Category Archives: National Politics

Vote Labour and Yes

by maxattacks

Today you have a chance to achieve two significant outcomes. First, if you believe the First Past The Post voting system no longer works and is completely indefensible then please vote ‘Yes’ in the referendum today for fairer votes and an end to tactical voting and wasted votes. Please do not base the AV referendum on petty party politics of Clegg/Cameron/Miliband.  Please leave that for the local elections, the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament elections as that is true place to tell the Coalition that they are cutting too far and too fast and to give you a voice in tough times through the Labour party.

Max

The problem with listening

by maxattacks

Chris Riddell 10 April 2011

If there’s one thing politicians need to do above all else is listen. Listen to experts, listen to other opinions irrespective of political allegiance and most importantly of all, listen to the people. Naturally then, I do welcome the pause in the break to the NHS reforms to allow Ministers to listen. Now, I’m not going to go onto the NHS reforms themselves as I’ve mentioned them enough on previous blogs. But, what I will blog about is the listening exercise itself.

After the Royal College of Nurses voted in favour in a vote of no confidence on Andrew Lansley a few days ago, the Health Minister claimed “I’m sorry if what I’m setting out to do hasn’t communicated itself…Listening to the vote this morning, if I’ve not got that message across then I apologise.”. Usually, I welcome apologises. Rather than showing a sign of ‘weakness’ they actually show a sign of humility and maturity. However, this so-called ‘failure to communicate’ is nothing less than patronising. What this is really saying is that we have failed to simplify the argument enough for you to understand, but we are still right and you are completely wrong. This don’t forget was just after 99% of delegates at the Royal College of Nurses conference deciding to vote in favour in a motion of no confidence in Lansley.

If the Health Minister is truly arrogant enough to believe that the Royal College of Nurses are too stupid enough to understand his proposals, he really has another thing coming.

Max

They Just Don’t Get It

by labourluke

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.

So much to talk about

by maxattacks

Apologises for the lack of  blogging lately. Been rather busy with essays, football match against BUCF (kinda) and general stuff back up north. Anyway, in that time there have been HUGE events in which I’d like to focus on. The NHS reforms (naturally), Portugal bail-out (naturally again) and University Minister, David Willetts, on Feminism.

First off, all I have to say on the NHS reforms is, thank god! No one wants these reforms. The BMA opposes it, the Lib Dems oppose it, 60% of GPs oppose the reforms and none other than Lord Tebbit opposes the reforms. If your too right-wing for Lord Tebbit, you know your policies have huge issues. Ian Duncan-Smith (IDS) even admitted that waiting times were already rising due to real term cuts to the NHS. Lansley has been hung out to dry by Cameron, lets only hope his reforms can also, permanently.

Now, naturally with the announcement of the bail-out for Portugal, Gideon jumped on the austerity bandwagon to claim that the cuts were right to prevent a similar situation occurring here in the UK. But if you stop, think and compare us, Portugal and other nation-states that have been bailed out you’ll see that this isn’t the case. For one thing, it’s important to note that prior to the bail-out, Portugal had had two austerity measures and three rises in VAT. Similarly, Ireland had been praised by the IMF in 2008 for “courageous” action for its austerity measures in an attempt to deal with its deficit. This naturally says something more about the problems of austerity than the problems of deficit/debt. For another thing, to say that Britain’s economy is anyway similar to Portugal’s/Ireland’s/Greece’s is absolutely ludicrous. We for one have a far, far larger economy than that of those countries, we have far more time to pay back our debts and most plainly of all, we’re not in the Euro so we can devalue our currency raise and lower interest rates. So please Gideon, don’t jump on the scaremongering bandwagon.

Finally, probably the least well known of the issues I’m focusing on is David Willetts’ comments on Feminism. Now, if you’ve been living in a cave the last couple of weeks what he said was that feminism was the “single biggest factor” for the lack of social mobility in Britain, as women who would otherwise have been housewives had taken university places and well-paid jobs that could have gone to ambitious working-class men. Now this is wrong and completely degrading on so many levels. Don’t get me wrong, Labour really didn’t do enough to tackle social mobility while in government. But feminism is in no way the cause of the problem. The true problem is the lack of aspiration from schools and deprived regions of the country to want young people to aim higher and also the problems of money that entail that. These comments also leave a more distasteful message. It is the assumption that women are out there, taking men’s jobs. Willets’ idea that women’s primary place is in the domestic household represents nothing less than a subliminal form of sexism. This is only exacerbated when he went onto excuse his comments with “It is not that I am against feminism,”.

This hasn’t been a good couple of weeks for the coalition.

Max

Just a very quick note

by maxattacks

Just a very quick break from my essay to indulge you with a little bit of information.

The BBC’s Stephanie Flanders has discovered that the Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR) is barred from testing alternative scenarios, so the government hopes no one will find out.

Is the Coalition scared of the OBR proving them wrong? From this it seems so…and now back to essay.

Oh and the best of luck for those going on the ‘March for the Alternative’ tomorrow in London! Do BULS proud!

Max

To AV or not to AV? That’s not the Question…

by labourluke

 

So the eagerly awaited and oh-so exciting AV referendum is now in sight, with Ed Miliband today setting out the Labour leadership’s opinion on one side, and many other Labour MPs and party members saying why they will be rejecting the proposal on the other. It does seem that the party is split down the middle – not a great position for an opposition party reassembling itself after electoral defeat. Incidentally, it is perhaps not the most shining example of ‘new politics’ or maturity when our leader refuses to unite with Nick Clegg because of his new status as Public Enemy Number One – surely there would be less cynicism in the electorate if we as an opposition party took each issue exclusively, instead of pointing the finger at the Tuition Fees Bogeyman.

The arguments for or against the Alternative Vote aside (I’m personally in the ‘Yes’ camp for want of something marginally further down the road to Proportional Representation), what strikes me the most after the disheartening advertising tactics of the ‘No’ camp (I’m sure you’ve seen the baby-in-incubator and soldier billboards) is the lack of interest amongst the wider electorate. Today I asked a friend of mine whether he had yet considered which way he would vote, and the reply was that it would make no difference to the political scene, so why should he bother? I wanted to answer his rebuttal, but found to my horror that I couldn’t. Whether or not we stick with First Past the Post or adopt AV will have little bearing on electoral outcomes on a national scale, only at constituency level (where AV would make elections far more interesting, as those who witnessed the Guild election results will testify), therefore the best we can hope for is the lesser of two evils, while those running for office continue to make vacuous or downright deceptive pledges in their election manifestos e.g. the marketisation of the NHS and tuition fees.

The real question on the ballot paper should not be ‘AV vs FPTP’, nor even the far more deomcratic ‘AV vs FPTP vs AV+ vs STV vs AMS…’, but something which reads less like a mathematical formula and more like a choice between two fundamental democratic frameworks that disillusioned voters can really get their teeth into. We need a choice over whether or not we want to overhaul the House of Lords (a process which has thus far taken a century); whether or not we want to de-throne and de-robe the monarchy; whether or not we want to reduce the stranglehold of the elites over our economy; in short, whether or not we want a new constitution. That is not to say the previous government had a gleaming record on constitutional affairs, although devolution and removal of hereditary peers were a good start. But by throwing a bone for the Lib Dem poodle in the form of a paltry referendum on AV, the Tories have got away with it again, whichever way we vote on May 5th.

The deficit blame game

by maxattacks

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not the biggest fan of the Head of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, but I do recognise he still know (at the very least) a fair bit about the economy. Now one of the reasons why there has been such little apathy or support for the cuts so far is that the Coalition has been always been able to simply say “Well we are just cleaning up the mess left by the previous Labour government.” which I can say if repeated as often as they do say, does make an impact and it does stick with you. But, that may well about to change.

Although he supports the Coalition’s current policies to cut the deficit (which I’ll disagree with, rightly so), he also over last weekend during the Tory’s spring conference in Wales stated that the real reason for the deficit was in fact not because of the last Labour government. Rather, like what we have been saying for the past two and a half years it was the fault of the banks and more stingingly of all that the action taken to address the financial crisis, in 2008 and 2009, “prevented a repetition of the Great Depression”.

Yes that’s right, the Governor of the Bank of England stated that 1. the deficit is not the fault of the last Labour government and 2. the economic stimulus was the right thing to do. If you’ve watched Question Time result over the last few weeks, the ‘deficit blame game’ is really not working.

Max

The case for AV

by maxattacks

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!

The Last Chapter for Libraries?

by labourluke

It was reported this week that our dear PM performed yet another U-turn (to add to the ever-growing list, which includes forests, school sports and even getting Larry the Cat) on the proposal to close a local library in his Witney constituency by Oxfordshire County Council, as reported in this week’s Independent on Sunday.

Not only is this flagrant hypocrisy given the closure of libraries on which local communities depend up and down the country, it is also ‘pork-barrelling’ of the lowest kind and an example that we are not in fact “all in this together”. The prospect of libraries being closed by local authorities who are facing savage cuts is deeply depressing – I, like so many other young people, relied on my local library for computer access growing up, but more importantly I was regularly able to borrow up to ten books at a time (some regrettably I forgot to return), discovering chuldren’s favourites like Jacqueline Wilson, Roald Dahl and Mark Twain in the process, alongside history books and encyclopaedias.

Not only is it divisive and running directly against the government’s intentions to mend our apparently ‘broken’ society, it is morally wrong to target the cuts on the poorest, the elderly and most importantly children, who have no vote and no say in how resources are allocated. Priorities have to be made, but library closures cannot even be justified on crude market terms, because they are still being used widely and are a lifeline for so many. It seems that the local lending library could be nearing its epilogue if we do nothing about it, with disastrous consequences for childhood literacy and social mobility.

Luke

AV? To you sir – I say ‘Meh’

by maxattacks

Meh. This is what I think to AV. After much consideration, I can’t help but feel a simple shrug of the shoulders is the best option.  I can see both the attractions and the downsides of changing the system but at the end of the day, for me, the timing is just wrong and promises about the new system could end up falling flat. A more proportional system is a great idea, but i say meh for two reasons.

One is the fact that, for once, Nick Clegg was in fact right when he called AV a ‘measly little compromise’. Why bother if you’re not going to go the whole hog? I actually don’t think AV will change our ‘culture of politics’ that much, still tending to leave us with a majority Labour or Conservative government, with the Lib Dems maybe being in with more of a shout at entering government  but with other small parties still essentially  not really factoring into it. The Electoral Reform Society has demonstrated how the election would have worked out had it been done under an AV system and, well, the result would have essentially been the same (http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/blog/?p=36) only fewer seat for the Tories and more for Labour and the Lib Dems.

Also, declaring that it will change politics is dangerous as when it doesn’t, politicians will only have disappointed us and it will simply be chalked up as yet another false promise from politicians to the people and do MPs really need another one of those?

Another thing is, well, isn’t the UK already going through enough of a transformation without adding this onto it? This is the main reason I am slightly meh towards it – now is not the time. The main debate is still on the economy and Conservative led cuts, which is where it ought to stay. Right now, people are far more concerned about the state of the economy and how secure their jobs are to be interested in the arguments regarding the way we vote; by the way I’m not saying people can’t cope with it, I’m saying people don’t want to hear it, big difference.

Labour need to be showing that there’s an alternative in the economic argument; we now have a shadow Chancellor that even I can see, being in another country, the Tories are scared of and when the Conservative- led government have already been in power for 9 months (yes it really has been that long …) and are STILL using the argument that problems with the economy are all Labours fault, people will quickly begin to tire of this and want action, looking to Labour to provide new and fresh policies which prove we are on their side, not to a party bickering about the voting system.

So, yeah. Meh to AV.

By Hannah Johnson, BULS member

Stagflation?

by maxattacks

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

Not another CRB check

by maxattacks

As being someone who has regularly worked with and volunteered for children organisations (Beaver Scouts, Young Amateur Swimming Clubs, etc) you would have thought I’d be over the moon with the Coalition’s plan to reduce checks to child workers. But what you’ll find is something rather mixed.

After completing countless CRB clearances for numerous organisations I do recognise the sheer scale of requirements needed, at times it really is just excessive. But, as much as I like the idea of removing so-called “red-tape” I’m equally aware of the present dangers this entails. Unlike buisnesses that complain about “red tape”, the importance of this “red tape” everyone should hold in a much higher importance given the potential dangers of child abuse.

It’s like when you go through security at an airport, yes it’s tedious, yes it takes forever and yes bits here and there are a tad unnecessary, but you feel a lot safer once you are in the air. The same is for CRB checks, yes bits are a bit unnecessary, but overall as the old saying says “It’s better to be safe than sorry.”.

Max

Beginning to see the light

by maxattacks

Like most in BULS, I for one have lost a lot of respect for the Liberal Democrats for numerous reasons. But as of yesterday, some faith has been restored. Nothing short of 90 Liberal Democrat Councillors of which 18 are leaders of local authorities wrote into the Times criticising the Coalition of the pace of the cuts.

Lib Dem Communities Minister Andrew Stunell had the cheek to urge his party members not to “fall out” over “pointless debate”. A “pointless debate”! There is nothing “pointless” about the Governments austerity programme. You may believe it is the right course of action, but this is so far from “pointless”.

This also feeds into a wider reality of Coalition of hypocrisy, the creation of the “Big Society” (however much a nice idea it may be) amongst a deep austerity programme. This is most symbolised in the scrapping of many libraries up and down the country which are bastions of localism.

Today my faith in one section of the Coalition was (ever so) partially restored; the same can probably never be said for the other section.

Max

Granted it’s a slight improvement

by maxattacks

Now here in BULS we are willing to give credit where credit is due, however slight it is. The Coalition has recently decided to raise the bank levy to £2.5 billion, up by £800 million. However, this is still not enough despite the improvement as the banks still face a tax cut of around a £1 billion when compared to the bankers bonus tax last year and that’s not even including the cut in corporation tax which means even with the bank levy the banks break even.

I’d also like to tackle the issue or argument that if you tax the banks too much they will move abroad. Well if you make it explicitly clear that this levy is just merely for the Parliament, even if the corporation tax cut doesn’t include the banks and the levy is higher, banks are not going to move abroad given they know it’s just for one Parliament, i.e. five years. So need to get into a big fuss.

Max

There’s No Such Thing As (the Big) Society

by labourluke

In an echo of the early years of the Thatcher government, where Michael Hestletine tried out some of his ‘experiments’ on the good people of Merseyside – culminating in the Toxteth riots and three million unemployed nationally – Liverpool has been at the centre of Cameron’s ‘Big Society’ pilot scheme. Until today that is.

The leader of (admittedly Labour led) Liverpool City Council today wrote to the Prime Minister explaining that it could not continue with the pilot as planned, because the money simply wasn’t there and key volunteering schemes are likely to be axed as a result. This is about as surprising a development as a premiership footballer being transferred to another club for an astronomical sum; it also demonstrates that, as predicted by many (including the general public, according to opinion polls) the Big Society will be stillborn.

How can the government expect people who work fulltime with children and cannot afford childcare (or even the bus fare) to run their own local services and volunteering projects, when there are no funds to back them up? This is set against the backdrop that the biggest cuts to local authorities are coming in places like Liverpool and Tower Hamlets rather than Witney and Cheshire. There are many people who are already overstretched from all ends of the income scale who give up their time to do good deeds in their local community, and these people should be praised. However if a youth drug rehabilitation centre is being run by people from the local community, who fills in and delivers this vital service when those who run it are either starved of funds or leave the area? The Big Society will lead to patchy and intermittent provision and disparities across local areas.

Less than a year since the election, and already the Big Society is being exposed for what it really is: at best, an ill-thought through policy written on the back of an envelope by someone who’s never been to areas of deprivation; or at worst, a cynical cover for an ideological slashing of spending on local authorities.

Luke

Come off it Dave

by maxattacks

This is an issue that’s very close to our hearts and many hearts of those in Birmingham University. It was revealed by the Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/8274663/Row-over-hike-in-university-vice-chancellors-pay.html)  that the University of Birmingham’s very own Vice-Chancellor, David Eastwood, was, including pension contributions, paid £392,000 last year. That’s right, nearly £400,000 a year! Not only that, this is (I think) twice as much as the Prime Minister is paid and it is also a 11% rise on the year before. 11%!! Now after proposing the new fees system that makes 77% of students worse off (that’s official numbers coming from the Institute of Fiscal Studies after much “number crunching”), he is has the audacity to award this astronomical pay rise. This is in contrary to budget cuts the University has made even long before the Browne Review in the Humanities departments and many of the lower paid staff (correct me if I’m wrong on this one) receiving a 1% pay rise. But with inflation rising this equates to a rather substantial cut.

Now I accept Eastwood can’t stop the imminent cuts coming from the government to the Higher Education budget and I accept Vice-Chancellors should be paid a decent wage (so to speak) for their job. But at least have the grace to truly be “all in this together” and stop this obscene display of out-of-touchness (if you get what I mean) with the rest of the student population at whole. It won’t stop the cuts either way, but the message is blatantly and strikingly clear David Eastwood. Make your choice for 2011.

Max Ramsay, Vice-Chair-elect

Uni’s Not For Me

by labourluke

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-12324225

It took me a long time to decide which issue to discuss on my first blog for Birmingham University Labour Students, as there are a myriad of things to be angry and anxious about at the moment thanks to the Con-Dem coalition. I pondered the dismantling of the NHS; the upcoming AV referendum and the scrapping of EMA, however an article which popped up on the BBC News website meant it had to be the tuition fees rise and its ramifications – BULS is, after all, a university society.

The latest development in this sorry saga is today’s latest UCAS admissions figures for 2011 entry, the last year before the trebling of fees in many instances alongside the ten per cent rise in salary of our Vice Chancellor. They reveal the stark reality that – despite what the government assures us – people are being turned off the idea of higher education in large numbers, most of whom will undoubtedly be from less privileged backgrounds. In the year that was supposed to be the ‘boom’ year of applications to beat the raising of the threshold in 2012, the number of applications only rose by five per cent, which in comparison with recent years and predicted trends is a sharp decrease in interest in degree courses.

Most disturbing of all was the plummeting of applications to -2 per cent in December, as the protests raged in central London and the heir to the throne’s wife was nudged with a stick. A brief fillip this may have been, but it demonstrates clearly that sixth-formers and school-leavers are seriously reconsidering their futures, weighing up whether it is really worth that much in debt only to come out jobless at the end of it. Just like the growth statistics, the figures are shocking, but not surprising considering the coalition’s arrogance and dogged determination to see through their most regressive and unpopular policies – which affect the poorest hardest – before the public realise what has hit them.

By Luke Jones, Communications Officer-elect

MP numbers

by maxattacks

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m all for reducing the expense of Parliament, or in fact any government funded institution as long it is not to the detriment of it’s ability to provide the service, except under special circumstances. So originally during the general election campaign last year one of the few things Cameron argued for that I could agree with was cutting the number of MPs by 10%. However, after a few months of thought and all this talk of the “new” politics that I began to have my own doubts over the issue. To establish a “new” politics is not to change the institutions and systems of government (although I’d like to see that as well), but rather the mannerisms, tone and attitude that it is carried out in.

The peak of this was without doubt the expenses scandal, which after years of gradual erosion of trust for politics the public were finally convinced of politics’ corruption and inabilities. However, the expenses scandal was merely just the final heavy straw on years of building perception that MPs were not engaging with their constituents and their general over the top behaviour in the House of Commons. Now don’t get me wrong, their are many MPs that do in fact engage with constituents to voice their opinions and grievances such as, Gisela Stuart in Edgbaston, Steve McCabe in Selly Oak, my own home MP, Lindsay Hoyle in Chorley and I’m sure many more MPs whatever their political party allegiance. But many MPs in safe seats don’t pull their weight.

So to get to the point, cutting MP numbers will actually rather create a “new” politics will result in a more out of touch politics. People need to see their MPs at local events, at local surgery’s and most importantly, on their doorstep and cutting the number is not going to help that one bit.

By Max Ramsay, Vice-Chair-elect

Double dip?

by maxattacks

I’ve never studied economics before

Now, I’ve never really been one for thinking that the government’s austerity programme would actually throw the UK back into a double dip recession. What was always my belief, and the belief of many others is that the economy would merely ‘bump along the bottom’ and have only a bit of growth and then begin to take off a few years down the line. What has happened and very unfortunately is that growth in the final quarter of 2010 actually contracted by 0.5%. That’s right, the economy shrank by 0.5%.

Now unlike the Tories during the recession in 2008 and 2009 I accept there is more to this than merely blaming the government of the day. The global economy is still in a very fragile state (something we argued during the general election) and the severe weather during December will have played it’s part. But, this is where my sympathy falls short. One of the biggest contributor’s to the contraction was the construction industry, shrinking by 3.3%(!). And why is this you may ask? Well, of course one of the major reasons was the ‘Emergency Budget’ and the scrapping of the Building Schools for the Future.

It seems the Tory-led Coalition seems completely incapable of realising the links between the public and private sector. If you cancel contracts, it will hit the private sector. If you do little to tackle the slowly rising unemployment, then where will the demand for the private sector come from? And if you think this is the end of if, you’re in for a disappointment, as soon the true effects of the savage cuts of the Comprehensive Spending Review will begin the to bite the real economy.

Britain is still not fully in recession yet, as two quarters of contraction are needed for that. But, if a full recession comes to pass next April then the Coalition will have no option to change course and re-think it’s economic strategy. While we in BULS and Labour as a whole will have the sad duty of saying “We told you so.”. But let’s just hope that doesn’t happen.

Max

Labour now has the Balls

by maxattacks

Chris Riddell 23 January 2011

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

Ed´s first reshuffle

by suzannahrobinson

A couple of thoughts…

Firstly, I genuinly believe that Johnson´s reasons are personal because he has a good relationship with Mili-E, and there have been no recent big revelations about changes to budget policy that could have worried him enough to resign.

Secondly fears of Balls-Miliband repeat of the Brown-Blair power struggle are groundless and unnecessary. There´s no secret agreement or deal, and having Cooper on the front bench is likely to make the pairing more stable.

Thirdly Miliband has shown brilliant and decisive leadership. Any surprise at his not offering chancellor to his brother is misplaced, David´s made it clear that he does not wish to be a member of the cabinet this term.

Fourthly I´m psyched for a Cooper-May standoff, I´m pretty sure Yvette is going to come victorious out of any tussle.

Suzy

Adios EMA

by maxattacks

And so it has now been confirmed after a final last ditch attempt in the House of Commons this evening, EMA is to be axed. Another broken promise from Cam/Clegg putting another nail in the nearly sealed coffin of the aspirations of the young people in this country. Already, the tripling of tuition fees will mean that those from poorer backgrounds won’t be able to go to university. Now, after the scrapping of EMA, those in this same group who may have been unsure if they could afford the cost of university won’t even be able to afford to stay on and learn at college or sixth form. It’s nothing short of disgraceful that the futures of our younger generation have been shot down in this way in just over 8 months. The good work of the last Labour government undone so quickly and with such little consideration as to the consequences it will have for them, the future of this country.

One of the reasons I’m Labour is that I recognise that the initiatives set up such as EMA and Aimhigher meant that I was able to go to this great university. I honestly don’t think I’d be here without them. I received EMA while I was studying my A-Levels a few years ago. I had no choice but to go to an inner city college 4 miles away from my house. My school’s sixth form closed down while I was there because the demand was so low for it. I was left with the cost of transport to pay, which was about £40 a month. I had the other expenditures such as stationery and food to consider on top of that which soon adds up, trust me! The argument by this government, that somehow this money is being wasted by students, just doesn’t wash with me I’m afraid. There was very little left over for to be spent on ‘social costs’ or whatever else they want to think it is spent on. I understand this may not be the case for everyone receiving EMA but the vast majority of students need this money to stay on and study. For me, and like with so many others, the simple fact was my parents wouldn’t have been able to help me out financially. So to put it bluntly, I would have been a bit buggered. Come the summer, so many will now be.

And on today of all days, the final decision comes: on the same day that the worst 16-17 unemployment figures are released since records began. A staggering 1/3 of young people in this age group are out of work, with the story being far gloomier in certain parts of the country. The shocking reality is that this will only get worse thanks to the abolishment of EMA coupled with the tuition fee rise. More young people will be condemned to the dole queue with such low prospects for the future. This is not how the government should be treating the next set of workers and great contributors to our economy. Labour gave the younger generation like me a leg up but, sadly, today this Tory-led government have decided to push them all back down to the ground.

Oliver Cosentino

Bankers bonuses

by maxattacks

I’m not going to delve too much into the Coalition’s U-turn on restricting bankers bonuses (literally found in first paragraph of Coalition agreement) as I ironically have a conservatism essay to do. So I though I’d let this video explain that in fact, bonuses, of any kind (except for ones which people’s income depend upon) just don’t work. Much to my surprise as well.

Max

Equality and education

by suzannahrobinson

First of all I’d like to apologise for not blogging much recently, I’ve been travelling a lot and trying to get all my essays and presentations done for Humboldt, which is taking twice as long because they’re all in German!

During the holidays I’ve been talking to people in Sweden and Germany about schooling. I find it a really easy political topic to engage young people on because it’s a common and recent experience and a lot of us are concerned by the state of flux the system is tumbling into.

New Labour introduced a lot of initiatives and revolutionised the school system in many ways. These changes were not always popular with parents and teachers but the central aim of each one was greater equality. The general coalition push for the re-introduction of grammar schools and the sponsoring of free schools does not have the same aim and will not produce positive results.

Germany has had a 4-tier system in place for several decades, in which 10-year-old children are separated into achievement-based groups and sent to either a Gymnasium, Realschule, Hauptschule or Forderschule. Those who try to sell such systems as meritocracies overlook the real input and output of pupils, and the uncomfortable statistics that show that selection hits the most vulnerable hardest.

The PISA Study (Programme for International Student Assessment) was first carried out by the OECD in 2000 and showed Germany to have a highly unequal and unfair system, with bright non-native speakers of German being relegated to the Forderschule, which is essentially a school for the mentally disabled rather than those of another nationality. As British studies have shown, bright students from poor families lose out in the current system to averagely gifted children from rich families, because the parents themselves are often more highly educated, better informed, and more driven.

In Sweden independent schools set up by groups of parents resorted to television advertising to drum up interest. This was very successful in a many areas, but produced the unfortunate result that state schools had to spend taxpayers’ money on running expensive advertising campaigns in order to be able to compete.

We don’t need to worry about the high achievers, but the children who fall through the cracks. Becoming resigned to a low social strata so early in life is damaging and leads to serious consequences later in life.

Suzy

Labour’s year

by maxattacks

2010 has been one hell of a hectic year for Labour, nationally and locally. So here’s my review of the year.

So in early 2010 we began with a very slowly (and I mean slowly) improving position (the polls were very slowly narrowing and Brown was beginning to perform a bit better at PMQs). People were beginning to actually question and analyse Tory policy (much to the latter’s own shock).

Gordon Brown

But of course, we remember the attempted Coup on Brown (http://bulsonline.org/2010/01/06/coup-dstupid/), the less said about that final attempted revolt the better. But apart from that the majority of the first few months of 2010 were focused upon the Tories incomplete and ill thought out policies which were actually being looked at now (again, much to the Tory’s shock). Unfortunately though, Labour failed to properly capitalise upon DC’s inconsistency over marriage-tax breaks, the level of the cuts and even the Lord Ashcroft scandal, etc.

Now I’m not going to lie, despite not exactly being an expert at election campaigns, Labour’s performance in the 2010 campaign was not exactly brilliant. Admittedly, we  didn’t have an Ashcroft of our own, but a daily press conference chaired by Peter Mandelson is not a way to woo the public. Moving onto the leadership debates, apart from the first one, Brown’s performances could have been much worse. He undoubtedly was the most policy detailed, but unfortunately, you need more than sound policy to win Televised debates.

The result that followed was no where near as anyone might have expected a year or two ago. Don’t be deluded though, in terms of share of the vote, Labour’s result was far from satisfactory, with our second worse result since the 1920s. In terms of seats we didn’t do too badly though. But, given that a year or two ago we were literally facing oblivion on a Tory 1997 scale (regularly behind in the polls by 20%+ in 2008 and 10%+ leads in 2009) was nothing less than a complete and utter failure on the part of the Conservatives. Labour locally also managed to retain Selly Oak and most surprising of all, Edgbaston, much to everyone shock (including my own if I’m being honest). Labour also made significant gains in the local elections nationally and slashing the Tory-Lib Dem Coalition in Birmingham Council to a wafer thin majority.

But ultimately, we couldn’t hold onto power, the numbers didn’t add up and the Lib Dems had already decided that they were moving to the Tories. And so ended 13 years of ‘New’ Labour. But, life had to move on and so began the process to replace Gordon Brown. I’m not going to lie, to the wider public, the election wasn’t the most inspiring and enthralling one ever seen and I personally had no love for any of the candidates at the start.

Of course, we all know what happened next. Probably one of the biggest political upsets of the past few years. After being tipped as Brown’s obvious future successor, David Miliband or Miliband the Elder, was pipped by his brother at what seemed to be the final post (quite literally, Miliband the younger became favourite on the very last day). This seems what happens when you underestimate Miliband the younger, you in the end regret you ever did. One of the definite features of Miliband the elder not winning was that the era ‘New’ Labour was finally brought to a close with most notably the Iraq war being deemed wrong. Of course, there has been apparent glee from the Tory ranks that ‘Red-Ed’ is a godsend. But, as mentioned before, be careful not to underestimate your opponents.

But of course, what now you may ask? Without a shred of doubt, Labour does need to formalise a coherent and well though out plan for it’s vision. But, we should be careful not to make the mistakes DC made when he became Tory leader. While DC did a lot to detoxify the image of the Conservative party (hug a hoody, huskies in Norway, etc), he very much failed to change the nature of the Conservative party, which ultimately cost him a landslide victory. Consequently, it’s the long and apparently slow road of renewal for Labour. But come 2015, get ready for the real change and the true optimists of British politics!

Max

A not so “Big Society”

by maxattacks

David Robinson, co-founder of Community Links

First off. Hope you all had a great Christmas. I’m finally back (kinda) and will tomorrow, Sunday or Monday be conducting a review of the last year for Labour and for BULS.

Anyway, on to more immediate matters. The “Big Society” as an idea is nice enough, naturally I have my doubts and certainly retain the right to be a bit sceptical. But, against the backdrop of a looming age of austerity those doubts can turn rather easily into downright scepticism. It also doesn’t help when you have the co-founder of the highly influential Community Links charity, David Robinson, arguing that the looming age of austerity could become a ‘Hurricane Katrina moment’ and destroy any chance of a potential ‘Big Society’.

Now this is coming from someone who supports the ‘Big Society’ idea. And to regard it as ”Forcing an unsustainable pace on a barrage of uncoordinated cuts that hit the poorest hardest” puts myself personally in a rather downbeat mood over the true outcome over DC’s ‘Big Society’. With nearly a quarter of  all charities being subsidised by the government and 13% relying on state funding relying on state funding for more than half their income, Robinson’s words really do hit home.

Max

Doesn’t it seem that everything happens when you’re away

by maxattacks

Sorry on behalf on all of the bulsonline team for the lack of activity lately. The end of term shenanigans have kept us all busy these past few weeks and I personally have been away in Edinburgh for the past few days.

Anyway, first thing on my blogging list to write about is, yes you guessed it, the Cable incident. In some ways, like potentially many Lib Dem grass-root members, I’m quite glad that Cable is fighting his own corner for the Lib Dems (it sure is a better alternative to the other option). In some respects, I can sympathise with Cable. Like I said on the whole Mervyn King incident via the wikileaks, people often let slip their own personal view points, we are human after all. However, that is where my sympathy stops. A Business Secretary has to rule on each case on the facts and evidence, you can’t go in with a pre-existing views. This applies to every case, despite the idea that “declaring war on Mr Murdoch” is something I very strongly sympathise with. It is a direct breach of the ministerial code and should result in nothing less than resignation. This is where the double standards come in.

I’ve always been rather sceptical about the Coalition claiming to “come together in the national interest” (naturally). But, it certainly seems in this one case that what happened was that DC’s decision not to sack Cable was in the Coalition’s interest rather than “the nation’s interest”. It’s blatantly clear, if this had been a Tory Minister, they would have been left out to dry long ago. What is also interesting is that Cable described the Coalition as “Maoist”, given that he believed they were trying to push through too many radical changes at once, many of which he disagreed with. Which neatly leads onto the next event I missed.

Apart from taping Cable’s views on the Coalition, the Daily Telegraph also recorded Scottish Secretary Michael Moore, Business Minister Ed Davey and Pensions Minister Steve Webb doubts over the Coalition’s claim to “fairness”. They criticised Child Tax Credit reforms and the Trebling of fees. Now rather than criticising the Lib Dems as a whole for supporting these measures, we should be working to encourage not only Lib Dem MPs, but party members and voters to think again about the Coalition and whether it is truly taking the right direction (although with the latter part, little needs to be done there). This is why I welcome Ed Miliband’s move to start calling the Coalition a “Conservative-led Coalition”. Also, I welcome (more or less) the reduction party membership fees for Young Labour members (15-27…ish) from the already ridiculously low £1 to 1p(!!). I know if Labour wants to increase membership amongst the younger generations sound policies are far more important, but you can’t say it wont help a bit.

Finally, on a completely different note. Yet even more genuine change has come to America. The old “don’t ask don’t tell” policy on banning gay people in the armed forces in the USA has finally, been repealed! Now some may say this won’t be good for the army as it’ll stir up homophobia, but if it is stirred up because of this at least it’s tackling homophobia. Consequently, because of this logic, not repealing this ban would have meant homophobia culture would have gone unchecked and unchallenged in the US armed forces.

Overall though, a rather good few days….shame I missed it all.

Max

Hey Burt!

by maxattacks

Last week, in a slight moment of procrastination I decided to email one of the local Lib Dem MPs. Lorely Burt had claimed to be wavering on the tuition fee vote so I thought it wouldn’t hurt to try and give her a push. Clearly, I wasted my time as she in the end decided to abstain on the all so crucial vote on Thursday. When I heard the news I wasn’t happy. She said in a letter to the guild of students last week that she did not agree with the proposals. So why could she not do the decent thing? Why could she not honour her promise she made to the NUS, the student population and future generations of children when she felt this way?

Even worse was the other local Lib Dem MP, John Hemming. The man who is not exactly whiter than white has proven this even more so by voting WITH the government to push through the rise of fees to £9000. Now, just a few days before the vote, a group of students from this University decided to occupy and shut down his office in Yardley. And his response, on national radio…  was to blame those individuals for now wanting to vote FOR the rise. When I first heard this, I thought he can’t be serious! But it would once again seem that he was. It is absolutely shameful.

Because I don’t think he ever had any intention of not voting against or even abstaining in the vote. And so to blame his decision on this minority of students, well it just doesn’t wash with me and I’m sure it doesn’t with you. It stinks of deceit and distaste.

For two MPs who don’t exactly have the largest of majorities, and find themselves not too far away from 3 large universities including our own, I find it ridiculous that they had the audacity to take this action. I wouldn’t mind having a bet that both of them will have a fight to keep their seats at the next election. That is if Hemming hasn’t turned blue by then…

Oliver Cosentino, BULS Member

Coastguards and Lib Dems

by maxattacks

It’s always easy to kick someone when they’re down. We all know it and we’ve all done it, metaphorically. Before, it was Gordon Brown and before that it could be argued it was John Prescott. But it seems now it’s the Lib Dems, or more specifically, Nick Clegg (Cleggy). And yes, the 90% of the population (approximately) agree with the “kicking”. Like John Denham (Shadow Business Secretary and now boss of former-BULS Chair, Tom Guise, well done on the job), we should rise above this natural instinct to further lambast Lib Dem MPs and supporters and resist being a “tribal” party. For this is what the true “new” politics, rising above petty point scoring and reaching out to disenchanted voters and MPs in a hope to win them round. On Thursday, the Lib Dem elite threw away any chance of being progressive. With 70% of Lib Dem party members regarding themselves to be on the left, this could not be a more opportune time build a broad progressive church to argue against the real enemy (so to speak).

Now that optimistic note is out of the way, I can now return to being generally p****d off with the government on the whole. How better than to point out cuts to the number of coastguard control centres. A report recently stated that half of the 19 centres could close. That’s right, half of the centres!! The necessity for deep cuts can be argued for (though I’d have to disagree), but cuts to services that literally save lives is downright disgraceful. These centres probably save hundreds of lives every year in some of the harshest conditions known to man (and woman) kind. So to almost half the number of centres is nothing less than a travesty.

I only hope to god that the Coalition rethinks this particular policy.

Max

Two wrongs don’t make a right

by maxattacks

Protesters outside Parliament

Right, I’m not going to really focus directly upon the vote today on  tuition fees, enough has been mentioned upon that area recently. Yes, it is disgrace it passed, but what is arguably a bigger disgrace, is the violence that ensued in the capital today.

If you want to change a government’s opinion and policies, the biggest asset you could ever have to achieve this, is public support. We still have that support (well at least a few weeks ago), with 60% opposing the trebling of fees. But as I was debating (so to speak) with BULS’ Former-Fresher Officer, Dan Harrison on facebook, he pointed out the important point of the the police’s unprovoked and aggressive attacks.

Now, this may well have happened (can’t completely say as I’ve been safe in Brum) and it is certainly something that can not be condoned. But, fighting fire with fire just results in, well….more fire. Two wrongs don’t make a right and most importantly of all, don’t stoop to their level. But, far more importantly. If, the police had acted in this way and the students had continued to protest peacefully, the whole news the next morning would’ve focused upon the police’s violence and public sympathy would have begun to swing behind the students. This would have been in very much the same way public and international sympathy swung behind Martin Luther King’s peaceful demonstrations in the 1960s. But what everyone will remember is the burning of rubbish tips, the first police cavalry charge in around twenty years, the attack on the Treasury building and the Supreme Court and the iconic photo of Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall’s car being attacked on the way to the Royal Variety show.

If anything, if the police where acting inappropriately, this would have aided the student’s cause. What has happened is that the chances of the government reconsidering the hike in tuition fees have now diminished.

Max

Good and bad news

by maxattacks

Great news (well, I think it is personally)! Alan Johnson has decided he will now support a graduate tax. Not only does this mean that Labour can no longer be accused of being disarray over higher education funding, but it means we are presenting the true progressive alternative on higher education funding. A tax that charges more the more you earn, rather than the flat rate level of interest under the proposed system and one that isn’t at completely extortionate levels of £9k a year. Hopefully, this could be the stepping stone to the scrapping of fees entirely in the (hopefully not to distant) future.

And now for the bad news. If you’re not aware already, Educational Maintenance Allowance (EMA) and the Aim Higher Programme are both being scrapped. Now whatever your views on the proposals on the trebling of fees, I will admit, however much I disagree with them, it is an arguable position. But, scrapping EMA and Aim Higher!? These are two bastions of social mobility. Yes I know EMA for one isn’t without its flaws, but to completely scrap it is completely indefensible. When the department that runs EMA messed up a few years ago when I was at College, hundreds of thousands of students nationwide struggle to makes ends meet (really need to look that saying up, could be “meat”) when it came to paper, books, etc or even simply making their way into college.

To put the bad news into context. Even Birmingham University’s Vice-Chancellor, Professor David Eastwood, who was on the Browne committee arguing for higher fees, said at a debate last night that scrapping EMA and Aim Higher was a disgraceful decision. It is an area that has had little coverage given the over-hanging shadow of the tuition fees debate, but it is easily just as important.

Max

All hail the minimum wage

by maxattacks

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

I told you we were the new party of students

by maxattacks

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 King

by maxattacks

There are many positions in society that require an independent stance on party political issues; the civil service, police constables, the Queen and yes the Head of the Bank of England. As you may be aware David Blanchflower, a leading economist and former member of the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee has called on King to resign following remarks released by Wikileaks where he expressed concerns about DC and Gideon’s ability and experience to run the economy prior to the election. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m no fan of King and independence that transcends both public support and an institutes actions and influence is necessary in the Bank of England. But passing remarks is in no way an infringement of this independence. King is perfectly entitled to his own private views as long as it does not impede or politicise his job.

However, one area I’m quite happy to criticise King is that of his own judgement. As late as Northern Rock, King would have rather the bank failed. And as late as last May, King was predicting the economy to grow by 3.5% in 2011, rather than the downgraded 2.1% published by the OBR a few days ago (although admittedly this might’ve been downgraded because the looming age of austerity).

Independent, yes (more or less), sound judgement, we have our doubts.

Max

Bumping along the bottom

by maxattacks

Yesterday the Office for Budget Responsibility  published it’s new growth and unemployment forecasts. If you’re not aware (given the news is now non-existent on the BBC website), growth forecast for 2010 was raised and job losses were slashed (which we welcome, although for the latter we’re hearing numerous other figures so retain the right to stay sceptical). But, once again, growth expectations for 2011 and 2012 have been lowered and OBR added that the government had a “better than 50%” chance of meeting its mandate to wipe out the structural deficit – the gap between spending and taxes – by 2015-16.

So what are we seeing here? Well the growth figures for this year have been raised due to the action taken by the last government over a number of months, the coalition may claim that this is there doing, but as every economist knows (though I can’t say I’m one) there is always a lag effect between a governments decisions on economic policy and it eventually effecting the real economy. And what of 2011 and 2012? Well this is there own doing, as this is the second time the OBR has slashed its growth forecast due to the policies the Coalition is implementing. Now I don’t think we’re going to see a double-dip recession (though with the continuing economic climate I wouldn’t rule it out) but what we will probably see is Britiain “bumping along the bottom” (if that’s the correct saying). We hope not, but still fear it all the same.

Max

The vast majority

by suzannahrobinson

School children at a protest march against the swingeing cuts and rising fees join hands to prevent any more damage being done to a police van that had already almost been tipped over onto other protesters. These girls represent one side of the student protest, and one we can all be proud of.

A more difficult, but very real element is the violence, from those whose anger has been brewing long before any cuts to spending or raising of fees were confirmed. Some young people seem to have joined in partly for the sake of having a go at the police, the everyday face of the state.

Imagine you’d developed a suspicion of authority because your family had been falling through the cracks for decades. Then suddenly EMA arrives, you’re entitled to it, and you decide to go on to 6th form. You feel like maybe things are changing, maybe the government cares about you after all.

Now that it’s being scrapped the damage won’t just be seen in our schools and universities but in our social cohesion, our sense of possibility and social mobility. Dialogue about yobs hijacking middle class protests and disgraceful schoolgirls wreaking havoc is threatening student unity before we’re even getting started.

Our young people need to acknowledge the anger but keep it peaceful, and stay united. We want equal treatment, we should extend it to each other.

Suzy

Gove’s at it again.

by jakelambertonline

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

Some actual sound moves from the PM, for once

by maxattacks

Chris Riddell 21 November 2010

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

Rumblings in the NUS

by suzannahrobinson

Click photo for the source

The University of Kent has tonight voted down a suggestion to abolish the Men’s Officer on the Union’s strong team.

The official NUS women’s movement has a problem with this.

The point of liberation positions is that those who are normally under-represented get a chance to be heard. In the case of women’s officer it’s also about promoting sexual equality, disproving stereotypes and encouraging a post-structuralist view of gender. It’s an issue of mutual respect.

Men’s Unions formed within the NUS have typically been reactionary irreverent organisations, including one that included “playing pool and drinking beer” among its written aims.

With LGBTQ organisations doing a brilliant job at representing the gay, bisexual and transgender men out there, it seems unnecessary to require a separate men’s officer. All we can hope is that the elected man will work with the women’s officer to promote gender equality.

Suzy

Divisions? What divisions?

by maxattacks

Ever heard of the website called “LabourList”? No, (forgive me if you have) well it is a grass-roots website, in which nearly all Labour members can contribute to and is essentially the BULS’ website’s “big daddy” and a true bench mark for all Labour affiliated blogs (yes, even the mighty BULS blog is humbled by it’s activity and quality). We should have a link somewhere, but in case you can’t find it- http://www.labourlist.org/

Anyway, a recent survey was published (http://www.labourlist.org/labour-divided-over-av-state-of-the-party—november-2010) on Labour members views on what route the party should take next. The biggest divisive issue had to be support for the AV referendum (42%-against, 33%-for). The next closest issue that divided as much would have to be whether to have primaries to select Labour candidates (for-47%, against-35%) in which I can easily say, isn’t the biggest issue facing the UK.

Although, there were a number of policy areas that Labour members were presented with on whether they would like Labour to pursue more closely. Topping the polls with 78.7% agreement, was taking a harder line on tax avoidance and evasion, which I think is brilliant. Too long has the media focused on “benefit scroungers” which in comparison is a tiny fraction to what the UK looses through tax avoidance and evasion. Also high on the list came rebuilding Labour’s reputation on the economy (64.4%), a National Care Service (62.6% and probably my personal favourite on the list) and making the robin hood tax a reality (61.1%). Coming near the bottom saw online referendums (18.5%), shake up of secondary education, teaching by ability rather than age (21.1%) and employee ownership (31.4%, a mild disappointment personally).

What to make of these figures then? Well one I missed out was that, Ed Miliband, Harriet Harman and the rest of the Shadow Cabinet are still relatively supported (Miliband a mere 12% think he’s doing a poor job, 72.9% think Harman is doing a good job, etc). Also, 65.3% of Labour members believe Labour should adopt an alternative economic model and plan to that of the Coalition’s, which is certainly imperative. Well, it seems that what Labour members want a detailed and clear plan to take on the Coalition (rather than make the mistake of making yourself to vague like Cameron did, which cost him a majority) and an emphasis on what traditionally Labour does best. Taking on the social injustices of the abusive rich in our society and our great compassion, with the hopeful creation of an institution to rival the work of the NHS, a National Care Service.

Max

And wow, my first somewhat optimistic blog in a while. Forgive me, still adjusting to my first ever government that on the whole I’m generally p***ed off with.

A great opportunity turned sour

by maxattacks

student_demo_ap1

There’s always someone who takes it too far. I do it far too often, but less said about that the better. The march against the proposed raise in tuition fees to £9000 a year was very well planned and timed for, DC was out of the country in China so Cleggy was taking questions at PMQs instead meaning he would be ridiculed for his U-turn on tuition fees. As for the vast majority of those who went there it was a very successful event, peaceful and making a very good point (would explain further but I’m back home up north and consequently not there, so I wouldn’t know the details).

But, someone always has to spoil the moment, someone has go too far. It is one of the cruel realities of life and the protest today in London was no exception. It was estimated by the NUS that 30k-40k students converged on London today, but it is estimated that mere 1k people were involved in the incident at the Millbank Tower.

Now don’t get me wrong, I can very much sympathise with the idea of smashing CCHQ. This is in very much the same way any Tory might sympathise with the idea of smashing up Labour’s HQ. But, it is certainly something neither side would condone. What happened here today was that a small number have completely ruined what would’ve been a peaceful demonstration, with even one ‘save EMA’ campaigner on the news giving the example of meeting an OAP who was out there on the behalf of her Grandchildren.

Unfortunately, what everyone will remember and what the headline papers will be tomorrow, is the grotesque violence seen at the Millbank Tower. In fact, it was widely regard that those at Millbank Tower, were not students per say but rather a hijacking by various groups such as Anarchists, far-left Socialists and the oh-so subtle SWP.

We all know that one person who doesn’t know the limits. And today, they did it again.

Max

In defence of Harriet Harman

by maxattacks

Harriet Harman

“OH SHUT UP!!” are the words I shouted at my laptop screen upon seeing this article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11719438. No, not at Harriet Harman, but at the ludicrously stupid Labour MPs, calling on her to resign after the events of former MP and Minister, Woolas’ expulsion from the Commons.

Harman disowned Woolas for an extremely good reason, he lied, not only that but knowingly, directly to his own constituents whose votes he was trying to win over. If we are trying to represent the true “new” politics, it’s vital that we do not tolerate the “old” and all the negativity and petty points scoring that came with it. Woolas’ decision was his own and yes the Tories may have lied and exaggerated themselves (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11614602), but as the old saying goes, two wrongs don’t make a right. We certainly do not have to stoop to their level.

Max

Fees, fees and more fees

by maxattacks

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

Thoughts for Armistice Day

by suzannahrobinson

As well as remembering the past and honouring the dead Armistice Day is a great opportunity to look at the role of the Army in today’s world.

Our army has come a long way since the Armistice. Cooperation, sustainability and peace keeping are the new buzzwords, and really have been put into practice, as evidenced by the new deal with France and the ongoing efforts in Afghanistan.

Oxfam estimates that of the 20 million troops currently employed globally, only 150,000 are employed in real peace keeping. Annually $120 billion is spent on global aid, while $1600 billion is spent on global defence.

As Britain struggles with the legacy of Iraq and the justification of war, it’s worth reassessing our priorities on the causes of conflict and the effect our actions have on citizens the world over.

Suzy

It keeps getting better

by maxattacks

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

“New”, “old”, it’s all the same to this kind of politics

by maxattacks

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

We’re warning you

by maxattacks

Chris Riddell 24 Oct

Many of you will have heard about the 490,000 job losses in the public sector from the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). But what if that number is wrong? The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) has predicted that in fact things are about to get worse. From the spending cuts and the rise in VAT, they predict around 1.6 million job losses in the next five years from the public and private sector (900,000-Private, 750,000-Public).

Yes, that’s right, 1.6 million! Of course it’s not without it’s flaws, Chief Economist at the CIPD, John Philpot, predicted unemployment would reach 3 million, thankfully the action Labour took in it’s last months in office has so far prevented this. But, 1.6 million!! This without doubt destroys any idea that the private sector will magically be able to create around 2 million jobs and is clear indicator to Cleggy, DC and Gideon, that you should not have your plans firmly nailed to the mast.

Max

Minutes/Info from Mini Forum Meeting

by smurphy2010

Autumn 2010 Campaigning and Political miniforum minutes 19.10.10

Attendees:

Matt Lamb – VPSAD

Jo Ormond – Student Activities coordinator

Benjamin Mee – Atheists, Agnostics and Humanists

Labour Students – Sam Murphy

United Nations – Anna-Kaisa Polojarvi

Socialist society – Vicky Taylor

Debating society – Rachael Twumasi

Take Back Parliament – Charlotte Galpin

  1. 1. VPSAD introduction to his role and miniforums

 

Matt explained that mini forums are a chance for groups of similar interests to discuss issues, ask questions and be given information from the Guild.

 

  1. 2. Open Forums

 

Open forums have replaced Guild council and are a less formal way for groups to bring issues/motions/feedback to the VPSAD. Two representatives from each miniforum will be elected to attend Guild Council on behalf of the miniforum

 

Student Groups:  Thursday 21st October, at 6.30pm; venue to be confirmed

19th Guild – 5.30pm,– for any issues relating to the Guild as an organisation and/or building

20th Education and University– 5.30pm,– for academic issues

21st Sports– 4.30pm,– for anyone involved in sport, at any level from occasional gym user to club captain.

22nd Welfare– 4.00pm,– any welfare issues.

 

  1. 3. Challenge VPSAD / Feedback from groups: activities so far/coming up; successes and challenges/issues

Socialist – Focus on Fees and would like as many societies as possible to get involved.  Providing transport to the Education Action Network national conference and rally if anyone wants to join us 31st October. (Matt also suggested getting in touch with Rob Hunter VPEA about fees campaigns).

 

UN – Have a yearly theme related to the Millennium Development goals.  Have events for climate event in Mexico and Stop Violence Against Women day.

 

Take Back Parliament – We’re a new group and we campaign to change the voting system.  At the moment we’re focusing on getting membership and have a couple of events lined up.

 

(Matt mentioned that the box office space outside Spar is now bookable by student groups and is an ideal place to promote your society / have a bake sale etc.  Book through reception.)

 

Labour – Have an event planned with Lib Dems, a trip to Brussels for European Parliament.  Want to start a living wage campaign (Take Back Parliament would like to work with Labour on voting reform.)

 

Atheists, Agnostics and Humanists – Have a screening of The Life of Brian on Thursday, also have events with Aston Humanists and Birmingham Humanists.  Have had some problems with paperwork with uni room bookings – Matt asked for details to be emailed to him so he could follow it up.

 

Debating – Had a public debate on the day of the Browne review.  Also have a debate on Thursday ‘This House would abolish the Monarchy’.  Also have debates coming up on Afghanistan and God.  Please email us with any suggestions for debates that you would like.

  1. 4. Know Your World promotion; need replies by Fri 22nd.

 

  1. 5. Get Involved (brief mention, not in detail, initial sign-up for interest

 

  1. 6. Guild Council elections

Standing candidates:

Anna-Kaisa Polojarvi

Sam Murphy

Rachel Twumais

RON

 

Brief summary of speeches:

 

Anna

  • Have experience of attending Guild Council and good perspective of what’s going on.
  • Feel that the new system will improve the way Guild Council runs
  • Believes it is very important to have representation at GC
  • Not running just to fill my CV – we need to raise issues concerning our groups
  • Will ensure good communication between groups
  • Also recognise there will be differences of opinion between C&P groups

 

Sam

  • Believe GC should expand to deal with campus wide issues
  • I am transparent, open, amiable, not scared to represent the needs of the miniforum
  • Experience of councils: local council and campaigning and representation

 

Rachael

  • Good at putting forward what people want done
  • Have responded to feedback from members within own society
  • Have experience of attending GC and have drafted a motion
  • Able to take a neutral stance

 

Sam Murphy and Rachael Twumasi elected

 

 

  1. 7. Any other business/comments

Anna – a what’s on calendar on the website with everything that’s going on across campus would be really good

Matt – I am on the working group to rebuild website and this is definitely something we want.  We are also trying to get some temporary measures in place.

 

A big bumbling Tory, yes, completely lacking a heart, no

by maxattacks

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.

Entirely welcome

by maxattacks

Today was published the latest growth figures of the third quarter between July and September. 0.8% which was twice as high as the expected 0.4%. Now, don’t forget though, this is still primarily due to the last Labour government, the Coalition had been in power for four months and this is before the CSR. I’m going to say that the final quarter will mainly be the cause of the last government as it will take a while for the CSR to effect, so anything that happens in 2011 will be the credit or failure of the Coalition as the CSR begins to bite. However, most economists are still arguing that the economy is still fragile, so don’t place your bets yet, and it is still warning for the governments deficit reduction plan, don’t be nailed to the mast.

Max

Will someone please think of the children!!

by maxattacks

Since day one, the Coalition’s economic plans have been argued over their fairness and their progressiveness (if that’s even a word). We’re all very familiar with the IFS and their take, but I thought it be more appropriate to focus upon the Coalition’s shifting reasons for their policies “fairness”. To begin with it was the idea that the burden of the cuts were to fall upon the higher earners (though of course it turned out to fall upon more on the poorest, women, the ethnic minorities, etc, but I won’t go into that again), but recently, Cleggy in particular shifted the argument to that this crisis shouldn’t be left for our children and that they shouldn’t bear the brunt. This argument in itself is a reasonable enough, but that of course assumes that your children are NOT effected by the problems caused by the current generation’s problems in the future AND now.

This was something I realised the Coalition was failing (again) upon when a very angry bloke (youngish and I think he was ginger, rather aggressive to about 19 mins in) pointed out the sheer contradiction between this argument and reality on last Thursday’s question time. The IFS worked it out to show that the average family with children will have 6.7% drop in income compared to 2.7% with families with no children, that’s a whole 4%! This is all from cuts in tax credits for poorer families, scrapping child benefits which will hit those whose families are just above the £45k threshold when one parent stays at home, an actual real term drop in investment into schools (due to an increased number of pupils), scrapping the building schools for the future programme and most relevant for us students, raising tuition fees to £7k a year. Cleggy once agreed and respected the IFS, but how times change and how politicians (who supposedly represent “new” politics) often disregard their once respectable views to justify their actions.

Max

Record breaking

by maxattacks

Last June, around 48 hours after the announcement of the ‘emergency’ budget the well respected Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) slammed the Coalition’s claim that the budget was ‘progressive’. It seems that the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) has smashed all records to be proved false; this time it only took the IFS around about 24 hours to slam the claim, again, that the CSR was regressive.

Many Tories last time around were quick to argue that the IFS is in the pocket of Labour, which is hugely untrue given they were highly critical of Labour’s policies on Child Poverty. And if anything shows how regressive the nature of the CSR is you look no further than Carl Emmerson, acting Director of the IFS: “Our analysis continues to show that, with the notable exception of the richest 2%, the tax and benefit components of the fiscal consolidation are, overall, being implemented in a regressive way.”.

There will come a point in the Coalition’s future where they will no longer able to say “this isn’t our mess” and “there’s no other option” because no, there is always an alternative and at some point in the not too distant future the public will realise that these are not “Labour’s cuts” but rather those chosen by the Coalition at a rate and speed they chose.

Finally, the only slim claim that the reason for the Coalition’s economic policies being fair was also destroyed yesterday. Both DC and Cleggy have argued that it’s not fair to leave the debt onto the next generation. Apart from raising tuition fees to £7k a year it is now revealed that despite the Pupil Premium for the poorest of pupils at primary and secondary schools, 43% of pupils in less deprived parts of the country would be hit by 5% cuts or more. That seems to me like that the debt is being shifted onto the next generation.

Max

Divided we fall

by suzannahrobinson

I admire Laurie Penny. I really do. But her latest blog on the New Statesman is counterproductive. Labour are NOT taking this lying down. Labour is the natural home for those who have been left out in the cold by the cuts, but more generally everyone who hasn’t been taken in by the talk of necessity must unite to oppose the spending review.

As the official opposition ours must be the loudest and most credible voice, the most potent ideas in creating alternatives, the bravest actions defending those who need to be defended. We must work together with the Lib Dem rebels when they emerge, with the unions, with the sensible media, the organisations facing decimation and the local councils. Because the Tories’ real mantra is not “we’re all in this together” but “Divide and Rule”.

It’s a clever strategy because stricken groups have started thinking “it’s us or them”. So the owners of art galleries might argue their case at the expense of theatres or museums. The NHS can campaign as being more essential that higher education. Those struggling to get onto the housing ladder can blame all those “benefit cheats” they’ve been hearing about.

Meanwhile we’ve been “benefitting” from a little Lib-Dem devolution in which local councils can decide exactly which services to cut from their budgets. This may lead to competition, but is more likely to lead to poor management and bankruptcy.

From division by group in society to division by area of the country the coalition has got us covered. But the protests are just beginning…

Suzy