Re: [Fsfe-uk] Swpat accepted; what now?

[Alex Hudson]

On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 16:59 +0000, Ralph Janke wrote:
> I would suggest to get as many MPs and candiates of Green Party and 
> Libdem on board to make it a campaign issue at the General Election. 

Well, firstly, there hasn't been an announcement of an election yet ;o)
Second, smart money is on early May - the Parliament has to get its act
together within three months, I believe. So, the election would be at
best in the middle of that period.

Third.. well, it's not really a national issue, and it's not going to be
an election issue either. We could wish it was, but I don't think there
is any leverage there.

> The Green party is on our side anyway, and the LibDems have something to 
> prove sicne they want to be an alternative, so they need any vote
> they can get.

Thus far, the Greens have proven to be relatively safe. The LibDems have
offered kind words and advice, but they have proved to not vote in much
better manner. I think they remain to be convinced on the issue (though
we must, of course, try). I again don't think that a GE will give us
much extra power, though.

> Oh, btw... the "nuclear" option of procedural problem will always stay 
> open if they pass it. That has to go to the European Court of Justice 
> anyway, but as more mistakes they make passing the directive as better 
> for that option.

Don't hold out any hope that option would work; I don't think it would.
Legislation is rarely overturned on procedural matters. In fact, even
where legislation is 'incompatible' with greater ideals (e.g., human
rights) there is still only limited scope to 'overturn' legislation
(which usually entails a strong request to look at the legislation
again).

The things I can think might be worth doing are currently:

      * asking MPs for a formal debate in our Parliament, as other
        Parliaments have done (either early day or an adjournment
        debate)
      * asking MPs to ask the Minister to start a new consultation on
        the matter, on the grounds that a. the original consultation was
        limited and general; the choice between the Council and
        Parliament positions should be more thoroughly examined; b. the
        outcomes of the workshops on 'technical effect' are essentially
        further consultation; c. the original consultation clearly
        confused some (e.g., "I want the current situation to stay the
        same - no software patents" is interpretable in a pro-swpat
        manner)
      * ask MEPs to examine the legislation more thoroughly, and not
        vote along party lines - given the damage caused by the Council
      * continue to attempt to educate the parties themselves

Are there other activities we could take? Is any of the above not worth
doing?

Cheers,

Alex.