Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Freedom of Information Act: Brown Will Sort It


Tory MP David Maclean rides a £3,300 quad bike through our Liberties, and below waves a red rag and some bull at Brampton, Cumbria."

The Guardian is correct to suggest that Gordon Brown is planning to sort out this unfortunate affair with a smart deal rather than a great clunking fist. Meanwhile as predicted opposition leaders and bloggers try to exploit the vote with a varying level of hypocrisy.

Most of us surely accept that MPs' private correspondence on behalf of constituents to public bodies should be protected? Most of us would surely wish to see more not less information on the detail of parliamentary expenses? Even with chronic scandalised misreporting.

As the Guardian report at the above link: "Mr Brown has come under criticism for appearing to support the measure at the same time as he has called for a more transparent government."

But writing in the Yorkshire Evening Post, Brown's sidekick-in-chief Mr Ed Balls said:

"Like many other MPs, I've been concerned that my correspondence on behalf of my constituents to other public bodies can be made public ... A private member's bill may not be the ideal way to go about settling this issue, but it's important we reach a conclusion whereby constituents are properly protected."
But he added:
"As for the proper public scrutiny of MPs' expenses and allowances ... the Speaker has said they will continue to be published. That's the right thing to do and I would like to see an amendment to that effect included in the bill."

Although only a quarter of Lib Demmers turned out for the vote, and Tories who turned up, including nine front benchers, voted for the unamended private members bill TEN-to-ONE, bothDave-id Cameron and Ming Campbell are competing in the outraged hypocrisy stakes

My information is that Labour MPs piled in on Friday to shut down the debate - the opposite of fillybustering - and that Gordon will sort things out to everyone's satisfaction - except perhaps the quad-biking David Maclean MP - with consenting adults of all parties in the Lords. A second piece of McDonnellism in just a couple of days.

Iain Dale has taken the opportunity to call Ming Campbell a liar for his saying Tory Front Benchers backed the bill. Only nine of them says Dale. But just TWO would have made Mr Campbell a truth-sayer, much as it goes against his party's "convictions". As Tories would have passed this bill by more than TEN-to-ONE on their own if Labour and Libs had all stayed home I think Mr Campbell whose people would have almost stopped them in fact has the slightly higher ground.

This has all been a rather clumsy way to get to a result - courtesy of a former Tory Chief Whip - but what ends well ends well. Full stop.

QUAD BIKE NOTES: Much as Libertarian PJC Blog disputes the legality of Mr MacLean's transport I think it is a completely fair use of public money, unlike his ridiculous Tory private members' bill which has so far cost us an estimated .... £xxxxxx?????

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Mini number plate on there. Eton?

Anonymous said...

The publication of constituents correspondence is a smoke screen. This is legally covered in the Data Protection Act. A letter in the Times today covers this aspect.

A bit late in the day for leaders to say they will sort it out. They should have had the intelligence to realise that the public see any move in this area as an attempt by MPs to protect themselves. There has been media coverage of this bill for months and also a petition on the No10 website. What is alarming is that many MPs voted for this bill without even knowing that the DPA covered the subject. They also felt that we would be appeased by a voluntary arrangement with the current speaker that MPs travel expenses would be published. They really insult me - no wonder people do not vote!

jailhouselawyer said...

Of course, Mr Dale would know a liar went he saw one...

Chris Paul said...

This Bill was/is Tory Tosh. I'm not sure quite why the PLP elements behaved as they did - perhaps Brown as leader and his whippery would have killed this one earlier? - but I don't take it at face value myself.

If constituents private mail and MP correspondence related to it are getting out then something needs to be done. Perhaps as Balls says this is not the best way or necessary but it's a bit of an avoidable storm in a tea cup which leaves neither main party looking good and LDs looking a bit half-hearted.

Anonymous said...

Ed Ball's piece in the Yorkshire Post is the usual NuLabor spin we have all become used to under TB.
To me this minor peice of legislation was a test for DC, and more importantly under "new management" NuLabor.
Both leaders could have stopped this bill in it's tracks.
With a whisper GB could have ensured his troops voted against this shoddy bill. Thereby showing we might be in for a new way under his leadership.
Similarly, DC could have led by example and actually bothered to turn up and vote. Instead we now see him trying to play ctach-up with public opinion.
I'm afraid to me both major parties have fallen at the first hurdle in getting my prospective vote.
And it wasn't a particular highly set hurdle!

Anonymous said...

I was surprised to see Tony Lloyd voted for the restrictions.

susan press said...

Chris, will you please stop using John McDonnell's name in vain and linking him to Gordon "Stalin" Brown. See my blog for an incisive piece by Alan Simpson.