Time to bury Milton Keynes?

Given the intellectual and political triumph of free market economics in the 1980s, I was always rather surprised that the Thatcher Government allowed the last of the new towns to be called Milton Keynes as opposed to Milton Friedman. Maybe now that the great economist has died, someone will suggest renaming it in his honour.

It wouldn't be the first time. Until the 1970s Milton Keynes did not actually exist as a place, being then three separate villages called Wolverton, Stony Stratford and Great Linford. There's an old family picture somewhere of my uncle standing beside the village signpost before it was swallowed up by the sprawl.

Justice for Mirza

Regular readers will know my views on the death penalty, so I was mightily relieved to learn that the death sentence imposed on British-born Mirza Tahir Hussain by an Islamic court in Pakistan has been commuted to life imprisonment.

This is almost certainly down to the recent intervention of the Prince of Wales, demonstrating that he has his uses in spite of the predictable sniping about him from those who seem to think now would be a good time to start dispensing with British traditions.

But a special mention should also go to Tim Ireland of Bloggerheads for this piece, entitled Bloody Darkies, highlighting the initial failure of the British press to report Mirza's plight.

It is probably the best piece of online journalism I have read on any blog over the past 12 months.

BlogGems

An occasional series dedicated to bringing the choicest comments from the blogosphere to a slightly wider audience.
No 1.

"The primary advantage of Labourhome over ConservativeHome is that LH is not dedicated to lining up the entire British working class and buggering them one by one."

Alex Hilton, owner of Labour Home and Recess Monkey, interviewed on the Mars Hill blog.

But whose Big Clunking Fist?

The next election contest, said Tony Blair yesterday, will be "a flyweight versus a heavyweight." He said of David Cameron: "However much he dances around the ring beforehand he will come in reach of a big clunking fist and, you know what, he'll be out on his feet, carried out of the ring."

He's right about Cameron, of course. The public will find him out before long and the Tories will discover that they have massively overestimated the impact that Blair's departure will have on their electoral prospects.

But did Blair's comments constitute the long-awaited endorsement of Gordon Brown, as seems to be the consensus this morning, or could it be, as The Sun suggests, that John Reid could still be the one to send the Boy David crashing to the canvas?

After all, as the commentator Peter Dobbie wrote a few years' back, the Home Secretary does have something of a reputation as a pugilist in Westminster circles.

What does seem to be clear is that Blair has endorsed Brown or Reid, as opposed to any other candidate - which is exactly how it should be. The two of them are head and shoulders above any other candidates when it comes to experience, gravitas, and the ability to command an audience, and if there is to be a contest, then those should be the two names on the ballot paper.

In other words, it's surely now time for Hutton, Milburn, Johnson and all the other John Major-alikes to crawl back under their stones and let the real men fight it out.

Reid still keeping options open

There has been much speculation in the blogosphere over recent days concerning John Reid's intentions towards the Labour leadership, for instance:

PoliticalBetting.com
Politaholic
The UK Daily Pundit
Guido Fawkes.

Two things appear to have kicked it all off - firstly Gordon Brown's rather ill-judged kneejerk reaction to Friday's acquittal of BNP leader Nick Griffin - which managed the not-inconsiderable feat of making Reid look like a liberal - together with a view in certain influential quarters that Brown will invariably end up becoming enmeshed in the loans-for-lordships affair.

I make no comment on any of this, other than to say that I don't believe Reid has ever ruled himself in or out of the leadership battle. As I wrote HERE ten days ago, "Gordon has the conditional backing of everyone that really matters. But they still reserve the right to challenge him if it all goes wrong."

Certainly this piece in yesterday's Guardian by Jackie Ashley - a journalist with close links to the Chancellor's camp - suggests that the Brownites are taking absolutely nothing for granted.

November 15 Update: Is the heavily law-and-order orientated content of today's Queen's Speech designed to help a Reid leadership bid? Mike Smithson thinks so.

All shades of opinion

I came across the new blog aggregator Political Opinions a week or so ago and added a link, and it seems that many other top bloggers including Dizzy and Jonathan Calder have since been doing the same.

The site has been put together by Grant Bowskill and I have to say I am fairly impressed. Design-wise, it is certainly a big improvement on UK Political Blogs and its search facility is far advanced, enabling users to search specifically for Conservative Blogs or Journalist Blogs, for instance.

At my suggestion, Grant agreed to put in direct hyperlinks to the most popular categories and I have accordingly added these to my blog as well under the relevant sections. For the benefit of those who can't be bothered to scroll all that way down, they are:

Conservative Blogs
Labour Blogs
Lib Dem Blogs
Journalist Blogs

There's also a section called Commentator Blogs which I think means blogs written by people who are neither journalists nor overtly party political.

Contest lacks the Footie factor

There are two recurring themes I have noticed in recent blog postings about the Labour leadership contest. Firstly, the unfavourable comparisons that have been made between the current crop of contenders and the stellar line-up in the race to succeed Harold Wilson in 1976, and secondly, the related issue of the current lack of a recognised leader of the left.

As Mike Smithson pointed out on PoliticalBetting.com today, the '74-76 Wilson Government contained an extraordinary concentration of political talent, with no fewer than six Cabinet "big beasts" putting themselves forward for the leadership.

They included both Michael Foot and Tony Benn from the left of the party - two acknowledged giants besides whom the current-day lefty hopefuls Michael Meacher and John McDonnell are mere political pygmies.

So is it because the left has been effectively marginalised under the current leadership - "Exit Hard Left Pursued By Blair" as one memorable newspaper headline put it a few years back? Or has the left just been desperately unlucky in that all those who might have become its standard-bearers have, in some way or another, fallen by the wayside?

I would contend that, by and large, it's the latter. While Mr Blair clearly does have a very different attitude to party management to Mr Wilson, preferring to lead from the front rather than trying to hold warring party factions together, I do not think he would have excluded the likes of Robin Cook or Clare Short from his Cabinet had they not decided to exclude themselves.

Either of Cook or Short could have gone on to establish themselves as the leader of the anti-war left, and thereby become a significant player in the forthcoming contest. But Cook sadly died, while Short threw away her position by her increasingly bizarre behaviour.

But if Gordon Brown's chances have been boosted by the lack of an obvious rival from the left, he has been even more fortunate in the trials and tribulations that have befallen his potential opponents on the right of the party.

If Alan Milburn had lived up to his early promise and not flounced out of government twice, if David Blunkett hadn't self-destructed after straying too far from his working-class roots, if Charles Clarke had developed some political finesse to go with his undoubted ability....then Brown might now be facing a much stiffer fight.

The 1976 contest was of course won by the centrist figure of James Callaghan after the two wings of the party cancelled eachother out. In particular, he benefited from the divisions between Roy Jenkins, Denis Healey and Tony Crosland, the Gaitskellite Friends and Rivals who could not agree which of them would be the candidate.

What today's Labour Party really lacks is not so much a Foot as a Crosland, someone who can provide some sort of intellectual framework for a left-of-centre government in the early 21st century. David Miliband probably comes closest - but he is one for next time round.

Blair cannot escape shadow of sleaze

Avoiding the temptation to write about the US elections, I returned to thye cash-for-questions affair in my latest column and accompanying Podcast this weekend.

As Mike Smithson speculates, the ongoing inquiry - which ministerial spinners assured us would be completed by now - could play an increasing important part in determining Tony Blair's departure date.

"Given the rate at which the wheels of British justice turn, it is reasonably unlikely that any charges will have been brought by the time Mr Blair leaves office as scheduled next summer.

"But the prospect of having the ongoing inquiry overshadow his final months in office has led some to speculate that Mr Blair could yet surprise us all and go early."

Has Johnson really quit the race?

Unlike Ben Brogan, I don't seriously believe Alan Johnson plans to do a U-turn and come back into the Labour leadership race - but I have to say that his new campaign website launched today had me wondering a bit.....

Yesterday, Johnson made clear he would be backing Gordon Brown, describing the Chancellor as a "towering political figure" and praising his "gravitas, experience, and intellect."

Fair enough, but somebody should have told the person putting together the media section of his new website which seems to be slightly off-message in this respect.

It currently contains the following stories, all seemingly promoting the idea of Johnson as a candidate not for the deputy leadership, but as a rival to Gordon for the top job.

"Alan Johnson displayed his leadership credentials to the Labour Party conference yesterday when he announced plans to restore confidence in school exams and to help children in care." Greg Hurst, The Times

"When the backstabbing finally stops, could Alan Johnson be the man who delivers the fatal blow to Brown?" Rachel Cooke, The Observer

"For many Labour MPs he represents the perfect alternative to the Chancellor, being everything that Mr Brown is not." Anthony Browne, The Times

"Gordon Brown's enemies are pinning their hopes on Alan Johnson." 'Bagehot," The Economist.

November 13 Update: This was post was picked up over the weekend by both PoliticalBetting.com and The Daily, both of whom provide interesting angles on it. On balance I tend towards The Daily's verdict that it was an unintended hangover from Johnson's earlier plans to contest the leadership, rather than Mike's interpretation that AJ might re-enter the race at some stage.

Johnson wakes up and smells the coffee

Education Secretary Alan Johnson has now formally ruled himself out of contention for the Labour leadership and announced he is contesting only the deputy's post - not at the Press Gallery Lunch as speculated on The Daily but in an exclusive interview with the BBC. That will piss a few people off for a start.

I must confess to being surprised. I am after all on record as having said that Johnson would "do a Prescott" and stand for both posts, while making the deputy leadership his main target. I wasn't the only one who thought this though....

What really did for him I think was his poorly received speech at the Labour Conference. He must have realised at that point that he didn't really have the support in the party to mount a meaningful challenge.

His withdrawal and declaration of support for Gordon Brown could have one of two effects. It could demonstrate that the momentum behind Brown is now such that he is unstoppable, or alternatively it could concentrate minds in the "Anyone But Gordon" camp to the effect that either (but not both) of John Hutton or Alan Milburn now emerge as serious contenders.

My assessment of the situation is that, with more than half the Cabinet on his side and the opposition to him fragmenting, Brown is looking pretty unbeatable, but politics abhors a vacuum and if at any point Gordon is seen as in any way vulnerable, someone somewhere will step into it. Even a very reluctant David Miliband might be persuaded if the alternative is a Labour election defeat.

A few weeks back, I produced this breakdown of where the various Cabinet members stand on the issue, and I think it's now time for an update.

Cabinet members explicitly and publicly backing Gordon Brown for the leadership

John Prescott
Margaret Beckett
Peter Hain
David Miliband
Hilary Benn
Alan Johnson

Cabinet members who have not expressed a public preference but who are known allies of Mr Brown

Jack Straw
Alistair Darling
Douglas Alexander
Des Browne
Ruth Kelly
Stephen Timms

Cabinet members who are currently remaining neutral or who have expressed no known public or private preference

Tony Blair
Patricia Hewitt
Hilary Armstrong
Jacqui Smith
Valerie Amos

Cabinet members who, while not allies of Mr Brown, have signalled that they will not run against him for the leadership

John Reid
Hazel Blears

Cabinet members who have privately expressed doubts about Mr Brown and who could reliably be expected to support "Anyone but Gordon" - if such a candidate exists

John Hutton
Charles Falconer
Tessa Jowell

Incendiary devices

Okay, so Bonfire Night has been and gone, but I was heartened to come across this post today from the influential Labour blogger Kerron Cross, calling for a ban on the general sale of fireworks.

Says Kerron: "I don't really understand the arguments for keeping fireworks on sale to the public when you look at the nuisance, injuries and disruption they cause. I welcome the Government clamp down on sales but...we need to ban the general sale of these devices - they should only be used by trained professionals at properly organised events."

I couldn't agree more. Apart fom the noise nuisance of having fireworks going off up to a month either side of November 5, there is absolutely no need for them to be on general sale given the growth of organised events. I went to an absolutely marvellous one on Sunday night at Belper Town Football Club which had everything you need - a great bonfire, plenty of food and drink, and a stunning diplay set to the music of Jeff Wayne's War of the Worlds.

Anyone in any doubt about the destruction fireworks can wreak in the wrong hands should read this horrific tale from the pages of the Blackpool Gazette.

This blog is a Mid-term Elections Free Zone

I have never really understood American politics. Never understood how an allegedly educated country could possibly elect as its president someone who failed to remember the names of other world leaders during a TV interview, and certainly never understood how someone who lied about never having had sexual relations with a White House intern could possibly be allowed to remain president after being found out.

I could go on. I don't understand, for instance, why people of a generally Christian worldview like myself tend to vote for centre-left parties in the UK, but invariably vote for the Republicans in the States.

So because I don't get American politics, and because I don't really want to take the trouble to try to get it, I am hereby declaring this blog a Mid-Term Elections Free Zone (a former editor of mine will appreciate the irony.)

For those of you who feel compelled to know more of what is going on over the other side of the pond, and what it might mean for us back home, I direct you to the BBC, to PoliticalBetting.com, and the good people at Blairwatch.

Spin cycle

One of the best blogs around at the moment is Dizzy Thinks, which today features this little tale about the announcement of some Government funding for the nine English regions "to tackle local congestion and inform the debate on a national road pricing scheme."

As Dizzy rightly points out, the sum of money in question - £7.5m - actually only works out at around £800,000 per region, a figure which "wouldn't pay for much more than the hot air consultancy fees" and which compares with the £200m cost of introducing congestion charging in London.

"However, the real killer comes in the second paragraph of the press release. It says the "money comes from the second round of an £18 million fund, set up in July 2005". So errr. hang on second... it's not a further £7.5 million at all, it's the same money from a lump sum already agreed and announced."

A story of little consequence in itself, then, but one which illustrates a wider truth about the Blair Government and its use of the technique of "repeat messaging."

This was an idea originally developed by New Labour in opposition which they have carried with them all the way though government. It works on the Orwellian premise that if you repeat something often enough, the people will have no alternative but to believe it.

Thus the life-cycle of a typical Government announcement would look something like this:

1. A forthcoming Government initiative is leaked to a friendly newspaper. The story is neither officially denied nor confirmed, but by giving someone an exclusive, it guarantees big headlines for the story in at least one newspaper and guaranteed follow-ups in all the rest.

2. A few weeks later, the story is confirmed in a ministerial press release, which receives little coverage other than perhaps a few pars in the Guardian's Society supplement.

3. Gordon Brown reannounces it in the Budget. Close analysis of Gordon's Budget speeches show that most of the contents, especially those relating to spending announcements rather than taxation, have already been announced.

4. The relevant Government department then produces its own separate release setting out further details of the Budget "announcement," followed by

5. Nine separate regional press releases setting out what the Budget "announcement" will mean for each region, which are usually identical apart from the insertion of the words North-East/North-West/East Midlands etc.

6. The money finally comes on stream, enabling the relevant department to announce it yet again.

7. Regional ministerial visits are organised around the announcement, showing how it is being spent in a particular region with acompanying photo-ops. Theoretically, there could be as many as nine of these.

8. The second round of funding comes on stream, as in Dizzy's example above, potentially kicking off the whole process again.

Of course, like much else about New Labour's news management techniques, the whole policy of repeat messaging has backfired spectacularly. The one question journalists always ask about these kind of announcements is: "Is it new money?"

When, nine times out of 10, the answer to that question turns out to be no, it becomes very easy to conclude that nothing the Government announces is funded from new money, with the result that even genuinely new announcements are then routinely ignored.

I think the record for Government reannouncements is held by the launch of the Regional Venture Capital Fund, which began life in the Department of Environment, Transport and Regions, and was then transferred after the 2001 election to the DTI which decided to reannounce it all over again.

Even though it was an initiative designed to help poorer regions like the North-East, I must confess that, after the first five times, I simply gave up on it.