Who Loses Most From Huhne’s Downfall?

It’s been nearly two days now since Chris Huhne surprised everyone and pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice — the plea being the surprising part, not the guilty. The political commentariat have had chance enough to chew it over, myself included.

So given that mere months before his resignation Huhne was being touted as a possible coup leader and alternative to Clegg, the fallout from this will do some fairly profound rearranging of the political landscape. Since the late unlamented Huhne’s Eastleigh seat is beyond a long shot for Labour, I can sit back and enjoy this a bit, and look at who this plays out worst for.

• Chris Huhne

This is the obvious one. The man will almost certainly be going to jail, and deservedly so frankly. Displaying a staggering sense of arrogance and self-importance, he allowed his lies to turn a trivial driving offence into a career-ending death blow. So he has lost his seat, from all accounts he has lost his family, and he will go to jail. But upon his release, he will probably write a best-selling tell-all book, and in end won’t do nearly as poorly out of the whole sorry situation as by rights he should.

• Nick Clegg

Again, conventional wisdom seems to say that a disgraced MP’s party leader will pay a price in political capital. After all, this was someone who implicitly had Clegg’s endorsement as a member of his party, and as a (presumably-vetted) one-time cabinet minister — so his personal judgement should come into question somewhat. Except that Mr Clegg doesn’t have a great deal to lose in that respect. His poll ratings are in the doldrums, and as mentioned above Huhne had been something of an agitator against him.

For evidence that Clegg wasn’t terribly sorry to see the back of Huhne, just take a look at his statement on the matter:

“This is obviously an extremely serious matter and it’s essential that the legal process is now allowed to run its course. I am shocked and saddened by what has happened, but I believe that Chris Huhne has taken the right decision in resigning as an MP.“

Frosty and fairly perfunctory. So long Chris, thanks for nothing!

• David Cameron

What does David Cameron have to lose here, I hear you ask. Well, take a close look at Eastleigh. Huhne’s majority was only 3,864, and that was before the Lib Dem poll collapse. Toss in a disgraced former MP, and this should be a seat which the Conservatives easily win.

Except… In the 2012 local elections, the Lib Dems paradoxically gained seats. Factor into that the high polling of UKIP and the controversy of gay marriage. It is quite likely that UKIP will poll highly here, splitting the right-wing vote and allowing the Lib Dems to retain the seat.

And imagine what that would do to Cameron’s disaffected backbenchers. They are already, reportedly, planning to demand George Osborne’s head on a silver platter after the May elections. If they lose the sort of Parliamentary seat which they will need to win in 2015 to have any chance of winning a majority, then Osborne’s sacking won’t be nearly enough.

Strangely, Cameron may lose more than anyone out of Huhne’s downfall. After all, nothing gets rid of a Conservative Prime Minister more effectively than the Conservative Party.

Why you need to vote for your Police Commissioner

The below is the text of a letter I wrote, published in the present Wokingham Times, in response to an earlier letter written by Green Party activist Marjory Bisset. In it, Marjory calls on Wokingham residents to boycott the Police Commissioner elections in protest against their imposition.

As you will see below, this is not a position with which I agree.

I was, I must admit, somewhat surprised to read Marjory Bisset’s letter in last week’s Wokingham Times advocating, on behalf of the Green Party, a boycott of the Police and Crime Commissioner elections. Whilst I share her scepticism about the new position, hers is, unfortunately, a position lacking pragmatism.

That these elections are going to happen is an unavoidable truth. Elected police commissioners are a Conservative policy and the Conservative Party has its eye on taking control of as many police forces as possible – including in the Thames Valley.

Over the last two and a half years I think we’ve seen all we need to of Tory policing policy. Budget cutbacks, accompanied by nonsense about not cutting the “front lines”, even as we see those front lines suffering. The former Chief Whip’s comments have shown just what the Tories think of police officers – and, indeed, the rest of us “plebs”.

As for the Conservative candidate in the Thames Valley, Anthony Stansfeld, his website demonstrates he is a man bankrupt of ideas to improve policing, and with neither the experience nor the imagination to have any. Indeed, his one policy that I have been able to find so far is that the new Police Commissioner should have a dedicated car and chauffeur. Whose priorities are these?

Residents of Wokingham should think carefully about whether this is a man, and a party, they want in control of their police force. If not, then the answer is not to boycott the vote – an action which can only hand victory to the Conservatives – but to read the policy pledges of the other candidates, and turn out to vote on November 15^th.

Matthew S. Dent

Twyford & District Labour Party

You’ll only get one chance to make this choice. After November 15th, you’ll be stuck with the winner for three and a half years. Take this opportunity. Use your vote to choose the best candidate.

David Cameron: Schoolboy Prime Minister

One of the criticisms most frequently levelled at David Cameron and the little cabal of ministers he surrounds himself with is that the overwhelming majority are from wealthy, public school backgrounds. I’m not sure that this is a real issue with the Conservative frontbench — though the decisions that they have made in office, favouring people of their own circumstances far above the vulnerable and needy definitely are.

But as the ideological wheels have been falling off the Cameroon bandwagon on a seemingly daily basis, what strikes me as most alarming is that the politicians running Britain seem to act like they are still a gang of over-privileged schoolboys.

It’s been something I’ve thought for a long time. The crowded House of Commons at Prime Minister’s Questions on a Wednesday afternoon has something of an air of a rowdy classroom, and the braying MPs certainly don’t help the overall image.

But looking at the actions of government ministers, and it seems that in their own heads they’ve never actually left school. Andrew Mitchell, swearing like a yob at the police. George Osborne, sitting in first class without a ticket and thinking he should get away with it because he’s head boy.

And then, a couple of weeks ago, when Chris Bryant asked about texts and emails David Cameron had refused to release to the Leveson Inquiry, we were treated to this bizarre display:

Which basically amounts to David Cameron saying:

“I’m not answering his question because he’s mean to me!“

Mental. Leaving aside that Bryant had apologised to the House, and what Cameron was looking for was some extra grovelling  to him personally, there’s something very distasteful about someone holding high public office flat-out refusing to answer a question from an elected representative simply because he doesn’t like him.

And not only that, but yesterday I saw this story on BBC News:

“A man who shouted ‘no public sector cuts’ at David Cameron during a speech in Glasgow has been ordered to carry out 100 hours of community service.“

He shouted at the Prime Minister. He shouted at him, and he got 100 hours of community service. I expect there are a lot of MPs feeling very worried at the moment, in case David Cameron should run to teacher with the refrain “He shouted at me!” and point at them.

Honestly, this is absurd. Our government is made up of schoolboys. And not the competent, high-achieving “gifted and talented” students. No, this lot have already proved themselves incompetent.

I’m afraid, people of Britain, we’re being governed by the Inbetweeners.

Voter apathy: a serious problem for the left

This weekend I was out and about in Maidenhead, canvassing for the Pinkney’s Green by-election next week. A  bizarre practice, canvassing, where we few political enthusiasts go door to door, bothering people who most of the time don’t want to be bothered in an effort to persuade them to vote for our candidate.

Like I said, a bizarre practice. But it’s one that forms the cornerstone of our democratic system.

And yet, knocking on doors on a brisk Saturday morning, I was alarmed at just how many people said that either they weren’t planning to vote or didn’t even know that there was an election on. The overwhelming majority of households showed a worrying disconnection and disaffection from their local democracy.

There are a number of reasons why this shouldn’t be surprising:

1. Democratic involvement and thus electoral turnout has been down on trend since the 1950s.
2. Turnout at the last local elections in Wokingham (the neighbouring authority to Windsor & Maidenhead) was only 30%, despite some serious local issues framing the ballot.
3. After the expenses scandal, Nick Clegg’s u-turn on tuition fees, the hacking scandal, the Tories’ NHS u-turn, and a host of other incidents, the public’s distaste for politicians is higher than ever.

But still, if you were to ask most people they would probably say they aren’t happy with the government — local or national.

It’s never been any secret either that conservative voters are more likely to go out and vote. There are all sorts of reasons, but it gives right-wing parties an electoral advantage (remember that when you hear Tory MPs talking about boundary reviews and Labour advantages). Those who would naturally support the Conservatives are more likely to go down to the polling station on election day than those who would naturally support Labour.

Part of it, I’m convinced, is down to a sense of empowerment. The more affluent voters more inclined to vote blue feel that they have a stake in the system and that their votes count. The poorer, more vulnerable voters who would be most helped by policies of the left do not. In the words of one gentlemen I spoke to on Saturday:

“Whoever I vote for, it makes no difference to me, it makes no difference to my life.“

Whether or not that’s true is up for debate, but what isn’t is that him and a lot of other people like him feel that way.

The truth is that politics is often boring. For every exciting moment of heated debate, there’s a boring committee meeting about details which would bore the pants off most. This is doubly true with local government. And yet, this it is through these mechanisms which their lives can be enhanced and improved.

This is a serious problem for the left, although I don’t have a solution. But a turnout as low as (or lower than) one third is not accurately representative of the public view. The only real remedy to this that we have at our disposal (excluding making voting compulsory) is party infrastructure, “getting the vote out“.

In the longer term, though, we need to do something to make people, all people, feel that their votes matter and make a difference.

Theresa May: playing politics with the police

I was listening to Theresa May’s speech to the Conservative Party Conference in Birmingham earlier, and although there was only one brief mention of cats this year (I can’t think why), there was something she said which took me by surprise.

“While Labour candidates use [the Police and Crime Commissioner] elections to play politics, and the Lib Dems try to make up their minds whether they should even take part, our candidates are talking about how to help their communities by getting tough on crime.“

Sorry, what? Labour are playing politics? That sounds odd. It seems to me that holding elections for the heads of police forces instantly politicises what previously was an independent and impartial — not to mention important — role.

I also seem to recall that it was a Conservative policy to introduce them, one which Labour opposed due to concerns that it would be…erm…playing politics with policing.

Labour Conference 2012 – A Summary

So conference is over. I’ve been home for a weekend, eating at regular times and not rushing all around Manchester to various fringe events. I am very much into the “comedown” stage of post-conference life. So what were the highlights? I’ve had a few days’ distance to think about this, and I’ve begun to put together a bit of a “best of” list:

• That speech. Yes, Ed Miliband’s leader’s speech. Undoubtedly the highlight of the week, and despite the scepticism of certain quarters, we could well see this as the turning point moment in his leadership. He was calm and confident, relaxed and likeable, and managed to do the whole thing without any notes. It was spectacular to behold.
• The emergence of a clear theme for Labour, as we head towards the next election. “One Nation” is not a new idea, but it is coherent and effective, and a clear counterpoint to the fractured and divided society that the Tories’ are creating in done sort of cynical divide-and-conquer strategy. It’s the clearest and most optimistic idea I’ve heard from Ed, and addresses my prior criticisms of the “predistribution” idea by couching it in understandable language.
• Meeting so many people who I have only known through a broadband connection. Around the converge in general, but also at the excellent Political Scrapbook tweetup. I don’t want to start listing names, as someone will doubtless get lost in the cloud which obscures my memory, but you are all awesome, and it was a particular joy to meet and endlessly discuss politics with Cllr Julian Ware-Lane. As For the tweetup, I remember as a particular highlight Tom Watson (yes, that Tom Watson) explaining to me the behind-the-scenes panicking at Labour HQ at the idea of Ed doing his speech without Autocue or notes. Apparently the scourge of Murdoch quelled the chaos, and told the Labour leader not to take any notice of it. Let Ed be Ed indeed.
• The sense of optimism. The Guardian rather unfairly described the atmosphere as flat, but my presiding sense was one of optimism. Living in an almost homogeneously blue bloc in the south east is disheartening sometimes, but meeting and talking to so many activists with so many stories from all across the country was encouraging. I feel utterly reinvigorated.

So where now? Well, in the long term, 2015 and a Labour government. But in the immediate term, there’s a by-election in Pinkneys Green ward in a few weeks, and the Police and Crime Commissioner elections soon after. Let’s start there. I’ll look for you all on the campaign battle-lines, comrades.

Does Ed Miliband Need to Get Angry?

Does Ed Miliband need to show some raw anger at the government to connect with the public, and win the 2015 election?

Despite the inconvenience, staying outside of Manchester for the Labour Party conference does have its advantages. Yesterday, heading into Deansgate on the train from Warrington Central, I got to overhear a couple of fellow passengers on the way to work, discussing the conference. In particular, they were talking about Ed Miliband.

Said one to the other, of the Labour leader:

“He’s definitely getting much better… I quite like him. I think he’ll do it.“

The other replied:

“He’s getting better, but he needs to lose his rag a bit, he needs to get angry about what the Tories are doing.“

Which played on my mind all day really. I completely understand what they mean, Ed has had a very rocky start to his leadership — though the post 1951 and post 1979 years tell a story of how explosive they could have been — and is only beginning to really pull his image into the Prime Minister he wants to become in 2015.

He’s a very thoughtful man, who doesn’t always come across that well on the TV screen, inviting comparisons with Clement Atlee — Winston Churchill allegedly said of the post-war PM “An empty taxi pulled up and Clement Atlee got out“. But Atlee founded the NHS and rebuilt Britain after the Second World War.

And anyway, in person Ed comes across quite differently.

Until yesterday, I had never met Ed. My first sight of him in the flesh was standing at the conference podium, introducing Professor Michael Sandel. For one thing, he was taller than I had expected, with a strong posture and a strange way of speaking which made you feel, even in a hall of thousands, that he was talking to you. That’s an important skill.

But of course it’s foolishness to suggest that as mitigation, because the simple truth is that even if he toured up and down the country from now until the general election, the entire population would never be able to have a one on one with him.

And it isn’t just the people catching the train to work in the morning who have noted the lack of anger. John Harris from the Guardian has described the conference atmosphere as “quiet, respectable and sedate“. Which seems a bit unfair to me. I would have said that it’s less an issue of a lack of anger, and more of realisation that Labour could not only get back into government, but maybe win a majority. It’s a quiet hope, that we’re almost holding our breaths in anticipation of, for fear that we could frighten it away.

But this afternoon sees Ed’s speech. I’ve been impressed with him so far this conference, and I think this could be where he starts to turn on the anger. If he does, and if he manages to communicate a sense of anger which resonates with the general public who are hurting under the cuts of a government who apparently think they should “learn their place“, then a Labour majority in 2015 will get that bit closer.

The View from the Third Row

Ed Miliband introduces Professor Michael Sandel at the Labour Party conference

So I’ve been to my first session of conference, and am already excited. My seat, as a delegate is right at the front of the hall, on only the third row back. The view will be fantastic, come Ed Miliband’s speech on Tuesday.

And actually, I’ve already had a bit of a sneak preview. When I first walled into the conference hall,.the man himself was just taking to the stage, to introduce the guest speaker Michael Sandel, a Harvard professor of political philosophy.

Anyone who says that Ed can’t hack it as a speaker is talking nonsense. The Labour party leader I saw today was confident, articulate and in the ascendent. He seemed more prime ministerial than David Cameron without even trying, whatever Tory polls might say.

And as an introductory figure, Professor Sandel set the scene brilliantly. He gave an excellent audience participation lecture on market thinking in our society. He explained how over the last three decades market thinking has crept from purely economics into areas of society too, without any public debate on the matter.

One particular story he told stood out. In Switzerland, the government were looking for a storage site for nuclear waste. They polled residents of a village near an ideal site on whether they would accept such a site nearby, and 51% said yes. Then they polled again, adding the condition that the government would pay each resident an annual payment. The yes vote plummeted to 25%.

The introduction of money, Professor Sandel said, changed the nature of the transaction, and changed the focus from the common good.

Professor Sandel finished by highlighting the need for debate of this change, asking if we want to live in a society where everything is for sale.

This is what the conference, Ed Miliband’s leadership, and the Labour party is all about. And I think people are starting to realise that. Certainty the Tories are realising, which is why they’re already starting a huge negative campaign against him.

Imagine if the next government was every bit as radical as Margaret Thatcher’s — but following policies of radical fairness and equality. Then you’ll see why I’m so proud to be Labour, and so exited to be here at conference this week.

Diary of a Conference Virgin

So I’ve left the sunny countryside of Berkshire. I’ve even departed the bustling metropolis of London (where, at Euston, I’m reasonably sure that the announcer said one train was calling at King’s Landing, of A Song of Ice and Fire fame). I am presently streaming my way up the country towards my old homestead of the North West. Yes, I’m headed to Manchester for the Labour Party Conference.

I’ve watched conferences on TV for the last few years, but this will be my first time actually attending; a true conference virgin. And, it’s fair to say, I’ve been unrestrainably excited all week.

I’ve been looking over the schedules, trying and for the most part failing to decide what to go to. Truth is, I’d like to go to everything; every conference hall session, every seminar, every talk, every meeting, and every reception.

Sadly, until Amazon deliver me the TARDIS I ordered, that won’t be possible. But I will be making sure to experience all that I possibly can of the whole extravaganza. I’m even *gulp* going to try to make a speech.

One of the things I’m most looking forward to is Ed Miliband’s speech on Tuesday. Not simply for Ed (though yes, that too), but also to experience a party leader’s speech in the flesh. Last year I watched Ed’s speech on TV, and my thoughts on it (excellent content, but somewhat stilted delivery) was quite different from the feedback of some of the people who were actually there.

And after Nick Clegg’s self-congratulatory, content-vacuum of a speech at the Lib Dem conference earlier this week, Ed has a real opportunity to present something radical and progressive.

Another high point is going to meeting a lot of people on the left with whom I’ve communicated a lot online, but not yet had the pleasure of meeting face-to-face. The Political Scrapbook-sponsored tweetup on Wednesday night should be good for that, but otherwise if you see me in the street do say hello. You’ll know me by my hair, and the rapt expression on my face — like a kid in a sweet shop.

(Also, most of my blogging this week, and I intend to blog a lot is likely to be done using the Android WordPress app — so do please excuse any slips in my usual high standards of spelling and formatting, and any other teething issues)

Falling on Your Sword

"You know, in certain older civilized cultures, when men failed as entirely as you have, they would throw themselves on their swords." (Serenity, 2005)

Joss Whedon’s Serenity is one of my favourite films. It’s fun, exciting and smart. In it, there’s a certain scene where the bad guy confronts the director of a facility from which a “patient” has escaped, and delivers this telling little line:

“You know, in certain older civilized cultures, when men failed as entirely as you have, they would throw themselves on their swords.“

It’s that line that occurs to me today, as political disaster after disaster explodes, rocking the ship of government to the point of capsizing. Politicians desperately scramble for excuses, for any scapegoat that will save their skins from the situations they have put themselves in.

Look to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. The Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt was well and truly “dropped in it” yesterday by James Murdoch’s testimony to the Leveson Inquiry. Hunt, it seems, was leaking information to News International and helping get their bid to take over Sky approved- a bid that he was adjudicating on.

What is Hunt’s response? He’s forced out his special advisor, trying to create a scapegoat despite the fact that the ministerial code clearly says that it is Hunt himself who bears responsibility.

Another example: today saw the announcement of the growth figures for the first quarter of 2012. They were terrible. So terrible, in fact, that we are now technically back in recession. This is a double dip that George Osborne assured us all that we would not suffer, and that anyone saying we would was wrong and profoundly irresponsible.

What was Osborne’s response? A lot of fluff about how it’s down to the Eurozone. When Labour left office the economy was recovering. Conservative economic policy started to turn that recovery into another downturn before the impact of the Eurozone could reasonably be blamed.

Both men have failed in their duties. Both have tried to deflect blame and responsibilty to save themselves and their positions. The scrabbling around to look for excuses is utterly undignified.

I’m not saying that previous administrations have been innocent of this same political grubbery, because they haven’t. It’s not just down to these particular individuals, but rather a malaise that has infected our political sphere as a whole, from top to bottom.

Look, for example, more locally to Wokingham. In the light of the disastrous new rubbish scheme the Conservative administration: firstly went into hiding; secondly came out fighting trying to smear anyone who criticised them; thirdly blamed anyone else they could think of.

There is a slimy, selfish inability to take responsibility in a dignified and honourable way that has taken hold. The present government seems, in every aspect, to embody this. From Theresa May’s spurious claims about cats, to Jeremy Hunt’s shadowy connections to News International, to the shattering mismanagement of the economy at George Osborne’s hands. If someone of import at least displayed a willingness to fall on their sword in penance for their failures, then there might at least be some confidence in the political system.