John Nicholson, a former Labour councillor and deputy leader of Manchester City Council, has written a very straight to the point blog post in response to Derek Wall's recent piece in the Morning Star. In it he explains why anti-racist voters on the left should back the Greens to keep out the BNP. John isn't a member of the Greens, so you have to read this post as someone on the left looking as a practical and sensible way for anti-racists to unite and beat the BNP.
With UKIP in continuing disarray it seems unlikely they will gain more votes than the BNP in this region, which leaves anti-racist voters to decide best to cast a tactical vote, because UKIP no longer look credible challengers for a seat. They have no councillors in the North West and finish behind us in council byelections or simply don't stand.
I'm going to play devil's advocate for moment. Let me make the case for the Lib Dems, Labour and the Tories as the best tactical anti-racist vote. So how do the cases for the other parties stack up in this region, if for example the BNP get 8.5%?
Lib Dem Arguments
The latest Lib Dem internal circular in the North West says:
"We will be fighting a tough campaign in the North West this year, particularly as Nick Griffin and the BNP are targeting our region to gain a seat in the European Parliament for their vile views. In 2004 we got more than twice as many votes as them so we got 2 seats while they got none. We need to do the same again this time. Every penny raised helps us get more Lib Dem votes to stop the BNP."
So the Lib Dems would have to gain 17% or more of the vote in this region, winning two seats, and thus denying the final seat to the BNP. What are their current prospects? Not good. In the pre-2004 election period, the Lib Dems consistently polled 22 to 30% nationally. Right now, they are consistently polling 12 to 19%, with only two rogue polls giving them a rating equal to their lowest poll rating in 2004.
But let's give them the benefit of the doubt. Imagine that a lot of people vote tactically for the Liberal Democrats to stop the BNP, and the Lib Dems were to get 17.1% - does that see off the BNP? Actually no, because they also need one of two other things to happen as well. The Lib Dem argument depends on either the Tories gaining 34% or more of the vote in this region (a 10% increase on last time) or Labour gaining more than 25.5% (a drop of less than 2%).
If either Labour or the Tories don't succeed in getting those respective shares of the votes, then it won't matter that the Lib Dems have won 2 seats, because the BNP will still win a seat.
Labour Arguments
Labour hold 3 seats in this region at the moment and no doubt want to try and avoid losing one of them, in what is likely to be a really tough election for them. Andy Newman writes at Socialist Unity Network:
"...the BNP also need to be defeated at the ballot box. That means voting, and while it is generally helpful for people to vote for any other party except the BNP, the left must be absolutely clear that beating the BNP in the North West means voting Labour. The campaigns from Searchlight will not call for a Labour vote and will just say vote to keep out the BNP, and I am sure that UAF will say the same. But in reality only voting Labour will stop them."
Let's assume that Labour win 3 seats, gaining 25.6% or more of the vote. Does that stop the BNP winning a seat? Once again, it really depends on how the other parties do. It stops the BNP if the Tories also get a 10% increase in their vote or if the Lib Dems also increase their vote.
So does the claim that "in reality only voting Labour will stop them" hold up? No. It isn't the full picture and it doesn't give anti-racist voters a full analysis, but that isn't the fault of the writer on this occasion. D'Hondt is complex, and simplistic calls from Labour to vote (Theresa) Griffin to stop (Nick) Griffin are to blame. These don't do Labour any favours. We need absolute honesty from all anti-racist parties to maximise the anti-BNP vote.
Conservative Arguments
I haven't seen any. I've not seen a single Tory argument that they are the best vote to stop the BNP. What is true though is that their vote share (as they are likely to gain the biggest share of the vote in this region) is going to be a crucial factor in determining the exact maths of allocating the 8 seats in this region.
In reality the claims being made by both the Liberal Democrat and Labour (in the direction of centre-left voters) to be the best tactical vote against the BNP are reliant on the performance of the Conservatives. In a situation where the BNP gain 8.5% of the vote, the only way to be sure they won't win a seat will be for the following results to happen:
Conservatives 34%+ (up 10%)
Labour 25.5%+ (down 2%)
Conservatives 34%+ (up 10%)
Lib Dems 17%+ (up 1.1%)
Labour 25.5%+ (down 2%)
Lib Dems 17%+ (up 1.1%)
So it is very pick and mix. Claims can be issued, but with little factual support. This isn't how the Greens do politics.
Our Case
If we finish ahead of the BNP, we lower their chances of winning a seat significantly. If you ask anyone with any political integrity whether the BNP have a better chance of winning the final seat if they finish as the 4th or 5th largest party, they will have to honestly answer that if the BNP finish 5th, the chances of them winning a seat are reduced and no longer rely on a lucky alignment of vote shares of 2 out of the 3 red, yellow and blue parties.
Throwing the Greens into the equation and keeping the BNP in 5th place is the best anti-racist vote. It means that only one of the red, yellow or blue parties has to do better than expected at the election, rather than two out of three. It means that the BNP will need a higher percentage of the vote than they would have done otherwise.
The criticism our opponents will throw at us is that the Greens only got 5.6% compared to the BNP's 6.4% last time round. But as John Nicholson points out, Respect (who gained 1.2% of the vote last time) are already tactically backing the Greens - our combined support last time was 6.8%, which is more than that gained by the BNP. The BNP have lost councillors in this region in the last five year, while we have made gains.
The current assumption is that the BNP vote will leap up at this election. Immigration, recession and anger at the government have enable the BNP to do really well at a number of byelections. However many people were predicting 7 to 8% for the BNP in the London Assembly elections last year (me included). They did increase their vote enough to win a seat by gaining just over 5%, but the biggest jump in their support occured between 2000 and 2004, not between 2004 and 2008.
I believe that we've already seen the biggest surge in BNP support at the last Euro Elections in the North West. Their vote will increase again, but this will be less than expected. Most of the lost UKIP support will be going back to a far more Eurosceptic Tory party, and while the BNP might be doing well in byelections or areas where they have existing pockets of support, they are going to struggle across the affluent areas of the region.
Former Labour councillors like John and former Liberal Democrat councillors are going to be going public on this issue in the coming weeks. What we are seeking to do is build an anti-racist coalition to keep the BNP in 5th.
Given that the Lib Dems were boosted by their opposition to the Iraq war in 2004 but are so much lower in the polls now, we think that they have the weakest case of the three larger parties for an anti-racist tactical vote.
We know the Tories will improve compared to 2004, but even so, a 10% increase in the Tory vote share in the North West would be astonishing. I simply don't think it will happen. Even allowing for a scenario similar to the London Assembly elections, with UKIP's vote collapsing to less than 2%, all of those voters would have to switch back to the Tories to make it a reality. I do think UKIP's vote share will halve, but that type of drop isn't on the cards in a European Election.
That leaves Labour as the least worst mainstream option. If you are an anti-racist voter, reluctantly considering voting Labour in the North West for tactical reasons, your vote will not be the best option, but it won't be wasted. Your problem might be more to do with the lengths Labour are going to go to stave off working class white voters deserting them and voting for the BNP.
Sometimes the maths are complex enough to make your brain hurt, but don't say I haven't tried to explain it in detail.
28 February 2009
27 February 2009
Animal Welfare and the Recession
The assumption being made by most commentators is that sales of Organic and Freedom certified meats will fall during the recession. It seems that in 2008 sales of organic meat held up compared to the year before, while sales of conventional meat fell. Just because incomes have tightened, it doesn't mean that sales are necessarily going to drop.
What might be interesting (if anyone has info to add) is whether we've seen an increase in vegan and vegetarian sales. The reality is that British consumers eat too much meat, and on animal welfare, environmental and health grounds, as a nation we need to eat less. It isn't realistic to think that we will see a wholesale change in eating behaviour overnight, but we could see changes because of the current economic situation. What would be a positive way forward?
A criticism of the wider Green movement is that we come across as preachy and absolutist. People that otherwise might be receptive to our message are sometimes put off by what they regard as a hectoring approach. We are passionate about what we believe in, and we shouldn't lose that, but we also need to look at practically how we move forward.
I don't like celebrity culture, but I think it is true to say that the attempts by Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and Jamie Oliver to put animal welfare into the mainstream of the British public conciousness, have been more successful than attempts to do so than any single issue campaigning group, but there are limits to how much campaigns can achieve without legislation. Green policy on Animal Rights is very strong, and both Caroline Lucas and Adrian Ramsay show that we are practically taking action whenever possible.
At the European Elections, animal welfare can be an issue that is lost in the wider political debate. I won't be making that mistake. High standards of animal welfare are tied in with much wider social issues. Cheap meat means low standards of food for low income families. Packaged ready meals emphasise convenience over content. We need nothing short of a food revolution and in this time of recession, we need to open the door to a different way of eating and invite people to walk through it (trying to shove people through it simply won't work).
The Greens will continue to support Compassion in World Farming and specific campaigning issues on animal welfare in Britain and Europe. Where the celebrity culture hits its limits, for example, the misleading case where Pork farming in the UK was promoted as having "very high welfare standards", we'll be working in Europe to improve the legislation on animal welfare not just in Britain but across the continent.
We can't just rely on celebrity culture to effect real changes. For that you need elected politicians, with a clear direction and policy on this subject. As Greens we are always seeking to improve on our manifesto but I challenge anyone to match up our policy against that put forward by the other parties with elected councillors, Assembly Members and Euro MPs.
You'll find Liverpool Greens at the Farmers Market on Lark Lane tomorrow, supporting our local and organic producers, and often you'll bump into members at the local veggie and vegan food co-operative Windmill.
What might be interesting (if anyone has info to add) is whether we've seen an increase in vegan and vegetarian sales. The reality is that British consumers eat too much meat, and on animal welfare, environmental and health grounds, as a nation we need to eat less. It isn't realistic to think that we will see a wholesale change in eating behaviour overnight, but we could see changes because of the current economic situation. What would be a positive way forward?
A criticism of the wider Green movement is that we come across as preachy and absolutist. People that otherwise might be receptive to our message are sometimes put off by what they regard as a hectoring approach. We are passionate about what we believe in, and we shouldn't lose that, but we also need to look at practically how we move forward.
I don't like celebrity culture, but I think it is true to say that the attempts by Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and Jamie Oliver to put animal welfare into the mainstream of the British public conciousness, have been more successful than attempts to do so than any single issue campaigning group, but there are limits to how much campaigns can achieve without legislation. Green policy on Animal Rights is very strong, and both Caroline Lucas and Adrian Ramsay show that we are practically taking action whenever possible.
At the European Elections, animal welfare can be an issue that is lost in the wider political debate. I won't be making that mistake. High standards of animal welfare are tied in with much wider social issues. Cheap meat means low standards of food for low income families. Packaged ready meals emphasise convenience over content. We need nothing short of a food revolution and in this time of recession, we need to open the door to a different way of eating and invite people to walk through it (trying to shove people through it simply won't work).
The Greens will continue to support Compassion in World Farming and specific campaigning issues on animal welfare in Britain and Europe. Where the celebrity culture hits its limits, for example, the misleading case where Pork farming in the UK was promoted as having "very high welfare standards", we'll be working in Europe to improve the legislation on animal welfare not just in Britain but across the continent.
We can't just rely on celebrity culture to effect real changes. For that you need elected politicians, with a clear direction and policy on this subject. As Greens we are always seeking to improve on our manifesto but I challenge anyone to match up our policy against that put forward by the other parties with elected councillors, Assembly Members and Euro MPs.
You'll find Liverpool Greens at the Farmers Market on Lark Lane tomorrow, supporting our local and organic producers, and often you'll bump into members at the local veggie and vegan food co-operative Windmill.
25 February 2009
Sympathy and Thoughts
We sometimes forget the human side behind our politicians, but the death of David Cameron’s son Ivan is a reminder that our politicians, like you and I, are parents and real people. Both Gordon Brown and David Cameron have experienced tragic personal bereavements with the death of their children. David Cameron is a parent, and like any other parent in the same situation, deserves sympathy and privacy.
Nick Clegg has recently had his third child and Caroline Lucas, our Green Party leader, was ejected from the Oxfordshire County Council despite being an elected councillor over a decade ago, because she was breastfeeding one of her children. All of our party leaders know what it is like to have children, and will be empathising with the pain felt by the Camerons today.
We shouldn’t question the motives of people who get involved in politics. All of us, from whatever political hue, decided to get involved within our communities to make a positive contribution. Sadly, in my opinion, some political parties get lost along the way.
Today, thousands of other parents around the world will lose their children as well. This could be through violence, war, malnutrition, lack of medical care or polluted water supplies. Their losses are no less painful that any of us might feel.
That’s why I’m in politics. We are a human race, not just a town, city or nation, but our world has huge and persistent inequalities. All politicians have a duty to work to address these. Far fewer children should die each day, and political parties in the richer nations of the world can and must do something about it.
Nick Clegg has recently had his third child and Caroline Lucas, our Green Party leader, was ejected from the Oxfordshire County Council despite being an elected councillor over a decade ago, because she was breastfeeding one of her children. All of our party leaders know what it is like to have children, and will be empathising with the pain felt by the Camerons today.
We shouldn’t question the motives of people who get involved in politics. All of us, from whatever political hue, decided to get involved within our communities to make a positive contribution. Sadly, in my opinion, some political parties get lost along the way.
Today, thousands of other parents around the world will lose their children as well. This could be through violence, war, malnutrition, lack of medical care or polluted water supplies. Their losses are no less painful that any of us might feel.
That’s why I’m in politics. We are a human race, not just a town, city or nation, but our world has huge and persistent inequalities. All politicians have a duty to work to address these. Far fewer children should die each day, and political parties in the richer nations of the world can and must do something about it.
23 February 2009
Weekend Viewing
In case you missed it, there is a substantial piece of coverage for us on the Politics Show. Max Cotton really puts Caroline through her paces, but I think the overall piece is very positive for us.
ICM's Research is here.
ICM's Research is here.
22 February 2009
BNP March in Liverpool Now Off
After creating chaos, causing Everton's home game to be postponed inconviencing thousands of their fans and generally provoking outrage, the BNP have apparently cancelled their rally.
Hat tip to Louise Baldock on this one.
Our letter sent to the local press on Friday below:
The BNP rally in the city centre of Liverpool has caused the Everton match to be postponed, inconveniencing thousands of fans, but there is a much bigger cost to the city.
How many people in Liverpool's Chinese, Asian and Black communities are going to be comfortable with their children going into town that day? How much money is going to be lost by city centre businesses? How much is it going to cost the Liverpool taxpayers to police an event that the vast majority of Liverpool's people don't want?
The reason the BNP have to be policed is simple. They intimidate their political opponents - as they did recently on the Wirral by leafleting around the home of an anti-racism activist [1]. They intimidate and abuse people from different nationalities - one of their candidates in Manchester was just convicted of doing this to a European neighbour [2]. At anti-racism demonstrations, BNP supporters will take photographs to post up on far right websites [3], to try and intimidate those of us who believe that whatever your skin colour, you should be treated equally.
If any other political party was to hold a rally, the cost to the taxpayer would be minimal as the rally would be peaceful. Instead the violent and intimidatory nature of the BNP means Liverpool people have to pay to protect the peace. The BNP hope to elect a Euro MP to represent Liverpool this summer. They are relying on political apathy at European Elections to help them.
It is the duty of the good people in Liverpool, who support football teams with players from around the globe, to reject the BNP where it will hurt them, by voting this June. Let's hope the presence of the BNP in Liverpool City Centre on the 14th March doesn't damage city centre business in the long term, or the friendly international appeal of our city.
Cllr John Coyne, Leader Green Group
Peter Cranie, Lead European Candidate, North West Green Party
[1] http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2009/02/02/bnp-party-activists-accused-100252-22834563/
[2] http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1097063_bnp_man_fined_over_racist_abuse
[3] At the rally held in Liverpool on the 29th November, Joey Owens, former BNP organiser for Merseyside circled around the crowd taking photographs. These are now online at Redwatch
Hat tip to Louise Baldock on this one.
Our letter sent to the local press on Friday below:
The BNP rally in the city centre of Liverpool has caused the Everton match to be postponed, inconveniencing thousands of fans, but there is a much bigger cost to the city.
How many people in Liverpool's Chinese, Asian and Black communities are going to be comfortable with their children going into town that day? How much money is going to be lost by city centre businesses? How much is it going to cost the Liverpool taxpayers to police an event that the vast majority of Liverpool's people don't want?
The reason the BNP have to be policed is simple. They intimidate their political opponents - as they did recently on the Wirral by leafleting around the home of an anti-racism activist [1]. They intimidate and abuse people from different nationalities - one of their candidates in Manchester was just convicted of doing this to a European neighbour [2]. At anti-racism demonstrations, BNP supporters will take photographs to post up on far right websites [3], to try and intimidate those of us who believe that whatever your skin colour, you should be treated equally.
If any other political party was to hold a rally, the cost to the taxpayer would be minimal as the rally would be peaceful. Instead the violent and intimidatory nature of the BNP means Liverpool people have to pay to protect the peace. The BNP hope to elect a Euro MP to represent Liverpool this summer. They are relying on political apathy at European Elections to help them.
It is the duty of the good people in Liverpool, who support football teams with players from around the globe, to reject the BNP where it will hurt them, by voting this June. Let's hope the presence of the BNP in Liverpool City Centre on the 14th March doesn't damage city centre business in the long term, or the friendly international appeal of our city.
Cllr John Coyne, Leader Green Group
Peter Cranie, Lead European Candidate, North West Green Party
[1] http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2009/02/02/bnp-party-activists-accused-100252-22834563/
[2] http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1097063_bnp_man_fined_over_racist_abuse
[3] At the rally held in Liverpool on the 29th November, Joey Owens, former BNP organiser for Merseyside circled around the crowd taking photographs. These are now online at Redwatch
21 February 2009
Lib Dem Leaflets in Liverpool
More on this soon [update - you can read the full story here], but we've been putting out a rapid response to the Lib Dems, who have circulated a smear leaflet in St Michaels ward in Liverpool.
They have claimed falsely:
- That they saved the school crossing patrols, and blaming council officers when the proposal was put forward by the Lib Dems themselves, and actually defended by their deputy leader in the public arena
- That Greens are going to limit your family size (!), based on Jonathan Porritt's recent comments, even though our regional Lib Dem MEP, Chris Davies, has a much more hardline view on this than even our party
- That Green councillors forced homeless people to sleep in the snow (seriously - they believe they can get away with this stuff)
Amongst the Lib Dem leafleters, we had the ward councillor, the member for Ethical Governance (!) and as yet unconfirmed, the Lib Dem candidate for Wavertree constituency
Our rebuttal has been very quick, and we have challenged the Lib Dem ward councillor to come and defend the claims in their leaflet at a public meeting.
We've got a couple of surprises lined up for a further response to the Lib Dems, who we suspected were going to take a "scorched earth" approach to campaigning in St Michaels, but our actions will be taking place elsewhere in the city. I should tip off the Lib Dems to take a quick look at their last leaflet in Church ward, which was illegal - more to come on this.
They have claimed falsely:
- That they saved the school crossing patrols, and blaming council officers when the proposal was put forward by the Lib Dems themselves, and actually defended by their deputy leader in the public arena
- That Greens are going to limit your family size (!), based on Jonathan Porritt's recent comments, even though our regional Lib Dem MEP, Chris Davies, has a much more hardline view on this than even our party
- That Green councillors forced homeless people to sleep in the snow (seriously - they believe they can get away with this stuff)
Amongst the Lib Dem leafleters, we had the ward councillor, the member for Ethical Governance (!) and as yet unconfirmed, the Lib Dem candidate for Wavertree constituency
Our rebuttal has been very quick, and we have challenged the Lib Dem ward councillor to come and defend the claims in their leaflet at a public meeting.
We've got a couple of surprises lined up for a further response to the Lib Dems, who we suspected were going to take a "scorched earth" approach to campaigning in St Michaels, but our actions will be taking place elsewhere in the city. I should tip off the Lib Dems to take a quick look at their last leaflet in Church ward, which was illegal - more to come on this.
20 February 2009
Civil Liberties Betrayed - 2
Many of you will have seen the story about the alleged "terrorism" arrests on the M65. The Daily Mail reported the story as "George Galloway £1million aid convoy link to three terror suspects arrested on M65". Coincidentally, a Press Association photographer happened to be there at the precise time the arrests were being made (hence the photograph included in the article). The three men have been released without charge and aid convoy to Palestine has not been disrupted.
One message on the Vote 2007 discussion board asks the following question:
"How did a Press Association photographer come to be present at precisely the time the police carried out an elaborate operation involving a long term surveillance operation, a helicopter and the closing of a motorway?"
This is a very good question. The poster goes on to suggest an answer.
"1) to smear the aid convoy with the "terrorism" tag, and ensure any support for the palestinians in this country is kept away from popular support. The only thing most of the general public new about the convoy was that it included potential "terrorists". The 3 detained were repeatedly asked about their links with the convoy, while the organisers were never once contacted by the police or interviewed about what they knew about the three men.
2) to intimidate the muslim community, by ensuring that the fear of being smeared with the "terrorism" tag keeps them away from political activity. The Burnley 3 had faced repeated intimidation and harassment over the last year that caused them to move house (locally). The mobile phones of all 9 arrested were confiscated in order to be analysed to recreate networks within the muslim community and with the left (Respect were the most prominent sponsor and organising force around the convoy).
However the operation did not go to plan. No evidence could be found about "a potential threat of terrorism in the Middle East" and the Blackburn people arrested included a number of prominent members of a mosque in Blackburn who were 'accidentally' picked up because they decided at the last minute to travel together. The linkages within the mosque network meant that pressure was quickly brought to bear on the police by the leadership of the muslim community including Labour councillors. The police had hoped to use the draconian laws our parliament has passed, to hold the men for a longer period of time and then release them when it was quieter. But the pressure became too much and eventually the police had to release them as innocents."
Recognising that this might be dismissed as "conspiracy loon" type stuff, the poster invites an alternative explanation. One is that the police were simply incompetent, picking up prominent members of the Muslim community with good links to democratically elected Labour councillors. Another is that they acted on very poor intelligence.
Quite how the police could have scored such a spectacular own goal for community relations in Lancashire is beyond me. The suggestion made by the poster, is that the police could easily have held those arrested for 28 days, had it not been for political pressure, and that is the Britain we live in today.
If you are Atheist, Christian, Jewish or Muslim, you can simply be stopped on a motorway, even if you are part of an organised, publicised political action and detained for up to 28 days. Your mobile is confiscated, your life is flipped over and then you are released without charge.
I'll be writing to the Lancashire Police. Their press statement says that they will "robustly investigate any information that is passed to us about possible terrorist activity". The questions that need to be asked - what intelligence did they receive, why were the press invited to record the arrests and were operational procedures followed correctly?
One message on the Vote 2007 discussion board asks the following question:
"How did a Press Association photographer come to be present at precisely the time the police carried out an elaborate operation involving a long term surveillance operation, a helicopter and the closing of a motorway?"
This is a very good question. The poster goes on to suggest an answer.
"1) to smear the aid convoy with the "terrorism" tag, and ensure any support for the palestinians in this country is kept away from popular support. The only thing most of the general public new about the convoy was that it included potential "terrorists". The 3 detained were repeatedly asked about their links with the convoy, while the organisers were never once contacted by the police or interviewed about what they knew about the three men.
2) to intimidate the muslim community, by ensuring that the fear of being smeared with the "terrorism" tag keeps them away from political activity. The Burnley 3 had faced repeated intimidation and harassment over the last year that caused them to move house (locally). The mobile phones of all 9 arrested were confiscated in order to be analysed to recreate networks within the muslim community and with the left (Respect were the most prominent sponsor and organising force around the convoy).
However the operation did not go to plan. No evidence could be found about "a potential threat of terrorism in the Middle East" and the Blackburn people arrested included a number of prominent members of a mosque in Blackburn who were 'accidentally' picked up because they decided at the last minute to travel together. The linkages within the mosque network meant that pressure was quickly brought to bear on the police by the leadership of the muslim community including Labour councillors. The police had hoped to use the draconian laws our parliament has passed, to hold the men for a longer period of time and then release them when it was quieter. But the pressure became too much and eventually the police had to release them as innocents."
Recognising that this might be dismissed as "conspiracy loon" type stuff, the poster invites an alternative explanation. One is that the police were simply incompetent, picking up prominent members of the Muslim community with good links to democratically elected Labour councillors. Another is that they acted on very poor intelligence.
Quite how the police could have scored such a spectacular own goal for community relations in Lancashire is beyond me. The suggestion made by the poster, is that the police could easily have held those arrested for 28 days, had it not been for political pressure, and that is the Britain we live in today.
If you are Atheist, Christian, Jewish or Muslim, you can simply be stopped on a motorway, even if you are part of an organised, publicised political action and detained for up to 28 days. Your mobile is confiscated, your life is flipped over and then you are released without charge.
I'll be writing to the Lancashire Police. Their press statement says that they will "robustly investigate any information that is passed to us about possible terrorist activity". The questions that need to be asked - what intelligence did they receive, why were the press invited to record the arrests and were operational procedures followed correctly?
19 February 2009
Crumbling Credibility
I’m still waiting for a recognisable English language site to lead on this, but reports from Spanish scientists indicate that the Wilkins Ice Shelf has started to crumble. Around 14,000 square km has been reported to have broken off.
We’ve had a normal or slightly colder than normal winter in Britain. The Climate Change sceptics have come out with their non-scientific assessments and disclaimers, but if we look at what has happened in the Southern hemisphere, with the horrific Australian bush fires in record temperatures, and the more recent scientific research that reveals that even Antarctica is warming more rapidly than expected, it doesn’t make for good news.
There is now a counterbalance to the sceptics and Climate Change denier brigade. They are the radical scientists that suggest our models are too conservative, that Climatic Change will be far more rapid and dangerous than forecast by the models accepted by the scientific community.
We can only hope that these more pessemistic predictions are not accurate. We actually need some lucky breaks if we are going to cope with the economic, environmental and political challenges we are going to face over the next decades.
What is shocking is that despite the obvious and profound changes being seen with the disintegration of the Larson B ice sheet in 2002 and now with the Wilkins Ice Shelf, is the lack of urgency from our politicians in the UK.
In Liverpool, we simply got a rant from the Lib Dem council leader in response to a straightforward council question on aviation at the last meeting. We asked why the Lib Dems opposed Heathrow expansion but supported Liverpool airport expansion?
Cllr Warren Bradley’s reply was: “There was absolutely no strategic reason why Heathrow requires a third runway, or further expansion, and I fully endorse Susan Kramer’s comments. To compare Liverpool John Lennon Airport with London Heathrow is nothing short of lunacy, and I wonder when Cllr Coyne [our Green group leader] is to ask the question as to whether Liverpool can become a one horse town again.”
I think that what happened was the question was pitched a little bit too high for the council leader last time. Hopefully we’ll have better luck with an easier to understand question to Cllr Bradley at the next council meeting. If he thinks ranting is going to get him off the hook on this, he’s sadly mistaken.
If the other parties are serious about Climate Change, they can’t just posture for the national media and do the opposite when they think they can get away with it. The Conservatives in Carlisle backed airport expansion there, and we all know about Labour’s national record, so it’s not just the Lib Dems who are hypocritical.
What is disturbing though is the talk in Lib Dem circles of trying to “bash” the Greens. Somehow the Lib Dems feel we are stealing their “green” vote. We’re not. If you are a Lib Dem reading this, your party gave up rights to environmental credentials a long time ago. All we do is expose your inconsistencies.
If you want Green, you can vote Green, and you can bet that in the Euro campaign we’ll be asking people who normally vote Lib Dem to support us. It will have two effects. More Greens will get elected and a poor result, where the Lib Dems lose support to us, will put pressure on Nick Clegg to set a principled line on the environment, not just a politically convenient one.
We’ve had a normal or slightly colder than normal winter in Britain. The Climate Change sceptics have come out with their non-scientific assessments and disclaimers, but if we look at what has happened in the Southern hemisphere, with the horrific Australian bush fires in record temperatures, and the more recent scientific research that reveals that even Antarctica is warming more rapidly than expected, it doesn’t make for good news.
There is now a counterbalance to the sceptics and Climate Change denier brigade. They are the radical scientists that suggest our models are too conservative, that Climatic Change will be far more rapid and dangerous than forecast by the models accepted by the scientific community.
We can only hope that these more pessemistic predictions are not accurate. We actually need some lucky breaks if we are going to cope with the economic, environmental and political challenges we are going to face over the next decades.
What is shocking is that despite the obvious and profound changes being seen with the disintegration of the Larson B ice sheet in 2002 and now with the Wilkins Ice Shelf, is the lack of urgency from our politicians in the UK.
In Liverpool, we simply got a rant from the Lib Dem council leader in response to a straightforward council question on aviation at the last meeting. We asked why the Lib Dems opposed Heathrow expansion but supported Liverpool airport expansion?
Cllr Warren Bradley’s reply was: “There was absolutely no strategic reason why Heathrow requires a third runway, or further expansion, and I fully endorse Susan Kramer’s comments. To compare Liverpool John Lennon Airport with London Heathrow is nothing short of lunacy, and I wonder when Cllr Coyne [our Green group leader] is to ask the question as to whether Liverpool can become a one horse town again.”
I think that what happened was the question was pitched a little bit too high for the council leader last time. Hopefully we’ll have better luck with an easier to understand question to Cllr Bradley at the next council meeting. If he thinks ranting is going to get him off the hook on this, he’s sadly mistaken.
If the other parties are serious about Climate Change, they can’t just posture for the national media and do the opposite when they think they can get away with it. The Conservatives in Carlisle backed airport expansion there, and we all know about Labour’s national record, so it’s not just the Lib Dems who are hypocritical.
What is disturbing though is the talk in Lib Dem circles of trying to “bash” the Greens. Somehow the Lib Dems feel we are stealing their “green” vote. We’re not. If you are a Lib Dem reading this, your party gave up rights to environmental credentials a long time ago. All we do is expose your inconsistencies.
If you want Green, you can vote Green, and you can bet that in the Euro campaign we’ll be asking people who normally vote Lib Dem to support us. It will have two effects. More Greens will get elected and a poor result, where the Lib Dems lose support to us, will put pressure on Nick Clegg to set a principled line on the environment, not just a politically convenient one.
16 February 2009
Polling and the Euros
It's difficult to work out from the national opinion polls how we are doing regionally. An individual poll in isolation will have a small sample size, but taking all the opinion polls together, we should get a better idea of the standing of parties.
The noteworthy info for this month is that these polls were all conducted at the height of the "British Jobs for British Workers" coverage, which was felt might benefit the BNP. One of the polls have put the Lib Dems up to 22% nationally (equal to their worst polling rating in 2004), but at the moment this poll is considered "rogue".
Populus North England:
Con 42%
Lab 30%
LD 16%
Grn 5%
BNP 4%
UKIP 2%
oth 1%
You Gov North:
Lab 43%
Con 38%
LD 11%
BNP 3%
Grn 2%
UKIP 2%
Com Res North England:
Con 37%
Lab 26%
LD 26%
Grn 3%
BNP 2%
UKIP 0%
These are of course, General Election voting intention, and if the question starts being asked about who someone might vote for at the Euros, the answers will show an increase for Greens, BNP and UKIP and a decrease for the red, yellow and blue parties.
It's promising that despite BJFBW dominating the headlines, the BNP seem not to have benefited. I believe Ipsos Mori might also be publishing some more polling data soon.
The noteworthy info for this month is that these polls were all conducted at the height of the "British Jobs for British Workers" coverage, which was felt might benefit the BNP. One of the polls have put the Lib Dems up to 22% nationally (equal to their worst polling rating in 2004), but at the moment this poll is considered "rogue".
Populus North England:
Con 42%
Lab 30%
LD 16%
Grn 5%
BNP 4%
UKIP 2%
oth 1%
You Gov North:
Lab 43%
Con 38%
LD 11%
BNP 3%
Grn 2%
UKIP 2%
Com Res North England:
Con 37%
Lab 26%
LD 26%
Grn 3%
BNP 2%
UKIP 0%
These are of course, General Election voting intention, and if the question starts being asked about who someone might vote for at the Euros, the answers will show an increase for Greens, BNP and UKIP and a decrease for the red, yellow and blue parties.
It's promising that despite BJFBW dominating the headlines, the BNP seem not to have benefited. I believe Ipsos Mori might also be publishing some more polling data soon.
13 February 2009
What Does Griffin Really Believe?
We all know that the BNP is trying to present a new, more inclusive and caring face to the British public. The old jackboots and white power stuff has proved a bit of a turn off to the voters. So we now have a very organised locally focused BNP, contesting any byelection they think will make them look good in the North West (and ignoring the ones that won't such as West Didsbury), campaigning on local issues and convincing the public that they are just another party.
It doesn't quite work. In Tameside's Hyde Newton ward, the BNP got just over 25% of the local election vote in 2003 with very little organisation or on the ground work. In the recent council byelection they went up to nearly 30%. This is a worry. Nearly a third of the ward voted for the BNP, but it is also a worry for Nick Griffin.
The far right blogosphere talks about conspiracies of all the other parties to defeat them, the intervention of the churches urging people not to vote for hate, the anti-racist leafleting and how the other parties won't be able to match that workrate in the Euro Elections. The problem for them is that actually if they can't win in these conditions under FPTP in a clear two horse race, they are going to continue to struggle locally to gain seats.
Furthermore, the BNP will be unable to put in anything like the effort they concentrate into local polls on a region wide basis, and if a concentrated effort can only raise their support by a small margin in the face of strong anti-racist campaigning, they are in for a shock as we approach the Euro Elections. Some observers believe that targeted anti-racist leaflets against the BNP can be counterproductive at a local level, as it doesn't fit with the face to face contact that locals have experienced, where "normal" people canvass politely for the BNP. However at a regional level the contest is very different.
Anti-racist leafleting in the Euro Elections regionally is of course going to go on in areas where the BNP get derisory votes. The BNP don't stand in Toxteth in Liverpool or in Moss Side in Manchester, where there is real ethnic diversity, and where attempts to whip up racial tension are simply not tolerated. There will be no benefit to the BNP from anti-racist leafleting in areas like this, but you can bet that turnout will go up, and it is easy to explain why if you look at Griffin's photo above (with caption left in).
So what does Griffin believe in? White power and National Front in 1983, reportedly believing it still acceptable to give nazi salutes in 1996 and he was happy to share a platform with white supremacists in the USA in 2006. He is the candidate for the BNP in this region and he has led the BNP for a decade. They remain a party that does not allow Black or Asian British people to join, but would allow a first generation white European immigrant to become a member. That is simply pure racism based on the colour of someone's skin.
The strongest anti-racist tools in this election will be exposing Griffin the man. Had the BNP chosen anyone else to lead their list in this region, it might prove harder to motivate voters to turnout against the BNP. The steady drip, drip attempts by BNP postings on messageboards talking cooly about nationalism, not racism, and the real makeover in public of a party that remains unreconstructed in its constitution, have made some impact. All that is washed away when the electorate is faced with the prospect of Nick Griffin as an MEP.
There is nothing to suggest Griffin has changed his mindset, only that he has recognised the need to tone down the reality of the BNP to achieve further electoral success. I won't be sharing a platform with Griffin or the BNP at any point in this election campaign because they remain a constitutionally racist party. With the recent backing given to the Greens by Respect in the North West region, we go into this European Election with a combined support of 6.8%, more than that gained by the BNP last time.
The BNP vote will rise in this region, but not by as much as some people are predicting. The recent offer by the BNP to UKIP to form an electoral coalition for the Euros shows that Griffin is by no means certain they will gain a seat. Searchlight and other anti-racist organisations are working hard and working very intelligently to boost turnout. That is not to underestimate the threat. The BNP vote is likely to be above the 7.5% they need to win a seat if they finish as the 4th largest party. Our job as the Greens, backed by a coalition of anti-racist voters, is to keep them in 5th and out of contention.
12 February 2009
Convoy To Gaza
Rebuilding Gaza is going to cost around $2 billion, but as the BBC reported:
"Even as aid agencies struggle to meet the immediate needs of those left injured, homeless and traumatised by the Israeli operation in Gaza, concerns are growing that reconstruction efforts could become bogged down in a complex political tangle."
The moves by activists in Britain to organise a convoy to Gaza deserve immense credit. For the ordinary civilians living in Gaza, the recent assault by the Israeli Defense Force has left untold misery, and many people mourning dead friends and relatives.
Gaza will need to be rebuilt and the international community needs to find a way to get a peaceful settlement, protecting civilians whatever side of the border they are born on. Much will depend on the current horse trading to form an Israeli government but in the meantime the convoy is a message of hope and solidarity to civilians in Gaza, some of whom have lost everything.
I read one really positive story today. Let's hope there are more to follow.
"Even as aid agencies struggle to meet the immediate needs of those left injured, homeless and traumatised by the Israeli operation in Gaza, concerns are growing that reconstruction efforts could become bogged down in a complex political tangle."
The moves by activists in Britain to organise a convoy to Gaza deserve immense credit. For the ordinary civilians living in Gaza, the recent assault by the Israeli Defense Force has left untold misery, and many people mourning dead friends and relatives.
Gaza will need to be rebuilt and the international community needs to find a way to get a peaceful settlement, protecting civilians whatever side of the border they are born on. Much will depend on the current horse trading to form an Israeli government but in the meantime the convoy is a message of hope and solidarity to civilians in Gaza, some of whom have lost everything.
I read one really positive story today. Let's hope there are more to follow.
6 February 2009
Tameside Result and Carlisle Byelections
The Labour Party beat the BNP to hold onto their Tameside council seat of Hyde Newton last night. Tories, Lib Dems, Greens and UKIP votes were very poor, as you might expect when voters are faced with a pretty clear "First Past The Post" contest where an openly racist party could get elected. Nigel Rolland and the local Greens worked hard putting out our material which was intended to reach our core supporters who otherwise might not vote.
What was absolutely key was the willingness of the local clergy to stand up and be counted in this byelection. Churches, whether they are Anglican, Catholic or another denomination, are international. They have multi-cultural congregations and are going to uphold equality. In the 1930s in Germany, the churches did not do enough to combat extremism, but lessons have been learned.
It will be disappointing for the BNP. In 2003 they managed 25.2% of the vote without much campaigning in this ward. They threw the kitchen sink at this one, and gained 29.4% which although an increase, probably marks the limit of what they are capable of even in an area where they have historically done well. However if the BNP manage that kind of small increase in support in the Euros, compared to the 6.4% they gained in 2004, they will increase that level of support to around 7.5% in June's European Elections, which may be enough for them to win a seat if they finish as the 4th largest party.
The next big contest for us where we are up against the BNP is in two byelections in Carlisle. Our candidates, John Reardon and Hazel Bowmaker, will be contesting the wards. Their press release follows below:
Green Party chooses candidates for city council poll
Party aiming for first councillors and Euro MP in 2009
The Green Party today announces the names of its candidates for two forthcoming Carlisle City Council by-elections in Belah and Castle wards.
The Belah poll follows the death of former Conservative Mayor Sandra Fisher, whilst the contest in Castle ward arises from the resignation of Liberal Democrat councillor Kimberley Hunter. Both elections will be held on Thursday 5th March.
In Belah, the Greens have selected Hazel Bowmaker who works as a Housing Co-ordinator for national charity Action for Blind People. Miss Bowmaker serves on the board of Impact Housing Association and chairs their community investment committee. The Greens believe that she would bring essential experience of housing issues to the authority. If elected Miss Bowmaker would, at 27, be the youngest city councillor.
Former Upperby councillor John Reardon will stand for the Greens in Castle ward. Mr Reardon, 33, is a teacher at Newman School and co-ordinator of the local party. He has a strong record of campaigning for sustainability and persuaded the city council to adopt the Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change in 2007. Mr Reardon gave up his free city council car parking pass when elected as a councillor in order to promote walking and cycling in the city, believing that public representatives should lead by example.
Nationally the Greens have 117 councillors, two Members of the European Parliament (including party leader Caroline Lucas) two Members of the Scottish Parliament, two London Assembly Members and one Northern Ireland Assembly Member. In June’s European elections the party needs to secure 8% of the vote across the north west of England to get its lead candidate Peter Cranie elected to the European Parliament. The battle for the final North West Euro seat will be between Mr Cranie and BNP leader Nick Griffin.
Miss Bowmaker said:
“The election of yet another Tory, Labour or Liberal Democrat councillor will mean business as usual and will make no difference to the way our city is run. However the election of Carlisle’s first Green councillors will be a vote for change, honest politics and sustainability.”
Mr Reardon added:
“Nationally over five years we have doubled our councillor numbers with little money, no corporate support and doing what Greens do very well, working at the grassroots level. The Greens are growing in size and political maturity. Hazel and I are standing on a platform of ethical politics, which means that we will put the interests of Carlisle people ahead of big businesses and unaccountable boards who have no loyalty to our area.”
Privately the Greens believe they have a good chance of winning Castle ward, where potentially in a five party contest Mr Reardon could be elected on 30% of the vote.
What was absolutely key was the willingness of the local clergy to stand up and be counted in this byelection. Churches, whether they are Anglican, Catholic or another denomination, are international. They have multi-cultural congregations and are going to uphold equality. In the 1930s in Germany, the churches did not do enough to combat extremism, but lessons have been learned.
It will be disappointing for the BNP. In 2003 they managed 25.2% of the vote without much campaigning in this ward. They threw the kitchen sink at this one, and gained 29.4% which although an increase, probably marks the limit of what they are capable of even in an area where they have historically done well. However if the BNP manage that kind of small increase in support in the Euros, compared to the 6.4% they gained in 2004, they will increase that level of support to around 7.5% in June's European Elections, which may be enough for them to win a seat if they finish as the 4th largest party.
The next big contest for us where we are up against the BNP is in two byelections in Carlisle. Our candidates, John Reardon and Hazel Bowmaker, will be contesting the wards. Their press release follows below:
Green Party chooses candidates for city council poll
Party aiming for first councillors and Euro MP in 2009
The Green Party today announces the names of its candidates for two forthcoming Carlisle City Council by-elections in Belah and Castle wards.
The Belah poll follows the death of former Conservative Mayor Sandra Fisher, whilst the contest in Castle ward arises from the resignation of Liberal Democrat councillor Kimberley Hunter. Both elections will be held on Thursday 5th March.
In Belah, the Greens have selected Hazel Bowmaker who works as a Housing Co-ordinator for national charity Action for Blind People. Miss Bowmaker serves on the board of Impact Housing Association and chairs their community investment committee. The Greens believe that she would bring essential experience of housing issues to the authority. If elected Miss Bowmaker would, at 27, be the youngest city councillor.
Former Upperby councillor John Reardon will stand for the Greens in Castle ward. Mr Reardon, 33, is a teacher at Newman School and co-ordinator of the local party. He has a strong record of campaigning for sustainability and persuaded the city council to adopt the Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change in 2007. Mr Reardon gave up his free city council car parking pass when elected as a councillor in order to promote walking and cycling in the city, believing that public representatives should lead by example.
Nationally the Greens have 117 councillors, two Members of the European Parliament (including party leader Caroline Lucas) two Members of the Scottish Parliament, two London Assembly Members and one Northern Ireland Assembly Member. In June’s European elections the party needs to secure 8% of the vote across the north west of England to get its lead candidate Peter Cranie elected to the European Parliament. The battle for the final North West Euro seat will be between Mr Cranie and BNP leader Nick Griffin.
Miss Bowmaker said:
“The election of yet another Tory, Labour or Liberal Democrat councillor will mean business as usual and will make no difference to the way our city is run. However the election of Carlisle’s first Green councillors will be a vote for change, honest politics and sustainability.”
Mr Reardon added:
“Nationally over five years we have doubled our councillor numbers with little money, no corporate support and doing what Greens do very well, working at the grassroots level. The Greens are growing in size and political maturity. Hazel and I are standing on a platform of ethical politics, which means that we will put the interests of Carlisle people ahead of big businesses and unaccountable boards who have no loyalty to our area.”
Privately the Greens believe they have a good chance of winning Castle ward, where potentially in a five party contest Mr Reardon could be elected on 30% of the vote.
5 February 2009
Standards Board Report
After a not inconsiderable wait, the Standards Board report into Warren Bradley’s conduct is here. In the words of the report:
Cllr Bradley was on one occasion “unwise and possibly naive” and his conduct “occasionally suggested lack of good judgement” in the wake of the Mathew Street festival cancellation in 2007.
Well Warren, that reads to me as:
“Your actions were stupid and make you look stupid.”
This follows on from Mike Storey being cleared on his latest Standards Board investigation, after having had to resign as council leader in 2005 over a previous investigation. I’m sure the fact that no further action will be taken comes as a personal relief to my local councillors, but really the point is that they should not have been in that position in the first place (full story from the Echo).
So no byelection (yet) in Wavertree, which must come as a huge relief to the Lib Dems in Liverpool, who hold 46 out of the city’s 90 council seats. We will have to wait and see what happens with Cllr Steve Hurst’s appeal against his recent Court conviction in relation to his campaigning in the 2007 local elections.
I certainly think that my local ward councillors must be worth a write up in the Rotten Boroughs section of Private Eye, and I’ll be disappointed not to see it.
Cllr Bradley was on one occasion “unwise and possibly naive” and his conduct “occasionally suggested lack of good judgement” in the wake of the Mathew Street festival cancellation in 2007.
Well Warren, that reads to me as:
“Your actions were stupid and make you look stupid.”
This follows on from Mike Storey being cleared on his latest Standards Board investigation, after having had to resign as council leader in 2005 over a previous investigation. I’m sure the fact that no further action will be taken comes as a personal relief to my local councillors, but really the point is that they should not have been in that position in the first place (full story from the Echo).
So no byelection (yet) in Wavertree, which must come as a huge relief to the Lib Dems in Liverpool, who hold 46 out of the city’s 90 council seats. We will have to wait and see what happens with Cllr Steve Hurst’s appeal against his recent Court conviction in relation to his campaigning in the 2007 local elections.
I certainly think that my local ward councillors must be worth a write up in the Rotten Boroughs section of Private Eye, and I’ll be disappointed not to see it.
2 February 2009
Ethical Politics
I've been a bit ill and out of the loop over the weekend, but I'm recovering now.
Two bits of real heartening ethical politics for you. Close to home, Liverpool's two Green councillors get a real result - saving school crossings, by passing the following amendment:
That the text of the budget statement set out in the minutes and recommendation of the Executive Board of the 16th January 2009 not be noted, Annexe A, as amended by the following, and the budget summary statement attached be approved:-
A) the following proposals in Annexe A be amended:
That the school crossing patrol proposal relating to the two posts which serve Greenbank Primary School be not approved. This is an example of a location where there are pedestrian signal controls. However with the knowledge of the location and reports it is widely known that vehicles frequently abuse the junction and are not controlled by the signals.
B) the following new proposals be now included in Annexe A:
Reduce revenue spending on council publicity by £20,000, with a request to the Chief Executive Officer to report on ways that might be achieved without damaging the core functions of the Council.
Any residual funds from this amendment be added to the budget for the school crossing patrol service in order to provide capacity for stand-by crossing attendants to cover absences.
And in Scotland, Patrick Harvie and Robin Harper look like they have provided a credibility boost to Green politics in general, with the coverage in a paper we might not normally see! For details, visit Two Doctors.
Two bits of real heartening ethical politics for you. Close to home, Liverpool's two Green councillors get a real result - saving school crossings, by passing the following amendment:
That the text of the budget statement set out in the minutes and recommendation of the Executive Board of the 16th January 2009 not be noted, Annexe A, as amended by the following, and the budget summary statement attached be approved:-
A) the following proposals in Annexe A be amended:
That the school crossing patrol proposal relating to the two posts which serve Greenbank Primary School be not approved. This is an example of a location where there are pedestrian signal controls. However with the knowledge of the location and reports it is widely known that vehicles frequently abuse the junction and are not controlled by the signals.
B) the following new proposals be now included in Annexe A:
Reduce revenue spending on council publicity by £20,000, with a request to the Chief Executive Officer to report on ways that might be achieved without damaging the core functions of the Council.
Any residual funds from this amendment be added to the budget for the school crossing patrol service in order to provide capacity for stand-by crossing attendants to cover absences.
And in Scotland, Patrick Harvie and Robin Harper look like they have provided a credibility boost to Green politics in general, with the coverage in a paper we might not normally see! For details, visit Two Doctors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)