Protecting children, delivery charges, nuisance calls and better comms support for deaf people - Lib Dem MPs' private members bills

Stephen Tall told us all about the private members' bills brought in by Tory MPs in their "alternative Queen's Speech" - everything from burka banning to reintroducing the death penalty to naming the August Bank Holiday after Margaret Thatcher.

I thought I'd look into the measures the Liberal Democrats who were successful in the Great Parliamentary Raffle are hoping to bring into law. As you might expect, they're a bit more practical and relevant.

Sir Malcolm Bruce's Bill is all about improving communications support for deaf people. Signature has more details:

Sir Malcolm is a tireless advocate for the deaf community and is keen to use this opportunity to improve the everyday communication experiences of deaf and hard of hearing people...
The main aims of the bill are to establish a body that oversees British Sign Language (BSL) training, BSL teaching and supports deaf and hard of hearing children in schools.

The full title is "a Bill to establish a body to assess provision of communication support for deaf people and to make recommendations; and for connected purposes". The short title of the bill has been confirmed as Communication Support (Deafness) Bill.

It would have been surprising if Mike Crockart hadn't produced a bill aimed at tackling nuisance calls. His campaign on the subject continues to gather support.  Which? magazine is supporting his bill:

Backing Mike Crockart MP’s Private Members’ Bill which aims to change the laws around how personal data is used and to give regulators more powers to tackle companies which breaks the rules, Which? executive director Richard Lloyd said:

“People are sick and tired of being bombarded with nuisance calls and texts. The current system is failing the public and given the scale of this problem, it’s time for the Government to step in.

“We urgently need to see a new approach, new laws and new technology to tackle this scourge on people’s lives. We hope MPs get behind this bill to strengthen the law on consent and put people back in control of their personal data.”

Last Christmas, Tavish Scott highlighted that Christmas would be cancelled if Santa had to pay the extortionate delivery charges often levied on parts of rural Scotland.  Robert Smith agrees and his bill aims to force retailers to be  more upfront about these charges. He said:

Some of the extra charges made by online couriers to deliver to parts of Scotland are just outrageous. Retailers need to think about finding more reasonable ways to deliver their products to rural areas. One option is to deliver goods by Royal Mail which charges one price to deliver anywhere in the UK. Alternatively retailers need to think about using couriers that charge more reasonable amounts for delivery in Scotland.

People in rural Scotland and on the Islands understand that products may take a little longer to arrive, but the additional cost charged by some companies just seems out of all proportion.

Finally, Mark Williams concentrates on child protection and updating the definition of what constitutes cruelty.  I will warn you that his explanation makes heartbreaking reading:

As a result, the 1868 Act stated that ‘wilful neglect’ was a criminal offence if the health of the child was or was likely to be ‘seriously injured’. The 1868 Act’s replacement in 1933 refers to the same requirement for neglect to be ‘wilful’, and for the child to be subjected to ‘unnecessary suffering’, and this only on a physical level, in order for that neglect to be criminal.

In my view there is no ‘acceptable’ level of suffering for children, and yet our laws in the United Kingdom currently assume that there is.

That needs to change – it cannot be the case that the ‘accidental’ neglect of children (that is to say there is nothing ‘wilful’ in the neglect) is not considered a criminal offence, and that no sanctions exist to tackle psychological and emotional child neglect – this is despite expert opinions suggesting that psychological neglect is the most destructive form of abuse.

I have encountered a number of harrowing tales since choosing to become involved in Action for Children’s campaign on Child Neglect. In one case, an individual child was openly told by his stepfather that he was hated; he was forced to go to bed before his siblings, at 6.30pm, and regularly wet his bed because his room was not lit, to the extent that maggots were found in the mattress. The child was persistently criticised, refused affection and told he wasn’t wanted; was socially isolated, prevented from playing with his siblings, and was used as a scapegoat for the family’s problems.

Yet, this is not considered criminal neglect by our laws and the police are, as such, powerless to intervene. When the child was finally removed to live with his grandmother, the hatred passed on to one of his younger siblings, who was only removed two years later.

All in all, a much more sensible package of measures.  If you want these to have any chance of success, it'll be down to lobbying MPs and government ministers to give them support and time, so get to it.

Skype an MP - Mike Crockart launches e-surgeries

Way back in the mists of time, my first awareness of an MP making themselves available to their constituents came through the pages of the John O'Groat Journal. Robert Maclennan, then a Labour MP but soon to join the SDP, held regular "phone-in clinics." This was a sensible approach to dealing with his vast constituency of Caithness and Sutherland. He had the face to face version as well, but the regular phone surgeries, accessed by a freephone number so there was no cost to the constituents,made sense to me.

That was more than 30 years ago. Today, MPs are always looking for new ways to stay in touch with people. When I worked for Willie, we took casework off Facebook and Twitter on a daily basis. Mike Crockart, Liberal Democrat MP for Edinburgh West, has decided to start holding surgeries via Skype.

The first event will take place on March 28th between 5-6 pm. Anyone who wants to take part will need do contact Mike's office in 0131 339 0339 to be allocated a private appointment.They would then have to download Skype and dial in on the day. I asked what would happen if a session over-ran and the next person dialled in. They simply wouldn't be added to the call until the previous person was finished.

Another thing I discovered was that Mike has done sign language surgeries using  a webcam for deaf constituents.

Introducing the e-surgeries, Mike said:

I know that people are busy and that often they can’t make it along to my surgeries. I want to be as accessible as possible for people who wish to let me now their views and for people who need my help.

For busy parents, business owners and those who live in the more rural parts of my constituency the e-surgeries offer a quick and convenient way to get in touch with me. At the moment those in some rural parts may struggle to secure the broadband speed required for the software, but I am confident that my campaign for better broadband will change that.

I am looking forward to hearing how the surgery goes. I know that Liberal Youth hold a lot of their Execs by Skype so it should work well.  Quite often, you need to hand over documentation when you are asking your MP to deal with something for you but that can be done at a different time or by post or by scanning and emailing them.

The #hardesthit fringe at Scottish Liberal Democrat Conference

The Liberal Democrats have done a lot of good in this coalition government, from ending child detention, to cutting income taxes for low paid workers to ensuring fair pension increases every year with Steve Webb's triple lock, to giving extra money to disadvantaged kids via the Pupil Premium, Nick Clegg's £1 bn Youth Contract and the extra money he's given to ensure half a million people get good treatment for mental health problems in England.

It's an impressive record. But there is bad to go with the good. Regular readers will be aware of my FFS list - that short but still worrying list of places I wish we hadn't gone. Right at the top is that part of welfare reform which cut benefits to sick and disabled people. However much we know that if the Tories had been left on their own to sort the welfare system, they would have been even worse, the reality of the Welfare Reform Act is something that many Liberal Democrats feel very uncomfortable with.

We are not, however, sweeping it under the carpet and pretending it isn't there. The Hardest Hit came to our Scottish conference in Dunfermline at the weekend and held a fringe meeting at which they told us about what some of the most vulnerable people out there are going through. The room was absolutely packed, showing that many of us care deeply about this issue and want to know how we can help.

The video that they showed us was hard to watch. Disabled people's fears about what may lie ahead were laid bare:



One point I would make, though, is that many, most even, of those who fear will not have their benefits taken away from them. Friends of mine went through months of hell worrying about having to go through the Work Capability Assessment. Now, I'm as cynical about ATOS and the system as anyone else, but even I was certain that there was no way they would be affected. And they weren't. But they went through hell. What happened to them was not humane. People have had two years of worry about the prospect of losing their benefits and that's just not fair. These are people who are already fighting their physical or mental condition to start with. They don't have the energy to put up with the insecurity and uncertainty, or the reality of losing their benefits as well. If people are being driven to want to commit suicide because they worry they are going to starve to death if they lose their benefits, that's something that we need to address. Now.

There have been some welcome changes to the Work Capability Assessment, but it's still not something which commands confidence among people. They don't trust it, and their cynicism about it is justified. Listening to Carolyn Roberts from SAMH talk about how a man who had barely left his house in 25 years due to Agoraphobia was put in the work related activity group, thus losing his benefits, made me furious. Let's hope that family gets the help they need to have that overturned on appeal - but, again, that is an incredibly stressful process, and very long drawn out. Often, once an appeal has been successful, the person barely has time to catch breath before being dragged in for the next assessment and the whole treadmill starts again.

Last year, I spoke at an RNIB fringe meeting on welfare reform. I was completely outclassed by Ken Reid (although I was pretty much on his side), the chair of RNIB Scotland. He is such a compelling and captivating speaker. Last year he asked us to imagine being suddenly blinded - it would take much more than the year you would get ESA for to get used to being blind and coping with life, let alone getting to work. This year, he talked about the Work Capability Assessment which he described as cruel and inhumane. He talked about the extra costs of being disabled - for example, he said it costs £800 for software to make your computer talk to you. He talked also about the disadvantages faced by disabled people in the job market, as well as the limitations to the jobs they can go for.

Carer Jacqueline then talked about the challenges of caring for her severely autistic daughter. She told us how it can take 3 hours to get her ready, and how her behaviour can be incredibly challenging to deal with. She's doing all this on around 2 hours' sleep a night. It's not the best environment to have to take on a whole load of Government bureaucracy as well.

Mike Crockart, MP for Edinburgh West, talked about his work on relating the WCA to human rights and how his committee had been very clear that the Work Capability Assessment had to take into account social and environmental factors.

I made a brief contribution right at the end, repeating my strong belief that we need Nick Clegg to call out David Cameron or any other Tory when they come out with their "scrounger" narrative. That seemed to have a lot of support in the room.

One of the fundamental tenets of liberalism is to protect citizens from abuse by the State. The Department of Work and Pensions doesn't always get it right. When it mucks up, it, like its friends HM Revenue and Customs and the UK Border Agency, it is very reluctant to admit or sort it. I think that we as a party need to do two things. First of all, we need to get evidence of where this new regime is letting people down. Hard evidence. And make sure our ministers know about every single case. We must not give up on them.

Secondly, we need to put our heads together and work out how best to challenge the system, how to make sure people going through it have a better experience. I wonder if we could learn from the likes of Citizens UK, who turned up at UKBA HQ with a caravan with nuns serving tea to the staff. That got them into high level talks and as a result small but significant changes have been made at reporting sessions. The frontline DWP staff are often poorly managed, underpaid, stressed and have little power within the organisation. They in turn are the point of contact with extremely vulnerable and often desperate people. It's a recipe for disaster and has to change. It will take inspirational leadership to change the culture at the DWP, to make people feel that they are being treated by human beings, not criminals.

We're not, as a party, in a place where we'd choose to be. I am glad that groups like the Hardest Hit and Scope, with whom I attended a very useful round table discussion in Brighton at Federal Conference, recognise that we do have a commitment to ensuring fair and proper treatment of people in the benefits system. George Potter's Equal Citizenship motion passed at Conference shows where our heart is.

Liam McArthur tells Holyrood: Governments must work to protect people from nuisance calls

Quite often, MSPs at Holyrood debate things in a mature fashion. We don't often see it because it happens after hours or doesn't get the coverage because it's too civilised.

One of these moments happened on Tuesday night when MSPs debated a motion from Liberal Democrat MSP for Orkney Liam McArthur on the subject of nuisance calls. This did get some coverage on the BBC, too. Liam told how nuisance calls are more than just inconvenient. They have a sinister side. A constituent of his, who has Dementia, was pressured into buying a broadband package despite not even  having a computer.

MSPs from all parties spoke in the debate, commending Liam for bringing it. Particularly alarming (sorry) was an account of how a constituent of Labour's Mark Griffin was subject to aggressive sales tactics during a call and was pressured into signing up for a burglar alarm with an expensive annual maintenance fee. He was able to advise her how to stop it but she should never have been treated that way.

There was a bit of a comedy moment when Tory Mary Scanlon spoke of being robo-called by Sean Connery asking her to join the SNP. "Did you?" said Nationalist Graeme Dey.

You can read the whole debate here and sign up to Mike Crockart's No to Nuisance Calls Campaign here.

Liam McArthur's speech is copied below in full.

In bringing this debate to the Chamber this evening, I’m painfully aware that it will strike many as a bit rich: politicians complaining about those who make nuisance calls.   Like most MSPs, I imagine, I have played my part in interrupting the odd family mealtime over the years – and not just in the McArthur household.

But the issues underlying this campaign are serious and deserve proper recognition, and so I warmly congratulate the Sunday Post for the leading role it has played in highlighting the problem of nuisance calls and texts.

My colleague, Mike Crockart has spearheaded the campaign at Westminster, but I felt it was important for this Parliament to make its voice heard in saying no to nuisance calls. 

I am therefore grateful to all those colleagues who have signed my motion and who will participate this evening: a show of support that demonstrates the cross-party nature of the campaign and nationwide extent of the problems created by nuisance calls and texts.

The aim of the campaign must be to bring an end, or at the very least significantly reduce the number of these calls and texts that are made.  I am hopeful this can be achieved.

In just over a month, more than 11,000 people have signed up to the campaign: testament to the strength of feeling about this issue. Many of my constituents in Orkney have got in touch to tell me how fed up they are of nuisance calls to their mobiles, home phones and to family members.  Not to mention the deluge of unsolicited texts.

Cold calling has been an issue raised at constituency surgeries for years. In the past, the energy companies were guilty of over-stepping the mark in a bid to persuade customers to shift supplier.  

Thanks to many local campaigns, most of the big six energy companies have now stopped doorstep selling.

But progress elsewhere has been slow.  I recently met a constituent, whose elderly mother, a dementia sufferer, was repeatedly called by one company and badgered to take out a broadband package.  She finally relented and signed up for the expensive offer - despite not even having a computer!

It took months to rectify the situation and get the money reimbursed.  But this case at least ended positively.  Many thousands more do not.

The bottom line is that people shouldn’t have to put up with this menace which puts many vulnerable and elderly people at risk of fraud. The calls and texts can seem threatening and intimidating; to many they are just as worrying as it would be were someone to appear on their doorstep unannounced and uninvited.

Astonishingly, there were 650 million silent calls made in the UK last year alone. This works out at around 50 nuisance calls a year for each Scot.  Across the UK, 3 million people will be scammed out of an average of £800 this year, as a result of obtrusive calls.

Something must be done about this and it seems clear that the measures currently in place to shield people from nuisance calls are not up to the job.

Like many, I know that I haven’t had a fall in the last 5 years; that I’m not entitled to PPI compensation and I certainly don’t want a pay-day loan.

But that doesn’t stop the offers coming thick and fast.  Even for those who have signed up to the Telephone Preference Service, it seems there is no escape.

According to Ofcom, complaints to the TPS about unwanted marketing calls jumped to almost 10,000 for the month of July. This compares to 3,212 in December 2011.

In an online poll of over 4000 individuals for Which? 76% of respondents said that despite signing up to the TPS they still receive lots of nuisance calls. Only 1% rated the service as excellent, most said that it made no difference.

The Sunday Post said recently:

“It’s clear from the overwhelming response we have had from our readers this problem plagues our daily lives. And yet regardless of asking for the companies to stop – and sometimes taking steps to halt them – the onslaught continues.

“The will is there from people to put an end to this once and for all. Now is the time for the Government to act on that will and strengthen existing legislation.”

The readers of the Sunday Post and the thousands who have backed the No 2 Nuisance Calls campaign want their voice to be heard. People feel under siege and it is time that we gave them the tools to fight back.

I believe it is time for the Information Commissioner’s powers be strengthened to take in all forms of unsolicited contact and for there to be single point of contact for any individual wishing to protect their privacy from unwanted calls, texts, fax or emails.

Yesterday’s announcement by the Information Commissioner’s Office that it was issuing fines of over £250,000 to two illegal marketeers who distributed millions of spam texts is evidence that, where it can, it will act.  But from the figures I have already quoted, it is clear that the ICO still lacks the tools it needs for the job.

Joint working between Scotland’s two governments can see progress made and I hope the Minister will now agree to work with his counterpart at Westminster in putting in place measures that will protect millions of Scots from nuisance calls.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I simply do not understand why we continue to allow this to happen, why we are so permissive about our telecoms contact.

If this was happening face-to-face; if pay day loan sharks or PPI insurance litigators were knocking on the doors of the elderly and vulnerable in our communities, then either running away or bullying them into making claims we’d be up in arms.

Just because the constant barracking, intimidation and hectoring happens after pushing buttons on a phone rather than pushing a door bell does not make it ok, or any less frightening to vulnerable people across Scotland.

And yet that is the everyday reality for too many of them. It cannot continue. It must stop.

I thank all those who have shown their support for this campaign, and my motion, and look forward to hearing what colleagues – and particularly the Minister – have to say.

Lib Dems take No to Nuisance Calls campaign to Holyrood

I've written recently about Liberal Democrat MP Mike Crockart's campaign to free us from the pain in the backside that is nuisance calls, emails and texts. These contacts aren't just a nuisance - they can be dangerous with vulnerable people being conned out of money.

Today, Orkney MSP Liam McArthur will propose the following motion at Holyrood. 

S4M-04204 ♦ Liam McArthur () (Scottish Liberal Democrats): That the Parliament understands that nuisance calls blight the lives of many people in Orkney and across Scotland; believes that these calls are particularly distressful for older, vulnerable people; is concerned that a quarter of a billion nuisance calls are made to Scots each year and that complaints about silent or abandoned calls in the UK have trebled in 2012; believes that poor regulation is failing to address the problem and that the rise in companies offering redress for missold payment protection insurance and a lack of consumer knowledge are exacerbating the situation; considers that more must be done to tackle nuisance calls and other forms of unsolicited contact, and would welcome a single, simple point of contact for any individual wishing to protect their privacy from unwanted calls, texts, faxes and emails.

 This motion has attracted support from Labour, Tory, SNP and Green MSPs. The debate takes place at 5pm tonight. Ahead of his speech, Liam said:

Astonishingly, there were 650 million silent calls made in the UK and 45 million spam texts sent in Europe last year alone. Every Scot is bombarded with 50 nuisance calls each year and, largely as a result of the obtrusive calls, 3 million people across the UK will be scammed out of £800 this year.

Even after joining the Telephone Preference Service, some people continue to receive nuisance calls relating to PPI compensation, accident claims or pay-day loan companies.

Measures currently in place to shield people from nuisance calls are not doing the job. The Liberal Democrats are calling for both of Scotland’s governments to work together to bring about measures that will protect millions of Scots from nuisance calls.
This could be done through the creation of a single point of contact for anyone wishing to protect their privacy from unwanted calls, texts or e-mails. Many of my constituents in Orkney have been in touch to tell me how fed up they are of nuisance calls and texts to their mobiles and home phones. I would urge people from across Scotland to sign our petition and make their voice heard in the fight against nuisance calls.

Edinburgh West's Lib Dem MP Mike Crockart started this campaign which has been backed by the Sunday Post. If you agree, you can sign up here.

Mike had a similar debate in Westminster two weeks ago. This is his speech from Hansard:

I wish to tackle the important issue of nuisance calls. Like many Members, I am fed up with receiving nuisance calls on my mobile and home telephone, and unsolicited texts sent to my mobile. It is a real problem for many of my constituents, much as cold-calling in person was many years ago. It was mainly energy companies who indulged in cold-calling in person, but thanks to many local campaigns across the country, most of the big six energy companies have stopped the practice. It is time to turn our attention to the issue of nuisance calls and texts.

There were 650 million silent calls made in the UK last year, and 45 million spam texts sent in Europe last year and every year. Some 3 million UK adults will be scammed out of £800 each this year by fraudulent marketing calls. It is clear that we have an industry in crisis and a country under siege. People should not have to put up with this menace, which puts many vulnerable and elderly people at just as much risk of fraud as if the crook or pushy salesman turned up at their door unannounced. Yet the two Departments responsible for various aspects of the industry—the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Ministry of Justice—do not seem to think that there is a need for any change in legislation.

In response to a letter that I sent him, the Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport, the hon. Member for Wantage (Mr Vaizey) said that although the Government do not believe that sweeping changes are necessary to the regulatory framework, the Ministry of Justice continues to keep the Information Commissioner’s Office powers under review. Thousands of people disagree and are backing my campaign to restrict this nuisance. They say that their experience shows that the current situation is simply not good enough. Many people have shared their horror stories with me. I would welcome the chance to meet Ministers from DCMS and the Ministry of Justice to discuss the issue.

The Sunday Post in Scotland has helped to promote my campaign nationally, and a spokesman for the newspaper recently told me:

“It's clear from the overwhelming response we have had from our readers this problem plagues our daily lives.

And yet regardless of asking for them to stop—and sometimes taking steps to halt them—the onslaught continues.

The will is there from people to put on an end to this once and for all. Now is the time for the Government to act on that will and strengthen existing legislation.”

I could not agree more.

Since launching my campaign only four weeks ago, over 10,500 people have signed the campaign petition at no2nuisancecalls.net—sorry for the plug. Like many others, I know that I have not had a fall in the last five years and am not entitled to any more payment protection insurance compensation, and I certainly do not want a payday loan. Nevertheless, I am continually contacted by text and phone by companies offering me those things.

I am registered with the Telephone Preference Service for both home and mobile numbers, but even that does not stop the onslaught. According to Ofcom figures, complaints to the TPS about unwanted marketing calls jumped to almost 10,000 for the month of July. That compares with just over 3,000 in December last year. In an online poll of 4,000 individuals for Which?magazine, 76% of respondents said that despite signing up to the TPS, they still receive many nuisance calls. Only 1% rated the service as excellent and said that they no longer received nuisance calls. Once again, the Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport, the hon. Member for Wantage, seemed to miss that point; he said that the TPS was generally successful in reducing the number of unsolicited marketing calls received. That is not the experience of the majority of people registering with it.

Ofcom suggests that increased activity by PPI and accident claims companies is partly to blame for the rise. The problem is partly the result of the fact that PPI calls are not classed as sales calls but as a service or marketing calls. On texts, the law says that there must be an unsubscribe option such as “Reply STOP to this number”. However, there are two problems with that. First, there are serious worries about how much it would cost to send such a text. Secondly, such a reply tells the sender that the number is genuine and in use, which might merely engender further contact from that company and from others.

Recent research by the Association of British Insurers has found that more than three quarters of people—78%—have been contacted by a claims management company asking if they have been involved in an accident or mis-sold payment protection insurance. The ABI found that 92% of those who received such a message from a claims management company said that it was not relevant to them.

Complaints about abandoned or silent calls trebled in 2012, rising from 957 in December 2011 to 3,390 in July 2012. That is probably only the tip of the iceberg. In May 2011, the Information Commissioner’s Office was given powers to fine companies up to £500,000 if they broke the rules on unsolicited texts and phone calls. To date, however, the ICO has failed to prosecute any company for breaking the rules, in spite of the fact that it has received more than 7,000 complaints this year—a 43% increase on last year, when fewer than 5,000 complaints were received for the entire year.

I understand better than most the difficulties involved in carrying out complex police investigations, but we must understand what prevents those investigations from leading to prosecutions and fines. Until an example is made, those companies will carry on unfazed. The ICO has done great work on fining companies that fail to look after their data properly, but the strongest action so far on breaking of the legislation governing unsolicited calls and texts was a strongly worded statement in July this year which talked of the ICO “baring its teeth”.

All of that points to a huge problem that is on the increase—indeed, it is out of control. Some companies offer a service to help protect people from unwanted calls, but it can be costly—anything from £35 to £100—and often those companies are not up front about the charges. To be frank, why should we have to pay for such a service anyway? I believe, as do the 10,000-plus people who have signed up to my online campaign, that we have the right to be free from such calls without having to pay for the privilege.

As I have said, the problem is out of control, and requires urgent action. The Information Commissioner desperately needs to have the power to end this menace. I am therefore calling for the Information Commissioner’s powers to be strengthened to take in all forms of unsolicited contact, and for a single point of contact for any individual wishing to protect their privacy and block unwanted calls, texts, faxes and e-mails. That express wish should be taken seriously and acted upon.

I simply do not understand why we continue to allow this to happen, and why we are so permissive about our telecoms contact. If Barclays or HomeServe—two companies that, between them, were fined £5 million for silent calls—were knocking on our vulnerable granny’s door every day, then running away before she answered, we would be appalled. Instead, we tell those companies that they can do that only one day in 20: 5% of their calls are allowed to be silent. If claims management companies were knocking on her door, then bullying her into making PPI claims or taking payday loans, we would be up in arms. Instead, we hide behind the claim that those are merely surveys. If, because of all of that, we had to hire a doorman at significant expense to filter all the unwanted people at the door and only allow real visitors in, that would be completely unacceptable, yet that is the awful, frightening telecoms reality for many older, vulnerable members of society. It simply cannot continue. It simply must stop.

Crockart and Featherstone sign No More Page 3 letter to Sun editor

The success of the No More Page 3 campaign continues with the petition having crossed the 40,000 signature milestone last night.

The organisers have now drafted a letter to the Sun editor Dominic Mohan for MPs to sign.

Dear Dominic Mohan,

We write to lend our support to the No More Page 3 Campaign. As MPs our role is to serve the people, and we cannot remain silent in the presence of a page that limits and misrepresents over half the population.

The largest female image in our most widely-read newspaper is of a semi-naked young woman. She is there purely for the sexual gratification of men. This is unacceptable.We want to live in a society where the most widely-read newspaper is one that respects women. Instead, The Sun publishes Page 3, which reduces women to objects. It reduces men to objectifiers. And it reduces this country to one that upholds 1970s sexist values.

We’re better than this.

Please remove these damaging pictures from your newspaper.

Yours sincerely,

Credit where it's due, I am chuffed that my local Labour MP Graeme Morrice has signed.

Liberal Democrats Mike Crockart and Lynne Featherstone have also added their names. Mike did so via Twitter last night, calling the feature an "indefensible anachronism."

That leaves 55 Liberal Democrat MPs, not to mention AMs, MSPs, GLAMs and MEPs who may not have heard of this yet - so over to you to persuade them if you agree this is a good idea.

I realise that many of you will have had better things to do on a Friday night, but on Newsnight, Harriet Harman debated the issue with Neil Wallis, a former deputy editor of the Sun. Talking about indefensible anachronisms, he basically said that there were plenty real women out there who supported page 3. What does that make Harriet, I and its many opponents then?

Caroline Criado-Perez has written an article for the Huffington Post which outlines the abuse that women who oppose Page 3 have taken:

The most common tactic deployed by those who disagree with the campaign is to try to undermine the position from which we object. This takes a number of forms, the most regular being to suggest that we speak from a position of "envy", "jealousy" and "insecurity". We are "bitter", "self-obsessed", "pitying" and, strangely, "vain", because we are "ugly", "flat-chested", "older", "less pert", and, almost inevitably, "lesbians". These attacks on our looks are closely followed by comments which dismiss our arguments and evidence as "nagging", "whining" and "moaning" - undermining tactics which are linked with the next most popular approach, which is to call us "immature", "pathetic", "little girls" and patronise us by addressing us as "dear".

She also points to a 2009 study which suggests that there could be a link between things like Page 3 and domestic violence.

Furthermore, while a direct causal link is impossible to prove until we have complete transcripts of everyone's brains, charities that specialize in domestic violence, such as The Freedom Programme and End Violence Against Women (EVAW) both consider the objectification of women in the media to be a considerable contributory factor towards violence against women. They cite a number of independent investigations, one of the most compelling being a 2009 Princeton study which scanned the brains of heterosexual men looking at sexualized images of women in bikinis. The areas of their brains that lit up were those that light up when we anticipate using tools; these women were responded to as objects to be used. Small wonder then, that the American Psychological Association cites a range of studies demonstrating that when people view media that portrays women as sex objects, they become significantly more accepting of sexual harassment and interpersonal violence.

Last week, my article asking politely that men don't read their pornography in the public space, which was republished on the New Statesman, attracted some pretty insulting comments. Even when I put it up on Facebook, I was called bonkers, militant and a moron - by Liberal Democrats, for goodness sake. The abuse I've taken over this issue makes the cybernats look like a bunch of cuddly teddy bears.

The point that was made time and time again was that women read 50 Shades of Grey, so why is it a problem. Really? There are all sorts of novels, from Jackie Collins to the Stieg Larsson trilogy which outline some pretty graphic and often abusive sexual encounters. The thing is, if someone's reading them on in public all you can see is words on a page. From a distance, this blog post looks exactly the same as a page from Mark Pack and Ed Maxfield's book, 101 ways to win an election. You can't tell what's being read.

However, if I filled the entire space with a picture of an almost completely nude woman, you'd be able to see it a long way away. Why shouldn't I ask people to be a bit more considerate about what they do in the public space?

If you agree with the No to Page 3 campaign and haven't yet signed the petition, please do so here. I was taken by something Mike Crockart said on Twitter this morning - that for his No to Nuisance Calls campaign, 7000 signed up from a newspaper cutting, while 5000 signed up online. I wonder if the next step is to get paper copies into coffee mornings, workplaces or whatever. Maybe person to person contact would have even more success. 40,000 online signatures in 3 weeks is pretty outstanding, but by getting out there into our communities and asking people we know, our colleagues, friends and families, we will inevitably reach more people.

Mike Crockart MP: Say no to nuisance calls

You know the feeling. You've just come in from work, you're rushing around trying to feed the cat, empty the bin, deal with your post, make the dinner and listen to the evening news. The phone rings. You have no way of knowing whether it's your partner wanting a lift from the station, your mum ringing for a chat, a work call or your friend ringing to bitch about the latest internal Liberal Democrat shenanigans. Not that the last would ever happen of course...

So, you turn down the cooker, drop the cat or its food and go and pick up the phone, missing that one 30 second snippet of Jo Swinson or Angela Constance you've been waiting to see all day, only to discover it's someone trying to flog you double glazing you don't need, insurance you don't want or a kitchen you'd love if only you could afford it. What makes the red mist descend with me is these recorded messages where there's not even a person at the other end.

That's just inconvenient. But there's a more sinister side. It's not just nice people who can get hold of your phone number. Look how this poor old man in North Yorkshire was conned out of £750 by a phone scammer.

Well, Liberal Democrat MP for Edinburgh West Mike Crockart has decided enough is enough. He's launched a campaign, backed by Scottish newspaper the Sunday Post, to do two things:

• for the Information Commissioner's powers to be strengthened to take in all unsolicited contact
• for there to be a single point of contact to opt out of the lot. Fax, email, mail, phone, the works.

Mike has a debate on the subject in the House of Commons today. He says:

I‘m fed up of nuisance calls to my mobile and to my home phone as well as unsolicited texts sent to my mobile. I know that it’s a real problem for many of my constituents and others across the UK. The bottom line is that people shouldn’t have to put up with this menace which puts many vulnerable and elderly people at risk of fraud just as much as if the crook or pushy salesman was turning up at their door unannounced.
There were 650 million silent calls made in the UK last year; 45 million spam texts sent in Europe last and every year and 3 million UK adults will be scammed out of £800 this year by fraudulent marketing calls. It is clear we now have an industry in crisis and a country under siege. Since launching the campaign only four weeks ago, over 10,500 people have signed the campaign petition. I hope that good old people power will demonstrate to the Government that the legislation in this area needs to be tightened and enforced vigorously.
 The problem is out of control and needs urgent action. We desperately need an Information Commissioner with the power to put an end to this menace.

 If you are similarly annoyed by nuisance calls from people trying to sell you stuff, sign the Say No to Nuisance Calls petition here.

Let's hope that this is another of these issues where the actions of a backbench MP can change things to remove what at best is a minor irritation, but can lead to catastrophic criminal consequences.

Mike has also written to the Culture Secretary and the Liberal Democrat minister Lord McNally to ask them to take action.

This issue clearly affects people way beyond the confines of Mike's lovely west Edinburgh constituency, so please feel free to share this widely, use on your Focus leaflets or local party websites or on any social networks you use.

Liberal Democrats Deliver: Green Investment Bank is Edinburgh bound

Liberal Democrat Business Secretary Vince Cable has announced today that the Green Investment Bank, a key element of Liberal Democrat policy will be based in Edinburgh and London, combining the advantages of Edinburgh's green sector and a base in the world's leading financial centre.

The news will please Mike Crockart, MP for Edinburgh West who has literally never shut up about this since he was elected. If I'd had a pound for every time he's asked about this in the House of Commons, I'd be able to keep the whole of Liberal Youth Scotland in drink for the Conference weekend.

This is a great triumph for Liberal Democrats within the Coalition, ensuring that £3 billion pounds to start with is there to finance green projects which will put our economy on a much more sustainable footing. It means that energy saving, renewable or skills developing measures which can't get the finance to get them off the ground right now may well come to fruition. It's really good news and shows how the UK Coalition Government is leading the way in ensuring that Scotland can develop a role as a renewables power house.

Mike Crockart had, probably, too many words to say about this, but in the spirit of celebration, I'll let you have them all here:

“The Business Secretary has today made the right decision and made it for the right reasons. For the past 16 months I have been arguing that Edinburgh is the best choice for the location of the Green Investment Bank because of its strength in depth in both financial services and green technology. It is this co-location that will make the bank a success and make Edinburgh a European centre of excellence for green investment.

 “Throughout that time I have been championing Edinburgh as the natural home of the Green Investment Bank. The city’s bid team put together an exceptional case for our capital and today’s announcement reflects that.

“Edinburgh’s case was supported by a group which started with the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce but grew to encompass more than 25 partners representing the best from the public and private sectors. Edinburgh's team has set the agenda from the start and helped to clarify the criteria for siting the ground-breaking institution.

“The bank will play a vital role in our transition to a low-carbon economy and will provide a welcome boost to the city’s economy, bringing with it an initial £3 billion to invest in green projects as well as the creation of 50-70 jobs by 2015.

“The investment bank is another way in which the Liberal Democrats in Government are working to rebalance our economy; making it more sustainable whilst also meeting green credentials. 

"In his speech on the future of Scotland in Edinburgh the Prime Minister described Scotland as a 'pioneering country’. Today the UK Government has demonstrated its belief in Edinburgh as a pioneer of the green revolution and a vital part of the UK’s drive towards a sustainable and green future.”

+++Breaking News - Mike Crockart resigns to vote against fees proposals

Andrew wrote the other day about the farcical incident where Radio 4's World at One programme broadcast an interview with a Yorkshireman purporting to be Liberal Democrat MP for Edinburgh West Mike Crockart.

Mike Crockart has now hit the headlines himself by resigning as PPS to Michael Moore MP, Secretary of State for Scotland so he can vote against the tuition fees rise tonight.

That means that at least three of the eleven Scottish Liberal Democrat MPs will be voting against the proposals, Mike, Ming Campbell and Charles Kennedy and at least four for, Alistair Carmichael, Danny Alexander, Jo Swinson and Mike Moore.

I have to be honest and say that if I were an MP, I would also vote against even though I wouldn't have signed the NUS pledge. I wouldn't want to have much to do with an organisation which betrays its members by wanting to cut the maintenance grants for the poorest students. NUS is a breeding ground for the Labour front bench - it's where Jack Straw and Phil Woolas come from, among others, and I will eat my hat if Aaron Porter is not on the Labour benches within a decade. There is much within the proposals that is good and progressive as I've written about at length. The reason I'd vote against is simply that I believe that higher education benefits all of society and therefore I just couldn't bring myself to vote for a system that lets that principle go.

Stop BAA taxing elderly, disabled and families at Edinburgh Airport

I am not best pleased that BAA have decided to charge £1 for access to a drop-off area close to the terminal at Edinburgh Airport.

They try to say that there will be a free drop-off area at the long stay car park and people can get a bus to the airport.

Oh well, that's fine then.

Or at least it's fine if you're young, fit, male and flying without young children.

If you're disabled you might be able to struggle to get a bus in the Summer, assuming that they provide wheelchair accessible buses but what if you have to wait for ages in the cold and dark in the Winter?

Ditto if you're elderly.

If you're female, you may not want to stand potentially alone on a dark Winter's morning for safety reasons.

If you have young children, even if there are two of you, managing a toddler and a baby, plus car seat and buggy out of the car that drops you off and on to a bus is going to be a nightmare.

So it's those groups who will be paying the charge.

Your affluent professional worker travelling alone will be able to avoid this tax with ease.

That's why BAA's decision to make a fast buck out of people by imposing this charge is completely and utterly wrong. I'm glad to see that Edinburgh West Liberal Democrat MP Mike Crockart and MSP Margaret Smith are campaigning against it.

If you agree with them, please join me in signing their petition here.