So the UKIP fox is in the Westminster henhouse - well it's not - they haven't got a single MP.
But that's not what you'd think if you beamed down from Planet Zog. The media and politicians from all three parties cannot get through an interview without talking about UKIP.
The only two political issues that seem to matter are Europe and Immigration. No wonder UKIP have just topped the poll!
There is a very human element to this - the anger most politico's feel about UKIP is understandable. They're a bunch of racists and homophobes whose policies are simplistic and treat the voters intellect with contempt. Yet they keep picking up votes. These people need to be made to understand. That's actually how I feel...until I put my campaigning head on.
UKIP have strong basic values which they communicate effectively. Their views on immigration and Europe are popular (but obviously absurd). But the number one rule of politics is to fight campaigns on your turf. Yet in 2014 all three political parties have fought on UKIPs turf and unsurprisingly they've lost.
All three parties have strong reasons to want the UKIP surge to recede. Both the Conservatives and Labour may lose seats to UKIP and the Tories may lose seats to Labour because of UKIP. For us, UKIP stands for everything that we are diametrically opposed to. The more they shift the debate away from our views the less we can push forward with our agenda.
So what can be done: Firstly it's time to draw to a close to the European and immigration debate. That means shut up about it. There is part of me that winces when Tory bankbenchers move motions for an early referendum.
Both coalition parties have good reasons to want to talk about the economy. Start talking about it - in great detail. Have debates about tax, services, deficit reduction etc. Because on all these points UKIP score badly when people know their policies. Simon Hughes comically destroyed UKIP's tax policy on Question Time a few years ago. Fundamentally I'm pretty sure UKIPs' confused Libertarian policies are not going to go down that well with the electorate.
Likewise Labour should be making points about UKIP reducing benefits and privatising the NHS. I'm not sure the UKIP voters in Rotherham would be that enamoured with these policies.
At the moment UKIP will start to die off sometime after the next General Election. Literally, most of their voters are old. But to stop a new generation of UKIP voters coming along we need to do something we haven't done in this country in a very long time.....
Build houses.
UKIP blame immigration for house prices (and rent increases), longer life expectancy is the real reason, but we can't be blaming the OAPs for the fact that most of my generation will struggle to get on the property ladder and therefore we will continue to get ripped off for rent.
This is why I'd advocate a national house building programme. Government directed to build millions of homes and fast. Green Belt, Tax incentives and planning regs would have to be looked at properly but I think the Government need to take charge. The housing market in the UK is classic example of market failure and it needs to be sorted.
Tuesday, 27 May 2014
Monday, 26 May 2014
A few post election thoughts
Wow - it's nearly two years since I blogged - lots of catching up to do!
We had a good election ,,,,
Local Election that is, and only in Yorkshire. I'm really pleased that we held our leader in Leeds and a myriad of other Councillors. It's the first time since 2010 since I've left a count not feeling distraught.
We had a very bad election.....
The European Election results were not just bad, they were appalling. They were far far worse than I expected. We have finally answered the perennial question - should we as a pro European party fight a European election on Europe? Er no.
Mark Park explained the mistake in an interview with the BBC. He basically said that as a radical reforming party we seemed to be defending the status quo. I'm Pro European, but I'm also not blind to the EU's numerous faults. I want to see greater democratisation of the EU, I want it be more cost effective and less bureaucratic (It's sad that Edward McMillan-Scott will no longer be able to fight to ditch Strasbourg) I'd like proper reform of the common agricultural policy and much more. The problem is that by saying we were the party of IN we were often left defending things we didn't believe were right. The EU needs reform and people (even supporters of the EU) know this.
This is why the majority of the population, while supporting our membership, are at best lukewarm about the EU. We made the mistake of thinking the EU was popular amongst those "Inners." it's not, most think our membership is the least bad option. So our Pro- European message was not going to appeal to the Inners at all.
Cack handedness abounds...
The day after the results I got an email from Annette Brooke. I'm sure the email was not from Annette Brooke, I'm sure she wouldn't have being so dumb to send something so flagrantly offensive as the tripe the party decided to unleash on it's members.
Fundamentally it said that the Local Election results were good where we worked hard. For those who lost this implied their defeat was down to their own deficiencies and had nothing to do with the national mood.
While undoubtedly we had some shit Councillors and candidates who frankly got what they deserved. The vast majority I know who lost, worked bloody hard and it is a tragedy they lost. That email can only have pissed of these people and their teams. Losing is an extremely emotional experience, for some it was a kick they really didn't need.
The parties top brass need to stop rolling out the "where we work we win/were doing well where we have MPs" line as
A) It's not true - ask Manchester, who properly worked hard and still got wiped out.
B) It pisses activists off
C) Who do we think is going to pile in in 2015 to our held seats? it's going to be the teams that Councillors in wards outside the parliamentary seats. If we abandon all hope in these areas we are damaging the activist base that may save MPs
D) It ignores reality, places are bucking the trend... but we do need to do something about the trend.
However I also received an email from Libdems4change asking if I would sign their letter trying to get Nick Clegg out. Carl Minns articulates why many of us were more than little perturbed about this http://carlminns.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/a-question-to-fellow-lib-dems-what-were.html
It reminded me a bit of the great Shed 7 song - Where have you been tonight? You should have been electing Lib Dems not fannying about with a letter.
Anyway they should have waited more people would have been pissed off on Sunday night than Friday morning!
I won't be signing the letter.
But....
We need to talk aboutKevin Nick
At the European Election when I saw the figures from Calderdale, a place that frankly is the most naturally Lib Dem place in the region (we got 4.6% of the vote) I thought that's it NICK HAS TO GO.
A day of mulling it over has left me feeling conflicted.
On the one hand I feel that Nick is toxic and that people simply have stopped listening to him.
But the argument that Cleggigista are putting forward that we risk going through all the pain to throw it away just as we are about to reap the rewards of the economic recovery is powerful.
The best blog on Lib Dem voice I have read in the last few days is this one by Iain Roberts http://www.libdemvoice.org/opinion-we-need-to-stop-helping-the-other-parties-and-change-our-message-40339.html
It expounds something I've felt for a long time. We need to sharpen up and stop being so nice. Sod collective responsibility - we need to say some of the Government's policies such as bedroom tax are shit and we are putting up with them so we can get x,y or z.
A few years ago I listened to Chris DaviesMEP rattle off a whole raft of things we had stopped that I'd never heard of. We must get these messages out there.
Ryan Coetzee is putting lots of time into branding. I fully agree with the Stronger Economy, Fairer Society stuff. But we have to back this up in Government.
A fairer society does not impose the prisoner book ban or marriage tax breaks. I know we can't stop everything but lets stop more things.
The end
Mad Tory backbenchers will want to push through a more right wing agenda to counter the UKIP threat. Simply we mustn't stand for it. Even if this means leaving the coalition early. It may even do us some good to quit over a point of principle.
We had a good election ,,,,
Local Election that is, and only in Yorkshire. I'm really pleased that we held our leader in Leeds and a myriad of other Councillors. It's the first time since 2010 since I've left a count not feeling distraught.
We had a very bad election.....
The European Election results were not just bad, they were appalling. They were far far worse than I expected. We have finally answered the perennial question - should we as a pro European party fight a European election on Europe? Er no.
Mark Park explained the mistake in an interview with the BBC. He basically said that as a radical reforming party we seemed to be defending the status quo. I'm Pro European, but I'm also not blind to the EU's numerous faults. I want to see greater democratisation of the EU, I want it be more cost effective and less bureaucratic (It's sad that Edward McMillan-Scott will no longer be able to fight to ditch Strasbourg) I'd like proper reform of the common agricultural policy and much more. The problem is that by saying we were the party of IN we were often left defending things we didn't believe were right. The EU needs reform and people (even supporters of the EU) know this.
This is why the majority of the population, while supporting our membership, are at best lukewarm about the EU. We made the mistake of thinking the EU was popular amongst those "Inners." it's not, most think our membership is the least bad option. So our Pro- European message was not going to appeal to the Inners at all.
Cack handedness abounds...
The day after the results I got an email from Annette Brooke. I'm sure the email was not from Annette Brooke, I'm sure she wouldn't have being so dumb to send something so flagrantly offensive as the tripe the party decided to unleash on it's members.
Fundamentally it said that the Local Election results were good where we worked hard. For those who lost this implied their defeat was down to their own deficiencies and had nothing to do with the national mood.
While undoubtedly we had some shit Councillors and candidates who frankly got what they deserved. The vast majority I know who lost, worked bloody hard and it is a tragedy they lost. That email can only have pissed of these people and their teams. Losing is an extremely emotional experience, for some it was a kick they really didn't need.
The parties top brass need to stop rolling out the "where we work we win/were doing well where we have MPs" line as
A) It's not true - ask Manchester, who properly worked hard and still got wiped out.
B) It pisses activists off
C) Who do we think is going to pile in in 2015 to our held seats? it's going to be the teams that Councillors in wards outside the parliamentary seats. If we abandon all hope in these areas we are damaging the activist base that may save MPs
D) It ignores reality, places are bucking the trend... but we do need to do something about the trend.
However I also received an email from Libdems4change asking if I would sign their letter trying to get Nick Clegg out. Carl Minns articulates why many of us were more than little perturbed about this http://carlminns.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/a-question-to-fellow-lib-dems-what-were.html
It reminded me a bit of the great Shed 7 song - Where have you been tonight? You should have been electing Lib Dems not fannying about with a letter.
Anyway they should have waited more people would have been pissed off on Sunday night than Friday morning!
I won't be signing the letter.
But....
We need to talk about
At the European Election when I saw the figures from Calderdale, a place that frankly is the most naturally Lib Dem place in the region (we got 4.6% of the vote) I thought that's it NICK HAS TO GO.
A day of mulling it over has left me feeling conflicted.
On the one hand I feel that Nick is toxic and that people simply have stopped listening to him.
But the argument that Cleggigista are putting forward that we risk going through all the pain to throw it away just as we are about to reap the rewards of the economic recovery is powerful.
The best blog on Lib Dem voice I have read in the last few days is this one by Iain Roberts http://www.libdemvoice.org/opinion-we-need-to-stop-helping-the-other-parties-and-change-our-message-40339.html
It expounds something I've felt for a long time. We need to sharpen up and stop being so nice. Sod collective responsibility - we need to say some of the Government's policies such as bedroom tax are shit and we are putting up with them so we can get x,y or z.
A few years ago I listened to Chris Davies
Ryan Coetzee is putting lots of time into branding. I fully agree with the Stronger Economy, Fairer Society stuff. But we have to back this up in Government.
A fairer society does not impose the prisoner book ban or marriage tax breaks. I know we can't stop everything but lets stop more things.
The end
Mad Tory backbenchers will want to push through a more right wing agenda to counter the UKIP threat. Simply we mustn't stand for it. Even if this means leaving the coalition early. It may even do us some good to quit over a point of principle.
Monday, 13 August 2012
We are not turkey's voting for Christmas!
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.
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.
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!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)