Alasdair Watson

So, the Digital Economy Bill passed. What now?

Well, first of all, you might consider writing to your MP again. Here’s what I’m sending. You’d need to amend it a bit to reflect your specific circumstances, but it might be worth doing.

Dear Sadiq Khan,

I wrote to you a few weeks ago, regarding the Digital Economy Bill. I didn’t ask that you vote for or against it, because while I personally am against it, I recognise that the issues it covers are very complex, the answers are not simple, and that points of view other than mine need to be thoroughly considered. I wrote to you instead to ask that you do everything possible to stop this complex bill going through in the wash up, something that many of your colleagues in both houses of Parliament described as a deplorable abuse of process, and highly controversial at the least.

I have not yet received a response from you. I’m sure one will be forthcoming, as you’ve always been very good about writing back when I have written to you in the past, but I think you will agree that with the bill now passed, this is very much a case of too little, too late.

I wasn’t the only one writing to my MP on this matter. Over 10,000 people wrote to their MP expressing similar sentiments. And I know that you have had more letters than mine on their subject – I’m personally aware of at least 6 other people who wrote to you on the same topic, and I am certain that we were far from the only ones, even if you only got a statistically average number of letters. This wasn’t an outcry in favour of file-sharing, or other criminal activity, this was the people demanding that their elected representatives do the job they were elected to do, and take time to actually consider and debate one of the most controversial bills this parliament has seen.

I write to you to request, firstly, an account of any steps you took to prevent the bill being dealt with in the wash-up, and secondly an account of the business that kept you from the House on the night of Tuesday the 6th of April between 5pm and 9:30pm, when the bill got its second reading – surely if the bill had to be dealt with in the wash-up, it should at least have had a properly attended debate.

I’m aware that you are, of course, extremely busy, and cannot be expected to attend every debate in the House of Commons, but with the election coming up, I would like to be sure I understand what it is that you prioritise above the issues that matter to me and thousands of others – there’s every chance it was something more important, and I would like to give you the opportunity to convince me of that.

Perhaps you might even consider raising a question in the house, demanding that as many MPs as possible account for their whereabouts that night – while I’m sure you and your fellow MPs hear from people in similar numbers on a variety of issues, it is certainly usual to see such a groundswell of support, not for an agenda, but for the process of democracy, and I would very much like to know why so many MPs ignored the request not for them to come down on one side of a particular issue, but to simply take time to consider it fully.

Yours sincerely,

Alasdair Watson

If you do send a similar letter, and hear anything back, please do let me know. I think it’d be interesting to try and put together a list of what all the MPs who weren’t present were doing, so if you feel like circulating this idea, do please do so.

It is wrong that it would make me more likely to vote Labour if they actually used this as a campaign advert. But it probably would.

Edit: From the Grauniad’s April Fools Day joke here.

Write to your MP. Do it now.

What about? Well, you may have heard me and others carping on about the Digital Economy Bill. I’m going to set aside how I feel about it (although I’ll come back to that another time) for a moment, and just accept that some sort of Bill with that name has some kind of useful purpose. OK. It’s going to happen. Except with a Bill this important (the bill is after all, setting the basis for a large chunk of how our economy will work over the coming decades) it has to be done correctly, and democratically. There has to be debate, and out elected representatives should have time to consider it.

They’re not going to get that.

The Bill is going to be dealt with in the wash-up. (The wash-up being that period prior to a general election where bills and amendments are rushed through the houses expressly without proper oversight and debate – in theory to allow the business of the old parliament to be concluded.) The link above mentions that what she’s talking about is based on hearsay, and is not to be taken as 100% correct until Hansard is published. So allow me to quote Hansard.

Lord Young of Norwood Green: I answered that. However, the noble Earl is clearly as unfamiliar with the procedure as, I confess, I am. Nevertheless, I am reliably informed that the usual channels will see the proposed new clause and that an amended clause will then be dealt with in the wash-up. I cannot give any more details. My noble friend the Deputy Chief Whip is nodding in the affirmative. I rest on the assurance that we intend to do this. It is a viable way forward.

They’re going to continue to amend and push through a massively contentious bill, during the wash-up. So I think I will continue to quote Hansard.

The Earl of Erroll: I am in a difficult position. I am delighted that the Minister realises the shortcomings of this clause; that it has replaced the previous Clause 17, which I did not like either; and that, therefore, something better will appear. On the other hand, the method by which it is appearing is by a complete and absolute abuse of parliamentary process. I am not quite sure why we bother to sit and debate any laws at all if the Front Benches in another place can get together and put whatever they like into a bit of legislation. That is for another time and another place. I have always found the whole area of wash-up very troublesome, particularly as a Cross-Bencher who does not get a look-in at all. I have seen some very funny things going through. When I see two Front Benches colluding, I usually think that we are in trouble.

This is troubling enough, except that the other day, a BPI strategy memo was leaked. I’m going to quote from it, too.

John Whittingdale – an inveterate “timing sceptic” (ie. he’s for the bill but doesn’t think it will get through in time) has said this week that he thinks that it could still be lost if enough MPs protest at not having the opportunity to scrutinise it.

Even the proponents of this Bill do not think it will pass if MPs actually have time to look at it. They are basing their strategy on being able to ram this bill through in a thoroughly undemocratic manner. And they are going to succeed, unless you write to your MP, and demand that they demand the time to fulfill their democratic obligations.