Why we need men

It's usually not possible for me to blog about individual casework, because of confidentiality issues. But good news re Dieumerci an asylum seeker from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, who is one step closer tonight to being allowed to stay in the UK, having almost been removed back to DRC. My office - by which I primarily mean Lois, my caseworker - has been working with Dieumerci's supporters over recent months to try to get the removal decision overturned. (This is why MPs have staff. I know some people will violently object to 'their money' being spent on paying MPs' staff to help asylum seekers stay in the UK; I am also reassured by the knowledge that many decent people, including Dieumerci's supporters from the church, will be very pleased that we do).

Earlier tonight I was in the Chamber, PPS-ing in an adjournment debate on the DRC which had been requested by Eric Joyce, the chair of the All-Party Great Lakes Group. Sometimes it's a bit of chore for a PPS, sitting through rather lacklustre contributions from tired MPs at the end of the day, but Eric's speech was incredibly good, and very moving. He spoke about sexual violence against women in Eastern Congo, and about the case of a woman who would have died in childbirth, from a simple breech birth, had the visiting MPs not been able to lend her transport to get to the nearest hospital. I'll post the link to it when it appears in Hansard tomorrow. Definitely worth a read.

It's so good to hear a male MP raise such issues - too many men assume that issues such as sexual violence and maternal mortality are "women's issues" (as we saw in yesterday's Africa debate). They shouldn't be. Rape doesn't happen without a man's involvement; childbirth can't happen without someone fathering the child. It goes back to what I said on a recent post. We need to engage men in such debates if we're ever to find solutions.

For some reason Eric's speech, when he talked about the almost epidemic levels of sexual violence in DRC, brought to mind an incident from when I was about 16 or 17. I remember taking the family dog for a walk quite late at night, and seeing at the traffic lights a mini-bus full of drunken men who were obviously on their way back from a rugby match. They had a blow-up doll in the van and were punching her over and over again, in the face. It has always stayed in my mind because of the sheer viciousness and hatred on their faces, and the fact they were all cheering each other on. Obviously it was only an inflatable replica of a naked woman, but you would never for one moment get a group of women behaving in such a way. If they were in possession of a male inflatable, they'd be treating it as an object of ridicule (isn't that what men fear most - women laughing at them?). And yes, I accept women can be violent, but I don't think there's ever that pack mentality, that sheer hatred of someone for no other reason than their gender.

As politicians we can only ever go half-way towards tackling sexual violence if we only look at half the equation, i.e. at the women who are victims. We need to look more closely at men's involvement, at male attitudes and culture and the kind of group mentality which leads to gang rapes or the use of rape as a weapon of war. And to do that, dare I say it - we need men.

The power of Twitter

Somewhat surprised that I seem to have become every media outlet's "our man on the scene" regarding yesterday's fracas in the Commons. If only my phone been working I could have tweeted as events unfolded, although really all I heard was what is commonly described as a 'kerfuffle' out in the lobby behind the Speaker's chair. One of the doorkeepers came in and said something to the Deputy Speaker who seemed very concerned about it, and then one of the Ministers on bench duty came in and said that someone had let off some CS gas but it was 'under control'. We all thought it was a protester trying to break into the Chamber, who had managed to get within yards of doing so.

As it was, it turned out to be a drunken journo, and unfortunately it now transpires it's not even someone anyone has heard of. More than a few of us were hoping it would turn out to be one of the parliamentary sketchwriters.

Economy debate going on without me

Got a short breathing space before I head to the Fabians seminar on child poverty, at which I'm speaking. Will reply to some of the questions on the child poverty post later in the week, when I have more time.

At the moment a full day debate on the economy is taking place in the main chamber. I wanted to speak in it, but it's not so easy when you're one of the newer arrivals in the House. The Speaker tends to call people in order of seniority, so two and a half hours into the debate we've had contributions from John Reid, Ruth Kelly, Peter Lilley, John Maples, as well as Alistair Darling, George Osborne and Vince Cable. Everyone except the front-benchers are on a ten minute time limit. This is intended to ensure that everyone who wants to speak, can do so, but by the time you've allowed for interventions it often means those at the end of the running order have to squeeze all they want to say into five minute's worth of manic gabbling and hope it looks better in Hansard than it sounded at the time. And because I've got other commitments today, including this Fabians seminar, I would definitely be at the very bottom of the list.

Yesterday's Africa debate was an example of things not going quite according to plan. It started off with a 14 minute time limit on speeches, which would have been decided by the Speaker when looking at how many people had asked to speak. (If you write to the Speaker beforehand you're more likely to get called). After a couple of hours of debate this time limit was cut to 12 minutes, indicating that more speakers had turned up. It was then increased to 17 minutes, indicating that some people hadn't used their full allocation or had given up waiting and decided not to speak after all. This turned out to be a misjudgment. In the last hour or so the Minister started to worry that there were still four or five speakers left, which would totally squeeze the time left for him to respond to more than five hours of debate. Either the PPS or the whip then has to persuade the backbenchers to try to cut down their speeches, which doesn't go down too well when an MP has been sitting there for five hours waiting to be called.

If it was a more obscure issue I could probably get away with popping into the Chamber for the last couple of hours and still being called, but not today.

Hold the front page - local edition

Bristol Evening Post editor to marry a goat. You read it here first folks. Unless you are also a regular on the Bristol Blogger's site.

Hold the front page

Tomorrow's Observer has a front page story that Alastair Darling is going to focus help in his forthcoming Budget on the poorest families. Can't find it on the website yet but the story is, I assume, linked to a letter to the Observer from 110 Labour MPs, calling for any future fiscal stimulus to be targeted at those who need it most and are most likely to spend it. I happen to have a copy of the letter. (Because I wrote it).

"This month marks the 10th anniversary of the Labour Government’s pledge to eradicate child poverty. We have come a long way since then, lifting 600,000 children out of poverty, with another 500,000 to follow as a result of investment announced by the Chancellor, including an extra £1bn for tackling child poverty in Budget 2008: proof, if it was needed, of this Government’s determination to ‘Keep the Promise’ on child poverty.

As Labour MPs we believe that as the global economic downturn hits us here in the UK, it is time to reaffirm and strengthen our commitment to this country’s poorest children. We welcome the Government’s decision to bring a Child Poverty Bill before the House in this parliamentary session, which will enshrine the child poverty targets in law.

There will be many demands made of the Chancellor over the coming weeks as he counts down towards his Budget on April 22nd. We believe that targeting resources towards the poorest children and their families does not just make moral sense; it makes economic sense too.

A targeted fiscal stimulus, aimed at those who need the money most and are most likely to spend it, is the best way to help the UK out of recession. An extra pound in the pocket of a family living in poverty will do more to increase demand, to keep people in jobs, and to keep our businesses in business, than its equivalent in tax cuts for an affluent household.

We do not need to choose between keeping the economy afloat and helping families keep their heads above water. The most effective economic recovery package – giving the most to those who need it most - can do both.

We – along with the 10,000 people who attended the ‘Keep the Promise’ rally in Trafalgar Square in October, and many more of our constituents too - urge the Chancellor to keep child poverty in mind as he prepares his Budget, and to ‘Keep the Promise’ to children in the UK."

Probably not a great weekend for the mobile to pack up - and whoever it is who has left messages, I can't access them but perhaps a text might work? But anyway, looks like job done.

Cows - a follow up

I was obviously feeling far too mellow when I wrote my first piece. Now I've done whatever the opposite is of 'mellowed' and I'm more than a little cross, not least because I've since been to the newsagents and seen that this non-story graces the entire front page of today's BEP. So here's my letter to the editor. Let's see if it makes Monday's edition.

"I was very disappointed to see the front page of Saturday's 'Evening Post' ('Pull the Udder One'). The link between the livestock industry and climate change is a serious issue, accepted by many people, from the UN and Al Gore down. I raised this in Parliament last week because I believe the facts demand action, whether that be the farming industry exploring ways in which emissions can be reduced or individuals who are concerned about the environment choosing to limit their meat consumption, in the same way that others are choosing to use their cars less or take fewer flights.

It is simply irresponsible journalism, however, to conflate this issue with the story about Bristol City Council's proposal to keep a herd of cows on Stoke Park. As I made clear in my contribution to that piece, the appearance of another 100 or so cows in the Bristol area is neither here nor there when it comes to the question of global warming. The fact that only one vegan (not 'vegans' as your strapline suggested) was found who would condemn the proposal on those grounds speaks for itself.

Whether keeping a herd of cows is a sensible project for the Council to embark upon is another matter. I, for one, would suggest their energies might be better expended in sorting out the buses and fly-tipping, and I think most council tax payers would agree. When can we expect to see serious proposals put forward by the Council for a Quality Bus Contract so that we can bring in real competition to First Bus, and an Integrated Transport Authority for the Bristol area? The Government has done its bit, giving local authorities new powers under the Local Transport Act. Now it's time for the Council to do the job that council tax payers are actually paying it to do.

Kerry McCarthy MP."

Less is more

Do you ever walk round a supermarket and just feel totally overwhelmed by it all? By the choice, by the variety, by the tiny little differences in price or packaging or ingredients between each brand? Just switched on the TV and there's an advert for some kind of fancy Pringles deluxe brand, in fancy little bags and in fancy little flavours ... Pringles are Pringles, they should be in tubes so deep you get your hand stuck in them. We don't need fancy Pringles. (Although we do need a vegan version of the sour cream and onion ones).

Obviously there's a commercial motive behind this. Once you've maximised your 'bogstandard' Pringles customer base and established the brand, you start looking at ways of selling the same kind of thing for far more money. But it's all... just a bit much, isn't it? I find myself longing for the simple life.

Stoke Park - the new Heathrow?

The Bristol Evening Post has picked up on the livestock issue with some enthusiasm, headlining their latest piece 'Cows as damaging as airports'. I should make clear that wasn't a quote from me, and that I don't think a herd of 100 cows or so matters a jot in the big scheme of things. As for whether Bristol City Council should really be moving into the beef-farming business, that's another matter entirely. How about sorting out the buses first?

A new blogger in town

Apologies to Gordon Prentice, but if there has to be one new Lib Dem MP in Parliament after the next election (and there doesn't), please let it be this guy. I particularly like 'Blogging will be light' and 'Is Sadiq Khan MP a terrorist?' And this one 'Why not to become a journalist?' Why not, indeed.

Thanks to Blackburn Labour for alerting me to this work of genius.

Why peel your own grapes?

People are often a little sceptical when I talk about the future being in hi-tech, hi-skilled jobs and how the UK and Bristol are well-placed to take advantage of this. Well here's some proof. We should be really proud of such achievements.

Livestock's long shadow - the debate

Here's the early Hansard record of my Westminster Hall debate today on "The Livestock Industry's Impact on Climate Change" (which despite what all my colleagues have been saying to me today is not just about flatulent cows!) Always a bit weird reading things in Hansard as it doesn't convey the spirit in which certain things were said. The Minister requoted the line that becoming vegetarian does more to combat climate change than switching to a hybrid car, and then said she had no intention of doing either (although she did tell me afterwards that her ministerial car is a Honda hybrid). I made what at the time seemed like a humorous intervention, saying I wanted it put on the record that I drove a Smart car. In cold print that just looks completely off topic! Or a bit smug. Actually I said Smart car roadster - the roadster bit is very important, it's not one of those funny little things. Wonder if it's too late to amend Hansard? Or maybe I could bring it up on a point of order after business questions tomorrow? We have to set the record straight!

Bit disappointed with the Minister's response. In fact, I got the impression that the objective was to say as little as possible... or as little on the actual topic as possible. For example, this: "Traditionally, here in the UK meat is an important source of protein, iron, calcium, zinc and other vitamins and minerals. I have a lot of sympathy with those who say that there is no such thing as bad food, that it is the diet that we get wrong and that we need a balanced diet and must exercise greater portion control. Delia Smith was arguing for that just the other day and I think that she is right." Fine, yes, it's one viewpoint, but nothing to do with the topic we were debating. (Her boss, Hilary Benn, is of course a vegetarian).

The main problem was that the Minister is from Defra, and so was only briefed to talk about UK agriculture and to stick up for British farming, whereas as I made clear in my opening speech, it's a global issue, and it requires global action. Reducing the environmental footprint of UK agriculture is just tinkering at the margins. So we really need to take the debate to the Department of Energy and Climate Change. Of course what I should have done was raise all this during the passage of the Climate Change Bill, but I was preoccupied with other things at the time and was kind of hoping someone else would do so. Someone who's not a vegan.

Another angle on our current debate

Following on from my 'Are rich people more intelligent?' and 'And it's not just about qualifications' posts, here's an interesting piece from today's Guardian about black pupils at Oxbridge. The background of the two lads profiled for the piece seems to bear out what I, and some others, have already said. (A black girl from my sixth form college went to Oxford - she ended up presenting Blue Peter. Or I assume she went to my sixth form; her sister certainly did. Vicky Lickorish was her name.)

I was told an interesting statistic the other week. One third of all black boys who go to university go to one university, London Metropolitan in North London. Shocking really. Wonder why that is?

I get a feeling of foreboding as I post this... How many comments am I going to have to delete?

Just to put the record straight...

Sadie is on good form here, with her account of this week's PMQs as narrated by Fraser Nelson. And Sadie, I do agree with you and Olly's Onions about Henry Porter, I really do. Despite the last post.

Chalk it up

For once I find myself agreeing with Henry Porter on this case of the UWE student who has been arrested for chalking civil liberties messages somewhere on the pavement in Broadmead. (For non-Bristolians, that's Bristol West constituency, in the city centre). Although I also agree with Dr Jazz in the comments section, who neatly punctures Mr Porter's self-importance.

The Bristol Evening Post carries a more comprehensive account, which reveals that it was the second time the student had been caught in the act. The first time he'd been let off with a caution. I can't see how a criminal damage charge can stick though. What's been damaged? Who has been harmed?

The other interesting aspect to this story is that he says he was approached by four policeman. Last week the media was debating whether police officers ought to walk the beat alone. rather than in pairs. (On the same day I walked into work at Westminster along the South Bank, and saw four police officers standing together chatting, enjoying the sunshine... nice work if you can get it.) I can understand why police officers would want to patrol in pairs, at least in certain parts of town. But four officers to arrest a lad scribbling on the pavement with a piece of chalk? All it needed was a bucket of water.

I know my place...

Douglas Alexander has had three parliamentary aides since he became a Minister. Bob Blizzard, Lawrie Quinn and me. Don't know why I'm suddenly reminded of that...

And it's not just about qualifications...

Seeing as the post on getting more young people into university has generated so much debate, here's another idea I've been germinating for some time.

When I was first elected I hadn't reckoned on becoming an employer too, of a small team of staff and the occasional slave labour (aka interns). I started off with very good intentions. I wanted to take on bright kids from poorer backgrounds who had made it to uni against the odds; who hadn't been to private school or Oxbridge or had family connections in the media or politics; who didn't have anyone to pull strings for them. People who just needed someone to give them a break.

But actually, it didn't turn out to be that easy. If such people were out there, I found it hard to find them. I ended up taking on a succession of interns who had been to public school, or were from Surrey, or were called Toby, or played classical instruments... (revealing my prejudices here, I know). Who were, by and large, very good.

So where were the kind of kids I was looking for? Partly it goes back to the issue we were discussing before; such kids are far less likely to go to university, and so there simply aren't as many of them around. And even if they do pretty well academically, once they get out into the 'real world' their horizons are limited by a whole range of factors: who they know; what their family expects; what they see as achievable ambitions. And sometimes by a desire not to become the type of person they met at uni (ref. 'Common People' and 'Misshapes' and other works of genius by Jarvis Cocker).

So how do we get round this? One of the obstacles in their way is that these days it's almost not enough to have a degree. Most of the applicants who send CVs my way now have Masters degrees. They've done gap years, travelling the world and working in orphanages in Africa and on environmental projects in Central America. They've had 'interesting' summer jobs, in the media or in politics or at NGOs. (A definite plus sign in my book is having worked at a restaurant called something like 'the Golden Egg' or in the kitchen at Littlewoods or in a packing-factory, all of which I did as a teenager. And by the way, working as an unpaid researcher for George Osborne or campaigning for the Tory candidate in the Crewe & Nantwich by-election... call me fussy, but that's a definite no. True stories, those.)

And then of course, there's the issue of money. I know most students leave university with debts these days, but it's amazing how many can scrape together the funds to work as unpaid interns for 6 months, adding valuable experience to their CV. Of course it helps if they can still live at home, and have parents who are willing to support them. But what about those who can't do this? The Government - by which I mean David Lammy at the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills, and Liam Byrne at the Cabinet Office with his Social Mobility White Paper, and Alan Milburn who has been charged with looking at fair access to the professions - are looking at ways to support young people break through this glass ceiling. And it's not enough simply to make these opportunities available - we need actively to seek out young people who might benefit, but who would never think of applying.

I think we in Parliament should set an example, with our own internship scheme and bursaries. How about adding 10p onto the price of every pint of beer or glass of wine sold in the Strangers and all the other Palace of Westminster bars, to pay for it?

Assisted dying

I wrote a letter to a constituent yesterday who was worried that the Government was contemplating legalising assisted suicide. I reassured her that there was no legislation currently in front of parliament ... and then up pops Patricia Hewitt today with her amendment to the Coroners and Justice Bill, which is going to be debated on Monday.

I got an email from Patricia asking if I'd add my name in support of the amendment, but only saw it late in the afternoon after the House had risen, so was too late to do so. I would have. I'm in favour not just of ensuring immunity from prosecution for those who travel overseas with the terminally ill to these clinics, but of allowing euthanasia or 'assisted dying' here too. Obviously, as I also reassured my constituent in my letter, we could not go down this path without public debate and very stringent safeguards to prevent abuse, but in principle I'm in favour. The Prime Minister isn't, and I'm not entirely sure why. (And here's an earlier post on this).

Are rich people more intelligent?

Getting into a mini-debate with people (Tories, Chris Hutt) on Twitter about widening access to uni. If 50% or more of kids from private schools have always gone to uni, why shouldn't 50% of all kids aspire to do so? Some people (OK, Chris Hutt) are arguing that doesn't compute, that rich kids will be on average smarter than poorer kids, because intelligence is hereditary and people who are intelligent are more likely to be rich. By rich I think they mean middle-class, whereas I mean 'able to pay private school fees' - and yes, I know some people on fairly modest incomes go to great lengths to scrape together the money to pay school fees. Still, on balance, the products of our private school system are from wealthier backgrounds than those from what less cautious souls than I might term a 'bog-standard comprehensive'.

But are they smarter? I don't think so. For a start, intelligent parents are more likely to be left-leaning and thus ideologically opposed to private schooling. (This is an incontrovertible fact, based on many years' personal observation on my part). And many highly intelligent people don't go into highly-paid jobs either, choosing to work in the public sector, or the third sector.

To cut to my question though, as it's way past bedtime... How do you judge who is more deserving of a place at a top uni, let's say Oxford or Cambridge: the kid from a rough background at a poorly performing school who gets 3Bs - or the kid from a solidly upper-middle class family who goes to one of our top public schools and comes away with 3As? OK, the rich kid has technically achieved more and is better educated (in a narrow sense), but who has the greatest natural ability, and the most potential? And who needs that Oxbridge place the most?

Today and tomorrow and the next day

Got back to Bristol early today, to join Consumer Focus at Cafe Maitreya for the local launch of their 'Streetwise' report, which was based on case studies carried out in Easton, as well as wider polling. They chose Easton for the study because it represents a microcosm of a typical city, with so much diversity in such a small area. The report looks at issues like energy prices, mobile phones, all those consumer issues which affect people on low incomes. Spent an interesting couple of hours with Ed Mayo and Lord Whitty from Consumer Focus, talking about fuel poverty, social tariffs being offered by energy suppliers, 'green' electricity companies and various related issues. So much could be done to raise people's living standards if we could just sort out some of the bureaucracy and muddle involved in accessing basic services. Was told a few horror stories, for example the woman who moved into a flat where the previous tenant hadn't paid his gas bill. The energy company accepted she hadn't run up the debt but said that 'someone had to pay it'. And then cut her off, with a £500+ reconnection fee when she couldn't/ wouldn't do so! As I said to Ed Mayo, they might just as reasonably have gone out and mugged someone in the street for the money, on the same grounds: "well, someone has to pay it"!

Left Cafe Maitreya (the UK's no. 1 vegetarian restaurant, as voted by Guardian readers) with just enough time to pop into the Sweetmart (which is not a sweetshop) for essential supplies. Ended up being given a tour of the shop's extension and upstairs by the owner. Really excited about his plans, but can't remember which bits are public knowledge and which are under wraps at the moment, so will wait for the big launch in a few months.

Tomorrow I'm visiting Headway, the brain injury association, at Frenchay hospital. (This has been on the cards for months, and rescheduled a couple of times, but seems very timely now). I'm also meeting with the new Chief Executive of Bristol Airport, and on Saturday I'm taking part in a panel session with young people about terrorism and violent extremism in the rather unlikely setting of Bristol zoo. Also doing quite a bit of campaigning - out in St George, and possibly Frome Vale - and attending my GC. Then on Sunday it's Mother's Day - and watching Slumdog Millionaire on DVD with the lads and a curry!

A portrait of poverty

OK, I'm sort of watching Question Time although it's not particularly inspiring tonight, and tweeting a bit through it, so not really able to do a proper post but thought I should mention Amelia Gentleman's excellent piece in the Guardian yesterday, on child poverty, which focused on one household in Hartcliffe, south Bristol. I've been in touch with Amelia over the past month or two, and know she has been doing a huge amount of background work on this issue, for example, meeting with parents at the Single Parent Action Network in Easton. A good piece of well-researched journalism, which nails the myth that poverty is self-inflicted (e.g. those feckless single mothers spending it all on drink or fags or pizza) or is just about a kid not being able to afford designer trainers or the latest Nintendo. The most telling point in the article though is the mother's admission she is trying to pay off around £600 in bank charges and penalties; it's those things which really hit a family's finances for six.

Will be doing lots more on child poverty over the next few months, in the run-up to the Budget and the launch of the Child Poverty Bill. Watch this space.