OK.....I have returned, unscarred from my Murder Mystery. Totally confused it has to be said, I was convinced it was me what dun it, with the help of course of Captain Pastings............
So, where was I?
Q - I think this was something about priorities?
Nick talked about his Freedom Bill, and that one of our first acts in power should be to remove a swathe of laws. He touched on ID cards, the DNA database, the right to protest. He talked about the research he had done, widely reported, to discover that there were 3,400 new criminal offences. He emphasised the fact that we must do our research.
Chris focused on the salami slicing of our civil liberties that has accumulated under a Labour Government. He highlighted the cases of Maya Evans and Walter Woolfgang. We are losing our liberties - no other country detains people for longer than 14 days and we are witnessing a worrying erosion of liberties. We should never forget the cumulative effect.
Q about how charismatic the candidates were
Chris observed that we were doomed to fail if not seen as charismatic. He felt it was up for others to decide as to whether a candidate was charismatic, his faith was in that everyone has a vote and he trusted in the collective wisdom of the party.
Nick was insistent that there was a need to represent the different strands of the party - the leader had to be the standard bearer for all off us.He believed he had the flair energy and dynamism necessary. We should celebrate our values and be ambitious.
Q - what does success look like?
Nick's ambition was to break the deadlock in 10 years, doubling representation as a stepping stone to power.
Chris was reminded of the wisdom from an ex Treasury colleague any prediction should be without a date! He broadly agreed with Nick that our objective should be 150 seats in 2 elections. He again referred to his belief that we were reaching a tipping point. He also saw the party on an ambitious route march, fighting to win, and he believed we had a real prospect of success .
Q how to reengage our youth
Nick reflected that it was a grotesque sin that our young people were being deliberately vilified by a so called progressive party. For him the key was communication.
Chris recognised that one of the key issues was the environment we were steeling the planet from our children of enormous importance was to reconnect locally with the young.
Q ? Er...........forgot this one but a prize to anyone who can guess it from the answers!
Chris - we should be inspiring the apathetic as an anti establishment party it was outrageous that the Labour Party had 55% of seats for 30% of vote - we needed to engage on a crusade for change.
Nick believes that we are the future, we should be a gathering point for those who want a different kind of politics, people not systems, communities not bureaucracy, human innovation not government dictat.
Well, I am dropping off at the mo, so may get to comment on this tomorrow.........maybe!
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Is it the Nick Huhne or the Chris Clegg Show?..........to be continued........
Just back from Rugby for the first official leadership hustings. I have decided to focus on the answers candidates gave to questions, as the contents of their speeches are already well known.
Bearing in mind my preferred candidate, I may have inadvertently got distracted from time to time when Chris was speaking, but have picked up as much as I can.
Q about what candidates would do in their first 100 days
Chris wanted to get the message of fairer, greener, less centralised across. Show that as a party we were more ambitious, not a 3rd party but a 1st . He believes there will be a tipping point when the electorate will come over to us. He would have a clear strategy to up our game so it is clear no other party can form a government without us. He also touched on the importance of fundraising.
Nick believed the first 100 days would give us a unique opportunity to get to the press - that we had the opportunity of a fairer hearing and we should be planning now for the election of a new leader. He believed we should create a sense of story, an idea that there was "something new afoot". His target was to break the mold in 10 years create a sense of excitement that we are a party on the march. His priority would be to establish our credentials as the anti establishment and campaigning party giving a voice to millions without a voice. And that we should do it in human speak - in ways people can understand.
Q about the two appearing to agree on policy
(I didn't quite get this question I thought it referred to the candidates but they seemed to have interpreted it as about parties)
Nick pointed out that the public perception is that we are all the same. He emphasised the need to do nationally what we do well locally, and that we needed to do so with a sense of flair and colour.
Chris talked about breaking the mold, that we should be seen as party there to change system and not just government. He reflected that despite 25% of the vote we had just10% of seats and that we can't build a fair society on the basis of an unfair system. He talked about the need to reconnect back. That a picture was worth a thousand words and suggested that on issues such as the loss of Civil Liberties MPs should do the same as Maya Evans, thus getting our message across visually.
Q about how to reach hard to reach places like the Black Country
Chris talked about his great grandfather having come from the Black Country. He said that we needed a party strategy and that we could bust the system in two parliaments. He felt we should have teams to recruit where we don't have a central spark.
Nick said we needed to talk to people, he had been out campaigning and had met people who hadn't heard from us before. We should build confidence in our ethos and values. He also stressed that candidates had to reflect contemporary Britain and that this was an issue he would be returning to.
Q about what was distinctive about each candidate
Nick referred to his record as shadow Home Sec at a time when the Home Office was as illiberal as it had ever been. He refused to accept the counsel from some senior colleagues that we should keep quiet. He expressed his outrage at the state of our prisons with 3,000-4,000 young men going to prison every month, into a system that wasn't working. His view was that we should take a principled approach. And he had done the same on immigration - put forward policies that would lead to a break through out of an incompetent system out of twilight zone - drawing illegal immigrants out and making them useful to society.
Chris said that we must make clear our differences That our policies are already there, our problem is communicating how we differ. On Iraq we were lucky to have our own issues but that isn't always the case especially when our policies get nicked. We must be more fleet of foot - research issues more - define wedge issues - and chisel away. Issues of social justice, freedom, green tax switch. We have had a problem honing down the central differences.
Q about the tole of the private sector in NHS
Chris referred to the proposals being worked up by Norman for more local control. Consequently some areas would choose to use the private sector, we were not offering top down proposals. We should scrap the centralised NHS and that for dynamism in the public sector you must have local control.
Nick said he had 2 priorities - greater control locally for NHS and to create a system that treats people like human beings - many get great service, but those with long term issues are not listened to. We should look at innovations in social care where people decide themselves who they want. He regarded the debate about the role of the private sector as a red herring and referred to the many rigged markets in high value schemes. He believed public monopolies were being replaced by private monopolies and gave as an example the buses in Sheffield.
Q asking about carers given that 1in5 of us are likely to be carers in fin the future
Nick pointed out that carers save us all billions. He cited the lack of respite care for carers as being unacceptable - this was an issue that must be more prominent.
Chris observed that councils were more concerned to protect their road budgets, rather than most vulnerable. He felt the degree of devotion of so many was astonishing but that they were often at their wits end.
To be continued.....................
I have to run off to a local party murder mystery evening............if I don't end up being the one getting it (which I know some of my esteemed readers would appreciate!) I will come back to this when I get home......
Bearing in mind my preferred candidate, I may have inadvertently got distracted from time to time when Chris was speaking, but have picked up as much as I can.
Q about what candidates would do in their first 100 days
Chris wanted to get the message of fairer, greener, less centralised across. Show that as a party we were more ambitious, not a 3rd party but a 1st . He believes there will be a tipping point when the electorate will come over to us. He would have a clear strategy to up our game so it is clear no other party can form a government without us. He also touched on the importance of fundraising.
Nick believed the first 100 days would give us a unique opportunity to get to the press - that we had the opportunity of a fairer hearing and we should be planning now for the election of a new leader. He believed we should create a sense of story, an idea that there was "something new afoot". His target was to break the mold in 10 years create a sense of excitement that we are a party on the march. His priority would be to establish our credentials as the anti establishment and campaigning party giving a voice to millions without a voice. And that we should do it in human speak - in ways people can understand.
Q about the two appearing to agree on policy
(I didn't quite get this question I thought it referred to the candidates but they seemed to have interpreted it as about parties)
Nick pointed out that the public perception is that we are all the same. He emphasised the need to do nationally what we do well locally, and that we needed to do so with a sense of flair and colour.
Chris talked about breaking the mold, that we should be seen as party there to change system and not just government. He reflected that despite 25% of the vote we had just10% of seats and that we can't build a fair society on the basis of an unfair system. He talked about the need to reconnect back. That a picture was worth a thousand words and suggested that on issues such as the loss of Civil Liberties MPs should do the same as Maya Evans, thus getting our message across visually.
Q about how to reach hard to reach places like the Black Country
Chris talked about his great grandfather having come from the Black Country. He said that we needed a party strategy and that we could bust the system in two parliaments. He felt we should have teams to recruit where we don't have a central spark.
Nick said we needed to talk to people, he had been out campaigning and had met people who hadn't heard from us before. We should build confidence in our ethos and values. He also stressed that candidates had to reflect contemporary Britain and that this was an issue he would be returning to.
Q about what was distinctive about each candidate
Nick referred to his record as shadow Home Sec at a time when the Home Office was as illiberal as it had ever been. He refused to accept the counsel from some senior colleagues that we should keep quiet. He expressed his outrage at the state of our prisons with 3,000-4,000 young men going to prison every month, into a system that wasn't working. His view was that we should take a principled approach. And he had done the same on immigration - put forward policies that would lead to a break through out of an incompetent system out of twilight zone - drawing illegal immigrants out and making them useful to society.
Chris said that we must make clear our differences That our policies are already there, our problem is communicating how we differ. On Iraq we were lucky to have our own issues but that isn't always the case especially when our policies get nicked. We must be more fleet of foot - research issues more - define wedge issues - and chisel away. Issues of social justice, freedom, green tax switch. We have had a problem honing down the central differences.
Q about the tole of the private sector in NHS
Chris referred to the proposals being worked up by Norman for more local control. Consequently some areas would choose to use the private sector, we were not offering top down proposals. We should scrap the centralised NHS and that for dynamism in the public sector you must have local control.
Nick said he had 2 priorities - greater control locally for NHS and to create a system that treats people like human beings - many get great service, but those with long term issues are not listened to. We should look at innovations in social care where people decide themselves who they want. He regarded the debate about the role of the private sector as a red herring and referred to the many rigged markets in high value schemes. He believed public monopolies were being replaced by private monopolies and gave as an example the buses in Sheffield.
Q asking about carers given that 1in5 of us are likely to be carers in fin the future
Nick pointed out that carers save us all billions. He cited the lack of respite care for carers as being unacceptable - this was an issue that must be more prominent.
Chris observed that councils were more concerned to protect their road budgets, rather than most vulnerable. He felt the degree of devotion of so many was astonishing but that they were often at their wits end.
To be continued.....................
I have to run off to a local party murder mystery evening............if I don't end up being the one getting it (which I know some of my esteemed readers would appreciate!) I will come back to this when I get home......
Friday, October 26, 2007
Stop Press - Loo's Muze Exclusive
I have just learnt, from a source close to Nick, that his nomination paper has been signed by the following MPs
- Danny Alexander heading up Nick's campaign
- Julia Goldsworthy - Nick's agent
- Stephen Williams - (Chris Huhne's agent last time)
- Steve Webb
- Sarah Teather
- Tim Farron - (Ming's PPS)
- Norman Baker - our own Eco champion
It has to be Clegg!
A couple of weeks ago I had the great honour of addressing a group of 6th form politics students at one of our local upper schools. Their teacher was at pains to reassure me that despite the pasting they had given our local Tory PPC the previous week, she didn't think I would have the same trouble given that they were much more sympathetic to the Lib Dems. So, as anticipated I had a great time. Nice easy questions, lots of opportunity to explain our policies and priorities. Only one thing they couldn't understand was our choice of leader. What could I say? As it happened within days we were faced with the prospect of choosing a new leader.
I have said it before and will say it again, our narrative must coalesce around our leader. We are the dynamic, radical party that appeals to young people, we need a leader who will live up to that image. But we also need a leader with sound liberal values, who will ensure our distinctiveness from the other two Tory parties.
That is why I am backing Nick Clegg. Nick is the candidate who for me is best equipped to get our message across. There are few people in politics with such incredible communication skills. He is a man of deep compassion and his politics is rooted in believing - it doesn't have to be like this for the millions in this country who remain in poverty in a country where the gap between rich and poor has widened under a Labour government.
There has been a lot of idle chatter about Nick being right wing. This is total piffle. Nick is first and foremost an instinctive liberal and for me it is that liberalism that matters most. Importantly he is someone who is prepared to listen and I believe can unite the party behind a forward looking and ground breaking approach to politics. I believe he will get our messages across in ways that really connect with people whoever and where ever they are.
There have been some interesting musings elsewhere on the importance of choosing a leader on the basis of their policies.........yes, but that's a fat lot of use if the leader can't communicate effectively with the electorate. We are not just choosing a leader to lead us motley crew, but a leader who can lead and inspire our nation.
So, I will continue to challenge Nick on the policy areas (and they are few) where we disagree, but I will give him my total support in his quest for leadership.
I commented a couple of years ago that I thought Charles was a Moses (leading us to the promised land) and that at some point we would need a Joshua to take us into that promised land. I believe Nick is that man.
I have said it before and will say it again, our narrative must coalesce around our leader. We are the dynamic, radical party that appeals to young people, we need a leader who will live up to that image. But we also need a leader with sound liberal values, who will ensure our distinctiveness from the other two Tory parties.
That is why I am backing Nick Clegg. Nick is the candidate who for me is best equipped to get our message across. There are few people in politics with such incredible communication skills. He is a man of deep compassion and his politics is rooted in believing - it doesn't have to be like this for the millions in this country who remain in poverty in a country where the gap between rich and poor has widened under a Labour government.
There has been a lot of idle chatter about Nick being right wing. This is total piffle. Nick is first and foremost an instinctive liberal and for me it is that liberalism that matters most. Importantly he is someone who is prepared to listen and I believe can unite the party behind a forward looking and ground breaking approach to politics. I believe he will get our messages across in ways that really connect with people whoever and where ever they are.
There have been some interesting musings elsewhere on the importance of choosing a leader on the basis of their policies.........yes, but that's a fat lot of use if the leader can't communicate effectively with the electorate. We are not just choosing a leader to lead us motley crew, but a leader who can lead and inspire our nation.
So, I will continue to challenge Nick on the policy areas (and they are few) where we disagree, but I will give him my total support in his quest for leadership.
I commented a couple of years ago that I thought Charles was a Moses (leading us to the promised land) and that at some point we would need a Joshua to take us into that promised land. I believe Nick is that man.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Is Political Suicide a Spectator Sport?
Paul Walter, bless him, commented on "My lips are sealed" last night - Gagged?! We don't appear to be hearing the last of it! How right you are Paul (as ever how tiresome is that?!). So.............I have outed myself on Facebook..............and somewhere else.
Leadership Elections? My lips are sealed..............
When everyone is chatting about the leadership election and I am gagged................what to say???? Well, I have had an interesting few days in Berlin, when I was delighted that a motion I initiated on the situation of the Arab citizens of Israel was passed. But I am not convinced that the way ELDR do business is the right way. Motions are submitted, amendments follow, there are then working groups to try and reach a consensus. Votes are only taken on contentious issues, motions are passed with little or no debate. This is very unfortunate. I wanted to get a feel for what my other European colleagues were passionate about..........instead there were points made about the minutiae of inappropriate commas!
But Berlin was lovely, it was fascinating to return (my last visit being pre the fall of the wall) and see how the city had been revitalised. A definite candidate for a future cultural visit.
My only other news is that I have been invited to become a blogger on my trade mag. This is a great honour, especially as the other person invited is one of my all time heroes, previously CEO of the National Youth Agency, Tom Wylie (seen here with Simon Hughes).
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Agreeing with James Graham
Having spent the last few days away at ELDR in Berlin - I have been catching up with the blogs and have found myself agreeing with James Graham (shock horror!) on a couple of points.
One is the comment he made in relation to the last general election campaign........"We spent so much time trying to widen our appeal in so many different directions that no-one knew what we were for." He also observed that our 10 point plan, and failure to link it with our underpinning philosophy gained us voters but not supporters. Absolutely!!!!
This is an issue close to my heart, we are a small party, we have to shout to get heard, we have to be fleeter of foot than the other two elephantine (apologies Millennium!) parties. So this constant idea of widening our base is totally misjudged.
As a student I spent many hours playing the game Risk. For those not familiar with this board game, the plan is to take over the world. Those who win tend to be those who consolidate their forces into defendable territories and then move out from there. A scattergun approach usually ends up with disaster......wipeout! We must take 
a truly radical approach that is prepared to sacrifice some ground (in hard to hold areas) for taking defendable and winnable ground.
a truly radical approach that is prepared to sacrifice some ground (in hard to hold areas) for taking defendable and winnable ground.So, I would like to see us lift our eyes from the minutiae and start considering the big picture.........yes that must link to FREE FAIR and GREEN - so long as we are clear how our definitions differ from the other parties who would also no doubt espouse freedom, fairness and greenness in their own way, but what about really coalescing around what I believe we can all aspire to, regardless or our party "wing", our stated ambition, that no one should be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity.
Loo's Muze............Gagged
Last week I received an email informing me that as a Euro candidate I was not allowed to endorse a candidate. Now, of course, the candidates may well be relieved at this news! The reason myself and other candidates have been thus silenced, is, in my view, a complete misinterpretation of the rule which states that we cannot have any endorsement in our literature from a "known" Lib Dem. I can accept that, not all candidates will have access to such endorsement. What I can't accept is this being interpreted as us not being able to endorse a candidate - guilt allegedly by association. This I can't accept, every single candidate is able to endorse a candidate if they so wish, so no one has an advantage. I am a Lib Dem because I am a liberal........I share the value of freedom of expression and that no-one should be "enslaved by conformity".........I thus find this ruling a tad absurd and illiberal....but am willing to be corrected.
Anyway, I am appealing this decision, but knowing how slowly the appealwheels turn in our party I am not holding my breath or expecting a decision pre 7th November (after which I can say what I like).
Friends and detractors alike will no doubt find it a little odd for me to keep my mouth shut on this really important issue.
I am considering my options, fellow bloggers are invited to vote in my poll..........
Anyway, I am appealing this decision, but knowing how slowly the appealwheels turn in our party I am not holding my breath or expecting a decision pre 7th November (after which I can say what I like).
Friends and detractors alike will no doubt find it a little odd for me to keep my mouth shut on this really important issue.
I am considering my options, fellow bloggers are invited to vote in my poll..........
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Stuck at Luton Airport with a 4 hour delay..............and its costing £1 for 10 minutes on the internet.........someone feel sorry for me! I am just hoping that Jo Hayes has her laptop in Berlin, otherwise signing off til Saturday.
L
x
L
x
And my choice for leader is...............
...........................................................................................................................................................................................Guess!
Monday, October 15, 2007
17th December? What's that all about?
I am not a member of FE so have no idea how they came up with their time scale, but surely, we need a bit longer to make a decision about a new leader?
Ming Resigns
In August I was vilified for saying what so many were thinking. That doesn't make me happy it is a sad day that it had to come to this. As I said yesterday, Ming is an honourable man and I expected he would do the honourable thing. I hope he will go back to his old job and regain the gravitas he had as our shadow Foreign Secretary.
The most important thing is that we get the right leader this time. Whilst I do accept what lots of fellow Lib Demmers have said that our problems are not just about our leader, our leader has a key role to play in getting our messages out.
The most important thing is that we get the right leader this time. Whilst I do accept what lots of fellow Lib Demmers have said that our problems are not just about our leader, our leader has a key role to play in getting our messages out.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
The Occasional Dissident............Time to Fez up?
Ming hit back at critics today saying that there was idle chatter from the occasional dissident......if that is true he has nothing to worry about. He is right, we all have a responsibility to raise our game, but he is the only one who can do anything about raising his own personal ratings.
Having spoken out earlier this year I have kept my mouth shut due to the possibility of a snap election and due to fellow party members asking me to because they believed it would damage the party. That is the last thing any of us want to do. All parties have their dissidents, in fact it would be quite unhealthy if they didn't. They can actually be quite useful for a leader to show his or her metal by either silencing them or bringing them on board. But there has to come a time when continuing to pretend everything in the garden is rosy is more damaging than being honest.
Ming is an honourable man. On a personal level he has been absolutely charming to me on the occasions we have met since my comments in the summer. He is hugely talented and has been and will continue to be an asset to our party. And because he is honourable I believe he will listen to what his parliamentary colleagues and grassroots activists are saying. A leader can continue very well with the occasional dissident, but when you have lost the confidence of a third of your party chairs and if that is translated to a third of your party, you surely must consider your position.
Having spoken out earlier this year I have kept my mouth shut due to the possibility of a snap election and due to fellow party members asking me to because they believed it would damage the party. That is the last thing any of us want to do. All parties have their dissidents, in fact it would be quite unhealthy if they didn't. They can actually be quite useful for a leader to show his or her metal by either silencing them or bringing them on board. But there has to come a time when continuing to pretend everything in the garden is rosy is more damaging than being honest.
Ming is an honourable man. On a personal level he has been absolutely charming to me on the occasions we have met since my comments in the summer. He is hugely talented and has been and will continue to be an asset to our party. And because he is honourable I believe he will listen to what his parliamentary colleagues and grassroots activists are saying. A leader can continue very well with the occasional dissident, but when you have lost the confidence of a third of your party chairs and if that is translated to a third of your party, you surely must consider your position.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Let's get the Lib Dems up to 51%
If you are a Facebooker can you go and download UK Politics ? At present we are on 19.8% of the vote, despite me persuading 6 of my mates to join! We all know us Lib Dems lead the pack in Facebook terms, so come on, let's prove it!
Inheritance Tax and Dancing on the Head of a Pin with Nick Clegg
At the WATO fringe Nick Clegg made a comment that I didn't get a chance to come back on, namely that as far as tax goes all three main parties were "dancing on the head of a pin". That may well be true Nick, but that doesn't make it right. On Sunday, Simon ( there is only one, no not Cowell!) was chatting to Andy Marr about us and the Tories being the tax cutters in contrast to Labour. Oh heavens, have I woken up in a parallel universe?!
This piece by Johann Hari in today's Indy says it all for me.
This piece by Johann Hari in today's Indy says it all for me.
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Well Darling.........................
Alistair Darling. Hmmmm, is that a contradiction in terms? I must confess I haven't yet read all 286 pages of his CSR, but what I have seen already hasn't really convinced me that it does what it says on the tin, namely "meet the aspirations of the British people". How I wish the document we got sight of today hadn't been disinfected. What fun if we had been able to track the changes!
So, lots of gimmicks, little long term thinking. I share a theory, you may know it.........the wise man built his house on a rock...........the foolish on the sand. One of my biggest criticisms of the way this government develops its policy is that it neglects to see the value of foundations, its all about packaging and short term gain. A few years ago the Connexions service was established. As chair of Unison's Youth and Community Workers Forum at the time I was very involved in the consultations about the service and the development of "personal advisers". On one memorable occasion I shared a platform with Malcolm Wicks where he took umbrage at my metaphor for Connexions (his baby). What I saw was that they had two perfectly good houses with solid foundations (the existing Youth Service and Careers), OK there were a few broken windows, the walls could do with a lick of paint and maybe the roof needed replacing. What did they do? They abandoned the existing buildings and built a brand spanking new orange and purple portakabin........no foundations and likely to be pulled down in a few years. Was I right? Has Connexions been taken back into local authority control? And all the time, those of us who tried to soldier on in a Youth Service that had continued to face cuts even under Labour, saw our cuddly cousins in Connexions squandering the resources that could have enabled us to provide important services to our young people. In the service I used to manage, once I had met all my staffing and revenue bills, I had £2,000 a year left to spend on young people! Sorry, I am still bitter. But what happened with Connexions happens time and time again. Peter is robbed to pay Paul as the focus group gaze drifts from this to that. So today it is cuts in inheritance tax, screening for MRSA, doctors open at weekends. Tomorrow it will be????
Yet again no real investment in Youth Service, billions to the Health Service, but no mention of dealing with mixed wards (particularly in psychiatric units), but plenty of money for Trident and reserves to ensure we can attack Iran if Mr Bush tells us to. OK those are some of my personal issues and I am sure there are some good bits..........I'll let you know if I find them.
So, lots of gimmicks, little long term thinking. I share a theory, you may know it.........the wise man built his house on a rock...........the foolish on the sand. One of my biggest criticisms of the way this government develops its policy is that it neglects to see the value of foundations, its all about packaging and short term gain. A few years ago the Connexions service was established. As chair of Unison's Youth and Community Workers Forum at the time I was very involved in the consultations about the service and the development of "personal advisers". On one memorable occasion I shared a platform with Malcolm Wicks where he took umbrage at my metaphor for Connexions (his baby). What I saw was that they had two perfectly good houses with solid foundations (the existing Youth Service and Careers), OK there were a few broken windows, the walls could do with a lick of paint and maybe the roof needed replacing. What did they do? They abandoned the existing buildings and built a brand spanking new orange and purple portakabin........no foundations and likely to be pulled down in a few years. Was I right? Has Connexions been taken back into local authority control? And all the time, those of us who tried to soldier on in a Youth Service that had continued to face cuts even under Labour, saw our cuddly cousins in Connexions squandering the resources that could have enabled us to provide important services to our young people. In the service I used to manage, once I had met all my staffing and revenue bills, I had £2,000 a year left to spend on young people! Sorry, I am still bitter. But what happened with Connexions happens time and time again. Peter is robbed to pay Paul as the focus group gaze drifts from this to that. So today it is cuts in inheritance tax, screening for MRSA, doctors open at weekends. Tomorrow it will be????
Yet again no real investment in Youth Service, billions to the Health Service, but no mention of dealing with mixed wards (particularly in psychiatric units), but plenty of money for Trident and reserves to ensure we can attack Iran if Mr Bush tells us to. OK those are some of my personal issues and I am sure there are some good bits..........I'll let you know if I find them.
Young Scot
I was delighted to hear that Louise McDonald has been appointed as the new CEO for Young Scot. In Marcus Liddle - Young Scot founder - she has a hard act to follow, but if anyone can do it Louise can!
I have had the pleasure of working with Louise and Young Scot for the past three years. They are a remarkable organisation, really making a difference to young people's lives in Scotland. Louise has all the qualities necessary to take over the role, she is professional and scarily efficient and effective (!) but with a warmth and humour that immediately endears her to everyone she meets. Her immense talent is already a huge asset to Young Scot and in her new role she will have even more opportunity to be the advocate she already is for the young people of Scotland.
Oh.........and she has got wicked taste in clothes and shoes, need I say more?!
(She also sent me a couple of pix from last year's Burns Night in Edinburgh......the other one is unpublishable! That's me with me mouth open dancing with the adorable Martin Coppack.)
Brown Backs Down
Well, we all turned up of one mind..........if it meant getting arrested, it meant getting arrested. With prison overcrowding were we really likely to see mass arrests? Maybe the plan was, if it was a tincywincy protest it was worth risking, but whilst the erstwhile mass support for Stop the War has melted away, protesters were out today in large enough numbers to have made it a tad embarrassing for MR B if the march had been stopped. I went with my pal Sharon - pic right (she who is banned from the House of Commons for shouting down into the chamber to agree with John McDonnell on 18th March 2003), she had gone prepared to be arrested, unlike me (never that well organised - I just took my mobile and Blackberry!) she had a clean pair of knickers, dental floss and baby wipe
s (one apparently doesn't get any toilet paper if arrested).
But today was a potential Rubicon and I was disappointed that so few of my fellow citizens saw that. As Martin Niemoller said in 1945
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
What was interesting was that the law dragged up by Gordon Brown was the one enacted to prevent the Chartists demonstrating. At a time when this same man spouts mealy mouthed words about Burma and every child being precious he doesn't want those of us who are outraged by an illegal immoral and unju
stifiable war which is killing the very children he claims to care for, to have our voices heard.
I was disappointed that there were no Lib Dem speakers, I will take this up with STWC but I was delighted to see David Howarth in Trafalgar Square. So, Sharon took a few pix, which can be seen here, sadly you are unlikely to see any coverage anywhere else.
s (one apparently doesn't get any toilet paper if arrested).But today was a potential Rubicon and I was disappointed that so few of my fellow citizens saw that. As Martin Niemoller said in 1945
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
What was interesting was that the law dragged up by Gordon Brown was the one enacted to prevent the Chartists demonstrating. At a time when this same man spouts mealy mouthed words about Burma and every child being precious he doesn't want those of us who are outraged by an illegal immoral and unju
stifiable war which is killing the very children he claims to care for, to have our voices heard. I was disappointed that there were no Lib Dem speakers, I will take this up with STWC but I was delighted to see David Howarth in Trafalgar Square. So, Sharon took a few pix, which can be seen here, sadly you are unlikely to see any coverage anywhere else.
Sunday, October 07, 2007
London Mayoral Race
Yesterday I trekked over to Bethnal Green for our Mayoral hustings. A poor turnout but all three contestants acquitted themselves well. Brian Paddick was more serious than in Brighton, Chamali was much better at answering questions and Fiyaz was far more commanding in his speech. Whilst the outcome may be seen to be a foregone conclusion, all three candidates have proved themselves fantastic advocates for our party.
Then it was back to dear old Bedford for a great night out with fellow activists.....it started off with the table nearest us singing some sort of drinking songs (sorry not a rugby fan - je ne comprend pas!) Dave Hodsgson and I both had the same thought at the same time, we should start singing The Land...........but we didn't, we stuffed ourselves instead!
Then it was back to dear old Bedford for a great night out with fellow activists.....it started off with the table nearest us singing some sort of drinking songs (sorry not a rugby fan - je ne comprend pas!) Dave Hodsgson and I both had the same thought at the same time, we should start singing The Land...........but we didn't, we stuffed ourselves instead!
Jack's Back so Back Jack?!
Well after weeks unable to get on line at home, here I am at last able to hit the blogosphere from the comfort of my own home! But..........don't hold your breath..............
So, no election (I am sure like most people I have mixed feelings about that) time to focus on my 3 impending contests...........hmmmm............ watch this space!
So, no election (I am sure like most people I have mixed feelings about that) time to focus on my 3 impending contests...........hmmmm............ watch this space!
Saturday, October 06, 2007
Ming's my Friend!
A little while ago I decided it was time to let bygones be bygones, bury the hatchet, let the water run under the bridge etc etc and ask Ming to be my friend on Facebook and he has accepted?! Now I know he doesn't actually have much to do with his Facebook, doesn't spend much time poking people or sending them wet smelly yellow invitations like my charming daughter does (!), maybe if he had he would have spurned me...............but now I have the opportunity to start my little campaign to write on Ming's wall...........more about that later.
Stop the War Demo Banned..........Where are our MP's?
There hasn't been much in the press about this sadly, but on Monday the Government has decided to ban a peaceful march called by the Stop the War Coalition. The protest has been called to demand all the troops withdrawn from Iraq immediately. The police have said all protests within one mile of Parliament are now prohibited. This is an affront to democratic rights and totally contradicts Brown's commitment to liberalising protest laws.
I am very disappointed that as a party we seem to have withdrawn support for STWC, not as individuals obviously, but collectively. I would not only like to see a Lib Dem speaking on the platform on Monday but also to see our parliamentarians collectively joining the demonstration, if for no other reason than to show how seriously we as a party take this affront to our civil liberties. I am emailing all those I know and I would hope any of you reading this with contacts with our parliamentary party will urge the same.
Assembly is at Trafalgar Square at 1pm Monday 8th. Please pass this information on to anyone who may be able to make it. But if you can't please at least sign the petition on the STWC website.
I am very disappointed that as a party we seem to have withdrawn support for STWC, not as individuals obviously, but collectively. I would not only like to see a Lib Dem speaking on the platform on Monday but also to see our parliamentarians collectively joining the demonstration, if for no other reason than to show how seriously we as a party take this affront to our civil liberties. I am emailing all those I know and I would hope any of you reading this with contacts with our parliamentary party will urge the same.
Assembly is at Trafalgar Square at 1pm Monday 8th. Please pass this information on to anyone who may be able to make it. But if you can't please at least sign the petition on the STWC website.
Friday, October 05, 2007
Why Jack is still not back!
I am so frustrated, you have no idea. I am still being denied access to the blogosphere from home. It's too long and boring a story, but it may lead to me leading a campaign to renationalise BT and nationalise Sky. Watch this space.................
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Should this be the end of Loo's Muze?
Someone, I can’t remember who, referred to my blog the other day as “the unfortunately titled Lindyloo’s Muze”. I have to confess I have been a tad troubled by this………what is unfortunate about it? Have I a gaping hole in my education, is Lindyloo a euphemism for I know not what? Is this what comes of dabbling in a male domain? Given the extraordinary range of names for blogs, maybe it’s a wee bit too pedestrian? So should I ditch it for one of my other nicknames (well one that I am aware of!) or perhaps my favourite pseudonym Dr Renie Selawi (an anagram of my former name). Or maybe it should just be entitled the rather more serious - Linda Jack and be done with it. Maybe you would like to vote, or maybe that would be just too boring……….
.........and another thing..........
With thanks for the feedback on my rant about the male dominated blogosphere, it also struck me that of course, nearly always, given the nature of the beast, my commentators are men. So I was delighted to get a comment from Alix who also posted on the issue.
Anyway, this is a first for me, blogging on the train on the way to York, actually demonstrates how addicted I have become, paying a fiver for the privilege! But I am paying more than money - unfortunately having decided to cart a laptop round with me as well as all my essentials for 5 days away from home (OK, it may have been the shoes as well!) - I have done my back in, so now having been sat down on the train for the last couple of hours I am wondering if I will be able to get out of my seat when I finally arrive........we shall see.
PS: Anyone know why my blog has gone off into some other, unrecognisable language,"Publicera Inlagg" and Forhandsgranska and Skriv and Lagg till lank till bilaga ?????
Anyway, this is a first for me, blogging on the train on the way to York, actually demonstrates how addicted I have become, paying a fiver for the privilege! But I am paying more than money - unfortunately having decided to cart a laptop round with me as well as all my essentials for 5 days away from home (OK, it may have been the shoes as well!) - I have done my back in, so now having been sat down on the train for the last couple of hours I am wondering if I will be able to get out of my seat when I finally arrive........we shall see.
PS: Anyone know why my blog has gone off into some other, unrecognisable language,"Publicera Inlagg" and Forhandsgranska and Skriv and Lagg till lank till bilaga ?????
Is Blogging a Feminist Issue????........and another thing........
I watched Duncan Borrowman's appearance on Doughty Street last night. I thought he was excellent (loved the jacket too Duncan!) but being a woman I couldn't help but notice it was an all male panel. Has anyone done any research on why the blogosphere appears even more male dominated than the wider politicosphere? Is it just that the guys have more time than us gals to put in their tenpenneth? Does it matter?
Actually, I do think it matters - and having thought about it a bit I reflected back on a conversation I had with Jeremy Hargreaves at conference. I love Jeremy to pieces - he is one of those talented, erudite, beautifully behaved people I aspire to be like but unfortunately never quite (or even nearly) make it! But on this issue we disagreed. Whilst I fully appreciate the difficulty chairs have when choosing speakers in any debate, the lack of women and BME members in many debates is often noticeable. Jeremy had kicked off the Israel/Palestine debate by pointing out that he had had very few cards from women. In the end only two women spoke. Two who had put cards in didn't, one of whom was me. Apparently I had had more than my fair share of opportunities that week (and was opening the debate on the armed forces following). The difficulty for me was that this was my major issue. I asked Duncan Brack at the end of conference if the fact that one is judged on how many times one has spoken already meant was that my only chance was to keep my mouth shut until the debate I most wanted to speak on. Yes says he. That's fine if your issue is early in the week, but if it is right at the end its a bit of a challenge, especially if you want to be helpful and put cards in when conference is short of speakers/women. But there were two issues for me in Jeremy's decision. Everyone who spends a long time preparing a speech (which I had done on this occasion) is disappointed not to be called, but in a popular debate that is inevitable, what is disappointing is that at a time when we are trying to challenge the status quo, we think we can do it by calling women in proportion to how many cards they put in. I thought a balance was supposed to ensure a balance of male and female speakers, we do after all make up 52% of the population. How are we ever going to change anything if we call women only in proportion to the number of cards they put in. It may be subliminal but we get what we see. I have used this example before, but it makes my point yet again. Whilst watching ballet when my daughter was small I asked her if she would like to be a ballet dancer, but mummy said she, can brown girls be ballet dancers? I hadn't seen it but she had. We will never increase the participation of women or BME members in conference debates until it becomes the norm that all are properly represented. Scurrying around trying to get women to put cards in demonstrates my point. So, for me, trying to be helpful backfired. Now, surprising as it may seem, I personally don't need any encouragement to say my piece, so the fact I was one of the women not called in a debate with 2 women and about 10 men was not so important, what was disappointing was that the other woman not called was a Palestinian.
So I do truly understand the dilemma for chairs, but no party will ever get its policy making right whilst it continues to fail to truly reflect the people it seeks to represent. As for getting more women contributing to the blogosphere, that may prove more of a challenge.............
Rant over, and anyway I am feeling very happy this evening after a second day in the febrile atmosphere that is the Labour Party Conference. A young woman came running up to me when I was walking through the exhibition hall. She just wanted to say how much she had enjoyed my speech at Lib Dem conference, I asked which one, she said the one at the WATO fringe. This made my day, as anyone who was there knows I was wrongly briefed, having been told I only needed to do an informal 2 minute intro (as opposed to 5 minute speech) and not having been told I was expected to speak in favour of the motion (which I couldn't do because I didn't agree with it!) it was very off the cuff. Although I have to thank David Boyle, when I discovered this and panicked he reassured me saying "I've never known you not be able to speak for 5 minutes Linda!"...........
Actually, I do think it matters - and having thought about it a bit I reflected back on a conversation I had with Jeremy Hargreaves at conference. I love Jeremy to pieces - he is one of those talented, erudite, beautifully behaved people I aspire to be like but unfortunately never quite (or even nearly) make it! But on this issue we disagreed. Whilst I fully appreciate the difficulty chairs have when choosing speakers in any debate, the lack of women and BME members in many debates is often noticeable. Jeremy had kicked off the Israel/Palestine debate by pointing out that he had had very few cards from women. In the end only two women spoke. Two who had put cards in didn't, one of whom was me. Apparently I had had more than my fair share of opportunities that week (and was opening the debate on the armed forces following). The difficulty for me was that this was my major issue. I asked Duncan Brack at the end of conference if the fact that one is judged on how many times one has spoken already meant was that my only chance was to keep my mouth shut until the debate I most wanted to speak on. Yes says he. That's fine if your issue is early in the week, but if it is right at the end its a bit of a challenge, especially if you want to be helpful and put cards in when conference is short of speakers/women. But there were two issues for me in Jeremy's decision. Everyone who spends a long time preparing a speech (which I had done on this occasion) is disappointed not to be called, but in a popular debate that is inevitable, what is disappointing is that at a time when we are trying to challenge the status quo, we think we can do it by calling women in proportion to how many cards they put in. I thought a balance was supposed to ensure a balance of male and female speakers, we do after all make up 52% of the population. How are we ever going to change anything if we call women only in proportion to the number of cards they put in. It may be subliminal but we get what we see. I have used this example before, but it makes my point yet again. Whilst watching ballet when my daughter was small I asked her if she would like to be a ballet dancer, but mummy said she, can brown girls be ballet dancers? I hadn't seen it but she had. We will never increase the participation of women or BME members in conference debates until it becomes the norm that all are properly represented. Scurrying around trying to get women to put cards in demonstrates my point. So, for me, trying to be helpful backfired. Now, surprising as it may seem, I personally don't need any encouragement to say my piece, so the fact I was one of the women not called in a debate with 2 women and about 10 men was not so important, what was disappointing was that the other woman not called was a Palestinian.
So I do truly understand the dilemma for chairs, but no party will ever get its policy making right whilst it continues to fail to truly reflect the people it seeks to represent. As for getting more women contributing to the blogosphere, that may prove more of a challenge.............
Rant over, and anyway I am feeling very happy this evening after a second day in the febrile atmosphere that is the Labour Party Conference. A young woman came running up to me when I was walking through the exhibition hall. She just wanted to say how much she had enjoyed my speech at Lib Dem conference, I asked which one, she said the one at the WATO fringe. This made my day, as anyone who was there knows I was wrongly briefed, having been told I only needed to do an informal 2 minute intro (as opposed to 5 minute speech) and not having been told I was expected to speak in favour of the motion (which I couldn't do because I didn't agree with it!) it was very off the cuff. Although I have to thank David Boyle, when I discovered this and panicked he reassured me saying "I've never known you not be able to speak for 5 minutes Linda!"...........
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Labour and the Liberal Democrats - whose progressive agenda?
Last night I went to the Fabian/Centre Forum fringe - Labour and the Liberal Democrats; whose progressive agenda? Labour front benchers were Angela Eagle and Michael Wills whilst we were well represented by Vince Cable and David Laws. I have to say I am warming more and more to David Laws, there is still a lot I would disagree with him on, but his commitment to social justice is unquestionable and both he and Vince put our case extremely well.
Michael Wills opened by acknowledging that there was an inevitable overlap in terms of shared policies but argued that the Labour Party occupied the progressive space more effectively. He suggested the reason for that was our position between Tory and Labour which meant we had to appeal to voters on both ends of the spectrum. He also suggested that being the party of government meant they could sustain their progressive agenda. He argued that the Labour Party brought real passion about social justice and acted to support the vulnerable and disadvantaged.
Vince started by recognising that for all the panel their opposition was the Tories, he had Labour activists who helped him in order to keep the Tories out. He acknowledged that we were the third party in parliamentary terms but reminded his audience that we had control in many, particularly inner city areas at local government level. He recognised an overlap, we are both internationalist (although he questioned Labour commitment to tackling corruption), believe in income redistribution, both parties differing from the Tories in our shared belief in the concept of public services. Where we differed was on the role of an increasingly centralised state and as he described it Labour's "casual regard of civil liberties". His analysis of Brown's "Big Tent" politics was that it was designed to destroy constructive opposition. He concluded with the need for electoral reform.
Angela started by referring to what she called the emotional issue on the ground of relationship between Labour and Lib Dem activists in some areas. She did not believe anyone owns the progressive agenda, acknowledging that we were well able to work together on particular issues, for example discrimination. Her analysis was that the Labour were collectivist whereas we were individualist. She did not accept Vince's analysis of the problem of an overbearing state, suggesting they were as open to bottom up as to top down solutions, but argued that the state was an enabling state. Whilst it may need looking at, we threw it away at our peril. She challenged the party however over our lack of progress on issues of representation within the party, that whilst we were strong on issues of discrimination we were not prepared to look at positive action such as all women shortlists.
David picked up on the issue of us having different messages in different parts of the country. He suggested that we had a greater unity of purpose and argued that after all all parties are coalitions. He told us of the approach he had from George Osborne, no ideological pitch (what a surprise) just a promise of a cabinet seat when the Tories won the general election. David said he drew a line and explained to George - on the left side of the line were the two progressive parties, on the other side of the line were the Conservatives, the clue is in the name! David acknowledged Labour's strong commitment to employment related issues, poverty and inequality. He pointed out that as liberals we have a greater scepticism of the role of government and a greater commitment to green issues and civil liberties. Our concern was to provide security to those on low incomes and he criticised the way tax credits were not targeted enough and argued for raising the basic pension.
The main focus of the questions that followed was on dirty tricks of Lib Dems locally, there was clearly a lot of bad feeling amongst those who felt our campaigning tactics in some areas were inexcusable. Angela Eagle called for a stronger message to go from our leadership to local parties about what was and was not acceptable. I happen to agree with her, as someone who relishes a fight I believe our policies speak for themselves and if we need to stoop to gutter personalised campaigning we don't deserve to win. However, as was pointed out, Labour are not squeaky clean themselves, so maybe it's an area we all need to give attention to.
I did get the chance to question Michael WIlls about his statement that his passion for social justice lead him to act to support the vulnerable and disadvantaged given the widening gap between rich and poor. He didn't answer until David Laws stepped in and answered for him. Then he came back with an answer which was basically that it would have been a lot worse without Labour, well that's alright then.
Then onto the LGA reception which we were sponsoring. I got chatting to a couple of Labour activists who turned out to live in Disley, my former home. As we were bemoaning the fact that no Cabinet ministers had made it to support the reception, and how the problem with parliamentary parties was that they so often paid scant regard to local government, my new friend exclaimed "There's Gordon!" "Gordon who?" says I..........anyway great excitement amongst the troops and I have to give him credit for at least showing his face.
Later I met local MP Patrick Hall, who introduced me to Peter Hain. A man clearly far too important to spend time listening to low life like me (you know that feeling when you know someone is desperately trying to escape from you.........or does that only happen to me?!) but I badgered on making my points about financial inclusion. Then I spotted Ivan Lewis, someone who I have a lot of time for as he was a good friend to the Youth Service. I reminded him of the first occasion we had met, when I was chair of Unison's Youth and Community Workers Forum - and my national officer was kicking me under the table because one is not supposed to interrupt a government minister! Anyway I made my case for separate wards in psychiatric wings and promised to continue to badger him about it.
An interesting day, odd to be at a conference as an observer rather than a participant.....very odd..........
Michael Wills opened by acknowledging that there was an inevitable overlap in terms of shared policies but argued that the Labour Party occupied the progressive space more effectively. He suggested the reason for that was our position between Tory and Labour which meant we had to appeal to voters on both ends of the spectrum. He also suggested that being the party of government meant they could sustain their progressive agenda. He argued that the Labour Party brought real passion about social justice and acted to support the vulnerable and disadvantaged.
Vince started by recognising that for all the panel their opposition was the Tories, he had Labour activists who helped him in order to keep the Tories out. He acknowledged that we were the third party in parliamentary terms but reminded his audience that we had control in many, particularly inner city areas at local government level. He recognised an overlap, we are both internationalist (although he questioned Labour commitment to tackling corruption), believe in income redistribution, both parties differing from the Tories in our shared belief in the concept of public services. Where we differed was on the role of an increasingly centralised state and as he described it Labour's "casual regard of civil liberties". His analysis of Brown's "Big Tent" politics was that it was designed to destroy constructive opposition. He concluded with the need for electoral reform.
Angela started by referring to what she called the emotional issue on the ground of relationship between Labour and Lib Dem activists in some areas. She did not believe anyone owns the progressive agenda, acknowledging that we were well able to work together on particular issues, for example discrimination. Her analysis was that the Labour were collectivist whereas we were individualist. She did not accept Vince's analysis of the problem of an overbearing state, suggesting they were as open to bottom up as to top down solutions, but argued that the state was an enabling state. Whilst it may need looking at, we threw it away at our peril. She challenged the party however over our lack of progress on issues of representation within the party, that whilst we were strong on issues of discrimination we were not prepared to look at positive action such as all women shortlists.
David picked up on the issue of us having different messages in different parts of the country. He suggested that we had a greater unity of purpose and argued that after all all parties are coalitions. He told us of the approach he had from George Osborne, no ideological pitch (what a surprise) just a promise of a cabinet seat when the Tories won the general election. David said he drew a line and explained to George - on the left side of the line were the two progressive parties, on the other side of the line were the Conservatives, the clue is in the name! David acknowledged Labour's strong commitment to employment related issues, poverty and inequality. He pointed out that as liberals we have a greater scepticism of the role of government and a greater commitment to green issues and civil liberties. Our concern was to provide security to those on low incomes and he criticised the way tax credits were not targeted enough and argued for raising the basic pension.
The main focus of the questions that followed was on dirty tricks of Lib Dems locally, there was clearly a lot of bad feeling amongst those who felt our campaigning tactics in some areas were inexcusable. Angela Eagle called for a stronger message to go from our leadership to local parties about what was and was not acceptable. I happen to agree with her, as someone who relishes a fight I believe our policies speak for themselves and if we need to stoop to gutter personalised campaigning we don't deserve to win. However, as was pointed out, Labour are not squeaky clean themselves, so maybe it's an area we all need to give attention to.
I did get the chance to question Michael WIlls about his statement that his passion for social justice lead him to act to support the vulnerable and disadvantaged given the widening gap between rich and poor. He didn't answer until David Laws stepped in and answered for him. Then he came back with an answer which was basically that it would have been a lot worse without Labour, well that's alright then.
Then onto the LGA reception which we were sponsoring. I got chatting to a couple of Labour activists who turned out to live in Disley, my former home. As we were bemoaning the fact that no Cabinet ministers had made it to support the reception, and how the problem with parliamentary parties was that they so often paid scant regard to local government, my new friend exclaimed "There's Gordon!" "Gordon who?" says I..........anyway great excitement amongst the troops and I have to give him credit for at least showing his face.
Later I met local MP Patrick Hall, who introduced me to Peter Hain. A man clearly far too important to spend time listening to low life like me (you know that feeling when you know someone is desperately trying to escape from you.........or does that only happen to me?!) but I badgered on making my points about financial inclusion. Then I spotted Ivan Lewis, someone who I have a lot of time for as he was a good friend to the Youth Service. I reminded him of the first occasion we had met, when I was chair of Unison's Youth and Community Workers Forum - and my national officer was kicking me under the table because one is not supposed to interrupt a government minister! Anyway I made my case for separate wards in psychiatric wings and promised to continue to badger him about it.
An interesting day, odd to be at a conference as an observer rather than a participant.....very odd..........
Gordon..........Never Mind the Rhetoric, what about the Reality?
I am just back from a wild night out at Labour Party Conference...........Bournemouth is a strange mix of memories for me, mainly from my Unison days, but this was my initiation into the eclectic mix of new and old Labour which passes for a conference. I arrived in time to watch Gordon's speech in the exhibition hall. He did go on.............and on...........and on.......in the end rather than watching paint dry I decided I had time to watch nail varnish dry. I sat on the floor and painted my nails. But, it has to be said, there was little for me to disagree with, apart from the usual attack on civil liberties. My question was, so where is the money coming from then? Lots of costly promises, no promises of increased taxes, gotta come from somewhere - my guess it will yet again be down to cuts to the less sexy services, such as mental health services. Lets see.........the Tesco approach to government, buy one get one free but the supplier pays. So, hospitals - deep clean, but do it within your existing budget.
More later..............it is a bit late even for a night owl..................
More later..............it is a bit late even for a night owl..................
Monday, September 24, 2007
Waiting for Gordo.............
Just about to head off to the conference centre for Gordo's speech. This is my first Labour Party conference and I was amused to note just how keen they are on promoting democracy within their party, perhaps this gives a clue to their approach to governing in general! The Conference guide (glossy and red) is full of fringes (tho to be honest I think we have a wider and richer selection), adverts, rallying calls to the troops..........and two pages, yes TWO pages devoted to the main business of conference! And of course, no opportunity for the troops to participate in policy making, no motions, just "Policy Seminars" - no narrative, just, for example on Tuesday morning "Policy Seminars - 0900 - 10.30 - Britain in the World - Health - Education". Well if I was a Labour footsoldier I may be a little miffed that three of the issues I care passionately about were awarded half an hour each for me to possibly put my tenpenneth in! (That'll learn me not to be so critical of FCC!!!!!).
So, watch this space, will report back later.............................
So, watch this space, will report back later.............................
Vivre la Différence!
If I had a pound for every time I had been asked why I had hitched my particular waggon to the Lib Dems.............the latest but one enquiry was Saturday night from my son who has just started his A level politics. "Mum, why do you want to be in a party that is never, well not in your life time, going to be in power?" "Son, you just joined that party!" "Oh yes!" Actually said son has just joined said party following an interrogation similar to that endured by the faithful wanting to be baptised............do you believe..........are you willing to lay your life down for...........you know the score. Then yesterday evening a call from a very old friend who informed me she had got into a bit of an altercation with her housemate. "Why on earth is Jack in the Lib Dems when they are never going to win?" And therein lies the rub, if every pore in your body oozes liberal democracy, how could you ever be comfortable anywhere else? Is it just an accident of history that we find ourselves in this position? In a nation that regards itself as generally liberal when will we reach the tipping point that will give the electorate the confidence that it is worth voting for us? That if they vote for us they will get us and not allow the Tories/Labour in through the back door? In a cynical climate where people are more likely to vote against the party they don't like rather than for the one they do, to outsiders I can understand why they think those of us who stick to our party because of our principles and not our personal ambition are on a hiding to nothing.
But, perhaps to the chagrin of some of you (!) I am still here. Still here, partly because I don't expect I would last more than 5 minutes in a less liberal party, but fundamentally because apart from a few well documented differences of opinion at the margins, I believe we have the policies and approach to policy making that can change our country and our world, for the better. Our party is not an end in itself, but a means to an end. If I had a ......penny for every time someone had said to me, either on the doorstep or socially, well I think we should give you lot a chance......but under the current system, they don't always want to take that risk, then I would maybe be rivalling Chris Huhne for riches!
So, for me, despite the odd bit of evidence to the contrary, there is still clear blue water between us and the other two Tory parties, lets hold our nerve and even consider being more radical............(?!)the electorate deserve a choice, and the way things are going we may be the only party able to deliver that.
But, perhaps to the chagrin of some of you (!) I am still here. Still here, partly because I don't expect I would last more than 5 minutes in a less liberal party, but fundamentally because apart from a few well documented differences of opinion at the margins, I believe we have the policies and approach to policy making that can change our country and our world, for the better. Our party is not an end in itself, but a means to an end. If I had a ......penny for every time someone had said to me, either on the doorstep or socially, well I think we should give you lot a chance......but under the current system, they don't always want to take that risk, then I would maybe be rivalling Chris Huhne for riches!
So, for me, despite the odd bit of evidence to the contrary, there is still clear blue water between us and the other two Tory parties, lets hold our nerve and even consider being more radical............(?!)the electorate deserve a choice, and the way things are going we may be the only party able to deliver that.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Ming's Speech.............................................
The convenience of having an internet cafe right next to the conference hall has given me the opportunity to say a few words about Ming's speech before having to run off. I think it was much much better than last year, punchier, more confident and more inspiring. At one point (when he was talking about an injured soldier he had met) I confess I was dabbing my eyes..........now everyone will be waiting for the but........ I guess I have some little buts which I will return to when I get home, the biggest one is about how our messages will play outside. Rather like a big tent religious rally, we all feel buoyed up and inspired, in our little bubble everything is wonderful, but, we must remember we are talking to ourselves. On Monday I got the chance to ask Ming a question about what we are for and how we get that message across. His answer to what we are for was sound (Jeremy H observing that I looked enraptured and as if the scales had fallen from my eyes!) however, he didn't answer the second part of the question, without an answer to that we are in danger of taking two steps forward and one and a half back.
A First Black Mayor...........or Leader?
Along with others I lazily boarded the bus to the London Mayoral Hustings yesterday (its the shoes darling!) for what was a great and well attended event. Clearly I have nailed my colours to the mast in terms of supporting Fiyaz Mughal, but I was impressed by Brian Paddick it has to be said. Despite his public profile it can't have been easy for him being thrown into the deep end with a bunch of potentially lairy activists. I thought he spoke well, he came across as warm, funny and relaxed. Chamili was clear and articulate, with my background it was great to see a young Asian woman in the frame, however, I couldn't imagine her having much in common with the young people I have spent most of my life with, or much ability to connect with them. Fiyaz was clear and knowledgeable, but knowing him sadly none of his great sense of humour surfaced. It hasn't changed my view that he would be a great and formidable candidate.....and he and Chamili clearly both have an important role of enabling us to consider, not just that we could have a black Mayor, but also a black party leader in the future. That has to be important in raising our profile within BME communities and in supporting the aspirations of the many hugely talented BME men and women we have within our party.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Boris: I'll Ban Bendy Buses...........
Well, that's OK then, we'll all Back Boris! I was rather amused throughout the day (having traversed the city six times today) to spot this Evening Standard Billboard headline. Funnily enough I had travelled from Bedford this morning with Tory PPC Richard Fuller (I know I get into terrible trouble fraternising with the Tories!) and another Bedfordian, Hywel Davies. Hywel takes a bendy - sorry fold up - bike and from my point of view takes his life in his hands to traverse the city (one of my fellow commuters who works at Lehman brothers does the same thing all the way from St P to CanWaf and swears blind he sees us all getting off the DLR) so when I asked whether there was anything that scared him about cycling in London, there was only one thing.............the Bendy Buses!
So, Boris's no 1 priority says it all. He only understands London in the context of his own, largely privileged, experience............good for him to cycle, but please, dear Boris, there are a few other issues in London that may be a teeny weeny bit more pressing to Londoners than bendy buses.
So, Boris's no 1 priority says it all. He only understands London in the context of his own, largely privileged, experience............good for him to cycle, but please, dear Boris, there are a few other issues in London that may be a teeny weeny bit more pressing to Londoners than bendy buses.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Lib Dem Mayoral Candidate........Brian Paddick or Fiyaz Mughal?
Interested to hear from my pal Fiyaz Mughal this evening that he has been selected as one of our potential candidates for London mayor. Of course Brian Paddick, who is also on the list starts ahead of the game because of his celeb status; however, I would caution against thinking he is an automatic shoo-in. Brian may have been a Lib Dem supporter for some time, but he is a new kid on the block as far as the party goes...........and as we all know, us Lib Dems can be an arsy lot when we think we are being forced down a particular road!
Saturday, September 08, 2007
A Broken Covenant - Lib Dem Friends of the Armed Forces Launch
As a disaffected 17 year old, desperate to get away from home and to be free to do my own thing, I had a choice. Get a live in job as a receptionist in Radlett, or join the army. I joined the army! Surprisingly I found myself working as an analyst with Special Intelligence (I know scary isn't it??! But of course, one of the roles of military intelligence is to confuse the enemy and I'm very good at that!).
I often joke that my first attempt at collective bargaining was in the army, and it didn’t go down very well. In fact, on one memorable occasion I was threatened with a charge of mutiny! However, that was more than 30 years ago and frankly, despite the progress we have witnessed elsewhere, the lot of servicemen and women has seriously declined.
Our armed services, whether we agree with the political decisions regarding their deployment or not, deserve our respect and gratitude. They operate in often dire and understandably extremely risky situations. What they don’t need to be doing is fretting about the living conditions of their loved ones at home, or worrying about whether they will have the right equipment, or whether that equipment will fail, or their boots will melt. If they are injured they don't want to be faced with yet another battle to get proper compensation at home.
The British Legion is launching its "Broken Covenant" campaign rightly drawing attention to the military covenant - if you agree that by committing themselves to put their lives on the line for their country our servicemen and women deserve more from their government and share the concern about the growing sense of disillusionment among Service personnel and veterans about their treatment by the state, please sign the message board here.
I often joke that my first attempt at collective bargaining was in the army, and it didn’t go down very well. In fact, on one memorable occasion I was threatened with a charge of mutiny! However, that was more than 30 years ago and frankly, despite the progress we have witnessed elsewhere, the lot of servicemen and women has seriously declined.
Our armed services, whether we agree with the political decisions regarding their deployment or not, deserve our respect and gratitude. They operate in often dire and understandably extremely risky situations. What they don’t need to be doing is fretting about the living conditions of their loved ones at home, or worrying about whether they will have the right equipment, or whether that equipment will fail, or their boots will melt. If they are injured they don't want to be faced with yet another battle to get proper compensation at home.
The British Legion is launching its "Broken Covenant" campaign rightly drawing attention to the military covenant - if you agree that by committing themselves to put their lives on the line for their country our servicemen and women deserve more from their government and share the concern about the growing sense of disillusionment among Service personnel and veterans about their treatment by the state, please sign the message board here.
As Liberal Democrats we have rightly been consistent, both in our opposition to the illegal war and occupation in Iraq but equally in our outrage at the iniquity of the failure in duty of care to our servicemen and women.
Liberal Democrat Councillor Damon Hooton who served in the army for 23 years and myself have established the Liberal Democrat Friends of the Armed Forces, to be formally launched at conference. Our aim is not to campaign on operational issues (there are other forums for that) but to campaign for the fair treatment of service personnel and their families.
The Lib Dem Friends of the Armed Forces will be launched on Monday 17th September 6.15pm in the Thistle Hotel. The fringe will be chaired by David Heath MP. Speakers include Nick Harvey MP, Michael Smith (Sunday Times Defence Correspondent) and Richard Bartle from BAFF (British Armed Forces Federation). Hope to see you there!
Friday, September 07, 2007
Late for a change........my must read blogs!
Given my blogosphere problems over recent months I unfortunately didn't get to vote in the top blog awards. Even if I did I would find it difficult to rank.........anyways, since I now have oodles of opportunity to mess about in the said blogosphere my must reads are now listed left...........
If any of you think you have been badly done by by not being included, this may be an oversight, if not, let me know and I will be suitably contrite.
The sad thing is that the guys still well outnumber the gals......is blogging a feminist issue I wonder?????
If any of you think you have been badly done by by not being included, this may be an oversight, if not, let me know and I will be suitably contrite.
The sad thing is that the guys still well outnumber the gals......is blogging a feminist issue I wonder?????
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Exploding Lipgloss and the Ubiquitous Paul Walter!
Just back from my jaunt across the Irish Sea to an amusing comment from Paul. As you can see, being able to spout forth to my heart's content given the internet has finally wriggled its way into my glorious old people's home, is proving irrisistable! (Don't worry I'll go to bed eventually).
But as for the lipgloss, actually I have real issues..........I didn't actually have any with me (I was trying to be poetic/ironic). To be honest, in some ways it is a metaphor for our current sorry political/social state. Not even here today gone tomorrow, here now, gone in 10 minutes......all gloss and no substance! What is it FOR?! I have tried, honest, but every time I wonder why I bother. Is it just that I am just such an unreconstructed liplicker, or is it just that I have the "wrong kind of lips"? Maybe the lips I got issued when God was handing out the lip genes were just impregnated with teflon? I marvel at the women (Mrs Beckham foremost amongst them) whose lipgloss appears to be genetic. How do they do it? If someone did a time and motion study, would they find that the time spent applying lipgloss was commensurate with that spent eating, sleeping or possibly...........breathing??????
However, undeterred and inspired by Mr W, I will endeavour to find my own brand of exploding lipgloss before conference............you have been warned!
But as for the lipgloss, actually I have real issues..........I didn't actually have any with me (I was trying to be poetic/ironic). To be honest, in some ways it is a metaphor for our current sorry political/social state. Not even here today gone tomorrow, here now, gone in 10 minutes......all gloss and no substance! What is it FOR?! I have tried, honest, but every time I wonder why I bother. Is it just that I am just such an unreconstructed liplicker, or is it just that I have the "wrong kind of lips"? Maybe the lips I got issued when God was handing out the lip genes were just impregnated with teflon? I marvel at the women (Mrs Beckham foremost amongst them) whose lipgloss appears to be genetic. How do they do it? If someone did a time and motion study, would they find that the time spent applying lipgloss was commensurate with that spent eating, sleeping or possibly...........breathing??????
However, undeterred and inspired by Mr W, I will endeavour to find my own brand of exploding lipgloss before conference............you have been warned!
Who says the camera never lies?
A couple of weeks ago, whilst at the Ross BBQ a fellow Lib Dem, a certain Mr Plater (actually Tim you remind me of Dave Aaronavitch on your pic for some strange reason?!), lambasted me about the pic on my blog. About time I changed it says he - subtext, why put a pic you took 20 years ago up and pretend it is you? Actually says I, it was taken in the last election. I don't actually get pix of myself taken on my own that often, and those I do would certainly not be suitable...... So the only one I have to hand was taken a few months ago and taken out of a bigger pic with my pal Martin, but try as I might the Big Brother Blogger won't let me change it? (help Duncan!) In the mean time I will be trying to find a photographer who is able to make me look the age I am on camera, as well as being intimate with the internal workings of the Blogspot!
Don't hold your breath but................
Now, there should be a choir of angels (or I guess for my detractors devils) singing at this point, I don't understand it, probably never will, but how come no one can call me but I can now get online at home? Technology was never my strong point, thank heavens I have a teenager! So, after a 5 month absence I finally have internet access at home. This is scary, it means in moments of boredom, inspiration, anger, pique, or plain devilment; whether that be in the morning before work, in the evening after work, or the middle of the night when I can't sleep, I may end up resorting to the blog to vent my spleen...................or alternatively lay myself open for being hung drawn and quartered by those who would rather I crawled back under the stone from whence I came..............no matter. Let's see how long it lasts. But for the time being this is sweet!
This Beggars Belief!
There are lots of things that beggar belief.........but this takes the biscuit! I have just arrived at Belfast International Airport to discover that, not only are we still subjected to the indignity of tipping out our perfectly packed handbaggage to find our potentially explosive lipgloss, toothpaste, shampoo et al, but now we are being charged for the privilege. Little dispensers have been set up emblazened with signs saying "resealable bags - 4 for a pound" ......now you don't get that sort of bargain in the pound shop!
As is my want I started my moaning with the nearest couple who would listen. They kindly gave me one of their reusable bags - and wouldn't hear of taking any money off me! So, having saved myself a pound I am now investing it in 20mins on the net, especially since my other candidate for "beggars belief" award is BT - yes, I finally got myself online at home, and what happens.............my telephone line goes down. It has been nearly a week and all I get are irritating texts telling me the engineers are dealing with it. If I were a conspiracy theorist.......
As is my want I started my moaning with the nearest couple who would listen. They kindly gave me one of their reusable bags - and wouldn't hear of taking any money off me! So, having saved myself a pound I am now investing it in 20mins on the net, especially since my other candidate for "beggars belief" award is BT - yes, I finally got myself online at home, and what happens.............my telephone line goes down. It has been nearly a week and all I get are irritating texts telling me the engineers are dealing with it. If I were a conspiracy theorist.......
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Dreaming of David Blunkett
Strange but true! Yesterday morning I found myself dreaming about David Blunkett. Actually it was a familiar dream, repeated with a changing cast of Labour characters. But yesterday it was Mr B. We were stood on my back step, I was remonstrating with him about how little his party had done for young people. "I remember 1997" says I "Despite being a LIb Dem I really believed you would invest in our young people, I believed the mantra - tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime." Well, I continued, as is my want, banging on about how useless they had been, how youth services had continued to be decimated, how the gap between rich and poor had widened, how our education system had failed so many of our most vulnerable young people, how asbos were criminalising a whole generation................then I came to. I had dropped off whilst listening to Thought for the Day, as I roused I realised we were at the 10 past 8 slot.......Blunkett was putting in his ten penneth on gun crime. Heaven knows what he said, but at least some of it must have penetrated my unconscious....the worst thing was realising it was 20 past 8 and my car was parked outside in danger of the green peril (aka our local traffic wardens), at that point scrambling into my jeans and charging down the stairs became much more important than worrying about what Mr B had to say......
Saturday, August 25, 2007
You're on your Jack!
The observant amongst you may have noticed the lack of women candidates in the Eastern European list.............er.............just yours truly. I know I bang on about these issues, but can we at least try to understand why we are so unrepresentative as a party? I have said it before, but will say it again.......I was so frustrated that at the Meeting the Challenge conference 18 months ago not one woman graced the floor, not even at a fringe meeting. When we debated Meeting the Challenge, I was the first woman to speak after 13 men. I had to ask Conference if they noticed anything different about me!
Well, I am far too tired to dive into an analysis of why right now, I am still coming to terms with the huge disappointment of discovering that SKY have only now told me that I have another 14 days to wait until my broadband wakes up........hmmmm..........but be warned, after that you won't be able to shut me up!
Well, I am far too tired to dive into an analysis of why right now, I am still coming to terms with the huge disappointment of discovering that SKY have only now told me that I have another 14 days to wait until my broadband wakes up........hmmmm..........but be warned, after that you won't be able to shut me up!
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
A month in the life of Cruella - Hugging Hoodies, Embarrassing Interviews et al
Because of having had such a turbulent few weeks with little access to my blog I seem to have a whole basketful of unfinished tomes.............anyway - here is a summary.
A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of spending a couple of days at the LGA conference. Highlight for me had to be Simon Hughes' speech. Not only because I am a confessed Simonphile, but particularly because his ten point programme for local government had top of the list investment in Youth Service and in particular in detached youth work. As someone who has spent most of my working life in youth work it was as you can imagine music to my ears. I listened carefully to the speeches by Mr Cameron and Ms Blears, just to see if they would back up their own rhetoric, but sadly not much mention of services for young people, although Cameron talked a lot about special needs education.
And then it was off to the Youth Summit, the swan song for my old pal, retiring CEO of the National Youth Agency, Tom Wylie. Tom is famous for his quip about hoodies "I Blame the Franciscans". A couple of years ago I got a hoodie made for him - you can't see it in this pic, but I had it printed with a little Franciscan on the front and a big one on the back with the text "I Blame the Franciscans" I dared him to wear it when the minister (Beverley Hughes) was speaking, on that occasion he didn't, but at the Youth Summit I am glad to say he did, and got quite a laugh. A couple of weeks ago was his retirement do, he received many well deserved accolades, including from Phil Hope MP (who used to work for the NYA), Tom has been a fearless critic of government youth policy and will be sorely missed, although I am proud to say he will now be chairing our advisory group at the FSA.
In the last month we also had a visit from Jafar Farah from Elijah Trust partner organisation Mossawa. He was over for a meeting with the LGA about town twinning with Arab towns, so we were able to arrange meetings in Bedford and in Westminster for him, it was the last week of term so difficult for many parliamentarians to attend, but pleased to say that Dan Rogerson made it.
As a granny it was a delight to celebrate my little grandaughter Sumaiyah's birthday - she is the image of her mum with a fantastic personality, you wait we'll get her on the podium at conference to speak about toddler's rights before she is 2!
Oh and that embarrassing interview..............that was with a couple of children at the Youth Summit, it's on the web somewhere...........a babycham in the conference hotel bar for anyone who can find it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)