Wednesday, October 04, 2006

Tories still don't get the English Question

To be fair, they are not alone. Labour and the Liberal Democrats have demonstrated in recent months that they don't really get it either. But David Cameron's comments yesterday indicating support for the ultmately unworkable concept of "English votes for English matters" is a real missed political opportunity in my book.

Regular readers of this blog will know that I have long advocated an English Parliament as the only way of answering the so-called West Lothian Question, although I prefer to call it the English Question as it is England which is the missing piece in the federal jigsaw that the Blair administration has created.

I don't want an English Parliament because I want to create another layer of politicians, but simply because I want to see the four nations of the UK treated fairly and equally. Any English Parliament would have to be accompanied by the abolition of the iniquitous Barnett Formula that gives the rest of the UK a huge inbuilt advantage in public spending-per-head that is no longer justified by their relative levels of need.

More than that, I believe the idea could have great electoral appeal in England. Labour's stubborn refusal to address the issue is a sitting duck for the Tories - especially in view of the overwhelming likelihood that the next Prime Minister will either be the MP for Kircaldy and Cowdenbeath or the MP for Hamilton North and Bellshill.

Mr Cameron's comments appear to have pre-empted the conclusions of the so-called "Democracy Taskforce" which has been set up under Ken Clarke to look at this and other issues arising from Labour's half-baked constitutional reforms.

It now appears that the king of the Tory blogosphere himself, Iain Dale, is going to launch some sort of campaign to get his party to take the issue more seriously. The very best of luck to him.

unique visitors counter

Tuesday, October 03, 2006

George Osborne should be utterly ashamed of himself. And so should Mary Ann Sieghart

Gideon "George" Osbourne, Tory toff and Shadow Chancellor, wants to have a debate with the Tory right about tax cuts because it will show that the party is changing. What he doesn't want to do is have a debate about his use of the word autistic as a term of political abuse towards his opponents, in this case Gordon Brown.

It wasn't all Osbourne's fault. The word was put into his mouth by the Blairite journalist Mary Ann Sieghart who has penned her own piece justicative HERE.

Sieghart, who was once so close to Mr Tony as to aspire to a job in the No 10 policy unit, gaily reassures us that "autistic" is an epithet that "plenty of politicians and journalists" have used about the Chancellor. "He does, after all, have an obsessive personality and rather low emotional intelligence. That is why the audience laughed: Mr Osborne’s joke resonated with them."

In other words, because it's Gordon Brown we're attacking, that's okay then.

For my part, I prefer the verdict of Nick Hornby, father of a 13-year-old autistic son, who said: "George Osborne doesn't seem to have noticed that most people over the age of eight no longer use serious and distressing disabilities as a way of taunting people."

If this is the "modern, inclusive" face of the Tory Party, it is clear that it still has a very long way to go.

October 5 Update: Sieghart has now written another piece in defence of her actions in which she blames the whole thing on Evening Standard Political Editor Joe Murphy, one of the finest reporters in the Parliamentary Lobby.

I know who I'd rather believe....

unique visitors counter

Monday, October 02, 2006

That Cameron speech in full

1. He's against tax cuts.
2. He's in favour of "trusting ordinary people to make decisions about their own lives."
3. He's against people "banging on about Europe."
4. He's in favour of sunshine.
5. Er, that's it.

If you really must, you can read a fuller version HERE, including the immortal closing line "the quiet man is here to stay and he's turning up the volume" "let sunshine win the day."

unique visitors counter

Labour's uneasy peace

The conference caravan may have moved on to the Tories in Bournemouth, but for the benefit of those who want a recap of last week's events in Manchester, my Labour Conference Podcast is now live.

As the great Mr Rawnsley said yesterday, the conference was ulimately a fudge that didn't really resolve either of the two big questions facing Labour - when is Mr Blair finally going to step down, and who is going to replace him?

"The warring factions have made their peace, but just like when the mafia hoods made their peace with eachother in the Godfather movies, it is a very fragile peace."

You can listen to the podcast HERE, view the text version HERE, and subscribe to the podcast by copying THIS SHORTCUT into your feed reader or listening software.

Thanks by the way to the podlounge.com for including my Week in Politics podcast in their directory. It lists all 36 of my podcasts HERE.

I expect I'll get around to posting on the Tories when I can be arsed....

unique visitors counter

Scariest song ever?

For all those in need of a break from the party conferences... there's a really good thread developing over on The Observer blog in response to a request for nominations for the scariest song ever.

As the illustration suggests, my vote has gone to Pink Floyd's Another Brick in the Wall Part Two, largely on account of the Gerald Scarfe video portraying a teacher putting his pupils through a mincer and an endless procession of hammers marching in unison. It may seem a bit tame now, but at the time it came out it was truly shocking, although the fact that it was scary didn't stop it being a great piece of music.

I have been amazed by the number of nominations for such 70s ephemera as Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep, Seasons in the Sun, Two Little Boys, Billy Don't be a Hero and even Puff the Magic Dragon. Were these songs really scary as opposed to just sad?

Anyway, for anyone with more than a passing interest in music, the full thread is well worth a read. Hat Tip: David Gladwin.

unique visitors counter

Friday, September 29, 2006

Labour contest: How is the Cabinet shaping up?

I began this week's postings on the Labour Conference by posing the question who is backing Gordon Brown for PM among the Press. I end it by looking at how much support he - or any other candidate - can expect from within the Cabinet.

For this purpose I have divided Labour's 23-strong top team into four groups ranging from Gordon's most public and enthusiastic supporters to the small faction who seem determined to stop him at any price.

It will immediately be seen that the Chancellor is in a very strong position, and that's reckoning without the cash for honours affair bundling Mr Blair out of office early after all.....

I will be updating this list regularly as the contest draws nearer and if and when the public positions of any Cabinet members change. I have a slight hunch that Alan Johnson might well be the next one to endorse him.

Cabinet members explicitly and publicly backing Gordon Brown for the leadership

John Prescott
Margaret Beckett
Peter Hain
David Miliband

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, including those required to do so by virtue of their position

Tony Blair
Alan Johnson
Patricia Hewitt
Hazel Blears
Hilary Benn
Hilary Armstrong
Jacqui Smith
Valerie Amos

Cabinet members who have privately expressed doubts about Mr Brown and who can reliably be expected to support "Anyone but Gordon"

John Reid
John Hutton
Charles Falconer
Tessa Jowell

unique visitors counter