Bob Piper has been a Labour Councillor for the Abbey
Ward in Sandwell, West Midlands, for nine years. He is a lifelong supporter of Aston Villa Football Club and a follower of Yorkshire County Cricket Club.
The views expressed here are mine in a personal capacity, not those of the Labour Party, Sandwell MBC, Aston Villa or Yorkshire County Cricket Club. Get it! Mine... just mine!
Politics Home Index, the best British political blog aggregater around, today launches its PHI 5000. It is a politically balanced group (?) of 5000 regular voters who will become an online focus group.
The initial findings won't make particularly good reading for Gordon Brown.
Never mind Political Betting... follow this man's predictions which appeared in The Independent on 11th August last year:
"You don't have to be Nostradamus, or even Eileen Drewery, to predict what is going to happen in the Premier League season, which begins today with no certainties except that Manchester United will win it, Chelsea will finish second, Arsenal will finish third and Liverpool fourth. That I know this before the season kicks off is of course dispiriting beyond belief, and means that as a source of excitement I must already focus on the relegation battle: any three from Derby County, Wigan, Birmingham City, Fulham, Reading and Sunderland."
Sadly, however, as Viner points out, you probably wouldn't have caused Mr Ladbroke to shed many tears on the sort of odds he would have been likely to give you. As predictions go, they were all too easily predictable. Surely the only question now is whether Martin O'Neil can prove Kevin Keegan wrong next season and break the boring monopoly of the self-perpetuating Champion's League four?
If that doesn't happen, though, I won't be as rash as Viner, who also predicted:
Continuing the theme of English football at the top level having become wearyingly predictable, I undertook to lead a triumphant conga across Soho Square, naked, in the almost unimaginable event of none of the so-called "Big Four" reaching the FA Cup final.
A reader earlier this week questioned why I spend so much time hanging around Iain Dale's site taking the piss out of him. I must confess, I'm guilty, I do... but that's because he makes it so easy.
Take today, Iain sneers at Ken Livingstone, reminding him that he lost the election for Mayor and suggesting that "he's going to be like one of those sad defeated MPs who appear in the House of Commons after they have lost, as they can't quite bear to leave."
This might be mildly amusing if it wasn't written by a loser who couldn't get elected to the House of Commons, and then organised David Davis' campaign for leader so well that he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.... and subsequently spends all his time hanging around Parliament bathing in the reflected glory of those that were elected.
'These suggestions are options for how to deliver what I've spoken about,'
he says - referring to his promise not to let 'things rest'. 'I am not going to comment favourably or unfavourably on any option like that until we are ready to do so.' Well, make of that gibberish what you will, but... via Tim Worstall, Reasons Not To Vote Tory No. 3,670 (is that all you've got, Tim?) we find Cameron telling the Yorkshire Post...
"I don't want to leave the European Union and I'll tell you why. This is a trading nation. Yorkshire relies on traded goods and on businesses which can trade all over the world and particularly in Europe. We export more per head of the population than America, Japan or other countries. We are a trading nation and Europe is a very important market for us. If we are not in the European Union, we would not be able to have a say over what the rules of the single market are. That is the primary reason for being a member of the European Union."
So, that's absolutely clear then. Nothing has been ruled out... apart from those things I've ruled out! This is of course, classic Cameron. Flag up one thing for one audience... and another thing for a different audience, and hope never the twain shall meet.
As ever, with the Tories, there's leg's on this one yet.
Believe it or not, 1278 people in Great Bridge, Sandwell, on the 4th May 2006, cast their vote to allow this man to represent them in the Council Chamber.
Holocaust
And last but not least the mother of all hoaxes, the Nazi Holocaust. What amazes me most about it is how otherwise intelligent people can be blind to the fact that if the arguments of the Holocaust revisionists were as false as claimed, there wouldn't be a necessity for systematically destroying and even imprisoning anyone who engages in 'denial'. And since when do the sensitivities of a tiny minority outweigh the freedom of expression of the rest?
The motivation for the invention of the Holocaust, apart from humiliating a beaten enemy, was to destroy all resistance against the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine and the genocidal treatment of the Palestinian people.
What interest did the ruling elite have in the Jewish state? Apart from the fact that many - if not most - members of the ruling elite have a Jewish background, the Zionist project was always about controlling the Middle-Eastern oil reserves.
A reflective look at the state of our nation, and more particularly the state of our Party, from Johnny Guitar, a socialist in Belfast... Your friend in the North.
Back in 1995 Clause IV of the Labour constitution was amended to present the organisation as a "democratic socialist party" whose goal was to place "power, wealth and opportunity in the hands of the many, not the few." Barely a decade on and Gordon Brown's current government is finding it impossible to live up to even the superficial sentiments expressed in that diluted statement of intent. Tony Blair once remarked that power without principle is barren but that principle without power is futile. Unless things change radically in the short term Labour will be a party with neither power nor principle.
As The Tory Troll points out, Boris Johnson said before the election, that he would...
end the "cronyism" and "secrecy" at City Hall, and publish on the internet as much information "from Day One" of his mayoralty.
As yet there still appears to be no information around about salaries and job descriptions of the gaggle on new 'Deputy' Mayors (all fine and hearty 'chaps' according to our resident blogging 'expert') that Johnson has appointed on whim.
Professor Bernard Crick writing to The Guardian letters page today:
Strangely, Gordon Brown set out clearly a new theme and potentially popular direction for Labour in his Fabian Society speech of 2006: "People and communities should now take power from the state and that means ... a reinvention of the way we govern: the active citizen, the empowered community, open enabling government." This implied, he said, a new constitutional settlement, taking citizenship seriously, rebuilding civil society, working for integration of minorities, and to be internationalist at all times. In other words, a radical decentralisation of power.
Does this have to be just good rhetoric and thoughtful mere words? He could use his office to transform politics by diminishing the centralised state and enhancing and trusting local government. Despite the craziness of trying to micro-manage a country of 50 million (England) from the centre, both major parties are nervous of local government because they are scared of the tabloid press forever trumpeting one local folly of the other side as if it were typical. We used to believe and teach that local government was the school of democracy. I once remarked to a secretary of state for education that if we could no longer speak and mean socialism, we might at least speak and mean democracy.
Bernard Crick
Edinburgh
A distrustful and insecure government could be even more reluctant today to devolve power to Conservative and Liberal Democrat controlled local authorities than it was even a week ago. A bold and forward thinking government, however, would commit itself to a greater devolution of powers to local level. For far too long we have run away from returning this responsibility to local authorities in case a 'Derek Hatton' springs up somewhere else, or the Daily Mail starts its demented squawking about 'Winterval' or 'Ba, Ba, White Sheep'.
The centralisation of power in England from local government to Westminster has been continuing unabated for decades and the Brown administration has an opportunity to reverse the trend. Devolution in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland has shown that people can be trusted if they are empowered. Neither Thatcher nor Blair had any time for local government, and as the powers and responsibilities have ebbed away from elected local government to nationally funded quangos it is little surprise that people question why they should vote in local elections.
Last Thursday, trying to get out the vote in the pouring rain, a woman on the doorstep said, "Why should I bother? The Council don't do anything anyway." I gave her my standard answer about the schools, and the roads, and the bins and the streetlights, before she jumped in with... "So, what are you telling me, if I don't go out and vote... we'll have no streetlights?" And she has a point. Local Government these days is not so much an instrument of local democracy as it is an administrative arm of central government.
So, when are we going to get that 'radical decentralisation of power' that Professor Crick describes?
I wrote last year, during David Cameron's darker days, about the fact that he seemed to be forever launching and relaunching 'fightbacks'. Well, the wheel has turned a circle, the Tories lead the opinion polls, and guess what, Gordon Brown is launching another 'fightback'. As I indicated last week, it is about being seen to be doing something. Any bloody thing.
Well, not much really. More immigration controls, more spending on schools in some areas, and.... appointing a trade union bloke to be the new General Secretary of the Party.
With the greatest respect to my Party leadership (anyone who uses the phrase 'with the greatest respect' is about to piss on your chips, by the way) I don't think appointing Mr Ray Collins as General Secretary of the Labour Party is an initiative, nor will it interest anyone outside of the handful of people at Party HQ.
As for Liam Byrne offering British workers "the first crack of the whip" instead of immigrant labour, I really hope and pray that wasn't the phrase he used. In any event, we are unlikely to ever 'outflank the Tories' on being nasty to foreigners. It is what people expect of the Tories anyway. If promising harsh measures against immigrants was a vote winner Michael Howard or one of those strange little bald blokes who led the Conservative Party for a while would already be in Downing Street. Dealing with immigration outside of the EU borders is, as most people already know, only tinkering with the margins anyway.
Increased school spending in areas of greatest need is certainly to be welcomed, but it isn't a new initiative - we've been doing it for 11 years now.
So, perhaps I should be relieved. Maybe we aren't 'relaunching' after all, it is just a journalists fantasy. If we're just getting on with the job, then that is what we should say we are doing. It's the economy, stupid, may be a cliche, but in politics it is a truism. We need to be seen to be in control of the economy, address issues of pensioner poverty, reverse the 10p tax decision and deal with issues such as social housing. Then, without relying on rhetoric such as reinvigoration by firm ideological leadership, we will show that Labour is better equipped to run the country than the Tories.
They've taken one small goose step forwards but they're a long way from parking their panzers on the lawn of Buckingham Palace.
We have to create a better society where social fungus like the BNP and the NF cannot take root. That means action at a grassroots level, at the ballot box and in the workplace. We need to fundamentally change society for the better. Anti-fascist leaflets make my heart sing with the light of a choir of angels, of course, but they are the bluntest of tools and we must not neglect that to rip out the roots of some problems we will have to dig down deep.
Cassilis is carrying a short audio blog roundup by fellow Scots blogger PollyOdd. It is only 10 minutes long, and well worth a listen, not only because he manages to read my words better than I actually wrote them. As Cassilis gives a short plug for future PollyOdd broadcasts, I'm hoping it will become a regular feature of what is already a 'must read' site.
Andy Howell at Political Futures had the idea of a weekly political audio blog round up some months ago, which I was to jointly produce with him, but disorganised socialists that we are, we never quite got round to doing it. Actually, Andy has a much more broadcastable style than me, and he has the technology, so I think he should just have got on with it. Iain Dale used to do something similar a year or so ago, but it was just too long to maintain interest. A short snappy 10 minutes, PollyOdd-style seems just about right.
One of the things I have always liked about the Labour Party is that you don't have to swallow the Party line. There is room for dissent, and as we often say, we are a broad church. Unlike the various Trotskyist sects or hard line CP'ers, we have a fairly open debate, and the disagreement is tolerated.
Of course, Iain Dale will bleat that no-one tells him what to write, and some people may even believe him. Personally, I don't think this spiteful series of attacks is anything other than a co-ordinated attack on any Conservative who happens to challenge the Cameron line. It is a sad sign for democracy, and a pathetic and demeaning position for a blogger to allow himself to be used in this way..
One of the things that has constantly hampered an incoming Labour Government has been the permanent civil service. They are of the same class as the Tories, all, Eton, Harrow Oxbridge types with an inbuilt conservatism. We should be allowed to sweep them out of power and employ those people who would understand the philosophy of an incoming Labour Government. No more should we have to endure this bunch of upper class nerds who can find a thousand and one reasons why a Labour Government shouldn't do something.
It is stultifying and they are a dead hand on progressive government. Why would any decent socialist want to carry on working in a Johnson administration anyway?
The long slow march of building the socialist alternative on your own
» Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Alan Thomas, over at Liberal Conspiracy, has had a blinding flash of illumination. He has discovered that Labour is not a force for revolution, that trade union Leaders do deals with the Party hierarchy, and even more startling, that London is not crammed full of left-wing voters.
Alan leaves it near to the end of his piece before telling us that he is not actually a Party member. And then we get this delicious piece of advice on What is to be Done?
There is, it seems to me, no alternative to the slow and patient work of building a working class political movement outside of the Labour Party. Such a stance may even entail endorsing a vote for certain Labour candidates at times, or candidates from other parties such as the Socialist Party or the Greens.
Well, thanks for that, then, Alan. I think I'll call it a day. I'll nip in to the Council House tomorrow and tell the Chief Executive I'm resigning my seat and I think we should hand it over to the Conservative who came second in my election. He was opposed to all of the extra expenditure on Health and Education, he wants to send immigrants and asylum seekers back to from where they came, he doesn't believe in social housing, or safety nets for the poorest in our communities. He thinks the minimum wage, employment rights for workers, four weeks paid holiday, health and safety regulations and increased parental rights are nothing more than burdens on business.
Oh, and he supported the war in Iraq and Afghanistan for good measure.
And then, from tomorrow, comrades, I'll start.... the slow and patient work of building a working class political movement outside of the Labour Party.
It will not be enough to see him through the next four years. Mayor Boris has two assets: the ambition - he will not want to fail - and a brain. Narrowly missing a First in Greats, he did not fall short because of stress arising from overwork. Yet there is one problem with the brain. It has hardly been used. Boris has never written a closely argued article: never tried to think his way through a complex intellectual question. When he is not clowning and goofing, he is remarkably inarticulate. He will take a dart at an issue, offering his solution in a slangy stumble. When someone points out the obvious flaws in his suggestion, he quickly becomes peevish. From now on, he will have to do better than that.
Just as an example, take this exchange with Johann Hari reproduced on Your Friend in the North on Johnson's support for Clause 28:
JH: Many gay people would feel anxious that you supported Section 28, and just a few years ago accused the government of having "an appalling agenda of encouraging the teaching of homosexuality in schools." Did you really think it was possible to teach children to be gay?
BJ: No, no, no, no, no - what's that? The only point I was making there was that I thought that this was being introduced in a sort of… my point was about political Balkanising. It was being done to provoke people, rather than any real desire to. As I recall the issue was to do with compulsion. Wasn't the question (about) whether or not schools should be compelled to have (these lessons)? I thought the issue was 'are you compelling teachers in schools to take a particular line', and I'm not in favour of that.
JH: No, that's not what Section 28 was. It wasn't about compelling people to teach about anything – it was the opposite. Section 28 in practice was a ban on ever teaching about homosexuality.
BJ: I don't think that's true. I'm not against… Well, let me tell you my version. If schools want to teach homosexuality, I think they should, I think that's fine. What I'm against is any kind of compulsions on teachers to do this that or the other, and that is what, from memory, I didn't like about the repeal. There's far too much proscription already of what teachers have to say and do.
Johnson is not the bumbling fool that he portrays for the media, but neither is he the articulate intellectual with a grasp of detail on political issues. This could, as many are already predicting, come back and bite Cameron on the bum.
Let's hope so, because at the moment we need all the help we can get.
