Since September 11, 2001, Tony Blair and the UK government have done everything possible to give support to the USA and the 'war on terrorism' They've done so in spite of the fact that there are some clear differences of opinion between the governments of the two nations - as seen, for instance, in the disputes over the treatment of prisoners at the Camp X-Ray in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

But I can't help feeling that the much-vaunted 'special relationship' between Britain and the US is going to become a bit strained in the months ahead. Attacking Afghanistan and getting rid of the Taleban was not a goal on which the whole world could agree, but few shed many tears when that appalling regime was removed from power.

However, even that degree of consensus might not line up to support the USA if the 'war' moved on to another battlefront. The latest rhetoric coming out of Washington has suggested that another country might soon be facing up to the might of the American military - and many of the other partners in the coalition that fought the Taleban might well be less sympathetic if, say, Iran or Iraq were attacked.

And now, there's a specific reason why the relationship between British and American governments could be under stress in the near future. That reason is that the state of Georgia is planning to poison a British citizen to death.

Tracy Housel was actually sentenced to be burned to death in an electric chair 16 years ago, but the state of Georgia's judicial system now poisons people instead of burning them. It has poisoned five people to death since October last year, so the threat to Housel's life is real and urgent. A ruling on his final appeal to the US Supreme Court is expected on February 25. If that ruling goes against him, Housel could expect to be executed within the following month.

There is no argument about the fact that Housel carried out a brutal killing. He battered to death Jeanne Drew, a hitch-hiker whom he met in Gwinnett County, Georgia. However, there is also no doubt that Housel was brain-damaged as a child, and suffers from blackouts. He is subject to hypoglycaemia, a condition which can have a drastic effect on a sufferer's mental state. Since he was jailed, medical experts have proved that when he killed Jeanne Drew, Housel was in the middle of a hypoglycaemia attack that would have greatly reduced his responsibility for his actions. He would probably have been unable to remember what he did, let alone control or explain it.

But when he was tried for the killing, his attorney failed to introduce any evidence about Housel's medical conditions - a fact which would be astonishing were it not for the fact that inept defence counsels seem to be a key feature in so many American death penalty cases.

Some appeals on Housel's behalf have been made by the British authorities. Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has written to the governor of Georgia asking him to commute the death sentence to life imprisonment. Vera Baird, the Labour Member of Parliament for Redcar, has collected 121 MPs' signatures on a House of Commons motion calling on Tony Blair to intervene personally in the case. Thus far, however, Blair has done nothing more than to promise, rather vaguely, that he will do whatever he deems reasonable to avert the execution.

Ms Baird has commented:
'There is no doubt at all that Tony Blair is very committed to opposition of the death penalty, but will he think it is "reasonable" to pick up the phone and make this call? There is no doubt that Housel committed the crime, but he was clearly brain-damaged. That is undisputed'.

Many seasoned observers of the American legal system now believe that, quite simply, Housel's life depends upon Blair's willingness to make a personal appeal over the case. Andie Lambe of Reprieve, an organisation which campaigns for the rights of prisoners on Death Row, has said:
'The only thing that can save him if the Supreme Court throws out the appeal for clemency is the personal intervention of the Prime Minister. Without his intervention, the execution will definitely go ahead but, with it, there is a chance that the Georgia Governor and Pardons and Paroles Board might reconsider.

'The timing is vital, too, because of the British prisoners being held in Guantanamo Bay. Jack Straw has made it clear he wants them to be tried in Britain, but if Mr Blair does not become personally involved in Tracy Housel's case, it will send the message that it is OK to execute Britons.'

That message must not be sent. If the death sentence against Housel is confirmed, Blair must intervene, even at the risk of straining his recently cosy relationship with the Bush administration. In the fairly recent past, prime ministers from Canada, Germany, Thailand and Mexico have successfully intervened to save the lives of prisoners threatened by the American way of judicial killing. Blair should follow their example.

Could many of us soon be logging on to h2g2 and then switching sites for a couple of minutes to go and vote in an election? The idea of electronic voting is certainly under discussion all over the world. Internet voting was used in the Democratic Party presidential primaries in Arizona in March 2000 - rather ironically, as it turned out, since the eventual fate of the party's nominee Al Gore ultimately turned on some decidedly low-tech electoral equipment.

Robin Cook, the leader of the House of Commons, has said that he wants the UK to become the first country in the world to use the Internet to choose its elected representatives (as opposed to its candidates, as happened in Arizona). British politicians have been showing a particularly keen interest in finding ways to persuade people to vote lately, largely because the turnout in some elections has been embarrassingly low. Less than 60 per cent of the electorate bothered to vote in the 2001 General Election, and turnouts in many local elections have been pitifully low.

However, an independent commission set up by the Electoral Reform Society has warned against rushing into electronic voting, largely because of the increased danger of ballot fraud it could produce.

Stephen Coleman, who chaired the ERS inquiry, has commented:
'This commission has taken a long, cool, calm look at a range of alternative methods of voting and wants to see a gradual approach to testing and implementing them. Let us look piece by piece at how elections work and how we can make them more convenient to people's lifestyles.'

The ERS report recommends establishing a technology task force to assess any electronic system being considered for use in elections, and using 'elector cards' with PIN numbers if telephone or online voting is introduced, in order to prevent fraud. It recommends requiring extra information, such as the voter's date of birth, to be listed on electoral registration forms to make postal voting fraud more difficult; and it suggests experimenting with all-postal ballots, telephone voting and electronic voting and counting in European elections and parliamentary by-elections before considering them for use in a General Election.

There are some good ideas there, certainly. I do not doubt that present British electoral practice can be inconvenient or even hazardous to voters, and that alternatives should be considered. In order to cast my vote in the 2001 General Election, I was required to go right into the heart of Bradford's most notorious red-light district - somewhere that I don't often visit, before you ask. There were young women loitering alone on two street corners adjacent to the polling station - and while they may have been party canvassers, I frankly doubt it. Even as a fairly solidly-built man, I felt a little nervous in that area.

But I can't help wondering if all this imaginative tinkering with voting mechanisms might not be missing the point. Isn't the biggest reason why people have been staying away from the polls simple disillusionment with the options on offer? Is it not possible that the main reason why people aren't bothering to vote in British elections is that there's an increasing feeling that the political parties are now so similar that there's no point in voting?

Personally, I don't subscribe to that view. I am proud of the fact that I've used my vote at every election at which I've been entitled to vote. But I do well understand why others feel differently - and if the choices on offer are uninspiring, then no amount of electronic wizardry will fire the electorate's enthusiasm for democracy.

Finally, I can just about muster the energy to tell you about an interesting competion that's been run right here at the BBC, on Radio Five Live.

If you're reading this on the day of the Post's publication, then there's still time to get your nominations in to the Fi Glover show's 'Bone Idle' competition, aimed at finding Britain's laziest and least ambitious individual.

The publicity for the competition points out that many young people have endured long queues recently in the hope of joining the dreadful manufactured pop group Hear'Say, or achieving fame via the UK TV show 'Pop Idol'.

However, it adds:
'But what about those of us who are totally lacking in ambition, drive and the will to succeed?'

The competition is described as '...a celebration of the motivationally challenged.'

So go on, enter the competition if you like. Personally, I can't be bothered.

Ormondroyd

07.02.02. Front Page

Back Issue Page