Yes, this is the same picture as last year, but on behalf on everyone in Birmingham University Labour Students (BULS), Happy New Year to all. We all know 2011 will be a testing year, but in the meantime enjoy the celebrations!
Max
First off. Hope you all had a great Christmas. I’m finally back (kinda) and will tomorrow, Sunday or Monday be conducting a review of the last year for Labour and for BULS.
Anyway, on to more immediate matters. The “Big Society” as an idea is nice enough, naturally I have my doubts and certainly retain the right to be a bit sceptical. But, against the backdrop of a looming age of austerity those doubts can turn rather easily into downright scepticism. It also doesn’t help when you have the co-founder of the highly influential Community Links charity, David Robinson, arguing that the looming age of austerity could become a ‘Hurricane Katrina moment’ and destroy any chance of a potential ‘Big Society’.
Now this is coming from someone who supports the ‘Big Society’ idea. And to regard it as ”Forcing an unsustainable pace on a barrage of uncoordinated cuts that hit the poorest hardest” puts myself personally in a rather downbeat mood over the true outcome over DC’s ‘Big Society’. With nearly a quarter of all charities being subsidised by the government and 13% relying on state funding relying on state funding for more than half their income, Robinson’s words really do hit home.
Max
As the title says, Merry Christmas to everyone out there (whatever your political allegiance) on behalf on everyone in Birmingham University Labour Students (BULS). Hope you can make it through the snow to your destination, wherever that may be!
This will by my own last post for a few days (busy Christmas Eve, needs not be said for Christmas day, going away 26th to 29th and then working a bit on the 30th). So again, have a great Christmas!
Max
Sorry on behalf on all of the bulsonline team for the lack of activity lately. The end of term shenanigans have kept us all busy these past few weeks and I personally have been away in Edinburgh for the past few days.
Anyway, first thing on my blogging list to write about is, yes you guessed it, the Cable incident. In some ways, like potentially many Lib Dem grass-root members, I’m quite glad that Cable is fighting his own corner for the Lib Dems (it sure is a better alternative to the other option). In some respects, I can sympathise with Cable. Like I said on the whole Mervyn King incident via the wikileaks, people often let slip their own personal view points, we are human after all. However, that is where my sympathy stops. A Business Secretary has to rule on each case on the facts and evidence, you can’t go in with a pre-existing views. This applies to every case, despite the idea that “declaring war on Mr Murdoch” is something I very strongly sympathise with. It is a direct breach of the ministerial code and should result in nothing less than resignation. This is where the double standards come in.
I’ve always been rather sceptical about the Coalition claiming to “come together in the national interest” (naturally). But, it certainly seems in this one case that what happened was that DC’s decision not to sack Cable was in the Coalition’s interest rather than “the nation’s interest”. It’s blatantly clear, if this had been a Tory Minister, they would have been left out to dry long ago. What is also interesting is that Cable described the Coalition as “Maoist”, given that he believed they were trying to push through too many radical changes at once, many of which he disagreed with. Which neatly leads onto the next event I missed.
Apart from taping Cable’s views on the Coalition, the Daily Telegraph also recorded Scottish Secretary Michael Moore, Business Minister Ed Davey and Pensions Minister Steve Webb doubts over the Coalition’s claim to “fairness”. They criticised Child Tax Credit reforms and the Trebling of fees. Now rather than criticising the Lib Dems as a whole for supporting these measures, we should be working to encourage not only Lib Dem MPs, but party members and voters to think again about the Coalition and whether it is truly taking the right direction (although with the latter part, little needs to be done there). This is why I welcome Ed Miliband’s move to start calling the Coalition a “Conservative-led Coalition”. Also, I welcome (more or less) the reduction party membership fees for Young Labour members (15-27…ish) from the already ridiculously low £1 to 1p(!!). I know if Labour wants to increase membership amongst the younger generations sound policies are far more important, but you can’t say it wont help a bit.
Finally, on a completely different note. Yet even more genuine change has come to America. The old “don’t ask don’t tell” policy on banning gay people in the armed forces in the USA has finally, been repealed! Now some may say this won’t be good for the army as it’ll stir up homophobia, but if it is stirred up because of this at least it’s tackling homophobia. Consequently, because of this logic, not repealing this ban would have meant homophobia culture would have gone unchecked and unchallenged in the US armed forces.
Overall though, a rather good few days….shame I missed it all.
Max
Last week, in a slight moment of procrastination I decided to email one of the local Lib Dem MPs. Lorely Burt had claimed to be wavering on the tuition fee vote so I thought it wouldn’t hurt to try and give her a push. Clearly, I wasted my time as she in the end decided to abstain on the all so crucial vote on Thursday. When I heard the news I wasn’t happy. She said in a letter to the guild of students last week that she did not agree with the proposals. So why could she not do the decent thing? Why could she not honour her promise she made to the NUS, the student population and future generations of children when she felt this way?
Even worse was the other local Lib Dem MP, John Hemming. The man who is not exactly whiter than white has proven this even more so by voting WITH the government to push through the rise of fees to £9000. Now, just a few days before the vote, a group of students from this University decided to occupy and shut down his office in Yardley. And his response, on national radio… was to blame those individuals for now wanting to vote FOR the rise. When I first heard this, I thought he can’t be serious! But it would once again seem that he was. It is absolutely shameful.
Because I don’t think he ever had any intention of not voting against or even abstaining in the vote. And so to blame his decision on this minority of students, well it just doesn’t wash with me and I’m sure it doesn’t with you. It stinks of deceit and distaste.
For two MPs who don’t exactly have the largest of majorities, and find themselves not too far away from 3 large universities including our own, I find it ridiculous that they had the audacity to take this action. I wouldn’t mind having a bet that both of them will have a fight to keep their seats at the next election. That is if Hemming hasn’t turned blue by then…
Oliver Cosentino, BULS Member
It’s always easy to kick someone when they’re down. We all know it and we’ve all done it, metaphorically. Before, it was Gordon Brown and before that it could be argued it was John Prescott. But it seems now it’s the Lib Dems, or more specifically, Nick Clegg (Cleggy). And yes, the 90% of the population (approximately) agree with the “kicking”. Like John Denham (Shadow Business Secretary and now boss of former-BULS Chair, Tom Guise, well done on the job), we should rise above this natural instinct to further lambast Lib Dem MPs and supporters and resist being a “tribal” party. For this is what the true “new” politics, rising above petty point scoring and reaching out to disenchanted voters and MPs in a hope to win them round. On Thursday, the Lib Dem elite threw away any chance of being progressive. With 70% of Lib Dem party members regarding themselves to be on the left, this could not be a more opportune time build a broad progressive church to argue against the real enemy (so to speak).
Now that optimistic note is out of the way, I can now return to being generally p****d off with the government on the whole. How better than to point out cuts to the number of coastguard control centres. A report recently stated that half of the 19 centres could close. That’s right, half of the centres!! The necessity for deep cuts can be argued for (though I’d have to disagree), but cuts to services that literally save lives is downright disgraceful. These centres probably save hundreds of lives every year in some of the harshest conditions known to man (and woman) kind. So to almost half the number of centres is nothing less than a travesty.
I only hope to god that the Coalition rethinks this particular policy.
Max
Right, I’m not going to really focus directly upon the vote today on tuition fees, enough has been mentioned upon that area recently. Yes, it is disgrace it passed, but what is arguably a bigger disgrace, is the violence that ensued in the capital today.
If you want to change a government’s opinion and policies, the biggest asset you could ever have to achieve this, is public support. We still have that support (well at least a few weeks ago), with 60% opposing the trebling of fees. But as I was debating (so to speak) with BULS’ Former-Fresher Officer, Dan Harrison on facebook, he pointed out the important point of the the police’s unprovoked and aggressive attacks.
Now, this may well have happened (can’t completely say as I’ve been safe in Brum) and it is certainly something that can not be condoned. But, fighting fire with fire just results in, well….more fire. Two wrongs don’t make a right and most importantly of all, don’t stoop to their level. But, far more importantly. If, the police had acted in this way and the students had continued to protest peacefully, the whole news the next morning would’ve focused upon the police’s violence and public sympathy would have begun to swing behind the students. This would have been in very much the same way public and international sympathy swung behind Martin Luther King’s peaceful demonstrations in the 1960s. But what everyone will remember is the burning of rubbish tips, the first police cavalry charge in around twenty years, the attack on the Treasury building and the Supreme Court and the iconic photo of Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall’s car being attacked on the way to the Royal Variety show.
If anything, if the police where acting inappropriately, this would have aided the student’s cause. What has happened is that the chances of the government reconsidering the hike in tuition fees have now diminished.
Max
Great news (well, I think it is personally)! Alan Johnson has decided he will now support a graduate tax. Not only does this mean that Labour can no longer be accused of being disarray over higher education funding, but it means we are presenting the true progressive alternative on higher education funding. A tax that charges more the more you earn, rather than the flat rate level of interest under the proposed system and one that isn’t at completely extortionate levels of £9k a year. Hopefully, this could be the stepping stone to the scrapping of fees entirely in the (hopefully not to distant) future.
And now for the bad news. If you’re not aware already, Educational Maintenance Allowance (EMA) and the Aim Higher Programme are both being scrapped. Now whatever your views on the proposals on the trebling of fees, I will admit, however much I disagree with them, it is an arguable position. But, scrapping EMA and Aim Higher!? These are two bastions of social mobility. Yes I know EMA for one isn’t without its flaws, but to completely scrap it is completely indefensible. When the department that runs EMA messed up a few years ago when I was at College, hundreds of thousands of students nationwide struggle to makes ends meet (really need to look that saying up, could be “meat”) when it came to paper, books, etc or even simply making their way into college.
To put the bad news into context. Even Birmingham University’s Vice-Chancellor, Professor David Eastwood, who was on the Browne committee arguing for higher fees, said at a debate last night that scrapping EMA and Aim Higher was a disgraceful decision. It is an area that has had little coverage given the over-hanging shadow of the tuition fees debate, but it is easily just as important.
Max
The Institute for Government yesterday published what they regarded to be “the most successful policy intervention since 1980″ (http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/pdfs/PSA_survey_results.pdf). So what are the top five you may ask, well I’m pleased to say three out of the top five are directly and solely the result of the last Labour government.
It’s good to know Labour had a large positive and successful impact despite all it’s flaws over the past thirteen years.
Max
As you may remember, following Vince Cable dropping a potential graduate tax, I claimed that Labour must become the new party of students. Well it seems the students agree. Yougov recently published a poll specifically for students on their voting intentions (http://www.today.yougov.co.uk/sites/today.yougov.co.uk/files/YG-Archives-Pol-ST-Students-261110.pdf) and well, it’s one hell of a swing.
In May the figures were amongst students Lib Dems-45%, Labour-24%, Conservatives-21% and others-10%. As of the survey between the 16th-19th November, the new figures are, Lib Dems-15%(-30%), Labour-42%(+18%), Conservatives-26%(+5%) and others-17%(+7%). So that’s right, the Lib Dems have been pushed into a miserable third place amongst students, -30% in the space of 6 months still shocks me though.
Yougov also asked a poll on government approval, which came to a net approval of -64%. 80% of students thought it was wrong for the Lib Dems to go back on their pledge and also 78% of students oppose the trebling of tuition fees to £9000 a year.
These figures are good for Labour, but we certainly should not take them for granted. And let us hope Labour’s policy review produces a graduate tax so we can retain our place as the new champions for students.
Max
There are many positions in society that require an independent stance on party political issues; the civil service, police constables, the Queen and yes the Head of the Bank of England. As you may be aware David Blanchflower, a leading economist and former member of the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee has called on King to resign following remarks released by Wikileaks where he expressed concerns about DC and Gideon’s ability and experience to run the economy prior to the election. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m no fan of King and independence that transcends both public support and an institutes actions and influence is necessary in the Bank of England. But passing remarks is in no way an infringement of this independence. King is perfectly entitled to his own private views as long as it does not impede or politicise his job.
However, one area I’m quite happy to criticise King is that of his own judgement. As late as Northern Rock, King would have rather the bank failed. And as late as last May, King was predicting the economy to grow by 3.5% in 2011, rather than the downgraded 2.1% published by the OBR a few days ago (although admittedly this might’ve been downgraded because the looming age of austerity).
Independent, yes (more or less), sound judgement, we have our doubts.
Max
The BP oil spill was a massive PR disaster for Britain, not least in the hearts and minds of ordinary America.ns. The latest Wikileaks report that Mervyn King described the ConDems as economically “out of their depth” makes us look more like the embarrassing friend or silly little brother than a special partner.
But all is not lost. Tory europhobia likely chimes in quite nicely with a USA that routinely censures EU trade protectionism, and as we know from transatlantic politics the Tories can present themselves as having quite a lot in common with both parties, as they are right-wing but as a rule a lot more moderate and civilised than many Republicans, and by and large approve of Obama’s health reforms.
And what with La Roux storming the charts, Russel Brand marrying showbiz royalty and Vernon Kay, Cat Deeley; Len Goodman, Piers Morgan and maybe even Cheryl Cole presenting primetime shows we might be gradually getting to the stage where, as the guardian puts it, our accent is no longer just for aristocrats and villians.
So where do we stand now? Will the special relationship take us as far as Iran? How will it affect our relationship with Europe? And come 2012 will Palin and Cameron egg each other on to even bigger cuts?
Suzy
Yesterday the Office for Budget Responsibility published it’s new growth and unemployment forecasts. If you’re not aware (given the news is now non-existent on the BBC website), growth forecast for 2010 was raised and job losses were slashed (which we welcome, although for the latter we’re hearing numerous other figures so retain the right to stay sceptical). But, once again, growth expectations for 2011 and 2012 have been lowered and OBR added that the government had a “better than 50%” chance of meeting its mandate to wipe out the structural deficit – the gap between spending and taxes – by 2015-16.
So what are we seeing here? Well the growth figures for this year have been raised due to the action taken by the last government over a number of months, the coalition may claim that this is there doing, but as every economist knows (though I can’t say I’m one) there is always a lag effect between a governments decisions on economic policy and it eventually effecting the real economy. And what of 2011 and 2012? Well this is there own doing, as this is the second time the OBR has slashed its growth forecast due to the policies the Coalition is implementing. Now I don’t think we’re going to see a double-dip recession (though with the continuing economic climate I wouldn’t rule it out) but what we will probably see is Britiain “bumping along the bottom” (if that’s the correct saying). We hope not, but still fear it all the same.
Max
“When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” ~ T. Jefferson.
Julian Assange and his colleagues have acted in a brave and selfless way, persisting in outing secretive documents despite smear campaigns and pressure from the highest levels of government.
Even if Wikileaks’ actions achieve nothing in terms of delaying action against North Korea and Iran, a point has been made. The internet is a weapon for transparency and democracy, and governments have never been more accountable.
Another possible consequence is simply increasing the security of intelligence, which can only be a good thing in a world threatened by terrorists.
Suzy
I know this guy is based in the US, it still has huge relevance to here as well. Due to my own more or less complete economic illiteracy, I thought this could explain on my behalf. Enjoy.
Max
School children at a protest march against the swingeing cuts and rising fees join hands to prevent any more damage being done to a police van that had already almost been tipped over onto other protesters. These girls represent one side of the student protest, and one we can all be proud of.
A more difficult, but very real element is the violence, from those whose anger has been brewing long before any cuts to spending or raising of fees were confirmed. Some young people seem to have joined in partly for the sake of having a go at the police, the everyday face of the state.
Imagine you’d developed a suspicion of authority because your family had been falling through the cracks for decades. Then suddenly EMA arrives, you’re entitled to it, and you decide to go on to 6th form. You feel like maybe things are changing, maybe the government cares about you after all.
Now that it’s being scrapped the damage won’t just be seen in our schools and universities but in our social cohesion, our sense of possibility and social mobility. Dialogue about yobs hijacking middle class protests and disgraceful schoolgirls wreaking havoc is threatening student unity before we’re even getting started.
Our young people need to acknowledge the anger but keep it peaceful, and stay united. We want equal treatment, we should extend it to each other.
Suzy
If you’re too depressed to realise lately, but DC is hoping to attempt measure the happiness of the nation. Now this is certainly something, well, different and I suppose I welcome it as being happy in life is something everyone will aspire to. However, international research has proven that the most “happiest” nations on the planet are those that are the most economically equal, like the Scandinavian countries. So be warned DC, if you do wish to improve the nations, “happiness index”, then an age of austerity isn’t going to be it’s biggest helping hand. Raising VAT, slashing Welfare, trebling tuition fees and everything else in between in the grand age of austerity, is just going to make society more unequal, and consequently, unhappier.
Max
I’m sat in the main auditorium at this year’s Labour Conference at Manchester Central waiting for Ed Miliband to come out and do his first question and answer session as leader of the Labour party. I look around me and it’s not the sight I expected to see. Coming to conference as a new member, I guess I didn’t know really what to expect, in truth, but I got the impression that it wasn’t the place for ordinary members to come to: everyone is in suits! And there was certainly nobody I could see below the age of 25 – quite odd considering I’d been invited by Young Labour as a new member to come along and meet Ed Miliband at some point during the day.
I ignored this feeling and shortly Ed made his way onto the stage with comedian, actor, mad man (for running 43 marathons in 50 days) Eddie Izzard! Now I’d found out were all the young members are, they were all on stage sat behind Ed and Ed. And this turned out to be the theme of the session. It was about grassroots labour for Mili E.
I’m aware that there has been some criticism of Ed in last month or so (and not just from the usual right-wing press may I say!) focused on his lack of voice and of a true alternative to the coalitions devastating cuts. At conference, however, I could tell he knew what he was doing. He understands the task in hand and has a rough idea of how to succeed in it. What he might be lacking is the specific ideas.
And this isn’t a bad thing. I’ll tell you why…
After the Q&A, Ed came along to a room to the side of the hall where 100 new young members had gathered. Also there was the general secretary, Ray Collins. After a short speech by Ed, he dug straight in and wanted to hear our opinions. That simple. He wanted us to highlight the issues young members have. A lot was discussed and as each idea was discussed it felt like real progress was happening right there.
We need a leader that listens. We need a party that listens. Because I think listening became the main factor in the election defeat. Gordon just wasn’t able to listen. If your government doesn’t listen then you aren’t going to vote for them again. Nick and Dave fooled people by saying that they were going to listen to them. People bought it. But now it appears they lied about this (shock much?).
We need members that can shape this party and determine which way it goes. If everything goes to plan, we will win the next general election. It won’t just be Ed that wins the next general election, it will be the unity of the members.
We need to join together and throw out the ‘new labour’ arguments. Every one of us has a slightly different view on past affairs and even current ones. We are never going to agree on everything but let’s agree on the values we share: the ones that protect every member of society; the ones that insure fairness! Because that’s why I joined the party in May.
I don’t think this branding of ‘Red Ed’ is going to stick. I’m personally hoping he’s going to become ‘The People’s Ed’. The leader that actually listens. And I think that’s all we need him to be. Because we can do the rest…
And if it does all start at grassroots level, then it all starts at BULS as well!
I know I’m ready for the fight, are you?
Oliver Cosentino, BULS Member
I suppose I just wanted to share some thoughts about the royal family and it’s relation to modern Britain brought about by the engagement of Prince William and Kate Middleton. Unsurprisingly excited, the Express and Mail gushed about the possibility of another “people’s princess”. There was even talk of how the rise of a “commoner” to the giddy heights of Queen-to-be demonstrated our “classless society”.
Nonsense. Kate is the product of Marlborough College, a £30,000 a year boarding school. The truth is that this a world away from the life experiences of the majority of people. A school colleague of Kate’s, Clarissa Sebag-Montefiore, claims that such lavish schooling doesn’t make people any less like the ordinary chap at your bog standard comprehensive. ‘Like other teenagers, Marlburians…experimented with Drugs, absconded on Saturday nights to go clubbing, smoked, had sex, and snuck spirits into the school by pouring them into shampoo bottles’. Well thank goodness for that! It’s good to know they’ve experienced the harsh realities of a pauper’s existence!
It has also emerged that Prince Charles has received £667,000 from the Ministry of Justice for the privilege of keeping Dartmoor prison on his land, and £677,000 from the Ministry of Defence for allowing the army onto his land for training. I’m appalled that Charles is getting this massive pay out, especially with massive cuts tearing apart the public sector and hitting the private sector too.
Now I’m no ardent republican. I have no problem with having a monarchy, although I’m not convinced by the idea that they are a good value investment for the country. I think tourists would be even more likely to visit the UK if they could actually get into some of the Queens palaces. But when nothing is safe from the vicious Tory cuts can we really justify hand outs to the Royals?
Jake Lambert
The slashing of the Schools Sports Partnerships followed the now familiar structure of this governments cuts announcements. First, we were told that there would be a new dawn for competitive sport in our schools, with ‘Olympics’ style events. Then, they slyly mention that they will cut the £162million that funds the development of sport in our schools. State school teachers, as always under the Tories, are expected to produce more without support.
Under the last Tory government only 1 in 4 kids were getting the minimum level of physical education in the school curriculum. Under Labour, the schools sports partnerships played a vital role in both bringing sport to all and developing competitive sport in this country. Their demise will not only leave many coaches and organisers who having devoted their careers to improving British sport unemployed, but also remove the funding which is essential to its development.
As England goalkeeper David James writes in the Observer today, we lament the gulf in class between our national football side and that of other major nations, but we have just 2,769 Uefa-qualified coaches. Compare that to Spain who have 23,995, Italy 29,420, Germany 34,970 and France 17,588. Grass roots sport, in all areas is gradually growing to the level of our European neighbours, but the Con-Dem coalition’s moves will cut this off before its had a chance to blossom. Their policy makes a mockery of claims about a legacy from the Olympics and our possible World Cup in 2018.
Gove’s sports policy demonstrates exactly what is wrong with the coalition’s education policies generally. Elite sport is not the most valuable role of sport in our country. Sport provides an avenue for many of the most disadvantaged young people in our country to interact, to communicate, and to excel. Good teachers impart values through sport and these can reach those who are forgotten by traditional education. Driven by a business obsessed ideology, this government sees the cost of everything and the value of nothing. Education has economic benefits, but that is not why its important.
Jake Lambert, BULS Secretary
How I voted as the Campaigning and Political mini-forum representative on the Guild Council on the 18/11/2010
In the interest of transparency I have decided to publish how I voted in the motions at Guild Council on Thursday. All items listed below were the only ones which were starred, which means they got debated in council, the un- starred ones got passed automatically.
Motion: Cuts and Fees vs. Motion: Birmingham Students say NO to cuts and fees (later carried)
I voted for the 2nd motion, (Birmingham Students say NO to cuts and fees)
These two items were taken together, in the interest of sparking debate within Guild Council. This is the NUS line and keeps representatives of the Guild in University meetings and committees, which if we directly challenged the university on things like the Brown review, we would not have a voice in. Better to be inside the meeting arguing students case than being a fringe party on the other side of the door; shouting not being heard.
Motion: Changing the name of the HSBC room to the Harvey Milk room (carried)
I voted in favour
This motion got amended slightly to include the room being used for student purposes in the future and to withdraw the clause to denoting some kind of capitalist agenda with calling it the HSBC room in the first place. It was called the HSBC room because no one had put forward an alternative name. It seemed sensible and it allows a great man to be honoured in our Guild.
Motion: Ethical Investment (not carried)
I voted against this motion
This motion proposed to include tobacco, alcohol, gambling, arms manufactures, and pornography into the guilds ethical investment policy, excluding the Guild investing its surplus in these industries. I thought students would find it hypocritical of the Guild to sell a lot of these items within the union and then have an investment policy against that. With arms manufactures as well, some students with engineering degrees etc will be looking to work in these sorts of legitimate industries and the guild would then be hypocritical to let them on campus in the jobs fair for example.
Motion: Guild Council frequency
I voted against this motion.
This motion called for more Guild Council meetings in the term similar to what the Guild Council did before the referendum. I voted against this motion because it would be contradicting the referendum where nearly 2000 students voted in favour of changing the structure of Guild Council to have less formal meetings replaced by open forums where any student can come along and express their issues and concerns. This is to give the average student more of a voice in the Guild, in theory. I think students would like to let this policy bed in, no matter what there view on the referendum; seeing as there have only been one round of open forums as of yet, it would be premature in before changing anything.
Motion: Amendments to the suppliers list (carried)
I voted against this motion.
This motion called for the RA’s suppliers list to become a recommended list rather than a mandatory list of companies that they can work with. This is to drive down costs and make sure RA’s are not being manipulated by companies. I voted against this motion although it went through because it was evident there had been problems with the suppliers list previously but the officer team seemed to have reformed the list prior to the motion going to Guild Council. Reforms such as if a company can give a cheaper cost; they can be placed on the list instead of another etc. This motion might be subject to legal issues in the future due to the University demanding things like a mandatory suppliers list in financial audits.
Motion: Disability policy (carried)
I voted in favour.
This bill was amended and re-named the mobility and access policy. The motion calls for the Guild to establish a mobility and access policy working group, to monitor access to the Guild and its events and to ensure all disabled facilities are working.
If anyone has any issues with the way that I voted please get in touch at the committee e-mail address or my number 0752513519.
Full detailed minutes of the meeting will be published on the guild website soon.
Remember that know your world is next week on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday.
Sam Murphy
I’m not going to lie, I personally have not been hit that hard by the recession and by the cuts (yet for the latter). But, credit where credit is due, for once the DC has made some sound moves. Lord Young’s comments are completely out of touch, low interest rates are of little concern for those struggling to make ends meet (or meat, not sure which) on minimum wage or a part of the 2.5 million (ish) unemployed. This incident alone does not equate to DC being out of touch, in fact, this shows humility for once (though I can’t say the same for a lot of everything else he stands for).
Other good news, DC has also decided to take his ‘vanity photographer’ off the Civil Service payroll (although it should not have been on it in the first place, we do welcome the U-turn). Also, we welcome the news of aid to the Irish Republic. They are one of our closest trading partners (and the only country to share a land border with the UK). This is in our, and Europe’s interest to help out Ireland (though I do feel and note the sheer irony and contradiction on part of the Tories in regard to government bailouts, which is effectively happening here given their own abrupt u-turn on the UK’s own bank bail out two years ago). But, don’t forget DC, Ireland is in this mess because they went down the road of austerity measures two years ago, take heed of the warning in our backyard.
Max
Mainly for the comments, but also because it’s politically significant as long as this country is a kingdom. We wish them all the best.
Suzy
The University of Kent has tonight voted down a suggestion to abolish the Men’s Officer on the Union’s strong team.
The official NUS women’s movement has a problem with this.
The point of liberation positions is that those who are normally under-represented get a chance to be heard. In the case of women’s officer it’s also about promoting sexual equality, disproving stereotypes and encouraging a post-structuralist view of gender. It’s an issue of mutual respect.
Men’s Unions formed within the NUS have typically been reactionary irreverent organisations, including one that included “playing pool and drinking beer” among its written aims.
With LGBTQ organisations doing a brilliant job at representing the gay, bisexual and transgender men out there, it seems unnecessary to require a separate men’s officer. All we can hope is that the elected man will work with the women’s officer to promote gender equality.
Suzy
Ever heard of the website called “LabourList”? No, (forgive me if you have) well it is a grass-roots website, in which nearly all Labour members can contribute to and is essentially the BULS’ website’s “big daddy” and a true bench mark for all Labour affiliated blogs (yes, even the mighty BULS blog is humbled by it’s activity and quality). We should have a link somewhere, but in case you can’t find it- http://www.labourlist.org/
Anyway, a recent survey was published (http://www.labourlist.org/labour-divided-over-av-state-of-the-party—november-2010) on Labour members views on what route the party should take next. The biggest divisive issue had to be support for the AV referendum (42%-against, 33%-for). The next closest issue that divided as much would have to be whether to have primaries to select Labour candidates (for-47%, against-35%) in which I can easily say, isn’t the biggest issue facing the UK.
Although, there were a number of policy areas that Labour members were presented with on whether they would like Labour to pursue more closely. Topping the polls with 78.7% agreement, was taking a harder line on tax avoidance and evasion, which I think is brilliant. Too long has the media focused on “benefit scroungers” which in comparison is a tiny fraction to what the UK looses through tax avoidance and evasion. Also high on the list came rebuilding Labour’s reputation on the economy (64.4%), a National Care Service (62.6% and probably my personal favourite on the list) and making the robin hood tax a reality (61.1%). Coming near the bottom saw online referendums (18.5%), shake up of secondary education, teaching by ability rather than age (21.1%) and employee ownership (31.4%, a mild disappointment personally).
What to make of these figures then? Well one I missed out was that, Ed Miliband, Harriet Harman and the rest of the Shadow Cabinet are still relatively supported (Miliband a mere 12% think he’s doing a poor job, 72.9% think Harman is doing a good job, etc). Also, 65.3% of Labour members believe Labour should adopt an alternative economic model and plan to that of the Coalition’s, which is certainly imperative. Well, it seems that what Labour members want a detailed and clear plan to take on the Coalition (rather than make the mistake of making yourself to vague like Cameron did, which cost him a majority) and an emphasis on what traditionally Labour does best. Taking on the social injustices of the abusive rich in our society and our great compassion, with the hopeful creation of an institution to rival the work of the NHS, a National Care Service.
Max
And wow, my first somewhat optimistic blog in a while. Forgive me, still adjusting to my first ever government that on the whole I’m generally p***ed off with.
It’s the fear of childbirth, and it’s on the rise.
Some women are refusing to have any more children, begging for caesareans, or demanding heavy dosing of powerful pain-relieving drugs. Others are preaching about their natural births, boasting about the 18-hour marathon that was their third experience, or scoffing at those who are deemed too “posh”, too “lazy” or now, to “scared” to push. The official view of Dr Tracey Johnstone, a consultant in foetal maternal medicine at Birmingham Women’s hospital, is for women to simply “realise that childbirth is painful” and suck it up.
Why do we do this to ourselves? We should rejoice in the medicinal progress that allows us to have safe, healthy, and yes relatively painless births, not try to out-compete each other for ever more natural and gruesome experiences.
Becoming a mother is scary enough. The first couple of hours aren’t going to make a difference to how much you love and care for your child for the rest of its life. Pregnant women have too many psychological, nutritional and emotional hoops to jump through already. Let’s stop judging and preaching, and for God’s sake let them eat painkillers.
Suzy
I’m beginning to become quite fond of Paul O’Grady now.
Max
There’s always someone who takes it too far. I do it far too often, but less said about that the better. The march against the proposed raise in tuition fees to £9000 a year was very well planned and timed for, DC was out of the country in China so Cleggy was taking questions at PMQs instead meaning he would be ridiculed for his U-turn on tuition fees. As for the vast majority of those who went there it was a very successful event, peaceful and making a very good point (would explain further but I’m back home up north and consequently not there, so I wouldn’t know the details).
But, someone always has to spoil the moment, someone has go too far. It is one of the cruel realities of life and the protest today in London was no exception. It was estimated by the NUS that 30k-40k students converged on London today, but it is estimated that mere 1k people were involved in the incident at the Millbank Tower.
Now don’t get me wrong, I can very much sympathise with the idea of smashing CCHQ. This is in very much the same way any Tory might sympathise with the idea of smashing up Labour’s HQ. But, it is certainly something neither side would condone. What happened here today was that a small number have completely ruined what would’ve been a peaceful demonstration, with even one ‘save EMA’ campaigner on the news giving the example of meeting an OAP who was out there on the behalf of her Grandchildren.
Unfortunately, what everyone will remember and what the headline papers will be tomorrow, is the grotesque violence seen at the Millbank Tower. In fact, it was widely regard that those at Millbank Tower, were not students per say but rather a hijacking by various groups such as Anarchists, far-left Socialists and the oh-so subtle SWP.
We all know that one person who doesn’t know the limits. And today, they did it again.
Max
I often find it difficult to answer when people ask me why there’s a Q in the University of Birmingham’s liberation association. This comic explains way better than I can. Everyone should be represented.
Suzy
“OH SHUT UP!!” are the words I shouted at my laptop screen upon seeing this article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11719438. No, not at Harriet Harman, but at the ludicrously stupid Labour MPs, calling on her to resign after the events of former MP and Minister, Woolas’ expulsion from the Commons.
Harman disowned Woolas for an extremely good reason, he lied, not only that but knowingly, directly to his own constituents whose votes he was trying to win over. If we are trying to represent the true “new” politics, it’s vital that we do not tolerate the “old” and all the negativity and petty points scoring that came with it. Woolas’ decision was his own and yes the Tories may have lied and exaggerated themselves (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11614602), but as the old saying goes, two wrongs don’t make a right. We certainly do not have to stoop to their level.
Max
Would you pay £9k a year to go to University? I would’ve had serious doubts about coming to Birmingham University if that was the case then. Now many reading this may turn around and say “but didn’t Labour treble tuition fees?”, “didn’t Labour start the Browne report?”. Did we do those things, yes. Am I going to blog here and defend them, absolutely not.
However, it is now irrelevant what happened ten years ago, what matters now is what happens, well, now and in the immediate and long-term future. And what we’re seeing is the trebling of fees (more or less) to create the most expensive state University system in the world!! (Given the likes of the USA’s Universities are in the private not state sector).
Shame, shame on you Cleggy. We all know it’s tempting to say whatever you want when you’re the third party and have no chance of winning power. But given everyone knew that the most likely outcome of the general election was going to be a hung Parliament there was every chance you would have to compromise on this policy. A cast iron guarantee for the abolition of tuition fees was a ridiculously stupid given the context of the election. Don’t worry, I want tuition fees scrapped in the long term as much as any average student (favouring a Graduate tax in the meantime), but don’t even attempt to justify or pitifully dress this hike as “progressive”.
Finally, shame on you the Conservative party for forcing the Lib Dems and more importantly, future students into this. You rightly once opposed tuition fees, where has that once fleeting soul disappeared to?
Max
As well as remembering the past and honouring the dead Armistice Day is a great opportunity to look at the role of the Army in today’s world.
Our army has come a long way since the Armistice. Cooperation, sustainability and peace keeping are the new buzzwords, and really have been put into practice, as evidenced by the new deal with France and the ongoing efforts in Afghanistan.
Oxfam estimates that of the 20 million troops currently employed globally, only 150,000 are employed in real peace keeping. Annually $120 billion is spent on global aid, while $1600 billion is spent on global defence.
As Britain struggles with the legacy of Iraq and the justification of war, it’s worth reassessing our priorities on the causes of conflict and the effect our actions have on citizens the world over.
Suzy
It seems not only is Cameron intent of having aspect of his day recorded vainly through his own personal photographer and cameraman, but apparently this is not enough, so what’s needed? Even more of DC’s chums, in this case, two personal stylists from the Tory party, one for DC and the other for his wife. My my, as I keep saying, how very “old” politics. He’s so focused with airbrushing his image it’s irrelevant what the message is.
Max
Stupid question right? They hate it, everyone knows that. Or at least Stephen Fry seems to.
He recently voiced the opinion that straight men feel that women are “disgusted” with them, and the latter only engage in sexual acts in order to secure and maintain relationships.
Is this a regressive step? Historically the ideal woman has been one without sexual desire, one who will remain loyal to her husband and bear only his children. Stephen Fry is paying a massive compliment to an entire gender in the eyes of organised religion and archaic morals.
So that´s alright then. But where does it leave straight men? Or, supposing there is such a thing, lesbians? Their ideal partners are “disgusted” by them, and since there are no “straight cruising areas” they have to put up with relationships in order to secure regular sex.
Cruising areas have chiefly arisen within the gay community because of a lack of provision for more traditional ways of finding a partner, such as nightclubs. Now that there is, in this country at least, a thriving LGBT nightlife, many gay men and women will choose to meet in a bar rather than “a churchyard” or “Hampstead Heath”.
Fry said “I feel sorry for straight men”. I do too, not because they can´t get women to have sex with them, but because the system is wrong.
The rules of society dictate that women are not allowed to enjoy sex or access it freely. They must wait to be wined, dined and otherwise spoiled, unless someone extraordinarily good looking/rich/popular comes along and impresses them enough. The effort and expense involved with all this leads to less sex for straight men and straight women, it becomes more of a big deal when it does happen, the resulting pressure means it happens even less and we comfort ourselves with the idea that women are frigid and men are rats.
Suzy
As you may be aware, I’ve always been a somewhat of a critic of the Coalition’s version of “new” politics, often sounding, feeling and looking like much of the “old”. Well he’s some more of it!
We’re all very aware of Cameron’s (DC) “Webcameron” (that bastion link to the plebs), well the woman who organised it along with the Tories personal photographer of DC have both been added to the Civil Service Payroll on a short term contract. Now at times of large austerity, isn’t it a tad unfair and hypocritical that the PM decides to employ quite literally, some of his mates? It’s irrelevant whether they followed Civil Service procedure and code correctly, the message is blatantly clear, austerity for you and new jobs for my chums.
It’s also the fact that when asked about this at PMQs by Miliband, DC replied ”engage in the issues”……..you’ll find this is an issue now DC of hypocracy. Yes, fair enough you’ve cut the communications budget, but it still doesn’t excuse your actions. Think DC, people can tell the difference between the “new” and “old” politics.
Max
Cherie Blair´s sister, the journalist and activist Lauren Booth, has recently converted to Islam. I´ve been following her progress with interest through her articles and interviews.
Her conversion has been one of overwhelming spiritual experience rather than intellectual conviction, but she is slowly working through the Qurán and learning to pray five times a day. She refers to lifestyle changes as a welcome relief, her children are enthusiastic about her new modest dress, her father´s alcoholism makes her more than happy to give up drinking, and her ongoing divorce makes it fairly easy to avoid dating.
Her political interest remain centred in the Freedom for Palestine campaign and in changing the way the West looks at Islamic societies. So it´s a shame that she´s brought feminism into the ring to defend herself against media attacks, because I don´t think she understands much about it.
Leaving aside her jibes about the cultural ignorance of white middle class women and women who consider themselves “liberated” [sic] but spend a long time on their appearance, she declares that most of our ideas about women´s roles in the Middle East and Islam are entirely wrong, and biased media coverage has led to this false image of opression.
While the Bible and Torah, when followed to the letter, result in reduced women´s rights, the Qurán goes further, in condoning disciplinary action towards and a form of ownership over wives. Naturally as an educated wealthy single woman living in a mainly secular society she is unlikely to suffer from any ill effects of these guidelines, but her conversion cannot be regarded as progress for the western woman.
Her impression of equality in the societies she visited fail to convince. She describes with delight her experience of bossy or cheeky behaviour from women as evidence of liberation, in the same way that someone mugged in Edgbaston might talk about moving to Ladywood. Her anecdotal evidence about women students and men who do housework count for nothing as soon as the going gets tough.
In everyday life we don´t notice our freedoms. In most countries rights don´t become obvious until we find ourselves without money, protection or physical strength. As soon as we´re out of our comfort zone it becomes blindingly obvious that without the sexual, legal, human rights that women enjoy in Britain and the social norm of being able to do things alone without suspicion, we are not truly safe, or truly respected.
Suzy
Many of you will have heard about the 490,000 job losses in the public sector from the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). But what if that number is wrong? The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) has predicted that in fact things are about to get worse. From the spending cuts and the rise in VAT, they predict around 1.6 million job losses in the next five years from the public and private sector (900,000-Private, 750,000-Public).
Yes, that’s right, 1.6 million! Of course it’s not without it’s flaws, Chief Economist at the CIPD, John Philpot, predicted unemployment would reach 3 million, thankfully the action Labour took in it’s last months in office has so far prevented this. But, 1.6 million!! This without doubt destroys any idea that the private sector will magically be able to create around 2 million jobs and is clear indicator to Cleggy, DC and Gideon, that you should not have your plans firmly nailed to the mast.
Max
Some questions for BULS, since I can’t ask y’all in the flesh…
Was the Rally to Restore Sanity a waste of time when people should have been spending their time campaigning on actual issues such as the conflict in Afghanistan?
Can the Tea Party movement be separated from misogyny and islamophobia?
Is the Tea Party movement grass roots in any credible way?
What will happen to the economy if the Democrats lose control of the House?
Is the Guardian perpetrating a witchhunt against O´Donnell?
To what extent has “I`m just like you” come to mean “I`m ignorant, naive and gullible” and “common sense” come to mean “the literal word of the Bible” in middle America?
Which pose a greater threat to the US – Christian extremists or Muslim extremists?
And finally…
How much will Obama have to compromise following the shift in power?
Suzy
Autumn 2010 Campaigning and Political miniforum minutes 19.10.10
Attendees:
Matt Lamb – VPSAD
Jo Ormond – Student Activities coordinator
Benjamin Mee – Atheists, Agnostics and Humanists
Labour Students – Sam Murphy
United Nations – Anna-Kaisa Polojarvi
Socialist society – Vicky Taylor
Debating society – Rachael Twumasi
Take Back Parliament – Charlotte Galpin
Matt explained that mini forums are a chance for groups of similar interests to discuss issues, ask questions and be given information from the Guild.
Open forums have replaced Guild council and are a less formal way for groups to bring issues/motions/feedback to the VPSAD. Two representatives from each miniforum will be elected to attend Guild Council on behalf of the miniforum
Student Groups: Thursday 21st October, at 6.30pm; venue to be confirmed
19th Guild – 5.30pm,– for any issues relating to the Guild as an organisation and/or building
20th Education and University– 5.30pm,– for academic issues
21st Sports– 4.30pm,– for anyone involved in sport, at any level from occasional gym user to club captain.
22nd Welfare– 4.00pm,– any welfare issues.
Socialist – Focus on Fees and would like as many societies as possible to get involved. Providing transport to the Education Action Network national conference and rally if anyone wants to join us 31st October. (Matt also suggested getting in touch with Rob Hunter VPEA about fees campaigns).
UN – Have a yearly theme related to the Millennium Development goals. Have events for climate event in Mexico and Stop Violence Against Women day.
Take Back Parliament – We’re a new group and we campaign to change the voting system. At the moment we’re focusing on getting membership and have a couple of events lined up.
(Matt mentioned that the box office space outside Spar is now bookable by student groups and is an ideal place to promote your society / have a bake sale etc. Book through reception.)
Labour – Have an event planned with Lib Dems, a trip to Brussels for European Parliament. Want to start a living wage campaign (Take Back Parliament would like to work with Labour on voting reform.)
Atheists, Agnostics and Humanists – Have a screening of The Life of Brian on Thursday, also have events with Aston Humanists and Birmingham Humanists. Have had some problems with paperwork with uni room bookings – Matt asked for details to be emailed to him so he could follow it up.
Debating – Had a public debate on the day of the Browne review. Also have a debate on Thursday ‘This House would abolish the Monarchy’. Also have debates coming up on Afghanistan and God. Please email us with any suggestions for debates that you would like.
Standing candidates:
Anna-Kaisa Polojarvi
Sam Murphy
Rachel Twumais
RON
Brief summary of speeches:
Anna
Sam
Rachael
Sam Murphy and Rachael Twumasi elected
Anna – a what’s on calendar on the website with everything that’s going on across campus would be really good
Matt – I am on the working group to rebuild website and this is definitely something we want. We are also trying to get some temporary measures in place.
I’m sure you are all aware of the proposed housing benefit cap proposed under the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). Labour officials were quick to criticise the policy as a ‘cleansing’ of the poor from the cities, much to the outrage of the Coalition. But, it seems we are not the only ones saying these borderline truths, London’s Mayor, Conservative Boris Johnson, today said he will not accept “Kosovo-style social cleansing” of the capital due to the cap in housing benefits.
Firstly, this is taking a step further than Labour did in its description, but it shows that those in charge of the actual cities will see the true mantra and devastation this will cause. London Councils estimates 82,000 families could be made homeless. 82,000 families(!), not people, families. And that’s not including, Birmingham, Manchester, Newcastle, Liverpool, Sheffield, Leeds and many more cities. Now credit where credit is due, (even though I do want Ken back as Mayor) I totally agree with Johnson on this issue. You know when these plans are heartless and a part of a ‘cleansing’ programme when even the the Tory’s own London Mayor opposes them.
Some very good ideas me thinks.
Max
Today was published the latest growth figures of the third quarter between July and September. 0.8% which was twice as high as the expected 0.4%. Now, don’t forget though, this is still primarily due to the last Labour government, the Coalition had been in power for four months and this is before the CSR. I’m going to say that the final quarter will mainly be the cause of the last government as it will take a while for the CSR to effect, so anything that happens in 2011 will be the credit or failure of the Coalition as the CSR begins to bite. However, most economists are still arguing that the economy is still fragile, so don’t place your bets yet, and it is still warning for the governments deficit reduction plan, don’t be nailed to the mast.
Max
Since day one, the Coalition’s economic plans have been argued over their fairness and their progressiveness (if that’s even a word). We’re all very familiar with the IFS and their take, but I thought it be more appropriate to focus upon the Coalition’s shifting reasons for their policies “fairness”. To begin with it was the idea that the burden of the cuts were to fall upon the higher earners (though of course it turned out to fall upon more on the poorest, women, the ethnic minorities, etc, but I won’t go into that again), but recently, Cleggy in particular shifted the argument to that this crisis shouldn’t be left for our children and that they shouldn’t bear the brunt. This argument in itself is a reasonable enough, but that of course assumes that your children are NOT effected by the problems caused by the current generation’s problems in the future AND now.
This was something I realised the Coalition was failing (again) upon when a very angry bloke (youngish and I think he was ginger, rather aggressive to about 19 mins in) pointed out the sheer contradiction between this argument and reality on last Thursday’s question time. The IFS worked it out to show that the average family with children will have 6.7% drop in income compared to 2.7% with families with no children, that’s a whole 4%! This is all from cuts in tax credits for poorer families, scrapping child benefits which will hit those whose families are just above the £45k threshold when one parent stays at home, an actual real term drop in investment into schools (due to an increased number of pupils), scrapping the building schools for the future programme and most relevant for us students, raising tuition fees to £7k a year. Cleggy once agreed and respected the IFS, but how times change and how politicians (who supposedly represent “new” politics) often disregard their once respectable views to justify their actions.
Max
Ok, I realise that I am lowering the tone of the fair-minded, considered and erudite blog before I even begin, and possibly embarrassing everybody by my bad rhyming and song choice, but we’re students people! Plus #CleggCovers is a big meme and suggestions have been rolling in from all sorts of young Labour bigwigs. So yeah, bear with 
Mr. Brightside by the Killers rewritten
VERSE
Coming up in the polls and I was doing just fine
Put my honour on hold, it’s coalition time
Got myself in a fix, guess gold and blue shouldn’t mix
It’s the new politics, it’s the new politics
It’s the spending review, and we’re cutting like hell
Is that bulls**t you hear? Is that bullsh**t you smell?
Letting all of you down, know you used to agree
This is Cameron town, and I’m his mini-me
BRIDGE
Then, promises get broken
Watch me squirm
Melting away like yellow snow
Our manifesto
CHORUS
Growing doubts
Kids and women losing out
Disregard all kinds of proof
Student fees are through the roof
But that’s how it has to be
Osborne’s at the treasury
All your hopes and dreams have died
You’ve just been Cleggified.
Suzy
In my capacity as BULS’ tweeter in cheif I have started following Nick Griffin, and my suspicions about him have been confirmed straight from the horse’s mouth. The BNP is “bewildered” by its responsibilities in Europe. Nick himself delights in causing trouble, but is singularly slippery on facts. He expects others to listen, but does not reply to others who comment or engage in any kind of conversation with anyone on twitter. Perhaps inevitable when 90% of the population hate his guts.
He also usefully reminded me that yesterday was Trafalgar Day, and started me thinking about patriotism in its many guises. Being in Germany I find it a very interesting topic, because I sometimes feel as though I am experiencing more than homesickness for my friends and family – an actual longing for England itself.
Where does this feeling come from? Why do I leap to defend the weather or cuisine when I know it is better in other countries? Why do I seek to protect the concept of Britishness against jokes and slander? I’m poud of our liberties, I’m grateful for our relative economic security and safety from attack. I love the infrastructure and the accents, the music and the telly, the literature and the arts. But Germany’s not bad either. I could have been born here, and lived a very similar life. I wouldn’t be disappointed with Australia or Greece. As the late Linda Smith observed, most people who are proud of being British are taking credit for something they took no part in forming. No one alive now was alive to invent Britain. Most patriots were born and live here, so to call themselves British is not an achievement.
Nick Griffin’s attacks on foreigners in Britain and Brussels seek to include people like me, who want to feel proud and superior, who can define themselves as British if nothing else, who get excited by history and intrigued by ancestry. But it’s too easy. Patriotism is a luxury we don’t need. Defending the things that Britain does well individually is brilliant. But this concept of there being something more, an essence that runs through all of us and through the place itself is crazy. We see it taken to extremes world-wide, with broad hysteria on immigration, globalisation and EU integration. With MSPs preaching independence at all costs, with the Tea Party movement’s covert xenophobia, with the PKK committing violence in the name of the as-yet-unrecognised Kurdistan, with neo-Nazis in Berlin.
The British media heaps scorn with alacrity on any politician appearing to be less than delighted about their homeland. In the case of Gisela Stuart I more than once had to talk round voters who were unwilling to “let the Germans in” by electing her. Clegg was vilified for his foreign wife and europhile credentials. We have an unhealthy obsession with this second-hand pride.
The human race is entitled to liberty, good health and financial stability. It is not entitled to patriotism.
Suzy
Last June, around 48 hours after the announcement of the ‘emergency’ budget the well respected Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) slammed the Coalition’s claim that the budget was ‘progressive’. It seems that the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) has smashed all records to be proved false; this time it only took the IFS around about 24 hours to slam the claim, again, that the CSR was regressive.
Many Tories last time around were quick to argue that the IFS is in the pocket of Labour, which is hugely untrue given they were highly critical of Labour’s policies on Child Poverty. And if anything shows how regressive the nature of the CSR is you look no further than Carl Emmerson, acting Director of the IFS: “Our analysis continues to show that, with the notable exception of the richest 2%, the tax and benefit components of the fiscal consolidation are, overall, being implemented in a regressive way.”.
There will come a point in the Coalition’s future where they will no longer able to say “this isn’t our mess” and “there’s no other option” because no, there is always an alternative and at some point in the not too distant future the public will realise that these are not “Labour’s cuts” but rather those chosen by the Coalition at a rate and speed they chose.
Finally, the only slim claim that the reason for the Coalition’s economic policies being fair was also destroyed yesterday. Both DC and Cleggy have argued that it’s not fair to leave the debt onto the next generation. Apart from raising tuition fees to £7k a year it is now revealed that despite the Pupil Premium for the poorest of pupils at primary and secondary schools, 43% of pupils in less deprived parts of the country would be hit by 5% cuts or more. That seems to me like that the debt is being shifted onto the next generation.
Max
I admire Laurie Penny. I really do. But her latest blog on the New Statesman is counterproductive. Labour are NOT taking this lying down. Labour is the natural home for those who have been left out in the cold by the cuts, but more generally everyone who hasn’t been taken in by the talk of necessity must unite to oppose the spending review.
As the official opposition ours must be the loudest and most credible voice, the most potent ideas in creating alternatives, the bravest actions defending those who need to be defended. We must work together with the Lib Dem rebels when they emerge, with the unions, with the sensible media, the organisations facing decimation and the local councils. Because the Tories’ real mantra is not “we’re all in this together” but “Divide and Rule”.
It’s a clever strategy because stricken groups have started thinking “it’s us or them”. So the owners of art galleries might argue their case at the expense of theatres or museums. The NHS can campaign as being more essential that higher education. Those struggling to get onto the housing ladder can blame all those “benefit cheats” they’ve been hearing about.
Meanwhile we’ve been “benefitting” from a little Lib-Dem devolution in which local councils can decide exactly which services to cut from their budgets. This may lead to competition, but is more likely to lead to poor management and bankruptcy.
From division by group in society to division by area of the country the coalition has got us covered. But the protests are just beginning…
Suzy
Osborne announced £81 billion reduction in public expenditure
As George Osborne ploughed through the list of ‘efficiency savings’, it seemed as though he struggled to iterate what he was orchestrating. Almost with a guilty conscience, he reached for his glass of water after every departmental shrinkage plan. The monetary arm of the state is no longer the source of promise that has rescued those trapped on the peripheries of society, it has now turned away. With this it has put the futures of a generation at risk:
The list is endless. To take £81 billion out of the budget through depreciating government spending in the vital services and help that our society necessitates over the next four years is without question showing a complete disregard for the poorest and most vulnerable in society. It is widening the gulf between the top of the social ladder and the bottom, and it recklessly diminishes the future prospects of those not even born yet. And as the Tory backbenchers praised and cheered their man’s vast Spending Review it got me thinking- this ties in with traditional and recurring Tory principles- to hold the poorest at arm’s length, and let the rich get richer.
Kieran
So here it is, after over 5 months of build up, the spending review is here, of course we don’t know everything that Gideon is going to cut yet (and I’m not going to cover the spending review fully, Kieran said he would do that). Average spending cuts of 25% to most Whitehall departments (with some suffering 40%) over 4 years and around 500,000 job losses over that same period (which the private sector will magically pick up after).
The Coalition has for a long period constantly lambasted the public that the scale and speed of these cuts “is necessary and unavoidable” and yes admittedly we’ve been stuck in a leadership election but it’s now our job to say, “No! There is always an alternative”. The Coalition has often used the comparison between a household budget and that of the structural deficit, and in this case we should do the same (bear with me), as when a family goes into debt, yes they need to balance the books but you never see a house do everything they can to reduce the debt as quickly as they possibly can by selling the furniture, the kitchen, the TV, etc until you leave the house completely bare.
Even though I sincerely doubt it, I do hope the Lib Dems will have softened the blow Gideon is going to make, but again, hugely unlikely.
Max
On the eve (almost) of the spending review, I thought it would be appropriate to have some fun out of the misery Gideon Osborne (or Boy George, take your fancy) is going to make with all of us dismayed as he throws any chance of recovery out of the window. Enjoy.
Max
In an end to the cosy “Multi-Kulti” rhetoric of recent years Angela Merkel has made the sudden announcement that it doesn’t work. That multiculturalism in Germany has failed, both in terms of community cohesion and economic reality. Her comments come on the back of statements made by her partner in the coalition, the leader of the CSU which specifically represents South Germany, who focussed on cultural purity and the higher birth rates among of immigrants. The comments seem to have been well received, with many Germans (up to 30%) agreeing that the country is “overrun” with immigrants.
In Berlin I’ve seen multiculturalism working. I’ve seen international art on the streets and in galleries, different cultures participating in sports together, learning and teaching together, eating together. Berlin has always thrived from being a real metropolis. Nothing that this city does well comes from cultural “purity” or homogeneity. It’s built on contrasts and mixing. Easteners, Westeners, Danes, Poles, Turks, Italian, Canadians all contribute.
It’s hard for a German Chancellor to make comments on immigration without being accused of holding far-right sentiments by the international community. Merkel is probably trying to reclaim the rhetoric from the real neo-Nazis in a way that our politicians so obviously failed to do before the election of Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons. Sarkozy and Obama have both been able to go much further because they haven’t got the terrible historical reputation that Germany has. The legacy of history can be seen as a blessing in this context, because it acts as a very potent check and balance against racism in the national consciousness.
Suzy
The pope’s latest round of canonisation has created the world’s first Australian saint. But why?
Sister Mary MacKillop did many wonderful things in her life for the poor, for the aboriginal community, for children. She was a good and pious nun. But she had been excommunicated for her role in exposing a priest as a paedophile.
This canonisation might be more than just the remembrance of a forgotten continent. It might be a gesture towards acknowledging the pope’s own criminal concealment of paedophilia. If so, then it’s a step. But it’s not nearly enough.
Aside from common decency, humanity and remorse, what could be more Christian than to make a full confession and beg for forgiveness? It’s too late to maintain the illusion of infallibility. All that can be given now is a semblance of moral goodness and honestly.
Suzy
The sharp prospect of the governmental chopping blade is a frightful thing, but its something we will all endure. Whether the coalition are right to cut so deep, so quickly, is a matter that can be debated for ages, but the unsavoury realisation is that it is going to happen and we are powerless to stop it. However I believe the one department that should be protected more so than others, is education.
We all realise that in order to maintain our proud position on the international stage as a hub of potential, promise and initiative, we need to sort our finances out. Yet within this lies the problem of why reducing the reach of the state’s monetary arm especially in education is counterproductive. Education is the bedrock of social mobility, the generation of new ideas, and the advancement of understanding. So reducing the finance it receives, reduces its importance in the eyes of young people, and starves them of realising not only their full potential, but that of our nation.
In today’s news a leaked source suggested that there could be funding cuts of up to £4.2 billion for universities in the next Spending Review. A few days ago Lord Browne’s report suggested that education will now become a prospect for the wealthier classes. And the threat of many universities caving in is one which has gathered speed. Politicians scrap over the definition of fairness, this isn’t fair- this is placing education on a pedestal and kicking the less well off further into the wilderness.
Kieran
Following the recent HIV scare in LA’s “Silicone valley” all prominent US porn companies have suspended business until those at risk can be quarantined and carefully checked. Once again the question of condom use in the industry has been raised by The Adult Industry Medical Health Care Foundation.
Meanwhile South Africa’s first porn film to feature an all black cast was produced this week. In a nod to the growing AIDS-awareness campaign both male actors wear condoms throughout.
Health-concious porn is highly important for three reasons. Firstly because diesease can spread through the worldwide industry very quickly and affect a huge amount of people. Secondly because it’s often the first exposure young people have to the act of sex itself, and therefore has a duty to educate. Thirdly because the good health, self-respect and self-worth of porn actors are crucial to bringing the idea of legitimate sex work into the 21st century and promoting a dialogue around safe and healthy stripping and prostitution.
Feminism needs to acknowledge that putting paper bags over lads’ mags in shops is not going to make sexuality go away. Extensive legislation is necessary to protect those involved, but also necessary are a greater awareness and a broader dialogue of and around the subject. Tarring the entire industry with the brush of “chauvanism” is not doing anybody any favours, because it makes it difficult to tell what is sexist and what is simply sex.
To end with a quote from the wonderful Wendy McElroy: ”What I am saying is that truth is usually more complicated than any one perspective can capture. Prostitution is not a monolith. Each woman experiences the profession in a different manner. And nothing can be gained by having different groups of feminists or prostitutes — all of whom are probably telling the truth of their own experiences — attempting to discredit each other.”
Suzy
When David Cameron (DC) and Nick Clegg (Cleggy) first had their first press conference in the No. 10 garden last May, they urged the reporters there and the wider public that this is the new politics, “co-operation in the national interest.” which no one can deny is not a good thing. But, a new politics that breaks with the past is a politics that leaves behind the petty point scoring and squabbling of the House of Commons that has plagued most notably PMQs since the late 1960s and particularly since the 1980s.
This is something DC failed to demonstrate today in (Ed Miliband’s very first) PMQs as the Coalition’s new politics often very much looked, sounded and seemed like the old. After five years of complaining that his predecessors did NOT answer the vast majority of his questions, DC seemed very unable to answer Ed Miliband’s questions on Child Benefit. What seemed to happen in the end was DC questioning Miliband on his own policies to which quite rightly he didn’t answer to (to simple fact that this is Prime Ministers Questions) instead brilliantly replying “I may be new to this game, but if I remember rightly it’s my job to ask the questions.”.
Ed Miliband was at least trying to break this mould, let’s only hope the Coalition follows suit.
Max
It’s incredible how personal interest stories can so effortlessly transcend borders. As BULS’ twitter officer I have been following “trending topics” very closely this year, and I can safely say that I have never seen such concentrated interest in one topic. As the 33 are being winched to the surface (as I write they are rescuing number 7 – José Ojeda Vidal) the story swamps 9 of the 10 top trending topics worldwide.
BULS would like to offer congratulations to all the brave people involved, particularly Luis Urzúa, the shift leader, who kept himself and his co-workers alive by dispensing sips of milk and teaspoonfuls of tuna every 48 hours for the 18 days before they were discovered, and wish them well over the recovery period. Here are some of the twitter highlights:
@Rosental Way Chilean authorities transformed #miner rescue into an emotional TV show will become classic case study
and my personal favourite:
@SamMannion: I do love the irony, it’s Thatcher’s birthday and the whole world is focused on a mine.
Suzy
‘We should be the people not just campaigning at elections but campaigning in every town, every city and every village for the things that matter to people there – because that’s the best way we have of reconnecting with people.’ Theses are Ed Miliband’s words at a recent question and answer session at the Labour party conference. After attending London Citizens five day training course in community organising, I feel have the versatile skills to make this rhetoric a reality. After an intensive weeks course I have realised the importance and power of relationships, within and outside of an institution. The Labour party has lost its covenant with the people; it’s lost the public relationship that is imperative to win elections but more importantly to be the real party of the people. The public does not trust in the Labour party anymore and this can only be cured when we create better relational power between the Labour party and communities. As an institution we have been more worried about the spelling of names in the minutes than the stories and experiences which hold us together. The Labour party was born out of civil society and now it needs to move back into communities, away from the bureaucratic institution it has become. After experiencing first hand the power of community organising at an assembly in Tower Hamlets, the Labour party has to trust its membership again but that trust needs to be reciprocated with a hunger from local parties, to work together and build relational power with other institutions. This change has already began, Movement for Change in a very short space of time has achieved a huge amount, training 1000 community organisers in four months however it will take much longer to reorganise the party into a movement again. We need a party based on being in relationship with each rather than being focused on bureaucratic tasks. Furthermore the Labour party must look to work together with friends in the local mosque, synagogue and trade union branch. This does not mean moving to the left, it means moving back into the communities that created the Labour party. It means being a party of action for local people in local areas, not just a meeting point for its members.
Sam Murphy
Labour Party activist and South Staffordshire district council candidate in May
After much scouring of the internet (and trust me there was a fair bit) it is safe to say that Birmingham University Labour Students blog is the most active and vibrant Labour Students blog in the country and equally more so than any Conservative Future University blog, with exception of University College London CF (though this due to most of their blogs regarding upcoming events). Don’t believe me, then follow the following link to see all the other Labour Students blogs http://www.labourstudents.org.uk/links and this link to BUC”F”s blog then scroll down until you see the list of links underneath the title “Conservative Future” http://bucf.wordpress.com/.
Max
Am I missing something here? Vince Cable is a lauded financial genius who has lectured in economics, worked as an economics advisor, written books about economics, and is generally credited for having predicted the credit crisis in Britain. Pretty watertight experience and skills comprised there, you might think.
Equally, he is the lauded champion of students, signing the NUS Vote For Students pledge himself with alacrity and encouraging other MPs to sign it, promising to abolish tuition fees and repeatedly asserting that his party’s budget proposals were comprehensive, well thought out and realistic, he has now literally U-turned and declared that the party will not be voting for the cap after all.
So what went wrong? Could there have been a miscalculation? Or simply dishonesty? He is quoted as having said that he has changed his position because “We are not in an ideal world.”
Clearly.
Suzy
Birmingham University Labour Students
John Ritchie
Brigidjones
daveborland
dorameredith
bensemens
chrisblewitt
oliverjackson
maxattacks
joshualt
suzannahrobinson
kohalloran
jakelambertonline
smurphy2010
labourluke
bulsonline
Guardian Unlimited