Attack on Aid Convoy

The world must no longer stand by with its collective “guilty conscience” and allow the Israeli Government to continue their policies of State Terrorism against the Palestinians and other Countries of the Middle East.
Now, before the usual culprits immediately spring into action with their hysterical screams of calling me an anti-Semite, lets make one thing abundantly clear. I make no apology for criticising Governments of any country including my own, when they commit acts of aggression or state terrorism against others. It seems that this latest act took place in International waters against ships carrying around 10,000 tonnes of aid for Gaza. In any interpretation, this is an act of piracy. Israel and its supporters will no doubt seek to justify this latest aggression with the “Israel’s right to exist and defend itself” argument. However, this cliché no longer has any credibility. What is abundantly clear is that had the ships not been attacked by the Israeli forces, the protesters (predominately Turkish nationals it seems ) would not have been killed.
For many years the Israeli Government has imposed a rigid blockade by land and sea against the people of (Gaza) Palestine, and the International Community has done little if anything, to resolve the situation. Now, a convoy of ships carrying humanitarian aid of food, medical supplies and home building materials, has been attacked in International waters. Already, the lies and distortions have been trotted out on TV from Israeli Government spokespersons, Knesset members and other pro Israeli experts, to justify this outrage.
Spain and Sweden have now withdrawn their Ambassadors from Israel, and perhaps other countries will follow this example. It will however require a concerted International response to ensure that the Israeli Government clearly understands that their actions are totally un acceptable.

The Expenses scandal goes on

Enough of this whining and hand wringing nonsense about what a noble and wonderful person David Laws is/was. Even Nick Clegg has joined the “Westminster Club” and the sound of doors banging shut as MP’s of all persuasions band together in closed ranks, defending the indefensible. The cold hard fact is that, had the question of £40k expenses claims not been brought into the public domain, David Laws would still be in the cabinet, would not have announced that he would immediately pay back the costs of the rent and other housing costs, and he would not have referred himself to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. His personal life has little, if anything, to do with the expenses claim. He was exposed as having made claims which should not have been made. How this equates with being an “honourable” man defies logic.
It seems that the age of a new cleaner political environment, much promised before the election, has lasted less than 30 days and we have reverted to the same old self interest of distortion and hypocrisy, as the Con/Lib cabinet of Clegg and Cameron perpetuate the “It’s ok if you pay the money back” philosophy.
With the newsreaders on Sky News and BBC News24 reporting that the Prime Minister is leading the tributes to David Laws, we should all remember that this is not reporting a death in the family, it’s reporting the discovery of another grubby little British MP with his fingers in the till.

Electoral Reform

During my time as a very active member of the Labour Party, there was always s difference of opinion, one of many, between those on the on the traditional right of the Party and those of us who believed that PR was a more democratic system of voting. First Past the Post will always favour Labour but will invariably produce Governments elected by less than 4 in every 10 of people voting. That, in my opinion is just one of the fundamental reasons why the total number of people turning out to vote has, until this election, been falling. Ironically, it is the FPTP voting system which has produced the current coalition perhaps as a result of many people voting tactically to try to ensure that, this time, their votes were not wasted and a change in the voting system could be made. At this election, there was a 65% turnout. This is a 4% increase on the previous election, when all expectations prior to polling day, were that turnout would be down.
Perhaps the Labour Party leadership election will produce a result which would allow me to rejoin a party of principle and vision rather a collection of populist opportunists called Nu Labour.
In his Compass publication THE FUTURE OF SOCIAL DEMOCRACY, Jon Cruddas writes

Democracy
To build equality, to create community and to secure a sustainable future we
must strengthen our democracy. We need constitutional change and proportional
representation – to push power out of Whitehall and closer to the people.


Now there, if he stands, is a candidate that I would campaign for and support, if I were still a member of the Labour Party

A coalition of the centre right

We now have a new Government. A coalition of centre right Conservatives and Liberal Democrats has replaced a centre right coalition of Labour. The prospect of a new political philosophy , shown at times during the election campaign by Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats, has been extinguished by the vision of seats in the cabinet and some political power for Lib Dems, albeit limited, for the first time in some seventy years. This has clearly been more attractive to the Liberal Democrat MP’s and Executive Committee members than remaining on the opposition benches in the House of Commons. The losers in this arrangement are of course a substantial number of Liberal Democrat Party members, and a significant number of people in the Country who voted Lib Dem in a number of Constituencies in the hope and belief that, at last, this time something may come as a result of their votes. Alas, the arrangement with the Conservatives has dashed that prospect.
Notwithstanding the agreement with the Tories in connection with a referendum on changes to the electoral system, the system to be proposed is the Alternative Vote, which the vast majority of people will argue is little better than First Past the Post and can often produce results which are even more distorted and un representative of electoral preference. Only one method of PR has any credibility and that is Single Transferable Vote. It is the system used in other Countries and ensures that a true reflection of voters preferences are shown in the resulting Parliaments. It is argued by critics of PR that the election results produce minority Governments which lead to protracted discussions between parties seeking to create a coalition. It is therefore ironic that our current FPTP system has produced in this election, exactly the same result. There also seems to be no timescale for the holding of this referendum. It could be that nothing will happen within the lifetime, however long that may be, before the first Thursday of May in 2015 !
Leaving aside the matter of Proportional Representation and the other points in the coalition deal, there remains the wider issue of how a progressive left of centre party can remain in such a close relationship with right of centre party and retain any impression of credibility with the voters. Many people voted Liberal Democrat on May 6th 2010, many for the first and in the light of subsequent events perhaps the last time, in the belief that their votes may have an effect in brining about change in the political and electoral system in this country. It seems that now, on May 12th 2010, we still have the same old attitudes but now disguised with some new faces. What ever happened to the belief in principle before expediency.

Calm down..........calm down.

Adam Boulton on Sky News. showing how he has really overdone it and should go and lie down in a dark room with a glass of milk and an asprin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gkHwU4DRA8

Nick Clegg for Prime Minister?

As we now have a “balanced Parliament”, it is crucially important to put together a working Government as soon as possible. It seems to me that the discussions between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats will be unable to resolve what are in effect, fundamental differences between their respective political positions. On the question of Electoral Reform alone, Clegg could not accept the offer of “setting up a committee” to look at the subject, and expect to retain any semblance of credibility with his party and more over the British people. On Europe, Defence, Nuclear power Public Expenditure, their differences are mountainous.
What then is the alternative? Clearly it would not be beyond the realms of possibility to create some form of coalition with the Labour Party. However, in this scenario, there is one huge problem. That problem is Gordon Brown. Never really accepted by many in the party as its proper leader, or in the Country as a rightful Prime Minister, Mr Brown ascended to the title through a coronation. It is already clear from comments made by or attributed to Mr. Clegg that the Lib/Dems will not accept any arrangement with the Labour Party under the leadership of Gordon Brown. This seems to be a significant obstacle.
However, there are already signs that moves are underway to replace Brown as leader.
In the event that a leadership contest is initiated, circumstances could arise whereby the question of stability in Government and a regeneration of Labour could be created.
Clearly, in my view, the British people would have great difficulty accepting yet another leader of the Labour Party as Prime Minister, where they had not had any opportunity to express an opinion as to whether the person was acceptable. Yet another coronation within the Labour Party, of an un apposed candidate assuming the position of holding the greatest office of State in this country, would be equally unacceptable to both people and institutions of Gt. Britain.
This problem could be resolved by a radical rethink of political attitude.
If Nick Clegg were to become Prime Minister of a Coalition Government, the way might be clear to resolving a number of issues to bring some form of stability to the economy, resolve the question of reform to the Electoral System and provide a basis for economic growth.
At the same time, the Labour Party would commence a leadership contest to replace Gordon Brown as Party Leader, and whoever became leader would also immediately assume the position of Deputy Prime Minister (and probably some other cabinet position) in Mr Clegg’s administration. The balance of such a coalition would of course, be the subject of agreement between the parties, and would no doubt raise eyebrows in the media.

Electoral Reform

Which result is the most representative of the way the people of this country voted on May 6th 2010?

A: What the result actually shows

..........................................Seats.............% of seats................% share of vote


Conservative........................307...............47%...........................36

Labour..................................258..............39%...........................29

Lib/Dem.............................57..................9%.............................23

Others.................................28.................5%............................. 12



B: What the result could show.


..........................................Seats.............% of seats................% share of vote


Conservative.......................234..............36%...........................36

Labour..................................188..............29%...........................29

Lib/Dem............................150.................23%.............................23

Others................................78................12%............................. 12

The case for electoral reform is compelling!!