Monthly Archives: July 2010

“making headlines”

by maxattacks

“making headlines” was David Miliband’s take upon David Cameron’s (DC) accusation at Pakistan apparently exporting terror to Afghanistan. Consequently because of DC’s “frankness” Pakistani intelligence officials have cancelled a visit to the UK while opposition politicians in Pakistan urged their President, Mr Zardari to call off his trip, while demonstrators burnt an effigy of DC on the streets of Karachi. It seems that DC has still yet to make the transition from politician to statesman.

It’s as David Miliband pointed out, while yes aspects of Pakistan have exported terrorism DC seems to forget that not only do Pakistan officials play a major role in the stemming of terrorism but Pakistan and its people have been victims of terrorism coming from Afghanistan. International diplomacy is all about making friends so you can influence your friends. Yes, stand up for your values but there is a fine line between “frankness” and making enemies. Thankfully though President Zardari is still set to visit the UK but the Pakistan intelligence service cancelled their visit in direct response to DC inability to understand both sides of the story.

Max

153, jellyfish, Trident, dolphins and a seal

by maxattacks

Chris Riddell 11.07.2010

Firstly, apologies for the lack of blogging recently. Been away in north Wales for the past week surrounded by a seal, dolphins (yes you heard me actual dolphins in north Wales!) and what seemed to be the world’s largest gathering of jellyfish, but that unfortunately is a different story.

Moving on swiftly, Education Secretary Michael Gove promised one of the greatest revolutionary reforms to the education system of all time. This was hoped to be achieved through the expansion of the academy programme which was started by Tony Blair’s Labour government. The Academy school programme was initially targeted at underperforming areas, now I don’t know if they were successful or not, but it seemed a good….ish idea at the time.

But now Gove has began rushing through legislation to allow any school the right to become an academy, independent from the local council (even though they already hold a large degree of autonomy). Gove claimed that around a 1100 schools had already signed up to become academies within a week, however, it was recently revealed a mere 153 have done so since the coalition took office. 153! Ed Balls has accused Gove of railroading the bill given only a mere 10% of the claimed schools have applied. Personally, I’m really not well aware of the pros and cons of the academy programme, but for a coalition that is supposed to represent “new” politics, it certainly shows a lot of the “old” brand by preventing Parliament from doing their job of proper scrutiny of bills.

Moving on again, it has been revealed that there is an apparent schism between the MoD and the Treasury over who should foot the bill for the renewal of Trident. The renewal of Trident is predicted to cost around £20 billion, the MoD budget is £40 billion and there is a large budget deficit, already you can see a slight problem. Personally, I’d love to see the back of Trident, but in the name of compromise here’s an idea that will kill two birds with one stone. How about keeping Trident but not renewing until the deficit is well and truly dealt with? Britain’s nuclear defence system is still very capable of wiping out numerous major cities across the globe, a slight upgrade that would increase the range of the submarines and the blast radius of the missiles a bit would surely not go to miss if its lifespan is prolonged. Just a thought.

Max

London Calling

by suzannahrobinson

Soundbites from BULS members on leadership:

Ken Livingstone wants to push through money-making and environmental reforms that local councils across the country could benefit from.

I don`t live in London, so I don`t care as long as the mayor is Labour. (thanks Ben)

Oona King is a faux labour, über Blairite, war supporting opportunist. And being a Blairite IS a bad thing because he`s a war criminal and didn`t stay true to Labour`s values.

King is the Labour of the future, Ken is the past. Blair never lost an election, and you can`t get anywhere on ideology alone (see: the 1980s). Also let`s wait for the report to conclude on whether or not he`s a criminal.

Blair had a time and place, but now the public want a fresh, more ideological Labour. Go Ed Miliband!

Suzy

It`s all relative

by suzannahrobinson

Yesterday evening an unknown man was buzzed into our building, entered our apartment through the door we often leave open and offered my flatmate money for sex. After a clear refusal in Turkish, English and Spanish, a violent struggle and threats to call the police he eventually went home, and we were left feeling terrified and dirty.  

The consensus about the event among my Turkish friends is as follows: that it is known in the neighbourhood that our apartment is occupied by young foreign women, who are probably not Muslim and definitely without the support of a large family bent on avenging insults to its women. Our brothers, fathers and uncles are far away, and we probably act like the American women in gossip magazines anyway, so will welcome advances. And if we don`t like it we can go back to where we came from.

Other things I find difficult to adjust to in İstanbul are the poor record on women`s liberation, the high birthrates, the tradition of the hostess never sitting down during a meal but continuing to serve throughout, the constant and indiscriminate leering by men of all ages and the incredible statistic that only 10% of Turkish women are in employment.   

It all makes the Ed/Yvette leadership issue look very, very trivial.

Suzy

The last gift of the Labour government

by maxattacks

In the second quarter of 2010 the UK economy grew by 1.1%. This is clearly the result of the actions taken by the Labour government in their final months and it would’ve been higher were it not for the Volcanic Ash cloud.

However, to say “oh, economy already back on track, it’s clearly secure to swiftly slash the deficit” is wrong! The Chancellor, Boy George, summed it up himself “Today’s figures show the private sector contributing all but 0.1% of the growth in the second quarter,” which consequently means that if you are going to “cut” your way out of the deficit that remaining 1% is going to disappear rather quickly. Add this to the fact that most economists are saying that the recovery is not secured meaning that to savage public services rather than a carefully planned programmed to halve the deficit in 4 years would plunge the country back into deep recession and this time, there will be no plan B.

Max

Before we miss the sparkly bandwagon…

by suzannahrobinson

Stephanie Meyer`s Twilight Saga, heaven knows, gets its fair bit of exposure. Precisely because of this I want to give it some space on our own venerable blog. The amount of impressionable people worldwide hopelessly in love with its characters or  ideas make it worth taking seriously.

The ”twilight is sexist” debate can be argued convincingly from either side. While Bella replaces her absent mother in exclusively performing traditionally female chores for her father, suffers from a lack of professional ambition in terms of a career outside the home, is perpetually in need of rescuing and puts up with an emotionally abusive boyfriend who also supervises her every move 24/7, bruises her during sex and prevents her from seeing her friends; there is plenty of objectification of the male characters to counterbalance it, from lingering descriptions of male beauty in the books to many many minutes dedicated to the sight of muscly topless men in the films. By the fourth book Bella is strong enough to stand up for herself, and becomes a protector instead of a victim, albeit mainly in the role of a wife and mother. Also the author, screenplay writer and director are all women, the audience is predominantly female and there is some attempt at a reversal of the Adam and Eve story in terms of who is tempting whom into sexual maturity.

So much for gender.

What I`m concerned with is the heteronormativity of it all.

In the world of Twilight borderline inter-species sexuality, necrophilia, paedophilia and sado-masochism are allowable and more or less practised. Nothing is off limits but the same sex. Werewolves undergo a process of “imprinting” when they find their soulmate, and whenever it is discussed the subject is represented as “he” and the object as “she”. Vampires never seem to bite a human of the same gender, and following in the footsteps of Buffy there is a certain devotion developed towards to the one who changed you. There is no exploration of sexual identity, all the characters are introduced in ready-made boy-girl pairings, in fact there is no possibility, in this world of societal outcasts, counter-culture and misunderstood teenagers, of any LGBT experience.

Suzy

Why nobody, not even on the left, should read the Guardian

by maxattacks

I write this, as you all by now are probaby well aware, as a left of centre, card carrying member of the Labour party. And I write this because I am, quite frankly, sick of fellow minded folks trusting this diabolical rag despite it being a paper that is inconsistent, hypocritical and simply, makes no sense whatsoever. Let me take the liberty to explain this to you.

This is, after all, a paper, that after years of supporting the Labour Party decided a week before the last election to support the Liberal Democrats. This it did citing as its motive the Liberal Democrats support for proportional representation (P.R). Yet immediately after the formation of the Con-Dem coalition, some ten days later, this ‘news’paper decides to renounce that support.

That to me does not make sense. Firstly and most simplistically, why drop a party immediately after it gains power for the first time in 60 years, just because it goes into coalition with a party you don’t like. Moreover, The Guardian’s switch is more staggering considering its support for PR (which as I said earlier, was the reason it publically gave for switching its allegiance from Labour to the Lib Dems.) Proportional Representation almost universally leads to the formation of coalitions, so for The Guardian to declare its support for the Lib Dems because of their support for PR, then weeks later to renounce that support because of the Lib Dems going into a coalition, which would be more, not less, likely to occur with PR, is frankly bonkers logic. If the Guardian’s support for the Lib Dems was based on them winning the election outright then it did so contrary to the vast majority of the evidence from polls, most political analysis and was reliant upon a swing that was unlikely even to the most ardent and politically naive Liberal Democrat.

I say this not because I am annoyed at the Guardian switching its support from Labour to the Lib Dems. That genuinely is not my problem. My problem is that the Guardian is repeatedly held up and used by members of the Labour Party or people on the left or in the centre as this beacon for sensible left of centre reporting and analysis. But in reality, this paper is just as unprincipled and flippy floppy in its nature, as any of the red tops or Murdoch press engine. But at least the red tops do not pretend to be sensible.

I don’t like the coalition. I dislike most of its policies, I don’t trust its underlying (largely Conservative) principles and I also don’t believe it is actually as stable and unified in purpose and compromise as is said (though I do not, myself, think this will become apparent for a number of years). But these are politically based, and I would argue very rational reservations for the coalition. My reasoning, even if you do not agree with it, is consistent. The Guardian’s scepticism of the coalition is not sound, consistent or based on anything other than rather politically naive and ill-considered malice. Yet despite this people on the left continue to quote it and rely upon it ad nauseum, believing, as I said, it to be a principled and consistent proponent of the ‘progressive’ wing of politics.

So I implore any self-respecting left or centrist person with an interest in political journalism which is not sensationalist but fair, sensible not senseless, to read the Independent, not the Guardian. Even the Telegraph, though a right-wing paper with which I have many disagreements, is at least consistent and sensible in what it says, even if I disagree with it. If you want a challenge, rather than mindless spouting, read that. But do not quote the Guardian pretending that it is anything other than TWADDLE!

By Sean Woodcock

Lord Mandy

by maxattacks

Lord Mandelson speaks 

In BULS, we’re mature enough to dole out criticism and praise where it is due and with the recent release of Lord Mandelson’s Memoirs “The Third Man”, it seems both are present here to one of the founding architectures of ‘New’ Labour. As business secretary, I personally believe Mandy did a brilliant job, the car scrappage scheme was one of the most successful parts of the economic stimulus package brought in after the wake of the financial crisis. His emphasis on a new high tech industries and manufacturing and his ardent support of the Regional Development Agency were just what the country needed in times of economic hardship.

However, Brown’s former adviser Charlie Whelan said “Peter ran the worst general campaign in Labour’s history,” Whelan told the Sunday Telegraph, “Nobody knew what the message was at all. It was a disaster from beginning to end.”. In this instance, how right he was. Now admittedly, I haven’t paid much attention to previous election campaigns, but the 2010 campaign was abysmal. Yes, we were just emerging from a recession and had a leader with a “radio face”, but frankly the campaign did not help. The press-conferences completely lacked any excitement and it seemed Brown was held back by Mandy. The latter we know given Brown’s firebrand speech near the end of the campaign, after Mandy was relinquished of some duties.

To be frank, there was no clear message, let us hope this is not the case in 2015. 

Max

This time for Africa?

by suzannahrobinson

It`s been a disappointing world cup, and I don`t just mean for England. The 2004 announcement of South Africa winning the bid to host led to predictions of a massive leap forward for the whole continent, as the World Cup was expected to raise Africa`s profile, increase levels of tourism, bring in revenue in prize money and foreign currency, provide investment and give it a greater sense of pride and identity.

Six years and sixty (?) matches later we have two anthems sung by a Somali-Canadian and a Columbian, a tournament dominated by European teams with Ghana the sole African representative past the group stage, inter-African xenophobia in Johannesburg… Time will tell but I think it`s already safe to say that hosting the World Cup was not South Africa`s holy grail.

Suzy

Two cents…

by suzannahrobinson

Having a bad feminist time of it in Turkey in terms of female employment,  roles in the home and freedom of clothing, but am really thrilled about Gillard! A bit of progressive news in traditional times ^_^

Interestingly it is forbidden for Turkish women to be scarved at uni, as it damages the precious separation of church and state. The really orthodox wear wigs to hide their hair all the same.

Thought I’d understand Islam more after a fortnight living in Istanbul, but the variety of practice here is bewildering! Hope to educated myself over the next few months and I’ll blog if I can think of anything good.

Suzy

How to lose a PM in 30 days

by Nash

Observing recent political events in West Island from across the ditch, I have been struck by both the swiftness and the apparent brutality of Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s removal by his own party in favour of his second-in-command Julia Gillard. The justification for his removal apparently a decline in Labor support in the polls during an election year; for which he as leader was deemed responsible. To a UK political observer the initial comparison is inevitable (and Martin Kettle at the Guardian milks it for all its worth).

But UK Labour is not Australian Labor, and we should be glad of this. Firstly Australian Labor is institutionally factionalised in a way which makes Blairite-Brownite “rifts” look like trivial squabbles over soccer team affiliation. Rudd had no core faction behind him, hence when the challenge came they swung behind Gillard. In addition, Rudd had probably alienated the powerful union factors with miner membership though his proposals for a new supertax on mining profits. The plan to reinvest these profits to the benefit of all Australians is in principle a sound idea, but one which threatened the interests of mine workers. Consequent hostile advertising from this sector likely cost a few points in the opinion polls and encouraged Rudd’s colleagues (with union backing) to act. Some of us in English circles may smile wryly at the thought that there is somewhere in the west where miners can still bring down a PM.

It is also much easier to stage a coup when only MPs have a say in their party’s choice of leader. Much of the action happened overnight in this time zone – talk of speculation coming around midnight followed by the news of Rudd’s resignation when I woke up on the floor the next morning. By teatime Gillard was meeting the Governor-General. Had Milliband, D. ever followed through on his many threats to stick the knife in we’d have gone through the whole nominations, campaigning, and membership ballots palaver. Arguably this grants the incumbent a significant advantage, but if it saves us the undignified spectacle of a brutal internal coup whilst being notionally more democratic then I for one am grateful.

Rudd had been in office for just under two and a half years, after a landslide victory in ’07. He had brought the Labor party back into power after 13 years of opposition. He’d initially taken a bold stand on global warming in a country with a deeply sceptical (and Murdoch-tainted) media, and at least attempted to redress historical grievances with the indigenous peoples. Until a matter of months ago he had polled as the 2nd most popular Australian PM in history – now he becomes the only to be ousted from office in a single term. 3-year term limits mean that an election was likely before the end of this year; with a change at the top it will likely come about even sooner (as Gillard herself has stated). We shall see if the Labor party’s gamble pays off. If it does, there may well be many a forlorn “what-if?” in the Milliband camp (though Labor’s defeat is not as likely, let alone as certain, as ours appeared in ‘09). I’m not sure which reflects worse on a party – regicide against a successful election winner, or the prospect of changing leaders twice in one term. “Unelected Prime Minister” rhetoric is disingenuous yet potent amongst the electorate, especially when there is very little to hide the naked ambition of those who make it to the top. I’ve seen identity politics used already to justify the outcome; a seemingly desperate spin. On this note it may be worth considering the success of other welsh redheaded Labo(u)r leaders.

I’m glad this undignified spectacle never befell Gordon. Rudd gave a gracious albeit tearful resignation speech, worth watching if only for his parting joke of “I’m still Prime Minister for another 30 minutes… I’m no longer leader of the Labor Party but I am Prime Minister… anything could happen folks”. To an outsider he seems a decent, honourable and principled man – I only hope his party don’t wind up regretting what they’ve done.

Comrade Nash

- BULS Southern Hemisphere correspondent