'It is interesting to see each week in the letters page that the election is under way with the Conservatives, Labour and even UKIP having an enjoyable time attacking each other. But I hope the voters won’t forget the Liberal Democrats.
'I agree with Roger Truelove, the Labour chairman, that we should have a positive debate about national and local issues and how we should approach the challenges facing us – and we look forward to that debate during the campaign. But the bottom line is that the Labour government has failed and is now drifting through its last days of power.
'Meanwhile, the Conservatives concentrate on negative attacks to disguise their lack of ideas and vision in the assumption that they only have to turn up to win. To be fair, they may well be right.
'Only the Liberal Democrats have a positive agenda for change with tax cuts, a green economy, genuine political reform and an ambitious programme for education investment – and that’s just for starters.
'I hope those who do not want to see Gordon Henderson sitting on the Tory benches as our next MP will consider the only real alternative.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Letter in Sunday Telegraph - 16 August
'Daniel Hannan is right to praise the use of an open primary in Totnes but forgets to state that, even if all MPs were selected this way, the end result would remain an unrepresentative parliament, still disproportionate to the voters wishes.
'The best answer is to adopt an electoral system known as Single Transferable Voting (STV). This is a method of large constituences with a number of MPs and allows voters to choose the individuals they want, rather than parties. A Tory voter would be able to choose from more than one candidate (as Mr Hannan encourages).
'An advantage would be that voters could vote against their MP (if angry over his/her expenses) but still vote for someone from that party, which they can't do at present.
'This is a more flexible and democratic process and the end result, although not exactly proportional representation, would be a far more representative parliament than is currently the case. I would encourage our politicians to back this method.
'The best answer is to adopt an electoral system known as Single Transferable Voting (STV). This is a method of large constituences with a number of MPs and allows voters to choose the individuals they want, rather than parties. A Tory voter would be able to choose from more than one candidate (as Mr Hannan encourages).
'An advantage would be that voters could vote against their MP (if angry over his/her expenses) but still vote for someone from that party, which they can't do at present.
'This is a more flexible and democratic process and the end result, although not exactly proportional representation, would be a far more representative parliament than is currently the case. I would encourage our politicians to back this method.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
The debate to have a debate
At every election, the topic arises of a US-style debate between the leaders, and you can’t beat the cut and thrust of a good verbal battle of ideas and propositions.
However debates can be blamed for losing elections but never credited for winning. Nixon’s performance against Kennedy in 1960 and Ford’s Poland gaffe in 1976 are just two examples. For this reason we are, alas, unlikely to ever see them here. It is usually the one who is behind in the polls who is keen for it to happen – hence Labour’s current interest.
For our part, we should not, of course, fear a debate on financial issues. Vince Cable should be able to comfortably wipe the floor with Alastair Darling and George Osborne. It is sad that the most able candidate for Chancellor is the least likely to get it – but such is life. Indeed I myself have been turned down for jobs in favour of less able candidates - some of whom then leave within two years.
At the last election Tony Blair argued that the leaders debate every week in the Commons – but the yah boo session whereby both leaders shout abuse at it other roared on by 300 rabble rousers is hardly the same as a civilised discussion.
Parliament has of course seen many great debaters over the years. Recent examples include Michael Foot, Enoch Powell and Tony Benn. You would take these guys on at your peril. But now leading politicians often avoid a proper debate like the plague.
In Sittingbourne, the Conservative candidate, Gordon Henderson, is a virtual dead-cert to win the seat. Would he have a public debate with the other candidates during the campaign next year? Perhaps not, but I might ask him nearer the time.
However debates can be blamed for losing elections but never credited for winning. Nixon’s performance against Kennedy in 1960 and Ford’s Poland gaffe in 1976 are just two examples. For this reason we are, alas, unlikely to ever see them here. It is usually the one who is behind in the polls who is keen for it to happen – hence Labour’s current interest.
For our part, we should not, of course, fear a debate on financial issues. Vince Cable should be able to comfortably wipe the floor with Alastair Darling and George Osborne. It is sad that the most able candidate for Chancellor is the least likely to get it – but such is life. Indeed I myself have been turned down for jobs in favour of less able candidates - some of whom then leave within two years.
At the last election Tony Blair argued that the leaders debate every week in the Commons – but the yah boo session whereby both leaders shout abuse at it other roared on by 300 rabble rousers is hardly the same as a civilised discussion.
Parliament has of course seen many great debaters over the years. Recent examples include Michael Foot, Enoch Powell and Tony Benn. You would take these guys on at your peril. But now leading politicians often avoid a proper debate like the plague.
In Sittingbourne, the Conservative candidate, Gordon Henderson, is a virtual dead-cert to win the seat. Would he have a public debate with the other candidates during the campaign next year? Perhaps not, but I might ask him nearer the time.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Kick off is nearly with us
Today is the first of August and that means one thing - yes, the start of the football season is soon upon us. I've got my FourFourTwo season preview so am almost ready for the kick off. The first live TV game is on Thursday on ITV4 in a game where Fulham are already three up against some team from Lithuania - but a drought is a drought.
My earlier grumble about Sky/ESPN/Setanta etc seems to have nearly reached a solution with ESPN possibly being available on Freeview. Hopefully they will sort this out before the Premiership starts. ESPN is showing the beautiful game from England, Scotland, Germany, Holland, Portugal, Russia (!) and the USA. That's a lot of footy.
This season, for a change, I think I will follow League One (what we used to call the third division). Not only does this appear to be the most competitive of the four divisions (can you guess the top four so easily) but, by co-incidence it contains my team (Norwich City), my local team (Gillingham), the local team of where I grew up (Wycombe) as well as the teams of some friends of mine (Leeds, Southampton, Charlton). Piece of luck eh?
And of course any mention of football must make us think of Sir Bobby Robson who I am sure will get a deserved minute's applause at many of the first games. He was responsible for Ipswich Town being a decent team, and gave us Paul Gascoigne and Jose Mourinho - but let's not hold that against him. He was a jolly good chap and our second best England manager. Rest in Peace Sir Bobby.
My earlier grumble about Sky/ESPN/Setanta etc seems to have nearly reached a solution with ESPN possibly being available on Freeview. Hopefully they will sort this out before the Premiership starts. ESPN is showing the beautiful game from England, Scotland, Germany, Holland, Portugal, Russia (!) and the USA. That's a lot of footy.
This season, for a change, I think I will follow League One (what we used to call the third division). Not only does this appear to be the most competitive of the four divisions (can you guess the top four so easily) but, by co-incidence it contains my team (Norwich City), my local team (Gillingham), the local team of where I grew up (Wycombe) as well as the teams of some friends of mine (Leeds, Southampton, Charlton). Piece of luck eh?
And of course any mention of football must make us think of Sir Bobby Robson who I am sure will get a deserved minute's applause at many of the first games. He was responsible for Ipswich Town being a decent team, and gave us Paul Gascoigne and Jose Mourinho - but let's not hold that against him. He was a jolly good chap and our second best England manager. Rest in Peace Sir Bobby.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
The axe of friendly fire
Sometimes in politics, one doesn’t agree with the leadership. I did not agree, for example, with our decision to abandon the pledge for a referendum on the Lisbon treaty. Nor the decision not to oppose David Davis at his self-declared by-election.
It was on the coach home yesterday that I opened the Evening Standard to see the headline that the Lib Dems were considering axing key pledges – and my heart sank to the floor. Free tuition fees – higher state pensions – all vote-winning eye-catching polices but were now ‘up for review’. In my mind’s eye I had the image of voting papers turning to dust.
It is difficult enough being a Liberal Democrat and getting your argument across to people without your leaders then saying that the message we have all struggled to project might not go ahead after all.
A criticism of the old Liberal-SDP Alliance was that it had no policies or beliefs. With the Liberal Democrats it is the opposite – not only are there too many policies, but they change so fast it is difficult for us members to keep up. I disagreed with the policy to reduce income tax by 4%, as I thought you could not make such a drastic cut coming into government. As I put my case to my local party, the policy was dropped – admittedly for a more sensible one.
I accept the argument that we must be responsible and honest with the electorate (although the other two parties do quite well without this) but with less than a year to an election, we cannot say to the electorate – ‘this is our programme but we might axe bits of it’. It makes us look confused and indecisive and provides ammunition to our opponents.
Faversham Lib Dem barbecue on Sunday. A good time to gauge some opinion from my colleagues over the burgers.
It was on the coach home yesterday that I opened the Evening Standard to see the headline that the Lib Dems were considering axing key pledges – and my heart sank to the floor. Free tuition fees – higher state pensions – all vote-winning eye-catching polices but were now ‘up for review’. In my mind’s eye I had the image of voting papers turning to dust.
It is difficult enough being a Liberal Democrat and getting your argument across to people without your leaders then saying that the message we have all struggled to project might not go ahead after all.
A criticism of the old Liberal-SDP Alliance was that it had no policies or beliefs. With the Liberal Democrats it is the opposite – not only are there too many policies, but they change so fast it is difficult for us members to keep up. I disagreed with the policy to reduce income tax by 4%, as I thought you could not make such a drastic cut coming into government. As I put my case to my local party, the policy was dropped – admittedly for a more sensible one.
I accept the argument that we must be responsible and honest with the electorate (although the other two parties do quite well without this) but with less than a year to an election, we cannot say to the electorate – ‘this is our programme but we might axe bits of it’. It makes us look confused and indecisive and provides ammunition to our opponents.
Faversham Lib Dem barbecue on Sunday. A good time to gauge some opinion from my colleagues over the burgers.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Back to business
Back to the fray as we had our first Sittingbourne Lib Dem meeting since the county council elections. This time to talk tactics regarding 2010 – when 16 of Swale’s 47 council seats are up for grabs. We are defending one while the Tories are defending 11 and Labour hanging on to four. The Conservatives will be hoping to increase their current majority of nine.
One complicating factor is that these elections may be the same day as a general election which will mean a higher turnout and that voters will have national issues more in mind. On the other hand, if Mr Brown decides to cling on to the very last second, he can go the full distance and have an election in June 2010.
I shall hope to be a candidate myself but whoever wins these 16 wards will only have a year to get comfy before getting back on the pavement – as the Council will be ‘all out’ in 2001 with all 47 seats being re-elected. This is a result of a Labour government granting a Conservative council request to alter the voting timetable with the aim of severely handicapping the smaller parties – especially the Lib Dems, as we don’t have the deep pockets of our two bigger colleagues. However, having said that, the Tories did very well in the county council elections despite doing hardly any work. So maybe less is more.
Of course, of all parties, Labour and the Conservatives have the cosiest relationship - as they have, for them, the perfect political system – where they can take turns to hold unrepresentative power and keep out anyone else who wants to get involved, while we go from one economic crisis to the next. It would be interesting if we were ever to introduce democracy.
One complicating factor is that these elections may be the same day as a general election which will mean a higher turnout and that voters will have national issues more in mind. On the other hand, if Mr Brown decides to cling on to the very last second, he can go the full distance and have an election in June 2010.
I shall hope to be a candidate myself but whoever wins these 16 wards will only have a year to get comfy before getting back on the pavement – as the Council will be ‘all out’ in 2001 with all 47 seats being re-elected. This is a result of a Labour government granting a Conservative council request to alter the voting timetable with the aim of severely handicapping the smaller parties – especially the Lib Dems, as we don’t have the deep pockets of our two bigger colleagues. However, having said that, the Tories did very well in the county council elections despite doing hardly any work. So maybe less is more.
Of course, of all parties, Labour and the Conservatives have the cosiest relationship - as they have, for them, the perfect political system – where they can take turns to hold unrepresentative power and keep out anyone else who wants to get involved, while we go from one economic crisis to the next. It would be interesting if we were ever to introduce democracy.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Our MP has resigned
The big local news this week has been the decision by Derek Wyatt, our Labour MP, not to stand at the next election. He has been MP for Sittingbourne and Sheppey since 1997, although he only held on in 2005 with a majority of 79. He has said it is for family reasons following his divorce and I think the fact that he has to defend a tiny majority against what looks like will be a nasty Conservative campaign was too much.
Like most MPs he got hit by the expenses scandal and his decision to take the second home allowance and not live in this area. He put his foot in it by saying this was because he found the commute from Sittingbourne to Westminster very exhausting. I quite agree, Derek, as I have been doing it for five years - as do hundreds of others!
By all accounts Derek Wyatt has been a good and hard working constituency MP, but unfortunately for him he has the word 'Labour' attached and hence is associated with our dire government.
On the eve of the county council elections, the Conservatives did a mail shot detailing Derek Wyatt's expenses - a rather unnecessary and negative attack in my opinion. The Tory candidate has promised not to claim the second home allowance - that will be interesting.
It is almost certain that the Conservative party will pick up this seat at the next election - then we in Sittingbourne will have a Tory borough council, a Tory county council and a Tory MP under a probable Tory government. Won't we be the lucky ones?
Like most MPs he got hit by the expenses scandal and his decision to take the second home allowance and not live in this area. He put his foot in it by saying this was because he found the commute from Sittingbourne to Westminster very exhausting. I quite agree, Derek, as I have been doing it for five years - as do hundreds of others!
By all accounts Derek Wyatt has been a good and hard working constituency MP, but unfortunately for him he has the word 'Labour' attached and hence is associated with our dire government.
On the eve of the county council elections, the Conservatives did a mail shot detailing Derek Wyatt's expenses - a rather unnecessary and negative attack in my opinion. The Tory candidate has promised not to claim the second home allowance - that will be interesting.
It is almost certain that the Conservative party will pick up this seat at the next election - then we in Sittingbourne will have a Tory borough council, a Tory county council and a Tory MP under a probable Tory government. Won't we be the lucky ones?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)