|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
| Green belt campaign
update |
| Hi all – 1. Housing development – a startling refusal Armed with the 2,000 responses that many of you have sent about the proposed housing development, I contacted the consultants who are assessing the proposals, and asked them for a meeting to put the factual issues that so many of you have raised. Startlingly, they replied that they are under strict instructions from their clients not to talk to any local politicians. They give two reasons: first, they are looking only at the technical aspects (such as impact on traffic), so don't want to hear about political considerations; second, as so many people in Broxtowe have objected, it might bias the result if they listened to all our points. This seems to me completely unacceptable. Obviously a technical consultant doesn't want to sit through some sort of political harangue. But the consultants are coming in from London and assessing dozens of different locations in a few weeks. People who live locally are aware of technical issues – traffic, flooding, infrastructure, water courses, and more – which we need to be sure they're aware of. Otherwise, projects might get to the detailed planning stage with basic flaws overlooked. It's part of my job as a politician to represent people's concerns, including technical issues, and I'm frankly not willing to accept that the unelected Nottingham Regeneration Limited (which is a company set up by all the local councils to do this sort of study) should be able to exclude elected representatives from the technical assessment stage. And as for the argument that listening to the issues that I raise might bias the outcome, it's open to other MPs and their constituents to raise concerns too. It's really not our fault if some of them don't – perhaps because they have less reason for concern than we do? Do you agree? If so, may I ask you to write to NRL to say so, simply asking them to listen to the practical points I would like to make on your behalf? Their address is: Nottingham Regeneration Limited, Shire Hall, High Pavement, Nottingham NG1 1HN Incidentally, to reinforce the point that Government policy is for eco-towns and sustainable development, not just cramming houses into every spare bit of space, I raised it at Prime Ministers' Questions. You can see the clip here: http://tinyurl. com/23bkvo In case you wonder about the gale of heckling in the middle, that's an occupational hazard of PMQ at the moment – the Conservatives are routinely disrupting points made from the Government side, however serious the issue, the idea being to put the questioner off his/her stroke. As you'll see, it sort of works, but not for long. If you are one of the kind people who has volunteered to help deliver letters on this subject, you should get a little package with a request for delivery near you in the next few days. Thanks again for your help! 2. Treating people as individuals I've just written a longish article for the next Beeston Express on the sharia law issue. As lots of you read that I won't repeat it here (though if anyone wants to see it anyway, let me know and I'll email it), but essentially I'm saying that I've no problem with people resolving personal issues (such as money-lending or settling divorce proceeds) any way they like, so long as it's voluntary and doesn't conflict with general British law. On the other hand, having two sets of legally-binding laws for one country is a complete non-starter for all kinds of reasons, including simple practical ones. But I also made another point that I'd like to explore a bit here. The Archbishop was, it seems to me, responding to a demand that virtually nobody is actually making. I have lots of Muslim constituents. How many times have they asked me to make sharia part of the British legal system? None. Is there a campaign for it? No. More generally, can we say that Muslims in general, or Christians, or atheists, want any one thing? Have a look at this poll of Londoners from a few months back: http://tinyurl. com/2jphbh The striking thing is that the "all Londoners" sample and the "Muslim Londoners" sample have almost identical views on almost everything. They have different religions, but it's not making them think differently – about crime, tolerance, terrorism or pretty much anything else. This is important, because it often seems to me that half the problems of the world come from the human readiness to categorise people by group. At a trivial level, it doesn't really matter – Arsenal supporters don't in general really hate all Manchester United fans, they only pretend to. But once it gets into the political realm, it becomes dangerous, since we stop treating people as individuals and start thinking of them as part of a different tribe. And it's completely unnecessary. Of course we should be helpful to people of other religions if there are practical issues that don't cause problems for others – if Jewish employees want to take Saturday off instead of Sunday, any reasonable employer will try to make it possible, and it's simply thoughtless to insist on serving pork as the only option in a canteen where the workforce is partly Muslim. But we shouldn't go looking for divisive issues, and the Archbishop's mistake, it seems to me, was that he's reinforced the tendency to think in tribal terms. His remarks, well-meaning though they were, have increased the number of people who are afraid that Muslims are collectively making demands on non-Muslims. In reality, the Muslims I know just want to get with their individual lives, like nearly everyone else. Meanwhile, the law should protect us as individuals with a right to be different from each other. I don't want a Christian State, or a Muslim State, or any other theocracy – just a decent society where we can all do what seems to us right, as well as we can. So, I believe, do most people of all faiths and none. 3. Lots of short items To conclude, a few items I've been asked to pass on: - South Broxtowe (Beston, Stapleford, Bramcote, Attenborough, Chilwell, Trowell) police report further progress: offences down 18% on last year (5263 victims down to 4332); burglary, car theft and criminal damage were all down by over 20% over 2007, encouragingly following the start of neighbourhood policing teams. Dwelling burglaries are now fewer than one a day in the whole of south Broxtowe (20,000 homes). The fly in the ointment is "common assault", with an increase last year of 33, many of them domestic violence (the more serious cases of wounding and aggravated bodily harm have fallen). The police are looking at targeting repeat offenders and giving vulnerable people personal attack alarms. - If you'd like email updates like this from my colleague in the European parliament, Glenis Wilmott, drop an email to maggie@gleniswillmo tt.org.uk and she'll add you to the list. Say I sent you! - Are you involved with a local school? If so, might they like to have 10 free chess sets? There are no strings – it's an offer from the English Chess Federation sponsored by Holloid Palstics (who are giving away 250,000 sets), and the school can take it up by contacting them at Office@englishchess .org.uk - LibDem councillor Adele Brunton asks me to plug the thriving Oxfam bookshop in Beeston. I'm glad to – it's got a large enough choice that you can shop there for pleasure rather than only because you want to support the cause, and it's an interesting experiment – a charity shop that just focuses on books. - Would you use an e-petition system to press issues in the House of Commons? There's a consultation going on until the 18th (I know the web page says the 15th, but apparently they've extended it) at http://forums. parliament. uk/e-petitions/ index.php? index,1 A few quick updates: 1. A few more hands this week? Thanks to everyone who has been helping deliver 15,000 letters about the housing issue this week. We could do with a tiny bit more help in the coming week for Chilwell (we need about six person-hours in total to complete the coverage). So far we've only asked people to do their own areas, but if anyone can do an hour or two in Chilwell this week please let us know (0115-9430721) . As before, this is a non-partisan thing, relating only to the housing issue and advertising the... 2. Chilwell Forum launch This will be at the Chilwell School on Friday, 7pm for 730 (i.e. doors open at 7, we start talking at 730 sharp). I'll brief people about where the housing issue stands, and give an update on what happens after the tram inquiry too, and then we'll throw it open to anyone who wants to say anything about Chilwell. Ideally I'd like to find a few local co-organisers to help set up future such events. 3. Small Print Bill My 10 Minute Rule Bill outlawing the use of small print to qualify contracts and advertising comes up on Tuesday week. It's being backed by RNIB, Age Concern, Help the Aged and the plain English Campaign. 10 Minute Rule Bills nearly always have a gruesome death in limbo, since they don't get Parliamentary time to complete their passage, but the point is to raise an issue - in this case particularly the rising tide of duff "you have won a prize" letters which are deceiving ever-larger numbers of vulnerable people, with get-outs in tiny print ('prizes subject to availability, recipient must collect in person from Bognor Regis'). 4. GP contracts There are two parallel controversies going on about GP surgeries. One is the basic contract. The previous contract was generally seen as pretty generous to GPs, to the point that the British Medical Association negotiators gave interviews expressing their incredulity that they'd been offered it. This time round, however, the Department of Health has asked GPs to have one three-hour surgery out of normal working hours. The BMA opposed this and offered a two-hour surgery. Negotiations became deadlocked and there have been clouds of rhetoric about it, including a controversial leaflet by one local surgery which suggests that it's all part of a government plan to replace GPs with large private companies and urges all patients to write to me (only three have done so). The BMA have now hinted that they might be able to live with the proposal, though, and is currently consulting its members. A separate debate is going on about whether group practices should be encouraged to have specialists on the premises, so that things that you might normally need to have done in hospital could be done in the surgery. Where possible, single-handed GPs would be encouraged to group together with others, as is already the case nearly everywhere in our area (but obviously not practical in a remote village). There are clearly pros and cons in having group practices, but in urban areas they seem here to stay and most people do in reality see the same GP each time, unless they need in a crisis to see whoever is available immediately. As group practices are the norm already here, I don't think our area will be much affected, but it's more an issue in London where there are apparently many single-GP practices. While I think some of the rhetoric is frankly silly, it does seem a pity that relations between Government, Trusts and GPs have got so strained, given that financing of surgeries is better than ever and we are all ultimately on the same side (patients!). I've urged the Department of Health negotiators to be as flexible as possible, and asked local GPs to try to influence the BMA team similarly. 4. Seal survey The local animal welfare campaign Respec tfor Animals (run by two Gedlnig Labour activists) have asked me to pass this on: The European Commission is considering banning all seal products that would save millions of seals from a horrible fate. You can help convince the EU to end the cruel seal product trade now by taking part in the European Commission's public consultation. The consultation takes the form of a survey. It will take you a few minutes to answer the complete survey, but not all questions are mandatory. If you only have time to answer one question (aside from your personal details, which you must fill in to participate) , please make sure that you answer the final one: "What would you suggest to decision-makers at the European level on possible legislative measures to regulate the placing on the market of seal products?". Please choose the last option: "The placing on the market of seal products, wherever they come from, should be banned." You can take the survey here: http://ec.europa. eu/yourvoice/ ipm/forms/ dispatch? form=seals Some of the questions may seem confusing. If you would like additional information on some of the questions to help guide you through the process this can be found at http://www.bansealt rade.org. However, this should be seen as advice only: it is important that you give your own opinion and that you express your views in the way you feel most appropriate. It is really important that as many people as possible take part in this consultation so please ask anyone you know to give just a few minutes of their time to help the seals. Best wishes Nick Best wishes, Nick
|
