The mystery of Blond, revealed
I was surprised last night. I read a Phillip Blond article in Prospect, and it was less asinine than I expected.
Rather than being mouth achingly stupid, it was merely utterly unrealistic and impossible as a platform for governing, which puts it with oooh, 99.9999% of articles written for political magazines.
Mind you, Blond didn’t make one mistake – a firm proposal that a Tory government should mutalise BA. (“Cameron should push a radical economic policy — mutualising British Airways…” ran the email I got promoting the piece). With what? I thought, Jellybeans? BA’s Market Cap is what, three billion. I can think of a few things we should be doing with three billion quid other than buying companies and turning their shares over to their workforce.
Anyway, turns out Blond doesn’t quite say this. Instead he just says mutuality provides a model for energy companies and BA, and leaves the thought hanging there, with no suggestion about what should be done with such a lovely model.
This is the tenor of the whole piece. Blond proposes a whole series of rather vague things that the Conservatives are never going to do continue reading… »
Vote Liberal Democrat
From Hagley Road to Ladywood’s pre-election series.
A lot of people don’t get the Liberal Democrats.
I think this is to do with the fact that we’re portrayed in the media (and, indeed, used to portray ourselves) as centrists, which given that the parties of the ‘left’ and ‘right’ in the UK are both right-wing authoritarian corporatist parties with little but brand names to distinguish them, leads people to dismiss us without really bothering to investigate what we stand for.
The fact is, the Liberal Democrats are a fundamentally different kind of party to Labour and the Conservatives. Not because of our policies – though these do differ substantially from those parties – but because of our philosophy. I don’t have much space, so I’ll give two examples.
The first is this, from our constitution, printed on the membership card of every member:
“the Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, in which no-one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity”.
Is this something you can really imagine ‘New’ Labour or the Tories saying? continue reading… »
Dr Feelgood
Dear Readers,
I thought I had a terrible disease. I went to see 99 doctors, and they all told me roughly the same thing. That if I act fast and change my lifestyle in key ways I can avert the worst. But if I carry on as I am, I am going to get very, very sick. It’s not clear but I might even die. Or so they say.
Of course there are discrepancies between the exact diagnoses and projections each doctor gives me – but I guess that’s only to be expected, as medical science is a tricky thing.
Or is it? continue reading… »
Vote Respect
Guest post by Salma Yaqoob. This is part of Hagley Road to Ladywood’s excellent pre-election series.
One of the many problems with the British electoral system is that it is fundamentally undemocratic. The first past the post electoral system effectively discriminates against the large percentage of the population that looks beyond New Labour or the New Tories when they cast their vote.
One consequence is that those whose voices are not represented by the mainstream get squeezed out. For example, it is a remarkable fact that the British parliament probably stands alone in Europe as never having had a single Green Party MP.
Another consequence is that as the parties merge into the middle ground in a race for a small number of marginal seats, so too does politics become less about substance and more about appearance.
On the main issues facing the British people today, there is only the appearance of difference on policy from Labour, Tories and Lib Dem.
On the economy, all three have for years embraced and celebrated the neo-liberal free market dogma responsible for record levels of wealth inequality and the worst recession in over fifty years.
They are also united on the necessity of vicious cuts as the solution to the crisis and are divided only on the timescale for the implementation of those cuts. continue reading… »
Twitter Wins Index on Censorship Award
The 10th Annual Free Expression Awards were presented last night, at the Royal Institue of British Architects. Twitter won the New Media Category for facilitating dissent around the world, from #IranElection to #Trafigura. Celebrated Tweeter Stephen Fry sent a message of congratulations.
The other winners were Rashid Hajili, chair of the Media Rights Institute in Azerbaijan; The Peruvian station Radio La Voz; and the Israeli publishing house Andalus. Heather Brooke, who prised open the MPs expenses scandal, won a special commendation.
Henry Porter has some commentary, and you can view the awards shortlist on the Index website.
House of Lords Reform – Tory Style
If ever further proof were needed that the Tory’s ‘Honest Dave’ shtick is no more than a shallow and unconvincing veneer then allow me to direct you to Conservative Home, where Jonathan Isaby is looking for a few suggestions:
ConservativeHome has been running a series highlighting people David Cameron should consider appointing to the House of Lords, since any Conservative administration formed after the general election would be able to call upon the support of the lowest number of Conservative peers in history.
Awww Diddums…
Its a clear indication of just how out of touch the Tories are that even after one of the own MPs proposed that any future peerages should be restricted solely to people taking up ministerial appointments or, if not, then at least restricted to retiring MPs who weren’t caught with their nose in the trough during the expenses scandal, Isaby is still pressing ahead with a Con Home series entitled ‘Search for a 100 Peers. continue reading… »
The economics of Stephen Byers
Here’s a horrible example of the middle England error from David Aaronovitch:
For eight years [Stephen Byers] remained on the backbenches, periodically suggesting an engagement in forming policy ideas for Labour’s future, but then announced his retirement at the next election. He was isolated and possibly rather bitter.
And almost certainly not well off.
Almost certainly not well off? Consider this. continue reading… »
Should candidates have to publish their tax status?
Last year, the Committee on Standards in Public Life made one of those simple suggestions which make you think, “Why haven’t people been suggesting this for years?”
Their proposal was that in a general election candidates should have to make the same sort of declaration of financial interests as MPs have to make. After all, if the point of such declarations is to have some transparency and let people judge politicians, doesn’t it make sense to provide that information to the public before we decide how to vote rather than only telling us afterwards whether perhaps we should regret our vote?
In an all too rare acknowledgement of the problems of changing election law at the last moment, the Ministry of Justice said it was too late to change the law in time for the 2010 general election. However, rather quietly a few days ago the department instead slipped out a recommended set of financial declarations that candidates, if they choose, can make.
Producing this voluntary scheme so close to the election is not exactly ideal, but even worse the scheme goes significantly beyond what MPs have to declare. continue reading… »
Court victory for anti-Heathrow protesters
Campaigners against the third runway in Heathrow were celebrating after judges ordered a review of the plans, particularly with respect to their effect on climate change policy.
Heathrow Coalition Against Aircraft Noise reported:
The Government’s airport expansion policy is in tatters this morning (26th March) after a Judge ruled that ministers did not properly consult on a number of key issues before attempting to give consent to a third runway at Heathrow airport.
The Judge ruled that a January 2009 statement to the House of Commons by Geoff Hoon giving the green light to Heathrow expansion had no legal substance. He dismissed the Government’s claims to the contrary as ‘untenable in law and commonsense’.
The implications of today’s ruling are profound, not just for Heathrow but for airport expansion plans across the UK. The Heathrow decision is blown wide open, with the Government ordered to go back to the drawing board and consult on a number of key issues where the Judge found the Government’s position to be questionable. The judge ruled that if the Government decides to push ahead with the runway project it must now review the climate change implications of Heathrow expansion, the economic case for a third runway, and the issue of how additional passengers would get to a bigger airport. He also ruled that the Government’s entire aviation policy must now be reviewed to take into account the implications of the 2008 Climate Change Act.
Local Labour MP John McDonnell added, “In essence, this judgment means that the game is up for a third runway at Heathrow and I am calling upon the government to accept the inevitable and lift this threat to my community.”
Graph-Fix Round-up – Lloyd George knew my bar chart
Last week, I promised you all a weekly round-up of some the worst examples of graph abuse appearing on election leaflets and although the number of submissions has been fairly low, so far, there’s been plenty of ‘quality’ material to play with.
Before kicking on with the round-up, a special mention has to go out to Mark Pack over at Lib Dem Voice for catching The Mirror’s art department playing silly buggers – nice one Mark.
Okay, that’s the preamble out of the way. Now on with the show, and we’ll kick things off with a fine effort from a minor party. continue reading… »
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or RSS feed. You can also get them by email and through our Facebook group.
» The real agenda behind Telegraph’s abortion investigation
» How Scotland Yard monitors prying bloggers and journalists
» When disabled people want to work – employers can hold the back
» Revealed: the reality behind Workfare and why it doesn’t work
» Job snob? No, I’ve got the T-shirt
» Why country-by-country reporting matters to our wellbeing
» If Unions want to become stronger, they need to modernise
» Why work “reforms” in Spain are a warning for workers across Europe
» Five things you need to know about the NHS bill
» Bigger. Fatter. Gypsier. More Racist.
» Laziness levels in Britain getting lazier, wails government
|
62 Comments 15 Comments 23 Comments 8 Comments 24 Comments 16 Comments 16 Comments 83 Comments 203 Comments 85 Comments |
|
LATEST COMMENTS » Chaise Guevara posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » TimJ posted on How Scotland Yard monitors prying bloggers and journalists » Shatterface posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Cylux posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » pagar posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » pjt posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » nothingspecial posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » Chaise Guevara posted on How Scotland Yard monitors prying bloggers and journalists » Patron Press - #P2 posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » karl meyer posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » BevR posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » bob woods posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » Alex Young posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » malcolm posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » BevR posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? |
