latest newsletters >>
next newsletters >>
previous newsletters >>

The Euro crisis/do we really want 95% mortgages back?/local events

24th November 2011

Hi all,

Sorry for the lengthy gap since my last update – I've been moving house. I gave my internet service provider three weeks' notice that I wanted to terminate the service, and they cut it off instantly. When I complained, they promised to restore it to 3 hours…then in 24 hours…then in 48 hours…then finally admitted they couldn't do it at all before I moved. Grrr!

(1) The Euro crisis

A few comments on this slow-moving drama. It looks as though the countries involved may be doing just enough to stave off disaster, though it's very hard to be sure. Looking ahead, there seems to be an emerging consensus that monetary union does need political union, with everyone from Angela Merkel to George Osborne recommending that the Euro countries introduce joint financial decision-making, giving up their fiscal sovereignty in exchange for more effective coordination and mutual support. There is, though, surely a risk that politicians get absorbed in this large long-term project at the expense of solving the immediate crisis – as one commentator put it, "Leafing through a catalogue of fire alarms while the house burns down". I know from my own experience that leading politicians love the Big Picture, to the extent that actually dealing with current issues seems less important.

Our influence on all this is very limited, and before we embrace the idea of a unified "core Europe" and a semi-detached "fringe Europe" too enthusiastically, it's worth looking at the downside as well. We are always going to be affected quite drastically by what happens on the Continent, as our largest trading partner, and if two-speed Europe is the long-term future we will continue to be shouting from the sidelines whenever problems arise. We need to be involved in the discussion constructively, not seeing it as an opportunity to fiddle with the Working Time Directive but trying to ensure that Britain has a balance of freedom of maneouvre and influence on what is happening around us.

(2) Back to 95% mortgages?

I see that the Government plans to use taxpayers' money to subsidise first-time buyers to get 95% mortgages, as in the good old pre-crisis days. I'm sure it'll be popular, but sometimes politicians need to say unpopular things: frankly it seems to me a serious mistake. We're three years into a crisis which was set off by reckless lending in the US housing market, and for a while there was a broad consensus that we needed to discourage people from taking on more than they could afford.

Look, there is a reason why it's difficult to get a 95% mortgage, especially if you're a first-time buyer: once interest rates rise from their current abnormally low rates, many people are going to struggle to keep up payments on a 95% level. What this is doing is setting up a wave of repossessions some years down the line, and it seems to me deeply irresponsible. An added twist is that the money is only being offered for newly-built housing: this will reduce the value of existing housing, while pushing demand out from the cities into new developments in places like Field Farm.

If the Government tries single-mindedly to reduce spending, one can disagree with the strategy (because it risks depressing tax revenue and making the deficit worse) and the speed and manner of the cuts, but at least there's a coherence to it. But the intermittent splurging on vote-catching schemes like this (the sudden subsidy for bin collection, on condition that it's weekly, was another one) reinforces the impression that Ministers don't actually know what they're doing.

Friends on the left compare the Government to Mrs Thatcher's but this seems to me both too harsh and too generous. Mrs Thatcher was systematically ideological from start to finish, but she was also generally competent at doing what she wanted to do (unfortunately, in some cases). The present government seems to me much more pragmatic, but also much less competent, to the point of looking like worried bystanders rather than effective leaders.

By way of balance, I don't agree with the Opposition's proposed VAT cut either: that would boost imports at a time when our balance of payments has failed to benefit from an effective devaluation of the pound (we've not even gained against the Euro as it sank in value throughout the crisis). I agree with Labour's other suggestions, though, targeting help for small businesses and industry, since the risk is that the current slump in investment will permanently shrink British capacity; I also think that the next round of local government funding cuts urgently needs to be postponed, both because local services are being gradually strangled and also because it really does not make sense to cut cutting into a recession.

(3) Local events

Chilwell Conservation Area consultation, December 1, Town Hall, Foster Ave, Beeston, 630pm onwards (open for drinks from 530).
Rumbletums Café, 2a Victoria St, Kimberley, Saturday 3rd December, 7.30pm to 10.30pm – Open Mic Night for young people with disabilities, their friends and families. "Bring your own CD's, MP3's and sing, dance, tell jokes or whatever."

Beeston Community Fair, Pearson Centre, Nuart Road, Saturday 3rd December, 10am-3pm. Stalls, hot cobs, music: raising money for World Aids Day.

Film at the Paradiso Cinema, Chilwell School, Queens Road West, Friday 9th December, The Bishop's Wife (1947). This is a change to the original advertisement due to licensing reasons. Starring Cary Grant, Lorretta Young and David Niven. Tickets on the door £5 (£4 conc) Films start at 7.30pm. Come at 7pm for refreshments.

I've been asked to mention a new Fair Trade shop – outside the constituency but set up by a Beeston resident: 'Fair Play' sells 100% Fairtrade gifts and games and is based at 24 West End Arcade, Nottingham (opposite the Central Library).

A Facebook group set up by Stapleford resident Richard Macrae to encourage local swapping and trading: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_175706445818989&refid=27

Richard also asks me to mention two outings that he's organising for Stapleford residents, the idea being to enjoy events with other local people: (a) Sleeping Beauty on Sunday 15th January at 130pm, Theatre Royal in Nottingham. Prices at £15.50 per person and the full amount is needed no later than Monday 5th December. (b) Twin Lakes day trip during the School Easter holidays. Wednesday 11th April 2012. Details for both from richardmacrae187@hotmail.com.

Best regards

Nick

Tram news, housing news (and non-news), boundaries, Express headlines

31st October 2011

1. Tram update

The Government has now given the City final clearance to build the tram extensions. The contracts are due to be signed in three weeks and the first work will start at the end of this month. I'm told that soon afterwards the local residents' consultation groups which I was promised two years ago will finally come into being – one for each section of the route, to discuss practicalities and timing.

2. Housing update

My compliment to councillors for listening to the consultation had a comically sarcastic reception from the councillor who actually heads planning (the LibDems' David Watts) – he said an email from "someone in Poland" had tried to claim the credit. I assume he means me (I was organising a Warsaw conference last week, but wanted to let you know the position without waiting till I got back). Grrr – by all means have a go at me, but don't misquote me. What I actually wrote was: "Particular credit goes to the TEPS campaign, which really has proved itself to be an effective grass-roots lobby – first over the trees, now this. My own role has been limited this time."

Meanwhile, when Anna Soubry circulated the news four days later she reported: "On Thursday evening the Council revealed they were in talks with the Ministry of Defence to build 2,500 houses on Chetwynd Barracks." Passing on this rumour set off a new wave of anxious emails (since an influx of that size on one spot would raise massive traffic issues) but it seems to be entirely mistaken (indeed, David Watts describes it as "nothing more than a complete lie"). I've argued for years that it would make sense to build some homes there since the MOD doesn't seem to need all the space and it's not exactly a site of great natural beauty – but not 2,500 of them! The situation is quite difficult enough without wild exaggeration and in general it's a good idea for MPs to (a) report on developments promptly and (b) get their facts straight when they eventually do report.

There is more to come on all this – having ruled out the Toton site, the council will be letting us know what they haven't ruled out in a month or so. I'll report back as soon as I hear further.

3. Boundary changes

The consultation is moving onwards, and the Boundary Commission has three options to choose from: its own proposal (which leaves Broxtowe almost unchanged, plus Gotham village), and proposals from Labour and the LibDems, which would in different ways merge Beeston and Chilwell with western suburbs of Nottingham and the rest of the constituency with parts further north and/or west. There will be public hearings on these options and then we'll hear nothing until next October, when they will make possibly revised proposals. After another round of consultation, they'll submit their report to the Government in summer 2013, after which Parliament will consider it. Since lots of MPs may lose their seats as a result, it's quite possible that it will then be voted down (cf. turkeys and Christmas) and we'll end up with current boundaries. Thus it may be best not to get excited about it, but if you'd like to get involved you can find the details here

http://tinyurl.com/3uxerky

or even speak at one of the public hearings, the closest of which seems to be this:

http://consultation.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/public-hearings/derby/

4. Panic and joy with the Daily Express

For amusement, a constituent collects front-page newspaper headlines, to see which stories turn out to be right. He's sent this selection from recent copies of the Daily Express:

October 26 2011 Pensions cut by £500 a year.
October 19 2011 Pensions to rise by £276 a year
October 13 2011 Joy at boost in pensions
September 12 2011 Pension pots slashed
September 04 2011 £25 Billion boost for pensions
August 31 2011 Pension values to fall by 60%
August 23 2011 Millions hit by pensions gamble
August 19th 2011 Pensions crisis as shares collapse.

As an illustration of how newspapers try to sucker people into buying them with daily sensations, this seems hard to beat. But although it's quite funny, it's also sad – there are elderly people out there who do depend on papers like the Express for their information, and they must be constantly upset by this hysterical soap-opera reporting – not just about pensions but health scares, exaggerated pictures of the risks of crime and much more.

5. Coming events

Compassionate Derby is described as a wonderland festival of healthy,environmentally-friendly and cruelty free food and lifestyle products. There will be free food samples, talks and demonstrations and a huge array of stalls. It is taking place in Derby Assembly rooms , Market Place on Sat 5th Nov 11am- 5pm.

The Midlands German Shepherd Rescue Centre are holding their Christmas Fayre on the 12th November 2011. There are stalls, a raffle, tombola and refreshments. Contact sarap1@hotmail.co.uk for more details.

Best regards

Nick

Major news on development consultation/Beeston renewables discussion

26th October 2011

Hi all,

I'm actually in Warsaw running a conference this week so I'll be brief, but after a quick phone call to check I wanted to let you know that as I've been expecting from private discussions, there's been a major move on the housing development issue. In view of the very large number of letters opposing the Toton development, the Council has voted unanimously this evening to exclude the proposed Toton site from further consideration.

There are several points I'd like to make on this:

1. As in previous council consultations there has been a good deal of cynicism, some politically inspired – "they've made up their minds", "they're just going through the motions", etc. The reality is that few if any councillors really have a particular agenda on these things, and it is always worth having a serious effort to persuade them rather than just make the self-defeating assumption that they won't listen. They consulted; people responded; they listened. It's how local democracy is supposed to work.

2. Particular credit goes to the TEPS campaign, which really has proved itself to be an effective grass-roots lobby – first over the trees, now this. My own role has been limited this time – I just talked quietly to a number of councillors about the strength of feeling and asked them to think again. I think they might well have done anyway.

3. The obvious question is the implication for other areas. My suggestion of taking up the issue of the Army site again is being followed up – as I argued, there are chunks of the site that appear to be currently unused, and the Army is contracting rather than expanding, so a review must be due. The other options that I've mentioned previously – Beeston (Boots etc.) and increasing housing density (more flats, fewer detached houses) – are also being looked at.

4. A significant issue where Government policy could help is that there are very substantial brownfield sites lying unused due to past pollution (including part of the Boots site, I'm told). At present, developers always go for green sites by preference, since cleaning up brownfield "used" sites is more expensive. A sensible Government policy would be to put a levy on greenfield development and offer the proceeds to developers for cleaning up brownfield sites. This would shift the terms of the calculation and the market would respond, with benefits for employment and the availability of urban affordable housing as well. After all, nobody wants derelict brownfield sites lying indefinitely as deserted eyesores, so sooner or later the issue needs to be tackled. The technology exists (the O2 arena was built on derelict and polluted land which needed a big cleanup): it's just a matter of money. I'll pursue this idea on the Labour side, but it's is a non-partisan proposal which I hope people in other parties may like to take up with their colleagues.

5. More generally, I hope that tonight's unanimous vote on the council is a harbinger of more cross-party work on this. It's easy to point fingers at each other but the basic fact is that developers with good lawyers will exploit any mistakes that councillors make, and it's vital that all sides work together – at different times as party support ebbs and flows we're all going to be responsible for the borough, and we don't want it to be an urban greyscape.

Local event

One I missed out last time, sorry!

RENEWABLE ENERGY SOMEWHERE IN BEESTON? – HAVE YOUR SAY!

There will be a Public Consultation Meeting on Saturday 29th October, 1.30 – 3.30, Beeston Library, Foster Avenue. Greening Beeston have secured funding for a detailed survey for a SOLAR or WIND TURBINE installation for a public building somewhere in Beeston. Now this local group needs your help to choose which site and whether it will be wind or solar energy. Come to find out more and CAST YOUR VOTE!
All are welcome. Refreshments will be available.
OR VISIT THE DISPLAY downstairs in the Library from Monday 24th October and cast your vote there
OR VOTE ONLINE AT: http://greeninginbeeston.weebly.com/.

Best regards

Nick

Housing and green belt: ways to break the deadlock / NHS reform/weekly bins

8th October 2011

Hi all,

A quirk of my current job is that I have to attend all the party conferences to represent the BUAV, so I've just rounded off three surreal weeks wearing successively LibDem, Labour and Conservative badges. "You're bananas to be cutting the police!" a demonstrator shouted at me in Manchester as I headed into the Tory conference, and handed me a banana to drive home the point. "I entirely agree with you," I said, eating the banana with enthusiasm. She looked surprised.

All the conferences were pleasant experiences, with the great majority of delegates interested in serious discussions, especially in the fringe meetings away from the cameras. It's fashionable to deride people who go to them – bunch of nerds in a bubble, and all that – but there are worse things than being willing to give up a week of your holidays to go and discuss what would make the country better.

I'd like to make some comments on the local housing issue, the NHS Bill, the bin collection issue, and a new youth group. First, a minor personal query. We're moving into a smaller rented home for various work-related reasons, and like most people in that situation we've got too much stuff. We're giving away surplus furniture to charity, but we don't want to dump too much as the change is probably temporary. I suspect we're going to end up with 30 or so packing cases that we can't easily fit in. If you happen to have spare space in a garage or similar that you are unlikely to need for a year or two, I'd be interested in renting it. (It's possible to rent commercially, of course, but the cost is startling – over £100 a month for 10 feet by 5 feet.)

1. The local plan

Now that the consultation is over, the council will need to decide on its housing strategy. I share the widespread concern about the prospect of large-scale development on west of Bardills and on Field Farm: we are not so rich in green space as to be relaxed about thousands of new homes being built there. I'd like to make some constructive suggestions:

a) The driver for the entire area is the Government estimate that our housing need will grow 10% in the next 15 years. This assumes no net migration: it's purely based on the existing need (which is unarguable – adequate property is barely affordable for many people) plus the assumption that we'll all keep living longer (probably true) and the projection that we'll keep on splintering into more and more single households. I'd like to challenge the last assumption: anecdotal evidence suggests that high tuition fees and general economic problems are actually reversing the trend, with families staying together longer rather than rushing off to get their own place at the first opportunity.

b) Even if you disagree, the 10% is being oddly distributed. Beeston is scheduled to get a 6% rise with 550 building plots. Yet Boots is offering more and more of its site for housing, and it would make perfect sense for that housing to be blocks of flats of different types: some designed for students, to ease the pressure on the town; some designed for older people, to match people living longer. The Boots site alone would take more than 550 homes on that basis, assuming that transport issues were properly addressed, and whatever one can say about Boots, it's not a green space.

c) Conversely, Toton is being potentially asked to take 800 homes, whereas the 10% increase would mean closer to 300. Quite apart from the green issue, I worry about the tendency to turn Toton into a giant dormitory. It has often one of the lowest crime rates in the borough, but one of the highest rates of anti-social behaviour, arguably because there's so little support for all the housing in local amenities, with developers cramming houses into every spare yard.

d) If we're looking for space in Toton, shouldn't another effort be made to get the army to release some of its obviously unused land. Every time I pass the depot I see row upon row of what seem to be completely unused warehouses. When I approached them a few years ago, they said they needed the land for possible future use, but with the current cutbacks in defence spending and Army layoffs, that surely isn't going to be true forever. It would be helpful if Anna Soubry were to re-approach the MoD and press for land release (and the MoD would get a very decent sum for it from developers, and have that much less need for cuts, so it would be win-win), and if she succeeds where I didn't, I'll be very glad to give her credit for it.
The consultation has clearly shown strong opposition to the suggested development. I think the council should think again, and challenge both the Government's population projection and the developers' passion for building on green spaces instead of Beeston.
Incidentally, the Beeston and District Civic Society have invited an architect to come and talk on this Friday 14th about planning issues more generally – if you're interested, it's at Beeston Library from 7.15pm. It's described as an Open Meeting, so I think anyone can attend.

2. The NHS Bill – last chance to amend

The NHS Bill is now in its final stages. As you may remember, there was widespread alarm at the extent of privatisation in the first version, and the Government promised to go away and think again. They've now returned, with more than 1000 amendments to be debated in a couple of days. I'm no expert on the Bill, but it looks as though the problems are still in there. See

http://tinyurl.com/NHSBill

for an analysis. The Lords are likely to amend it once again, and the Government will then seek to overturn the amendments in the Commons. I'd like to ask Anna Soubry to consider just on this one occasion deviating from the party whip to avoid a real disaster in a few years' time.

3. What happened to localism?

In the middle of the severest squeeze on local government expenditure in living memory, the government has suddenly found £750 million spare which it's offering councils, on condition that they spend it on restoring weekly bin collection. I know some people are keen on this, while others think it's bad for recycling. That's not the point I'd like to make.

Leave aside the curious fact that we are supposedly focused on reducing the deficit, but money is always available for pet projects from bombing Libya to winning votes through bin policy. The councils have been forced to squeeze spending on elderly people's care, on libraries, on road maintenance, on youth facilities and many other things. So my question is this. If we're to be encouraged to think locally and help our communities, shouldn't we be able to decide for ourselves whether our local priority is bin collection, elderly care, road repair or something else? What happened to localism if we can't even decide about our bins?

4. New Duke of Edinburgh Award group
On a positive note, there's a new group starting up in Beeston to encourage young people to try for a Duke of Edinburgh award.

The group is an "open" group, which means it's not associated to a school and is therefore open to young people who are home educated or for those young people who don't have the opportunity to undertake the award with their school.

The group meets at the Beeston Youth & Community Centre, West End, Beeston, Nottingham NG9 1GL on Wednesday evenings between 7 and 9pm. We are actively seeking young people (aged 14 and above) from the Beeston and wider area who wish to find out more about DofE and if it's for them.

Contact can be made by email to dofe@beestonopenaward.org.uk or by phone to Phil Stainer on 07517732007.

Best wishes

Nick

Local housing plans/Can we have innovation without chaos?/NHS reform scandal

5th September 2011

Hi all,

Just back from a week's holiday in a cottage we rented in Dorset – warmly recommended if you like peace and quiet. I have a hectic period coming up since I need in my current job to attend all the main party conferences. MPs develop more cross-party friendships than one might think, so I'm looking forward to them, but I'll be living largely out of a suitcase for a few weeks.

I wanted in this update to have a look at three major current controversies: the change in planning laws; the revised NHS reform and the free schools drive. First a couple of shorter items:

1. New policy ideas

There's a new book out today contributing fresh ideas on a wide range of policies: to declare an interest, I wrote two of the chapters (but my fee is going to charity). Details in case you're interested are here:

www.whatnextforlabour.com/contributors

Yes, I know they've stuck my academic title into one of them and not the other – possibly because my article is actually rubbishing my PhD sand suggesting ways to encourage better PhDs. The university article develops a theme that I discussed first on this thread – many thanks to everyone who helped me refine my thinking.

2. Local updates

• The Attenborough flood defences are now at an advanced stage and completion is expected next year. After all the controversy on the route, there's broad relief that it's finally working out, and it's only fair to admit that I was wrong in predicting that this route would get bogged down in legal challenges. The cricket pitch will be out of action until 2013 and the football facility for probably longer, but the fields will eventually be protected. I hope that the last stage can be completed without too much disruption and the village will then be safe.

• The Stapleford health centre closure is going ahead; once the cash-strapped authorities had decided that they wanted to close it, it was evident that they were just going through the motions. I'm afraid it's likely to close this month.

• The Awsworth recycling plant proposal has been withdrawn, following vigorous local objections.

• Both Stapleford and Kimberley police stations are being closed as a consequence of the reduction in police funding. My personal view on the Kimberley closure is that since the local police are being required to cut spending, it does make sense to concentrate on minimising the cuts to police on the street rather than trying to keep open a counter service in a not particularly central location. The Stapleford station is much more central but its limited hours of service made it not that useful. Unless many of you feel strongly that keeping the stations open should have top priority, I'm not planning to oppose this move – we need to concentrate on fighting to keep as many officers and PCSOs on patrol as possible.

• The Stapleford CAT is meeting on Thursday 8th September evening (7.30, I think, though I'm trying to get that confirmed) at Pastures Community Church to discuss the local housing plan, with a representative from Broxtowe Council present.

3. The changes in planning law

I've mentioned this earlier and you've probably seen press discussions, but a brief update may be helpful. The Government's basic proposal is that the current presumption against most development should change to a presumption in favour, except for protected sites and possibly green belt. As you may have seen, this is being opposed by a coalition of conservation groups, including the National Trust, but the government seems determined to press ahead. However, councils who can show that they are building a lot of new houses in some places can use that as a reason to oppose building even more in others.

This means that the 50% of councils without a proposal for substantial new housing development will find that developers can walk all over them: any proposal not on specifically protected land will simply go through, so we could for instance find tower blocks being erected in wildly unsuitable locations.

As I reported earlier, Broxtowe is therefore consulting on where to authorise new housing, concentrating on the areas west of Bardills (where the tram will have its endpoint) and north of Stapleford. I don't think there is any case at all for Broxtowe not having a plan, since we'd then be completely exposed to developers' greed – the question to be resolved in the coming months is where the new housing should potentially go. If you've not taken part in the consultation, it's still worth talking with your local councillors about your views.

Does this mean that new housing will then appear quickly? No, because of the recession – there is very little appetite for new developments at the moment. But the decisions taken now will have an effect over the next decade and longer.

4. Free schools – can we have more innovation without chaos?

This is part of the Government's programme which is quite interesting, even though it has serious problems. The basic concept is that pretty much anyone should be allowed to set up a school if they can meet the basic requirements (notably the National Curriculum) and they should then be able to compete with established schools. While you can't always rely on Wikipedia, in this case there is what seems to me a balanced presentation of the idea here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_school_%28England%29

The snags are clear enough – since the school can set its own admission policy, it can reintroduce selection by the back door, creaming off the best students from local schools and rejecting late developers or kids with learning difficulties. As funding follows the pupils, this seems likely over time to leave the existing schools in increasing difficulty, seen as second best and struggling to survive.

However, there aren't many people who really argue that the school system is perfect, so we shouldn't get into the position of rejecting any kind of innovation from outside the current structure. There are existing ideas like Steiner schools which have always struggled to fit into the state system. By the nature of new ideas, some will succeed and some won't, so what we need is a system that allows innovation but provides a stable basic system which can cope with failure – otherwise we'll have kids bouncing back and forth between
established schools and new schools that don't work out.

What I'd like to see, therefore, is a counter-proposal retaining the coordinating role of LEAs but setting up a duty to consider new proposals reasonably – with a limit of say one in each borough every 10 years. That would give scope for initiatives but avoid chaotic results in urban areas if a flurry of new schools compete for attention.

5. Son of NHS reform – it's back!

The impression that the drastic NHS changes had been kicked into the long grass turns out to have been deceptive. The problem remains this:

a) NHS trusts no longer have to meet targets for waiting times

b) NHS trusts no longer have a cap on how much money they can earn from fee-paying patients

c) NHS trusts are under severe financial pressure.

The result is obvious: to escape the financial pressure, trusts will increase the proportion of treatment given only to fee-paying patients. That in turn will increase waiting times for everyone else. The result – and we've been here before, in the 1990s – is that people with painful conditions will feel they need to try to find the money to get treated in reasonable time. The head of the British Medical Association pointed all this out again only last week. And while the Government is at it, it's removing the responsibility of the Secretary of State to ensure the quality of the NHS.

Having been quite polite about the schools reform, I'm going to be rude about this one. I think it's disgusting, and a complete betrayal of the promise to protect the principles of the NHS. It doesn't matter how much fancy rhetoric we're given about "letting professionals set priorities" and "promoting local decision-making". It's fundamentally wrong, and reverses the genuinely positive changes in the NHS of the last decade. If allowed to go through, they will eventually lead to the NHS being a fallback system if you can't afford to go private.

Finally…

6. Local event

Friday 9th September 2011, 7.30pm

Paradiso Cinema presents: Oranges and Sunshine
The story of Nottinghamshire social worker, Margaret Humphrys, and the Child Migrants Trust at Chilwell Arts Theatre, Chilwell School as above.
Tickets on the door - £5, £4 (conc). Come at 7pm for refreshments.

See www.childmigrantstrust.com for the background story to this.

Best regards

Nick

What should we do after the riots?

15th August 2011

Hi all,

I've waited a few days to comment on the riots – one of the luxuries of not being an MP at the moment is being able to take time to think through issues instead of being bombarded by the media for instant reactions.

Before getting into the discussion, I wanted to say that I'm going to try to get a Lords nomination for Tariq Jahan, the father of one of the boys killed by a speeding rioter who made an astonishingly eloquent speech – just a little while after his son's death – which is thought to have headed off what might have been some very nasty counter-riots. I expect you've seen his speech to the angry and distressed crowd, but an extract is worth repeating:

"I can't describe to anyone what it feels like to lose your son. I miss him dearly, but in two days the whole world will forget, no one will care. I don't blame the Government, I don't blame the police, I don't blame anybody… My family wants time to grieve for my son. People should let the law deal with this…Blacks, whites, Asians – we all live in the same community. Why do we have to kill one another? Why are we doing this? Step forward if you want to lose your sons. Otherwise, calm down and go home – please."
And they did.

You can see him talking at the peace rally today if you click on the second picture:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-14521307
In my opinion, he's done more for community relations than any number of think-tank reports and earnest speeches, and if he's willing, I'd like to see him in the Lords (I don't care for which party, if any) – I'm not being rude about former colleagues on either side when I say that we need people like him there more than we need another retired politician, civil servant or businessman.

Some thoughts:

1. We have a serious problem that goes beyond immediate riot control
Like pretty well everyone else, I'm appalled at the riots and I don't think there's any excuse for the rioters – neither political nor social nor anything else. But we need to be clear about the underlying problem. What the riots have exposed is what people in rough areas have known for a long time: there are a good many people – not all of them young – who will be as rough and as acquisitive as they think they can get away with, and who don't see themselves as part of an organised society at all.

It's important to understand the thought process here (understanding is not the same as supporting). A typical rioter is, say, 18, male, and in a peer group that values (a) toughness and (b) visible prosperity – bling, fashionable clothes, the latest electronics, etc. He hears that general disorder has stretched the police and there are lots of smashed windows and goods for the taking. If he joins in, he may well get some cool goods to show his friends (even share out, gaining even more kudos), and he can show he's really hard – not afraid of the police or anyone else. And it sounds exciting and dramatic. He might get caught and sent to prison for a bit, but even that might build his reputation, and anyway he'll probably get away with it. Is he going to stay at home and watch telly? No.

Part of this is utterly alien to most of us, and part of it isn't. The instinct to do wrong things that you think you'll get away with is completely endemic in Britain (to an extent that it isn't elsewhere in Northern Europe in my experience). Speed on the road except where there's a camera; buy and sell goods and services in cash to avoid tax; fiddle your expenses (yes, MPs – and not just MPs); award yourself a gigantic bonus because you can; misuse your position of control if the people you're dealing with won't complain. None of these things are violent – but then nor is nipping into an already-broken window to pinch something. It's just that in many circles some of these things are semi-accepted behaviour, rather as larceny is accepted behaviour in the street gangs.

As I've said, this isn't an excuse – two or indeed ten wrongs don't make a right, and anyway violent crime and street disorder are a different matter from petty larceny. But there is a general problem that we have an ultra-individualist, frontier-style society in which looking after Number One is seen as the norm.

2. What can we do about it?
First, I agree with the courts imposing exemplary sentences. Normally it's be ridiculous to be sent to prison for stealing some bottles of water (or, in one weird case, a packet of Imodium), but we can't afford to let the impression get hold that rioters largely got away with it. So judges are right to impose punishment at the high end of the range for each case. That's happening, and I think with luck it will have a sobering effect.

Second, I don't agree with collective punishment being levied on people who weren't rioting. The woman who Wandsworth proposes to evict has a 5 year old daughter and an 18-year-old son who hasn't even been tried yet: the council is chasing headlines by trying to evict her. If he's convicted, he'll almost certainly go to prison, and that's his punishment. It's an offence to natural justice to visit his alleged sins on his mother and young sister – and it's daft, since the council is legally obliged to rehouse them immediately, so they'll simply be thrown out of their home and put in a similar one. And if people collectively think that the punishment for rioting should be eviction, then that needs to be a change in the law, not some councillor chasing headlines.

Third, the point that both Boris Johnson and Ed Miliband have made – this is simply not a time to be cutting the police. I've no doubt that, as in every organisation, efficiency savings are possible, and they should be made anyway. But the best estimate of the impact of the proposed cuts is that we'll have 16,000 fewer officers – that's around 30 fewer for every borough in Britain, or ten officers in every 8-hour shift. If we believe – and I'm sure it's true – that the rioters were partly responding to the conviction that they would be too numerous for the police to handle, what sort of message do we send if we cut a swathe through the police force? I understand that the Government is thinking of reducing the 50p tax rate, and we're continuing to blow money away every day in Libyan air raids. These might or might be desirable, but really, community safety is more important, and it's just stubbornness for Cameron to dig in over this.

Fourth, a less fashionable point: we also need to stop cutting probation officers. In a few months' time, most of the rioters are going to come out of prison, possibly chastened but quite possibly toughened as well. It is going to be absolutely critical that they get intensive supervision and, where they're willing to try a better way, support and advice. If we just let them slip back into their old circles because we think we can't afford to supervise them, we are making a false economy. I see that it's proposed to "crack down" on gangs by chasing their leaders if they don't pay their TV licences – that sort of thing is an empty gesture unless we get at the individual followers we aren't addressing the real problem.

And finally, we do need to look at the wider society that we have built. Maybe we all could do more to encourage social cohesion and discourage cynicism and acquisitiveness. It's not exactly working well at the moment, is it?

Before concluding, a plug for a new blog – Cllr Janet Patrick in Beeston West has launched it:

http://www.janetpatrick.org.uk/

Best wishes

Nick

previous newsletters >>