I was speechless when I saw this BBC interview with Ed Miliband yesterday. It was one of the most gut-wrenchingly awful media performances I've seen from the Labour Party leader.
Whatever your view on the strikes yesterday, Miliband's muddle was excruciatingly painful to watch. His parrot-like repetition of the same tried and tested lines spoke of a man clearly ill at ease with his script, knowing as he did that he was walking a near impossible tightrope of trying to appease his own party whilst not being painted into a corner by 'middle Britain'. He sounded wooden and stilted and thoroughly un-natural.
The final question was truly awful. Given an opportunity to provide some humanity as a father of children, he just trotted out the same line that he'd worn out over the previous 2 minutes.
Who is Ed's media consultant? Because if someone honestly told him that this was the way to interview then they need really should consider a new career in watching paint dry.
For my sanity Ed and for the sake of your leadership of the Labour Party, sort it out before your Party sort you out instead.
Showing posts with label Labour Party. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Labour Party. Show all posts
Friday, 1 July 2011
Friday, 27 May 2011
My Wonderfully Naïve E-mail to Ted Heath in 2001
For any political historian (of which I enthusiastically count myself as one), BBC Four's documentary this week on the titanic duel at the centre of British politics between 1965-1975 was a 'must watch' event.
I found it absolutely fascinating.
Hearing the accounts of the main players close to both Heath and Wilson at this time, mixed in with the excellent array of political archive footage and the music of the period, brought alive this pivotal period in our history which at its end, began to see the break-down of the consesual style of politics that had marked British political life post-1945.
It can be viewed for the next few days on BBC iPlayer, right here.
Heath, Wilson and I
My University dissertations centred around this period of political history so my views come from much detailed research into a period in which I did not live at first-hand.
My BA dissertation centred around the 1963 Conservative Party leadership crisis and I proudly gathered a First for my efforts (and a 2:1 degree in all). Ted Heath played a minor role in this work whilst Harold Wilson meanwhile, played a central role in my MA dissertation effort which concentrated on the Labour Party's attitude towards Europe between 1964-1983. Admittedly, my effort here was much for the worse of having began gainful employment and I was fortunate to have scraped a 40% pass which also went for my Masters as a whole.
Through these studies, I formed a rather low opinion of Harold Wilson who I've never held in high esteem. For me, his brand of 'personality over politics' marked him out as an early day version of Tony Blair. Much of the credit for the good that came from his time at No.10 (particularly between 1964-1970) I feel belongs to his his Home Secretary and latterly Chancellor of the Exchequer, Roy Jenkins.
Ted Heath meanwhile is a bewilderingly complex character to try and decipher. He certainly lacked Wilson's charisma and common touch and yet he did seem to have a deeper grasp of what he was all about. His singular greatest achievement and one for which I am thankful, was his success in getting Britain into the European Community in the early 1970s.
My E-mail to Ted Heath
It was my admiration for his ability in this arena, if none else, that enticed this young and politically keen though rather green and naïve young 18 year old to send a personal e-mail to him back in 2001.
I was a first year student in Aberystwyth University and I recall sitting in the Pantycelyn Halls of Residence computer room, prior to the 2001 General Election, sending a handful of electronic messages out to politicians both local and national, asking questions to them on various issues. I was only beginning to become politically active (indeed, I only joined the Liberal Democrats the autumn previous and my total effort in the 2001 campaign was to deliver one leaflet for the party around Pantycelyn!) and I was keen to communicate my various political interests to these different politicians.
Specifically, I recall sending an e-mail out to Alec Dauncey who is an Aberystwyth Town Councillor who at that time was standing as the Welsh Liberal Democrat Parliamentary candidate for Preseli Pembrokeshire where my parents moved back to from south Pembrokeshire in 1999. He had the good grace to reply to my e-mail and we have struck up a good friendship ever since.
I also decided to e-mail Ted Heath. For it was now 2001 and he was retiring from Parliament having been an MP for a remarkable 51 years since the General Election of 1950. I haven't got the text of that e-mail that I sent a decade ago but if I recall correctly, it was in the spirit of grateful thanks for the work that he did with Europe. I also recall rather cheekily asking him, (particularly as the Conservatives were struggling against a popular Tony Blair and New Labour project at the time) why he remained a Conservative and wasn't now alligned with the more moderate and internationalist Liberal Democrats. I must've been in a slightly provocative mood at the time but suffice to say, I never received a reply - which was a great shame!
A Reflection
My sentiments on both Wilson and Heath were summed up neatly at the end of the BBC Four documentary by Lord Donoughue who was Harold Wilson's senior policy advisor between 1974-1976 and remained in that role under Jim Callaghan until his defeat to Margaret Thatcher in 1979.
He therefore had a greater insight into the mind of Harold Wilson than many and yet his startling comment, for one with Labour links, of Wilson was this...
"He wasn't a revolutionary and he wasn't very radical. Ted Heath was much more radical than Harold Willson".
I rest my case.
Hearing the accounts of the main players close to both Heath and Wilson at this time, mixed in with the excellent array of political archive footage and the music of the period, brought alive this pivotal period in our history which at its end, began to see the break-down of the consesual style of politics that had marked British political life post-1945.
It can be viewed for the next few days on BBC iPlayer, right here.
Heath, Wilson and I
My University dissertations centred around this period of political history so my views come from much detailed research into a period in which I did not live at first-hand.
My BA dissertation centred around the 1963 Conservative Party leadership crisis and I proudly gathered a First for my efforts (and a 2:1 degree in all). Ted Heath played a minor role in this work whilst Harold Wilson meanwhile, played a central role in my MA dissertation effort which concentrated on the Labour Party's attitude towards Europe between 1964-1983. Admittedly, my effort here was much for the worse of having began gainful employment and I was fortunate to have scraped a 40% pass which also went for my Masters as a whole.
Through these studies, I formed a rather low opinion of Harold Wilson who I've never held in high esteem. For me, his brand of 'personality over politics' marked him out as an early day version of Tony Blair. Much of the credit for the good that came from his time at No.10 (particularly between 1964-1970) I feel belongs to his his Home Secretary and latterly Chancellor of the Exchequer, Roy Jenkins.
Ted Heath meanwhile is a bewilderingly complex character to try and decipher. He certainly lacked Wilson's charisma and common touch and yet he did seem to have a deeper grasp of what he was all about. His singular greatest achievement and one for which I am thankful, was his success in getting Britain into the European Community in the early 1970s.
My E-mail to Ted Heath
It was my admiration for his ability in this arena, if none else, that enticed this young and politically keen though rather green and naïve young 18 year old to send a personal e-mail to him back in 2001.
I was a first year student in Aberystwyth University and I recall sitting in the Pantycelyn Halls of Residence computer room, prior to the 2001 General Election, sending a handful of electronic messages out to politicians both local and national, asking questions to them on various issues. I was only beginning to become politically active (indeed, I only joined the Liberal Democrats the autumn previous and my total effort in the 2001 campaign was to deliver one leaflet for the party around Pantycelyn!) and I was keen to communicate my various political interests to these different politicians.
Specifically, I recall sending an e-mail out to Alec Dauncey who is an Aberystwyth Town Councillor who at that time was standing as the Welsh Liberal Democrat Parliamentary candidate for Preseli Pembrokeshire where my parents moved back to from south Pembrokeshire in 1999. He had the good grace to reply to my e-mail and we have struck up a good friendship ever since.
I also decided to e-mail Ted Heath. For it was now 2001 and he was retiring from Parliament having been an MP for a remarkable 51 years since the General Election of 1950. I haven't got the text of that e-mail that I sent a decade ago but if I recall correctly, it was in the spirit of grateful thanks for the work that he did with Europe. I also recall rather cheekily asking him, (particularly as the Conservatives were struggling against a popular Tony Blair and New Labour project at the time) why he remained a Conservative and wasn't now alligned with the more moderate and internationalist Liberal Democrats. I must've been in a slightly provocative mood at the time but suffice to say, I never received a reply - which was a great shame!
A Reflection
My sentiments on both Wilson and Heath were summed up neatly at the end of the BBC Four documentary by Lord Donoughue who was Harold Wilson's senior policy advisor between 1974-1976 and remained in that role under Jim Callaghan until his defeat to Margaret Thatcher in 1979.
He therefore had a greater insight into the mind of Harold Wilson than many and yet his startling comment, for one with Labour links, of Wilson was this...
"He wasn't a revolutionary and he wasn't very radical. Ted Heath was much more radical than Harold Willson".
I rest my case.
Thursday, 20 January 2011
Miliband & Balls - More Edd the Duck than Ed Murrow
This one will be un-Cole-like brief post but it really is interesting times for the Labour Party.
Goodbye Alan
I’ve always rather like Alan Johnson and thought that he was one of Labour’s best electoral bets to take over from Gordon Brown. But he didn’t stand so we’ll never know. What we do know is that Ed Miliband’s surprise decision to make him Shadow Chancellor barely 3 months ago was a mistake. Gaffe after economic gaffe left him floundering and didn’t give Ed the kind of media coverage that he wanted as he tried to stamp his newly found authority over his bewildered, election battered party.
Balls in more ways than one
He’s a typical, Brownite/Prescottite tribal Labour bully-boy bruiser. His language is the kind that will put people off politics and he’ll rub up the wrong way as many if not more people than he’ll positively persuade with his arguments.
The Ed Show
So, we now have 2 prime Brownite Labourites at the helm of the Labour Party - both of whom happened to be called Ed.
Goodbye Alan
I’ve always rather like Alan Johnson and thought that he was one of Labour’s best electoral bets to take over from Gordon Brown. But he didn’t stand so we’ll never know. What we do know is that Ed Miliband’s surprise decision to make him Shadow Chancellor barely 3 months ago was a mistake. Gaffe after economic gaffe left him floundering and didn’t give Ed the kind of media coverage that he wanted as he tried to stamp his newly found authority over his bewildered, election battered party.
But for all his error prone pronouncements of late, his standing down from the Shadow Cabinet, like with David Miliband before, will be a big blow to Labour. These are two big respected beasts that they can scarcely do without right now.
Balls in more ways than one
As opposed to the inherently more likeable and reasonable Johnson, I’ve still yet to find any redeeming features in the shape of Ed Balls.
He’s a typical, Brownite/Prescottite tribal Labour bully-boy bruiser. His language is the kind that will put people off politics and he’ll rub up the wrong way as many if not more people than he’ll positively persuade with his arguments.
The Ed Show
So, we now have 2 prime Brownite Labourites at the helm of the Labour Party - both of whom happened to be called Ed.
What kind of show are they going to put on for us I wonder.
A more statesmanlike, responsible and reasonable opposition to the Coalition? Or more of the same juvenile, childish behaviour that we have become far too accustomed too since the autumn?
I expect it'll be less Ed Murrow and more Edd the Duck.
A more statesmanlike, responsible and reasonable opposition to the Coalition? Or more of the same juvenile, childish behaviour that we have become far too accustomed too since the autumn?
I expect it'll be less Ed Murrow and more Edd the Duck.
Tuesday, 18 January 2011
Labour - the new Thatcherite Republican Party
It has surely been a mind boggling 24 hours for Members of the House of Lords.
Their mamouth all-night sitting came to an end earlier today after almost 21 hours. This isn't the longest sitting in its history but it certainly gave the Prevention of Terrorism Bill debate that ran from 11am until 7.31pm between 10-11 March 2005, a run for its money. It is also likely to be the first of a number of all-night sitting over the coming days and weeks so that record may go yet.
Filibustering - American Style
If anyone is 'playing politics' here then it's the increasingly infantile Labour Parliamentary Party.
No, No, No - Are Labour the new Thatcherites?!
It was Labour's great nemesis Margaret Thatcher who famously exclaimed 'No, No, No' in the House of Commons as her Prime Ministership came towards its end. Yet, now ironically, it's the Labour Party themselves that are sounding more militantly Thatcherite in their negativity than ever before.
Not only Thatcherite, but also like her beloved Ronald Reagan's own Republican Party.
A travesty to British Democracy
This sour-grapes rubbishing of anything coalitionist is now this week being witnessed with this House of Lords fiasco. What kind of democracy do we live in that can see such ridiculous scenes as we have witnessed these past 24 hours? On that point, what type of political party would stoop to such levels? Well, the Labour Party, clearly.
As Party President Tim Farron stated in an e-mail to members earlier today: "I’m all in favour of proper debate but Labour is cynically using the old politics of the worst sort to stop people have their say. Labour peers claim to be offering scrutiny, but that argument vanishes as soon as you examine their behaviour in the debate".
It's even more unbelievable as it's Labour who claim the credit for (semi) reforming the House of Lords in the first place. To be more blunt, it's their cack-handedness that allowed it to remain in a semi-reformed stated for this past decade. Like with other Labour messes that were left behind last May, it's been up to the Coaltion Government to try and put things right.
So there will soon hopefully be progress made by Nick Clegg to bring a final solution to the House of Lords fiasco. But until then, we must watch another as the Labour Party do all that they can to stick two fingers up to the coalition.
It's a real farce - this incident over the past 24 hours and Labour's more general unwillingness to be in any way a reasonable and responsible opposition.
Their mamouth all-night sitting came to an end earlier today after almost 21 hours. This isn't the longest sitting in its history but it certainly gave the Prevention of Terrorism Bill debate that ran from 11am until 7.31pm between 10-11 March 2005, a run for its money. It is also likely to be the first of a number of all-night sitting over the coming days and weeks so that record may go yet.
Why? Well, Labour are adament that they will destroy the Coaltion Government's Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill which needs to be passed by mid-February for the AV Referendum to go ahead as planned on May 5th.
Filibustering - American Style
Labour have talked and talked and talked. They will of course argue that their cause is legitimate but the reality is that they're looking to deliberatley cause trouble for the sake of it. They argue that the Bill is 'political'. Well, bringing in AV which is Labour Party policy and which is supported by their own leader certainly shouldn't rankle. As far as the equalisation of constituencies is concerned, making every vote as equal in weight as possible as the next one is a laudable objective. If that so happens to mean that a number of overly populated Labour seats of old will need to be revised, then so be it.
If anyone is 'playing politics' here then it's the increasingly infantile Labour Parliamentary Party.
Their West Wing style filibuserting efforts of trying to talk the bill to death will not be successful. The Coaltion Government are united in its resolve to conclude this business on time and I am confident that they will.
No, No, No - Are Labour the new Thatcherites?!
It was Labour's great nemesis Margaret Thatcher who famously exclaimed 'No, No, No' in the House of Commons as her Prime Ministership came towards its end. Yet, now ironically, it's the Labour Party themselves that are sounding more militantly Thatcherite in their negativity than ever before.
Not only Thatcherite, but also like her beloved Ronald Reagan's own Republican Party.
Since 2008, I have witnessed with growing incredulity the American Republican Party's complete and utter obstinance against the democratically elected Democratic Congress' political wishes. You can disagree with decisions made but do so in a pro-active manner. Heckling and shouting for the sake of it without giving a viable alternative is irresponsible opposition. Sadly, the Democrats undeservedly lost control of the Lower House of Congress last November and the Republicans now have a foot back in the door.
Now we see the Labour Party here talk and act with the same vitriolic sentiment. Since the election last May they have been quick enough to damn any initiatives that the Coalition Government have put forward. On the biggest single issue, the economy, they have not put up any detailed alternative to the Coalition's spending cuts. But then how could they when Ed Miliband has a 'blank piece of paper'.
Indeed, one of the most illluminating blog posts that I've read in a long time was on this very point and was published yesterday by The Very Fluffy Diary of Millennium Dome, Elephant. I really encourage readers here to read it as it makes the point that Ed Miliband can't differentiate between the deficit and the debt (two very different things) and also adds that Labour wasted an opportunity to fix the roof whilst the sun was shining a decade ago.
A travesty to British Democracy
This sour-grapes rubbishing of anything coalitionist is now this week being witnessed with this House of Lords fiasco. What kind of democracy do we live in that can see such ridiculous scenes as we have witnessed these past 24 hours? On that point, what type of political party would stoop to such levels? Well, the Labour Party, clearly.
As Party President Tim Farron stated in an e-mail to members earlier today: "I’m all in favour of proper debate but Labour is cynically using the old politics of the worst sort to stop people have their say. Labour peers claim to be offering scrutiny, but that argument vanishes as soon as you examine their behaviour in the debate".
So there will soon hopefully be progress made by Nick Clegg to bring a final solution to the House of Lords fiasco. But until then, we must watch another as the Labour Party do all that they can to stick two fingers up to the coalition.
It's a real farce - this incident over the past 24 hours and Labour's more general unwillingness to be in any way a reasonable and responsible opposition.
But Labour shouldn't fear for I'm sure there are two emminent politicians who would be proud of their negative and oppositionist 'achievements' - step forward Sarah Palin and Margaret Thatcher.
Monday, 17 January 2011
Why I'm not accepting Ed Miliband's offer of joining the Labour Party
I was planning to blog this a few days ago but have been beaten to the punch by Caron's Musings who wrote an excellent critique for why Ed Miliband's latest invitation for Lib Dems to join the Labour Party should be rebuffed.
To follow Caron's lead on this, what would I rather do than join the Labour Party?
Why?
Well, I can't better Caron's observations which are spot on.
I am not illiberal, I am not an authoritarian, I do not want to be ruled by the unions and I am not obsessed with centralisation. I therefore do not want to join the Labour Party.
A Lib Dem through and through
I am a coalitionist in as far as I believe that we need to be grown up enough to work with others to put the country back on the right track.
That doesn't mean that I agree with every policy that this government comes up with. Why should I? This government is mainly made-up of a Conservative Party that I have little time for. But we must accept that compromise is necessary to move the country forward.
I will disagree with the coalition when I feel it right to do so but that will not hide my pride in the fact that we as Lib Dems are putting our policies into government for the well-being of the people we represent for the first time at a UK-wide level for generations.
Labour had their chance and they blew it and you Mr Miliband sat around the Cabinet table when a number of those decisions were made.
I'd rather jump off a pier into the sea than join the Labour Party (I can't swim).
To follow Caron's lead on this, what would I rather do than join the Labour Party?
- Become a Tottenham Hotspur fan (I loathe them);
- Walk along a mountain face precipice, Italian Job style (I suffer from a mixture of vertigo and claustrophobia);
- Wind the clock back and go to school naked as happened far too often in those bizzare dreams we all have as children;
- Sit in a room with David Coulthard for more than 10 minutes (those who know me well know that I have little time for that pompous prat of a lacklustre, talentless ex-Formula One driver);
- Appear on an Iceland advert (probably the worst made adverts in the history of TV advertising).
Why?
Well, I can't better Caron's observations which are spot on.
- Iraq - an illegal war, enough said;
- Implicating this country in complicity with torture;
- Letting down the poorest by increasing the gap between rich and poor;
- Failing to fix the roof when the sun was shining - meaning we all suffer as a result of their economic incompetence;
- Failing to regulate the banks, either before or after the crash;
- Wasting a fortune on illiberal ID cards;
- Their dissembling over the cuts in spending they would have made if they had won the election;
- The appalling mess they made of the Tax Credit system, and their treatment of thousands of poor families, forced to repay thousands they couldn't afford;
- Imposing control orders on people without telling them even what they were being accused of;
- Centralising public services to the detriment of people using them;
- Taking kids' DNA without parents' permission;
- Storing the DNA of innocent people;
- Running an inhumane and often brutal immigration system;
- Making a hash job of House of Lords reform;
- Refusing to carry out their election promise of brining in electoral reform.
I am not illiberal, I am not an authoritarian, I do not want to be ruled by the unions and I am not obsessed with centralisation. I therefore do not want to join the Labour Party.
A Lib Dem through and through
I am a coalitionist in as far as I believe that we need to be grown up enough to work with others to put the country back on the right track.
That doesn't mean that I agree with every policy that this government comes up with. Why should I? This government is mainly made-up of a Conservative Party that I have little time for. But we must accept that compromise is necessary to move the country forward.
I will disagree with the coalition when I feel it right to do so but that will not hide my pride in the fact that we as Lib Dems are putting our policies into government for the well-being of the people we represent for the first time at a UK-wide level for generations.
Labour had their chance and they blew it and you Mr Miliband sat around the Cabinet table when a number of those decisions were made.
I'd rather jump off a pier into the sea than join the Labour Party (I can't swim).
Friday, 7 January 2011
David Chayter - Go to Jail. Go directly to Jail. Do not pass Go, do not collect £20,000 in Expenses
A month ago I wrote here of my anger at those former Members of Parliament who had disgraced themselves but even worse than that, the political process, with their expenses scandals.
Well today, the British public and the political process has had some retribution - some comeback for what was a disgraceful period in recent history.
Well today, the British public and the political process has had some retribution - some comeback for what was a disgraceful period in recent history.David Chayter, a former Labour MP, had pleaded guilty for fraudulently claiming more than £20,000 in expenses and was today given a custodial sentence of 18 months.
Like Johnathan Aitken before him, he will go to jail.
A Custodial Sentence
His lawyer said he was a "broken man" who had paid a "devastating price" for the claims and asked that he be spared a jail sentence. Thankfully, this request was ignored.
Sentencing him Mr Justice Saunders said the 2009 MPs' expenses scandal had "shaken public confidence in the legislature and angered the public"
Sentencing him Mr Justice Saunders said the 2009 MPs' expenses scandal had "shaken public confidence in the legislature and angered the public"
He said: "These false claims were made in breach of the high degree of trust placed in MPs to only make legitimate claims.
"These offences have wider and more important consequences than is to be found in other breach of trust cases. That is the effect they have had and will have in the confidence the public has in politicians."
The judge added that MPs' behaviour must be "entirely honest if public confidence in the parliamentary system and rule of law is to be maintained".
Mr David Chayter, please meet Mr Jonathan Aitken
He has hit the nail on the head in his judgement and the only possible conclusion therefore, was a custodial sentence.His 18 month sentence matches that given to former Conservative MP Johnathan Aitken who was jailed for perjury back in 1999. He served 7 of those months behind bars. It's quite possible that Chayter will not serve a full sentence either. But that is for the future.
Today at least as his moves towards his new home, there will be a feeling that justice has been seen to finally be done.
Today at least as his moves towards his new home, there will be a feeling that justice has been seen to finally be done.
Wednesday, 5 January 2011
Lib Dem defection to Labour akin to jumping onboard the Titanic
I read with interest Betsan Powys' BBC blog today about a Welsh Lib Dem defection to the Labour Party in Neath Port Talbot.
I can't say that I know Cllr John Warman. His face doesn't register with me and I've been an active member and conference go-er now for nearly a decade so Betsan is right when she says that he his hardly the high profile kind of defection that they'd love to welcome to their ranks.
This is the party's response:
"It's very sad that he has gone back to the Labour Party that has wreaked havoc in the Welsh economy.
"John Warman is returning to a party that has left families in his ward paying thousands for their mishandling of the economy, ran our health system into the ground and made a sham of our education system."
It's true and I know personally from speaking to friends who live in the Neath Port Talbot area that they are fed-up with the one-party dominance that Labour has executed over their area for so long. Cllr Warman may believe that he is 'going home' to the Labour Party after 30 years but I wouldn't want to be associated with a party that has caused so much havoc for our country during recent years. Their disdain for civil liberties also shows them up as not being the progressive party that they purport to be.
No, I'd rather stick with a party that is putting its liberal credentials into place for the good of those I represent whilst also taking responsibility for putting right the mess that was left by the previous government back in May.
It's called being 'grown-up'.
Coalition government means having to compromise at times as Labour themselves know in Cardiff Bay with their power-sharing executive with Plaid Cymru. It is for the common good that we work with other parties when no-one of them has won an outright majority.
I wish Cllr Warman well but I fear that he has been greatly misguided in his decision.
I can't say that I know Cllr John Warman. His face doesn't register with me and I've been an active member and conference go-er now for nearly a decade so Betsan is right when she says that he his hardly the high profile kind of defection that they'd love to welcome to their ranks.The Welsh Liberal Democrat response I felt struck the right measured tone. I don't like it when political parties go all personal after a member has defected to another party and we were right not to this time.
This is the party's response:
"It's very sad that he has gone back to the Labour Party that has wreaked havoc in the Welsh economy.
"John Warman is returning to a party that has left families in his ward paying thousands for their mishandling of the economy, ran our health system into the ground and made a sham of our education system."
It's true and I know personally from speaking to friends who live in the Neath Port Talbot area that they are fed-up with the one-party dominance that Labour has executed over their area for so long. Cllr Warman may believe that he is 'going home' to the Labour Party after 30 years but I wouldn't want to be associated with a party that has caused so much havoc for our country during recent years. Their disdain for civil liberties also shows them up as not being the progressive party that they purport to be.
No, I'd rather stick with a party that is putting its liberal credentials into place for the good of those I represent whilst also taking responsibility for putting right the mess that was left by the previous government back in May.
It's called being 'grown-up'.
Coalition government means having to compromise at times as Labour themselves know in Cardiff Bay with their power-sharing executive with Plaid Cymru. It is for the common good that we work with other parties when no-one of them has won an outright majority.
I wish Cllr Warman well but I fear that he has been greatly misguided in his decision.
Thursday, 23 December 2010
We Lib Dems may dislike the Tories but Labour can *add expletive* right off
It's a bold, sweeping heading for a blog post if ever I've written one but after another tumultuous week for Lib Dem Ministers, some 'end of year' Coalition considerations must be made.
Torygraph 'Sting'
Over the past few days, Lib Dem Ministers have all found themselves at the end of what has basically been an entrapment process by the Daily Torgraph. The ethics and the legality of what this newspaper has done lies on extremly thin ice (sorry, seasonal pun intended) and could be challenged in the courts. But be that as it may, the repercussions of the so called 'revelations' must be dealt with.
Lib Dems don't like Tories - Shock Horror!
What we have heard have been rather frank, apparently 'off-record' murmurings of discontent from Lib Dem Ministers about their Tory coalition partners.
Well don't be surprised! In what has been an incredible year in British politics, we now find ourselves being governed by a full-blown coalition for the first time in 65 years. These things don't happen every day of the week and the implementation of such an arrangement between erstwhile political foes is bound to throw up many discontents.
What we've heard this week in the main has been a personal uneasiness between Lib Dem Ministers and Conservative colleagues who were until last May, sworn political enemies. Crossing the rubicon and working together as has been done in the public interest won't dispel these tensions overnight. Tensions will remain and so they should. For this is a coalition made up of two sovereign parties, both of whom have their own distinct agendas and ideas on how to best run the country. But neither won the election in May and so had to accept that working together in the spirit of compromise was the grown-up way forward.
Tories don't like Lib Dems? You can bet on it!
It's the knowing that these grumblings are occurring underneath the Tory surface which makes us Lib Dems know that we're doing something right. Indeed, knowing that our Ministers have these deeply held reservations about their Tory colleagues gives us at the grass-roots level a confidence that they are doing all that they can to push Lib Dem influence to the max in their respective departments.
Vince Cable however, went to far. As much as I and most Lib Dem members would've been pleased to hear him speak of a 'war' against Rupert Murdoch, his comments were ill-judged because of the quasi-judicial role in which he found himself. In 'Council code of conduct' speak, he pre-determined himself and it was right that the decision on Murdoch's take over of BSkyB was taken away from him. It's a shame but the right thing to do all the same even though I share Vince's sentiments.
Rank Labour Hypocrisy
But despite this Lib Dem discontent, it is a boring matter of fact that we are doing what is best for the country in working together with the Conservatives to put the country back on the right track.
Ed Miliband's comments yesterday on launching a scheme inviting young people to join Labour for a penny, in a recruitment drive designed to attract disillusioned former Lib Dem supporters, was pathetic. He also extended an olive branch to Lib Dem ministers unhappy with the government's direction, saying he would "welcome" them on the Labour benches.
Is he stupid or something? As much as we don't find working with the Conservatives a bed of roses, at least they had the balls to come together with the Lib Dems to work in the national interest. The Tories could've stuck it out and led a minority-government, called a snap election for this autumn and could well have won a majority themselves as did Wilson for Labour in '74. But they, like the Lib Dems decided to put party rancour aside to put the country back on a more stable footing.
Labour refused to play ball. They refused to be constructive when the time for talking arrived. They refused to be pro-active in offering a non-Tory government alternative. They refused to admit that they had to accept much of the blame for the financial mess that they left the country in. They refused to take responsibility for their actions and were willing, indeed keen, to go back into opposition for their own party political benefit.
Such a reprehensible attitude towards the greater good has severely damaged their reputation with the Lib Dem grass-roots and now, Ed Miliband wants US, Lib Dems to join back with Labour? Is he completely insane? Me, a Lib Dem, to join a party that reneged on the top priority facing all politicians - the well-being of our country? A party that has such a 'clean-slate' of policies that what it adds up too is having no policies at all? A party that destroyed our civil liberties when in government? A progressive party?! Ha! No chance!
Making a Liberal Difference to the Government of the United Kingdom
The Lib Dem MP for Torbay, Adrian Sanders has put down in writing his own observations on the siutation in his blog here. He gives his own insiders view of the problems that we face as a maturing, grown-up party of government.
What particularly strikes true to me though is his comments about better promoting the message of what Lib Dems in government are delivering. He states:
"When constituents and others complain to me about putting the Tories in power I ask them to imagine a Conservative Government retaining a 50p top rate of tax, introducing an increase in capital gains tax, implementing a bank levy to fund child tax credits for poorer families, taking the lowest paid out of income tax altogether, extending the national minimum wage to include apprentices and reducing the age at which the full NMW is paid, increasing the number of social housing allocations above those of the previous Labour Government, establishing a pupil premium to increase the funding for pupils in poorer areas, investing £900 million to reduce tax evasion and amend legal loopholes that allow for tax avoidance, proposing a £140 minimum state pension, setting up a Green Investment Bank, moving towards a House of Lords elected by PR, agreeing to a fixed term Parliament and much, much more.
"And before they can say tuition fees I ask them would a Tory Government have agreed to a fee cap?
"Would they have introduced measures where all students will repay less per month under this Government’s policy than they currently pay? Where the lowest earning 25% of graduates will repay less than they do now? Where the top earning 30% of graduates will pay back more than they borrow and are likely to pay more than double the bottom 20% of earners? Where over half a million students will be eligible for more non-repayable grants for living costs than they get now? Where almost one million students will be eligible for more overall maintenance support than they get now? Where part-time students will no longer have to pay upfront fees benefiting up to 200,000 per year? Where there will be an extra £150m for a new National Scholarship Programme for students from poorer backgrounds and tough new sanctions on universities who fail to improve their access to students from such backgrounds?
"There is so much positive policy and influence to promote, but we can’t get it across to the electorate unless we can show how we made the difference. Getting this information out and understood is part of a giant task that now confronts us to rebuild trust with voters who feel we have let them down, or worse betrayed them".
His final point is key - getting that message out. Because there's no doubt that this Government has a real liberal streak running through it that would not have existed under a purely Conservative alternative or indeed, a continuation of the Labour farce that preceded it.
We need to tell the world and it's dog what we're doing and how we're influencing government policy with those of our own. We may not like the Tories, but the country is in damned better shape for having us in the middle of government with them that if the they or Labour were left in charge on their own.
So here is one Liberal Democrat member who laughs in the sorry face of Ed Miliband. As I mentioned in my blog post here when he was elected leader, Labour made a big mistake in choosing Ed over David. I agree with my sentiments then, even more today.
Torygraph 'Sting'
Over the past few days, Lib Dem Ministers have all found themselves at the end of what has basically been an entrapment process by the Daily Torgraph. The ethics and the legality of what this newspaper has done lies on extremly thin ice (sorry, seasonal pun intended) and could be challenged in the courts. But be that as it may, the repercussions of the so called 'revelations' must be dealt with.
Lib Dems don't like Tories - Shock Horror!
What we have heard have been rather frank, apparently 'off-record' murmurings of discontent from Lib Dem Ministers about their Tory coalition partners.
Well don't be surprised! In what has been an incredible year in British politics, we now find ourselves being governed by a full-blown coalition for the first time in 65 years. These things don't happen every day of the week and the implementation of such an arrangement between erstwhile political foes is bound to throw up many discontents.
What we've heard this week in the main has been a personal uneasiness between Lib Dem Ministers and Conservative colleagues who were until last May, sworn political enemies. Crossing the rubicon and working together as has been done in the public interest won't dispel these tensions overnight. Tensions will remain and so they should. For this is a coalition made up of two sovereign parties, both of whom have their own distinct agendas and ideas on how to best run the country. But neither won the election in May and so had to accept that working together in the spirit of compromise was the grown-up way forward.
Tories don't like Lib Dems? You can bet on it!
What we have heard this week of course are the Lib Dem 'discontents' on being a part of this practical process. But what the Daily Torygraph have decided against doing is shining a mirror against the Tory Ministers in the Government to see how they view this political arrangement. Because the truth of the matter is they won't be happy with it either and why should they?! Before the election they accused the Lib Dems of being a 3rd party irrelevance but now, they've had to share power with us and tht sits very uneasily with the right-wing of the Tory Party in particular.
It's the knowing that these grumblings are occurring underneath the Tory surface which makes us Lib Dems know that we're doing something right. Indeed, knowing that our Ministers have these deeply held reservations about their Tory colleagues gives us at the grass-roots level a confidence that they are doing all that they can to push Lib Dem influence to the max in their respective departments.Rank Labour Hypocrisy
But despite this Lib Dem discontent, it is a boring matter of fact that we are doing what is best for the country in working together with the Conservatives to put the country back on the right track.
Ed Miliband's comments yesterday on launching a scheme inviting young people to join Labour for a penny, in a recruitment drive designed to attract disillusioned former Lib Dem supporters, was pathetic. He also extended an olive branch to Lib Dem ministers unhappy with the government's direction, saying he would "welcome" them on the Labour benches.
Is he stupid or something? As much as we don't find working with the Conservatives a bed of roses, at least they had the balls to come together with the Lib Dems to work in the national interest. The Tories could've stuck it out and led a minority-government, called a snap election for this autumn and could well have won a majority themselves as did Wilson for Labour in '74. But they, like the Lib Dems decided to put party rancour aside to put the country back on a more stable footing.
Such a reprehensible attitude towards the greater good has severely damaged their reputation with the Lib Dem grass-roots and now, Ed Miliband wants US, Lib Dems to join back with Labour? Is he completely insane? Me, a Lib Dem, to join a party that reneged on the top priority facing all politicians - the well-being of our country? A party that has such a 'clean-slate' of policies that what it adds up too is having no policies at all? A party that destroyed our civil liberties when in government? A progressive party?! Ha! No chance!
Making a Liberal Difference to the Government of the United Kingdom
The Lib Dem MP for Torbay, Adrian Sanders has put down in writing his own observations on the siutation in his blog here. He gives his own insiders view of the problems that we face as a maturing, grown-up party of government.
What particularly strikes true to me though is his comments about better promoting the message of what Lib Dems in government are delivering. He states:
"When constituents and others complain to me about putting the Tories in power I ask them to imagine a Conservative Government retaining a 50p top rate of tax, introducing an increase in capital gains tax, implementing a bank levy to fund child tax credits for poorer families, taking the lowest paid out of income tax altogether, extending the national minimum wage to include apprentices and reducing the age at which the full NMW is paid, increasing the number of social housing allocations above those of the previous Labour Government, establishing a pupil premium to increase the funding for pupils in poorer areas, investing £900 million to reduce tax evasion and amend legal loopholes that allow for tax avoidance, proposing a £140 minimum state pension, setting up a Green Investment Bank, moving towards a House of Lords elected by PR, agreeing to a fixed term Parliament and much, much more.
"And before they can say tuition fees I ask them would a Tory Government have agreed to a fee cap?
"Would they have introduced measures where all students will repay less per month under this Government’s policy than they currently pay? Where the lowest earning 25% of graduates will repay less than they do now? Where the top earning 30% of graduates will pay back more than they borrow and are likely to pay more than double the bottom 20% of earners? Where over half a million students will be eligible for more non-repayable grants for living costs than they get now? Where almost one million students will be eligible for more overall maintenance support than they get now? Where part-time students will no longer have to pay upfront fees benefiting up to 200,000 per year? Where there will be an extra £150m for a new National Scholarship Programme for students from poorer backgrounds and tough new sanctions on universities who fail to improve their access to students from such backgrounds?His final point is key - getting that message out. Because there's no doubt that this Government has a real liberal streak running through it that would not have existed under a purely Conservative alternative or indeed, a continuation of the Labour farce that preceded it.
We need to tell the world and it's dog what we're doing and how we're influencing government policy with those of our own. We may not like the Tories, but the country is in damned better shape for having us in the middle of government with them that if the they or Labour were left in charge on their own.
So here is one Liberal Democrat member who laughs in the sorry face of Ed Miliband. As I mentioned in my blog post here when he was elected leader, Labour made a big mistake in choosing Ed over David. I agree with my sentiments then, even more today.
Thursday, 16 December 2010
A Proud Day to be a Liberal Democrat - Ending Child Detention
It's been a rocky few weeks for the Liberal Democrats as the tuition fees debate has given us our first real test since going into Government.
But today as members, we can be justly proud to be Liberal Democrats in goverment because Nick Clegg has announced, as promised, that the barbaric system of detaining children will end by the by next May.
For all their progressive talk, Labour's record in government when it came to civil rights was shoddy at best - such are their controlling, authoritarian tendencies.
Liberal Democrat Infuence in Government
The Coalition’s Programme for Government stated that ‘we will end the detention of children for immigration purposes’.
There is no doubt in my mind that if it wasn't for the Liberal Democrat influence in government, this would not be happening. Had the Tories been in government alone would they have prioritised the ending of this inhumane policy? I very much doubt it.
Because this is a policy long-championed by the Liberal Democrats. They were the only party to include this commitment in their manifesto. In an open letter to Gordon Brown in 2009, Nick Clegg wrote: “One of the best ways to judge the moral compass of a nation is how we treat children … How on earth can your government justify what is in effect state-sponsored cruelty?”
Not in my name, and not any more.
You want to see how Liberal Democrats in government are playing a positive role in changing lives for the better? Then here's a case in point.
But today as members, we can be justly proud to be Liberal Democrats in goverment because Nick Clegg has announced, as promised, that the barbaric system of detaining children will end by the by next May.As reported on Freedom Central, no child is currently in an immigration detention centre and no child will spend this Christmas in an immigration detention centre. The Coalition Government has also announced the reform of our immigration system to make it more family friendly – creating a system that is humane, fair and effective.
Labour Shame
In Labour’s last 5 years in office alone the Government locked up 7,075 children for an average of just under 2 weeks each (12.74 days). That works out at 7 children a day. Last year alone, 1,065 children were locked up by Labour, 173 of whom were locked up for longer than a month. For all their progressive talk, Labour's record in government when it came to civil rights was shoddy at best - such are their controlling, authoritarian tendencies.
Liberal Democrat Infuence in Government
The Coalition’s Programme for Government stated that ‘we will end the detention of children for immigration purposes’.
There is no doubt in my mind that if it wasn't for the Liberal Democrat influence in government, this would not be happening. Had the Tories been in government alone would they have prioritised the ending of this inhumane policy? I very much doubt it.
Because this is a policy long-championed by the Liberal Democrats. They were the only party to include this commitment in their manifesto. In an open letter to Gordon Brown in 2009, Nick Clegg wrote: “One of the best ways to judge the moral compass of a nation is how we treat children … How on earth can your government justify what is in effect state-sponsored cruelty?”
Not in my name, and not any more.
You want to see how Liberal Democrats in government are playing a positive role in changing lives for the better? Then here's a case in point.
Saturday, 4 December 2010
David Chayter & The Angry Young Man
I'm angry. Very angry.
Angry at the MPs that took advantage of the old expenses system to rip off British tax-payers. I'm angry on behalf of those who pay their taxes, and also on behalf of those low-ranking politicians such as myself whose reputation has been dragged into the gutter because of their selfish actions.
Yesterday, one of the four politicians (Labour MPs David Chayter, Elliott Morley and Jim Devine along with Conservative Lord Hanningfield) who are going to court to answer for their misdemeanors, pleaded guilty.
David Chayter, a former Labour MP, is now facing a criminal conviction for false accounting and will be sentenced in the New Year. I hope he goes to jail and I hope he goes to jail for a good number of years. I gather the maximum is 7 but pleading guilty may save him a year or so from this figure.
Not all politicians are criminals
Those that have been caught out will hopefully, deservedly get their just deserts.
But I hope we can begin, as a result of this, to put the whole sorry saga behind us. Because the majority of MPs, let alone politicians at lower levels, are actually in the business for the right reasons.
The likes of David Chayter, Elliott Morley, Jim Devine and Lord Hanningfield are already guilty of dragging the reputation of all politicians into the gutter. I hope in the weeks and months to come, they are found guilty by the courts and are punished accordingly with custodial sentences.
Angry at the MPs that took advantage of the old expenses system to rip off British tax-payers. I'm angry on behalf of those who pay their taxes, and also on behalf of those low-ranking politicians such as myself whose reputation has been dragged into the gutter because of their selfish actions.
Yesterday, one of the four politicians (Labour MPs David Chayter, Elliott Morley and Jim Devine along with Conservative Lord Hanningfield) who are going to court to answer for their misdemeanors, pleaded guilty.
David Chayter, a former Labour MP, is now facing a criminal conviction for false accounting and will be sentenced in the New Year. I hope he goes to jail and I hope he goes to jail for a good number of years. I gather the maximum is 7 but pleading guilty may save him a year or so from this figure.
Not all politicians are criminals
Those that have been caught out will hopefully, deservedly get their just deserts.
But I hope we can begin, as a result of this, to put the whole sorry saga behind us. Because the majority of MPs, let alone politicians at lower levels, are actually in the business for the right reasons.
They and indeed I, are not in it for the money or the advantage that it can give, but to actually make a positive difference to the communities that we represent. If I wanted to make loads of money then I wouldn't be a County Councillor. I get paid £12,500 for doing what I do. If I wanted more than, they I'd go and do something else. But instead, I'm doing what I do because there's nothing better than helping local residents out on their day-to-day problems. It may not change the world in the bigger sense but if I can help make lives easier for residents in Cardigan, then that is a very worthwhile thing to do.
Indeed, in the 6 years that I have been a Ceredigion County Councillor, I have not claimed a penny of expenses. I'm paid a more than reasonable amount for doing my job and when we're having to ask local residents to tighten their belts as the economic situation demands, then I should do the same also. I'm angry at those who took advantage of the old system to deliberately milk it for all it was worth for their own personal gain.
The likes of David Chayter, Elliott Morley, Jim Devine and Lord Hanningfield are already guilty of dragging the reputation of all politicians into the gutter. I hope in the weeks and months to come, they are found guilty by the courts and are punished accordingly with custodial sentences.Wednesday, 17 November 2010
A Poor No Show from Cheryl Gillan
I've not been impressed with Cheryl Gillan's performance as Secretary of State for Wales.
It's not because she's a Conservative. It's not because she represents an English constituency (she is Welsh in all fairness). It's just because, well...how can I put it diplomatically and tactfully....it's because I don't think she's very good at her job.
I wasn't a fan of Peter Hain either. Yet, despite the fireworks that have been lit by both Hain and Gillan since May, they're actually quite similar I feel. Their attitude and the way they communicate is so off-putting. It's the old 'ya-boo' politics speak that turns so many people off politics.
They epitomise all that is worse of the 'Punch and Judy' style of politics.
They both come across to me as being typical old war horses from a tribal age and they can't quite, indeed they probably don't even want to, act in a more measured, moderate way.
An Aberystwyth University Rebuff
Well, now they're at it again. Cheryl has today pulled out from giving the key note annual lecture at the Institute of Welsh Politics at Aberystwyth University. It's a prestigious speech to give and I was on hand to listen to Welsh Liberal Democrat leader Kirsty Williams give it in recent years. It really is quite a thing to be asked to give this annual lecture.
But, because there was due to be a student protest at the event because of the London Coaltion Goverment's tuition fees plans, she has apparently pulled out on the advice of the police.
Hain has of course responded with vitriolic words such as 'a total disgrace', 'contempt', 'arrogant' and 'outrageous' .
The words I would use for Cheryl would be the following - 'disappointed', 'let-down', 'regretful', 'short-sighted', 'a missed opportunity' and 'own worst enemy'.
By pulling out of this engagement at the last minute, she has given more ammunition to those like Peter Hain who are waiting and willing for her to slip up. She really doesn't help herself. If she had the courage of her conviction, she'd see it through. Yes, the student protest turned nasty in London last week, but don't tar all students with the same brush.
This is yet another Cheryl Gillan political own-goal.
As for Peter Hain? Bloody hell, they're as bad as each other.
It's not because she's a Conservative. It's not because she represents an English constituency (she is Welsh in all fairness). It's just because, well...how can I put it diplomatically and tactfully....it's because I don't think she's very good at her job.
I wasn't a fan of Peter Hain either. Yet, despite the fireworks that have been lit by both Hain and Gillan since May, they're actually quite similar I feel. Their attitude and the way they communicate is so off-putting. It's the old 'ya-boo' politics speak that turns so many people off politics.They epitomise all that is worse of the 'Punch and Judy' style of politics.
They both come across to me as being typical old war horses from a tribal age and they can't quite, indeed they probably don't even want to, act in a more measured, moderate way.
An Aberystwyth University Rebuff
Well, now they're at it again. Cheryl has today pulled out from giving the key note annual lecture at the Institute of Welsh Politics at Aberystwyth University. It's a prestigious speech to give and I was on hand to listen to Welsh Liberal Democrat leader Kirsty Williams give it in recent years. It really is quite a thing to be asked to give this annual lecture.
But, because there was due to be a student protest at the event because of the London Coaltion Goverment's tuition fees plans, she has apparently pulled out on the advice of the police.
Hain has of course responded with vitriolic words such as 'a total disgrace', 'contempt', 'arrogant' and 'outrageous' .Peter, a word of advice. Shut up.
The words I would use for Cheryl would be the following - 'disappointed', 'let-down', 'regretful', 'short-sighted', 'a missed opportunity' and 'own worst enemy'.
By pulling out of this engagement at the last minute, she has given more ammunition to those like Peter Hain who are waiting and willing for her to slip up. She really doesn't help herself. If she had the courage of her conviction, she'd see it through. Yes, the student protest turned nasty in London last week, but don't tar all students with the same brush.
This is yet another Cheryl Gillan political own-goal.
As for Peter Hain? Bloody hell, they're as bad as each other.
Wednesday, 10 November 2010
A NUS Protest Backfired
It was not what they had planned but it will forever be remembered for it.The almost riotous scenes at No.30 Millbank will make the headlines tomorrow and is what will remain in the public mind when the NUS Higher Education march of November 2010 is remembered in years to come.
Tens of thousands of students, many of whom were from Aberystwyth and Lampeter, and many of those were Liberal Democrat students, travelled in good faith today to legitimately demonstrate against Government plans to increase the tuition fees cap up to £9,000.
The Militant Tendency
But despite their peaceful protests, the efforts of a few have again stolen the headlines. To me, the sight on the evening news tonight of militants causing criminal damage in the name of student activism, sickened me.I've been on NUS protests myself so I can speak from personal experience. In 2004, we were bused direct from NUS conference in Blackpool, to London to campaign against the 3rd Reading of Labour's Higher Education Bill (the reading followed the 2nd Reading which was passed by just 5 votes if memory serves me correctly). This of course was a Labour Government inacting the concept of tuition fees in the first place which is why, 6 years on, there's a lot of rightful indignation now at what is Labour's own indignation at the current proposals. For it was Labour who opened the floodgates for what is currently being investigated by the new government.
But less of the politics.
In 2004, we had a good natured demonstration. I don't recall any odious elements that destroyed the overall vision of the day on that occasion, but unfortunately that can not be said of this occasion.
Shame on the militant few who have wrecked what should've been a peaceful protest.
Wednesday, 20 October 2010
My CSR Response
Well, there we have it. The coalition has given it's detailed response to the financial predicament in which it, and the country finds itself in.
I can't say that I'm happy with it in its entirety. Quite frankly, if you can find a single person who is happy with it in its entirety, then you will have found a mad man.
Labour planned undetailed cuts of 20% (£48 billion). Today the Coalition announced cuts of 19% (£47 billion) with details on savings and investments.
I must say, that after all of the scare-mongering of recent days and weeks, I feel much more at ease with the overall package than I thought I may be. Indeed, as much as it will be derided by members of the opposition, I feel that there is a sense of 'fairness' running through what we have heard today.
The Good Points (in no particular order)
There's still more details coming out as I type this evening, but this review has passed a number of the hurdles of 'fairness' that I wanted to see and which I feel shows the strength of having Liberal Democrats in government.
In particular, the elderly have been protected. By retaining their universal benefits and ensuring that their winter fuel allowance, free bus passes and TV licences (for 75-year-olds) are maintained, I feel that we've really done a good thing. The increase in the retirement age to 66 by 2020 is noticeable particularly as it included both women and men. That's quite a jump.
The benefits squeeze is going to be a challenge but I see nothing wrong in incentivising those on benefits to work. For once, and it seems go be a given across political lines, there's a sense that Ian Duncan-Smith has really made some significant progress with his radical, progressive reforms. Indeed Steph Ashley puts it much better in her blog some months ago - Dib Lemming: You know when Nick Clegg said that this was going ...:
I'm pleased to see that the Government is going to take a much greater hit in Whitehall too. Does this mean job losses? Undoubtedly. But then who in their right mind can put forward a deficit reducing plan that doesn't involve job losses? I've not seen one yet. If some of those losses are in the city, then in my book it reduces the losses that will be felt in the regions and here in rural Wales particularly.
In the 'fairness' stakes, I'm happy to see cuts to child benefit for higher rate taxpayers. It just sounds like common sense to me.
I'm also pleased to see, for the first time in a generation, a Government announce that it expects prison numbers to fall. There's far to many people going to jail for minor offences who are better placed paying their debts to the community, in the community.
Tough decisions will need to be made by the governments in the devolved parliaments of the UK but I was pleased to hear George Osbourne make the point that the Barnet Formula will indeed be reviewed - we need it to ensuire fair funding for Wales. The Welsh Assembly Government has cuts of around £450m a year to deal with which in % terms is closely comparable to the kind of cuts that Scotland and Northern Ireland will have to deal with.
It would've been much worse
Had the Liberal Democrats not been a part of this coalition, there's no doubt that it would've looked a lot worse with a Tory-only led Government. There's some good stuff in here and whilst there's much that I'm not happy with, I feel it's much better than it could well and indeed looked like being only days ago.
I can't say that I'm happy with it in its entirety. Quite frankly, if you can find a single person who is happy with it in its entirety, then you will have found a mad man.
That's the point. This isn't nice. This isn't pleasant. This isn't easy. But what it is, is necessary.
Labour planned undetailed cuts of 20% (£48 billion). Today the Coalition announced cuts of 19% (£47 billion) with details on savings and investments.
I must say, that after all of the scare-mongering of recent days and weeks, I feel much more at ease with the overall package than I thought I may be. Indeed, as much as it will be derided by members of the opposition, I feel that there is a sense of 'fairness' running through what we have heard today.
The Good Points (in no particular order)
- As mentioned above, the average percentage cut for departmental budgets over the next 4 years at 19% is much lower than the expected 25% cuts that were expected.
- Universal benefits for pensioners will be retained and the temporary increase in the cold weather payment will be made permanent.
- Winter fuel allowance, free bus passes and TV licences for 75-year-olds are protected.
- There'll be funding for 75,000 adult apprenticeships.
- The science budget will be frozen and not cut as had been expected.
- The Monarchy will have to pull their belts like the rest of us and stomach a 14% cut.
- Free Museum entry will remain.
- The BBC license fee is to be frozen for the 6 years.
- The decision on renewing Trident is to be put back to the next Parliament.
- Confirmed £2.5bn "pupil premium" for teaching for disadvantaged pupils and a real-terms increase in funding for schools in England from £35bn to £39bn.
- The NHS in England will see a real-terms increase in funding every year, budget to rise to £114bn by 2015. New cancer drug fund to be provided. But £20bn in efficiency and productivity savings sought by 2014. An extra £2bn for social care by 2014-15.
- This support for health and education should pass down to Wales via the (albeit discredited) Barnett Formula
- £1bn for green investment bank.
- A doubling from the expected £3bn to £6bn of cuts emanating from Whitehall.
- A cut of 3,000 Prison places expected by 2015 and plans for a new 1,500-place prison have been dropped.
- The Bank Levy to become permanent.
- £1.5bn in compensation to Equitable Life policyholders hit by its near collapse.
- £900m to target tax evasion that is hoped to bring back £7bn to the Treasury.
- Cuts to child benefit for higher rate taxpayers to generate £2.5bn.
- £2bn investment in a new universal credit.
- Weekly child element on child tax credit to rise by £30 in 2012 and £50 by 2012.
- The Severn Barrage scrapped on cost grounds. Many environmentalists will indeed welcome this but I see it as an opportunity missed.
- The scrapping of the planned £14bn defence academy at St Athan.
- Police cuts of 4% a year. This however wasn't as bad as I had feared and there should be enough scope to cut bureacracy within the service to ensure that front-line numbers aren't affected.
- The 18% cut for the Business Department which will have a knock-on effect on University funding.
- Ring-fencing of local authority revenue grants to end and with a 7% annual vut in budgets.
- The aim to built 150,000 new affordable homes is welcome but what of the redefinition of social housing and changed terms for new rental agreements?
- The BBC's funding of S4C. However this works out, S4C must be ensured that it's editorial independence continues. What does irk me particularly here isn't so much the decision which has merits, but the way it was done with apparently no discussion with S4C before it was leaked on the BBC last night. Sorry, but that's not good enough. S4C are apparently this evening to launch a judicial review against the decision. It'll be interesting to see what happens with that.
- £1bn for green investment bank - it had been hoped that there'd be more available than this.
- Cuts in the Justice Department threaten local justice with the possible closure of Magistrates Courts.
- The added welfare cuts are tough but hopefully will act as an incentive to work.
There's still more details coming out as I type this evening, but this review has passed a number of the hurdles of 'fairness' that I wanted to see and which I feel shows the strength of having Liberal Democrats in government.
In particular, the elderly have been protected. By retaining their universal benefits and ensuring that their winter fuel allowance, free bus passes and TV licences (for 75-year-olds) are maintained, I feel that we've really done a good thing. The increase in the retirement age to 66 by 2020 is noticeable particularly as it included both women and men. That's quite a jump.
The benefits squeeze is going to be a challenge but I see nothing wrong in incentivising those on benefits to work. For once, and it seems go be a given across political lines, there's a sense that Ian Duncan-Smith has really made some significant progress with his radical, progressive reforms. Indeed Steph Ashley puts it much better in her blog some months ago - Dib Lemming: You know when Nick Clegg said that this was going ...:
I'm pleased to see that the Government is going to take a much greater hit in Whitehall too. Does this mean job losses? Undoubtedly. But then who in their right mind can put forward a deficit reducing plan that doesn't involve job losses? I've not seen one yet. If some of those losses are in the city, then in my book it reduces the losses that will be felt in the regions and here in rural Wales particularly.
In the 'fairness' stakes, I'm happy to see cuts to child benefit for higher rate taxpayers. It just sounds like common sense to me.
I'm also pleased to see, for the first time in a generation, a Government announce that it expects prison numbers to fall. There's far to many people going to jail for minor offences who are better placed paying their debts to the community, in the community.
Tough decisions will need to be made by the governments in the devolved parliaments of the UK but I was pleased to hear George Osbourne make the point that the Barnet Formula will indeed be reviewed - we need it to ensuire fair funding for Wales. The Welsh Assembly Government has cuts of around £450m a year to deal with which in % terms is closely comparable to the kind of cuts that Scotland and Northern Ireland will have to deal with.
It would've been much worse
Had the Liberal Democrats not been a part of this coalition, there's no doubt that it would've looked a lot worse with a Tory-only led Government. There's some good stuff in here and whilst there's much that I'm not happy with, I feel it's much better than it could well and indeed looked like being only days ago.
Thursday, 7 October 2010
Labour's Big Fat NO to Wales
Welsh Labour will not be happy tonight. Not happy at all.
Labour's Shadow Cabinet elections have just been announced and not one of the 19 'winners' are Welsh MP's.
49 Labour MP's put their names forward for the 19 places directly available in Ed Miliband's Shadow Cabinet. Of those 49, 8 were Welsh MP's. But Labour's 258 MP's who voted for their top 19 candidates, decided against putting Peter Hain, Chris Bryant, Kevin Brennan, Wayne David, David Hanson, Huw Irranca-Davies, Ian Lucas and Alun Michael onto the front bench.
A Kick in the Teeth for Welsh Labour
This is a real kick in the teeth for Labour heavyweights such as Peter Hain and Alun Michael. Peter Hain remember was a former Secretary of State for Wales and held the same post in Northern Ireland when Tony Blair successfully oversaw the coming together of the DUP and Sinn Fein. He also ran for the Deputy Leadership of the Party (and it goes without saying, lost). Alun Michael was none less than Tony Blair's hand picked first 'First Minister' of Wales when devolution got underway with the Welsh Assembly in 1999.
But more than anything, this is a real red-faced moment for Red Ed and his Red Party.
Welsh Members Through the Back Door?
Ed Miliband still has the discretion of choosing 5 additional members to complete his Shadow Cabinet. If he has absolutely any sense at all, he'll make sure that one or two of those five come from Wales.
But in the meantime, I can already see tomorrow's Welsh media coverage. The Western Mail will jump on this 'snub' to Wales and it'll no doubt be a topic of discussion on Radio Cymru's weekly topical programme 'Dau O'r Bae'. Whoever's representing Welsh Labour on the panel tomorrow better get ready for some serious flack!
Labour's Shadow Cabinet elections have just been announced and not one of the 19 'winners' are Welsh MP's.
49 Labour MP's put their names forward for the 19 places directly available in Ed Miliband's Shadow Cabinet. Of those 49, 8 were Welsh MP's. But Labour's 258 MP's who voted for their top 19 candidates, decided against putting Peter Hain, Chris Bryant, Kevin Brennan, Wayne David, David Hanson, Huw Irranca-Davies, Ian Lucas and Alun Michael onto the front bench.
A Kick in the Teeth for Welsh Labour
This is a real kick in the teeth for Labour heavyweights such as Peter Hain and Alun Michael. Peter Hain remember was a former Secretary of State for Wales and held the same post in Northern Ireland when Tony Blair successfully oversaw the coming together of the DUP and Sinn Fein. He also ran for the Deputy Leadership of the Party (and it goes without saying, lost). Alun Michael was none less than Tony Blair's hand picked first 'First Minister' of Wales when devolution got underway with the Welsh Assembly in 1999.
But more than anything, this is a real red-faced moment for Red Ed and his Red Party.
Welsh Members Through the Back Door?
Ed Miliband still has the discretion of choosing 5 additional members to complete his Shadow Cabinet. If he has absolutely any sense at all, he'll make sure that one or two of those five come from Wales.
But in the meantime, I can already see tomorrow's Welsh media coverage. The Western Mail will jump on this 'snub' to Wales and it'll no doubt be a topic of discussion on Radio Cymru's weekly topical programme 'Dau O'r Bae'. Whoever's representing Welsh Labour on the panel tomorrow better get ready for some serious flack!
Saturday, 25 September 2010
Ed Miliband - Labour's Wrong Choice
Wow. That was an incredible result. For a while there I actually thought that David had held on but I had a feeling as they walked into the auditorium that his smile was false. Ed looked petrified. He looked like he'd just put a knife in his elder brother's back.
I was totalling up the figures instantly in my head and once David's final total came to 49.something, I knew straight away as the audience too realised what this meant, that Ed had 50.something.
The Unions decide, not the Members
What strikes me is that it is not the normal members of the Labour Party who have chosen their leader but the Trade Unions. David Miliband should have won this contest and indeed he led all of the way until the final ballot.
Indeed on the first ballot, the scores were as follows.
David M 37.78%
Ed M 34.33%
Balls 11.79%
Burnham 8.68%
Abbott 7.42%
Eventually, it was Ed Balls' votes that finally took Ed past his brother.
But David Miliband had the larger support of his fellow MPs and the membership at large. They clearly saw what the country would've seen in David Miliband - a Prime Minister in-waiting. His own MPs backed him in greater numbers than any other and the members of his own party also.
But that means nothing. To paraprhase the Sun in 1992, 'It was the Unions wot won it'. They've got their man, but it wasn't the man the Labour Party actually wanted. This brings into sharp focus the mess that is the electoral college that elects a Labour Party member. The Liberal Democrats vote their leader on a 'one member, one vote' basis and that's the democratic way in which it should work.
Labour's Left-ward march
I had great concern that David Miliband's wider, mass appeal would give him the edge. I worried that Labour would see the light and have the sense to pick the man who could bring them back to the centre.
But the Unions have pulled them back to the left. Of course, this will be very popular with many within the Labour Party but at a wider level, I see this as a back-ward step for Labour. A move to the left won't play well in the country as a whole.
This will be re-emphasised if Ed chooses Ed Balls as his Shadow Chancellor. It's very possible that he will. If he takes that decision, he will alienate yet more centrist, middle-of-the-road supporters.
Responsibility for past mistakes
What we must remember of course, is that like all of the other candidates (apart from Diane Abbott) Ed sat in the out-going Labour Cabinet. They took collective responsibility for decisions that led to the economic mess in which we now find ourselves. He will find it particularly difficult to speak against government policy from a left-leaning position, if he doesn't acknowledge this.
Good luck Labour - you're going to need it
Of course, good government depends on having a good opposition. Ed Miliband therefore has a great responsibility ahead of him.
However, since May, Labour have been anything but responsible. More people would listen to their protestations against coalition government policy, if they actually admitted to fouling up Britain's economy up in the first place, instead of bickering from the sidelines as if it was nothing to do with them.
Ed would do well to make this admission from the outset as leader. Somehow however, I doubt he will and if the Unions pull him left, then responsible opposition is not what we'll get.
1st Preference
David M 37.8%
Ed M 34.33%
Balls 11.8%
Burnham 8.7%
Abbott 7.4%
2nd Preference
David M 38.9%
Ed M 37.47%
Balls 13.2%
Burnham 10.4%
3rd Preference
David M 42.72%
Ed M 41.26%
Balls 16.02%
4th Preference
Ed M 50.65%%
David M 49.35%
I was totalling up the figures instantly in my head and once David's final total came to 49.something, I knew straight away as the audience too realised what this meant, that Ed had 50.something.
What strikes me is that it is not the normal members of the Labour Party who have chosen their leader but the Trade Unions. David Miliband should have won this contest and indeed he led all of the way until the final ballot.
Indeed on the first ballot, the scores were as follows.
David M 37.78%
Ed M 34.33%
Balls 11.79%
Burnham 8.68%
Abbott 7.42%
Eventually, it was Ed Balls' votes that finally took Ed past his brother.
But David Miliband had the larger support of his fellow MPs and the membership at large. They clearly saw what the country would've seen in David Miliband - a Prime Minister in-waiting. His own MPs backed him in greater numbers than any other and the members of his own party also.
But that means nothing. To paraprhase the Sun in 1992, 'It was the Unions wot won it'. They've got their man, but it wasn't the man the Labour Party actually wanted. This brings into sharp focus the mess that is the electoral college that elects a Labour Party member. The Liberal Democrats vote their leader on a 'one member, one vote' basis and that's the democratic way in which it should work.
Labour's Left-ward march
I had great concern that David Miliband's wider, mass appeal would give him the edge. I worried that Labour would see the light and have the sense to pick the man who could bring them back to the centre.
But the Unions have pulled them back to the left. Of course, this will be very popular with many within the Labour Party but at a wider level, I see this as a back-ward step for Labour. A move to the left won't play well in the country as a whole.
This will be re-emphasised if Ed chooses Ed Balls as his Shadow Chancellor. It's very possible that he will. If he takes that decision, he will alienate yet more centrist, middle-of-the-road supporters.
Responsibility for past mistakes
What we must remember of course, is that like all of the other candidates (apart from Diane Abbott) Ed sat in the out-going Labour Cabinet. They took collective responsibility for decisions that led to the economic mess in which we now find ourselves. He will find it particularly difficult to speak against government policy from a left-leaning position, if he doesn't acknowledge this.
Good luck Labour - you're going to need it
Of course, good government depends on having a good opposition. Ed Miliband therefore has a great responsibility ahead of him.
However, since May, Labour have been anything but responsible. More people would listen to their protestations against coalition government policy, if they actually admitted to fouling up Britain's economy up in the first place, instead of bickering from the sidelines as if it was nothing to do with them.
Ed would do well to make this admission from the outset as leader. Somehow however, I doubt he will and if the Unions pull him left, then responsible opposition is not what we'll get.
The Labour Party Leadership Result in Full
1st Preference
David M 37.8%
Ed M 34.33%
Balls 11.8%
Burnham 8.7%
Abbott 7.4%
2nd Preference
David M 38.9%
Ed M 37.47%
Balls 13.2%
Burnham 10.4%
3rd Preference
David M 42.72%
Ed M 41.26%
Balls 16.02%
4th Preference
Ed M 50.65%%
David M 49.35%
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)