Peter Watt « Labour Uncut

Posts Tagged ‘Peter Watt’

Does anyone outside the Westminster village give a damn about Leveson?

14/06/2012, 07:00:44 AM

by Peter Watt

People are suffering out there. Families’ finances are under pressure as prices rise while their incomes remain static. The numbers who are unemployed keeps rising and the fear of losing your job is very real for many more.

It manifests itself in small ways for many families, perhaps the occasional meal out has stopped. Or the much loved and deserved annual holiday has been downgraded or cancelled. The car costs more to fill up and that credit card bill suddenly seems a real worry as money runs out sooner in the month than it did. The news is full of rumblings of worse to come as the dark clouds of possible Euro meltdown gather. It all adds to up to a great deal of worry that is being quietly borne in millions of homes across the country.

People don’t expect to be told “it will all be alright” by their politicians. And even if politicians did say that they wouldn’t be believed anyway. But they have every right to expect that politicians are working tirelessly for them and on their behalf.

So imagine how you must have felt this week as you realised that there was still a couple of weeks to go until pay-day and the kids needed new shoes or the tax on the car was due. And then you flicked on the news and saw that once again the entire political class appeared to have its collective head stuck up its own arse once again!

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 13 Comments »

The uncomfortable truth about party politics is that loyalty trumps morality

07/06/2012, 07:00:28 AM

by Peter Watt

This week there was one story that depressed me more than any other. It was actually quite a small story and you may well have missed it. It involved Baroness Sayeeda Warsi and a referral to the City of London Police following various allegations in the national newspapers about her expenses.

Putting aside the actual allegations and whether or not the police should be involved, for me the really depressing part of the tale was actually an interview given on LBC 97.3 by the MP who referred the matter to the police, Karl Turner.

Karl was being interviewed on the James Whale show and you can hear the interview here. Basically Karl appears to concede that, despite the matters being considered being serious and a non-party political issue, he would not have referred a Labour MP in the same situation.

Now I don’t know Karl and I am sure that he is an excellent MP. But inadvertently he has allowed something to be raised in public that is a pretty uncomfortable truth about party politics. Worse, it is something that most people involved in party politics will recognise and actually completely accept. In the words of Disraeli to errant MPs, “damn your principles!” and “stick to your party.”

All political parties make much of the fact that they “stand up for” people; that they are “working together” for the greater good. All try and portray their positions as being in the national interest and of being a selfless pursuit of power that once achieved would give them opportunity to deliver for others.

To a very large extent of course this is true. But there is another side; a side that allows things to become, well a little less balanced: namely that when push-comes-to-shove all that really matters is that my team wins. Quite often this trumps the more altruistic elements of political motivation.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 10 Comments »

The fightback fundraiser kitemark can help free CLPs from central command and control

31/05/2012, 07:00:45 AM

by Peter Watt

The next election is going to be tight. We all know that the polls are in our favour at the moment but in all likelihood they will be considerably closer come the start of the short campaign in 2015. And along with death and taxes the only certainty in life is that elections cost a fortune. In fact if it wasn’t for the occasional aberration (possibly in 1997 and definitely in 2005) then the other certainty is that the Tories significantly outspend Labour at elections. If you take the 2010 election then the Tories spent £18m while Labour spent £8m!

Now let’s assume, quite reasonably, that Labour is still pretty broke at the next election. Let’s also assume that the unpopularity of the Tories impacts on their funding a bit and that Labour is conversely able to raise a bit more. But given this, it is an odds on assumption that the Tories will still outspend Labour once again.

And in a tight race, extra funds in the right places could really make a difference to the outcome. Now we could sit around and hope that the parties sort out the issue of party funding in time for the next election. But if a Labour victory depends on that, then then we are screwed.

Traditionally the Labour Party raises most of its money centrally. That’s not to say this money isn’t raised locally because it clearly is. But the bulk is raised centrally with the big trade union money and high-value donations going into the central campaign pot.

And then marginal seats are effectively subsidised in the long months leading up to the short campaign by the central pot. With the marginal seats being expected to raise a fair old whack themselves of course.

Other local parties support the efforts in marginal seats by sending in activists and by not receiving as much central subsidy. So a relatively large and professional central and regional campaign team ensures direct mail, leaflets, staff and so on is all targeted on the marginal seats.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 2 Comments »

Labour is missing a trick on Beecroft

24/05/2012, 07:00:13 AM

by Peter Watt

There is nothing like a bit of hysteria to whip up a good story. The report from venture capitalist Adrian Beecroft into possible changes in employment law was finally published this week. I say finally, as the draft report leaked to the Telegraph was dated October 2011. The reaction of much of the left has been so frenzied Labour is in danger of missing a trick.

First things first; the report is not in itself going to deliver growth in the economy, it is not in fact in any shape or form a growth strategy and, as far as I can tell, no one from the government is claiming that it is.

People keep saying that we need a growth strategy, as if growth is simply in the gift of the government but no one has yet established quite what this holy growth grail looks like. Hikes in spending aren’t possible and the options to tax raise tax to fund investment are limited. And so, whoever was in charge, would face the same problem.

Labour of course has its “five point plan for growth and jobs” which is ok as far as it goes but it really isn’t going to singlehandedly turn the economy around, even if it was fully implemented tomorrow. No, the uncomfortable truth is that the road to growth is likely to be paved with luck and a series of small and not very exciting stepping stones that cumulatively help encourage investment and inspire consumer confidence and thereby, help our economy to grow.

The government has however put all of its economic eggs in one basket; as David Cameron seemed to confirm this week when he again claimed that the only way to deliver growth was austerity.

In the face of this, it is right for Labour to criticise the government’s lack of ambition on growth and or even tweak its economic approach in light of evidence that it needs to do more. Where is the creativity, the innovation or the optimism? Some measures may work, others may fail but when faced by a flat lining economy, surely it is worth trying?

The government could continue to cut spending while taking some modest steps that may help deliver growth. Some of these measures could be very local or regional whilst others, as Peter Mandelson and Ed Balls set out, should be delivered internationally.

So why then has Labour become near-hysterical about the Beecroft report. Logically, looking at removing barriers preventing firms from employing people has to be a sensible thing to do. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to allow a government to remove red tape to allow business to prosper.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 29 Comments »

As Greece melts down, is anyone meeting in Cabinet Office Briefing Room A (COBRA)?

17/05/2012, 12:23:22 AM

by Peter Watt

Over the years, you always knew when there was a real crisis on, when you heard there was a meeting in COBRA. Whenever a news reader announced that the prime minister had chaired a meeting of COBRA it was generally pretty serious stuff. Apparently, in the interests of accuracy, the meetings are actually called COBR meetings – room A refers to just one of the secret command and control centres in and under Whitehall.

Wikipedia describes COBRA as:

“A term used to describe the formation of a crisis response committee, coordinating the actions of bodies within the government of the United Kingdom in response to instances of national or regional crisis, or during events abroad with major implications for the UK. The constitution of a COBR will depend on the nature of the incident but it is usually chaired by the Prime Minister or another senior minister, with other key ministers as appropriate, and representatives of relevant external organizations such as the Association of Chief Police Officers and the Local Government Association.”

These meetings and their venues were once so secret, it was only in 2010 that a single photograph of “room A” was released.

In recent years, and I may be wrong about this, it seems that COBRA has convened more often: summer riots, foot and mouth, terrorism, contingency planning for fuel strikes and volcanic ash clouds have all prompted the COBRA to raise its head. It is all perfectly sensible that the government has the ability to bring the right people together with the information they need to make effective decisions quickly. Not a panic move, but a good example of our government working to maintain essential services and keep us safe.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 7 Comments »

Time for politicians to be straight with the voters

10/05/2012, 07:00:10 AM

by Peter Watt

Real life is full of doubt and ambiguity; shades of grey dominate and we are rightly suspicious of people who peddle certainty.

But when it comes to politics it seems that certainty is still the preferred currency, or at least that is the perceived wisdom. Politicians cannot express uncertainty, only 100% assurance, because to allow for anything else is to invite a charge of weakness and ridicule.

Much of the time we are all complicit in this nonsense. Can you imagine if Ed Miliband, or any of the other candidates in the leadership contest, had said ‘I think I will make a good leader – but I’m not sure’? Or if David Cameron had stood at the despatch box yesterday and after being excoriated by Ed Miliband, angrily asserted he was ‘reasonably certain’ that Ed was wrong!

Yet the truth is that most political decisions are subjective involving the weighing up of evidence and options and then making a decision that is hopefully right. It’s not surprising that the public are increasingly sceptical about politician’s ability to tell the truth. They just do not believe that politicians can or will deliver.

Remember how polls said that Ken’s fares policy was popular? Well the same polls often showed that the public also did not believe that Ken could make this happen. So for all Ken’s façade of certainty over his policy, including a promise to resign if he failed, the public were unmoved.

Politicians are caught between a rock and a hard place. They must appear certain at all times or they will be seen as weak. But this certainty does not mean that they are believed and in fact feeds a sense amongt voters of politicians as liars who do not, or cannot, deliver.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 15 Comments »

In praise of…local councillors

03/05/2012, 07:00:24 AM

by Peter Watt

It’s a big test today for all of the parties. London and Glasgow will be watched particularly closely but so will the results from Derby, Plymouth, Southampton, Harlow, Norwich and, well you get the point! Will Labour get more than 700 gains? Will the Tories lose more than 300?

Will the Liberal Democrats go into meltdown? Clever people will talk about the impact of the ‘omnishambles’ of the News International scandal and the budget on the Tory vote.

There will be a debate about whether there is evidence that Ed Miliband is convincing voters that he is more than David’s brother and is edging towards Downing Street. The results will all be scrutinised and analysed for their national significance. But to be honest this inevitable focus on the national is a shame because it masks the individual battles and hard work of thousands and thousands of local candidates across the Country.

I once stood for election to Poole borough council. I came within 54 votes of winning what had been a safe Tory ward. But to be honest with hindsight I am glad I didn’t win! Being a councillor is just too much like hard work for my liking! In fact at a time when politics is held in such low regard, local government is a beacon of hope.

Local councillors are the unsung heroes of the political world. They are often part-time holding down a job as well as carrying out their council work. Yes they get allowances, but they are hardly paid a fortune. And for their allowances they are incredibly good value. The endless lists of committees and panels, school governors and board meetings, the residents’ panels, full council meetings and group meetings. This merry-go-round of public service is often interminably boring but really quite important and frankly someone has attend!

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 6 Comments »

Why on earth are we even talking about Lords reform?

26/04/2012, 07:45:35 AM

by Peter Watt

I have been building up to write this for days now. Because I have been getting angrier and angrier the more I thought about it – House of Lords reform.

What is it that politicians don’t understand here? Voters hardly hold their political masters in the highest regard. Not to put too fine a point on it, they don’t like politicians and certainly do not value them. It may or may not be unfair but they think that politicians are self-serving and live in their own rarefied world.

What voters certainly do not see is a political system that provides a solution to the problems that they experience in their day-to-day lives. In fact many voters are angry and probably blame politicians for many of the world’s ills. To be fair, from the voters point of view there is much to feel angry about. The expenses scandal; an economic crisis that the political class seems immune from; tax cuts for their mates, tax rises for everyone else and ever increasing prices.

And the response of our politicians? That we need even more politicians!

Apparently we need to expend huge amounts of political energy and effort passing legislation that will create 450 new professional politicians. Presumably all of whom will need paying, will need staff, offices and expenses. Who will need to be elected and who will all need to spend their time justifying their existence.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 16 Comments »

What on earth is going on with politics at the moment?

19/04/2012, 07:00:53 AM

by Peter Watt

Does anyone know what is going on out there? Really? Until a month ago it was all so much simpler.

The Tories didn’t really have a coherent tale to tell but then nor did anyone else so it didn’t really matter all that much. They bumbled along making mistakes and generally looking incompetent. But crucially voters had been persuaded that they were dealing with an out of control deficit that Labour had caused.

And that was the end of the discussion.

Anyway, they had David Cameron and he looked and sounded prime ministerial, made tough decisions and even diplomatically bashed the Germans and French. No matter how bad it got, he was their trump card. And Labour, not to put too fine a point on it, had its own problems: perceptions of economic incompetence and a leader who was still finding his feet as far as voters were concerned.

But then came the budget and suddenly the Tories and David Cameron are wobbling.

All that bravado and self-confidence appear shaken to its core. Instead of charting a route to sunnier times the budget looked elitist, favouring the rich. And worse it looked muddled as its measures unravelled and established more and more losers.

Ed Miliband gave one of his finest performances in the Commons after Osborne’s budget speech. The discomfort on the faces of David and George was there for all to see, and on the benches behind them you could see doubt.

Over 4 weeks later the budget is still the issue of the moment, and at issue is the Government’s credibility. George Osborne appears to have disappeared and no one on the Government side seems overly keen to defend the finance bill. Certainly not David Cameron; he seems intent on avoiding answering any of Ed Miliband’s questions at successive PMQ’s.

Ed’s victories at the despatch box have rattled Cameron. And the more rattled David Cameron gets the less prime ministerial he looks and sounds. His attacks become more and more sneering, dismissive and personal and his lack of attention to detail becomes ever more obvious. It’s not attractive.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 12 Comments »

Ed’s funding proposals: Nearly but not quite

16/04/2012, 07:00:55 AM

by Peter Watt

Yesterday morning Ed Miliband used his slot on the Andrew Marr show to outline some eye-catching new proposals on funding political parties. It sounded good and it almost was, but it could end up being a disaster.

First let’s expose some myths.

The Labour party does not receive the majority of its income from the trade unions. In an average, non-general election year, income comes roughly from the following sources:

£8 million in affiliation fees from trade unions;
£7 million from the tax payer in Short money and so on;
£5 million from individual membership subscriptions.

This gives a “definite” income of about £20 million per year. In addition the Labour party gets:

£2 – 5 million in donations from individuals, companies and trade unions; and
£5 million from other things like commercial income, legacies and dinners.

This gives a potential income of £27 – £30 million per year. Clearly in the run up to an election you would expect an increase in donations. So Ed’s cap of £5000 per year will hurt. Under his proposal this will impact between £2 and £5 million per year and more in the year before an election.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 9 Comments »