Labour Uncut

UNBOUND: Tuesday News Review

24/05/2011, 06:42:02 AM

The World’s Commander in Chief

It comes as the President of the United States arrives in London for a three-day state visit. He and his wife Michelle will stay at Buckingham Palace as guests of the Queen. This afternoon the Prime Minister and his wife Samantha will host a barbecue in the Downing Street garden for the President and First Lady. In a joint newspaper article today the two leaders point to the close relationship between the two countries, and say it is vital not just for Britain and America, but also the rest of the world. The two men say: “When the United States and Britain stand together, our people and people around the world can become more secure and more prosperous. “And that is the key to our relationship. Yes, it is founded on a deep emotional connection, by sentiment and ties of people and culture. But the reason it thrives, the reason why this is such a natural partnership, is because it advances our common interests and shared values. “It is a perfect alignment of what we both need and what we both believe. And the reason it remains strong is because it delivers time and again. Ours is not just a special relationship, it is an essential relationship – for us and for the world. Mr Obama last night addressed an adoring audience in Dublin. He had earlier visited Moneygall, a small village in County Offaly, the home of one of the President’s ancestors who emigrated to America in 1850. – Daily Telegraph

Hurried along by the Icelandic ash cloud, President Obama arrived early in the UK, where he will meet with David Cameron to rechristen the special relationship between Britain and the U.S. as the ‘essential relationship’. With the Grimsvotn volcano eruption threatening UK airspace Mr Obama cut short his visit to Ireland by a night and touched down at 10.15pm yesterday at Stansted Airport on Air Force One for his first state visit. But despite the hasty change to their planned schedule, the couple were still given the formal welcome expected of a state visit. The Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall were originally due to meet the Obamas tomorrow, but instead the couple were greeted by the Lord in Waiting Viscount Brookeborough, who met them on behalf of the Queen. And instead of a traditional red carpet they left the plane on special red-carpeted stairs because of windy conditions at the airport. Among the party was also Alison MacMillan, deputy director of protocol from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) who greeted the president on behalf of the foreign secretary. An RAF Ceremonial Squadron was on hand, saluting as the couple walked the red carpet to their motorcade. Also present was US ambassador to the UK Louis Susman and his wife Margaret, Chief Constable of Essex Police Jim Barker-McCardle, and Nick Barton, managing director of London Stansted Airport. – Daily Mail

I thought Hannan was bad enough

A Tory MEP has claimed some rape victims are partly to blame for their assault. Former party spokesman Roger Helmer made the comments in defence of Justice Secretary Ken Clarke’s claim last week that the crime had less serious forms. Contrasting date-rape to “classic stranger rape” on his blog, Mr Helmer said a woman who “voluntarily undresses and gets into bed … surely shares a part of the responsibility, if only for establishing expectations”. “Most right-thinking people would expect a much lighter sentence. Rape is always wrong, but not always equally culpable.” Labour frontbencher Caroline Flint branded the comments “outrageous”. – Daily Mirror

Writing on his blog, Roger Helmer weighed in behind the justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke, who last week suggested some forms of rape were more serious than others. Helmer’s comments were criticised by a party spokesman and by Tory MP Louise Bagshawe, who said his remarks were “appalling”. Helmer described a “classic stranger rape” scenario, where a “masked individual emerges from the bushes, hits his victim over the head with a blunt instrument, drags her into the undergrowth and rapes her, and then leaves her unconscious, careless whether she lives or dies”. He then described “date rape” as being when a woman “voluntarily goes to her boyfriend’s apartment, voluntarily goes into the bedroom, voluntarily undresses and gets into bed, perhaps anticipating sex, or naively expecting merely a cuddle. But at the last minute she gets cold feet and says ‘Stop!’ The young man, in the heat of the moment, is unable to restrain himself and carries on. In both cases an offence has been committed, and the perpetrators deserve to be convicted and punished. But whereas in the first case, I’d again be quite happy to hang the guy, I think that most right-thinking people would expect a much lighter sentence in the second case. Rape is always wrong, but not always equally culpable.” – the Guardian

Just go for it lads

A controversial new industry earmarked for the edge of Liverpool is backed by MPs today – despite being linked to polluted tap water and fears of gas explosions in the USA. The Government is urged to give the go-ahead to “shale” gas drilling, with a prediction it could be worth £28bn and cut Britain’s dependence on imported gas. The recommendation comes just months after a company revealed huge untapped reserves are trapped in rocks beneath Wirral, North Cheshire and North Wales. IGas said it hoped to exploit a string of licence areas around Liverpool, including exploration blocks beneath John Lennon Airport, Widnes and Warrington. – Liverpool Daily Post

There should be no moratorium on prospecting for shale gas in the UK despite concerns about its negative environmental impacts, a report from an influential group of MPs has advised. The UK could have “considerable” shale gas resources, particularly offshore, said the energy and climate change select committee, and should exploit these to reduce reliance on energy imports. But the MPs acknowledged that exploiting shale gas could be environmentally damaging and could spell severe problems for the renewables industry, which is facing a lobbying onslaught from gas industry representatives seeking to position their fuel as “green” because it produces less carbon than coal. Tim Yeo, the Tory MP and former minister who chairs the committee, said: “Shale gas could encourage more countries to switch from coal to gas, which in some cases could halve power station emissions. But if it has a downward effect on gas prices it could divert much needed investment away from lower carbon technologies like solar, wind, wave or tidal power.” – the Guardian

Posted in Unbound | 3 Comments »

UNCUT: The positive alternative to just denouncing cuts

23/05/2011, 03:00:42 PM

by Jessica Asato

I don’t agree that Labour should stop fighting the cuts as Peter Watt wrote last week. But in the furore surrounding his audacious suggestion, most people seemed to miss a sensible point. That the public still blames Labour for overspending and is aware that, had we been elected, would be making cuts too, seems lost on the wider party.

On the doorstep, the overwhelming impression I get is that people are indeed angry about the cuts that are threatening their communities, but don’t believe Labour has yet set out a credible alternative. The question – so what would you do differently – has become as tricky on the knocker as taming a tetchy pitbull.

It is because we have such trouble answering this simple request that the cuts have become our single narrative. We cling to the belief that as people see services falling away they will repent of ever doubting Labour. They’ll flock back to the true righteous path and thank Labour for spending their money on great things. Except, they won’t. No matter how much we shout “international global financial crisis”, the public believes that Labour got the country into a financial mess like they always do and don’t know how to get out of it.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncut | 12 Comments »

UNCUT: The government’s policy on the armed forces: giving with one hand and taking with the other

23/05/2011, 12:00:33 PM

by Michael Dugher

After months of pressure from the Royal British Legion and others, including the Labour frontbench, and in the face of certain Parliamentary defeat, the government finally agreed to enshrine the “military covenant” in law. A year ago, Cameron had personally promised to have the covenant “written into the law of the land” in a big set speech on HMS Ark Royal, only to later back track on the pledge (and then scrap the Ark Royal for good measure). The government’s u-turn on the covenant is welcome. At a time when more is being asked of our armed forces, it is vital that we put the government’s obligations to the armed services on a proper legal footing. Yet the announcement is, sadly, only the latest example of the government’s approach to the armed forces: giving with one hand, while taking away with the other. Labour should expose this. We also need to recognise both the achievements, as well as the limitations, of our time in office. And we need to be at the forefront of argument that our forces and their families deserve the very highest levels of care and support.

The truth is that Labour should have taken the covenant out of party politics at the end of the last parliament. The opportunity was there to fully commit to enshrine the covenant in law, as we had already paved the way with some ground-breaking work on armed forces’ welfare. Labour was the first to deliver a cross-government strategy on the welfare of armed forces personnel. Bob Ainsworth, in particular, deserves credit for pushing through the publication of the service personnel command paper in summer 2008, when he was minister for the armed forces. This set out improved access to housing schemes and healthcare, the doubling of compensation payments for the most serious injuries, the doubling of the welfare grant for families of those on operations and free access to further education for service leavers with six years service.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncut | 2 Comments »

UNCUT: Looking to 2014, not 1974: the case for spending limits

23/05/2011, 07:00:17 AM

by Rob Marchant

During the last two weeks, pieces by Uncut columnists Atul Hatwal and Peter Watt seem to have caused something of a controversy in Labour circles by suggesting that Labour keep to Tory spending limits. Peter’s piece was followed by a passionate defence of the current position by LabourList’s Mark Ferguson; not to mention a more wild-eyed, man-the-barricades-the-Tories-are-coming, ad hominem attack from Owen Smith.

So before making our minds up, perhaps we might take a cool, detached look at the case for change. The question of tax and spending limits is not new: indeed, it was raised on these pages back in March. However, given that spending is arguably the most critical question to answer before the next election and will quite possibly decide its outcome, it is important to construct the case clearly and calmly, brick by brick.

Historical evidence on beating incumbent governments: Since 1974, from the table below, no party has challenged an incumbent on a tax-raising platform, and won. In contrast, we challenged three times 1983-1992 on such a platform and lost each time.

UK changes of government after 1974

Year	Winning Challenger	Manifesto pledge
1979	Tory	Pledged to cut taxes, although raised VAT and arguably did not carry out the pledge. Cut spending.
1997	Labour	Pledged to keep to Tory spending limits for two years, and did. Pledged balanced budgets and no increase in income tax for 5 years, and kept them.
2010	Tory (in coalition)	Pledged not to raise NI and cut spending to reduce debt.

The tough questions: a. by 2014, why do we think that a political approach which hasn’t worked electorally in 40 years will work for us then? Especially when, in the political climate of the 1970s, people were demonstrably warmer to the idea of higher taxes in return for a larger public sector? And b., if it was felt necessary to do this in 1997 (growing economy) to get elected, why do we think raising taxes in 2011 (stagnating economy) a good idea? Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncut | 35 Comments »

UNBOUND: Monday News Review

23/05/2011, 06:45:47 AM

How many re-launches do you need?

David Cameron will today reaffirm his commitment to the institution of marriage and the importance to children of stable relationships. He will accuse the last, Labour government on focusing too much on ploughing money into children’s services, without appreciating that it is stable families who provide the prerequisite for a happy life in adult years. By supporting relationships – preferably within the context of a marriage – the Government will in future put families at the heart of policy making. The Prime Minister’s recommitment to the importance of marriage comes as he uses a major speech to attempt once again to define his crusade of the Big Society. – Daily Telegraph

Strong families are the foundation of a better Britain, David Cameron will say today in a fourth attempt to revive his Big Society project. The Prime Minister will return to the pro-family agenda he championed as leader of the Opposition, arguing that good parents teach their children about responsibility. In a major speech, Mr Cameron will say he is ‘pro-commitment’, adding: ‘I back marriage, and I think it’s a wonderfully precious institution.’ The Prime Minister’s speech is meant as a riposte to critics, including many in his own party, who say the Big Society vision is ill-defined and unworkable. In his fourth attempt to relaunch the project, Mr Cameron will attempt to broaden its aims beyond encouraging more volunteering and charitable work. – Daily Mail

Following an admission by the minister responsible for running the big society project that the government had failed to explain it, the prime minister will say the initiative runs through all the government’s public service reforms. It also explains why he wants to build a “stronger society” with families at its heart. Cameron will say: “You learn about responsibility and how to live in harmony with others. Strong families are the foundation of a bigger, stronger society. This isn’t some romanticised fiction. It’s a fact. There’s a whole body of evidence that shows how a bad relationship between parents means a child is more likely to live in poverty, fail at school, end up in prison or be unemployed in later life.” Downing Street acknowledges that it has struggled to explain to voters the big society, the central theme of last year’s general election campaign. It is intended to devolve power and to foster a greater sense of responsibility by loosening the role of the state. – the Guardian

Ed warns of ‘a jilted generation’, whatever that is

A generation is growing up in Britain which is in danger of being unable to afford to buy their own homes until they are middle-aged, Ed Miliband is to warn. In a keynote speech at the Royal Festival Hall in London, the Labour leader will accuse David Cameron of betraying the young – saying they are being forced to bear an unfair share of the Government’s cuts. He will dismiss the Prime Minister’s claim that the Government is taking drastic action to tackle the deficit in order to ensure that young people growing up now are not left to shoulder the debts of their parents. “The Jam generation” of politicians – like Mr Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne who grew up listening to the iconic band in the 1980s and now dominate government – is, he will say, in danger of creating the “jilted generation”. – Daily Mirror

Shrinking wages and higher debts will force today’s children to wait until their 40s before they can buy their first property, Ed Miliband will warn on Monday. Days before he marries Justine Thornton, the Labour leader will illustrate his fears for future generations by talking publicly for the first time about his children. Miliband’s speech at the Royal Festival Hall in London is designed to develop what he is calling a “national mission” to confront the government’s failings. He believes David Cameron is exacerbating problems such as shrinking or stagnant wages by making deficit reduction his main priority. “I am worried – and every parent should be worried – about what will happen to our children in the coming decades, about what the future holds for us, our children and our country, about what sort of place Britain will become.” – the Guardian

Alex’s big day

Oil revenues will be top of First Minister Alex Salmond’s agenda today when he meets Conservative Chancellor George Osborne as part of talks with UK ministers over the next 48 hours. Mr Salmond is set to present his list of demands to the Chancellor as well as Energy Secretary Chris Huhne, before meeting Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg tomorrow. He is to call for changes to the increase on oil revenues announced in the Budget to fund the fuel stabiliser. The £10 billion tax grab by Mr Osborne has, according to oil companies and the SNP, put 10,000 jobs in Scotland at risk with companies choosing to invest elsewhere. – the Scotsman

He will take time out after talks with Chancellor George Osborne to address the Foreign Press Association, before meeting Energy Secretary Chris Huhne this evening. Tomorrow he will have wide-ranging discussions with Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg. A Government spokesman outlined the agenda: “The meetings are expected to cover a range of issues including: how the UK Government’s Scotland Bill legislation can be improved to strengthen the Scottish Parliament’s economic powers; Scotland’s £200 million Fossil Fuel Levy funds; electricity market reforms; and industry fears over the recent North Sea oil and gas tax hike and the Scottish Government’s alternative proposals which would protect exploration and development activity.” Mr Salmond said: “The priority of the new Scottish Government, for which we carry the overwhelming mandate of the Scottish people, is to ensure we strengthen the Parliament’s ability to build sustainable economic growth and create jobs and future prosperity from our nation’s great resources”. – Daily Herald

Gove’s ‘dog eat dog’ education plan

Restrictions on the expansion of the most popular state schools will be lifted, allowing them to take on more pupils, Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, has disclosed. The move will mean that more parents will win places for children at their first choice of school, Mr Gove said. However, it is likely to increase the financial pressures on struggling schools because funding is determined by the number of pupils they have. The changes, which will apply to all state schools, will be outlined in a revised school admissions code to be published this summer. The Government suspects that local authorities sometimes prevent good schools from raising their intake because it becomes harder to sustain weaker schools when pupil numbers drop significantly. – Daily Telegraph

Posted in Unbound | 1 Comment »

INSIDE: Denham nicks it from Balls for goal of the month

22/05/2011, 06:50:50 PM

Denham overtakes Balls in last hour of voting to win by less than 2%

In a dramatic last gasp victory, John Denham overtook long time leader Ed Balls to win the shadow cabinet goal of the month. Denham received 36.5% of the votes cast compared to Balls on 34.6%.

Andy Burnham was third with 19.2% with John Healey on 5.8% and Douglas Alexander on 3.9%.

Since voting started on Friday, John Denham and Ed Balls were level pegging in the public vote until Balls opened up a narrow lead late on Saturday. Balls seemed set to hold on for victory only to be overhauled by John Denham in the last hour of the competition.

The closeness of the vote is in marked contrast to last month, where Ed Balls’ winning margin was over 40%.

Denham’s victory comes off the back of securing his first urgent question since the shadow cabinet was formed.

By moving quickly on the morning of 10th May and tabling the urgent question, John Denham was able to force David Willets back to the Commons to take the question. The resulting exchange meant Denham featured heavily in the night’s news bulletins and managed to pick-up May’s goal of the month.

Not bad for a morning’s work.

Over the past few months, John Denham’s performance has been something of an enigma. While clearly talented and blessed with a commanding baritone, ideal for the chamber, he has only sporadically demonstrated his ability.

In terms of work rate in the House of Commons, John Denham has barely broken a sweat. Before May, he had tabled a total of 11 written questions, asked nine oral questions and made 5 speeches at the despatch box. For the shadow secretary of state for Business, a department fraught with crisis, this is far from stellar performance.

But outside of Parliament, it’s a different story.

John Denham has issued a stream of press releases and comment on stories, securing media profile that makes him one of the most familiar shadow cabinet faces on our TV screens.

What made Denham’s goal of the month a cut above his previous work was the way it combined activity in the House of Commons with media coverage outside of parliament.

Putting down the urgent question not only held Willets to democratic account, it created a parliamentary occasion that broadcasters could use in their news packages.

This one-two of using parliament as the spring board for media coverage was a model of how to hold the government to account. If John Denham can repeat this in the coming weeks, Vince Cable will soon be back where he belongs – vying with the likes of Chris Huhne, Ken Clarke, Andrew Lansley and Michael Gove for the title of cabinet gaffer.

Your winning moment:

Posted in Inside | 1 Comment »

UNCUT: The Sunday Review: Liverpool FC’s 2010/2011 season

22/05/2011, 02:00:04 PM

by Anthony Painter

This was the year of lost owners, three managers and the end of history for Liverpool FC. And despite the tumult – nearly quite literally losing everything – it may have recaptured its soul. The story of Liverpool’s year offers deeper lessons that reach beyond the Shankly gates. Some of those lessons are even political. It’s definitely a story of our world and times.

Let’s start with Tom Hicks and George Gillett. And a basic point: there is no rational financial reason for anyone to own a football club. It’s pure vanity; the economics of mad men. So you have to be very rich for it to work in the long-term. Sure, it’s a growing market as the entertainment industries beyond film go global. But the costs are too high, the rewards too uncertain, and the loyal revenues only compensate to a limited extent for the high risk-low reward business model. You do it out of vanity in the main – you want to own people’s dreams and put yourself on a glamorous platform. Either that or you are a crazy gambler.

Little business sense means that if you are not super rich you have to borrow on unreasonable terms. And if you want to build a top side you have to borrow a lot. Hicks and Gillett weren’t super-rich. They borrowed on ridiculous terms. They couldn’t compete but, worst of all, they lied – to everyone including themselves. They were symbols of the age of capitalism we have just come through. Luckily, a quintessentially English establishment figure, Martin Broughton, chairman of British Airways, came to Liverpool’s rescue and justice was done. Hicks and Gillett left with less than nothing. The swindlers were swindled.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncut | 4 Comments »

HOME: The week Uncut

22/05/2011, 10:30:46 AM

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

David Lammy offers his take on blue Labour

Dan Hodges PMQs sketch

Peter Watt thinks it’s time to accept the cuts

Sunder Katwala calls out Progress

Jim Murphy says it’s not time to give up the nuclear deterrent

Alex Hilton on Ken Clarke and rape

… and Atul Hatwal brings us the shadcab goal of the month

Posted in Home | No Comments »

UNBOUND: Sunday News Review

22/05/2011, 09:22:41 AM

Tory right question Cameron’s risk taking on law and order

Senior Tories have raised concerns that the party is risking its reputation for being strong on law and order as the police unveiled plans for a summer campaign of protest against coalition cuts. Officers from more than 40 forces will put their case against the government’s cost-cutting and wider changes, at a meeting in parliamenton Monday, while the Police Federation, which represents the rank and file, has announced a national “day of action” in July aimed at derailing the current policies. David Davis, the Conservatives‘ former home affairs spokesman, expressed fears that the party was in danger of losing its reputation for being tough on crime and that public confidence was being dented by cuts to the police and justice systems combined with new liberal sentencing policies. After a week in which the justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke, caused a storm over proposals to offer shorter sentences to rapists who confessed at an early stage, Davis said: “There is a serious risk that the Conservative party will lose its clear 20 to 30 point opinion poll leads [over Labour] on crime and immigration if it does not take a clearer stance on these issues.” – the Observer

How long can Huhne hold on?

Chris Huhne’s estranged wife is expected to tell police a female confidante of her husband also took points for him on her licence. Vicky Pryce, who will be interviewed by detectives this week, claims that Mr Huhne evaded points for speeding on more than one occasion. Miss Pryce, 57, has told friends that Mr Huhne not only persuaded her to take points for him – but that he also got another person to do the same on a separate occasion. A source said: “Vicky has been telling people she is not the only one to take points and that Chris had got someone else to do it before her. She has said she will do whatever is ‘necessary’ and ‘appropriate’ to help the police investigation and that means telling them everything she knows.” Mr Huhne, 56, will also be quizzed by police under caution in coming days as he battles to save his career. Mr Huhne, who strongly denies the allegations, faces jail if convicted of perverting the course of justice by getting his wife to take his penalty points. – the Telegraph

Pressure mounted on Chris Huhne last night with a flurry of fresh allegations over his penalty points saga, including the claim that he accepts that he may have been driving his car on the day it was clocked speeding eight years ago. The embattled Energy Secretary is expected to tell police he “cannot be sure” he was not behind the wheel when it was caught exceeding the speed limit in March 2003, according to a report in The Sunday Times. The paper quoted a member of Mr Huhne’s camp saying that he could not remember his movements on the day in question. The source added: “He hasn’t got a diary about whether he drove or not.” The concession follows weeks of flat denials that Mr Huhne pressurised his wife, Vicky Pryce, into accepting the three-point penalty so he could escape a driving ban. Observers pointed out that, if the minister is interviewed this week by police under caution, the “can’t remember” position would be more easily defensible in law if the case ever went to court. – the Independent

Clegg takes aim at NHS in attempt to bring party in line

The dispute within the coalition government over NHS reformshas intensified after Nick Clegg demanded the removal of another main part of the proposals designed to encourage competition and private sector involvement. The deputy prime minister has put himself on a collision course with the health secretary, Andrew Lansley, by proposing that a clause in the bill encouraging “any qualified provider” to take over services from the NHS should be radically rethought or dropped. Clegg told senior Liberal Democrats that he would scupper Lansley’s bill unless the Tories agreed to the new demand. He has already insisted on scrapping the requirement that Monitor, the NHS regulator, compels hospitals to compete with each other. He wants it to be replaced with a duty to promote collaboration. – the Guardian Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Unbound | No Comments »

UNCUT: There’s no excuse. Ken Clarke should be sacked.

21/05/2011, 10:30:40 AM

by Dennis Kavanagh

It’s 1991. A young and charismatic Bill Clinton indicates that he will seek the nomination of the Democrat party for president; the Super Nintendo is launched; the first gulf war is in full swing and good old Lord Lane in the UK abolishes the “anachronistic and offensive” marital rape exemption in R v R.

Shocked? Don’t be. The current rape debate really is taking place in a country where you could quite lawfully rape your wife up until the invention of 16 bit gaming technology. While Bush Snr was threatening to bomb Sadaam back to the stone age, Fred Flinstone sexual values were in full swing over in Blighty. Little surprise, then, that the backdrop to the latest discussion over rape takes place in a country where around 60,000 women are raped every year – the majority by partners or men they know – and only a tiny fraction, around one in ten, report it to the police. Of these few cases, less than 7% result in conviction according to rape crises England and Wales.

Rape and offences of assault by penetration are in this unique position because they’re often difficult evidentially. They’re not taken seriously and a set of myths have grown up around rape that make securing convictions the exception rather than the rule.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncut | 6 Comments »