Right-wingers are living in immigration conspiracy land

by Guest    
February 23, 2010 at 4:05 pm

contribution by 5 Chinese Crackers

A few months ago, Andrew Neather wrote a pro-immigration column in the Standard saying that although immigration was a good thing and there were sound economic resons behind allowing it to increase, there was also an undercurrent in early 2000s Labour thinking that reasoned that immigration would also increase multiculturalism, which was a good thing.  That made him uncomfortable.

The tabs seized on this and turned the main reason for Labour’s immigration policy into a dastardly master plan to change the face of Britain on purpose, just to hack off Conservatives.  Mwuh-huh-huh-huh-haaah!

Neather reacted to this by writing a rebuttal, ‘How I became the story and why the Right is wrong’ in which he said:

Somehow this has become distorted by excitable Right-wing newspaper columnists into being a “plot” to make Britain multicultural.

There was no plot.

But this idea of a secret plot has resurfaced, because MigrationWatch sent out an FoI request and now they’ve got the smoking gun that proves Labour did deliberately increase immigration on purpose as a secret scheme to encourage multiculturalism! 
continue reading… »

When will we learn the lessons of Private Equity?

by Adam Lent    
February 23, 2010 at 3:21 pm

Rewind almost three years and the trade union movement was embroiled in a bitter media spat with the private equity industry.

In a portent of something much bigger, private equity firms were accused of playing fast and loose with high levels of debt to buy up companies they neither understood nor cared for in order to make a quick buck.

But the ridicule aimed at the unions in the Summer of 2007 was often intense. It reached its nadir when the Chair of the All Party Private Equity Group, Sion Simon, went Paxo on the TUC General Secretary at a hearing of the Treasury Select Committee.

Simon asked Brendan Barber six times in quick and testy succession to produce the evidence that private equity firms increased risk for the companies they acquired.

Well, the evidence is now here.
continue reading… »

Former deputy says Boris “arrogant”; wants to rule

by Sunny Hundal    
February 23, 2010 at 1:51 pm

A former deputy of London’s occasional mayor Boris Johnson has launched a ferocious attack on his former boss, branding him “arrogant”.

In an interview with the Daily Mirror he said Boris believes he has a “divine right to rule the country”.

I was at a dinner function with David Cameron shortly after the May 2008 mayoral elections when he leaned towards me, sort of winked and said, ‘Boris is a loose cannon. You are the man who is going to keep him in check’.” Meanwhile Boris bragged to Mr Clement – who was forced to stand down as deputy mayor in an expenses scandal last year – “I could do his job. I could even be Prime Minister.

The paper goes on to quote him as saying:

Boris thought the fact Cameron called himself ‘Dave’ was hilarious. He would always make a point of calling him ‘Dave’ and then rolling his eyes when he called. People know Boris as Boris and Cameron was always jealous of his popularity, so it was funny that David Cameron seemed to be trying to emulate him.

Boris is arrogant. He thinks, ‘I’m more intelligent than Dave, I’m more popular than Dave, I’d do a better job than Dave’.

He thinks he has a divine right to rule the country. Boris isn’t a team player, he only wants to be the captain.

In the extraordinary interview, he goes on to say:

After his many dressing-downs Boris became frustrated and would stomp about, slamming doors and going into an incoherent rant muttering words like ‘c***’ and ‘f***’ and banging his fist on the table. His frustration came from the view that he could do Dave’s job better.

The personal rivalry is likely to become more intense after the General Election if Cameron becomes PM.

Read the full interview here.
via Dave Hill

via MyDavidCameron

The elite’s contempt for ordinary people

by Don Paskini    
February 23, 2010 at 10:45 am

There was a good example of the open contempt which the media have for ordinary people and for democracy in the Times recently. Mourning the “profoundly depressing”, “colossal loss” of James Purnell standing down from Parliament, their leader included a spoof recruitment advert:

Wanted: a highly intelligent, experienced person to kick his heels for at least five years. Travelling to and fro from some of the most inconvenient places in the country, you will have the opportunity to work seven days a week. On Sundays you will be able to enjoy attending civic events.

We promise to select your immediate boss from among your worst enemies. In return we will pay you less than half of what you might earn elsewhere. You will have to shoulder your own expenses. We are seeking a candidate willing to endure repeated insults from customers.

This is a window into the minds of a sneering, out of touch, hard to reach elite.

Thanks to journalists and Tories for the fake concern about what a devastating blow Purnell’s departure from parliament is for the centre left, but somehow I think we will cope.
continue reading… »

Now charity chief claims she’s being bullied too

by Sunny Hundal    
February 23, 2010 at 8:59 am

Today the Daily Mail is leading the fightback on behalf of the National Bullying Helpline’s disgraced chief Caroline Pratt.

The head of an anti-bullying charity who claimed Downing Street staff had called for help said she ‘knew how they felt’ last night as she faced the full force of a Labour fightback.

Christine Pratt, chief executive of the National Bullying Helpline, said she felt ‘slightly intimidated’ by the Government’s response to her allegations. But she defiantly insisted she had received a recent email from one member of staff directly complaining about Gordon Brown’s conduct.
….
Mrs Pratt told the Daily Mail: ‘I’m beginning to understand how some of these people who say they were bullied were feeling.’

Of course the Daily Mail did not bother asking about the particulars of her organisation that raised concerns in the first place.

In another twist to the controversy, cabinet secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell has also come out and denied that he had ever warned the prime minister about behaving in a bullying or intimidatory manner.

In his first remarks since the allegations broke, Gordon Brown said: “The cabinet secretary has made it clear that he’s had no inquiries, there’s been no reprimand, there’s been no private message to me …[The] story is completely wrong.”

Lord Mandelson, the business secretary, went on the offensive by claiming the Tories were behind the attempts to smear the PM.
…
Former deputy prime minister John Prescott went further, accusing David Cameron of employing “the biggest bully in the world” as his communications director: Andy Coulson , the former News of the World editor.

Meanwhile, Cameron’s ratings aren’t looking too good.

The Greens have changed their approach to science

by Jim Jepps    
February 23, 2010 at 8:45 am

There has been an ongoing “re-evaluation” of Green Party policy around scientific evidence recently. This came about mainly due to a few journalists helpfully letting us know that there was some deeply dodgy stuff in policy.

It certainly came as a shock to many of us who had not thoroughly read our voluminous policy documents.

This conference saw the first swath of re-orientating our policy on a more science friendly footing. We passed the motion on abolition of the science pledge – a policy so offensive to scientists and ‘technologists’ that it makes me wince just to think of it. Anyway, it’s gone. Hurray.

This was quickly followed by the passing of the science chapter enabling motion which means that the party has officially endorsed a review and rewrite of our entire science and technology section of the PSS, our core policy document.

That’s going to take some hard work and we’ll be looking for people both inside and outside of the party to help us with that process.
continue reading… »

Neo-nazis prevented from marching in Edinburgh

by Don Paskini    
February 23, 2010 at 7:00 am

Neo-nazi group the Scottish Defence League tried to stage a march in Edinburgh at the weekend, but were prevented from doing so by anti-fascist activists.

The Scotsman reports that:

Only about 40 supporters of the SDL turned up, and they found themselves corralled into a pub at the bottom of the Royal Mile for several hours. There were five arrests for public order offences but the Scotland United rally, attended by about 2,000 people, passed off peacefully in Princes Street Gardens, about half a mile away.

Though Cowards Flinch has an interesting eye-witness report about the day.

It highlights the disagreements over tactics between some activists, led by Unite against Fascism and the Socialist Workers Party under the banner of Scotland United, which favoured a parallel rally and actively opposed any idea of direct confrontation with the SDL, and others (led by a range of activists from the Scottish Socialist Party, anarchist groups, student groups and others (including, it must be said, individuals from UAF/SWP)), which favoured direct confrontation via a march on the SDL position wherever it may turn out to be.

2,000 people attended the anti-fascist rally, while 200 directly confronted the SDL and prevented them from marching. There were only five arrests for public order offences, and no one was injured during the protests.

I think it is worth reflecting on this for future anti-fascist activity, and would be interested in people’s thoughts. Should there be any kind of counter-mobilisation by anti-fascists when neo-nazi groups like the Scottish or English Defence Leagues announce a march?

If so, should this be a separate rally, or direct confrontation, or both?

And if (as I think this example shows) the most effective response is one which combines the two tactics, how can campaigners make sure that they work together effectively, rather than undermining or cutting across each other?

Tories crash 3pts in latest poll; hung Parliament!

by Newswire    
February 22, 2010 at 7:00 pm

The Conservatives should no longer count on winning the election outright, according to a Guardian/ICM poll published today.

The new survey suggests Britain is on course for a hung parliament amid faltering public support for David Cameron’s party.

The opposition have also lost ground on key policy issues, including the economy, and in particular may be losing their campaign against Labour’s so-called “death tax”. Labour leads the Tories by eight points as the party with the best policy on care for the elderly.

…more at The Guardian

Vote on Parl. reform to close; what do you want?

by Sunny Hundal    
February 22, 2010 at 6:30 pm

Power2010 is entering the final stretch of its public vote to find the very top ideas that will fix UK politics.

Over 4,000 ideas were submitted, boiled down to a list of 29 by the deliberations of a representative sample of the UK, and then opened up to the public vote. Almost 100,000 votes have been cast in just under 5 weeks.

There’s now just a matter of hours left to have your say.

The 5 ideas with most support come midnight tonight will become the ‘Power Pledge’ and the backbone of a major campaign, reaching across the UK, to pressure every candidate in every constituency to back reform.

Proportional representation is currently topping the leaderboard with well over 11,000 votes, with Scrap ID cards and Rollback State Databases not far behind.

The race is tight for 3rd, 4th and 5th, place, meanwhile, with An Elected Second Chamber, English Votes on English Laws, A written Constitution and Fixed Term Parliaments bunched at around 6,000 votes.

Not far behind are more populist reforms like Right to Recall and None of the Above, which could easily make it on to the Pledge with a last-minute surge.

The campaign is set to be the largest third-party campaign at the coming election with volunteers and full-time organisers around the country.

Be sure to have your say on the final pledge before voting closes tonight! http://www.power2010.org.uk/votes

Bullying Helpline now slammed by others orgs

by Sunny Hundal    
February 22, 2010 at 5:02 pm

The Charity Commission has today confirmed that it will investigate into claims that the National Bullying Helpline were breaching charity rules.

This comes on top of statements by more organisations condemning it for its “breach of confidentiality”.

Third Sector magazine reports that the Charity Commission it had received “a dozen-or-so complaints” and would look into the matter.

Rekha Wadhwani, chief executive of The Helplines Association, said the NBH was not an association member and she was very disappointed by the breach of confidentiality.

“We are all about giving trust to callers,” she said. “It takes a lot of effort to pick up the phone, and you can only do it if you are sure it won’t be all over the TV and radio.

“This is a breach of confidence on a big scale. Within the organisation people will be going round thinking, was it you, or you or you?”

Bullying UK have now said they would be writing to the Charity Commission to complain and called for Mrs Pratt to consider her position.

One patron of the National Bullying Helpline, Cary Cooper, resigned in protest this morning.

Within the last half-hour, another patron – Mary O’Connor – has also resigned.

The Conservative Councillor told the FT:

“I can’t condone what has been said,” she said. “It takes people a long time to get the courage to come forward about this sort of thing, and then you get something like this which could throw them off course again. How many people this evening will say, ‘if I complain (to a helpline) someone will tell somebody?’ It will make people cautious.”

UPDATE

It’s now been reported, via Twitter, that Sarah Cawood has now resigned as a patron of the charity.

RECENT OPINION ARTICLES

Diane Abbott resigns from abortion panel 19 Comments Watch: Chicken chases Boris Johnson 33 Comments Does Priti Patel MP care for human rights? 59 Comments Watch: funny spoof explains benefits cuts 18 Comments UKuncut to join disabled to oppose Welfare bill 15 Comments Lawson’s GWPF faces questions over funding 25 Comments Shock poll shows public indifferent to Labour’s new cuts line 38 Comments Watch: NHS report “vindicates Labour” 7 Comments Daily Mail writer: Hurrah for French fascists! 64 Comments Save our pensions! Unite slams Unilever in video 11 Comments

LATEST COMMENTS » Sunny Hundal posted on Revealed: govt to restrict abortion counselling despite Nadine Dorries vote » Sally posted on Even by economic standards Hester's £1m bonus is unworthy » Flowerpower posted on Diane Abbott resigns from abortion panel » Tom (iow) posted on The benefits of being a "burden" on society » Anne posted on Revealed: govt to restrict abortion counselling despite Nadine Dorries vote » Ian M Davies posted on Week of action against Atos begins Monday » Robert2012 posted on The benefits of being a "burden" on society » G.O. posted on Would raising the tax threshold actually help the poorest? » Dave posted on Revealed: govt to restrict abortion counselling despite Nadine Dorries vote » Schmidt posted on Even by economic standards Hester's £1m bonus is unworthy » Link: “govt to restrict abortion counselling despite Nadine Dorries vote” | Help Me Investigate Health posted on Revealed: govt to restrict abortion counselling despite Nadine Dorries vote » Planeshift posted on Would raising the tax threshold actually help the poorest? » Makhno posted on The benefits of being a "burden" on society » Trooper Thompson posted on Would raising the tax threshold actually help the poorest? » ukliberty posted on Does Priti Patel MP care for human rights?