Sir Desmond Swayne TD

Sir Desmond Swayne TD

Twitter

Make misogyny a hate crime email campaign

By

Protecting women and girls from violence and supporting victims is of the utmost importance. The publication of the tackling violence against women and girls strategy will make progress towards ensuring that women and girls are safe everywhere – at home, online and on the streets. The strategy will increase support for victims and survivors, increase the number of perpetrators brought to justice and to reduce the prevalence of violence against women and girls in the long-term.

Since the publication of the Hate Crime Action Plan in 2016 there has been an increase in reporting and improvements in identification and recording of crime by the police. However, rates of attrition within the criminal justice system remain worryingly high and targeted online abuse continues to present a significant problem. While in contrast to overall trends, under-reporting still exists within specific groups.

You may be aware of the wide-ranging Law Commission review into hate crime. The review, which has now been published, includes a number of recommendations around levelling up the protection for disability and LGBT victims, tackling sex and gender abuse, and protecting freedom of expression. The Government is currently reviewing the report and recommendations and I look forward to its full response in due course.

While this is not making misogyny a hate crime, it can inform longer-term decisions once the Government has considered the recommendations made by the Law Commission.

Beastly Whips

By

I was surprised by the accounts of strong-arm tactics by Government whips. I know too many of them well and they are not unpleasant and aggressive ladies and gentlemen.
I was myself a whip both in opposition and in Government and over the course of the decades I witnessed the waning of their influence.
My whip asks me how I plan to vote rather than telling me. It’s not unreasonable for me to let him know,  so that he can at least get the responsible minister to address my reservations and see if he can persuade me with reasonable argument.
That one might believe a threat to turn off government largesse in one’s constituency strikes me as highly improbable. Government expenditure just doesn’t work like that. You’d have to be quite gullible to believe any such threat.
Slightly more plausible would be a threat to stymie your prospects of becoming a minister, or other parliamentary career opportunity, were you flout the whip. Nevertheless, even that threat has diminished over recent years. There was a time when the Party Leader would focus on Cabinet appointments and leave the junior ministerial ranks to the Chief Whip to decide, but those days have gone. Equally, the appointment of so many serial rebels to high office has made nonsense of the notion that promotion is dependent on obedience.
The appointment to sit on Commons Select Committees, or to be Chairman of any of them was, until recently, entirely in the gift of party whips, giving them significant patronage and leverage. That however, was reformed under the Cameron premiership and those positions are now elected, removing another potential weapon from the armoury of the whips.
There have been other factors at work too which have led to more independence of mind among MPs.
First, the ease of electronic communication has given MPs much more exposure to the opinions and influence of their constituents. It also provides a useful network for like-minded MPs to encourage one another under the radar in any potential rebellion.
Finally, the opening-up of candidate selection processes to more democratic procedures, such as open primaries, introduced number of MPs who considered that it was more their own personal ‘brand’ rather than their party brand that won the day and, in turn, they exhibited a greater measure of independence. Though they were few in number, their attitude was very infectious.

The notion that whipping can influence a leadership challenge is just complete nonsense and it is secrecy makes nonsense of it. Whatever you may tell your whip, or anyone else for that matter, only The Chairman of the 1922 Committee ever knows if you really sent in a letter, and only you yourself will know how you voted in any subsequent ballot.
It’s a bit like the constituent who stopped me the other day and told me he’d only vote for me at the next election if I voted for a particular candidate after a leadership challenge. No doubt he trusted me to tell him who I voted for in any such ballot, but how would I ever know that he’d fulfilled his part of the bargain at the next election?

With whipping, I think we almost got to the position where, if you want to win, then you’ve got to win the argument. Which in a democracy, is no bad thing.

Unequal access to IVF treatment email campaign

By

In England, decisions about local NHS fertility services are determined by clinical commissioning groups, taking account of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) fertility guidelines. Local National Health Service bodies are expected to commission fertility services in line with the NICE guidelines so that there is equal access across England.

The existing NICE fertility guidelines include provisions for same sex couples who have demonstrated their clinical infertility through six failed cycles of artificial insemination. The criteria in the guidelines were developed as a way of achieving equivalence between opposite-sex and same-sex couples in establishing clinical infertility and accessing National Health Service fertility treatment services. NICE has begun a scoping process for the review of these guidelines.

No couple should face disproportionate or unequal costs in their efforts to overcome fertility issues, which is why it is important that NICE is looking at reviewing the existing guidelines.

DS.

Parties

By

I voted against the regulations that deprived of us of so much of our liberty during the various iterations of lock-down over the last couple of years.
I also spent a significant amount of time explaining the regulations to constituents, advising them and answering their questions about what they were permitted to do. This was particularly the case for so many self-employed constituents who were unclear as to whether they could continue working. The principal difficulty was confusion between what was regulation and what was only guidance. This even confused police officers, with people being told to stop doing things which, in fact, they were entitled to do.
I rather think that Sue Gray’s inquiry into parties in Downing Street will focus on this distinction between regulation and guidance and, in particular, the fact that Number 10 is a place of work and not a dwelling, where the rules were quite different.
If this does indeed turn out to be the Monopoly “get out of jail free card”,  I fear it just won’t wash because the distinction between regulation and guidance was never clear in the minds of the public in the first place.
As far as they are concerned it looks like one rule for us and another for everyone else.
A significant danger for the PM, were he to be exonerated by Sue Gray’s inquiry,  is that some new allegation then hits the headlines. 
I have received a huge correspondence on this whole business, representing a number of different points of view. I’ve said I will reflect on all that constituents have said to me -and I will. 

Bonkers

By

On Wednesday last week Mr Speaker granted an urgent question to My Colleague Miriam Cates MP on the Government’s COVID vaccination strategy, which includes the policy of sacking -starting in April- any unvaccinated NHS and domiciliary care staff.
The question was timely because, as another colleague, Dr Andrew Murrison MP put it, “when the facts change, we are entitled to change our minds”. The reality is that when Parliament passed the regulations in December which enforce the policy of sacking unvaccinated NHS and care workers (although I voted against the provisions), we didn’t then know what we now know: Which is that risk the unvaccinated pose to patients declines after a very short period and that we have the alternative of regular lateral flow testing, which will tell, whether healthcare professionals pose a threat to their patients.
The vaccination doesn’t stop you catching COVID or passing it on, what it does is reduce your risk of serious illness. So, the rationale for forcing it on NHS and care staff has gone.
 The Government’s own analysis is that that 73,000 NHS staff and 38,000 domiciliary care workers will leave as a consequence of the policy of enforced vaccination.
We have no plan for how to replace them and there is already a critical shortage of domiciliary care workers, so much so that beds are unnecessarily occupied in hospitals because care providers have insufficient staff to care for them if they were allowed to go home.  

The Government should seek to persuade NHS and domiciliary care workers to be vaccinated, not threaten to sack them. The current course of action is just bonkers.
Alas, we made no progress in persuading ministers last week, there is still time, but it is fast running out 

 

 

Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill email campaign

By

The UK has consistently led the way on animal welfare. It was one of the key EU members that lobbied for the recognition of animal sentience in Article 13 of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009 and, in addition, recognised in law that animals can feel pain and suffering through the Animal Welfare Act.

Now that the UK has left the EU,  we have the opportunity to go further to promote animal welfare by making sure that all Government departments consider animal sentience in policy, covering all vertebrate animals from farm to forest. The Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill, which is making its way through Parliament, enshrines the recognition that animals are sentient in domestic law. It also creates a proportionate accountability mechanism to help reassure that central government policymaking takes this into account.

The Bill will create an Animal Sentience Committee with experts which will produce reports on how well policy decisions have paid all due regard to the welfare of animals. The relevant minister must then respond to reports via statements to Parliament. From now on, ministers will need to be ready to show that the needs of animals have been considered in relevant policy decisions. 

These reforms will also underpin the Government’s Action Plan for Animal Welfare, which contains upwards of forty valuable reforms. The Government is committed to maintaining the very highest standards of animal welfare and this piece of legislation will contribute to that goal.

DS.

Elections Bill email campaign

By

The aim of the Elections Bill is to ensure that our electoral system remains secure, fair and transparent. In order to ensure that legitimate categories of third party that may emerge in the future are not unduly restricted in their ability to campaign, Clause 23 proposes that the Government be able to amend the list of legal entities eligible to register as campaigners under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000. Any such change would be subject to Parliament scrutiny in the usual way and there would be no unilateral change by the Government.

In any election, there needs to be spending limits on candidates, on political parties and on third-party campaigners to ensure a level playing field. That is why additional provisions will be introduced on campaign expenditure which would require third party campaigns to give notice to the Electoral Commission at a lower level of expenditure than is currently required. Such third-party spending limits prevent undue influence by American-style ‘Super-PAC’ pressure groups.

Third parties would also be required to have a legitimate UK interest to campaign in UK elections. Campaign spending, which is part of a joint plan between a registered party and a third party or parties, would be counted as part of the spending limits of all parties involved. I believe campaign expenditure and joint campaigning should be transparently and fairly regulated.

With regard to proposals concerning the Electoral Commission, I believe it is the role of the police and the prosecution services to determine whether there has been a breach of criminal law, and whether such a breach should be prosecuted in a court of law. The Bill intends to clarify this status quo. This is not about interfering with the investigative, operational or enforcement decisions of the Electoral Commission. A strategy and policy statement will be introduced that will set out guidance and principles which the Commission will have to have regard to in the discharge of its functions. It is common for the Government to set a policy framework which independent regulators work toward, and the policy statement will be ratified by Parliament. The reforms would not affect the ability of the Commission to undertake enforcement action but it would ensure greater accountability to Parliament.

DS.

Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill and the right to protest email campaign

By

In this country, we have a long-standing tradition that people can gather together and demonstrate, and the right to protest peacefully is a fundamental part of our democracy which I fully support.

In recent years I have been concerned by the extensive disruption that some protests have caused. Certain protesters, who have glued themselves to buildings, blocked bridges and obstructed access to buildings such as the Palace of Westminster and newspaper printing works, have highlighted some gaps in current legislation, which has not been updated since 1986. Recent events have shown us that existing public order legislation is no longer fit for managing the types of protest we experience today.

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill will strengthen police powers in England and Wales to tackle non-violent protests that have a significant disruptive effect. These powers will allow the police to safely manage protests where they threaten public order and stop people from getting on with their daily lives. The Government is taking proportionate action to ensure a crucial balance is struck between the fundamental right to peaceful protest and the rights of people to get on with their daily lives unimpeded.

The measures in the PCSC Bill are not about stopping or clamping down on right to protest but ensuring the police can better manage highly disruptive protests and maintain the balance I have outlined. 

It is the case that when using these powers, or existing public order powers, the police must act within the law. Importantly, the police must be able to demonstrate that their use of powers are necessary and proportionate. It is also clear that the police must act compatibly with human rights, in particular Article 10 (freedom of expression) and Article 11 (freedom of association).  

Much has been said regarding the proposed public nuisance offence. Clause 59 gives effect to recommendations made by the Law Commission in their July 2015 Report on ‘Simplification of the Criminal Law: Public Nuisance and Outraging Public Decency’. The report stated that the common law offence of public nuisance should be replaced by a statutory offence covering any conduct which endangers the life, health, property or comfort of a section of the public or obstructs them in the exercise of their rights. 

Importantly, the new statutory offence of public nuisance will cover the same conduct as the existing common law offence of public nuisance. 

DS.

Paint Recycling email campaign

By

The Resources and Waste Strategy sets out the aim of leaving our environment in a better state than we inherited it and I welcome the Royal Society of Chemistry’s work on the issue of waste paint.

The new Waste Prevention Programme proposes action by Government and industry across seven key sectors – construction; textiles; furniture; electrical and electronics products; road vehicles; packaging, plastics and single-use items; and food – to minimise waste and work towards a more resource efficient economy. This includes steps to design and manufacture products for optimum life and repair and reuse more items. The draft Programme includes a chapter on ensuring we have well-functioning local systems and services to facilitate reuse, repair and remanufacture – for example, via the operation of Household Waste Recycling Centres to enable reuse, or piloting circular economy hubs.

Further, the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) 1990 places a duty on Waste Collection Authorities (WCAs) to provide places, usually Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRC), where residents in their area can deposit their household waste.

The Waste and Resources Action Programme’s guidance for HWRCs, published in November 2018, states that, in order to promote responsible behaviour by local residents, local authorities should not charge residents for depositing waste from small scale DIY activities.

Voluntary action is also being taken by industry, alongside community initiatives, to reduce waste paint. Community RePaint schemes collect and redistribute paint, preventing it from going to waste. You can find out more about donating paint to Community RePaint schemes here: https://communityrepaint.org.uk/

Radiotherapy email campaign

By

As has been the case throughout the pandemic, the NHS will continue to maintain services wherever possible, particularly for urgent and cancer care. Patients are encouraged to contact their GP with concerns about their health, particularly for suspected cancer symptoms.

The Government is absolutely committed to supporting the NHS recovery from Covid-19, which will help to reduce waiting times for cancer treatment and care.

The NHS Long Term Plan (LTP), published during 2019, outlined a number of new measures for catching cancer early and providing treatment, with the aim that from 2028, 55,000 more people each year will survive their cancer for at least five years after diagnosis. One of the measures outlined in the plan is safer and more precise treatment, including advanced radiotherapy techniques and immunotherapies to continue to support improvements in survival rates. This will be supported by a £130 million upgrade of radiotherapy machines across England, including £32 million to replace 17 Linear Accelerators aged over 10 years by the end of March 2022, as well as commissioning the NHS new state-of-the-art Proton Beam facilities in London and Manchester. 

DS.