Showing posts with label welfare reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label welfare reform. Show all posts

Wednesday, 18 March 2009

(Some of) what I've been up to this week

Some days as an MP you end up doing quite a lot of high-visibility stuff in the Chamber that people get to hear about, either because they watch the Parliament channel or have signed up for theyworkforyou alerts or catch sight of you on the news. Monday was such a day - I managed to get called twice at DWP questions despite not being on the order paper. My first question was prompted by an email I'd had from a constituent, protesting at the Government's announcement of a special package to help senior executives who have lost their jobs get back into work. And then I managed to get called during topical Qs too, and took the opportunity to flag up the 10 year anniversary of Labour's pledge to abolish child poverty.

Then we had a statement from Alistair on the G20 finance ministers meeting, and I asked about city regulation. When I was on the Treasury Select Committee I'd asked on several occasions (in committee and on external visits) about the phenomenal growth in derivatives trading and the hedge funds, and whether the Bank of England and FSA and Treasury felt they could properly assess the level of institutional and systemic risk. From what I can recall, the responses often involved them explaining derivatives or hedge funds to me in slow and careful language, as if my concern was only prompted by the fact that I didn't really understand what these scary things were. I did. I do.

Anyway, they insisted they were on top of things, and now it seems that they weren't. (Ditto when Andy Love MP used to ask them about the sub-prime mortgage market. Andy spent most of the Treasury Select Committee's trip to Washington/ New York in 2006 asking economists and politicians and regulators about the sub-prime mortgage market: well ahead of the curve on that one). I digress, as ever: my question to Alistair was how, when financial institutions employ people with Ph.D. in physics and mathematics to conjure up new products and make hugely complicated calculations about market risk, could the FSA ever hope to keep up? Looking forward to the debates on Adair Turner's report on an end to 'light touch' regulation, but that's another topic for another day.

Later on in the day on Monday I spent three hours - interrupted by a meeting with Ed Balls and the rest of the DCSF ministerial team to talk about schools and children's issues in Bristol - in the Chamber for the Youth Parliament motion. When faced with Tory MPs who are doing their best to talk the issue out, and talking complete nonsense in the process, it's a difficult choice: do you sit still, say nothing and hope they will eventually shut up? Or do you rise to the bait and intervene on them to point out just how stupid their arguments are? I went for the middle option - didn't speak in the debate but couldn't resist a few interventions, e.g asking the leader of the old fogey tendency, Christopher Chope MP, how many young people he'd consulted (five, two of whom were gap year students in his office, two of whom were his daughters - and his local youth MP, who didn't agree with him). There was also a completely fatuous thread being pursued at one point by Philip Davies MP, who was trying to argue that allowing UKYP to use the chamber wouldn't play any part in encouraging more young people to become involved in politics. Which I can't be bothered to explain here. Just take it from me, he was wrong. And if you want some hard proof of just how far Cameron has got to go in dragging his backbenchers into the 21st century, have a read of the full debate in Hansard. (And bear in mind, they're trying to talk it out so when they say the Government doesn't want to debate it, they mean the Government doesn't want to spend so long debating it that a decision never gets made).

Anyway, as I was saying, some days you spend a lot of time in the Chamber. Today was the complete opposite. No point going in for Scotland questions (although I had submitted a question about seals being killed by Scottish trawlermen but it didn't get drawn). Then there was statement on the Staffs hospital which, though important, is obviously more a matter for the local MPs. And then there was an opposition day debate on the economy, which would have been worth being in the Chamber for, but we've got another full day debate on the economy on the 31st which I plan to speak in... So, by the end of the day had only spent half an hour in the Chamber, for PMQs.

I did, however, have a really interesting and productive day. For example, I met with the regional head of Barnardo's to talk about the children of prisoners, and to discuss how to take some of these issues forward. We're in the position now that we were with young carers ten years ago; it's simply not on the radar. But Ministers are starting to take an interest, and I'm confident we can really push the agenda over the coming months. Barnardo's in the South West is taking a lead on it, with two pilots - one in Bristol, one in a rural area - which could be really groundbreaking. So, left that meeting feeling very postive and energised, and then had a meeting of the All-Party Group on Poverty, with Sir Richard Tilt of the Social Security Advisory Committee, which was mostly about reform of the social fund. John Battle and Terry Rooney were amongst the other MPs there - both incredibly knowledgeable about welfare issues, and how different elements of the system fits together. Or doesn't fit, which is often the problem. The task now will be to put this information to some use.

Last port of call of the day was the Child Poverty Action Group's event to mark the 10th anniversary of the Government's pledge to abolish child poverty. Good opportunity to catch up with Kate Green from CPAG and some of the other child poverty campaigners. Ed Balls was the guest speaker, and it overran a bit, so we ended up having to race over to the Commons to catch the 7pm vote. Made it with seconds to spare. Very impressed by Ed's ability to leap up three stairs at a time, and even more impressed by his insistence on waiting for me to catch up. Don't know quite what the people in the public gallery would have thought when they saw me sprinting into the chamber as the doors were about to close, clutching my bouquet of flowers. (Won an award, CPAG MP of the Year...)

So, as I started off by saying - some days it's public, some days it's more behind the scenes stuff. But both are equally important. You have to know what you're talking about before you try to stand up and talk about it. Although I'm not entirely sure Messrs Chope and Davies have learnt that lesson yet.

Thursday, 18 December 2008

Last day of term

Been round a colleague's flat tonight, for a little end of session soiree. Curry, crisps and karaoke, except the machine had broken so we resorted to playing party games, including 'Secrets' where someone confessed to have a Labour rose tattooed on their left buttock (I guessed Pat McFadden, but I was wrong), someone else to not being able to say the word 'strategy' without stuttering (which must make life very difficult for them as a Govt minister and no, that wasn't Pat either) and John Denham confessed to having staged a one man sit-in in his headteacher's study at the age of 16 over the state of the school cricket pitch. He got what he wanted, but then had to run the lunchtime cricket club every Friday for the next two years. Oh, and someone else owned up to having appeared on Blockbusters (and I still have the dictionary and sweatshirt to prove it. My mother has it on the same video tape as a recording of Jesus Christ Superstar.)

Anyway, tomorrow is officially the last day of term but we're on a one-liner so lots of people went home tonight. I'm number 16 at Treasury questions, 'though last time I checked I was gradually creeping up the order paper as others pulled out. Asking about a fiscal stimulus. Do we need one? Yes. I may have to give a bit more thought to that tomorrow.

Then the PM will be doing his statement on Iraq, and then it's the end of term debate when we can talk about whatever we like, and I'm going to talk about welfare reform. And then some poor PPS has to wait around for the adjournment debate at 6pm, on Sri Lanka. (That would be me, and actually it isn't DFID but I just agreed to do it to be nice. Which is the second time in just over a week. Those FCO boys owe me big time).

Saturday, 13 December 2008

Kite-flying on the 'underclass' issue

For those of you who have been showing an interest in the welfare debate, Hazel Blears' interview in today's Times is worth a look.

On a minor point, far be it from me to challenge the veracity of a Cabinet Minister's words, but I think Hazel (4'10") is being a teensy bit economical with the truth when she claims to be the same height as the Queen (officially 5'4"). For those who care about such stuff, I've spent many an hour on this website, Celeb Heights, which is totally addictive.

Wednesday, 10 December 2008

Welfare reform

Straight after PMQs we had a statement from James Purnell on the Welfare Reform White Paper. I was sitting next to Rob Marris, and as we were the last two people to be called the House was treated to the spectacle of the two of us bobbing up and down for an hour, trying to catch the Speaker's eye and looking absolutely ridiculous; he's a good 18 inches taller than me.

Yesterday (Tuesday) lunchtime I got a call from a journalist, saying the Tories were going around telling the press that there was going to be a sizeable Labour rebellion on this and only the Tory votes would save them. Strange then that the Tory spokesman, Chris Grayling, asked a senior Labour backbencher Tuesday night if he thought there was going to be a rebellion and looked very disappointed when he was told no. Not that we have rebellions - or votes - on White Papers anyway.

The White Paper is in part based on the Gregg review. That would be Professor Paul Gregg of Bristol University's Institute of Public Affairs. It would also be the same Paul Gregg I last saw at UK Decay's reunion gig in Luton last summer. Funny to think that the lad who lent me his Scritti Politti picture disc of 'Jacques Derrida' twenty-five years ago is now a Professor. He'd probably say the same about me becoming an MP.

Anyway, the statement is good stuff, although I share the concerns expressed by Roger Berry that some vulnerable people - e.g. people with mental health problems, or people with serious disabilities or illnesses - might be alarmed by the press coverage which gives the impression they'll all be frogmarched into work, no matter what their problems. Also concerned about people with fluctuating illnesses, like ME. And what happens if people simply won't be 'better off' in work, because of a host of complicating factors. Lots of detail to be thrashed out, and much of it depends on the sensitivity and competence of Job Centre staff (and there being enough of them to have time to display their sensitivity and competence). I'm meeting Job Centre staff and other people working in this sector in Bristol on Friday to discuss, and am going to get really stuck into this. I want us to get it right.