of civil liberties and the onset of a police state - the practicalities should see that idea murdered at birth.

Only last week I blogged about the answer to my parliamentary question on the accuracy of the current 4,000,000 strong DNA database - to receive a reply admitting that something like 500,000 of the entries are inaccurate - with wrong name or wrong address.

Why oh why oh why are the government (and judges) so keen on spending zillions keeping track of the innocent rather than tracking down the criminal? Guys - spend the money on police - and on helping to prevent crime through education and youth services.

Yes - DNA is a fantastic detection tool and provides the corroborating evidence required for a conviction. But DNA isn't the Holy Grail - and the more everyone holds it up as such - the less likely we are to have the proper professionalism applied to detecting crime. Eggs and one basket are the words that come to mind.

Labels: crime, dna

Basically, I have lain prone on a beach in France virtually immobile for the last six days. Generally, I like more active holidays - visiting cities, galleries, sites of historic interest or natural beauty - but as this was it for the summer - lying down was required. (And yes - I went there and back by train). No - I didn't think about politics - other than four calls from the print press - I was a politics-free zone.

One of the calls was from The Independent on the back of answer to a parliamentary question I had tabled on the DNA database. Ironic really as part of my holiday reading was Michael Crichton's novel 'Next' which is basically about the perils of DNA and mucking about with genes. He takes it to extreme of course – but that is what makes it a fun novel.

The media call fed into the more pragmatic side of DNA. The answer had come back to my question showing that something like 500,000 of the entries on the database had errors. Without going into the ins and outs of what I think about the dangers of the DNA database again (you can read my previous DNA article here) - at its very basic you would think accuracy was a key requirement?

You can read The Independent's DNA story here. I will now be asking for an investigation into just how so many mistakes are not only made - but kept!

Labels: dna

After PMQs I dashed over to College Green to shoot for Spotlight - a Northern Ireland news program with a good reputation. They were tracking DNA (so to speak) and in particular Low Copy Number (LCN) DNA.

They had picked up on my track record of challenging some of the issues around this super-detection tool and apparently there is a big case in Northern Ireland concerning DNA. The thing about LCN DNA in particular is that it can use something as small or infinitesimal as a single cell found at a crime scene – which sounds great at first because you think, “that means it’s much easier to track down criminals as you don’t need as much evidence to identify them.”

But - my argument is that I shake hands with people all day long and therefore my LCN DNA will be in their clothes, houses, offices etc. It will end up all over the place, on people and in places I haven’t had anything to do with. So LCN DNA should only be used cautiously – and only with corroborating evidence.

I also met up with World Development Movement who are busy lobbying ahead of the introduction of the Climate Change Bill. We are on the same page apparently (hate that expression!) in the key issues around how climate change will hit the ultra poor countries of the developing world much, much harder than us in the Northern hemisphere – so it is both a development and an environmental issue.

So we talked over how to challenge some of the issues in the current proposals and how to get them amended to include things like annual targets for carbon emissions and a development expert on the panels etc.

Labels: dna

Labour's national DNA database-by-stealth has been in the news again, though there is also good news that some decent ethical oversight of the whole exercise might be put in place. Typical however of Big Brother New Labour - do the database first and worry about whether it's the right thing to do or not afterwards!

You can take part in the Lib Dem campaign on this issue on our DNA database website.

Labels: dna

I was speaking yesterday in a break out group at the CRE Race Convention. My session was about race discrimination in the criminal justice system. It was a pretty lively debate. A core problem – on which there was widespread agreement – is that of “disproportionality” running through every part of the criminal justice system. This means that people from ethnic minority communities are far more likely to be stop and searched, have DNA records taken and a host of other things than they should be given their proportion of the population or of the criminal population. And - despite a great deal of talking the talk - the issue appears very resistant to fixing.

My own view is that it comes down to leadership. If everyone understood that any discrimination would be monitored and recorded and SUPERVISED - and that jobs would be lost as a result - then we would see a shift. But despite the very genuine efforts - that level of priority and commitment is not yet truly there.

Take the police and the borough commander level. If the crime targets were down - top brass would be on the phone to the local commander wanting to know the reason why! The same cannot be said around issues of disproportionality. So perhaps the next step is, as one man suggested, disproportionality targets. Only the police are already drowning in targets - and unless the top brass take this as seriously as the crime stats - then the results won't change.

And in case anyone has forgotten - the stats in London (for example) on DNA retention are that against a background of 28% BME population in London, there is a disproportionate arrest rate of 48% and a rate of 60% of DNA records are from the BME population. Translated - that means that not only are the police disproportionately arresting black and ethnic minority people - they are getting it humungously wrong! And time spent wrongly arresting innocent people is time lost on catching criminals.

I have a meeting coming up with a senior Met Officer to discuss the arrest policy. For it seems clear to me that disproportionality starts with stop and search and the continues through the criminal justice system from arrest to sentencing. Another chap very wisely suggested that there be an independent study of disproportionality across the whole criminal justice system - and I think that would be an excellent thing to do.

As for Ken Livingstone's purile attack on the Race Convention - typical brattish behaviour from a spoilt child! As usual.

Labels: dna

I've written on this blog (and elsewhere) before about some of the concerns with use of DNA records in the fight against crime.

Nuffield Bioethics are running a consultation on use of DNA records etc. It's not an official government consultation, but one well worth taking part in anyway I think. See Nuffield Bioethic's website

Labels: dna

Went to New Scotland Yard to meet with Gary Pugh (in charge of forensics) about DNA. DNA is taken from people who are arrested, some of whom are then found innocent. Now here’s the thing – if you look at the DNA taken from innocent people, a far higher proportion of it comes from members of the ethnic minorities than their overall proportion in the population. And remember we’re talking about people found innocent here - so it looks as if there’s something very troubling going on.

Anyway – having asked my Parliamentary Question a while back and got the numbers showing that an innocent member of an ethnic minority is much more likely to be wrongly arrested than an innocent white person, I had written to Sir Ian Blair (Met Police Commissioner) to ask why the figures are as they are? Is it discrimination resulting in ethnic minorities being wrongly arrested far too often or does he have some other explanation?

No answer for a long, long time. But eventually they agreed to have a look at the issue - hence my meeting today. However, it turned out they wanted to deal with the DNA side as opposed to the disproportionaly arresting innocent men side. Having first agreed that we would need another meeting about this somewhat important aspect with the appropriate person - we went on to discuss DNA.

I suppose they are concerned because I keep raising a number of issues around DNA in general and around the retention of DNA records from innocent people. (There’s more about this on the campaign website, http://campaigns.libdems.org.uk/dna - including a link on the right hand side to an article I’ve written about why it matters even for innocent people if their DNA records are being wrongly kept).

Gary informed me that there is now to be an 'ethics' panel being set up, which is good – if belated – news. It was also clear that whilst DNA and its database was set up in regard to catching criminals (and I reassured him that I think in terms of a detection tool the sun shines out of DNA's bottom) it is being used for a number of other - probably legitimate - purposes but also possibly open to less worthy ones and commercial ones.

Labels: dna, ian blair

I've added to my website an article about what's wrong with the national DNA database Labour are building - tackling in particular the question, "but what does an innocent person have to fear?" The answer - a lot! Read it and see ...

Labels: dna

Have been working with Nick Clegg to do some campaigning to follow up on the DNA database issues I've mentioned before. We've now got a petition people can sign, along with its own DNA petition website.

Labels: dna, nick clegg

Off to the Scout Park again for photo op with local commander Simon O'Brian and Ken Ranson (of Scouting Association), two of the Safer Neighbourhood officers from Bounds Green ward and Cllr John Oakes - local councillor. We are there to meet local photographers from local papers to push hard for funding to build replacement buildings for the ones currently not 'fit for purpose'. They are not only not fit but actually in such a state of disrepair that they can't be used.

I am a big fan of this project. I've written the strongest supporting letters I know how to do to support the lottery and heritage bids. I want it for the Scouts - but I also want this amazing eight square hectares of open space in the middle of Bounds Green (that almost nobody even knows exists) to be opened up for all the local young people.

The Scouts will obviously use what they need first - but that leaves oodles of opportunities for our local youngsters. The two Safer Neighbourhood officers are running a scheme this summer for youngsters from Bounds Green between the ages of 13 and 18 to come and do outside activities. And I would like to see a mix it up program which takes kids from all the different schools - so they are not necessarily with their peer groups - and throw them together for a week of outdoors activities. The buildings and open spaces can be hired for meetings and events. There is so much that could be made of this space.

Back to the constituency office for a management meeting. I am trying to arrange a meeting with Richard Sumray - Chair of Haringey Primary Care Trust (PCT) - to push forward the Hornsey Hospital redevelopment. With the dosh now available from the government there is a possible opportunity of forcing the pace.

The hospital closed despite a massive local campaign - and the deal with the campaigners was that it would be redeveloped as a local community health facility with respite care beds etc. etc. It must be something like four or so years since we have been meeting about its future with the PCT - but nothing concrete (literally) yet.

I have decided to try and force the pace on this. The Health Trust insists it must sell off a large chunk of the land - but a) this isn't fair and b) there is not guarantee the funds will go back into this particular site. Anyway - I spoke to Richard Sumray a couple of weeks ago and he promised me a public meeting in September. I believe Richard's assurances that he is committed to pushing the new facility through - but I want to help him by applying as much pressure as I can. My diary organiser had phoned Richard to make the appointment but he is currently in some far flung part of the world. To be continued.

I want to know what the Council are doing about the Noel Park children’s play equipment. It made it into the press when I went over there to meet parents who are outraged that their children are facing a second summer without the promised replacement equipment. I wrote to Cllr George Meehan (Labour Leader of the Council) about it - no reply yet of course. The newspaper had a quote from the council saying they were sorry there had been a delay. But I am now going to write to Ita O’Donovan - who is the Chief Executive - as I expect she will be far more able to efficiently expedite matters than George.

Then it's in to Parliament for the last official day of sitting - so I finish up odds and sods. I pop over with Nick Clegg (Shadow Home Secretary) for a photo op on DNA and then have dinner with my researcher and interns to thank them for their really hard work. The intern system is fantastic - hopefully for both sides. Young graduates mainly, although I have taken some school leavers and gap year students, work for expenses but get useful experience and a better of idea of what such a career might really involve - and also then get to put that they have worked for an MP on their CV. They come and go relatively quickly - but I have to say I have had some wonderful young people over the last year.

Labels: dna, george meehan, nick clegg, richard sumray

Calming down with the Sunday papers I see The Observer has carried the story about DNA that they spoke to me about earlier this week.

A private firm has been secretly keeping the DNA details of thousands of people. I predict that DNA issues will run and run and that all the assurances about the integrity of the database are not worth the paper they aren't written on! The Government says the DNA database and DNA details are tightly controlled - the truth is rather different.

I had headed off this morning for a day of rugby. Not particularly my scene - but we have a great Haringey team - the Haringey Skolars - playing at home today. The Skolars' Chair, Hector, has invited me to lunch followed by the afternoon watching the match. So off I go. The Skolars are Rugby League (not Union - I'm learning) and over the last eleven years they have built up not just a team, but a raft of supporters, Super Skolars (young supporters) and also work in Haringey schools to bring rugby to all. They are clearly completely and utterly committed to improving sport and life chances in the borough. Indeed that is why I am spending the day with them - to show support.

Given that the Skolars won 31 to 6 today (and they have not had the most successful season) it was definitely a very good day on which to see them play for the first time! Their home base is the New River Stadium in White Hart Lane and if anyone is interested they can contact them on 020 8888 8488 and the website is www.skolars.com.

Labels: dna

Bad news this week about the decision on the Cranford Way concrete factory - the Inspector has given it the go ahead. Everyone is devastated. Following a tremendous campaign by local people and politicians across the parties - the Inspector deemed to find that all our cares and worries were as nothing. According to his findings we must all be mad. Sadly - it will be ordinary local people who pay the price in their quality of life reduction if we are right and he is wrong.

Goliath has won. Well Goliath in this case has loads more dosh for fancy lawyers.

Oh yes - the Inspector has applied various conditions to London Concrete's permission to go ahead. But I wonder how long their promise to only supply Haringey building sites with concrete will last - and how long before they apply for an extension to the number of lorries going in and out. Enforcement is not the weapon of choice - but now we will just have to see. The planning process is always weighted in favour of the presumption to permit - sadly. And unlike London Concrete who were able to appeal the initial refusal of their plans – residents cannot appeal this decision as there is no appeal against the Planning Inspector. Judicial Review is the only next step - and that would be impossible to stage and even if we could - I don't think they would not find against the process.

So depression all round.

Leave London for Torquay at 3.45 on Thursday for Question Time. Researching - I feel sure that Ming's speech on tax (attacking twin evils of climate change and the widening equality gap by upping eco-taxes and reducing capital gains tapers etc on shares) will be on the agenda. I am wrong in the event - not even a mention.

To my horror, earlier in the day I find out that George Galloway is on the panel. I had been told about David Lammy and Liam Fox - but not gorgeous George. I wouldn't have gone on with him if I had known. He is a brilliant orator - but a dominating bully in terms of a panel. However, no choice by the time I find out. Worse - they sit me next to him. And thus it was - from the terror raid to the murder of the Butcher of Baghdad it was George on his soapbox.

Given Respect only has one seat in Parliament - don't even think he should get the time of day. Particularly after his colleague decided to whip up the divides in Forrest Gate by advising Muslims to withdraw cooperation with the police.

Whatever else I might think about this seemingly bundled operation - the police had to go in. The intelligence seems wanting - and this isn't the first time. But when both Muslims and everyone else need most to rely on each other and hold hands against the terrorists - George's lot are stirring it - and successfully. The march on Friday will not be helpful. Even if peaceful - it is not necessary. The police will get it in the neck anyway if they have got it wrong on such a massive scale again. And the intelligence services need to go back to school - or over to Canada where they seem to get it right - and they could learn a few lessons.

It's an evil agenda - and the shame is - that there is a great need to support the Muslim community in this terrible time for them - as the terrorists hide behind their skirts. But George's way creates division and discord.

Anyway - the boys (and there were four of them and one of me) were all being very alpha male and so hopefully I provided some common sense.

Got back to London around 3am.

Notice in my inbox when I get in (yes - I did - even at that time of night) that some of the DNA stuff has appeared in the media - which is good as I am determined to follow this through until we get results. This was when I discovered from the answer to a Parliamentary Question (PQ) I had tabled that individuals’ samples on the DNA database have been shared with other foreign countries with no real safeguards in place.

Under new EU proposals, all member states will be able to access the British DNA database and the information on it. This is bad in itself and a bad omen for the upcoming ID register, now the Government has made it clear that our personal data can be shared with foreign countries.

There are no real safeguards in place to control this huge database - which leaves it open for misuse, especially as now we find out it's not only being misused in our country but also internationally. What confidence can we have in the Government’s reassurance of the DNA database having proper safeguards when, until last year, they didn’t even collate requests properly?

Labels: dna, george galloway, liam fox

Guest on panel of speakers at Liberty's Annual General Meeting. Walking in slightly early I catch the tail end of motions being put. And extremely heated and controversial they were. The first I caught was on whether teachers who had had allegations made against them of child abuse issues - false allegations mind you - should be able to get them removed from the record. Currently the Criminal Record Bureau searches result in these allegations being recorded and remaining part of the record. Not surprisingly (and quite outside the current news about the CRB making mistakes on their checks) this has meant that perfectly innocent teachers have found that because of this they have been unable to continue in their profession. Very emotive - and so emotive in fact - that it got sent back (remitted) for further work I guess. But the interesting thing about this moral dilemma is that it follows a current trend where we are seeing the authoritarian view voiced saying that the tarnishing of innocent people is a price we have to pay for the protection of our children. I don't think that is right. I think we are sophisticated enough to get it far more right than we are getting - and it is not good enough to presume guilt 'in case'. Protection for children must be rigorous and paramount - but where it is found to be wrong (the allegations were found to be false), there can be no reason for leaving erroneous records in place to hound those falsely accused in perpetuity. You cannot argue that simply because an allegation - possibly malicious - has been made then there is no smoke without a fire. That is the danger of police records and the holding of innocent DNA and so on. These mistakes are perpetuated once systemised in the cyberworld and the potential extension across other databases means that errors or wrongs will be exacerbated and perpetuated.

The second of the motions I caught was whether a member of the BNP should be allowed to be employed in the public services - like the prison service. The argument raged - and it is a difficult one. Do you take the purist view and say regardless of politics or religion everyone should be employed on an equal basis until such time as they act or do something wrong. Or do you avoid the problem by not employing and thus excluding the possibility? These are the questions of moral dilemma for a free society - and seemingly even Liberty has difficulties finding the answers.

Labels: dna

Off to do the Sunday Politics Show for the third week in a row. Added to our number this week is Tony Travers. We hash over vagaries of London's voting patterns. After the show, Tim Donovan, Tony and I chat about the disintegration of the Labour party as it appears to descend into civil war with Brown's henchmen turning up the heat - hoping to force Blair into going, or at least stating when he will be going.

I try and persuade Tim to do a show on DNA. I have been championing a number of issues around DNA for some years - and the Independent on Sunday runs a story using a quote from me and the answer I got to a Parliamentary Question on what percentage of innocent DNA comes from black and ethnic minorities. It's about 24% nationwide - but the figure that no one is picking up on yet - is that in London this kicks up to 57% of innocent DNA is coming from non-whites. It's huge – way, way above their actual representation in the population as a whole.

Labels: dna, politics show, tim donovan, tony blair, tony travers

Campaigning all day - and then suddenly - whilst stuffing envelopes with Neil and Monica I remember that I have to do a live radio show. Luckily, I remembered with a half hour to spare. This was for a station in the Midlands and on the revelation through my Parliamentary Question that 24% of citizens who have a DNA profile on the national DNA database (NDNAD) are from ethnic minority communities. This compares with 8% black and ethnic minority members in the general population.

I have come to two conclusions. Firstly - the police are clearly arresting a disproportionate amount of innocent black men. I believe that this is because wherever discretionary powers are used - those powers are used disproportionately. This means that all the work we have all been doing, including the police themselves, to eradicate disproportionality is clearly not working.

I often think whilst a proportion of this - hopefully quite small - is actual racism that the vast majority of it is conditioning. But policing should be about intelligence and evidence - and the challenge has to be to become so professional in carrying out duties that there is no way of telling what an officer is thinking on a personal basis. So - back to the drawing board on how to reduce the conditioning or counter it - so that disproportionality is diminished.

The second conclusion I have come to is that until disproportionalilty in policing is conquered - that this database has unintended consequences. I don't think, that whilst the new powers to take DNA from those arrested was taken through Parliament that the outcomes had been thought through. It is unquestionable that DNA has moved forward the technological ability to detect crime. So - I have come to accept that a database of those charged and convicted or those cautioned is legitimate. I have also come to believe that checking DNA taken from those arrested and checked against cold cases is legitimate and valuable. Many murders and rapes have been solved that way. However, if DNA that is taken is kept on those who are not charged, cautioned or matched against cold cases - therefore innocent - there can be no reason to keep those DNA records and they should be destroyed.

I think this needs to come back to Parliament for debate. On Thursday in a debate about Forensic Science Services (too long to go into here) I made the same point. Andy Burnham wouldn't let me come back on the issue of bringing it to the floor of the Commons as he seemed to think that the original debate was enough. I disagree profoundly with him. And for both reasons - the principle of innocent until found guilty which is subverted by the retention of the DNA of the innocent and for the reasons that the database itself is biased towards collection of black and ethnic minority DNA - this issue must come back to the chamber.

Labels: crime, dna

A woman was found dead in a flat in Wood Green. She had died more than two years earlier. The television was still on. Her shopping was at her side. Apart from the Brit media on this - interestingly - the Australian and Italian media are very het up about it. I had a word with an Italian TV station and asked them why this had become such a huge story in Italy. It's because it is unimaginable in Italy that you wouldn't a) know your neighbour and b) not be inquisitive about a flat that had no comings or goings. The Italian nation is agog at our apparent lack of community mindedness.

And where was everybody? It's tragic that there were no friends or family there. There should have been a number of authorities involved in Joyce Vincent's life. Someone should have been asking why the part of her rent not paid by housing benefit wasn't paid. Where were social services? How did this poor lady fall through the safety net? This case shows the need for a human checking process.

Apparently Ms Vincent was a victim of domestic violence and, who knows, maybe she didn't want people to know where she was and had discouraged contact from her family. She also lived in an area with quite high population turnover.

Nevertheless this is a reminder to all of us all that we should look out for our neighbours – but, as the interviews with her neighbours show, this is much easier said then done. At what point do you start worrying if you don’t see your neighbour? What do you do when you have started worrying? And so on.

Meanwhile, the answer to my Parliamentary Question on the ethnic breakdown of those people who have been arrested but not charged or cautioned – i.e. were innocent - has come back showing that 24% are from ethnic minorities. The black and Asian population of the UK as a whole is less than 8%. (The figures are based on the make-up of the DNA samples in the national DNA database as these arrests are the basic source of DNA in the database).

So what on earth is going on? My guess (although I will obviously await for the outcome of the investigation into these figures that I am calling for) is that disproportionality is alive and well; that is, where there is discretion in the use of police powers, they are disproportionately used against those from ethnic minorities.

What these figures demonstrate quite clearly to me is that disproportionate numbers of black and ethnic minority members are being wrongly arrested. They are innocent. This is wrong. This is discrimination. Whilst a lot of work has gone on to improve training for police in stop and search etc - it is clearly not working.

And Charles Clarke is adding more and more discretionary powers to the police to administer summary justice - let alone the carrying of ID cards in due course. All of which will make these problems even worse.

Labels: charles clarke, dna

First thing over to City Hall for private briefing on Operation Minstead. It was basically the same presentation that I had had some while back - and still they haven't got their man. They are still painstakingly sifting through lists and lists of possible persons of interest. And all the DNA trawl in the world hasn't yielded up the perpetrator. Will it ever? Leave in a rush as I have my session with Ming at 11.15am.

I go in and up to the office where Ming is ensconced with Archie Kirkwood - his political adviser. We have a very good discussion I thought. There is a little awkwardness around our different sides in the leadership election, but that’s natural. More interestingly I get a chance to discuss where I might want to be in the future and also, more importantly, to bung my two pennies in on the organisation and campaigning aspects of the Liberal Democrats. Hopefully they will let me keep policing!

At lunchtime, I go to a meeting where three women (partners or parents) of someone who has died have had the most appalling and tragic experience and the most horrific mistreatment by a coroner. It seems to me from the evidence presented that there is plenty of reason for a public enquiry into the cases that appear to have been so poorly, or negligently handled. Watch this space.

And out on the campaign trail knocking on doors for a good session - which restored my soul. It was so good, and happy and people were just nice, nice, nice.

PS If you watched Question Time tonight you will have noticed that Nick Clegg who I was bumped in favour of, was not there. On Tuesday or Wednesday this week - QT had decided they wanted to change back to me. Unfortunately, by this time I had made another arrangement. So they bumped Nick in favour of Jean Lambert, Green MEP. C'est la vie!

Labels: dna, ming campbell, nick clegg

Surgery all morning. The last case was quite challenging. Obviously no details - but in overview - a woman came because her son, 13 years old and black, had been stopped by the police and asked to account for what he was doing. He and some friends were described as hiding in the grounds of public building playing hide and seek. Nothing came of it and the police had written to the mother following her complaints to say that they accepted her son's explanation. End of story. Except - that although there is no police record or criminality etc - the boy's details will remain on the database as having been stopped and asked to account.

As we went through what had happened, the woman became extremely agitated and before long completely hysterical, sobbing and shouting and weeping and wailing. What was at cause of this was a mixture of indignation that her boy had been stopped at all and that the police shouldn't be allowed to stop a 13 year old and ask for details (she said they intimidated her son to get them), that the details filled in on the Stop and Search form were inaccurate and that he would be down in police records and this would count against him throughout his life as black boys have the odds stacked against them.

It is one of those situations where I just use enough authority to try and bring calm. I know theoretically people used to say you are meant to slap someone who is hysterical around the face and the shock is supposed to bring them back to their senses. However, I hardly think that a viable or acceptable solution in this day and age! I can just see the headlines. What was the most difficult was that she couldn't hear anything I was saying. And in fact I thought she had a good point.

It sort of relates to my work on DNA where I am fighting to bring some rationality and fairness to what gets retained by the police when someone is innocent. Likewise, her boy was innocent. She has the letter from the police saying so. But because the police stopped him, his details will remain forever on the database and this may well somehow count against him at a later date and in another context.

So I will pursue this. Because if there is any risk that retained details on an innocent black boy might one day mean that he is prevented from something - a job or a place at university because somehow that information is available - then it should not be retained on record. I will be writing to the police chief to find out what happens to such records, why they keep them and whether there is a particular reason for this boy's details to be kept. We will see.

There is a whole surveillance society being created at the moment - and we have to be sure that the balance between our civil liberties and catching criminals is not only a fair one - but an agreed one!

From surgery make my way to Highgate Primary School where I am talking to about 30 children from the school council and school newspaper about climate change and recycling - and how lovely it was to be surrounded by enthusiastic youngsters who peppered me with lots of questions and who clearly understood already the need to care about what we use and how we use it and the dangers that faced us.

More fascinating for them - was the fact that this was my old primary school! Neither the head nor the teachers had realised that this was indeed my own Alma Mater! And what memories it sparked. I was describing to Anthony - the teacher in charge of this project - and we didn't use first names when I was there- that we had had a boys' playground and a girls' playground. And he laughed at the idea of gender playgrounds - but that's how it was. And I remembered all my old teachers' names. Also, the head was called Mrs Ruby Jobson (I think) and I remember her calling my mother in for a chat because my mother was not a fan of education and thought you should get out into the world and work as soon as possible. She herself had left school at 13 to train under a milliner - which she hated. Anyway - Mrs Johnson called her in and told her that her little girl was quite clever and advised that I sit for a scholarship. My mother reluctantly agreed. But the interesting thing is that we hadn't done any algebra and apparently you needed to be able to do algebra to sit the exam. So the Headmistress sat me in her own office for six weeks and tutored me personally. I sat the exam. I got the scholarship. And the rest is history. So - an unexpected walk down memory lane!

Then I get a call from a reporter from Radio 4’s Today programme who wants to come and interview me post the fabulous Dunfermline by-election result - as Haringey is one of those councils that is mooted may fall to the Lib Dems. It's a program to do with what is happening and why in Labour's heartlands. So he comes to the Three Compasses pub (where my office is upstairs) and I am sitting downstairs having a coffee with my 3 o'clock appointment - Ian Grant - from Open Door.

Open Door is voluntary organisation part funded by state and the rest by raising funds and it has a team of councillors that work with 13 to 24 year olds with mental health problems. One of the projects they are doing, and which they want to promote more widely, is support for parents of teenagers with mental health problems as there is nothing available. The other gap is care for 18 - 21 year olds who often seem to fall between two stools. I am particularly cross about the lack of resource or interest in mental health.

Firstly, neighbour disputes are often mental health based issues and often crime in the community is because care in the community doesn't work. The police and the prison system end up dealing with what are mental health issues - and of all the under-funding - talking therapies are the lowest in the food chain!! We did actually have an opposition debate this week in Parliament for the first time on mental health for over eight years. And Charles Clarke in his statement yesterday on offenders doing community sentences did mention in passing that the government will be bringing forth legislation in the mental health area. Anyway - the reporter put his tape recorder on and taped a bit of that meeting too.

Then I did the interview - and yes - Labour heartlands will fall (I hope) and he was particularly interested to know how and why I had managed to overturn a Labour lead of 26,000 in two elections. It's not hard to understand. Haringey Labour ran a one party state where residents were ignored and treated as voting fodder who would vote Labour whatever. Someone like me comes along and says I will listen and care and do things about your everyday life - yes it matters - clean streets, lighting, paving stones and so on. I have always argued that if you can't keep a street clean how can you run the country? Of course, over the years the Lib Dems have been working in Haringey - we have succeeded in pushing through improvements - on cleaner streets, recycling, school places - all of which Labour ignored until we became a threat, campaigned on these issues and put them in our leaflets. So - there is every chance that we will take the Council in May. Fingers crossed!

As I finish the interview - the CND lobby arrives. I was expecting about 5 of them - but around 12 -15 turn up. We pass an interesting half-hour and each member (virtually) of the lobby presents their case. For the avoidance of confusion - I am against the replacement of Trident with an equivalent system. For the time being, I believe we need a minimum nuclear deterrent. What does that mean? Enough to make anyone think twice about attacking us. I would wish to move to disarmament - but I think that is unrealistic at this moment in time and am not in favour of unilateral disarmament. I want a debate in Parliament on this issue - and indeed a debate in my own party too. I believe the world has changed and is changing and the way war is waged is also changing. The threats of the past are replaced by different threats now. Our defence needs to adapt to these changes.

Labels: charles clarke, crime, dna, highgate primary school

Busy day today. First off - accompany Alistair Carmichael (our Shadow Home Secretary) to the Home Office for a meeting with Minister Tony McNaulty. Basically it was to run through his thinking on immigration and asylum. He wasn't as bad close up as I had feared given to my knowledge he has never smiled. This is probably an exaggeration - and it may well be that he has simply never smiled at me!

Rush back for Home Affairs team meeting followed by Prime Minister’s Questions where Tony Blair made absolute mincemeat of Cameron - and very enjoyable it was too. I am not partial to blood sports - but it would be disingenuous if I denied the pleasure I got from his mauling.

Firstly Blair was well on song - albeit Cameron handed him a real gift by saying that Labour had flip-flopped. Coming from the flippiest flopper in town - it was then open season. I am particularly incensed over Cameron's rubbish at the moment because of his latest conversion to getting rid of the Royal Prerogative - i.e. Tony Blair's ability to take this country to war - and wants parliament to have the authority in this. Only a few months ago Clare Short brought in a Private Members Bill for the armed forces which would have done exactly that. Friday morning when such Bills are debated is quite difficult to get MPs to stay for - however lots of Lib Dems and Labour did - because it was so important. But only 6 Tories were in evidence and voted - and guess what - David Cameron was nowhere to be seen! The rank hypocrisy is striking - so his come-uppance was richly deserved.

Then I dashed over to Methodist Central Hall for a lobby by the local Defend Council Housing group - who are up in arms about ALMOs. Their complaint is that the goalposts are moving on what was voted on by leaseholders and tenants. I raise it with my Council Group in the evening and our housing spokesperson, Dave Beacham is going to make sure that the motions they passed in their forum are discussed by the Board.

Then I rush (late) to Environmental Audit Committee where we take evidence on why the government is too lily livered to actually stick to its targets or deal with taxing consumption. Then I rush to a meeting to thrash our the line on DNA (more to come another day). which is one of my passions (a bit nerdy) and then rush back to Haringey to Council Group.

Labels: dna, tony blair

Well - no surprise what the gossip at the Palace of Varieties is today. Members of the other parties and the media keep asking - did you know? I think the answer is that no-one knew - except apparently the News of the World. And I guess, after Mark had withdrawn from the leadership they had to get their story out before their hook for it with the leadership contest wasn't headline news any more.

I am kicking myself because the odds are shortening on Chris - and when I first urged him to run he was on at 300-1 and fourth in line for the throne - and I haven't had time to put a bet on. Now the odds have shortened faster than any other political odds in history and he is in second place.

I go over to Alexandra Park School later morning for a photo op with two of the sixth formers who have gained Oxbridge places - one at each Oxford and Cambridge. The head, Ros Hudson, rang me last week to tell me the good news – so this is to celebrate to have two kids in the first year of the new sixth form attain such places. We have a cup of tea and a chat about the interviews they have both been through to get their places - terrifying. The newspapers turn up to take the photo - and hopefully this 'good news' story will encourage others to reach for the stars too.

When I get to the Commons, I discover it is Questions to the Minister of the Defence Department - and decide I want to put a question to him. In order to get called (if you are not one of the MPs selected in the ballot for Questions on the Order Paper) you have to stand up each time anyone finishes speaking during this session. I sit quiet until Question 5 which is on Iraq - as the question I want to ask is on this subject.

This time I am lucky and I get called to ask my question - which is: 'Has the Minster had any discussions about gradually replacing British troops in Iraq with troops from Muslim Countries?' John Reid, I think, looked pretty pleased to get an opportunity to say who he had been speaking to and push this up the agenda as he had had a number of meetings on the issue. So that was good all round - as I do think the sooner we are replaced by troops better trusted than ourselves the better for all.

I have a short meeting with the man who has been the subject of the police trawl for Operation Minstead and who was asked to give a 'voluntary' DNA sample and refused. The deadline for Met to respond to the CRE call for extra information is 30 January - as is mine for a response from Met Commissioner Ian Blair to my enquiries on this matter.

In fact DNA is in the news for all sorts of reasons at the moment. I have had a bee in my bonnet about it for some time and my various Parliamentary Questions (written) have elicited some startling statistics including the disproportionate amount of DNA taken from black men and the fact that the DNA of around 134,000 innocent people who were never charged or cautioned is now on the record books.

This weekend the coverage is about the 24,000 of those who are juveniles. This is shaping up for a real battle at some point - as there is a national database being built by stealth. If the Government want this - then they should have the balls to put forward legislation and have the public debate. My simple question to those who defend what is happening is this: 'if it's so great and without any problems, why not be upfront and have an explicit debate and agreement (or not) to set-up such a database?'

I think it would be dreadful - but at least there would be a logic to it if the whole country was held. Randomly keeping the DNA records of people the police erroneously arrest is ludicrous. Doing it by default also means we don’t get the same safeguards in place as we would if there was a proper debate and decision.

Personally, and this is not necessarily the party view we will come to when we discuss it further, I think it will lead to all sorts of mischief. For instance - once DNA is the main arbiter of guilt or innocence - how easy it will be to set someone up! I can foresee absolute nightmare scenarios - and what is a phenomenal detection tool and confirmation of guilt - will be misused ultimately. And a million other issues - but the temptations will probably be too much for old authoritarians to resist. Let alone if we have a malign government who might misuse such a system.

This issue comes up at the emergency Home Affairs Team Meeting which Alistair Carmichael has called as he has stepped up to take Mark's place until the leadership contest is decided and the new leader reshuffles us. It would be fair to say that there are a variety of views on the issue - and so we need a paper that brings us up to date on facts around DNA before we can make our judgements. Alistair seems to have it all under control.

We sit talking into the late night between and after votes - about the leadership contest. We may all have differing views on who should be crowned - but the spirit is good between our different camps - thank goodness!

Labels: alexandra park school, dna

Early morning meeting with Richard Sumray, Chair of Haringey Primary Care Trust (PCT). I have asked him to come and update me on the proposed development of Hornsey Central Hospital. It is now years since I joined local campaigners to campaign against the closure of the old hospital and then with local campaigners to ensure that a community health facility replaced what was lost.

Richard had been hoping to have a public meeting in December but this is now delayed until January because the relevant policy paper has not yet gone to the trust’s Board and won't do now until January. The proposed scheme - the Primary Care Resource Centre, the Healthy Living centre and other health functions yet to be decided by the practitioners - is still on but there are still some big stumbling blocks remaining before the project can proceed. The second floor of the 2nd Stage, which was to provide offices, hit a dead end when it became clear that the costs were too high. The Strategic Health Trust rejected the project as it was thought to be unaffordable. Since then Richard Sumray and the Board have been re-examining the whole project for ways of making it more affordable and therefore viable.

The redevelopment is being funded through the Government’s LIFT scheme, which means involving a private partner. The PCT consulted their private partner over the idea that the private partner take on the risk of the top floor - developing it for themselves. This would theoretically make it financially feasible, and mean that there were no major changes to the amount of health services to be provided. However, there are risks. The PCT is pretty desperate to get the plans for Hornsey Hospital finished and through by March, because otherwise they will be left with a large financial deficit at the start of the next financial year. But because of the huge level of bureaucracy involved in LIFT schemes it is even money as to whether they will make it.

In the afternoon I am see an 'informant'. Since my days on the Met Police Authority (MPA) I have been pursuing the use of DNA in the search for an abhorrent rapist. The crimes - against old women - are an abomination and have been going on for around ten years with no success by the police in capturing the criminal.

However, in recent years the police have been trawling the black community for 'voluntary' DNA samples. These samples have not, in my view, been voluntary at all. 125 refusniks received an intimidatory letter from a senior detective saying that he was going to look into their reasons for refusal and then let them know of his decision. Well - if it was voluntary - no need to look into anything or decide anything. Furthermore, five of those written to continued to refuse and in the end were arrested. Two gave in at that point, and the remaining three arrested had their DNA taken - as once arrested it is compulsory.

It is so easy to say end justifies means. It is easy to see the argument that this crime is so horrific that it is right to take DNA voluntarily or otherwise. Don't get me wrong. The police are doing a great job. But it is a complete misnomer to call this type of testing 'voluntary'. It is clearly mandatory in practice. And if mandatory DNA testing is happening, that should only be after a proper debate results in a decision to change the rules – we shouldn’t get mandatory testing introduced by the back door. Balancing civil rights, personal freedoms and the fight against crime are tricky - which is all the more reasons why such decisions should not happen on the quiet and without proper public debate.

Since then the trail had gone somewhat cold - for me. The police still hadn't caught the culprit. Then I got an email from someone who only recently was pulled in to give a sample on a spurious excuse and refused. He said he couldn't put it all in an email - so today he came into see me. And he had quite a tale to tell. Needless to say - I will be pursuing this as soon as I have put together an appropriate strategy to so do. It was extremely disheartening to hear some of the treatment he encountered.

Ironically, I then dash over to Earls Court for the Met Police Authority's Christmas do! Very nice to see everyone again. I do miss the MPA - however being LibDem spokesperson on Police, Crime and Disorder and Prisons at least keeps me in the right portfolio.

Labels: dna, hornsey central hospital, mpa, richard sumray

I go to speak at the Liberal Democrat London Region Conference. I, Susan Kramer MP and Sarah Ludford MEP are on a panel answering questions from the attendees. However, the earlier debate is heated and running overtime and Shami Chakrabarti, the Director of Liberty has already arrived and is timed for 4.30pm - so I suggest to my co-panellists that we cut our session from an hour down to just half an hour. So that's what we did.

Shami did a truly star turn. She has a phenomenal use of the English vocabulary - and a delivery that is very winning in manner. And of course, she is delivering music to Lib Dem ears - the civil liberties agenda. Her job must be a constant delight - to fight the good fight - and get paid for it! I think she is an excellent proponent and a real champion of this agenda.

She slides through all the terrible thefts we have witnessed since Labour came to power. From Control Orders, to ID cards, to proposals to remove trial by jury, to religious hatred legislation (removing free speech), to banning behaviour as a substitute for real cure, to the terror laws and the extension of detention without charge, to retention of DNA records on a national police database regardless of guilt or innocence - to name just a few. These are not just the ones that Shami brought up - but they are what has become a litany of loss. Shami finished with the shameful move to accept evidence got by torture. One wonders where it will end and just how far this will go.

Labels: dna, sarah ludford, shami chakrabarti, susan kramer

Our Shadow Home Secretary is really unwell - to the point that he cannot leave his house in Winchester. So I go forth for the Liberal Democrats on the terrorism issue today. I start with an interview for BBC 24 followed by a 'package'. (That is a pre-recorded interview that they will use later in news programmes about the terror proposals and the 90 day sticking point). Then I go and do the meeting with Home Secretary Charles Clarke. Love the new Home Office building. Lots and lots of media outside. Such are these moments.

Clarke runs through the amendments they will table (or his assistant does the detail more accurately). They are small beer. Welcome - but not the meat of the disagreement between the Government and the rest of us struggling with the need to balance protection of our citizens with our civil liberties. He doesn't wish to revise the bit on 'glorification' or redefine ''terrorism' - nor does he want to put the number of days on the table.

But what he does say is that the Government is likely to table an amendment tonight at close of business which will be somewhere between 28 and 90 days.

Spend the next few hours coping with media bid after media bid. Basically our position is that we will use Lib Dem votes in whatever way brings the number of days extension as near to the original 14 as possible. Clarke appears willing to pluck a number out of the air based on no criteria or logic or evidence that I could get out of him. Later I hear that T Blair is warning us all that 90 days is a must and if anything happens it will be our fault.

Sabre rattling is so easy when we are all so frightened of terrorist attack. That's why we have to stand firm and keep cool heads to analyse what is best to deal with terrorists. I don't believe that the police argument really holds up. There is existing legislation barely utilised - and in one case not even enacted - which would deal with some of the issues and allow police the extended time they crave.

Anyway - at 2.30pm, just to top it all, it is Home Office questions in Parliament and I have to man the front bench and actually have Question 6 on the Order Paper. This is about the DNA national database. I have discovered that there are 3.3 million samples of DNA on the database – and 32% of all black males in the UK are in it compared with only 8% of white males. I ask the minister to investigate what lies beneath these figures - and ask him if he agrees that there is concern that there is racial profiling going on. Not much of an answer in terms of my request - to be pursued.

Do a couple more interviews and then dash off for younger daughter's reports night having made sure that another of the Home Affairs team can cover the media for the evening.

Labels: charles clarke, dna