Labour’s best local election result since 1995 and the Tories’ worst since 1996, yeah, we’ll take that

Ed Miliband in Birmingham yesterday with Birmingham Council Labour Group leader, Sir Albert Bore

That’s right, throughout Friday Labour saw it’s best performance in a local election since 1995 (all in proportion to how many Council elections were up for grabs as last year we gained more but far more were up for grabs). And similarly the Tories saw their worst local election result since 1996 and the Lib Dems now have dropped down below 3,000 councillors for the first time in the party’s existence.

This was a result that exceeded everyone’s expectations on all fronts. With most Tories attempting to spin the result to say we needed around 450 councillor gains to be seen as a success, we only smashed that with 823! When everyone expected Scottish Labour to lose Glasgow City Council we not only fought off a SNP challenge but took control of the council at the expense of the Lib Dems and Tories. When everyone said Labour would only win a slight majority in our very own Birmingham City Council, we smashed all expectations by gaining 20 councillors and winning a 34 seat majority. When it was expected Welsh Labour would fail in taking Cardiff City Council, we defied all predictions by gaining 33 councillors and winning a majority of 17! And we’re very proud of very nearly almost gaining control of the Greater London Assembly, falling short by 1 Assembly member.

This election wasn’t without its disappointments though. BULS’s very own Honourary life Member, Dennis Minnis, was unsuccessful in taking Edgbaston. And biggest of all, huge disappointment at Ken’s defeat. We are all glad Ken did defy most  (but not all, sadly) odds by not letting Boris have a shoe-in election by pushing the margin on the second round to a close 3%. Many Tories see Boris as the next leader and Prime Minister in waiting. “Wiff-waff” may well have edged it in London, don’t expect the country to do the same.

Of course, the results did see successes close to our hearts in BULS. Obviously there was turning Birmingham City Council red, but BULS saw former student of the University of Birmingham, Karen McCarthy, join former BULS Secretary, Brigid Jones, as a Councillor for Selly Oak. Quinton ward, where Grandee Nash played a large hand in, was also successful in electing Caroline Bradley.

All in all, while this was a brilliant result for Labour nationally we have to remember this has happened to opposition parties in the past. Hague, Howard and Kinnock all saw similar successes at mid-term local elections in their time in opposition. This was a much needed boost, not a prelude for the general election. Though it is safe to say, that the media, politicians and the wider public can no longer claim Miliband has no chance at 2015. There’s still a hell of a lot of work to be done, but we now know that we still do have a shot at 2015.

Max

Local elections: our candidates

As we all know, the London mayoral election is quickly approaching. The two front-runners, and perhaps the candidates who are of most importance to us Labour lot, are well known: Ken Livingstone, the famous collector of lizards, and Boris Johnson, the living incarnation of a 15^th century duke.

However, whilst these candidates have received plenty of media coverage, it remains that others have been pushed into the background. So what I want to – very briefly – highlight, are a couple of local council candidates in Birmingham.

BULS has, in the last year, been very active in the local area. Last year, Edgbaston council candidate Dennis Minnis lost by only 21 votes. This year, he is standing again, and BULS has been behind him 100%. A few weeks ago, a few of us went out on a Saturday to talk to local residents with Dennis. As we were walking down Charlotte Road (not too far from the Vale), Dennis told us that in the early 1990s, he won a large redevelopment fund for the street. Before, he said, there were partially deserted and dilapidated high rise buildings. These tower blocks are now gone, and the street looks entirely different (there’s even a nice playground there, where Catie Garner, our incoming Chair, got very distracted with the shiny swing sets). Dennis is incredibly passionate about his local community, and this is just one example of the astounding work that he has done in the past.

Another candidate who I would like to quickly mention is Elaine Williams, the council candidate for Harborne ward. Unlike Dennis, she has never been a councillor before, but is by no means any less passionate. I met Elaine last October, and have been out campaigning for her ever since. Recently, she wrote in Harbone Local News about the local elections (http://www.harbornenews.com/April2012/index.html). On page 15, she talks about the work she has done in the last few months for Harborne. One point she highlights concerns the sale of the Clock Tower on Harborne High Street, a former local community centre. In short, the grade II listed building was in need of repair, and the local Tories commissioned the erection of scaffolding on the building. Along with James McKay, the only Labour councillor in Harborne, Elaine found through an FOI request that the scaffolding cost around £12,000 a week. They then subsequently found an alternative quote of £2,000 a week, which was ignored by the Tories. Within no time, the debt quickly amounted to around £800,000. Recently, the centre was sold for £100,000, effectively meaning that £700,000 of local taxpayers’ money was lost. As James said in a radio interview, you’d be hard pressed to find a flat for £100,000 in the centre of Harborne, let alone a grade II listed building.

It’s also worth having a look at this – http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/harborne_clock_tower_sale_price?unfold=1 – to see more about the work she’s done regarding the Clock Tower (scandal). 

As one of the most talked about issues in Harborne, Elaine has been at the forefront of the debate. Like Dennis, she has been passionate about local issues, and would no doubt do a fantastic job as Harborne’s second Labour councillor.

This is my first blog, and as boring as it might be, I really wanted to highlight this issue. Whilst other political issues like the London mayoral election and the Birmingham Mayoral referendum are at the forefront of the news, dedicated individuals like Dennis and Elaine are hardly talked about. Of course, I’m not surprised, but I wanted this rant to provide some needed attention to our local candidates. It’s easy for these candidates to be lost in the political mix, but with the local elections dawning on Thursday 3^rd May, I wanted to quickly show that councillors can make a difference, and that these candidates will make a difference if elected.

By Ed Gilbert, Vice-Chair-elect

The Bankers’ Budget

Nobody would expect a fair budget from George Osborne. The Chancellor was never going to give a budget that benefitted the many over the few, or one that put the realities of everyday life above right-wing economic dogma. Expectations suitably adjusted, we can perhaps take small comfort from the 50p tax band “only” being cut to 45p. Ed Miliband gave a sterling speech in response, and I raise a glass to the intern who wrote the jokes. Professional hacks will be casting their own analysis; what follows is my personal take on some of the details.

 

The Chancellor’s big spin on this budget is that it “rewards work”.  We already know that under-18s are to endure a cut in the minimum wage. In the UK it is possible to work a 40-hour week and still live in poverty. The way to make work pay is, surprisingly enough, to actually make work pay, by implementing a proper living wage. Today we heard no commitment on improving the pay of the low paid. It would be naive to ever expect one from a Tory Chancellor. Increasing the income tax threshold seems reasonable, but not when even the poorest are still hit by VAT, and duty on fuel, alcohol and tobacco. What Osborne gives with one hand, he takes several times over with the other.

 

Projections for economic growth and for a fall in unemployment are welcomed.I only hope they hold true. As far as I am aware the budget made no specific commitments relating to the latter. I fear that further cuts to the Department of Work and Pensions will only result in more inhumane box-ticking and the harassment of the vulnerable. The Government – as ever – has put all its faith in the hands of the wonderful private sector.

 

On the 50p rate, the detail most comprehensively leaked, news was always going to be disappointing. Having endured two years of the government chaffing on about deficit reduction, one could at least have assumed that they intended to maximise tax revenue. Basic maths will tell anyone that a 50p rate will raise more by its presence than its absence (“Laffer Curve” / wishful thinking / pseudoscience aside). Osborne himself stated that the rate raised around £1 billion. To me a lot, to him “next to nothing”. Cutting it will cost £100m. That’s a lot of disabled children who will have to go without.

 

The moral case for the 50p rate is even more clear cut – there can be no reason why someone “earning” in excess of £150,000 per year needs a penny more. Greed can be the only motive, and the one which leads to tax evasion and avoidance. It will be argued that such non-payment means that the tax rate might as well be cut. Just apply this same rational to other crimes such as burglary and murder – “You’re never going to catch every criminal, might as well legalise it!” – to see what a fallacy it is.

 

Tax evasion is “morally repugnant” according to Osborne. It is hard to shake off that dirty feeling that comes from agreeing with him – especially given those are often my own words. Tax evasion, and avoidance, are both morally reprehensible. They are as much a theft from the community as your typical off-licence robbery, in scale perhaps more so. The problem is that Osborne is the last person I would expect to do anything about it. I fear that despite pledges to the contrary, he will be all talk and no trousers. Every spending decision taken thus far by the government has convinced me that it is a government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.

 

Miliband’s best line came when he challenged the government front bench to admit who among them personally benefit from the budget. Furthermore it is worth considering how many prominent Tory donors will also benefit. Such borderline conflict of interest makes a mockery of democracy – and will certainly not be reported in the Tory press. The headlines will trumpet crumbs from the rich men’s table, and ignore the widening inequality that will be a direct result of Osborne’s decisions.

 

Labour should commit to restoring the 50p band, and to actually getting serious on tax fraud, just as we should commit to renationalising the NHS. Anything less will be to continue to concede to the rightward drift of our national political discourse.

By Chris Nash

Ich bin ein Trot

In the past week the “progressive” mask of the Tory party has all but disintegrated. Once again, boggle-eyed theories of “the enemy within” have been aired. By now most people in the country will be aware of the morally repulsive government scheme that is workfare. Anyone with a heart and a social conscience will be opposing it.

According to Grayling and IDS though, we opponents are just a tiny “unrepresentative” bunch of extremist “trots”. Ah yes, “trots”, meaning trotskyists; because if you can’t counter an argument with logic, reason and facts, then why not descend into slurs, name-calling and ad homninum? I have used the term “trots” in the past to refer to left-wing opponents. It was wrong of me then, being both ignorant and a lazy and knee-jerk form of argument. All in all its use by the government signifies an intellectual unwillingness to engage in the issues.

Yet what can we expect from men who so clearly do not know the difference between right and wrong? Already they have lied through their teeth about the “voluntary” nature of workfare. Government documents are, even now, being fabricated or hidden from official websites. The DWP, as always, peddles its Orwellian propaganda. Everyone who has first hand experience of the Job Centre and these schemes knows that Grayling and IDS are open liars. When brave individuals like Cait Reilly have dared to stand up against workfare, they have been mercilessly slurred and slandered in the Tory press. Now there are threats of a heavy police presence at future workfare protests – presumably to intimidate the vulnerable into compliance.

I am against workfare because I believe in a fair days pay for a fair days work. I oppose businesses exploiting the free labour of the unemployed. I oppose the unemployed being punished for economic circumstances beyond their control. I oppose undermining the wages of paid employees by working for free. I oppose already rich individuals and shareholders profiting from forced and unpaid labour.

According to Grayling and IDS, all this makes me an “extremist” and a “trot”. This being so, all hail Comrade Trotsky!

By Chris Nash

The old fetish

Friday was the day the old fetish returned. The day Cameron delved into nostalgia. And the day he set Britain at odds not only with the other 26 EU member states, but rationality itself.

What we saw on Friday was a Prime Minister with his hands tied by dogmatic backbench MPs. But not to worry, it seems Cameron had unveiled his all powerful ‘veto’. The only problem with this is that it’s not a true veto of any sorts. Negotiations will still be ongoing, the remaining 26 EU states will still formulate an agreement and Britain will not be present to have any say in the talks.

This is catastrophic failure for Cameron who has severed any attempts to help salvage the Euro which is not only in the EU’s interest but vital in Britain’s interests. In the words of a Facebook update by my own brother:

“Tory lol. Blame the economic problems on the Euro crisis, then veto the plan to save it knowing full well that the the EU will cut you out and essentially get rid of any say you have in determining the future of Europe, and by extension, Britain”

Some may call it Bulldog spirit, I’d like to call it naively dogmatic.

Max

The pressure mounts

With inflation around 5%, consumer confidence falling for four months on the trot, business confidence falling to a two year low, growth flat-lining in the past 9 months and growth expectations themselves being cut, you would have thought Gideon (George) Osborne would think things could not get any worse.

Well apparently they can. It seems 100 leading economists have written into the Observer to tell Gideon to adopt a plan B. Now while letters like this have been done in the past, the difference being that this time it has an alternative outline. It’s an alternative Miliband and Balls should take head to:

1. An immediate halt to cuts, to protect jobs in the public sector. (Although I wouldn’t not cut entirely, for one, I’d cut the renewal of Trident).
2. A new round of quantitative easing but the money wouldn’t go to the banks. Rather to finance a “Green New Deal” to create thousands of new jobs.
3. Benefit increases to put money into the pockets of those on lower and middle incomes and give a boost to spending.
4. A financial transaction tax to raise funds from the City to pay for investment in transport, energy and house building. (Robin Hood Tax anyone?)
5. Introduce a truly progressive tax system so that those at the bottom don’t face the greatest burden proportionately (Or simply having the rich pay their taxes will be a start)
6. Introduce a tax on land value to increase revenue and reduce the possibility of another debt-fuelled housing price boom.
7. Copy South Korea and China’s model of state assistance for industry by creating a British investment bank. (Something that Lord Mandelson was beginning to champion in the last year of the Labour Government)
8. Invest in transport and infrastructure to create jobs, but also to encourage people out of their cars and into trains or on to bicycles
9. Judge the economy not on whether there is growth in GDP, but on a new catch-all criterion that takes into account the desire for minimal unemployment, and for work-life balance, economic and social stability, and job satisfaction.

So Gideon, even though we know you wont, please take heed of the recommendations. Simply living in the nostalgia of a failed plan of the early 1980s wont guarantee success. And Miliband and Balls, these recommendations should be the essence of your policy review, take them on board!

Max

David Miliband

I’ve just got back from the double David Miliband event, and just wanted to write a report.

I thought the crowd during the first part (In Conversation with David Miliband – in the great hall) was fairly tough, there were questions about Palestine, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria and Guantanemo Bay. One of the best questions was “What would you say to David Eastwood about the Browne Review?” and David replied in a very diplomatic manner, ending with the comment that he didn’t think it was “all Professor Eastwood’s fault”. I for one hope that Eastwood noticed the resentment in the room and the general jibes against tuition fees and millionaires.

The second part (The Living Wage Launch with David Miliband) was more relaxed and entertaining. Luke asked a great question about solidarity with potential allies and recognising the real enemy. David replied “kicking Lib Dems is pleasure, kicking Tories is business. Politics is business”. He also highlighted the work of his “Movement for Change”, responding to comments that it seemed similar to the Big Society by stating that society is our turf, we have always been known as socialists not statists, and the Tories are only developing policies to promote society because they are terrified of being known as the “there is no such thing as society” party. I’m sure many of us can see through their Big Society strategy to a purely Thatcherite idealism, and recognise that grass roots activity and community organisation always has been and will remain a Labour policy area.

In conclusion, congratulations to the BULS members who helped to organise the talks, and I hope those who missed out come to the upcoming great events!

Suzy

That Old Chestnut

David Cameron has a nerve. Not only has he U-turned over his pledge in opposition to hold a referendum over the UK’s terms of membership of the European Union, but today he had the temerity to force Nicolas Sarkozy to back down and accept his presence at key Eurozone talks to try to deal with the Greek debt crisis on Wednesday.

Once again, only one year into the new government, a Conservative prime minister is becoming about as stable on Europe as Edwina Currie is on her feet. We all know deep down he is a staunch Euro-sceptic, so why doesn’t he have the guts to come out and be frank with the British people, and say that he would love us to turn our backs on our continental partners, but that he also loves us to lecture and patronise them on economic policy, despite the fact that UK growth is anaemic at best, and backwards at worst, thanks to his policies.

A referendum on EU membership now would of course be absurd, but having called for one in opposition, the PM should stick to his guns and create a disunited and discredited government, and do us all a favour by breaking up the coalition and triggering a general election. You can’t have your bun and eat it, and you can’t be half in, half out, of the EU – leaving the Eurozone (or more accurately, Germany) to do all the hard work and then turning up to talks this week to act as one of the key players while facing a referendum proposal at home from your own backbenchers is hypocritical and downright embarrassing for Britain.

It was Ed Miliband, incidentally, who called on Cameron to give up his trip Down Under and attend the meeting, therefore whether or not you agree that Cameron has a right to be there, it is clear that the Labour leader is ahead of the curve on this one, as he was on phone hacking and as he was at PMQs this week.

It might sound like a cheap shot from the comforts of opposition – and we all know Blair and Brown disagreed over the Euro – however it is clear that yet again the Tories are divided over Europe. Europhile or Europhobe, this is one of the few reliable constants of the European project.

In light of recent events

In light of the NHS reform bill being pushed through the House of Lords, I’d like to draw attention to what many Tories may be thinking now because of it.

Enjoy

Max

 

Why Turn Blue When Just ‘Labour’ Will Do?

As Ed Miliband gathers opinions and considers the future policy direction of the Labour party as part of the Policy Review, there has been much debate recently about whether or not to pursue ‘Blue Labour’, as proposed by the academic and Labour peer Maurice Glasman. Blue Labour, a response to ‘Red Toryism’, aims to put co-operatives and the community at the heart of the lives of ordinary British people, and is a rebuttal of New Labour’s strangling embrace of neo-liberalism, which left swathes of grassroots Labour supporters feeling alienated and ignored by the party leadership.

Glasman has a point, for throughout the history of the ‘people’s party’ there has been a split between liberals, state socialists and those who favour co-operatives and more local organisation – many Labour MPs today are also members of the Co-operative Party, and since its inception at the turn of the twentieth century the Labour movement has been associated with local organisation and mobilisation.

Martin Pugh in his 2009 book “Speak for Britain: A New History of the Labour Party” argues persuasively that the real dilemma for Labour through its history has not been attracting liberal support, but attracting hard-working but low-paid voters from the temptations of the Conservatives: many ordinary working class communities share the Tories’ patriotism; love of the armed forces (many of them have close relatives or friends serving in Afghanistan); desire for home ownership and a tough stance on law and order – why did so many vote for Margaret Thatcher in 1979, read the Daily Mail, and in a few cases drift to more extreme parties through fear of their jobs because of immigration and globalisation? Pugh stresses that when Labour came into being many voters were torn between it and the Tories because of these economic concerns, plus social beliefs like temperance or the role of the Church in schools.

Where Glasman takes the wrong path, in my view, is in his attempt to respond to Cameron’s Big Society by mimicking it and advocating a further retrenchment of the state, along with a return to a 1950s-style focus on the family, the flag, and feminism being almost unheard-of. That’s not ‘Blue Labour’, that’s just conservatism. If we as social democrats want to see equality of provision across the board, we need to expose the Big Society for what it is: a cover for cuts dreamt up by Steve Hilton when the Tories needed to be seen to be shedding the aura of Thatcherism.

If Labour is to win elections again without ditching our principles – to do so would be an insult to people like the families of those killed in Norway – we need to ‘re-connect with the grassroots,’ to use the spin-doctors jargon, by addressing, or at the very least appreciating, the legitimate concerns of the hard-working folk who keep the economy growing and keep money coming into the Exchequer. Instead of Big Society initiatives, we need to take the lead on key issues like housing, providing ample employment for deprived communities and young people generally, and not simply dismissing people’s concerns about migration and welfare dependency. That does not mean leaving the EU, saying we should only have British jobs for British workers, or undertaking humiliating fit-for-work tests like those currently going on under Iain Duncan Smith. It just means listening to those too well-off to be on benefits but on low wages, as well as staying true to  proud values like tolerance. If we go some way to pointing out these worries in opposition, whilst criticising the Con-Dems’ unfair cuts, the sought-after swing voters will follow, and we may just wake up to find ourselves in government again.

The end of Murdoch’s political monopoly?…Let’s hope so

To be brutally honest, when this whole phone hacking milarky began to come out 6, 9 months ago I really couldn’t care that much. But now, truly, everything has changed. The biggest circulatory newspaper of all time is being dropped, Andy Coulson has been arrested, murder and soldier victim families phones being tapped and quite frankly, the media will never truly be the same again.

So what can we identify and salvage from this wreckage? Well first off to get you in a good mood only Ed Miliband’s finest performance as Labour leader to date by being the first to call for enquiries, the first to call for the axing of the PCC, the first to call for Rebekah Brook’s resignation and the first to demand the transfer of the BSkyB bid to the competition commission. Ultimately, this is a welcome overcoming of fear of the Murdoch empire. Too long has a US-based media tycoon dictated overarching control over Britain. Don’t get me wrong, Labour’s hands are far from clean when it came to dealing with the tycoon master, but this is a major break not just for Labour but for British Politics as one major political force cuts it’s links with the media empire it feared. Miliband despite his fine performance recently has to be careful as already a senior Miliband aid received a “very hostile” threat, not veiled at all, from a News International journalist warning: “You have made it personal about Rebekah, so we’ll make it personal about you.”.

This break for British politics is all very well but it depends on Cameron following suit, which he has so far shown to be unwilling. It is clear that Camero also fears the monopoly and is too entwined in the spider’s web of Murdoch’s empire to truly break free. It was Cameron’s decision to bring in Coulson fresh from News of the World not only in to his team while in opposition but as Director of Communications in No. 10 despite an uneasy background record and he has paid dearly for this judgement. Let’s hope Cameron can make the right decision over the BSkyB deal as this is truly the real prize in all this chaos.

For Murdoch to jettison the very paper that brought him into the British media it seems that he realised the true potential of BSkyB. Newspapers are in decline, the future is the internet and TV. Sky’ revenue is already greater than the BBC’s which combined with his remaining papers would place Murdoch beyond reach of any rival media circles and organisations. With this power he could begin to truly cripple one of Britain’s greatest institutions, the BBC. Any chance that Sky would remain a fully bias free organisation is impossible given Murdoch’s record with the Times, the Sun, the NoW and Fox News over in the USA.

We’ve made our move, it’s time for Cameron to follow suit and do the right thing and remove this poison from British politics once and for all.

Max

Unite Behind The Unions

This week, the ominously-titled Business Secretary, Vince Cable, quickstepped down to Brighton to address the conference of the GMB Union, and calmly warned delegates, in no uncertain terms, that they can either lay back and take the savage cuts from the coalition government or face the consequences, which will take the form of more draconian anti-union legislation than even Maggie could dream of.

The coalition’s plans to pre-empt any upcoming Seasons of Discontent include only allowing official strike action to be valid where over 50 percent of members vote to withdraw their labour. This despite the fact that turnout in May’s AV referendum was only 42 percent; if the rules being drawn up for the unions were applied to that particular plebiscite we would now be going through that shambles of a campaign all over again. Perish the thought.

However over the last twelve months we have come to expect this sort of hypocritical posturing from the government, aimed at punishing the ordinary working man and woman for the 30-year poker game that took place in the City of London. We have even got used to the fact the the Liberal Democrats are happy to do all the dirty work while the Tories get on with the more important matters of screwing up the NHS, the Royal Mail, higher education and so on.

What is most worrying is the deafening silence coming from the Labour party over the last week.

It seems Ed Miliband, frightened by the response of the reactionary media after his speech at the March for the Alternative in Hyde Park earlier this year, has taken cover in the vain hope that all will blow over and the coalition will make itself so unpopular by 2015 that he will be swept to number 10 to save the day. It is not going to blow over. The Con-Dems will continue on their crusade against the public sector in the coming years, and can be forgiven for believing they have no effective opposition – when the only public figure speaking up for public sector workers is the Archbishop of Canterbury, you know Labour is in a bit of a pickle.

It’s time we got over the 1983, defeatist attitude and spoke up for ordinary working people who face falling wages, living standards and an uncertain future. This does not mean retreating into an unelectable, hard-left cocoon; it means not forgetting those who founded the Labour party in the first place over a century ago.

The problem with listening

If there’s one thing politicians need to do above all else is listen. Listen to experts, listen to other opinions irrespective of political allegiance and most importantly of all, listen to the people. Naturally then, I do welcome the pause in the break to the NHS reforms to allow Ministers to listen. Now, I’m not going to go onto the NHS reforms themselves as I’ve mentioned them enough on previous blogs. But, what I will blog about is the listening exercise itself.

After the Royal College of Nurses voted in favour in a vote of no confidence on Andrew Lansley a few days ago, the Health Minister claimed “I’m sorry if what I’m setting out to do hasn’t communicated itself…Listening to the vote this morning, if I’ve not got that message across then I apologise.”. Usually, I welcome apologises. Rather than showing a sign of ‘weakness’ they actually show a sign of humility and maturity. However, this so-called ‘failure to communicate’ is nothing less than patronising. What this is really saying is that we have failed to simplify the argument enough for you to understand, but we are still right and you are completely wrong. This don’t forget was just after 99% of delegates at the Royal College of Nurses conference deciding to vote in favour in a motion of no confidence in Lansley.

If the Health Minister is truly arrogant enough to believe that the Royal College of Nurses are too stupid enough to understand his proposals, he really has another thing coming.

Max

They Just Don’t Get It

I’ve now returned to Birmingham after a week in which the Coalition managed to look incompetent and shambolic as well as cruel. We’ve had Willetts admitting he is content to see poorer students having to settle for a degree at their local sixth form, rather than enjoying the full university experience; Norman Tebbit joining the near-univeral coalition against the NHS transformation; U-turns on defence spending and health to add to the growing list which includes school sports and buildings, forests, and even the Downing Street cat; and of course Nick Clegg. When he hasn’t been complaining that he is the nation’s ‘punchbag’ or facing criticism from his own son, he has been making some interesting comments about social mobility.

I am not going to slam the Deputy Prime Minister for having had a leg-up from his neighbour (a peer of the realm) in order to get an internship at a bank (it had to be a bank), because I challenge anyone reading this – assuming I have a readership – not to have seized the opportunity in the same way if they were in Nick’s position. A Labour party which wants social justice and equality of opportunity from birth should not be blaming someone for a background thay had no control over, and that even includes Cameron who had someone put a word in from Buck House. However, Clegg’s attempts at addressing the age-old problem of the ‘It’s who you know’ culture were embarrassing, coming at the same time this government is slashing Sure Start centres, EMA, univeristy budgets and allowing socially divisive ‘free’ schools to blossom up and down the country.

I spoke to people this week in the valleys who have Masters’ degrees who have spent over a year unemployed – young people with ambition, drive and what should be a promising career ahead of them. I overheard sixth form students on the bus complaining that they had not been accepted for any of their UCAS choices, despite the prediction of 4 As at A-level. I have personally had difficulty finding summer placements when I am not lucky enough to be able to work unpaid for six months in central London. Nick Clegg’s diagnosis was correct, but there is far more to it than setting an example to almost-bankrupt businesses by paying interns at Lib Dem HQ.

We need a new cultural shift in this country, brought about by government, where the disadvantaged are caught as soon as possible and at every stage of their lives are helped to gain the same opportunities as the better off. This should not involve positive discrimination or handouts, but should involve investment in our young people which other European countries manage while they bail out their neighbours, but we seem to think is unaffordable. A national internship scheme or national bursary programme, complementing investment in careers education (which at the moment is dire) to inform young people that they are just as talented and ambitious as the more privileged, and what opportunities are out there for the taking, is desperately needed. The underlying factors, such as affordable transport, need to be subsidised so someone who lives in the middle of nowhere with no ‘contacts’ can get work experience in a city near them.

There are important elections coming up in the devolved nations and local councils in England. Young people should be demanding better from the government and their local councils at the ballot box, and should express their dissatisfaction with the Coalition, which just doesn’t get it.

To AV or not to AV? That’s not the Question…

 

So the eagerly awaited and oh-so exciting AV referendum is now in sight, with Ed Miliband today setting out the Labour leadership’s opinion on one side, and many other Labour MPs and party members saying why they will be rejecting the proposal on the other. It does seem that the party is split down the middle – not a great position for an opposition party reassembling itself after electoral defeat. Incidentally, it is perhaps not the most shining example of ‘new politics’ or maturity when our leader refuses to unite with Nick Clegg because of his new status as Public Enemy Number One – surely there would be less cynicism in the electorate if we as an opposition party took each issue exclusively, instead of pointing the finger at the Tuition Fees Bogeyman.

The arguments for or against the Alternative Vote aside (I’m personally in the ‘Yes’ camp for want of something marginally further down the road to Proportional Representation), what strikes me the most after the disheartening advertising tactics of the ‘No’ camp (I’m sure you’ve seen the baby-in-incubator and soldier billboards) is the lack of interest amongst the wider electorate. Today I asked a friend of mine whether he had yet considered which way he would vote, and the reply was that it would make no difference to the political scene, so why should he bother? I wanted to answer his rebuttal, but found to my horror that I couldn’t. Whether or not we stick with First Past the Post or adopt AV will have little bearing on electoral outcomes on a national scale, only at constituency level (where AV would make elections far more interesting, as those who witnessed the Guild election results will testify), therefore the best we can hope for is the lesser of two evils, while those running for office continue to make vacuous or downright deceptive pledges in their election manifestos e.g. the marketisation of the NHS and tuition fees.

The real question on the ballot paper should not be ‘AV vs FPTP’, nor even the far more deomcratic ‘AV vs FPTP vs AV+ vs STV vs AMS…’, but something which reads less like a mathematical formula and more like a choice between two fundamental democratic frameworks that disillusioned voters can really get their teeth into. We need a choice over whether or not we want to overhaul the House of Lords (a process which has thus far taken a century); whether or not we want to de-throne and de-robe the monarchy; whether or not we want to reduce the stranglehold of the elites over our economy; in short, whether or not we want a new constitution. That is not to say the previous government had a gleaming record on constitutional affairs, although devolution and removal of hereditary peers were a good start. But by throwing a bone for the Lib Dem poodle in the form of a paltry referendum on AV, the Tories have got away with it again, whichever way we vote on May 5th.

1m young people unemployed: A price worth paying?

‘Unemployment is a price worth paying’ were the words that showed millions of Britons what the Tories really know about ordinary people. As unemployment rises again, and youth unemployment in particular is about to hit 1 million, my belief is that the people, and the Big Society, are better off when we are in work. It is especially important for young people to get a foothold in work and is certainly in the interest of both society, and HM Treasury to ensure that as many young people as possible can get work, or continue in further education.

There is a fundamental contradiction in Tory rhetoric about worklessness. At once they are carving a deep wound in our public services, and ‘cutting’ the jobs, and therefore the lives, of thousands of public sector workers. They cut the Future Jobs Fund, a vital programme which provided 18-24 year olds who had been out of work for six months with temporary employment. They abolished Education Maintenance Allowance, which provided thousands of less well off children the chance to afford further qualifications to help them compete in the labour market.  And they quashed the opportunity for 10,000 young people to go to university this year. At the same time the benefit budget is slashed and the coalition promise to get people off benefits and back into work. Where will these jobs come from? And what do those unable to find work, or unable to work at all, do when their benefits are reduced?

The Tories believe the private sector will provide these jobs, that private businesses will create well over 2 million jobs in the next few years. When the private sector created little more than 300,000 jobs between 1993 and 1999, I think everybody can see this for the nonsense it is.

But what would Labour do? The pathetic Tory response to all the criticism has been to point at the lack of concrete policy detail from Labour. They might say that this was a tactic we used while in Government. The fundamental difference is that Labour showed the Tory manifesto up for what it was. Lies, dishonesty, manipulation and branding with barely a sniff of the horror that a Tory government would really unleash. Labour were right.

This is what Labour would have done. We would have kept Education Maintenance Allowance, as Michael Gove promised before the election, thereby helping thousands of young people stay in education and encouraging aspiration. We would have given those 10,000 young people the chance to go to university, the chance to better themselves and more than pay off the cost of their education to the tax payer. And we would have protected the Future Jobs Fund, a scheme which helped 50% of young claimants move off benefits after their placement, and which the coalition advisor Frank Field called “one of the most precious things the last government was involved in, a lifeline that no amount of ‘New Deal’ rhetoric ever offered the unemployed”.

The Tories don’t understand people. They don’t care about people. Otherwise they would realise that every job cut is an assault on a family, every child that has to drop out of college is a slammed door on the future of this country, and every moment a person spends fearful of their prospects will eat away at our ‘big society’.

Jake

Stagflation?

Growth stalling, inflation rising and unemployment rising, for all the Tories comparison themselves and 1979 coming in “to clean up Labour’s mess”, it seems this government more reflects the 1970s than did Labour. Now, in BULS we’re wise enough to recognise that this ‘stagflation’ is not due to the cuts (as they are still yet to take fully effect yet) but rather the ending of Darling’s economic stimulus.

Up until the growth figures came out last month I personally very much doubted that the UK would actually slip into a full blown double-dip recession, but rather ‘bump along the bottom’. Since these figures have been produced, I fear there is a very good chance now. If this continues and even if worsens when the cuts bite (which I have a feeling they will do) Labour will have the sad duty of saying “don’t say we didn’t warn you” as throughout the election we campaigned to keep investment in the economy until 2011. But, I hope for the sake of the people of Britain, that day never comes.

Max

There’s No Such Thing As (the Big) Society

In an echo of the early years of the Thatcher government, where Michael Hestletine tried out some of his ‘experiments’ on the good people of Merseyside – culminating in the Toxteth riots and three million unemployed nationally – Liverpool has been at the centre of Cameron’s ‘Big Society’ pilot scheme. Until today that is.

The leader of (admittedly Labour led) Liverpool City Council today wrote to the Prime Minister explaining that it could not continue with the pilot as planned, because the money simply wasn’t there and key volunteering schemes are likely to be axed as a result. This is about as surprising a development as a premiership footballer being transferred to another club for an astronomical sum; it also demonstrates that, as predicted by many (including the general public, according to opinion polls) the Big Society will be stillborn.

How can the government expect people who work fulltime with children and cannot afford childcare (or even the bus fare) to run their own local services and volunteering projects, when there are no funds to back them up? This is set against the backdrop that the biggest cuts to local authorities are coming in places like Liverpool and Tower Hamlets rather than Witney and Cheshire. There are many people who are already overstretched from all ends of the income scale who give up their time to do good deeds in their local community, and these people should be praised. However if a youth drug rehabilitation centre is being run by people from the local community, who fills in and delivers this vital service when those who run it are either starved of funds or leave the area? The Big Society will lead to patchy and intermittent provision and disparities across local areas.

Less than a year since the election, and already the Big Society is being exposed for what it really is: at best, an ill-thought through policy written on the back of an envelope by someone who’s never been to areas of deprivation; or at worst, a cynical cover for an ideological slashing of spending on local authorities.

Luke

Uni’s Not For Me

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-12324225

It took me a long time to decide which issue to discuss on my first blog for Birmingham University Labour Students, as there are a myriad of things to be angry and anxious about at the moment thanks to the Con-Dem coalition. I pondered the dismantling of the NHS; the upcoming AV referendum and the scrapping of EMA, however an article which popped up on the BBC News website meant it had to be the tuition fees rise and its ramifications – BULS is, after all, a university society.

The latest development in this sorry saga is today’s latest UCAS admissions figures for 2011 entry, the last year before the trebling of fees in many instances alongside the ten per cent rise in salary of our Vice Chancellor. They reveal the stark reality that – despite what the government assures us – people are being turned off the idea of higher education in large numbers, most of whom will undoubtedly be from less privileged backgrounds. In the year that was supposed to be the ‘boom’ year of applications to beat the raising of the threshold in 2012, the number of applications only rose by five per cent, which in comparison with recent years and predicted trends is a sharp decrease in interest in degree courses.

Most disturbing of all was the plummeting of applications to -2 per cent in December, as the protests raged in central London and the heir to the throne’s wife was nudged with a stick. A brief fillip this may have been, but it demonstrates clearly that sixth-formers and school-leavers are seriously reconsidering their futures, weighing up whether it is really worth that much in debt only to come out jobless at the end of it. Just like the growth statistics, the figures are shocking, but not surprising considering the coalition’s arrogance and dogged determination to see through their most regressive and unpopular policies – which affect the poorest hardest – before the public realise what has hit them.

By Luke Jones, Communications Officer-elect

Double dip?

Now, I’ve never really been one for thinking that the government’s austerity programme would actually throw the UK back into a double dip recession. What was always my belief, and the belief of many others is that the economy would merely ‘bump along the bottom’ and have only a bit of growth and then begin to take off a few years down the line. What has happened and very unfortunately is that growth in the final quarter of 2010 actually contracted by 0.5%. That’s right, the economy shrank by 0.5%.

Now unlike the Tories during the recession in 2008 and 2009 I accept there is more to this than merely blaming the government of the day. The global economy is still in a very fragile state (something we argued during the general election) and the severe weather during December will have played it’s part. But, this is where my sympathy falls short. One of the biggest contributor’s to the contraction was the construction industry, shrinking by 3.3%(!). And why is this you may ask? Well, of course one of the major reasons was the ‘Emergency Budget’ and the scrapping of the Building Schools for the Future.

It seems the Tory-led Coalition seems completely incapable of realising the links between the public and private sector. If you cancel contracts, it will hit the private sector. If you do little to tackle the slowly rising unemployment, then where will the demand for the private sector come from? And if you think this is the end of if, you’re in for a disappointment, as soon the true effects of the savage cuts of the Comprehensive Spending Review will begin the to bite the real economy.

Britain is still not fully in recession yet, as two quarters of contraction are needed for that. But, if a full recession comes to pass next April then the Coalition will have no option to change course and re-think it’s economic strategy. While we in BULS and Labour as a whole will have the sad duty of saying “We told you so.”. But let’s just hope that doesn’t happen.

Max

Some actual sound moves from the PM, for once

I’m not going to lie, I personally have not been hit that hard by the recession and by the cuts (yet for the latter). But, credit where credit is due, for once the DC has made some sound moves. Lord Young’s comments are completely out of touch, low interest rates are of little concern for those struggling to make ends meet (or meat, not sure which) on minimum wage or a part of the 2.5 million (ish) unemployed. This incident alone does not equate to DC being out of touch, in fact, this shows humility for once (though I can’t say the same for a lot of everything else he stands for).

Other good news, DC has also decided to take his ‘vanity photographer’ off the Civil Service payroll (although it should not have been on it in the first place, we do welcome the U-turn). Also, we welcome the news of aid to the Irish Republic. They are one of our closest trading partners (and the only country to share a land border with the UK). This is in our, and Europe’s interest to help out Ireland (though I do feel and note the sheer irony and contradiction on part of the Tories in regard to government bailouts, which is effectively happening here given their own abrupt u-turn on the UK’s own bank bail out two years ago). But, don’t forget DC, Ireland is in this mess because they went down the road of austerity measures two years ago, take heed of the warning in our backyard.

Max

“New”, “old”, it’s all the same to this kind of politics

As you may be aware, I’ve always been a somewhat of a critic of the Coalition’s version of “new” politics, often sounding, feeling and looking like much of the “old”. Well he’s some more of it!

We’re all very aware of Cameron’s (DC) “Webcameron” (that bastion link to the plebs), well the woman who organised it along with the Tories personal photographer of DC have both been added to the Civil Service Payroll on a short term contract. Now at times of large austerity, isn’t it a tad unfair and hypocritical that the PM decides to employ quite literally, some of his mates? It’s irrelevant whether they followed Civil Service procedure and code correctly, the message is blatantly clear, austerity for you and new jobs for my chums.

It’s also the fact that when asked about this at PMQs by Miliband, DC replied “engage in the issues”……..you’ll find this is an issue now DC of hypocracy. Yes, fair enough you’ve cut the communications budget, but it still doesn’t excuse your actions. Think DC, people can tell the difference between the “new” and “old” politics.

Max

The day the poorest were to get poorer

Osborne announced £81 billion reduction in public expenditure

As George Osborne ploughed through the list of ‘efficiency savings’, it seemed as though he struggled to iterate what he was orchestrating. Almost with a guilty conscience, he reached for his glass of water after every departmental shrinkage plan. The monetary arm of the state is no longer the source of promise that has rescued those trapped on the peripheries of society, it has now turned away. With this it has put the futures of a generation at risk:

• It has forced those who work so diligently to offset their well-earned retirement plans, by increasing the retirement age. This is compounded by a further £3.5 billion worth of contributions that have to be made by public sector workers for their pension schemes.
• The departmental cuts total £46 billion, including 27% from local government, 29% from the environment and 23% from the Home Office.
• It has taken a further £50 a week from those who genuinely claim incapacity benefit, and has stripped another £7 billion from the Welfare budget (the equivalent of £1000 a year from 7 million families) on top of the £11 billion cuts announced previously. Those depending on tax credits and housing benefits will now get a significant amount less or nothing at all.
• 40% cut in Higher Education- stifling the chances of many innovative and bright young people to excel in the world of academia. My thoughts on this are in a previous blog written recently.
• The Ministry of Defence will face an 8% reduction in funding which equates to the loss of 42,000 army personnel or civil servant jobs over the next five years.
• He announced that the commitment to the renovation and new building of social housing will be cut by 60% over the next four years.

The list is endless. To take £81 billion out of the budget through depreciating government spending in the vital services and help that our society necessitates over the next four years is without question showing a complete disregard for the poorest and most vulnerable in society. It is widening the gulf between the top of the social ladder and the bottom, and it recklessly diminishes the future prospects of those not even born yet. And as the Tory backbenchers praised and cheered their man’s vast Spending Review it got me thinking- this ties in with traditional and recurring Tory principles- to hold the poorest at arm’s length, and let the rich get richer.

Kieran

The end is nigh

So here it is, after over 5 months of build up, the spending review is here, of course we don’t know everything that Gideon is going to cut yet (and I’m not going to cover the spending review fully, Kieran said he would do that). Average spending cuts of 25% to most Whitehall departments (with some suffering 40%) over 4 years and around 500,000 job losses over that same period (which the private sector will magically pick up after).

The Coalition has for a long period constantly lambasted the public that the scale and speed of these cuts “is necessary and unavoidable” and yes admittedly we’ve been stuck in a leadership election but it’s now our job to say, “No! There is always an alternative”. The Coalition has often used the comparison between a household budget and that of the structural deficit, and in this case we should do the same (bear with me), as when a family goes into debt, yes they need to balance the books but you never see a house do everything they can to reduce the debt as quickly as they possibly can by selling the furniture, the kitchen, the TV, etc until you leave the house completely bare.

Even though I sincerely doubt it, I do hope the Lib Dems will have softened the blow Gideon is going to make, but again, hugely unlikely.

Max

Guess the caption, spending review special…

On the eve (almost) of the spending review, I thought it would be appropriate to have some fun out of the misery Gideon Osborne (or Boy George, take your fancy) is going to make with all of us dismayed as he throws any chance of recovery out of the window. Enjoy.

Max

True Tory thinking of the NHS

Actual footage of a Tory MPs views on the NHS……………………………..thankfully not, but funny all the same, enjoy. (Sorry it’s slightly out of sinc)

Max

It’s short-sighted to slam the lib dems now

Let’s be clear this is a Conservative lead government implementing predominately Tory policy bar a few half-hearted attempts at Lib Dem fig leaves, such as the referendum on AV. Recently there has been a lot of anti Lib Dem rhetoric thrown about by the Labour leadership candidates, especially by Ed Miliband who I support incidentally. This kind of rhetoric against the Lib Dems in government, in my opinion is short sighted, too tribal and ignores the true architects of the cuts regime: the Tories.

It will get a loud cheer from the Labour party faithful and applause from the gallery but anti liberal democrat rhetoric places the Labour party in permanent opposition if it continues on this path. As a party we have to be ready to talk and work with other parties on the left as most of the wider public now like coalitions and politicians working together. Of course as a party we should focus on winning a majority at the next general election but after such a heavy defeat in the spring and the way this has election panned out I believe that will be difficult to achieve in only one term. However we should be ready, unlike in May, for a coalition government, we should be looking to work with the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party and others on the pluralistic left to make sure a Tory government is a thing of the past. With a progressive alliance we can place the Tory’s in opposition indefinitely.

As well as Labour swallowing its tribal instincts, this kind of politics is very much dependant on the electoral system. I would be in favour of a more proportional system possibly in the form of AV+ however this is not on the referendum ballot paper although I hear Caroline Lucas is mounting an amendment to add it on. Despite the A.V referendum being placed alongside the gerrymandering of constituencies in the same bill, the next leader, whoever it is, should campaign for a ‘yes’ vote. The alternative vote would make coalitions governments more likely and be a step in the right direction to making parliament more representative and go a way to gaining lost trust in the political system. In May as a Labour party we should show the public we are grown up politicians, ready to be an effective opposition but more importantly a credible government. That means as Martin Kettle states in his draft Labour leader speech in Friday’s Guardian, and I paraphrase ‘I will stand shoulder to shoulder with Nick Clegg on this issue’

Come May 2015 the electoral map will look very different, and a Lab-Lib coalition might be very much on the cards. The Labour party has to swallow its tribal instincts and be ready for coalition. Coalitions are here to stay; the country and the labour party can’t afford to be prevented from going into government because it can’t accept a pluralistic vision of politics. Labour needs to not retreat into the introverted tribalism that has marked some of the last five years of power. To avoid a prolonged spell in the wilderness, Labour must look to the wider public and move to a more pluralistic form of doing politics.

Sam Murphy @Murphys_Law19

Student and Labour party activist, South Staffordshire District council candidate in May.

We are NOT all in this together…..and even they know it

“We are all in this together” is the famous six worded sentence announced by George Osborne at the time of the emergency budget. However, this declaration has taken yet another blow. Despite the budget already being proved to hit women, ethnic minorities and the north disproportionally more, it is now revealed that the Scotland’s, Wales’ and Northern Ireland’s First, Deputy and Finance Ministers also concur that we are indeed not all in this together. An extract from the joint statement can be found here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11493001 and so proves that no, it isn’t Labour in denial over the figures, in this declaration we have the DUP, Sinn Fein, SNP and Plaid Cymru as well. And no, they aren’t doing this to gain popularity with a “tussle” with the government in London; they are doing this because what the Coalition is doing in regards to the structural deficit is in fact not in the national interest. But rather a backdrop for ideological dogma, as placed extremely well by the columnist Polly Toynbee, “Blue ideology comes well disguised at a time when all cuts, however extreme, can be disguised as necessity.”.

This is also reflected recently on the daily politics show recently where it was revealed that since David Cameron became leader in 2005 Tory party membership has dropped by a third(!) in the space of five years, yes Labour’s dropped throughout 13 years in government, but this is something quite phenomenal and while in opposition too. This is in direct contrast to Labour membership which has shot up since May 6^th with what I’m proud to announce, 65 new fully fledged members of BULS at the fresher’s stall and a further 150 added to the emailing list.

Max

Osborne’s vision for the future

Contrary to the pre-election promises of both the Tories and the LibDems that child benefits were not to be called into question, they are now to be cut to all those individuals earning over the 40% tax rate. Obviously these middle to high earners won’t miss the hundreds or thousands of pounds they should have been entitled to as much as lower earners. This child benefits cut is therefore “not as bad as it could have been”, as opposed to those that will follow it, which I fear will be bad, worse and ugly.

While this policy compares favourably with Victorian conservatism, when the lower classes were discouraged from having children in order to leave greater space and resources for the “better quality” middle class offspring, it doesn’t show much of a departure fro recent Tory policy. It still manages to hit women hardest, especially by discriminating against single mothers. The massive loophole meanwhile, maintained for purposes of “simplicity”, allows for high earning couples to benefit, as long as each partner earns less than 44 thousand alone.

It also leaves the coalition sending the public yet another mixed message – marriage is good, raising children is bad. I’d be excited to find out the rest of Gideon’s plans for our families, if I wasn’t too busy quaking in my boots.

Suzy

Ideological dogma, and nothing less

David Cameron (DC) was today in none other than good ol’ Brum at a “PM direct” session (where I think BCF where present). Reading in the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/03/david-cameron-public-sector-cuts-permanent (sorry Sean but I saw it on Facebook) recently DC pledged at the session that once the deficit has been dealt with, funding will not be restored to public services.

Now to put this in perspective, DC (and recently Cleggy) have been arguing that the savage cuts they are going to make to the public sector are apparently “necessary”, leaving aside whether the ideas are right or wrong it is this key argument of “necessity” that has prevailed through. What we have seen here from DC is that no, the rate in which they are cutting is not in fact necessary but rather a pre-text for petty ideological goals and dogma.Essentially, what DC is saying is that once the deficit has been dealt with, the state will not return to help those in need, it won’t increase investment in the primary areas of the NHS, Police (which protect the health, safety and wellbeing of people) and Education which are three most important tiers of the public sector and social benefits to those truly in need them in any future troubles will also be stuck at their austerity levels.DC states that “How can we do things differently and better to give value for money?” which is understandably fair enough, if you’re going to spend money, it has to be at the best value for money, but there is a distinct line between “value for money” and downright underinvestment. I hope DC will have the humility one day to feel remorse for the pain he is about to cause for mere ideological dogma.

Max

153, jellyfish, Trident, dolphins and a seal

Firstly, apologies for the lack of blogging recently. Been away in north Wales for the past week surrounded by a seal, dolphins (yes you heard me actual dolphins in north Wales!) and what seemed to be the world’s largest gathering of jellyfish, but that unfortunately is a different story.

Moving on swiftly, Education Secretary Michael Gove promised one of the greatest revolutionary reforms to the education system of all time. This was hoped to be achieved through the expansion of the academy programme which was started by Tony Blair’s Labour government. The Academy school programme was initially targeted at underperforming areas, now I don’t know if they were successful or not, but it seemed a good….ish idea at the time.

But now Gove has began rushing through legislation to allow any school the right to become an academy, independent from the local council (even though they already hold a large degree of autonomy). Gove claimed that around a 1100 schools had already signed up to become academies within a week, however, it was recently revealed a mere 153 have done so since the coalition took office. 153! Ed Balls has accused Gove of railroading the bill given only a mere 10% of the claimed schools have applied. Personally, I’m really not well aware of the pros and cons of the academy programme, but for a coalition that is supposed to represent “new” politics, it certainly shows a lot of the “old” brand by preventing Parliament from doing their job of proper scrutiny of bills.

Moving on again, it has been revealed that there is an apparent schism between the MoD and the Treasury over who should foot the bill for the renewal of Trident. The renewal of Trident is predicted to cost around £20 billion, the MoD budget is £40 billion and there is a large budget deficit, already you can see a slight problem. Personally, I’d love to see the back of Trident, but in the name of compromise here’s an idea that will kill two birds with one stone. How about keeping Trident but not renewing until the deficit is well and truly dealt with? Britain’s nuclear defence system is still very capable of wiping out numerous major cities across the globe, a slight upgrade that would increase the range of the submarines and the blast radius of the missiles a bit would surely not go to miss if its lifespan is prolonged. Just a thought.

Max

The axe falls

Today saw George Osborne’s first ever budget as Chancellor in which Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats showed how much they had sold themselves out. Despite accusing Cameron of threatening to raise VAT with a re-run of the famous Tory poster of “Labour’s tax bombshell” have now agreed with their coalition partners to indeed raise VAT to 20% in which the house was in uproar! The thing with the VAT is that it is generic, it targets no specific group, so in other words, rather than taxing higher earners, it is those on middle to lower incomes who will suffer from this “tax bombshell”. Here is a rundown of the main aspects of the budget:

1. VAT will rise from 17.5% to 20% from January 4, 2011 (already touched upon but still rather ironic)
2. Councils which propose low council tax increases will be offered extra funds to allow them to freeze the tax for one year from April 2011 (would be great if we had the money)
3. Capital Gains Tax remains at 18% for low and middle-income savers but from midnight, higher rate taxpayers will pay 28% (now that I can agree with)
4. The capital gains tax “entrepreneurs relief” rate of 10% on the first £2m of gains will be extended to the first £5m (frankly if they earn that much they deserve a level of taxation, especially now)
5. No raise to alcohol, cigarettes and fuel (pity it wasn’t raised on cigarettes)
6. Low income families will get more Child Tax Credit – the amount per child will rise by £150 above the rate of inflation next year (again, I can agree with that)
7. Sure Start maternity grant will be restricted to the first child (kind of stupid, better have it the other way around as you will have more mouths to feed)
8. Corporation Tax will be cut next year to 27%, and by 1% annually for the next three years, until it reaches 24% (should be raised for bigger businesses in my eyes)
9. Average real terms budget cuts of 25% over four years – except for health and international aid (there goes my local bobby and half of the state sector teachers
10. Personal income tax allowance to be increased by £1,000 in April to £7,475 – worth £170 a year to basic rate taxpayers (the sole thing in this budget I would commend, obviously the Lib Dems managed to get A concession out).

VAT rise which will hit the poorest hardest and corporation tax cuts…….in the words of J. K. Rowling, “I’ve never voted Tory before, and they keep reminding me why.”

Max

Philippa Stroud

Firstly I’d like to thank BULS for electing me to the post of director of social media. Otherwise I would never have joined Twitter and therefore never have been made aware of who Philippa Stroud is and what she stands for. 36 hours after the story broke on the front page of the Observer all other major papers (apart from the Telegraph which played it down) and even the BBC have maintained a deafening silence on the issue. Ken Livingstone raised the issue on the Daily Politics show and was hushed up by the presenters.

But it’s been trending #1 on Uk twitter for 24 hours, the facebook event “Lets help Philippa Stroud get better” has 62 members and the facebook group “If Cameron cares an ounce about LGBT people, he’ll sack Philippa Stroud” has 1,544 members and counting.

This is big news, and it’s simply not being reported by the Murdoch press. The silence of the BBC, to whom, according to Stonewall UK the LGBT community contribute £190 million annually in license fees on this issue is shameful.

So what has Philippa Stroud done?

Having stood as a Conservative PPC in Ladywood Birmingham in 2005 she is now standing for Sutton and Cheam in South London. In 1989 she founded the King’s Arms Project – a Christian night shelter offering counselling to drug addicts, alcoholics, and LGBT people. She believed homosexuality was caused by demons, and could be cured by prayer and exorcism.

There has been no statement of apology or explanation from the Conservative party or David Cameron, Philippa Stroud herself having issued a statement which leaves lots of questions unanswered: “I make no apology for being a committed Christian. However, it is categorically untrue that I believe homosexuality to be an illness and I am deeply offended that The Observer has suggested otherwise. I have spent 20 years working with disturbed people who society have turned their back on and are not often supported by state agencies; drug addicts, alcoholics, the mentally ill and the homeless that I and my charitable friends in the public sector have tried to help over the years. The idea that I am prejudiced against gay people is both false and insulting.”

She refused to comment on whether she believes LGBT people can be cured by the power of prayer, and whether she includes them under her definition of “disturbed people” or the “mentally ill”. She may not be prejudiced against the LGBT community in that she would treat them the same as anyone else suffering from demon possession, but is clearly not pro-liberation.

As a member of the New Frontiers Church of which her husband is a minister she has also pledged to: “be subservient to the wishes of my husband in all things” and submit to “male servant leadership and joyful female submission” – a remarkable attitude for a prospective female MP. I wonder what her views on abortion, same-sex civil partnerships and LGBT adoption are?  And when it became OK for the state and religion to cross over in this manner?

For a full briefing of the recent LGBT gaffes committed by the Tories see http://issacgreaves.eu/attackoftheclones/

The public have a right to demand proper coverage, proper investigation and a proper apology or some heads on plates. Instead we have 768 google hits for Gillian Duffy , and only 9 for Philippa Stroud.

My only comfort is that she probably won’t get elected because the constituency in which she’s standing has a strong and popular Lib Dem MP Paul Burstow who is standing for re-election.

Suzy

Radicals? Really?

I was surprised yesterday to see Dave have a column in the comments section of the Guardian where he claimed the Tories were the true radicals and that Labour were now the reactionaries. A more or less response was published in todays Guardian from Polly Toynbee which effectively ripped Dave to shreds-http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/10/beware-radical-tories-reality-terrifying

In short this was little points of the modern Tory party:

• Dave and Boy George are advocating cuts to public services, benefits, borrowing and letting unemployment rip
• When this last happened child poverty shot up from 1 in every 7 children to 1 in every 3
• “tax credits, better benefits and Sure Start lifted 500,000 out of poverty”
• “a marriage bribe of £150 that leaves out the lowest paid married couples and deserted wives.”
• “In the wash-up Cameron stopped a referendum on the voting system and House of Lords reform.”
• “He blocked sex education and one-to-one tuition for slow readers.”
• “His shadow home secretary repudiated protection for gay people, while his MEPs voted for homophobia with their weird new party.”
• “A Financial Times survey of Tory candidates this week pointed to the scale of climate change denial in the party.”
• “Most resist a cap on bankers’ bonuses and want less financial regulation: many come from the financial sector, others from PR and marketing, and they want the 50p top tax scrapped.”
• “Conservativehome.com finds them rabidly Eurosceptic.”
• “The national insurance rise they oppose costs £4 a week per employee – not, says James Caan of Dragons’ Den, a sum that deters hiring.”
• “he will cap public officials’ pay at 20 times their lowest paid staff. Reasonable enough, but Income Data Services says only some 100 people would be affected.”
• “Voters know that the big market destroyed the economy, while the big state rescued it.”
• “Cameron offers tax cuts that will require double the depth of spending cuts and probably mean double the job losses.”
• Would scrap the regional development agency
• ” Cameron would increase unemployment: the Small Business Federation says “the jewel in the crown” of Labour’s Keynesian borrowing is the £5bn of tax postponed for 200,000 small businesses, saving many of them and their 1.4m jobs. But Cameron says all such borrowing “must stop instantly”. Unemployment is much lower than expected, but Cameron would send it back to the 1980s.”
• “Most wicked would be Cameron’s plan to cut Sure Start back to its origins, with maybe 500 of 3,500 centres surviving in skeleton: so much for his concern about “social mobility stalling”.”
• “School budgets, not ringfenced, would get a £1.7bn cut, the Institute for Fiscal Studies reckons, before paying for new parent-run schools.”

So evidently, he is in fact radical, but not in the way he makes himself out to be.

Max

‘Efficiency’ savings

Two little things pointed out today on the BBC I found rather funny on the ensuing national insurance rise/Tory ‘efficiency’ savings.

1. Alistair Darling today pointed out that this morning Dave admitted that his proposed ‘efficiency’ savings would not be enough to fund all his proposed tax breaks but then declined to say where the money would come from to fund the rest.
2. And on BBC news amongst Tories promising to extend a stopping of benefits if an individual is caught committing benefit fraud 3 times to (I think) 3 years; they failed to point out that not a single person last year got caught committing benefit fraud 3 times.

A little on the side, tax breaks for married couples, while still lacking full detail (how original) the Tories will be going ahead with it. I’m sorry but you could really spend that money elsewhere on far better causes like rejuvenating deprived areas, creating a more environmentally friendly economy or simply paying off the deficit.

Max

Just a thought…

With the campaign well under way, many have begun to question Dave’s consistency on cutting the deficit. Labour wishes to cut the deficit in half in 4 years, the Tories say they will do it faster. However, there is one little nagging issue for the Tories as they have made similar pledges to cut certain taxes, namely:

• Most of the national insurance rise
• Inheritance tax for the 3000 richest families
• Marriage tax breaks
• Council tax

Now frankly during decent economic periods these would actually be realistic arguments and policies, but when the UK has only just emerged from recession (I read somewhere today that the UK has in fact avoided a double-dip recession with growth at 0.4% for the first quarter) and a substantial budget deficit. So where will this money come from to fund millionaires? Yep, you guessed it, front line services with Boy George (Osborne) saying that it would cost 44,000 public sector jobs. There has been an apparent efficiency savings but even IF they managed to cough up the aforementioned amount of money it still would not be enough to cover all the tax cuts.

Max

Lest we forget 2

2. Tory political oppurtunism at the worst possible time

The second blog in this series I was going to save for last but as it is the biggest issue I personally have against Dave and the Tories, I thought it’d be better to get it out of the way now. The cartoon above is taken from my favourite political cartoonist, Chris Riddell, from the Observer. This was done just after the Tories 2008 party conference and virtually the start of the financial crisis were the banks were on the edge of collapse.

If you drift your memories back to Labour’s 2008 conference Gordon Brown famously stated in the midst of the banking crisis, “this is no time for a novice”. This was followed by Dave at the Tory party conference who pledged Brown a degree of support to bail-out the banks. 10 days later Dave changed tack in PMQs and attacking Brown for the likes of reckless spending and so ending the temporary political truce. Evidently Dave’s made a big issue out of this since which, but what about those 10 days?

Brown was jetting around Europe organising an international effort during those 10 days and obviously he got a tad of media coverage, which was inevitable given the circumstances.

So it can be seen that Dave did realise that this at the time was the right course of action but once again his need to appear different to the Government (and somehow a better option) prevailed. But, this is something we cannot allow the public to forget or to forgive!

Max

Lest we forget 1

In response to BUC”F”s Daniel Cole’s “Lest we forget” blogs on the BUC”F” site I thought in the name of balance, point out what is so dearly wrong with the Tories and why they should not be allowed to govern. This will hopefully come in weekly instalments.

1. Tory dogma and opposition to real change

• 1998, the Tories opposed the introduction of the minimum wage, which until previously wages such as £2 per hour were common place and legal
• 1997-8, the Tories opposed devolution to Scotland (only to later accept it)
• Plan to cut child tax credits
• Plan to scrap many Sure Star centres for those on modest incomes
• Voted against the compulsory 5 year jail sentence for carrying a gun
• David Cameron voted against granting gay couples the right to adopt
• Plan to scrap patient’s right to see a specialist within two weeks if your GP suspects you have cancer (which I frankly find disgusting)
• 2002, the Tories opposed the ban on hunting Foxes with dogs (and wish to overturn the ban still)
• David Cameron voted against the NHS Foundation Trust in 2003
• David Cameron voted to keep Section 28 in 2003
• The Tories are against the proposed AV system and making the House of Lords an elected chamber

 Tory dogma, once again. More to come next week and every week until the election

Max

It’s the little victories that count

Today saw Boy George (George Osborne) going to the business school on campus today. BULS was planning to have a protest, but unfortunately, not enough people turned up (only me, Dan and Maise with Kieran and Jake turning up after he had gone). Thankfully though, we did manage to get a little victory, which made our day. After covertly sneaking in, acquiring some discarded name badges as effective disguises (I was called Tom), past BUCF who were wearing suits (again) and managed to catch Osborne himself, where Dan managed to get a photo with him.

Enjoy

Max

More political opportunism

 It was revealed yesterday that the Tories have seized on strikes by British Airways and on the railways to claim Britain is facing a “spring of discontent” because of Labour. Now I’m sorry, whatever your views on the individual strikes taking place at the moment, you can hardly compare this to the ‘winter of discontent’, the circumstances are entirely different, for a start Unions are nowhere near as powerful and influential as they once were. It just seems to me that Dave’s using this opportunity to 1. Distract media attention from his Lord Ashcroft scandal, 2. Try and give Brown another blow and 3. Similarly, trying to take a swipe at the Unions because of his party’s dogmatic view. Political opportunism at its best.

Max

Next Tory party conference?

Could this be at the next Tory conference if they win the general election? And yes in the final days of my tenure I’m hardly finding serious stuff, lol!

Max

BUCF derecognised, again

BREAKING NEWS!

It was recently learnt that the Birmingham University Conservative Future (BUCF) was derecognised yesterday. This isn’t the first time the BUCF has been derecognised (http://bulsonline.org/2008/12/06/buls-inside-i-didnt-recognise-bucf/). However, this time little is known (on my part at least) what were the reasons for this. From what I know directly from BUCF members is that they received an email of constitutional breaches (not sure if it was the Guild’s or their own constitution though) and not to mention the ongoing fiasco over their AGM. I do know from a particular source in BUCF that they had been considering voluntarily derecognising for some time as they haven’t received a grant from the Guild in a couple of years.

Whatever the reasons, I’m sure they’re far better than last time (essentially no one was sent to a Guild Council meeting for months on end). Obviously, the full story so far is not known so this presumption may well be wrong, but every other society manages to get the grant, why not BUCF? I sincerely wish they could sort out their problems and get back into the Guild, but whatever happens, we wish them the best of luck. And if anyone from BUCF wants to fill in the details it would be much appreciated.

Max

Neck and neck

As this article shows (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7054655.ece), polling in the key marginal seats is essentially, neck and neck with occasionally Labour pulling ahead to a o.6% margin, while this is certainly not much it is far better than it was about 6 months ago.

But what has gone wrong for the Tories, throughout most of 2009 they were often polling around a 15% lead, this has been drastically slashed to around 6% now and because the FPTP system heavily favours Labour (the great irony of Tory opposition to the proposed AV system) it would mean the Tories would only just be the largest party in a hung Parliament by 3 or so seats. There are a number of reasons I believe for this decline:

Obviously, these past 2 months for Dave have not been his best, Ashcroft non-dom revelation, changing tack on spending cuts, 3 times getting the statistics wrong (crime, teenage pregnancy rates and the number of votes cast at the last election). But, I personally think there is one simple reason, they have got complacent, the Tories believe they will be able to just waltz into No. 10 and in doing so have not made the policies bomb-proof (so to speak) for when the spotlight was turned upon them. Back in 1997, New Labour feared Major and the government and so they ran a highly tight campaign, not leaving room for error. This is the Tory’s greatest failure, underestimating Labour.

Max

Tory campaign receives a not so welcome boost

It was recently revealed yesterday that none other than Robert Mugabe, President of Zimbabwe has endorsed Dave and the Tories. Maybe they share similar policies?

Max

Lord almighty Ashcroft

A recent take on the Lord Ashcroft scandal which has shook the Tories from good old mydavidcameron.

Poor Dave, it’s not been a good 2 months for him has it?

Max

Cameron exposed

Been finding funny things rather than serious stuff recently, but meah.

Max

Economics for Dummies

 

More from our favourite mydavidcameron website. Found this one particulary amusing.

Max

So much for a “good clean fight”

Well it wasn’t just DOD. http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Conservative-Party-Headquarters-Call-On-Conservative-Future-To-Disrupt-Browns-Election-Speech/Article/201002315553150?lpos=Politics_First_Poilitics_Article_Teaser_Regi_4&lid=ARTICLE_15553150_Conservative_Party_Headquarters_Call_On_Conservative_Future_To_Disrupt_Browns_Election_Speech

Seems like some people like to fight dirty. “In a leaked email to members, chairwoman Sophie Shrubsole said: “CCHQ (Conservative headquarters) have requested that Conservative Future members from across the country gather in Warwick to form our own publicity stunt. This will be a sign to the Prime Minister and the Labour Party as a whole, that as Conservatives we are ready for the General Election. It will no doubt act as a demoralising element to Gordon Brown’s trip. Ms Shrubsole told members: “This will not appear as a Facebook event, as we are trying to keep our preparations as low-key as possible.”…Now while Sophie is not the “chairwoman”, I do personally think that BUC”F” has sunk to a new low.

From what I’ve heard it was regarded as rather amusing at the conference. Pity the Tories are having to resort to this, no one was there at the opening of the airbrushed Dave posters, admittadely they were vandalised a bit later on, but your kind of asking for it when they’re that bad.

Max

3rd time lucky?…maybe not

Well frankly, the last month and a half have been a bit of a sham for the Tories. Twice in recent weeks they have come out with false statistics (the first being the level of violent crime and the second being the number of votes at the last general election and so why we shouldn’t switch to AV-http://bulsonline.org/2010/02/09/deja-vu/). While the crime figures have some context due to the changing of the system in 2002 but this-http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8515798.stm is a tad over the top. The 10 poorest areas of the country have 54% of 18 year old girls pregnant or have had a baby? Nope, somewhat like 5.4% (down on 1998 at 6%), somewhat missed a decimal place there in an attempted to bash the “broken” Britain! Even the Liberal Democrats’ chief of staff, Danny Alexander, saying: “The Tories seem to think that half our teenagers are pregnant, our cities are like The Wire and that people will get married for a few extra quid.”

Well chosen words

Max

The twisting of the evidence

Like most people at BULS, up until the UK emerged from recession I was beginning to find it rather boring of Dave and Osborne attacking the government for lagging behind in recession while the “world left us behind”. But, this has been showed by recent figures that this well is not going to happen just yet.  Europe’s biggest economy, Germany failed to grow at all in the last quarter of 2009 while other countries such as Spain, Italy (who’s also apart of the G20) and Greece are still in recession. This shows that no Dave, we weren’t being left behind, and drastic cuts will plunge UK and then potentially parts of Europe back into recession also.

Mini-rant over

Max

I thought the Tories were supposed to be good at PR

A new poster was revealed yesterday (I think) by the Conservative headquatres. While Cameron wisely after the fiasco of his last poster stood out this time the new poster does reveal a new level of hypocracy.

Personally, I like the fact that they skimmed over their own inheritance tax cuts. Here’s two improved posters.

Come on Dave, Labour hasn’t even started their campaign yet, pull yourself together!

Max

Deja vu

Well, I recently found this on the Tories main website with good ol’ Eric Pickles talking about Tory opposition to the proposed AV system (which while he’s denying plurality to the British people he indeed does have the right to oppose), but when it gets to 0.50 in, quite a blatant factual flaw arises (I wonder if he got the statistics from Chris Grayling).

Now, there is blatant proof other wise from this source (http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2005/RP05-033.pdf) if there’s any doubt, just go to page 8 which even though doesn’t have the exact number of votes, the percentage itself is pretty clear. Keep the statistics right Eric!

Max

No price on a life

Gordon Brown today pledged to offer free, one-to-one home care by specialist nurses to those suffering from Cancer. This in turn would save £2.5 billion a year by reducing hospital admissions. However, some people seem to not get the message, Andrew Lansley the Shadow health secretary said that “Gordon Brown needs to make clear to patients which other schemes he plans to cut” and claims that this will in fact cost £100m. I’m sorry, but so much for “I’ll cut the deficit, not the NHS” and also, I personally think that if it leaves £100 million more in debt but saves lives (which it will) it is money well spent.

Max

‘Skin-deep’ localism

This frankly is rightly so, if you decentralise administration too much of any governmental department it will lead down the road of blatant inequality on the part (in this case schools) of the ones using the service. This is very much similar to the NHS checklist, where the Tories quite frankly oppose a measure (theoretically at least) that grants a minimum standard to all patients who are admitted. Now this is the same again, some schools will be put in the most ridiculous locations and so degrading the minimum standard which should be guaranteed to everyone, not just to help a small privileged few.

It has recently been revealed that if they won the general election, the Conservatives would in effect; treat new schools like major infrastructure projects. But Schools Minister Vernon Coaker said, “With no planning restrictions schools will be able to open in pre-fabricated buildings and rented office blocks, as they do in Sweden, without the sort of decent facilities all children should have like places to play and do sport outside.”.

Max

A nation of conservatives?…Nah!

  There’s recently been a lot of talk that apparently the only thing 13 years of Labour governments has achieved is that we are all now conservative. Well, to be frank, this is ain’t true. A recent poll conducted by Comres and published yesterday in the Independent (the one that shows that also shows the Tory lead has shrunk to a mere 7 points) shows that more people identify themselves as Labour rather than Tory (37-31 in fact-http://www.leftfootforward.org/2010/02/more-people-identify-as-labour-as-public-remain-sceptical-of-tory-economic-policy/). Personally, from seeing these figures, it shows that the most Dave can achieve at the next general election, the very most, is a small Conservative majority (around 20 or so).

Britain, well and truly progressive since 1964! 

Max

“Iron Lady” to “Flip-flop” Dave…Oh dear, oh dear

It was announced on the 15th January, George Osborne was telling us that the Tories would bring in an emergency budget within 50 days of taking office. Now this was all very fine (except for of course, it is the wrong measure to take), but Dave himself today said that a Conservative government would not make “swingeing cuts” to public spending during its first year.

Now, in all due fairness, credit has to be given to Dave, he’s finally beginning to see sense, but this is a far flung shot from the Tory’s “Glory Days” under Maggie herself with the famous, “You turn if you want to. The lady’s not for turning”. Pity for Cameron he somewhat fails to live up to her.

Max

‘Broken Society’ an excuse to batter Britain.

I do not like to use isolated incidents for point scoring. So I think David Cameron’s use of the Doncaster killings is no better than populist electioneering. Tony Blair used the Bulger killings in a similar way. Not to say that these killings are not newsworthy. Truly they are horrific. But the reason that they are newsworthy must surely be because they are so shocking? If our society was broken, to the extent that David Cameron says, why would this sort of incident not occur more often. But if we take the Bulger killing in Liverpool and this latest one in Doncaster, we can see that the killings took place in similar areas. Liverpool, in 1993, was a wreckage of a place slowly struggling out of the depressing circumstances of the 1980s when its main industries were closed, communities uprooted and many families livelihoods threatened. Type into google ‘the Toxteth riots’ for an indication of how bad it was. In 1993 then, Liverpool was a down and out place, not the resurgent and confident city that it has began to be rebuilt into in recent years. Doncaster similarly is an area that had its main industry (mining) torn out from under it in the 1980s. It has had similar problems with unemployment, uprooted communities and crime. Hence we see the parallels between the two places.

Clearly there are problems when crimes such as the Bulger and Doncaster killings take place. As I said, I think it is unfair for anyone, Labour or Conservative, to use one crime for political purposes. Just as I think attributing such crimes to a “broken society” as Mr Cameron does, when these killings have taken place in communities that have been broken by a Conservative government, which David Cameron largely intends on reciprocating, and whose leader Mrs Thatcher stated “There is no such thing as society.” The angry public reaction to these killings, suggests, in my view, that while there is certainly evidence of problems within our society, it is very much in existence and is still far from broken.

 

Sean Woodcock, BULS Member

Welcome news

Unemployment recently fell by 7000, making this recession the quickest to see a rise in employment. Correct me if I’m wrong but this seems to be something the Tories are skimming over…..who are we to judge. This has now left unemployment figures back under 2.46 million. Yes there is the good chance it may start to increase again, but it is forecast (albeit not by the Met office) to peak at a mere 2.8 million which 1. is half a million lower than the previous two recessions and due to population growth, far proportionally lower than either of the past two recessions. There is also the interesting fact that we are dealing with long term unemployment, rather than leaving a generation on the dole with over the past year, 70% of claimants have come off benefits within six months, compared with 63% in the downturn of the early 1990s and 60% in the recession of the early 1980s.

Money well spent don’t you think?

Max

Ironic…

In the wake of Obama proposing new curbs on banks, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, (Boy) George Osbourne has quickly followed suit. Now this is all very…very…..nice, correct me if I’m wrong though, but around about 3 years ago didn’t (Boy) George call for greater deregulation? He also recently stated that “This is a welcome move by President Obama that accords very much with our thinking,”….well, despite that Obama supported helping the economy when it was in dire trouble, but surprisingly enough, he didn’t. It seems…just seems that (Boy) George is trying to cuddle up to “Mr President” (don’t believe me, check the BUC”F”s blog on the “special relationship” between Britain and America at the moment)…..just a thought.

Max

Bad luck Dave

Recently the BUC”F”, well a while ago, posted on the recent revealing of Cameron’s new poster, he’s an article from the (Tory)graph also has a sounding verdict on Dave’s airbrush http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/david-cameron/6997940/Do-David-Camerons-new-posters-work.html

Max