Paul Flynn - Read My Day

Stop ennobling party hacks

Stitch-up

The late Roy Hughes may provide posthumous evidence on the the inquiry into honours.

He was the Newport MP with a record period of 33 years service.  His career was dominated by his uncompromising defence of the working classes to the extent that he objected to his union supporting teachers and lawyers as MPs. His biggest public controversy was when he appeared to defend the Munich killing of Israeli athletes on the ground of the worse suffering of Palestinians.

There was surprise when he accepted a peerage after being re-selected to fight his Newport East seat. He was later  frank in describing the details of the offer. Gordon Prentice MP raised the issue of party hacks who are kicked upstairs. He suggested that the HOLAC, the appointing body, should vet the political lists of peers submitted by political parties. Without quoting names, he mentioned the large number of MPs who resign shortly before General Elections to reappear  later as Lords. Expert Meg Russell agreed and suggested that parties should submit longer lists so that an element of choice can be made by Holac.

Gordon asked whether the best legislators are being appointed or is the House of Lords used as dumping ground for party problems. Without naming Roy, I suggested that evidence was available in his frank admissions of how he was ennobled. He said that when he first hinted that he might be prepared to stand down from his Newport East seat, 'They came at me like elephants'.  Tony Blair was searching for a seat for Tory MP defector Alan Howarth.

I can confirm Roy's account because I was told by Welsh Shadow Secretary Ron Davies that Roy was going. His next sentence rocked me back on my heels as a total non-sequitur. 'You are well disposed towards Alan Howarth, aren't you?'  I was and I had welcomed his joining the Labour Party because of his compassionate views on Social Security. The juxtaposition of Ron Davies' two sentences was persuasive evidence that Roy was being elevated in order to find a seat for the Tory defector.

The shortlist for the Newport East seat was manipulated to ensure that Alan Howarth was competing with three of the weaker candidates. The present splendid Assembly Member for Newport West Rosemary Butler and the MP for Cardiff West were both taken off the short list because they were strong threats to Alan's selection. The stitch-up worked Alan became the MP for Newport East and Roy became Lord Islwyn.

There are hundreds of example of all the main parties using the Lords to solve their own problems rather than appointing the best qualified legislators. In any reform there might be some limits on the choice of political parties. Few Lords are prepared to reveal the murky details of how they were chosen. Roy's frankness may well advance a worthwhile reform.

Lobbyists to be probed

Persuaders

'Lobbyists' no longer exist. The name died of shame.  But the business of persuaders-for-hire continues.  Lobbyists have metamorphosised themselves into political or public affairs consultants. Their approach is subtler but their purpose is still subversive.

So much so that the Public Adminsistrtion Committee are today launching a probe into the murky trade.

The crude bribes of the recent past, trips, meals and money, have been replaced by intelligent targeted flattery.

I reply to most lobbyists’ letters with a standard abusive reply.  It explains to them that lobbying organisations are an ugly, anti-democratic and corrupting incubus that haunts the British body politic.

I helpfully suggest that their clients should directly approach MPs because using lobbyists as a conduit only adds to their costs for no worthwhile purpose.

That is precisely what has happened.  At least one firm does nothing but that. They are still lobbying but they call themselves a ‘Result Orientated Political and Public Relations Agency’, or a ROPPRA.  They employ 60 people of which 50 are ‘consultants’. They do not approach any MPs directly.

Two covert techniques are used.  For good causes, ROPPRAs draft letters to MPs that are then sent under the letterheads of the charity.  Each letter is drafted to appeal to the personal convictions of  each MP based on  knowledge of constituency interests  and  parliamentary activity.  Hansard is trawled to discover what levers need to be tugged to excite MPs’ devotion to the cause on offer.

Many of the campaigns seek extra funding for charities. Most MPs are unaware that a large slice of the cash that may be gained has already been sliced off by the ROPPRA’s fee.  The professional persuaders have become so skilful, it is not possible to detect their expensive fingerprints on appeals from worthy groups. They have failed if their cover is blown.

Bad causes require greater subtlety. When Mega-greed PLC want to persuade MPs that their constituents need more of their harmful, polluting products, a ROPPRA will suggset the best conduit to parliamentarians..  Few MPs  promote greed or pollution publicly. They would smell a  rat if a letter from a ROPPRA arrived.

Mega-greed and ROPPRA together seek out constituents whose jobs or pensions are under threat unless Mega-greed expands. The most irresistible letters for MPs are handwritten ones that carry the postmarks of their constituencies. Trade Unions are enlisted to approach Labour MPs and Trade Associations are pressurised to contact Tories.

It’s the low key vicarious alternative to the frenetic direct lobbying of the recent past. Another reason for the decline in activity is the fading influence of backbenchers. Power is now concentrated in the hands of a tiny group of people close to the Prime Minister. The key decision to go ahead with the Millennium Dome was taken by less than half the Cabinet.  Formal or informal contacts with the Prime Minister or his inner circle are now greatly prized by the persuaders.

MPs are no longer the main focus of their work.  But lobbying stills prospers, profitable even from its hidden bunker.  Occasionally, the worst form of pre-Nolan abuse breaks through. Two years ago I was forced to draw to the attention of the House authorities  abuses by  lobbyists  registered as ‘researchers’ to members.

One had a pass as an unpaid researcher to an MP.  He told me that he did “some work” for the member, but received a “living wage” from one of the four registered interests he had as an individual freelance influence.  All were commercial firms with murky reputations.

One of the firms is notorious. Their cheating of their customers has been  universally condemned by the national press. The freelance lobbyist improperly used the House’s internal mail  to send  old press cuttings  attacking  the character of the leader of a group  campaigning against the accused firm.

In the past some MPs allowed lobbyists to work under the guise of  ‘researchers’.  It gave them privileged access to the facilities of the House.  This practise has probably now ended following the sleaze scandals.

MPs are so alarmed at possible sleaze accusations, they refuse to accept invitations even to entirely legitimate events. The IPU and CPA find it increasingly difficult to recruit members for visits abroad. A character-building, blameless, fact-filled visit to Finland in January might be judged by voters to be as corrupting as a weekend in the Paris Ritz.

Going underground has not reduced the malign affect of political lobbying. It still exerts great power and influence on legislators.   Rich and powerful bodies still buy extra advantages for themselves. They corrupt the political process by ensuring that the attention of politicians is directed to the causes that can pay the biggest fees, not those that have greatest needs.

The Select Committee already has some hair raising evidence of dubious practices. I look forward to asking a qusetion or two.

A voyage of serenity and euphoria?

Pharmageddon  doom

There were several follow-up articles in the specialist medical press to the Independent on Sunday's fine report on Pharmageddon. One by Steve Head questioned what I said. This is my response.

If Mozart had been on Ritalin or Beethoven on anti-depressants, we would probably  never have heard of them. The seductive fable of  the Pharmas is that life should be a voyage of serenity and euphoria from cradle to grave. Their balms will protect against all grief, pain, anxiety and desolation. They falsely promise escape from the inevitable trials of life in exchange for supplicant dependency on their products.

Disregarded are the supreme creative force of suffering, the pain-displacement by work and stress and the escape from dependency through self-generated coping with adversity. None of those are profitable.

Pharmageddon is when medicines produce more ill-health than health, and when medical progress does more harm than good. It may be coming. Each year the drugs bill grabs a bigger chunk of the NHS budget - impoverishing other services.

Of course I agree with your correspondent Steve Head on the miraculous benefits of modern pharmacology. But many of these achievements have been  subverted and perverted by the pharmaceutical industry in pursuit of greed. The argument is not with the science but with the marketing and promotion of drugs of questionable value. History should encourages a little humility.  For depression, Freud dispensed to patients, family and himself the wonder drug cocaine. Its favoured successor was bromide which created its own psychosis. Then came the mass disasters of benzos,the problematical tri-cyclics and SSRIs. All were promoted as beneficial, non-toxic, free of harmful side effects or risk of dependency. That's a good century and half of error and damage.
25 million
Still the depression-creation industry flourishes. GlaxoSmithKline told me  that 25 million people in Britain should be on anti-depressants at some time in their lives. "Sadder today than yesterday? ...take a pill and a have a day off.". It will at first makes you even sadder, give a buzz but perhaps create dependency.

We have been conditioned to believe that life  is empty without a malady. My wife has suggested a new illness, Syndrome Deprivation Syndrome for those poor souls who lives are  ailment-free. No symptoms to compare with those afflicted by newly invented diseases of  social phobia, attention deficit hyperactivity syndrome, compulsive shopping disorder, allergy to the 21st century etc. The definition of obesity is drawn so widely that it includes Russell Crowe, Brad Pitt and George Clooney.

GSK's branding of Irritable Bowel Syndrome is instructive. A three-year medical education campaign was launched as the strategy for the drug Lotronex. The aim was to establish irritable bowel syndrome to doctors as a significant and discrete disease state and to convince patients that IBS is a common and recognised medical disorder.

Articles were planted in the medical journals; the health correspondents were recruited to write about Lotronex.  There were plans to establish patient groups. In the event, the drug was withdrawn after serious and fatal adverse side effects. The food and drug administration in the United States said that using the drug to treat the 95% of patients in whom the condition was not serious- would do more harm than good. The drug has gone but the newly packaged disease lives on.
Vioxx
My own personal experience has reinforced my caution. I have had the good luck and sense to refuse prescriptions for Eraldin, Opren and Vioxx. The news of Vioxx as the source of  '144,000 heart attacks and strokes' in the USA was posted on an arthritis charity website alongside a note saying that the site had been refurbished with help from Vioxx manufacturers Merck. The charity's  advice was 'Don't Panic- get another painkiller.'  Panic would have been the sane reaction by anyone taking a drug that might kill them.

Hysteria

Pharmas are subverting charities and patients groups with donations. Whose advice can we trust? A few years ago, a patient under instruction from a Pharma-employed PR Company pressed me to push for Tarceva to be prescribed for pancreatic cancer. The patient had been given a wildly optimistic account of the drug. I had a constituent with pancreatic cancer and I hopefully researched the drug. Objective evidence at the time was that it costs £16,000 a year, increased life expectancy by 12 days and caused serious adverse effect in 10% of users-including death.

But objective truth is absent from these hysterical campaigns that cynically employ attractive sympathetic patients to drum up support for NICE's rejected drugs. To the tabloids all new drugs are miracles-ignored are their  side effects or limited utility. Expectations are raised  to undermine the rational decisions of Nice. Unfortunately politicians find the defence of a NICE judgement puny when confronted with the wild exaggerations and unscientific blackmail of the baying tabloid wolves. They are the outriders of Pharmageddon. To frustrate their forward charge we need to campaign of demedicalisation. Society's childlike faith in medical outcomes should be undermined with objective evidence untainted by Pharma-greed.

Foul-up or conspiracy?

Peter Hain stirred thing up yesterday - probably accidentally.  He said that there should be no referendum on full powers for the Welsh Assembly for four years. The One Wales agreement which is the basis of the Labour-Plaid coalition states that there should be one before then,  in the life of the present Assembly's term of office.

This is view that Peter has always had. As a devolutionist with a proven record, he is nervous of premature referendum before public opinion is overwhelmingly behind  devolution. That is the reason for the delay, not a surrender to anti-devolutionists who are looking increasing desperate.

The Tories are falling into the slippery slope trap. Demanding the same advantages for England that Scotland and Wales enjoy, they are powerfully making the case Parliament for Wales. Unionist Tories are helping the devolution process. They know they are going to lose support when the LibDems get a credible leader. The charmed life of the SNP in Scotland is also lubricating the advance of devolution. It now seems inevitable that Wales is on the way to having a full parliament.

The 'One Wales' agreement is between the Labour Party in Wales and Plaid Cymru. Backwoodsmen in the Commons and Lords Labour ranks were apoplectic about it. They were squashed by the Welsh Labour Party  who knew that it was unpalatable - but the best option on offer. In spite of whines about the new coalition and Convention, the power has now flowed down the M4 from London to Cardiff. Some MPs are wounded as they see their influence and power ebbing away. But for the first time for centuries Wales can take its own decisions on the soil of our own county. This will be settled in Cardiff and not in London.

Silent David and David rent-a-quote

The Two Davids

The people of Gwent elected two MPs named David Davies in 2005. One is known as Dai the other as Top Cat, because of his initials T.C. Both have been hyperactive this week. Dai called for fewer Welsh MPs, Top Cat self-indulged in a vacuous rant.

David Davies Monmouth is living down to our lowest expectations of him.

A populist rent-a-quote at the Welsh Assembly, he won acres of  publicity for parroting the right-wing absurdities of the tabloid press. There were signs in his early days in Westminster that he wanted to grow up from schoolboy politics and create a respected persona. He appeared to be ashamed of his 'Daily Mail personified' tag which won headlines but left his fellow Tory MPs smirking.

He failed to changed. Of the three Welsh Tory  MPs he is the least impressive and was not considered when a frontbench appointment was made. Parliament has always had publicity gluttons who will mouth the quotes invented by tabloid journalists. Their careers amount to zilch in achievement.

His current campaign is to put more people in prison. for longer periods. All sentences should be longer without remission. That's always a winner with the unthinking  public. David sees himself as the voice of the common man. He is the drain down which the lowest common denominator of public bigotry and ignorance flows. Mostly his statements of the obvious echo the bigotry the common moron. On his website an article describing a very thinly attended adjournment debate is illustrated misleadingly with a picture of a packed Houses of Commons. His latest intervention is to demand  a heavier sentence for a man who committed a terrible crime against a child. The man was sentenced to 12 years in prison and his wife for six. By any standards these are as severe sentences. Probably the heaviest  the law allows. Everyone shares the horror at the crime. Nobody needs a MPs to tell us they did something dreadful.

There is little or no chance that these sentences can be extended. So what's the point? The only explanation for politicians braying off in these circumstances in their own aggrandisement. This is attention seeking., not grown-up politics, David.

Dai Davies

Perhaps unwisely Dai Davies has to-day called for fewer Welsh MPs. As an undistinguished junior MP  with a record of relative inactivity, he is not best qualified to pontificate. The People's Voice for Blaenau Gwent has been mute in parlaiment.

He spoke only seven times in the last year - but, to be fair, always to good effect. His regular attendances in his corner seat in the Chamber are impressive. He probably sits through more debates than any other member. But his voting record is an atrocious 50%. That by far the lowest of any Gwent MP and compares very unfavourably with Jessica Morden had a great deal of time off maternity leave in the year but managed a 66% voting record.

Possibly Dai is present and does not always vote. It's easy for most MPs because whips tell us whether we for or against. When Gwynfor Evans was the sole  independent MP his most difficult task was finding what the votes were all about. It is far from easy as the order paper is written in impenetrable legalistic language.

Dai may protest that he may have been present but there is no way to abstain. There is. That's to do a 'David Taylor' trick and vote 'for' and 'against.'  That way your presence is recorded. It's tricky explaining to constituents how their MP can be one both sides of the question, but it's the only way until we legislate for abstentions.

Dai has submitted a formidable 363 written questions but his voters would be astonished to learn that most are about matters foreign or nuclear. I have never heard him ask an oral question nor does he appear to submit them. He has made a number of interventions on the industrial workers subject on which he has specialist knowledge. 

Dai has earned respect for his quiet dignified approach to his work. But his level of parliamentary activity is below par.

Crackberry

The Blackberry is addictive.

I've had mine a month now and I'm hooked. Just in time to use in the Chamber. Inevitably the fuddy duddies objected. They were propping up the fable that speeches in the Chamber enjoyed an audience of attentive MPs hanging on every word. That's true for key speeches by frontbenchers and those by backbenchers who are have respected expert knowledge. But there acres of dross, verbal junk intended to inflate egos, impress constituents or just to use up debating that would otherwise be taken by opponents.

There is a convincing theory that no-one listens to the first answer that Ministers give to an oral questions. The House in general switches off. They know it will be bland and defensive answer. Even the questioner will not hear it because they will be preoccupied with rehearsing the supplementary question they are about to ask. I treasure past examples.

Proof of this was provided by Ynys Mon Plaid Cymru Member Ieuan Wyn Jones in 1996. He had asked how many representations the Minister had received on the threatened closure of Benefit offices in Wales.

'A number' said Social Security Minister and Monmouth MP Roger Evans ' contemptuous retort. Ieuan said .... "I am grateful to the Minister for that reply." As the answer was the Parliamentary equivalent to "Get Stuffed' it's reasonable to conclude that Ieuan was not listening to Roger 's put-down.

Daringly Peter Bottomley in May 1986 again proved the theory by dragging extraneous information into oral replies to Transport Questions. He had a bet with, among others, John Major that he could intersperse extraneous information into oral questions.

He had an oral question on the unpromising subject of 'Bus Lanes in London.' He gave three supplementary answers to experienced Commons performers including super backbencher the late Tony Banks.

Incredibly he weaved into his replies the information that "Anne Boleyn had six fingers on her left hand", that "Burkina Faso means the land of wise men' that "Frogs eat with their eyes shut." and that "13% of people share their bath water."

No-one noticed Nobody asked whether he had gone off his rocker. He won his bet.

Thinker Gordon.

Gordon the losers of the last two weeks dog fight is emerging as a politician of great substance.

He wrote his speech this week on liberty. Contrast its cleverly expressed profound ideals  with the infantile drivel of parliamentary exchanges and hope.

The Conservative poll rating is sliding. They will drop into freefall when the LibDems get a credible leader. Hope twice.

Jess shames the Davids

Value for money

If politicians can feel shame, the two Gwent Davids should be turning red today. They may be feeling perky with the publication of members expenses, but the real 'value for money' comparison is woeful.

Some credit can be given to the Argus in that they attempted to give some details of MPs expenses. Remarkably all the figures seem to be accurate. In the past they mixed up Paul Murphy and Jim Murphy and said that Paul had claimed £17,000 in travel costs when he had a nil claim. But the Argus nailed the popular lie of the tabloids that MPs are 'pocketing £200,000 in expenses.'

All Gwent MPs are in the general average of all 650 MPs, with no high or low spenders. The main differences are in staffing costs.  Independent MP Dai Davies was Gwent's cheepie. He underspent  his staffing allowances by  £19,000 and David Davies Monmouth by £34,000. Good ? Probably not. There is another side to this. It can be said that their underspend denies local people the chance of  jobs and the constituency the advantages of an office that is fully staffed. £19,000 could create a reasonably paid additional job in Blaenau Gwent and a great improvement in the service provided to local people. Two jobs could be created in Monmouth. Money spent on MPs staff is beneficial.  Would Dai prefer the cash to be spent on Trident, nuclear power, an Iran War or other subjects of his pqs?

For the first time ever MPs staff have decent salaries for their skilled work.  I have enough work for two or three extra staff and I do not understand  why any MPs should underinvest in staff.

For a fair judgement of MPs value for money a comparison should also be made on their work output. This is published on They work for you.com. While it's impossible to accurately assess the value of an MP, in  terms of parliamentary activity, the two that underspend on staff seems to be the least active in  parliament.

David Davies MP has voted less often that the average in parliament at only 56%. Jessica Morden who gave birth during this period managed a creditable 66%. Inevitably Jessica had time off for the birth and her maternity leave. As member of the Council of Europe I miss many divisions but my record is better than David's or Dai's. The People's Voice MP has a woeful record of only 50% of votes and seven speeches. That's poor. If either of the cheepies or their friends start to crow about allowances, ask them about value for money.

Swords
The House of Commons is infested with quaint obsolete traditions that persist in the face of common sense and cost.

The love of  the past and a delight in the novelty discourages any crude attempts at modernisation. A book could be written about the crazy rules that are still in force and act a trip wire to the unwary. I was asked by a radio producer if I would try to enter the Commons chamber wearing a suit of armour. I declined on the grounds that my constituents prefer a serious MP rather than a practical joker. There is Commons rule that forbids anyone entering the Chamber wearing a suit of armour. The producer wanted to teat whether it still operated. Being expelled from the Commons for a juvenile jape  would be long remembered.

Another probably everlasting absurdity is the pretence that MPs wear swords. When a new carpet is ordered for the Commons Chamber, two broad red lines are woven into the green. If MPs cross those lines in debate, they are 'out of order.' The lines are two swords lengths and one foot apart. We can wave our swords at opponents but not connect.

In the members cloakroom under our coat hangers is piece of purple ribbon on which to hang our swords. These are renewed every year. I was amused to see last week that someone has used one of them for their intended purpose.

British Vietnam

NATO could be on the brink of collapse.

British, Canadian, Dutch, and Estonian troops are paying the bloodprice of the war in Southern Afghanistan. We have lost 82, Canada 71, and the Netherlands 11.

Frantic pleas are being made to Germany, France and Italy to undertake their share of the burden and operate in the dangerous south.  Their politicians and public are reluctant to throw away the lives of more of their citizens. Germany has already lost 22 soldiers in their 'safe' area.

NATO has always been victorious in their operations. Canada and the Netherlands are under great pressure to pull their troops out as the realisation that this is an impossible mission spreads. If that happen the UK and the USA may end up being the final large states engaged.

The unity of NATO would be shattered and we would be hurtling to the hell of a British Vietnam.

Guilty until proved innocent

.

Newsnight, no.
A Guardian article today alleged that Lord Doug Hoyle accepted payment to introduce a lobbyist to a Defence Minister.  I have no way of knowing whether this is true. Being against judging people to be guilty unless first proven innocent I want to remain silent on the issue at the moment.

However a fortnight ago, I was called by the Guardian. They outlined the alleged circumstances and I said that this would be wrong because Peers or MPs should not be for hire. The Guardian tagged my comment to the bottom of the Doug Hoyle story.

I have no complaint because I am keen to raise interest in my Select Committee's new inquiry into lobbying. This afternoon I did an interviews with Carolyn Quinn for the PM programme on the condition that it was about the general danger of new lobbying rather than putting the boot into Lord Hoyle.

Newsnight asked me to appear live on their programme tonight. It is clear that it will be more Hoyle baiting. I declined. The subject is a massive one of subtle influence being wielded by the rich and powerful behind the scenes at Westminster. This is a much bigger subject that what alleged in Hoyle's case. Perhaps someone else might agree to appear on Newsnight.

I'll watch with interest.

Fun pain
Does something happen to hunters' brains? Are they all fools or do they just think the rest of us are?

I had a preposterous e-mail today that's reminiscent of the celebrated ones all Labour MPs had during the fox hunting ban debate. A favourite was

'As master of the South Wilts Foxhunt and a lifelong Labour supporter, I must tell you I will never vote Labour again if the ban goes through. Yours etc, Nigel Chumleigh -Traveston.'

In almost all cases they came from constituencies where Labour has never won an election. Today's letter (see yesterday comment) purports to come from a serving soldier who has been persuaded to take up fox hunting because I am against bringing back the cruelty into the sport. Huh ? I cannot detect any rational thought process here. If Tommy Atkins is genuine, I will happily eat crow but I believe I detect the scent of  raving animal tormentor out to try a new desperate ploy. 

He has overdone the war hero claim. How many soldiers have served in Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Iraq (3 times) and Afghanistan? 

Is anyone so naive to  think that I will  believe a syllable of this and drop my animal welfare campaigning ? It's possible, he does. Anyone who thinks that subjecting animals to pain for fun is a reasonable sport is capable of believing anything.

Brainiacs
The sound of the clash of intellects  resounded along the lower Committee Corridor yesterday.

The Public Administration Committee were continuing our honours probe in the appropriate  David Lloyd-George room. Two of our witnesses are from Brunel University but we were discreetly informed that do not always see eye-to-eye of all academic matters.

Tactfully we seated, House of Lords expect Dr Meg Russell, between Professor Justin Fisher and Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky. At first all was courtesy, sweetness and light with a subtle undercurrent of hostile body language between the Professor and the Doctor.

Then the Professor, in an aside,  said he was the 'principal adviser' to a Commission's Report. Doctor Pinto-Duschinsky in his reedy thin voice piped up , 'I'm sure my colleague does not wish to take credit as a 'principal adviser' to the many errors in the Commission's conclusions. He then proceeded to describe a long litany of alleged major blunders in the report.

The Professor laughed defensively and shifted his posture.  It was all quietly dignified but it was a devastating put-down. This is war among the brainiacs. 

Piffle Artist Pinter.

Idiotic
So David Lloyd-George was a minister when Britain bombed Iraq two and a half lifetimes ago. What's the connection between that and the unveiling a statue to him today? Harold Pinter thinks it's a disgrace.

I was lined up with the Guardian's Michael White on BBC Wales today. The intended row with me for and Michael against did not happen.  We both thought Harold's protest was stupid. While I agree entirely with Pinter on the Iraq war, this is a ludicrously contrived protest. Another 'Lloyd-George' crime. according to Harold,  was that he used the 'N' word as a term of racial abuse. News for you Harold it was used universally 70 years ago. There was no alternative.

It's idiotic to judge politicians from the past by our present day standards. Of course there is plenty of mistakes in the life of any politician who has enjoyed decades of power. But Lloyd-George is certainly in  the top four best politicians of the last century. For my money he is the best  with Clement Attlee as the runner-up.

Both built the welfare state but Lloyd George was the bravest in putting in the foundations. He was abused for daring to tax people to pay for the first old age pensions and sickness benefits. He was a brilliant war leader who brought the First World War to a swift close- always listening to the troops not the generals.

Brilliant, quixotic, lecherous, conspiratorial, eloquent, compassionate, devious, original and resourceful. No other British statesman matched him for interesting virtues, vices and achievements.

The statue is along overdue tribute. But he should have been draped in a Welsh Dragon - not the Union Jack. That would have been his wish.

Whoop
Danny Kushlik and Steve Rolles have done more than anybody else to inject some sanity into the drugs debate.

Last night, they launched their think-tank Transform's new book in the Commons. Their message is the drugs prohibition is killing people by the hundreds of thousands across Europe. Yet, our political parties are not prepared to think.

I ask a PQ on what studies have done on the effects of declassifying cannabis. 'Zilch' was the answer - but still policy will change. We are moving in an evidence-free prejudice-drenched zone. Steve Rolles' new book Tools for the Debate is "whoop' a page read. It's packed with brilliant and utterly convincing evidence-based argument.

The new message is that we must find common ground to bring the two sides of prohibitionists and pragmatists together. Transform kindly let me chair their meeting and plug my European Drugs Convention. That is a first step in bringing all sides together.

Great work, Transform.

Extremists

I've tabled a new EDM that champions the heroes who take on the law-breaking hunt thugs. It has been swell received and there has been a rush to sign. Progress has been made with more prosecutions and an increasing swing to cruelty free hunting.

That this house applauds the brave hunt monitors who challenge the extreme violence and intimidation of  hunt extremists to ensure the law is  obeyed and to gather evidence to present to the authorities; thanks and congratulates the Daily Mirror for publishing evidence of  violence directed at monitors from Protect Our Wild Animals and for the paper's  excellent work to protect wild animals from cruelty; calls on the  police and Crown Prosecution Service to ensure the Hunting Act 2004 is properly enforced so that the law can be upheld.

Futile fishing expedition

Sumo

The after-shocks of yesterday’s confrontation with Yates of the yard continue to rumble.

All favourable from MPs. it’s surprising how many have a low opinion of the Met Police and spill out anecdotes about the way they operate.

The claim that the Police do not leak is ridiculed. As a committee we have powerful evidence from one witness. He kept a detailed diary which records the remarkable coincidences of frantic press activity that preceded his every approach by the police. Before yesterday he did not want us to use it. Yates may well be provoked the witness into changing his mind.

There is snorting contempt from the hacks at Yates’ claim that he had never spoken to a lobby journalist – especially from lobby journalists. Possibly he does not know what a lobby journalist is. That’s the charitable explanation.

The press reaction was depressing predictable. Simon Hoggart said the committee were like ‘one legged sumo wrestlers collapsing in a heap.’ I don’t get. We are delightfully slim. The rest of the sketches were uninspired and few understood the key points.

Most paper reported that Yates confirmed that Tory Blair refused to be interviewed under caution. That was not said. Only a hint that his staff might have talked about unspecified consequences. Yates answered me unequivocally by saying that Tony Blair laid down no conditions.

Inevitably the least wise question had the greatest publicity. The Tory who talked about the ‘police practically kicking in a door at six in the morning’ messed up a good point. But Yates scored because no door was kicked down.

Happily the vast live television coverage at a quiet time in parliament meant that hundreds of MPs watched the cross-examination and they are of one mind. This was a legitimate political stunt by the SNP, strung out at ridiculous length of 16 months by an ambitious policeman who was on a fishing trip ‘because you never know what might turn up.’ Nothing did turn up.

He needed a witness who was prepared to say that he had been offered a peerage in exchange for a bribe. That’s how the only conviction under the 1925 act was obtained. There was no glimmer of a chance of that happening in this case.

Popular Green

A string of Tories were lucky to be listed to ask consecutive question at Prime Minister’s Question Time. Strangely this is good news for Labour MPs. It gives us the chance to ask opportunistic question as the Speaker calls alternatively from Opposition and Government benches.

Jessica Morden took advantage and did a splendid paean of praise of the city she represents. It based on yesterday’s news of our recognition as the top green city. We were short listed for another major award recently.

This will put new heart and confidence in the City Council’s green agenda. The petty foolish campaign to bring back the weekly bin collection can be firmly rejected. It’s based on falsehoods. The council could not have succeeded without the wholehearted enthusiasm of local people. A green agenda is crucial and popular.

The City of Flowers can continue to develop further as the country’s greenest city.

Junk Science

Great to see the politically comfortable view of the Chief Scientist ridiculed. His view on nuclear power chimes comfortably with the Government’s opinion.

Professor John Bourne, the chairman of the ISC, called the chief scientist's report "superficial". It had rejected the work of his group without providing an adequate explanation of why the conclusions were wrong. In fact, the central premise on which the ISC's report was based is irrefutable. A cull might reduce bovine TB in specific areas in the centre of anti-badger agitation. But the increase it would cause, outside the culling area, would be greater than the reduction within its boundaries.

David King has only to consult the work of David Macdonald, the director of prominent  wildlife conservation research unit, to understand the nature of the error which invalidates his report. Macdonald discovered what he called "the perturbation effect" - the reaction of surviving badgers to a cull which slaughtered most of their set. Death all around them would "have a profound effect on their lifestyles. Changes in their immune systems would make them less resistant to disease and bereaved badgers would traverse the country ... infecting more badgers and more cattle." It is even possible to put a rough percentage on the gains and losses. A 20% reduction inside the culling area would produce an increase of about 27% beyond its limits.

Reputable thorough science says the cull would make matter worse. Is the Chief Scientist out to appease his political masters?

Yates of the Yard

Outwardly calm, his body language eloquently expressed fury. Yates of the Yard is not happy this afternoon giving evidence to the Public Administration Select Committee.

 

His most eloquent answer was the five seconds of silence that followed this question from Committee Chairman Tony Wright. “Have you discovered there’s a trade in peerages?

Of course there is a trade, has been for 70 years and all three main parties are up to their necks in it. Our political system is – apart from Scandinavia- the cleanest in the world. Labour brought in a major reform act to make donations transparent. Sadly there was a loophole on loans and we appeared to have jumped straight through it.

Of course the police should have investigated an opportunistic complaint by a Scottish Nationalist MP quite legitimately on the political attack. But it should have been done and dusted in a few months. A complaint against Tories was over very rapidly without dawn raids, leak to the press and the torment that the witnesses went through.

One myth was nailed firmly by Yates. There has been a persistent story that Tony Blair refused to be interviewed ‘under caution.’ I asked Yates, ‘Did Tony Blair lay down any conditions under which he agreed to be interviewed.”. “No” was the unequivocal answer.

I accused Yates of being ‘cavalier’ in his treatment of witnesses. He said that he knew it was ‘uncomfortable’ for them. ‘Uncomfortable?’ They went through hell. Several wrote to us of their ‘prolonged deep distress’, and the ’continuing ordeal’ of being hung out to dry with constant press stories that were unfair and untrue.

As a committee we remain irritated that this investigation forced us to suspend our own. Had we continued we would have delivered practical proposal to reform the system.

  The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) stonewalled many questions that appeared legitimate to us. ‘That’s an area I can’t discuss.’ This is a big area - the size of a sub-continent. But the Inspectors inner fury occasionally slipped out. When the CPS refused to say why the diary of one of the witnesses was ruled out as inadmissible, Yates chipped in. His answer gave more than a hint that he thought that the diary might be the ‘crown jewels’ that would have allowed a prosecution to go ahead.

As a Committee we will be pilloried by the press as apologists for a rotten system. None of the committee is. But without a witness who was prepared to say that a bribe had been offered in return for a peerage, a prosecution was never a serious possibility. In the only successful case brought in the 82 years since 1925, there was such a witness.

The investigation has been futile. It has delayed reforms and inflicted a year and a half on torment on honourable people who are bewildered because they believe they have done nothing wrong. Sound and fury signifying nothing.

Newport's eco-feet

Jessica Morden and I have today tabled the following EDM in celebration of Newport's fantastic ecological achievements. 

Early day motion

Newport’s ecological footprint

That this House applauds the inspired work of Newport City Council and the people of Newport in achieving top place along with Plymouth for the lowest ecological footprint in the UK; is delighted  Newportonians are best at using public transport, reducing energy waste at home and consuming more locally-produced food; recognises the courageous leadership of the City Council in establishing the best value, most efficient and ecologically sound waste management system in Wales; welcomes the foresight of the people of Newport in leading and  cooperating with the city’s green agenda and looks forward to an intensification of Newport’s brilliant achievements.

Paul Flynn
Jessica  Morden

Bloodbath as sensible as witch-burning.

The extraordinary recommendation to slaughter of badgers is scientifically illiterate. Trevor Lawson public affairs advisor to Badger Trust commented: " Prof King's list of recommendations repeat virtually word for word  the opinions of farming unions and the cull mad vets in Defra. This is a highly-politicised rush to judgment, which, ludicrously, contains no cost benefit analysis.
"Prof King says his aim is to control bTB in cattle but he ignores the fact that this can be achieved by improving the cattle testing regime. The science shows that cattle are the primary source of infection for both each other and for badgers but this is of no interest to Prof King. His shallow report amounts to a shamelessly one sided examination of the problem."

What is inexplicable is that the advice involved Ireland

where 30 years of badger culing has left that country with twice the level of bTB as we have. As always, right wing rural morons and farming unions see mass killing of animals as the answer to all country problems. TB in cattle is a menace and costs the taxpayers £80 million last year in free insurance to farmers. There have thunderous demands to slaughter badgers blamed as the main carriers of the disease.

A scientists report published earlier this year said that  culling around outbreaks of the disease in cattle would be "likely to make matters worse rather than better."

The culprits in the spread of the disease are the farmers themselves. Controls on cattle movements are weak and the bTB is passed from bovine to bovine.

Dai rage

A throwaway joke line on this blog has cause a minor outbreak of consternation.

In order to improve the disgracefully under-reprentation of oldies in the Commons, I urged Blaenau Gwent to invite Tony Benn to stand.

The splendid Luke Young report’ on his blog: "What started out as a harmless suggestion, turned into a lot of fun. About a week ago, I said that I liked Paul Flynn's idea of having Labour legend Tony Benn stand in Blaenau Gwent. A battle of the Socialists kind of thing. I hadn't realised that the supporters of current MP Dai Davies would get so riled.

So me, stiring the pot, decided to have a straw poll to see who people would vote for. The results were pretty conclusive:

Dai Davies 59%

Tony Benn 41%

Dai wins. It would be easy for me to say that the daily visits from the same IP addresses, won it for the People's Voice MP, but I'm happy to let this one go. If anything, it's made me realise that we don't need Tony Benn or any other high powered Labour gun. We just need a serious, strong candidate, because that's exactly what the other side are afraid of.

Well done Dai, well done. I have not spoken to Dai Davies recently. But I understand he is mightily unpleased. Only a joke Dai.

St Cadocs

Visits by large groups to the Commons are always nail biting affairs. So much can go wrong.

The vist by 42 members of St Cadoc’s Church Caerleon looked as though it would be wrecked by the General Eelection. My staff made Herculean efforts to beg, bribe and bully admission tickets for the Chamber. They amassed a creditible 16.

The day went like a dream. A congestion-free ride on the M4, a visit with great guides and an enjoyble questions and answers session. Monday is usually a dull empty day in the Chamber. They had the good luck to witness the Prime Minister and Leader of the opposition having a go at each other.

A great visit.

Des Browne is still is deep denial.

On the basis that persistnence is a political virtue I raised again the Herlmand disaster. I had no hope of a sensible answer. I was not disappointed.

I tried a gentler approach in asking for a review of the mission impossible. Yes there have been successes in the Helamnd province but also dreadful failures. The worst is the totally unexpected scale of the deaths of valiant British soldiers. 18 were killed in the Parliamentary Recess. Uncounted local civilians have been killled. Mostly woman and children slaughtered by American bombs. The result is that we are losing the all-important war for hearts and minds. Millions of local people who welcomed our forces to their country in 2001, happy to see the Taliban go, and are now prepared to have them back because they are don’t want to live in country that is at war without end.

The answer was tawdry and dismissive. The deaths of our soldiers and local innocents will continue to escalate.