With the first day of temperatures above freezing for what seems like an eternity, it seemed like a good idea to do a bit of tidying around the house. Now I had always considered myself to be the sort of person who didn't gather too much 'stuff', a theory which bit the dust when I moved house eighteen months ago, and needed a rather large skip to dispose of the detritus of my life.
It is amazing just how much stuff the average person gathers in the course of a lifetime. Given the falling price of household goods over the past two decades, it is easier to buy a replacement than to repair the old item or, worse still, buy something that you see in a sale because it is cheap and you probably need one. We tend to forget what we actually have, due to relative plenty, and you could argue that this has been a factor in the consumer-led boom that ran into the sand last year.
We are often the same with food. We buy food, put it away and forget about it. Supermarkets tempt us with offers and we end up buying things that we hadn't actually needed. I'm as guilty as anyone. As a single male, I quite often impulse shopped, ending up with fresh food that ended up in my recycling bin, dry goods that went past their use by date, and frozen food that sustained freezer burn, and I'm not much better married. In financial and environmental terms, it's a bit of an indulgence. Worse still, my indiscipline means that I need to waste time making shopping trips for small amounts of stuff when I could be doing something more useful - and believe me, I could use the time.
My wardrobes are the same. I tend to keep things that I've outgrown, in the optimistic expectation that I might lose some of the weight I've put on over the years. As a result, I have drawers full of clothes that I don't use, and find it hard to locate the clothes that fit. The temptation is to go out and buy more, rather than get good use out of those that I've already spent good money on.
My parents, and the generations before them, didn't have access to such a vast array of cheap 'stuff'. They tended to get more use out of what they had, and saved the remainder for a rainy day. Perhaps we need to rediscover that sense of living within our means as a way of changing the consumer-led culture that has led to unprecedented levels of personal debt, and the resultant financial vulnerability of so many in our communities.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Saturday, January 10, 2009
An invitation from across the ocean
I am often surprised by the number of readers who come from beyond the Liberal Democrat family (or my own, for that matter) and, in some cases, from around the globe. Yesterday was a case in point.
I received, by means of a comment on my blog, an invitation to have my blog included in a list of blogs which will appear on a website called GlobalPost.com. Naturally, I was suspicious, and had a look at their website. What I discovered was an organisation which will be launching a new international news service, intended primarily, but not exclusively, for an American audience, with correspondent journalists in some forty-six countries around the world, backed up by a selection of bloggers. I appear to be one of the latter.
So, gentle reader, I have accepted the invitation, and am now flying their logo on my sidebar. They go live on Monday, and I wish them every success, given that their stated aim is to provide better coverage of overseas events to the U.S. market. In that one of the often levelled criticisms of Americans and American policy makers is a lack of knowledge of the world around them, this can only help all of us...
I received, by means of a comment on my blog, an invitation to have my blog included in a list of blogs which will appear on a website called GlobalPost.com. Naturally, I was suspicious, and had a look at their website. What I discovered was an organisation which will be launching a new international news service, intended primarily, but not exclusively, for an American audience, with correspondent journalists in some forty-six countries around the world, backed up by a selection of bloggers. I appear to be one of the latter.
So, gentle reader, I have accepted the invitation, and am now flying their logo on my sidebar. They go live on Monday, and I wish them every success, given that their stated aim is to provide better coverage of overseas events to the U.S. market. In that one of the often levelled criticisms of Americans and American policy makers is a lack of knowledge of the world around them, this can only help all of us...
Selecting a PPC for Brent North - meeting the Returning Officer
Brent North is not a constituency that has a long and noble tradition of Liberal success. Indeed, under the existing boundaries, it didn't have much of a Liberal Democrat presence, even though we hold 26 out of 63 council seats in what was a three-constituency borough.
However, the Boundary Commissioners have changed that, creating a new Brent North that is rather bigger, and contains nine wards. Three of them elected Liberal Democrats in 2006, five elected Conservatives and one Labour. I mentioned a few days ago that, despite that, it is a Labour-held constituency.
Despite the 'distractions' of target seat status for Brent Central and Hampstead & Kilburn, the Local Party were keen to select a PPC (Prospective Parliamentary Candidate) and, accordingly, had approached Margaret Joachim, the Regional Candidates Chair, to seek the appointment of a Returning Officer. Unexpectedly, last week we were lucky enough to have one assigned.
It is indicative of the shortage of Returning Officers in London that our newly appointed RO is from Folkestone, Darren Briddock, but he very graciously attended our Executive Committee at short notice so that we could get a flying start.
After outlining the process, we were invited to appoint a Selection Committee that represents our diverse membership. And, quite naturally, I put myself forward and am now part of the team that will filter potential candidates. After all, I was the only other person in the room who really knows how it works
So, we have a Returning Officer, a Selection Committee and an outline timetable. Alright, we probably won't come out of this with a Barack Obama, but who knows, even the sainted Barack had to start somewhere...
However, the Boundary Commissioners have changed that, creating a new Brent North that is rather bigger, and contains nine wards. Three of them elected Liberal Democrats in 2006, five elected Conservatives and one Labour. I mentioned a few days ago that, despite that, it is a Labour-held constituency.
Despite the 'distractions' of target seat status for Brent Central and Hampstead & Kilburn, the Local Party were keen to select a PPC (Prospective Parliamentary Candidate) and, accordingly, had approached Margaret Joachim, the Regional Candidates Chair, to seek the appointment of a Returning Officer. Unexpectedly, last week we were lucky enough to have one assigned.
It is indicative of the shortage of Returning Officers in London that our newly appointed RO is from Folkestone, Darren Briddock, but he very graciously attended our Executive Committee at short notice so that we could get a flying start.
After outlining the process, we were invited to appoint a Selection Committee that represents our diverse membership. And, quite naturally, I put myself forward and am now part of the team that will filter potential candidates. After all, I was the only other person in the room who really knows how it works
So, we have a Returning Officer, a Selection Committee and an outline timetable. Alright, we probably won't come out of this with a Barack Obama, but who knows, even the sainted Barack had to start somewhere...
Is £800 a fair price for a Taser?
I note that the Government have bought 5,000 Tasers for use by frontline police officers in England and Wales, as part of a programme whereby 10,000 will be provided in total. The cost? £4 million.
I admit that I remain unconvinced that such weapons form part of an effective policing strategy. Whilst human beings are not designed to be submitted to high voltage electric charges, and anyone given a weapon is more likely to use it, regardless of training, this resembles an accident waiting to happen.
It is, however, part of a progression towards greater militarisation of the police in this country, whereby weapons and technology are utilised to make up for a lack of numbers at the sharp end, on the street. And yet despite this, people don't feel any safer. Indeed, the fear of being attacked is now bolstered by the risk that you might get stunned by a Taser-wielding police officer.
The only real answer is a return to visible policing, and whilst the move towards ward-based policing is a step forward, I remain unconvinced that their profile within the community is any better. The public feel reassured when they see police officers in areas where they feel otherwise vulnerable. I accept that in this era of 'time and motion' led efficiencies that it might not produce tangible gains, but the intangible ones are equally valuable, i.e. greater freedom to move around your community or greater usage of public transport, to take just two examples.
Sadly, though, it looks like Tasers are here to stay. We can only hope that there aren't too many innocent victims whilst police officers familiarise themselves with their use...
I admit that I remain unconvinced that such weapons form part of an effective policing strategy. Whilst human beings are not designed to be submitted to high voltage electric charges, and anyone given a weapon is more likely to use it, regardless of training, this resembles an accident waiting to happen.
It is, however, part of a progression towards greater militarisation of the police in this country, whereby weapons and technology are utilised to make up for a lack of numbers at the sharp end, on the street. And yet despite this, people don't feel any safer. Indeed, the fear of being attacked is now bolstered by the risk that you might get stunned by a Taser-wielding police officer.
The only real answer is a return to visible policing, and whilst the move towards ward-based policing is a step forward, I remain unconvinced that their profile within the community is any better. The public feel reassured when they see police officers in areas where they feel otherwise vulnerable. I accept that in this era of 'time and motion' led efficiencies that it might not produce tangible gains, but the intangible ones are equally valuable, i.e. greater freedom to move around your community or greater usage of public transport, to take just two examples.
Sadly, though, it looks like Tasers are here to stay. We can only hope that there aren't too many innocent victims whilst police officers familiarise themselves with their use...
Friday, January 09, 2009
A day on the witness stand for God?
It appears Stephen Green, of Christian Voice, has complained to the Advertising Standards Authority about the Atheist Bus Campaign adverts running on buses across the country on grounds of ‘truthfulness’ and ‘substantiation’, suggesting that there is not ‘a shred of supporting evidence’ that there is probably no god.
Whilst the British Humanist Association are enjoying the joke, I do find myself wondering if this might be the moment when Mr Green discovers that there is a point beyond which his campaigning leaves behind what vestiges of credibility it might once have had.
Now don't get me wrong. Whilst I'm not an active church-goer, I still retain a sense of faith in some sort of divine presence, call it a god or whatever. In the absence of rules which dictate exactly what will happen in every circumstance, the element of randomness, for me at least, reassures me that science does not have all of the answers.
However, whilst it might be difficult to supply supporting evidence that there isn't a god, it's going to be even more difficult to provide evidence that there is one. And, whilst the idea of a distinguished elderly gentleman with a white beard and flowing white robes appearing before the Advertising Standards Authority to give evidence is an appealing one, I won't be turning up in the expectation of his arrival (sorry, my upbringing involved a patriachial deity concept - it's very hard to shift...).
On the other hand, if he did, I'd like to think that he might find the time to smite Stephen Green with a lightning bolt...
Whilst the British Humanist Association are enjoying the joke, I do find myself wondering if this might be the moment when Mr Green discovers that there is a point beyond which his campaigning leaves behind what vestiges of credibility it might once have had.
Now don't get me wrong. Whilst I'm not an active church-goer, I still retain a sense of faith in some sort of divine presence, call it a god or whatever. In the absence of rules which dictate exactly what will happen in every circumstance, the element of randomness, for me at least, reassures me that science does not have all of the answers.
However, whilst it might be difficult to supply supporting evidence that there isn't a god, it's going to be even more difficult to provide evidence that there is one. And, whilst the idea of a distinguished elderly gentleman with a white beard and flowing white robes appearing before the Advertising Standards Authority to give evidence is an appealing one, I won't be turning up in the expectation of his arrival (sorry, my upbringing involved a patriachial deity concept - it's very hard to shift...).
On the other hand, if he did, I'd like to think that he might find the time to smite Stephen Green with a lightning bolt...
Have Liberal Youth no sense of romance?
In my capacity as Returning Officer to Liberal Youth, I am required to attend those meetings where elections take place. So far, so logical...
However, their Spring Conference has been called for the weekend of St Valentine's Day at the University if Warwick, and I find myself wondering whether they had realised that when they picked the dates. Is romance a dead letter amongst the young?
It isn't going entirely to plan...
Liberal Youth have a wonderfully ornate set of rules pertinent to the co-option process. They read well although the phrase, "The Executive Committee shall be able to co-opt X number of members to carry out designated roles" has generally sufficed elsewhere.And so I am running a co-option 'election' to fill a temporary vacancy on their Executive Committee. The poll shall be open for seven days or until the votes outstanding have no impact on the result. Looks like seven days then...
Israel and the Liberal Democrats: a bureaucrat responds further to Iain Dale
I had taken some offence at Iain Dale's accusation that we might be becoming an 'anti-Israel' Party, and effectively 'called out' Iain to defend himself. In typical style, his response was rapid (how does he do it?) and fairly forceful. I did draft what I thought was a pretty good riposte but, one technological glitch later, it was lost forever. However, I'll have another stab here...
Iain, you have called upon the Liberal Democrats to convey a more balanced stance on Israel and Palestine. Unfortunately, the only way to adequately balance opinion would be for a few Liberal Democrats to speak out for the right of Israel to carry on with its strategy of dropping large volumes of high explosive on Gaza. Sorry, but that just won't wash, and you will continue to be disappointed.
You have repeated your claim that we are one-eyed in respect of our stance towards the two sides and I refer you to the comments made by our Foreign Affairs spokesman, Edward Davey. Of course, looking at the Party's website for the comments made by our spokesman might be a bit tricky, but you do seem to be everywhere else...
To be blunt, most of those who entirely support the rights of the Israeli people to live in peace and security within recognised borders within our Party are rightfully uncomfortable with the results of the Israeli campaign. Most people will have no objection to Israel defending itself against attack, as long as that response is proportionate. However, the deaths of innocent civilians in large numbers is not something that many people can endorse with a clear conscience, and I would be disappointed if there was a Liberal Democrat who could find it in themselves to do so.
However, you are entirely right in one sense. Whilst my point about the use of conventional warfare methodology against terrorists said exactly what I intended to say, I could, and probably should, have expanded on that point. So I will.
In recent years, we have seen a move away from wars of nation against nation towards more random attacks by small, ideology-driven groups of fanatics against predominantly civilian targets. The campaign by Hamas against Israel is, to a great extent, an example of just such a conflict.
Hamas 'fighters' launch hit and run attacks, and are extraordinarily difficult to confront and defeat by the use of aircraft and artillery in an area such as Gaza. Their willingness to use densely populated areas and public buildings as a base for rocket launches means that any counter-attack using conventional methods will simply lead to collateral losses that are unaccepted to a viewing public easily swayed by pictures of injured or dying women and children. As integrated into their communities as they are, if Israeli forces attack, they can melt back into the populace and disappear, waiting for the next opportunity to probe at possible Israeli vulnerabilities.
Lest we forget, we are talking about an organisation that has cynically played upon the heartstrings of the world's media. Accusations that Hamas have prevented the injured from being evacuated in order to generate more martyrs demonstrate that all that matters is the ability to generate undeserved sympathy whilst blackening the reputation of the Israeli people in the eyes of neutrals beyond the region.
But enough of the context. What are my thoughts on how to proceed? Any successful attempt to combat terrorism is based on an effort to deny oxygen to terrorist movements, to cut off the flow of new recruits, to isolate them from the communities they purport to fight for and, finally, to persuade communities that these people present a risk to their peace and security.
Such a campaign comes in three parts, political, moral and military. In the first instance, it is necessary to stop the bloodshed. Given the imbalance of casualties, it is perfectly legitimate to take obvious steps to achieve quick gains - one presumes that preventing the deaths of innocent civilians is a legitimate aim - and if cutting off the flow of armaments to Israel is one means of doing so, then I'm comfortable with that. If it requires a guarantee from the United States to defend Israel whilst the next stage proceeds, so be it.
A ceasefire secured, action is then required to build a meaningful civil society in the West Bank and Gaza. It means investment in infrastructure, in building a politically neutral military and police force, in developing independent media and genuine political parties founded on ideas and not hatred. By building up the Palestinian economy, citizens will develop an interest in maintaining peace. Here, I plead the example of Northern Ireland, where investment flourished and wealth increased accordingly after the bombing stopped.
Alongside this, work must be done to root out the terrorists. This is, perhaps, an opportunity for the Arab League to demonstrate their commitment to a two-state solution. Whilst a working civil society is being created, those within the community who seek peace need support to overcome those who believe in the bomb and the bullet. Whereas a wholly military answer is unlikely to succeed, an effective police action is far more likely to work. I believe that a contingent from other Arab nations could do the job effectively, if they are genuine in their willingness to find solutions. The European Union, if it can get its act together (and here I am less optimistic), can also play a major role.
The reward for compliance? More investment, both for Israel and Palestine. In the long run, both sides will be better off, better able to protect and nurture their citizens and, perhaps one day, normalise relations and work together for the good of all. Alright, that last bit might be a bit naive, but it does at least indicate that there is hope for a positive outcome. In return, the Israelis can address those issues which have so inflamed Arab opinion. Illegal settlements can be dismantled, the wall demolished where it lies in disputed territory - there can be no objection to a nation building a wall on its own border.
Establishing genuine peace requires a different mindset on the part of the two sides in this dispute. An eye for an eye has, so far, left both sides blind, and yet there are so many in both the Israeli and Palestinian communities who yearn for peace and a better life for their children. The regional powers and the United Nations have an opportunity to achieve something that has evaded us all for sixty years, and if preventing the Israelis, albeit temporarily, from shooting themselves in the foot is the price, then perhaps it is a price worth paying. Otherwise, we will, all of us, continue to suffer the costs of international terrorism and instability in a region that influences us all.
I will now return to your attacks on Liberal Democrat spokespersons and bloggers (and the two are not necessarily the same, I think we all agree). You rightly point out that one of our younger, more immature bloggers, Irfan Ahmed, rather let the side down with his objectionable use of the phrase 'the Jews'. It was therefore rather odd that you should choose to give his views a rather bigger platform than they might otherwise have had. For the record, I think that Mr Ahmed has a tendency to shoot first and think later, when provoked to do so. He has form, and I've taken no joy in pointing that out. I've done it anyway though...
And finally... yes, the reference to your political ambition was a cheap political attack on you. What on Earth did you expect though? To paraphrase a leading Conservative blogger, do you think Liberal Democrats should just sit back and accept that dozens of attacks every week will be fired onto our members, activists and elected representatives? Besides, you're the one who harps back to selections he didn't win...
Indeed, your rhetorical question invites the more extreme elements of the pro-Israel lobby to spread the slander that we are an anti-Semitic Party. It's bad enough that some of our members tend to be, to put it kindly, maladroit when discussing the Middle East, but you have been around long enough to remember the 'Zionism is Racism' debates of the mid-eighties, and the unpleasantness that infected campus life in particular at that time. So take care, Iain, because such debasement of the political currency for narrow political advantage hurts us all eventually.
Iain, you have called upon the Liberal Democrats to convey a more balanced stance on Israel and Palestine. Unfortunately, the only way to adequately balance opinion would be for a few Liberal Democrats to speak out for the right of Israel to carry on with its strategy of dropping large volumes of high explosive on Gaza. Sorry, but that just won't wash, and you will continue to be disappointed.
You have repeated your claim that we are one-eyed in respect of our stance towards the two sides and I refer you to the comments made by our Foreign Affairs spokesman, Edward Davey. Of course, looking at the Party's website for the comments made by our spokesman might be a bit tricky, but you do seem to be everywhere else...
To be blunt, most of those who entirely support the rights of the Israeli people to live in peace and security within recognised borders within our Party are rightfully uncomfortable with the results of the Israeli campaign. Most people will have no objection to Israel defending itself against attack, as long as that response is proportionate. However, the deaths of innocent civilians in large numbers is not something that many people can endorse with a clear conscience, and I would be disappointed if there was a Liberal Democrat who could find it in themselves to do so.
However, you are entirely right in one sense. Whilst my point about the use of conventional warfare methodology against terrorists said exactly what I intended to say, I could, and probably should, have expanded on that point. So I will.
In recent years, we have seen a move away from wars of nation against nation towards more random attacks by small, ideology-driven groups of fanatics against predominantly civilian targets. The campaign by Hamas against Israel is, to a great extent, an example of just such a conflict.
Hamas 'fighters' launch hit and run attacks, and are extraordinarily difficult to confront and defeat by the use of aircraft and artillery in an area such as Gaza. Their willingness to use densely populated areas and public buildings as a base for rocket launches means that any counter-attack using conventional methods will simply lead to collateral losses that are unaccepted to a viewing public easily swayed by pictures of injured or dying women and children. As integrated into their communities as they are, if Israeli forces attack, they can melt back into the populace and disappear, waiting for the next opportunity to probe at possible Israeli vulnerabilities.
Lest we forget, we are talking about an organisation that has cynically played upon the heartstrings of the world's media. Accusations that Hamas have prevented the injured from being evacuated in order to generate more martyrs demonstrate that all that matters is the ability to generate undeserved sympathy whilst blackening the reputation of the Israeli people in the eyes of neutrals beyond the region.
But enough of the context. What are my thoughts on how to proceed? Any successful attempt to combat terrorism is based on an effort to deny oxygen to terrorist movements, to cut off the flow of new recruits, to isolate them from the communities they purport to fight for and, finally, to persuade communities that these people present a risk to their peace and security.
Such a campaign comes in three parts, political, moral and military. In the first instance, it is necessary to stop the bloodshed. Given the imbalance of casualties, it is perfectly legitimate to take obvious steps to achieve quick gains - one presumes that preventing the deaths of innocent civilians is a legitimate aim - and if cutting off the flow of armaments to Israel is one means of doing so, then I'm comfortable with that. If it requires a guarantee from the United States to defend Israel whilst the next stage proceeds, so be it.
A ceasefire secured, action is then required to build a meaningful civil society in the West Bank and Gaza. It means investment in infrastructure, in building a politically neutral military and police force, in developing independent media and genuine political parties founded on ideas and not hatred. By building up the Palestinian economy, citizens will develop an interest in maintaining peace. Here, I plead the example of Northern Ireland, where investment flourished and wealth increased accordingly after the bombing stopped.
Alongside this, work must be done to root out the terrorists. This is, perhaps, an opportunity for the Arab League to demonstrate their commitment to a two-state solution. Whilst a working civil society is being created, those within the community who seek peace need support to overcome those who believe in the bomb and the bullet. Whereas a wholly military answer is unlikely to succeed, an effective police action is far more likely to work. I believe that a contingent from other Arab nations could do the job effectively, if they are genuine in their willingness to find solutions. The European Union, if it can get its act together (and here I am less optimistic), can also play a major role.
The reward for compliance? More investment, both for Israel and Palestine. In the long run, both sides will be better off, better able to protect and nurture their citizens and, perhaps one day, normalise relations and work together for the good of all. Alright, that last bit might be a bit naive, but it does at least indicate that there is hope for a positive outcome. In return, the Israelis can address those issues which have so inflamed Arab opinion. Illegal settlements can be dismantled, the wall demolished where it lies in disputed territory - there can be no objection to a nation building a wall on its own border.
Establishing genuine peace requires a different mindset on the part of the two sides in this dispute. An eye for an eye has, so far, left both sides blind, and yet there are so many in both the Israeli and Palestinian communities who yearn for peace and a better life for their children. The regional powers and the United Nations have an opportunity to achieve something that has evaded us all for sixty years, and if preventing the Israelis, albeit temporarily, from shooting themselves in the foot is the price, then perhaps it is a price worth paying. Otherwise, we will, all of us, continue to suffer the costs of international terrorism and instability in a region that influences us all.
I will now return to your attacks on Liberal Democrat spokespersons and bloggers (and the two are not necessarily the same, I think we all agree). You rightly point out that one of our younger, more immature bloggers, Irfan Ahmed, rather let the side down with his objectionable use of the phrase 'the Jews'. It was therefore rather odd that you should choose to give his views a rather bigger platform than they might otherwise have had. For the record, I think that Mr Ahmed has a tendency to shoot first and think later, when provoked to do so. He has form, and I've taken no joy in pointing that out. I've done it anyway though...
And finally... yes, the reference to your political ambition was a cheap political attack on you. What on Earth did you expect though? To paraphrase a leading Conservative blogger, do you think Liberal Democrats should just sit back and accept that dozens of attacks every week will be fired onto our members, activists and elected representatives? Besides, you're the one who harps back to selections he didn't win...
Indeed, your rhetorical question invites the more extreme elements of the pro-Israel lobby to spread the slander that we are an anti-Semitic Party. It's bad enough that some of our members tend to be, to put it kindly, maladroit when discussing the Middle East, but you have been around long enough to remember the 'Zionism is Racism' debates of the mid-eighties, and the unpleasantness that infected campus life in particular at that time. So take care, Iain, because such debasement of the political currency for narrow political advantage hurts us all eventually.
Thursday, January 08, 2009
Irfan, take a deep breath, count to ten and then blog...
I've been having a bit of an exchange with that Iain Dale over the past twenty-four hours, and will be resuming 'hostilities' shortly. However, I've had Irfan's contribution to the Israel/Palestine debate tossed back at me, so I had a look... and gosh, you really know how to pour paraffin onto a fire, don't you? And yes, I noticed your subsequent correction but really, what were you thinking?
So, you've offended homosexuals and Jews, planning to go for Catholics next?...
*holds head in hands in despair*
So, you've offended homosexuals and Jews, planning to go for Catholics next?...
*holds head in hands in despair*
London Region: why building your strategy based on the views of four individuals is less than ideal
James Graham reports that Chamali Fernando, an aspiring Mayoral candidate for the 2012 London elections has apparently resigned her membership of the Liberal Democrats. In some ways, I regret that. I voted for her over Brian Paddick in the selection contest for our nomination last time because, whilst I expected him to win, I wanted Chamali to know that there were those of us who thought that she had real potential. However, what's done is done, and Chamali will doubtless find other theatres for her ambition.
Last November, at the Regional Conference, I was somewhat taken aback by the response given by the Chair, Denys Robinson, in reply to a questioner suggesting that we make the number one candidate on our Regional List for the London Assembly our Mayoral candidate. He stated that none of our three serving Assembly Members wanted to be our Mayoral candidate, and that our only declared aspirant Mayoral candidate (and here he named Chamali), didn't want to be on our Regional List.
Far be it from me to criticise Denys, but I see two problems here. Firstly, promoting a potential Mayoral candidate at a meeting of the Regional Party, if only by inference, potentially sent a message to other potential candidates that she was the 'anointed one' (and boy, doesn't that look stupid now...). Secondly, since when did the views of four people negate the possibility that a particular strategy might not necessarily be harmful to the Party as a whole?
There was perceived to be a chasm between our Mayoral campaign and that for the Assembly, and we need to find a way of linking the two more effectively. It might be that members across London think that the notion of our Mayoral candidate topping the Regional List is a good one, even if I have some personal doubts in terms of appropriateness. So we really need to put the matter to our members and let them tell us what they want us to do in their name.
Given that the number of people influencing our strategy is now just three, and that we're without any apparent aspirant to the position of Liberal Democrat candidate for London Mayor, perhaps we might like to revisit this?
Last November, at the Regional Conference, I was somewhat taken aback by the response given by the Chair, Denys Robinson, in reply to a questioner suggesting that we make the number one candidate on our Regional List for the London Assembly our Mayoral candidate. He stated that none of our three serving Assembly Members wanted to be our Mayoral candidate, and that our only declared aspirant Mayoral candidate (and here he named Chamali), didn't want to be on our Regional List.
Far be it from me to criticise Denys, but I see two problems here. Firstly, promoting a potential Mayoral candidate at a meeting of the Regional Party, if only by inference, potentially sent a message to other potential candidates that she was the 'anointed one' (and boy, doesn't that look stupid now...). Secondly, since when did the views of four people negate the possibility that a particular strategy might not necessarily be harmful to the Party as a whole?
There was perceived to be a chasm between our Mayoral campaign and that for the Assembly, and we need to find a way of linking the two more effectively. It might be that members across London think that the notion of our Mayoral candidate topping the Regional List is a good one, even if I have some personal doubts in terms of appropriateness. So we really need to put the matter to our members and let them tell us what they want us to do in their name.
Given that the number of people influencing our strategy is now just three, and that we're without any apparent aspirant to the position of Liberal Democrat candidate for London Mayor, perhaps we might like to revisit this?
On hearing from my local Labour representatives
Dear Councillors Crane, Moher & Moher,
I've lived in Kingsbury for about eighteen months now, in a Labour-held ward (Fryent) in a Labour-held constituency (Brent North). Curiously, on the new boundaries, Fryent is in fact the only Labour-held ward in the new Brent North (three wards are Liberal Democrat, the other five are Conservative - independents who defected from their Party excluded). So naturally, I would expect to hear more from my three councillors and my MP, Barry Gardiner, in an attempt to buttress their support in the ward.
But no, the silence has been fairly deafening. I did get a rather glossy four page A4 leaflet from Barry just before the 'General Election that never was' - on no, we had never considered the possibility of going to the country early, honest we hadn't - but from my councillors, nothing. Until this week...
I returned from Suffolk on Monday to find a lovely glossy A3 folded leaflet from Barry, including a calendar. Very nice, fairly high quality, nice range of pictures of Barry with various elements of the community. A bit light on what he's done since 2005, but not a bad effort.
This evening, I returned home to find a leaflet in my porch. It's a piece of A4 with a letter on the front and a questionnaire on the back, headed 'Fryent Councillors Survey Autumn 2008'. Not a great start that, is it? A closer look is clearly needed, so let's see what you have to say...
Dear Residents,
As your local Councillors we are writing to seek your help. Over the last few years we have met many of you and our records show that you might have indicated your support for the work we do in the ward on your behalf.
Don't think so, my friends. You haven't knocked on my door, put a leaflet through it to tell me what you've done, and even if you had, I'd hardly indicate my support for you. I'm the Secretary of the local Liberal Democrats... oh, and yes, my wife was a frontbench spokesperson in the House of Lords for the Liberal Democrats and is now Party President. Not obvious supporters, are we? Oh yes, and what work have you done? Oh, I forget, you haven't told me...
We are writing because we need your help with information, so that we can do our job more effectively. Your views are important to us and we would really appreciate a few moments of your time to answer a few questions for us.
And what, pray tell, is your job?...
Why do we need your help? Few people attend our surgeries so gathering information this way will help us represent your views and opinions. It will help us prioritise issues and gives us an indication of what your concerns are. It also indicates were the Council should be trying to improve its services and allocating resources.
Very nice, very indicative that your surgeries are pretty useless. Might that be because you don't run the council?
There follows a set of pictures of the three of you with your names and e-mail addresses underneath. Such a pity that two of you can't actually spell the name of the borough you serve. Brent isn't even that difficult, but if you (Jim and George) want me to write to you at cllr.jim.moher@bremt.gov.uk and cllr.george.crane@bremt.gov.uk respectively, then you're sending me a clear message that you don't care enough to even proof-read a brief letter. Given that Autumn was some time ago, you clearly don't care enough to deliver your missive to me promptly either...
So, let's turn to the questions...
I've lived in Kingsbury for about eighteen months now, in a Labour-held ward (Fryent) in a Labour-held constituency (Brent North). Curiously, on the new boundaries, Fryent is in fact the only Labour-held ward in the new Brent North (three wards are Liberal Democrat, the other five are Conservative - independents who defected from their Party excluded). So naturally, I would expect to hear more from my three councillors and my MP, Barry Gardiner, in an attempt to buttress their support in the ward.
But no, the silence has been fairly deafening. I did get a rather glossy four page A4 leaflet from Barry just before the 'General Election that never was' - on no, we had never considered the possibility of going to the country early, honest we hadn't - but from my councillors, nothing. Until this week...
I returned from Suffolk on Monday to find a lovely glossy A3 folded leaflet from Barry, including a calendar. Very nice, fairly high quality, nice range of pictures of Barry with various elements of the community. A bit light on what he's done since 2005, but not a bad effort.
This evening, I returned home to find a leaflet in my porch. It's a piece of A4 with a letter on the front and a questionnaire on the back, headed 'Fryent Councillors Survey Autumn 2008'. Not a great start that, is it? A closer look is clearly needed, so let's see what you have to say...
Dear Residents,
As your local Councillors we are writing to seek your help. Over the last few years we have met many of you and our records show that you might have indicated your support for the work we do in the ward on your behalf.
Don't think so, my friends. You haven't knocked on my door, put a leaflet through it to tell me what you've done, and even if you had, I'd hardly indicate my support for you. I'm the Secretary of the local Liberal Democrats... oh, and yes, my wife was a frontbench spokesperson in the House of Lords for the Liberal Democrats and is now Party President. Not obvious supporters, are we? Oh yes, and what work have you done? Oh, I forget, you haven't told me...
We are writing because we need your help with information, so that we can do our job more effectively. Your views are important to us and we would really appreciate a few moments of your time to answer a few questions for us.
And what, pray tell, is your job?...
Why do we need your help? Few people attend our surgeries so gathering information this way will help us represent your views and opinions. It will help us prioritise issues and gives us an indication of what your concerns are. It also indicates were the Council should be trying to improve its services and allocating resources.
Very nice, very indicative that your surgeries are pretty useless. Might that be because you don't run the council?
There follows a set of pictures of the three of you with your names and e-mail addresses underneath. Such a pity that two of you can't actually spell the name of the borough you serve. Brent isn't even that difficult, but if you (Jim and George) want me to write to you at cllr.jim.moher@bremt.gov.uk and cllr.george.crane@bremt.gov.uk respectively, then you're sending me a clear message that you don't care enough to even proof-read a brief letter. Given that Autumn was some time ago, you clearly don't care enough to deliver your missive to me promptly either...
So, let's turn to the questions...
What issues are important to you right now?
Local - list from 1 to 5, 1 being highest priority
- Street Cleaning
- Parks
- Education
- Local GP's
- Libraries
National - tick one
- Cost of Living
- Tax
- Crime
- NHS
- Jobs
Alright, a bit basic, but fair enough...
- Do you use the internet?
- Have you access to e mail?
- Can we contact you using e mail with local information?
- Would you visit a web site if it was just for local information?
- My e mail address is ....
- Would you like to meet us regularly to talk over local issues?
- My phone number is or contact me at home.
- Phone ..... Address .....
- I have a concern but its not mentioned above - tell us more in the space below.
Ah, now all is clear. You don't actually care about my views, you're just making a blatant attempt to harvest contact information, especially e-mail addresses and telephone numbers, probably because you find it so difficult to deliver leaflets. And don't start me on the design qualities of your leaflet, or lack thereof. Oh, but don't worry, I'll be passing the document on to our Borough Organiser, as he needs a good laugh. If he produced something as hopelessly inadequate as this, I'd be wondering about finding a replacement.
If you want to engage with me, tell me what you've done and what you propose to do in the future, but please don't insult my intelligence with such a poor attempt as this. Ah well, at least the Conservatives aren't doing anything here either, so you might just get away with it...
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Alas poor Iain, I knew him well...is Mr Dale intent on becoming a rather mangy attack dog?
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. Iain Dale has accused our Party of being anti-Israel. What is a nice boy from North West London who started his political life in one of the country's most Jewish constituencies with a Local Party who used to spend much of their meetings talking about Prague before the war - because many of them appeared to have lived there - to do?
I've generally taken a pro-Israeli stance. I attended North Kensington Reform Synagogue for a number of years, an unusual shul by the very diversity of its membership and, in particular, its leadership, and those who know Beit Klal Yisrael will know exactly where I'm coming from when I say that. I'm far from being a knee-jerk Zionist but I start from the basis that an Israeli state free from fear of attack is an obligatory goal for any plan to 'resolve' the Middle East issue. The 1947 borders are sacrosanct, unless a swap of territory can make both an Israeli and a Palestinian state more secure and is agreeable to both sides.
So, if Iain is right, I should really be ashamed of my membership of the Liberal Democrats. Well no, not really. My support for Israel is not blind, and I am aware that a long series of ignoble decisions to ignore illegal building in, and occupation of, territory that would form an integral part of a Palestinian state have made peace much more difficult to attain. It is a very short step to understanding why the extremists on both sides have been able to so easily persuade enough people to take action which merely inflames those sections of their communities into supporting acts which they would otherwise condemn.
So, when Iain asks, "Are the LibDems Becoming the Anti-Israel Party?", I realise that all he is doing is taking part in the usual cheap shot attacks that discredit politics and demonstrate why his involvement in 'Total Politics' is a potentially double-edged sword in terms of its future success.
To suggest that the comments of an individual member of our group in the European Parliament are indicative of an anti-Israel stance in the Liberal Democrats is absurd, as absurd as suggesting that the alleged violent acts of a Conservative MP (Andrew Pelling) were indicative of a pro-physical violence stance in the Conservatives. For the record though, I'll note that I don't hold much truck with the approach that Chris Davies takes which, whilst mostly reflective of our Party's stance, places it in a context that many of us would find unfamiliar. Half of a story is not better than none, might I suggest?
Nick Clegg, in calling for a cessation of arms sales to Israel, touches on a sensitive issue. If you believe that a sovereign nation has the right to defend itself from attack, then Israel is within its rights to launch attacks on military targets within the Gaza Strip, indeed the United Nations Charter permits such acts. However, if you believe that the Israeli actions have gone beyond proportionate, and risk the deaths of too many innocent bystanders, then one way of preventing it is to prevent the supply of further armaments.
I've always taken the view that fighting conventional wars against terrorist organisations is fairly futile. They do not adhere to the Geneva Conventions, think nothing of using innocent civilians as shields for their attacks and, when attacked, are content to melt back into that very civilian population until another opportunity for terror appears. The Israeli government and military appear not to share my view, and the result is a level of civilian casualties that is being waved as a shroud to persuade Arab opinion of the evil of the Israelis. It isn't a hard sell.
In terms of cynicism, Hamas are hard to beat. They appear to be doing everything to maximise the impact of Israeli attacks, and suggestions that they have at times prevented the injured from being evacuated to Egypt indicate their desire to blacken the reputation of Israel regardless of the cost to individual victims. If the rocket attacks stopped, international pressure on Israel to stop its attacks would become impossible to resist but the number of 'martyrs' would also stop climbing and the radicalisation of Palestinian youth become that little bit more difficult.
So,by joining the calls for a ceasefire, and proposing action which might bring such a ceasefire closer, are Liberal Democrats taking an anti-Israel stance? No, I think not. Is it likely to be successful? Actually, I doubt it, but it is better to try than to do nothing. If anything, it's a bit idealistic, but what's wrong with a little idealism in a war-weary world?
I do despair of Iain sometimes. He has a first-class mind in a second-class political party, and if he concentrated on the argument rather than the partisan soundbite, would have even more of my respect than he does now. Or is he now so desperate to become a Conservative MP that he is willing to sacrifice his principles from time to time to achieve that? It may be naivety on my part, but wasn't politics once an honourable profession? Wouldn't it be better if someone whose opinions are taken seriously set an example? Over to you, Mr Dale...
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
Welcome to my freezer, sorry, home...
Ros and I have spent most of the past three weeks in Suffolk, and I have returned to London to find that my house is like a refrigerator. Odd really, because I could have sworn that I had set the timer on the boiler to come on twice a day, heating the house and boiling some hot water to prevent frozen pipes and the like.It clearly hasn't worked because the temperature in my office (formerly the second bedroom) is akin to being outside. It really is very chilly... So I am reduced to drinking rakia and typing energetically to prevent hypothermia from setting in. Luckily, I've been busy setting in train a co-option for the position of General Executive Member for Liberal Youth.
I am the very model of a twenty-first century Returning Officer, so notice of poll has been by text message, with an e-mail to follow tomorrow morning (strike that, this morning...). The two candidates have been informed, and provided with contact details for the Executive (the electorate in this instance). Hopefully, I'll be able to declare a result in the early hours of Friday morning...
In other news, I've joined LiveJournal. I've found that not being to comment on blogs that use LiveJournal is a bit frustrating and whilst my blog is staying put on Blogger for the time being, who knows what the future holds?
Busy, busy, busy... and now I'm going to find something warm to drink...
Friday, January 02, 2009
What a way to run a railway...
I'll admit that I'm still hooked on the romance of trains. I'm not a train spotter, one class 47 locomotive looks very much like any other, but I enjoy train travel. The news over the past few days has rather depressed me though.
First, the fare increases. Now I'd be the first to accept that there is a case for investment in Britain's railways. However, given that I, along with my fellow citizens, pay more for my fares than my European counterparts, 6% plus is an awful lot to be asking for, especially when most of us will be lucky to get a third of that as our pay rises this year. And of course, that's just the minimum rise, with unregulated fares increasing by as much as 11%.
In their defence, Michael Roberts, of the Association of Train Operating Companies, said Monday's increases were partly because taxpayer funding was being reduced. He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "Fare changes this year will help pay for 265,000 extra services, all against a background which is determined by government policy to reduce the call on us as taxpayers."
The fare changes "actually in our view strike the right balance between trying to ensure a reasonable level of increase to fund in return much improved services," he added.
Now, that may be the argument, but why doesn't it appear to be borne out by the facts. As regulars readers know, I have the pleasure of using National Express East Anglia, who have recently removed the restaurant car service from their trains on the London to Norwich route. Is that a much improved service? I think not. Better still, they have now announced that, following a review of their operations, they are cutting 350 jobs in an attempt to enhance customer satisfaction and provide a better service. A better service with less people? Yes, and I'm a monkey's uncle...
Elsewhere, there are reports that hundreds of station ticket offices will close or reduce their opening hours. Passengers will have the alternative of using call centres or the Internet. How the elderly, those needing extension tickets or anyone who has difficulty in wading through the maze of fare structures and restrictions are meant to cope is beyond me. One might almost suspect that they really don't want ordinary people to ride on their trains.
Naturally, if off-peak passenger numbers fall, the Train Operating Companies will use that as an excuse to cut off-peak services. It is high time that Government uses its powers to demand a genuinely fair deal for passengers, and ensure that we get a better return on our investment. I do not see why we should enable private enterprises to make huge profits from an effective monopoly, and especially when it is taxpayer money that is used to maintain and upgrade key rail infrastructure.
The Conservatives have no right to whinge, as it was all their fault that we ended up with such a complicated structure, fit only for lawyers and accountants, that actually makes innovation and service enhancement more difficult than it was in the days of British Rail. And isn't that just saying something?
At least Norman Baker is getting rightly indignant about it...
First, the fare increases. Now I'd be the first to accept that there is a case for investment in Britain's railways. However, given that I, along with my fellow citizens, pay more for my fares than my European counterparts, 6% plus is an awful lot to be asking for, especially when most of us will be lucky to get a third of that as our pay rises this year. And of course, that's just the minimum rise, with unregulated fares increasing by as much as 11%.
In their defence, Michael Roberts, of the Association of Train Operating Companies, said Monday's increases were partly because taxpayer funding was being reduced. He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "Fare changes this year will help pay for 265,000 extra services, all against a background which is determined by government policy to reduce the call on us as taxpayers."
The fare changes "actually in our view strike the right balance between trying to ensure a reasonable level of increase to fund in return much improved services," he added.
Now, that may be the argument, but why doesn't it appear to be borne out by the facts. As regulars readers know, I have the pleasure of using National Express East Anglia, who have recently removed the restaurant car service from their trains on the London to Norwich route. Is that a much improved service? I think not. Better still, they have now announced that, following a review of their operations, they are cutting 350 jobs in an attempt to enhance customer satisfaction and provide a better service. A better service with less people? Yes, and I'm a monkey's uncle...
Elsewhere, there are reports that hundreds of station ticket offices will close or reduce their opening hours. Passengers will have the alternative of using call centres or the Internet. How the elderly, those needing extension tickets or anyone who has difficulty in wading through the maze of fare structures and restrictions are meant to cope is beyond me. One might almost suspect that they really don't want ordinary people to ride on their trains.
Naturally, if off-peak passenger numbers fall, the Train Operating Companies will use that as an excuse to cut off-peak services. It is high time that Government uses its powers to demand a genuinely fair deal for passengers, and ensure that we get a better return on our investment. I do not see why we should enable private enterprises to make huge profits from an effective monopoly, and especially when it is taxpayer money that is used to maintain and upgrade key rail infrastructure.
The Conservatives have no right to whinge, as it was all their fault that we ended up with such a complicated structure, fit only for lawyers and accountants, that actually makes innovation and service enhancement more difficult than it was in the days of British Rail. And isn't that just saying something?
At least Norman Baker is getting rightly indignant about it...
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
2008: the year in review in three parts (3) - triumph and... actually, just triumph
Nominations for the Party Presidency opened on 1 September. We knew that Lembit would run, although his campaign was a bit of a slow-burner, as James Graham took great pleasure in pointing out. The 'I'm 4 Ros' campaign, already in high gear, launched officially with a video, a launch event, a campaigning event in Kingston and a database that was beginning to show just how valuable it would eventually prove to be.
I managed to find time to give a master class in how to be a Local Party Secretary, and if only I had the time to do all of those things, I'd probably make a really good one. What do you mean, I am one?...
At Conference, I had a minor clash with Lembit. I was only asking him the obvious questions, but others felt that there was an edge previously missing from blogger interviews. And another candidate emerged... What made Chandila Fernando's campaign so unexpected was that he had offered his services in support of Ros's campaign just a week earlier. We may never know what then caused him to seek nominations for a run himself, although I have my deep suspicions.
We were still travelling, to Bexley, to Haringey and to Western Counties. Ros's campaign team were producing leaflets, sending e-mails and making telephone calls. Lembit was doing... err... not much. Chandila was entertaining us all with a website that didn't actually do anything. Eventually, a clock appeared, counting down to an apparent launch. When the clock reached zero, nothing happened. Not so much trouble shooter as hapless amateur. Chandila, what did he stand for? "Absolutely nothing", seemed to be the answer. His photograph looked good though, as at least one Lib Dem blogger noted...
By October, we knew where we all stood. Liberal Democrat Voice released the results of its poll including all three candidates. According to its readers. Ros was going to win in a canter. None of us believed it...
Ros and I were everywhere, with hustings to attend, speeches to give, and canvassing to do. The Opik campaign finally got underway, although the Fernando campaign continued to be substance free. It certainly made his hustings speeches easier, although it was noticeable that, the longer he was given to speak, the less effective he became. Hustings were clearly a problem, despite the decision by the Returning Officer not to sanction any official ones. It showed, and I issued a guide on how to run one after a series of shambolic attempts. The PCA 'hustings' was the worst, although the inability of anyone to make a decision and stick to it, even in terms of the time given to candidates to speak demonstrated why we are so short of Returning Officers...
My cat, Cincinnati, made his political debut in my manifesto for English Candidates Committee, although his picture only appeared on ther blog in the end, as I was re-elected unopposed.
November saw the culmination of two years work on the part of Ros, as Liberal Democrat voters elected her Party President with a huge mandate. Whilst Lembit made a gracious speech in defeat, Chandila made a typically mean-spirited, churlish contribution... and then disappeared... I only hope that he has no aims in the field of diplomacy...
Meanwhile, my wish was granted, as Barack Obama became President of the United States. A great result for the rest of the world, even if his inheritance was probably the worst since Franklin Delano Roosevelt took office in 1933...
At home, the Baby P catastrophe proved once again that the combination of control freakery, Labour's infatuation with targets and a council incapable of dealing with criticism was deadly. We haven't heard the last of this by any means, although whether even the best systems and staff can completely prevent such occurences is questionable. The Conservative response was to criticise the Government whilst not actually offering an alternative themselves. Not much new there, then...
I had problems with the way we select candidates for Parliamentary by-elections, which led to a bit of a falling out with Martin Turner and the Parliamentary Candidates Association. Whilst they got a bit upset, Ros and I took our leave and went to Madeira for a week. When we returned, Martin and I exchanged a few e-mails, agreed on a means of progression and shook hands on it. Admittedly, the promised password for the PCA website never emerged, the promised copy of their e-mail to members was just that, promised, and the only comments were supportive of my view, but...
And so we reached December. I got to attend the State Opening of Parliament, and wondered whether its lack of content presaged an early general election. There was a crisis brewing though, and the third Monday saw me liveblog my breakfast to mark the end of the restaurant car service on National Express East Anglia. Or was it the end?...
I got involved in an unlikely by-election debate, and decided that it might be fun to attack the English Democrats. Indeed, it was fun, although it was interesting to see that if you actually discipline those posting comments, occasionally they respond in the right way. And for those of you who haven't gone to Bexley and live within reasonable journey time, go on, you'll be more than welcome.
And so the year comes to an end. I'm still hopelessly in love with Ros, I still have cats, albeit only two (rest in peace, Victoria, Frankln and Eleanor...) and I'm preparing for life as the Honourable Lady Mark (another inspirational line from Jennie...). 2009 may not be as dramatic, but it certainly won't be dull...
I managed to find time to give a master class in how to be a Local Party Secretary, and if only I had the time to do all of those things, I'd probably make a really good one. What do you mean, I am one?...
At Conference, I had a minor clash with Lembit. I was only asking him the obvious questions, but others felt that there was an edge previously missing from blogger interviews. And another candidate emerged... What made Chandila Fernando's campaign so unexpected was that he had offered his services in support of Ros's campaign just a week earlier. We may never know what then caused him to seek nominations for a run himself, although I have my deep suspicions.
We were still travelling, to Bexley, to Haringey and to Western Counties. Ros's campaign team were producing leaflets, sending e-mails and making telephone calls. Lembit was doing... err... not much. Chandila was entertaining us all with a website that didn't actually do anything. Eventually, a clock appeared, counting down to an apparent launch. When the clock reached zero, nothing happened. Not so much trouble shooter as hapless amateur. Chandila, what did he stand for? "Absolutely nothing", seemed to be the answer. His photograph looked good though, as at least one Lib Dem blogger noted...
By October, we knew where we all stood. Liberal Democrat Voice released the results of its poll including all three candidates. According to its readers. Ros was going to win in a canter. None of us believed it...
Ros and I were everywhere, with hustings to attend, speeches to give, and canvassing to do. The Opik campaign finally got underway, although the Fernando campaign continued to be substance free. It certainly made his hustings speeches easier, although it was noticeable that, the longer he was given to speak, the less effective he became. Hustings were clearly a problem, despite the decision by the Returning Officer not to sanction any official ones. It showed, and I issued a guide on how to run one after a series of shambolic attempts. The PCA 'hustings' was the worst, although the inability of anyone to make a decision and stick to it, even in terms of the time given to candidates to speak demonstrated why we are so short of Returning Officers...
My cat, Cincinnati, made his political debut in my manifesto for English Candidates Committee, although his picture only appeared on ther blog in the end, as I was re-elected unopposed.
November saw the culmination of two years work on the part of Ros, as Liberal Democrat voters elected her Party President with a huge mandate. Whilst Lembit made a gracious speech in defeat, Chandila made a typically mean-spirited, churlish contribution... and then disappeared... I only hope that he has no aims in the field of diplomacy...
Meanwhile, my wish was granted, as Barack Obama became President of the United States. A great result for the rest of the world, even if his inheritance was probably the worst since Franklin Delano Roosevelt took office in 1933...
At home, the Baby P catastrophe proved once again that the combination of control freakery, Labour's infatuation with targets and a council incapable of dealing with criticism was deadly. We haven't heard the last of this by any means, although whether even the best systems and staff can completely prevent such occurences is questionable. The Conservative response was to criticise the Government whilst not actually offering an alternative themselves. Not much new there, then...
I had problems with the way we select candidates for Parliamentary by-elections, which led to a bit of a falling out with Martin Turner and the Parliamentary Candidates Association. Whilst they got a bit upset, Ros and I took our leave and went to Madeira for a week. When we returned, Martin and I exchanged a few e-mails, agreed on a means of progression and shook hands on it. Admittedly, the promised password for the PCA website never emerged, the promised copy of their e-mail to members was just that, promised, and the only comments were supportive of my view, but...
And so we reached December. I got to attend the State Opening of Parliament, and wondered whether its lack of content presaged an early general election. There was a crisis brewing though, and the third Monday saw me liveblog my breakfast to mark the end of the restaurant car service on National Express East Anglia. Or was it the end?...
I got involved in an unlikely by-election debate, and decided that it might be fun to attack the English Democrats. Indeed, it was fun, although it was interesting to see that if you actually discipline those posting comments, occasionally they respond in the right way. And for those of you who haven't gone to Bexley and live within reasonable journey time, go on, you'll be more than welcome.
And so the year comes to an end. I'm still hopelessly in love with Ros, I still have cats, albeit only two (rest in peace, Victoria, Frankln and Eleanor...) and I'm preparing for life as the Honourable Lady Mark (another inspirational line from Jennie...). 2009 may not be as dramatic, but it certainly won't be dull...
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
2008: a review of the year in three parts (2): one of our opponents is missing
We returned from India, tanned and happy, but with much to do. I had found time, even on honeymoon, to be annoyed by Bob Shaw once again. His response was to write a snarky blog entry suggesting that I was attacking him because he was being beastly to my now wife. Whilst that might have provided a justification, what he never seemed to realise was that I was attacking him because I loathed him and everything he stood for as a blogger. I called him a coward and a hypocrite, and had it not been for the fact that this is a blog where foul language is not used, I would have used a whole range of Anglo-Saxonisms in reference to him.
I wasn't happy with Labour (again), and was observing the meltdown of their support in some unexpected places. But the charge towards the nanny state continued apace, with smoking and drinking coming under the microscope. My response was to start my exploration of the wonderful world of small Suffolk breweries.
Whilst Ros was beginning to crank up her campaign with visits to the West Midlands and the South West, there was no sign of campaigning life from any opponent. We knew that Lembit was intending to get his nomination in, but we were wondering when he would start putting himself about... We never did find out who ran the YouGov poll about the Presidency though...
July saw the 'I'm 4 Ros' campaign overseas and on a pilgrimage, where I met Jennie for the first time. Detouring to pay a lightning visit to the Glasgow East by-election, I rejoined Ros for a sally across the border into Wales - oh yes, there were no 'no go' areas for the campaign...
I got tremendous entertainment out of the White Paper on House of Lords reform, and remain convinced that selecting new Peers by means of a contest whereby applicants have to compete against each other to collect water in buckets from a tap placed eight feet off of the ground whilst dressed as penguins and standing on a greased revolving platform. Wouldn't you pay good money to see that? I know I would...
In August, I discovered a new cultural form, only to discover that misogeny is everywhere. The video should have been a giveaway really but merely demonstrated what a sheltered life I've led... Labour didn't get campaign finance reform, Conservatives didn't understand why Ian Oakley's vile behaviour in Watford was a problem for us all. They didn't have any policy yet, either.
To take my mind off of it all, Ros whisked me away to Scotland, Cornwall and Wales (where I got to meet Steph, as well as someone called Kirsty Williams - whatever became of her, I wonder?), although I did find time to fall out with another member of the Taunton Deane massive...
Life was about to get really hectic...
I wasn't happy with Labour (again), and was observing the meltdown of their support in some unexpected places. But the charge towards the nanny state continued apace, with smoking and drinking coming under the microscope. My response was to start my exploration of the wonderful world of small Suffolk breweries.
Whilst Ros was beginning to crank up her campaign with visits to the West Midlands and the South West, there was no sign of campaigning life from any opponent. We knew that Lembit was intending to get his nomination in, but we were wondering when he would start putting himself about... We never did find out who ran the YouGov poll about the Presidency though...
July saw the 'I'm 4 Ros' campaign overseas and on a pilgrimage, where I met Jennie for the first time. Detouring to pay a lightning visit to the Glasgow East by-election, I rejoined Ros for a sally across the border into Wales - oh yes, there were no 'no go' areas for the campaign...
I got tremendous entertainment out of the White Paper on House of Lords reform, and remain convinced that selecting new Peers by means of a contest whereby applicants have to compete against each other to collect water in buckets from a tap placed eight feet off of the ground whilst dressed as penguins and standing on a greased revolving platform. Wouldn't you pay good money to see that? I know I would...
In August, I discovered a new cultural form, only to discover that misogeny is everywhere. The video should have been a giveaway really but merely demonstrated what a sheltered life I've led... Labour didn't get campaign finance reform, Conservatives didn't understand why Ian Oakley's vile behaviour in Watford was a problem for us all. They didn't have any policy yet, either.
To take my mind off of it all, Ros whisked me away to Scotland, Cornwall and Wales (where I got to meet Steph, as well as someone called Kirsty Williams - whatever became of her, I wonder?), although I did find time to fall out with another member of the Taunton Deane massive...
Life was about to get really hectic...
2008: a review of the year in three parts (1) - renaissance bureaucrat in frockcoat surprise!
As usual, it’s time for me to review the year past as seen from the eyes of a party bureaucrat. Except that this year was rather less about bureaucracy and more about romance and campaigning.
As the year began, we (and there was the key first difference from 2007) were a bit busy. The house in Kingsbury was on the market for sale, we had put in an offer on a house in Needham Market, preparations were well advanced for our April wedding and a Presidential campaign was beginning to step up a gear. There were hints that the wheels were about to fall off of the economy, but the sheer horror of what was to come was still to be anything other than a twinkle in Mr Cable’s eye. There would be some implications to come, but I didn’t care - after all, I was in love…
I was on good predictive form though, calling the race for the Democratic nomination as a likely Obama win before the Iowa caucus (blog entry 8 January), and picking out some of the reasons why Hilary would lose. I was struggling with choice and free trade, but nothing new there, whilst preparing to be financially shafted by my employers (no change there either). Boy, was I right there, and we are still to reach agreement a year later. Ros started blogging, and whilst her readership figures were hardly in the Guido/Iain Dale league, ‘Because Baronesses are People too…’ would prove to be a slow-burning precursor for a Presidency to come.
In February, I launched my first attack on the Parliamentary Candidates Association for past uselessness, more in regret than anger. They had a new Chair, so that was alright, wasn’t it? Tory sleaze was back, and wasn’t that going to be a feature of the year to come. Conservatives were beginning to prepare for government. Not by creating policy, no, by demonstrating that they’re view of government was a means of making money and settling scores. Ideas were not to be encouraged. Labour were beginning to implode, the economy was weak, all that Cameron, Osborne and the rest had to do was wait. Wasn’t it?
Labour’s response? More sleaze, more stupidity. Peter Hain left office to spend more time with his home tanning machine and take lessons in basic arithmetic after failing to declare more than £100,000 of donations to his disastrously unsuccessful campaign to be Deputy Leader, whilst Caroline Flint demonstrated exactly why she shouldn’t be allowed to do anything that might require empathy or integrity.
The Bones Commission, which I had suggested to Nick Clegg in the aftermath of his election as Leader (he reads every word I write, you know) via the medium of Liberal Democrat Voice, was at work, and I wasn’t entirely happy with the suggestion that it was all the fault of a bunch of bureaucrats. I could have named names but I was still being nice to people (it wouldn’t necessarily last)
Niceness lasted into March, as I tried a reprise of my role as peacemaker, after Nich Starling and Alex Wilcock had a quite entertaining set-to. Not for the first time, Nich hit the nail on the head, only to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by allowing his inner conspiracy theorist to replace intellect and diplomacy. Alex went volcanic in his typically erudite way, unleashing a flow of molten invective all over Norfolk (we were comfortable with that in mid-Suffolk). As usual, Alex saw the light. Nich demonstrated why Tories like him…
At Conference, Lembit moved a motion calling for the role of the Party President to be split into two jobs. In return, I attacked him and the Federal Executive for incompetence, defeatism and an utter incomprehension of the notion of conflict of interest. Whilst two members of the Federal Executive did have the courtesy to defend their stance (Erlend Watson and James Gurling), very few people saw the irony of a declared candidate for the Presidency claming that the job couldn’t be done… The ’I’m 4 Ros’ campaign team sat in a corner of the conference hall, and watched as the motion was passed but without the required two-thirds majority. You can guess which way I voted.
Nick Clegg talked about ‘Faceless Britain’ in his conference speech, and I did see what he was on about, but my first Regional Conference was about to take precedence. It went rather well, and I declared myself to be a fan-boy (thank you, Jennie, for this addition to my vocabulary) of Baroness Hamwee of Richmond upon Thames (is there something in the water in the Royal Borough?)
Reprieved, the ‘I’m 4 Ros’ campaign began to gather momentum, with a number of events, including an astonishingly intellectual fundraiser, starring Brian Eno. We attended the launch of ‘Liberal Youth’ and, although the significance of this was yet to become apparent, I was not to hear the last from them as the year progressed.
My patience with Bob Shaw finally ran out though. He’d been annoying me for a while, with a series of misogynist, snide attacks on Ros. That, I was willing to let go albeit grudgingly, but cowardice and hypocrisy provided too tempting a target. Ironically, it wasn't my last run-in with someone from Taunton Deane...
As the year began, we (and there was the key first difference from 2007) were a bit busy. The house in Kingsbury was on the market for sale, we had put in an offer on a house in Needham Market, preparations were well advanced for our April wedding and a Presidential campaign was beginning to step up a gear. There were hints that the wheels were about to fall off of the economy, but the sheer horror of what was to come was still to be anything other than a twinkle in Mr Cable’s eye. There would be some implications to come, but I didn’t care - after all, I was in love…
I was on good predictive form though, calling the race for the Democratic nomination as a likely Obama win before the Iowa caucus (blog entry 8 January), and picking out some of the reasons why Hilary would lose. I was struggling with choice and free trade, but nothing new there, whilst preparing to be financially shafted by my employers (no change there either). Boy, was I right there, and we are still to reach agreement a year later. Ros started blogging, and whilst her readership figures were hardly in the Guido/Iain Dale league, ‘Because Baronesses are People too…’ would prove to be a slow-burning precursor for a Presidency to come.
In February, I launched my first attack on the Parliamentary Candidates Association for past uselessness, more in regret than anger. They had a new Chair, so that was alright, wasn’t it? Tory sleaze was back, and wasn’t that going to be a feature of the year to come. Conservatives were beginning to prepare for government. Not by creating policy, no, by demonstrating that they’re view of government was a means of making money and settling scores. Ideas were not to be encouraged. Labour were beginning to implode, the economy was weak, all that Cameron, Osborne and the rest had to do was wait. Wasn’t it?
Labour’s response? More sleaze, more stupidity. Peter Hain left office to spend more time with his home tanning machine and take lessons in basic arithmetic after failing to declare more than £100,000 of donations to his disastrously unsuccessful campaign to be Deputy Leader, whilst Caroline Flint demonstrated exactly why she shouldn’t be allowed to do anything that might require empathy or integrity.
The Bones Commission, which I had suggested to Nick Clegg in the aftermath of his election as Leader (he reads every word I write, you know) via the medium of Liberal Democrat Voice, was at work, and I wasn’t entirely happy with the suggestion that it was all the fault of a bunch of bureaucrats. I could have named names but I was still being nice to people (it wouldn’t necessarily last)
Niceness lasted into March, as I tried a reprise of my role as peacemaker, after Nich Starling and Alex Wilcock had a quite entertaining set-to. Not for the first time, Nich hit the nail on the head, only to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by allowing his inner conspiracy theorist to replace intellect and diplomacy. Alex went volcanic in his typically erudite way, unleashing a flow of molten invective all over Norfolk (we were comfortable with that in mid-Suffolk). As usual, Alex saw the light. Nich demonstrated why Tories like him…
At Conference, Lembit moved a motion calling for the role of the Party President to be split into two jobs. In return, I attacked him and the Federal Executive for incompetence, defeatism and an utter incomprehension of the notion of conflict of interest. Whilst two members of the Federal Executive did have the courtesy to defend their stance (Erlend Watson and James Gurling), very few people saw the irony of a declared candidate for the Presidency claming that the job couldn’t be done… The ’I’m 4 Ros’ campaign team sat in a corner of the conference hall, and watched as the motion was passed but without the required two-thirds majority. You can guess which way I voted.
Nick Clegg talked about ‘Faceless Britain’ in his conference speech, and I did see what he was on about, but my first Regional Conference was about to take precedence. It went rather well, and I declared myself to be a fan-boy (thank you, Jennie, for this addition to my vocabulary) of Baroness Hamwee of Richmond upon Thames (is there something in the water in the Royal Borough?)
Reprieved, the ‘I’m 4 Ros’ campaign began to gather momentum, with a number of events, including an astonishingly intellectual fundraiser, starring Brian Eno. We attended the launch of ‘Liberal Youth’ and, although the significance of this was yet to become apparent, I was not to hear the last from them as the year progressed.
My patience with Bob Shaw finally ran out though. He’d been annoying me for a while, with a series of misogynist, snide attacks on Ros. That, I was willing to let go albeit grudgingly, but cowardice and hypocrisy provided too tempting a target. Ironically, it wasn't my last run-in with someone from Taunton Deane...
The big day or, at least, the first of the big days, was coming up fast, yet the Campaign for a Real President could not wait, and we went to the North East for the first big tour. And whilst the Conservatives were demonstrating exactly how not to run an internal party candidate selection. I was even quoted favourably on Conservative Home (don't worry, I'm not turning into Nich Starling...).
The only sunny day in the whole summer (alright, there may have been others but do you remember any?) was timed to coincide with the wedding of baroness and bureaucrat. Whilst the new power couple fled to India for the best part of three weeks of sun, massage and elephants, my old friend, Empress Jessica, reported on the Valladares family wedding of the year for the Amaranth edition of 'Hello' magazine.
Monday, December 29, 2008
It is cold and dark. I must really like Grace...
Welcome to platform 1 here at a pretty cold Welling Station. At least, it's apparently pretty cold, although I've worked up a sweat delivering for Grace Goodlad's campaign to be the new Liberal Democrat councillor for East Wickham. Given that I've commuted in from Suffolk this morning, put in a full day at work and then come to Bexley, my enthusiasm for getting Grace elected is undeniable.
I wasn't as organised as might be ideal, as I've done my delivery round with a laptop on my back, but despite the dark and cold, it went pretty smoothly. The part of the ward that I was in is comparatively easy to deliver, although not as easy as East Dulwich was (minute front gardens, long terraces and flat ground for the most part).
However, all this means nothing unless people come forward to do the delivering, which is what brought this North Londoner to distant South East London. Bexley is a prime example of a place where we have a potential vote far greater than that achieved in recent years. It wasn't that long ago that we had fourteen councillors and were part of the administration, yet now we have not a single councillor. And yes, going from zero to one might not mean much in the scheme of things, but it means that there is another potential block of votes that can be delivered in regional list elections which wasn't fully tapped before. How many votes were we short of a second European Parliament seat in London in 2004? How many votes short of a fourth London Assembly seat this year?
I'm a firm believer that a small investment in those areas where we are weak will pay off if it is converted into a few more members, a few more activists and an extra councillor or two. It isn't exactly a fashionable view, I know, but given that our performance in list elections is hardly stellar, what harm is there in trying something slightly different?
Ah well, at least I've done something useful this evening...
I wasn't as organised as might be ideal, as I've done my delivery round with a laptop on my back, but despite the dark and cold, it went pretty smoothly. The part of the ward that I was in is comparatively easy to deliver, although not as easy as East Dulwich was (minute front gardens, long terraces and flat ground for the most part).
However, all this means nothing unless people come forward to do the delivering, which is what brought this North Londoner to distant South East London. Bexley is a prime example of a place where we have a potential vote far greater than that achieved in recent years. It wasn't that long ago that we had fourteen councillors and were part of the administration, yet now we have not a single councillor. And yes, going from zero to one might not mean much in the scheme of things, but it means that there is another potential block of votes that can be delivered in regional list elections which wasn't fully tapped before. How many votes were we short of a second European Parliament seat in London in 2004? How many votes short of a fourth London Assembly seat this year?
I'm a firm believer that a small investment in those areas where we are weak will pay off if it is converted into a few more members, a few more activists and an extra councillor or two. It isn't exactly a fashionable view, I know, but given that our performance in list elections is hardly stellar, what harm is there in trying something slightly different?
Ah well, at least I've done something useful this evening...
Thursday, December 25, 2008
A Christmas Message from the Honourable Lady Mark to an expectant nation...
Whilst the Queen is telling us all that it's our turn for an annus horribilis, I thought I might say something a little more uplifting.
For me, at least, 2008 has been a year of personal growth (in more than one way) and of increasing happiness. President-elect Ros and I got married, travelled the Liberal Democrat world, and triumphed against the apparent electoral odds. Yes, it's been a good year.
I've met some wonderful people, who have reminded me of why we do what we do for our cause, and seen some amazing places - Skara Brae, Blaenavon, the Mendips to name but three. My belief in what we seek to achieve as Liberal Democrats has been bolstered and, whilst we may disagree on the means, we do coalesce around the ends for the most part.
And so, a Merry Christmas to you all. Enjoy the festive season, take care of those whom you love, and find a little time for yourself - you're worth it. And now, if you'll excuse me, I have an appointment with a turkey that won't be kept waiting...
For me, at least, 2008 has been a year of personal growth (in more than one way) and of increasing happiness. President-elect Ros and I got married, travelled the Liberal Democrat world, and triumphed against the apparent electoral odds. Yes, it's been a good year.
I've met some wonderful people, who have reminded me of why we do what we do for our cause, and seen some amazing places - Skara Brae, Blaenavon, the Mendips to name but three. My belief in what we seek to achieve as Liberal Democrats has been bolstered and, whilst we may disagree on the means, we do coalesce around the ends for the most part.
And so, a Merry Christmas to you all. Enjoy the festive season, take care of those whom you love, and find a little time for yourself - you're worth it. And now, if you'll excuse me, I have an appointment with a turkey that won't be kept waiting...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)