House of Commons

Latest news on house of commons

Acting Met chief could step aside in Damian Green leak row

The man tipped to become the new Metropolitan police commissioner was last night understood to be considering whether he should apply for the job, after a barrage of criticism from politicians on all sides over the arrest of the shadow Home Office minister Damian Green. Sir Paul Stephenson, as acting head of the Met, ultimately sanctioned the arrest of Green over his role in publishing documents allegedly leaked to him by a mole in the Home Office. His decision, described by one senior officer as "totally catastrophic", has led to a furious reaction from the Conservative party leader, David Cameron, the mayor of London, Boris Johnson, and members of the cabinet, who are understood to be divided over the issue. The deadline for applications for the top job at the Met is noon today and Stephenson is understood to be wondering whether the post is worth the flak. "He is a man who does angst over things quite a lot and he will be thinking very hard about this," said one source. Senior members of the cabinet have expressed deep disquiet over the treatment of Green, who was detained by police for nine hours last Thursday and forced to give a fingerprint and DNA sample. Some ministers voiced unease on the margins of a cabinet meeting in Leeds on Friday. They believe the police's behaviour was heavy-handed and gave the impression that the state was attempting to block the opposition from holding the government to account. Other ministers said that the police had good grounds to question Green. Harriet Harman, the leader of the Commons, admitted yesterday that she was "very concerned indeed" about what had happened, although the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, refused to apologise and insisted the police were independent. Today Jack Straw, the justice secretary, said that Smith was right not to apologise for what had happened to Green. "If any home secretary had offered an apology, there would have then been a huge furore about the fact that the home secretary was prejudging the actions and activities of the police without an investigation," Straw said in an interview on BBC Radio 4's Today programme. Straw said that if the Tories were unhappy about what had happened, they could complain to the independent police complaints authority. He also said that he was "pretty certain" that, once the affair was over, parliament would review the procedures that led to Green's office at the House of Commons being searched by police. The Tories intensified pressure last night by revealing further details of the police questioning of Green, who was arrested on suspicion that he had procured leaked documents from Chris Galley, a 26-year-old junior civil servant. Police allegedly accused the MP of "grooming" the young civil servant, in what was seen as an attempt to prove that Green had broken the law by offering inducements to procure leaked documents. A Tory source said that Green was furious at the use of a word with such horrendous connotations. "This was clearly designed to provoke Damian. This is typical of the cack-handed way the police have handled this." Such revelations will add to the pressure on the Met, and specifically Stephenson, who was seen as the favourite to succeed Sir Ian Blair as the new commissioner. He is understood to have had a furious row with Johnson on Thursday after telling him of the impending arrest. A Scotland Yard source yesterday denied that anyone had been bugged as part of the inquiry, after speculation that the police had listened in to calls between Green and the civil servant accused of leaking documents to him. Police sources stressed that they were investigating whether Green had aided, abetted and encouraged the civil servant to procure the information. Senior officers were split over whether the MP should have been investigated or arrested at all, it emerged yesterday. Some within Scotland Yard viewed the issue as a disciplinary one for the civil service, and not a criminal matter at all. Publicly the Met is defending its actions, saying there was nothing unusual about the use of 20 officers to carry out searches and the arrest of Green. "There were four addresses, five officers for each address," the source said. "The investigation is ongoing. That is all we are saying." There was also a row brewing between the Crown Prosecution Service and the police. The Guardian has been told that the CPS was involved in the decision by Bob Quick, the Met's assistant commissioner of specialist operations, to arrest Green. But the CPS angrily denied it was party to the decision to arrest, saying: "We were involved only in the preliminary stages of the investigation." It emerged that the arrest had not been sanctioned by the new director of prosecutions, Keir Starmer. A spokesman for the CPS said that Starmer had only been informed shortly before detectives swooped. This is crucial to another growing row ? the decision by the Commons serjeant at arms, Jill Pay, and the Speaker, Michael Martin, to allow police to search Green's office. Pay reportedly gave the go-ahead after police told her that the DPP had given his approval to the arrest. Martin is due to make a statement on Wednesday. Dominic Grieve, the shadow home secretary, said the police might have misled Pay. "One way of reading the contradictory explanations between the sergeant at arms and what the DPP has said is that the police misled her. That's a very serious issue which needs to be looked into," he told Sky News. A spokesman for Martin said: "The Speaker will be speaking to the house when the house returns."Damian GreenConservativesPoliceLondon politicsLondonguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Energy firms demand huge increases in direct debits

Sara Greig, a child support worker for Shelter, has only four radiators in her one-bed flat in Glasgow. She recently installed new insulation and diligently followed the recommendations in an energy saving report. Her annual gas bill will be £600 at the very most, so she was astonished when Scottish Gas wrote to her this week demanding she raise her monthly direct debit from £25 to £125, equivalent to £1,500 a year. Greig is one of a growing number of customers angered by demands for higher direct debits that bear little relation to their gas usage. Customers complain the demands amount to little more than a free loan. Prompted by a wave of complaints, the chairman of the House of Commons business and enterprise select committee, Peter Luff MP, this week demanded that the energy regulator Ofgem launch an inquiry. He wants it to investigate whether the energy companies have been abusing the direct debit system to build up cash surpluses. Luff has received so many complaints from his constituency, Mid-Worcestshire, that he handed Ofgem's chief executive Alistair Buchanan a file containing the details of households that have had their direct debits upped, despite being significantly in credit. "There's a real temptation for the companies to boost their cash flow at a time of economic recession," he says. "I think things are getting worse and there will be people in fuel poverty who are paying by direct debit who can't afford these huge increases. Ofgem needs to investigate this issue urgently to see if they think this is correct - and if they are, we need to do something about it."If successful, Luff will be a hero to many consumers. Guardian Money gets regular complaints about direct debits from customers who say they feel browbeaten into accepting increases. Greig's case is typical. She was aware that her payments would rise, as she was £377 in debt to Scottish Gas, part of British Gas. "I appreciate that costs are going up and it is winter, but I do not understand how this increase can be so enormous," she says. "We have just insulated our flat and put reflective material down the back of radiators; I've done an energy savers report, all in an attempt to save money. But it appears to have made little impact."Given that her annual consumption is likely to be at most £600 a year, she should only need to pay a maximum of £86 a month to clear the debt and to cover the next year's use.Despite this, Scottish Gas insisted that it would only decrease her payments to £105. "Gas consumers use four times as much gas in the winter as at other times and it makes clear sense to build up a credit over the summer," a Scottish Gas spokeswoman says."Customers are typically £66 in credit at the start of the winter, and £70 in debit at the end. Direct debits are there to make sure customers don't get huge bills they won't be expecting and would struggle to pay."Greig's case shows that even after being given the right information, gas companies will try to raise direct debits. British Gas is one of the worst, but it is by no mean alone. The consumer group Which? said recently it believes that fuel companies could have already earned as much as £660m from customers over-paying their direct debits.Ofgem said this week it was examining Luff's file. "Suppliers should treat their customers fairly and Ofgem expects them to do so. To date we have no quantified evidence indicating misuse of direct debit schemes," it said.There was further evidence this week that prices should start coming down in the spring. Joe Malinowski, owner of TheEnergyShop.com comparison website, said: "The further wholesale energy markets fall, the bigger the scope for cuts in retail energy bills. We calculate that cuts in energy bills could now be in the region of £200 over the next 12 months." In Monday's pre-budget report, the chancellor said Ofgem would have to publish quarterly reports to allow consumers to track whether price falls were feeding through to retail prices.Debit where debit is dueWhat to do if the gas company hikes your direct debits: ? Despite what the person in the energy supplier's call centre might tell you, as the customer you have the right to set your direct debit payments at any level you like. ? Average gas usage for a standard home is currently around £800 a year; electricity is close to £500. Bear this in mind when considering any letter from a power firm telling you to raise your direct debits. If you're already in credit and being told that repayments are to rise substantially, then challenge it.? It's important to make sure you are dealing with actual meter readings rather than estimates. The power suppliers regularly overestimate usage and set direct debit payments accordingly.By taking regular meter readings, your supplier should be able to predict usage more accurately. ? If the power firm refuses to lower payments or hand back your surplus, simply cancel the direct debit, take the refund, and then reinstate it at a level of your choosing. Don't be bullied by call-centre staff who are told to do everything they can to keep customers in credit.Just be aware that if you set them too low, you run the risk of running up a large deficit which, at some point, you will have to pay off.? Remember there's nothing to stop you paying by quarterly direct debit - in which case you'll simply pay for the fuel you've actually used, providing a meter reading is taken. This doesn't allow you to spread the payments, though.? If any money is taken in error, the direct debit guarantee means the bank has to refund the money wrongly taken. If you are a victim of this, exercise your right to have your money returned, and argue about the rights and wrongs of the case later.m.brignall@guardian.co.ukEnergy billsHousehold billsConsumer affairsFamily financesguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Cameron anger at 'Stalinesque' arrest of Tory MP in leak inquiry

A political row erupted last night after counter-terrorism police arrested the shadow Home Office minister, Damian Green, after he published leaked documents allegedly sent to the Tories by a government whistleblower.An angry David Cameron condemned the arrest as "Stalinesque", after Green was taken into custody at about 1.50pm in his Ashford constituency and escorted to a central London police station.At around 11pm, as the Tories accused the authorities of a "perverse sense of priorities" for using counter-terrorism officers to arrest an MP while terrorists attacked Mumbai, Green was released on unconditional bail to return at a date in February for further questioning.A "tired and angry" Green said early this morning: "I was astonished to have spent more than nine hours under arrest for doing my job. I emphatically deny that I have done anything wrong. I have many times made public information that the government wanted to keep secret, information that the public has a right to know."In a democracy, opposition politicians have a duty to hold the government to account. I was elected to the House of Commons precisely to do that and I certainly intend to continue doing so."Green's defiant statement came at the end of a day in which nine counter-terrorism officers conducted simultaneous searches at four locations: Green's constituency office and home in Ashford, Kent, his office in the House of Commons and his London home.The MP was arrested under common law for "aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring misconduct in public office".The police action followed the arrest 10 days ago of a government whistleblower who allegedly leaked four documents to Green, who then passed them to the press. Cameron was convinced that such a move would have to be approved at top political levels. A Tory source said: "David Cameron is angry. This is Stalinesque."Labour sources indicated that neither the prime minister nor the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, knew about the arrest. Gordon Brown only learned of it around three hours later. Sources said it was "preposterous" to suggest that ministers would have approved the arrest.The Metropolitan police denied any ministerial involvement.Cameron and the London mayor, Boris Johnson, were informed that Green would be arrested. Johnson reportedly asked Sir Paul Stephenson, the deputy commissioner of the Metropolitan police, whether he was sure that he needed to arrest Green, who could have been questioned.George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, told the BBC: "I think it is extraordinary that the police have taken that decision. It has long been the case in our democracy that MPs have received information from civil servants. To hide information from the public is wrong."ConservativesDavid Cameronguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

If we want more representative MPs, we need to start talking about class

In some circles, the fashion among politicians for pinching Barack Obama's magical rhetoric is now known as the Yes We Can-wagon. Last week it was Harriet Harman's turn to climb aboard - though in fairness, there was at least some superficial logic in her use of Obama's name. In the wake of the election of the first black president, she announced a decisive move on the representation of women, ethnic minorities and disabled people at Westminster, and a year-long Speaker's conference inquiry into the issue of representation. The initiative came with a flurry of speculation about building on the legal status of all-women shortlists with new laws allowing all-ethnic minority candidate selection, a pledge to look at gay and lesbian representation, and the obligatory reference to the president-elect's most easily-stolen slogan. Obama, Harman told the Commons, "has reaffirmed and re-legitimised democracy in America. He said, 'Yes we can.' We should say, 'Yes, Westminster can too.'"Here, though, is the big drawback. Even if all this is being packaged with 21st-century buzz-phrases, it smacks of Labour politics of an older vintage and the great mistake of the metropolitan left of the 1980s: keeping the flag flying for a polite version of identity politics but neglecting the issue of class. In June, Harman launched a national equality panel that promised explicitly to look at the issue of socioeconomic inequality, so why isn't that an issue when it comes to the makeup of the Commons? If class is to be discussed, the best that can be hoped for is that it will come up under "other associated matters", which hardly sounds promising.Before we get started, this is not meant as any kind of argument against moving on the representational deficits that people involved will be talking about. But without work on class - and the associated matter of an increasingly dominant professionalised political elite - the process will be fixed in a state of weird denial. Consider the numbers: in 1987, long after the high-water mark of working-class representation in the Commons, 73 MPs who had come from manual occupations were elected; by 2005, the figure had dropped to a mere 38. In crude terms, that makes for a startling picture: about a third of the working population being reflected in just over 6% of MPs. Worsening this imbalance, there's the continuing rise of MPs who have known precious little apart from the political whirl. Figures from the Nuffield election studies project put the share of current MPs who were "politicians or political organisers" at 14.1%, up from 5.4% in 1987 - an increase surely reflected in the numbers from Westminster-aligned trades like thinktanks, PR and public affairs.Of course, there are politicians from all sides who are discomfited by this. A couple of weeks ago, for instance, the secretary of state for communities, Hazel Blears made a speech to the Hansard Society full of tough talk. "It is deeply unhealthy for our political class to be drawn from a narrowing social base and range of experience," she said. Parliament was in need of "people who know what it is to worry about the rent collector's knock or the fear of layoff ... in short, we need more Dennis Skinners, more David Davises, more David Blunketts". The consequences in policy terms mean that too often, understanding the concerns of whole swaths of people becomes a matter of peering at them through the steamed-up lenses of focus groups. Meanwhile, given the fixation of the main parties with supposedly affluent marginals, many issues are either overlooked or addressed late in the day: the crisis in social housing, the divisive effects of too many companies' reliance on agency workers, problem debt, and so on. Disengagement inevitably increases and before you know it, the ghoulish opportunists of the BNP come along to fill the vacuum.So what can be done? Behind this lurks a mess of stuff: the centralising of party machines, the dereliction of parties on the ground, and the long decline of a model of civic engagement that once stretched from churches, through institutions like the Co-ops and trade unions. There again, the latter are far from breathing their last, and there are other projects and groups that may yet provide wellsprings of political leadership. One thinks of, say, the grassroots organisation London Citizens, responsible for the London living wage campaign; or the Young Foundation's UpRising project, aimed at fighting what it calls "channel blockage" - the absence of "routes for many talented young people, particularly from white working class and minority communities, into positions of power". At present being piloted with 60 19- to 25-year-olds from the boroughs of Barking and Dagenham, Newham and Tower Hamlets, UpRising is aimed at acquainting them with campaigning and decision-making - and although its organisers say they've yet to reach parts of the social map that are truly disengaged, UpRising claims to be already operating outside the usual social networks. Its official patrons include Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg, which points up an interesting problem: if they were confronted with the energised, inquisitive people the programme aims to cultivate, wouldn't their whips and party managers feel uneasy?Meanwhile, as fractious talk eddies around Westminster, we await the names of the 17 MPs who will make up the Speaker's conference - to be chaired by that former sheet metal worker and shop steward Michael Martin. One parliamentary source says Labour MPs who have been sounding off about the neglect of the class issue have been branded "dishonest" (no, I don't get it either), but among the dissenters you can detect a pretty straightforward concern. It's difficult to put it delicately, but it goes something like this: the Harman critique of parliament's inadequacies is in danger of engendering tokenism, and its definition of success could be a political class that may look different but will still be too cut off from the socio-economic nitty-gritty. In the brief debate that followed her proposal, the Labour MP Tony Wright - who says he's "astonished" at the limited remit of the Speaker's conference inquiry - was a lone voice, but he said something very important: "The Labour party came into existence because the Liberals were refusing to choose working-class candidates, so the trade union movement and others said, 'We will set up our own party to ensure that working-class people can enter parliament'. It would be odd to talk about the problem of under-representation in public life and to set up a Speaker's conference at which we could think about those issues and come up with remedies, without mentioning class at all."Quite so, which brings me to an American politician with opinions that may not lie too far away. His arguments are focused largely on education and employment, but the logic is much the same. Go through his cuttings file, and you find opposition to those who want to roll back what Americans call affirmative action, leavened with the idea that if you're going to carry on looking at race and gender, you should also take the class question into account, so as not to ignore "white kids who have been disadvantaged ... and shown themselves to have what it takes to succeed". Riders on the Yes We Can-wagon should take note: his name is Barack Obama.House of CommonsLabourConservativesLiberal DemocratsRace issuesGenderEqualityguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

House of Commons envelopes could be made abroad

The manufacture of House of Commons envelopes is likely to be shifted overseas an MP said today.

MPs decry Heathrow T5 fiasco

'National embarrassment', says Transport Committee The House of Commons Transport Committee has described the anarchic opening of Heathrow's Terminal Five as a "national embarrassment" which showed "serious failings on the part of both BAA and British Airways".?