« July 2004 | Main | September 2004 »
August 31, 2004
Tories in Turmoil
It's the final week, and your choice is between David Blunkett and Tony Blair. Poor old Saddam missed out by only one vote which just goes to show what people think of Blair, Blunkett and the Conservative Party. Vote away and the result will be announced next monday. --------Posted by Clive at 9:44 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 27, 2004
Tories in Turmoil
Another two evictions are due on Sunday, and I can tell you that while one candidate looks to be a dead cert for eviction, two others are neck-and-neck. So go ahead and vote for who you think should be the next leader of the Conservatives. --------Posted by Clive at 5:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Democracy
The Electoral Commission has completed its review of all-postal voting and concludes that it should no longer be used in British elections. The report doesn't rule out postal voting using a revision of the system recently piloted, but states that voters should retain the option of voting a polling stations.So the Electoral Commission has recognised and confirmed what many suspected, that the - in some cases marginal - gains in turnout were offset by the allegations of electoral fraud and abuse that diminshed public confidence in the system. It remains to be seen whether or not John Prescott and Charlie Falconer will heed the Commission's findings, as it it was their departments who were responsible for pushing the trials so aggressively in the first place.
--------
Posted by Clive at 12:37 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Impeach Blair
With www.impeachblair.org now up and running, I've written the following letter to my MP:Dear Mr xxxxxxxx
I recently wrote to you regarding Tony Blair and whether or not he had become an electoral liability. In your reply you stated that you believed politics to be about more than personalities, but at the same time expressed a feeling that Labour had not been bold enough with its policies.
With the publication yesterday of the report commissioned by Adam Price MP it would seem that the conduct and actions of Tony Blair over Iraq continue to dominate the political agenda. I understand that you were opposed to military action in Iraq, and hope that you will give the report due consideration. There appear to be so many examples in the report where the Prime Minister made statements which, by omission of key facts, by over-emphasis on dubious intelligence materials and by simple manipulation of language gave a misleading impression of the intelligence underlying a need for military action. To let such behaviour go unchallenged by Parliament would be a travesty, and would only exacerbate the distrust of our political institutions which the electorate now have.
It is likely that many in the Labour Party will be concerned that the impeachment of the Prime Minister could be damaging for both the party and any MP who supported the move. I believe that the only way for politics to move forward in this country is for the bonds of trust and accountability between politicians and the electorate to be restored. However given the lack of public confidence in the reports of both the Hutton and Butler inquiries, given the scale of public protests against the war and taking in to account the inability of the government to put Iraq behind it, then impeachment seems to me the only way to resolve the matter.
I would therefore ask you to give your support to the Impeach Blair campaign. Let Tony Blair stand trial before parliament, before the elected representatives of this country. Then, regardless of the verdict, this country will be able once again to place its trust in the Government, Parliament and the Labour Party.
Yours Sincerely
The UK Today
--------
Posted by Clive at 10:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 26, 2004
Impeach Blair
The report is now available from www.impeachblair.org. There are also links to enable you to register your support, receive progress updates and to contact your MP to encourage them to support the motion. I would urge anyone with a desire to see Blair removed to go to the site and register their support. And contact your MP. I sense a growing momentum in the national desire to be rid of Tony Blair, now is the time to keep the pressure on.Do. It. Now.
Thank. You.
--------
Posted by Clive at 2:40 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The Sun
While most people are focussing on the details of the case against Mark Thatcher, and the convoluted links between different individuals, government ministers and business, only in the Sun could you find this angle on the case:Mark at mercy of cannibal - ACCUSED Sir Mark Thatcher could face 20 years' jail - but may be handed over to a cannibal dictator said to eat his opponents' TESTICLES.
That's more like it. Who gives a stuff about the rights or wrongs of the case, Mark Thatcher having his balls eaten is what really matters.
--------
Posted by Clive at 2:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Sport
Now the UK Today doesn't usually do sport, not because I'm not interested, but rather because I'm not interested enough. Besides which, there are plenty of other sites which do sport a lot better.Anyway, enough of the excuses, here's a bit of sport for you to contemplate:
Labour Party Manifesto - 1997
Sport
A Labour government will take the lead in extending opportunities for participation in sports; and in identifying sporting excellence and supporting it.
School sports must be the foundation. We will bring the government's policy of forcing schools to sell off playing fields to an end. We will provide full backing to the bid to host the 2006 football World Cup in England. A Labour government will also work to bring the Olympics and other major international sporting events to Britain.
In 1998 the Labour Government acted on this promise by introducing the School Standards and Framework Act, section 77 of which empowered the Secretary of State to protect school playing fields. In the last 6 years, of 213 applications made to sell school playing fields only 6 have been rejected.
Tony Blair, 20th June 1999
Let's make this clear. We want to back competitive sports in schools and between schools.
Tony Blair, 28th September 1999
Today we set out more plans to boost arts, culture and competitive sports in schools.
Tessa Jowell, 17th March 2002
I want school sports coordinators to spend the next 12 months bringing competitive sports back to schools.
Charles Clarke, 23rd May 2004
We need to do more to get sport back into schools.
Then earlier this week we were treated to the latest pronouncement from this government on sport in schools, with Blair backing plans to spend £459m per year on sports training including extra-curricular sports (which used to have a different meaning when I was at school and usually involved girls, cigarettes and bike sheds).
Now not only does this latest announcement carry the smell of hypocracy - it was many of the left-wing LEAs which started the decline in competitive school sports in the first place, but there seems to be an air of jumping on the Olympic bandwagon. We have another restatement of a failed manifesto promise from 7 years ago, dressed up as an entirely new policy and announced at a time when British athletes are doing well in the Olympics.
Hell, maybe I'm being cyncical, and maybe this announcement and Cherie Blair's appointment as an ambassador for London's 2012 Olympic bid are unrelated. You decide, but once again we have a classic example of New Labour being long on rhetoric, but short on delivery.
--------
Posted by Clive at 2:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The Big Intervention
Nice to see Plaid Cymru MP Adam Price wants to impeach Tony Blair for misleading the public over Iraq. I think the fact that the last impeachment case was nearly two hundred years ago gives a good indication of Price's chances of suceeding, though Keith Vaz deserves a good slap for claiming that This matter has been put before the nation day after day over the last few years. All these reports have exonerated the government and it's time to move on.In fact there's a fair bit of traffic on this one:
Blair impeachment campaign starts - BBC A campaign to use age-old powers to impeach Tony Blair for misleading the public over the Iraq war is being launched by a group of MPs on Thursday.
MPs plan to impeach Blair over Iraq war record - The Guardian. MPs are planning to impeach Tony Blair for "high crimes and misdemeanours" in taking Britain to war against Iraq, reviving an ancient practice last used against Lord Palmerston more than 150 years ago.
MPs in bid to impeach Blair - Daily Mail. An all-party group of MPs is hoping to use an ancient Parliamentary mechanism to bring the Prime Minister to trial in Westminster Hall.
MP tries to impeach Blair on WMD - Telegraph. A Welsh nationalist MP has drawn up a report detailing the Prime Minister's alleged "high crimes and misdemeanours" which will form the basis of the indictment.
Short of putting a bullet through Blair's head or blowing the bugger up (and I'm not advocating either course), the best chance for ridding ourselves of this turbulent Prime Minister is through the Labour Party, groups such as Save The Labour Party and The Big Intervention. However, if you truly care about this country then it is incumbent upon you to support any campaign that has a chance of unseating Blair.
--------
Posted by Clive at 9:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 25, 2004
Ah!
Or should that be Baa!. I'm sure someone, somewhere, will find a use for this masterpiece of research. --------Posted by Clive at 1:02 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Iraq
Of the thirteen people arrested in terror raids, eight have been charged with conspiracy to murder and conspiracy to commit a public nuisance by using radioactive material, toxic gas, chemicals or explosives.Now it will be interesting to see how this case pans out, but had it not been for Bush and the US, things might have been so different. As Juan Cole muses, did the Bush Administration squander a highly placed double-agent within Al Qaeda, and adversely affect the British raid, simply to score points off the Kerry Campaign.
--------Posted by Clive at 12:10 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The Big Intervention
Unrepentant Blair ready to face down party rebels - Independant As the Independant article shows, there is still a need to keep the pressure on the Labour Party to remove Tony Blair. This is a man so obsessed with having his own way that he does not see party unity as being of any great importance; a truly dangerous position to take. Blair also appears to be demonstrating his lack of realism by claiming that he has come through the fire and put Iraq behind him, yet will not promise that there will be no more Iraqs.Undoubtedly Blair will try and use fear of a resurgent Conservative Party as a club to beat his critics into submission and enforce unity, but that is a dangerous strategy given his performance in recent polls. If Labour truly desires a third term and a convincing election victory, then dumping Blair is the only realistic way forward now.
--------
Posted by Clive at 11:52 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Sudan
Well things are looking no clearer with regard to British involvement in the crisis in Darfur. On the positive side, it is a relief that Blair has dropped any idea of direct military intervention by British forces, an approach that left me filled with dread.But that's about it for positives. For starters, anyone listening to Jack Straw speaking in Darfur would be left with the abiding impression that British policy was now to take a softly, softly approach, giving Khartoum more time to act rather than keeping up the pressure on the GoS. Now the UN deadline runs out on Monday, and it will be interesting to see what Britain's stance is with regard to sanctions. My suspicion is that there will be some serious back-pedalling, considering statements such as:
My core message to the president was that the UK’s interests and the interests of the international community are the same as those of the president and government of Sudan
Hardly the strongest of language there. And according to British officials, a UN embargo on oil exports is unlikely to be called for by the UN Security Council. Which makes Jack Straw's denial that the international community was going soft on Sudan appear a little disingeneous. The African Union is trying to resolve the situation, but any weakening in the resolve of the international community will undermine their efforts, and the Union needs all the support it can get.
--------
Posted by Clive at 11:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 24, 2004
Wimps
If what Robin Cook says is true, then the Labour cabinet can consider themselves no better than the spineless wimps who kowtowed to Thatcher during her Downing St residency. It is surely the responsibility of cabinet members to stand up and speak out in cabinet for what they believe is right. Instead of which we are faced with a cabinet of shoe-gazing invertebrates who would rather take the easy option. And by their inaction, they not only handed authority to Tony's unelected kitchen cabinet, but did great damage to the democratic process in this country. If they believed Blair was wrong to go to war, then they should have spoken out or resigned, not meekly acquiesced to their leader's desire for war. As a result, they must accept as much responsibility for the war as Blair. --------Posted by Clive at 2:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 15, 2004
Tories in Turmoil
A colour photograph signifies a continued presence in the competition. A black and white phot shows a loser. The public have spoken and now Gordon Brown and Charlie Falconer have loser taped across their faces in glorious monochrome. Keep voting folks, the race isn't over yet. --------Posted by Clive at 9:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 13, 2004
Strathspey Today
Next week the UK Today will be coming, albeit intermitantly, from Strathspey in bonnie Scotland. Please keep voting for your choice of Tory leader at Tories in Turmoil, especially as it is becoming quite a race between 5 of the candidates. --------Posted by Clive at 4:08 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Prostitution
I'm not sure which part of this Independant article bothers me the most. On reflection though, we're all used to CheriePosted by Clive at 11:24 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Civil Liberties
Good post over at bloggerheads that ties in with the three posts I made yesterday and Wednesday:Terror
Arrested Development
It's Torture and It's Legal
I'm not trying to alarm you, but be aware that your freedoms will be diminished by this Home Secretary. Don't let it happen.
--------
Posted by Clive at 11:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 12, 2004
Send three and fourpence
If the War in Iraq weren't so bloody tragic, then the story of the retired army major, deaf in one ear, with no sense of smell, suffering from chronic back pain and - in his own words - who doesn't know one end of an SA80 assualt rifle from the other being asked if he is prepared to serve in Iraq would be funny.However, the reason may well be penny pinching at the MoD. As the article states:
He believes that, because he remains on the reserve list until his 55th birthday next May, the MoD might be trying to recruit a "Dad's Army" of reservists on the cheap.
"If they recruit people like me for six-month tours of duty they save money because that would be it for me after the tour," the father of three said at his home in Outwell, Norfolk.
"But if they recruit somebody in their early 20s they would have to pay them for however long their service was, find them a home and all the expense that goes with it."
--------
Posted by Clive at 3:13 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
It's Torture and it's Legal
For now, the definitive statement on the legitimacy of evidence obtained by torture, from Lord Justice Laws:I am quite unable to see that any principle prohibits the Secretary of State from relying on evidence coming into his hands which has or may have been obtained by torture by agencies of other states over which he has no powers of direction.
If he has neither procured the torture nor connived at it, he has not offended the constitutional principle which I have sought to outline.
I cannot believe that the law should sensibly impose on the Secretary of State a duty of solemn inquiry as to the interrogation methods used by agencies of other sovereign states
I wonder if David Blunket and the estimable Law Lords can spell complicity? Because taking this stance makes Britain complicit in acts of torture, regardless of where they are conducted. Furthermore, it gives the message to the world that not only does Britain condone the use of torture, but is prepared to act on the fruits of such acts regardless of the fact that evidence obtained by torture is highly likely to be completly unreliable.
Put more bluntly, this case has shown that for Blunkett, the end does justify the means. That such an attitide should exist at the heart of our system of law and order should be of grave concern to us all.
Update - additional commentary over at bloggerheads
--------
Posted by Clive at 2:51 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Arrested development
It would appear that David Blunkett has too much time on his hands. There can be no other explanation for the latest proposals to come out of theIn a move to reassure the public, the Home Office is describing the changes as a tidying-up exercise. Home Office minister Hazel Blears suggested that while the proposed changes would make every offence arrestable but what we are also saying is that you have to show that it was necessary in these circumstances. Well that's all right then. After all, as Blears points out, today a constable could come upon an offence and he might not be sure whether it is arrestable or not. In future that would be very clear. Well, clear enough as to whether or not the crime is an arrestable offence, but the constable still has to decide on the necessity. So all the exercise will achieve is to move the area of uncertainty, rather than actually bring any clarity.
In fact it will most likely make matters worse for the public. Once a crime is defined as arrestable, most police will tend to err on the side of making an arrest, rather than a caution, especially when taking in to account the easing of the rules regarding drug testing and personal and property searches. You can see it now, can't you. Police suspect a person of involvement in a crime, but have no evidence. No problem now, simply wait for them to drop a crisp packet on the floor then bang! Bring them in for questioning, administer a drugs test, strip search them and search their home. And if the police don't find anything, well the person must be a criminal, they were arrested for committing a crime, albeit a trivial one.
Taking things even further, the proposals also cover giving additional powers to community support officers, including the ability to search people for weapons. Which seems plain bonkers to me. If they suspect someone of being armed then they will need to call for backup from regular police as the community officers will not have the training or equipment to deal with suspected armed people. Unless the motivation is to provide an excuse for the community officers to stop and search whoever they like.
It is blatantly obvious that the current incumbents at the Home Office cannot even spell the words civil and liberty, let alone grasp their meaning. And it all makes Michael Howard look like a lily livered wimp, poor sod. Just after his get tough on crime speech as well. It is almost as if both the main parties are locked in some life-or-death struggle to outdo each other with the harshness of their law and order proposals, rather than come up with realistic a credible policies to address the concerns of the general public.
--------
Posted by Clive at 2:19 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 11, 2004
Blush
Well, what can I say other than thank you. Notoriety at last. --------Posted by Clive at 6:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Terror
Read this report and just remember, it could happen to you. Some of the men involved have spent 3 years in prison, without being charged of any crime, on the basis of evidence procured by the Americans at Guantanamo Bay.Given that these men have been held for so long without trial, you might think that the evidence linked them to planned terrorist atrocities. In fact none of the appellants was certified as being concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of international terrorism but rather they were certified as being members of, or belonging to, or supporting or assisting, an international terrorist group.
They do have the option of choosing to leave the country, as two have already done, but while Morroco or France may not be too bad, returning to countries such as Iraq or Afghanistan may not be a viable option.
What this does do highlight the dangers inherent in ill-considered legislation rushed through in the aftermath of the 11th September attacks on the US. Under the Anti–Terrorism Crime and Security Act, the Government must show only that it has reasonable grounds to suspect that foreign nationals have links to terror before issuing certificates to hold them.
Blunket is undoubtedly pleased that his legislation has been upheld:
I am pleased that my decision to certify these individuals as suspected international terrorists who pose a threat to our national security has been upheld by the Court of Appeal. The Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act was introduced in response to the public emergency we face, in order that government can fulfil its primary obligation - to protect national security. I have used its powers sparingly and proportionately in only the most serious circumstances, to prevent foreign nationals who we believe are international terrorists, but are unable to deport, from remaining at large in the UK.
See, once again the spectre of international terrorism is used to justify draconian laws which restrict civil liberties. Even a cross-party group of MPs and Peers have urged Blunkett to end the detention of foreign terror suspects without trial. At some point one can only hope that the government will realise that the price it is paying for T.W.A.T. is too high. And the sooner the better.
--------Posted by Clive at 4:13 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Hutton
So Lord Hutton's inquiry into who leaked details of his report to the Sun has failed to turn up a culprit. I can't say I'm too surprised, given a conversation I had with a person at the Department for Constitutional Affairs nearly 2 months ago. It is interesting to note that many of the quotes in the BBC article appear lifted from the transcript of the Select Committee meeting of 13th May 2004, which makes one wonder just what the investigation has been doing for the last 3 months. Which leaves us to draw the inevitable conclusion that the leak investigation was merely a face-saving exercise into who leaked a whitewash document; an unedifying waste of taxpayers money that has done nothing to advance the cause of truth. --------Posted by Clive at 4:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 10, 2004
The Big Intervention
Following on from the Renewal, editorial, yesterday saw Roy Hattersley speaking out in the Guardian. And his message was that John Prescott is the man to save the Labour Party, that Somehow - perhaps employing a subtlety that his critics do not believe him to possess - Prescott has to persuade the prime minister that the future of the Labour party is just as important as the greater glory of the leader who cuckoos in its nest. Threats may have to take the place of persuasion. But saving the party is John Prescott's obligation. It will also confirm his place in history as the best deputy leader Labour has ever had.Today it is reported in the Independant that Labour activists are circulating a resolution of no confidence in Tony Blair for the Party's autumn conference. According to the article Mark Seddon, editor of the left-wing Tribune magazine, said there were 59 Labour MPs who would support a resolution for a change of leader at the party conference - more than 20 short of the total required to trigger a full debate.
And this is where you come in. At The Big Intervention we asked you to raise a single question with your Labour MP, whether or not they considered Blair to be a liability. To date we have received 4 replies; 2 no comments, 1 no and 1 maybe. What we want you to do now is ask your Labour MP to give some consideration to the resolution currently being circulated amongst the constituencies. Attend their surgeries and raise the issue there, talk to local councillors, Party members, anyone in the local party who can get the message across to your local MP.
There is a window of opportunity here. If you can encourage your MP to support the resolution then we can at last have an open debate on the matter. But we need to act now. So tomorrow, pick up the phone and talk to your constituency office, write that letter to you MP, attend that surgery, above all act.
--------Posted by Clive at 5:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Sudan
All credit to the UK Government for their commitment to aiding the humanitarian effort in Darfur. The UK has already given over £36 million, and £6.2 million to the UN effort. This looks even more impressive when you consider the fact that France and Spain together have only donated £2.5 million and Japan has only just beaten Lichtenstein by donating less than £500,000. --------Posted by Clive at 5:19 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Crime and the Conservatives
Well, Michael Howard has spoken and now we should know where the Conservatives stand on law and order. Howard made some good points regarding respect, responsibility and decency:As a society we are in danger of being overrun by values which eat away at people's respect for themselves, each other, their homes and their neighbourhood.
Most damaging of all has been the dramatic decline in personal responsibility.
Many people now believe that they are no longer wholly responsible for their actions.
It's someone else's, or something else's fault - the environment, society, the Government.
He was also critical of the spread of political correctness and the over-reliance on the pet theories of sociologists. Which is all very laudable, but for many he is preaching to the converted. It is not enough to be able to point at something and say "that is the problem", what are needed are solutions. And this is where Howard's speech made for interesting reading:
How does it help parents instil discipline if they are told that they cannot smack their children?
Which would be all very well if smacking had been outlawed years ago, and the decline in social responsibility could be linked to the banning of smacking. But there is no link, and equating the smacking of a child with the instilling of discipline may appeal to Mail readers, but is no solution itself.
Next up on the list of solutions is absentee fathers:
Children, especially boys, benefit hugely from a male influence in their lives.
Of course this isn't always possible because a large number of men simply abandon their responsibilities as fathers.
But there are many fathers in Britain today who do want to play their part, yet cannot get access to their children.
Conservatives believe that there should be a strong legal presumption in favour of both parents having equal rights in the upbringing of their children.
This change to our family law will mean that fathers are much more likely to remain involved in their children's lives even when families split up.
Which is a great way of laying the boot into single mothers and divorcees. Now while I'm sure Fathers 4 Justice will be well chuffed with the above analysis, I would expect any self-respecting single mother to be mad as hell. It's not enough that the father of your children has walked out on you, now you have the leader of Her Majesty's Opposition telling you that you're doing a cr*p job bringing up your children. Not exactly a vote winner that one, and neither is it a solution.
And so to schools. They can't escape the Howard Finger of Blame either:
Discipline in school is also essential if children are to learn respect for authority at an early age.
I suspect that I am just one of millions of parents and grandparents bewildered and horrified by the breakdown in discipline in our schools.
Violence in the class room is rising - up nine-fold since 1997.
Yet all too often teachers cannot discipline pupils, let alone expel them from school.
And it is often teachers - not pupils - who find themselves on the wrong side of the law.
Only recently we had the nonsense of a teacher taken to the Crown Court to stand trial by jury because she had - in jest - put some tape over the mouth of a child.
Disruptive and violent pupils don't just ruin their own education - they ruin that of every other child in the class.
We will introduce enforceable home-school contracts that spell out both parents' and pupils' responsibilities.
Another great collection of soundbites, but nothing tangible. What on earth is an enforceable home-school contract? Is it one of those great ideas where the parent is sent to prison if their children is a persistent truancy offender? How the hell does he think that is going to help matters when he has just pointed out that absentee fathers are a problem. Now we're potentially adding absentee mothers to the equation.
Howard then has a go at the Police, or rather the target driven nature of policing today. Which is all very well, but he insists on throwing the baby out with the bath water.
The McPherson Report recommended that the police keep a record of every stop they make - and that anyone stopped by the police should be able to see a record of that paperwork.
Conservatives would not implement this recommendation.
And Conservatives will support the police when it comes to stop and search.
Increased stop and search is part of the solution to rising crime.
Effective policing depends on stop and search.
Well, that'll make the various ethnic communities really happy. More stop and search eh. There were good reasons behind the recommendations of the McPherson Report, but as far as Howard is concerned it would seem that the ends justifies the means. Next thing you know he'll be wanting to re-instate the SPG. Does no one remember Peach and Towers?
Not content with that, Howard raised the bogieman of terrorism.
In response to the 9/11 disaster David Blunkett rightly gave the police new stop and search powers to deal with terrorism.
At the time he described them as "reasonable and proportionate".
Not surprisingly the police used those new powers.
The inescapable conclusion is that the man's an unreformed fascist. The application of the Terrorism Act 2000 and subsequent anti-terror legislation has been farcical, given the low charge and conviction rates. Yet Howard approves of these powers, regardless of how ineffectual they actually are.
The speech continues in the same vein, more police, more prisons, more rehab places. A speech long on promises and rhetoric, but woefully short on actual policies. And no mention of how he would fund this massive expansion in the police, prisons, etc.
Yet at the end of the day, Michael Howard is content to blame everyone from the Labour Government to single mothers, but takes no responsibilty for the failings of previous governments, including the ones he served in. A lot of the ills of society can be laid at the door of Thatcherism, the belief that the individual is more important than the community.
This speech offered nothing tangible, no real vision of how to improve law and order, just a collection of soundbites that may appeal to traditional Tory voters
--------
Posted by Clive at 4:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Vaccination
After yesterdays example of mouth-foaming by Melanie Phillips in the Daily Mail, today the Sun steps into the 5-in-1 vaccination debate. According to Downing St, Tony Blair wants to reassure parents that the new jab is safe. Just for the sake of clarity, I'd like to remind you that this is the same Tony Blair who was so determined to reassure the public of the safety of the MMR jab, that he refused to confirm whether or not Leo received the vaccination. In The Sun Says it makes this point, whilst conveniently overlooking the fact that many people no longer believe a word Blair says anyway. --------Posted by Clive at 10:28 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 9, 2004
The Big Intervention
A damning idictment of Tony Blair can be found in the latest edition of Renewal, a quarterly Labour journal that has been a long-time supporter of modernisation and the New Labour project. Although Blair may feel pretty secure at the moment, the latest editorial is likely to cause at least a modicum of upset in Downing St, coming as it does from people who would once have been considered Blairs ideological allies.The editorial claims that:
The party hierarchy just does not realise what a large hole it resides in. The European results demonstrate the dealignment of political loyalties that has been accelerating under New Labour. The dominant feeling in the electorate is not so much that there are no differences between the parties. Rather it is that two terms of office with massive majorities has not made enough of a difference and that the parties don't behave any differently when in power. Worse, our democracy has been eroded, there is no new politics and trust in politicians is at an all time low.
However, the journal doesn't stop there. Instead it continues to attack Blair:
We did genuinely think that Blair would open up spaces to reshape and renew social democracy. We were wrong. Gradually that early promise of a new politics has receded and it is blatantly obvious that there is no point waiting for or wanting a better Blair.
And it points out that Blair's leadership has become less about changing Britain for the better, and instead simply an attempt to marginalise the Conservative Party. And while it recognises this achievement, the editorial highlights the price the party has paid in following this policy:
At every turn the strategy is to keep the Tories out of the ring. But the cost to social democrats is debilitating. Sure we have power, but are denied the means to do anything purposeful with it. This is the Blair Catch 22.
As everyone, with the exception of Blair, acknowledges, Labour's second term will be remembered for one thing only, the War In Iraq. The journal goes so far as to describe the War In Iraq as being Blair's Poll Tax, an assessment that may well prove accurate come the next election:
As it stands, none of the major rationales for the war stand up. There are no weapons of mass destruction, the country, the region and the world are not safer places, the lives of the Iraqi people are not safer and it remains an open question whether they are or will be much better. And the debris has inevitably fallen primarily on Blair, given that he took an unwilling and unenthusiastic party and people into the conflict. Tragically, Blair still appears to believe that if he can only explain it one more time, we will get it. But Tony, we get the message - we just don't accept it. Iraq is Blair's poll tax, a fundamental breach of trust, demonstration of arrogance and strategic blunder for which the party as a whole is paying the price.
Now the point to remember is that this editorial was written by people in the Labour Party who should be (and indeed were) most sympathetic to the New Labour project and to Tony Blair's modernisation program. That these fellow travellers should choose to not merely distance themselves from Blair, but to actually call for him to stand down should set warning bells ringing in No. 10.
Everyone remembers what happened to the Conservatives after the Poll Tax fiasco. Party membership began to decline, then more and more Conservative councillors lost their seats and eventually the public turned its back in disgust at the shambolic nature of the party as evidence by Black Wednesday and the ERM mess. At the moment Labour Party activitist can point to a healthy bank balance, but that is a result of increasingly large donations by a relatively small group of donors. At the same time Labour's party membership has declined to 215,000 the lowest level since records were first kept in 1928. And this fall has been from the heady heights of 1997 when membership stood at 409,000.
It would appear that the editorial board of Renewal share the concerns of many of us who believe in social policies. But now is not the time to desert the Labour Party, now is the time to reclaim it. If you've become a lapsed member of the party, or if you're undecided whether or not to join, just think on this. The Labour Party is still the only credible party for people who believe in social justice. Turning your back on the party will condemn this country to an eventual return to Tory policies, whether implement by a Conservative or a New Labour government. As the people behind Renewal have shown, the only place from which to effect change is from within the Labour Party. And only by joining, or rejoining, will we be able to reclaim the Party from the wealthy elite who desire only to purchase power by any means.
--------
Posted by Clive at 3:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
T.W.A.T.
Last week the police arrested 13 men under the Terrorism Act 2000, amid claims (in the Murdoch press) that they were part of an Al-Qaeda plot to attack Heathrow. Today two have been released without charge; two have been freed and then re-arrested, one for immigration irregularities and the other for forging ID documents; and the remaining nine are still being questioned after police were given an extension to continue questioning them until tomorrow. It will be interesting to see how many of the remaining nine are charged under the 2000 Act, and how many successful convictions result. Given the extremely low conviction rate to date, don't expect many additional convictions to result from last week's raids.Yesterday Blunkett continued to defend the government's silence on the matter of last weeks raids: Is that really the job of a senior cabinet minister in charge of counter-terrorism? To feed the media? To increase concern? To have something to say, whatever it is, in order to satisfy the insatiable desire to hear somebody say something? Of course not. This is arrant nonsense. Of course it is just possible that the real reason for Blunkett's silence is that he had nothing to say.
For an interesting analysis of last week's raids, check out this post at Bloggerheads
--------
Posted by Clive at 2:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Vaccination
Now I'm no medical expert so will not comment on whether or not the new 5-in-1 combined vaccination for babies is a good thing or not. I am, however, a supporter of vaccination programs and - unlike Tony Blair - can confirm that both my children have had the MMR jab with no side-effects.My concern is whether or not the Department of Health will be able to sell the new vaccination to the public at large. Vaccinations are at an all-time low, mainly as a consequence of all the bungled publicity regarding various studies that have shown the MMR jab to be totally safe/a minor risk/likely to seriously harm children/turn three year olds into brain succking zombies.
Vaccination is important. I have a neighbour who is living evidence of the dangers of measles, having contracted the disease some 50 years ago it developed into encephalitis leaving him with learning difficulties and prone to frequent fits. Now when the first concerns emerged regarding MMR, as parents stopped having their children vaccinated the risk was still low, a consequence of herd immunity. But levels of vaccination have fallen to the point where herd immunity no longer exists in some areas. As a result we run the risk of seeing a measles epidemic, with all the associated illness, long term disabilities and possible death that will result.
So it is of critical importance that the Department of Health gets this new vaccination right. And that means having all the evidence available for both the media and the public to peruse. If the evidence is inadequate, possibly as a consequence of insufficient testing or merely because the DoH hasn't got its act together, then the introduction should be delayed until the DoH is in a position to be able to reassure the public.
Get it right, and the DoH could restore the public's confidence in childhood vaccinations in general. Get it wrong and many children will face an uncertain future, and a possible return to the days of more widespread occurences of polio, diptheria, measles, etc, and all the suffering that entails.
--------
Posted by Clive at 2:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Tories In Turmoil
At the end of the first week you have spoken, and both Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt have been voted out. Between them they amassed a massive score of just 2 votes. So keep on voting to see who'll be kicked out at the end of this week.Additionally I'd like to thank everyone who has helped make The UK Today the number one result when searching for tories in turmoil at Google
--------
Posted by Clive at 10:17 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 6, 2004
TWAT
Once again, an excellent post over at bloggerheads regarding The War Against Terror (TWAT), the recent arrests and the supposed threat against Heathrow.Just remember, the fear they are spreading is not for your benefit, but for theirs. Somethin to bear in mind:
If the thought processes of an individual can be limited to the point of strict conformity to an outside source of thought, the said individual need no longer be considered as such. The enforcement of order becomes possible for anyone with enough power to control what is projected.
Can anyone say Murdoch?
--------
Posted by Clive at 2:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Mad Cow
As if having the government banging on about TWAT (The War Against Terror) wasn't enough to put the frighteners on us, now scientists are warning that more people may be at risk of vCJD than was previously thought.Well personally, as someone who happily munched his way through quantities of British beef in the 80's and 90's, I'm not loosing any sleep over the matter. The worst case estimate for the scale of the epidemic was that 3,800 people might die from vCJD. Which seems a significant number until you consider that a similar number of people were killed in the WTC on the 11th Sep 2001, and that 3,508 people were killed on British roads last year (along with 33707 gravely injuered).
So, if you're going to loose any sleep, let it be over the carnage on our roads, a risk many run every day, rather than the legacy of dodgy beef and Conservative policies, or the risk of being blown up by Al-Qaeda. What is important is that we understand how the BSE/vCJD situation came to arise and that we ensure it does not happen again.
--------
Posted by Clive at 2:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Postal Voting
I remember the outcry earlier this year when postal voting was introduced as the only means of voting at the local and European elections in some areas. Whilst the opposition parties and various independant bodies warned of the risk of increased electoral fraud, the government pressed on, claiming that the new postal votes were as safe as houses.Now the dust has settled, it would seem that the government is effectively admitting that the scheme was as secure as it first claimed. In a proposed change, Nick Raynsford has announced that voters may have to register for a PIN number as part of an individual voter registration system. Now it is good to see the government taking electoral fraud so seriously, but given all the concerns raised prior to the elections, and throwing in the postal problems with actually delivering the ballots, then one can only assume that the recent trails were motivated more by dogma and a desire to save face than good practice.
--------
Posted by Clive at 2:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Smile
Are we about to see the demise of the passport photo booth and a return to the days of using a professional photographer for passport photos? It would seem so, given the requirements of new passport scanners, introduced to aid The War Against Terror. The scanners seem pretty demanding in their requirements which leads me to wonder whether or not they'll actually prove effective. Things outlawed from passport photos include:
- smiling
- frowning
- any other non-neutral expression (whatever the hell that means)
- mouth open
- long fringe
- wearing of headgear
- wearing of sunglasses
- no shadows in photo
- look straight ahead only
- glasses must be worn at the end of the nose, and must not produce reflections
- image must not be under-exposed
Now if the scanners are so crap that they can't function unless the photo meets such extreme criteria, then why the hell are we bothering with them. Especially given that humans seem emminently capable of doing the job with a greater degree of flexibility already.
And how are those of us who regularly change the amount of facial hair we display supposed to manage. Should I have 3 passports, clean-shaven, moderate stubble and full on beard?
Another classic, ill-considered policy from the people who have already given us the flawed biometric ID card proposals, namely the Department of Unworkable Ideas, aka the Home Office. A little bit of advice for Blunkett; file this one under R.
--------
Posted by Clive at 2:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Tories in Turmoil
The first two evictions will take place Sunday night, so get voting for the person you'd most like to see running the Conservative Party. On Sunday we'll find out just which of our candidates are so nondescript, so totally lacking in charm and appeal that you wouldn't even want to see them running the Conservatives. Go on, vote, you know it makes sense. --------Posted by Clive at 9:19 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 5, 2004
Blogging for MPs
In an effort to demonstrate to my local Labour MP and his constituency workers the power of blogging, I have created a blog on his behalf. The blog for Michael Clapham MP can be found at http://michael-clapham.blogspot.com.This site will not be satirical in nature, but will attempt to emulate the sort of blog I'm sure Michael will run once he understands the power of blogging.
Update - 17:05 - All 3 Barnsley MPs now have blogs set up for them. Given the nature of politics in Barnsley, running all 3 blogs is manageable - at least for the short term. Hopefully once the summer recess is over I will have been able to convince the 3 MPs and their constituency workers of the value to them of blogging. The new blogs are:
http://michael-clapham.blogspot.com
http://eric-illsley.blogspot.com
http://jeff-ennis.blogspot.com
--------
Posted by Clive at 12:29 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Terror
I urge you to read the post today at bloggerheads regarding the War on Terror. Manic effectively and efficiently hits the nail on the head, and reinforces the fact that there undoubtedly are a multiplicity of hidden agendas running in the UK, the US and Pakistan. And none of them have anything to do with improving your safety. This is about international back scratching and the prime motivator for every leader involved is How can I use this to my advantage rather than How can I use this to better ensure the safety of my people. --------Posted by Clive at 10:30 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 4, 2004
Tories in Turmoil
Over on the official Labour Party website, they are holding a Big Brother style competition to see who the leader of the Conservative Party should be - unfortunately, they appear to have over-looked one key point...Certain key New Labour figures are more Conservative than many Tories, so rather than choosing a new Tory leader from the ranks of the Conservative Party it seems wholly appropriate to select a figure from New Labour.
Therefore, in the spirit of cross-party cooperation, the UK Today is running its own Tories in Turmoil competition, but offering a far more appropriate selection of candidates.
And a big thank you to manic at bloggerheads for the Scumometer, candidate photos, how to get away with tasteless humour and other misdemeanors.
--------
Posted by Clive at 5:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Sudan - Clarification
After reviewing both Monday evening's post on Blair and the Sudan, along with the associated comments, some clarification is required.When I referred to diplomatic means, I was including the use of UN Peacekeepers in that category, as I firmly believe that any force mandated by global concensus avoids the stigma of being perceived as a purely military force.
Furthermore (and this was completely missing from the original post) I believe that this is a golden opportunity for the African nations to work to resolve a major crisis in Africa, with the support of the West.
The main point I was trying to make was that the UK and the US should not take the lead militarily in addressing the situation in Darfur. These were the nations who I refered to as the Crusaders of the 21st Century, nations sullied by their involvement in Iraq and who, by their presence, may well run the risk of harming any global effort in Darfur. In addition, I was trying to highlight how Blair turns these situations into some form of moral crusade, yet the aftermath of our involvement tends to be less than glorious.
If Blair really wants to make a difference in Darfur without harming any global effort, then I have two suggestions for him:
1 - Instead of sending 5,000 troops to the region, send 5,000 government sponsored aid workers along with humanitarian aid.
2 - Address the business links between the UK and Sudan that have effectively support the GoS throughout many years of civil war and internicine strife.
What matters in Darfur is that the humanitarian crisis be resolved as quickly as possible. And that is where I believe direct involvement of the British military in response to a moral rallying cry from Tony Blair will be counter-productive.
Hopefully this has clarified my position. If nothing else, blogging at the end of a busy day may not always be the best way to get a point across.
--------
Posted by Clive at 9:16 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Terror????
Last night 13 people were arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000. This brings total arrested under the act since 11-Sep-2001 to 562, yet only 98 have been charged with any resultant crime, and only 14 people have been convicted of crimes covered by the Act.The Parliamentary Human Rights group is due to publish a report tomorrow, which many believe will be critical of the Terrorism Act 2000, its application and the treatment of prisoners arrested under its terms. Which given the figures above, is understandable. In spite of the increased threat of terrorism since 11-Sep, barely 20% of arrests have led to any conviction whatsoever, and only 2% have led to a terror-related conviction. Hardly a ringing endorsement of either the legislation, or Blair's continual warnings that we're all at risk.
Maybe Scotland Yard were feeling left out of the action, after seeing the US jumping about on the basis of 4 year old intelligence. Or maybe there's some domestic bad news to come out, and Blair wants our attention distracted. Which may also be the US motivation, given that Lynddie England is currently before a military court. And it isn't as if HMG hasn't tried this tactic before; we all remember the tanks rolling in to Heathrow.
So once again I going to have to reserve judgement on last night's arrests. History has show too many times that little faith should be placed in these announcements, and reality usually rears its head within a week or so.
--------
Posted by Clive at 9:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 3, 2004
Go In, Stay In, Tune In
Congratulations to Thomas Scott, whose Preparing for Emergencies parody site is now top of the heap at Google. And a big raspberry to the Home Office who, it is hoped, might one day get this sort of thing right. --------Posted by Clive at 9:56 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 2, 2004
Sudan
In some quarters, Tony Blair's push for resolution to the crisis in Darfur is being portrayed as a second chance, an opportunity for Blair to restore his image after Iraq. Once again Tony will present himself as the shining knight of multilateralism, defending the weak, the poor and the oppressed.However, in some quarters the healthy voice of scepticism is being raised. We have, after all, been here before. Kosovo, Afghanistan, Sierra Leone, Iraq. All were portrayed as crusades of moral rightness, yet only the most deluded individual would consider them humanitarian successes. What Sudan needs now is a diplomatic and humantarian solution, not another miltary exercise for the Crusaders of the 21st Century.
(Thanks to Manic for the link to Newsweek)
--------
Posted by Clive at 8:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The Big Intervention
Finally received a response from my MP to the Big Intervention question. To be honest, it's a typical political response, managing to avoid answering the question directly. However, it may give an insight into a typical Labour MP's thoughts on the matter.Thank you for your letter regarding the Prime Minister and whether he is a liability.
To my mind politics is about policies not personalities. I do consider that Labour needs to be bolder. Perhaps bringing the railways back into public ownership and linking pensions to earnings would be a start. Policies like these would put clear blue water between the Labour Government and the Tory opposition. That said, Labour's investment in the public services has helped to improve the quality of life of the nation.
I hope this information is helpful to you.
So we can chalk that one up as a maybe/no comment then.
--------
Posted by Clive at 6:21 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Hey stupid
You've got to wonder at the stupidity of some criminals. Take this leader of an organised car theft gang for example.Using identity theft to generate finance agreements to purchase BMWs, Jaguars, etc was pretty smart. But parking the stolen cars outside their council estate, and keeping all the details on an iPod weren't.
--------
Posted by Clive at 11:36 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Mr Cockup
Bit of a cockup over at the Home Office, where a terrorism document is described by Muslim leaders as being deeply offensive about their religion. The focus of their anger is a cartoon which portrays all Muslims wearing beards and traditional headgear as terrorists. Blunkett had better be careful, or the Home Office may end up prosecuting some of its own staff under his proposed new laws on inciting religious hatred. --------Posted by Clive at 11:15 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Equality
The Institute for Public Policy Research today publishes a report that effectively audits social injustice in this country.Whilst it praises the government for successfully addressing poverty, it is critical of progress made with regard to inequalities. Over the last 10 years, the percentage of wealth held by the wealthiest 10% of the population has risen from 47% to 54%. Furthermore, democratic participation is falling, and political influence is polarising according to class and wealth.
For anyone truly concerned about social equality and the state of the nation, I would recommend downloading the current version of the report (the final version will be published in November).
--------
Posted by Clive at 10:58 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Red is Blue
Or alternatively, New Labour are the Conservatives which goes a long way to explaining why this may not be a good idea, and not just in the short term.Okay, so you're probably wondering what justification exists for equating New Labour with the Conservatives. After all, Labour is the party of the people, of the working man in the street and his union, whereas the Conservatives are the party of the elite, the wealthy and the establishment.
When Tony Blair became leader in 1994, membership stood at 265,000 and by the time Labour came to power in 1997 that figure had increased to 407,000. However, by the end of 2003 membership was down to under 215,000, the lowest since the party started keeping records in 1928. Yet last year, as the party's membership continued to drop, Labour managed to take in £9.1million, more than double the previous year. Which leads to the inescapable conclusion that Labour is willing to sacrifice its traditional support in exchange for sponsorship by a wealthy elite, effectively selling its soul.
Then look at the policies. Both the Tories and Labour appear locked in a struggle to out-do each other in the minutae of their policies which, at a macro level, are virtually indistinguishable in too many areas, from PFI to public sector job cuts. Even the soundbites are indistinguishable, with Blair recycling Thatcher's quoting of St Francis of Assissi, or Hazel Blears statement that a Labour third term could lead to the party governing for decades which is just the sort of statement Thatcher would have made. Even my local MP agrees, I do consider that Labour needs to be bolder. Perhaps bringing the railways back into public ownership and linking pensions to earnings would be a start. Policies like these would put clear blue water between the Labour Government and the Tory opposition. Well bravo! that man.
--------
Posted by Clive at 10:08 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I don't get it
Mark Palios, divorcee, chairman of the Football Association, has an affair with an unmarried secretary, resigns.Tony Blair, Prime Minister, leads the country to war, misrepresents flawed intelligence, resulting in deaths of Iraqi civilians and British soldiers, denies any responsibility, retains his position.
Can anyone explain this?
--------
Posted by Clive at 12:41 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack