For sheer ineptitude the efforts of the new and now very recently resigned Conservative chief fundraiser Peter Crudas take some beating. His performance in offering opportunities to shake the Prime Ministerial paw,-or for more bigger piles of loot possibly if absurdly to have "influence" were up there with, and reminiscent of, the Duchess of York's offerings to sell access to the Duke. Both were hideously cringemaking and made one wonder how on earth why any candidate for signing up would even want to continue the conversation or be able to avoid throwing up. Strangely though there are people in the world to whom even this tacky flypaper does not shout loudly "Don't come anywhere near,-flee now!".
Party funding and the influence it may give or be portrayed as giving donors has been a vexed question. The Labour Party is probably the most problematical. Over 80% of its income comes from the trade unions who are not exactly a disinterested entity. They also pretty much control the party conference votes through their dominant blocks and certainly chose the current leader, the ever santimonious and hand wringing Ed Miliband. For that alone they expect influence. Unsurprisingly the Unite leader Len McClusky is described as being "very close" to the Labour leader.
Historically the Conservatives have relied more on big businesses and wealthy individuals. Some of the latter give because they genuinely believe in the Conservative philosophy,-if there currently is one,-or to help keep the others out or in the case of the ones targeted by this approach,-mostly driven by simple naive vanity. Seemingly they revel in the prospect of being able, however misleadingly and pointlessly, to say they have dined with Dave("Oh, I see him often you know")in an upper room at number 10 or elsewhere. Any self respecting political party or social group would simply say they don't want them, however brightly their Gold Cards shine. Today the Conservative Party in the Commons seem to have failed to fling back into Miliband's lap retorts about supping with union leaders.Are there no good knockabout cut and thrust parliamentary debaters in the chamber?
After this embarrassment, the theatrics and posturing of which may go on for a while, there is no doubt that politicians of all parties and none will be a little more careful to avoid accusations of lying down with dogs and catching fleas. Leaders will also have to select their advisors and "doers" a bit more wisely.
The Lib Dem position is a little unclear. Buying supper with Nick would appear to be at best a low cost austerity driven option but realistically probably isn't considered worth even small change by serious social climbers or influence seekers. Their Party's position is probably more the reverse,-how to pay people to come and chat to them over a bottle of no air miles English organic eco-red or Elderflower cordial.
The solution of course is to ban all donations and fund political parties out of the public purse. The problem though is that Joe Public's purse is firmly closed when anyone called double glazing salesman or politican comes to call. That makes it very unlikely to fly.
There is another bigger and possibly nastier beast in the influence game and one that has been used and abused in Britain for centuries. It is of course the honours system from the award of peerages downwards. While it has a good side in recognising and rewarding the often unsung truly deserving, too often it has been used to reward party donors and the undeserving and self promoting for good behaviour ("services to the nation"), to encourge people not to rock boats or stand in the way of things or to otherwise use the less positive side of real influence. It is time we said "Enough, away with all this. The whole titles and letters thing gets in the way of social cohesion rather than enhances. It is divisive and as such corrosive". The days of King Arthur, barons and the like should be long over and a puritanical line of zero tolerance is needed to all forms of political patronage and external funding. It can sail too close to corruption and become just that. The alternative is to continue a long, slow slide towards the Zimbabwe model. Anyone really want that? Sorry, silly question maybe.
Monday, 26 March 2012
Wednesday, 21 March 2012
The 2012 Budget Debate: 20th March .Ed confirms the end of New Labour.
On the sunny evening of May 2nd 1997 Tony Blair rode into Downing Street on the wave of national optimism. Even many traditional Tory voters, tired and frustrated with the introverted self destruction of their own party thought that maybe this new center ground reincarnation of Labour might be worth a try. For the first time Labour looked inclusive and didn't institutionally hate anybody other than its own. The days of class obsessed Old Labour could be over. British politics might take a turn for the better.
This afternoon, nearly 15 years later,the Labour Leader,-if that is not too strong a word,-rose to reply to George Osborne's budget. Never mind the ins and out and the detail. Ed's first few lines said it all, if not in quite the way he intended. In response to the fact that not only the lower paid but also the better off gained from some of the tax and welfare measures he declared that the notion of "We are all in this together" was dead. With those words indeed it is. All the standard repertoire of "hate the rich" lines came out. It was all so predictable .The relatively recent but constantly repeated (Labour for ever repeat all their key phrases,-presumably they think the electorate isn't too bright) came tumbling forth. "Out of touch" was wheeled out again. It often appears along with dog-whistle mutters about or oblique references to toffs, Etonians and others who may have made money unless they are footballers, celebs,lottery winners,pop stars and the like who have of course earned their money and are irreproachable. The real message from New Old Labour is that unless you are one of the latter or one of Brown's "hard working families"(=not very well off) or of course a Labour politician or activist they don't really like you very much at all. The idea of socialism-free inclusiveness, the big tent and occupying the real centre ground of politics has died. Hopefully also dead then is the idea that this benighted party, to whom business success, and the creation of wealth and jobs for others are an anathema, could ever return to power and have the chance to drag down the economy and any spirit of national endeavour and enterprise even more than they did last time.
In short Ed was in his comfort zone and showing his true colours and political divisiveness. Not an enticing zone for the rest of us.
This afternoon, nearly 15 years later,the Labour Leader,-if that is not too strong a word,-rose to reply to George Osborne's budget. Never mind the ins and out and the detail. Ed's first few lines said it all, if not in quite the way he intended. In response to the fact that not only the lower paid but also the better off gained from some of the tax and welfare measures he declared that the notion of "We are all in this together" was dead. With those words indeed it is. All the standard repertoire of "hate the rich" lines came out. It was all so predictable .The relatively recent but constantly repeated (Labour for ever repeat all their key phrases,-presumably they think the electorate isn't too bright) came tumbling forth. "Out of touch" was wheeled out again. It often appears along with dog-whistle mutters about or oblique references to toffs, Etonians and others who may have made money unless they are footballers, celebs,lottery winners,pop stars and the like who have of course earned their money and are irreproachable. The real message from New Old Labour is that unless you are one of the latter or one of Brown's "hard working families"(=not very well off) or of course a Labour politician or activist they don't really like you very much at all. The idea of socialism-free inclusiveness, the big tent and occupying the real centre ground of politics has died. Hopefully also dead then is the idea that this benighted party, to whom business success, and the creation of wealth and jobs for others are an anathema, could ever return to power and have the chance to drag down the economy and any spirit of national endeavour and enterprise even more than they did last time.
In short Ed was in his comfort zone and showing his true colours and political divisiveness. Not an enticing zone for the rest of us.
Monday, 12 March 2012
Twiga is back.......
After six weeks in the mountains,savannahs,coasts,cities and dorps of Africa one returns expecting that a lot has moved on and changed in the world. Oh well, we all have disappointments.
Let's take a quick sweep of what's afoot around the globe..........
UK: Back just in time to see the sandal wearers spring conference in Gateshead. Twiga had wondered why our old Labour,- that's Old Labour,- friends had been a bit quiet in their opposition role lately while simultaneously moving ahead of the Tories in the polls. The answer is of course simple. The Lib Dems have been doing the opposition bit for them so why should they open their mouths and spoil it? Still the untrained puppy in the house of government,the Lib Dems continue their incontinence on the carpet and to out-Labour Labour in their enthusiasm for "fairness" (something Dave keeps talking about too though he probably isn't too sure what it really means). They interpret the concept as being to do with the rich paying their "fair share" of taxes . Fine but as the top 10% of earners pay around 60% of the nation's taxes in any case aren't we there already? Might they not reasonably think that a Hong Kong type flat rate tax system would be much fairer, really fair even. There the more people earn the more they pay and the ratio of tax to income remains constant rather than being disproportionately or unfairly tilted against hard work and high achievement? With a flat rate way these people would still pay the bulk of the nation's taxes and subsidise the rest but in a way that incentivises them. That sounds very fair and simple so why not? Is punitive taxation just for the sake of being seen to be hard on the better off fair? It's difficult to see how it could be. UK Plc, led by Lib Dem and Labour politicians and with the aquiescence of Tory leadership trying hard not to be the nasty party ,seems to be heading dangerously back into the destructive and objectionable class war jungle. It's not healthy and it's not good for anyone.
USA: Talking of people doing other people's work for them, the Republicans publicly internecine process of choosing a Presidential candidate for this year's fast approaching elections is certainly working well for Obama and the Democrats. As more and more extreme conservative views, especially about women's rights to make their own decisions on contraception, abortion and pre-testing for foetal birth defects get trotted out by the day, more and more must be thinking this is going too far and will be left with only one voting option,-Obama. No wonder the President is looking rather relaxed at the moment.
SOUTH AFRICA: Any visitor to the opposition-run Cape at the moment will come away marvelling at how well the transition to New South Africa has gone. The infrastructure is largely well maintained, service everywhere is good, the tourism industry is high quality and increasingly manned by bright young black and coloured people while new roads are appearing at a rate unthinkable in Britain. That's how it looks.
Not far below the surface though things are not quite so rosy. There is still a huge unemployment problem,-increasingly not only for previously disadvantgaed blacks but also now for young whites to whom state employment is pretty much barred while quotas remove opportunities in the private sector. Population growth continues to run ahead of GDP growth. Murders of (well over 1,000 so far)and very unpleasant pressures on white farmers to quit strike a sour note and threaten long term large scale food production. Militant unions discourage overseas investment which sees largely non unionised, high work ethic Asia as a much better bet. The "real" ANC, the province of Winnie Mandela and the youth league in particular, is very different from the wise, statesmanlike, healing and unifying Nelson Mandela version. It itches to drive a populist racial agenda for Zimbabwe type land "redistribution", seizure of power from the provinces, intervention in business and life in general and would drive investment and any real prospects for future prosperity ever further away. The best bulwark against this will be the rapidly growing affluent black middle classes but they are a long way from having a numerical majority.
Problems therefore lie ahead and it is a race against time for enough black South Africans to have an interest in stability and prosperity to counterbalance the easily whipped up anger of those who do not see themselves as any better off than they were under apartheid. The race and haves/have not genie is much easier to take out of the bottle than to put back in and Winnie & Co are knowingly playing with fire.
Africa, for the image as well as economics of the continent, badly needs South Africa to be a success even if they don't love it too much. The issue isn't just for the one country alone.
RUSSIA: No surprises from the elections there and Putin's footwork in returning to power. Although all the evidence says the elections were skewed, the other evidence says that this was unnecessary as he would have won fairly easily anyway. The national love of a strong man remains despite past brutalities and present misdeeds. The country has a long way to go before the majority chooses a western style of debate and democracy. In the meantime Russia will continue to support other regimes with an intolerance of opposition and a liking for repression of opposing voices,- eg Syria.
THE EU AND THE EURO: The two stagger on in their mutually suffocating embrace. Reality is that the Euro was always a dodgy German/French creation aimed at securing control of the economics and thereby the politics of the EU. One size visibly doesn't fit all 27 countries of widely varying cultures and economic models spread over a large geographical area. Supporting an artifical creation to try to make it work despite the facts of life is imposing huge and expensive strains on the future of the EU itself. The solution would seem to be a Euro and a non Euro zone within the EU and for the overall objective to move away from political union (=Franco/German domination) for which nobody has ever voted, back towards a much simpler and less centrally controlled free trade area. Apart from anything else this would reduce the huge unproductive overheads of the vast Brussells burocracy. Massive savings would flow from simplification of processes, reduction of runaway salaries and allowances, abandonment of the alternative Strasbourg setup, the reduction of working languages to two or three and a host of other common sense but "politically sensitive" moves. Trying to please everyone is almost impossible and incredibly and impractically expensive. No business would saddle itself with or survive such expensive and productivity deadening overheads.
AFGHANISTAN: Over 400 British deaths now notched up and inevitably more to come. For what? We have already said this is an unwinnable directionless war with fictitous objectives (keeping terror off British and American streets wasn't it?). The problem now is that leaders on both sides of the Atlantic are terrified of a withdrawal resulting in the overthrow of the hugely corrupt and duplicious Afghan government. This would prove what most people instinctively know,-ie that the whole intervention has been a waste of lives, time and money,- and the nations' TV screen will be full of military Mum's saying "My son died for nothing other than keeping the politicians' faces. Therein could lie electoral disaster for some although in the UK the blame would have to be spread across all parties and leaders. That would mean Blair, Brown and Cameron and many members of their cabinets and shadow cabinets.
The fact is that collapse of the current Afghan government is likely whenever withdrawal takes place. Its leaders will be lucky to escape with their lives. A period of Taleban rule is highly likely before the Afghans themselves decide whether or not they will put up with that long term. The various tribes, clans and groupings don't really like being governed or told what to do by anyone and only a very loose form of central government, and certainly not control, is acceptable. Any vision of Westminster type parliament or a US style Congress is laughable. Some kind of national council or forum will emerge although not in a form which we would describe as necessarily numerically democratic or even majority rule. The only thing that unifies the country is a hatred of occupation by any form of foreigners. The British learned that in the 19th century, the Russians in the 20th and the British and Americans are relearning it in the 21st. If only more of our leaders had listened during their school history lessons. One would have thought that at least Fettes in Edinburgh (Blair) and Eton (Cameron) would have dinned it into their pupils better. Maybe history was programmed into the immediately after lunch slot?
SOMALIA: Pirate activity appears to be down, possibly as result of more ships carrying their own armed security people. Sensibly nobody is saying much about who is doing what but it is reasonable to assume that, EU naval vessels apart, shoot to kill and "Don't ask, don't tell" are more prevalent than before. The Kenyan army has been pressing Al Shabaab and there is an objective to drive the terrorists out of Kismayu. Al Shabaab have declared war on Kenya and Saturday's bomb in a Nairobi bus station can be seen as a declaration of intent. Kenya's tourism business in particular holds its breath. Meanwhile Mogadishu, uneasy though it is, has begun to resume some appearance of normality.The rapidy expanding Turkish Airlines has begun a twice weekly scheduled service from Ankara to the city. There is no pleasing everyone though. Al Shabaab have accused the Turks of bringing in goods to compete with local traders and out of date foodstuffs to poison the population.
That is a quick update of some things picked up in a scan around the world's horizons. There's much more happening out there and at home of course and we will revert to some of them as they come into post holiday focus. The world is never boring.
Let's take a quick sweep of what's afoot around the globe..........
UK: Back just in time to see the sandal wearers spring conference in Gateshead. Twiga had wondered why our old Labour,- that's Old Labour,- friends had been a bit quiet in their opposition role lately while simultaneously moving ahead of the Tories in the polls. The answer is of course simple. The Lib Dems have been doing the opposition bit for them so why should they open their mouths and spoil it? Still the untrained puppy in the house of government,the Lib Dems continue their incontinence on the carpet and to out-Labour Labour in their enthusiasm for "fairness" (something Dave keeps talking about too though he probably isn't too sure what it really means). They interpret the concept as being to do with the rich paying their "fair share" of taxes . Fine but as the top 10% of earners pay around 60% of the nation's taxes in any case aren't we there already? Might they not reasonably think that a Hong Kong type flat rate tax system would be much fairer, really fair even. There the more people earn the more they pay and the ratio of tax to income remains constant rather than being disproportionately or unfairly tilted against hard work and high achievement? With a flat rate way these people would still pay the bulk of the nation's taxes and subsidise the rest but in a way that incentivises them. That sounds very fair and simple so why not? Is punitive taxation just for the sake of being seen to be hard on the better off fair? It's difficult to see how it could be. UK Plc, led by Lib Dem and Labour politicians and with the aquiescence of Tory leadership trying hard not to be the nasty party ,seems to be heading dangerously back into the destructive and objectionable class war jungle. It's not healthy and it's not good for anyone.
USA: Talking of people doing other people's work for them, the Republicans publicly internecine process of choosing a Presidential candidate for this year's fast approaching elections is certainly working well for Obama and the Democrats. As more and more extreme conservative views, especially about women's rights to make their own decisions on contraception, abortion and pre-testing for foetal birth defects get trotted out by the day, more and more must be thinking this is going too far and will be left with only one voting option,-Obama. No wonder the President is looking rather relaxed at the moment.
SOUTH AFRICA: Any visitor to the opposition-run Cape at the moment will come away marvelling at how well the transition to New South Africa has gone. The infrastructure is largely well maintained, service everywhere is good, the tourism industry is high quality and increasingly manned by bright young black and coloured people while new roads are appearing at a rate unthinkable in Britain. That's how it looks.
Not far below the surface though things are not quite so rosy. There is still a huge unemployment problem,-increasingly not only for previously disadvantgaed blacks but also now for young whites to whom state employment is pretty much barred while quotas remove opportunities in the private sector. Population growth continues to run ahead of GDP growth. Murders of (well over 1,000 so far)and very unpleasant pressures on white farmers to quit strike a sour note and threaten long term large scale food production. Militant unions discourage overseas investment which sees largely non unionised, high work ethic Asia as a much better bet. The "real" ANC, the province of Winnie Mandela and the youth league in particular, is very different from the wise, statesmanlike, healing and unifying Nelson Mandela version. It itches to drive a populist racial agenda for Zimbabwe type land "redistribution", seizure of power from the provinces, intervention in business and life in general and would drive investment and any real prospects for future prosperity ever further away. The best bulwark against this will be the rapidly growing affluent black middle classes but they are a long way from having a numerical majority.
Problems therefore lie ahead and it is a race against time for enough black South Africans to have an interest in stability and prosperity to counterbalance the easily whipped up anger of those who do not see themselves as any better off than they were under apartheid. The race and haves/have not genie is much easier to take out of the bottle than to put back in and Winnie & Co are knowingly playing with fire.
Africa, for the image as well as economics of the continent, badly needs South Africa to be a success even if they don't love it too much. The issue isn't just for the one country alone.
RUSSIA: No surprises from the elections there and Putin's footwork in returning to power. Although all the evidence says the elections were skewed, the other evidence says that this was unnecessary as he would have won fairly easily anyway. The national love of a strong man remains despite past brutalities and present misdeeds. The country has a long way to go before the majority chooses a western style of debate and democracy. In the meantime Russia will continue to support other regimes with an intolerance of opposition and a liking for repression of opposing voices,- eg Syria.
THE EU AND THE EURO: The two stagger on in their mutually suffocating embrace. Reality is that the Euro was always a dodgy German/French creation aimed at securing control of the economics and thereby the politics of the EU. One size visibly doesn't fit all 27 countries of widely varying cultures and economic models spread over a large geographical area. Supporting an artifical creation to try to make it work despite the facts of life is imposing huge and expensive strains on the future of the EU itself. The solution would seem to be a Euro and a non Euro zone within the EU and for the overall objective to move away from political union (=Franco/German domination) for which nobody has ever voted, back towards a much simpler and less centrally controlled free trade area. Apart from anything else this would reduce the huge unproductive overheads of the vast Brussells burocracy. Massive savings would flow from simplification of processes, reduction of runaway salaries and allowances, abandonment of the alternative Strasbourg setup, the reduction of working languages to two or three and a host of other common sense but "politically sensitive" moves. Trying to please everyone is almost impossible and incredibly and impractically expensive. No business would saddle itself with or survive such expensive and productivity deadening overheads.
AFGHANISTAN: Over 400 British deaths now notched up and inevitably more to come. For what? We have already said this is an unwinnable directionless war with fictitous objectives (keeping terror off British and American streets wasn't it?). The problem now is that leaders on both sides of the Atlantic are terrified of a withdrawal resulting in the overthrow of the hugely corrupt and duplicious Afghan government. This would prove what most people instinctively know,-ie that the whole intervention has been a waste of lives, time and money,- and the nations' TV screen will be full of military Mum's saying "My son died for nothing other than keeping the politicians' faces. Therein could lie electoral disaster for some although in the UK the blame would have to be spread across all parties and leaders. That would mean Blair, Brown and Cameron and many members of their cabinets and shadow cabinets.
The fact is that collapse of the current Afghan government is likely whenever withdrawal takes place. Its leaders will be lucky to escape with their lives. A period of Taleban rule is highly likely before the Afghans themselves decide whether or not they will put up with that long term. The various tribes, clans and groupings don't really like being governed or told what to do by anyone and only a very loose form of central government, and certainly not control, is acceptable. Any vision of Westminster type parliament or a US style Congress is laughable. Some kind of national council or forum will emerge although not in a form which we would describe as necessarily numerically democratic or even majority rule. The only thing that unifies the country is a hatred of occupation by any form of foreigners. The British learned that in the 19th century, the Russians in the 20th and the British and Americans are relearning it in the 21st. If only more of our leaders had listened during their school history lessons. One would have thought that at least Fettes in Edinburgh (Blair) and Eton (Cameron) would have dinned it into their pupils better. Maybe history was programmed into the immediately after lunch slot?
SOMALIA: Pirate activity appears to be down, possibly as result of more ships carrying their own armed security people. Sensibly nobody is saying much about who is doing what but it is reasonable to assume that, EU naval vessels apart, shoot to kill and "Don't ask, don't tell" are more prevalent than before. The Kenyan army has been pressing Al Shabaab and there is an objective to drive the terrorists out of Kismayu. Al Shabaab have declared war on Kenya and Saturday's bomb in a Nairobi bus station can be seen as a declaration of intent. Kenya's tourism business in particular holds its breath. Meanwhile Mogadishu, uneasy though it is, has begun to resume some appearance of normality.The rapidy expanding Turkish Airlines has begun a twice weekly scheduled service from Ankara to the city. There is no pleasing everyone though. Al Shabaab have accused the Turks of bringing in goods to compete with local traders and out of date foodstuffs to poison the population.
That is a quick update of some things picked up in a scan around the world's horizons. There's much more happening out there and at home of course and we will revert to some of them as they come into post holiday focus. The world is never boring.
Saturday, 11 February 2012
Twiga on Holiday!
Apologies for the current quiet spell for new posts but Twiga is currently holidaying and viewing the world from the savannas of native African territory. As result new posts will be intermittent through to the end of the first week of March when there will be many 360 degree views to report.
Meanwhile the UK and world nonsenses continue regardless. The Syrian cities are on the brink of becoming new Sarajevos while the world, paralysed by the UN's deference to undemocratic countries large and small stands back and watches. We could be on the brink of one or more major scenes of human slaughter. In the UK the saga of changing managers of the national football team seems to be a bigger preoccupation for many of the media. The outgoing man has said "I'm fed up with this ,- I'm out of here" ( and who can blame him) while another veteran and fresh from a successful court appearance on another small matter has said sort of "Don't mind if I do". Comedy indeed.
Other things have sadly been much less comic. In the words of McArthur "We shall return" to them soon,- and find some good things too. Meanwhile back to this acacia tree.
Meanwhile the UK and world nonsenses continue regardless. The Syrian cities are on the brink of becoming new Sarajevos while the world, paralysed by the UN's deference to undemocratic countries large and small stands back and watches. We could be on the brink of one or more major scenes of human slaughter. In the UK the saga of changing managers of the national football team seems to be a bigger preoccupation for many of the media. The outgoing man has said "I'm fed up with this ,- I'm out of here" ( and who can blame him) while another veteran and fresh from a successful court appearance on another small matter has said sort of "Don't mind if I do". Comedy indeed.
Other things have sadly been much less comic. In the words of McArthur "We shall return" to them soon,- and find some good things too. Meanwhile back to this acacia tree.
Sunday, 22 January 2012
Sunday Quickie- Ashdown advises.......
.......that the proposed £26k per household limit on benefits claims is not a good idea.
That has every chance of meaning that it must be a very good one.
That has every chance of meaning that it must be a very good one.
Tuesday, 17 January 2012
Education, Education,Education..........
.. so said Tony Blair at the start of his heady first term of office as British Prime Minister heading up the then exciting and shiny New Labour.
He was right. Good education, and particularly state education, is key to Britain pulling itself out of its trademark quagmire of a class ridden, socially and divided society which has hauled it downwards into underperformance and its historic problems of under achievement and poverty.
Michael Gove's current efforts to do something about it in state schools (it is generally , but not always, done anyway in the private sector) are resolute and progressive in that they put the interests of the children way ahead of those of the teachers. At last here is someone who proposes to tackle a problem everyone has always known about,-that of the poor performing or even hopeless teacher. They do exist and they blight the lives of those subjected to them. Thanks to the power of the unions and timidity of many head teachers it has been almost impossible to deal with them and few are ever actually sacked. Some are encouraged to leave but are provided with references which enable them to go on and inflict their inadequacies on other pupils somewhere else.
Gove is proposing to take the issue by the scruff of the neck and make it possible to dismiss a poor performer within a term rather than a year. This is excellent for pupils, parents and the standing of the teaching profession itself. As such it might reasonably expect a warm welcome from all quarters.
Not so. Given the opportunity to embrace a new, happier and better world in which children have the best chance to thrive at school, the unions have opted as ever to defend the barricades of the supply side,-their members as employees rather than the same people and others as customers of education. Their attitude is the same as encountered right across the spectrum of all activities,- "You will have the quality we say you can have, not a jot more." All very Soviet in style. As result they have labelled this initiative as "A bullies charter". They love the word bully. It crops up in all sorts of disputes as part of a bid for the moral high ground. Any union member who has tried to stand out against the crowd in an industrial dispute knows what bullying really is. In reality the idea that they might be positioned as a much bruised David fighting a Goliath on behalf of their members has long been and remains ludicrous. The truth here is that they are fighting for themselves and their membership numbers. It is these which make them viable as businesses. The fight for the vast majority of their members and the rights of everyone to the best possible education schools of all kinds can provide seems to be out of their radar range. maybe it's the concept they struggle with. Their simple overriding interest in power and control is further demonstrated today by some of their very hostile comments about Ed Miliband who they regard as their appointee (as indeed he was) daring to say that he agrees with the needs for "cuts" and the public sector wage freeze. They certainly aren't looking to play any part in the revival of a feel good factor in the near future. No change then and no search for a new and relevant role in designing a new and better Britain,-just a hankering for the broken down old one.
He was right. Good education, and particularly state education, is key to Britain pulling itself out of its trademark quagmire of a class ridden, socially and divided society which has hauled it downwards into underperformance and its historic problems of under achievement and poverty.
Michael Gove's current efforts to do something about it in state schools (it is generally , but not always, done anyway in the private sector) are resolute and progressive in that they put the interests of the children way ahead of those of the teachers. At last here is someone who proposes to tackle a problem everyone has always known about,-that of the poor performing or even hopeless teacher. They do exist and they blight the lives of those subjected to them. Thanks to the power of the unions and timidity of many head teachers it has been almost impossible to deal with them and few are ever actually sacked. Some are encouraged to leave but are provided with references which enable them to go on and inflict their inadequacies on other pupils somewhere else.
Gove is proposing to take the issue by the scruff of the neck and make it possible to dismiss a poor performer within a term rather than a year. This is excellent for pupils, parents and the standing of the teaching profession itself. As such it might reasonably expect a warm welcome from all quarters.
Not so. Given the opportunity to embrace a new, happier and better world in which children have the best chance to thrive at school, the unions have opted as ever to defend the barricades of the supply side,-their members as employees rather than the same people and others as customers of education. Their attitude is the same as encountered right across the spectrum of all activities,- "You will have the quality we say you can have, not a jot more." All very Soviet in style. As result they have labelled this initiative as "A bullies charter". They love the word bully. It crops up in all sorts of disputes as part of a bid for the moral high ground. Any union member who has tried to stand out against the crowd in an industrial dispute knows what bullying really is. In reality the idea that they might be positioned as a much bruised David fighting a Goliath on behalf of their members has long been and remains ludicrous. The truth here is that they are fighting for themselves and their membership numbers. It is these which make them viable as businesses. The fight for the vast majority of their members and the rights of everyone to the best possible education schools of all kinds can provide seems to be out of their radar range. maybe it's the concept they struggle with. Their simple overriding interest in power and control is further demonstrated today by some of their very hostile comments about Ed Miliband who they regard as their appointee (as indeed he was) daring to say that he agrees with the needs for "cuts" and the public sector wage freeze. They certainly aren't looking to play any part in the revival of a feel good factor in the near future. No change then and no search for a new and relevant role in designing a new and better Britain,-just a hankering for the broken down old one.
Friday, 13 January 2012
The parocial politics of British transport policy. What they mean- and the risks.
British Transport Secretary Juntine Greening's go-ahead for the new HS2 High Speed rail link initially between London and Birmingham with later extensions to Heathrow from the southern end and Manchester, Leeds and ultimtely possibly points north and Scottish from the northern, came as a welcome relief.
Two previous decisions, the one saying "Never" to the building of a third runway at Heathrow and the much smaller but still important rejection of the low cost plan for a rail link between Heathrow and the 3rd rail electric railway network south of the airport, west to Reading and east back to London's Waterloo looked very politically orientated towards rewarding and encouraging Conservative voters in sometimes closely contested west London constituencies, not least those of Ms Greening and her predecessor, Philip Hammond.
The cancellation of the 3rd Heathrow runway, already given the go-ahead by Labour's forward looking Lord Adonis (also the prime mover of HS2), was a disastrous and nakedly political and parochial vote-grabbing promise by David Cameron before the May 2010 General Election. It was also electorally unnecessary. It was the epitome of vision-free Little England thinking and pointed worryingly towards the lack of any political philosophy about building for the country's future. Worse still, it did not point towards any alternative other than the decline of London as a world airline and business centre and hub. It was electioneering at its worst and if uncorrected it will cost UK Plc billions at an ever increasing rate over years to come.
The cancellation by Hammond of the southern Heathrow rail connection was also dire. A Works Order was imminent and the digging not far off when the Secretary of State brought it to a juddering halt. The problem? Traffic congestion and delays if a major level crossing in the middle of his constituency had to close 4 more times every hour. That would have cost him a few hard times at local social occasions.
On the back of these two decisions, the prospects for HS 2 did not look good. There has been and continues to be almost hysterical opposition to the project particularly from Conservative constituencies and Councils in Buckhamshire, Oxfordshire and Northamptonshire. Further north, where the Tory constituencies begin to thin out, most MPs and Councils unsurprisingly want it. Megaphone level opposition and disinformation continue to flow and look like remaining as serious background noise as the project moves tortuously forward at the speed of a constipated snail over the next four years. That's the earliest the first sod might be cut. There have been threats by MPs to resign or at least abandon their posts (The Welsh Secretary) and voters to vote for someone else at the next election. Who? Ed Miliband? In the Chilterns? UKIP? Well, maybe but not in big enough quantities to dislodge the Tories. That little calculation may have swung the balance this time in favour of ignoring the sensitivities of the local constituencies. A few sops were thrown in to placate wealthy Tory interests,- Hartwell House saw its section of line bent a bit towards the much larger number of less well off/influential people in the a big new estate on the neighbouring fringe of Aylesbury and the short bit further out past Edgcote House was gently curved away to go closer to less affluent folks instead. The view down into the Vale of Aylesbury from Waddesdon Manor doesn't appear to have fared badly either, not that a distant railway line would have been intrusive anyway.
Transport is just one area of government/political activity. If these sorts of things appear to be happening in that quarter, what ,one speculates, is going on in others where local interests of both MPs and constituents, are involved ? The expenses scandal and public outcry last year showed indignation about any whiff of less than the highest standards of behaviour being shown by the elected representatives. Expenses are just one area of activity. Determination and execution of policy in the whole national interest rather than local or personal ones is another. Mr Cameron is on dangerous ground if he allows any chinks to appear in his once stated intention of cleaning up Westminster behaviours. The need/demand is for integrity. Let's say it again and spell it out slowly so there's no mistake. I-N-T-E-G-R-I-T-Y.
Two previous decisions, the one saying "Never" to the building of a third runway at Heathrow and the much smaller but still important rejection of the low cost plan for a rail link between Heathrow and the 3rd rail electric railway network south of the airport, west to Reading and east back to London's Waterloo looked very politically orientated towards rewarding and encouraging Conservative voters in sometimes closely contested west London constituencies, not least those of Ms Greening and her predecessor, Philip Hammond.
The cancellation of the 3rd Heathrow runway, already given the go-ahead by Labour's forward looking Lord Adonis (also the prime mover of HS2), was a disastrous and nakedly political and parochial vote-grabbing promise by David Cameron before the May 2010 General Election. It was also electorally unnecessary. It was the epitome of vision-free Little England thinking and pointed worryingly towards the lack of any political philosophy about building for the country's future. Worse still, it did not point towards any alternative other than the decline of London as a world airline and business centre and hub. It was electioneering at its worst and if uncorrected it will cost UK Plc billions at an ever increasing rate over years to come.
The cancellation by Hammond of the southern Heathrow rail connection was also dire. A Works Order was imminent and the digging not far off when the Secretary of State brought it to a juddering halt. The problem? Traffic congestion and delays if a major level crossing in the middle of his constituency had to close 4 more times every hour. That would have cost him a few hard times at local social occasions.
On the back of these two decisions, the prospects for HS 2 did not look good. There has been and continues to be almost hysterical opposition to the project particularly from Conservative constituencies and Councils in Buckhamshire, Oxfordshire and Northamptonshire. Further north, where the Tory constituencies begin to thin out, most MPs and Councils unsurprisingly want it. Megaphone level opposition and disinformation continue to flow and look like remaining as serious background noise as the project moves tortuously forward at the speed of a constipated snail over the next four years. That's the earliest the first sod might be cut. There have been threats by MPs to resign or at least abandon their posts (The Welsh Secretary) and voters to vote for someone else at the next election. Who? Ed Miliband? In the Chilterns? UKIP? Well, maybe but not in big enough quantities to dislodge the Tories. That little calculation may have swung the balance this time in favour of ignoring the sensitivities of the local constituencies. A few sops were thrown in to placate wealthy Tory interests,- Hartwell House saw its section of line bent a bit towards the much larger number of less well off/influential people in the a big new estate on the neighbouring fringe of Aylesbury and the short bit further out past Edgcote House was gently curved away to go closer to less affluent folks instead. The view down into the Vale of Aylesbury from Waddesdon Manor doesn't appear to have fared badly either, not that a distant railway line would have been intrusive anyway.
Transport is just one area of government/political activity. If these sorts of things appear to be happening in that quarter, what ,one speculates, is going on in others where local interests of both MPs and constituents, are involved ? The expenses scandal and public outcry last year showed indignation about any whiff of less than the highest standards of behaviour being shown by the elected representatives. Expenses are just one area of activity. Determination and execution of policy in the whole national interest rather than local or personal ones is another. Mr Cameron is on dangerous ground if he allows any chinks to appear in his once stated intention of cleaning up Westminster behaviours. The need/demand is for integrity. Let's say it again and spell it out slowly so there's no mistake. I-N-T-E-G-R-I-T-Y.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)