I know, another post about Labour list. Please humour me, but this is truly wonderful. It’s the same cotent, but no moderated comments and a much better design. There is hope after all for Labour blogging!

Cory

Update: This may be even more hilarious.

You remember Labour List, of which I blogged yesterday? I logged on today just to see how it was going, and the front story on what calls itself “Labour’s biggest independent grassroots e-network” is an uncritical cut-and-paste job of an article written by…………..Gordon Brown.

Yup. That’s right.

Maybe I missed something, and Brown resigned as Labour leader and has returned to the grass roots. Independence my big toe. Draper seems to mean well, but seems to be well-meaning but crap, another New Labour tradition exhibited by figures such as Harriet Harman.

Still no posts from Piers Morgan though. Maybe there is a God, after all.

Cory

In the UK, the Conservative Party is winning the battle of the blogs, at least in terms of readership. On Wikio’s list Iain Dale, Guido Faukes and Conservative Home are the top three ranked sites. Liberal Conspiracy was formed in 2007 and has been a success, as a forum for those on the Left to discuss issues, find new blogs and organise campaigns. It’s currently at number four on wikio’s list, which is deservedly high, and I always visit it everyday.

LibCon is not, however, a pro-New Labour blog. True, it has Labour members who blog for it, but also Liberal Democrats, Greens, and those of no fixed party. It is an invaluable meeting point for all of ‘us’ on the Left. There is therefore a vacuum of pro-Labour blogs. According to wikio Labour Home is the highest-ranked pro-Labour blog, which is a jumbled, unattractive-looking mess. I can’t imagine it gets a great deal of readership outside the party faithful, nor is that influential on the party leadership in the same way Conservative Home can be.

In this spirit, bag-carrier-turned-therapist Derek Draper has launched Labour List, of which he is the editor, which hopes to be the space for Labour members to turn to. The project seems to have been in the offing for a while now, judging from Sunny Handal’s post here and Derek’s article for the Mail on Sunday, where he writes that Douglas Alexander offered him some work in the run up to the election that never was in autumn 2007.

I can’t say I’m overly impressed at first glance. The picture I got when I clicked on the site at first was one of Gordon Brown with Alan Milburn, with Brown smiling like a man who’s just remembered he has left the gas on. The layout looks OK at the top, but at the bottom articles seem to jumble into a heap, withnoformattingandnoparagraphssoit’sjustoneblockoftextandit’sbloodyhardtoread. (sic). An analysis of the site here suggests that it’s not based on a blogging format like wordpress, where people can just log on and post articles, so everything may have to go through Draper. Not a bad thing in itself, but the beauty about blogging is the speed you can go from idea to finished article.

As Iain Dale points out, ‘Draper has three problems - funding, independence and contributors’. The website needs labourites who will be allowed to be critical of the party if they want to be, and write attractively, informatively and engagingly. Look down the left hand side of Labour List and see who’s contributing: Peter Mandelson (hmmm…) Charlie Whelan (aaahhh…) Alan Milburn (oh!) and then you see the name of one certain Piers Morgan, and you throw your computer against the wall, and start weeping at the thought that civilisation has come to this.

Labour is not going to win the blog wars with Piers Morgan.

If you have summoned up the will to carry on, you’ll find Tristam Hunt and Ken Livingstone, the latter of whom Draper has mentioned as proof the blog will be independent of the Labour leadership. In his reply to Iain’s three problems here, Draper writes on the subject of independence ‘time will tell’. Which isn’t the equivocal drum-beating of independence I was hoping for. Draper is the editor, surely if he wants it to be independent it can and will be independent. Time is not and should not be an issue. On a happier note, he mentions that anyone who wants to write for the site can just e-mail him. If you fancy it, give it a spin.

On the subject of newer writers, he mentions one Sarah Mulholland, who comes in for a bit of a savaging from the Devil’s Kitchen. He can be a bit hit and miss, but he is worth reading on Labour List. On his advice, I read her article, which you can find here. Despite asking nine questions, by my count, about top-up fees, she does not actually answer one of them. I want to be charitable, and say that it’s nice a student politician can say some positive things about top-up fees in an even-handed fashion. But on a website like Labour List, I want a point of view. Something to engage with, to challenge or defend.  The article gives nothing of the sort, it’s like trying to have an argument in an empty room.

It’s early days, and I’m sure both Sarah Mulholland and Labour List will improve with time. I want a reason or two to renew my Labour membership. The official launch is on February 12th 2009, so we should reserve proper judgement until then at least.

Cory

Expect to see headlines like “Labour: Gordon Brown support slumps to its lowest since polling began” in newspapers often over the next few months. Political news could well become like the weather reports that say this is “the hottest February since records began”, or whatever.

Still, there is a crumb of comfort in the article:

“It is the lowest level of support for Labour since pollsters Gallup first asked people to declare their voting intention in 1943, a few months before the Battle of El Alamein.”

Two years later, in 1945, Labour won a landslide. We can dream, can’t we?

Cory

Once again, I have returned from my self-imposed exile. I have finished exams, huzzah!

I return with encouraging news - there is something more incompetent than the Labour government. It doesn’t appear to be of this world though:

“The crew of the international space station have been left with almost nowhere to go - because their only toilet is broken.”

Hmmm….

Cory

Ken Livingstone or Boris Johnson. Come May, one of those two (sorry Brian Paddick) will be Mayor of London. Maybe this is someone’s idea of a sick joke.

 

Neither candidate is particularly inspiring. Livingstone, the incumbent, has been fairly decent. The congestion charge is controversial, but is probably the best centre-left policy enacted in Britain since the minimum wage. Under Livingstone, London has cemented its position as a financial hub and, at the time of writing, no other banks have fallen into receivership this week.

 
There have been well-documented allegations of drunkenness and financial irregularity against him, but they have not damaged his poll ratings. Indeed, one allegation alleged by Channel 4’s Dispatches was that a clique of Livingstone’s wanted to turn London into a socialist state. However, most people are already aware that “Red Ken” is slightly left-wing, and these revelations have hardly damaged his reputation.

If you think that voting for Ken Livingstone despite his flaws is a special case, take a look at Boris Johnson. An Independent survey of London’s business leaders found that 57% think Boris isn’t serious enough, 40% don’t think he has a clear set of policies and 53% think he’s a buffoon. But 60% of respondents would still vote for him.

 
 
 

This article by Johann Hari was written a few days ago, but I’ve only just come across it. Memo to self: must read more of his stuff.

It gives four very good reasons for why Labour shouldn’t implode, and instead stop David Cameron being Prime Minister. Given the chance, the Conservatives would screw over some of Britain’s most vulnerable:

1) Chronic drug addicts
2) The poorest students
3) Part-time workers
4) Single mothers

These are the practical issues at stake if Labour continues to ebb in the opinion polls. How much more important are they than when precisely Jon Mendelsohn knew that some weirdo was giving money to Labour under different names – the question that has been riveting the process-obsessed Nick Robinson school of politics for weeks? And how much more important are all these real people – chronic drug addicts, poor students, part-time workers, single mums – than the fatuous, foolish questions our pundits are incessantly asking about Gordon Brown’s personality?

Cory

Here’s my interview with Richard Corbett MEP for Redbrick. He is a genuinely nice guy, and it’s great to talk with someone who is so obviously passionate in favour of the EU. Makes a nice change:

To call Richard Corbett pro-European seems something of an understatement. At Oxford University he co-ordinated the “Yes” campaign in the EU Referendum in 1975. He was first elected as a Labour MEP for 1996, and is now Deputy Leader of the Labour MEPs.
 
Corbett has many other interests on his CV. He is currently on two European Parliamentary Committees, a member of groups including Amnesty International, The Rambler’s Association and the Fabian Society, and President of the British Beer Club in the European Parliament. He is also a passionate Liverpool fan. I resisted the urge to talk to him about beer and football all afternoon. You would much rather read about the European Union, anyway.
 
It is a refreshing change to hear someone talk so enthusiastically in favour of the European Union in the way Corbett does. For all of his other interests, he says that he is most passionate when talking about Europe.
 
Why should we stay in the EU? “There are three reasons. The first is an idealistic reason – to achieve peace. Since the fall of the Roman Empire to World War Two, almost every generation in Europe has been at war. The EU has helped bring about peace. Secondly, from a pragmatic point of view, it makes sense for a range of interdependent small and medium sized countries to work together. Finally, there is the selfish reason. Britain is a trading nation and its exports are vital. 60% of its trade is with the EU. She does more trade with Holland alone than with the rest of the Commonwealth put together.”
 
Corbett is also eager to combat the UK’s negative perception of Europe. “There is so much misinformation and a very well-financed anti-European campaign. It is difficult for pro-Europeans to put their views across. The bulk of the press in Britain is anti-Europe. In readership terms, 67% of newspapers are in the hands of those who are against Europe. From the Times to the Sun, there is a deliberate policy to portray the EU in a negative light. This leads to a succession of ‘Euromyths’. This is designed to make the EU look silly, but also sinister.”
 
Examples of silly Euromyths in the British press include the claim that the EU wanted to standardise the size of European condoms and force farmers to grow straight bananas (the two stories aren’t connected).
 
If you could change one thing about the EU, what would it be? “Stop the European Parliament meeting at Strasbourg. It has to meet there, instead of Brussels, four days a month. It’s like asking the House of Commons to move to York for four days a month. It is silly and wasteful”.
 
We also talk about what Gordon Brown’s “vision for Britain” should be. As well as improving key public services, Labour should, “retain our uniquely successful record on economic performance”. Does Corbett think this unique record would have suffered by joining the Euro? “We have managed OK in the short-term, but does staying out mean losing out?
 
“There are two ways we can lose out. The first is that British firms compete with Eurozone firms at a disadvantage, as they have to incur “conversion costs” and “hedging costs”. Secondly, it could lead to less inward investment. If a Japanese firm, say, wanted to invest in the EU, it would locate in the main currency area. Ireland now gets lots of inward investment, because it’s an English-speaking country in the Eurozone.”
 
Europe is now back on the agenda, with calls for a referendum on the EU Reform Treaty. With more people now unsure of why Britain should be in the EU at all, it is pleasing to see those like Richard Corbett flying the flag for Europe. For one thing, the EU annoys the Daily Telegraph, and anything that does that cannot be too bad.

Cory

Here is my “satire column” for Redbrick. I will write something positive about Labour when I think of something.

Another week, another government computer system goes tits up.

 

Last week Channel Four reported that the £4 billion MOD computer system was “not fit for purpose” (John Reid’s phrase is seemingly here to stay). The Defence Information Infrastructure (DII) was meant to be online by the end of March this year. It is supposed to allow the army to order supplies more efficiently, for instance. Despite costing billions of pounds, DII is eighteen months behind schedule.

 

The MOD chose a consortium called Atlas to implement DII. At the head of Atlas is EDS, a company that has already screwed up the tax credits system which shelled out over £5 billion in overpayments. It doesn’t take great insight, surely, to realise that DII was always going to go wrong. It’s like putting Harold Shipman in charge of an old people’s home.

 

Back in March, you may remember, thousands of junior doctors’ details somehow made it onto the internet. These details included their criminal records, sexual orientation and religious beliefs. Then Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt said that MTAS, the online application system used by those applying for their first hospital position, “had not been an unmitigated disaster”. So that’s alright then. As long as it’s only a slight disaster, that’s good enough for Pat.

 

Incredibly, an even bigger loss of personal data happened this week at HM Revenue and Customs. Computer discs containing the personal details of everyone who receives child benefit have been lost. That’s over seven million families and 25 million names.

 

25 million?! That’s a stupid number. It’s more than three times the population of Switzerland. How can you possibly lose that many names?

It seems that the discs were put in the post, not by recorded delivery as is usual procedure, and never appeared at their final destination (the National Audit Office, for those who are interested).

 

This is an incredible piece of incompetence. There is probably more care taken over delivering a book by Amazon, than there is over the names, addresses, bank account details and National Insurance numbers of 25 million people.

 

The discs are password protected, and according to Chancellor Alistair Darling, the discs haven’t “fallen into the wrong hands”. But this was still a breach of data protection (this sort of personal info shouldn’t just be bunged in the internal post) and the head of HM Revenue and Customs, Paul Gray, has resigned over the issue.

 

It’s nice to see the head of an organisation taking responsibility and resigning for once. Unlike, say, Sir Ian Blair. When a string of operational procedures goes wrong and an innocent man is shot, Sir Ian does not see this as a resigning issue. What is the point of paying the head of something lots of money if they can’t be arsed to take responsibility when things go wrong?

 

The scariest thing about all these computer systems failures is that the government wants to set up an even bigger computer system. The national database for ID cards would be humungously (yes, I’m sure that’s a word) large, with personal details and even biometrics on them. It’s not just names and addresses, but people’s eye scans and fingerprint details too.

 
There are those who argue in favour of ID cards from the point of view of: “If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.” This is a ridiculous position anyway, but let us give it the respect it doesn’t deserve. If your personal details and bits of your eye are on a database, and there is a very big chance that this information could be lost, or accidentally leaked onto the internet for everyone in the world to see, than I think we do have a reason to fear. Don’t you?

Cory

I was asked to write a satirical column for Redbrick news. Did I succeed?:

No Harman-y

 

All this talk about Gordon Brown’s election problems is very boring. He may have had a bad Prime Minister’s Questions, but that doesn’t really matter. Nobody watches PMQs anyway. Or knows what his “Vision for Britain” is. Only that it consists of Gordon Brown being in power for at least another eighteen months or so.

 

Instead, let’s talk about Harriet Harman. You have probably forgotten who she is already – she won the Labour Deputy Leadership contest earlier this year. Which surprised me. As a Labour party member I voted in the election, and Harriet’s campaign seemed to be the worst. Worse even than Hazel Blears, and the sight of Hazel Blears on television usually makes me want to gouge my eyes out with rusty spoons. Harman’s campaign seemed to rest on two main planks. The first was essentially “Vote for me because I am a woman”. The second was to say that Labour ought to apologise for the Iraq war. She then denied saying this after she became deputy leader.

 
Therefore Harman comes across as a loose cannon, who is prepared to say just about anything to anyone in order to please them. In her campaign she claimed she had always “campaigned for equality and social justice.” In fact, when Harman was Social Secretary in 1997 she cut the benefit rate for unemployed single parents (something she had spoken out against in Opposition).
 
On last week’s Question Time, Harman again confirmed her “loose cannon” status. Asked whether Gordon Brown should have called an election (zzzz…) Harman said she thought that Parliament, not the Prime Minister, should decide when to call an election. Like many of Harman’s ideas, this seems well-meaning but crap. Parliament already has the means to do this, through a vote of no confidence motion. Having fixed-term Parliaments is, however, a separate and better idea.
 

Furthermore, she doesn’t seem to have talked to anyone before unveiling this idea. Gordon Brown has said nothing about it. On the Labour website there is nothing. Other senior Labour figures have said, you guessed it, nothing. Perhaps we should just put Harriet Harman and Ed Balls in a cupboard or something, and let them out after Labour wins the next election. They will cause less damage there.

 

End of the Ming dynasty

 

Liberal Democrat MPs make unlikely assassins, but they have now stabbed two leaders in the back within nineteen months. I feel sorry for Ming Campbell, whose only fault was not his ability or his views, but his age. Now their caretaker leader is Vince Cable, a man who looks like Ming, but with less hair and bushier eyebrows. Potential leaders have until October 31^st to throw their name into the hat.

 

For the moment, however, there is the usual claptrap that is spouted after a leader goes. Lib Dem MPs are continually praising Ming. Party president Simon Hughes, for instance, said that he had brought “purpose and stability” to the party. But if Ming was so good, why was his job “under discussion” - as the aforementioned Mr Cable said the day before Ming resigned? David Laws, Lib Dem spokesman for something or other, appeared on Channel 4 news to praise Ming. When asked who he thought should be the next leader, he replied that it was inappropriate to speculate at this moment in time. If you cannot speculate on who should be your new party leader when there is a vacancy, then when can you speculate?

 

Well, I am going to speculate now. The frontrunners are Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne. Nick Clegg is a trendy, David Cameron-type. But if you were going to vote for a David Cameron type, wouldn’t you just vote for David Cameron? Chris Huhne, by contrast, is boring. The Lib Dems need a vote winner, someone who the voters recognise. Which is why the new leader should either be Charles Kennedy or Lembit Opik.

 

By getting rid of Charles Kennedy, the Lib Dems lost their only electoral asset. Bringing him back would be embarrassing, but necessary. If that proves to be too embarrassing, then the Lib Dems should embrace Mr Cheeky Girl as their new leader. He at least is recognised by most of the general public, and this counts for more than policy in British politics today. As Alistair Darling as shown, if you don’t have a policy of your own, just nick the Opposition’s. With Labour and the Tories increasingly similar, there is a need for the Lib Dems to be distinctive. And how much more distinctive can you get than Lembit Opik?

 

And finally…

 

Laughing at the Lib Dems is harmless enough, but laughing at Tories is much more fun. They were left £8million in the will of Branislav Kostic. Sadly, he had been suffering from serious mental health problems, and was convinced only the Conservatives could protect humanity from evil spirits. This week a judge forced them to return the money to his family, and ruled that Mr Kostic would not have given to the Conservative Party “if he were of sane mind”. Well, who would?

Cory