UNBOUND: Thursday News Review

19/08/2010, 07:34:56 AM

Level pegging after 100 days

At a time when it’s tough to get on the employment ladder, kicking away the first step up that was Labour’s future jobs fund at the same time as removing 10,000 university places is callous. It’s also economically illiterate, hiking welfare costs and reducing tax take. Scrapping the schools building programme, ending Labour’s planned expansion of free school meals and taking away free swimming and play areas place our youngest in the cuts front line. The reality that it is ideology driving this government is nowhere more evident than in the wasteful £3bn, top-down reorganisation of the NHS – the age of austerity suspended when there’s a free market to introduce to the NHS. – Peter Hain, The Guardian

#idontagreewithnick

'No thanks Nick'

Labour leadership contender Ed Miliband has said he would demand the resignation of Nick Clegg before forming a coalition with the Lib Dems. Mr Miliband told the New Statesman that the deputy prime minister’s support for the government’s spending cuts would make it “pretty hard” to work with him. The comments come after Lib Dem deputy leader Simon Hughes said a coalition with Labour was “still on the agenda”. – The BBC

Banks should pay their way

Miliband [David] proposes to double a 2 billion pound annual tax on banks introduced by the coalition — a move to make banks contribute to reducing the deficit after several of them had to be rescued during the financial crisis. He said this would enable the government to avoid cuts in tax breaks for business investment announced by finance minister George Osborne in an emergency budget in June. “He is imposing a bank levy of 0.07 percent of the (banks’) balance sheet. That is by no means a big hit on the banks,” Miliband said, adding however that Britain needed a strong financial services sector. “If you doubled the bank levy you wouldn’t have to abolish capital allowances for manufacturing,” he said. – Reuters

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

GRASSROOTS: We must be ready to act when big society fails the people, says Warren Morgan

18/08/2010, 03:00:37 PM

“There is no such thing as society”.

Margaret Thatcher’s famous quote from an interview with Woman’s Own actually came quite late in her premiership, in October 1987. It is David Cameron who, in just the opening few months of power, is seeking to make that statement a reality.

Whether reducing the scope of government through far-reaching cuts or through deregulation at every level (from removing speed cameras to abolishing the Audit Commission, both Tory government creations), the new government is rolling back the state faster than at any time in the last Tory administration. Indeed the pace of change is likely to be greater than at any time since the Attlee government of 1945-51. October’s spending review will accelerate that change even further.

The Tory narrative on eliminating both the debt and Labour’s “bloated state” has been bought by much of the electorate in the south east as there is little to challenge it. A by-election gain by the Tories from Labour in Kent last week is evidence that their national 42% poll rating is no illusion waiting to be swiftly punctured by a fresh face at Labour’s helm, in this part of England at least.

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: Moving the goalposts on higher education will leave scars on our society, says Aaron Porter

18/08/2010, 12:30:14 PM

As A-level results day approaches it is already clear that over 150,000 students with both the grades and the desire to study at university this year will be left without a place.

Crucially, this limit on places is not one of necessity; the restrictions on university places are being achieved through an entirely arbitrary cap on student numbers which is itself being enforced through the government’s threat to fine any university which ends up oversubscribed.

Michael Brown, vice-chancellor of Liverpool John Moores university said last week that the government fines for over recruitment mean that some universities will even have empty spaces despite turning qualified applicants away, with government fines preventing universities from accounting for inevitable drop-outs before the start of term by slightly oversubscribing courses at this stage.

This is both morally unacceptable and economically short-sighted. It is morally unacceptable that students who have worked in order to achieve grades that would normally be sufficient to study at university will – for reasons entirely out of their control – find that the goalposts have been drastically moved. These young people are being denied the opportunity to study at university, with all the intrinsic value that holds, together with the increased work and career opportunities that affords.

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNCUT: The new leader should carry out their own strategic defence review, says Eric Joyce MP

18/08/2010, 09:00:58 AM

Labour is dangerously becalmed on defence and foreign affairs. So many issues afire in the media, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, trident, defence on wikileaks, and amazingly the government’s strategic defence review are going wholly unremarked upon by the opposition.

Our leadership race has so far failed to test the candidates on defence and foreign affairs, while shadow ministers have in their hands the outgoing baggage of policies followed through in government.  Yet the root of our problems is not the need for a rest or a simple change of personnel. It is political stasis borne of fear and ignorance of defence.

Governments generally stand or fall on the perceived strength of their economic management, but it’s a pre-requisite for any putative party of government that it is trusted on defence. Labour orthodoxy has it that the electoral disaster of early 1980s was heavily contributed to by our courting of CND (of which Tony Blair was once a member), which was a long way off the broader public opinion during the cold war.  It’s been an article of faith since then that we must at least neutralise defence as a problem by adopting a conservative approach to all defence-related issues.  Our strict, pro-nuclear line has been the primary symbol of that.

During Tony Blair’s premiership, George Robertson’s strategic defence review, followed by UK interventions in the Balkans and Sierra Leone, helped to solidify public confidence in Labour.  That we were now ‘sound’ on defence tucked away what would otherwise have been some lingering establishment doubts about the whole novel enterprise of an enduring Labour government. 

Fast-forward to today.  Electorally, Iraq damaged Labour badly; mainly amongst our own natural supporters sceptical of our deep and seemingly unquestioning subordination to the US defense department.   The British establishment pretty much stayed on board. Over the last half-dozen years, Labour’s leadership has sought to bridge a chasm between the instincts of our political supporters and those of the establishment.

But for at least a year, something very new has been afoot, and it is paradigm-busting.  Mainstream Labour opinion and received establishment instincts on trident, Afghanistan and many of the key defence and foreign affairs issues of the day are converging,  perhaps for the first time since 1945.

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNBOUND: Wednesday News Review

18/08/2010, 07:30:03 AM
 

Polling: not great

Polling

The Conservatives have mislaid their lead but it is Labour, and more especially the Liberal Democrats, that ought to worry. That is the paradoxical message of today’s Guardian/ICM poll, which shows a leaderless Labour party drawing level with the Tories for the first time since Gordon Brown’s disastrous dalliance with a snap poll in the autumn of 2007. – The Guardian.

Voters believe the Lib Dems sold out by going into government with the Tories – but are glad they did.
And they don’t want either party to rule alone, a survey reveals. The public’s contradictory verdict was given on the first 100 days of the Coalition Government. – The Sun.

100 weeks, not days

David Cameron’s political marriage of convenience reaches its 100th day today and, so far, the relationship has held firm. But there are testing times to come. “The next 100 weeks – not days – will define this government,” said John McTernan, a former political secretary to Tony Blair. – The National.

Blair

Why did he wait so long to announce it? The question continues to hover over Tony Blair’s decision to present his memoirs money to charity. His decision to write the book was taken long ago. The bargaining over the financial terms finished months ago. Only after long thought has he decided to donate the earnings  –  surely not too difficult for a man whose current income has been estimated at anything up to £9 million a year. – The Mail.

 

Darling: deficit deniers

Darling

“I think we did the right thing by preventing the banking system from collapsing, by supporting the economy with the result that we got through the recession and back into growth far more quickly than would otherwise be the case. But I think we should’ve been far clearer, firstly as to why the deficit had risen in the first place, because our revenues had collapsed during the downturn, but secondly, yes you had to get your deficit down, you had to do it over a sensible period and in a balanced and measured way, but also that the at the same time government had a role to play in order to ensure we got recovery and to secure growth in the future.” Alastair Darling tells Channel 4.

Reid remembered

Today Jimmy Reid is best remembered as the spokesman of a struggle that asserted people should come before profit and that unemployment can be resisted. Jimmy Reid’s funeral: Thursday 19 August, 1.30pm, Govan Old Parish Church, Govan Road, Glasgow. – Socialist Worker.

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

GRASSROOTS: Who can beat Boris? Ken, argues Steve Hart

17/08/2010, 04:00:21 PM

The London Labour electorate will decide between Ken Livingstone and Oona King on a number of factors. Who has a strategic vision for London? Who can inspire Londoners? Who can defend London against the Tory- LibDem government cuts best? Who has clear policies on London’s economy; for jobs, for transport, for a green future, for diversity, against crime, against poverty?  Who has the ability and experience to implement policies effectively? These are just a few of the factors to consider.

But the London selectorate want to be sure that they are electing the candidate with the best prospect of defeating Boris.  My paper tries to examine some of the evidence and debunk some of the myths. But the key point is clear – the Ken Livingstone electoral premium makes him the strongest potential candidate for Labour in London.

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

HOME: Chris Leslie MP counts down 100 days of regressive government

17/08/2010, 01:30:45 PM

What have the Tory/Lib Dem government achieved in their first 100 days? They have certainly been busy with their ‘reform’ agenda; the only problem being the nature of those reforms.

As an exercise in charting their disastrous progress to date, I wondered if it would be too stretching to list 100 substantive backward steps for each day so far.

Sadly, it wasn’t that difficult and my efforts are listed below. It may just be my perspective on things, but it already has the feel of one of the most regressive administrations in living memory. Are there things I’ve missed in my list? Probably, but it’s just a start.

1.       Choosing to raise VAT to 20% next year

2.       Cutting the corporation tax of the banks by £1billion

3.       Implementing a feeble banking levy at a rate half that implemented in the USA

4.       Freezing child benefit for the next three years

5.       Scrapping the child trust fund

6.       Deciding against the mutualisation of elements of the existing state-owned banking sector

7.       Scrapping the health-in-pregnancy grant

8.       Keeping unemployment higher than needed through anti-growth budget measures as assessed by the office of budget responsibility

9.       Raising insurance tax on holiday and travel insurance to 20%

10.    Increasing insurance tax on cars and homes from 5% to 6%

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

GRASSROOTS: The Con/Lib government aren’t playing fair by cancelling the playground programme, argues Pat Kane

17/08/2010, 11:41:32 AM

Michael Gove’s cancellation of the playground building programme last week is no surprise to those familiar with the Gradgrindery of his general educational philosophy, history and Latin lessons. But however unlikely its success, it is worth remembering just what a triumph the programme was for the outgoing new Labour administration.

It is true that when the then children’s secretary Ed Balls announced close to christmas in 2007 that over £200 million was to be earmarked to build 3,500 playgrounds, and then followed it through in the subsequent two years, advocates of play were pinching themselves.

New Labour, with various invocations of a renewed work-ethic for the work-shy and a notoriously exacting measurement culture in education, did not seem the most propitious sponsor of the value and benefits of play; oblique, messy and experimental as play is. Ed Balls did not join up his thinking when he rejected the Cambridge Primary Review in 2009, which showed conclusively that an extended period of kindergarten-style play up to the seventh year was the best developmental start for school children.

But there it was; alongside play initiatives from the lottery fund and echoed throughout the devolved parliaments, a commitment to building playgrounds as a step towards rethinking how we regard the activity of children in our public spaces, town and cities. It’s tempting to say that in a similar way to our shifts on climate change the scientific consensus on the health, the cognitive and social benefits of more play in our lives; both for children and adults, was becoming indisputable.

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

GRASSROOTS: Blair’s book gesture is testament to the quality of its author, says Paul Richards

17/08/2010, 08:00:56 AM

Tony Blair’s autobiography A Journey would have made its author a very rich man. Or should that be an even richer man. The advance was £4.6 million. There’ll be a lucrative serialisation in a Sunday newspaper. It will be translated into many languages, and sell around the world. Already 14 territories have secured translation rights. There is little doubt that with an early release as a paperback Blair’s book will hit the non-fiction best-seller lists and stay there for many weeks. It will probably rival Barack Obama’s Dreams of My Father as a best-seller by a politician which cuts through to the mass market.

All of which makes his decision to donate every penny to the Royal British Legion both remarkable and laudable. For most leading politicians – Prescott, Mandelson, Thatcher, Clinton, Wilson, etc – a memoir is partly the chance to set the record straight, but mostly the chance to make a wad of cash for the retirement fund. Blair has shown that he is a cut above your average politician. He wants his book to tell a story, not make a mint.

There are plenty of people who will say it’s just ‘blood money’, motivated by guilt for sending British troops to war in Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan and Iraq. The professional, irreconcilable Blair-haters are always swift to ascribe motives to Blair’s every move. It must be quite a responsibility to possess the ability to read Blair’s mind so accurately all the time. They will never accept, unlike the British Legion, that this is simply a fantastically generous  donation to a good cause. The grubby motives they will ascribe, and ill-grace with which they will react to the donation, say more about them than Blair.

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

UNBOUND: Tuesday News Review

17/08/2010, 07:56:53 AM

Goodbye Alan, it’s been emotional

I, for one, am fed up with the media myth which suggests that the Blairites were the cool dudes in the dull Labour gang, that they were popular and/or adored, and that they singlehandedly won general elections for the party. Did anyone ever say to themselves, “I’m voting Labour because of Alan Milburn”? Did people take to the street in protests when Blunkett was sacked from the cabinet? Did the likes of Patricia Hewitt, Geoff Hoon and Stephen Byers help or hinder the Labour re-election effort earlier this year, when they were outed by Channel 4’s Dispatches grubbing for cash? And did anyone really doubt that the ultra-Blairites like Milburn and Hutton were closer to the Tories, in their pro-market, pro-privatization, pro-rich ideology, than to the Labour Party, new or old? – The New Statesman

On Wednesday, he will deliver a speech on social mobility and confirm the disclosure in yesterday’s Sunday Telegraph that Alan Milburn has been appointed an independent adviser to the Government. John Prescott‘s furious denunciation of Milburn as a “collaborator” tells you all you need to know about the political symbolism of this coup: the former Health Secretary and one-time Labour leadership contender joins his fellow Blairite, John Hutton, and Labour’s star thinker on welfare, Frank Field, in the coalition’s Big Tent. David Blunkett is reported to be next on the list of invitees. Just as Blair wooed senior Lib-Dems and One Nation Tories to New Labour — what Alastair Campbell called “Operation Hoover” — so Cameron and Clegg are recruiting disenfranchised Blairites. – The Evening Standard

Read the rest of this entry »

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon