« May 2004 | Main | July 2004 »

June 30, 2004

Social Division

Interesting report published by the University of Sheffield today, which analyses census data from the 2001 and 1991.

For starters, the number of households that are poorer is up from 21% to 24%, and while 1.7 million jobs were created in the South East, 0.5 million skilled jobs disappeared from the labour market in the North. Southerners have access to more dentists and doctors, fall ill less frequently, earn more and tend to be better educated. Furthermore, the population of northern cities such as Manchester and Liverpool is falling.

So the North-South divide is continuing to grow. Unsurprising really, as it is a division which predates the Thatcher era, with both population and affluence drifting southwards for at least 100 years. And while Thatcher's policies exacerbated the trend, the current government has been singularly unsuccessful in having any impression. As one of the authors of the report, Dr Dorling, states:

There's only been a few years in the last century when on average the population hasn't moved southwards.

So we should expect this divide to widen over the next 10 or 20 years, unless something dramatic was to happen.

And as the Deputy Prime Minister is the person responsible for this area, the chances of anything dramatic happening are approximately zilch.

--------

Posted by Clive at 4:24 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Hutton

With Iraqi WMDs back in the news as a result of the Butler Inquiry, perhaps now is a good time to reflect on the Hutton Inuqiry, and more specifically the investigation into the leak of the report. The last press release from the Hutton Inquiry website is dated 29th Jan 2004, and states:

Following the disclosure by The Sun newspaper of some of the conclusions of Lord Hutton's report before its publication, Lord Hutton has put in train an urgent investigation into the handling of those copies of the report released to the parties to the Inquiry in advance of publication. This will also include the handling of the report by the Inquiry itself and by the printers.

The Solicitor to the Inquiry, Martin Smith, will establish an audit trail of copies of the report and those who had access to them before its publication.

In the light of the outcome Lord Hutton will review what further steps he might take.

Back in March 2004, Tim blogged the following over at bloggerheads:

Bloggerheads - Fri, March 12, 2004
The Hutton Inquiry
We're still waiting for the results of Lord Hutton's 'urgent' investigation into the leak of some of his conclusions to The Scum that so conveniently set the tone for Tony and his cronies.

I called the DCA Press Office. It was hard enough to get an answer at all (I'm not from a newspaper, and therefore have nothing to do with media or publishing, y'see) but I pressed for one and got it. Kind of.

They have no idea how long it will take. No idea at all.

I don't sense a lot of urgency. I think a little pressure is called for..

It is now 5 months since the investigation was announced, and still no public pronouncement or conclusion. After contributing to the profits of Telewest, I finally managed to find someone at the Department for Constitutional Affairs who would at least speak to me. The only thing they knew was that some information was available at the Parliament website. After much searching, I tracked down a transcript from the Public Administration Select Committee meeting of 13th May 2004, which can be found here. The relevant segment is as follows:

Q126 Mr Brennan: How do you think those leaked out to the media? The conclusions appeared in the Sun before you were able to give your report. I know you were very unhappy about that.

Lord Hutton: Yes, I was very unhappy and very disappointed because the solicitors had put into operation a number of measures which we hoped would ensure that there was no leak. When the leak occurred, I asked the solicitors to conduct an investigation. They have conducted a very full and detailed investigation, and they have furnished me with a full report. Unfortunately, they have not been able to discover the source of the leak, which I am afraid sometimes happens as regards leaks. But I have asked further investigations to be undertaken and those investigations will include a consideration of whether there are any additional steps that can be taken in future to ensure that confidential reports do not leak before publication. I am sure you will appreciate that I do not think it is appropriate for me to say anything more on those further investigations because they are taking place at the moment.

... and ...

Q140 Mr Trend: I am intrigued by something you said earlier as to whether or not your inquiry finished because there was the Sun's leak, which has been looked into, you say, and then you asked for further investigations. I gather that one inquiry has become a full committee of state almost. Do you intend to go on? I think it is admirable that you have just announced you would go on and look at this business. Do you still have a budget line, a staff? Can you keep going?

Lord Hutton: It is not going to be a widespread investigation. There are further aspects of the matter, which I do not want to go into at the moment, which I have asked to be investigated because I thought it right. It is a very serious matter that there is a leak of this nature, particularly when very strenuous efforts were made to preserve confidentiality until the report, so I thought it right that certain further investigations should be made.

So in effect we'll never know who leaked the report or why. And the results of the failed investigation are unlikely to be made any more public than a transcript of a commons select committee. So much for being open and accountable. Sort of confirms all our suspicions regarding the original inquiry.

--------

Posted by Clive at 2:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 29, 2004

Butler

I suspect that many of us were expecting the Butler Inquiry to be just another government whitewash. I would imagine that Tony Blair was of a similar opinion. So the news today that Butler is reopening the investigation into whether Blair deliberately misled the country over the 45 minute claim must have come as a bit of a shock. Butler has written to editors of provincial newspapers as follows:

One of the issues the review committee is exploring is the use of the intelligence in the dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction published on 24 September 2002. One aspect of this is any action taken by the Government to guide the media towards reporting particular aspects of the dossier.

In that context, it would be very helpful to the committee to know whether you or your reporters were briefed by representatives of the Government about the dossier in the period immediately prior to its publication and whether, post-publication, you were guided to report particular aspects, such as the statement that some chemical and biological weapons were deployable by Iraq within 45 minutes of an order to use them.

It is worth noting that it would take just one editor to confirm the allegation, and Blair would be condemned as a liar. It doesn't matter how small the paper's circulation is, if there is evidence of this guided briefing, then our Prime Minister has not only lied, but will have been proved to have been lying. And the Hutton Report will have lost what little credibility it still retains (if indeed it ever did).

The irony of the situation is that the Conservatives refused to cooperate, and the LibDems complained that the commitee's remit was too narrow. Yet it now looks like Butler is conducting a comprehensive investigation that may well inflicted further damage upon a Prime Minister who is fast become a liability. Indeed one cannot help but wonder if revelations of this kind are the reason why two forthcoming by-elections have been brought forward to the 15th July.

(link courtesy of manic)

--------

Posted by Clive at 9:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 28, 2004

Silver Ring Thing

I've blogged about Silver Ring Thing before, and sent a letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury expressing my concerns. Anyway, a troupe of 30 Silver Ring Thing virgins arrived in the UK this week, intent on spreading the message of abstinence to the faithless youth of Britain. Unfortunately for the SRT, they don't appear to have realised just how secular this nation has become. Of the 9 shows planned for their tour, 3 have already been cancelled due to lack of interest. Which is, in my opinion, a good thing. What is needed now is a more realistic and open approach to both sex education and contraception. Firstly we need to accept that young people are going to experiment with sex, as generations before have done. In which case, we should try and ensure that young people today are equipped with the knowledge to practice safe sex, and thus avoid the risks of both unwanted preganancy and infection by sexually transmitted diseases. My sincere hope is that this tour is a resounding failure, and that Silver Ring Thing departs these shores, taking its dangerous dogma with it.

Posted by Clive at 9:13 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

June 24, 2004

EU

So much for banishing the myths surrounding our membership of the EU as Tony Blair announced after agreeing to the newly drafted EU Constitution. Today we witnessed one of the more rabidly pro-European Labour MPs, Patricia Hewitt, sounding off with the usual spin and scare in the New Statesman today

"It would have the effect, and would be intended to have the effect, of putting Britain on the margins, and probably on the road to withdrawal."

"It would quite clearly cause a crisis in the relations between Britain and the rest of the EU. We would have to sit down and work out where to go. It's unlikely there'd be any sympathy for the British position."

Well, thank you for that reasoned and rational response Patricia. And according to her ladyship, we have the EU to thank for...

"...cheap phone calls, clean beaches, clean water..." and "...cafe culture, Italian food, all of that..."

Well, BFD if that's the best she can come up with. And to suggest that continued membership of the EU would bring the UK into line with a Europe with...

"a better pension system, and a better transport system"

... is more than just a little misleading. After all, the pension crisis in the UK is a consequence of over-exposure to stock market performance, Gordon Browns tax raid and a change in accounting practices that highlighted the gaping holes in company schemes at the worst possible time. And as for transport, well you can look back to nearly 50 years of failure to define a coherent transport policy for this country. So to argue that continued membership of Europe will actually solve these problems is laughable.

If Patricia Hewitt is the best pro-Euro spokesperson the Labour Party can bring out, then Tony Blair has some serious challenges to face if he is going to try and win the referendum. In fact, Hewitt highlights the problem, that the pro-Euro heavyweights have all but disappeared from the Cabinet. While Hoon remains for now, Mandelson has gone, as have Byers and Cook; Straw is caution personified and Brown will only have Europe on his terms, rather than the almost romanticised ideal that Blair is trying to sell us.

Maybe that is Blair's tactic, to let Hewitt bore us to the point of near terminal ennui over the next 2 years, and drain the lifeblood out of the debate long before the referendum.

--------

Posted by Clive at 4:36 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Choice

Yesterday we were treated to the Conservative's vision for the NHS and today we see Labour's plans. The first point to note about Labour is that in spite of having only 24 hours to save the NHS back in 1997, they now need another 5 years to sort it out. The depressing thing about both parties is how little difference there is between their plans.

Choice - Both Labour and Conservatives will allow patients total freedom of choice over where they are treated. Which, to be honest, seems pretty damn pointless if not unworkable. After all, most patients would probably prefer to be treated locally, rather than, say, halfway across the country. And then one needs to consider the potential impact on those hospitals seen as centres of excellence. After all, if the majority of patients in the North East wanted to be treated at Sheffield Northern General, then that poses a significant problem for the hospital, especially if it has to meet targets for waiting times. What is really required is a good standard of health care delivered locally. After all, if your local NHS Trust could deliver as a minimum an acceptable level of treatment and care, then there would be little or no incentive to look elsewhere for treatment.

Private Health Care - There is a modicum of clear water between the two parties on the subject of the use of private health care provision. The Conservatives would - unsurprisingly - offer a state subsidy to those patients opting for private treatment. This approach would tend to favour the more well-off patients who can afford to pay the costs above and beyond the subsidy, whilst being of little benefit to the poorer members of society. By contrast, Labour would restrict the use of the private sector, by allowing NHS managers to buy services, but not providing any direct subsidy to patients. So effectively the Conservative plans would benefit the well-off patients and the private health providers, whilst the Labour approach would restrict the financial benefit to the providers, but not the patients. The question is whether or not letting the NHS spend money in the private sector is the best use of its funding.

Target Setting - And at last some open ground between the two parties. Conservatives want to dump centrally set targets, and let each trust define its own. Meanwhile Labour want to stick to targets set in Whitehall. Both approach seem to owe more to dogma than pragmatism. Without a centralised element there is a) no control over the targets set and b) a major issue when trying to monitor and compare performance between Trusts. However, unless some local input is given to targets, to take account of regional variations in overall health, specific illness rates, etc, then central targets will become either a fiction which some trusts will never meet, or a lowest common denominator rendering comparisons pointless (cf A level grades).

Foundation Hospitals - The Tories want more hospitals to become Foundation Trusts, and Labour want all hospitals to attain Foundation status by 2008. So no real difference there then. And don't expect any great distinction between the two on spending controls, as both will allow free-market forces to have an impact, although Labour do intend to keep some borrowing restrictions in place (unlike the Conservatives).

Spending - Once again, bugger all difference here, with both parties commited to spending roughly similar amounts. The only difference being that Labour will raise the money through increased taxation and some efficiency cuts in other areas of public service, whilst the Conservatives will most likely not raise taxes, but instead wield a larger axe.

Given how much each party keeps harping on about giving us more choice, it is both frustrating and depressing to see the two main political parties offering so little choice in policy. There is no reference to reductions in the use of PFI from either party, and both seem commited to letting the NHS spend our money on private services. In fact, apart from the taxation aspects, Labour's policy could almost have been written by Conservative Central Office.

The NHS could be a world-beating service, providing quality health care to all who need it. But until such time as one of the parties is prepared to truly address our requirements for the NHS, we will be left with the prospect of increasing sums of money being poured into a 20th century solution to a 19th century problem. And we've been there before. After all, one of the reasons the Conservatives could get away with the reductions (or minimal increases, depending on how you view the figures) in health expenditure was because a significant pecentage of the electorate were fed up with seeing the NHS as nothing more than an inefficient moneypit.

Tony Blair would like the next general election to be about domestic policies, but as long as the Labour party can only offer variations on a Conservative theme, then he is going to be disappointed. Now is not the time to be cautious, now is the time for audacity, to bite the bullet and truly get to grips with providing effective 21st century health care for all who need it.

--------

Posted by Clive at 3:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 22, 2004

The Big Intervention

Firstly, the Big Intervention goes on. Initially both Tim and myself believed that a short sharp campaign would be effective, though I'd always been prepared for a longer battle. Well, we were wrong. Wrong in so far as we thought that Blair would, for the first time in a long while, see reason, and go. Well he didn't, but that isn't a reason for giving up.

Over at bloggerheads you'll be able to read Tim's final thoughts and feelings. I can understand the frustration and resignation that he is feeling, having experienced the same many times before during the 80's. There comes a point in time when you need to back down, disengage from the protest business and spend time with family. And I'd like to take this opportunity to thank him for all his efforts over recent years which, though he may not feel it now, have made a difference.

Western civilization, as embodied by the U.S., the U.K. and their allies, is heading down a dangerous path, and it is our moral duty to make our leaders see reason and turn back. When the government of a nation can use legal arguments to justify torture of fellow human then that government no longer possesses any semblance of legitimacy. When the government of a nation ignores the inhuman actions of both itself and its allies, then that government must be brought down.

So the Big Intervention goes on. The current target is to have brought about leadership change by the end of the Labour Party Conference at the end of September. That gives us 3 months to engage our MPs, the Trade Union leaders, religious leaders, celebrities and above all the public. This is more than just blogging though. This will require effort. We need to distribute leaflets, write letters, send faxes, talk to people, get the message across and change opinions. Because if we don't, we are as guilty as our leaders for not doing the right thing.

So get out there and do it.

--------

Posted by Clive at 12:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 21, 2004

The Big Intervention - Update

There'll be a whole raft of Big Intervention stuff tomorrow - including the relaunch for the run to the Labour Party Conference, the current state of engaging the Unions, details of the Labour Euro-Rebels, etc. --------

Posted by Clive at 7:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Blunkett

Nice to see that the Home Secretary has so little work to do that he can find time to personally take an interest in "nailing" an English football fan convicted of rioting in Portugal. Why should he be getting involved publically. The man was arrested, tried and convicted in Portugal, but, due to a failure to follow established procedures, he had to be released on arrival in the UK. There are a number of issues surrounding his trial that may well lead to a successful appeal against the original conviction.

No don't get me wrong. By no stretch of the imagination do I condone football violence, but at the same time I find the sight of the Home Secretary taking a popularist approach to a case, rather than allowing for due process, to be a most disturbing development. There are times when these mistakes arise and sometimes you have to live with the consequences. What is important is that future mistakes are avoided. Blunkett's frustration is understandable, but is no excuse for a public vendetta that merely shows him unfit to be Home Secretary.

--------

Posted by Clive at 10:13 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 17, 2004

Trains

Is there a clue for the future of the railways in the UK hidden in the announcement that the Scottish Executive is to gain control of spending on both trains and tracks in Scotland? Although this leaves the franchise operators in place, it represents a significant step towards a halfway house re-nationalised railway system, at least in Scotland. This rationalisation is one of the first fruits of the Government's rail review, the objective of which was to streamline the industry. Whether the endgame will result in a nationalised railway network is unknown at present, but in light of the huge levels of public funding, it would make sense for the tax payers to realise all the benefits, without shareholders creaming a little off the top for dividends. In fact, with the ScotRail franchise going to First Group who already control 70% of buses in Scotland, and who's operational headquarters are in Aberdeen, it might be interesting to consider whether Holyrood will be taking this consolidation any further? --------

Posted by Clive at 2:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Protest

Could to see that legal support of legitimate protest is alive and well, at least in Scotland. Two members of the public had been accused of intimidating MSP Frank McAveety when they protested about the war in Iraq and the closure of local swimming baths. According to McAveety, he'd felt the worst intimidation in his life whilst canvassing on behalf of the Labour Party in Glasgow. Sheriff Graeme Warner's response as he cleared the protestors was heart warming in the extreme, containing such memorable quotes as:

If this was the most frightening thing he has experienced in his career, then he must live a very sheltered life.

I could understand it more if he lived in some sort of tyranny, but that is hardly the case.

It is naive and unrealistic of a cabinet minister to think he cannot attract attention on the streets, especially at a time where a war is on-going.

And the best of all, which Tony Blair would do well to remember:

Surely in the society that we live in, one can express such views to politicians.

--------

Posted by Clive at 2:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Iraq

Nice to see the government is either still in denial, or otherwise incapable of accepting the facts. In spite of the report from the US commision yesterday stating that there were no links between Al-Qaeda and Saddam, Downing Street is still insistent that the links were there. Only now, instead of a link it is the permissive environment that Saddam created in Iraq, in which terrorists could operate in relative comfort.

When will Blair stop spinning and just come clean. We've been here before with WMDs. First he had them and could launch in 45 minutes, then he had the potential, and so far on the ground investigators have found bugger all. Now we have Blair who originally supported the US claim that Saddam had links with Al-Qaeda, now claiming he created a permissive environment even when the US states categorically that there were no links.

You might as well claim that the fact that some of the 11th Sept terrorists spent time in Britain, and learned to fly in the US, means that both the US and UK created a permissive environment. Of course Blair would counter that in the case of the US and UK, the terrorists operated only as a result of inadequate intelligent information. But the same could have applied to Saddam, given that there is no love lost between him and Osama.

Once again we are witness to the unedifying sight of our Prime Minister continue in his futile attempts to justify his illegal actions. However, given that the real reason for our involvement would show Blair to be weak willed, ineffectual and easily led, is it any wonder that we are still presented with regular displays of legalistic word twisting.

As Gordon Brown seems to have learned long ago, if you have nothing to say, then say nothing lest you appear a fool.

--------

Posted by Clive at 1:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Immigration

The National Audit Office today reported on Visa Entry to the UK and it should make for unsettling reading at the Home Office. In spite of all th spin and bluster; in spite of attempts to downplay the fiasco by using phrases such as insufficiently robust; in spite of persistant denials even after Beverley Hughes resignation; in spite of attempts to portray anyone wishing to discuss weaknesses in the immigration system as racist; in spite of all this the Home Office overruled UKvisas in 90% of applications from Romania and Bulgaria. The report is critical of the Home Office's failure to communicate adequately, such that in many cases where it over-ruled UKvisas, no explanation was given, but instead a basic "issue the visa" letter was sent.

As for Blunkett, well the report from the NAO does nothing to improve perception of his role in the whole sorry mess. The NAO report does effectively refute the claim that the Home Office were simply waving immigrants through in an effort to fiddle the figures. And the Sutton Report, while admiting that there were abuses also states that ministers were not aware of them. Which is pretty damning for Blunkett as the only remaining conclusion is that system was out of control and ministers were totally unaware.

The bottom line is that the emotive nature of immigration is going to make the definition and implementation of sensible policy a challenge, but that is not an excuse for poor communication, incompetence and dishonesty from department heads and ministers. And dishonesty is an accusation that Blunkett will find hard to avoid. Suspicion continues that Blunkett misled MPs and neither the NAO report nor the Sutton findings do anything to either confirm or refute such allegations. We may never know just how much (or little) the Home Secretary knew, but if evidence ever comes to light showing that he was aware of the scale of problems, then he may wish he'd resigned at the same time as Ms Hughes.

--------

Posted by Clive at 12:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The Big Intervention - Update

No more leaflets until the weekend, though still keeping up the stickers. Currently working my way through the various Trade Unions, starting with the FBU and CWU. --------

Posted by Clive at 12:29 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 16, 2004

Europe

Interesting article in today's Independant regarding the funds available to the Foreign Office to promote Europe in this country. Currently the budget is £200,000, or the equivalent of 4 days spending on British security contractors in Iraq. Obviously the government would like to spend more, but there are only 2 sources of funding open to it, either the tax payers or the EU itself. In light of the recent election success of the UKIP, then asking a euro-sceptic public to stump up funding would appear counter-productive, increasing irritation with Europe which in turn would offset any additional Yes votes raised. In addition the No campaigners could then legitimately demand equivalent public funding, with considerable justification. Which pretty much rules out the use of public funds, at least openly. But going to the EU would be equally unpalatable, provoking an anti-EU backlash as well.

Yet Blair is determined to deliver a Yes vote in the referendum, which implies that either the government will seek private funding from pro-Europe sponsors, or else try and hide any public or EU funding. If public funding is used, then one has to wonder at Gordon Brown's position on the matter. Whilst openly against handing over any control of fiscal policy to Brussels, he may well be more flexible on other matters. And perhaps Brown sees the EU referendum as his way into Number 10. Let Tony deliver an election victory, albeit with a massively reduced majority, then stump up the cash for a referendum before becoming Prime Minister. This would leave Blair as a convenient scapegoat for a Brown administration, but is a dangerous gamble that relies on Blair delivering at least a working majority.

Update - 16:35 - And judging by this Sun article it would appear that Rupert Murdoch is throwing his weight behind the No campaign. In fact I haven't seen the Sun put the boot into Blair this much before; likening him to Neville Chamberlain selling out the Czechs; describing Blair as a man with no ears; and pretty much accusing him of lying.

--------

Posted by Clive at 2:56 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 15, 2004

Immigration

While everyone's attention has been focused on the election results, the Foreign Office has been quietly kicking the UK consul in Romania. James Cameron was the man who exposed the immigration system abuses in Romania, abuses which eventually led to the resignation of immigration minister Beverley Hughes. Cameron has been put on a final warning, denied promotion for 3 years and a pay rise for a year, a typical New Labour reward for telling the truth. --------

Posted by Clive at 4:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The Big Intervention - Update

Emailed my MP, printed more stickers, emailed Roy Bailey (folk singer, has toured with Tony Benn), printed more stickers.

Contemplating placing an add in local press this week.

Meanwhile Blair remains defiant. Some choice quotes in that article...

"No politician can afford to be deaf to the voice of the electorate. There are clearly big challenges ahead for the country, concerns that we have to address, big arguments to be won about the future direction of policy in this country. But these are arguments I am prepared to win.

... the classic "I hear what your saying" of management speak, which translates as "I see your mouth moving, but am so convinced of my rightness that I'm going to ignore what you're actually saying."

With regard to Europe, his position is...

What we will not do is to marginalise Britain in Europe simply for the sake of it.

Well, excuse me for being a bit dense, but that's our choice, not his now that we've been promised a referendum. Unless he is aluding to a desire to badger us into voting Yes by holding repeated referenda until he gets his own way.

But the best one of all is...

Now is not the time for a change in direction ... but a change in gear

Presumably he is refering to the sort of gear change where you're blasting onto the motorway at 70mph in 3rd gear, then accidentally select 1st instead of 4th at which point the engine climbs out from under the bonnet, smacks you in the face and yells "Oi! Stupid! Watch what you're doing!"

At the end of the day, all this posturing is just "The lady's not for turning" in a different guise.

--------

Posted by Clive at 3:56 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The Magic Goes Away

In the aftermath of the local and Euro election results, Tony Blair has told the Labour Party We have got to have confidence in our arguments and hold our nerve and believe we will win. He wants to put Iraq behind him, refusing to even consider an apology and instead focus debate on domestic policies.

Unfortunately for both him and the Labour Party, Iraq is not going to simply go away. The announcement that four British soldiers are to face courts martial in relation to Iraqi prisoner abuse almost guarantees that Iraq will stay in the media spotlight for a while yet, especially as the trial will take place in public. And the fact that there are at least four other cases which will be refered to the Army Proescuting Authority is likely to prolong the agony for Blair, as will the unlawful killing case refered to the CPS and under investigation by the Metropolitan Police.

Meanwhile Gordon Brown today celebrates becoming the longest serving Chancellor of the Exchequer since the 1820s. On the whole it has been a pretty successful 7+ years, taking a stabilising economy inherited from the Conservatives and building on that the longest period of uninterrupted economic growth in the last 200 years. His most inspired move was giving the Bank of England freedom to set interest rates, a move which still outweighs his pensions raid, excessive reliance on stealth taxation methods and his presiding over a potentially unsustainable housing boom and increasing levels of personal debt.

Now Brown has been described as psychologically flawed, but compare his track record with that of Blair's before jumping to conclusions. And do we really want a media darling for Prime Minister, or a sound thinker with a track record of 7 years of success behind him?

--------

Posted by Clive at 10:15 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 14, 2004

Europe

Is the big idea of a European state drawing to a close? In the UK the European Elections turned out to be a great success for the UK Independence Party, with both Labour and the Conservatives loosing out. And across Europe, Eurosceptic parties appear to have made significant gains as well. My suspicion - or more honestly, my hope - is that voters across Europe have no desire to become a part of some amorphous super-state; that a common market is sufficient and single currencies, harmonised laws and the overhead of a substantial European bureaucracy are too great a price to pay.

On a more humourous note, I had to smile at John Reid's attempt to put a positive spin on events by pointing out that the Conservatives had not done well either. More depressing was his response to the message sent by voters. If both pro-Europe (Labour and LibDem) and mildly Euro-Sceptic (Conservative) parties took a pounding at the polls, then one would assume that the government would pay more attention to the opinions of the electorate. But instead Reid sees it as a challenge to argue their case for Europe. Ah the joys of adherence to dogma.

--------

Posted by Clive at 1:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The Big Intervention - Update

Another 500 A5 leaflets printed off, so more letterboxing tonight. Also some postering as well, along with stickering bus stops, lamp-posts, etc. Bloody knackering work, but worth it (I hope). Letters written and posted to local Labour MPs and constituency Labour Party. Weighing up whether or not to place an add in the local paper this Friday. Part of me says not to bother as the Big Intervention is supposed to run until 21st June, but my personal deadline is the Party Conference, so it may be worthwhile. Thoughts anyone? --------

Posted by Clive at 1:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 12, 2004

Blair Must Go

Poster and sticker printing at the moment. Tomorrow morning is sees the start of the local Big Intervention campaign in Barnsley. Anyone in South Yorkshire who wants to get involved, just drop me an email. --------

Posted by Clive at 6:35 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The Big Intervention

I remember the Thatcher years all too vividly. I was too young to vote in 1979, but still remember the collapse of the Lib-Lab Pact, Labour's not working campaign, and the end of post-war consensus politics. Then came the nuclear weapons with the announcement in 1980 that cruise missiles were to be based at Greenham Common. By 1983 Heseltine was Minister for Defence and MI5 was actively working against CND and other organisations protesting against nuclear weapons.

The General Election of 1983 was my first chance to vote, as I had only just turned 18 a couple of weeks earlier. In spite of living in a staunch Conservative constituency, there was no way I could consider giving my vote to the Tories. We'd seen rising unemployment put the lie to the 1979 campaign posters, increased spending on nuclear weapons and an illustration of hollow rhetoric on curbing the unions with the Miner's victory in early 1981. Then came the Argentine Invasion of the Falklands, a consequence of bungled foreign policy decisions. But the military victory enabled Thatcher to reverse her increasing unpopularity. On 9th June 1983 the Conservatives increased their share of the vote by 4%, adding a further 58 seats while Labour lost 60 MPs. Many blamed the Labour Manifesto, described by Gerald Kaufman as the longest suicide note in history, yet in today's terms, the abolition of the House of Lords, scrapping of Trident and Cruise and withdrawal from the EEC no longer seem quite so radical. Nevertheless, the Conservatives won and the country faced another 5 years of Tory Rule.

In 1984 the Miners Strike, one of the most divisive events in modern British history, took place. Communities and families were split as Thatcher spent £6bn on smashing the miners. The cost in subsequent welfare payments, lost revenue and keeping pits mothballed eventually totaled £26bn. I was living in South Wales at the time, studying at the Polytechnic of Wales (for those too young to remember, a polytechnic was like a university but more in touch with the real world and industry, effectively done away with by the Tories in 1992) and living on a grant (again for the younger readers, way back in the early 80s each student was given a grant to enable them to live while studying, rather than a loan. The result was that many students obtained degrees without accumulating thousands of pounds of debt. The Tories introduced Student Loans in 1990). To this day I find it hard to believe that any leader could divide the country merely to satisfy their own personal agenda.

1985 saw the Wapping industrial disputes with the print unions while 1986 brought the Westland affair. Privatisation was in full cry and the gap between the haves and have nots was widening almost daily. At the same time the traditional social values were being eroded by the greedy and rapacious nature of Thatcherism. In spite of Neil Kinnock's modernisation of the Labour Party, the Liberals and the SDP split the opposition vote at the 1987 election. Much to my disgust we were presented with the prospect of yet another 5 years under the Conservatives.

By 1992, I had begun to believe that the pendulum was finally swinging in the right direction. The Conservatives had ditched Thatcher and displayed an degree of economic ineptitude rarely seen before. Privatisation was now more dogmatic than ever, we'd had Poll Tax riots and Major had signed the Masstricht Treaty. Meanwhile John Smith was displaying his talents as shadow chancellor, Kinnock had resolved the internecine strife within Labour, and an election victory seemed almost inevitable. I still remember watching the results come in after polls closed on 9th April 1992. The sense of disbelief, the sheer incredulity at John Major managing to win that election. And with a majority of only 21 MPs it was clear that the next Conservative government was going to be a less than edifying prospect.

1st May 1997 was truly a great day. Tony Blair (having succeeded the late John Smith as Labour leader) swept to power on a tidal wave of goodwill and national unity. Not only did we celebrate a majority of 179, but we had the added pleasure of seeing the departure of such Conservatives as Michael Portillo, Malcolm Rifkind and Norman Lamont. To my dying day I will never forget the look on Portillo's face as he lost his seat. After the election euphoria, things did indeed get better. Gordon Brown, having inherited a now steady economy, built economic growth on those foundations. The Fuel Protests of 2000 were a miner glitch, and any failure to enact significant improvements in the public services could be put down to 18 years of Tory misrule, and a sense of hesitancy from a party concerned that it be reelected an in it for the long haul, rather than voted out after one term.

Then came the quiet landslide of 2001, with Labour's majority dropping by only 12 seats. Now we would see delivery on promises. In spite of the scandals that had rumbled around the government (Mandelson, Eccleston, Hinduja, etc) surely reelection with such a substantial majority, and after 4 years of groundwork, would result in major progress at last.

In fact, 2001 was the beginning of the end of my trust in Blair. In spite of the vast sums of money being thrown at the public services, many areas stubbornly refused to improve. In many cases thinking the unthinkable was simply a case of continuing with the status quo, a recipe for long-term failure. Whenever things went wrong, Tony would announce his personal involvement, before moving quietly on to the next issue when his intervention made no significant difference.

Then came 11th September 2001 and its aftermath. Intervention in Afghanistan replaced one set of tyrants with another, but at least there was credible justification for military action. Blair's handling of Iraq finally showed what many of us had suspected; that Blair was a misguided leader, who stubbornly placed his faith in an American president that many considered a joke. Yet rather than honestly present his reasons for our involvement, Blair instead chose to twist words and spin lies to the media to gain our support. Instead of leading our country, he followed Bush. Instead of uniting our country in a common cause, he brought division. In short, Iraq showed Tony Blair's leadership to be an exercise in failure, the man himself coming across as a self-obsessed dictatorial Prime Minister in the mould of Thatcher.

So I sit here today, looking at the fallout from the local elections. And I wonder how anyone could consider yesterday's performance by Labour to be anything other than a disaster for the country. Do we really want a return to the sort of government the Conservatives gave us for 18 years. Because were yesterday's performance to be repeated at a general election, then Labour would be out, with the Conservatives being the largest single party, albeit with no overall majority.

Thus The Big Intervention. Blair is a liability, a divisive influence who, by his continued presence as leader of the Labour Party and Prime Minister, will in all likelihood hand this country back to the Conservatives with all that entails. The inescapable conclusion is that Tony Blair must stand down for the good of the country. And if he won't see reason, then the Labour Party has a duty to this nation to see that the right thing is done.

Many people have questioned my loyalty, challenged my patriotism simply because I dare to call for Tony Blair's removal from power. But my loyalty is to this country, to my fellow citizens of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, not to an individual politician. And past achievements cannot excuse current failures. All products have a best before date, and politicians such as Tony Blair are, when all is said and done, products of political and media machines. Blair should accept that his date has passed, that he is now a liability and the time for his departure has arrived.

The Big Intervention is the way forward, the way to ensure that this country continues to grow socially, economically and culturally. Certainly we should never forget how lucky we are in this country, remembering that there are many people who live in fear and suffering, such as the people of Darfur in the Sudan. These people look to countries such as ours for help and support, yet as long as we remain divided by our leadership then the help they need will never arrive. And a return to the selfishness of Conservative rule will prove no comfort for them.

The Big Intervention may well be the only way forward. Please, take the time to visit the site, to consider what we are say and, above all, to act. Not tomorrow or the day after or sometime soon, but now. Write to your local Labour MP, contact your local Labour Party, print posters, write letters to your local paper, just get involved.

Thank you for listening.

--------

Posted by Clive at 1:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 9, 2004

Miscellany

Public Smoking Ban Seems like things are still a bit confused in the government. While Tony Blair is considering introducing a public smoking ban, Health Secretary Dr John Reid instead chooses to patronise the lower classes by suggesting that smoking remains one of their few pleasures. Reid's statements were made during a Big Conversation event. But what is the real reason for his opposition to any ban? Is he pandering to Gordon Brown, hoping to retain the revenues for taxation on cigarettes, or trying not to upset the working class vote? One thing is for sure, he doesn't appear motivated by any desire to improve the nation's health.

The Invisible Man
While Labour's last party political broadcast focussed once again on Michael Howard, it is interesting to see how Tony Blair is notable for his absence from most Labour publicity material for tomorrow's elections. And one thing I noticed during the journey to Wales at the weekend was a marked absence of any Labour posters. Plenty of Lib-Dem, Conservative, Plaid Cymru and even UKIP, but zilch for Labour. That smacks of either a high degree of confidence, or resignation that a bloody nose is on its way regardless. While a drubbing would be good for those of us who desire to see Blair stand down, my thoughts are with the true quality Labour councillors who are at risk through no fault of their own.

ID Cards
The information watchdog's concerns over ID cards are growing. As more details emerge, he has gone from healthy scepticism to increasing alarm. Read the article, as Richard Thomas makes some very valid points. And for Blunkett to acuse him of grandstanding is simply dishonest, as Thomas is speaking for many of us who view the open-ended scheme as a real threat to civil liberty.

Bribery?
Yet another less than bright idea to encourage voting. If children in Sefton can prove that their parents have voted, then they get a chance to win a playstation. Hardly a constructive approach to low turnout, and of dubious democractic nature. After all, how can a child prove their parents voted? And what would be done with the information gained?

Fraud
Another Lib-Dem arrested in connection with vote fraud. While at the same time one has to question the health of democracy in this country when people can see nothing wrong with trying to sell their vote. Still, given the contempt for consensus and democracy displayed by our PM, is it any wonder that we are now seeing such shabby occurences.

--------

Posted by Clive at 11:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 7, 2004

There's lovely

The UK Today is in Wales this week, connected to the Internetweb by an IR link and a T610i mobile at an awesome 9.6k. At that speed and absent a local internet cafe, expect infrequent posting this week, with an end-of-day summary post being the only certainty. --------

Posted by Clive at 11:34 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 4, 2004

Iraq

So the US and UK governments still can't agree on the actual powers the new Iraqi government will wield, in spite of the handover of power scheduled for just over 3 weeks time. Once again Colin Powell has insisted that the Iraqis will have no veto over coalition troops.

"You can't use the word 'veto'," said Colin Powell

You can almost hear Terry Jones saying "He's not the Prime Minister. He's a very naughty boy!"

Could someone please have a word with Tony Blair and ask him to quit the charade over where the real power and authority lies in Iraq. It was always inevitable that the US would dictate the terms under which power is to be transfered, and no matter how strongly Blair desires different terms he is never going to get agreement from the US. All his continued protestations achieve is to make him look weak and foolish. Hardly what we want to see from the leader of this country.

--------

Posted by Clive at 12:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Crunch Time

Fed up of feeling insignificant? The time for change is fast approaching. And it is your turn now.

The Big Intervention

See more details at Bloggerheads

You want to see change for the better? You want to make a difference? You want your voice to be heard?

If the answer is yes, then get ready to act.

Today.

Thank you.

--------

Posted by Clive at 12:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Fuel

Once again, when crisis looms Tony Blair takes charge personally. This time, with the likelihood of fuel protests growing by the day, Blair has said that he is keeping the option of raising fuel tax in September under review. But does Blair really have that authority, or is it just more man of the people spin? The person who will actually make the decision is Gordon Brown, not Tony Blair. Tony make ask Gordon not to raise duty, but at the end of the day Blair can't coerce Brown. And this isn't the first time that Tony has been reliant on Gordon's good offices to deleiver him from trouble. Remember the Tuition Fees revolt, and de facto rebel leader Nick Brown's sudden volte face after a cosy chat with Gordon Brown? If Gordon Brown can wield such authority from behind the scenes, and indeed if Blair is so reliant on Gordon's goodwill, then isn't it time that the one cabinet member with real credibility and authority be given the opportunity to work openly?

Even if Blair avoids a repeat of the last fuel protests he cannot hope to emerge unscathed, as any victory will be seen as having been dependant on Gordon Brown. Indeed it should be noted that in news reports relating the discussions with OPEC ministers, it is always Gordon Brown who is mentioned, not Tony Blair. As Blair continues to struggle in the morass that is Iraq, expect to see more domestic issues being resolved by the real power in the cabinet.

Update - 11:10 - As the story now shows, most protests have been put on hold, and the credit goes to Gordon Brown, as this quote shows ...so we are prepared to give Mr Brown the benefit of the doubt and see what his proposals are.

--------

Posted by Clive at 10:00 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Credit

According to a Mori poll, credit card debt isn't the big problem it has been made out to be. The poll was based on 48,000 interviews, but while the sample size is significant, the accuracy of the results are based on the questions asked, and also the honesty of those questioned. And unlike voting intentions, the level of an individual's debt is a personal matter. Would you be open and honest about your financial affairs to a complete stranger? And if you're currently in denial with regards to personal debt, then how likely are you to admit something to a pollster that you can't face yourself? The only way to realistically assess the scale of this nation's debt is for the banks and financial institutions to publish detailed figures, but if those figures were to show irresponsible lending then how likely is it for the banks to cooperate. Obtaining credit should not be impossible, but at the moment it is far too easy and everyone concerned - both borrowers and lenders - need to display a greater sense of realism. --------

Posted by Clive at 9:35 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 3, 2004

Fraud

This case of electoral fraud is unlikely to be the last case we hear of in those areas trialing all-postal voting. It probably isn't the first either. But how ironic that it should be the LibDems who are first with their hands in the cookie jar. This quote from a LibDem spokeperson says it all...

"We do not condone any illegal activity in relation to postal votes, but we fear this system is open to abuse. The abolition of polling stations means that people cannot be guaranteed the right to vote in privacy and security. All the problems that have arisen with the system of postal voting should be carefully reviewed after the elections."

In other words, our man did it, but it is all the fault of the government for getting rid of polling stations. Well, that's about par for the course.

--------

Posted by Clive at 10:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 2, 2004

Sudan. Again.

And again and again and again. As often as necessary until something is done. Ingrid over at Me and Ophelia is providing an excellent point of contact and source of Sudan/Darfur related linkage. Also check out Passion of the Present.

Right, now a reminder of things YOU can do that can make a difference:

EDM1051. You're reading this, so you're obviously connected to the internetweb, so it'll only take you a minute or two to use Fax Your MP to ask your elected representative to sign it. While you're typing, ask them to sign EDM293 as well. All this will cost you a couple of minutes of your time, and maybe a few pennies worth of online connectivity. Small price eh? For those after a more personal touch, you can write to your local MP care of the House of Commons as follows:

[Insert MP's Name Here]
The House of Commons
London
SW1A OAA

That'll only set you back 27p, so for less than a pound you can engage your MP. The good thing about Fax Your MP is that they track responses, so you should know within 2 weeks whether or not they're going to act.

Now you may be wondering why these EDMs are so important. Well the bottom line is that they are the only way we are likely now to get any coordinated government action. As this report in the Telegraph shows the British government desires to do as little as possible to help resolve the situation in Darfur. Now maybe the dislike of military intervention is understandable given the current overstretch resulting from Iraq. And there's always a spokesman who can be relied on to trot out the old mantra that "sanctions don't achieve anything", but given the treatment of Iraq, both those replies are disengenious.

Now the real reason for government inactivity is summed up in one word - oil. Sudan has it, but so do more influential states in the Gulf, states that we don't want to upset too much by helping Sudan to stabilise. And at the same time several British firms are profiting from the developing oil industry in Sudan, and upsetting the Sudanese government would do their profits (both current and future) no good whatsoever. And China is involved in Sudan as well, so we don't want to queer the pitch for them either, especially given the market potential that China represents.

It is up to us to make our government act in a positive manner. So send that fax, write that letter, but above all else, do something.

--------

Posted by Clive at 6:51 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Tony, Rupert and the EU

Looks like Tony's upset Rupert again, this time by giving in to French demands for a European Public Prosecutor. What is more interesting is the sheer level of disinterest in the story displayed by other news outlets including the Daily Mail, Guardian, Independant, Telegraph and even the Times. While all the time the Sun is spluttering and foaming at the mouth. The question to which I'd like an answer is whether or not the Sun's editorial constitutes unfair political advertising, coming as it does a mere 8 days before the EU elections? Given the circulation figures of the Sun, could it not be seen as support for the UKIP? --------

Posted by Clive at 3:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Fuel

The Tories seem to be on a bit of an opportunistic roll at the moment. As the threat of fuel hitting £4 a gallon or more and a return to the protests of 4 years ago, up steps Michael Howard to support the oppressed road-users.

I can understand that people might be very angry indeed if the government were to proceed with an increase in fuel duty at this time - it would cause great hardship to many people. I would entirely understand if they wanted to protest peacefully and within the law.

Well good on you Michael. After all, you were a member of the government that introduced the Fuel Price Escalator back in 1993. And it didn't take long for the escalator to rise from 3 percent above inflation (Mar 1993) to 5 percent (Nov 1993).

And a quick glance at the history of fuel taxation makes for interesting reading, and shows that real fuel tax bandits are in fact the Conservatives and Liberals. So can a leopard change its spots or is Michael Howard simply jumping on another popularist bandwagon.

--------

Posted by Clive at 10:48 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Credit where credit's due

Ingrid over at Me and Ophelia has taken me to task (in the nicest way) for not giving praise when it is due. In the interests of redressing the balance, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the staff at the A&E Department of Barnsley General Hospital for the quality of care I recieved this morning. Especially in light of how I sustained my injury. --------

Posted by Clive at 9:59 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 1, 2004

That's another fine mess...

... you've got me into David. Once again, the man at the Home Office can be proud of another bodged job. Today the Prison and Probation Services are merged into the National Offender Management Service. According to the Government this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to revolutionise the way we treat offenders. Which explains why the merger occured when most civil servants are enjoying a day off. And what is this obsession with revolution and rebranding, other than as a way of making public institutions more appealing to the private sector. After all, we already have private security companies ferrying prisoners and privately run prisons, not to mention PFI involvement, so privatisation of the rehabilitation aspects of the criminal justice system can't be too far off. --------

Posted by Clive at 3:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

This is not democratic

The postal voting farce continues, as the Government attempts to blame everyone but itself for the delays and cockups. The original deadline for all ballot papers to be dispatched was to be tonight, but that deadline has been waived as a result of nearly half a million ballot papers having not yet been sent. Thousands of ballot papers have had to be reprinted due to significant errors and the wrong ballot papers have been sent out in other areas. And all this was avoidable, had John Prescott simply listened to the Electoral Commission.

But instead the Government pressed on, determined to boost turnout or so it claimed, though the real motivation is to boost the Labour vote. And while Labour is taking a backward step with postal voting, spare a glance for India who has successfully taken an electoral leap into the 21st Century.

Still, the real winners will be in the legal profession as challenge after challenge is brought in response to this fiasco.

--------

Posted by Clive at 12:01 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Leadership? Change. Now.

A quick update. The online petition code is working and will be put live this afternoon. The printer is getting back to me by the end of today with prices for T-shirts. They will have the Leadership? Change. Now. logo on the back, and a choice of the Deaf to all Reason or Our Leader is a Follower on the front. Still working the Blair Dirt list and the "A good father would resign". Must be careful with the latter, on second rewrite already. Update later.

Update - 21:20 - Petition now up and running.

--------

Posted by Clive at 11:08 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack