Birmingham University Labour Students

That’s right, four by-election victories on the trot. Yes, all these were in Labour held seats, but it’s important how every single one has seen a significant swing towards Labour each time. The results were as follows:

Labour – 12,639 (54.42% up by 10.79%)

Conservative – 6,436 (27.71% down by 6.32%)

Liberal Democrats – 1,364 (5.87 down by 7.87%)

UKIP – 1,276 (5.49& up by 3.45%)

This has seen a 8.6% swing from Tory to Labour, when compared to the last general election which saw a mere 4.8% swing from Labour to Tory. Yes, the turnout was very low, but what do you expect at this time of year?

Either way, great result!

Max

Friday was the day the old fetish returned. The day Cameron delved into nostalgia. And the day he set Britain at odds not only with the other 26 EU member states, but rationality itself.

What we saw on Friday was a Prime Minister with his hands tied by dogmatic backbench MPs. But not to worry, it seems Cameron had unveiled his all powerful ‘veto’. The only problem with this is that it’s not a true veto of any sorts. Negotiations will still be ongoing, the remaining 26 EU states will still formulate an agreement and Britain will not be present to have any say in the talks.

This is catastrophic failure for Cameron who has severed any attempts to help salvage the Euro which is not only in the EU’s interest but vital in Britain’s interests. In the words of a Facebook update by my own brother:

“Tory lol. Blame the economic problems on the Euro crisis, then veto the plan to save it knowing full well that the the EU will cut you out and essentially get rid of any say you have in determining the future of Europe, and by extension, Britain“

Some may call it Bulldog spirit, I’d like to call it naively dogmatic.

Max

#godisgove and #torybible are to hashtags on twitter which have both appeared in recent days in the wake of Michael Gove’s decision to issue a King James edition of the bible to every state school in England. Now I’m not going to get into the whole inappropriateness of this act (If you know me well enough you’d remember I’m a massive atheist, but, I like to keep my role as BULS’s Vice-Chair totally separate from religion). But here according to LabourList are the top 10 best tweets featuring those hashtags.

Enjoy:

@4harrisons - And Cameron said “let there be growth” but lo! There was no growth

@mattedbrooke – And God said, “why have you eaten from the forbidden tree?” And Adam said, “we inherited this fruit from the labour government”

@ChrisBryantMP – Faith, hope and charity – have now been abolished as they were unproductive

@politic_animal – And on the seventh day he would have liked to have rested, but the government had opted out of the Working Time Directive

@lethandrel – And the lame were made to walk and the blind to see – well, according to the new assessments ….

@johnprescott – Blessed are the coalition for they shall inherit from and blame the last government

@cllr_robbins – Blessed are the freeschoolmakers: for they shall be called the children of Gove

@MatofKilburnia – And Lot’s wife was turned into a pillar of salt, which Gove did putteth in school dinners & lo Jamie Oliver was displeased

@GoodmotherMobbs – And the lepers were ‘cured’; as ATOS found them fit for work

@evilflea – And then He createth all of the beasts and the animals, excepteth the cat, which he did not make up.

Max

Yesterday we saw a good sign in the economy that inflation had fallen from 5.2% to 5%. We welcome it but it’s still not good enough, especially when Eurozone inflation has remained at a reasonable 3%. It seems however, this is rather irrelevant with the news released today by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) where unemployment has risen to 2.62 million from July to September.

That’s right, the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer who over a year ago claimed “we were out of the woods” now had the audacity to have one of their Ministers for Work and Pensions, Chris Grayling, claim that ”What we’ve seen over the last quarter has been the real impact of the crisis in the eurozone”. That’s right, they’re blaming their old punch bag, Europe. Don’t get me wrong, the crisis in the Eurozone is severe, but it in now way at a stage to make a real impact on unemployment figures, especially in a non-Euro state.

With the number of people claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance rising to 1.6 million by 5,300. The highest number of women out of work since February 1988 at 1.09 million rising by 43,000. Youth unemployment breaking the 1 million mark at 1.02 million with a rising by 67,000 and the unemployment rate of 8.3% being the highest since 1996 and the total number of unemployed people the highest since 1994, it’s about time Cameron and Gideon took another look at their plan.

Max

With inflation around 5%, consumer confidence falling for four months on the trot, business confidence falling to a two year low, growth flat-lining in the past 9 months and growth expectations themselves being cut, you would have thought Gideon (George) Osborne would think things could not get any worse.

Well apparently they can. It seems 100 leading economists have written into the Observer to tell Gideon to adopt a plan B. Now while letters like this have been done in the past, the difference being that this time it has an alternative outline. It’s an alternative Miliband and Balls should take head to:

1. An immediate halt to cuts, to protect jobs in the public sector. (Although I wouldn’t not cut entirely, for one, I’d cut the renewal of Trident).
2. A new round of quantitative easing but the money wouldn’t go to the banks. Rather to finance a “Green New Deal” to create thousands of new jobs.
3. Benefit increases to put money into the pockets of those on lower and middle incomes and give a boost to spending.
4. A financial transaction tax to raise funds from the City to pay for investment in transport, energy and house building. (Robin Hood Tax anyone?)
5. Introduce a truly progressive tax system so that those at the bottom don’t face the greatest burden proportionately (Or simply having the rich pay their taxes will be a start)
6. Introduce a tax on land value to increase revenue and reduce the possibility of another debt-fuelled housing price boom.
7. Copy South Korea and China’s model of state assistance for industry by creating a British investment bank. (Something that Lord Mandelson was beginning to champion in the last year of the Labour Government)
8. Invest in transport and infrastructure to create jobs, but also to encourage people out of their cars and into trains or on to bicycles
9. Judge the economy not on whether there is growth in GDP, but on a new catch-all criterion that takes into account the desire for minimal unemployment, and for work-life balance, economic and social stability, and job satisfaction.

I think most of us can agree that sex education has an important role to play in public schools. But to what level of importance would you say it is?

To Conservative MP, Andrea Leadsom, it seems not very. Let’s put this into context. In England and Wales sex education is not a compulsory subject for public schools (I know for one that I personally received nothing at my High School) and that parents are allowed to “opt out” their child if the school does teach it. And you wonder why we have the highest teenage pregnancy rates in Europe.

Anyway, back to Andrea Leadsom. It seems she believes that parents should have to “opt in” their children to sex education classes and that current sex education books are “inappropriate”. This is while a report published by Ofsted last year pointed out that a quarter of schools in England are not providing good enough lessons about sex, relationships and health.  At the same time new research in the last couple of weeks provided information that “81% of 14 to 18-year-olds said their information came from the internet, the television and their friends.” and “one in four pupils do not have any sexual and relationship education in school.“.

Now some may say that abstinence only sex education is the only sound and “moral” way forward. But when we analyse this claim, it’s quite apparent that this argument is not grounded in research and facts. The Council of Scientific Affairs states that ”Current research findings do not support the position that the abstinence-only approach to sexuality education is effective in delaying the onset of intercourse.”.

I have already done a similar post on sex education before. But the point still stands, we need more not less sex education. If we truly want to tackle STDs, teenage pregnancies and yes, even abortions (again look to my previous post and subsequent comments regarding abortions) we need sound and effective sex education with no “opt-outs” for pushy and insecure parents.

So please Leadson, could the education system have some more.

Max

David Cameron has a nerve. Not only has he U-turned over his pledge in opposition to hold a referendum over the UK’s terms of membership of the European Union, but today he had the temerity to force Nicolas Sarkozy to back down and accept his presence at key Eurozone talks to try to deal with the Greek debt crisis on Wednesday.

Once again, only one year into the new government, a Conservative prime minister is becoming about as stable on Europe as Edwina Currie is on her feet. We all know deep down he is a staunch Euro-sceptic, so why doesn’t he have the guts to come out and be frank with the British people, and say that he would love us to turn our backs on our continental partners, but that he also loves us to lecture and patronise them on economic policy, despite the fact that UK growth is anaemic at best, and backwards at worst, thanks to his policies.

A referendum on EU membership now would of course be absurd, but having called for one in opposition, the PM should stick to his guns and create a disunited and discredited government, and do us all a favour by breaking up the coalition and triggering a general election. You can’t have your bun and eat it, and you can’t be half in, half out, of the EU – leaving the Eurozone (or more accurately, Germany) to do all the hard work and then turning up to talks this week to act as one of the key players while facing a referendum proposal at home from your own backbenchers is hypocritical and downright embarrassing for Britain.

It was Ed Miliband, incidentally, who called on Cameron to give up his trip Down Under and attend the meeting, therefore whether or not you agree that Cameron has a right to be there, it is clear that the Labour leader is ahead of the curve on this one, as he was on phone hacking and as he was at PMQs this week.

It might sound like a cheap shot from the comforts of opposition – and we all know Blair and Brown disagreed over the Euro – however it is clear that yet again the Tories are divided over Europe. Europhile or Europhobe, this is one of the few reliable constants of the European project.

In light of the NHS reform bill being pushed through the House of Lords, I’d like to draw attention to what many Tories may be thinking now because of it.

Enjoy

Max

Going to use a bit of the Brigid Jones BULS blog formula this morning.

It turns out there’s going to be the biggest drop in middle-income families incomes since the 1970s and so pushing 600,000 more children into poverty according to the IFS. This is while Gideon (George) Osborne has announced a £840 million tax break for multinationals using tax heavens while it turns out the amount of tax money lost in the FTSE 100 by tax avoidance is estimated to be £18bn. So much for the cuts being “progressive”.

To insult to misery, it turns out public sector job losses will 50% higher than originally predicted. So much for Cameron’s pre-election claim that any Minister who came to him with front-line public sector cuts would be told to go back and have a rethink.

Max

Enjoy

Max

Enjoy

Max

After Gideon’s (Osborne’s) low-key and rather dull speech at the Tory Conference today where he claimed his economic plan to be working and even, dare I say it, “flexible”. I’d like to draw attention to the only aspect of Gideon’s plan that has so far proved to be “flexible”, the growth expectations  by the IMF over the last 6 months or so, curtsey of LabourList:

The fact is, the CBI, the IMF and now even some Tory backbenchers and Chairs of Treasury select committees have called for a plan for growth or at least attempts to stimulate it. Like we said a few weeks ago, a temporary cut in VAT would be a huge stimulus as pointed out by the IFS.

It seems Gideon was only really to parade the the low interest rates in his speech, but with the abysmal growth over the last year or so, it seems we may have a rise in interest rates regardless if growth doesn’t pick up.

So please Gideon, think again.

Max

9/11 – A Warning from Recent History

For someone of the age of the current crop of Labour Students, it is particularly difficult to believe that it is ten years tomorrow since the lives of millions were changed forever on September 11th, 2001. Most of us were still in primary school at the time, and it is perhaps apt that our generation – one that was constantly told we were growing up too fast – had our innocence of the world around us robbed so suddenly on that bright Tuesday morning. Hearing and seeing the images of the planes hitting the World Trade Center still transfixes all of us, and as much as we might want to look away having seen enough, we can’t quite bring ourselves to stop watching.

However it is our generation – the 9/11 generation – who will be the politicians and headline-makers of the coming years, and if anything good can come of the last decade, it is surely the lesson  that those in power have a responsibility not to overreact when faced with such onslaughts. Our party’s most successful leader (in electoral terms) no doubt had good intentions, but made the grave error of marching the troops gung-ho into an unplanned and illegal war, probably creating a whole new generation of terrorists in the process, while at home him and those around him were complicit in eroding many of the freedoms we were meant to be protecting, including detention without charge and freedom from torture. If the horror of terrorism reaches us again, we must pause and assess the causes before acting. The same rule should apply for other crises, like the riots this summer.

Backbench Tories Have Nothing To Worry About

Today is the final day of the Plaid Cymru autumn conference in Llandudno, north Wales. The outgoing leader, Ieuan Wyn Jones, made his final conference speech yesterday after an electoral drubbing for the nationalist party in the Welsh Assembly elections in May. Unlike in Scotland, where the SNP have been successful, he argued that coalition government in Cardiff Bay (of which Plaid was the junior party) meant Plaid’s achievements in government were smothered by Labour, and that the party was punished by voters for not claiming credit for them.

Aside from the fact that Plaid achieved very little in government in a time of economic turmoil other than a referendum with poor turnout which managed to bore even political anoraks, their experience in coalition should serve as a lesson to Westminster politics. This week Tory backbenchers, angry over law and order, Europe and abortion, moaned that the Lib Dem ‘tail’ was wagging the Tory ‘dog’ and that Nick Clegg was being given too many concessions by the Prime Minister. However come the election in 2015, the Tories will have nothing to worry about, as the voters are likely to give them sole credit for any successes – particularly if the economy picks up (not a given considering Osborne’s slash-and-burn approach) – and they will certainly not be looking to make some sort of permanent alliance with the Lib Dems, contrary to what some commentators are predicting. The coalition dog will probably have his tail docked when the voters are next given a choice.

About Bloody Time

This week the ban on gay and bisexual men giving blood for life in Britain was finally overturned (although you’d be forgiven for not noticing the leap forward because the BBC thought Strictly Come Dancing was more important on the news bulletins that night). This is a triumph that equality campaigners have been working tirelessly for for years, and at last gay men will be able to save lives and help tackle the urgent need for more donors. No more will the official policy imply that gay men cannot be trusted to practice safe sex and ‘probably have HIV’.

Although the ban was only replaced with a one-year time lag since a donor’s last encounter, it is still progress, and puts us more in line with the situation in similar countries.

As Ed Miliband gathers opinions and considers the future policy direction of the Labour party as part of the Policy Review, there has been much debate recently about whether or not to pursue ‘Blue Labour’, as proposed by the academic and Labour peer Maurice Glasman. Blue Labour, a response to ‘Red Toryism’, aims to put co-operatives and the community at the heart of the lives of ordinary British people, and is a rebuttal of New Labour’s strangling embrace of neo-liberalism, which left swathes of grassroots Labour supporters feeling alienated and ignored by the party leadership.

Glasman has a point, for throughout the history of the ‘people’s party’ there has been a split between liberals, state socialists and those who favour co-operatives and more local organisation – many Labour MPs today are also members of the Co-operative Party, and since its inception at the turn of the twentieth century the Labour movement has been associated with local organisation and mobilisation.

Martin Pugh in his 2009 book “Speak for Britain: A New History of the Labour Party” argues persuasively that the real dilemma for Labour through its history has not been attracting liberal support, but attracting hard-working but low-paid voters from the temptations of the Conservatives: many ordinary working class communities share the Tories’ patriotism; love of the armed forces (many of them have close relatives or friends serving in Afghanistan); desire for home ownership and a tough stance on law and order – why did so many vote for Margaret Thatcher in 1979, read the Daily Mail, and in a few cases drift to more extreme parties through fear of their jobs because of immigration and globalisation? Pugh stresses that when Labour came into being many voters were torn between it and the Tories because of these economic concerns, plus social beliefs like temperance or the role of the Church in schools.

Where Glasman takes the wrong path, in my view, is in his attempt to respond to Cameron’s Big Society by mimicking it and advocating a further retrenchment of the state, along with a return to a 1950s-style focus on the family, the flag, and feminism being almost unheard-of. That’s not ‘Blue Labour’, that’s just conservatism. If we as social democrats want to see equality of provision across the board, we need to expose the Big Society for what it is: a cover for cuts dreamt up by Steve Hilton when the Tories needed to be seen to be shedding the aura of Thatcherism.

If Labour is to win elections again without ditching our principles – to do so would be an insult to people like the families of those killed in Norway – we need to ‘re-connect with the grassroots,’ to use the spin-doctors jargon, by addressing, or at the very least appreciating, the legitimate concerns of the hard-working folk who keep the economy growing and keep money coming into the Exchequer. Instead of Big Society initiatives, we need to take the lead on key issues like housing, providing ample employment for deprived communities and young people generally, and not simply dismissing people’s concerns about migration and welfare dependency. That does not mean leaving the EU, saying we should only have British jobs for British workers, or undertaking humiliating fit-for-work tests like those currently going on under Iain Duncan Smith. It just means listening to those too well-off to be on benefits but on low wages, as well as staying true to  proud values like tolerance. If we go some way to pointing out these worries in opposition, whilst criticising the Con-Dems’ unfair cuts, the sought-after swing voters will follow, and we may just wake up to find ourselves in government again.

Sorry for the lack of blogging in the past couple of weeks, I myself have been working almost full-time with a work-placement on the side. Anyway, I’d like to focus on two of the biggest economic updates in a news dominated by the ongoing phone hacking scandal. The up coming growth figures for Tuesday and the situation over the debt talks in the USA.

First off, who needs a plan B, right? Judging by what is being said by the likes of the National Institute for Economic and Social Research (NIESR) this stubbornness is not quite paying off. The GDP growth figures are mainly regarded as the be and end all test for a government’s economic credibility. To meet budget forecasts for growth this year the UK will need 0.8% of that well needed boost. What the NIESR is predicting the Office for National Statistics to actually say is that the UK has grown by a mere 0.1% with some City forecasts predicting a contraction.

Now don’t get me wrong, here in BULS we are capable of recognising that the Chancellor (Gideon) can not control every aspect of the economy. The rise in oil and food prices and the growing concern over the Eurozone crisis aren’t the greatest assets ever. In fact, the idea of austerity does have the vague potential to work, as seen in Canada in the 90s and in the UK in the 80s. But these are totally dependant upon favourable economic circumstances in neighbouring nations such as Europe and the USA. Sadly though, we currently don’t have those circumstances. We don’t have secure and confident markets in Europe and the USA and this is something Gideon totally fails to grasp. Cutting spending to reduce the deficit is all very well but once again, it’s pointless without growth to fuel this deficit reduction and with average pay rising at 2.3% and inflation at 4.2% (thank you VAT hike) this recovery is still far from certain.

Turning our attention over across the Atlantic it seems Federal government has seen a roadblock to progress because of dogged stubbornness with Republican House Speaker John Boehner walking out on a crucial debt talks with Senate leaders and the White House. Now anyone who’s studied the US governmental and political structure will always recognise that it is a system based upon compromise. With an increasingly ideologically driven Republican based House of Representatives, Obama has had to make drastic compromises in the name of reaching a deal for the good of America.

The President has already pledged to double his cuts particularly in the area of medicare which many supporters (such as myself) are completely aghast at, with $650bn of extra cuts pledged recently. Either way, this is a man who will attempt to build the bridge with his conservative law-makers. Sadly, it takes two to build a bridge and this is not what we are seeing from the Republican end of the river who refuse to raise any taxes (I thought they were rather keen on deficit reduction?). The Republicans have increasingly gone down the road of stubbornness in the past few years, but now it’s time to walk the walk as well as talk the talk as they put aside ideological differences. Sadly, given the ever increasing grip of the Tea Party, I doubt this much needed maturity will happen any time soon.

Max

To be brutally honest, when this whole phone hacking milarky began to come out 6, 9 months ago I really couldn’t care that much. But now, truly, everything has changed. The biggest circulatory newspaper of all time is being dropped, Andy Coulson has been arrested, murder and soldier victim families phones being tapped and quite frankly, the media will never truly be the same again.

So what can we identify and salvage from this wreckage? Well first off to get you in a good mood only Ed Miliband’s finest performance as Labour leader to date by being the first to call for enquiries, the first to call for the axing of the PCC, the first to call for Rebekah Brook’s resignation and the first to demand the transfer of the BSkyB bid to the competition commission. Ultimately, this is a welcome overcoming of fear of the Murdoch empire. Too long has a US-based media tycoon dictated overarching control over Britain. Don’t get me wrong, Labour’s hands are far from clean when it came to dealing with the tycoon master, but this is a major break not just for Labour but for British Politics as one major political force cuts it’s links with the media empire it feared. Miliband despite his fine performance recently has to be careful as already a senior Miliband aid received a “very hostile” threat, not veiled at all, from a News International journalist warning: “You have made it personal about Rebekah, so we’ll make it personal about you.”.

This break for British politics is all very well but it depends on Cameron following suit, which he has so far shown to be unwilling. It is clear that Camero also fears the monopoly and is too entwined in the spider’s web of Murdoch’s empire to truly break free. It was Cameron’s decision to bring in Coulson fresh from News of the World not only in to his team while in opposition but as Director of Communications in No. 10 despite an uneasy background record and he has paid dearly for this judgement. Let’s hope Cameron can make the right decision over the BSkyB deal as this is truly the real prize in all this chaos.

For Murdoch to jettison the very paper that brought him into the British media it seems that he realised the true potential of BSkyB. Newspapers are in decline, the future is the internet and TV. Sky’ revenue is already greater than the BBC’s which combined with his remaining papers would place Murdoch beyond reach of any rival media circles and organisations. With this power he could begin to truly cripple one of Britain’s greatest institutions, the BBC. Any chance that Sky would remain a fully bias free organisation is impossible given Murdoch’s record with the Times, the Sun, the NoW and Fox News over in the USA.

We’ve made our move, it’s time for Cameron to follow suit and do the right thing and remove this poison from British politics once and for all.

Max

We’re all very aware of the Tory-led Coalition’s spree of u-turns which numbers around 15. Naturally then it was a matter of time before Cameron would attempt to spin what had been going on. Yesterday in a press conference Cameron claimed that a u-turn (although under this government they have regarded them as “policy rethinks”) was a “sign of strength”. Now in part, I agree with that sentiment. It is far better to consider alternative views and opinions and it is not a sign of weakness if you genuinely change your mind or if the evidence shows other-wise to your own beliefs in the long-run.

However, it’s far far better to get it right first time round. We all know this government is Maoist in terms of the speed of reform and this has clearly been shown through the sheer number of u-turns. Things are not thought out and the public will eventually catch on. It’s all very well to be a “listening government”, but I believe it’s far better to listen before you are made to.

We’ve come along way from the “lady’s not for turning”.

Max

Just a quick blog before bed (the morning will feature the Republican Presidential Nomination race) and I’d like to thank Planetpmc for pointing out the 15 major U-turns the Tory-led government has had to make in the past year. Enjoy:

1.  NHS Direct ‘not being scrapped’ - http://bit.ly/lAdTjv

2.  Government confirms re-think on school sport funding - http://bit.ly/mtyFFH

3.  Downing Street rejects child milk scheme cut suggestion - http://bbc.in/k1NoGE

4.  Sale of forests in England scrapped - http://bbc.in/jCmqmT

5.  Plans to grant anonymity to rape case defendants scrapped - http://bit.ly/ketJd1

6.  Government backtracks on Bookstart - http://bit.ly/j1AvuP

7.  Housing benefit cap to be postponed until January 2012 - http://bit.ly/iIrrD1

8.  Government admits defeat on immigration target - http://bit.ly/lU5nHV

9.  Military covenant to be enshrined in law after months of criticism - http://bit.ly/mQKfUC

10. UK coastguard station closure plans ‘scaled back’ - http://bbc.in/lE0VHs

11. Government ‘abandons’ plans for weekly rubbish collection - http://bit.ly/mveDsv

12. Cameron tears up Ken Clarke’s “soft” sentencing policies - http://bit.ly/iFGA0a

13. David Cameron denies ‘humiliating U-turn’ on NHS - http://tgr.ph/kryKEU

14. Treasury backtracks on Danny Alexander’s pension reform plan - http://bit.ly/lVocDX

15. Ken Clarke forced to abandon 50% sentence cuts for guilty pleas - http://bit.ly/iz4qZA

The 1926 General Strike was a tipping point in industrial relations and Trade Union laws with only the 1980s to rival it. But ultimately, it was rather unsuccessful. Now don’t get me wrong, strikes can work, but this was at an era when strikes could truly make an impact. So for Unison to claim it will unleash strikes on the scale of 1926 is rather worrying. Please don’t think I disagree with the outrage of the Unions and their members but not only do they not know the failed history of that event but strikes really do not have the same resonance and power they once had (thank you Maggie….) in this day and age.

I agree that automatically shifting the retirement age to 66 and then pledging to negotiate is nothing less of a disgrace on the  part of the Coalition. But, Ed Balls on the Andrew Marr programme this morning was certainly right in one respect, this is a trap. Many of the Tory right revel in the “glory” of fighting an enemy and to Gideon Osborne, this is indeed a perfect distraction from a flagging economy. So please, make sure public support is on your side before such widespread actions are taken and try your best to negotiate as too often the powerful use the powerless to distract the public from the former’s incompetence and corruption, don’t let the same happen to you and be wary.

Max

It’s not exactly a secret that us in BULS have our, ahem, tad differences with David Cameron. But I personally like to make a point of mentioning areas and events we can agree on (and that is a rather event) and Cameron’s defence of the safeguarding of the international aid spending against the own right of his party particularly that of Defence Secretary, Liam Fox. Never should we balance the books on the back of the poorest people in the world, it is morally wrong and completely unjustifiable. To say other wise is a completely vile idea particularly when Liam Fox advocates this simply as ‘common sense’ which is nothing less than disgusting.

I also welcome Cameron’s pledge for immunisation 243 million children to keep with the millennium development child mortality goal. Far, far too often are third world deaths completely and utterly preventable and especially by such quick and easy means.

We should not be afraid to accept our similarities when they arise and so on this exceptionally rare occasion (and I mean exceptionally rare), thank you Cameron.

Max

Right this had to be cleared up. As you probably know the Telegraph recently published leaked documents on Ed Balls’ role in the Gordon Brown’s camps attempt to oust Blair. It seems from the documents that Balls was a primary agitator in the attempts to demand a leaving date from Blair and presenting Brown as a Prime Minister in waiting……..well is any of this new? Of course not! Will it effect his ability to do his job as Shadow Chancellor? Again, of course not! Will it mean Balls will follow a similar path to his former master, Brown and attempt to oust Ed Miliband? Of course not as unlike Blair and Brown, Balls and Miliband actually ran against each other in the leadership election which was conclusively resolved (if you exclude disgruntled sore-loser supporters of David Miliband). And frankly, Labour is far beyond the petty squabbles of the Blair-Brown and is a largely united force unlike after losing power in the 1950s and 1980s. So all of this is totally irrelevant, we have moved on.

There’s also accusations that Balls alongside Brown ignored warnings and continued spending increases well above inflation and so further created a deficit before the crash of 2008. Come off it! These claims were directed around the year of 2006….when Balls was merely a back-bench MP. Of course you have to remember this is coming from the Telegraph and these claims have jumped on by particularly Michael Gove. This is all very well, but Gove fails to mention that Gideon was committed rigorously to Labour’s spending plans up until the 2008 crash and that on the eve of the 2008 crash Brown had a lower deficit than he had inherited back in 1997 as Chancellor.

Max

Thought you’d like this one. Not sure of the actual date but clearly it is before the general election in 2010.

Max

First off. I’d like to point that I respect the decision of the people of Britain in a resounding ‘No’ vote to AV. It’s a shame further electoral reform has been buried for a century, but I’m not a Lib Dem so I’ll get over it. But, I would like to explain why ‘No’ won.

The primary reason for a ‘No’ victory was Clegg’s insistence in holding the referendum on the same day as local elections across England, the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and Northern Irish Assembly elections. Because of this the people regarded the referendum as one on Clegg rather than a change to the voting system, consequently, due to Clegg’s unpopularity the referendum could have never been won. The coinciding with the local elections was further capitalised on by the ‘No to AV’ campaign, blatantly spreading personal attacks on the Lib Dems and more specifically Clegg himself. Admittedly, I myself am not the Lib Dems biggest fan any more and the ‘Yes’ side was not perfect either in the campaigning, but the Tories completely refusing to discredit the personal attacks which only gave them legitimacy.

This was because the ‘No to AV’ campaign, despite all the publicity of its Labour supporters, was in effect another Tory ‘No to AV’ group and any attempt to deny this is just misguided. The ‘No to AV’ group was 90% funded by Conservative donors and famously in areas of London ‘Labour No to AV’ leaflets had to be withdrawn because of printing at the bottom that read “produced by the Conservative party”. The ‘No to AV’ campaign went even further down the line than merely personal attacks, they also went on a blatant lying spree with famously the £250 million and vote counting machines claim. The reason why we now no this was a blatant lie was because prominent Labour supporter of ‘No to AV’, David Blunket, actually admitted that the £250 million claim was a figure they plucked out of the air. Now while it was a blatant lie (coupled with the “If you vote Yes this baby/soldier will die” lie) it was an effective lie.

This then leads finally onto the effectiveness of the ‘Yes’ campaign which was nothing less than a shambles. There was no coherent and simple message to sell to the British people and their entire campaign group was made up of Lib Dems and a number of charities, with the former being only good at localised, targeted campaigns.

But anyway, electoral reform is now buried for another century, it was good while it lasted, but it’s time to move on.

Max

I’ve now returned to Birmingham after a week in which the Coalition managed to look incompetent and shambolic as well as cruel. We’ve had Willetts admitting he is content to see poorer students having to settle for a degree at their local sixth form, rather than enjoying the full university experience; Norman Tebbit joining the near-univeral coalition against the NHS transformation; U-turns on defence spending and health to add to the growing list which includes school sports and buildings, forests, and even the Downing Street cat; and of course Nick Clegg. When he hasn’t been complaining that he is the nation’s ‘punchbag’ or facing criticism from his own son, he has been making some interesting comments about social mobility.

I am not going to slam the Deputy Prime Minister for having had a leg-up from his neighbour (a peer of the realm) in order to get an internship at a bank (it had to be a bank), because I challenge anyone reading this – assuming I have a readership – not to have seized the opportunity in the same way if they were in Nick’s position. A Labour party which wants social justice and equality of opportunity from birth should not be blaming someone for a background thay had no control over, and that even includes Cameron who had someone put a word in from Buck House. However, Clegg’s attempts at addressing the age-old problem of the ‘It’s who you know’ culture were embarrassing, coming at the same time this government is slashing Sure Start centres, EMA, univeristy budgets and allowing socially divisive ’free’ schools to blossom up and down the country.

I spoke to people this week in the valleys who have Masters’ degrees who have spent over a year unemployed – young people with ambition, drive and what should be a promising career ahead of them. I overheard sixth form students on the bus complaining that they had not been accepted for any of their UCAS choices, despite the prediction of 4 As at A-level. I have personally had difficulty finding summer placements when I am not lucky enough to be able to work unpaid for six months in central London. Nick Clegg’s diagnosis was correct, but there is far more to it than setting an example to almost-bankrupt businesses by paying interns at Lib Dem HQ.

We need a new cultural shift in this country, brought about by government, where the disadvantaged are caught as soon as possible and at every stage of their lives are helped to gain the same opportunities as the better off. This should not involve positive discrimination or handouts, but should involve investment in our young people which other European countries manage while they bail out their neighbours, but we seem to think is unaffordable. A national internship scheme or national bursary programme, complementing investment in careers education (which at the moment is dire) to inform young people that they are just as talented and ambitious as the more privileged, and what opportunities are out there for the taking, is desperately needed. The underlying factors, such as affordable transport, need to be subsidised so someone who lives in the middle of nowhere with no ‘contacts’ can get work experience in a city near them.

There are important elections coming up in the devolved nations and local councils in England. Young people should be demanding better from the government and their local councils at the ballot box, and should express their dissatisfaction with the Coalition, which just doesn’t get it.

It was without a doubt Labour was going to win the Barnsley Central by-election, but what wasn’t known was the margin and the performance of the other parties. The results are as follows for those who don’t know:

Labour-60.8% (47.3% in 2010)

UKIP-12.19% (4.7%)

Conservative-8.25% (17.3%)

BNP-6.04% (8.9%)

Independent (Tony Devoy)-5.23% (1.6%)

Liberal Democrat-4.18% (17.3%)

This represents nothing less than a whitewash for the Lib Dems, second place to sixth and losing their deposit is nothing less than humiliating. The Tories fared little better losing around half of their support. Yes, Labour was always going to win this seat, but what we have here is resoundingly bloody brilliant win as public opinion ever so gradually begins to swing against the Coalition.

Max

As I noticed on the BUCF blog today, they have made their position clear on the upcoming referendum, no guesses what side. Now this is the first nation-wide referendum since the 1975 referendum on whether the UK should stay in the EEC, but, BULS officially doesn’t have an opinion on the matter. Now unlike the Lib Dems Youth Society and BUCF, BULS is a far broader church in regards to electoral reform with all forms of voting being supported by individual members, FPTP, AV, AV+ and STV. However, I’m pleased to officially announce that this may well change, as on (probably) the 24th March BULS will have an internal debate and vote on the direction of support for the referendum with “Yes”, “No” and “Neither” being BULS’ final decision on the referendum (ironically using an AV system). This blog is where I’ll put the case for a “Yes” vote for BULS.

One of the great myths of AV is that it fails to produce strong and stable governments. If you look to Australia  and its AV system since 1910 there have been only two hung Parliaments, 1940 and 2010. Comparing this to the UK’s FPTP system where we have had hung Parliaments twice in 1910, 1929, February 1974 and 2010, not to forget almost hung Parliaments in 1950, 1964 and October 1974. While in Canada where they also use FPTP, there are more less permanent hung Parliaments.

The second is that people who vote for minor parties get two votes, which simply fails to acknowledge one of the simple aspects of AV. Candidates who are eliminated also have any first preference votes they received eliminated also. So no, people can’t vote twice.

And thirdly is that AV is not tried and tested unlike FPTP. For those in the “No” camp from the Tory party who fail to remember that AV (or at least a similar form of it) was used in the 2005 leadership election and if FPTP had been used, David Davis would have been elected leader of the Conservative party. AV is also used to elect people in charities, businesses, trade unions and even MPs electing their speaker. Hypocrisy is consequently laid bare for some politicians and political party members who oppose the referendum.

AV represents a change to end tactical voting, MPs appealing to a narrow section of their constituents and wasted votes. I’ll be voting “Yes” on March the 24th and May the 5th, I hope you can do the same on at least the latter.

Max

p.s. This is my 200th blog(!) making ‘Ramsay’s F Word’ the largest single category on the BULS website!

‘Unemployment is a price worth paying’ were the words that showed millions of Britons what the Tories really know about ordinary people. As unemployment rises again, and youth unemployment in particular is about to hit 1 million, my belief is that the people, and the Big Society, are better off when we are in work. It is especially important for young people to get a foothold in work and is certainly in the interest of both society, and HM Treasury to ensure that as many young people as possible can get work, or continue in further education.

There is a fundamental contradiction in Tory rhetoric about worklessness. At once they are carving a deep wound in our public services, and ‘cutting’ the jobs, and therefore the lives, of thousands of public sector workers. They cut the Future Jobs Fund, a vital programme which provided 18-24 year olds who had been out of work for six months with temporary employment. They abolished Education Maintenance Allowance, which provided thousands of less well off children the chance to afford further qualifications to help them compete in the labour market.  And they quashed the opportunity for 10,000 young people to go to university this year. At the same time the benefit budget is slashed and the coalition promise to get people off benefits and back into work. Where will these jobs come from? And what do those unable to find work, or unable to work at all, do when their benefits are reduced?

The Tories believe the private sector will provide these jobs, that private businesses will create well over 2 million jobs in the next few years. When the private sector created little more than 300,000 jobs between 1993 and 1999, I think everybody can see this for the nonsense it is.

But what would Labour do? The pathetic Tory response to all the criticism has been to point at the lack of concrete policy detail from Labour. They might say that this was a tactic we used while in Government. The fundamental difference is that Labour showed the Tory manifesto up for what it was. Lies, dishonesty, manipulation and branding with barely a sniff of the horror that a Tory government would really unleash. Labour were right.

This is what Labour would have done. We would have kept Education Maintenance Allowance, as Michael Gove promised before the election, thereby helping thousands of young people stay in education and encouraging aspiration. We would have given those 10,000 young people the chance to go to university, the chance to better themselves and more than pay off the cost of their education to the tax payer. And we would have protected the Future Jobs Fund, a scheme which helped 50% of young claimants move off benefits after their placement, and which the coalition advisor Frank Field called “one of the most precious things the last government was involved in, a lifeline that no amount of ‘New Deal’ rhetoric ever offered the unemployed”.

The Tories don’t understand people. They don’t care about people. Otherwise they would realise that every job cut is an assault on a family, every child that has to drop out of college is a slammed door on the future of this country, and every moment a person spends fearful of their prospects will eat away at our ‘big society’.

Jake

Growth stalling, inflation rising and unemployment rising, for all the Tories comparison themselves and 1979 coming in “to clean up Labour’s mess”, it seems this government more reflects the 1970s than did Labour. Now, in BULS we’re wise enough to recognise that this ‘stagflation’ is not due to the cuts (as they are still yet to take fully effect yet) but rather the ending of Darling’s economic stimulus.

Up until the growth figures came out last month I personally very much doubted that the UK would actually slip into a full blown double-dip recession, but rather ‘bump along the bottom’. Since these figures have been produced, I fear there is a very good chance now. If this continues and even if worsens when the cuts bite (which I have a feeling they will do) Labour will have the sad duty of saying “don’t say we didn’t warn you” as throughout the election we campaigned to keep investment in the economy until 2011. But, I hope for the sake of the people of Britain, that day never comes.

Max

As I haven’t blogged in a while, and looming essay deadlines have delayed a number of crudely started blogs, I thought I’d share a picture I took during the 2010 election. My hometown of Eastbourne was considered a fairly safe Tory seat until 2005, when tactical voting turned it into a Tory-Lib Dem marginal. 2010 saw it turn a sickly shade of orange as even more tactical voting brought the Lib Dems narrowly to power. This is exactly the sort of seat where Labour can really hit the Con-Dem coalition in the upcoming council elections. To take seats, or even just to push incumbent candidates close, in areas where Labour was non-existent in 2010, would see a lot of shaky knees in the Liberal Democrats, and the Tories too.

"Jeremy, what do we like again?" "Check the sign dear" "Oh yes; money."

But on a light hearted note, if you want to see just how dispirited local Tories were in Eastbourne, when it became obvious they were going to lose, just look at this photo. They even had to persuade themselves to vote!

Jake

Now, I’m not going to focus on Alan Johnson, Suzy has already dealt with that, but I just like to say he’ll be surely missed from the front-line politics.

Anyway, we move onto Johnson’s successor, Ed Balls. Now to many Tories, they will regard this as a late Christmas present. The well oiled Tory party machine has already been making well-directed attacks towards Gordon Brown’s former chief economic’s adviser and playing at his past which was so intertwined with the Blair-Brown feud. Yes, Balls was a major figure during the feuds, but as a wise Baboon once said “Oh yes, de past can hurt. But the way I see it you can either run from it, or learn from it.” (the wise Baboon being Rafiki from the Lion King……..BULS draws wisdom from many walks of life). Yes, Balls’ part in the feud was far from his finest hour and many of the economic policies did contribute to the financial crisis (will come back to the latter part later). But, this is a time for Balls in particular to shape his own image and reputation. As Shadow Chancellor, with his deep knowledge of economics, he will be able to establish at least a broad thinking idea of Labour’s alternative and most likely rip Gideon to shreds in the process (I particularly like the idea of the latter).

With growth beginning to slow, inflation and unemployment rising, there has been no better time to be an “attack dog”. But the Tory-led Coalition is quick point out the failures of economic policy Labour made. We did make great progress under ‘New’ Labour, but we also made grave mistakes. But, to counter the Tory-party machine, we do need strong responses in order as well as humility about our record. When Cameron (or indeed anyone) criticises Labour failing to regulate the banks, quote back Gideon and Cameron’s years of calling for further de-regulation. And when Cameron claims Labour’s spending caused the deficit, don’t forget to remind them that Conservative spending policies before the 2008 crash would have rigidly stuck to Labour’s. The Tory-lead Coalition’s deceit cannot last forever and hopefully, Ed Balls can dispel the rhetoric as soon as.

Max

Well the results are in and yes, the most important point of the night, Labour has kept Oldham red. With a 48% turnout (down on May’s 61%) the results are as follows:

Labour – 42.1% of the vote (31.9% in May)

Liberal Democrats – 31.9% (31.6%)

Conservatives – 12.8% (26.4%)

UKIP – 5.8% (3.9%)

BNP – 4.8% (5.7%)

So the first good result you can see (apart from Labour winning) is that the BNP lost its deposit, always a good thing. But without a doubt the most notable result of the night was the complete collapse of the Conservative vote, yes, third parties are always squeezed, especially in by-elections, but not to this extent. A 14% slump in the vote is rather unheard of, leading to a 11% swing from Tory to Labour (a swing I could very easily get used to). It seems that a combination of tactical voting and a half-hearted campaign by CCHQ, despite insistence otherwise, is going to mean DC will have some stuff questions to answered by from his backbenchers.

Also, great to note that Labour’s majority in Oldham (3558) is now higher than it was in 1997, during Labour’s peak.

Max

Given I’m one of BULS’s token few Northerners, I though it would be appropriate to have a blog on the upcoming by-election. Cautious confidence is probably the best way to describe Oldham East and Saddleworth. Already we have seen a number of polls from ICM and Populus showing Labour having a around 17% lead over the Lib Dems (with a surprising slump in support for the Tories). However, another  polling company, Survation, has recorded the Labour leader being 1&(!!). Labour are the bookies favourite to win, but, I cannot stress any less without doubt, not to slacked the momentum. This is the first time in years that the Lib Dems wont be all masterful in by-elections.

Throughout the entire campaign the Lib Dem candidate and Cleggy have been emphasising that this by-election is about selecting a new local MP. I’d have to agree that this is what it ought to be about, but since when have by-elections ever been about local issues?

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.

1. The minimum wage
2. Devolution
3. Privatisation
4. Northern Ireland Peace Process (this began under the Thatcher/Major governments but was finished under Labour, so obviously can’t take full credit)
5. Sure start

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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:

• It has forced those who work so diligently to offset their well-earned retirement plans, by increasing the retirement age. This is compounded by a further £3.5 billion worth of contributions that have to be made by public sector workers for their pension schemes.
• The departmental cuts total £46 billion, including 27% from local government, 29% from the environment and 23% from the Home Office.
• It has taken a further £50 a week from those who genuinely claim incapacity benefit, and has stripped another £7 billion from the Welfare budget (the equivalent of £1000 a year from 7 million families) on top of the £11 billion cuts announced previously. Those depending on tax credits and housing benefits will now get a significant amount less or nothing at all.
• 40% cut in Higher Education- stifling the chances of many innovative and bright young people to excel in the world of academia. My thoughts on this are in a previous blog written recently.
• The Ministry of Defence will face an 8% reduction in funding which equates to the loss of 42,000 army personnel or civil servant jobs over the next five years.
• He announced that the commitment to the renovation and new building of social housing will be cut by 60% over the next four years.

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

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

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

Actual footage of a Tory MPs views on the NHS……………………………..thankfully not, but funny all the same, enjoy. (Sorry it’s slightly out of sinc)

Max

The month is April 2010. The location is Joe’s Bar in the Guild. A lively debate is taking place over four pints of beer.

“So you’re trying to tell me that the Conservatives are anti-poor, anti-gay, anti-women, anti-public services.”

“Basically, yeah.”

“Well then you’re full of **** because I heard Cameron’s speech on the NHS and he says he’s gonna protect it! They haven’t mentioned anything about punishing the poor either, you’re just making that up, cos we’re all in this together. And they have gay front-benchers, and JUST in case you’ve forgotten Thatcher was a woman.”

How many times have we experienced this rebuttal? This battle for hearts and minds, with us hungover in scruffy jeans on one side and Cameron’s big air-brushed face on the other?

And how many people came back to us over the following months and said “Mate, I’m sorry, if I’d known they were gonna cut my cousin’s benefits I wouldn’t have voted for them.”

But by then it’s too late. We need a shorthand, to unpick all the rhetoric, all the speeches, all the elaborate policies with questionable motives. Left and Right.

To say that a party is right wing is to know its history. Its history of opposing measures for the greater equality of gender, race and sexuality. Its financial backers in big business, its think tanks and advisers comprising the bigoted, the religiously extreme, the regressive. Its instincts to offload responsibility, make a profit, and favour choice over health and happiness. How it will respond in a crisis, where its priorities will lie, what it wants to achieve and the kind of country it’ll leave behind as its legacy.

Right wing and left wing speak for themselves.

And once you understand the divide you can read between the lines of speeches, because you know the place they are coming from in the first place. Ed Miliband declaring that he’s not in the pockets of Unite isn’t going to scare the Unions because they also know that they share a common, left wing, goal with Ed to defend workers against cuts. Whereas Cameron promising not to include the NHS in his cuts was a plea to those old enough to remember the last Tory government for another chance.

Right wing and left wing are more important than election promises. Years after everyone has forgotten that speech that leader made at conference the backbone of the party is still the same, and will react to each new problem in an essentially typical way. Giving credit to the Tories for cutting child benefit for the relatively wealthy is to silently acknowledge that it’s a surprise, that it’s essentially out of character, that it’s even a little bit left wing, because the true right-wing instinct would be to just scrap it altogether.

But that would make them unelectable.

Suzy

Let’s be clear this is a Conservative lead government implementing predominately Tory policy bar a few half-hearted attempts at Lib Dem fig leaves, such as the referendum on AV. Recently there has been a lot of anti Lib Dem rhetoric thrown about by the Labour leadership candidates, especially by Ed Miliband who I support incidentally. This kind of rhetoric against the Lib Dems in government, in my opinion is short sighted, too tribal and ignores the true architects of the cuts regime: the Tories.

It will get a loud cheer from the Labour party faithful and applause from the gallery but anti liberal democrat rhetoric places the Labour party in permanent opposition if it continues on this path. As a party we have to be ready to talk and work with other parties on the left as most of the wider public now like coalitions and politicians working together. Of course as a party we should focus on winning a majority at the next general election but after such a heavy defeat in the spring and the way this has election panned out I believe that will be difficult to achieve in only one term. However we should be ready, unlike in May, for a coalition government, we should be looking to work with the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party and others on the pluralistic left to make sure a Tory government is a thing of the past. With a progressive alliance we can place the Tory’s in opposition indefinitely.

As well as Labour swallowing its tribal instincts, this kind of politics is very much dependant on the electoral system. I would be in favour of a more proportional system possibly in the form of AV+ however this is not on the referendum ballot paper although I hear Caroline Lucas is mounting an amendment to add it on. Despite the A.V referendum being placed alongside the gerrymandering of constituencies in the same bill, the next leader, whoever it is, should campaign for a ‘yes’ vote. The alternative vote would make coalitions governments more likely and be a step in the right direction to making parliament more representative and go a way to gaining lost trust in the political system. In May as a Labour party we should show the public we are grown up politicians, ready to be an effective opposition but more importantly a credible government. That means as Martin Kettle states in his draft Labour leader speech in Friday’s Guardian, and I paraphrase ‘I will stand shoulder to shoulder with Nick Clegg on this issue’

Come May 2015 the electoral map will look very different, and a Lab-Lib coalition might be very much on the cards. The Labour party has to swallow its tribal instincts and be ready for coalition. Coalitions are here to stay; the country and the labour party can’t afford to be prevented from going into government because it can’t accept a pluralistic vision of politics. Labour needs to not retreat into the introverted tribalism that has marked some of the last five years of power. To avoid a prolonged spell in the wilderness, Labour must look to the wider public and move to a more pluralistic form of doing politics.

Sam Murphy @Murphys_Law19

Student and Labour party activist, South Staffordshire District council candidate in May.

“We are all in this together” is the famous six worded sentence announced by George Osborne at the time of the emergency budget. However, this declaration has taken yet another blow. Despite the budget already being proved to hit women, ethnic minorities and the north disproportionally more, it is now revealed that the Scotland’s, Wales’ and Northern Ireland’s First, Deputy and Finance Ministers also concur that we are indeed not all in this together. An extract from the joint statement can be found here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11493001 and so proves that no, it isn’t Labour in denial over the figures, in this declaration we have the DUP, Sinn Fein, SNP and Plaid Cymru as well. And no, they aren’t doing this to gain popularity with a “tussle” with the government in London; they are doing this because what the Coalition is doing in regards to the structural deficit is in fact not in the national interest. But rather a backdrop for ideological dogma, as placed extremely well by the columnist Polly Toynbee, “Blue ideology comes well disguised at a time when all cuts, however extreme, can be disguised as necessity.”.

This is also reflected recently on the daily politics show recently where it was revealed that since David Cameron became leader in 2005 Tory party membership has dropped by a third(!) in the space of five years, yes Labour’s dropped throughout 13 years in government, but this is something quite phenomenal and while in opposition too. This is in direct contrast to Labour membership which has shot up since May 6^th with what I’m proud to announce, 65 new fully fledged members of BULS at the fresher’s stall and a further 150 added to the emailing list.

Max

In tomorrow’s Sun is published a significant result for the Labour party. For the first time in three years the Labour party is ahead in the polls http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2814 at Lab-40%, Con-39%, LD-12%. Yes, it is the tiniest of margins and yes it may be even a freak poll, but it is as significant as the Coalition’s approval ratings slipping into negative for the first time and the public disapproving of the Government’s austerity measures for also the first time last month.

However, do not get complacent! While we may be ahead in the polls a large amount over the next five years, it is certainly no guarantee of victory. Just look at Thatcher’s first term in office, hugely unpopular for most of her term and then went onto win a landslide (though admittedly it is unlikely the Coalition will have any Falkands War to help save them). Labour must be the clear, viable alternative to the Coalition, or else who knows how big the “Big Society” will be or how long will the new age of austerity last as nothing in Politics is inevitable or definite.

Max

I know it’s a bit late but it’s worth noting that that last week the coalition’s approval ratings entered negative for the first time yet (-2, 39 approve, 41 disapprove) in a YouGov Daily Tracker poll (http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2786). Admittedly this may be a fluke result and also there are evidently a lot of “don’t knows”.  But, given the government have still yet to enact any spending cuts, things are going to get very bad, electorally, for the coalition soon. It’s safe to say this is a rather quick fall from grace and probably the first of many many more negative ratings to come.

Max

Boy George (Osborne), DC (Cameron) and Cleggy have all ardently claimed that the recent “emergency budget” was hardwired into being a “progressive” budget and that the poor would be shielded from the upcoming years of austerity and that in the words of DC, “we are all in this together”…….what he forgot to add was “…unless you’re rich but you’re particularly in if you’re poor”.

A recent report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), Britain’s leading independent tax organisations completely destroyed the coalitions claims that the budget is “progressive” but rather describing it as “clearly regressive as, on average, they hit the poorest households more than those in the upper middle of the income distribution in cash, let alone percentage, terms.”. Yes, you read the quote correctly; it hits the poorest harder in cash never mind percentage terms!

The IFS also said the poorest 10% of families would lose over 5% of their income as a result of the budget compared with a loss of less than 1% for non-pensioner households without children in the richest 10% of households. It added that the budget contrasted with the “progressive” plans for 2010-14 inherited from Labour, under which the richest 10% of households bore the brunt of the cuts.

Leaving aside whether it is a right or wrong descision to attempt to remove the structural deficit within 5 years, I can assure you know that the coalition will turn round and you use one of the oldest tricks in the books, blame the predecessors. Well let me say, don’t you even dare, don’t even dare, this is now totally the coalition’s doing. This is what happens when you have severe changes to housing benefit, disability allowances, tax credits and a deficit reduction plan that is totally out of balance in terms of cuts to taxation.

We all knew the Tories where bulling when DC stated that “we are all in this together” and that the Lib Dems had sold themselves out on economic policy, but now we have conclusive proof from a well respected independent body, all we can say now is, need we say more…

Max

David Cameron (DC) was today in none other than good ol’ Brum at a “PM direct” session (where I think BCF where present). Reading in the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/03/david-cameron-public-sector-cuts-permanent (sorry Sean but I saw it on Facebook) recently DC pledged at the session that once the deficit has been dealt with, funding will not be restored to public services.

Now to put this in perspective, DC (and recently Cleggy) have been arguing that the savage cuts they are going to make to the public sector are apparently “necessary”, leaving aside whether the ideas are right or wrong it is this key argument of “necessity” that has prevailed through. What we have seen here from DC is that no, the rate in which they are cutting is not in fact necessary but rather a pre-text for petty ideological goals and dogma.Essentially, what DC is saying is that once the deficit has been dealt with, the state will not return to help those in need, it won’t increase investment in the primary areas of the NHS, Police (which protect the health, safety and wellbeing of people) and Education which are three most important tiers of the public sector and social benefits to those truly in need them in any future troubles will also be stuck at their austerity levels.DC states that “How can we do things differently and better to give value for money?” which is understandably fair enough, if you’re going to spend money, it has to be at the best value for money, but there is a distinct line between “value for money” and downright underinvestment. I hope DC will have the humility one day to feel remorse for the pain he is about to cause for mere ideological dogma.

Max

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

I was watching question time last Thursday (yes I know this might be a bit late) and was pained to see none other than Vince Cable (the only Liberal Democrat I have a great degree of respect for) being effectively made to eat his own words from the general election campaign. It was quite clear that he hated every moment on the show and half of what he said he obviously did not personally believe.

Now the coalition was the best option open for the Liberal Democrats after the election, better to influence events on the inside than shout from the sidelines. But, one of their major failings is that they have for the time being, failed to give the coalition a distinct progressive edge. They failed to shift the burden of the Tory cuts onto the rich but rather onto the poor as argued by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Fuk%2F2010%2Fjun%2F23%2Fbudget-welfare-poor-ifs-report&h=94854p2-JAX6pOiaLB95ROte4HA and humiliatingly had to u-turn over a rise of VAT which topped the Tories era of austerity.

These failures are being noticed by the electorate, with support in a YouGov poll on the 5th May at a high 28%, while on the 25th June it was shown to have been decimated to a mere 16%. Another poll showed that 48% of people who voted for the Liberal Democrats at the last election are less inclined to do so again, primarily over the rise in VAT.

The future doesn’t look bright for Vince and his fellow Liberal Democrats, if the coalition does succeed the Tories will gain credit, being the dominant partner and if it fails, the Liberal Democrats will never again be able to regard themselves as a progressive force.

Max

Today saw George Osborne’s first ever budget as Chancellor in which Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats showed how much they had sold themselves out. Despite accusing Cameron of threatening to raise VAT with a re-run of the famous Tory poster of “Labour’s tax bombshell” have now agreed with their coalition partners to indeed raise VAT to 20% in which the house was in uproar! The thing with the VAT is that it is generic, it targets no specific group, so in other words, rather than taxing higher earners, it is those on middle to lower incomes who will suffer from this “tax bombshell”. Here is a rundown of the main aspects of the budget:

1. VAT will rise from 17.5% to 20% from January 4, 2011 (already touched upon but still rather ironic)
2. Councils which propose low council tax increases will be offered extra funds to allow them to freeze the tax for one year from April 2011 (would be great if we had the money)
3. Capital Gains Tax remains at 18% for low and middle-income savers but from midnight, higher rate taxpayers will pay 28% (now that I can agree with)
4. The capital gains tax “entrepreneurs relief” rate of 10% on the first £2m of gains will be extended to the first £5m (frankly if they earn that much they deserve a level of taxation, especially now)
5. No raise to alcohol, cigarettes and fuel (pity it wasn’t raised on cigarettes)
6. Low income families will get more Child Tax Credit – the amount per child will rise by £150 above the rate of inflation next year (again, I can agree with that)
7. Sure Start maternity grant will be restricted to the first child (kind of stupid, better have it the other way around as you will have more mouths to feed)
8. Corporation Tax will be cut next year to 27%, and by 1% annually for the next three years, until it reaches 24% (should be raised for bigger businesses in my eyes)
9. Average real terms budget cuts of 25% over four years – except for health and international aid (there goes my local bobby and half of the state sector teachers
10. Personal income tax allowance to be increased by £1,000 in April to £7,475 – worth £170 a year to basic rate taxpayers (the sole thing in this budget I would commend, obviously the Lib Dems managed to get A concession out).

VAT rise which will hit the poorest hardest and corporation tax cuts…….in the words of J. K. Rowling, “I’ve never voted Tory before, and they keep reminding me why.”

Max

For those of you who don’t know, Birmingham Conservative Future (BCF) held their Annual General Meeting (AGM) today. I don’t have all the results but here we are:

President: Sophie Shrubsole

Vice-President: Adam Jenner (Internal) & Tim Hasker (External)

Blog Editor: Max Genoni

Publicity Officer: Owen V. Williams

We congratulate everyone who stood and welcome the new committee and hope BCF will rejoin the Guild and become BUCF once more!

Max

Bowing to the judgement of the electorate, and in a dignified and timely manner, Gordon Brown has resigned as PM. As he refused to back a candidate for the Party leadership, so he refused to mention Clegg or Cameron, instead telling the waiting cameras how much he has enjoyed the opportunity to do good that his job has offered, and how much he’s looking forward to focussing on being a husband and father.

BULS pays tribute to his many years of devoted service, his economic prowess and his honest and heartfelt efforts to improve the lot of the British people and the world’s poorest.

As for the new coalition government, my feelings are summed up in this pithy poem:

Roses are red,

Labour are too

We were right when we warned them

Vote yellow get blue

But here’s to making the most of opposition. Here’s to laughing in the face of compromise and putting our Labour values first. Here’s to spending more time and effort in constituencies and local government. Here’s to doing everything we can to make this time count. And here’s to getting back in as soon as the electorate deems us worthy.

Suzy

Labour had 191 women PPCs prior to this election, which has translated into 81 women MPs – 31% of Labour MPs.

For comparison:

Labour had 101 women MPs in 1997, 24% of the total.

And the tories in 2010?

48 women MPs. 15% of the total.

Labour have also provided parliament with its first 3 muslim women MPs – Rushanara Ali of Bethnal Green and Bow, Yasmin Qureshi of Bolton South East and Shabana Mahmood of our very own Birmingham Ladywood!

And 12 other black or ethnic minority MPs – Diane Abbott kept Hackney North and Stoke Newington, Keith Vaz kept Leicester East, Marsha Singh of Bradford West, Sharma Virendra of Ealing Southall, Gavin Shuker of Luton South, Khalid Mahmood of our own Birmingham Perry Barr, the great David Lammy of Tottenham, Sadiq Khan of “yes we Khan” fame and Tooting, Mark Hendrick of Preston, Anas Sarwar of Glasgow Central, Chuka Umunna of Streatham and Dr Chinyelu Susan Onwurah of Newcastle Central.

That’s 5.8% of Labour MPs. We’re almost there on representation, at least as regards sex and ethnicity!

So proud to be Labour. Our party prioritises equality. You can’t say fairer than that.

Suzy

Firstly I’d like to thank BULS for electing me to the post of director of social media. Otherwise I would never have joined Twitter and therefore never have been made aware of who Philippa Stroud is and what she stands for. 36 hours after the story broke on the front page of the Observer all other major papers (apart from the Telegraph which played it down) and even the BBC have maintained a deafening silence on the issue. Ken Livingstone raised the issue on the Daily Politics show and was hushed up by the presenters.

But it’s been trending #1 on Uk twitter for 24 hours, the facebook event “Lets help Philippa Stroud get better” has 62 members and the facebook group “If Cameron cares an ounce about LGBT people, he’ll sack Philippa Stroud” has 1,544 members and counting.

This is big news, and it’s simply not being reported by the Murdoch press. The silence of the BBC, to whom, according to Stonewall UK the LGBT community contribute £190 million annually in license fees on this issue is shameful.

So what has Philippa Stroud done?

Having stood as a Conservative PPC in Ladywood Birmingham in 2005 she is now standing for Sutton and Cheam in South London. In 1989 she founded the King’s Arms Project – a Christian night shelter offering counselling to drug addicts, alcoholics, and LGBT people. She believed homosexuality was caused by demons, and could be cured by prayer and exorcism.

There has been no statement of apology or explanation from the Conservative party or David Cameron, Philippa Stroud herself having issued a statement which leaves lots of questions unanswered: ”I make no apology for being a committed Christian. However, it is categorically untrue that I believe homosexuality to be an illness and I am deeply offended that The Observer has suggested otherwise. I have spent 20 years working with disturbed people who society have turned their back on and are not often supported by state agencies; drug addicts, alcoholics, the mentally ill and the homeless that I and my charitable friends in the public sector have tried to help over the years. The idea that I am prejudiced against gay people is both false and insulting.“

She refused to comment on whether she believes LGBT people can be cured by the power of prayer, and whether she includes them under her definition of “disturbed people” or the “mentally ill”. She may not be prejudiced against the LGBT community in that she would treat them the same as anyone else suffering from demon possession, but is clearly not pro-liberation.

As a member of the New Frontiers Church of which her husband is a minister she has also pledged to: “be subservient to the wishes of my husband in all things” and submit to “male servant leadership and joyful female submission” – a remarkable attitude for a prospective female MP. I wonder what her views on abortion, same-sex civil partnerships and LGBT adoption are?  And when it became OK for the state and religion to cross over in this manner?

For a full briefing of the recent LGBT gaffes committed by the Tories see http://issacgreaves.eu/attackoftheclones/

The public have a right to demand proper coverage, proper investigation and a proper apology or some heads on plates. Instead we have 768 google hits for Gillian Duffy , and only 9 for Philippa Stroud.

My only comfort is that she probably won’t get elected because the constituency in which she’s standing has a strong and popular Lib Dem MP Paul Burstow who is standing for re-election.

Suzy