Peter Cranie

Holocaust Memorial Day

2012-01-27T05:00:00.000-08:00

Sadly, antisemitism in the form of hostility and discrimination against Jews is still a problem today. Each year Holocaust Memorial Day reminds us where discrimination against any group within society leads.

I'd recommend that readers take the time to read Andy Newman's (Socialist Unity Network) piece in the Guardian from last year. I'd highlight this passage:

"Sometimes well-meaning people fail to recognise antisemitism when they encounter it, because they are not attuned to the linguistic codes in which it is expressed, or are unaware of the cultural themes of anti-Judaic prejudice being drawn upon."

What this means is that sometimes antisemitism arises in recklessness or a lack of awareness about how comments can be damaging to Jewish people. As individuals, we are likely to react defensively if we are challenged, understandably so, as all moral people would seek not to offend intentionally. But as Newman makes clear, defending or dismissing a challenge to language used in itself becomes antisemitism.

Last year I taught a Jewish student on a UPS International Perspectives module. He genuinely didn't have the much understanding about the history of Israel/Palestine. To expect otherwise would be antisemitic stereotyping of him as an individual, based on a projection that every Jewish person is concerned with this international issue. Nor could I have expections about him to be more or less critical of Israel than any other student, for the same reason.

On the left, direct antisemitism will stand out when it comes up. However, there is less certainty in respect of platform sharing. I've been clear that I would not share a platform with the BNP. I don't want to share a platform with someone who is racist. However, in the polarised politics of the Middle East, there are occasions that when we are rightly showing solidarity with people in Palestine, we end up at protests where there are chants of "we are all Hezbollah" or with speakers who have expressed clearly antisemitic views. This is a problem, and to quote Andy Newman again, "The Palestinian cause is hindered, not helped, when the left fails to notice or confront anti-semitism."

It is vital that we continue to be critical of the actions of the government of Israel. To choose to boycott Israeli goods or protest against the oppression of Palestinian people is a justified moral position. But as I've argued elsewhere, what is crucial for an individual or a political party, is consistency. To only focus on or predominantly focus on the Israel/Palestine issue alone, without a consistent approach to all of the oppression experienced around the world, will be seen as antisemitism.

As an anti-racist, I'm clear that these issues need to be discussed and debated and this must be an ongoing. The fact that we commemorate Holocaust Memorial Day means we can refocus on oppression within our own society, particularly in respect of the travelling community, Islamophobia and the need to be vigilant about anti-semitism.

Gayle O'Donovan

2012-01-22T15:37:00.000-08:00

Today I physically shook as I read an email that informed me that a good colleague had died. It was especially hard to hear about the loss of such a young, talented woman, who has put such a lot into not only our political party, but social and environmental causes in general. My thoughts are with her family and her friends.

I got to know Gayle pretty well during our 2008 Hulme campaign. We were working really hard to try and hold onto our only council seat in Manchester and she was there at most door knocking and leafleting sessions. She had a positive bubbly attitude and was possessed of a mild Irish lilt that made her instantly memorable. Gayle and many others put in a tremendous effort and despite losing by (just) 50 votes, there was a feeling that Manchester Greens had put together the best campaign in a very long while.

Gayle was one of those people that put others first. I remember having to arm twist her just for her to consider standing as a target candidate at some future point. She was a political natural. She put in a lot of work helping our Euro campaign in 2009, when I was standing as lead candidate, sadly another near miss. In 2010 Gayle was selected to stand as the lead candidate in Hulme and for the General Election in Manchester Central. She ran a brilliant campaign and we gained more votes than ever before or since, but as in many other places, our local election efforts were swamped in a General Election tide.

Gayle not becoming a councillor meant that the party got the benefit of her enthusiasm, ideas and dynamism on the national executive from 2010 onwards. While I didn't have as much contact in the last couple of years with Gayle, particularly after she moved to Norwich, we still swapped the occasional text and she was instrumental in helping us to troubleshoot a potential problem here in the NW, even after she had moved region.

I am filled with sadness that we have lost such a good person politically but more than that, I am sorry that I'll never share another pint with Gayle at Conference or on a party social. She was great company, blessed with wit and an ability to speak her mind. Rest in peace Gayle.

Liverpool Greens Vote Against Cuts

2012-01-18T04:57:00.000-08:00

This is an updated post from earlier, hence the title change. The full text of today's amendment being put forward by Liverpool's Green councillors is at the bottom of this post. In summary we identified 7 cuts that could be avoided if Liverpool, a Labour council, would raise council tax by 3.5%

I've just tweeted that our two councillors voted against the cuts following a text message from Cllr John Coyne. I'm therefore certain that our amendment was not passed.

There will be a final point at which Labour in Liverpool might possibly reverse its current trajectory of accepting the government's 2.5% "bribe" to freeze council tax this year. Let's be clear what that means. In the following year there will be 2.5% less revenue than there would have been otherwise. That means there will be £4 million less for Liverpool City Council to spend on its services that year (and every following year).

What we are proposing is a 3.5% council tax rise (inflation at year end of 2011 was 4.2% so this is below the inflation rate we've had this year) which would have raised an additional £1.6 million this year and therefore mean a further £5.6 million would have been available to spend next year.

It seems that the local Labour leadership is on the wrong trajectory. I sincerely hope that the many good Labour councillors there are in Liverpool can put forward and win the argument, within their own party, about why they should raise council tax. There is just one chance left for what is the right decision for Liverpool. Sadly, it is too late for the services below, which will now experience cuts as listed.

I don't yet know if any Labour councillors abstained (I hope so). If you didn't, we'll hold you to account in the coming years. The Lib Dems, apart from their gimmick over the contingency fund, have no real alternative to offer in Liverpool. We'll have to be the voice of real opposition from now on.

The Green amendment that was not accepted:

"Delete action EW3, thus retaining Bulky Bobs as a free service - cost £260,000.

Delete action C5, thus retaining £900,000 local authority contribution to child and adolescent mental health - cost £200,000

Mitigate action C7 and retain some grant provision for school uniforms in cases of severe hardship, for example where the child of a low income family needs to buy a second uniform after a change of school, following exclusion or otherwise, or in cases where a low income family needs to buy a uniform for more than one child in an academic year - cost £200,000.

Delete action C9, thus retaining £176,000 for teenage pregnancy advice service - cost £76,000.

Delete action C10, thus retaining £258,000 local authority funding for support to parents with disabled children - cost £108,000.

Delete action C24, thus retaining support for ethic minority, traveller and asylum seekers' children - cost £95,000.

Delete action ASC8, thus retaining local authority support of £1,900,000 for older people in sheltered housing - cost £300,000.

The total costs of those amendments would be £1,239,000.

Increase council tax in 2012/13 by 3.5% thus foregoing the government "incentive" of 2.5%.

The balance of £361,000 should be placed in reserves.

Having decided to increase Council Tax by 3.5%, the net effect of that decision after the additional costs of the above changes, should be the availability of £4,361,000 to pay into reserves in 2013/14 and again in 2014/15. Council should consider using reserves to mitigate cuts to services, after consultation, or to reintroduce services."

Leaving Labour

2012-01-16T15:04:00.000-08:00

So the disappointment has begun. Ed Balls and Ed Miliband, both in this together. We've been here before, or more specifically I have.

I was a member of the Greens from 1989 to 1991, but didn't renew my membership. Back then there was a lack of organisation or actual politics in what appeared to be a friendly, but slightly disorganised social club. It was my natural political home in terms of the global issues that faced us, but in the 1992 election, I reverted to the party I had been brought up to support, Labour.

In Scotland, supporting Celtic and Labour was seen as a constant. They were your team. Celtic represented your heritage, Irish Catholic. Labour represented you, as a member of the working class. Ignoring the fact that my mother was in fact, English and Protestant, I was pretty much expected to follow this tradition, and my membership of the Greens was a "youthful error".

Like most people, I went to bed on the 9th April 1992 expecting to wake up with a Labour government, the party I'd voted for. Like many others, I was stunned by the result. When John Smith became leader, I joined Labour. While my uncle disagreed profoundly with John Smith's politics, he essentially said he was a decent man. After the death of someone I believe would have made a good Labour leader, I didn't vote for Blair, but I stayed in the party.

As a young activist, working in a marginal constituency in London in the run up to the 1997 election, I met Blair and Brown. I listened as they explained how it would be different this time. While they pledged that they would match Tory spending plans in opposition, I convinced myself that when Labour did win the 1997 election they would look at the needs of everyday folk around the country and realise that we needed to transform our society. Once elected, with an overwhelming mandate, the timidity and the fear of change quickly left me disillusioned. I didn't renew my membership and I'm glad that I was not still in the Labour Party when a Labour leader decided to side with the most right wing American president in history to invade Iraq.

2010 was the closest election since 1992 and for me there are similarities. Many people who had left Labour in the previous 13 years, for a variety of reasons, were angry and frustrated by the return of a Conservative to 10 Downing Street. Some rejoined Labour, quickly forgeting the mistakes and the anguish of seeing what was once the party for working people. Just like in 1997, those good people are trying hard to ignore that the Labour Party increasingly takes for granted the very many good Labour activists, supporters and voters who still try to hold true to Labour's roots.

I rejoined the Greens in 1999 after returning from a year of travelling and seeing Greens elected in Scotland and to the European Parliament. It is the best decision I ever made. I became an activist after George Bush became US President. Since then I've put whatever I could into the party, in terms of my personal efforts in Liverpool, the North West and our national party, and I am proud of the progress we've made across the country.

While I recognise my party is far from perfect (nor am I), there is not a week that passes by that I don't look at the work done by our local Green councillors in Liverpool, the North West Green Party, our leader and first MP Caroline Lucas and by the very many Greens doing great things around the country.

The Greens are a party that is making progress. We stand for something different. We are the last party standing against the cuts and the last party that advocates radical redistribution of wealth in a country that grew increasingly unequal during 13 years of Labour government.

A few ex-Labour people are joining us. For now it is just a trickle, but there will be many more to come in the next decade. Leaving Labour is not an easy thing to do for people. There are feelings that you betraying your side or your corner, but for many people in Labour, it the party leadership that has left them as a residue from a previous era, taken for granted but no longer respected.

Leaving Labour is also hard because people who you have worked alongside and socialised with stop being your friends. If your whole life and your whole social network is tied to a political party, that makes it very hard. But it can be done and in fact, life after Labour can be even better. The Greens are the redistributionist social democratic party Labour used to be. We still have a way to go in finance and campaigning capability, but each additional activist makes our work easier.

Thinking of Leaving Labour? Then think about Going Green.

Local Issues

2012-01-11T13:46:00.000-08:00

Two very quick points to this post. Brilliantly, our local Sure Start Centre is set to remain open for another year, despite the big budget cuts. This is likely to be with a reduced service, but for any new parent, a local centre like this is invaluable.

Next up. If you live in Liverpool, and you haven't already done it. Switch to receiving your bill by email to save money (and local services) by visiting http://http://liverpool.gov.uk/council-tax/paperless-billing/

That's it for now!

Salmond Fishing

2012-01-09T14:43:00.000-08:00

So David Cameron has seen fit to try and influence the Scottish vote on independence. Probably not his smartest move, but it is still by no means certain how Scotland will vote, whenever a referendum is held.

My own feeling (as an Anglo-Scot now settled in Liverpool) is that it nudges Scotland a little closer to independence, but that the SNP and Alex Salmond in particular, won't take kindly to Tory and Lib Dem attempts to overrule them from Westminster. So as Cameron tries to catch Salmond, he might find that his rod will be used to beat him.

I've speculated before about what would happen in the event that the UK was to hold a straight yes/no referendum on membership of the EU. In the current climate, England would certainly vote to leave, but I doubt Scotland would. So if the First Minister wants to wreak havok south of the border, he could do worse that ignore Cameron's deadline but in the run up to the Euro Election in 2014 announce that not only will the SNP hold a referendum on independence, but that he will include a question or questions about whether an independent Scotland should remain in the EU.

Cameron might look Prime Ministerial at the moment, but as many Scottish politicians have discovered, catching Alex Salmond out isn't easy. I look forward to seeing what he and the SNP will do in response.

Ballot Paper

2012-01-04T14:52:00.000-08:00

We've received our ballot papers for the selection of the lead candidate in the North West for the next Euro Elections and for our regional GPRC reps.

Can I urge all North West members to take the time to read all the statements and vote. There are five very good candidates (yours truly included). A high turnout will show whoever wins the ballot that the regional party is really going to get behind us in what will be a crucial election, not just for our party in the North West, but for the Green Party nationally.

House Rules

2011-12-27T12:17:00.000-08:00

If I remember rightly, when I first launched this blog all manner of comments were accepted, including anonymous ones. After a while, when it became clear that Anonymous comments tended to be abusive or did not attempt to develop or discuss ideas in a balanced way, I switched off that option and now I rely on someone to have a Google account.

My view now is that I'm going to go a step further. I want this blog to be about having a political conversation, with other Greens, with others who have different political views and for people to have a conversation with me. One of the key aspects of having a conversation is knowing who you are talking to, so that is a new house rule in regards to the Comments.

There (has been) a time and a place for anonymity / avatars on blogs, but the way in which I want to have a conversation now is to do it on the record, with other people willing to do the same. If you want to be anonymous, or you post under a Google identity that says nothing other than the date it was created (often simultaneous to the comment...) then I'm highly unlikely to publish your part of the conversation.

For those that want to have open and frank discussions, there are message boards where you can either choose to be yourself or not. In the past, I've been an occasional anonymous contributor (although it didn't take too much detective work to know who I was), but it is not something I'd do now. My blog is something that is on the record, and I think that is how I'd like to conduct my online discussion.

There is an exception to this general rule I'd like to make clear. You might want to be anonymous to everyone else, but you can choose to email me alongside your comment at petercranie@greenparty.org.uk to introduce yourself. I'll then be more than happy to have that conversation with you, but will respect your right to remain anonymous to others.

As always, feedback on this gratefully received. I hope everyone has enjoyed some family time during this holiday season. I've got six days before I'm back at work and I intend to spend most of that with my family. Happy Hogmanay all!

Boycotting China - how it has gone

2011-12-21T14:02:00.000-08:00

Readers with long memories will note that my new year's resolution in 2011 was to boycott Chinese goods, unless I could determine they were produced in a way that I felt was ethical (eg - trade union representation and ethical conditions of work). So how has it gone?

Firstly, I'll come clean where I have fallen down, through my own fault, on two occasions. Ben 10 figures (and pretty much everything else to do with that show) are manufactured in China. On one occasion, I'd promised my oldest son he could pick a toy (this is shortly after the birth of the youngest one), and he chose something I was supposed to be boycotting. On another occasion, I was buying replacement glasses (after a few smashes) and did not check. I got home to find out that I had bought something from China.

Other than those two episodes, I'm happy that I've achieved my objective which was to consciously choose not to buy Made in China goods. I don't want to re-run the "boycott" debate and whether it is a helpful term, which perhaps deserves another post in the new year. As best as possible, I'm going to continue to make that ethical choice in future. Dealing with a specific point raised in the comments back in January, what happens when I buy new electronic goods, next year or in the years that follow?

It may be simply unavoidable for a replacement device or electronic equipment to completely avoid dubious source materials or production. The only ethical choice will be to avoid consumption. Coltan sourced from the Democratic Republic of Congo almost certainly powers the laptop I'm writing on and the mobile phone I use. How many of us that have supported boycott campaigns (of Nestle for example) will continue to use products that clearly have as bad or worse backgrounds?

As a teenager, I boycotted South African goods in the era of apartheid. Consciously I will continue to avoid buying products from the USA, Zimbabwe, China and Israel. Sadly, Canada is likely to join that list due to its government position on the Kyoto treaty. I will also avoid (zealously) Nestle products and we have switched almost everything we do financially over to the Co-operative Group in the UK. The obvious criticism is that you end up avoiding buying anything - not actually a bad outcome if you are a member of an anti-consumerist party which fundamentally disagrees with our current economic system (and this is the subject of an upcoming post).

However, I want to end this post with a challenge for me and for the many of us for whom a simple "boycott" campaign is more about a "feelgood" factor for the person boycotting, rather than a consistent and ethically considered position.

Each weekday, I drive to work, car sharing with 2 others. As an alternative, the bus trip would be about 2.5 hours each way and on the two nights I work late, I would finish work after the last bus leaves. My diesel and my regular purchase of it supports an industry that is fundamentally damaging the planet. Not only that, the countries from which it is sourced are often those with dismal records on human rights and the repression of their own people. We are not in the financial position to afford an electric vehicle that could remove this dependence.

Most days in the last month, we've had the central heating on. The gas we purchase may well be sourced through Ecotricity, but it has to come from somewhere initially. Some of the countries that are the major producers (eg - Kazakstan) are far worse offenders than countries that I would otherwise boycott. Although we've had a wood burning stove installed in one room, there are times when it is too cold throughout the house to just use that alone.

So the challenge for all of when we talk about boycotts or ethical consumption is to avoid cherry picking and apply ethical standards consistently. This is not easy and something I hope to improve on in the coming year.

General Election March 2012?

2011-12-14T14:05:00.000-08:00

Given that today saw unemployment at its highest level since the last Conservative (led) government in 1994, inflation running at nearly 3% above the government target and the economy bumping along the bottom, it is a strange question to ask. I'll make clear that I don't think it is likely, but I do think that we should consider this possibility and be adequately prepared.

Yesterday there were three opinion polls, two showing the Tories drawing level with Labour and the final one showing them 2 points ahead in the polls. This is a knee jerk public reaction to Cameron's use of the UK veto at the emergency EU summit. It has been popular. As a result there has been some chatter online from some Tories and some writers suggesting that a spring election should be considered.

So how could this come about:

- Splits in the coalition over Europe and other issues continue and Cameron eventually says he has to call an election because the Lib Dems are sabotaging the coalition (or they leave it)

- The Tories are the first off the blocks to offer a referendum on the EU in their manifesto (probably a 3 way one similar to the SNP offer in Scotland)

- Ed Miliband continues to struggle as Labour leader, and will be seen as untested and unelectable by the public, not to mention unsupported by many in his own party

- Cameron would be convinced he could mop up the anti-EU vote of the hard right (UKIP got 3% in 2010, potentially costing the Tories 10 seats)

The outcome that Lib Dems lose seats to the Tories in the south as Labour voters desert them and don't vote tactically (a swing of 5% to the Tories would give them 20 seats). All else being equal, this would lead to a Tory majority of 15+ and a term that runs to 2017, with Scottish independence "Yes" vote potentially locking the opposition parties out for a generation.

Even for an outside possibility we Greens must prepare for this possibility and do so urgently. Caroline Lucas would have a strong chance of retaining our seat in Brighton Pavilion despite what will be a no doubt fearsome assault by the red and blue parties but what would be crucial is the rest of the national party mobilising to stand as many candidates as possible, and that means running selections in January and raising the multitude of £500 deposits we'll need to contest more than half of the 650 constituencies.

Let's keep an eye on the situation for now.

Methane, CO2 and a Call to Action

2011-12-13T14:57:00.000-08:00

Bright Green has a good posting that you should read before this one, but in summary, a large release of methane is really, really bad news for us as a global society and for many of the species that inhabit our planet.

I've just added a CO2 counter to this blog that is a reminder to me and hopefully to the reader about the single most pressing issue we are faced with. The banking crisis, the Euro zone problems and budget cuts are going to pale into insignificance if we face an uncontrollable rise in global temperatures over the coming decades.

The social issues we are faced with right now matter immensely to each of us. We are seeing people consigned to an unemployed future before they have reached their 20s. Our most talented young people are being saddled with lifetime debt before they even start applying for jobs. Those of us lucky enough to be in employment are clear that the coming years are going to be very tough. We will have to fight our corner to protect jobs while our national government avoids implementing simple policies like the Tobin Tax, that could make a hugely positive difference.

What I am convinced about is that we are talking about two sides of the same problem. We have a dominant global free market ideology that has delivered development and wealth, but has concentrated into elites around the world, instead of being shared for the common good. The excesses of this system have led to environmental degradation, distain for human rights (by us about regimes like Uzbekistan) and have established a system that will fight to protect itself despite a gradual death spiral caused by huge amounts of global debt.

In the face of that we have emerging bottom up movements like Occupy. We've seen and are seeing people campaign for freedom, respect for human rights and the chance of real democracy around the world. The internet has enabled some tremendous advances and has for the first time in history given the many the chance to quickly organise against elites, expose hypocrisy and challenge injustice. We are living at an exciting time but also an immensely challenging time and a new and fairer way of life will evolve out of the current mess we find ourselves in. I hope and believe that it will do so quickly. The methane and CO2 levels mean we face a deadline for action, but we don't know exactly when it is.

Each person will have their own path and I firmly believe that for me, the Green Party is the best possible way of effecting political change in Britain and in Europe. The national appeal this month is asking for our support. It will get mine and I hope if you are reading this, you will consider donating too.

Thank you.

Time for a Discrete Poll Listing for the Greens and UKIP?

2011-11-17T09:08:00.000-08:00

The standard formulation for a political opinion poll question is along the lines of:

“If there was a general election tomorrow, would you vote Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat or some other party?” (Comres, October 2011)

I think this kind of question is outdated and doesn’t reflect the new reality of a pluralist political system with 5 or 6 recognised parties, with a much wider and diverse range of views.

If we reflect back at October’s polls (and I’ll explain shortly why I’m omitting YouGov), look at the relative scores for the Lib Dems, Greens and UKIP:

Ipsos Mori

Lib Dem 12
Green 4
UKIP 4

ComRes (p16)

Lib Dem 14
Green 5
UKIP 4

Populus
Lib Dem 8
Green 3
UKIP 5

YouGov produce polls far more frequently than these other telephone pollsters making any direct comparison impossible. Suffice to say that the Greens always seem to poll relatively poorly with YouGov, while UKIP seem to do a bit better (7% in one poll relative to the Lib Dem’s 9%). That said, the exposure of the continued crisis in the Eurozone will be a constant reminder to people being polled about European issues. That alone may explain UKIP’s relatively high performance, but not the discrepancy with the other pollsters. Their Q&A on their methodology and who will be answering their surveys is here and I’ll posit that the demographics of YouGov panellists will be more UKIP friendly.

So if the gap between the 3rd placed party and 4th placed one is 9% there is an argument that perhaps the 4th placed one can be lumped in with “others”. When that gap is just 3%, that is no longer credible.

We’ll have to monitor the polls, but you can be sure that were the Greens and UKIP to receive a discrete poll listing, our true polled level of support will be higher than is currently shown. It is time for a change and it will be interesting to see which pollster is going to be brave enough to instigate it.

Definitely Maybe

2011-11-10T14:11:00.000-08:00

This is a post I’ve been mulling over for a while, and to get the context, you should read Probably Not first of all.

It’s 2011, the Euro zone is in crisis, banks regard European governments like an interest free overdraft facility and unemployment is at its highest since 1994 when I graduated. Our politicians don’t have the answers we seek, CO2 emissions rise relentlessly, global temperatures continue to climb and the ice continues to melt.

On the 16th December, nominations close for the European Election list in the North West. We are selecting our two lead candidates for 2014. I was clear in my mind back in 2009 that it would not be me leading the list again, something that I initially found difficult to accept, but grew into. The reasons I gave then still apply now – both my sons will be either at school or nursery, settled and enjoying life here in Liverpool. I had to move around a lot as a child and I don’t think it benefited me. I want to avoid that for my children.

There were three people that I felt could really lead the list next time. I think it is factual to say that two have them have come to a considered position that being a Euro MP is not a job they want to do at this time in their lives. The third has stated clearly to me that they will stand, but only if I refuse to and actually they want me to stand again.

Over the last two years I have been grateful for all the kind words from colleagues who felt I should stand again. I have carefully considered what is being asked of me in standing, both personally and politically, and while it will undoubtedly be very tough indeed on both me and my family, I am going to submit a set of nomination papers. I hope that North West members will vote to nominate me as the lead candidate once again (the “maybe” part of the blog post).

There can be illusions that campaigning is a tough and time consuming job, with no guarantee of success. It is going to take a huge effort to win the first Euro seat for the Greens outside of London and the South East, but we are up to the challenge. While I can’t repeat what I did from 2004 to 2009 (working part time/contracts), I do think that a stronger team of candidates, from 1 to 8 will be the key to success this time round.

Should we win (and we must win a seat this time) I’m under no illusion that I am going to have to make some personal sacrifices to do the best possible job I can for the people of the North West.

I’m writing this as I travel back on a 2 hour 13 minute train from London to Liverpool after some Environmental Representative training at my union HQ in London. I last saw my oldest son awake when I put him to bed on Monday night. I miss seeing both my boys and it is particularly hard to not see them for days in a row.

Life as a Euro MP is not child friendly. I will renew my pledge now that I will only ever travel from the North West to Brussels by train, but I also know that this means I’ll miss seeing my sons from Sunday night through to Fridays every three weeks out of four. As any parent will know, this is incredibly hard thing to do.

So what changed my mind? The lobbying and persuasion of some key people has been important, but so has the continued rapid ice loss year on year at the north pole, the crisis in our economy and the need to articulate a different vision of life to the overconsumption that is degrading the planet we live on. We may have as little as five years left to prevent runaway Climate Change.

I will stand again and put my heart and soul into the next Euro campaign for the Greens in the North West. It is a difficult personal decision, but I want the best future for my children. That means standing up again to be counted and doing the utmost I can to secure a lower carbon future as quickly as we can manage it. The stakes have never been higher, and I hope that if you are reading this, you’ll be willing to pledge to do something to support our efforts in the North West.

In 2009 we were incredibly close – less than 5,000 votes away from beating Nick Griffin and the BNP to that final seat. We need your help to reverse that result in two and a half year’s time. Let’s hope our efforts will be successful this time. Please get in contact and let me know what you are able to do to help. We need an army of volunteers to compete with the five other parties in the NW that currently benefit from Euro MP salaries, offices and expenses. We need to match their efforts on a fraction of the budget, and that needs to start now.

Global Restart

2011-11-03T05:58:00.000-07:00

The 1990s saw the fall of Soviet era communism in a way that could never have been forecast. Certain frames of thinking - Cold War realities - that we had grown up with, suddenly receeded. Anyone of my age will probably have seen When The Wind Blows.

Is Global Capitalism, or more specifically, debt fuelled growth, about to see a similar disintegration? It is possible that the European and US economy will stagger through this crisis, but the writing is on the wall longer term. This system doesn't work either.

What we are short of is an alternative and a strategy for managing the collapse. There will need to be a Global Restart (usually an IT term) of the economy. It is possible to agree on some basic principles for a more just form of economics, such as Sustainable Development and a fundamental redistribution of global wealth, but the specifics about how we manage a transition to that system while economies are in crisis requires a lot of work.

There are some good ideas out there, but will we need the next Jesus, Mohammed, Marx, Einstein or Hawking to articulate that vision in a way that billions will be influenced by them? Or is it possible that with the internet humanity has gone forward far enough that we won't rely on just a single figurehead, but instead see the ideas flow up from the grassroots in a truly revolutionary way. We live in interesting times.

Lancashire Wyreside

2011-10-26T15:17:00.000-07:00

Now that internet is restored at home (we are currently decorating the living room and everything has been off for a couple of days), I wanted to belatedly highlight the hard work that has been put in by Sue White, our candidate, and the work by the campaign team headed up by Jake Welsh. I'll update with the result once that comes in.

Showing Early Promise

2011-10-16T13:15:00.000-07:00

Usually when I go doorknocking on a Saturday morning, it is with child number two, who at six months just falls asleep for an hour or so as I push him around. However, number one son has become increasingly inquisitive about "Daddy doing politics" so yesterday both boys came out with me in St Michaels ward.

Seamus showed good doorknocking potential once he got the hang of it, and tried to join in the conversations...

"You any problems lady?"
"We fix problems."

Add in a hello and goodbye and he is better than some opposition canvassers I've heard about. All that and not quite 3 years old. Still, I won't be signing up for party membership just yet. That would mean he could vote in internal elections, and he probably isn't old enough to read the literature from the different candidates just yet. However, I have heard that sort of thing has been done within another party in Liverpool, apparently. I imagine it is quite helpful when it comes to selection battles!

Luciana Berger's Response on Strikes

2011-09-22T14:25:00.000-07:00

I'll be trying again if we are out on strike on 30th November, but here is Luciana Berger's reply in full about the strikes.

"Thank you for taking the time to email me about this important issue.

I did speak in the House on 30th June, in order to defend the jobs of my constituents who work in the Identity and Passport Service. I felt this was a very important issue for my constituents, and I felt I needed to represent their views in Parliament. This is a matter I am continuing to work on.

I know how strongly many teachers and other public sector workers feel about the Government’s proposed pension reforms. The average public sector pension is currently only £7,800 per year and almost half of public sector pensions receive less than £5,600 per year so I appreciate how important these changes are for teachers and workers across the public sector.

Strike action, of course, should always be a last resort and it is absolutely vital that the Government work closely and openly with trade unions and teachers in order to find a solution that rewards the hard work, skill and dedication of teachers while remaining affordable for the taxpayer. I believe it is unhelpful and unacceptable for the Government to announce the likely result of pension reforms, while negotiations remain ongoing.

I voted against the Government’s plans to increase the State Pension Age to 66 by 2020 – which will lead to significant losses for many people, including predominately women in the 50s – and I also agree that it is unfair for the Government to permanently switch the up-rating of pensions and benefits from the Retail Price Index (RPI) to the, normally lower, Consumer Price Index. I raised the issue in Parliament last year, asking the Chancellor, George Osborne, about how the government will protect people from the loss in value. You can read the question here.

I know that teachers and public sector workers do not want to take industrial action and I know that parents and the public do not want to see their services disrupted. While I cannot support strike action while negotiations are ongoing, I believe these strikes could have been avoided if the Government had been prepared to engage constructively with the concerns of those affected.

Thank you once again for writing to me on this important issue. If you feel there is anything I can do to assist you in future, please do not hesitate to contact me"

Nothing about the reasons for supporting the NUJ strike, and absolutely on message, parroting Ed Miliband's comments at the time of the strike. A polite reply though, and I'll be corresponding with my MP more in the coming months I'm sure.

Leaving the Liberal Democrats?

2011-09-09T05:55:00.000-07:00

As Green Party Conference starts, I’m of course disappointed not to be attending, but enjoying the outside perspective, as the BBC and Guardian cover our pitch to disaffected Lib Dem voters and activists.

One point raised by the media is that our opinion poll ratings have ranged from 2 to 6%, while the Lib Dems are tracking around 9 to 15%. That point ignores the fact that when the question is asked about who you would like to vote for, Green isn’t ever given as an option. The pollsters ask if you would like to vote red, blue or yellow (or for some “other” party). It’s an important point, because you have to compare like with like.

So disaffected Liberal Democrats, what does the future hold for you? Do you stay or do you join us on principle (or Labour for convenience)? This earlier post outlines the successes we’ve had when former Lib Dem councillors have joined us. Here in Liverpool, John Coyne, a Lib Dem until 2006, was re-elected as a Green again this year with over 50% of the vote, in an election where all but 2 Lib Dem councillors lost their seats.

Choking Canary

2011-09-04T14:48:00.000-07:00

Take a look at the current extent of Arctic Ice Melt. Maximum ice melt will see a near repeat of the record low extent of Arctic ice in 2007 - it could be just above or below the record set four years ago.

However, the bigger concern is that Arctic Ice Volume, at 3 million cubed kilometres of ice, is the lowest ever. In 1979 it was 17 million cubed kilometres at this time of year.

For Solidarity or For Show?

2011-08-02T04:26:00.000-07:00

My local MP, Luciana Berger, yesterday tweeted with a handy photo of her support for the striking NUJ journalists:

“joined @bbcmerseyside staff on their picket line in the rain #nuj re#solidarity” 1st August 2011

First point. Well done. These journalists are exercising their democratic right to defend their pay and conditions in the face of cuts and Labour MPs should show solidarity.

Going back to the 30th June and a different strike, Ed Miliband made it clear that he expected Labour MPs to cross picket lines to turn up in the House of Commons that day. A clean sweep of Liverpool MPs, Luciana Berger, Steve Rotherham, Louise Ellman and Stephen Twigg all duly turned up. George Howarth in Knowsley and Helen Jones MP for Warrington North were also there.

At face value, this should have caused major ructions in Liverpool Labour. There are a great many sincere and principled people in the Labour Party – probably the majority of the membership and a great many of the representatives at local government – who supported striking lecturers, teachers and public sector workers. To give you a flavour of some of the Twitter comments the day before, the widely respected Cllr Louise Baldock, Chair of the North West Labour Party, said:

“Dear LP members and especially MPs, cross a picketline and you and me are finished #justsaying” 29th June 2011

Emotions run high on issues like this, but I’m actually not going to attack the Liverpool Labour MPs that went into the Commons on that day. You can see that this was the scheduled debate on the Liverpool Passport Office, where local MPs raised concerns about the dismissal of 14 staff and the conduct of the Identity and Passport service. Our local Labour MPs had to strike a balance between representing local people and showing support for the hundreds of thousands that were striking to defend their jobs.

But it is clear that things could have been done differently. If Liverpool Labour MPs supported the strike, they could have nominated one person to go in and represent the sacked Liverpool workers in the debate. We have to recognise that with a Conservative led government, Parliament is not going to make allowances for non-attendance due to conscience, and the working rights of a different set of people were at stake. The other MPs could still have shown solidarity on the picket line but this all presupposes that the other Labour MPs in and around Liverpool actually supported the strike. Comments welcomed to indicate whether that was the case or not.

Given that I can’t find any indication about whether Luciana Berger supported our strike action or not on the 30th June, I think it is wrong to leap to a judgement on this. However, if photos showing solidarity on the picket line are going to be tweeted and possibly used in campaign literature in future, I think we need to know the full picture and whether she supported the other strike action on the 30th June.

I want to know what my local MP actually stands for. So I’m writing to her to ask and I’ll share whatever answer I get.

Knowsley Green Party

2011-07-26T14:36:00.000-07:00

I'm delighted to say that I've been helping Knowsley Greens get a local party established and to contest the upcoming Page Moss byelection. So for a while, you'll find me contributing to http://knowsleygreenparty.blogspot.com/ rather than here.

Marie (Mari) Rea is our excellent candidate. She used to work for the former left wing Liverpool MP Bob Parry and along with a number of others, she'll be working to get a number of Green candidates and a target ward strategy in Knowsley from 2012 to 2014.

Page Moss has been badly hit by floods four times in the last four years. The Liverpool Echo site shows some of the damage. This will be a big issue on the doorstep.

A Pause

2011-06-21T14:37:00.000-07:00

As posting has become more infrequent, I'm going to go offline on this blog for a while. I'm intending to come back, but it will have to be when I've got the time available to do it once again, which could be a while.

Threat of Redundancy

2011-06-14T13:03:00.000-07:00

Like many others out there at the moment, my job is at risk. Tomorrow I submit a form that will be assessed by my college. Many others who I work with will do the same. On Friday a number of people will find out they don't have a job any more. It isn't a nice situation.

The last time I was in this situation was the morning after the European Election results in 2009. I'd just spent five years of my life working part time and devoting as much time as I could to win a Euro seat for the Greens in the North West region. We lost, narrowly, and 10 hours later I was told that unless I could relocate to London, I'd be redundant from my part-time job.

So for the very many of you out there who have jobs under threat or know a friend, relative or loved one who is at risk of losing their job, I know how you feel. That is why it is particularly galling to hear the leader of the Labour Party, equate benefit claimants to the boardroom. As A Place to Write puts it:

"When Ed Miliband promised to tackle the “take what you can culture” from the “boardroom to the benefits system” I couldn’t help but think he must be joking. Comparing the boardroom- where salaries are set to rise to one hundred and forty five times national median earnings, to the benefits system, which barely supports the 2.5 million people who are scrambling for five hundred thousand jobs, many of which offer pay which wouldn’t push them above the poverty line- seems like a joke doesn’t it?"

Left on the Shelf

2011-06-09T15:22:00.000-07:00

Before I get onto the main content, I just want to state that my intention here is to play the ball, not the individual player, so any criticism is general and not specific to any one party or organisation, but an attempt to give a genuine overview of politics to the left of Labour after 2010. Respect are currently undertaking a review of their position after the 2011 local election results, but they have been, and in places remain, a credible electoral presence. This post primarily considers the future electoral role of socialist parties.

When you google “mass socialist party” 78,900 hits come up. Those explicitly socialist (and communist) parties to the left of Labour seem to me to be the last true believers. From what I've been able to ascertain, the total membership of Socialist political parties in the UK is likely to be around 10,000. [I’d welcome anyone who can provide figures and a credible link for completeness]

I'll start with some cold facts and figures. Membership levels based on the Electoral Commission party accounts in 2010 were:

Democratic Socialist Alliance (People Before Profit) – not stated

Socialist Alliance - 102

Socialist Alternative – not stated (election umbrella)

Socialist Equality Party – not stated

Socialist Labour Party – 3,260

Socialist Party of Great Britain – not stated

Socialist Peoples Party – 44

Socialist Studies Party – not stated (inactive)

Socialist Unity – not stated (inactive)

Solidarity – 450

Scottish Socialist Party – not stated

TUSC – not stated (election umbrella)

The Socialist Party (not listed in the Electoral Commission Accounts) claims over 2,000 members in 2011.

To quote someone who commented on a Socialist Unity thread, “Calculating SWP membership numbers is a bit like trying to hold water in your hand”. The estimates I’ve seen are around 3,500 but it is difficult to establish what criteria is actually used to define membership. [Again any info welcomed on this].

A lot of people blamed the SLP and NO2EU (a forerunner of TUSC) for our narrow loss to the BNP in the North West in 2009. It is an easy conclusion to draw. The Greens were 0.3% short of beating the BNP, the SLP gained 1.6% and NO2EU gained 1.4%. Our research suggests that 3 out of 10 NO2EU supporters would have voted Green as a second preference. But as I’ve previously stated, I and others felt the biggest single contributing factor was due to misinformation delivered by a larger party in red.

It is simply a fact that in pretty much every list election under a proportional system since the voting reforms introduced for certain elections by the Labour government at the end of the 1990s, Socialist Parties have managed to capture 1 to 3% of the vote, even in elections with genuine Proportional Representation. It is likely they continue to go on handing over lost deposits in most of the bigger elections for the foreseeable future. To Green colleagues who feel this way - we shouldn't be angry over this or get annoyed at socialist candidates standing and "splitting the vote" - this is simply an electoral reality, to be anticipated and acknowledged.

So with such longevity and with reasonably substantial memberships (the Greens had less than 5,000 members as recently as 2004) why has there been such ineffectiveness (with some exceptions of course) of parties with the word “socialist” in their name within the electoral arena? I’d posit four possible reasons:

1. Many people who are socialist still vote Labour or vote Green. Many Labour members still regard themselves as socialists (even if other socialists disagree). Joe Anderson, leader of Liverpool City Council, is one example, stating "I'm a trade unionist. I'm a socialist. I've been one all my life and as far as I'm concerned…" Likewise, there are Greens who regard themselves as socialist, eco-socialist or “on the left” of politics, our former Principal Speaker Derek Wall, being an obvious example.

2. Socialism is associated with repression, totalitarianism and an absence of democracy. I’m not saying that is an accurate perception of what socialism is, but that it is simply how the vast majority of non-politicised people react to the description. Even a strong leaflet campaign can’t overcome that barrier – persuading the majority of people of a contrary view can only really be tackled by door knocking and consistent work on behalf of the community.

3. Splits. The People’s Judean Front problem.

4. Socialist parties still being in awe of Trade Unions. This is a problem for two reasons. The Trade Unions do not have the power they once did. That is not to say that they are not influential or can’t be effective (I’m a Membership Secretary of my local branch of UCU and we’ve just seen them negotiate £30 off the annual registration fee with the IfL after a strong campaign). Secondly, most of the largest Trade Unions are linked with Labour, and with the exception of PCS and a number of Socialist Party activists who hold influential roles, there is simply no route in for a small socialist political organisation. Given that socialist parties don’t often have very wealthy members, there is no credible funding source.

The biggest electoral problem now for any party that is trying to attract voters who are explicitly on the left is that Labour is now in opposition. This has squeezed the political space outside of the Labour Party as voters, even socialist ones, hold their noses again and vote Labour in opposition to the Tory / Liberal Democrat coalition. These are going to be lean electoral times for socialist parties.

I think that most Greens will acknowledge that in the 2010 General Election, at a local level we also got squeezed hard. However this was more to do with an increased level of turnout that saw a (then) record number of Green votes in some council wards but losses of seats we had gained four years previously on lower turnouts. In contrast, local election results in 2011 show that our national support has returned to the 2007 level, but through effective electoral targeting we gained and now hold far more council seats than we did four years ago, and we also have the huge boost of our excellent MP in Parliament, Caroline Lucas.

This is no mean feat, considering that the 2007 local elections were at a time when Tony Blair was immensely unpopular, Labour had been in government for 10 years and the Iraq War, Labour’s introduction of Tuition Fees in breach of their manifesto promise and dark economic storm clouds on the horizon meant that many former Labour members and supporters had no hesitation voting Socialist, Green or Liberal Democrat instead.

In 2011 Ed Miliband has said Labour got it wrong on the Iraq War, that students should back Labour because the Tories / Lib Dems have introduced higher tuition fees and that the economy is in trouble because the coalition are cutting too far, too fast. Even so, Labour is still struggling to establish any consistent poll lead at a time when an effective opposition should be hammering this government. (Incidentally, they also seem to have an eye on a potential rival for votes).

After our results in 2010, there was a lot of internal discussion in the Greens about the potential for a squeeze, but we’ve shown that we are ready to deal with it, and indeed we will still make progress even in a political climate when Labour are in opposition. In a similar exercise, it sounds like Respect members are currently engaging in a similar process to work out where their priorities lie.

In conclusion, I think that socialist parties will need to seriously consider whether they continue to contest elections, or try and add what is in most cases marginal support to candidates from other parties. In elections over the next four years where proportional systems are used, I would expect that TUSC or another umbrella label will be used, with much the same result as in the previous 15 years (around 1 to 3%).

A mass socialist party is not credible in Britain in 2011 despite the most catastrophic economic circumstances. Indeed most socialists interested in influencing electoral politics in most areas of the country will have already joined Labour and the Greens.

Those who choose to remain in their particular socialist party (or work under a particular electoral umbrella) will have my admiration for their principled devotion to their position. I do understand what that is like. When I first stood in Liverpool in 2002, we barely had a functioning local Green Party, but what I could see was a clear way forward and a sense of purpose about what we could practically achieve - we have 2 councillors now and finished 2nd in two other wards this year. I expect further Green electoral progress locally and nationally.

What is crucial in my opinion is that there will be many people out there who are at this particular stage in their lives are ready to engage in something. Many more will now choose direct action organisations like UKUncut but the prolific activity of socialist parties at freshers fayres up and down the country will see some choose a decade or two in organisations that will be unable to win elections despite yearly promises of progress.

The struggles ahead of us are going to be tough and I respect anyone who fights for social justice or to protect the future for our children and grandchildren. Those who choose socialist parties will do so for principled reasons, but should be under no illusions that whatever influence they will have will be outside the electoral system not in it.

Independence - An Anglo-Scot Perspective

2011-06-01T04:56:00.000-07:00

My mother is English (Yorkshire) and my father Scottish, of Irish ancestry. I was born south of the border, but spent my formative years in Bo'ness before moving back again.

I've grew up with antipathy towards the term British - British Empire, British Imperialism (I've just read the Afghan Wars 1839-1919) and British government. Unsurprising in the 1980s in Scotland. As I've grown older and appreciated the perspective of Asian and Black people, who are 4th or 5th generation British (like me), I've mellowed a bit. So what are my thoughts about my former home, with a lot of my extended family living there, becoming an independent country and me effectively becoming English rather than British?

It will not make much practical difference to my experience of crossing the border as an independent Scotland would remain in Europe. I also hold the view that Scotland and the people that live there should be in charge of that decision, and I think it would be in Scotland’s interests in the very long term to be an independent nation within the EU.

Unionists in Scotland should be wary of underestimating Alex Salmond. His eye will be on the timing of the referendum. The SNP does not need the majority of Scottish people to vote for full independence consistently, he only needs them to do it once. He’ll be looking for an alignment of issues in a time period that will drive up pro-independence support. A few months ago the polls suggested the SNP would lose power at Holyrood, so the fact that opinion polls don’t point to a win for full independence should be noted, but the accepted wisdom that Scotland won’t vote for full independence is in my view wrong.

Issues that might enhance Scottish nationalist sentiments in the coming years will be the British Olympic football team (imagine the situation if not a single Scot is in the starting XI), the Scottish government taking positions fundamentally at odds with the UK government when voting in European Council of Ministers and the forthcoming energy crisis. Right now, all eyes are on the SNP as they try and tackle the sectarian crisis in Scottish football that has flared up this season. I think this is a key test in winning and keeping the confidence of the people I share heritage with, Scots with Irish ancestry.

On a greener political slant, Scotland is blessed with huge natural and renewable resources. At a time when the German and Japanese governments have committed to a renewable and non-nuclear future, Scotland can and should be committed to the same, not just under an SNP government, but with an all party consensus. Nuclear will look less attractive, particularly if the relatively uninhabited parts of Scotland are in the running for nuclear disposal, even the low level variety.

For me, the issue that most vexes me is the political implications for the UK without Scotland. England is a Conservative country. My city Liverpool certainly isn’t, but if you look at post war election results, the nation of England has statistically shown a much higher level of Conservative support than the UK as a whole.

In the recent AV referendum, the rank and file of the Labour Party, including many of their councillors, rejected and campaigned against the option of Alternative Voting. Ed Miliband got it right, and his rank and file largely got it wrong.

Should Scotland choose independence, First Past the Post in England will consistently deliver Conservative majorities. The sting in the tail for those in (English) Labour who campaigned against AV would be Scottish independence and Tory dominance of the remaining UK. One thing is for sure, we'll all be looking north with great interest.

Greens at 6% Nationally in Opinion Poll

2011-05-26T04:38:00.000-07:00

The latest IPSOS-MORI poll for Reuters gives us our joint highest national poll rating in the last 10 years at 6%.

Labour 42%
Tories 35%
Lib Dems 10%
Greens 6%
SNP/PC 4%
UKIP 2%
BNP 1%

It is not coincidence. The high profile of our leader, Caroline Lucas, as the first Green MP is having an impact on public consciousness. It also follows on from elections where we had a record number of candidates for this particular date in the electoral cycle and the fact that we ended the election with 130 councillors in 43 local authorities.

So each and every one of us who stood as candidates or helped a Green councillor get elected should be proud of what we’ve done so far, but the challenge is just starting. The recent defections of two councillors in Solihull and Milton Keynes (ex Lib Dem and ex Labour respectively) show that we are the principled alternative from the left to the centre of British politics. What is vital is that increasingly in every ward and every seat at Westminster, we field candidates, and that means byelections too.

Former Lib Dem* councillors

2011-05-20T14:27:00.000-07:00

* Insert party here

Well done to all the Green councillors who were elected in England. We ended the week of 6th May with 130 elected principle authority councillors on 43 different councils. This is our highest ever total and we will improve on it again next year.

We should not get ahead of ourselves. We are still very small compared to the red, yellow and blue totals nationwide, but we are by far the biggest of all of the others, despite some hype about UKIP this time. The Lib Dems took a hammering in the northern cities and lost over 700 seats. Before the results came in, the general consensus was that 600 losses would be disastrous.

Just two weeks on from the elections, our councillor numbers are now up to 132. Firstly we've had an independent councillor in Solihull join us, welcome to Howard Allen, and today to Liz Campbell from Independent (formerly Labour) to Green in Milton Keynes.

That is two defections in two weeks. No one expects that rate to stay as high as it is, but it would be reasonable to suggest that there will be more people, including councillors currently sitting with other parties or as independents, who will join us in the coming year. What are their prospects for re-election as Greens?

Liberal Democrat councillors with a good reputation for local representation and a social and environmental conscience, who genuinely feel that their party has moved away from them, should not worry about joining the Greens. The same is true for independents or Labour councillors, and even in opposition, Labour members are still coming across to us.

Here in Liverpool, John Coyne left the Lib Dems over a matter of principle in 2006, as he opposed a pathfinder initiative that threatened the homes of people in Liverpool. He joined the Greens. He was re-elected as a Green councillor in 2007 with 38% of the vote, and has been re-elected again this year with over 50% of the vote. This is a resounding success for us, and here in Liverpool, John has been transformative for our local party.

In Middlesborough, Joe Mishna joined the Greens in 2007 and has just been re-elected as a Green councillor. In Totnes, Robert Vint left the Lib Dems last year and has just been re-elected.

No current Liberal Democrat/Independent/Other out there who is considering defection will be under any illusion that re-election as a councillor is going to be more difficult if you join the Greens instead of LabLibCon with their established party machines. That in itself is a healthy indicator that when individuals are choosing to join the Greens in the coming months, they are doing so for the right reasons.

Usually there are different prospects for different individuals. Someone with less than a year to go before re-election faces an uphill task to get re-elected. If they have two or three years left of their term, the prospects are far better. However, for Liberal Democrat councillors, things are different.

Popular local Lib Dem councillors in Liverpool, like Paul Clein, were swept out on a wave of anti-government sentiment. That will still be there next year, and arguably may have grown even stronger in the meantime. Across the north, you've got examples of "paper candidates" from the Greens polling better than Lib Dem candidates who put out leaflets and ran a campaign.

With the miserable little compromise that was AV (and yes, I still voted for it as it was fractionally better than FPTP in my opinion) now passed by, a lot of Liberal Democrat councillors will be considering their positions. I think we'll see a few more join us.

Liverpool Round Up

2011-05-07T07:27:00.000-07:00

It was a good night for the Liverpool Green Party on Thursday. Across the city we polled 6% of the vote (just 0.06% behind the Tories), so we just missed out on becoming the third party in terms of vote share. Full results listing is here. Our great success was seeing John Coyne re-elected in St Michaels ward. The result was:

Green 1978 (50%)
Labour 1341 (34%)
Lib Dem 326 (8%)
Tories 143 (4%)
Others 130 (4%)

Well done John and to everyone that helped. This year I was a very small part of the team due to my family commitments, but I am delighted to have helped.

Of the 30 wards up for re-election, the Lib Dems only won 2, holding Woolton and Church. Labour won 26, retaining all their seats, and sweeping away many senior Lib Dems. These included Paul Clein in Greenbank, the subject of an earlier posting. Back in December, he wrote the Guardian and it looked like he might resign from the Liberal Democrats. He didn't and his record as a local councillor counted for very little as people voted against the coalition and returned a Labour councillor for the first time in a great many years.

Had Paul Clein stood to retain his seat as an independent, he'd have done a lot better. There was some discussion in the Greens about that possibility. We've had our differences in the past with both Paul and Jan Clein, but as I hinted at the time, there would have been a few of us in the party willing to argue the case for standing down and supporting him had he chosen that route. It would then have gone to a vote of the local party. Having chosen to seek re-election as a Lib Dem and having seen that party pull out of the joint budget agreement at the 11th hour, I think that avenue is now closed. He has been very gracious in defeat and spoken a lot of sense about the Lib Dem brand now being "toxic" in Liverpool (and Manchester and a host of other places...) and I agree with those who say that the result he saw was unfair to a councillor that has worked hard and served his ward very well for over 20 years.

Other senior Lib Dems have fallen around the city. Steve Radford's Liberal Party very comfortably held their seat in Tuebrook and Stoneycroft. The Conservatives failed to make any significant inroads towards winning a seat in Woolton or elsewhere.

Strangely, we've found ourselves in the position of also having finished in 2nd place in a couple of wards in Liverpool this time, albeit in wards with absolutely crushingly big Labour majorities. These were Princes Park and Central. In Riverside, where I stood albeit as a largely "paper" candidate this time, we were in 4th but just 5 votes behind the 2nd place Tories.

Our meeting is on Monday and I'm sure the campaign to defend Sarah Jenning's seat in next year's election will start immediately. The Lib Dems might be finished as a force in the ward, having dropped from a surprise "Cleggmania" win for Sharon Green (now an Independent) to a dismal 3rd place, but Labour will be looking to expand further. With the Lib Dems likely offering so little resistance, the red machine will have the time and the money to work St Michaels very hard over the next 12 months. We'll have our work cut out for us, but 1978 votes is a new record level of support, and we'll be confident of success again.

St Michaels - Green Hold

2011-05-05T17:16:00.000-07:00

I've left the count early, as you'd expect given Hughie is still less than a month old and it would be selfish to leave my wife to manage the whole night by herself...

The good news is that we won 5 out of 5 polling districts according to our sampling, so it will be a comfortable hold for us. Full details to follow at lunchtime tomorrow.

The Lib Dems are projected to lose 12 out of the 13 seats they were defending, with only Richard Kemp managing to hold onto his seat.

Predictions

2011-05-04T15:33:00.000-07:00

Nothing specific about us I'm afraid, as people could accuse me of having some form of knowledge about postal votes, but it does seem that the Lib Dems could be down to between 23 and 26 seats in Liverpool when the polls close tomorrow.

In what was once an unassailable ward for the Lib Dems, Church, where we live, Labour have delivered two leaflets today, with one reproducing the embarrassing story run by the Sunday Express about Cllr Richard Kemp. In response, the Lib Dems have rolled out former cllr Colin Eldridge, to ask people to vote for him. If he holds on tomorrow night it will be by a very narrow margin. Greenbank, Wavertree and Cressington are also ones to watch tomorrow, although to lose Cressington would be disastrous for the Lib Dems.

Finally, one thing I have learned in this campaign, from a "senior Lib Dem". Although Paul Twigger was named on the leaflet that slandered two Green councillors, as one or two of us have suspected, he didn't actually write the stuff. So he has listened to some bad advice and taken the flak for someone else (I wonder who????) - not the brightest thing to do given that publicity almost certainly will cost him his seat tomorrow night.

Big GOTV day tomorrow for us in St Michaels, so off to bed now!

Yes to AV, then Yes to PR – a Canada inspired posting

2011-05-03T13:51:00.000-07:00

I’m delighted the Elizabeth May has been elected as the first ever Green MP in Canada. It mirrors the success of Caroline Lucas in the UK (also under FPTP) and Adam Bandt in Australia (a breakthrough under AV).

Let’s have a look at the overall results:

Conservatives 39.6%
NDP 30.6%
Liberals 18.9%
Bloc Quebec 6.1%
Green 3.9%

This is a timely reminder that under FPTP even a vote of 4% nationally translates into just 1 seat (0.3% share) for the Greens, while just under 40% of the popular vote has given the Canadian Conservatives 54% of the seats. A minority of votes but as a single party winning they take all the power. Is that fair?

It might be simple. It might be how a horse race works but it is not a fair system. For those of you, who like me, grew up in the 1980s let me just give you a quick reminder of the figures in our own elections.

1983

Conservatives 42.4%
Labour 27.6%
Alliance 25.4%

1987

Conservatives 42.2%
Labour 30.8%
Alliance 22.6%

In 1983 42% of the vote gave the Tories 61% of the seats and in 1987 the same share gave them 58% of the seats. If you are like me, you will remember the anger and frustration living in a country where a dominant minority imposed their will on our political system for a generation.

One of the rallying cries of the No2AV, Yes to PR supporters has been that AV can deliver even more disproportionate results. It can and in 1997 it would have done so. The Labour landslide would have been an avalanche, but it wouldn’t have affected the 1980s results by much at all.

But the politics in any country is about more than just the voting system. Under FPTP, the Conservatives in Canada were reduced from 169 seats to just 2 in the 1993 election, despite winning 16% of the vote. The Liberal victors in that election gained 32% of the vote but got a whopping 60% of the seats. As we’ve seen in the election results across the water last night, with the emergence of the NDP as the biggest opposition party, Canadian politics is more fluid than our own.

In the UK, even with their worst election results in the last 30 years, both Labour and the Tories continued to win a very large number of seats. Our political culture will continue to be dominated by these two parties until we force them to accept a genuinely proportional voting system.

The Liberal Democrats, even with AV, will struggle to win more seats because as a party of government they can no longer face both ways – we’ll see that in the results of the proportional Scottish elections and FPTP local elections on 5th May as Lib Dems in the northern areas, who have relied on attracting tactical or floating left wing voters, take a hammering.

So why am I going to vote for the change and for AV on Thursday? AV alone is not the prize in this referendum. The prize is electoral change on a national level for this generation. It is the freedom of people to begin to think outside of “football” politics where you support the reds or the blues depending on how your family brought you up. It is the end to the two party system and the beginnings of European democracy.

I expect this vote to be a lot tighter than the polls are predicting. A vote for Yes will make further change inevitable. As increasing number of people express first preferences for parties other than the red, yellows and blues, the system will be blown wide open. AV will make way for a more proportional system.

For genuine progressives in Labour, typified by those far sighted people in Compass who are pursuing a more pluralist and inclusive approach, there is nothing to fear from the changes that will come. For the dinosaurs, like David Blunkett and John Reid, and the safe seaters, like Hazel Blears, the thought of change clearly terrifies them.

Winning the referendum, however narrowly, will mean healthier and more diverse politics. A defeat will kick anything other than modest reform of the Lords (and you can predict just how keen the current incumbents will be about change) into the long grass for many years to come. If it is lost, I will be disappointed but not surprised.

No2AV, Yes to PR may peel off enough pro-reform voters to win it for the dinosaurs. It is one area where the AV campaigners have been afraid to tread for fear of leaving themselves open to attack. With 36 hours left, it is a last chance to make the point that you can vote for AV not because you like it, but because it is a step away from FPTP and two party dominance. Yes2AV, then Yes to PR anyone?

Liverpool - A Lib Dem Disaster Zone

2011-04-25T15:37:00.000-07:00

After scandal and the resignation of their group leader, comes another defection from the Lib Dems to Labour. Although Cllr Millar was not facing re-election this year, his seat would almost certainly have fallen to Labour in 2012. You can read into that what you will.

If the Lib Dems think this is going to be the last of their bad headlines before polling day, they need to think again. There is more bad news to come.

Election and Referendum Outlook for the Greens

2011-04-24T13:35:00.000-07:00

There are just ten days left until polling day and I wanted to put down a few thoughts about the forthcoming elections.

Last year we felt a "Local Vote Green" message would offset the one off increase in turnout here in Liverpool. The tactic worked - Tom Crone, our excellent Riverside Parliamentary candidate, gained 1355 (3.5%) of the General Election votes cast across 6 wards - but gained 1790 in St Michaels alone for the local elections. Unfortunately, Cleggmania from the TV debates kicked in just as Postal Votes went out last year. That is what cost us a narrow victory in St Michaels, and wasn't anything we could have anticipated or counteracted through our local campaigning. The result boosted the Lib Dems at our expense in our two target wards.

A year on, Clegg's unpopularity is such that I've not seen a single local Lib Dem leaflet with him on it. Living in Church ward, I also note that Richard Kemp's two communication leaflets to postal voters only contained the words "Liberal Democrats" in the imprint, and nowhere else on the form. Even allowing for national unpopularity, seats such as Church ward should really still be safe, but the Warren Bradley resignation, just before Postal Votes went out is now likely to give Liverpool Labour a chance to take seats like Church they would not realistically have otherwise. Elections are about events, and this year national unpopularity and the former local leader self destructing will drive the Liverpool Lib Dem vote lower than it would be otherwise.

In all this, we are focused on retaining our St Michaels seat, with Cllr John Coyne running a strong re-election campaign. Every vote will be fought for, but I would expect John to hold his seat, a view shared by pundits from other parties, on the Vote 2007 website. We will also be looking to build our level of support in Greenbank, where Lawrence Brown has been working hard as a our candidate. I expect the Lib Dem share of the vote to drop in both wards, and Greenbank is a very interesting one to watch as it has a very large student population, who may be more likely to vote this year because of the Referendum on AV.

Late last year, Paul Clein wrote to the Guardian pondering his future as a Liberal Democrat. Since then he has made the decision to stick with it and we'll see if that was the right call. Had he gone Independent before this election, I think he would have had a stronger chance of re-election by combining an effective student campaign combined with his long standing history in the ward. As it is, I think Greenbank is too close to call this year.

Moving further afield, we are contesting over 1600 local election seats in England this year, and I'd expect a number of Green gains, particularly in Brighton. In Wales, we have the Assembly elections, and in South Wales Central some positive polling and a clear electoral strategy give us our best chance yet of gaining our first Green AM in Wales.

In Scotland, we could be making some serious headlines on May 6th. In today's opinion poll for Scotland on Sunday, the Greens are at 7%, equal with the Lib Dems. The Scotland Votes seat prediction suggests that could mean as many as 8 Green seats in Holyrood. Even a doubling of our seats from 2 to 4 would be a big step forward.

This should be a good set of elections for the Greens but there is also the small matter of the AV referendum. This is a choice between a deeply unfair and disproportionate system where you can vote once, and a deeply unfair and disproportionate system where you can express your preferences. The latter is preferable in my opinion, and I will be voting in favour of the change. I think the outlook for an increase on our single MP in the next parliament will be increased by the switch to AV, but my reason for voting in favour will be to keep pushing the door for genuine reform.

AV will show that increasingly people want to cast their vote for parties other than Labour and the Conservatives. In the face of this evidence, further electoral reform will follow. Under FPTP, preferences will remain masked by tactical voting considerations and instead of further reform, the failure of this referendum will be used by Labour and Conservative politicians alike to keep reform off the agenda for another generation. I believe it will be a very close vote and that it will be narrowly won by those arguing in favour of reform, but we shall see.

Warren Bradley Resigns

2011-04-18T12:12:00.000-07:00

Update: According to David Bartlett on Twitter, Bradley has been suspended by the Liberal Democrats pending an investigation

In a fast moving news story, Warren Bradley went from scandal story to resignation in a few hours today. The original story, about him allegedly fraudulently signing his own son's nomination papers as a witness, with his son claiming that his (the candidate signature) was faked, left him in an untenable position. A few hours later, his resignation email was sent, where he does not admit any wrong doing and will be taking some legal advice.

One of the comments on David Bartlett's blog illuminates what is often unsaid about the former council leader's "private life":

"The background to this is a personal disaster for Bradley on many levels. As I understand matters, the 'senior Lib Dems' whom he claims have undermined him include his original mentor, Lord Mike Storey. Richard Kemp is a long-time adversary and can be ignored. It's Storey's involvement that has changed the game. Storey remains close to the Bradley family, and is sympathetic to the wife faced with Bradley's desertion a year back. Neither Storey, the wife, nor his parents, nor apparently his son Daniel, have forgiven him for walking out for the hate-monger, Sharon Green. Beneath the politics lies a nest of unrelenting domestic bitterness. Quite why the Lib Dems re-elected Bradley last year is beyond rational explanation. If they now choose Richard Kemp, that will be too."

I agree with Bradley that private lives should remain private, but there are limits to what should be considered private. Sharon Green, referred to as "the hate-monger" in the comment (not language I would choose), was exposed as having an offensively mocking image of disabled youngsters tagged as "the Labour opposition". At the time, Bradley mustered a defence that didn't stand up to scrutiny and said "he considered the matter closed". He also strangely said:

"As I'm not a member of Facebook, I have not seen the alleged picture, nor would I know how to access it."

Given that the picture was posted in January 2010, which was before Sharon Green was even a Lib Dem candidate or had any history of political activism in Liverpool that I or other Greens were aware of, it was unlikely for her as an outsider to have the depth of knowledge of the personalities involved to have tagged the picture in the way it was done. Given the defence put forward by Cllr Green, it would point the finger at someone with knowledge and ill feeling towards the Labour group.

Just ten days before the Facebook scandal broke, Bradley had survived a leadership challenge by a very narrow three votes. Had the leadership contest taken place after the Facebook scandal, and with all members of the Liberal Democrat group aware of Bradley's personal relationship with Cllr Green and his initial response, I believe he would have been defeated by any credible alternative candidate.

By February of this year, an internal Lib Dem and council investigation both reported back on the Facebook scandal. No further action was taken, but the lack of any message or contact with Facebook to complain that the account had been hacked undermined the explanations that had been given. I believe the question the press should have asked to Warren Bradley during these investigations is whether he posted the picture or had access to Cllr Green's Facebook account, and a response would then have been on record. The reason it should have been asked is that by then it was common knowledge that Cllr Bradley and Cllr Green were in a relationship.

So while I have sympathy with Warren Bradley over what is now likely to be a very painful time personally, as he has to find some way forward with his 18 year old son, simply declaring something as "private life" doesn't put it off limits if that influences your judgement, or potentially raises questions about your conduct as the leader of a political group. His career is now over but I hope that he and his family find some form of personal peace in the future.

Time Off For Paternity

2011-04-18T11:19:00.001-07:00

Our second son Hughie was born on the 8th April at a healthy weight of 7lb 12oz. We are both delighted and so far so good with our oldest boy, who seems to be genuinely enjoying the extra overall attention from all our visitors.

I'm off on paternity leave until 3rd May. I might manage a bit of politics in my spare time, but I'm largely focusing on family time for now, as a happy dad.

2011 Local Election Candidates In Liverpool

2011-04-04T10:44:00.000-07:00

As a very much non-target candidate in Riverside this year, I'll be doing what I can to help John Coyne get re-elected in St Michaels.

With all the candidates now listed for the 2011 local elections, it looks like a full slate for the Greens, Conservatives, Labour and even Steve Radford's Liberals. However the Lib Dems seem to have failed to come up with a candidate in Everton, Kirkdale and Norris Green. In previous years, missing Lib Dem candidates have usually been as a result of a tactical arrangment with Steve Radford's party, but this year it simply looks like no one was willing to sign for them to be a candidate!

In Praise of Liverpool's First Elected Green Councillor, John Coyne

2011-04-02T17:57:00.000-07:00

In 2006 John Coyne left the Liberal Democrats on a point of principle. He objected to the demolition of the Welsh Streets by the Lib Dem council as part of a national Labour Pathfinder initiative. John became an independent but talked to us after doing so. Just before the 2006 local election after a democratic vote by members of the local Green Party at a specially convened meeting, John announced he would become a Green councillor for the last year of his term. In the 2006 local election, we took 2nd place in St Michaels by a margin of just 5 votes, but that proved crucial.

We put a tremendous amount of collective work into St Michaels ward over that year, knowing that John was an underdog candidate fighting for re-election against a Lib Dem dominated council who were very keen to get rid of him. After some shenanigans during the election campaign and some outstanding work from our team, in particular "The Inconvenient Truth" rapid response leaflet we put out when the Lib Dems were working hard to pretend it was a contest between just them and Labour certainly helped, but it was John's personal profile, his history as a ward councillor in Dingle since 2002 and St Michaels since 2004 that swung things our way. John was re-elected with a comfortable majority.

Since 2007 John has been the leading source of ideas and inspiration for Green politics in Liverpool, handing over the responsibility of group leader to our other excellent Green councillor in St Michaels, Sarah Jennings (elected 2008). He's led from the front, taken tough decisions when required and shaken up a sometimes sterile Liverpool political scene.

If you want to read about everything that has been done in that time, the Liverpool Green Party website has an excellent news archive, with press release and news report, following press release and news report of the good work that both John and Sarah have done in the area.

In every one of the four local elections in St Michaels since 2006, the Labour Party has finished in third place. Even last year, with the huge boost of a General Election turnout, Labour were still only third, but after winning back the council their tails are up and are no doubt keen to try and "sneak through the middle" in St Michaels. The Lib Dems are struggling, with the discredited Sharon Green of Facebook fame their only councillor in the ward, they also have to deliver an apology mid way through the campaign, for the defamation of our two councillors, a story I discussed on an earlier post.

However, we cannot take a single vote for granted and elections are only won with hard work and committed activism. Even a councillor as popular as John Coyne needs support if he is to get re-elected. I'd therefore ask all North West members to get in touch to offer support to help us win this seat again, not just narrowly but with a convincing majority. We'll gladly welcome your donations and your good wishes, but most of all we need your time. Election campaigns need bodies on the ground, particularly now.

You can get in touch with me on this blog, on Facebook or through petercranie@gmail.com - don't just sit it out as a spectator. We narrowly missed out on a third council seat last year and one thing we know for certain is that election campaigns need support. Get involved and help make May 5th the day we elect John for another four year term.

And if you don't believe me, these are the words of one of John's political opponents, Warren Bradley, leader of the Lib Dem group in Liverpool, published by the Liverpool Daily Post on the 8th June 2009:

"If you work hard in your community you will not lose." Cllr Bradley uses Liberal leader Steve Radford and Green leader John Coyne as examples of people who command personal followings because they work hard.

Greens Set to Gain First Regional Seat in NSW - How AV could enable a second breakthrough in Norwich South

2011-04-02T14:06:00.000-07:00

With 90% of the votes counted, it looks like the Greens are going to finish in 2nd place on first preference votes in the Balmain constituency in the New South Wales state election in Australia. More on the overall results from Jim Jepps, but this is an unashamed trainspotting post for those still thinking about the implications of AV.

As things currently stand (about a week after the counting began), the votes are as follows:

Coalition 14,857
Greens 14,015
Labor 13,770
Others (5) approx 3,000 votes

It is the race for 2nd place on first preferences that matters in this seat, as it did when the Greens broke through into the Australian national parliament last year. Under First Past the Post, the Coalition candidate would be sneaking home due to a split vote between the Greens and Labor in this seat, with around 31% of the vote (the same percentage we gained to win Brighton Pavilion in 2010). Under AV, Green/Labor swing voters in Balmain have been able to vote Green with a first preference vote because they were free to do so, knowing that they could preference Labor if the Greens remained the 3rd placed party.

After preferences start getting allocated, with the "run off" effectively between the Greens and Coalition, the current totals are:

Green 18,674
Coalition 17,128

Not everyone who voted Labor, or for one of the other parties, will have preferenced the Greens (or the Coalition candidate), but 4,000+ have done so and made clear that they would prefer a Green to a Coalition MP. Hence the likely outcome of a single Green MP in the NSW Parliament (despite a 10%+ level of state wide support).

AV doesn't eliminate tactical voting, but it does allow preferences to be expressed, so should Britain adopt AV for General Elections, we as Greens should expect the following:

- More people willing to vote for us with their first preference vote (evidence - higher level of Green support at PR elections already when voters are confident a Green vote will count):

- A deposit saving level of Green support in 300 to 400 constituencies in the UK, which will be worth £150,000 to £200,000 of funding to us per election

- A substantial increase in Short money (state funded political funds to support MPs in Parliament) assuming we retain Caroline Lucas in Parliament

If anyone disagrees with any of these three conclusions, I'd be interested to hear your reasoning.

But what intrigues me is the impact of AV in Norwich South (or a successor constituency). The Lib Dem MP won there with 29% of the vote and we were fourth with 15%. That is not a massive gap. I think AV will lead to the following:

- "Scared" Labour and Lib Dem voters in 2010, who are much more inclined to vote Green at local and European elections in Norwich, will mean our first preference vote will increase from 15% to the 23 to 28% range

- Tactical votes from Conservative voters to the Lib Dems in 2010 will return back to the Conservatives under a preference system

It seems pretty clear to me that the key to a Green win in Norwich will be to get into the top two positions but they'll need a bigger margin than the Balmain Greens have managed. Those who remain as Lib Dem voters in 2015 will be much more inclined to 2nd preference the Conservatives than other parties. Once Lib Dem votes transfer to other parties it will be who is in 2nd place out of the Greens and Tories who'll decide whether Labour regain the seat or not.

A Green 2nd place will mean a close contest between Labour and the Greens under AV. A Conservative 2nd place will mean a comfortable Labour win. And yes, all this does mean that I think that the Liberal Democrats, with a sitting MP in Norwich South, will drop from 1st place last year to 4th in 2015. It may even happen elsewhere under AV, and I'll be looking at a couple of other constituencies after the local election results have come in.

While I'd prefer to see the incredible work done by our party in Norwich rewarded with an outright victory, both on first and second preferences (and that can't be ruled out, particularly if the local Labour Party makes a mess of running the council), AV gives us more a fairer chance of getting a second MP into Parliament in four years time.

A Bad Run for Lib Dem Councillors

2011-03-30T14:24:00.000-07:00

On a day where an opinion poll in Scotland puts the Greens ahead of the Liberal Democrats for the first time, it's worth noting that not all of the Lib Dem problems are due to their national government.

We've had the well publicised Paul Twigger apology to our Green councillors, and I've just come across another grudging apology forced out of a Lib Dem Cabinet member in Birmingham, who accused a fellow councillor of being a Muslim extremist.

Given that another Midlands Lib Dem, this time a Parliamentary candidate in 2010, beat to death his family cat, they seem to be having a run of extremely anti-social behaviour.

The pressure is on ahead of May 5th. The only question now is how bad the level of Lib Dem losses will be.

London ComRes Results

2011-03-23T14:49:00.000-07:00

Voting intention in an Evening Standard/ITV London poll by ComRes shows the following General Election voting intention (P11):

Labour 48%
Tories 31%
Lib Dems 9%
Greens 7%
UKIP 4%

Very good news indeed for our Assembly list candidates next year.

Falling in with the wrong crowd

2011-03-16T15:11:00.000-07:00

I remember Paul Twigger as a young enthusiastic student on a CVS day. He was clearly passionate about local issues and angry at Labour at a time when they had taken us to war in Iraq under false pretexts. I encouraged him to join the Greens, but he was already involved in the Lib Dems. He missed out on election in 2004 in Princes Park, but a couple of years later he became a councillor and soon became Warren Bradley's right hand man.

So it with some sadness that I report here on what is likely to be the end of his political career, in Liverpool at least. He was a Lib Dem Parliamentary candidate in 2010 but his own party now say they are reviewing his candidacy and recent events will be "taken into account". He is up for re-election in his Knotty Ash ward where Labour are likely to take his seat. On his record is a previous misdemeanour that involved some franked mail from his then employer (John Moores University) being used for political purposes.

People want elected representatives that are of good character. Paul clearly works hard and is committed to the party he represents. On a person to person basis, he has always been perfectly decent to me, going as far as to say he hoped that I would beat Nick Griffin in the Euro Elections. So all that he needed to do was to man up, apologise for what was clearly a slur on two very hardworking and ethical Green councillors who would never have done what he reported they did. He was offered opportunity after opportunity to do so. He failed to do it and he got that profoundly wrong.

I had to apologise for something I wrote on a blogpost and leaflet last year that was inaccurate. I believed that a particular candidate had previously overclaimed on mileage, with genuine evidence for that particular view. I was wrong. There was a reasonable explanation for it. We were challenged. We apologised on our next leaflet.

On a couple of comments on David Bartlett's blog, the suggestion is made that actually Paul Twigger is simply carrying out the bidding of Warren Bradley, with one poster suggesting that, "...didn't even write it, or co-wrote it, but is having to take all the blame whilst bradley and others get off scot free!!! Didn't this happen before...........?". The latter point is probably a reference to Steve Hurst, another Lib Dem councillor who was caught delivering defamatory leaflets in the guise of another party.

If that is the case, there is a way out for Paul at some point in the future, which is under new Lib Dem leadership and with a genuine clean slate, coming clean about who did what in the last five years of Lib Dem sleaze in Liverpool. Maybe, just maybe, in that case, he might have a future political career to pursue.

It is a shame. He was a promising young activist who fell in with the wrong crowd.

Time for a Bold EU

2011-02-10T13:22:00.000-08:00

Like many of you, I've just watched the news. Ben Ali was deposed in Tunisia but Mubarak wants to cling on.

The US President seems at a loss to deal with the situation. Robert Fisk writes well here. The Saudi Arabian regime seemed desperate to keep Mubarak in place and the Israeli government is understandably nervous.

Our own government hasn't done much, with William Hague's recent comments simply ridiculous:

"Amidst the opportunity for countries like Tunisia and Egypt, there is a legitimate fear that the Middle East peace process will lose further momentum and be put to one side, and will be a casualty of uncertainty in the region."

In case he hadn't noticed, the continued building of settlements on the West Bank, the Wikileaks revelations and the fact that reports like the ones Keith Taylor is responding to, fuel resentment and anger, serving as a recruiting agent for extreme groups. There has to be an alternative way forward.

There is an opportunity here. The EU with its not insignificant economic power but which has lost its direction and purpose, has to seize this opportunity to put forward a new vision, of Mediterranean states working together, ending old animosities and building a peaceful future.

A fully democratic North Africa and Middle East is a vision worth pursuing. Economic aid, preferential trade deals and tourism are the incentives that should be extended to those states that choose freedom, democracy and peaceful development.

Unfortunately I fear that as usual our EU leaders will be slow to grasp the significance of what could be achieved. I hope I am proved wrong.

Cutting No Ice With Deniers

2011-02-07T14:19:00.000-08:00

One of the usual denier tactics when we talk about ice melt in the Arctic is to point to Antarctica and say that the ice cover is growing there. It has been the case that coverage has recently been above average, due to fairly well understood weather patterns. That isn't the case now. Antarctic ice coverage is now at its average extent.

There isn't a lot of good news on our side of the world though. Next month the ice begins to retreat, and as reported here at Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis, Arctic Sea Ice is currently at its lowest ever extent. While inhabitants of Clarkson World (copyright excellent Robert Webb article in the Telegraph) will no doubt have their own "scientific" explanations, there is simply going to come a time when they will be as absurd as flat earthers.

Hacked Off

2011-01-21T13:48:00.000-08:00

It's not often you thank a celebrity, but Sienna Miller's case against the News of the World has been a significant factor in finally flushing Andy Coulson out of Downing Street. There is surely much more to come on this.

I'm on the Question Time panel at the Greater Manchester Against Cuts Conference tomorrow. I'll report back on this as soon as possible.

Back to the Future

2011-01-20T15:56:00.000-08:00

So Alan Johnson has gone, not for political reasons, but due to a difficult personal story that is going to be on the front of the Daily Mail and other papers tomorrow. His replacement, Ed Balls, is a tough ambitious character in the shadow chancellor position, serving in the Shadow Cabinet under a leader that he stood against.

Labour is back to the future. Clashes between Blair and Brown characterised the New Labour era, and the scene is set for a repeat. After a brief respite thanks to the Oldham byelection victory, Ed Miliband will be back under scrutiny as he manages a difficult transition.

On a more upbeat note, the 10 o'clock show on Channel 4 tonight made me laugh out loud. If you haven't seen it, watch David Mitchell wipe the floor with one Tory MP early in the programme. David Willetts does a better job, but still gets a couple of incisive points in. I think this sort of thing on TV is long overdue. Nothing can entirely recapture some of the magic of the 11 o'clock show, with this particular piece being one of my favourites.

Syllogism

2011-01-18T13:54:00.000-08:00

This is an ancient form of logic, invented by the Greeks, but often applied incorrectly.

First statement: "Wind farms in Britain generated practically no electricity during the recent cold spell"

Second statement: We need power most when it is cold

Conclusion: Wind power is useless

This lazy reasoning by opponents of renewals continue to miss the point about energy mix and alternatives. What is absolutely crucial is that we offer a more logical alternative conclusion when this challenge is thrown up.

We could offer the following alternative conclusions:

Conclusion: We must find an economic way of storing wind energy

Conclusion: We must have other renewable sources capable of meeting baseload requirements all year round

Conclusion: We recognise that we must get more energy efficient and be ready for some energy rationing if we don't

Glasgow Gets Even More Interesting

2011-01-14T14:10:00.000-08:00

With George Galloway due to launch his campaign for election to the Scottish Parliament, the announcement of Gail Sheridan as the lead Solidarity candidate has come somewhat out of the blue.

The Scottish Greens will be hopeful of winning a second seat in Glasgow, but in a crowded left of Labour field, it now seems unlikely that Galloway, Sheridan the SSP or any other possible socialist list will reach the required 5% threshold.

However, I've been wrong about George Galloway once before, and it would be foolish to completely write off his chances. I think he can potentially still spring a surprise, but it will be much harder to do now.

Byelection Thanks

2011-01-14T13:53:00.000-08:00

While 1.5% is never a great result, we should remember that we don't do well in byelections. I know Peter Allen, Ian Barker and many others worked very hard on the campaign. They should take heart. Crewe and Nantwich was the last comparable "marginal" byelection, where we ran an absolutely minimum campaign, gaining just 0.9%, so the effort will have had some effect.

Barnsley Central will not be a particularly easy constituency for us either but I am of the opinion that as a national party we should be contesting each and every national byelection. That will be a decision for the local (or possibly regional) party, so we'll have to see what is decided. 1 to 2% is normal for us in our less active areas, as voters end up sliding towards the bigger parties as they feel they have to make their votes count.

An interesting analysis of the vote (see below) by one of the commenters on politicalbetting.com (comment 345) suggests that under AV, Labour would also have won. Derek makes the opposite case on his blog. I'm certainly of the opinion that if voters in Oldham East and Saddleworth felt that they could first preference a party that wasn't tainted by a previous candidate and disgraceful election literature, or a coalition party that has made complete u-turns on its pre-election promises, then our first preference votes would have saved our deposit and showed a much truer representation of our support.

A Labour win under AV?

As usual, AV analysis seems to be done backwards. I’ve simplified slightly here, but not I hope unfairly, to suggest how AV might have worked with the votes as cast:

Under AV: Total votes cast 34930 - initial 50% mark 17,465.

Assume Bus Pass party all vote Con but no other preference: net effect winning post reduced to 17,432

Assume Pirate Party (96) all vote Lib Dem
Assume English Democrats (144) vote UKIP/Con but no other preference: net effect winning post reduced to 17,360
Assume MRLP (145) vote Lib Dem
Assume Green (530) vote Labour: now on 15,248
Assume BNP (1,560) vote 75% Labour (1,170): now on 16,418
Assume UKIP (2029) vote Con with no other preference: winning post reduced to 16,345 and Labour elected without having to worry about Con first preference votes transferring to Lib Dems.

Note that the official winning vote is less than 50% of the number of valid votes.

Note also how important second preferences of minor parties are in the outcome: how Tories and Lib Dems think for second preference is apparently irrelevant. This is why I think AV could radicalise UK politics if it is adopted.

ComRes Puts Greens at 5% and Lib Dems 12% nationally

2011-01-11T12:37:00.000-08:00

We've had good ComRes polls before this one on a GE voting question (in the 5/6% range) but the most interesting thing for me is the low level of Lib Dem support (Table 6 is the one that gives the headline results). Questions asked by pollsters are prompted, along the lines of:

"If there was a General Election tomorrow, which party would you vote for? Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrat or some other party?"

If a Green, UKIP and BNP option was added to the question instead of just "other party" there would be an effect. So we are on 5% unprompted versus 12% prompted for the Lib Dems.

This is just one poll but we should keep an eye on the trend. Lib Dem support will have further to fall as the effects of cuts really starts to bite.

You are AVing a Laugh

2011-01-06T15:34:00.000-08:00

Socialist Unity is currently carrying a thread titled "Why AV is Less Democratic than FPTP". On the other side, Daniel Hannan in the Telegraph has a helpful Ten Reasons to Vote No to AV. The No campaign in Labour is also very vocally critical, as you would expect.

When we are discussing AV in respect of the upcoming referendum, we are not comparing it to a genuinely proportional system. The contest, if you consider it, is between AV and the First Past the Post System we currently use.

One of the perceived strongest arguments against AV is that it can be (note "can be") less proportional than FPTP. In the 1997 General Election, it is highly likely that an AV system would have delivered an even bigger Labour majority than actually happened under FPTP.

The AV2011 site explains this as follows:

"Every 20 years or so a political party gets a thumping majority in the House of Commons as a reward for winning a minority of our votes"

However, the Democratic Audit pre-election briefing makes clear that:

"Parliaments in which no single party had a majority of MPs, or out of which a coalition government was formed, were the norm in UK politics before 1945"

So what we are really looking at is the past 65 years of political history. In 1945 we know that Labour won a landslide of seats under FPTP and a majority of 146. In 1959, the Conservatives won a majority of 100. In 1966 Labour got a majority of 96. In 1983 the Conservatives won a majority of 144 and in 1987 a majority of 102. The Labour landslide of 1997 I've already mentioned, but we also need to include 2001.

So one of the arguments against AV is that around every 20 years or so it could deliver a massive majority to one party. This is in contrast to FPTP, that has delivered massive majorities (more than 90) to a single party in nearly half of all elections held since 1945.

This idea that AV is somehow going to be less democratic, because their is an occasional chance that there will be a landslide for one party should be put in careful perspective. Landslides will become less likely under AV because it will also change the way we vote. This "counter argument" that somehow holds up FPTP as being more democratic needs to be put to bed.

Boycotting

2011-01-03T11:30:00.000-08:00

While I bought some gifts from Oxfam and other second hand sources this year, while wrapping presents (recycled paper of course) I took a look at the country of origin in a lot of smaller presents, particularly the toys. 9 out of 10 were Made in China.

So next year's resolution for me is to avoid buying Made in China goods. The Human Rights abuses in China are significant and concerning, yet we continue to buy a massive amount of consumable items from that source. However, I'm under no illusions that successfully boycotting all Made in China items is going to be very difficult.

I'm not in favour of a blanket boycott of any country. If something is Made in China, by a co-operative of trade union represented workforce, I would consider it if there is no nearer source. Any examples of this are gratefully received.

I recognise this is going to be a very difficult resolution to keep to 100% but if I do trip up, it is likely to be in the supply chain for a final product. Happy new year to all of us.

The New Tory Party

2010-12-19T04:15:00.000-08:00

As Greens, we naturally view the Conservatives with distrust, dislike of their policies and ourselves in opposition to them. Cameron is a Prime Minister who is deeply disliked by the many, many people already feeling the impact of cuts. This post in no way attempts to apologise for that, but there is some political significance in the way that even today's Conservative party has moved to a much more enlightened position on some very basic issues.

Twenty years ago, it would have been impossible for Nigel Evans to come out as gay in the Conservative Party. Twenty years ago it would pretty impossible to see a young Asian woman like Priti Patel tipped as a future Tory high flier. Twenty years ago, I wouldn't have predicted that the Conservatives would accept the existence of manmade Climate Change.

There is still homophobia in the Conservatives. There is still racism. There is also still a culture of dismissal about Climate Change amongst many Tories, and there is certainly a lack of action from this government, just like the last one. That said, when even parties we oppose are making social progress, we should acknowledge it as such. That doesn't diminish the horrendous impact of Conservative led policies on the lives of ordinary folk in Britain, which is a far bigger issue for us to deal with.

Drake and Some Universal Truths

2010-12-14T13:46:00.000-08:00

I've just watched an excellent BBC4 programme, "The Search for Life: The Drake Equation". The maths suggests we are not alone in the universe and the tough question we should ask is, "why hasn't anyone else made contact?"

The Drake Equation is hard science:

The Drake equation states calculates N as the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible

and it is based on a calculation that multiplies the following:

R* = the average rate of star formation per year in our galaxy
fp = the fraction of those stars that have planets
ne = the average number of planets potentially supporting life per star with planets
fℓ = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point
fi = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
fc = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space
L = the length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals into space

The last one is the most interesting from a Green perspective. Civilisation, in its loosest possible sense, has been around for about 6,000 years if you go from our history or 12,000 if you go from the origins of agriculture. Shortly after inventing radio signals, we invented very destructive weapons, stockpiled them around the world, knowing that if they were ever used it would be the end of our civilisation and probably our species. We've not dealt entirely with that problem, but history has worked out well in that we are still here. It could have been different, but in that alternate reality nobody ever got the chance to blog.

We have also dealt with a specific measurable problem, that was having a significant impact on health and human beings. It is still going to take many decades or even a couple of centuries, for Ozone in the upper atmosphere to recover, but it looks likely to do so.

But we are not doing very well with our current problem, which is going to be Earth +2.0 degrees. Cancun is weak. Kyoto didn't deliver and we have a flat earther problem with social "free riders" who don't care about wider consequences, as long as they can remain comfortable with their ultra-libertarian and self-centred view of the world and our species.

Given that we've so far failed to grasp the problem, it might be interesting to speculate on just how far our period of civilisation will go on for. In 1961 Drake suggested that an average period for a species to be able to broadcast such signals would be 10,000 years. Is that really going to be realistic given our current challenges?

The optimist in me likes to think we'll manage to sort it out. I certainly hope so for the sake of my sons and for their children as well.

Political Fall out for the Lib Dems

2010-12-11T07:18:00.000-08:00

Yesterday there was another by-election to follow on from the ones in other northern cities. This time in Warrington, where a Lib Dem / Conservative council is in power and in a ward where the Lib Dems have councillors. Last night's result was as follows:

Labour 1032 (71%, +18%)
Lib Dem 221 (15%, -17%)
Cons. 112 (8%, -7%)
Green 47 (3%, +3%)
Ind 33 (2%, +2%)

The mood is going to be very sombre for Lib Dem councillors up for re-election in the north of England next May. In wards where the Lib Dems have previously been able to get social liberals, Greens and disaffected Labour voters to back them, they are now being deserted. Yes, turnout is lower in byelections, but the pattern is absolutely clear. Despite putting out "neck and neck" leaflets, and running a full campaign, the Lib Dems are suffering one bad byelection defeat after another.

Labour must be rubbing their hands in glee. Having spent 13 years in government, they are now rebounding at a local level, particularly where the Lib Dems have become their main opposition. The core level of national Lib Dem support is probably around 8 to 10%. Even with a full byelection campaign, as in Warrington, Manchester (Hulme) and Liverpool (Croxteth), they are getting hammered. However, Lib Dems councillors don't have to continue to line up to go over the top in May.

Yesterday we saw a few Lib Dem defections. There was this piece on Lib Dem Voice, a Haringey councillor go independent, the Daily Record carries this report and James Ogley, who says he will be joining the Greens.

A few Lib Dems will be carefully considering their position this weekend. While this isn't an Iraq War level of significance for those that remain in the Lib Dems, trust in them and the promises of their leader are in tatters.

Who Voted "Yes" to Tuition Fees

2010-12-09T12:08:00.000-08:00

The following Lib Dems, 28 out of 57, voted in favour of the trebling of tuition fees:

* Danny Alexander
* Norman Baker
* Sir Alan Beith
* Gordon Birtwistle
* Tom Brake
* Jeremy Browne
* Malcolm Bruce
* Paul Burstow
* Vincent Cable
* Alistair Carmichael
* Nick Clegg
* Edward Davey
* Lynne Featherstone
* Don Foster
* Stephen Gilbert
* Duncan Hames
* Nick Harvey
* David Heath
* John Hemming
* Norman Lamb
* David Laws
* Michael Moore
* Andrew Stunell
* Jo Swinson
* Sarah Teather
* David Ward
* Steve Webb

A further 8 Lib Dems abstained. Of these, 2 were in Cancun, where Huhne's Yes vote would have been cancelled out by a no vote by Martin Horwood. Sadly there has been some abusively hysterical stuff from the Lib Dem blogosphere, demanding that Caroline Lucas should have "paired" with Chris Huhne and not voted on this, particularly from a self titled "senior Lib Dem policy maker"... very sad indeed! Obviously such a "senior" fellow should at least know who is pairing with who in his own party.

Credit to the 21 Lib Dems who did show some backbone including John Pugh in Southport, and voted against their own government, and to the two that resigned from the government to do so. The full breakdown, including the Tories who also rebelled is here on the BBC.

A Letter from a Local Lib Dem

2010-12-07T02:17:00.000-08:00

In case you missed this, Paul Clein, a Lib Dem councillor in Liverpool, had this letter published in the Guardian last week:

"I voted for Nick Clegg as Lib Dem leader. I don't doubt him, or Vince Cable, when they say the deal on tuition fees is fairer than would have been the case post-Browne under either a majority Tory or Labour government (Leaders, 1 December). But Clegg leads a party which is against tuition fees as a matter of principle, believes higher education should be funded from general taxation and that we already have a progressive graduate tax – income tax. Given that, it is irrelevant where tuition fee boundaries are set. Experience from Australia and the US shows that young people from poorer families will nearly all go to less prestigious (ie cheaper) universities with fee structures of this nature. Unfortunately, we are a party of mainly social liberals led by a coterie of mainly economic liberals. This is a litmus issue for many members. I am not alone in considering my membership after 21 years, 19 of them as a councillor. Nick, this is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Paul Clein"

We have had some quite vigorous campaigns against the Lib Dems in Greenbank, so I don't currently consider he would contemplate us as an option. However as I wrote here, Liberal Democrat councillors who can't stomach the coalition are faced with some very hard choices.

I think Paul Clein is a serious politician who is clearly having to think hard about staying to fight his corner in the Lib Dems, or potentially becoming an Independent. He is also up for re-election this coming May, so this will be a very interesting case to watch.

Greenbank has a substantial student population, and Labour (who came reasonably close to taking the seat last year on the back of a big General Election turnout) will be pushing hard, although with the election more likely to focus on local issues, it will be much harder for them. We also have a new candidate (more on him soon) who will be very competitive this year and will work to hold and increase our vote of 800 last year. In a normal local election year, about 1200 votes would be likely to put you into contention to win.

If Cllr Clein goes Independent before the election, I think he should be applauded for his political courage (if I was still living in the ward and it was an AV election, he would get my second preference vote). Given the results in northern city wards like Hulme, Croxteth and Worth Valley recently, those that remain as Lib Dem candidates in May are likely to be punished for the national decisions of their party, whatever is known about their merits as a long standing ward councillor.

Freedom

2010-12-07T01:47:00.000-08:00

It is difficult to comprehend what freedom really means. Like other things we value in life, we often don't appreciate something unless we know what it is like to endure its absence.

Yesterday I had a long discussion with one of my students. He was a non-Muslim from Iran, who had a good job working in the water industry there. He had a nice house and car, but no freedom. He left in 2004 to seek a better life here.

He arrived and went by the book, explaining his need for asylum. He was given leave to remain, but with the condition that he supported himself and did not rely on the state to provide for him. He worked 7 days a week for the next few years, in fast food outlets. An educated, intelligent man, working 7 days a week, without a break for years. In his words, he thought he would have a better economic life here, but that hasn't been the case. Only now is he financially able to take time out to study and gain qualifications here.

In class yesterday, when I asked what would make him happy, he said "freedom for my country". He is proud of his Persian heritage, from Cyrus to the traditions of modern Iran, but he is pained by the severity of human rights abuses in his country. He is angry and sickened by the stories he hears of torture and rape of political opponents of the current regime.

We had a discussion about the Green revolution and what might of been. In the short term, he is not optimistic, but longer term he feels change will come, and that it will be irresistable. I hope so too.

International

2010-11-26T12:41:00.000-08:00

I've been updating my PowerPoint presentations for the next module I'm teaching on Public Services at work, International Perspectives. It can be incredibly tough to judge just how much or how little you show students about situations like Darfur, Kosovo and Iraq. Some of the images of war and the Human Rights abuses that have occurred are too explicit, but you can't hide the reality of some of the awful things that go on in our world. What I am trying to do is to balance that with some of positive things that we do manage at an international level, with relief efforts and humanitarian missions. I hope I get the balance right.

The Australian Greens are already punching their weight in the lower house of the Australian Parliament. Adam Bandt's motion on Gay Marriage was carried by one vote (even one Green MP can make a difference).

Time reports that the current Israeli Knesset has put a further barrier to peace in place and opened up the country to further attacks, according to the Labour Defence Minister Ehud Barak. He goes on to say:

"A Palestinian state is in Israel's clear interest... this [law] won't do anybody any good. We must get pass the obstacle of settlement freeze, because is a weak point for Israel that cannot be explained to the world."

The consistent position of the Palestinian Authority is in my opinion the correct one. It will push public opinion in the world in favour of the Palestinian negotiators. The logic is impeccable. If the Israeli government is unwilling to even freeze settlements in the West Bank, how could it possibly make the much further leap to withdrawal? I think Ehud Barak is smart enough to recognise that. One thing is certain, the push by President Obama for peace is badly stalled, and I can't see how that impasse is going to be overcome at the moment.

There is an excellent article in today's Independent by Kate Allen from Amnesty International. We've made considerable strides in Britain in trying to protect our children from abuse. Despite the appalling cases where our system doesn't succeed, such as Baby Peter or Khyra Ishaq, we have a social services system and a society that predominantly works to protect children. As Allen's article highlights, children elsewhere in the world don't benefit from that protection.

The biggest story internationally is the very real threat of further skirmishes or conflict between the North and South Koreas. With Kim Jong-il's succession, a period of instability in the North has arrived. That is bad news for international stability. Even the might of China is not necessarily enough to prevent further provocation. These are difficult times and it is easy to forget that ordinary North Koreans live in poverty, without democracy and often threatened with starvation. Such a regime must be brought to an end. We can hope that perhaps a change of leadership might lead to some reform, but it is not the simplistic situation that many people perceive. There are complex dynamics to consider, as outlined in the Huffington Post by Ra Jong-Yi.

It's easy to feel down and depressed about the state of the world at times, but then along comes Sarah Palin with a gaffe to cheer you up.

Croxteth byelections result

2010-11-19T03:07:00.001-08:00

So the Croxteth byelection result gives us the basic message that where the Liberal Democrats once ran Labour close, or even won the seat (by 10 votes most recently), here in Liverpool they are likely to get knocked back considerably. Labour seem set to benefit.

What does that suggest for the 2011 local elections? Well locally it means that the Lib Dems will be defending seats rather than going on the offensive to try and win back the council, despite the inevitable bluster that will precede May's contest. I think things would be different if somehow Labour had clung onto power nationally and the Lib Dems remained in national opposition, but the reverse is now true.

I imagine the Lib Dems probably only think one gain is even possible, and we'll be expecting them to throw everything at St Michaels again. Given the national situation, the halving of Lib Dem support in opinion polls and a small but significant student hall in the ward, they will face an uphill struggle against John Coyne, our incumbent and very well known and liked local councillor. I strongly believe that if the local elections had been separate from the General Election in May, we would have won a third seat in St Michaels, and that it was really only the Cleggmania surge that carried the Lib Dems through. Once bitten, twice shy. That said, nothing will be taken for granted by us.

Council business has continued. A Green amendment to the Labour motion against the cuts was accepted by Labour. The Lib Dems couldn't stomach it though. It said:

"Council regrets missing the opportunity presented at the annual budget meeting to set this year’s Council Tax at a modest 1 per cent increase and regrets forgoing the chance to thereby obtain approximately £1.6 million as a buffer against the cuts which were fully anticipated. Council therefore agrees to consider reasonable rises in Council Tax charges in the forthcoming years in order to mitigate some of the effects of the government-imposed financial restrictions."

As usual, it was only the Greens that earlier this year were willing to even suggest that a below inflation council tax rise would be better than a freeze, given that the red, yellow and blue parties had all admitted that cuts were on the way. Instead of heeding this, Labour and the Lib Dems both froze council tax, putting electioneering ahead of the interests of the people of Liverpool. To their credit, Labour at least recognise that not considering this was a mistake.

David Bartlett has picked up on another Green amendment, about Human Rights issues and China. Why is it so difficult for other parties to state the obvious about Human Rights abuses abroad?

For reference: Croxteth result remains

Martin CUMMINS (The Labour Party Candidate) 1,447
Stephanie TILL (The Labour Party Candidate) 1,424
Mark Anthony COUGHLIN (Liberal Democrat) 611
Michael John MARNER (Liberal Democrat) 479
Kai ANDERSEN (Socialist Labour Party) 135
Peter TIERNEY (British National Party) 117
Barbara BRYAN (Socialist Labour Party) 70
Eleanor Edith PONTIN (Green Party) 63
Tony Stop-Mass-Immigration HAMMOND (UK Independence Party) 50
Paul Duane RIMMER (English Democrats "Putting England First") 35
Steven McELLENBOROUGH (English Democrats "Putting England First") 33
Norman COPPELL (Conservative Party) 31
Brenda COPPELL (Conservative Party) 29
Michael John LANE (UK Independence Party) 19

Greens to Mount Electoral Assault on Lib Dems

2010-11-15T02:50:00.000-08:00

Up until the election, I would have argued against this. While we are often appalled at the tactics used by the Lib Dems, and have often been attacked and misrepresented by them, there was overlap in areas like electoral reform and government accountability.

Since entering government, the Lib Dems have consistently shown that they have had little mitigating effect on the Conservatives. Given their long-term commitment to electoral reform, they sold out cheaply and not a single Lib Dem MP voted in favour of Caroline Lucas' amendment to offer the British people a choice between AV and real Proportional Representation.

As we saw in the recent Hulme byelection, which in retrospect we were not really prepared for, and even allowing for the much lower turnout, look at what happened to that Lib Dem vote:

May 2010

Labour 2445
Lib Dems 1229
Green 1172
Con. 490

November 2010

Labour 1031
Green 451
Lib Dem 151
Con. 67

Both Labour and us saw a percentage increase in the vote on a much lower turnout. But look at what happened to the Lib Dems. We have the Croxteth byelection very soon in Liverpool, in which we've done some campaigning, to test the water. There are two seats, although we only have one candidate on this occasion. One was held by Labour and one was held by the Lib Dems. This was a marginal seat. We'll see what happens.

If indeed the Lib Dem vote collapses, we may have to review our strategy locally to see what seats may be vulnerable to us in this new political environment.

Another Party Conference

2010-11-14T13:01:00.000-08:00

Reports on the Respect Conference can be found on the blogosphere, with both Socialist Unity and Liam Macuaid reporting back. The Scotsman and the Daily Record report on an amendment to the Respect constitution that paves the way for George Galloway to stand for election as an MSP on the Glasgow top up list.

I attended the Conference as one of the morning session's guest speakers and spoke for around 15 minutes in a session introduced by Salma Yaqoob and chaired by Kay Phillips. I took time to thank members of Respect for the support they had given us here in the North West in our battle against the BNP in 2009. I went on to talk about the struggle against cuts, the questions I'd like to see Ed Miliband answer and finally how best to make a political impact after the recent change of government. The reception was warm and I had a good talk with a number of the delegates at lunch.

Sadly I've heard today that some of the people I was with yesterday were attacked at a meeting they were holding in Oldham, again reported at Socialist Unity. According to one of the comments, five men were arrested. I hope that all present at the meeting have not been too shaken by this.

Quirky Youtube AV Video

2010-11-14T06:05:00.000-08:00

I used this with my students in our Government and Politics unit on Friday.

What political party do you view as "banana flavour"?

Aung San Suu Kyi Walks Free

2010-11-13T16:05:00.000-08:00

As read in the Independent. Some good news on a busy day, but with no guarantee of improvements in the lives of ordinary people in Burma.

I've had a busy day today and I hope to update on things tomorrow.

International

2010-11-11T12:19:00.000-08:00

So David Cameron has visited India and China in the last week. No mention of Kashmir or Tibet in public though, despite fears of increased militancy in the former and despite a recent poll of that showed 3 out of 4 British adults think that protecting human rights in Tibet is at least as important as maintaining good trade relations with China.

The Republicans will take control of the House of Representatives in January. President Obama has acknowledged the losses, but looks unlikely to give ground on healthcare. However, any serious US action on Climate Change is going to be dead for the next two years at least, and has perhaps been lost altogether.

It is no clearer how exactly our last government's wise decision to "bring democracy to Iraq" is actually going to be. The Parliament is due to sit for the first time since the elections in March, but there is no certainty about how things are going to work. This follows on from another bloody week in Iraq which is now very much third division news in the British media since Britain ended combat operations.

Finally, will the G20 heed the call to adopt the "French model" which allows European Courts to go after and seize the assets of money laundering by rich and corrupt officials from some of the poorest countries in the world?

Thank You

2010-11-08T03:26:00.000-08:00

As a party, we are often very poor at thanking people for their long service in our national bodies. Nicola Watson and Tim Dawes recently ended their terms as Co-Chairs of GPRC and deserve credit for a great deal of the work that was accomplished during their time.

I'll not always agree 100% with the decisions and actions taken by the bodies that run our party, but I would never question the motivation and hard work put in by those that accept and work in roles that are often stressful, to do their best to try and move our party forward.

Thank you to Nicola and Tim.

Woolas and Court Cases

2010-11-06T15:08:00.000-07:00

I won't rewrite what has been covered elsewhere, but I'll share my own personal story. In the run up to the Euro Elections, I was speaking at a panel at Manchester University. A No Borders protest, that gained wide publicity, showed the power of the custard pie in exposing the Labour government's record on immigration. On the video you see my right arm briefly. Chris Davies (Lib Dem MEP) and myself, both got hit as well.

Woolas (or in legal terms, his agent) stepped well over the line in the leaflets used in the General Election. I think the judges have got the verdict right.

I'll reiterate that anyone can make a genuine error. Politics can be tough, but in ten years of campaigning, I've only ever made one mistake in drawing an incorrect conclusion from research I was doing. We published something wrong, we got challenged and we apologised (in our next leaflet). That is how it should be done.

As many of you already know, we are bringing our own Court case on the Liberal Democrat agent who published an appalling leaflet that claimed that Green councillors had forced homeless people to sleep in the snow (not very believable). I understand that papers have now been served, so we'll have our very own Court date in Liverpool soon.

The Confidence Fairy

2010-11-03T14:04:00.000-07:00

I'm thinking carefully about how I bring up my son. Do you lie to him and introduce mythical figures that don't really exist - Santa Claus, Leprechauns and the Confidence Fairy - or do you point out the real truth, based on social and economic reality from an early age?

This has become a pressing question, as he is showing early potential in free market economic thinking as he learns to count. His current sequence is:

One
Two
Three
Six
Eight
Nine
Ten
Eleven
Sixteen
Eighteen

I'll need to check that other 2 year olds are not moonlighting and somehow predicting that cuts won't impact on the economy...

International

2010-10-27T12:00:00.000-07:00

Five stories that have caught my attention this week:

Arundhati Roy faces arrest after speaking out over the ongoing Indian occupation of Kashmir. Over 100 people have died in a government crackdown and millions of Muslim people live under the military rule of a government they do not recognise as legitimate.

The Tasmanian forests are looking safer than before with an immediate benefit being felt.

The French unions may be adopting different tactics in regards to the recent strikes over pensions, as refinery workers protest and strikes seem to be winding down.

On the one hand, internal politics in Israel points to Ehud Barak silently freezing further construction on the occupied territories, but that is only after Associated Press estimated that ground had been broken on 550 houses after the end of the freeze. An early November deadline for the United States to try and keep peace talks going is looming.

...and that early November date coincides with the US mid-term Congressional Elections. This Saturday, two rallies will take place in New York, with Jon Stewart from the Daily Show, leading a call for sanity while America seems to be having a storm in a Tea Party frenzy.

Back Online

2010-10-25T14:12:00.000-07:00

Normal service will be resumed soon. We've actually been able to move house (yes!) and wifi is now enabled here.

Lots to catch up on, but tonight it is late and my working day started very early!

Poetry and Not in Motion

2010-10-08T14:31:00.000-07:00

It hasn't been a good day. Our tenancy runs out a week on Saturday, but the vendor of the house we are buying doesn't seem willing to move out, which isn't consistent with earlier discussions we had. It may be back to square one soon, and we'll be in very temporary accommodation for a while.

Even on very bad days though, you can have a little lift. My friend Jane Aspinall has been quietly posting on her own blog. She is an excellent poet and it is good to see her online as well! Welcome Jane and I look forward to reading more soon.

Common Campaigning(!)

2010-10-04T15:48:00.000-07:00

It is not often you'll see a headline starting with, "Tory MP and Green MP join forces..."

Douglas Carswell is a rare political animal. He is a Conservative who is in favour of Proportional Representation. Both he and Caroline Lucas have both tabled amendments to the AV Referendum Bill to alter the question so that a genuine PR option is available. It makes sense for them to agree on the wording.

Any Lib Dems brave enough to break ranks? Go on... you know you want to.

Applauding Respect

2010-09-28T13:35:00.000-07:00

Yesterday some appalling remarks made by a member of Respect's national council were published on this blog.

Within 24 hours, the Respect national officers had met and expelled him from the party. Salma Yaqoob comments here. There may be a right of appeal, but I am impressed by the swift and professional way this issue has been handled. We could definitely take on board how swiftly and decisively this action has been taken.

Green Party disciplinary procedures are still rooted in a sense of utopian consensus, and they have not been swift enough to tackle the issues that can crop up in a party of nearly 12,000 members, nor decisive enough to address issues that distract us from our core activities of campaigning and winning more seats at every level of government.

Our party still needs fundamental internal reorganisation and disciplinary issues will have to be addressed far more quickly than under our present system.

Directions in Politics

2010-09-25T12:15:00.000-07:00

Ed Miliband didn't vote for the Iraq war, he is a clean break from Labour pre-2005 and progressives in UK politics need to hope that he can be an effective opponent of this coalition government. He has shown one key attribute that makes him more qualified than his brother to lead the Labour Party, and that is courage. In contrast to the United States, British politics is not dynastic, and Ed Miliband knew that this would also be his one and only chance to lead the Labour Party. Had his brother been elected leader, he would never have got the opportunity.

David Miliband, unless something shocking happened to Ed, will never now lead the Labour Party. He will never be Prime Minister. For a man that has clearly displayed that ambition for the last few years, it will be a bitter pill to swallow. He shouldn't blame his brother though. He had his chances in 2007, 2008 and 2009 to step up and challenge Gordon Brown. Each time he backed away and he will have to find a way to deal with his own poor judgement.

David Cameron will be happy, apparently. For the next four and a half years, he will hammer home the fact that Ed Miliband is only Labour leader because of votes gained through the Trade Union part of the ballot. David won more support of his fellow MPs (& MEPs) and the majority of support of paid up Labour members.

For those of us that understand the history of the Labour movement, we can fully understand the reasons why, but in the harsh prism of a mostly right of centre mainstream media, Labour's own leadership election rules are going to cause them continued problems. One member, one vote, is simple and understandable. If donors to the Tories (or employees in their companies) also had a vote in their leadership contests, the BBC, the Guardian, the Independent and the Mirror would attack on this point.

I'm holding back my judgement on Ed Miliband until he makes a call on the AV referendum issue. I'll be astonished if he asks Labour MPs to back the amendment proposed by Caroline Lucas. However, even Labour supporters have suggested this would be the right thing to do:

"...if Lucas and every Labour MP were to vote for such an approach, it would not have the votes to carry. In fact, that would largely turn out as a political stunt to embarass the LibDems since they could not vote for it without breaching the Coalition Agreement, despite their own support for PR."

I'd go beyond this. SNP, Plaid and the NI nationalists would almost certainly back such an amendment. For every Lib Dem MP suffering in coalition with the Tories, the chance to vote for genuine PR might yet offer that once in a generation re-alignment. If the bill passes with the amendment, it would leave the Lib Dems divided but would give them a new lease of life at the next General Election, under a new leader. If the Lib Dems stick to the coalition agreement, they will never recover.

So we'll see pretty soon if Ed Miliband is interested in pluralism and a realignment of politics, or simply working in party self interest and hoping to bring Labour back to power under First Past the Post with less than 40% of the vote in 2015.

I think the points made by Jane Watkinson are important to consider for us as Greens. We should not be launching into knee-jerk attacks on Ed Miliband. Disillusioned Lib Dems are the most likely new joiners for both Labour and the Greens, and we are not going to attract people if we are only interested in attacking others. Much better to see what Ed is like once he starts having to make political decisions as Leader of the Opposition.

Things That Need Addressing

2010-09-24T12:44:00.000-07:00

Reading about Kashmir in this week's Guardian, it struck me how little attention this issue receives in the British media. Unlike the issue of Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, which is tackled almost daily, particularly during the latest attempts at peace talks, Kashmir's occupation by Indian forces receives little or no attention.

"India, meanwhile, continues to garrison half a million soldiers in Kashmir, nearly three times the number of American troops in Iraq at the peak of the occupation. India's half-century-old Armed Forces Special Powers Act, which was extended to Kashmir in 1990, gives troops the legal authority to shoot any person they suspect of being a threat, and guarantees immunity from prosecution. To bring a soldier before a civilian court requires the permission of India's home ministry; more than 400 such cases are still waiting for it."

Similarly, the coverage of China's occupation of Tibet is occasional, but there is no less injustice or oppression than in either of the previous international examples. Both of these issues deserve more attention. Particular matters of international concern require recognition, and I intend to draft an amendment to the Green Party's Policies for a Sustainable Society International section, so that these issues gain the recognition they deserve (please email me if you are interested in helping).

But to briefly return to Israel / Palestine once again, there is an interview by Johann Hari of Gideon Levy in today's Independent. Levy intensely criticises Israel politics and the state of public opinion in Israel but he also notably says:

“But I do not boycott Israel. I could have done it, I could have left Israel. But I don’t intend to leave Israel. Never. I can’t call on others to do what I will not do... There is also the question of whether it will work. I am not sure Israelis would make the connection. Look at the terror that happened in 2002 and 2003: life in Israel was really horrifying, the exploding buses, the suicide-bombers. But no Israeli made the connection between the occupation and the terror. For them, the terror was just the ‘proof’ that the Palestinians are monsters, that they were born to kill, that they are not human beings and that’s it. And if you just dare to make the connection, people will tell you ‘you justify terror ’ and you are a traitor. I suspect it would be the same with sanctions. The condemnation after Cast Lead and the flotilla only made Israel more nationalistic. If [a boycott was] seen as the judgement of the world they would be effective. But Israelis are more likely to take them as ‘proof’ the world is anti-Semitic and will always hate us.”

You need to read the whole article and take time to consider the author's opinions at length about Israel/Palestine. No one could accuse Levy of being a Zionist or an apologist for Israel, but he has a reasoned position on why he doesn't support a boycott. I may not agree with him on every point he makes, but the article is worth reading.

There has sadly been a little too much intolerance of people within the Greens who disagree with our policy on Israel / Palestine, and some systemic problems dealing with complaints raised about language and attitudes on some email lists. Jim Jepps summarised this well in a recent blog comment:

"Although I don't think it is institutional anti-semitism in the party I do think we have a constant failure in the way we deal with disputes or handle individuals who do inappropriate things.

That failure to intervene firmly enough (or at all) can lead to a small group of people or single individuals making discussions or lists poisonous - and I know many people leave those lists because they don't reflect the friendly and useful Green Party they know in their local area.

I think the people making a complaint have a point that is worth replying to and we should try to address their concerns. Although I should say I don't 100% agree with them on the detail and definition I think it would be an error for the party to dismis this out of hand."

We are party that is doing tremendous work in the communities in which we are elected, but that still has structures that were formulated when we were not much more than a glorified social club for radical thinkers (maybe a bit harsh, but it does express my feelings). Reform is needed and it will come. We need to bring our party structures into the 21st Century, so we can prepare for our role as a much more influential and national force in British politics.

There will no doubt be some pain along the way, the usual resistance to change because of a fear of the unknown, but it is clearly time to move our party forward. I am hugely proud of the vast majority of work our party does, the way it operates and the difference we make, but there are things that we need to address. The time to start that is now, to address these issues and conclude the updates to our national structure well before we reach the Euro and General Elections of 2014 and 2015.

Tower Hamlets Mayoral Contest

2010-09-23T12:25:00.000-07:00

As I've pointed out in an earlier post, Alan Duffell is the Green Party candidate for mayor of Tower Hamlets. While no one will be expecting a Green win, the Supplementary vote system means Green supporter can vote for us as a first choice option, then decide tactically how to use their second preference.

I'm following the story as it develops, but in brief, here is a summary of the Labour Party selection process so far:

- Lutfur Rahman is excluded from the shortlist of candidates
- He overturns this judgement in Court
- Rahman wins the Labour nomination
- This week (with nominations closing tmw) Labour's NEC suspends Rahman and appoints the 3rd placed nominee as his replacement
- George Galloway returns to London for emergency discussions about whether Respect will stand a candidate
- Rahman declares he will stand as an independent

What happens next is anyone's guess. George Galloway may stand as a candidate, or Respect may back Rahman as an independent candidate. The first preference Labour vote will be split. It is conceivable that Labour could finish out of the top two places in the election, with the run off being between Rahman and the Conservatives. Respect could also revive themselves if they were to make the top two.

One thing is for sure, tomorrow morning will be interesting in the Tower Hamlets elections department as the nominations come in.

Future Friendly Awards

2010-09-19T09:00:00.000-07:00

I've just voted for the excellent Sefton Green Gym.

Worth checking out their site if you haven't visited it before.

You Have Always Been (a bit) Right Nick

2010-09-18T06:29:00.000-07:00

Most of us have read and absorbed the Independent piece over the last 12 hours. When the Lib Dems narrowly elected Nick Clegg as leader (although if you'll remember he was a hot favourite who nearly snatched defeat from the jaws of victory), the writing was on the wall for left leaning Liberals.

While Nick Clegg may never have been a member of Tories, there is strong evidence he was in the Cambridge University Conservative Association in 1986/7. Students do stupid things, and people do change, but people usually start left and drift right.

After becoming leader, Clegg as a co-author of the Orange Book, brought these ideas to prominence in the Lib Dem manifesto. So today's news is not really a shock.

So if you are a Lib Dem councillor, activist or member who engaged with the Lib Dems from 2003 to 2005 under Charles Kennedy at a time when Labour had become increasingly the "Big Brother" and authoritarian party the left opposes, you are faced with some difficult decisions.

1. Stay and fight: after committing years of work and becoming part of a political party, you have many personal connections that will be damaged or severed if you leave. A lot of Lib Dems will remain in their party and in the coalition even if they don't agree with it. If enough of them remain, there will be a supportive network of "rebels" who oppose the coalition, but who have no real influence.

2. Independence (or local issue parties): some Lib Dem councillors will go Independent, or may collectively leave and form a "Townsville first" type party in the areas they represent. Many will represent traditionally working class areas. If they are up for re-election in 2011/12, they are at a high risk of losing their seats campaigning as Lib Dems.

3. Defection to Labour: this is the obvious route out. Labour are comfortably in opposition and people do oppose the coalition. Defecting to Labour does mean you have to swallow the Iraq War and forgive the 13 year attack on civil liberties, failure to address income inequalities and lack of action on environmental issues. But with pragmatic matters in mind (eg - getting re-elected in 2011 and 2012) many Lib Dems will switch to the Labour party.

4. Defection to Greens / Liberal Party: a few Lib Dems will take this much harder route, with no absolute guarantee of re-election, but will make a significant positive impact for us (or potentially the old Liberal Party) where they do so. Here in Liverpool, John Coyne in 2006 went initially Independent, then Green. He was re-elected in 2007 as a Green councillor.

Obviously the latter route is one that we as Greens will be most interested in. There are no certainties, but capable hard working Liberal Democrat councillors could be leading figures on Euro lists and candidates to be Green MPs / Upper House representatives in elections from 2014 onwards. The impact of the coalition on British politics will see a significant boost for the Greens. Many former Lib Dems will stand a far better chance of re-election as a target Green candidate who left the Lib Dems on a point of principle, than as party loyalists in a Tory dominated coalition.

That doesn't mean the Greens will accept any old councillor. We rejected a defection in Preston in 2005 and it is clear that we only want decent, hard working councillors to represent us. But what is clear is that some of our most talented party members were once representatives of Labour, the Liberal Democrats and other parties. While the Labour Party will be grabbing more headline defections in the way that this example in Sheffield played out, there will be fewer but far more significant defections of left leaning Lib Dem representatives activists to the Greens. In many cases, such moves could play a huge role in pushing us forward as a party, and breaking up the red, yellow and blue stranglehold on local government.

No Respect

2010-09-16T14:03:00.000-07:00

In what has come as a major surprise, Respect announced that they will not be contesting the Tower Hamlets mayoral election. Instead, they are backing the Labour candidate Lutfur Rahman who is regularly featured in Private Eye. All this is reported in the East London Advertiser.

Respect were instrumental in organising the petition for an elected mayor, and to see them step aside like this is unexpected. The election is going to be conducted under the “Supplementary Vote” system. As the Tower Hamlets website says:

“In this election you will have two votes. Vote once in the first column for your first choice candidate and once in the second column for your second choice candidate. You do not have to cast a second choice vote, but you must cast a first choice vote or your ballot paper will not be counted.”

I know already that some Respect activists elsewhere in the country are questioning the logic of this decision. It would have been very possible for them to call for a first vote for Respect’s candidate, with the supplementary (second) vote going to Lutfur Rahman.

A blueprint for this campaign was the agreement between the Greens and Labour about 2nd preferences in the 2008 London Mayoral campaign. We recommended that Green 2nd preferences would go to Ken Livingstone – this was very much despite the party he represented – recognising we would have preferred him to Boris Johnston.

The right of sensible conspiraloons think it all an Islamic plot and that a deal has been done to let Respect win any subsequent byelection. The other suggestions being posited on Socialist Unity are that Respect is broke and / or this is simply a bad tactical decision. Detractors keep suggesting that George Galloway and Salma Yaqoob will defect to Labour, but I think that will also prove wide of the mark.

It is worth keeping in mind that it may be worth taking an alternative view, which is that Respect are going to try and do politics in a new way. That means picking and choosing their electoral battles, supporting candidates they feel able to tactically endorse (as Respect in the NW did in the 2009 Euros for us) but remaining as a vocal and independent left-of-Labour political organisation.

If so, that is a very tough path to follow, although not an impossible one. The difficulty is that activists such as Andy Newman and others, will join Labour, reducing the amount of actual campaigning Respect can achieve. Some activists may also consider the Greens in the longer term. It’s too early to tell, but I think for now we should give them the benefit of the doubt and assume Respect will be around for a lot longer than many are currently predicting.

We have already made a clear pitch for the progressive vote in Tower Hamlets, where Alan Duffell is our Mayoral candidate, although I doubt very much that we will be specifying a second preference vote. Definitely a contest to watch, even if a Labour and Lutfur Rahman victory seems like a foregone conclusion.

Sharon Green Update: Lib Dem Internal Investigation Report

2010-09-13T14:11:00.000-07:00

This was reported locally at the weekend in the Liverpool Echo and in the Liverpool Daily Post. It is clearly flannel.

What we can draw from this "investigation" is the following:

- The Lib Dems are taking no action (all Lib Dems have to be re-approved to stand)

- No one could "prove beyond reasonable doubt" that she had posted it

- The investigation either didn't ask, or Cllr Green didn't answer, the question that any investigator would need to ask about who else had access to her personal computer, and if not her, who else could have posted it? A friend, a partner?

This lack of investigation has raised more questions than it has answered. You can read what Cllr Green's own colleagues think of it all at Lib Dem Voice, but what will they think of their own investigation proving so toothless?

In other Sharon Green news, a quick snapshot (today) of her attendance record since getting elected isn't exactly impressive. Despite only having 6 meetings to attend, she has only managed 3.

All of this is very unfortunate for voters in St Michaels. Instead of electing Tom Crone, who worked alongside Cllrs John Coyne and Sarah Jennings for two years before the election, and who would have been a fantastic local councillor, St Michaels residents now look to have Sharon Green until June 2014.

Conference

2010-09-12T12:43:00.000-07:00

Before the Euro elections, in the days when I did politics full time, while working part time to earn enough to get by, I was a full on attender of Conference. The advantage of four days is that you get far longer to catch up with old friends. Two days is too short, but with work on Friday and Monday, that is all I can manage these days.

Other bloggers have been providing useful updates:

Bright Green Scotland
Rupert's Read
John Reardon
Jim Jepps

and if you want to watch Caroline's speech (again) you can get it here

We've endorsed voting Yes in the AV referendum as a step towards genuine PR (James Graham, the well known Lib Dem blogger was at the workshop), the first step of a major re-organisation of our party structures was taken at a very progressive and consensual workshop and we've also passed some excellent policies.

To all of you that I didn't get enough time to catch up with fully, my apologies.

Very Close - Well Done to the Norwich Greens

2010-09-10T11:40:00.000-07:00

When we make a gain of a council seat it is unusual to feel a twinge of disappointment. However, Norwich Greens got very close to making history last night, and will be knocking on the door in 2011 and 2012 to take control of the city council.

Well done to all the Greens who held their seats plus our gain in Thorpe Hamlet. Commiserations to Jessica Goldsmith who was 188 votes away from taking Sewell (turnout was 2000 voters), and we also polled well in Lakenham, where we would have needed another 292 votes to overhaul Labour (with the Lib Dems narrowly in 2nd place).

I'll leave it to the Norwich Greens to fill us in on the detail, and I'm sure there will be a lot of discussion at Conference tomorrow. One thing I will say is that the coverage we've had in today's media is up on any previous Conference. Winning a seat at Westminster has certainly had an impact.

Norwich Going Green

2010-09-06T13:36:00.000-07:00

Tonight I've spoken to one former Green councillor and one current Green councillor in Norwich. They still need more bodies to help with knocking up on Thursday (you can never have enough!) but there is a positive feeling about how we are going to do on Thursday.

The main losers of this election will be the Liberal Democrats, who look set to feel a backlash from people who voted for them, but ended up with David Cameron as Prime Minister. What will decide this election is how well we do against Labour in the marginals with them.

We can once again be proud of the incredible work that Norwich Greens have put in, not just in the last month, but for a decade in building their local party. Thursday night might have to be a late one!

Lib Dems Deserting

2010-09-01T12:29:00.000-07:00

Hot on the heels of the first principled Lib Dem defection to Independent on Halton Borough Council, three more Lib Dems have left, citing problems with the coalition.

The full story is here.

National Debt Initiative

2010-08-30T13:57:00.000-07:00

I think I missed this first time round. For anyone else who did too, the full article and links are on the Glasgow Media Group site.

National Debt Initiative - Guardian article on one-off tax on the richest 10% (16.08.10)

Can we urge those who are interested in the proposal to do all they can to push the arguments and figures contained in the article in to the media. This means writing letters, texting, tweeting and e-mailing news programmes and the press. Each week there are new stories on the cuts, their effects on the poor and public support for the Government's economic strategies, yet the elephant size results of the poll featured in the Guardian article show that 74% off the population would favour a one off tax one the wealthiest 6million people. The silence on this is being imposed by the media itself. They are well aware of the figures. The BBC's Today programme asked us to send them these the day before the Guardian article appeared. The Sunday Times and The Independent on Sunday also had the article but rejected covering it. It is important to break this silence, so please do all you can.

You Gov Poll Results on Attitudes to Paying off the National Debt (Including Tax on Richest 10%) (June 2010)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/15/deficit-crisis-tax-the-rich

The results of the poll and the article itself are available to read and download by clicking on the links above. To date, the article has generated over 550 responses in the paper's Comment is Free section. The figures on wealth quoted come from the Government website and can be viewed at http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/wealth1209.pdf.

One criticism made in the responses on the Guardian website is that 'the rich won't allow/accept it' but the poll results show the richest groups slightly more in favour than the low income groups. We asked informally some wealthy people why this might be so, and concern for social order was one reason, another that if the government finances were stabilised , then 'the stock market would go through the roof' and they would get their 20% back anyway. Also the plan does not necessitate immediate payment. It is about taking liability for the debt and would be payed off as a form of death duty or through low interest payments. The key issue is to take wealth which is effectively dead and trapped in the higher reaches of an inflated property market and use it for investment in areas such as new technologies, research and proper funding of centres of excellence as well as meeting key social needs. This is nothing to do with funding incompetent spending, but about an efficient use of national wealth for the benefit of the whole population.

Cutting NHS Direct - Wrong, Stupid and a False Economy

2010-08-28T12:31:00.000-07:00

"Roughly 14,000 people a day call NHS Direct for medical advice, with the service costing £123m a year to run."

We rang NHS Direct about our son yesterday. They provided quick, appropriate and accurate medical advice. Since he was born, we've used the service a couple of times, once in the middle of the night. Without NHS Direct we would undoubtedly have used a walk in centre or had to spend a morning waiting for an emergency appointment at our local GP.

We'll hear time and again in the next few weeks about how GPs think NHS Direct isn't delivering value for money, but there are strong arguments to the contrary. That is my own personal experience and I support the argument put by Dr Brian Gaffney arguing that NHS Direct saves health services £162 million in efficiencies.

Defections

2010-08-24T11:15:00.000-07:00

Firstly, welcome to Cllr Robert Vint who has left the Liberal Democrats to join the Greens in Totnes.

Secondly, here in Liverpool Ian Jobling has left the Lib Dems and crossed the floor to the ruling Labour Party. David Bartlett's blog reports here.

Advance Australia Greens - AV helps deliver a breakthrough

2010-08-23T12:08:00.000-07:00

Adam Bandt has been elected to represent Melbourne in the House of Representatives. This is an incredible breakthrough moment for our sister party. There were Green second places in Batman and Grayndler, with close misses in Denison and Sydney. In the Senate, it looks like the Greens will hold 9 seats, meaning that from July 2011 (when the new Senate sits) they will hold the balance of power.

With all the first preference votes counted in Melbourne, Labor held the lead:

Labor 39.5%
Green 36.1%

Once the preferences were transferred, the Greens overtook Labor to win 56% to 44% with some counting still not yet finished.

This got me thinking. What would AV have done for us in Brighton Pavilion in 2010?

"Primary vote" (FPTP)

Greens 31%
Labour 29%
Tory 24%
Lib Dem 14%
Others 2%

The bulk of the "others" vote was UKIP, so we could for arguments sake assume they all chose the Conservatives as a second choice. It isn't enough for them to overtake Labour into 2nd place. Where would Lib Dem preferences have gone? I'd argue strongly that a lot of people may have voted Lib Dem during Cleggmania, but would have preferenced the Greens. However the key point here to note is that in order for the Greens not to have made the top two in Pavilion, out of that 14% of the electorate, the Tories would have had to get say 8% with Labour and Greens getting just 3% each. Not realistic, not in Brighton.

Under AV, it would have been a Green v Labour run off, with an unpopular Labour candidate (not the incumbent) against a dynamic and new Green challenger, just like in Melbourne. We would have won by a much bigger margin in 2010. The more interesting discussion is whether AV would have enabled us to make the breakthrough much earlier on. Let's take a look at the 2005 Pavilion result:

Labour 35%
Tories 24%
Greens 22%
Lib Dems 17%
Others 2%

UKIP only got 1% back then, so we add that to the Conservative total. Then on the Lib Dems preference allocation, the Greens would have needed 6% (Labour 8% and Tories 3% as an example) to get into second place in the runoff. It is conceivable under AV that we would have been in a Labour v Greens contest five years earlier, especially if you consider that both the Lib Dems and Greens were against the Iraq War, and for many people that was a heavy influence on their voting choice. Where would the bulk of Tory preferences have gone? To Labour? Doubtful. Probably to the Greens. In my opinion we'd have won and made a breakthrough five years earlier under an AV system using these results.

Oh hang on a minute though, I'm being awfully "conservative" and overlooking a basic point. How many people would have voted Green as a first choice, safe in the knowledge that their second choice for Labour or the Lib Dems would "keep the Tories out" in both 2010 and 2005. A lot more.

Why Respect should be backing AV

Birmingham Hall Green result

Labour 33%
Respect 25.1%
Lib Dem 24.6%
Tories 15%
Others 2%

How would Tory preferences have been reallocated? I believe that if Salma Yaqoob was the candidate seen as best able to beat Labour, she would have attracted a decent amount of support even from the Conservatives. However, it is also reasonable to argue that more Tories would put their second choice vote as Lib Dem. Again though, how many reluctant Labour (or Lib Dem) voters would have chosen Salma Yaqoob as their first choice safe in the knowledge that their second preferences would have gone back to Labour (or the Lib Dems)? Given these two factors, I believe you would have a Labour v Respect runoff for the seat. As we've seen from Australia, when it is about defeating an incumbent and opposition MP, even right wing protest votes will swing behind left of Labo(u)r challengers.

I will attach the health warning to this. Australian voters have a choice of above and below the line voting. Many choose to vote above the line, and they accept preference allocation in the way their party decides is best for them. That isn't what we are going to be offered in an AV referendum. Our voters are going to have to rank candidates in the way they see fit, and that will be slightly different.

The Case for AV - Part 2

2010-08-19T11:15:00.000-07:00

This post will look in detail at what a change to an AV system will mean for the Green Party, starting with our own positioning and looking in detail at the financial implications.

There has also been some other debate elsewhere in the Green blogosphere on this. Derek Wall is against, Nishma Doshi is sceptical, Jean Lambert is in favour, Caroline Lucas called it a "small step" in the right direction and Jeff at SNP Tactical Voting (now a GPEW member - welcome!) is in favour but studying the evidence.

A Democratic Decision

This autumn there will be a debate at Conference to determine our position on AV. There are three possible outcomes, that we vote to support yes or no, or that due to some procedural eventuality, we end up with no position on it.

Whatever Conference decides, which will become the official position of the party, I think this is going to be an issue where there will be a difference of opinion between different individuals within our party. That is the sign of political health by the way!

Once our policy position is set, we are free to campaign how we like, but we’d have to make clear we disagree with our party on this particularly issue if we are on the wrong side of the Conference decision.

Financial Implications for the Green Party

At the moment, to hold a deposit under the First Past the Post system, we need to gain 5% of the votes. In marginal seats this is incredibly difficult. In an analysis of the 2005 General Election results, our vote was squeezed by 30 to 40% in marginal seats in an election where Labour were comfortable winners. As we’ve seen from the 2010 General Election results, a marginal election has a huge squeeze effect on us, with only a few exceptions to this rule.

It is in my opinion reasonable to assume that under an AV system we will be able to retain a great many more deposits as people express their first choice preference for us, before allocating a second choice to the least worst option. The cost of lost deposits to us in this election was £164,000. In fact, the lost deposit is one of the principle barriers to enabling a Green candidate to stand in every UK seat.

I think we also have to plan our General Election strategy around the retention of Brighton Pavilion (or its successor constituency after boundary reworking) and gaining Norwich South (or its successor). There may also be other plausible seats in play by then under AV. If we succeed in re-electing even a single MP, we will likely once again qualify for Short money. This is public funding for the following purposes:

• to assist an opposition party in carrying out its Parliamentary business;
• for the opposition parties' travel and associated expenses; and
• for the running costs of the Leader of the Opposition's office.

At this General Election we qualified for Short money by winning one seat and at least 150,000 votes. This is worth £53,987, plus £1,573 travel expenses for our single MP to help her carry out her Parliamentary business. As this Parliamentary note makes clear Short money has a real use for a small opposition party as it can be used for:

“… research associated with Front-Bench duties, developing and communicating alternative policies to those of the Government and shadowing the Government’s Front Bench.”

The immediate impact of a General Election for the Green Party fought under AV would be significantly fewer lost deposits and a greater allocation of Short money if we were to win at least one seat in the next General Election. As I made clear in my last post, the decision to back AV or not should not be about what is good for the Green Party, but it is vital that the practical implications of the change are understood for us as a party.

The Dynamics of the Campaign

At the moment the Liberal Democrats are embraced in gently suffocating deadlock with the Conservative Party. This referendum was the shabby compromise they accepted for going into coalition, and Nick Clegg probably sold himself and his party short in accepting it. That said, it is now on the table and will be backed by all the Lib Dems (whether personally in favour of the coalition or not) as a route to further electoral reform. They will view it as the start of the journey, not the end.

Given that Labour are likely to oppose the bill in Parliament, and many MPs in safeish Labour seats are going to look nervously upon any change, I think it is likely that Labour will oppose the referendum, or at absolute best, allow individuals in the Labour Party to campaign as they see fit. I’d be delighted to be proved wrong on this! The Electoral Reform Society (ERS) and the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust are likely to be key campaigners in favour of the change.

This gives the Lib Dems their last hurrah – by presenting themselves as the plucky underdogs taking on the two party system once again. Clegg would revel in it and probably regain some popularity during the campaign, with voters offering the benefit of the doubt given that he is trying to make a historic change. We can certainly neutralise any popularity gains Lib Dems would make from this at a local level, by offering critical support to the campaign, but keeping our focus on protecting public services and our genuine commitment to the environment (in contrast to huge central government funding cuts).

If on the other hand, we officially position ourselves against AV because it just isn’t good enough, I’d expect the Lib Dems to attack us as idealists, unwilling to deal with real issues and siding with the all of the conservative voices in British politics. There are dangers for us if Conference does take that view, although individuals can make clear their own preferences. Given that further on in this Parliament, with many Lib Dems becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the coalition, being seen as pragmatic and still in favour of further reform will likely prove attractive to increasingly disaffected Liberal supporters.

If Conference does vote in favour of AV, we have to offer an innovative contribution to the campaign that makes sure the Greens are at the forefront of reform, ahead of the Lib Dems and everyone else. I have some clear ideas about how we do that, but I won’t be sharing them in public for other parties to steal them.

Dealing with the result

I’m in favour of this system as a step on the way to genuine voting reform. AV would be used to fight the next General Election and I think the changes would enable the Green Party to become a stronger force in British politics. We also need to recognise that we would liberate a great number of dyed in the wool Labour (and Lib Dem) supporters from tribal voting patterns.

If AV is used at a 2015 General Election, local election reform will follow. It would be unsustainable to keep FPTP as our method of electing local government if we had changed it for national elections. I think this would enable us to increase our councillor base significantly in a number of our stronger areas. Even in current low activity areas, high numbers of Green first preferences in certain council wards would show where we could potentially make quick breakthroughs.

We could be underestimating the appetite for reform. The system chosen for local council elections may employ AV+ rather than straight AV for a variety or reasons, but the key point is that once the break has been made from FPTP, further reform will be easier to make. One reason for thinking this is that the House of Lords will eventually be using a more proportional system of election, although we don’t yet have a timetable on how soon this will happen.

My personal view in the event the referendum is lost, Nick Clegg would be considerably diminished, but Cameron will be keen to avoid breaking the coalition at a time when cuts are really biting. Reform of the House of Lords would be the only thing left for the Lib Dems in the coalition, and I would expect it to be fast tracked. House of Lords elections would have to be set to enable strong proportionality as compensation for the many Lib Dem MPs who will lose seats if the next election is still under FPTP, otherwise open rebellion would quickly follow a lost referendum. However, I think the House of Lords reform will proceed in that way even if the AV referendum is won, although the timescale will be longer.

In conclusion

I’m backing AV, along with Adrian Ramsay and a number of others in the party. It isn’t the end, but rather it is the beginning of a journey towards true PR. Like our internal referendum on leadership, this is also a key political decision for us. I look forward to the debate at Conference!

Sharon Green Facebook Story on Channel 4

2010-08-18T13:42:00.000-07:00

You can watch it here. The specific mention is 1 min 10 seconds in.

I'd be interested to hear what the regional party investigation (reported here) has uncovered, as the Channel 4 story seems to suggest it was now in the past.

The Case for AV

2010-08-10T12:47:00.000-07:00

If we had a referendum giving us the option of an Additional Member System, STV or AV+, like all of those in favour of real electoral reform, I'd reject AV immediately. We don't. The referendum being put in front of us is a continued "First Past the Post" (FPTP) system, and the alternative is AV.

So what are the system arguments in favour and against?

The Electoral Reform Society website has a good section on both FPTP and AV, and it is the main site I use when teaching this topic to Public Services students.

To summarise, the main argument against AV is that it could deliver an even less proportionate parliament than under FPTP. There is no doubt that it gets rid of the idea that a vote for any party is wasted, and by having the option of ranking candidates, voters can express themselves in a more effective way.

An example of AV acting disproportionately would have been in 1997. The huge swing against Major's Conservatives would under AV left the Conservatives with less seats than the Liberal Democrats.

What are the political arguments?

AV would have some other effects. Where a disgraced politician stood for re-election, say for example Hazel Blears in Salford and Eccles, it is likely that under an AV system she would have lost her seat.

However it doesn't address the fact that voters in constituencies like Liverpool Riverside, where Labour polled nearly 60% of the vote, are still likely to return a Labour MP. Other votes here count for nothing and have little prospect of altering the result in the near future. Even for the Labour supporters here, they may find themselves looking in frustration at marginal seats across the water in Wirral that Labour narrowly lost to the Conservatives. Some votes are more equal that others.

AV would have brought us much closer to winning Norwich South, we probably would have won Brighton Pavilion by a wider margin after transfers and Salma Yaqoob would have benefited in Birmingham Hall Green, with enough Lib Dem transfers to unseat the Labour incumbent. On the other hand, AV would effectively shut the door on the BNP ever winning a Westminster seat (and would rob them of all council representation if it was introduced at a local level). While an AV referendum shouldn't be about what is good for the Green Party, we have only one MP in Westminster, despite gaining nearly 9% of the national vote when the closest thing we have to proportional elections (the Euros) took place in 2009.

In terms of what happens after the referendum on AV, the sensible political question to ask is that if the British public reject a limited (and less than ideal) reform of the voting system, how likely is it that a better proposal will come along? My view is that if the AV system is rejected in 2011, the opportunity to reform our voting system will be lost for another generation. On the other hand, if AV cracks open the door of national political reform, we can expect more changes to follow.

How is internal and external dialogue developing so far?

A lot of people I know have, for very principled reasons, decided that AV isn't the route forward. I agree with the fact that the Lib Dems have sold their long term ambition of genuine voting reform short. I also think that whatever position our Conference takes on this, people are free to make their own position and views clear. I'm also proud that as a party we will discuss and vote on this.

The Liberal Democrats will be campaigning in favour of AV. The Conservatives and Labour will overwhelmingly campaign against (with notable exceptions). The BNP seem to be against and view it as a conspiracy designed specifically to damage them. UKIP favour AV+ but don't seem to have a clear line on the current referendum yet.

The debate will continue and I'll post some more of my own thought on this soon.

Green Party Leadership Election

2010-08-02T05:01:00.000-07:00

Given that I am acting as Campaign Chair for Caroline Lucas and Adrian Ramsay, working alongside the excellent John Reardon, who is managing the campaign, I thought I'd post up a few thoughts on why re-electing Caroline and Adrian is the right thing for the party to do.

We started 2008 with 7,441 members of the Green Party. But today membership is close to the 12,000 mark. That increase is a credit to every single activist, campaigner and candidate that has stood for the Green Party. That increase is also about the leadership shown by Caroline and Adrian, who were elected as our first ever leadership team in 2008. Their leadership, electoral campaigning and media work has been a huge success for our party. There is no better team to continue to take us forward to future success, but it is crucial that this leadership election debates the issues that will matter in the coming years.

When we democratically made a decision to have a Leadership team in the party, we chose to reject the dangers of “traditional” top down party leadership structures. Caroline and Adrian have 1 vote each on our Green Party Executive committee, along with 13 other members. Their role is to inspire through moral leadership and to act as clear and identifiable spokespeople for our party.

In the first two year term there has been elation, with the election of Caroline Lucas as our first ever MP at Westminster, but for many of our hardest working activists there have also been disappointments. We narrowly missed out on winning more Euro seats in 2009 and many local parties lost vital local election contests in May this year, as a national election turnout swamped the hard local work that many of us had put in.

As our lead candidate in the North West region’s Euro Elections (where we lost out by just 0.3% to Nick Griffin and the BNP) I can understand just how painful it has been for many of our best activists around the country not to succeed despite tremendously hard work. We all have our own viewpoints on the reasons. My only criticism is that collectively and in hindsight, decisions by the Executive in 2009 look like they were not ambitious enough financially or electorally for our party. A couple of political message boards have made the point after the publication of the annual register of accounts by the Electoral Commission that in 2009 we were "mean" greens - we didn't spend our money. Arguably that was a bad call. The election of more MEPs would have paid for the extra investment. What is crucial is that we get things right next time.

What I do know is that both Caroline and Adrian were amongst those arguing for more ambition. We must be willing to acknowledge that we could have done even better and I want those leading our party to be those who are credible elected figures, with a track record of success, who take onboard the need to improve and to make the right judgement calls for our future development. That criteria doesn't just apply to Caroline and Adrian though, it needs to apply to every single member of the Executive.

In their first term as our Leadership team, Caroline has been elected to Westminster, where she is already punching far above the political weight of a single MP. Adrian has been a huge part of the inspiration and perspiration behind the awesome electoral success at a local level in Norwich, where we are genuine contenders to take control of the council in elections on the 9th September this year. He also doubled our share of the vote at the General Election in Norwich South to 15%, overcoming the three party squeeze that cost us many lost deposits elsewhere in the country.

Both Caroline and Adrian are committed to providing the moral leadership needed on the Green Party Executive to get things right in this electoral cycle. That means a big increase in local councillors, success in the two Assembly elections in 2011/12 and the transformation of the Green Party from a small party with pockets of strength, to a national force. We can only do this by winning in more regions in the 2014 European Elections and more seats in the next scheduled General Election in 2015.

This isn’t an easy task, and it does not just fall to two people. It requires an ambitious Green Party Executive, visionary collective leadership and a huge amount of work from each of us.

If you voted in the 2008 leadership contest, make the judgement for yourself about how you vote this year, and do it on the track record of the incumbents:

- 65% increase in membership in two years

- Caroline Lucas, our first MP in Westminster

- Adrian Ramsay in Norwich, leading by example in each and every election campaign there since 1998 with huge success and the best prospect of our next MP at Westminster

If you are one of our new members, we are delighted to have you on board. I hope you participate in this leadership election and re-elect the leadership team that has no doubt played a part in your decision to join us.

A final point that we have made on the limited amount of campaign literature we have produced is to urge people to go and support Adrian Ramsay and the Norwich Green Party in the extraordinary local elections called for the 9th September. We need to do whatever we can to ensure that Norwich Greens end up as the largest political party there (see Rupert Read's latest post).

I'll be expanding on some of my thoughts here soon. There is some big thinking going on in the party about political strategy and with the Liberal Democrats in a government committed to the most brutal cuts in history, there will be a historic opportunity for our party to grow rapidly in the coming few years. Every Liberal Democrat up and down the country has a choice, stay or go. Those brave and principled Lib Dems that leave, such as Mike Shepherd in Halton, can hold their heads high.

Caroline and Adrian will be getting my vote. I believe they can and will inspire many more politically active people to join us, particularly former Labour and Liberal Democrat activists. The Green Party is needed now more than ever before, and every activist counts.

Norwich Council Update

2010-07-16T02:16:00.000-07:00

The background to this is covered well by Rupert Read. Essentially a Court decision has removed a third of the city councillors, with byelections now pending and potentially taking place on the 9th September (although no date is yet known).

Firstly, congratulations to Samir Jeraj, who has become our Green Group leader in Norwich albeit under unusual circumstances. Secondly commisserations to the councillors (of all parties) removed in what are ridiculous circumstances. My friend and now former councillor, Howard Jago, has seen his sole source of income removed and is now another one of the many people looking for work.

What this means is that we now face local elections in Norwich with a very strong chance of becoming the largest party on the city council. Adrian Ramsay, our Deputy Leader and the rest of the Norwich team are gearing up for some incredibly hard campaigning and will welcome help from outside the city.

And why should people be voting for the Greens in Norwich, as opposed to Labour or Lib Dem. Well on Norfolk County Council, only the Greens tried to stop the cuts in local services, from Rupert Read again:

"The term 'Oppposition Councillors' in this article is a little misleading, when in fact LibDems didn't really challenge the cuts (after all, they are part of the 'savage cuts' governing coalition), and no Labour councillors even bothered to turn up! Ie all this was Green work. Well done the Green Party County Councillors!"

While we didn't win a seat in Norwich South at the General Election, there are a lot of dissatisfied ex Lib Dem voters out there. A lot of them will be voting for us.

5th May 2011

2010-07-01T13:27:00.000-07:00

The announcement has been made. The referendum on AV is to be held on the same day as local elections in England, the Scottish Parliamentary election and the Welsh Assembly.

For anyone who wants the run down on AV, the Electoral Reform Society website gives a good run down.

Arctic Sea Ice Melt

2010-06-30T13:04:00.000-07:00

Image from http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png

This isn't good. 2007 was a record low amount of ice cover (dotted line) and this year the ice cover is even lower.

We are a party with policies on nearly every area, but we came into existence to do something about the long term future for our society. On a day when the Independent reports that we are not really making any underlying dent on our CO2 emissions, it truly is a worrying future not just for generations unborn, but for all the people that share this planet today.

Bloggers Block?

2010-06-16T11:58:00.000-07:00

[Hat tip to David Bartlett for the title]

I don't think so. Just a triple whammy of a sad death in my wife's family, an overwhelming amount of marking as students get their assignments in days before various deadlines and in the last week, a bit of the World Cup.

Normal service will be resumed soon.

The New Politics Laws

2010-05-29T13:28:00.000-07:00

There will be many people with sympathy for the personal circumstances of David Laws. The problem is that he clearly breached the rules. I think his decision to resign, promptly, following these revelations, is the right one, given the role he was playing in the government. For his prompt resignation, he should be given some credit.

What does this mean for the "New Politics" of the coalition? Some quick thoughts:

- The Liberal Democrats claims to be better than the Labour / Conservatives at a national level in terms of the expenses scandal are in tatters

- The General Public will now simply be thinking, "different government, same old politics"

- One of the key links between the Conservatives and the Lib Dems in this coalition is now removed. In what will at times be a very strained relationship in the coming years, he may have proved to be the difference between a coalition that cracks, and one that holds together

A Facebook Question - Answers Wanted

2010-05-28T13:58:00.000-07:00

The big political story in Liverpool today is unfortunately this piece:

"Liverpool Lib Dem Councillor in web disabled 'joke' fury"

Before I go on, I should declare an interest in this. Sharon Green won the St Michaels seat in a close contest with Tom Crone, our local and very hard working candidate. She had been a relative late entry to the ward, with very little seen from the outgoing Lib Dem councillor. In contrast Tom had worked alongside our two Green councillors for the last four years and lives in the ward. The increased turnout and postal votes going out in the middle of "Cleggmania" enabled the Lib Dems to pull off what was a shock victory.

This post is to pose a question to Green bloggers and readers. Two alternative explanations are being offered. If you are a Facebook expert, please could you identify whether either or both are plausible (you need to view the screenshot on the news story):

Explanation 1:

“This picture was posted via an external source to her profile by another, which subsequently downloads automatically into your photo file."

She [Sharon Green] “could not be held responsible”.

Someone else sent the image to her page and she thought she had removed the “offensive” picture.

Explanation 2:

"...the picture appeared to have been placed in an online 'album' called 'the opposition by Sharon Green', which could not be created or accessed by anyone but the owner of the Facebook page."

Views please.

The Alternative Queen's Speech

2010-05-25T13:52:00.000-07:00

As reported by Channel 4:

My government's overriding priority is to modernise the British economy for a low-carbon future, to create an economy more balanced between manufacturing and services, more resilient in the face of financial crises, where wealth is more equitably distributed and the more vulnerable in society are offered greater protection.

My government will bring forward a bill to initiate an emergency investment package, to cost £44bn, which will be intended to create over one million new jobs and training places.

This investment programme will result in significant improvements to public transport, including fare reductions of up to ten per cent. It will provide free insulation for all British homes. It will transform Britain's renewable energy sector into a world leader, which in turn will support the restoration of domestic manufacturing industry. It will also set our country firmly on the road to a zero waste economy.

In parallel with this bill, my government will continue the previous government's efforts to tackle Britain's budget deficit by 2014, but with greater emphasis on raising tax levels on the wealthiest thirteen per cent of earners.

The redistributive tax measures will ensure that a non-means-tested citizen's pension may be introduced at the level of £170 for individual pensioners and £300 for couples. This will ensure that no British pensioner is living below the poverty line.

My government will cancel new road building plans and transfer £30bn from the road building budget towards public transport and measures to promote and facilitate cycling and walking, including safe routes to school programmes.

Other fiscal measures my government will bring forward will include measures to ensure that the costs of high-carbon modes of transport better reflect their costs to society.

My government will introduce a bill to prevent any further private finance initiatives, and to keep the Royal Mail in public ownership, as the first step towards reversing the privatisation of public services.

My government will seek effective global and European collaboration to combat climate change, in a globally equitable manner, which will involve 90 per cent cut in UK CO2 emissions from 1990 levels by 2030, starting with a ten per cent cut in the coming year and following with successive year-on-year cuts to ensure the overall target is met.

My government will complete the reform of regulation of the financial services industry to ensure greater protection for savers and taxpayers, but will bring forward further legislation for the establishment of a nationwide network of not-for-profit community banks, and to separate retail from investment banking. Those banks which are wholly or partly state-owned will pay no bonuses above £25,000, and a permanent tax on bonuses will be introduced. A "Robin Hood tax", a tax on financial transactions, will also be established.

Recognising the international nature of the problems in financial services, my government will actively pursue with our European partners regulation at an EU level.

My government will introduce legislation to bring about wide-ranging political and electoral reform, including a fair and inclusive voting system which will be extended to a fully-elected second chamber.

My government is committed to making Britain a fairer and more inclusive society, and to this end will bring forward legislation to promote this. This will include a requirement for all companies to have at least 40 per cent of their boards of directors made up of women, and to penalise employers who implement unequal pay. The same legislation will strengthen the protection of disabled people and those with mental health problems against discrimination.

My government will bring forward plans for a very early withdrawal of British forces from Afghanistan. At the same time it will seek international support for the establishment of a peace conference involving all Afghanistan's neighbouring countries, and measures to enhance economic and political stability in Afghanistan.

Legislation will be brought forward to decommission Britain's nuclear weapons.

Other measures will be laid before you.

I pray that the blessing of almighty God may rest upon your counsels.

Our First Green MP!

2010-05-14T12:04:00.001-07:00

We've had a Green MP for a week now, and a week truly is a long time in politics. Last Friday morning at about 6am I exited Ormskirk Civic Centre, and my second count of the night. I got back to a local member's house, ready to go to bed for two hours before going to work, when in came the Brighton Pavilion result on my phone. What a moment that was.

I can understand that to the bigger parties, it isn't such a big deal. One MP. But it is a big deal for us. A really big deal and it has already had an effect. While the local disappointment was palpable in the party, this result was historic and showed that when we get things right as a party, we can achieve tremendous things. All of those involved deserve a huge pat on the back.

Elsewhere, it was a squeeze. A credible 14.9% for Adrian Ramsay in Norwich South, but not quite what we hoped for. Tough in Lewisham and Lancaster for us, but with a positive advance in Cambridge under the excellent Tony Juniper, there was still cause to be optimistic for future FPTP elections, if that remains our Westminster system. Salma Yaqoob also deserves a mention for a strong showing for Respect in Birmingham Hall Green.

I'll be writing more at length about how we can go forward, and our national political situation soon. Membership is up nationally (again) and the future is looking very positive for us as a party. It won't be long before more Liberal Democrats follow the example of their Worcester chair.

Local Disappointment

2010-05-14T11:41:00.000-07:00

After a busy week of work and being more ill than I care to deal with at work, time for a posting...

We got swamped in a tide of turnout and entrenched voting patterns in Liverpool. Our failure to gain seats this time mirrors the experience of Greens around the country - Manchester, Sheffield, Lewisham, Camden - despite polling record numbers of votes in local elections, Green councillors lost their seats and we failed to make gains. There was the odd spectacular exception, including Rob White's breakthrough in Reading, but generally it was a difficult result.

Before the campaign started, we knew we would have to be ambitious in Greenbank, pushing things hard just to compete. Our sampling from the Euros in 2009 was very promising. We had pipped the Lib Dems (just) across the ward. We were probably marginally down in terms of the actual number of people that voted for us this year in Greenbank, but without exact figures, that is difficult to tell.

The campaign team worked really hard for me. They deserve huge thanks, as do the 800 people that voted for us in the local elections. However, we knew once postal votes were coming in that the seat was now being pushed beyond reach, although as anyone in politics knows, you can't comment on PVs. We were prepared for the result on the day. Congratulations to Elaine Allen on winning the seat.

St Michaels was a much harder result to take. The Lib Dems did well. Despite a candidate that was only selected in the last few months, the then leader of the council, Warren Bradley, put a huge amount into this one ward. I think Labour will look at the level of vote they got without a campaign and will be quietly kicking themselves that they went for Greenbank and not St Michaels, although I can understand tactically their reasons for doing so.

Tom Crone, our candidate in St Michaels, has put in a tremendous amount of work over the past four years for us. He's effectively been a third councillor, without ever being paid for it, and has done some incredibly work. He deserved better than to miss out this time. Politics can be very unforgiving, but I hope he looks back with pride on his record 1790 local Green votes, and his excellent work as our Parliamentary candidate this time. I think he should take particular pride in the cartoon in the Guardian, where he Larry and Alex are so "on message" just days before our historical breakthrough to Westminster.

Finally, although we lost our deposits in Liverpool, not a single vote for us in the Parliamentary election was wasted. The Green Party will now get public funding (Short money) worth £53,987, plus £1,573 travel expenses after qualifying by getting one seat and at least 150,000 votes. For the trainspotters amongst us, the formula used is £14,015 per seat in Parliament, plus £27.99 per 200 votes. What it effectively means is that the lost deposits we've had to pay for will effectively be recycled back to us as a political party over the next five years.

And now for the fun post...