December « 2010 « Labour Uncut

Archive for December, 2010

The week Uncut

18/12/2010, 10:30:18 AM

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

Tom Watson offers a Christmas toast to the leader

Michael Dugher says replacing nanny with nudge is no joke

Dan Hodges interviews the shadow defence secretary, Jim Murphy

Stella Creasy says together we can make the government act on legal loan sharking

Peter Watt says that we don’t have the time to be rational

Kevin Meagher thinks Coronation Street is a Tory conspiracy

Tory local government leader lets slip contempt for the north

Posted in Home | No Comments »

Saturday News Review

18/12/2010, 09:12:04 AM

Government’s immigration policy “chaos”

A temporary cap on the number of skilled workers from outside the EU allowed into the UK was introduced “unlawfully”, the High Court has ruled. Home Secretary Theresa May introduced the cap this summer as an interim measure ahead of a permanent cap. But a legal challenge to it was upheld with judges ruling that ministers had “sidestepped” Parliamentary scrutiny. The Home Office said this did not imperil its flagship immigration policy but Labour said it was in “chaos”. The BBC’s Home Affairs Correspondent Danny Shaw said the ruling was an embarrassment and a setback for the coalition but was not a fatal blow to its plan for a permanent cap on non-EU migration. – BBC

Critics say the ruling is important for British business as the current cap is damaging industry in the UK. The changes were deliberately intended to give the minister flexibility and the ability to change the numbers allowed in to work, without having to go before Parliament for scrutiny. Lord Justice Sullivan said: “The Secretary of State made no secret of her intentions. There can be no doubt that she was attempting to sidestep provisions for Parliamentary scrutiny set up under provisions of the 1971 Immigration Act, and her attempt was for that reason unlawful.” The changes introduced were substantive and should have been laid before Parliament, he said. – Press Association

Actress files dossier on hacking

The past week has seen several more twists in the Andy Coulson saga. Far from resolving the allegations surrounding the UK prime minister’s principal media adviser, they have only served to muddy the waters further… There remains a need for a deeper inquiry. An independent review of the police investigations would be a start. The Miller claim also raises questions about News International. Its executives have told a parliamentary committee that only one journalist was involved in the hacking. Ms Miller’s dossier casts doubt on this. Mr Coulson’s position is not untenable. It may be true that, as he claims, he was unaware of what his staff were up to. He made that claim again this week – under oath as a witness in the perjury trial of a former Scottish politician. But while the drip of claim and counter-claim continues, this affair cannot be put to rest. And without a resolution, it will continue to undermine Mr Coulson’s credibility and, by extension, that of the prime minister. – The FT

The document suggests that the hacking of the two actors was part of a wider scheme, hatched early in 2005, when Mulcaire agreed to use ”electronic intelligence and eavesdropping” to supply the paper with daily transcripts of the messages of a list of named targets from the worlds of politics, royalty and entertainment. The evidence explicitly contradicts the account of the News of the World and its former editor Andy Coulson, who is now chief media adviser to Prime Minister David Cameron. They claimed that Goodman was the only journalist involved in phone hacking. He and Mulcaire were jailed in 2007. The disclosure is embarrassing for Scotland Yard, which has held a large cache of evidence for more than four years but failed to investigate it. – Sydney Morning Herald

Cameron discourages Tories in Oldham East

The best tactic for beating Labour might seem to be for the Tories quietly to encourage their supporters to fall in behind Mr Watkins. However, his share of the vote fell in 2010. The reason the contest was so close was that a chunk of the Labour vote defected to the Tory, Kashif Ali. With the Lib Dems in trouble nationally, many of the Tories argue that Mr Ali is the more credible challenger. So they will not have been pleased to hear what David Cameron had to say yesterday: “The context of the by-election is that the MP elected at the election has been found in court to have told complete untruths about his opponent… In that context, we wish our partners well. They had an extremely tough time. All the unfairnesses and untruths about their candidate [Mr Watkins] – he’s now been exonerated. So of course I wish them well.” He did not sound like a leader intent on victory. – The Independent

The prime minister yesterday appeared to slacken Conservative resolve in the forthcoming Oldham East and Saddleworth byelection, doling out generous words for the Lib Dems’ election effort. Liberal Democrats have been canvassing hard in the constituency for the seven months since the general election victory there by Labour‘sPhil Woolas, which they immediately set about contesting. Nick Clegg’s party missed out on the seat by just 104 votes in May, but the result was declared void last month by an election court that found that Woolas had made false statements about his Lib Dem rival Elwyn Watkins. This week, the Liberal Democrats defied convention to call the date of the byelection, when it is usually the incumbent party who move the writ. – The Guardian

What a principled bunch

Nick Clegg’s position should be understood and forgiven. He is instinctively a conservative, and he should not be blamed for following his heart and head. It is the so-called progressives who have betrayed what they once insisted were their principles. A half-hearted revolt over student fees is not enough to salvage their reputation. Nor is Simon Hughes’s occasional grand-standing about coalition policies that he never actually opposes. No Lib Dem who was offered a place in the government declined to serve. No groups have been formed within the party to oppose the coalition in principle. Danny Alexander is the boy who stands on George Osborne’s burning deck and Vince Cable is the self-appointed captain of David Cameron’s praetorian guard. – The Guardian

Posted in Unbound | No Comments »

Music. Celtic. Rome. Dan Hodges interviews Jim Murphy

17/12/2010, 12:00:44 PM

by Dan Hodges???

To the untrained eye, Jim Murphy’s office shuns convention. A guitar propped casually in the corner. Football memorabilia on prominent display. A large framed photograph of America’s first Roman catholic president, Jack Kennedy.

Uncut knows better. Music. Celtic. Rome. The holy trinity of the Scottish left.

At a time of upheaval in the party and the country, Labour’s shadow defence secretary is radically conformist. While Ed Miliband was meeting the teenage leaders of the EMA protest, Jim Murphy was rubbing shoulders with some of the stiffest collars in Westminster. (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 3 Comments »

Coronation Street is a Tory conspiracy

17/12/2010, 07:00:20 AM

by Kevin Meagher

The cobbled streets of Weatherfield have never been fertile ground for Labour.

In fact, the residents of those pre-WW1 terraces do not seem to have any political opinions at all. Neither do they gossip about the weather, football, or indeed, television. But that’s Coronation Street for you. A tale of everyday folk that’s nothing like the tale of everyday folk.

As it chalks up its half century, the truth is that Corrie has always been slyly political. Rather than a paean to Labourism, however, it is a bastion of petit bourgeois Tory values.

The small businessman does no wrong. The humble worker is always the pig-headed architect of his or her own woes. The poor are usually loveable buffoons. Simpletons like Tyrone. Bone-idle shirkers like Jack Duckworth. Harridans like his wife Vera. Feckless dole dossers like Les Battersby. (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 15 Comments »

Friday News Review

17/12/2010, 06:59:42 AM

Government tax and benefits cuts dragging people in to poverty

Hundreds of thousands of people will be dragged into poverty by the Government’s tax and benefit reforms, according to research. The respected Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) forecasts an overall rise in poverty among both children and working-age adults over the next three years. Its findings contradict Chancellor George Osborne’s claims that the spending review will not increase child poverty over the next two years. His claims were “totally unacceptable” and “disastrous”, according to campaign groups, who demanded a re-think of the coalition’s cuts programme. – Evening Standard

New forecasts from the Institute for Fiscal Studies show that the government’s claim that child poverty will not increase over the next two years as a result of changes announced in the Spending Review is broadly accurate. However, poverty among both children and working-age adults is likely to increase significantly from 2013/14. The IFS has projected the number of children and working age people that fall below both the absolute poverty line (measured at 60% of real terms median income for 2010/11) and relative poverty line (measured as 60% of the median income of that year). They give forecasts up to 2012/13 and up to 2013/14. – Left Foot Forward

Between 2010–11 and 2013–14 average incomes are forecast to stagnate and both absolute and relative poverty among children and working-age adults are expected to rise, according to projections published today by the Institute for Fiscal Studies. The IFS researchers forecast absolute and relative income poverty amongst children and working-age adults for each year to 2013–14, using a static tax and benefit micro-simulation model combined with official macroeconomic and demographic forecasts, taking into account current government policy. They also forecast poverty under a scenario where the coalition Government simply implemented the plans for the tax and benefit system it inherited from the previous administration. – Liberal Conspiracy (more…)

Posted in Unbound | No Comments »

Wheeler briefing: the government’s plans for social housing

16/12/2010, 03:00:09 PM

by Peter Wheeler

The government is consulting on proposed changes to the provision of social housing. These proposals can be downloaded from the department for communities and local government at www.communities.gov.uk and responses need to be returned by January 17 to housing reform@communities.gsi.gov.uk

Many of the proposals are permissive, allowing councils and housing associations to make changes rather than compelling them.

MAIN PROPOSALS

Security of Tenure

Existing tenancies would remain as now, although the government is asking if tenants who move should be given one of the new fixed term tenancies. Councils and housing associations will be able to give fixed term tenancies, with a minimum period of two years. These tenancies will be at social rent levels.

Succession

Rights to succeed to a tenancy for new tenants will be standardised for council and housing association tenants. Spouse/partner will have an automatic right to succeed (as long as the spouse/partner wasn’t a successor). Children and anyone else will be up to the landlord.

Affordable Rents

The government plan to introduce a new “affordable Rent” for housing associations to offer to new tenants from April 2011. These will be short term tenancies at a rent higher than the current social rent level – up to 80% of local market rents.

Allocations

Councils will no longer have to have ”open” short-lists, but central government will decide priorities.

Mobility

There will be a nationwide home swap scheme to improve mobility.

Homelessness

Councils will be able to meet their duty to the homeless with an offer of suitable private rental accommodation.

Council Housing Finance

Current arrangements will change to a self-financing arrangement with councils keeping all the rent money they raise and spend it locally on services.

IMPLICATIONS

1. That the changes are permissive means that the decisions ostensibly will be taken locally. Labour needs a clear, consistent policy to respond to these changes at a local government level.

2. The attack on security of tenure reflects the Tory view that social housing is “poverty housing”. Depending on the criteria adopted we could see tenants moved on at the end of two years if their circumstances improve.

3. This will act as a disincentive to people improving their conditions, make it harder to develop strong communities and risk creating ghettos of poverty.

4. Restrictions on succession raise the possibility of families being evicted on the death of a parent.

5. “Affordable Rents” could see major increases in rents for new tenants. Perversely, much of the increase will be met by housing benefit. Setting rents in this way means the level of housing association rents can be skewed by local areas of affluence. Salford Quays, for example, will artificially inflate the average rent level. It appears that this provision only applies to housing associations/Almos.

6. The changes to housing finance appear to allow cash-strapped councils to use rent revenue to subsidise other services.

Posted in Grassroots | 4 Comments »

Together we can make the government act over legal loan sharking

16/12/2010, 12:00:42 PM

by Stella Creasy

Campaigns thrive on names and numbers – the more of either, the greater the chance of interest and engagement. History may lionise the lone crusader, but it is only through convincing others to join in that causes actually succeed. If we are to win the arguments for progressive policies, Labour must be capable not only of speaking up for our ideals but building a critical mass of active champions for our actions in every community.

Yet in the competition for the airtime of advocates that now defines modern politics, slick single-issue groups often surpass complicated political messaging. We know many people share our progressive instincts – and that many also baulk at the confusion of institutions we have set up to express them. Even the hardiest Labour enthusiast struggles to set out with conviction the vital differences between the GC, EC, branch and LGC meetings. So to, when supporters make the effort to attend such forums we can let detail on policy close down rather than open up debate. Too often we start by proposing motions for others to be for or against rather than with open enquiry and deliberation to see if we can find mutual terms for collective action.

If we are confident in our passion for social justice, we should embrace and enjoy the process of seeking shared ambitions as well as recognising the value of compromise along the way. This principle is not just about being inclusive; it’s also about being effective. Common cause is the foundation block for asking people to help and ultimately common endeavour. That’s why in the fight to end legal loan sharking, as much effort has been made not just to have the right arguments about legislation, but also to reach out to any and all those who share our concerns. (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 1 Comment »

We haven’t got time to be rational

16/12/2010, 07:00:07 AM

by Peter Watt

A mistake that we make on the left is to behave as though people make rational decisions, when we know that on the whole they don’t. People tend to make emotional decisions. We go with what feels right; and then if it feels right we adapt our rational thinking to meet our emotional view of the world.

It is what we do when we are trying to make decisions in our personal lives. You may start with logic, but ultimately you just go with your gut. And it is as true in politics as in life. If we had won in May, we would have made cuts, reformed welfare and implemented the Browne review. OK, we might have done things slightly differently (I am sure that we wouldn’t have tripled tuition fees; but we’d have put them up), but we would have rationalised the things we didn’t like. We would have taken to the airwaves and Twitter in defence of the government’s decisions. We would be stressing the overall impact of the international banking crisis and the noble and progressive motives of the government.

And that is why a “two year blank piece of paper” is potentially disastrous for Ed Miliband’s leadership, and therefore the Labour party’s chances at the next election. Rationally, of course, it makes sense. We have just suffered the worse election defeat for nearly thirty years. A period of reflection; time being taken developing policies for an election not due to be fought until 2015; what is wrong with that? (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 3 Comments »

Thursday News Review

16/12/2010, 06:59:30 AM

Lib Dems fear support dropping by day so move writ for by-election

Well, it looks like we’re going to have a Jan 13th by-election in Oldham East and Saddleworth. Labour MP Chris Ruane’s question at PMQs wasn’t knocked down by David Cameron and Tory sources later all but confirmed the date. This is all highly unusual because normally it is upto the incumbent party to move the writ of a by-election. Labour sources say they were planning to do so in early January, with the election taking place in Feburary. They point out that it has only been a couple of weeks since the Woolas court judgement and didn’t want to impose a campaign on the voters over Christmas and New Year. If the Lib Dems do indeed break with the convention and try to move the writ themselves (it has always been open to any party to do so), it will further underline the gulf between them and Labour. – PoliticsHome

Normally it is up to the party who previously held the seat – in this case Labour – to call the election. But the Lib Dems will break with Parliamentary convention and call the election themselves. The party’s decision means that campaigning for the election will take place over the quiet Christmas period. It also means that over 1200 students studying at the Huddersfield University campus in Oldham will still be on holiday when by-election takes place. The Lib Dems only need 103 more votes than in May to take the seat from Labour who said yesterday they will not to contest the move. – The Independent

The headline in the Manchester Evening News says it all. The Lib Dems will be moving the old & Sad by-election writ today and a Tory prime minister accuses Labour of “running scared”. Clearly the decision to put convention to one side and for a non-incumbent party to be moving the writ suggests a high degree of co-operation between the coalition partners. For if Labour object the overwhelming advantage that the Tories plus the Lib Dems have in terms of MPs will come into play. Labour might have wanted a February encounter but they have no control. – PoliticalBetting

Liam Fox under fire from Foreign Office

Liam Fox, the defence secretary, is planning to defy the Foreign Office by making a personal visit to Sri Lanka this weekend to deliver a speech in honour of a former foreign minister. The Foreign Office is debating whether to appeal to Downing Street to prevent Fox from visiting Sri Lanka, whose government is facing allegations of war crimes during its final assault on the Tamil Tigers last year. The row erupted after Fox, who has personal links to Sri Lanka from his time as a Foreign Office minister in the 1990s and who has visited the country twice in the last 13 months, accepted an invitation to deliver the Lakshman Kadirgamar memorial lecture. The invitation was issued by the widow of the late foreign minister, who was murdered by a Tamil Tiger sniper in 2005. – The Guardian

Ainsworth calls for drugs policy shake up

Mr Ainsworth is the most senior politician so far to publicly call for all drugs, including heroin and cocaine, to be decriminalised. He said he realised while he was a minister in the Home Office in charge of drugs policy that the so-called war on drugs could not be won. Mr Ainsworth has called for a strict system of legal regulation under which different drugs would either be prescribed by doctors or sold under licence. The Labour backbencher said successive governments had been frightened to raise the issue because they feared a media backlash. But he predicted in the end ministers would have no option but to adopt a different approach and consider decriminalisation. – BBC

Posted in Unbound | No Comments »

Five tests for Cameron in Russia

15/12/2010, 05:23:07 PM

by James Watkins

We missed a trick in 1991 – and David Cameron will know this when he visits Moscow in the New Year.

Back in the early 90s the then US president, George H W Bush and John Major, hunkered down in Downing Street, may not have publicly crowed at the collapse of the Soviet Union, but their actions spoke louder than their words. Though Russia joined the G8 group of wealthy nations, the lack of assistance fully to buttress the Russian economy led to a dive in living standards – rubbing salt into Russia’s already wounded pride.

This chain of events has led to the nationalism we see today, with Russian prime minister, Vladimir Putin, saying that Stalin was not all bad and that the Soviet collapse was a “catastrophe” while Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, deliberately made a show of visiting islands that are a bone of contention between Russia and Japan.

All of this is not the best backdrop to the British prime minister’s visit, but there have been some developments that have recently boosted Russian confidence.

NATO and Russia agreed this autumn to work together on anti ballistic missile defence. In April, the United States and Russia agreed on a major nuclear arms reduction treaty. The Russian government was able to extend its lease for its Black Sea naval port – thanks to a pro-Moscow Ukrainian government. Russian troops still occupy parts of northern Georgia which – superficially – gives Russia the upper hand in the region. And, as we all know to England’s cost, Russia will host the World Cup. (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 1 Comment »