The Jury is Out

Spoke yesterday in the debate on the second reading of the Fraud (Trials without a Jury) Bill.

This nasty little measure is aimed at removing the right to trial by jury in some fraud cases. Jury trial has been a feature of our legal system for eight hundred years. It is one of the cornerstones of our liberty and we tamper with it at our peril.

There were some powerful speeches on our side, most notably from Douglas Hogg and Richard Shepherd, who were both ferocious in their attack upon the Bill.

The Government benches were (astonishingly, given the constitutional importance of the issue under discussion) almost empty throughout the debate, although Bob Marshall-Andrews, the Labour MP for Medway and an eminent QC, demolished the Bill with an intellectually impeccable argument.

Needless to say, the Government won the vote on a three-line whip, but I have no doubt that we have not heard the last of the Bill. The Lords will hate it and the Government will probably, to its shame, have to rely on the Parliament Act to get it passed.

The most depressing moment of the debate came when Stephen Hesford, Labour MP for Wirral West, described the assault on liberty proposed by the Bill as simply a “case management” issue.

May God help us all.

Stepping it Up

I was asked last week by the Denbighshire Free Press to answer a set of questions for publication in their “It’s My Life” column. They were mostly quite fun to answer – what was my favourite food, what would I do if I won the lottery, and so on.

One of them stumped me, however; they wanted to know what I did for exercise and, to be honest, I couldn’t think of any meaningful exercise I do take. I walk to and from the House of Commons, of course – a round trip of over two miles – and must walk at least another mile around the endless corridors of the House every day. That lot would total about 5,000 to 6,000 steps, but I once read that you should try to walk 10,000 steps a day, and I certainly don’t do that.

Several of my colleagues are fitness fanatics, the most notable being Desmond Swayne, MP for New Forest West, who swims in the Serpentine every day before breakfast and thinks nothing of cycling thirty or forty miles. I certainly couldn’t aspire to his superhuman asceticism.

I suppose I really ought to join a gym, but, frankly fear that I would soon lose interest in pedalling furiously for half an hour, only to find myself precisely where I started.

Perhaps I should start to take a detour through St James’s Park on my way in to work, in an attempt to build up my tally of steps. We shall see.

The Return of the I-word

Remember when Dafydd Wigley led Plaid Cymru? Come on, I’m sure you do!

Well, Dafydd was a shrewd political operator – probably the best Plaid have ever had. He knew what was likely to appeal to voters and what wasn’t, which is why, against the odds, Plaid did so relatively well in the first Assembly elections in 1999 and rather worse in 2003, after he stepped down.

In particular, Dafydd knew that the Plaid commitment to independence was electoral poison in Wales, which is why, in the run-up to the 1999 elections, he was careful to distance himself from the i-word, to the extent of denying that it had ever been part of Plaid’s vocabulary.

In an interview quoted on the BBC website, he said:

"We haven't used the term full independence or independence at all in any stage in our history.

"We have used the term self-government and self-government within the European context as we believe that is the relevant term.”

But Dafydd is no longer minding the shop and things have gone from bad to worse for Plaid. That trend looks likely to continue, if last Thursday’s party political broadcast is anything to go by. Fronted by Adam Price MP, and set in an aptly deserted TV studio, not only did it employ the i-word liberally, but it also trumpeted the party as “the only socialist party” in Wales.

Dafydd Wigley, I’m sure, will be seething.

Take a look at Adam’s performance here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nshjVw8feV4 .

A Relaxing Weekend

An extraordinarily hectic day-and-a-bit.

Friday evening, attended the BBC Children in Need “Party for Pudsey” at Colwyn Bay’s Eirias Park. The good news was that North Wales was at last getting a little more recognition from BBC Wales. This was the Beeb’s main Welsh event; in previous years the big Welsh broadcast has tended to come from Cardiff, so well done, BBC!

The bad news was that it poured with rain, but that didn’t seem to put off the big crowd that had turned out to watch Ronan Keating and Jamelia perform on the open-air stage (which had to be hastily re-erected after it was blown down in Wednesday’s gales).

Saturday started with a surgery at Abergele, followed by a long, slow drive down the tortuous and exasperating A470 to Penarth, where I was speaking at an evening function. I then took the M4 to London, arriving at my flat at 3.00 a.m. to snatch a few hours’ sleep.

Now I am in the deserted House of Commons, working on a speech I must make on Thursday.

Set out on paper (or should it be pixels?), the above looks a crazy way to spend a weekend. But I love it and wouldn’t have it any other way.

A Tough Call

Spoke today at a rally in Colwyn Bay organised by Ian Turner, vice-chairman of Conwy Alzheimer’s Society. Ian is an old friend of mine and a passionate campaigner for the Society.

The rally was aimed at focusing attention on the announcement by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) that it will restrict the prescribing of Alzheimer's drugs to those in the “moderate” phase of the disease. Those in early and late stage Alzheimer’s will now not be able to have the medication.

Many of my constituents suffer from this dreadful disease. It impacts not only on the sufferers, but also on their families and carers, often over many years. The drugs NICE proposes to ration are not hugely expensive - £2.50 per day – but their use could make an enormous difference to so many people’s lives. Pfizer, the manufacturers of the drugs, have decided to challenge the NICE decision in the High Court, so there is still some hope that it will be reversed.

Everyone recognises that the NHS is not a bottomless purse; there has to be some degree of rationing. But the NICE decision on Alzheimer’s drugs has brought to the fore some very serious questions that need to be asked about the NICE appraisal process.

The most pressing issue is whether it is right for NICE to consider only the consequences of its decisions on the health and social care budget.

There is a strong argument for NICE also to consider broader issues of cost effectiveness, such as the impact on carers and families. In the case of Alzheimer’s drugs, this is huge.

And as I was Saying...

As if on cue, the remarks in my last post seem to have found support from Terry Grange, Chief Constable of Dyfed-Powys Police.

According to today’s Western Mail, Mr Grange has criticised the Government for its "‘hairy chest’ approach of using ever-tougher measures and rhetoric in the battle against crime”.

The Mail reports that he:

“criticised the constant introduction of new legislation, saying that there had been five Criminal Justice Acts in the past five years compared with about one in each Parliament before.

“The latest raft of legislation was due to repeal much of what was introduced by the same Government in 2001, he said.”

Well, quite. Mr Grange’s intervention is timely and I hope that the Government listens to what he has to say.

But I doubt it. The hallmarks of this Government are its bossiness and its uncontrollable instinct to micro-manage every facet of the public services. It just won’t trust the professionals to do their jobs, so it prescribes and proscribes, through legislation, exactly what they must and must not do.

And when it gets it wrong, as it often does, it tinkers with it still further, which is why the Criminal Justice Act 2001 will be unpicked and revisited in this session of Parliament, as if in some grotesque remake of Groundhog Day.

Legislative Overload

The new session of Parliament opened today with the sort of breathtaking ceremonial that would impress even the most diehard republican. I have always been a royalist, and the assembly of Queen, Lords and Commons was a tangible manifestation of the system of government that has served this country so well for so many centuries.

The coming session will be dominated by Home Office Bills. The Government appears to be determined to demonstrate the extent to which it is prepared to out-tough the Tories on immigration, terrorism and crime. Consequently, we are to be given yet more of the same old laws.

Since Labour came to power, we have had more than 50 Home Office Bills, much of it redundant legislation. 110 of the provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2000, for example, are still not in force; 17 were repealed before they ever came into force and another 39 have been repealed subsequently.

We are suffering from legislative overload, when often what is needed is simply effective enforcement of the existing legislation.

We should not forget that the hate-preaching cleric, Abu Hamza, was not convicted under any of the new race and religious hatred laws introduced by the Government. He was imprisoned after being found guilty of an offence under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

Cold Turkey or Chicken?

Another triumph for the booming Human Rights industry, undoubtedly the fastest growing sector of the UK economy. The Government has caved in to a claim by almost 200 prisoners who complained that they were deprived of their drugs when admitted to jail, forcing them to go “cold turkey”. Rather than take them on in the courts, HMG bottled it and has agreed to make unspecified payments to the claimants, rumoured to be as much as £10,000 a head.

The consequences of this are wholly predictable. Thousands of other prisoners will be queuing up for their ten grands, and the overwhelming likelihood is that the Government will pay them out, too.

Only last weekend, Gordon Brown was blathering self-righteously about the need to legislate to curtail free speech still further, after the leader of the far-right BNP, Nick Griffin, was cleared by a Leeds jury of using words or behaviour intended to stir up racial hatred. Wrong priorities, Gordon. The appalling Griffin’s rant was entirely odious, but even more repugnant to most people, particularly victims of crime, is the spectacle of Her Majesty’s Government supinely shelling out millions of taxpayers' pounds to convicted criminals.

If the Human Rights Act produces this sort of lunacy, it should be the first piece of legislation in line for fine-tuning.

The Sound of Silence

To Ruthin, to lay my wreath at the War Memorial. A large crowd is present, including a great number of children and young people. I am moved, as ever, by the sight of the many veterans who turn out as a mark of respect for their fallen comrades.

Every year, the attendances at Remembrance Day parades increase, probably because of the increasing number of conflicts in which British forces are involved.

Every year, too, we witness the vacuous posturings of people such as the news reader Jon Snow, who has refused to wear a poppy on screen. He complains about "poppy fascism". Frankly, I don't care if Snow wears a poppy or not, but to use the word "fascism" in connection with the Poppy Appeal is an unpardonable insult to all the brave men and women who risked and, in many cases, gave up their lives in the fight against Hitler.

Why can't the chattering classes learn that sometimes it can be much more sensible to keep silent - particularly at this time of year?

Poppycock

Spend the morning in the Bay View shopping centre in Colwyn Bay, helping the British Legion sell poppies.

The public are very generous and I enjoy speaking to the ex-servicemen and women, who give up so much of their time collecting for the Poppy Appeal every November.

I am told by Arthur, one of the sellers, that health and safety regulations mean that I must not help buyers of poppies with their pins: I might injure them and the Legion would be sued. I am incredulous; these people have risked their lives for their country, yet are now inhibited from helping people fix their poppies to their lapels by an overweening, meddling bureaucracy.

I am half minded to tell them to ignore these petty diktats; no court in the land would award damages against a poppy seller collecting for the Legion on Armistice Day. But I bite my tongue; the compensation culture has become such a depressingly corrosive feature of life in this country that I really can’t be sure.

A Round Peg

Rather remiss on the blogging front this week, owing to my unexpected promotion last Tuesday and the consequent media activity.

Was called to David Cameron’s office, where I was pleased and astonished to be offered the position of Shadow Minister for Wales. Called my sister, Clare, and told her the news that I was now a front bencher. She said, “Oh good, you’ll have a better view.”

Colleagues very kind and congratulatory. My good friend, Brian Binley, however, could not resist reminding me of the line in “A Man for All Seasons”, where Thomas More chides the perfidious Richard Rich, who has received the office of Attorney General for Wales as a reward for his treachery: “Why, Richard, it profits a man nothing to lose his soul for the whole world... but for Wales?”

I told Binley that he could have had gainful employment in imperial Rome as the man who rode behind the Emperor in his chariot, whispering: “Remember you are only mortal.”

I am delighted with the job, however. A Welshman as Shadow Welsh Minister. Sometimes, just sometimes, in politics, round pegs are put in round holes. Or, at least, I hope they are.

Green with Envy

Very early wake-up to do interview on BBC Good Morning Ulster programme. They had picked up my press release about Peter Hain's gaffe.

Before the interview started, they played a longer extract from Peter's piece on Wednesday, which had not been quoted on the Radio Ulster website. Not only did Peter utter the words quoted in my last post, he also said that the deal would make the people of Wales "green with envy".

This only reinforces my feeling that he can't carry on doing both jobs. He must decide which one he wants and leave the other.

Having said that, he was on the Today programme a little earlier trumpeting his credentials to be Labour Deputy Leader (and, one imagines, Deputy PM after Tony Blair departs), so perhaps this whole issue will be overtaken by events.

A Bit Irish

An enormous gaffe this morning by double-hatting Welsh / Northern Irish Secretary, Peter Hain.

Speaking on BBC Radio Ulster after the announcement of a Treasury deal aimed at smoothing the way towards establishing a Northern Ireland executive, a clearly delighted Peter said:

"No other part of the United Kingdom, including Wales which I also represent as its Secretary of State, has got anything like this package."

Concern has already been expressed about Peter’s dual role as Secretary of State for both Wales and Northern Ireland; it was put to him when he appeared before the Welsh Affairs Select Committee last week.

His latest comment, however, raises a much more serious concern; he is positively crowing that he has achieved a better deal for Northern Ireland than for Wales.

It is now absolutely clear that Peter Hain cannot continue trying to ride two horses at the same time. We in Wales need a Secretary of State who is batting for Wales, and Wales alone, and who will be a strong voice for Wales in the cabinet.

If Peter is happier concentrating on his Northern Ireland brief, he should consider handing over his Welsh portfolio to a colleague who can devote all his time and energy to Wales and to putting Wales first.

Diversionary Tactics

According to a report on today’s BBC News website, three North Wales Labour MPs have mounted a concerted attack on Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom, accusing him of wasting money on “gimmicks”, spending too much time writing his blog and, in effect, incompetence.

Now, I have criticised Richard Brunstrom in the past and he has criticised me. No doubt we will both do so again. However, I try to ensure that I when I do criticise him, it is on policy rather than personality. The Labour MPs’ attack is, in my view, unnecessarily ad hominem.

What appears to have roused their ire is Mr Brunstrom's comment on the force’s announcement this week of 120 redundancies among civilian staff and its warning that it faces a budget shortfall of £3 million. Mr Brunstrom blamed a reduction in funding, combined with a possible cap on council tax rises. He said that the Government had put "police finance into a really dreadful mess”.

I have no doubt there has been some unwise spending, as is the case in any large organisation, but the truth is that Richard Brunstrom’s opinion is, in essence, correct. North Wales Police is facing a massive financial crisis because of lack of support from the Labour Government, both here at Westminster and in Cardiff.

This will certainly affect its ability to fight crime. The work previously done by the redundant civilian staff will probably now have to be carried out by uniformed officers. Crime fighters will become pen pushers. Furthermore, there has been no recruitment of new officers for 12 months. Police numbers have fallen by 75 over that period. We have fewer bobbies and no rookies.

To add insult to injury, Police Minister Tony McNulty recently announced that the Home Office will pay the force no more than £100,000 to compensate it for the merger fiasco, leaving it with a serious shortfall.

And, because of underfunding, council tax will no doubt rise again next year, way beyond the rate of inflation, but even that will not be enough to redress the deficit.

This is, truly, a "dreadful mess" and is entirely of the Labour Government’s making. The vocal MPs, therefore, rather than getting personal with Mr Brunstrom, should be holding their own Government to account and demanding proper funding for the force.

But to do that would simply highlight their own party’s deficiencies, and that wouldn’t do in the run-up to the Assembly election.

It is far easier to slag off Richard Brunstrom.