The Stilettoed Socialist

I've moved!

2010-02-14T21:12:00.002Z

For my new look blog... visit me on http://stilettoedsocialist.wordpress.com/

Change we see...

2010-01-25T16:32:00.003Z

An excellent campaign from Labour HQ has been going on for quite a while now, see more about it here, where anyone can send in photos of the changes we see after 12 years of Labour government. Images of new schools, hospitals and children's centres have flooded in and continue to do so. I absolutely love this campaign, concrete evidence for all to see of the effects of Labour investment, benefiting the many and not the few. Our principles, that people like me bang on about so often, in action. To those on the right, in the Liberal Democrats (as mentioned below) and even on the far left, who say Labour has let down this country, I'd ask them to take a look. A picture says a thousand words.

It would be great to see people spread their experiences of the change Britain has seen in the past 12 years on forums like Twitter, Facebook and crucially amongst their friends and family. This campaign must remind people of our record and why we deserve their vote, a vote that takes 30 seconds, but that lasts 5 years (that one courtesy of David Tennant).

Last night I might have to admit, I lost it a little. As we get so close to a decision on the future of this country being made, I see a party who think they are about to cruise into Downing Street on the back of negativity, disillusionment and a reluctant acceptance of the fallacy that a change of government will "freshen things up", it's the "inevitable political cycle". To that I say, in an ever so profound way, b*ll*cks. The images from the #changewesee campaign are what government is about, concrete improvements to societies who rely on government intervention to keep them turning. I ask you what a #changewesee campaign for the Conservative administration from '79 to '97 would look like? Ugly. What do we get when we want to see "new faces" for the sake of it, when we overlook policy promises or political ideology? Boris.

So as this video from 2005 which I was watching last night suggests: if you value it, vote for it. I'll be tweeting Labour achievements that mean a lot to me under #changewesee .This is campaigning at it's best.

All you need is love

2010-01-21T22:18:00.007Z

Harriet Harman will tell Compass tomorrow of Labour plans to tackle inequality. Unlike Cameron’s “all you need is love” agenda, Harman will face reality head on. Wait, before you think I’m about to write a press release, I’m not, stay with me. This is not an easy way out for Labour. In underlining what Government can do to alleviate inequality Harman is admitting, as Labour should be doing that, frankly, we haven’t done enough.

In the past few decades governments have, as Polly Toynbee puts it, let the camel train stretch too far. Those at the front are now so far ahead that those at the back are left with a cloud of dust in their faces, out of view of the galloping frontrunners. New Labour assumed that the gap between the two was pretty much irrelevant, as long as those at the back were advancing. To some extent, that could be argued to be the case.

Labour has ensured those at the bottom have been pulled up. Half a million children out of poverty, the minimum wage, Sure Start, not to mention the revolution in our public services, have made sure that those with very little are no longer on their knees, where the last Tory government left them in '97. I want to emphasise that point strongly. When Liberal Democrats like Evan Harris suggest Labour’s time in government has been an unending sequence of disappointments (in a Fabian conference session, where Will Straw fought Labour's corner beautifully), I want to scream. At him. How dare he. It hasn’t and those who rely on the great changes Labour have implemented in the past 12 years, know so. Patients in waiting rooms, cancer sufferers, kids in newly built or refurbished classrooms... I could go on.

But as Labour enter into this fight, we must seize an all more radical approach to inequality. Where lifting those up from the bottom is no longer enough, and where we recognise that the length of that camel train is pivotal to the cohesiveness of our society. Harman recognises that, and so does Gordon. In emphasising the impact of socio-economic factors on the lives of future generations, Labour is doing what good government should be doing, facing up to reality, head on. The fear of the “you’ve had 12 years” reposte should not stop Labour admitting where we could have gone further, harnessing the progressive agenda and running with it. It’ll be tough, accusations of class war will fly. Let them. A mother’s hug isn’t going to solve social inequality, and it is a lazy, easy and very Conservative way out to suggest it will.

Smile

2010-01-20T17:06:00.004Z

A few things that made me smile today.

One post here from a young activist who has decided to join the Labour Party, partly because of the power of Twitter. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it Peter Kellner!

@collectormaniac says

"The fact is, Labour activists are some of the nicest people I’ve met, with some of the best opinions and finest arguments. I am proud to be part of a party that fights for equality and has done so much good for this country"

I couldn't agree more. The sense of belonging is partly why I am in the party I am, and Twitter, with it's online community, builds upon that, allowing someone who remains cynical about certain aspects of the party, to realise that there are those who share common goals and common worries, but knowing that belonging to a political party is the greatest act an individual can do to bring about change in this country. So a huge welcome to CollectorManiac (!) as she says, the future's red! And we like it!

According to a tweet I've seen today, mydavidcameron.com is now the most visited UK political site. Which is pretty extraordinary, and credit where it's due to it's creator. I found this one particulalrly amusing, probably because it's scarily accurate.

Right on recession, right on recovery

2010-01-20T13:07:00.005Z

Was struck by something today. Having heard the encouraging news that unemployment has fallen by 7,000, suggesting that the previous fall was not an anomaly but in fact a sign of a trend that we all hope continues, a tweet from @UKLabour flashed up on my screen. It linked to a Jobs Interactive Map, a fascinating comparative tool which allows us to see the difference in unemploylent figures between the most recent recession and the Tory recession of the 90s. The map is a glaringly obvious vindication of Gordon Brown and the Labour Party's tough action. Proving that investing in people, public services and job creation schemes is the best way to tackle a recession. That unemployment and risking the future of this generation, and future ones by proxy, is not and never can be a price worth paying.

I would like to make clear for any readers unsure about which party's policies on recession and recovery really work, that in EVERY SINGLE PART OF THE COUNTRY unemployment was worse under the last Tory recession than the most recent one.

Now this post may sound like a collection of soundbites, I really don't mean it to. Although I don't apologise for it. These facts should be on the tip of everyone's tongues, at the forefront of their minds, and should be guiding their hand when they get into the ballot box on polling day. It is not by chance that there are 450,000 more people in work than experts predicted at the time of the budget. It's not luck. It's the result of fast, decisive action in the face of financial collapse. ATM machines within 2 hours of being empty is no joke, as Gordon said on Saturday at the Fabians Conference, this past year has been the greatest possible rebuttal to those who say Government is always the problem. But then, I suppose it depends on which Government...

Thank God we'll never know what could have been...

2010-01-11T17:51:00.001Z

Will hopefully be firmly back in the blogging seat when I get back to laptop on Wednesay.

In the meantime, and yes I have already shamelessly plugged this article on Twitter today for it is a thing of pure beauty, have a read of solid gold Hutton http://bit.ly/66vfYA .

And before you choose 'change', think what it could entail...

Dominic

2010-01-04T17:12:00.005Z

I did say I didn't want to harp on about Polly Toynbee, but reading her Hard Work - Life in low pay Britain book in bed last night, I have a paragraph I'd like to remind her of.

Firstly, a little background, the book, rather brilliantly, details Polly's experiences of hard work on low pay (as the title suggests) in Britain, she is living on Clapham Park Estate, which at the time of writing, had been awarded £56 million as part of Blair's New Deal.

Dominic was a fellow resident who Toynbee got to know. Arriving in Britain from Nigeria as a student in 1970, he worked hard until his kidneys failed him, and was now too "weak to run for a bus" , living on incapacity benefit. I quote from her "Clapham Park Neighbours" chapter:

"He (Dominic) had been to a public meeting or two (re the New Deal grant for the estate) but was unsure what to believe. Essentially until he saw an entry-phone on our front door and central heating fitted in our cold flats he was disinclined to believe anything was changing for the better, even though the repainting of our block, inside and out, was already clearly under way...However I was surprised when he suddenly burst into a riff of optimism about this government: "I rate Tony Blair most highly", he said. "Almost as highly as I rated Harold Wilson. It was Margaret Thatcher that destroyed everything, and look, all around us here, this estate is part of her wreckage! Once we had caretakers on every block, but she took them away. She took everything away, cut everything." He was shaking with anger at the thought of her as he took his Labour Party membership card out of his wallet to wave at me with pride."

Maybe Polly could think of Dominic when writing her next column, and the millions like him, who rely on a united Labour Party fighting to govern. If he and the other residents of Clapham Park are forced to accept similar cuts and wreckage from a Cameron government, who have not learned the lessons from Thatcher, they would never forgive a Labour Party for turning inward now, instead of fighting tooth and nail until May. And they'd be right not to. So, this time, I think Polly's advice will, and must, fall on deaf ears.

Predictions for the People

2010-01-03T15:38:00.000Z

Here are my 2010 political predictions published today in the Sunday People. (Would link but haven't worked out how to do that yet on phone.) Missed Gordon on Marr today, Labour people on Twitter are telling me he did well, Tories that he did awfully. Just what I expected! Will have to watch when I get laptop back.

3 January 2010

THE PEOPLE looks into THE YEAR AHEAD
2010 is set to be a landmark year - and here The People's panel of experts give their predictions for the next 12 months. It will soon be General Election time and feisty political blogger Ellie Gellard gives her penetrating analysis of the political scene.

....

Politics by Ellie Gellard

What a disastrous year that was for politics. I predict 2010 will be better (which wouldn't be hard). This general election year should see a clean fight between the three major parties tearing apart policies not personalities.

The public needs its faith in politicians restored, not further destroyed. And here's some breaking news: the Lib Dems may serve a purpose in 2010.

With opinion polls as tumultuous as ever, and the Tories failing to seal the deal with the electorate, the time has come for the Lib Dems to hop down from the comfortable fence they have been perched on for so long.

If a hung parliament is really on the cards, Clegg's crew will have to decide which party has priorities closest to the ones which they hold dear. It's exciting isn't it - 2010 may be the year we find out the answer to the age-old question of what the Lib Dems are actually for.

I predict that all three of the current leaders will head their parties at the election but two will be gone after it. Politics is a rough sport.

Speaking of which, if the Tories get in, the Tory speaker will go. If Labour hold on, he'll stay. The Opposition really don't like him, bless, he's one of their own. Meanies.

Mandy (left) will earn himself another three titles in 2010. He hasn't got nearly enough.

The internet will play a huge role this year with politicians and activists tweeting and blogging their way through the campaign.

Though Hazel "YouTube if you want to" Blears may be sceptical, Brown, Clegg and Cameron must use the internet to its full potential. Expect online campaigning, debates and MPs fully into "engage" mode.

(NB I'm not sure about "penetrating political analysis" but there you go... And FYI Mandy isn't on the left [no political jokes required] I couldn't find the picture)

Who needs enemies...?

2010-01-02T17:49:00.001Z

I don't really want to waste time discussing Polly Toynbee's latest Guardian column here, but I should say the following. I am a big fan of Polly, I think her policy suggestions are usually spot on and her books, excellent. I think she has a strong moral compass which more often than not, means she advocates voting Labour. She recognises, like the Guardian apparently does, that this country is at it's strongest when the Labour party is at it's strongest. As a political commentator she has every right to call leaders of any political party on their policy decisions, and she does so. Most of the time I think she's dead right.

Her column today, in which she once again calls for Brown to go in a rather nasty manner has, however, made me lose a considerable amount of respect for her.

Gordon Brown is leading Labour into the fight of our lives at the next election. The feeling at conference and since is that we are up for it. Ready to fight, fully behind him. And we are. It does not help, in a media hostile to Gordon and Labour, for someone whom activists and supporters of our party regard highly, to once again call for division, splits and ousting of our leader. Naval gazing in a recession doesnt look too great. Gordon is not perfect, he is uncomfortable on camera. He is no showman. We know that. But he is fundamentally the right person to lead us into this monumental election. And if, which I do not for a moment believe, we end up with a Tory government in June, will Polly be happy in the knowledge she can say "I told you so"? No. She will be rightly distraught at the malicious cuts to public services and destruction of the fruits of Labour investment that will follow.

So could I suggest, Polly, that you give up your one woman (ok, maybe three-person with Clarke and Sheerman) attempt at ripping apart our PM, and join the fight for a better Britain? You have ideas we should use, appproaches we should adopt, but use your widely read column to do your bit for those who have no such voice...Not to personally attack someone who is tirelessly working to do just that.

Laptopless

2010-01-01T23:30:00.001Z

Have left laptop at home in London where I won't be for two more weeks. Someone has just told me I can blog on my iPhone, this is a test run....

Normal service will resume soon!

Virgin Voters

2009-12-15T19:19:00.007Z

And no, unlike some people have suggested, this has nothing to do with the Catholic Church.

Da yoof (it won't all be like this, I swear) of today are very much involved in politics. They just might not know it... from Scouts organising campaigns against the rain tax, to marchers on the Wave, to going to Copenhagen to rally for a deal - young people are perhaps more involved than ever. There are big causes to warrant involvement and climate change, for a topical example, perhaps has a certain resonance with the young. We're around on this planet (hopefully) for quite a while, and according to some predictions, if we carry on as we have been doing, it'll be a very different world when we shuffle off this mortal coil. This gets cheerier... I assure you.

In the 6 months leading up to the next election, big issues like these will be debated far and wide, hopefully minus Simon Cowell - you can imagine it can't you? Clegg gets knocked out (impartial hat is slipping, I know, it's only a metaphor) and we get to DEADLOCK with that heart beating music, Dermot has his arms around Gordon and Cameron, both sweating, waiting for Louis Walsh to decide the future of the country...

But really, Strictly Come Debating aside, issues will be firmly on the table. Which party will lead us out of the recovery in a sustainable and sensible way? Which party will ensure that those who can't afford to pay for the recession, don't? (I'm seriously trying to be impartial here, stop laughing at my efforts) Which party will invest in green technology and green jobs? Which party will secure necessary funding to ensure education continues to improve and more young people get the best possible start in life? These questions need answers. Our politicians will probably do their best to put forward the Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat solutions to the issues we face. But it probably won't be enough. It wasn't enough to get more than 60% of young people voting at the last General Election. If we follow politics we hear soundbites from all three parties so much that we can probably repeat them verbatim. If we don't follow politics, then many say they can hardly tell the difference - all three parties are "virtually the same". They're not, they're absolutely not, and this is where I finally get to Virgin Voters.

Virgin Voters is a site set up by Kerry McCarthy MP and myself to try and get young people talking to politicians. We want a conversation between people whose first GENERAL election will be in 2010, and the people looking for their votes. PPBs are great (particularly a certain recent one which I happened to quite like), debates on Newsnight are great, if you like that kind of thing... but we have to face the fact that although many of us delight in indulging in a little party political point scoring, it turns a lot of people off. Virgin Voters is trying to open up a forum of debate to people who might not notice the continuous and rather alarming change in Brillo's hair colour on This Week as they may be...shock horror...doing something else on a Thursday night. It's about discussing issues and the political solutions on offer. Kerry and I are, if you didn't already know, somewhat affiliated to the Labour Party, but as she says on her blog, this is very much intended to be cross party, a "conversation" (I know that sounds pretentious, but I can't think of another way of putting it at the moment). Plus, it's not about us...

If you're political - go and fight your corner, if you're not, go and ask whatever questions you'd like answered and if you're an MP or PPC, well stop reading this and go engage dammit!

Virgin Voters is on Facebook and Twitter @virginvoters

The Fighters and Believers

2009-11-18T18:16:00.003Z

I don't want to sound too much like Hugh Grant from Love Actually (ok, I do) but I must say from now on the Labour Party is prepared to be a lot stronger.

Here, in case you haven't seen it is our Party Political Broadcast, which has just this second been shown on BBC2 for the first time. Millions (I hope) of people will have now seen a Labour Party fighting for the future of this country.

I have written a lot about this film so all I'll say is this... We are the party of the fighters and believers, so we will go on, to May, fighting and believing in our Party. We'll have the battle scars to prove it, but it'll be worth every one of them.

Against the Odds

2009-11-14T16:33:00.005Z

It was a well known fact that a lot of people at Labour conference were incredibly moved by the video shown before Gordon's speech. Against the Odds goes through a potted history of the Labour Party, showing exactly why we can and must win.

I thought it might be an idea to ask the Labour Party if they had considered using the film as a Party Political Broadcast...fast forward about a week and we're here: the #againsttheodds campaign has gathered phenomenal momentum, and I have just this moment heard that Eddie Izzard has tweeted his support. I can't quite believe how a small idea, hidden in the deepest of grass roots could get this far, Alastair Campbell has blogged on it, a few hundred have signed our petition and more have joined our Facebook group.

I've written a more detailed piece on Labourlist about why I think this video should be shown across the nation to remind people of what a Labour government can do, and has done.

Funny what can happen when you put your mind to something isn't it?... #GameOn

As the blood boils, I write...

2009-11-03T14:29:00.008Z

Have found the urge to blog on a few articles I've read recently... the last was yet another Daily Mail attempt to smear Harriet Harman. I go, therefore, from the ridiculous to the sublime. David Aaronovitch writes a superb piece in today's Times on Cameron's call for David Miliband to apologise for suggesting the views of Kaminski, one of the Conservatives' allies in their hideous EU grouping, were disgraceful.
They are disgraceful (see linked article). Miliband was right. He was right to say that they were repugnant views and he was right to call the Conservative leader on his alliance with such a man. I am sure there are many who find the views of Kaminski disgusting.

Though, I have to say I find David Cameron's request for an apology from Miliband chilling.

As Aaronovitch points out:

I find myself amazed by how Mr Cameron ever came to be in the position of demanding that a foreign secretary, descended from Polish Jews, should apologise for possibly offending the sensibilities of a foreign politician who vehemently opposed there being an apology for the massacre of Polish Jews. I think of all the things that Mr Cameron has got right in his leadership of the Conservatve Party and my mental jaw drops at the sheer wrongness of it.

This goes above the usual party political banter that I, and other activists indulge in frequently. This is not about Tory toffs or "Mr 10%", it goes further and I fear deeper. It is about David Cameron and the Conservative leadership showing themselves up for what they really are. Surrendering a place in the centre-right EPP grouping to join a fringe grouping of far right nationalists in order to placate the Euro-sceptic section of their party, and perhaps to secure UKIP/Tory floating voters. Many might say this was tactically quite clever.
But the move comes at a high price, one of political respectablity. And Cameron's call for Miliband to apologise should also prove costly. Aaronovitch suggests the Conservative leader should go to the theatre, I would suggest the drawing board, where first on the agenda should perhaps be an apology, of a different kind.

The raving FemiNazi is defeated...and a hideous excuse for murder is upheld

2009-10-28T14:14:00.006Z

yet more vile spoutings from, as Stephen Fry beautifully referred to it, "the paper any self respecting person wouldn't be caught dead reading" on Harriet Harman's attempt to outlaw the defence of 'infidelity' in murder cases, i.e. a man (or woman, though the defence is overwhelmingly used by men in cases such as these) "potentially escaping with a charge of manslaughter if their wife was having an affair".

Let's just have a little nosey at the headline shall we...

Judges sink Harriet Harman's 'obnoxious' plan to strip men of infidelity murder defence

I struggle to breathe reading the headline through the rage, I really do. By the end of the article, I was in need of emergency resuscitation.

We are now all too familiar with this rag of a paper, disguising itself as journalism, beating Harriet Harman and her disgusting feminism down at every opportunity, just remember the LESSONS ABOUT WIFE BEATING AT THE AGE OF FIVE: IN THE WEEK HH TAKES CHARGE YET ANOTHER FEMINIST INITIATIVE gem we got from this rotten corrupt and morally defunct publication in August.

We've recently had a woman all us girlies can be proud of, no not Harriet who has fought for an equality bill which as Brown said at conference will "change this country for the better and forever", don't be ridiculous, I mean the passionate purveyor of female rights DM columnist Amanda Platell who probably sees her stints on Richard and Judy's sofa defending Kate Middleton's choice to "wait for Wills" as doing her bit for the struggle. She eloquently and poignantly suggests,

Feminist? Ms Harman is a zealot whom history will judge to have done more to hinder the progress of women in the 21st century than any Page 3 bimbo.

But we can easily dismiss that as, well, 'bitchy' tripe. It's when this publication, which I cannot bring myself to call a newspaper ventures into the realm of the real issue that I get scared. Harriet Harman was calling for a change. As she says herself, quoted in the piece -

'For centuries the law has allowed men to escape a murder charge in homicide cases by blaming the victim...Ending the provocation defence in cases of "infidelity" is an important law change and will end the culture of excuses.'

Yes, it has and yes it would. How can a law, which seems medieval in it's foundations, be upheld as a legitimate defence today? And how can a publication, along with a High Court judge (heaven knows, by the way...) chastise a minister for trying to put a stop to it?

I don't know... but yet again I find myself defending the easily defensible against the indefensible. If that makes sense... Nevertheless, Harriet, I ask you to wear this with pride -

A Labour Melting Pot...

2009-10-28T08:59:00.007Z

What does a 'normal' Labour activist look like? Are they a plump, Northern, older man with thumping fists and a ever increasingly noticeable bald patch? Certainly, I've met many who fit that description. Where might they be from? Well, I've hastened a guess that they might be Northern, or Welsh perhaps? Maybe Liverpudlian? What do they do? Well they may well be retired, probably lived quite a difficult life, might well have joined a Union and become pretty active. They have probably been to getting on for fourty Labour Conferences and have seen many a leader come and go, been used to our criminally long spell in Opposition and welcomed (perhaps with some reservations) a New Labour party into government in 97 with a tear in their eye, and a smile of relief at the chance to change things. They may well have become disillusioned with some of the policy roads the Newer factions of the party have gone down in the past 12 years, but remain fundamentally convinced that Britain is better after, yes, Blair, Brown and most importantly, Labour.
They may look to the next election with a sinking feeling, that the dark days of opposition could be round the corner, this country that we can now feel proud to be part of, could once again slip into the hands of those that feel they were born into power to protect their right to it. Those who see the past 12 years as a temporary blip in the status quo of Britain, where Tories rule and Labour annoyingly rebel. Where people know their place, and know they'll stay there. The 'normal' Labour man I have been imagining may well be ready to give all he has to what will be the toughest fight our party has faced in twenty years. Thank God he is.

This activist, and those like him, are a fundamentally important part of our party. They're it's soul to an extent. But I completely reject that they are the only 'type' of activist or MP that our party can have to remain 'real socialists', to remain faithful to the cause of the working classes, to remain the party of the less fortunate. I have been attacked on, our old fave, Twitter for being a spoilt little daddy's girl (as I've vented my spleen on here before about) and a traitor to the working classes my party should represent because I tweeted that I'd had some cocktails. I'm sick of writing posts about myself but give me a moment to just respond...I'm not rich. I'm not spoilt. My mum and dad were both brought up in council houses, one in South London, the other North. My dad's parents were Irish immigrants and my mum's mum was a single parent who had her at 18, raised her well but struggled. I've never been spoilt and my family have never been well-off. I've had the benefit of an extraordinary (free, but Catholic) education which I am hugely grateful for, but to some extent resent. The point of this is that none of it really matters. Or shouldn't do anyway.

As I've said before, Tony Benn has hardly had a tough life, but he's one of our greatest fighters for the rights of those less fortunate. Nye Bevan was the son of a struggling miner raised in a community which knew little else but socialism, yet said himself when he became a minister that he openly indulged in the finer things in life, whilst struggling for a better 'lot' for his people, and for a health service in place of fear. Both men have done extraordinary things, from polar opposite backgrounds. Where Nye's achievement is probably more extraordinary, the politics of Tony Benn is impressive and inspiring considering his background of privilege.

In short, it's about where we as political voices, small like mine or loud and powerful like Nye's or Tony's, are aiming for, not where we've come from. Labour are proud to be a party who have stood up for women's rights, stood up for worker's rights, stood up for those who couldn't stand up for themselves.
Bevan once said, "when I listen to the cacophony of harsh voices trying to intimidate, I close my eyes and listen to the silent voices of the poor", this is what we as a party should forever be trying to do, irrespective of the background, age or gender of our representatives, but acutely mindful, always, of those we represent.

as an aside, someone has just brought my attention to this on Polly Toynbee which I think exemplifies my point nicely.

Why I'm Labour ...

2009-10-23T19:39:00.002+01:00

And because I cannot believe I hadn't put this up on here before now... If you haven't seen it, please watch. Please...

Compassionate Conservatism... unless you're foxy...

2009-10-20T17:40:00.001+01:00

A letter from Hilary Benn MP...

The ban on fox-hunting – that Labour Party members from across the country worked so hard to achieve – is under threat.

Yesterday, at a time when our Labour Government is focused on tackling the recession and securing our economic recovery, the Tory spokesman on Animal Welfare re-affirmed that the Tory Party, if elected, would set aside Government time for a vote to repeal the ban.

And make no mistake - David Cameron and members of his top team have made it very clear that their intention is to see the return of the cruel spectacle of foxes being torn to pieces in Britain’s countryside.

So I need your help. Please sign up now to Back the Ban.

We need to make sure that as many people as possible know that a consequence of voting for the Conservatives at the next election will be an end to the ban on fox-hunting with dogs.

I’m going to be campaigning alongside animal welfare organisations on this in the coming weeks and months and it will help a lot to know if you’ll support our campaign.

Sign up now to pledge your support for my campaign.

Once you’ve signed up I’ll be in touch by email next week to let you know exactly how you can help.

Together we can make sure that as many people as possible know that a Conservative Government would mean an end to the ban so many people worked so hard to introduce.

Thank you

Hilary Benn

Collectivity Mr Cameron? You can keep it...

2009-10-10T19:49:00.006+01:00

I am going absolutely stir crazy tonight. This will probably not be the night that you read this, as I have absolutely no way of knowing how to get one of the freaking 17 wifi connections that I can see on my screen, to give me a connection to the (Geordie Big Brother accent >>) outside world.

I have had no news (that is worth hearing about), no television (that is worth watching), I have missed Tory Party conference (ok, maybe not a bad thing for my mental health, but I could really do with knowing my enemy - I did hear that they outlined a policy or two this week. Holy shit.) I also missed the Paxo/Boris already legendary tête-à-tête (it’s happening already…poncy frenchisms are sneaking their poncy way into my writing)…Honestly though, if Ann Widdecomb had defected to the Labour Party, Dennis Skinner to the Liberals and, I don’t know, a sanctimonious lefty LD to the Tories, I wouldn’t have a clue.

If all that has happened in the past few days, then you won’t believe me, but I really didn’t know.

I did get the Guardian the day before yesterday. It analysed Osborne’s speech, which apparently repeated Cameron’s new mantra of “we’re all in this together”. For once, I agree with him. We are all in this together. All in this crap created by the “crème de la crème” of society – those you, sir, squirm at taxing for fear they’ll pee off. You should be absolutely ashamed of yourself and your party’s rotten values.

It is shameful, Mr Cameron, that we are all in this mess together, we shouldn’t be.

Here comes my Toynbeeite tirade… Those who had played big boy monopoly with money they didn’t have, should frankly go straight to jail, should not pass go and should definitely not collect £200. We know they took the risk, leaving us to pay for it. But instead, we pick up a spade and start shovelling our way out of this mess, because that’s what we do in a crisis, band together -it’s admirable- it demonstrates the socialist tendencies which brought about the NHS, but this time, it should not be asked of us.

The “age of austerity” which hurtles round the corner – at increased speed and ferocity each time the Tory lead increases – is upon us.

I reject that collective age of austerity.

I reject the notion that collective restraint is the answer to this problem. Those at the top have behaved morally reprehensibly and do not deserve to be there (if they ever did) still. We must redefine the priorities of our society. Tax those who have benefitted (and many who have created the hole we find ourselves in) to pay for the backlash from a long period of unprecedented growth.

Do not make the next generation pay through reduced funding in education. Do not make the sick pay, cutting investment when the NHS is finally a service we can love. Do not make those who could not afford a crisis, shell out for one they had no part in creating.

It is unfair. It is unjust and it is cowardly.

Why don’t we ask these questions of our politicians, of all colours, Mr Marr and co? Instead of speculation on the potential reasoning behind a certain someone’s intolerance to Rioja and Roquefort.

The weird world of Labour conference...

2009-10-04T19:18:00.006+01:00

They called it the "Fightback Conference", and fight back we did...

Labour Conference 2009 was my first, hopefully of many, and against sky high expectations, it did not dissappoint. I have come away thinking that I'd quite like to live in a mini community where only Labourites would be allowed in...we'd debate, drink and boogie our lives away. It would be amazing, but isolationist, separatist and wrong - so I suppose a week a year will have to suffice.

Here's some snippets of the most eventful evenings of conference... will do a more in-depth analysis of conference outcomes later. Maybe.

My conference experience started (after a lost key incident ,which we'll not go into) with John Prescott's Tweet4Victory session (see my last blog), his "Stop Complaining, Start Campaigning" mantra was perfect to kick off a week that would be packed full of positivity, fighting spirit and a clear determination to not let this country slip into Tory hands without a fight. Last year, our party was divided and unsure, yet the feeling of Lab09 (as I'll call it) could not have been more different. Charles Clarke and his like were shunned to back tables in bars and essentially ignored. On this first night, I was introduced to Sarah Brown who was, as expected, lovelier than lovely, and also to Harriet Harman. On meeting HH, if my memory serves me correctly, I said "I love you so much, I think I might be sick". Well done Ellie, good first impression.

The second night, was perhaps one of the strangest I've had (well, until the Wednesday) when Douglas Alexander (yes the Secretary of State for International Development??!!) introduced me to Polly Toynbee. So, I met my hero, and yes, I was shaking. Especially when she seemed quite excited by my twitter name... I have to say I did suggest her latest article, in which she wrote Gordon's speech for him, would have been improved upon by cutting out the small insignificant paragraph where he'd resign...

A tweet up (left, with Ed Balls, Kerry McCarthy, Tom Watson, Andrew Gwynne and others) would follow, (I'm not sure about the chronology of these events, it was an eventful week) with Labour's prolific tweeters and our Tsar. Was lovely to put some faces to tweople. It however was rather odd when Ed Balls came over and declared "so who's BevaniteEllie then?" ... the power of twitter, eh?!

After a pretty hilarious Labour sing-a-long by the piano of the Grand Hotel, with Ben Bradshaw, who's jacket was NOT on my chair...along came the final evening. An evening which will be forever locked in my memory...which I am not sure is a good thing or not.

Here's what happened...So Kerry, Sophie, Rhiannon and I arrive at the Labour Staff party in the Lo Lounge, all seems normal. We meet some people who work for South West Labour, who we know and get chatting. It's quite quiet at this point. As the place starts filling up we grab a table near the dancefloor. On comes a song (which might have been D:Ream) and I think I see two people who look a lot like Neil and Glenys Kinnock having a boogie. I go closer, yep, it really is them.. The guy who delivered one of the greatest speeches in our political history ("I warn you" one) is dancing, rather energetically, in front of me. This is like a very strange dream ...
The place is boiling. Really, ridiculously hot. On comes "It's raining men" and just at the crucial moment after "for the first time in history....It's gonna start raining men...." Mandy bounds in, right on cue and busts some pretty impressive and rather daring moves. Picture the scene, the Kinnocks boogying to my left, Mandy to my right (how apt) and then Ed Balls in front about to join the spectacle. At this point I did actually put down the wine and pinch myself. If this wasn't weird enough, "Mickey" comes on, and a rather sweaty, but energetic, Mandy comes over. I am now dancing with Peter Mandelson (HE HAS POWER) to Mickey, at Labour Conference.

....All I could think? I'm telling one of the most prolific politicians in the country to 'spin'. And spin he did.

Coming to you live and direct from Paris...

2009-10-03T23:37:00.003+01:00

A ridiculously quick blog here, I will write at length about #lab09, or Labour conference for you non-twitterati out there, tomorrow. Just seen this pic on John Prescott's Go Fourth websiteLike he says, from left to centre left, moi, Kerry McCarthy MP, JP himself and Grace Fletcher-Hackwood... all at Tweet4Victory event.
Was a great night, and an even better week, and I thought if I write this taster now, I'll have to do more tomorrow...

I'm a nobody...

2009-09-07T19:01:00.010+01:00

I'm confused. I joined Twitter in March this year and created this blog a little later. I've got quite a few followers on Twitter now, many whom I really enjoy conversing with. Many whom I cannot stand. And some who are just completely vile. I thought I'd just tweet and blog to myself and maybe a few like-minded comrades about Labour Party stuff, exchanging ideas and well, kind of bonding. I have done that, but for some reason (and I think it's probably my inability to let Tories be Tories without questionning or arguing with them) many seem to be more than a little riled by me.

I now have one imitation on Twitter, who basically tweets as me (as another female Labourite has had) - along the lines of 'I'm a rich little girl with socialist ideologies probably served to me on a wooden spoon by daddy', oh and some reference to Weightwatchers which I dont really understand. Many have told me imitation is the best form of flattery - meh, not so sure.
Today I've had people blogging about tweets where I have suggested ToryBear is a jumped up Tory and he shouldn't have gone round to the Draper/Galloway household delivering a writ from Nadine Dorries, and filming it. People blogging about tweets where I mistyped an answer to a question (again on Smeargate), later clarified within about 3 seconds.
Why? Who gives a stuff? As Nikki from Big Brother would say "Who is sheeeeee???" Answer: no-one!

I have no power. I have no influence. I'm not an MP, not a councillor and not even in the 100 top-left blogs! (I didn't know there were 100! - but I'm not bitter - it's a Conservative ploy)

There are Libertarians who tweet at me (it was constant at one point) ,tweets I never read because they're horrible. Sexist, offensive and in some cases abusive. I don't get it. There are many people on the blogosphere I dislike. Some I detest. But I wouldn't go to the trouble of pretending to be them. Or being truly incessantly abusive toward them.

So I'm a woman, I say what I think. I like Harriet Harman, I like Polly Toynbee, I love the Labour Party and I think this country is better in the hands of Gordon Brown than anyone else at the moment. So shoot me. Or blog about me. Whatever.

I'm a creep... I'm a Tory...

2009-08-19T18:39:00.006+01:00

A gem of a find here passed to me on Twitter via @Jasonargonaut (well actually it was found by Bristol University's other firey female Labourite, Emma, but she's not on Twitter... yes, #fail )

Listen to this,

he's been called the YouTube Billy Bragg, possibly a step too far(as he can't really sing) ,but it made me smile on the 6:30 train to work this morning. And that's no mean feat.

Another treat for your ears, Kerry McCarthy, our new online leader, Twitter Tsar (which is unfortunately going to stick, Kerry) or officially - New Media Campaigns Spokesperson (woop woop!) is interviewed by the Guardian today on how, as Prezza put it beautifully, Cameron is "an email politician in a Twitter age".

...Oh and one last lazy link, Brian Barder who writes for LabourList today concludes with this poignant reminder and a link to a letter from someone who can say they warned you...(and it's not Kinnock)

"A recent letter in the Guardian carries a warning that should be printed out and pinned to every notice-board in the country. The most frightening danger facing the country is not the credit crunch, not the recession, and certainly not the national debt: it's the threat of a Conservative government, and what it will do. It's time to say so, loud and clear."

#welovetheNHS and this time it's political....

2009-08-15T20:41:00.007+01:00

Gordon Brown writes:

Eleanor,

I want to say a huge thank you to all of you who have supported the #welovethenhs campaign.

I have been profoundly moved by the enormous groundswell of support for the NHS in the last few days. A genuinely National Health Service – introduced by a Labour government in the teeth of opposition from the Conservatives and the medical establishment – is one of our nation’s finest achievements.

So it is understandable that the Conservative leadership have tried to distance themselves from those in Tory ranks who criticise the NHS.

But the reason why their comments have generated so much anger is that they spoke to a larger truth.

That truth is that there are two Tory faces on the NHS. Behind all the recent talk of commitment, the party has not truly been reformed. Despite all their talk of reform, the Conservatives still put special interests before patients’ interests.

The Conservatives say they are committed to the NHS but they would scrap our guarantees for patients – including the guarantee to see a specialist within 2 weeks if your GP suspects you may have cancer.

The Conservatives say they are committed to the NHS but they would scrap our agreement with the GPs that means nearly three quarters of practices now offer extended opening hours.

The Conservatives say they are committed to the NHS but they would let hospitals mortgage their own assets – even though they admit this brings the risk of financial failure.

I will not stand by and see the NHS and its brilliant staff denigrated and undermined, whether that's by the right wing in the United States or by their friends in the British Conservative Party.

This is not just a debate for this week. It is central to everything we believe in and care about. And I am determined to take the fight to the Tories, not just today, but in the weeks and months ahead.

Thank you for backing our NHS.

Gordon Brown

I read that at the bus stop on my phone today. And if I'm honest I was very moved, I'll explain why in a moment (incidentally someone on Twitter, who shall remain nameless thought the email he/she received was specifically for them! bless). The #welovetheNHS campaign has been spectacular. It's incredible to sign on to Twitter and see hundreds of new messages every couple of minutes in support of our health system. Most along the lines of without the NHS 'I wouldn't be here'.

I don't have to convince anyone who reads this blog, that I love the NHS too. It's the reason I joined the Labour party. It's the reason I most probably could never leave the party. And, to jump on another bandwagon, I wouldn't be here without it too. But the creator of the #welovetheNHS campaign or twampaign (I am so bad at those it's ridiculous) says he's annoyed the Labour party are hijacking the campaign for party political purposes. I could not disagree more.

The NHS is a party political issue. When both main parties are fighting an election to run the system. Party politics could mean the difference between life or death , a cancer wait for two weeks or eighteen. And if that is not a 'conversation' that the Labour party can enter into, fighting,I don't know what is. It would be remiss not to. If I thought we, as a party, were not battling for the patients (past, present and future) and staff in the service, I would think we should give up and go home now.

There is not a doubt in my mind that the Labour Party are the Party of the NHS. The Tories are the party of low taxes, yes. Individualism, yes. But the NHS, never. Churchill and his party opposed it from the beginning, calling Mr Bevan 'the minister of disease' and rallying alongside the BMA to stop the State dictating whether you live or die, removing the medical authority from the surgery to Whitehall, rendering doctors civil servants. Sounds familiar doesn't it?

As The Mirror (who have responded to the campaign brilliantly) wrote today
"No Labour MEP would ever go on US TV to run down the health service. No Labour cabinet minister would forge links with US politicians at the forefront of attacks on the British health system. But Tories are guilty of both these traitorous acts...Only Labour can be trusted to protect the health service"

They're right aren't they? Can you imagine Alan Johnson or Andy Burnham venturing across the pond and doing the same. Or indeed Claude Moraes MEP or Mary Honeyball MEP. They wouldn't, because if they thought like Mr Hannan, they wouldn't be in the party. Labour see the NHS as our greatest achievement, a source of pride. It's emotional to us, a symbol of functional socialism that we fought to achieve in the darkest post-war years. Our economy was not thriving, but Nye and Attlee saw our nation's health as far too important to neglect. Whereas the Tories, past and present, see it as a financial burden, they are electorally obliged to maintain.

I honestly do not think #welovetheNHS would have trended in 1996. A crumbling, crippled service brought to it's knees by the LAST Conservative government. No Ancient History textbooks needed folks, their last stab at power. Labour have revitalised it, into a NHS we can all be ridiculously proud of.

So forgive us, if we want it to stay that way.

I was booorrrn by the river...

2009-08-07T12:40:00.006+01:00

Sorry, a random title I know but this post concerns Obama and whenever his name is mentioned I tend to hum a little Sam Cooke, so while I'm trying to reach the "it's been tooooo hard living..." line, you have a butchers at this pure piece of solid loveliness in full in the NS courtesy of the leader of the free world. And if you can't trust him, who can you, eh?

There is increasing anxiety within the Obama administration over the foreign policy of Cameron, a man the US President dismissed as all "sizzle" and no substance.

From across the Atlantic comes more detail about Barack Obama's opinion of David Cameron. Last year, I reported that the then presidential candidate had emerged from a meeting with the Tory leader describing him as a "lightweight". Now it is claimed that Obama also said that Cameron is all "sizzle" and no substance. The colourful verdict was apparently the result of meetings with Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and Cameron on 26 July last year, at the end of a Continental tour. I have been contacted by a senior figure at a respected national newspaper who gave me an account of the meetings from an Obama aide. After taking breakfast with Blair, visiting Brown in Downing Street and meeting Cameron in parliament, Obama is said to have given the following verdict: Blair was "sizzle and substance"; Brown was "substance"; Cameron was merely "sizzle".

Two days earlier, Obama had delivered a pro-European speech in front of 200,000 people in Berlin, dismissing "voices that deride and deny the importance of Europe's role in . . . our future". The president has also said he regards the EU - as opposed to the UK - as his country's key ally. The Tory leader, who has isolated his party in Europe, appears to be at odds with Obama in this and other areas.

Indeed, while Obama opposed the Iraq invasion from the beginning, Cameron (it is often forgotten) supported the war. Cameron told Obama during the recorded section of their chat last July that "judgement" is key to success as a leader. Yet his attempts to compare himself to Obama as a "change" candidate are not borne out by substance. The neoconservatism and free-marketeerism of his top team are opposed to the values of Obama's administrationSo there you have it. Mr President has spoken. Cameron is all mouth and no trousers. Which, of course we knew, but it's kinda nice to have the most powerful person in the world confirm our suspicions isn't it?
For quite a few years we've held a smug authority over the US, thanks to Bush. Do we really want this sizzling sausage representing us, standing next to one of the most inspiring political orators and figures of modern times?
A change aint gonna come with the substance-less sizzle. Labour have got the substance, we can work on the sizzle.

(any contributors to a caption competition for the above pic?)

update: Kerry has just tweeted "am I the only the only person who think Cameron doesn't actually have much 'sizzle' either?"
God, what was I thinking... of course he doesn't, perhaps more of a stew?

The curious case of Harriet Harman

2009-08-05T17:08:00.015+01:00

As I, perhaps rather optimistically, think visitors to this blog may not visit (or indeed God forbid buy the paper) the Daily Mail website, I thought I'd give you a taster of their new lows. New lows that today were smeared all over their front page.I've had to read this twice and glance at the date of the paper, but no, contrary to the weather it aint April and apparently this Mr Slack is a journalist (probably from the Carol Malone school of writing). Anyway have a gander and a warning, I'm commenting afterwards, so if you agree with it, I'd click away- trust me, you'll hate what I've got to say. And me. And Harriet. So maybe actually you should go now- go on, off you pop.

So, for the rest of us... try and stay with it without reaching for the scissors:

LESSONS ABOUT WIFE BEATING AT FIVE: IN THE WEEK HARRIET HARMAN TAKES CHARGE, YET ANOTHER FEMINIST INITIATIVE
(wtf??? sorry, I'll keep quiet)

James Slack

Pupils as young as five will be taught about the evils of 'wife beating'(1) and the need to form healthy relationships.

The lessons are part of a controversial (2) drive, unveiled today, to reduce violence against women and young girls.

They will include teaching boys that they must not beat their partners or any other female.

Healthy relationships: Harriet Harman, pictured yesterday getting her nails painted at a youth club, wants women and girls to feel safer (3)

Last night, critics warned that ministers are cramming the already over-stuffed National Curriculum with lessons that should be taught in the home or in the community.

Others say the plan is part of the feminist agenda led by Harriet Harman in her role as Equalities Minister.

They pointed out the new classes will not cover violence against men (4), who are far more likely to be the victims of violent crime.

In the past few days alone, Miss Harman has blamed men for the banking crisis, and suggested the Labour Party should always have a female in one of its top two posts.

Miss Harman was due to be involved in its launch, before becoming embroiled in a Whitehall row over rape laws...

Feminist agenda: Under controversial plans, schoolboys will be taught not to beat their partners or any other female (5)

The most eye-catching proposal (6) in the document is the one to force schools to introduce statutory lessons in 'educating children and young people about healthy, nonviolent relationships'...

Margaret Morrissey, of family lobby group ParentsOutloud...added: 'I do not really want my youngster to be indoctrinated with these things.(7)...

It declares: 'Our vision is a society where women and girls feel safe and confident in their homes and communities so that they can develop fully, live freely, contribute to society, and prosper in their daily lives. We want to overcome women's and girls' fear of crime and the gender-based violence that they experience.'(8)

As well as the lessons, the already stretched Health Service (9) has been ordered to conduct studies into how it can improve treatment of women at risk of violence, and police must carry out a review of domestic violence incidents.

I've edited the 'best bits' so if you can manage it here's the full story .

I wanted to do a blog post 'in defence of Harriet Harman' or along those lines recently. When looking through her interviews, apart from perhaps one line she could have phrased slightly better, I couldn't honestly find the militant feminism and the seeds of pure hatred for half the population she was meant to have left in the dusty trail behind her this weekend.

Anyway, I'm a fan of Harriet. I said it on Twitter and I'll say it again here. I've met her quite a few times (some less embarassing than others - but that's for another day) and she's a charming, strong woman who I have bucketloads of respect for.
Similarly, it is no secret that someone with a blog such as this, and of the political persuasion that I am, is no fan of the Daily Mail. I'm not. But today's headline was one of the worst I've ever seen, not infuriating, not laughable, but downright frightening. The hatred of Ms Harman is unjustified and reeks of the sexism she rallies against.

But quickly, let's just have a little look some of those gems, shall we?

(1) I'm just wondering why the inverted commas? Is there something not evil about wife beating? Or are we just angry at the term? Does it reek of that disgusting Equalities department and their 'PC -gonefreakingmad' agenda?

(2) controversial drive to reduce violence against women and young girls - controversial pourquoi? This whole bloody article is madness. I'm sorry. Is there anyone, anyone who would suggest educating young children about healthy/stable/non-violent relationships wasn't a good use of school time?

(3) does she? The cow.

(4) Yes men are more likely to be victims of violent crime. Domestic violence is a different story, 1 in 4 women are said to be victims of DV, it's one in 6 men (there are problems with statistics on DV- these are for single incidents, it is thought women are much more likely to be victims of recurrent DV & are also far more likely to die as a result of it (2 women a week). However, this initiative is hardly going to preach that it's OK to hit men. It will teach that violence is unacceptable in relationships. And that will, obviously, affect both men and women.

(5) I think that one speaks for itself.

(6) That is definitely not the most eye catching proposal in the document, and if it is, then we've just proved this article is a load of fear-mongering, sexist, Harman-hating ,bandwaggon jumping, tripe.

(7) 'Indoctrinated' ????!!!!!! with respect for women? You are a very, very, silly person Madam, with very, very scary views.

(8) Does anyone else see a problem with that?

(9) I think when a health service like ours cannot afford to invest in keeping women safe, confident and alive, it will be the day our moral authority, that the NHS affords us, disappears.

So that's all I have to say on this crud. If you'd like to vote on whether this is a good initiative (The Mail would like you to say no, in case it wasn't obvious)

Oh and keep up the good work Harriet, with a policy-hungry opposition and some government departments a little too scared to implement some needed change at the moment for fear of the Dacre-diss, we need some courage. It's refreshing. And for anyone who thinks politicians were boring, I give you...Ms Harman. Thank you and good night.

Proportional Representation, a bit like green veg

2009-07-28T01:16:00.010+01:00

'Charlotte Leslie - What voters really want' (I hope it's not her) writes in the Guardian today about how those on the doorstep are just not that into reform of the voting system. She may be right. In times like these, whether FPTP stays or we opt for the AV ranking system, or indeed a form of PR, I'm sure the people of her target constituency aren't losing sleep over it.

But does that discount it completely? I'm sure many aren't losing sleep over Sri Lanka, does that mean governments shouldn't consider it an issue? nope.

MPs, governments, political parties: they're all here to work on what we're worried about, yes, but not only that. Politicians know that the FPTP system is outdated, and that in keeping it, the old rotten politics that people are so sick of stays the same. Regardless of whether Julie Kirkbride or Margaret Moran resign or not, our stilted electoral system will ensure that both Labour and the Tories keep up the scrambling for those few marginal seats. Those few voters who decide the outcome of elections. The needs of those in safe seats can be, and I'm not saying they always are, but can be ignored with relatively little electoral penalty. FPTP created New Labour, and fuelled the creation of the myth of Compassionate Conservatism. It's not an issue on the lips of many in Bristol North West, where Ms Leslie hopes to gain her seat (from a great MP-Doug Naysmith who's retiring, *coughs* vote Sam Townend *coughs*) but it affects the democratic accountability of Westminster, so it should be at least on hers.

I'm wondering why the article Leslie writes is in the Guardian at all. She merely regurgitates every other article written by journalists, candidates, bloggers since the expenses scandal began.

If my pavement pounding, knuckle-wearing experience as a candidate is anything to go by, by all means, Brown can concentrate on rejigging voting systems – and it's true that politics does need a radical change. But I'm afraid I have a feeling that Brown's obsession with political manoeuvring, which is so obviously driving these so-called reforms, is not only out of touch – it's exactly what people outside the Westminster village are so fed up with.

I'm not sure 'people' outside Westminster would be fed up with a change to a voting system where many of their votes are worth about as much as a Woolies voucher. So we may not want or care about electoral reform, but we need it (that's where the green veg simile comes in) Oh and, Charlotte, did that pavement pounding, knuckle wearing experience include your 'Cameron's cabinet in waiting' photo shoot in Tatler? (smug young Tory no.6) Cheap shot I know, but the audacity of that article made my blood boil.

The Tories don't want proportional representation. They don't want anything but FPTP. I wonder why. There are arguments to be made for the pros and cons of all systems, they're dull and tedious, but I think they have to be made. Then we can decide. And the Party who offers that choice will be able to walk tall into future elections.

A letter to Gordon from Vote for a Change

What makes Widders laugh? Poor people and the aspiring middle classes who fail miserably, apparently.

2009-07-27T19:06:00.004+01:00

Today's G2 asks a few political figures "So what cheers you up?"...
Here are a few responses

Ann Widdecombe - I need to look no further than Keeping Up Appearances. Hyacinth Bucket's snobbery, her husband's ineffectual attempts to mitigate it, her ghastly in laws (who happen to be working class and drive an old banger, how ghastly) and the much put upon friend are wonderfully portrayed - without the need for smut or innuendo.(funny, Anne, I thought you'd be first in line for Bruno myself. Not a fan of gratuitous nakedness and scenes of a gay sexual nature? I'm shocked)

Shami Chakrabarti - I can't be bothered to write hers out, it was boring. But just the notion that anything can raise a smile to that blusherless faced, crop haired, Tory sympathiser is beyond me.

Alastair Darling - Yes Minister never fails to make me laugh. Although it's less comedy, more documentary. oh, and black humour - it's kept us going over the last two years at the treasury (bless)

Margaret Beckett - The Last of the Summer Wine (Jesus wept) makes me laugh a lot. Have I Got News for You is also quite funny. But I don't like it when it gets too cruel. (Paul, Ian, I do hope you're listening, Margaret would like you to tone it down)

Alan Johnson - Blackadder, Fawlty Towers ... make the Johnson's laugh. (AJ, I expected a few more 'hip' choices considering your cutting edge taste in all things musical) Quintissential, British humour: puns, word play, double-entendres.

There you go. I do hope you're thinking the same as me. Did these people stop watching TV in 1975? A little mention for 'In the Loop' would have gone far in this selection. People say MPs are out of touch, for God sake peeps, don't fuel it.

The Labour Party and the C-word. Part I.

2009-07-25T15:41:00.003+01:00

So Jeremy Clarkson has proved what a gentleman he is yet again.

From today's Guardian:

The Top Gear presenter Jeremy Clarkson is at the centre of a new controversy after again making offensive comments about the prime minister in front of the BBC2 show's studio audience.

Clarkson, who previously had to apologise to Gordon Brown in February after calling him "a one-eyed Scottish idiot", described him as a "c*nt" in not-for-broadcast comments during the recording of this week's Top Gear programme on Wednesday night.

"Clarkson was talking about a government policy and said as his payoff line: 'The reason you can't do that is because Gordon Brown is a c*nt,' " the eyewitness said. "Everyone found it very funny."...

During a press conference in February in Australia, Clarkson courted controversy by using personal remarks to criticise Brown's handling of the global financial crisis.

"We have this one-eyed Scottish idiot who keeps telling us everything's fine and he's saved the world, and we know he's lying but he's smooth at telling us," he said.

I'm wondering why the BBC are spending so much time deliberating on when to air the Apprentice to prevent clashes with the election, while overlooking the rotten behaviour of one of their biggest 'stars'.... Actually, I may have answered my own question there.

So while it was never intended to be broadcast, and free speech dictates Mr Clarkson can say what he likes, the issue remains, an issue which has been brought to the fore in recent months- that we pay this imbecile. Public money funds his extraordinary pay packet. Maybe instead of using all his energy on a strangely personal, venemous hatred of Gordon, he could put some more into entertaining people, which I'm assuming is what the BBC, and we, pay him for.

Forget Purnell, it's Mr Benn we should be listening to

2009-07-22T15:18:00.004+01:00

From today's Comment is Free , I;m going to publish Tony Benn's artice in it's entirety - pure, common, golden sense.

Arguments the left has to win

We must settle our differences on issues from nuclear weapons to healthcare if we are to exert pressure on the policy makers

- Tony Benn
- guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 22 July 2009 11.30 BST

This week James Purnell launched a Demos project, Open Left, which is asking what it means to be on the left today. To understand the difficulties that face the left you have to start way back. For almost 10 years a consensus has developed within the three main parties inspired by the Thatcher counter-revolution, which argued that government should keep out of industry and leave everything to the market.

It was that very policy that led to the present economic crisis and which has had a dramatic effect on the level of Labour support in two ways: a falling turnout for Labour and the emergence of the BNP.

The present government has many achievements of which we can be proud, not least on the environment, but the party is seen as offering management rather than representation. Policies worked out on the sofas in Whitehall will not, in my opinion, make much of a contribution to the rebuilding of confidence among the voters.

Nor indeed will sectarian strife on the left help.

More and more people worldwide now see that the basic conflict is between the majority who create the wealth and the handful who own it and want jobs and homes, good healthcare and education, decent pensions and peace.

From where I see it now, outside parliament, the reconstruction of a strong left has to begin by developing powerful campaigns centred on the issues that concern people, which can bring in support from across the whole political spectrum.

The Stop the War movement, which has been one of the most successful in my lifetime, enjoyed the backing of conservatives, liberals, greens, as well as those on the left, and will ultimately win a majority for a policy of withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Now some generals are coming out against nuclear weapons at the moment when we are being told we may have to spend billions to upgrade them. This project is the most obvious candidate for a cut in public expenditure.

Housing is another example. We see a long housing waiting list and unemployed builders who cannot be financed because the money is going to the bankers, some of whom are getting huge bonuses, paid for by taxation.

Similarly there is great anxiety about the deliberate privatisation of the public services – which we have seen in academies and the private financing of hospital building – which leaves them outside any democratic control.

It is the same with civil liberties that have been eroded and state pensions which are still dropping behind the earnings with which they were once linked.

Then there is taxation – where the modest increase announced for wealthier people has been denounced by the City but it is nothing compared to the highest level when Churchill left office in 1945 – 95%, justified on the grounds that the money was needed to fight the war and that the rich should share the burdens that others had to bear. These arguments apply to the present economic crisis.

We have to win these arguments if we are to retain power next year.

And that means there has to be much more pressure from below on the policy makers in Downing Street. Out of such pressure will come a revitalised left renewing its commitment to serve those it has always sought to represent.

For the first time in my life the public is more progressive on all these issues than New Labour.

Democracy is the buckle that links the streets to the statute book and to renew the left, democracy must be strengthened in a world increasingly dominated by forces we do not control.

this stood out to me:

The present government has many achievements of which we can be proud, not least on the environment, but the party is seen as offering management rather than representation

I think that's it. The Labour party was seen as a democratic institution answerable to the people it was created to represent. A people who themselves were not fully enfranchised when the party was born. A union movement which should have proportional influence on the party it funds, and a membership which must have a say. If the Unions and the membership of the Labour Party had power, then many more would see Labour for what it should be...a vehicle for change, a vehicle which uses it's power for the good of the majority of our society. We need to represent, as Tony says, rather than manage.
There may lie the answers to our waning popularity, not to mention the financial crisis of our own.

TWITTER!!!!!

2009-07-20T00:20:00.004+01:00

I'm sitting in bed, crying with laughter at the recent tweeting trend on twitter - #freeBevaniteEllie.
To all my lovely twitter comrades (and Lousie Bagshawe!!!!) thank you for your support at my untimely ban... Some tweets are verging on the 'she was a lovely person, and we'll remember her'/eulogy side, but I'm ever so grateful.
I think it may have been because someone was trying to hack into my account. Not sure but Twitter is taking it's sweet time to rectify my sentence without trial :-(

So as Grace said 'enough with the twitter funeral already'! but thanks, I'm truly touched.
And Harriet probably won't step in, and Polly (gift of the gab) may not offer up her crucifyingly bare twitter account as a 'prisoner exchange'. But you never know.

I love you all for orchestrating a campaign which Obama would be proud of; Cllr Tim, Grace, Ged Robinson, Hadleigh (yes even your New Labour self), the great gar, jamesTart, and many others I momentarily forget. And I suppose a special thank you (and this truly crucifies me but...) to Louise Bagshawe, crossing the widest party divide to free me.
Peace out comrades, Speak soon... ifTwitter becomes the democratic institution it once was, again!

oh and Louise I will NEVER be ThactheriteEllie. NEVER!

Selling a myth

2009-07-15T21:25:00.006+01:00

And today I met the salesmen. Oliver Letwin entered the room sweating, took out his embroidered handkerchief and dabbed his forehead. I'd hasten a guess that the sweat was partially due to the humid conditions in Westminster this eve, and partially because he had just entered a room full of Compass supporters with Jon Cruddas sitting at the table, ready to pounce. Having seen Jon speak at quite a few events, I don't blame Ollie, his perspiration was probably justified.
Anyway, the debate tonight surrounded 'Communitarianism' and its place on the left and on the right. I'm not going to go into great detail, partly because I lack the inclination, and partly because I'm not gonna lie, I don't fully understand the intricacies of the Communitarianist debate.
What I'd like to discuss is New Toryism. Red Toryism. Compassionate Conservatism. Whatever you'd like to call it, I was damn sure it didn't exist before tonight. Was I converted? What do you think...

Philip Blond (a so called 'red Tory') argued for the redistribution of inherited wealth. He didn't go into detail. Quelle surprise. I was biting my tongue, until he finished, to raise the elephant in the room. The gentleman behind me got there first... Maybe Letwin and Blond had forgotten Tory policy on Inheritance tax. Thankfully comrade behind me reminded him. There were protestations of "I don't necessarily support that policy" from Blond, yet when questioned whether he was fighting the policy from within the party, you could hear the proverbial pin drop. This new 'progressive agenda' (LOL) whitewashes over traditional Tory thinking which still has a stronghold on the party. On Cameron too. Cameroonism - talk the talk, but when it comes to walking anywhere - nah, there's a Jag following behind, and they'll hop in.

Letwin and Blond spoke, audaciously and rather proudly, of a Broken Britain, which the Tories are now "primed to step in and save".
Every time I hear the BB phrase emanate from a Tory mouth, I feel something in my stomach about to emanate from mine.
Broken Britain, if it exists, was broken by the individualistic ideology, and rejection of community and society of the Thatcher epoch. It sounds old. It sounds easy for Labourites to say. But it's true. And Thatcherism retains a strong influence in the Tory party today. To an extent, it retains a strong influence in the Labour Party too. But we let Compassionate Conservatism paper over that at our peril. The inherent, incessant cracks that Thatcherism produced in our society remain. New Labour tried to use the easy 'plaster of Paris' approach. That hasn't worked. But if the New Tories think they're the best party suited to implement the whole scale reform of the ideology which underpins Politics, economics and therefore British society today, then might I suggest we all give up and leave now?

Labour cannot win another election by moving more and more towards the right, and in doing so, pushing the Tories even further. We must reoccupy the left. The left of centre, and in giving Tories the space to define themselves, probably the centre too. New Labour, I believe, is founded on the core belief that the Tory party are the natural party of government, that we must hijack their appeal and their voters for success. Maybe, maybe not. But success at what price? This country is essentially socialist at heart.Britain has an instinct of collectivism, which we see in times of hardship. Our default setting. Our most treasured institution? The NHS, a purely socialist one. We need functional democracy (i.e. PR) , when we engage people -more people than those in swing constituencies which dictate the political agenda and the battle for centre (-right) ground- they become interested. This moment is too important for the vast majority of our country to feel disillusioned. Tories won't deliver what we need, they won't even pretend to try.

So you'll not be surprised to hear I'm not buying the new model the Tories are selling. The winner of the next election will shape a new political era. The fallacy that markets could rule, relatively unregulated with no casualties was exposed for what it was last year. The market model seeks profit wherever it can, not fairness or justice, or indeed a good society. The Tories don't have the inclination to implement the vital change necessary. Labour, at the moment, may not either. But we've got a history and a fundamental ideology, upon which we were founded, to work with. Whereas the Tories have Phillip Blond.

Polly v IDS. I think that's what you might call a KO.

2009-07-15T15:38:00.002+01:00

Just in case you missed it....
12 mins 40 in, IDS capitulates. The Toynbee is just too much for him.

Lookin' good for 61...

2009-07-04T20:03:00.010+01:00

So tomorrow our NHS is 61. Not a milestone birthday I grant you, but a birthday none the less. I'm wondering why don't we have a bank holiday to celebrate the finest achievement of Nye Bevan and Attlee's post-war Labour government? Gordon uttered something along those lines last year, I'm not sure if anything came of it.

The 5th July 1948 saw the launch of our National Health Service. From midnight doctor's phones rang off the hook and queues, which would render Wimbledon ashamed, began to form. This was people taking up their new right, their right to healthcare. It was the jewell in our crown and thanks to Labour investment, which buffed a tarnished jewell in 1997, it still is.

Michael Portillo wrote on the 50th anniversary of the service, that it is one wrapped in dogma. I agree. A dogma which underlines Nye's vision, that a fundamental right of each and everyone of us is the right we have to a sick bed, a National Health Service in place of fear. Mr Portillo suggested this Bevanite dogma stilts the service, prevents change and will ultimately be it's undoing. Now I return to my defualt position of fundamentally disagreeing with Mike. We, as a country, complain often and complain freely about our health service. That is only because we are so sure it will always be there. Bevan's ideological dogma has secured the future of the service, any challenge to it's publicly funded nature would be political suicide. Thank God.

As I've said before on here I am, what would be termed, a drain on the service after two episodes of meningitis, and a heart operation within the last 6 years. The Taxpayer's Alliance would have a field day.
I don't want to fear going into hospital. Or to fear family members or friends doing the same. I don't want anyone to have to wait longer than 2 weeks if they have suspected cancer. I don't want anyone to have to wait longer than 18 weeks for a hospital appointment of any kind. I don't want Andrew Lansley in charge of our health service. I don't want a Tory government.

The Curious Case of Nadine Dorries

2009-06-23T19:21:00.008+01:00

Having been slightly bored today, and following my outrage at Little Miss Dorries infanitle behaviour at the election of Speaker Bercow, I had another look at her blog.

Some gems that stand out follow.

because Bercow supported the 24 week abortion limit staying so ...

"it is for this reason, more than any other, that I shall make my commitment to guarantee, by any means at my disposal, that should John Bercow become Speaker, I will do my best to make sure that it is one of the shortest served appointments in the grand, and glorious, history of that coveted chair."

That's the spirit Nadsy. Forget parliamentary reform. Forget restoring the authority and reputation of parliament. Let's chuck another one out.

on a recent dinner with David Cameron
"The night ended as it began, with laughter.

Can you imagine Brown even knowing what I was talking about, if I were sitting next to him and I said 'just when you thought life couldn't get any better, along comes a Mint Baileys.' ?

Exactly. And it was good to see him laugh because we all know that there must be times during his day, when David the man, trapped within the pages of his frantic diary, cries somewhere inside."

I'm sure Brown wouldn't have had a clue, Nadsy, what you were on about, a bit like the rest of us. (anyone else lost?)

So, is this the greatest campaign tool at Labour's disposal?

I know she's had a hard time from Labour bloggers, and I hate to single one woman out. But when it's her, I don't know, it just seems wrong not to.

If you've developped a taste for it... here's more Dorries' insight into the world of the body politic.

I'm audaciously proud of this Labour government, but a change has gotta come...

2009-06-15T16:40:00.004+01:00

At the Compass conference on Saturday there was a palpable sense of urgency in the room. Leading journos and politicos called for this moment to be seized. Most agreed a Labour government could do it. Though most too, were sceptical. At the risk of sounding like an X Factor finalist - some people wait a lifetime for a moment like this...
I'm proud of this Labour government. Voices from the right, and the left, who suggest the past 12 years have been void of any success enfuriate me, and undermine their valid argument that the Labour government must change direction.

At a time when consistent polling suggests the majority of the public favour increased spending in public services over tax cuts, the Labour Party should be in its element. Instead we're scrappling for ground. Only recently getting on the offensive and trying to expose Tory policy for what it is, dangerous and potentially socially crippling.
Many argue that to admit we, as a party and as a government, must change undermines our weakening authority. The old "You turn if you want to..." malarkey. I refute that. A government which admits to having to rethink strategy and decisions made in the good times, to suit a changed world, is a strong one.

So in these nine months or so, let's do it. Let's scrap ID cards. Let's forget Heathrow. Let's not replace Trident. I can imagine the Tory reaction, millionnaire's row would indeed have a field day at the subsequent PMQ's. Brown and the Cabinet would have to be on every TV sofa to justify the massive rethink. But people sitting at home in Labour heartlands, and throughout the country would be watching a Labour government strong enough to regenerate. A responsive government which is malleable to the situation of the day. I don't know if that would garner popularity, but I'm sure it would garner respect.
Scrapping these initiatives would free currently prescribed capital to start a massive council house building programme. There are 5 million people on waiting lists, living precarious lives unable to become fully contributing members of society. Let's make a dent in that number and fight a general election on an aim to slash it. This would wrestle a large chunk of the BNP agenda from their grip. No, we shouldn't legislate in response to a fascist party, but we ignore the reasons as to why many voted for them at our peril. This council house building scheme would be, by proxy, a massive job creation scheme, which could link with the Apprentices initiative that Brown has championned.

Let's have courage. Unpopularity yields opportunity. To embark on a new agenda for a new age would refresh a tired government and a tired Party. No saying sorry for tax rises Gordon. Promise electoral reform and put the Tories on the back foot. Treat us like idiots, yes, explain the differences of the systems, pick one and go for it. A referendum at the next election. In order to increase the painfully low comparative turnout at our elections, let's ensure the millions that are not registered to vote, are. A commitment to functional democracy. Not a bad agenda to pursue.
Finally, and it's passé, cliché, whatever, but for God's sake ditch the electorally toxic brand of New Labour. No, no old Labour. Just Labour. Reinstate the power of conference and ordinary members, and we may get more. Scream to high heaven the success of our investment in the NHS.

We can win the next election, it is pure laziness to suggest otherwise, we can win and it is imperative that we do win. But we've got to change, and quick. I don't make apologies for being proud of what we've done in government, but I have the audacity of hope that we can do better.

The plaster hurt, but it's off.

2009-06-05T17:42:00.007+01:00

The past 24 hours have been perhaps the most politically compact and fast moving I've ever witnessed. When people talk of 'nights the government fell', you find it hard to imagine the atmosphere. Now, I don't. Last night was painful yet strangely exciting at the same time. When you're in it deep, chinks of light seem like gold dust, nay freaking diamonds. Labour councillor Brenda Hugill held onto Lawrence Hill ward in Bristol by nine votes. Sorry, by NINE votes. We heard it was lost, then it was won, then a recount, and finally the declaration was like the sweetest melody I've heard. A mumbling old man with a quiet, gravelly, deep voice reading out a list of numbers was akin to the greatest composition ever made. I might add a fabulous addition from Kerry McCarthy MP and myself of a whimpering 'booooo' after the BNP result was read out. Yes, that declaration was musical.

Perhaps that was the highlight of the night, bad news was to come. 8 out of 10 Labour councillors up for election lost out. As Lib Dem newly elected, victorious councillors entered to applause and cheers, you would be forgiven for thinking Obama had entered the Council House. He hadn't. Bitter? Hell yes. Easton should have gone Labour, a fantastic candidate lost out by about 100 votes. 100 votes that may have come out had Ms Blears kept her embittered, disloyal and horrendously hypocritical trap shut. In fact, Ms Blears, would you like to come and explain to the residents and the candidate for Easton, who has worked day and night for months, why you felt the need to assert your now inexistent authority over our Prime Minister the day before an election where the price of failure was higher than ever? Where the price was fascism. Good luck in those grass roots, snakes lurk.

I hope, now our cabinet has been fumigated of the rats that snuggled in the crevasses of government, we can fight this year on policy. Shouting from each and every rooftop the necessity of Labour solutions to global and local problems. We need a Labour government, we need Labour councillors, we need Labour MPs, we need Labour values. We don't need Purnell. Labour isn't finished because he and his like have left government, in fact we're strengthened. Tumours have been removed.

And Hazel Blears can rock the boat, but it aint our boat you're rocking love. You've jumped ship.

*I have to mention, that contrary to Twitter reports regarding my extraordinary mystic meg predicitons of 'taxi time' in the 'I keep Faith' post, I am not Gordon Brown. Nor have I ever been Gordon Brown, nor do I have any intention of becoming Gordon Brown. He is the best man for the job of being Gordon Brown, with the most experience, and I am backing him 100%.
Phew, glad that's on record.

Friday 5th June. Plaster time.

2009-05-29T22:53:00.012+01:00

Those of us who fight the good fight all know the night of June 4th is going to be tough. Whether you're waiting to hear local election results in cold church halls or snuggled up in bed, relatively dubious and still fuming at the behaviour of a minority of members, the result of crumbling political faith will come home to roost and hit us all on the morning of June 5th. It'll be painful. Especially painful for many Labourites, who see the party as much more than a political body -it's almost a religion, which makes defeat, and perhaps more importantly distrust from the public, all the more crushing. Compare these elections to those of November 4th 2008 and you'll feel yourself deflate. Next Friday is last chance saloon for Labour. We may have no chance for the general election. Let's face it, we probably don't, but we should have. And Friday is D-Day. Decisions must be made and agendas formed. The results of these elections will be shockers. But, as Polly Toynbee has said in today's Guardian, shockers must result in change otherwise disaffection will spread even more fiercely than it has done so far.

Pounding the East Bristolian streets for the past couple of weeks, the public response has been rocky. The first weekend of Telegraph revelations brought wry smiles and occassional disapproving frowns. Come the weekend after, there was anger, anger which has not dissapated. Yet the people of East Bristol care that their homes are safe, their new schools are maintained and their communities are strengthened. That is where the faith comes back into politics. Not when people can see Chameleon grinning on BBC news 24, happy with his plans for the most unimpressive, bourgeois revolution of Westminster. Not then. But when things change around them. When they feel slighlty safer and slightly more secure. This is the message I've been hearing. Labour have been hurt by this scandal, and by others, but when it comes down to the nitty gritty, as David Miliband pointed out today, schoolkids in Bristol are ALL going to new or newly refurbished schools. Every one of them. That is the function of government. And that is what Labour is for, if we forget that, and forget to remind people of that, then we're finished. And deserve to be.

It's going to be a tough week. What's new? I'm not looking at polls, it's too depressing. Friday is plaster time. The PLP may need to go through some short sharp pain just to show people we're listening. There is a reason why Labour has won three terms of government. There is a reason why places like East Bristol return a (very fine!) Labour MP. Thursday may be a lost cause. Disaster put down to exceptionally horrific circumstances. Yet come Friday we have no excuse. Remind people of Labour's reason, if that means fresh faces at the top then so be it. We haven't the luxury of pride. People like those I've met recently won't forgive inertia. Friday the 5th June, make or break.

I keep faith* (in some of you)

2009-05-20T23:47:00.008+01:00

What would a Labour cabinet, sturdy and strong enough to lead us into the next election, look like? Even if you're from the school of thought that Labour have indeed no chance of getting anywhere near government come 2010 (a school I'm resisting going to with every fibre of my being), surely some improvements in cabinet could ensure Labour secure key reforms that may make eventual Tory years slightly more manageable. I think there are some members who are going great guns, Mr Johnson in particular, but it would be difficult to argue that changes couldn't be made to improve our chances. I'm also well aware many may come back with the witty reposte of 'none of 'em, hang the lot. OK. But revolution, and indeed immediate general elections aside, can we pick a fantasy cabinet and give no.10, who obviously refresh this blog hourly, some top tips for winning ways...

Let me suggest a few I'd go for:

RIGHT (H)ON:
Harriet Harman - stay. Equality Bill linked her inextricably to her job. Recently showed leadership as Leader of the House. Lot more to be done though, think she can oversee modernisation as she has emerged relatively cleanly from expenses scandal.
Alan Johnson - stay. Health dept. needs our best hitter. Heavyweight till the end. 2010 may bring promotion, ya never know.
Hilary Benn and Ed Miliband - stay. Pretty solid (and both emerged as clean as carbon capturing from expenses scandal).

TAXI TIME:
James Purnell - go, go, go. We'll shut our eyes and you can cross the floor. No one will know, I promise. Plus in it deep re capital gains tax
John Hutton - don't look him directly in the eyes. Many could do better, including Des Browne.
Hazel Blears - can't really come back from this and, although she didn't, it seems like she's undermining Gordo. Bad PR. Hazel should do more work within Labour party, inspiring action. Her call to arms at Labour conference was pretty impressive.
Geoff Hoon - Heathrow. 'nuff said. Expenses trouble.

Any suggestions? Or abuse? whichever.

*inspired by Mr. Bragg at weekend

Them and Us

2009-05-15T18:07:00.011+01:00

"We're all middle class now", not on your nelly. Blair's dream for a chocolate box, middle class, meritocratic England was exposed for what it is this week, from Westminster. Crap.

For any New Labourite or Compassionate Conservative who comforted themselves with the thought that centre ground politics had rid itself of the notion of a class war, this week proves otherwise. Moats, mole killers, light bulb changers, helipads, swimming pools and servants quarters (yes, that's what Sky news named one claim as)- all evidence for the distinct cultural divide that separates our two main parties . Here and now. It may be uncomfortable for those who squealed with glee at Blair's infamous declaration, but class in politics is as prevalent as ever. Labour MPs aren't faultless, in fact those who have cheated the system are probably worse. We should be above reproach. The upbringing of many a Labour MP , amongst the constituents they represent, should teach humility and a sense of right and wrong. They don't feature on the Eton Curriculum.

So many in the Tory party are, as much today as ever before, used to a level of decadence, where employing someone to change their light bulbs is normal. For anyone to believe, in all seriousness, that they can represent the entirety of this country is deluded. Prescott's claim for two toilet seats, and Shahid's claim for a telly emphasises the point, does it not? These are pretty mundane items. Cheeky, yet almost (and again, I say almost) endearing. Too far? ok.

Many working class commentators and voices, like Prescott, are mocked for seeming hard done by, bitter and twisted. With these revelations, and a peek through the letterbox of many of the Opposition, is it any surprise? The class struggle is as biting and bitter as ever, and that's where this public anger comes from. The age of austerity promoted by the Tory Party is more sickening than ever. How dare they. Austerity presumably would rule out a tax funded mole murderer?

I'm not saying that the rich shouldn't be in politics. Not at all. Yet surely the strength of the Labour Party is the diversity of its representatives...from Tony Benn and Harriet Haman to John Prescott and Alan Johnson, each one brings a slice of the British cake to the table. There is no such range in the Tory party, a range so necessary for a government to have. So, in a week where Tory MPs call for an 'opt out' of the minimum wage from their tennis courts, can we take a moment to digest the audacity, and then respectfully decline.

*I know Labour MPs have repaid more and probably quantitavely claimed more, I'm talking about the actual items though, and the culture they represent.*

When I grow up, I want to be...

2009-05-13T23:57:00.003+01:00

Just a quickie.... Had an interesting conversation with a young man today, we were discussing prospective careers after university and he asked me what I wanted to go 'into'. When I said politics, he looked at me with what I can only describe as utter contempt. It was as if I had said I'd quite like to go 'into' child trafficing. He promptly asked which party I was part of and my response seemed to tip him over the edge. His disgust turned to sympathy. He treated me as if I was slightly slow and perhaps mentally troubled. Once I'd proved my relative (and I say relative) sanity, it soon switched back to disgust.
Incidentally he declared a desire to go into investment banking, to make a fast buck, which he saw as veritably noble in comparison. Jesus.

These elections are about more than politics...our morality is at stake

2009-05-11T14:08:00.007+01:00

During a bit of a political weekend, there was one moment when, and it sounds cliché I admit, but time kind of stood still.
It was on Saturday afternoon and I was in the centre of Bristol at a Hope not Hate rally. An organisation set up to campaign against the BNP, trying to mobilise voters for the EU elections (not the most exciting I grant you), to keep fascism out of mainstream politics. The moment came when I read a quote from London BNP candidate Nick Eriksen, it is as follows:

"Rape is simply sex. Women enjoy sex, so rape cannot be such a terrible physical ordeal. To suggest that rape, when conducted without violence, is a serious crime is like suggesting that force feeding a woman chocolate cake is a heinous offence. A woman would be more inconvenienced by having her handbag snatched."

I think I'll leave it there. Suffice to say, that they may not be the most exciting elections in the world, but the price of apathy is incomprehensible.
June 4th - don't let that be the day this country was tarred, with this most dispicable brush, forever.

20 point lead? That has it's price...

2009-05-08T21:59:00.004+01:00

Brown bashing, possibly, turned a corner this week. I think PMQs did it. It had all gone too far. Bear bating of the PM, with some justified points I admit, leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. It must approaching bullying mustn't it? Yes he's the PM but, as even Cameron admitted this week, no one doubts Brown came into politics for the right reasons. No one would sign up for this. No one should have to. We are undoubtedly laying the foundations for the type of leader I certainly don't want.

What I don't understand, and the point of this blog, is why Cameron has had it so easy? Even the left leaning papers don't seem intent on exposing his lack of substance. A McBride-ite agenda shouldn't be pursued. I'm not talking about personal attacks at all. But if this 'chap' really is on the verge of leading our country (I'm crossing anything I can while writing this sentence) shouldn't the media be exposing his lack of policy? The 20 point lead has a price of accountbility, or should do anyway. Shouldn't the hypocrisy of his 'age of austerity' while he sits comfortably in his million pound + home in Notting Hill be staring us in the face? (It's very nice by the way...my school was round the corner)

If the threat of a Tory government is imminent, then the media should be asking pressing questions of Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne., and doing so now. Would they keep SureStart? Would they maintain similar levels of investment in the NHS? Would they keep the Apprentices scheme? (No, no, no-by the way)An age of austerity will have victims. Surely we have the right to know who they'd be.

Cameron said he had recently recognised the greatness of the NHS because of his son's treatment. That worried me. I'm sure a lot of the Tory cabinet use private healthcare... If Ivan Cameron had been born a healthy baby boy, would his father not have recognised the value of our national service on which the vast majority of us rely? I have relied on the NHS in the past 5 or so years, having two episodes of meningitis and a heart operation - I think I'm what you would call a 'drain on the system'. However, I recognised the necessity and value of the service before relying on it. That is the strength, I feel, of the Labour movement. A lot of Labour MPs will never be hard up, look at Tony Benn for goodness sake, but they recognise the need to provide for those who are. I think it's something called socialism.

The media aren't on Labour's side, The People has even turned away, and it's not surprising after 12 years. But they'll all surely be complaining when Tory cuts mean public services are whittled away.The Mirror and The Guardian do their bit, but surely the vast majority of the press should see it as their duty to scrutinise those on the edge of power? In doing so, they may be pushed ever so slightly further away.

Thank Gord for that...

2009-05-05T14:46:00.004+01:00

At last a message from on high. What are Labour doing in recession? This...
Policy, Policy, Policy. Nice.

No Woman No Cry?

2009-04-26T23:21:00.004+01:00

Do women in government get a harder time than their male counterparts?

The recent furore surrounding Ms Smith was gold for tabloids - sex, shame and a home secretary all in one story...not since "back to basics" have journalists had an easier day, or week, at work. I'm not sure, though, if it would have been the same for a man. If Jack Straw's (for a random example) wife had claimed for some naughty little extras would they're have been a constant hounding of the guy, a media vying for blood, content with nothing less. Was everyone secretly waiting for the woman to fail as home secretary, it's not a woman's job after all is it - police , guns and nasty, scary criminals and all.

Similarly, the name Harriet Harman is enough to provoke the nastiest reaction in the nicest of people. Now, I'm biased but I think she's fab (she told me to be a MP and I almost fainted). However not many do, even within the party many (including a minister who I thought better of) shudder at any mention of the harrier. Maybe a strong woman, not afraid to speak her mind, is too much to take. Alright she can break that ceiling, just as long as she keeps quiet once she's up there. When she spoke for the public on Fred the Shred's pension she was hushed by the Downing Street machine. Even if she is a formidable character who's difficult to warm to, so are many men in government - John Hutton's hardly a loveable rogue for God's sake.I think she probably gets the hard time she does simply because of her gender. A man fighting for the rights she does would be hailed as a hero, would he not?
Oh and Hazel Blears. Maybe even the mention of her name suffices to expand on my point.

*Would mention Ruth Kelly but I don't like her either.

Clear Red Lines

2009-04-22T22:49:00.008+01:00

"Where's my apology?" asked Nadine Dorries for her Prime Minister's question on an historic day for the country. Sod the economy, sod the poor, sod the unemployed...what about me, me, me? Again and how I hate to do it, but there my friends lies evidence for Tory priorities. Lloyd George would be spinning in his grave.

Meanwhile in the real world where politicians debate policies and running the country, Darling drew clear red lines between us and the party who believe we should walk on our own, or be left to crawl on our knees. Unafraid of retreating on a New Labour promise, he taxed the wealthy to pay for securing the future of a generation. The price of not doing so, and a disaffected, unemployed youth is too high to contemplate.
I hope there are little or no cuts in public services - a legacy of New Labour will always be record investment in the NHS and education. What we must do now is exploit the opportunity that unpopularity yields.
It can't get much worse, many expect Cam&Co to ride into Downing St next year, if we commit ourselves to being, once again, the party answerable to the people of this country and not to the City then we have at least our moral integrity to boast. I know many New Labourites are as allergic to the notion of morality in politics as many a Tory, but morals, they may be making a comeback. May even be 'trendy' again. If, which is still possible, this display of Labour bravery and commitment transfers to the polls then who knows what may happen.

Conversely, the severest downturn since WWII could wake our party up and bring disaffected Labour voters back. In doing so, maybe just maybe, there's a chance that the Etonians may have to wait longer than a year to get their mucky hands on the power they so crave.

Harry Potter and the chamber of the Commons.

2009-04-17T23:08:00.010+01:00

Do celebrities have a place in politics? I've often wondered whether or not famous types who 'come out' as a certain Party's supporter really do help (or indeed hinder) said party's electoral appeal. Would it be underestimating voters to suggest that celebs hold sway over their decisions?
Cheryl Cole, the nation's favourite pint sized Geordie, said in Vogue the other month that she was a Brown supporter, suggesting Cameron was a bit creepy. Hands up, I got a bit excited. Well, I suppose it can't hurt can it? But no 'Chezza-bounce' was reported.Which got me thinking, could celebs make any difference at all, does it depend on who's endorsing who, or should they just keep their bouches shut?

Let's be fair, Labour have cooler 'stars' to reel off as supporters, though it wouldn't be hard, - Eddie Izzard, Jo Brand, Stephen Fry(I maintain he must still be Labour contrary to recent reports), Alan Rickman, Jason Isaacs, Patrick Stewart, Noel Gallagher, Ken Loach, Billy Bragg and the touch of stardust from JK Rowling, I could go on, for a bit. The Tories on the other hand have relatively few to boast, at least few that admit to their Tory tastes...someone once said the following list resembled the dinner party from hell. Here goes, deep breath Cilla Black, Ian Botham, Frank Bruno, Joan Collins, Ronnie Corbett, Paul Daniels, Jim Davidson, Ken Dodd, Nick Faldo, Anneka Rice, Peter Stringfellow, Anthony Worral Thompson and Marco Pierre White. I invite you to boycott any product or programme affiliated to those in blue.

So does any of this make a difference? Should Labour be ringing JK to hop on board Prezza's GoFourth bus round the country? Should Cameron be approaching the delightful and politically astute Jim Davidson for some priceless A-list endorsements? I can see the amount of question marks that litter this blog, but I really want to know. CelebPoliticos - could they even increase participation in politics? Although it might be rather depressing, maybe it's a pragmatic marriage of two very separate worlds.

*I apologise for any offence caused by the photograph used. He's not funny and he's not clever, I know.

In Place of Fear

2009-04-16T23:07:00.005+01:00

The luxury of opposition in recession is bewildering. Tory policy on the economy (despite Carol Vorderman's expert help) , the NHS, housing (despite Kirsty Allsopp's expert help) and pretty much any other area remains as elusive as ever. When they back the Government's stance on this economic crisis, they are seen as honourable - putting party politics aside and recognising the gravity of the situation we face. When they oppose Govt. spending, they're seen as the voice of "us taxpayers", standing up to the state-worshipping spendthrifts who care not -a- jot about public debt.
Fine, Labour had many years enjoying the luxury of being the 'anti-establishment' party, the voice of the people. The Tories can have their moment. One Tory tactic though, maddens me. Fear.
Tories have always capitalised on public worries, divide and conquer, destroy unionised workers - power in the hands of the working many is dangerous. That has been pretty evident, those who reject such tactics usually reject the party. What Cam&Co, however, have done recently scrapes the barrell of Tory morality. They say we are saddling our children with a debt they will be paying off on their deathbeads. Nice one, bring in the kids, death and debt. Cast the net wide, sure to hit more nerves that way. This emotional blackmail is real sleaze, slippery politics which preys on the most vulnerable and fearful in our society. What C&C neglect to mention is the price of 'doing nothing' at the moment. "Shortchanging the future" was what Obama called it, the social cost of a generation of unemployed young people can't be measured in terms of GDP.
So let's reject the use of fear by this policy-free party. In times like these it shows what they're really made of. Not empowering the people, but keeping us quiet, scared and desperate. Please God, not that desperate.

A rule for one...

2009-04-15T23:11:00.004+01:00

When first hearing of 'smeargate' I was hugely annoyed. What really got me was the fact that the laziness and childish acts of one unelected employee of No 10 and another self-elected representative of the Labour Party could drag us through the mud in such a way. The subject of this blog, though is not 'smeargate', it's hypocrisy.
May I firstly say that the content of those emails was below the belt, unnecessary and infantile.
However, I have never seen interviews as sanctimonious and opportunistic as the ones I've seen over the past 5 days. Nadine Dorries and Chris Grayling (not to mention Iain Dale and Guido Fawkes[?!]) pop up on the BBC or Sky news about once every half hour. They talk of how shocked and hurt they were by the content of the emails and how 'regret' wasn't good enough. They want blood God damn it. So if the reverberations from the stamping of Etonian feet hasn't yet reached Downing Street, may I cut in? You want your sorry? We're still waiting for ours.

The stench of hypocrisy reeks. About three weeks ago, John Prescott brought a piece of footage to light on his GoFourth website. Tory MEP Daniel Hannan had featured on Fox News, he talked of how Obama was wasting our good old 'taxpayer's money' etc. etc. and then he said something frightening. He spoke of the NHS being a 'failed socialist experiment', he warned America of the perils of 'socialized medicine' and suggested our National system had been a mistake. I watched mouth agape, I have to say I was raging. After Prezza had called for Cameron to distance himself from these comments there was silence. No statement. No 'regret'. No sorry.

If Cameron can stand by, silent, whilst one of his party's elected representatives preaches that our NHS was a '60 year mistake', then how dare he spark up demanding a sorry from Brown over petty, infantile emails? Either they are both responsible for their subordinates or not? Surely this is telling. Cameron preoccupies himself with party political jousting and one-up man ship (the crimes with which he charges Draper&co) whilst one in his own ranks denounces the most important public service we have and he's tongue tied. If playground, bully-boy emails were worth a statement, why isn't the rubbishing of our NHS?
I regretfully demonstrate Tory priorities. Sorry.

12 years New?

2009-04-14T18:22:00.004+01:00

'New Labour' has been in government for almost 12 years now, as a political machine it has been operating even longer. I make no secret of the fact that, although I understand NL has brought electoral success- the likes of which 'Old Labour' had never done, I have never been a huge fan. Generations of my family have been members of the Labour Party, yet as soon as 'New Labour' came into being, they left. I could understand the need for a centre-left reinvention in times of 'boom' when Thatcher's individualistic influence had changed the psyche of our country and rendered 'socialism' the dirtiest of words. But times have changed.

This "credit crunch"(doesn't that phrase trivialise this crisis?..."like a credit crunch with your tea love?") is a force for change the likes of which I have never seen. This is the time for Labour to shed it's cloak of insipidity and become reborn. The People's flag aint deepest pink after all. When public sentiment swings against bankers instead of 'benefit scroungers' and Nationalisation becomes a word one can now use in polite company, an opportunity has arisen - one we can't afford to let pass. Polly Toynbee called for "strong red lines" to distinguish Labour from the Tories. There are many differences. But there could be more. Is it therefore time to ditch the 'New' from 'New Labour' and become what we always were once again, not old, not new, just Labour. After all something that's over fifteen years old is not really New after all, is it?

The Brink of the Abyss?

2009-04-12T22:58:00.001+01:00

I stand here, on the brink of the abyss. Ready to dive into the blogging arena for the first time. I won't begin with a 'real' blog, need to accustom myself to this first.
All I'll say is that I hope anyone who reads what will follow enjoys it's content, I'm sure it may evoke extreme opinion...which I look forward to.