I haven't had chance to post since the House of Lord debacle, but last week Nick Clegg announced that he would get all our MPs to vote against boundary changes. I fully support this decision.
Firstly the coalition agreement cannot be taken in isolation the argument that that the Boundary changes is linked to the AV referendum is spurious. If you agree to a contract where you provide a specific amount of work and then you don't do all the work then the employer is likely to deduct some of your potential earnings. We can't have a deal where one party loses on the whim of another.
As a party we were going to be criticised for either been petulant or being a doormat - it's better to be petulant who gets something that we want (or in this case stops something we don't want) than viewed as weak. A message had to be sent.
The Boundary changes would have cost us MPs. We retain a large number of our seats because of the personal votes of our MPs. Bringing in new areas would have diluted these personal votes. Additionally what has happened in the way we campaign and target is that many of the wards around marginal seats have seen minimal activity as we target resources at our key parliamentary seats.
As I said in the pub at the weekend - do you think we would be turkeys voting for Christmas? After nearly a century where the Great British constitution has continually damaged us do you think we we would actually vote to make it harder for ourselves? We are re daft but not that daft.
Monday 13 August 2012
Wednesday 11 July 2012
The Email Nick Clegg should have sent
After a day becoming more and more depressed watching the coverage of the Lords and crowing Right wing Tories and authoritarian Labour MPs I got an email from Nick Clegg which started off like this:
"Dear Rob,
This evening we overwhelmingly won an historic vote on the Second Reading of the House of Lords Reform Bill - a Bill that will finish something our party started a century ago.
This is a huge triumph for our party, and a clear mandate to deliver much needed reforms to the House of Lords. "
At the precise moment this popped into my inbox a little piece of me died. Whoever sent this email needs their head examining.
Yesterday was a disaster - we have probably lost the only opportunity we will ever have to get an elected Lords and the party needs to realise this. Everything about the coalition has changed and we need to get our heads around this.
Sending this email was trite, treated the membership with contempt and was actually dishonest. We are not stupid, we now know that Lords reform is further away after yesterday, not closer. It has been the subject to much mockery on the Internet and I'm sure Andrew Neill will have a field day with it on This Week. Can an MP with a straight face say Yesterday was a triumph - no of course not.
Politically it's also daft - we need to appear to be angry not compliant if we are to get our own way. Cameron needs to be scared of us, not his own right wing.
This is the email I would have sent members last night if I had been Nick Clegg:
Dear Rob,
Yesterday was a day when I was proud of my party, all 57 of our MPs voted to end privilege and patronage in our democracy.
However the conduct of both the Labour Party and a significant number of Tory MPs left me ashamed to be a Parliamentarian. They were happy to scupper Lords Reform on the basis either of narrow party political gain or because they do not believe in democracy. While we passed legislation to start the ball rolling on Lords reform, getting the legislation enacted onto the statute book will be much harder now because of the wrecking antics of these MP. It was clear that we could not win the programme motion which would have set a timetable for Lords Reform which is why I agreed to withdraw it.
However this is not the end for Lords Reform, the bill will be brought back for it's second reading in the Autumn and we will fight tooth and nail to win this battle.
But we need your help - over the coming months I am asking you to "spread the word" talk to your family, your friends and your neighbours about why Lords Reform is important. Support Lords Reform online at www.fixparlaiment.org and help the Lib Dems deliver their message on the ground by delivering leaflets and knocking on doors.
We are determined to defeat the forces that protect the establishment and carry out this vital reform.
All the best
etc
I will write in the coming days about what the party should do now but one must be to be honest with their own members!
"Dear Rob,
This evening we overwhelmingly won an historic vote on the Second Reading of the House of Lords Reform Bill - a Bill that will finish something our party started a century ago.
This is a huge triumph for our party, and a clear mandate to deliver much needed reforms to the House of Lords. "
At the precise moment this popped into my inbox a little piece of me died. Whoever sent this email needs their head examining.
Yesterday was a disaster - we have probably lost the only opportunity we will ever have to get an elected Lords and the party needs to realise this. Everything about the coalition has changed and we need to get our heads around this.
Sending this email was trite, treated the membership with contempt and was actually dishonest. We are not stupid, we now know that Lords reform is further away after yesterday, not closer. It has been the subject to much mockery on the Internet and I'm sure Andrew Neill will have a field day with it on This Week. Can an MP with a straight face say Yesterday was a triumph - no of course not.
Politically it's also daft - we need to appear to be angry not compliant if we are to get our own way. Cameron needs to be scared of us, not his own right wing.
This is the email I would have sent members last night if I had been Nick Clegg:
Dear Rob,
Yesterday was a day when I was proud of my party, all 57 of our MPs voted to end privilege and patronage in our democracy.
However the conduct of both the Labour Party and a significant number of Tory MPs left me ashamed to be a Parliamentarian. They were happy to scupper Lords Reform on the basis either of narrow party political gain or because they do not believe in democracy. While we passed legislation to start the ball rolling on Lords reform, getting the legislation enacted onto the statute book will be much harder now because of the wrecking antics of these MP. It was clear that we could not win the programme motion which would have set a timetable for Lords Reform which is why I agreed to withdraw it.
However this is not the end for Lords Reform, the bill will be brought back for it's second reading in the Autumn and we will fight tooth and nail to win this battle.
But we need your help - over the coming months I am asking you to "spread the word" talk to your family, your friends and your neighbours about why Lords Reform is important. Support Lords Reform online at www.fixparlaiment.org and help the Lib Dems deliver their message on the ground by delivering leaflets and knocking on doors.
We are determined to defeat the forces that protect the establishment and carry out this vital reform.
All the best
etc
I will write in the coming days about what the party should do now but one must be to be honest with their own members!
Tuesday 10 July 2012
Lords Reform - we really need this
Today could be a day school children learn about in a hundred years time. The day Britain broke free from the yoke of despotism and embraced democracy. More likely the powers of vested interest and privilege will win the day and the vote will be lost.
The House of Lords is a disgrace, if a foreign country decided to set up a democracy where an unelected bunch of rich, religious and privileged old people could veto legislation, we would call this a scandal. This is precisely what happens today in Briatain.
Astonishingly only 4% of Lords are under the age of 50! and there are only 2 Lords (out of 850) under the age of 40 (and none under the age of 35).
The Lords does have power - it amends legislation on a regular basis and often squashes legislation by talking it out. It is not the benign institution it is made out to be. It has a track record of defending privilege and power at the expense of Joe Public.
But the question I want to really ask is what happens for us if we do lose the vote tonight. Over the last few years, as a Lib Dem, I've taken a lot of flack. The Government cuts have lost us votes by the bucket full (although I agree with them and actually they are basically Labour's fault). But I have struggled to swallow the changes to the NHS, tuition fees, the 50p rate, Police Commissioners, Free Schools and much more. I have swallowed these changes because I accept the need for compromise in a coalition Government.
Over the last few years, in the North, we have lost about two thirds of the Councillors, I and many of my friends have lost their jobs - through no fault of our own. We no longer run large Councils such as Hull, Sheffield, Newcastle, Cardiff or Liverpool. We've been wiped out on numerous Councils. In Wales we have become a virtual minority party and in Scotland we've been beaten by a man dressed as a penguin.
And God help us at the next General Election.
So why the bloody hell are we putting ourselves through this?
I'm not saying we haven't had our successes - the tax threshold changes have helped millions of people ( if the Tories had been in Government by themselves this tax cut would have gone on inheritance tax instead). We've made school funding fairer through the Pupil Premium, we are bringing forward legislation on Gay Marriage and we've stopped the Tories doing a hell of a lot of bad/bonkers stuff. But many of these changes can be (and probably will be) easily reversed and changed by the next Government. To get up in the morning and hold my head up high, I need something lasting that will make a difference and House of Lords is that something.
If we can't get something that is a) in all parties manifesto, b) has large public support (69% want reform only 5% want the status quo according to an April Yougov poll) and c) is in the Coalition Agreement then we really are powerless and being taken for a ride.
If we lose tonight it shown that the Government is unable to implement the Coalition document. Brutally the Tories have reneged on the deal. As a party we need to think long and hard about how we need to respond to this.
I do not think we should pull out of Government as lets face it we would be battered at the ensuing General Election (and on a personal note I've booked a Holiday in August which I really need!) but we need to be more calculating on what is in our best interest. The Administration will have to become a de-facto confidence and supply Government.
Tomorrow, if we lose we should come out and veto the Boundary Changes and the Data snooping laws. No Lib Dem wants the latter anyway and the Tories really want the former. This would be a statement of intent and would set a marker down for the rest of the 2 and a half years in Government.
If we do veto boundary changes, we will be accused of stopping an important reform of equalizing the size of constituency allowing everybodies vote to be equal.
Well actually votes under the FPTP cannot be equal. Nearly a million people voted for UKIP at the last General Election yet there is not a single UKIP member on the green benches. I'm not going to have a long rant about PR but this change will make very little difference to the fairness of the outcome of an election - and that is what really matters. In fact it will make it harder for many smaller parties to get their voice heard at all as the larger the constituency the harder it is for anyone bar the main two too win.
Secondly one of the big pluses of FPTP is the supposed link between MPs and Constituencies. It allows MPs to represent communities and argue for them. What the Boundary changes effectively does is destroy this notion. Communities are split apart, local authority boundaries are crossed, it will make it harder for MPs to effectively represent communities. As the Liberal Democrat believe in Community Politics this is surely something to hard for us to swallow without an improvement in another area of our democracy?
Dean, on Lib Dem Voice says that if we veto Boundary Changes we will have failed:
1. To demonstrate that coalitions are workable. - rubbish surely it's the Tories who are hell bent on destroying the coalition by not backing the coalition agreement.
2. That the lib Dems are a serious grown up party ready for government - Wrong - being a grown up party ready for Government means standing up for yourself and the people who elected you - rolling over and doing as your told is not part of being a grown up party!
So in summary if we lose tonight we can stop being NICE - time to be bitter and twisted, grow some balls and put ourselves first for once.
The House of Lords is a disgrace, if a foreign country decided to set up a democracy where an unelected bunch of rich, religious and privileged old people could veto legislation, we would call this a scandal. This is precisely what happens today in Briatain.
Astonishingly only 4% of Lords are under the age of 50! and there are only 2 Lords (out of 850) under the age of 40 (and none under the age of 35).
The Lords does have power - it amends legislation on a regular basis and often squashes legislation by talking it out. It is not the benign institution it is made out to be. It has a track record of defending privilege and power at the expense of Joe Public.
But the question I want to really ask is what happens for us if we do lose the vote tonight. Over the last few years, as a Lib Dem, I've taken a lot of flack. The Government cuts have lost us votes by the bucket full (although I agree with them and actually they are basically Labour's fault). But I have struggled to swallow the changes to the NHS, tuition fees, the 50p rate, Police Commissioners, Free Schools and much more. I have swallowed these changes because I accept the need for compromise in a coalition Government.
Over the last few years, in the North, we have lost about two thirds of the Councillors, I and many of my friends have lost their jobs - through no fault of our own. We no longer run large Councils such as Hull, Sheffield, Newcastle, Cardiff or Liverpool. We've been wiped out on numerous Councils. In Wales we have become a virtual minority party and in Scotland we've been beaten by a man dressed as a penguin.
And God help us at the next General Election.
So why the bloody hell are we putting ourselves through this?
I'm not saying we haven't had our successes - the tax threshold changes have helped millions of people ( if the Tories had been in Government by themselves this tax cut would have gone on inheritance tax instead). We've made school funding fairer through the Pupil Premium, we are bringing forward legislation on Gay Marriage and we've stopped the Tories doing a hell of a lot of bad/bonkers stuff. But many of these changes can be (and probably will be) easily reversed and changed by the next Government. To get up in the morning and hold my head up high, I need something lasting that will make a difference and House of Lords is that something.
If we can't get something that is a) in all parties manifesto, b) has large public support (69% want reform only 5% want the status quo according to an April Yougov poll) and c) is in the Coalition Agreement then we really are powerless and being taken for a ride.
If we lose tonight it shown that the Government is unable to implement the Coalition document. Brutally the Tories have reneged on the deal. As a party we need to think long and hard about how we need to respond to this.
I do not think we should pull out of Government as lets face it we would be battered at the ensuing General Election (and on a personal note I've booked a Holiday in August which I really need!) but we need to be more calculating on what is in our best interest. The Administration will have to become a de-facto confidence and supply Government.
Tomorrow, if we lose we should come out and veto the Boundary Changes and the Data snooping laws. No Lib Dem wants the latter anyway and the Tories really want the former. This would be a statement of intent and would set a marker down for the rest of the 2 and a half years in Government.
If we do veto boundary changes, we will be accused of stopping an important reform of equalizing the size of constituency allowing everybodies vote to be equal.
Well actually votes under the FPTP cannot be equal. Nearly a million people voted for UKIP at the last General Election yet there is not a single UKIP member on the green benches. I'm not going to have a long rant about PR but this change will make very little difference to the fairness of the outcome of an election - and that is what really matters. In fact it will make it harder for many smaller parties to get their voice heard at all as the larger the constituency the harder it is for anyone bar the main two too win.
Secondly one of the big pluses of FPTP is the supposed link between MPs and Constituencies. It allows MPs to represent communities and argue for them. What the Boundary changes effectively does is destroy this notion. Communities are split apart, local authority boundaries are crossed, it will make it harder for MPs to effectively represent communities. As the Liberal Democrat believe in Community Politics this is surely something to hard for us to swallow without an improvement in another area of our democracy?
Dean, on Lib Dem Voice says that if we veto Boundary Changes we will have failed:
1. To demonstrate that coalitions are workable. - rubbish surely it's the Tories who are hell bent on destroying the coalition by not backing the coalition agreement.
2. That the lib Dems are a serious grown up party ready for government - Wrong - being a grown up party ready for Government means standing up for yourself and the people who elected you - rolling over and doing as your told is not part of being a grown up party!
So in summary if we lose tonight we can stop being NICE - time to be bitter and twisted, grow some balls and put ourselves first for once.
Thursday 24 May 2012
Clegg isn't a commie but social mobility is an issue
The Daily Mail thinks that Nick Clegg is a communist - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2148484/Nick-Clegg-accused-adopting-communist-policies-state-school-students-universities.html
This is a bit of an about turn for the Mail who accused him of being a Nazi during the 2010 General Election!
The Daily Mail blasted Clegg because he has highlighted the widening gap between the educational performances and opportunities between private and state school pupils.
Before Tony Blair, the previous 5 Prime Ministers were all state educated. In the 80s and early 90s the problem seemed to be in decline with John Major declaring Britain to be a classless society.
Now most of the Cabinet and the majority of the opposition front bench are privately educated. It's a problem across many major industries - those who have over the last ten years risen to the top tend to have the "old school tie".
So what has happened in the last twenty years to halt and reverse social mobility? you could write a book on it (and I don't intend too). Andrew Neill presented a documentary on it, where he lamented the loss of Grammar Schools. I don't intend to either agree or disagree with his verdict, but as I am a former Grammar School pupil I did find his view interesting.
One personal point I would make one assertion between the difference between my experience at a Grammar School and my wife's experience at a Comp. My wife is brighter than me, she achieved straight As in her GCSEs and A-Levels. I was pretty much a straight B pupil - good, but not great. Yet, when we looking for Universities, I was hauled into the Head of 6th Forms' office and he made it clear to me that I could get into a Russell Group University and it was important that I applied for them. My wife, on the other hand received no such encouragement, had she gone to my school she would have been told to apply for Oxbridge. This is of course just one example from more than a decade ago, but I do wonder whether Comps do enough to open the eyes of their brightest pupils to the possibilities that they could pursue.
This is a bit of an about turn for the Mail who accused him of being a Nazi during the 2010 General Election!
The Daily Mail blasted Clegg because he has highlighted the widening gap between the educational performances and opportunities between private and state school pupils.
Before Tony Blair, the previous 5 Prime Ministers were all state educated. In the 80s and early 90s the problem seemed to be in decline with John Major declaring Britain to be a classless society.
Now most of the Cabinet and the majority of the opposition front bench are privately educated. It's a problem across many major industries - those who have over the last ten years risen to the top tend to have the "old school tie".
So what has happened in the last twenty years to halt and reverse social mobility? you could write a book on it (and I don't intend too). Andrew Neill presented a documentary on it, where he lamented the loss of Grammar Schools. I don't intend to either agree or disagree with his verdict, but as I am a former Grammar School pupil I did find his view interesting.
One personal point I would make one assertion between the difference between my experience at a Grammar School and my wife's experience at a Comp. My wife is brighter than me, she achieved straight As in her GCSEs and A-Levels. I was pretty much a straight B pupil - good, but not great. Yet, when we looking for Universities, I was hauled into the Head of 6th Forms' office and he made it clear to me that I could get into a Russell Group University and it was important that I applied for them. My wife, on the other hand received no such encouragement, had she gone to my school she would have been told to apply for Oxbridge. This is of course just one example from more than a decade ago, but I do wonder whether Comps do enough to open the eyes of their brightest pupils to the possibilities that they could pursue.
Tuesday 22 May 2012
The man I hate most in politics - The Baron Winston
When asked which politician I despise most, my answer surprises most people. It's not Thatcher, Blair, Brown, Tebbitt, Ed Milliband, Philip Davies or one of the many other crackpots who have represented us on the green benches of the House of Commons.
It's Lord Robert Winston, not that kind doctory type you may say. YES I do mean that horrible anti-democratic Labour zealot.
You see the above names don't pretend that they are not politicians. They stood for elections, present their views and won or lost accordingly. While I generally dislike their politics, I admire the fact that they are upfront and honest with party affiliations and put themselves up for public critique (and occasionally ridicule).
The Lord Winston however does not do this, instead because of his roles, both within the medical profession and as science TV presenters, the general public views him as a neutral figure. Somebody they can trust over political issues when he speaks. Yet of course he is not. He is a Labour Lord, taking the Labour Whip and speaking in a Parliamentary assembly on behalf of them.
This is of course a problem, when he speaks about Lords reform. Because he speaks about protecting an institution, the public view him not as a Labour Lord, trying to keep his expenses, but as a that nice guy off the telly. It gives him a non-politician credo that is totally misleading. He is a politician - just an unelected one, I can't vote to replace him though like I should be able to do with someone who impacts on the laws I am meant to abide by!
It's Lord Robert Winston, not that kind doctory type you may say. YES I do mean that horrible anti-democratic Labour zealot.
You see the above names don't pretend that they are not politicians. They stood for elections, present their views and won or lost accordingly. While I generally dislike their politics, I admire the fact that they are upfront and honest with party affiliations and put themselves up for public critique (and occasionally ridicule).
The Lord Winston however does not do this, instead because of his roles, both within the medical profession and as science TV presenters, the general public views him as a neutral figure. Somebody they can trust over political issues when he speaks. Yet of course he is not. He is a Labour Lord, taking the Labour Whip and speaking in a Parliamentary assembly on behalf of them.
This is of course a problem, when he speaks about Lords reform. Because he speaks about protecting an institution, the public view him not as a Labour Lord, trying to keep his expenses, but as a that nice guy off the telly. It gives him a non-politician credo that is totally misleading. He is a politician - just an unelected one, I can't vote to replace him though like I should be able to do with someone who impacts on the laws I am meant to abide by!
Back Blogging
Well according to Blogger the last time I posted anything was July last year. I didn't really plan on stopping it just turns out I've been quite busy - mainly with a new job. But I plan to start blogging again from today!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)