Monthly Archives: January 2012

Nick Clegg’s lobbying group opposes criminalisation…

This law “is contrary to the interests of UK taxpayers.

“It would provide a valuable state funded benefit to wealthy tax avoiders.

“This influential lobby has the ear of Conservative Justice Minister Crispin Blunt.”

Could this be love?

Ok, ok, love for the Lords is a bit much, but could it be that our campaign of common sense and compassion is beginning to have an effect?

On Friday, the Evening Standard reported that Lib Dem peers are vowing to oppose plans to make squatting a criminal offence, by tabling an eminently sensible amendment.

Quick: dig a moat…

This week Chris Moncrieff wrote an article in the Daily Mail, in which he whipped up fear in the usual ways, offered not a single fact and shouted: the Moldovans are coming!

Chris’ article was entitled ‘It won’t be long before an Englishman’s home is someone else’s castle’, evoking the image of east Europeans overrunning the parapets, and reinforcing the siege mentality that readers of the Daily Mail seem to lap up…

Time to brief the Lords

The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill which includes Clause 145 (previously 136), added at the last-minute, to criminalise squatting in residential buildings is currently passing through the Lords. The bill is at the committee stage, which means the Lords will gradually read through every clause in the Bill, and discuss any amendments to each clause. Any Lord can join the debate, and any Lord can table an amendment. Every amendment will be discussed. Unlike MPs, Lords don’t have constituents. This means that anyone is allowed to contact any Lord – but it’s not always easy. We have […]

George Monbiot says something eminently sensible about democracy…

Last year the government launched a consultation on criminalising all squatting in residential buildings; 96% of the respondents argued that no change in the law was necessary.

But on 1 November, just five days after the consultation ended, the government jemmied an amendment into the legal aid bill, already halfway towards approval.

This meant that the House of Commons had no chance to scrutinise it properly, and objectors had no chance to explain the issues to their MPs…