UNCUT: 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.

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: Let knowledge, not politics, rule the Lords

25/04/2012, 01:30:53 PM

by Jonathan Roberts

For a hundred years discussion of the reform of the House of Lords has provided intrigue, gossip and occasional melodrama.  The outrage at new proposals coming from the government backbenches rightly highlights how ‘out of touch’ this diversion from more pressing matters is (like, you know, the economy), but the depth of feeling some Parliamentarians have gives an indication as to why meaningful reform has never happened.

The most significant improvement in modern times came early in the Labour Government with the removal of the vast majority of hereditary peers.  Even this change, which was so obviously appropriate, caused Tony Blair a huge headache.  To impose genuinely radical reform will result in something closer to a debilitating migraine.

It is easy to forget that the current make up of the House of Lords was specifically argued against in the Parliament Act itself – where it is described that the current regime should be only a temporary measure until peer elections were fought.  Bearing in mind that income tax, introduced by William Pitt the Younger, was supposed to be a temporary measure, one could be left with the impression that there is nothing more permanent in government than a system originally labelled as ‘temporary’.

But the parties should not race towards House of Lords elections.  The UK is not suffering from an absence of democracy – quite the opposite, with parish, district and county elections every four years, European and parliamentary every five.  Soon we will be adding mayoral and police elections to the mix and I have a sneaking suspicion American-style school boards won’t be far behind.  This voting business is really rather regular – and with turnouts being as dire as they are, one has to question whether the public really is crying out for yet another dreary Thursday morning trip to the village hall.

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: David Cameron’s political judgement makes him the real Hunt of this story

25/04/2012, 07:10:40 AM

by Atul Hatwal

Why does Jeremy Hunt still have a job? His holding statement last night was so full of holes it could be used to sieve the peas.

Hunt’s words were carefully chosen, and as ever when politicians’ parse, it is what is not explicitly ruled out that counts:  “some of the evidence reported meetings and conversations that simply didn’t happen “.

So, some of the meetings and conversations did happen.

That’s enough. A cursory reading of the e-mails suggests that for Hunt to survive, Frédéric Michel would have had to have been a complete fantasist. Jeremy Hunt has already said he is not.

The depth of trouble in which Hunt finds himself can be gauged by the way the Leveson cache of e-mails is being reported: almost always with a prefix such as “devastating”, in the same way Andrew Lansley is normally “gaffe-prone” or “under pressure”.

Naturally, Jeremy Hunt thinks he can ride out the storm. After spending the best part of the past two decades scrambling to climb the greasy political pole (so to speak), he and his advisers will desperately be looking for a way through the minefield. It’s an understandable human reaction.

But what makes less sense is the response from Number 10.

Quite apart from the substance of the issue and the appalling privileged influence that the Murdochs clearly enjoyed, there is something potentially even more damaging in the Downing street reaction, certainly in the medium term: their failure of political judgement.

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: The joy of tax

24/04/2012, 07:30:33 AM

by Peter Goddard

Let’s play a game.

Add another word to the following to make a popular phrase… “Tax _____”

What did you answer? Burden? Evasion? Avoider? Loophole?

Whatever it was, the chances are you weren’t thinking anything positive. “Tax hero”? “Tax Embracer”? Unlikely.

The debate around tax, on both side of the political divide always seems to revolve around who isn’t paying enough, who is benefitting too much and inevitably, who is cheating.

But whilst the activities of UK Uncut and their ilk play a valuable role in exposing corporations and individuals who are paying far less than their perceived fair share, are we missing a trick on the other side of the equation?

When I donate £25 to Save the Children, I receive an effusive thank you and the assurance that I have bought ‘safe birth kits’ for five women giving birth at home.

When I give £10 a month to adopt a leopard with the World Wildlife Fund, I receive an effusive ‘thank you’ from the recipients. I also receive regular updates about my newly-saved jaguar and, if I want, a cuddly toy.

And yet when I pay thousands of pounds each year to HMRC, what do I get? To stay out of prison.

Whilst I am a huge fan of not going to prison, it is hardly surprising that thousands of people and companies choose to minimise the amount of tax they pay, sometimes using the mechanism of giving money to charity to reduce their payments.

Either way, the individual is paying out, but at least with charity they have a feeling of wellbeing and a cuddly leopard to show for it.

So why is nobody making any attempt to celebrate the people who do indeed “pay their way”?

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: A note of caution for Labour on François Hollande’s lead

23/04/2012, 03:01:32 PM

by Atul Hatwal

What’s that? A left-wing party doing well? Sacre bleu!

The response on the centre-left to François Hollande’s lead in the first round of the French presidential election has been a mix of excitement and hopeful expectation.  Billy Hayes, leader of the Communication Workers Union tweeted last night “Socialism is on the agenda, via La France”.

Lessons are already being learnt and precedents noted for Labour’s own strategy for victory in 2015.

But some caution would be advised.

France is not Britain and in amidst the understandable optimism there are some fairly serious reasons to be reticent about reading too much into a Hollande lead for Labour.

Three in particular stand out: Sarkozy’s perceived responsibility for the crash; his conduct in office and the narrowness of Hollande’s first round lead.

First, Nicolas Sarkozy is one of the few remaining leaders in office whose tenure pre-dates the crash of 2008. Gordon Brown, Silvio Berlusconi and Luis Zapatero are all gone. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the case, in the eyes of his electorate, Sarkozy will bear some culpability for the disaster.

From the major European nations, only Angela Merkel has retained office following the crash and it’s no coincidence that her survival has been secured as Germany has avoided the worst ravages of austerity.

The electoral gravity on this issue weighs against Labour and at the next general election David Cameron will still be reminding the public that the crash happened on a Labour government’s watch.

Second, Sarkozy is partially being punished for not being monarchical enough. The French take the ceremonial solemnity of the office of president very seriously and his conduct in the office is deemed by many to have been sufficiently unbecoming.

There is no natural read across to Labour’s experience on this, not unless David Cameron divorces his wife and shacks up with Adele.

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

GRASSROOTS: Broadband of brothers: citizen soldiers and cyber warriors

23/04/2012, 07:30:37 AM

by Dan Fox

Dan Fox’s skills-focussed ‘Cyber Reserves’ proposal won the Pragmatic Radicalism Defence Top of The Policies, last month.

An active national security policy is an expensive business. So given how uncertain our world has become, in terms of both the economy and the threats we face, and how active our armed forces have been this last decade, it is not surprising that defence is permanently at the top of the political agenda. Last October’s Strategic Defence and Security Review has been followed by Labour’s own consultation.

But one of the most significant initiatives of recent times has received relatively little attention outside of military circles: Future Reserves 2020 (FR20).

With conscription and national service distant memories in the UK, the military reserve no longer occupies a place in the popular imagination similar to that in countries (such as America , Canada, Israel and some of our European partners) where citizen soldiering is more commonplace.

The citizen soldier is a complex concept, with a millennia-old tradition. It is grounded in the idea that the diversity, effort and volunteer commitment of all can be mobilised in defence of communities, societies and nations when required, or kept prepared in reserve.

To be sure, for many who have not chosen a regular military career in the first place, the commitment to training and then serving even part-time with the army, navy or air force to defend our land, sea and air, is problematic. There is, however, another environment where dealing with the dangers we face requires a range of experience and approaches.

Protecting cyberspace is not just a military responsibility, but a Cyber Reserve, based on the principles of civilian volunteers already entrenched in the current reserve forces, can have a crucial role to play.

Even the most diligent of military observers is unlikely to be familiar with the Special Works Teams of the Royal Engineers, covering railways, power, fuel, water, ports and construction. But, comprised of reservists with relevant civilian qualifications and careers, these units have, since the 1960s, contributed to the construction and protection of critical infrastructures.

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

GRASSROOTS: When does a protest vote stop being a protest?

20/04/2012, 01:33:11 PM

by Ben Mitchell

When it commands 9% of the vote and sits in third place in the polls, overtaking the Tory-led government’s junior partner.

That’s what happened this week when a YouGov poll put UKIP on 9%, one point ahead of the Lib Dems. The first time this phenomenon has occurred.

As is often the way when the smaller parties make inroads at the expense of the big three, a spot of panicking breaks out, the scratching and ruffling of hair, followed by the soul searching. At least two of these were probably true if you were a Conservative.

How much of a danger do parties like UKIP really pose? Surely, it’s typical to give the government a bashing two years into their term? Especially one feeling exposed, without a majority of its own to fall back on.

Nothing more than a bit of fun and games. When push comes to shove, supporters will flock back to their masters. When it really matters, on polling day, they’ll revert to type.

Or they won’t.

It’s right, as one commentator noted this week, that to treat UKIP as a political force is certainly over-doing it.

They don’t have a single MP, control only one small council, and saw their leader, Nigel Farage, humiliated at the last general election, beaten into third place by Flipper – a guy dressed as a dolphin in protest at the ‘flipping’ of homes scandal that beset MPs that year. Something that the speaker, John Bercow, whose seat he was challenging, got caught up in.

Whichever way you look at it, UKIP’s rise mirrors that of the fourth column: ‘Others.’

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: The cure for lobbying scandals is simple: More politicians with backbone

20/04/2012, 07:30:40 AM

by Kevin Meagher

Come the nuclear holocaust, political lobbyists will work for the invertebrates, bartering for concessions from the reigning cockroaches.

What is certain is that the indestructible public affairs industry will get past the government’s wishy-washy consultation on reigning-in Westminster’s pin-striped influence-peddlers which closes today.

Spurred into action by a cavalcade of lobbying calamities, ministers propose a statutory register of public affairs professionals; once they’ve blown the cobwebs of it from the last time it was proposed. So back around the track we go.

Constitutional affairs minister Mark Harper is in charge of spinning this old record. The stated purpose of the register is “transparency” in a bid to “open up politics” and make it “more accessible to everyone.” A White Paper is promised in due course.

But a statutory register (replacing the voluntary one that’s already in place) is roughly the equivalent of one of those photographs of a house for sale in an estate agents window. It’s a superficial gesture that gives us a partial flavour, a rough idea, without telling us anything specific about the contents – and only a fool would draw a conclusion on that basis.

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: So remind me again, why should Lord Ahmed should be a Labour peer?

19/04/2012, 01:18:36 PM

by Rob Marchant

Last weekend, the world was shocked to learn that a Labour peer was allegedly calling for a bounty on the heads of Bush, Blair and Obama. “Allegedly”, because there was seemingly no independent confirmation by UK media of the story, which Ahmed vehemently denied. The Labour party, for once, reacted almost immediately in suspending the whip “pending investigation”.

On Monday, thinking it strange that no-one had seemingly bothered to dig deeper into the clip from Pakistani TV, Uncut did a little more research and was advised, by a friendly Urdu-speaking journalist, that, although the clip appears to contain footage from the relevant speech, it was voiced over and did not confirm his exact words. Alarm bells sounded.

On Tuesday it was confirmed that his exact words were different, that he “only” called for George Bush and Tony Blair to be brought to trial for war crimes, a proposal he boasted that he would personally fund. Oh, and name-checked the leader of the Mumbai bombers in a statement of brotherly solidarity.

So, the Pakistani press misreported. And the British press were lazy.

And you know what? He should go anyway and the whip should stay withdrawn. Here’s why.
Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: A question of competence

19/04/2012, 10:00:21 AM

by Pat Mcfadden

For most of the period since the election, the government has been pretty successful at setting the agenda, particularly around the central question of tax and spend.

The spending cuts they have put through, they argue, are done more in sorrow than in anger and although these are tough decisions it’s really all Labour’s fault for letting things get out of hand.  This has been the dominant narrative.  Labour’s counter argument that the growth of the deficit was a necessary (and internationally replicated) step to stop recession turning into depression has struggled to be heard.

That was the framework of UK politics until recently.  But something has changed.  I don’t believe this is the politics of specific measures like the granny tax or the pasty tax.  There have been plenty other individual measures people have disliked in the past two years but they have been largely accepted because of the acceptance of the dominant political narrative.

What has changed is the public’s judgement about the government’s competence.  In other words, the key change is no single measure but rather the different lens through which the government is now seen.  Put bluntly, people will forgive a government a lot of unpopular measures if they think the government knows’ what it’s doing.  They will be a lot less forgiving if they think they don’t.

The key break point was petrol.

Whatever the outcome of the current negotiations in the drivers’ dispute, the queues outside filling stations a couple of weeks ago were unnecessary and dangerous.  I don’t know if the government whipped this up because they wanted a strike story or because of “genuine” incompetence but it doesn’t really matter.  The public know that the government screwed up.

There was no need to tell people to rush to the filling station, and certainly no need for the stuff about jerry cans.  No strike had been called and seven days’ notice is required anyway.  Petrol delivery and use is a very delicate just-in-time process.  We are highly dependent on it and essentially, the nation’s fuel stock is in the tanks of our cars.  Any unnecessary upset in that system is irresponsible and dangerous.  Better and safer advice would have been to store stamps in jerry cans.

This petrol screw up has changed the way the public are looking at other decisions.  The government is losing the benefit of the doubt on the budget issues around pensioners’ taxes and VAT on hot food.  Suddenly they look more vulnerable.  For the first time in two years, Labour has an opening.  Of course it remains to be seen whether we can take advantage of it, but the opening is there.

The importance of this competence question should not be underestimated.  People are less ideological than most politicians think.  They will often believe in some things advocated traditionally by one party and some other things advocated traditionally by another.  Of course in the end it’s a choice on a package of these.  But whatever the ideology of a government, the voting public expects them to know what they’re doing.  For the first time since the election, that is now in doubt.

Pat McFadden is Labour MP for Wolverhampton South East.

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon