Archive for December, 2010

Monday news review

06/12/2010, 07:55:34 AM

Count down to fees vote

Nick Clegg is facing the strongest challenge to his authority as Liberal Democrat leader since the formation of the coalition after he failed to broker an agreement on tuition fees with the party’s president in advance of a Commons vote on Thursday. As rebel Lib Dem backbenchers intensify their demands for the vote to be abandoned in favour of a wider review of university funding, the deputy prime minister was tonight bracing himself for a “train wreck” which could see his MPs splitting four ways. Amid fears in Downing Street that Clegg is suffering a disproportionate amount of damage, David Cameron sanctioned a “rescue Nick” operation over the weekend to shore up his deputy’s position, scheduling two announcements that would appeal to Lib Dem members. – The Guardian

Just four days to go before the big commons vote on fees and what could potentially be a career-ending decision for each of the 57 MPs who were elected for the Lib Dems last May. What would you do in their position – there are just three options: You vote for the tripling of the maximum fee and risk being accused of breaking your promises and alienating a significant part of your electorate who might take it out on you at the general election. You vote against the increase in fees and risk party unity as well as in four years time being unable to associate yourself as much with the success of the coalition’s policies, assuming that they are perceived to have worked. You abstain which also breaks the fees pledge that you signed, means you cannot share as much credit for the recovery if that indeed is what happens and you look like a wuss. To my mind abstention is the worst of all worlds with none of the pluses and all of the minuses. – Politicalbetting

UCU general secretary, Sally Hunt, said: “These proposals, if they go through, will change the entire landscape of education in this country and we must continue to oppose them. We need to expose the damage they will do to our universities, colleges and communities. MPs must be left in no doubt of the strength of opposition to these plans and the consequences of voting for them. We have been overwhelmed by support from people across the country against these plans and we hope they will all join us in making their voice heard this week.” NUS President Aaron Porter said: “The joint NUS and UCU march that brought together 50,0000 people on 10 November has provided the spur to a new wave of activism and lobbying, placing the Government’s policy on fees and student support policy under huge pressure. This week we must keep that pressure up as the vote approaches. MPs can be left in no doubt as to the widespread public opposition to these plans or of the consequences of steamrollering them through Parliament.” – Press Association (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

On FIFA, Cameron is our leader

05/12/2010, 10:02:09 AM

By Dan McCurry

Before the FIFA announcement I would have agreed with Ken Livingstone that it would be better to put off the Panorama broadcast until after the vote. There is corruption in the world and we do our bit to discourage it. But it is probably a bit too much to ask us to be martyrs for the cause. I am sure you agree.

But how do you feel since the vote? How do you feel since they taught us a good lesson? Do you feel chastised?

Having had your wrists slapped by FIFA, do you feel sufficiently regretful? Perhaps we should apologise to them? Admit that we were wrong to allow the BBC to behave in such an adversely critical manner to the good people of FIFA? Perhaps we should promise never to do it again? Do you think so?

I do not.

Do you want to know what I feel? I’ll tell you: how dare they? How dare they treat us with that sheer contempt?

Do they think we should go away with our tails between our legs, having learnt our lesson? Do they think we should be humbled? Harried? Humiliated?

I am with David Cameron on this. I am a Labour bloke, but political parties do not come into it on this occasion. As far as I am concerned, when I saw him humiliated, I felt humiliated. I felt my country humiliated. I felt every British citizen had been humiliated.

And that was the point. They wanted to punish us for the audacity of exposing their corruption. As if we were arrogant to believe that it was for us, the pompous British, to condemn theft: the stealing of money. Because that is what corruption is. Pure and simple.  And for that – that very same bunch of thieves should teach try and teach us a lesson?

Well I say this: I am with you, Cameron.

I am with you and so is the whole of the Labour party. Every MP, councillor and party member. We are with you on this all the way. You are the leader and we look towards you. So now that we have been publicly humiliated in front of the whole world, show us what you are going do about it.

Come on, prime minister. We are waiting and we want to know.

Dan McCurry blogs here.

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Sunday News Review

05/12/2010, 10:02:00 AM

Clegg: No regrets

Briefly hailed as more popular than Churchill, Nick Clegg may well now be the most hated man in Britain. Effigies burnt in the street, dog mess through his letterbox, bike rides abandoned over fears for his safety. “I never imagined it would be any different,” he insists. Liberal Democrat leader; Deputy Prime Minister; architect of a new politics; and Judas to millions of students. The one-time political outsider sits forward on a plush, cream Whitehall sofa in defiant mood; belligerent even. “Not a week goes by without a commentator saying ‘next week the coalition will fall apart’, and not a week or day goes by without us confounding those views.” There must surely be times, though, when he has had second thoughts, regrets. “No. None at all. I’m absolutely convinced that almost any other course of action would have been a disaster for the country.” – The Independent

Once upon a time, long, long ago – well, six months ago – Nick Clegg gave a pre-election interview to the Observer in which he forecast “Greek-style” unrest on the streets of Britain if the next government tried to drive through policies for which it did not have a proper mandate. I thought at the time that this was over-the-top attention-seeking by a Lib Dem leader who was then struggling to make an impression on the consciousness of the nation. For this was before the leaders’ TV debate which briefly transformed him into the messiah of a new politics. I am now happy to admit that I was wrong and he was right. The government is facing street demonstrations with a Greek streak during which the protesters roar that they have been betrayed. What Nick Clegg didn’t anticipate – where his crystal ball let him down – was that he would be the focus of the fury. – The Observer

Will they, won’t they?

As students gathered for another angry demonstration on the streets of Westminster, Nick Clegg suddenly had a change of heart. He telephoned Vince Cable in a panic. “We’ve got to abstain,” he told the Business Secretary. Mr Cable was shocked at the apparent wobble. He told the Deputy Prime Minister he must hold his nerve on the approaching vote on the Coalition’s proposal to charge students up to £9,000 a year for their university fees. But Mr Clegg was adamant that he could not vote for it, according to insiders. Clearly shaken by the strength of the protests, he insisted that the party should abstain on the proposals when they go before the Commons on Thursday, despite his personally having defended them robustly in public for weeks. Mr Cable had also defended the proposals vociferously, and not just to the general public. It was the Business Secretary who was charged with writing to every Lib Dem member just before the policy was unveiled, urging them to accept the plan. Having nailed his colours to the mast so forcefully, Mr Cable was determined not to be seen performing a u-turn. He made clear they should not back out now. – The Telegraph

Nick Clegg tried last night to buy off protesting students with a pledge that the poorest ones would escape tuition fees for up to two years. The Deputy PM revealed the U-turn as chaos reigned among Lib Dems MPs ahead of a crunch vote on tuition fees on Thursday. Under his plan, about one in 20 of the 400,000 who go to university each year would be exempt from tuition fees for one year. About 80,000 students – who were eligible for free school meals in their secondary schools – a year would fight for just 18,000 places on the National Scholarship Programme. The move is aimed at easing students’ fury over the planned hike in tuition fees after violent protests across the country. But Lib Dem bosses last night refused to say whether they would vote to lift the cap in England from £3,375 to £9,000 a year – even though Lib Dem Vince Cable is the architect of the idea. – The Mirror

(more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Exclusive: Phil Woolas’ email to his CLP

04/12/2010, 11:21:17 AM

Subject: Re: Message to CLP members

Dear Friend

The judgement today is devastating news for Labour in Oldham – despite winning the appeal for jurisdication, overturning the Saddleworth Election hearing ruling on the law and winning our costs, the judges in the High Court were not able to overturn the decision on the alleged staterment of facts. They did, today, make it very clear that our side strongly contested the election Court judges interpretation of our leaflets but said they could not  intervene.

I decided this afternoon that an appeal to the higher Court would not suceed as it, too, would only be able to look at the points of law and not examine the content of the leaflets.

We have to live with that and move on.

That means we have to win the By-election for Labour.

Whatever you think of the Court’s decision, the handling of it by the Party or my conduct, what is important is not my personal circumstance but the life chances of the people of Oldham. The Coalition are wreeking havoc and we have the opportunity to send a powerful message of opposition. PLEASE do all you can now to help Labour win again.

The campaign office is at 132 Grange Avenue, OL8 4EQ. It is open tomorrow and Sunday from 10am till 6pm. The Party staff are doing a great job but they can’t do it on their own. I am humbled by the fact that many supporters have refused to join the campaign until my case had been finished. But if you want to wipe the smile off the Liberals’ faces, please now join in.

In 1995 we changed British political history: let’s do it again.

Yours sincerely

Phil Woolas

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

The week Uncut

04/12/2010, 10:30:00 AM

In case you missed them, these were the best read pieces on Uncut in the last seven days:

We don’t see it, but our arrogance stops us from listening says Peter Watt

Dan Hodges interviews the “bionic Blairite” Hazel Blears

There’s no crisis and no division, just a duty to oppose says Michael Dugher

John McTernan makes the case for greybeards in the new generation

You don’t build the future by trashing the past argues Will Straw

Atul Hatwal says the Labour bandwagon needs to confront its lost estates

Blears and Cruddas join forces to fight IDS & Cameron & Uncut gets excited

Tom Watson is chasing down the enemy within: metal thieves

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Saturday News Review

04/12/2010, 09:02:06 AM

Vince will vote…

Business Secretary Vince Cable will vote for a rise in university tuition fees, he revealed today. The Twickenham MP suggested earlier this week he may abstain in a House of Commons vote next Thursday if his Liberal Democrat colleagues wanted him to. But in an exclusive interview with the Richmond and Twickenham Times today, he said he had reconsidered his decision and had “no doubt” he should support the contoversial policy that will allow some universities to charge up to £9,000 in fees. – The Richmond & Twickenham Times

Vince Cable declared that he faced a “duty” to vote in favour of the rise in university tuition fees next week, guaranteeing a split in Liberal Democrat ranks when grandees oppose the policy. In a move which surprised senior party figures, who had thought Cable was prepared to abstain in the interests of party unity, the business secretary insisted that the rise in fees was the right policy. “Obviously I have a duty as a minister to vote for my own policy – and that is what will happen,” Cable told his local newspaper, the Richmond and Twickenham Times. Cable, who has the right under the coalition agreement as a Lib Dem MP to abstain in next week’s vote, has indicated to fellow ministers that he is minded to vote in favour of the rise on the grounds that he is the responsible minister. He also believes he has introduced fairness to the system by raising the salary level at which the fees are paid back from £15,000 to £21,000. – The Guardian

The party promised in its manifesto to abolish tuition fees, and senior figures including their leader, Nick Clegg, signed a pledge to vote against any increase. The party was yesterday forced to call off its London conference which was due to take place this weekend after students threatened to protest outside. In interviews earlier this week, Mr Cable said his “personal instinct” was to back the fees package in the Commons. But he said he was “happy to go along with” a mass Lib Dem abstention if all the party’s MPs agreed to it. On Friday, he told the Richmond and Twickenham Times he made this offer as an “olive branch” for colleagues who were “finding this difficult”. Mr Cable added: “There is a dilemma.”I’m very clear I regard the policy as right and as a member of the Cabinet I am collectively responsible for the policy. “There is no doubt that is what I should do.” – The Telegraph

Chaytor pleads guilty

David Chaytor became the first former MP to be convicted over the expenses scandal after pleading guilty today to three charges of false accounting, days before he was due to stand trial. The former Labour MP for Bury North had previously denied fraudulently claiming parliamentary expenses. His eleventh-hour change of plea at London’s Old Bailey came as he exhausted legal avenues to stop his case, due to reach trial on Monday, being heard in the criminal courts. The 61-year-old stood in the glass-panelled dock of court 11 as the three charges were read aloud, answering “guilty” to each of them. Afterwards, he was mobbed by photographers as he left court in a black taxi with his legal team, making no comment. – The Guardian (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

You don’t build the future by trashing the past

03/12/2010, 02:30:54 PM

by Will Straw

With Labour still recovering from its second worst defeat in 90 years, now is the time for a thorough reassessment of what the left stands for. The policy review and reforms to party structures that Ed Miliband has announced should be welcomed. Before ink is spilled on the “blank sheet of paper”, time should be taken to debate and consider a range of different perspectives on the future direction of the left.

The five-point plan set out in Neal Lawson and John Harris’ essay in this week’s New Statesman should therefore be welcomed. But by trashing new Labour’s record with little consideration of the many achievements that 13 years in power delivered, Lawson and Harris risk alienating a group of reformers who could, in other circumstances, find common cause with their mission. The Labour party could easily unite around a programme dedicated to defeating inequality, building a new model of capitalism, localising public services, tackling climate change, and creating a more pluralistic politics – as Lawson and Harris suggest. But their approach is not the way to get there.

In their essay, Lawson and Harris write:

“New Labour stayed in office for 13 years because the world economy was so strong and the Tories were so weak. But even in such benign circumstances, the poor got poorer and the planet burned … The only plan they had was to stoke a finance-driven, lightly regulated economy, and then surreptitiously take the tax skim to fund social programmes”.

What a simplistic view of Labour’s time in office. Few saw the financial crash coming; even fewer set out the remedies in advance of the Lehman’s collapse. Adverse criticism of new Labour around 2003 was primarily concerned with the war in Iraq and the marketisation of public services; not the reregulation of the City. Basel I and II passed without a murmur. Where was the compass paper in 2005 calling for a ban on short selling or a British uptick rule prior to 2007? Twenty-twenty hindsight is a fine thing but those who call now for a new form of capitalism should be more realistic about the collective hubris of the boom years. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

The government must make sure they prioritise children

03/12/2010, 01:15:49 PM

by Kate Green

UNICEF’s Report Card 9 shows that, in comparison to other developed countries, it is material inequality that let’s UK children down.

UK levels of income poverty push the most disadvantaged children further behind compared to similar countries, such as France and Germany.  That’s deeply unfair to children growing up in this country, it’s a waste of children’s potential, and it damages all of us. Inequality between children affects everyone: through costs to business, the police, courts and health and education services.

UNICEF is calling for ambitious action by the government on income poverty in the forthcoming child poverty strategy, and to ensure that children living in poverty do not pay the price for reducing the deficit. But cuts to family incomes and to the public services that families rely on threaten to damage children’s wellbeing and outcomes.

Ministers say their spending plans won’t increase child poverty over the spending review period, but that’s hardly an ambitious statement from a government that’s supposed to be signed up to the target in the Child Poverty Act to reduce child poverty to 10% by 2020.

We can’t afford for progress to stall now: despite Labour’s investment in tax credits, child benefit and helping more parents into employment, we’re already behind target. Cuts to housing benefit, to child benefit, and to help with childcare costs will put families under more strain. Ministers need to show much greater determination and ambition to put families and children first. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

The Battle for Barking: good television – bad politics

03/12/2010, 12:00:19 PM

by Dan Hodges

The Battle for Barking, broadcast on More4 earlier this week, made for compelling viewing. Award-winning documentary maker, Laura Fairrie, spent a year “embedded” with the Margaret Hodge and BNP campaigns as they fought house by house, street by street, for control of the constituency and the council.

I was in Barking for part of that campaign as well. My job was to manage the press on behalf of Hope not Hate. I spent some of that time dealing with Laura Fairrie.

She’s a talented documentary maker. And a brave one. At best, the BNP are instinctively suspicious and hostile towards the media. At their worst, they turn violent.

Laura Fairrie didn’t infiltrate them as such. She wasn’t filming under cover. What she did was much harder. She got them to accept her. Then trust her. By then end, they had come to like her. There’s a telling moment at Griffin’s campaign launch when the BNP’s Bob Bailey asks for questions, and says, “Let’s start with Laura”. It’s said with undisguised affection. “They’ve had such terrible experiences with the media and film makers”, Laura told the Guardian. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Letwin checking up on Lansley: John Healey’s letter to David Cameron

03/12/2010, 10:56:41 AM

Rt Hon David Cameron MP

Prime Minister

10 Downing Street

London

SW1A 2AA

01 December 2010

I welcome the review of the Health Secretary’s plans for the NHS that you have asked Oliver Letwin to undertake, confirmed by No10 and the Treasury to the Financial Times and reported today.

This is the right time for the review, before the Government gets any deeper into the high-cost, high-risk internal reorganisation that Andrew Lansley set out in his White Paper in July.

My concern is for the future of the NHS, and this is entrusted to you and your Health Secretary for now.

This is set to be a period of severe financial squeeze for the NHS. Despite your promise to protect the NHS and to protect NHS funding, the health service is already showing signs of strain. This time next year, when the NHS will be operating on funding from the first year of your Spending Review, rather than the last year of ours, these strains will be much clearer to patients and the public.

This is a period during which the efforts of all in the NHS should be dedicated to making sound efficiencies and improving patient care. It is therefore exactly the wrong time to be forcing the NHS through what the King’s Fund Chief Executive describes as “the biggest organisational upheaval in the health service, probably, since its inception”. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon