04-Jul-09
Greening the reds, reddening the greens
Simon Butler
4 July 2009
Green Left, an eco-socialist current within the Green Party of England and Wales, held its annual general meeting on June 20 in London. It discussed the work of the network over the past year in struggles against war, racism and environmental decay and in winning support for eco-socialism as a solution to the economic and climate crises.
Green Left co-convener Joseph Healy reported on the results of the European elections. The Green Party retained seats in London and south-east England. Overall, the party's vote was up by 44% from the 2004 result.
The worrying election of two candidates of the racist far-right party, the British National Party was discussed.
The meeting assessed the campaigns Green Left has been involved in. These include campaigns against New Labour's school privatisation agenda, support for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights, and solidarity with the recent student occupation against the deportation of cleaners at the University of London's School of African and Oriental Studies.
The meeting also noted Green Left's success in getting progressive economic and immigration policies adopted at the last Green Party conference.
Green Left was formed in 2006 by Green Party members convinced that an "ecological, economically and socially just and peaceful society has to be based on an anti-capitalist political agenda".
It seeks to win support for eco-socialist ideas and encourage activism within the Green Party. It also seeks to build stronger links with anti-capitalist forces outside the Green Party, in Britain and internationally.
Green Left's focus on coalition-building, and its engagement with anti-capitalists of various traditions, is part of its goal of "greening the reds and reddening the greens".
Its founding statement, called the Headcorn declaration, argued: "Since the activism of William Morris in the Social Democratic Federation and Socialist League in the late nineteenth century, there has been an eco-socialist tradition in Britain.
"Green Left believes that eco-socialism provides an alternative to a society based on alienation, economic exploitation, corporate rule, ecological destruction and wars. Our analysis demands that in the best tradition of the historic left we 'agitate, educate and organise' to build such an alternative."
The Tories delivered their 4th campaign leaflet today for the Norwich North by-election. It's an A3, 8 page newspaper style leaflet and it has too many pages for me to put up on this blog so I'll just do the front page.
The inside pages have a lot of national content, quite a lot of national article about George Osborne, Cameron and Gordon Brown and a lot of "Insert candidate's name here" stuff with little local relevance alongside some local stuff that has already featured in previous leaflets. Quite professional in appearance but rather dry, the leaflet that is.
What amused me were some of the quotes from the leaflet. The point of quotes from members of the public is supposed to be to show your candidate is a really hard working person capable of achieving things and a person who works year in, year out, so the choice of quotes was somewhat strange.
This is odd. This is the sort of reply I get from a bank saying "Thank you for your reply to out letter concerning your overdraft" or "Thank you for your reply concerning cancelling your contract with T-Mobile". It does not not actually say anything has been achieved, indeed the quote tells us only that she replied to a letter.
So in essence, during the local elections Chloe Smith did some surveying. Fine, okay, but as someone selected to fight the back in 2008 I'd have preferred a quotations showing she works outside of the election period, not just every Spring.
And finally, my favourite non descript quote.
Now Stuart Clancy is my County Councillor in Taverham, which until Ian Gibson resigned had been part of the new Broadland seat meaning Chloe Smith was not the candidate for this area. This means that since Ian Gibson has stood down, Chloe Smith has suddenly been supporting Cllr Clancy in his campaigns ? Presumably, but what are they. The local Tory leaflet make no references to any local campaigns by Cllr Clancy in Taverham and I certainly know nothing about them. So in essence, since Ian Gibson has stood down, she's been campaigning in Taverham ? Not the best quote in the world then.Yes, I'm being picky and yes, before people make the point, I am a Lib Dem so I am biased (if you want Tory bias read Iain Dale, but surely the Tories could have chosen a better set of quotes than these ?
John Lloyd is a commentator unafraid to hit the counter-intuitive button. He does more in this FT article than bemoan the gap between people and politicians, aggravated in the UK by the MPs’ expenses scandal and in the Republic by the gombeen culture. That democracy is in trouble – in some versions terminal trouble – is now the commonest of ideas among political scientists, coupled with a regret that their warnings have not been attended to. In one of the first scholarly articles to tackle the expenses scandal, for the next issue of Political Quarterly, the political scientist Alexandra Kelso says that “the House of Commons and its MPs have unequivocally failed to tell the public about who they are, what they do and how they do it, in spite of much good advice from many quarters”.
The criticism from scholars is that politicians do not give the public the governance they want. Somewhat contradictorily, they also charge that politicians do not provide what the public needs – even when people do not want what is needed. Experts increasingly believe that even the best of politicians cannot match the world’s challenges, because interest groups and popular attachment to high consumption will defeat them.
So climate change policies are woefully inadequate and there are few ideas around to capture the public imagination. Lloyd's argument peters out rather in an anti-climax. He seems to be saying there’s an innate wisdom in public opinion, a concept that sounds suspiciously like Rousseau’s “general will”, but he advises politicians to “listen to, learn from and level with these citizens if you want to stay in power – and for parliamentary government to continue.” Well and good but how does this apply to new banking regulations for instance? The public are supposed to be up in arms about the revival of the bonus culture, particularly when they’re supposed to be controlling the banks. How does this translate into action? Too tight regulation with bigger capital deposits ,say, simply postpones the day when banks can increase lending. Perhaps we can grasp the banking problem easier if we ask a question with an ethical content: what do bankers deserve to be paid? Robert Peston helps us steer through those thickets. The answer seems to be: not as much as they think. Their performance levels out at about average between good times and bad. So many public decisions require expertise to understand and to anticipate unintended consequences. Yet this shouldn’t be an argument for losing faith in democracy. There is no excuse in c21 for silly rows over the basic facts of public spending. Government of whatever party should be compelled to disclose the figures. We're getting near that point with the independent release of govenment statistics but we're not there yet. Much wider disclosure of information coupled with far wider accountability from politicians and bankers alike, would allow the public to sniff out authentic answers and would I believe stimulate a revival of trust and involvement in politics.
Just some food for thought as their isn't anything else happening to blog about. Was it the image above and many occasions like that which destroyed British politics? Everyone knows of the image of Mr Blair and Brown buying each other ice creams at the Labour party conferences in Blackpool but was it this that caused the problems that we are facing today.If in 1997 Blair throw Brown to the back benches and didn't make him Chancellor he wouldn't have to enjoy ice creams with him and British politics might not be as bad as it is today with Brown as leader.
Or was it that Brown promised to pay for the ice creams and Blair could not resist so took him up on his offer and made him Chancellor in return for free ice creams?
An ice cream costs 99p with a flake. Even if Brown bought Blair ice creams the most it could have cost could be £100 but we will have to pay for a £100 or so savings made by Blair when we get a Tory government.
This letter was first broadcast on WBAIX on July 3rd.
Letter from an Israeli Jail
By Cynthia McKinney.
This is Cynthia McKinney and I'm speaking from an Israeli prison cellblock in Ramle. [I am one of] the Free Gaza 21, human rights activists currently imprisoned for trying to take medical supplies to Gaza, building supplies - and even crayons for children, I had a suitcase full of crayons for children. While we were on our way to Gaza the Israelis threatened to fire on our boat, but we did not turn around. The Israelis high-jacked and arrested us because we wanted to give crayons to the children in Gaza. We have been detained, and we want the people of the world to see how we have been treated just because we wanted to deliver humanitarian assistance to the people of Gaza.
At the outbreak of Israel's Operation 'Cast Lead' [in December 2008], I boarded a Free Gaza boat with one day's notice and tried, as the US representative in a multi-national delegation, to deliver 3 tons of medical supplies to an already besieged and ravaged Gaza.
During Operation Cast Lead, U.S.-supplied F-16's rained hellfire on a trapped people. Ethnic cleansing became full scale outright genocide. U.S.-supplied white phosphorus, depleted uranium, robotic technology, DIME weapons, and cluster bombs - new weapons creating injuries never treated before by Jordanian and Norwegian doctors. I was later told by doctors who were there in Gaza during Israel's onslaught that Gaza had become Israel's veritable weapons testing laboratory, people used to test and improve the kill ratio of their weapons.
The world saw Israel's despicable violence thanks to al-Jazeera Arabic and Press TV that broadcast in English. I saw those broadcasts live and around the clock, not from the USA but from Lebanon, where my first attempt to get into Gaza had ended because the Israeli military rammed the boat I was on in international water ... It's a miracle that I'm even here to write about my second encounter with the Israeli military, again a humanitarian mission aborted by the Israeli military.
The Israeli authorities have tried to get us to confess that we committed a crime ... I am now known as Israeli prisoner number 88794. How can I be in prison for collecting crayons to kids?
Zionism has surely run out of its last legitimacy if this is what it does to people who believe so deeply in human rights for all that they put their own lives on the line for someone else's children. Israel is the fullest expression of Zionism, but if Israel fears for its security because Gaza's children have crayons then not only has Israel lost its last shred of legitimacy, but Israel must be declared a failed state.
I am facing deportation from the state that brought me here at gunpoint after commandeering our boat. I was brought to Israel against my will. I am being held in this prison because I had a dream that Gaza's children could color & paint, that Gaza's wounded could be healed, and that Gaza's bombed-out houses could be rebuilt.
But I've learned an interesting thing by being inside this prison. First of all, it's incredibly black: populated mostly by Ethiopians who also had a dream ... like my cellmates, one who is pregnant. They are all are in their twenties. They thought they were coming to the Holy Land. They had a dream that their lives would be better ... The once proud, never colonized Ethiopia [has been thrown into] the back pocket of the United States, and become a place of torture, rendition, and occupation. Ethiopians must free their country because superpower politics [have] become more important than human rights and self-determination.
My cellmates came to the Holy Land so they could be free from the exigencies of superpower politics. They committed no crime except to have a dream. They came to Israel because they thought that Israel held promise for them. Their journey to Israel through Sudan and Egypt was arduous. I can only imagine what it must have been like for them. And it wasn't cheap. Many of them represent their family's best collective efforts for self-fulfilment. They made their way to the United Nations High Commission for Refugees. They got their yellow paper of identification. They got their certificate for police protection. They are refugees from tragedy, and they made it to Israel only after they arrived Israel told them "there is no UN in Israel."
The police here have license to pick them up & suck them into the black hole of a farce for a justice system. These beautiful, industrious and proud women represent the hopes of entire families. The idea of Israel tricked them and the rest of us. In a widely propagandized slick marketing campaign, Israel represented itself as a place of refuge and safety for the world's first Jews and Christian. I too believed that marketing and failed to look deeper.
The truth is that Israel lied to the world. Israel lied to the families of these young women. Israel lied to the women themselves who are now trapped in Ramle's detention facility. And what are we to do? One of my cellmates cried today. She has been here for 6 months. As an American, crying with them is not enough. The policy of the United States m
I've lifted this important message below direct from the Cornwall 24 forum.
Any queries with regards to the new Census 2011 arrangements please contact Malcolm Brown, Senior Research and Information Officer (Cornwall Council), by telephone on 01872 322621 or by email mbrown@cornwall.gov.uk
Regarding the 2011 ONS Census, are the ONS once again using the '06' category for recording Cornish ethnicity as they did in 2001 ?
Will the ONS be obliged to record the number of "Cornish" identity returns as they did in 2001 as they have stated:- "For those groups that will not be covered by tick-boxes, ONS will be liaising with representatives of groups to inform them of the policy and encourage members of the group they represent to make full use of the write-in boxes to ensure their community is accurately measured."
There are 2 questions that apply to the Cornish.
15. What is your national identity ?
16. What is your ethnic group ?
I guess many Cornish will write Cornish as their ethnic group (which is recognised by the ONS) and also write Cornish as their national identity (which is not recognised by the ONS).
This leads to a number of questions:-
1. Who will be checking how accurately the ONS measure the Cornish return ? Will there be independent Census scrutineers in 2011 to accurately verify the number recorded as Cornish ?
2. If people record Cornish as their national identity (which is not recognised by the ONS), then what will this be changed to - British or English ? or will it be registered as an unfilled, or a spoilt paper ? If they are changed, then who will do the changing ? What policy will be deployed to determine the change and will the citizen be notified ?
3. Will the ONS be allocating a census code for those people who wish to record their national identity as Cornish ?
4. What publicity will be given to Cornish options available in questions 15 and 16 in Cornwall ? Will there be any funding made available for publicity from Cornwall Council or in the local press etc, to ensure that Cornish people are actually aware of the Cornish option ? (unlike in 2001 when there was little publicity regarding the Cornish option).
5. Many Cornish people have stated that due to the Census confusion with problems recording their identity that they will not be completing the 2011 Census, leading to even fewer Cornish returns.
6. What is Cornwall Council's opinion and position regarding these questions ?
7. A Cornish tick box was not allocated as the ONS stated that "insufficient requirement for the data had been expressed by Census users" and "national identity and ethnicity questions will contain tick boxes only for the largest groups" -- but the ONS then went on to include a tick box for the ethnic group "Irish Travellers", even though their numbers in the UK are probably comparable to those of the Cornish
The main problem with the 2001 Census form, was that in order to register as CORNISH, people had to deny they were BRITISH. As Cornish people do not, in the main, wish to reject their British identity, by making it an either/or decision, the ONS form inhibited people from registering as Cornish. This was merely one feature of the Census that led to Census 2001, and will lead to Census 2011, under-recording the numbers of Cornish by a factor of at least four. This has a significant adverse effect on the Cornish, particularly in terms of general policy formulation and service delivery.
It has also been shown that the the low Cornish Census return statistic in 2001 (the ONS were alerted to the Cornish Census recording problems prior to conducting the Census) was used by the Government in the High Court to undermine a legal challenge designed to ensure that the Government extended the rights of the "Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM)" to the Cornish.
Do you think that the reluctance of the ONS/Government to recognise the Cornish on the 2011 Census could be explained as perhaps another case of forced assimilation ? Could continued refusal of Cornish recognition (including not being recognised as per all other UK indigenous minorities under the FCNM) could be perhaps explained as deliberate cultural genocide, whilst the indigenous population is gradually being replaced for example through mass (70,000) housing projects which will not benefit local people but will in the long term encourage more people to re-locate to Cornwall ?
You can follow debates and news on the Cornish census tick box campaign here on the Cornwall 24 and This is NOT England forums.
The campaign can also be found here on facebook
This letter was first broadcast on WBAIX on July 3rd.
Letter from an Israeli Jail
By Cynthia McKinney.
This is Cynthia McKinney and I'm speaking from an Israeli prison cellblock in Ramle. [I am one of] the Free Gaza 21, human rights activists currently imprisoned for trying to take medical supplies to Gaza, building supplies - and even crayons for children, I had a suitcase full of crayons for children. While we were on our way to Gaza the Israelis threatened to fire on our boat, but we did not turn around. The Israelis high-jacked and arrested us because we wanted to give crayons to the children in Gaza. We have been detained, and we want the people of the world to see how we have been treated just because we wanted to deliver humanitarian assistance to the people of Gaza.
At the outbreak of Israel's Operation 'Cast Lead' [in December 2008], I boarded a Free Gaza boat with one day's notice and tried, as the US representative in a multi-national delegation, to deliver 3 tons of medical supplies to an already besieged and ravaged Gaza.
During Operation Cast Lead, U.S.-supplied F-16's rained hellfire on a trapped people. Ethnic cleansing became full scale outright genocide. U.S.-supplied white phosphorus, depleted uranium, robotic technology, DIME weapons, and cluster bombs - new weapons creating injuries never treated before by Jordanian and Norwegian doctors. I was later told by doctors who were there in Gaza during Israel's onslaught that Gaza had become Israel's veritable weapons testing laboratory, people used to test and improve the kill ratio of their weapons.
The world saw Israel's despicable violence thanks to al-Jazeera Arabic and Press TV that broadcast in English. I saw those broadcasts live and around the clock, not from the USA but from Lebanon, where my first attempt to get into Gaza had ended because the Israeli military rammed the boat I was on in international water ... It's a miracle that I'm even here to write about my second encounter with the Israeli military, again a humanitarian mission aborted by the Israeli military.
The Israeli authorities have tried to get us to confess that we committed a crime ... I am now known as Israeli prisoner number 88794. How can I be in prison for collecting crayons to kids?
Zionism has surely run out of its last legitimacy if this is what it does to people who believe so deeply in human rights for all that they put their own lives on the line for someone else's children. Israel is the fullest expression of Zionism, but if Israel fears for its security because Gaza's children have crayons then not only has Israel lost its last shred of legitimacy, but Israel must be declared a failed state.
I am facing deportation from the state that brought me here at gunpoint after commandeering our boat. I was brought to Israel against my will. I am being held in this prison because I had a dream that Gaza's children could color & paint, that Gaza's wounded could be healed, and that Gaza's bombed-out houses could be rebuilt.
But I've learned an interesting thing by being inside this prison. First of all, it's incredibly black: populated mostly by Ethiopians who also had a dream ... like my cellmates, one who is pregnant. They are all are in their twenties. They thought they were coming to the Holy Land. They had a dream that their lives would be better ... The once proud, never colonized Ethiopia [has been thrown into] the back pocket of the United States, and become a place of torture, rendition, and occupation. Ethiopians must free their country because superpower politics [have] become more important than human rights and self-determination.
My cellmates came to the Holy Land so they could be free from the exigencies of superpower politics. They committed no crime except to have a dream. They came to Israel because they thought that Israel held promise for them. Their journey to Israel through Sudan and Egypt was arduous. I can only imagine what it must have been like for them. And it wasn't cheap. Many of them represent their family's best collective efforts for self-fulfilment. They made their way to the United Nations High Commission for Refugees. They got their yellow paper of identification. They got their certificate for police protection. They are refugees from tragedy, and they made it to Israel only after they arrived Israel told them "there is no UN in Israel."
The police here have license to pick them up & suck them into the black hole of a farce for a justice system. These beautiful, industrious and proud women represent the hopes of entire families. The idea of Israel tricked them and the rest of us. In a widely propagandized slick marketing campaign, Israel represented itself as a place of refuge and safety for the world's first Jews and Christian. I too believed that marketing and failed to look deeper.
The truth is that Israel lied to the world. Israel lied to the families of these young women. Israel lied to the women themselves who are now trapped in Ramle's detention facility. And what are we to do? One of my cellmates cried today. She has been here for 6 months. As an American, crying with them is not enough. The policy of the United States m
One in four drink too much, official figures show.
Ten million people in England - one in four adults - are putting their health at risk by drinking too much, official figures have shown.
Litres of alcohol per person aged over 14 (PDF)
2002: 11.13
2003: 11.34
2004: 11.59
2005: 11.4
2006: 11.0
2007: 11.2
This data is significant because per capita consumption effectively measures the amount of ethanol consumed by a person, which is what the system of units is supposed to do. But while units have to be clumsily estimated, the per capita system measures what has actually been bought and therefore, one has to assume, been drunk.
According to the Institute of Alcohol Studies - no friends of the booze - total alcohol sales have fallen by 13% since 2001/02**. According to the ONS, the number of teetotallers has risen from 9.5% to 14% since 1992. And pubs are closing at the rate of 53 a week. And per capita consumption of pure alcohol currently stands at 11.2 litres, much less than Luxembourg (15.6 litres) and, indeed, less than 14 other European countries. That's your 'Booze Britain' for you.
*These figures are shown in table 2.5 of Statistics on Alcohol, England 2009
** Page 8 of Drinking in Great Britain (PDF)
In his report, Sir Liam noted that over the preceding 20 years, the country's disposable income had risen faster than alcohol taxation, and alcohol had become ever more affordable.
When inflation is factored in, British households' disposable income increased from 100 to 208.8 between 1980 and 2008. In other words, people can afford to buy more than twice as much as they could in 1980.
Between 1980 and 2008, the price of alcohol increased by 283.3%. After considering inflation (at 21.3%), alcohol prices increased by 19.3% over the period.
Teenage drinking epidemic 'causing misery'
Britain needs to wake up to the epidemic of binge-drinking among teenagers and the misery it is causing thousands of families, one of the country's most senior policemen has warned.
He criticised the drinks industry for targeting the young and exporting its "negative costs on to the streets, hospitals and into the criminal justice system".
A survey of 13,000 young people by the Trading Standards Institute found the number of teenagers who drank weekly fell from 50% in 2005 to 38% this year.
Fewer teenagers are drinking regularly - partly because it is becoming harder for youngsters to get hold of alcohol, a Trading Standards survey suggests.
One in five pupils (20%) [11-15 years] had drunk alcohol in the last seven days, a proportion which has declined from 26% in 2001.
The proportion of pupils who have never drunk alcohol has risen since 2003, from 39% to 46% in 2007.
Trading Standards North West, which carried out the poll, said it intended to write to the firms behind these drinks to "seek clarification of the plans for action to reduce their appeal to young people".
There'll be a big hoo-ha going on over at the England project bunker this evening as my good lady and a very good mutual lady friend of ours have decided that they would quite like to share a Birthday celebration. Not being ones to hang about the oven for too long we have decided that the main source of sustenance will be what can only be described as a colossal chilli.
Neither Birthday actually falls today but that won't stop the guzzling of enough alcohol to fill a small lake.
Weather today, fine and warm. Head tomorrow, dull and painful.
Schools bar parents from sports day... to keep out paedophilesNaturally the righteous who came up with this shit have their reasons.
Parents have been banned from attending their children's sports day in an extraordinary measure to protect pupils from child abductors and paedophiles.
More than 270 pupils from four primary schools took part in the event - but there were no spectators because the organisers said they could not prevent 'unsavoury' characters from sneaking onto school grounds.
The decision to bar parents was made after a risk assessment concluded that Sandy Upper School in Biggleswade, Bedfordshire, could not 'guarantee the children's safety' when it hosted the athletics day.
Paul Blunt of the East Bedfordshire School Sports Partnership, which ran the event, said the 'ultimate fear' was that a child could be abducted.So if we are to head down this road, then who watches the watchers in that case? Who checks on the teachers to ensure they are trustworthy.
He said: 'If we let parents into the school they would have been free to roam the grounds. All unsupervised adults must be kept away from children.
Today sees a march of gay pride through London with various dignatories clamouring to be seen and heard indicating their support for the march and all it holds dear. I wonder how many would run to join the tail end of a straight pride march if any such thing was conceived?I find the whole thing rather negative. It does not help that the stereotypical camp gays will be the ones that the press will photograph. The whole thing is not about so-called gay pride but about making those who have views on homosexuality that do not fit it with the new order silent and marginalised. Listening to the likes of Chris Bryant, a man who posed in his underpants on a gay website, criticising the Conservative Party is distasteful in itself.
We appear to be moving into the realms of a fascist-style thought approval mode. Ben Bradshaw, a man who was involved once in producing a homoerotic "prayer book" and, like Chris Bryant, is acting like a gay Trojan horse in the Church, attacks the Conservative Party and says "a deep strain of homophobia still exists on the Conservative benches". This implies that those who disagree with his gay mantra should be silenced.
I consider the bandying about of the word homophobia (itself a non-word) with such loose reason is itself an insult. Alan Duncan is a Shadow Cabinet member. He happens to be gay. He is in a civil partnership. I have not heard that being "discussed". Duncan says of the Labour tirade, "This is the last gasp of Labour's desperation. Bradshaw and Bryant are simply trying to stir up hatred and division from the last century and it's both unwarranted and unworthy. It's simply untrue. I believed we had reached the happy point where politics had been taken out of this altogether. But these remarks show that Labour is actually the nasty party. I have publicly paid tribute to Tony Blair for his achievements, particularly on introducing civil partnerships. David Cameron this week said that on section 28 we had to admit we got it wrong. The party has changed. I bet in Labour backwaters there are plenty of people who don't like the fact that Ben Bradshaw is gay." Now all that is true.
There was a time when homosexuals could be blackmailed. The blackmailer would suggest that exposure to the criminal justice system would end a glittering career or a happy marriage. Most caring thoughtful people found this utterly distasteful and wanted the law changed. I have no sympathy with blackmailers. It is the lowest form of financial crime. In fact, the current crop of banking spivs could not stoop so low. However, it is one thing to give fairness of treatment to people. It is quite another to denigrate in a nasty way those people who disagree with you.
Ben Bradshaw and Chris Bryant appear to be raising a rallying flag. In their sights are those they call "homophobes". These are those who hold to traditional church teaching, those who consider homosexual practice incompatible with family life, and others who express contrary views to the Bradshaw/Bryant thought process. The Pope is vilified in their eyes. The Church is to be attacked at every turn. We have already heard their bile over the Catholic adoption agencies.
Is it now suggested that only those who agree with this form of censorship can enter the House of Commons? Surely not! Those MPs who, in conscience, cannot subscribe to promoting this "gay agenda" will need all the courage at their disposal because this un-Christian duo will be attempting to make their lives hell.
It is not true to say that the Tories voted against creating an offence of homophobic hatred, as Angela Eagle alleged. They DID support the creation of an offence - in fact David Cameron stated on the floor of the House that they would do so - and as a result that part of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 passed without division. So no Conservative voted against it.
The Tories did support amendments to the bill that would have inserted a 'free speech' clause of one sort or another. Edward Garnier tabled one at Committee stage on behalf of the front bench. Most Conservatives, on a free vote, then supported at Report stage another amendment tabled by LABOUR MP Jim Dobbin. In the House of Lords an amendment was successfully tabled by Lord Waddington. But when the bill was returned to the Commons, Labour ACCEPTED this amendment in order to get the bill on the statute book. In short, the Tories voted for creating an offence; but they voted for a free speech clause - as did Gordon Brown, Jack Straw and the Minister moving that part of the bill Maria Eagle. The argument that 'only one Tory voted for it and that was John Bercow' is a piece of shit-stirring, frankly - Bercow was voting with the LibDems and AGAINST Labour. At previous stages Bercow had not voted for the free speech clauses - but a handful of other Conservatives had done so too.
More recently, in the Coroners and Justice Bill, Labour are trying to remove the Waddington amendment. The Tory position is to retain the clause; Labour argue that it did not, in truth, reflect the will of the Commons.
Regardless, it is clear that the Tory position in relation to the homophobic hatred offence is that they supported it, and to say otherwise is a lie. The reason that people are free to stir up hatred against gay people is not for want of legislation but because Labour, typically, have still not actually brought this legislation into effect. Yet again, they have passed legislation largely for symbolic and strategic reasons but haven't actually put it into law. You could argue that if Labour were serious about protecting gay people from hatred, they would implement that legislation rather than posture about it.
* I should make clear that the position I have outlined in the official Tory position on this legislation. It is not mine. I opposed this legislation as I made clear in a Telegraph column in November 2007.
Opposing this legislation is not anti-gay. Rather, it is pro freedom of speech. Such proposals would never see the light of day in the US, where freedom of speech is enshrined in the constitution. This issue makes the case better than anything else for a written constitution.
If, as is suggested by Justice Secretary Jack Straw, the burden of proof is on the accused to prove they didn't mean something in a hateful way, it will create a legal minefield. If someone calls a homosexual a ''poof", it can be meant in a number of ways, as this week's Ofcom ruling in favour of Channel 4 has shown. It can be meant in a hateful way but it can also be used as an affectionate term, believe it or not.
Having said that this legislation should be opposed by the Opposition, I have few expectations that they will do so. Tories will seek to amend the proposals but in the end political realities will dictate that they will not go into the ''no" lobby. A ''courageous" abstention will probably win the day.
The Mule
The four other UK nationals are in the cell with me. There's 14 of us in the 7 by 7 meter cell which includes the toilet and shower, so very crowded. It's very hot and there's only a tiny window. We get woken up at 6 in the morning for an inspection and have to stand to attention, and then they repeat that at 9, and we are only allowed out of the cells for a few hours each day. They keep giving us forms to sign but they are in Hebrew so we don't. Although I'm able to cope here, other people are less comfortable than me in the situation. If we're here for a long time - like some of the other people in here have been - then it will be tough.
(...)
This is not about us here in the cells, it's about the denial of human rights to the people of Palestine, and in particular the inhumane blockade of Gaza. People must not forget about what is happening to Gaza. At the moment they are even being denied food and medical supplies. After the carnage of the 1500 people killed in January, we won't forget and we'll keep on going and keep fighting for the human rights of the people of Palestine.
The News Letter and Belfast Telegraph are reporting that First Minister Peter Robinson has offered to meet the Orange Order and Garvaghy residents in an attempt to solve the Drumcree dispute.
The News Letter quotes Robinson saying:
“I have written to both the Orange District and resident's group in good faith and I hope that they will feel able to respond in a positive manner.
By demonstrating a commonsense approach, I am certain that we can find a way through this issue. I will do all I can to help progress this matter to a consensual conclusion, but I would be equally content if in the preliminary discussions the two parties agree on some other approach or arrangement which might meet reach the outcome that everyone in Portadown and indeed throughout Northern Ireland wishes to see.”
The Grand Master of Portadown district gave the intervention a warm welcome though Brendan McKenna of the Garvaghy residents association seemed more cautious.
Fancy a bit of gentle exercise in the open air tomorrow morning? (Sunday)
Then join Wapley Bushes Conservation Group at their work morning. Meet 10.00 am at the gate on Shire Way, Yate.
More details available here.
Fair enough me writing on LabourList, Stephen Tall from LDV writing for LabourList even if a back bench Lib Dem MP did it but why the leader of the Lib Dems?
We tend not to be too poll-obsessed here at LDV - of course we look at them, as do all other politico-geeks, but viewed in isolation no one poll will tell you very much beyond what you want to read into it. Looked at over a reasonable time-span and, if there are enough polls, you can see some trends.
Here, in chronological order, are the results of the twelve polls published in June:
Tories 37%, Labour 21%, Lib Dems 19% - YouGov/Telegraph (4th June 2009)
Tories 38%, Labour 22%, Lib Dems 20% - ComRes/Independent (9th June)
Tories 36%, Labour 24%, Lib Dems 19% - Populus/Times (12th June)
Tories 35%, Labour 20%, Lib Dems 16% - Harris/Metro (23rd June)
Tories 40%, Labour 24%, Lib Dems 18% - YouGov/Times (14th June)
Tories 39%, Labour 27%, Lib Dems 18% - ICM/Guardian (16th June)
Tories 39%, Labour 25%, Lib Dems 19% - Mori/Unison (16th June)
Tories 38%, Labour 22%, Lib Dems 20% - ComRes/Independent (21st June)
Tories 38%, Labour 21%, Lib Dems 19% - Mori (unpublished)
Tories 38%, Labour 25%, Lib Dems 18% - YouGov/Telegraph (26th June)
Tories 40%, Labour 24%, Lib Dems 17% - YouGov/People (26th June)
Tories 36%, Labour 25%, Lib Dems 19% - ComRes/Independent (28th June)
Which gives us an average rating for the parties in June as follows (compared with May's averages):
Tories 38% (-2%), Labour 23% (-1%), Lib Dems 18% (-1%)
All but one of the polls in this month's round-up took place after the 4th June elections, and usually there is a 'winner's premium': a small boost for whichever party is judged by the media/public to have done best. The same has proven true in 2009 - it's just that the winner's premium has been spread among the minor parties (Ukip, Greens, BNP et al).
Remarkably all three major parties have, according to our monthly average, shed support in the past month. I think that's the first time this has happened in all the months I've been writing LDV's poll round-ups. In fact, if you look at the past two months (ie, post-'Expensesgate'), the Tories have dropped from 43% down to 38% (-5%) and Labour from 28% to 23% (-5%).
The Lib Dems can take some comfort that our support has remained steady at 18%, and we appear not to have been too badly hit by the relatively minor expenses indiscretions of a handful of our MPs. Equally, we'll be disappointed that at a time when both Labour and the Tories have taken big hits, losing one-tenth of the public's support, we have done no more than hold our own.
The FT this week published an analysis by academics Niall Ferguson and Glen O'Hara, Do not count on the Tories winning just yet, highlighting quite how unpredictable the coming general election actually is:
The reality is that the electoral position of the Tories is significantly weaker than that of Labour 12 years ago. Opinion polls have the Tory vote hovering between 36 and 40 per cent. This is nowhere near Labour's poll position in early 1995, close to 60 per cent. The polls then probably overstated Labour support but the fact remains that the Conservatives have yet to win over the majority of voters. ...
We are not saying that the Tories cannot win the general election. But it is by no means as certain as many assume. Even now, with the prime minister on his knees, our prediction would be for the Conservatives to be the largest party in a hung parliament or to have only a small majority. It is a long, hard slog that lies ahead.
AN intriguing "tri-rainbow" coalition is being mooted by some Welsh Labour strategists, we can reveal.
Such an alliance would involve the Liberal Democrats joining Labour and Plaid Cymru in an enlarged left-of-centre Assembly Government after Rhodri Morgan steps down as First Minister.
Firstly the One Wales government has a massive majority in the Senedd, so who in their right mind would believe that they would want to share power with the Liberal Democrats? Secondly this would require the abandonment of the One Wales agreement. It's so pie-in-the-sky that it should have been published on April 1st, not July 4th.
Although the leadership of both Labour and Plaid Cymru dismissed the idea last night, well- placed sources within Welsh Labour insisted the prospect was a runner...
Would "well placed" mean "standing next to an exit" perchance?
Another Welsh Labour strategist said: "There would be another advantage in bringing the Liberal Democrats in. Three of the four Plaid ministers are doing a good job: Elin Jones is doing very well with Rural Affairs, it is generally agreed, Alun Ffred Jones is doing OK as Heritage Minister, and Jocelyn Davies is fine as Deputy Housing Minister.
"The one Plaid minister who is not doing well is Ieuan Wyn Jones, the party leader...
It would appear that "strategist" is now an euphemism for somebody in their cups. Now who was it that Ieuan upset on the Labour back benches recently...?
A spokesman for the Welsh Liberal Democrats said: "We are hearing similar things from within Labour, although no direct approach has been made to us.
"It's the type of progressive solution that could be very good for Wales.
"Bringing us into government would make the coalition broader and would help dispel the negative view of some people that coalitions are more to do with stitch-ups and deals than they are about running the country.
And which "spokesman for the Welsh Liberal Democrats" was that pray tell? Martin forgot to discover how this statement squares with Kirsty Williams' views that the present administration is a "failure" and that "compromise" (a necessary feature of any coalition) is a dirty word.
Really, Martin; if you're going to go out on the piss with members of the Huw Lewis Fan Club then try to leave pen and notebook back at the office, eh.
Half of the EU doesn't want nuclear plants. Their choice, literally no reason it should dictate ours The EU would need hundreds of them and it takes a decade to build just one The implication that it would thus take hundreds of decades to build them is wrong for the same reason that it doesn't take 5 hours to cook 100 eggs. In any case it does not take a decade to build a reactor - Westinghouse say they can do it in 3 years, if it first takes 7 years to let government agree to it that is not inherent & an argument for having reducing the amount of government eco-regulatory parasitism. Not only do they cost a fortune to build they also cost a fortune to take down. No true - the first reactor at Shippingport cost $98 million to decommission & modern ones are built specifically to dismantle more easily. Again we see the eco-crowd vastly inflating regulatory costs & then complaining that regulatory costs are so high The used fuel has to be stored for xthousand years. Not true - reactor waste, precisely because it is highly radioactive burns down to safe levels in 50 years & to less radioactive than the ore it was mined from in 2-3 centuries. The cost of the fuel is going up even faster than oil and gas. So what - uranium cost is a tiny part of nuclear cost, indeed this is why the price is volatile The uranium costs a lot of energy/pollution to extract and process Not true - if it cost as much as coal to extract it would cost as much as coal - once again we see the eco-fascists ignoring the price system & making assertions based firmly in mid air. and isn't durable either. Obviously not true - uranium has been here since the Earth was formed 4.5 billion years ago - how much more "durable" is required The safety is questionable. Not true. Nuclear has the best safety record of any power system - more people have died falling of windmills that in nuclear power though nuclear generates hundreds of times as much power Nuclear power favours monopolies. Not true - organisational structure depends on how things are organised not on the technology Nuclear power requires lots of expensive engineers and support staff. Staff, & other, costs are far lower per kwh power produced - is it supposed to be a fault that it can produce a lot of power Nuclear power can't live with renewables because you can't turn it on/off at will. Wholly untrue - nuclear is a very good match with hydro precisely because you the latter is so flexible which is why France is 80% nuclear & 20% hydro. What the idiot means is not renewables but that it doesn't fit with windmills but since they can't be switched on when required windmills "can't live with" windmills - in fact all this assertion shows is that windmills are completely useless because they can't produce ANY baseload power but only occasional power which, to be used at all, requires genuine generators of all sorts have to be turned off Builders of nuclear plants systematically ask for priority to the net because otherwise they would go bust. The truth is the exact opposite. Builders of nuclear plants systematically offer the cheapest power meaning that a sanely run grid would naturally choose them as first option - Windmillers demand & being politically connected, get priority to the net though they produce the most expensive power. This is what the Renewables Obligation means Enough reasons? Not really but clearly the best the eco movement can do.
For the truth on the subject see Professor John McCarthy's site
'however, the inequalities that persist are frustrating. It is ludicrous, for example, that there is still a blanket ban on gay men donating blood, irrespective of whether they practice safe sex or if they have tested negative for HIV. Plus, although civil partnerships have been a step forward, until same sex marriage is permitted it is impossible to claim gay and straight couples are treated equally. And in school playgrounds 'gay' is still used as a four letter word.'
So as the Euro Tories take a step back to those days by aligning themselves with European Homophobes. And Ben Bradshaw recently added that a deep vein of homophobia still reaches right through the Tory establishment to the front benches. I'm proud of our leader, our party, our Liberal Youth for their stance against homophobia wherever they find it.
Philip Blond, the so-called ‘Red Tory', has just written an article setting out his new Big Idea for reducing poverty, which is about ‘recapitalising the poor'.
These Big Ideas come along quite frequently, and there is quite an easy and quick way to test them out. Simply pick one policy area that you know about and see if the author's suggestions and analysis suggest they know what they are talking about. If so, read on, if not, bin the rest.
So here is Blond's ‘Red Tory' approach to social housing:
Councils have used their housing stock to generate cash income for benefit dependency for generations. By constantly raising rents, councils have created housing that the working poor cannot afford. Some sort of redress is required - a capital or asset credit, financed by a council bond, should be applied to those whose long-term benefit has, in effect, subsidised council receipts.
This credit should be a tradable asset that, when conjoined with other new ventures such as community shares or social investment, can generate an asset effect for those whose routes out of poverty are presently so curtailed.
Leaving aside the atrocious writing style, this is total and utter drivel, even by the extremely low standards of most discussion about housing policy. Council rents are lower than rents in the private sector, whereas Blond appears to think they are ‘unaffordable' for working people.
The reason why very few working people can get a council house is because of the massive shortage of supply, not because of a conspiracy by councils to raise rents so that only people on housing benefits can afford the rent.
Based on this nonsense, he has a totally incomprehensible suggestion whereby councils will borrow money and give it to those of their tenants who have been on housing benefit for a long time. People will then be able to trade these capital credits, and this will give them a route out of poverty.
They will get this (presumably) instead of housing benefit/Local Housing Allowance, because the idea is to move from spending on welfare to ‘investment'. The kindest thing it is possible to say about this idea is that it doesn't address any of the problems that social housing tenants actually face.
Blond's other ideas seem at a first glance to be equally nonsensical, and he's been churning this sort of stuff out for months. But really, there is nothing to see here which is even worth beginning to engage with.
Labour were warned about the consequences of their abandonment of the government sovereign rite to protect its citizens, but as ever they thought they knew better.
Instead of the crocodile tears, how about getting her husband to the dispatch box to apologise and beg for forgiveness for allowing such an unequal extradition arrangement to exist ( and the one with EU countries also ) and to beg the house to repeal the relevant Labour legislation ?
PS What won't Sarah Brown do to get headlines right now ? She is as guilty of the destruction and demise of the UK caused by her husband as any of the other in the gutless Labour group that allows the unlelcted prime minister to continue for one more day in office.
It appears that the inflation rate is being applied where it suits universities, but not where it will improve student support. In the context of the current recession, these real terms cuts in student support will be felt in students' pockets.
Mrinal Patel faced up to a year in jail or a £5,000 fine after Harrow council accused her of lying about where she lived to get her five-year-old into one of the most sought-after primaries in London.
But the council has dropped the case after receiving legal advice that its use of the Fraud Act 2006 could be open to challenge, a decision which has wide-ranging implications for enforcing school admissions rules across Britain. Harrow is calling on ministers to tighten the law to stop cheating by parents. Link to full story
In the words of Devil's Kitchen:
Ed Balls: this man is an unmitigated cunt. And not the good type of cunt, the kind that attractive ladies have between their legs. Oh, no. This man is the worst cunt in the world--a diseased, unkempt, unwashed, scabby, Polly Toynbee cunt, with big pointy fucking teeth. The cunt.Here here. Fuck off Ed, just fuck off and die.
After he moved Jimmy charged £3,996 for legal fees, then bought household goods including a leatherette shoebox for £14.99, a vacuum cleaner for £89.99, a wine rack for £14.99, an ironing board for £39.99 and an oven glove for £6.99.
In 2007 Mr Healey claimed £1,431 to replace his front door. Plus £258.50 to paint the sodding door!
His claims in the same year included £7,612 for timber windows, £1,317 for a bed, sofa and shelving units, £95 for a swivel chair from Ikea and £25.98 for four pillows.
He also claimed £129 for a television, having claimed £299 for a television two years previously.
So Jacqui Smiths husband was not the only one having a wank at the taxpayers expense...Mr Donaldson, 46, a married father of two, used his Commons second home allowances to pay for films in his hotel room nearly every time he travelled from Northern Ireland to the capital on parliamentary business.
In total, Mr Donaldson submitted second home claim forms, including receipts, relating to 68 pay-to-view movies.
The tidal wave of goodwill and togetherness that washed over the UK will no doubt subside and we'll go back to a yawning indifference as the Lions tour trundles to an end, the England Cricket team bat their way through the sporting calendar during the Ashes and the football season monotonously kicks off once again. Meanwhile, the gap between us all gets that little bit wider.
It was fun though, wasn't it? Knowing that whoever you might have sat next to on the bus or bumped into in a shop or worked alongside in an office, you always had a few minutes of Andy Murray chat to fall back on to feed a fuzzy bond that tends to be absent between us.
I couldn't help but worry therefore that the awful news of an old lady's body lying undiscovered for five years serves as a dark clarion call for us all. Neighbourliness and community spirit stands on the brink while we immerse ourselves in our daily lives at the expense of taking interest in those around us.
It may seem an extreme comparison but I just can't shake the thought that the explosion of optimism and good-feeling surrounding Andy Murray's sunkissed Wimbledon adventure gave us a tantalising glimpse of how we wish to interact with others and yet, for most of us, that sad story of Isabella Purves could all too easily have happened on our very own street.
The eyes of the nation, of a packed centre court were once again fixed on the Wimbledon semi-final yesterday despite the implicit assumption that the last great British hope would crash out at some point.
In a ritual that is repeated every year, the buzz about the 'reaching the final' was inevitably extinguished after four nail-biting sets.
A Wimbledon official said: "If you asked any one of these people before the match whether they might be in denial, they would look blankly at you. But as they stream out of centre court, they mutter - 'I just knew it was too good to be true'.
When at the end of a long process that often takes months, even years the person concerned is declared innocent, it is too late, the damage has been done. The accused person's reputation and career has been damaged and he or she is often exhausted both physically and financially through defending his or her reputation.
The damage can be so severe that often those who bear ill-will to a particular politician use the process of complaint as a weapon against them, constantly alleging wrong-doing even when there is no palpable evidence just so that they can then go to the press and onto phone-ins to imply that the politician concerned is guilty by the fact that he or she is associated with an on-going investigation. It takes considerable durability to survive a major allegation of impropriety.
As far as the person being hunted is concerned the principle of innocent until proven guilty goes by the board. It is the media and the reaction to their stories that determine guilt not the process of the law or of regulation. It is the act of complaining and the subsequent and necessary investigation that determines the politician's future, no matter how absurd the allegation.
I am therefore reserving judgement on George Osborne's mortgage until it is properly investigated and a considered verdict has been reached. Mr. Osborne himself is now fighting a battle on two fronts: public perception and the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner. He needs to win the latter to survive the rigours of the first, but he needs to fight hardest on the first if the verdict of the second is to matter at all.
Whether there is a scandal waiting to break I do not know. We will just have to wait and see. However, I know how difficult it is to maintain a work-life balance when you are a full-time politician and I am in a very minor and insignificant league. The strain on Palin's family must have been immense and would not have been helped by her own behaviour since being brought onto the Presidential ticket by John McCain.
I am sure that a woman of Tiny Fey's talents and abilities will have no problem in finding other work.
The sun is shining and my Virgin train is firing like a bullet to London town. I'm heading to the geek-of-geek symposium - OpenTech09. Frankly, I'm more excited than I should be. This is partly because in recent years I've been too busy to enjoy the full conference. It's one of those measurable quality of life gains you can count after leaving ministerial office.
Mainly though, it's because I can listen to an iPhone full of my own music on the empty train. The Soulsetters, Juan Amelbert, Mary Jane Hooper, Margie Hendrix and other great R&B tracks are livening up the journey. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind my four year old using the phone as the most expensive games console in Europe to play Animatch. I don't mind the scratches, the weetabix crustaceans, the constant low battery. Sometimes though, it's just nice to get and hour to yourself.
The experience is made all the more joyous by these luxurious Bose QuietComfort 3 Acoustic headphones
As reported in today's "Courier" (click on headline above to view), yesterday I met with two senior representatives of Royal Mail, including their Dundee West Sorting Office Manager, to discuss the deluge of complaints I have received over the past two months regarding the quality of mail deliveries across the West End of the City and the wider Dundee West area. The talks were positive and I hope that residents will see improvements to mail deliveries.This meeting gave me the opportunity to raise the many concerns I have received from residents about detrimental aspects of mail deliveries in the past few months and to specifically go over the problem areas with Royal Mail. The complaints have ranged over a number of aspects of Royal Mail service - late deliveries, lack of prompt deliveries, particular problems with packets and parcels, longer delivery rounds resulting in some mail not being delivered on time and difficulties in getting through to the sorting office on the phone.
I do have to say that the Royal Mail staff did recognise that there have been difficulties but assured me that they are working to ensure improvements. They have assured me that where there are problems with amalgamated delivery rounds and complaints continuing to come in, they will be willing to revise them and we set up direct lines of contact should I continue to receive complaints or concerns from constituents.
With regard to the difficulties of contacting the Sorting Office by phone, I was assured that steps were being taken to ensure that staff were available to answer calls and when this was not possible, an answering machine would be available where residents can leave the details of their enquiry. I hope this will resolve the complaint of people just getting the dialling tone when trying to get through to the Sorting Office.
During the meeting, I went through a list of particular issues in specific streets that have been raised by West End constituents to enable Royal Mail to look into these. Royal Mail is anxious that customers report complaints via their customer service local rate number 08457 740 740 as all complaints are logged and passed on to local staff for attention.
