Lunchtime Legend

Yes to AV, Yes to Equal Constituencies, but not like this.

I am a long standing and passionate supporter of electoral reform. I feel that our current system of voting is manifestly unfair and skews our public policy agenda in favour of the few and not the many. The alternative vote is far from perfect, it isn’t the system I would chose but it is better than the status quo.

So I was delighted when the Labour promised to back AV in the manifesto. And whilst I was devastated to see the Tories back in power a small crumb of comfort for me was that part of the coalition agreement would deliver a referendum on electoral reform that I hoped would make our politics better.

AV ballot paper

I also support, in principle, the idea of equal sized constituencies. It is clearly inarguable that in a democracy this is a desirable, and necessary thing. It has long been a tenet of progressive and left wing politics, dating back to the chartists, that we should have equal sized constituencies.

But the problem for me is the basis on which the Condems are trying to introduce the equal sized constituencies; namely that of the existing electoral roll. The problem with this is that there are millions of eligible voters not currently on the electoral register.

People not on the electoral register are disproportionately the poor, the young and those form ethnic minorities. It will be fundamentally and in principal wrong to draw new constituencies without first making real efforts to get these people onto the roll.

Or better still if we are going to move to equal size constituencies lets base them on numbers of people eligible to register to vote. This would be fairer, and more democratic, and it would also make it impossible for the wreckers in both Labour and the Tory parties to oppose constitutional reform.

The Tories have obviously set Labour a trap here and it is necessary to act wisely and cautiously. By tying the AV referendum (something that is a Labour manifesto pledge) to boundary reform that Labour can never accept they are putting Labour into a difficult position.

For me the sensible course of action would be to make it clear that Labour will offer full support to the bill on the proviso that the basis of equal sized constituencies is changed to those eligible to register. This would put the ball back in the Governments court and it would be them, rather than us who seem unreasonable.

So in short Yes to AV, Yes to equal constituencies, no to the dishonest way the government are basing the boundary reviews.

Crime and Punishment

Some time ago in my “5 reasons to be optimistic…” blog I suggested that it was possible that there might be some elements of the con-dem agenda that we would (whisper it) actually be quite pleased with on the left.

Not the economic class warfare on the poor that the con-dems are engaging in, nor the attempt to deconstruct universal education, nor for that matter most of their public policy agenda. But where they do seem to have stolen a march is in terms of the Liberty agenda.

I agree whole heartedly with Diane Abbott when she wonders, in exasperation, how we ever let the Tories be to the left of us on civil liberties.

Prison

So therefore I had mixed emotions last week when listening to Ken Clarke’s speech about penal policy. These emotions were mixed because I found myself agreeing with most of what he had to say, and then tearing my hair out at Jack Straws response.

Basically Clarke made a break away from the Michael Howard “Prison Works” dogma which has driven penal and criminal justice policy in the UK since the early 90s. Clarke noted that the current levels of incarceration in prison today would have seemed unbelievable in the early 90s, and further that most European countries have proportionately lower prison populations and lower crime.

I doubt that the Tories have undergone any particular Damascene conversion to a more thoughtful and progressive policy of Criminal Justice. I rather suspect that when Clark lambasted Labour for “Conducting policy with a chequebook in one hand and the Daily Mail in the other” the emphasis was very much on the former.

Despite this, the policy here offers a real prospect of a public policy change for the better. Labour have been locked into a destructive arms race that we can *never* win on Criminal Justice. It does not matter what we do, how hard, how illiberal, how shrill we are it will never satisfy the Mail, the Express or Disgusted form Tonbridge Wells.

Instead we now have an opportunity to argue for a more sensible and evidence Criminal Justice Policy. One that recognises that the causes of crime are varied, and that being “tough on the causes” of crime does not mean just banging more people up.

Maybe we can argue for a more sensible drugs policy? Or at the very least properly funded treatment for addicts. Perhaps we could be looking at things like restorative justice, which has been shown to have a significant impact on the recidivism of offenders.

But mostly this con-dem switch will allow us to maybe position ourselves on the side of the Angels again. The Labour Party could just try to score some cheap political points in the face of this as Jack Straw has tried to do. If we do this we are missing one of the tricks in respect of why Labour lost the election.

It would be better, and more progressive if we tried to be positive and dream of a good society. One in which we do not have the highest prison population in Europe, and in which we look to genuinely reduce crime, rather than just react to it.

Why an embarrassing exit might be good for England.

Like most England fans I was apoplectic on Friday evening at the standard of the performance it simply wasn’t good enough. Abject, turgid, disastrous, ponderous were just some of the words that sprung to mind to describe the performance. On the other hand I certainly wasn’t surprised at this. I knew England were not the side others seem to think it is, all the same the degree to which we played badly was shocking.

I spent a lot of time on the blower to various pals of mine that evening talking

Continue reading Why an embarrassing exit might be good for England.

My take on the Labour Leader TV hustings last night.

As I come from Plymouth in the sleepy Westcountry it is very unlikely that I will be able to attend a Labour Leader hustings in person. This in of itself is a concern; Plymouth is a reasonably big city in an area of the country where Labour did appallingly at the election. There are two key marginals here we lost one, and narrowly held the other. I kinda think that a party keen on learning lessons would come here….

That aside the fact that I probably won’t get an opportunity to

Continue reading My take on the Labour Leader TV hustings last night.

What next for the Labour Party?

Whatever hopes and dreams people may have for a “new politics” or for a different pluralist model in a world after electoral reform, the Truth is there is only one option now for those who oppose government. That is the Labour Party, if the Tories are not the principal party in Government after the next election then they won’t be replaced by Lib Dems, Greens, or one of the plethora of Left Wing Parties. That is the realpolitik.

What should be the questions for Trade Unions and the left is:-

What kind

Continue reading What next for the Labour Party?

Some idle speculation about the future for Political Parties.

Providing the Con-Dem coalition doesn’t volcanically explode in only a few months due to falling outs and fundamental incompatibility then there is every chance that for good or for bad the coalition will re-shape, and re-mould British politics and it could end up having a profound effect on our party structure. Particularly if voting reform happens.

I am massively in favour of voting reform, I think changing “the rules of the game” will have a massive impact on how the game is played. And a proper pluralism in our Party system,

Continue reading Some idle speculation about the future for Political Parties.

Five reasons to be optimistic despite the Con-Dem Government.

Let’s be honest, Labour losing the election and the Tories getting the keys to number 10 is not, and cannot be considered a good thing. Hard times will come for the country, and the trade union movement, and working people in general. But despite this I think there are some reasons to be cautiously optimistic that this may not be quite as bad as we had feared.

1. The Tories didn’t win.

This election was there for them, the Labour party had been in power for 13 years was becoming deeply unpopular.

Continue reading Five reasons to be optimistic despite the Con-Dem Government.

Football needs “socio” fan ownership.

Whilst this season has seen some fantastically unpredictable football, that has surely thrilled most fans, and certainly the neutral, for me the most striking thing that has been happening this season in terms of football has been the growing financial crisis.

Whilst this has been simmering under the surface for years it really seems to be coming to the fore, firstly with Conference side Chester City being wound up and expelled from the Conference to the soap opera that has been Portsmouth FC in the Premier League.

That well known clubs may

Continue reading Football needs “socio” fan ownership.

I’m against the TV leaders’ debates.

I need to start this by saying I am sure the part leaders TV debates will be very interesting. I will watch them and probably crack out some popcorn. But the truth is I do not think they will be good or healthy for our democracy.

The problem is that the TV debates will inevitably lead to a “dumbing down” of politics to the basic sound bite slogan level. Further people will, even more than they do now, make judgements based on appearances. Famously in the 1960 US presidential election John

Continue reading I’m against the TV leaders’ debates.

Lunchtime Legend

Categories

Archives

Last.fm RPS