Uncut « Labour Uncut

The unholy alliance that made multiculturalism a dirty word

27/12/2010, 07:00:01 AM

by Atul Hatwal

In the Observer two weeks ago, Anushka Asthana posed an interesting question, “why did multiculturalism become a dirty word”?

Anushka’s article describes her personal experience. It gives a pointed example of how multiculturalism works. But, eloquent as the piece is, it doesn’t address her question.

When looking for answers, there can be a tendency to over-intellectualise. To retreat into a discussion of Britishness and think tank generalities about society. This misses the point.

Multiculturalism has become a dirty word because of the specific actions of individuals. To be more precise – one leading man and an unwitting supporting cast of so-called community leaders.

Top billing goes to Trevor Phillips, former chair of the commission for racial equality and current chief executive of the equality and human rights commission. In 2004 he made a deliberate calculation: to reposition himself as a New Labour-type race relations tsar. Someone to do for equalities what the best man at his wedding, Peter Mandelson, had done for Labour. (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 2 Comments »

The Santa subterfuge: the greatest conspiracy of all

25/12/2010, 01:47:27 AM

by Kris Masgai

We were both stood on his desk Blu-tacking paper chains to the air conditioning ducts when he said it: “We’re not going to tell Ben there’s a Father Christmas”.

He and his wife have talked it over. They both believe that it is wrong to lie, wrong to mislead your children, wrong to say “do as I say, not as I do”. And the upshot is that Father Christmas will be sacrificed to integrity. “How”, he reasoned, “can we expect him to learn right from wrong if we don’t tell him the truth”?

Ben is not quite a year old, so he won’t be asking Father Christmas questions this year. But as soon as he does, his parents say they will “not confirm the existence of Santa Claus”.

There was uproar in the office.

Ours is a big team in a big open plan space. We like a good argument. Ideally one that lasts for the best part of a day, fanned by new people arriving and lobbed-in, googled “facts”. Everyone has an opinion. But, for the first time in living memory, we were all – but one – unanimous. (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 1 Comment »

A reckoning for the second rate: the Lib Dems are simply not qualified to govern

24/12/2010, 07:00:10 AM

by Dan Hodges

In his classic work Fever Pitch, the book that finally enabled middle class supporters to emerge from the football closet, Nick Hornby devotes a whole chapter to a single player, Gus Caesar.

Caesar’s place in literary history was secured in the eighty third minute of the 1988 League Cup final between Arsenal and Luton. With his side 2-1 up, the England under-21 defender chased down an innocuous ball in his own penalty area. Then something strange happened.

Some say he was distracted by a Luton striker who had moved goal side of him. Others that his studs became caught in the Wembley turf. Whatever the reason, with the option of sliding a pass to a colleague, or launching the ball to safety, he chose to do neither. Gus Caesar simply fell over. A melée ensued, in which Luton scrambled an equaliser. They went on to snatch a late winner and raise the trophy. Caesar was swiftly transferred, never playing in the top flight of football again. (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 5 Comments »

Ed needs to answer the question Cameron can’t: why does he want to be PM

22/12/2010, 03:00:01 PM

by Jonathan Todd

The front page of the Spectator Christmas special depicts Nick Clegg crushed between David Cameron’s foot and ice. This captures the conventional wisdom. Cameron is doing well out of the deal that created his government. Clegg isn’t; and Ed Miliband isn’t in sight. The Tories hover around 40 per cent. The Lib Dems have shrunk beneath 10 per cent. Labour leads these polls, but we are told that Miliband is insufficiently visible.

While Cameron may glide over the ice on The Spectator’s cover – just as he glided away from the bullets that Clegg took on tuition fees – this ice masks ideological differences in all three parties. The strategic questions are obvious. How should Cameron consolidate his dominance, Clegg recover and Miliband become more prominent? The answers, however, reveal deeper ideological fissures.

John Kampfner urges a bolder articulation of Clegg’s liberal beliefs in the face of the existential threat to his career and party:

“He has to produce a radical narrative that differs from the Tories’ ideological opposition to the notion of government as an economic actor, while maintaining his distance from the overtly statist instincts of Labour traditionalists”.

Clegg will campaign for AV, while his Tory ministerial colleagues defend the status quo. Kampfner demands, additionally, a full and distinctive articulation of liberal principles from Lib Dems in government.

The more principled Lib Dems have been thought those who stayed out of government, voted against tuition fees and who have been wooed by Miliband. Tim Farron leads this cadre from the backbenches, as Graham Brady, chairman of the 1922 committee, leads what Tim Montgomerie calls mainstream Conservatives. Kampfner wants Clegg to prove that Lib Dem principles aren’t the exclusive preserve of the backbenches.

For Clegg to do this he needs more policy wins to justify his cohabitation with Cameron. However, these wins would threaten liberal conservatism, the counter point to mainstream conservatism. As a Cameronian minister put it to Daniel Finkelstein:

“The narrative might easily develop that anything progressive comes from the Lib Dems, and that is very dangerous to us”.

Liberal Conservatives, like Nike Boles, want Tory/Lib-Dem government to last into the next parliament. Maybe they see more to like in Clegg than Brady. However, the Conservative brand may retoxify (assuming it ever fully detoxifies) if they allow liberal conservatism to seem only capable of delivering progressive outcomes in combination with Cleggite liberalism. The Lib Dem ideological renewal that Kampfner wants is not, therefore, without risk for Cameroons. Particularly if this renewal combines with louder and more organised complaints from mainstream Conservatives about dilution of Conservative principles on tax, crime, immigration and Europe, the need for liberal Conservatives to flesh out a principled argument for continued Tory alignment with the Lib Dems may become more pressing.

Two-party government is unusual in this country. Two parties clearly setting out ideological differences in government is more unusual still. The likes of Farron and Brady may sit on the same side of the House but they are sure to make ideological arguments of quite different flavours over the next year. Kampfner illustrates the pressure Clegg is already under to demonstrate the ideological consistency of decisions taken in government. Cameronian ministers may come to face similar pressure. How will they react?

In last year’s Spectator Christmas special James Forsyth wrote:

“The most important thing Cameron should think about over Christmas is why he wants to be prime minister. As the Times — normally favourable to Mr Cameron — opined last week, he has not yet conveyed a clear sense of this to the public”.

The failure of the Conservatives to win an outright majority shows that Cameron never managed this. Abandonment of Conservative principles is unconvincingly blamed for this by mainstream Conservatives. Cameron displayed agility in forming a government having failed to secure a Conservative majority. But it remains bizarrely unclear why he wants to be prime minister. It may be out of belief in the same things as Brady. It may be out of belief in the same things as Clegg. Or does Cameron stand for a liberal Conservatism that is distinct from both Brady’s mainstream Conservatism and Clegg’s liberalism?

He seems likely to believe whatever is necessary for him to remain PM for as long as possible. Undoubtedly, there is scope for Miliband – leader of the most ideologically united of the three parties – to make mischief. He should build bridges with disenfranchised Lib Dems. And encourage the disgruntlement of mainstream Conservatives.

But, first, this Christmas, Miliband should answer the question that Cameron didn’t answer last Christmas: Why does he want to be prime minister? He doesn’t want to be prime minister to make unhappy Lib Dems feel better. He doesn’t want to be prime minister to resurrect policies rejected by voters in May.

He wants to be prime minister to prove that Labour’s best instincts are in tune with the best instincts of the British people. That when the native genius of these people combines with the liberating force of Labour government, great things happen. Finding a way of successfully communicating this, and embedding Labour’s authenticity, is a more important strategic challenge than the tactical games of pulling at the ties that bind the Tories and Lib Dems together. This is, fundamentally, about ideology.

Jonathan Todd is Uncut’s economic columnist.

Posted in Uncut | No Comments »

Ignorant, hypocritical buffoon. And worse. Cable must go.

22/12/2010, 10:44:15 AM

by Tom Watson

I like the guy. I held out hope he might end up being the axle of progressive politics in Britain. Yet it’s hard to resist the urge to slap Vince Cable around the chops.

Six months into the Conservative-led government, he’s left himself looking like, and let’s not mince words, he looks like a cock. What a total ignoramus. What a self-indulgent buffoon. What a hypocrite. For the protection of his own dignity, he should resign.

There are two winners out of this episode: David Cameron and Rupert Murdoch.

Here’s what Jeremy Hunt recently said in Broadcast magazine about Rupert Murdoch:

“Rather than worry about Rupert Murdoch owning another TV channel, what we should recognise is that he has probably done more to create variety and choice in British TV than any other single person because of his huge investment in setting up Sky TV which, at one point, was losing several million pounds a day.

We would be the poorer and wouldn’t be saying that British TV is the envy of the world if it hadn’t been for him being prepared to take that commercial risk. We need to encourage that kind of investment”.

Here’s what independent media analyst, Clair Enders recently said:

“Somewhere between 2015 and 2020, News International, Sky will control 50% of the newspaper and television markets respectively…..They will have a force de frappe which none of their competitors can match, while the BBC’s income will be negotiated downwards, and ITV simply lives with the ebb and flow of the advertising market”.

So, the company that hacked the phones of the royal princes will own half the newspaper and television market in Britain. If this was Zimbabwe, we’d be sending resolutions to the United Nations about it. It’s not though, and Jeremy Hunt, easily the most ambitious member of the cabinet, will make the decision.

That’s why Cable has to go. He can’t do his job. We trusted that he would do the right thing. Faced with the indisputable truth about media plurality in Britain we were counting on him to face down all opposition and for the first time in decades, stand up to Rupert Murdoch. And now he can’t.

Do you think that Jeremy Hunt, having said what he said about Rupert Murdoch, is going to go against his instincts and turn down News Corp’s bid for complete control of Sky? No. Neither do I.

Like Clare Short in Tony Blair’s administration after the resignation of Robin Cook, Cable’s days are numbered. I can’t understand how he can allow the public humiliation to last longer than today. But ministerial office does that to some people. They can’t let it go.

In choosing a slow lingering death, Cable has further weakened Clegg and the coaltion partners, though they appear too frightened and stupid to know this.

It’s inevitable. He’s broken one of the rules of being a minister. It’s probably the third rule concerning standards in public life. The one that says:?

“In carrying out public business, including making public appointments, awarding contracts, or recommending individuals for rewards and benefits, holders of public office should make choices on merit.”

We’ll no doubt be arguing about this for days to come, but we already know that Cable has broken the even bigger rule of ministerial life: don’t believe the hype. His own ego has destroyed him.

The Cable incident is another unforced error from a ragged government. Paradoxically, it helps Cameron as he strengthens his grip on a coalition government that has been shown to be paralysed by disagreement and personal loathing between ministers.

My God, what a mess though. And we’re only six months in.

Tom Watson is Labour MP for West Bromwich East

Posted in Uncut | 13 Comments »

Sally Bercow prefers electoral reform to adult videos

22/12/2010, 08:07:07 AM

by Sally Bercow

It is hard to get excited about electoral reform. Indeed, mention AV to the proverbial bloke on the bus and he will look completely blank. And then perhaps he will think “audio visual” and start fantasising about the latest 52” Sony Bravia with Bose surround sound. Or maybe he will blush because “adult video” has popped into his head (though he only watched one, many moons ago, purely for research purposes – honest). Or, if he is a retired cardiologist, he might claim to be reminiscing fondly about aortic valves (believe this if you will).

Only if you have chanced upon a Liberal Democrat (increasingly improbable, statistically speaking) or your telltale cagoule-clad political geek, will he say, “aah – the alternative vote, the electoral system in which voters rank constituency candidates in order of preference”. Which, of course, is the right answer in the context. Please note if you have landed here after googling “AV”, this is Labour Uncut. No adult videos here. (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 8 Comments »

The left is losing its marbles

21/12/2010, 07:00:06 AM

by Dan Hodges

I’ve taken Tom Watson’s advice. I’ve poured myself a stiff drink, kicked back and raised a festive glass to Ed Miliband.

But nothing’s happened. I waited for the warm glow. A mellow wave of positive reflection to engulf me. Nothing.

Try as I might, I cannot conjure up the magic. The excitement. The anticipation. The child-like optimism. Like the boy in the Polar Express, I no longer believe.

I wish I could. I wish I could see the things that others see. Ed striding up Downing Street, waving to the cheering crowds. Len McCluskey, Charles Kennedy and Charlie Gilmour locked in a sublime embrace of unity and comradeship. New foreign secretary Chuka Umunna, chancellor David Miliband and community rehabilitation secretary Ed Balls applauding his arrival.

There is the audacity of hope. And there is the sleep of reason. We have ended the year succumbing to the latter. (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 64 Comments »

Let’s end the conspiracy of silence on immigration

20/12/2010, 12:00:23 PM

by Atul Hatwal

Shrinking violet is a term not normally associated with Ed Balls. But in the three months that he’s been shadow home secretary, something strange has happened. He’s been quiet. On one of the core issues for his brief, one of his flagship themes during the Labour leadership election – immigration – he has maintained near-trappist levels of silence.

Before Friday’s ruling that the government’s temporary cap was unlawful, he had only made one major intervention on the topic. When drawn on the government’s policy, Ed’s line was that 80% of immigration was from east European members of the EU and therefore the cap wouldn’t work. It was a good line.

Shame it wasn’t true.

The net number of people coming into the UK in 2009 from new EU member states was 5000, only 2.6% of total net arrivals last year. Just because Mrs.Duffy said it, doesn’t make it so. Ed Balls was lucky. The competition for column inches on Labour’s problems meant he got off lightly. (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 1 Comment »

John Woodcock’s sober predictions for 2011

20/12/2010, 07:00:02 AM

by John Woodcock

For those who wish to ensure that festive cheer does not cloud their senses, here are some fairly sober predictions for 2011:

1. Labour councillors and activists will pull out all the stops for the May elections and make significant gains. So far – so optimistic. But this success will make some think we are already at the “one last heave” stage. When in fact we will only be making our way out of base camp. As the cuts begin to bite, it will be tempting to mistake the uncertainty felt towards the Tories for people renewing their bond with Labour. Such a misinterpretation is likely to be our biggest barrier to having the conviction to make the difficult decisions needed to win back the public’s trust.

2. Ed Miliband will not be among those falling into that trap. In one crucial respect, he will continue to think about the cuts programme in the same way as does the Tory leadership. While the public’s perception of what is happening now is hugely important, both David Cameron and our leader understand that cuts will have been implemented at the time of the next election. So the main debate, as the country goes to the polls, will be where we go from 2015. Not whether there might have been a better way of getting from 2010 to 2015. (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 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 »