And another thing…

I DON’T table many Early Day Motions (EDMs) but tonight I tabled this:

That this House welcomes the presence and activities of railway enthusiasts on the UK rail network; acknowledges the potential positive contribution to station security made by railway enthusiasts who are often seen as providing extra “eyes and ears” for the security services through their activities; is concerned at recent reports that some rail enthusiasts have been prevented from carrying out lawful activities – including photography – by station and train staff; and calls on Network Rail and the train operating companies to respect the legal rights of members of the public to pursue their interests at stations.

It will appear on tomorrow’s published list. Quite a lot of support from colleagues so far.

I TABLED an Early Day Motion (EDM) the day before yesterday, the first time I’ve done so for a long time.

They’re interesting things, EDMs. Most, if not all, MPs receive countless requests from constituents every week requesting that they sign this or that EDM. Only back bench MPs can sign. This is more than a convention; if you’re a whip or a minister you’re actually prevented from having your name against a motion. When I was appointed as a minister in September 2006, I received a letter from the Table Office in the House of Commons informing me that my name had consequently been removed from every EDM I had previously been supporting.

Many back benchers, however, refuse to sign EDMs at all. Depending on your perspective, this allows them to have an “equal opportunities” policy towards all their constituents; alternatively it could be seen as a policy that disappoints every constituent who wants to see his or her MP support a particular cause. Parliamentary Private Secretaries (PPSs), although technically (unpaid) members of the government, sometimes sign EDMs, though can’t sign those that criticise the government or which call for a change in policy.

But what do they actually achieve? Very little, if you want to take the cynical approach. They’re almost never debated (not while I’ve been an MP, anyway). However they can serve as a useful temperature gauge of MPs’ views in certain policy areas; ministers sit up and take note when any motion starts to gain the support of more than 100 or so MPs.

And they’re one of the few mechanisms that the public have for having a say, albeit indirectly. There are certainly more than a few EDMs which I probably wouldn’t have signed had constituents not drawn them to my attention.

But their importance shouldn’t be overstated, and constituents shouldn’t be too disappointed if their MP informs them he or she can’t support a particular EDM.

In the run-up to war in Iraq, the comedian Mark Steel tried to suggest that Tony Blair had, in the 1980s, ignored the plight of the Iraqi Kurds who were massacred by Saddam using chemical weapons. He drew this conclusion because Tony had not signed a particular EDM on the subject at the time. A ludicrous conclusion, which could only have been reached if one assumes that every MP sits down every day and goes meticulously through the published list of EDMs and signs every single one with which they agree.

Perhaps there are some MPs who do this, but very few. Most of us will sign EDMs where we’ve been asked to by constituents (provided we actually agree with them) and those motions in which we have a particular interest. But it would be nonsense to claim that the absence of a Member’s signature from an EDM will, on every occasion, suggest opposition.

You can see a list of the EDMs I’m currently supporting by clicking here.