Barnet Eye Exclusive : The Andrew Dismore MP and the Gurkhas

Yesterday I was in Finchley for the Barnet Community Campaign March to protest against the councils atrocious policy of sacking sheltered housing wardens, from Finchley Central to Victoria Park. MP for Hendon, Andrew Dismore also showed up for the march. As he's been a vocal critic of the policy, making some rather good points in the commons earlier this week, I was not one of those critical of his appearance. It is fair to say that some sections of the crowd rather gave him the bird when he stood up to speak at the closing rally. The two main issues that irked the crowd were MP's expenses and Andrews failure to support the Gurkha's in the recent commons debate.

Prior to the start of the march, I was having a chat with John Burgess, the local UNISON organiser. I expressed my disappointment at Andrew Dismore for his failure to support the Gurkhas. John rather agreed. I expressed my view that the Gurkha's should be held up as a shining example of the positive role of immigrants and people born abroad to the UK. No one can doubt their contribution and they provide a powerful example of why the BNP's racist policies are so out of step with the views of the British public. Given the ethos of the regiment and the type of people it recruits, I think it is beyond doubt that all Gurkhas who woulkd choose to settle in Britain would work hard and be a great assett to us all.

As we were discussing this, Mr Dismore arrived. I had no desire to get the march off to a bad start, so I thought I'd try and catch Mr Dismore at the end and have a word with him. After the speeches, as the crowds started to drift away, I took the opportunity to take up the issue.

I asked him why he didn't support the motion. His response was to ask if I'd actually read the motion. I responded that I hadn't. He then said "Yes, Matthew Offord didn't actually read it before he criticised me either. I don't support things unless I've read them". Now I'm a dyslexic Punk Rock Guitarist. Mr Dismore is a lawyer by trade. My assumption was that hidden in the text of the motion, was something which the press, the rebel Labour MP's & the British public had missed. Well, here is the motion.

Chris Huhne (Eastleigh) (LD):

I beg to move, That this House regrets the Government’s recent statement outlining the eligibility criteria for Gurkhas to reside in the United Kingdom; recognises the contribution the Gurkhas have made to the safety and freedom of the United Kingdom for the past 200 years; notes that more Gurkhas have laid down their lives for the United Kingdom than are estimated to want to live here; believes that Gurkhas who retired before 1997 should be treated fairly and in the same way as those who have retired since; is concerned that the Government’s new guidelines will permit only a small minority of Gurkhas and their families to settle whilst preventing the vast majority; further believes that people who are prepared to fight and die for the United Kingdom should be entitled to live in the country; and calls upon the Government to withdraw its new guidelines immediately and bring forward revised proposals that extend an equal right of residence to all Gurkhas.

You can read the whole text HERE. I did. Maybe I'm thick (well no maybe there at all really), maybe my dyslexia has prevented me from properly understanding the text of the motion (I've reread it 5 times to make sure). What I can say is this. There is no doubt in my mind that there is NOTHING in this motion which I disagree with. The Government came across as mean spirited, petty and out of touch in opposing it. Andrew Dismore's response to me graphically illustrated to me why I trust thick Punk rock guitarists more than clever Lawyers and MP's. His answer was clever, it got him off the hook in the conversation, but ultimately it has just reinforced my annoyance at him for employing such a ruse. Well Andrew, this is a public forum, tens of thousands of people look at this blog, so please put us out of our misery. Post a comment here to explain what your objection to the text of this motion was.