MPs' expenses: things for policywonk to say if she gets the chance

[policywonk]

So I'm off tomorrow afternoon to this panel discussion thing: here are the details

I'll go through the old thread tonight but post any more stuff here. Y'know, if you want to.

I'm SO OVER MPs' expenses.

[policywonk]

Am back.

Eastbound Jubilee line is a bugger at rush hour, non?

Was very interesting

Sorry for non-response to Tweets, couldn't see what was coming in.

I asked two qs (was quite competitive to get a question in - once again swotty seating placement in middle of front row was helpful):

1. should the disciplining of MPs be removed from the Standards and Privileges Committee and be made the responsibility of an independent body, or would this be too big a breach of parliamentary sovereignty (nobody answered this one); and
   
2. mumsnetters are very interested in Heather Brooke, and would particularly like to know how we can find out which MPs were blocking her FOI requests (this one was ilovemydog's I think). Normie Norm started bouncing in his seat when I asked this one. It also prompted the following exchange:
   
   Julia Hobsbawm: So this is a hot topic on MN then?
   Me: Oh yes.
   JH: MNetters are interested in Healther Brooke? Is she a mother?
   Me: ?
   Jenni Russell from Grauniad: Don't be underestimating the intelligence of mothers, Julia!
   JH: Oh God no sorry, that's not what I meant. It's just that Heather Brooke's not a mother, I don't think.
   
   (She came up to me and apologised afterwards, and we had a little huddle with Jenni Russell who's a mate of Justine's apparently and very pro-MN.)

[OlympedeGouges]

well done wonk. Interesting slip from JH....
What were their answers?

[morningpaper]

Wonka, I love your:

ME: ?

Is she a mother fgs

Well done!

[policywonk]

Thanks Len

Anyway, Norman made a point of answering the second q - he obviously wants the bastards to be named and shamed.

He said: a) look at the list of MPs on the Commons Commission. That's Martin (bye-bye now), Harriet Harman (she really has not covered herself in glory over all this), Nick Harvey (LibDem, North Devon), David Maclean (villain of the piece: Cons, Penrith and the Border), Stuart Bell (co-villain, Lab, Middlesborough) and Alan Duncan (Con, Rutland and Melton).

b) Go to Hansard and look at the MPs who supported the third reading of David Maclean's private member's bill to exempt Parliament from FOI legislation. That's a long list, but I can post it here if you like, or stick it on my MN blog.

[ilovemydogandMrObama]

Hilarious!

Did you get an answer for who was blocking the requests? Was it the Speaker's Office?

[policywonk]

Thanks mp. I was quite nonplussed by the question. But she did apologise a lot. And I like her dad (the only person whose autograph I have ever solicited).

[policywonk]

I need to do a shout out to An MNer Who Seems To Wish To Remain Anonyous But Who Gave Norman Baker's Exact Answer On A Thread Several Days Ago, if she's reading this.

[policywonk]

anonyous?

Did I mention that Julia H apologised?

[policywonk]

Julia H is a PR person - used to run Hobsbawm Macauley (sp?) with Sarah Brown but they had a big old falling out.

Her dad is Eric Hobsbawm, Marxist historian extraordinaire and fantastic writer.

[policywonk]

at 'Is he a parent?'

If you didn't see my Tweets, the hot news is that a lot of the MPs in the room were supporting John Bercow (Conservative but famously independently-minded) for Speaker (although apparently there's an odd situation in which Conservatives, broadly speaking, are supporting Labour's Frank Field (silly person IMO) and Labour is supporting Bercow); and the General Election is going to be on May 6 2010.

[ronshar]

Two questions. Didnt you do well.

What exactly has being a mother got to do with anything? Surely we are sentient human beings first, then slaves to our offspring second. I have so much more time on my hands now so I can I can keep up with most of the shite coming out of parliament!!!!!

[policywonk]

That's the one justa - think it got ripped to shreds on here (there's a surprise!)

Thanks Ronshar

Helena Kennedy was ruddy marvellous. I told her she has a lot of fans on here (did not specifically mention Pan's wish to lick her face). She is tremendously tiny, brilliant speaker, very quick and fluent (lawyer).

She said that this is a political moment that could be seized to great effect, but that at the moment too many MPs don't 'get' how furious people are. She said she's been speaking to doorstep canvassers, many of whom are knocking on a bit, and they are saying that they're being met with real fury on the doorsteps and a lot of them are saying they don't want to do it any more cos they're intimidated and pissed off.

She commented (as a Labour peer) that Labour have failed to engage properly with the constitutional reform agenda, but that one thing they have done - Freedom of Information legislation - led to these details being revealed, so they have done some good.

[ronshar]

I'm glad Julia is a PR professional! We need more people in PR, really there arent enough people to tell us what we want and what we dont want.
I cant get rid of the feeling that it is PR professionals who have helped to create alot of the mess we are in

[policywonk]

HK also said that there's a misperception that voters are apathetic. She reckons they're not apathetic; they're unhappy, feel voiceless, fed up with stage-management of politics, know that politicans promise the earth to get elected and then don't do half of what they promised, feel that the major parties are too similar, distrust the culture of professional politicians and the conveyer belt from politics into the private sector (she gave the eg of Blunkett widening the use of DNA sampling hugely while Home Sec and then stepping directly on to the board of a DNA testing company when he left the cabinet. Which does stink to ruddy high heaven.)

She wants: written constitution (written with input from the electorate, not solely by politicians); funding of political parties (she admits this is a non-started in present climate); reduction in size of Commons and particularly Lords (she says the Lords expense scandals have yet to come out); greater powers for Select Committees, less power for whips; immediate moratorium on all appointments to Lords (including Martin) until situation has stabilised.

[ronshar]

I think I would also like to lick HK face
That all makes good soundbites and is probably what we would all like to have implemented.
I had forgotten about Martin and his elevation. Great just what we need more incompetant Lords.

[Jux]

Fantastic. And two questions! Policywonk for Pope! er PM I mean.

[policywonk]

Thanks jux.

Do you think people agree with all those things, ron? I do, but it's a fairly liberal/reformist agenda. I think the public at large barely understand this argument, let alone support it (this probably sounds insulting but I do think it's true - say you want a written constitution and the average person will go 'eh? I thought we already had one?')

[MollieO]

Not sure if I am surprised or not about HK advocating a written constitution. USA has one and I'm not sure I'd want any part of that.

Lords don't get paid so the only money they get is what they claim in expenses. Would make interesting reading I'm sure but not the double standards of MPs being paid to do a job and then effectively claiming another salary in addition.

Well done for getting two questions in PW.

[policywonk]

And so to Normie Normster. I still want to lick his face, he was marvellous. (For those who don't know, Norman Baker (LibDem, Lewes - fab town, fab MP) has been ploughing a lonely furrow on political transparency and Freedom of Information for years now, and he's been saying for ages that the public need to know what's been happening behind closed doors.)

Said that this is a Berlin Wall moment in British politics. He commented that the Commons 'feels' better today because MPs know they've begun to tackle the issue. The next Speaker will have a mandate because, for the first time, s/he will have been elected by private ballot (something that was unthinkable even a few days ago - I heard someone pshaw-ing the very idea of a secret ballot only a couple of days ago on the radio).

To some extent the new Speaker will be chosen by the public at large (in that MPs will take a close interest in any published opinion polls about the candidates); the public is finally taking ownership of the parliamentary process.

There needs to be a rebalancing of the relationship between the executive (government) and legislature (Commons/Lords); powers of appointment and declaration of war/peace need to be given to Parliament at large. No more guillotining of bills; they don't do it in the Lords so it's not necessary in the Commons either. (He gave the example of a debate yesterday in which just half an hour was allocated to the use of DNA samples.)

Importance of freedom of information; transparency is the key to a modern society and to giving power to the electorate. This whole issue has only come to light because of transparency measures.

He also sees more independents being elected at all levels, and a corresponding diminution in the power of the big parties.