Good choice

The lady at the Borders check-out counter smiled: "Thats a good choice."

I was buying a copy of the latest Neal Stephenson novel: Anathem. His previous novels include Cryptonomicon, a tying together of the code-crackers of WW2 with the rise of the Internet, and The Baroque Cycle, so mighty a trilogy that it has reportedly been republished as 8 books. This thunders through his unique take on the history of the late 17th / early 18th century, thrashing together the science and banking of Isaac Newton, thoughts on the rise of the modern world (and its financial, scientific, political and social institutions) with a thumping good adventure story. A writer who educates you on great science, makes you think - and creates worlds you can drown in. Brilliant.

"Yes - he's great isn't he!" So good that I'd even bought the hardback - something I usually only do when the book is a present. And delighted to have found a fellow fan.

"Er no - I meant that". She pointed at the second item I'd added (My excuse being that it was stacked enticingly next to the till).

A Cadbury's Creme Egg.

What next?

As the world grumbles about bankers and swears "never again" the question we must answer is what next?

James Callaghan apparently said: "There are times, perhaps once every thirty years, when there is a sea-change in politics". He was referring to the coming Thatcher revolution that transformed the nature of the relationship between capitalism and the state. New Labour added a human face to the Thatcherite economic concensus.

Now, 30 years later, the events of the past few months are very clearly showing that (at least) aspects of this are not sustainable. What is not so clear is what comes next - and the current debate is not showing much in the way of breakthrough thinking.

The state running the commanding heights of the economy is not going to happen - especially as this currently simply seems to mean spending as-yet uncounted sums of taxpayer money. Under a communist system the central planning team may have been suboptimal - but at least they did not consume the 10% of GDP that UK financial services has done. The role of the two is arguably similar - deciding where to deploy resources in the economy to maximise investment returns (albeit with slightly different end ambitions).

But the UK has to answer some critical questions:

1. Should the UK attempt to reduce its dependence on financial services? Inevitably this will happen (already the City is well on the way to 30% + reduction in staffing) but what alternative economic sector does the UK really have to replace it? And does the coming wave of US regulation offer a real opportunity to strengthen London's position in the global financial system - if that system survives...
2. What alternative economic sectors can we build out? How do we grow a significant green industry (at the same time as everyone else decides to go down the same road)?
3. How we do face the coming pension and demographic crisis?
4. How will the UK's business and social fabric survive what are going to be many long years of working through paying back our debt (rather than spending on anything else).

The answers to these questions (and there are others) will define the political meme of the next thirty years. That no one yet has the answers is one of the reasons why no one yet has the next election in the bag.

Plus ca change

Its been a while since I last blogged.

And not much has changed.

"Milliband should run - but won't" from April 2007.... now looks like he's ducked his chance for a second time in a row. Begins to look like a habit.

Meanwhile, the Evening Standard picked up on my comments on Party Treasurers "Unsung soldiers of democracy" and asked me to write this up for them. Letters page of the Evening Standard - its not yet Guido Fawkes on Newsnight but...

Politics is getting interesting again. The US election has been a shot of pure political adrenalin; the fall and return of McCain, the textbook Obama insurgency. The Republicans are now digging out their 2000/04 Election "kulturkampf" playsheet to counter the heroic Obama verbal onslaught. Its been a roller-coaster ride and its not over yet.

By contrast, the end of the Labour Government feels like its a simply a question of a few more dead-on-arrival relaunches. But things will get more interesting with a Prime Minister Cameron: he is no Blair, no Thatcher.

Time to be back.

Blair's heir finds his Campbell

So Andy Coulson, the former Editor of the News of the World is to be the new Director of Communications for the Conservative Party.

He is obviously supposed to be the Alastair Campbell to David Cameron's Tony Blair. He may well offer an approach that is every bit as brutally effective at savaging a tired NuLab administration as were Campbell's attacks on John Major (remember the "Y-fronts outside his trousers" image).

But one of the most powerful moments of the whole "end of Blair" saga was Michael Howard looking Campbell in the eye on Newsnight and telling him how much he had lowered the quality of British public life. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-QxBTR9_HU)

So in making this choice (doubtless a smart operational one) Cameron cements his positions as a true heir to Blair.

Brown vs ?

At least Gordon's coronation avoids the ridiculous situation where the unions end up with a critical choice in who will be the next Prime Minister.

Now that Brown has no competition for the leadership a nation (OK, a tiny proportion) will turn its eyes to the Deputy leadership selection race. This looks like it might shape up to be the proxy for the national debate on Labour's future that the leadership race should have been.

And the debate might - if it somehow catches fire, and Cruddas is surely best placed to deliver that - become more interesting than all but the most eye-catching of Brown's pronouncements. Why? Because whizzy announcements from the top have become rather too much part of the Blairite background. Something genuinely exciting from the Deputy Leadership debate may wake things up - with 6 candidates playing it safe will not wash.

And who knows - we might even end up with a Deputy Leader with a far stronger mandate from the Party than Gordon Brown.

Milliband should run - but won't

All the recent speculation about whether or not Milliband will run rather miss the point. He should.

I start with the assumption that he wants to be Prime Minister. My evidence? He is a politician. The Pope is Catholic.

Given this - why should he not take the gamble and go for it? The scenario under which not running make sense is that Labour will lose the next election, then David Cameron loses the next Election - and we'll get Prime Minister Milliband.

This assumes several things:

• That Labour will lose the next election. Given current opinion poll trends this would appear worth a bet.
• That David Cameron will prove a shallow and unsuccesful PM and lose the following election. Possible.
• That the Labour Party in opposition will maintain its discipline and hold together - meaning that the next Labour leader could bounce back to power after a brief interim in Opposition. Hmm.

All this would mean that David Milliband could pull off what William Hague could not. Step in to the leadership of a party that will have been exhausted by over a decade in power, and with some unfinished squabbles to settle. And go on to win.

I'm not sure what Milliband can lose by running. The various threats to his career are aggressively unsubtle - whether from Beckett or un-named Brownite sources. But if Brown wants to win a General Election he has to prove himself able to manage a big tent, and therefore casting out one of the few remaining talents in the Labour front ranks from spite would be seen as yet more proof of Stalinist tendencies.

Running a smart campaign would raise Milliband's profile, especially outside the Labour Party. He would be guaranteed good media coverage as the press are desperate for a battle; a new story after the years of Blair / Brown duopoly. He would go from a smart egghead to a real contender-in-waiting. Look how improved Chris Huhne's status was by his daring bid for the LibDem leadership.

And it would be good for the Labour Party. An open debate might actually help refresh the Labour Party - vital given the current intellectual exhuastion on display. It might even be good for Gordon Brown - he would be seen to have beaten a serious challenger. He would be forced to have a debate - and show that he can actually win an electoral contest.

For Milliband there is also the simple problem of timing: it is rare that you get a second opportunity. The alternative is to blink and not go for the race. When, with courage, he might have won. In short, Michael Portillo.

Portillo or Hague? Great choice. David Milliband - run!

PS If he did run, its likely that he would lose the internal party vote, but he might just win the popular outlook outside the Party. But of course he won't run. His articles and general comments suggest that he would so love to run. But can't quite bring himself to do so. Shame.

Blair's last grasp

Every time I speak to anyone working in Whitehall I hear the same thing: if a policy proposal or No. 10 diktat comes through then the civil servants receiving it ask themselves if Gordon Brown would like it, or want it to happen. If yes, it happens. If not, well there's always the slow tray...

We're in a pre-dawn world where Blair clings on to the last shadows of his rein, desperate to safeguard his destiny, still personally persuasive to the last (and Labour will soon realise how much they'll miss him). But he's frantically pulling on levers of power that no longer really connect to the front line of the civil service. All around him the No. 10 team are polishing their CVs and working out the colour of their parachutes.

Menawhile, Gordon Brown practices his smile in the mirror, as all the polls suggest mounting leads for David Cameron. And Government waits for the new dawn.

Rather than bemoan this lack of movement perhaps we should be grateful. The busier Blair's lot have been the more half-baked and incompetent legislation they have pushed through. A spell of quiet would do everyone a dose of good. Its only political hacks (and bloggers) who crave constant movement.

Market leadership

When Mirror journalists ramped shares they'd recently bought, and then sold them after they rose in response they ended up in jail. The 'City Slickers' affair nearly destroyed Piers Morgan's career many years before his Iraq pictures.

How handy then that the rise of new markets offer less risky ways for commentators to make money from their words. Guido Fawkes - widely read and closely followed by the political elite - recommended a bet on the Labour leadership market, then piled out shortly thereafter which you can do with spread betting. As he put it: "Even easier than investing in private equity..."

http://5thnovember.blogspot.com/2007/03/profit-from-politics.html

And an even better tax regime than private equity.

Triple-counting signatures

Much has been made of the 1.3m (and counting) signatures on the N.10 E-petition website against road charging. I'm not a techie, but one reason for this might just be that when you sign up for a petition (once) you get 3 replies from the website that you need to click to confirm - possibly triggering 3 signatures?

I was signing up to a petition against ID cards

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/IDcards/

Judging Number 10

Its not an obvious thought - and its one that I find hard to bring myself to say, but I will.

I hope, I really hope, that Tony Blair is not charged, let alone found guilty, of any wrong doing in the ongoing cash for honours scandal.

Let me explain.

Firstly, the last thing British politics needs is corruption at the highest level - so I am living in hope that he will not need to be hauled in front of the courts. This would be destructive for both the country but also our whole system of politics.

The hardest conversation I find on doorsteps when canvassing is persuading disinterested, often young, people to vote - not when I encounter someone with a strong set of views counter to my own. This would only get harder. On an international level it will make it harder for any British Givernment to wield any moral clout when criticising countries like Zimbabwe as they engage in truly corrupt mis-Government.

I also think that Tony Blair has done far more shocking things - like invading Iraq - and that is what he should have been punished for. But at the ballot box, not at the hands of the police.

Meanwhile, what sort of Government will we have if it is constantly in fear of judicial enquiry? Trust is the key to running any sort of organisation, and especially so in Government. Constant worries about deleting Emails and individuals coveribg themselves will not help Government work effectively.

Meanwhile, Governments of all colours have given honours to raise cash for politics. The answer is reform - of the Lords, of our political processes and of the role of money in our elections. Blaming it all on Blair will be to miss the structural issues at the expense of the crudely personal.

Don't get me wrong - if he has broken the law then he should be prosecuted. But I so hope that he hasn't.

Reid with embarassment

Another day, another wave of embarassment for John Reid.

He is not a man who is very easy to warm to but its hard not to feel a little bit sorry for him as yet another mine explodes under his feet. He has not yet been in the job so long that he could have turned the Home Office round. The problem is that he has not helped himself - by singing from the Daily Mail song book he can hardly complain as the tune gets nastier and nastier.

However, the woes of the Home Office go to the very heart of the failed Blair project.

Whilst "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" is now often seen as simply a piece of spin it remains one of the most powerful slogans of the New Labour avalanche. David Cameron was groping towards the same position with his "hug a hoodie" speech.

But, rising to power, New Labour was obsessed with the media. Alistair Campbell and Peter Mandelson decreed a media planning cycle that required quick Government responses to newspaper headlines, thus creating a blizzard of initiatives. Given the nature of tabloid journalism this affected the Home Office more than any other department (with Health following close behind).

'Tough on crime' was far easier to show than 'tough on the causes of crime' - projects which would inevitably take far longer to mature. Ironically, a decade in is when some of those latter types of projects might be beginning to make a real impact. But instead we have had a decade that added a criminal offence for almost every day that New Labour has been in power.

And because there was so much going on there was no time for doing the simple, boring things like getting processes and systems lined up and teams talking to each other. No time for management.

And so we have a sky-rocketing prison population, a disaffected judiciary delighted to have the opportunity to put the boot in as they very publicly release child abusers and a Home Office in crisis.

Not to worry though, Reid has the perfect answer: capture the headlines with a plan to split the Home Office in two. Problem solved! Until the next revelation...

Freedom of Information

Why is it that this Government seems intent on destroying even the good things they've done?

They are now set on limiting the Freedom of Information Act which has been used to such effect by campaigning MPs like Norman Baker and journalists in the serious press (especially the Guardian). The aim apparently is to limit the "serial requestors" - in other words the dogged investigators who keep digging for information.

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/greenslade/2007/01/join_the_campaign_to_prevent_f.html

But it will hopefully save the Government £10m... Hurrah - that's enough to begin saving for another war.

New Year blues

There is a lot of speculation about the supposed imminent collapse of the most successful multi-cultural and multi-ethnic state in modern history. No, not Iraq. The UK.

Strong polls for the SNP, and carefully-fanned English resentment of the higher levels of public spending in Scotland mean that political commentators are talking seriously about Scottish independence. Or as seriously as political commentators who have a regular deadline to fill with the latest breathless crisis can do.

But this is hugely irresponsible. For 300 years the Anglo-Scottish Union has created an immensely successful dynamic that has benefited both nations. This may not always have been put to the very best possible use - witness the race for Imperial domination. But it has created the modern world of liberal democracy, the importance of the rule of law, the Industrial Revolution and the global financial system. Now – at least partly because the Tory party wants to destabilise Gordon Brown and the press are happy to have a story – all this is being cast in to doubt.

There may be a coherent intellectual argument to make for splitting the Union – but it has to involve the belief that it will be through broader integration with the European Union that England and Scotland can regain the influence and scale that would be lost through partition. To be fair that is part of the SNP argument. But the very right-wing English commentators calling for a split are the same ones who turn puce at the very mention of the EU.

As you may be able to guess from my name I feel especially torn. My family roots are Scottish but I grew up in London. One grandfather slogged through the trenches of World War one with the London Scottish. I personally feel British before I feel either Scottish or English.

The current system is not perfect. It not fair or sustainable that our current Home Secretary can bring in laws that do not affect his constituents. But to jump from this to breaking up the Union shows a short-sightedness that can only be driven by the need to sell more newspapers tomorrow. Or rattle the Chancellor.

Happy New Year

I saw in the New Year in a wind-blown house somewhere near Glasgow. The storm knocked out the electricity, meaning that we ended up eating (and drinking) in a room full of candles, listening to the rattling moan of the tempest outside. A nearby shed was shaking itself to bits in the wind and it was dangerous to venture outside as the night was full of flying tiles. It had all the makings of an Agatha Christie novel and I was waiting for the sudden news that our host had been found dead in the kitchen / sitting room / bedroom, slain by a kitchen knife / tile / rolled up newspaper. The coppers would have to be round in the morning to work out who'd done what.

A useful insight in to what it must be like in Downing Street as 2007 starts.

Crisis at Christmas

I am volunteering at Crisis at Christmas, the homeless charity, again this year.

An early start this morning so I won't write much now (its well past midnight) as I've another early start tomorrow but a few thoughts from today:

• Volunteers do a variety of tasks. My first job was an outside job making sure that everything was orderly in Leadenhall square next to the shelter. On one side of the square is the Lloyd's building, dating from the City's last great boom in the 1980's. On the other is the 'Erotic Gherkin' Swiss re building squarely from the current boom. Quite a contrast to the makeshift shelter housed on two floors of what was an M&S mini-market and London branch of an Italian merchant bank until recently. The square was full of people bustling to work as the City awoke from its Christmas slumber - speaking the myriad languages that are the hallmark of one of the world's leading financial centres. Inside the shelter this is reflected in the thick set of pages at reception telling volunteers how to greet homeless guests in a dozen different languages. London's contrasts - linguistic, financial and personal - never cease to amaze, worry and inspire me.
• Working at Crisis at Christmas always restores in me real faith in the fundamental quiet decency of so many of my fellow citizens - whether guest or volunteer. If you want to help Crisis (or better yet volunteer!) go to http://www.crisis.org.uk/
• Speaking to guests, and hearing their stories of how they ended up on the streets I always am struck that, but for the grace of God, there go I. The gap between living in a stable, secure home (often with family) and the life on the streets is scarily narrow.

Now to bed, much to do tomorrow.

Education and the Environment

The ongoing weakness of British scientific education - engineering, physics, mathematics and natural sciences - has been widely discussed. The seeming inability of Britain's businesses to harness the inventive power of the UK's scientists and engineers is also much lamented. These issues are usually seen in the context of the decline of Britain's long term international economic competitiveness.

However, they may be even more important than this.

The UK has long been a hub of scientific advance - the Industrial Revolution was born on these shores and the proportion of recent inventions is significantly higher than our population, or relative GDP would warrant. A recent BBC webpage lists the computer, the pill, the photo-copier, aspirin, television, the mobile phone, the jet engine and the flushing toilet...

It may well be that there is something in the British education system or character that means that - even though we struggle to organise the latest in cutting edge manufacturing processes - we have an inventive streak that few others can match.

If so, the decline of our science grad output may mean that the pool of inventors who might just help save the environment is getting smaller. Less scientific grads means less inventions means less chance for useful inventions for the environment. This alone obviously will not be enough to tackle climate change (indeed it sounds rather like a George Bush policy). The Liberal Democrats have the right set of tax policies to begin to move in the right direction, but break-through technology would surely help.

Then again, my first degree was in medieval history so what do I know?

Caroline, or Change

Had a lovely family outing to see 'Caroline, or Change' at the National Theatre http://www.nationaltheatre.org.uk/caroline/. Its a somewhat surreal opera - the opening scenes include bursts of song from a washing machine and a dryer - but one that powerfully evokes a time (and characters from); the South of the US in 1960s. It shows how fundamentally good people can be propelled to speak evil through no real fault of their own; and the challenge of how to live a life well.

And Tonya Pinkins who plays the title role can both act - and really belt it out!

Reid back tracks on ID database

John Reid has just announced that they will not, after all, be building a giant computer database for storing all our ID card information: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6192419.stm
They will still gather the information but it will be on a variety of existing databases.

So we go from an overarching, overweening white elphantine waste of money with significant implications for individuals' privacy to the mere wastage of moderate sums, marginal impact on our privacy and mundane inefficiency.

A typically 3rd rate fudge from a Government whose management abilities never cease to underwhelm.

If only I could believe that someone had had a twinge of conscience about the impact of their ID project - instead it will be a simple realisation that they were staring down a black hole, financially and technically. They will portray the amount not spent on the system as a "saving".

PS Not a bad day to bury the news as the Ipswich murders spring back to national headlines...

Oops, he did it again

Iain Dale, one of the godfathers of political blogging, has just posted about my General Election opponent in Rotherham in 2005, Denis MacShane under the title of "Denis MacShane Falls Foul of Mr Speaker". (http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2006/12/denis-macshane-falls-foul-of-mr.html#links

In asking Margaret Beckett the question:
"Next year, Britain will celebrate two great acts of union—that with Scotland and that within the European Union. May I invite my right hon. Friend to take off her sober Foreign Secretary garb and, now and then, return to Margaret the great campaigner and campaign against some of the rancid rabble on the Opposition Benches who reject both the EU and the Act of Union with Scotland?"
he apparently strayed off her Ministerial scope and in to the overtly political.

As a strong supporter of both the EU and the Act of Union I happen to agree with Denis. In questioning if we can ever have a "Scottish" Prime Minister the Tories are playing with fire for the sake of short term political gain against Gordon Brown. And their anti-Europe stance runs profoundly counter to the country's long term interests.

Denis' best point, but a pity for the country, is that he is probably the staunchest ally of the European Union in the Labour Party. It was a combination of Brown's irritation at this - and his repeated hunt for media airtime, sometimes at the cost of caution - that hastened his departure from the role of Europe Minister after the last General Election.

But its hard to keep him down - only Denis would treat the 9% swing I got against him at the last General Election as something to celebrate in his acceptance speech. The reason? For the first time since World War I the two "progressive parties" had put the Tories in to 3rd place.

Sad Ending

Watching the closing days of the Blair regime I am torn between anger and sadness.

Anger at the squalid little scandals that are causing long term damage to the fabric of our democracy; cash for peerages, dodgy decisions on corrupt arms dealing probes, lies about Iraq, vast sums squandered on ID cards... The list is long.

Sadness because in 1997 Blair had a once in generation opportunity. A massive majority, an awesome political machine, a huge wave of popular and media goodwill, a discredited opposition - he could have done anything.

Anything. Rebuilt our education system, re-engineered Britain's relationship with Europe, created a thorough (and properly thought through) reform of our political set-up, delivered an NHS for the 21st Century...

The gamble he chose to take was Iraq.

And he could have done anything... How can you not be sad?

How NuLab works

If you want to see how New Labour runs the country then switch on your telly now.

As the media focuses on the unfolding tragedy in Ipswich and flashes back to the death of Princess Di they have chosen today to slip out a whole bunch of news.

• 2,500 post offices will face the axe.
• There will be a third runway at Heathrow (doubtless the "very last" such development...).
• The Serious Fraud Office probe in to British Aerospace's questionable sales relationship with the Saudi Royal family when they purchased Eurofighters will be closed down. (According to the BBC the SFO said "No weight has been given to commercial interests or to the national economic interest.")

But then the bubble burst on them - and Inspector Yates' team had a chat with the PM so at least that will probably head the news.

Despite all this the story that heads the BBC website's most read list is rather more fishy: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/world/asia-pacific/6178659.stm

Obama fever

The emergence of Barack Hussein Obama brings hope to those depressed by American politics. This from the nation that gave the world George Bush.

The decline of American influence and prestige around the world is not ultiamately to the world's benefit, however much it has been abused by the current President. There are precious few world problems that America is not critical to help solve. I have monitored two elections in Kosovo (raw, inspirational, hectic affairs for ultimately disappointing electoral results); a province that Europe was not willing or able to intervene in alone. And the powers seeking to fill America's place in the world rarely inspire great confidence.

Bush's misguided pursuit of American unilateralism has simply revealed its inherent futility. America was key to the creation of the post-war multi-lateral UN for good reason. Now the US military has learnt the hard way that their overwhelming power, once used, is spent. And America's enemies have learnt to go nuclear as fst as they can - it is no accident that it is on Bush's watch that the number of nuclear nations has practically doubled.

And at home America is more divided than ever. The incompetence and indifference revealed during Hurricane Katrina was simply the thin end of the Bush wedge: massive tax cuts for the rich, a grotesquely unblanced budget and widespread corporate favouratism.

And lets not get started on his environmental record.

Obama might just be an over-hyped media flash-in-the-pan. But wouldn't it be nice if he wasn't?

PS Although the idea of a female President is incredibly attractive it is not clear that Hilary Clinton's current favourite status will carry her through. Besides a Presidential line up that has gone Bush - Clinton - Clinton - Bush - Bush and then Clinton - Clinton (by when George's brother Jeb will ready for another Bush - Bush?) has a certain nepotism to it. How grateful must we be that neither Carol Thatcher or James Major looks set to take up politics....

Ticketless Tory

See that there is a small story in the press today about David Cameron losing his ticket on the way to Wembley. He allegedly got off with buying a new one for £3 rather than paying the £30 fine.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23377830-details/Ticketless%20Cameron%20let%20off%20without%20a%20fine%20on%20the%20Tube/article.do

Ok, so what. Man forgets ticket, ticket collector treats him decently. Big deal.
Except that...

"His spokesman said: "David did buy a ticket. He was even able to produce the receipt for it when he arrived at Wembley Park. ""

Who exactly gets a receipt on the Tube for a £3 ticket when they are travelling for personal reasons? Have you tried to get a receipt on the Tube? Most odd.

Crunch time for Cameron?

I'd keep an eye on Cameron in the coming months.This is make or break time - and it may be coming faster than expected.

His plan has always appeared to be to spend Year 1 re-positioning the Tory Party away from its "nasty" roots by surprising us all with his 'liberal' acts and comments. That his first interview post-elevation as Tory leader was in The Observer has always struck me as a class move. The year since then has been somewhat haphazard - and occasionally disastrous as when ambused by Douglas Alexander who dubbed his comments on youth crime as "hug a hoodie" - but the implicit promise has always been that we should withhold judgement until his policy commissions began to report.

Well, they are beginning to report. The Tax Commission made various suggestions (£21bn in tax and spendings cuts, no suggestion of green taxes) that the leadership recoiled in horror from. Now Iain Duncan-Smith has delivered his views on poverty in Britain and - behind what probably was not a snear at gay families - there are some familiar themes emerging. Family break-down, growing debt, declining social mobility under Labour even as the sums spent on benefits rise inexorably... Good of the Tories to finally catch on to what has been happening to this country that they used to run.

But the challenge for Cameron is where to raise his policy standard. Is it on a liberal position that will increase the number of disaffected Tories turning to UKIP's "commmon sense" and continue the sniping that he has received from the Daily Mail. Or will it be on traditional Tory ground?

The NuTory answer would presumably be the former, but there must be some concern within the senior echelons of the party over the potential disaffection of the rank and file activists. Blair's great triangulation success included a love / hate relationship with the Labour front line: he would alternatively bate them (to satisfy Murdoch / the Daily Mail) and then throw them nuggets like the ban on fox-hunting. Cameron's biggest effort to deliver to the rank and file: pulling the Conservatives out of the EPP Group in the European Parliament ended in tears. Now we hear almost daily reports of unrest in the shires: http://www.libdemvoice.org/more-conservative-candidate-trouble-342.html

And the press are beginning to tire of the 'Cameron is a darling' storyline. Expect more references to Eton; who knows, even some scandal on one of his inner circle? Opinion polls are inconclusive http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2006/12/11/will-gordons-recovery-be-sustained/ but trending away from a clear Tory victory. Tony always looked like a winner, hence his party stuck with him almost whatever he did. Cameron may never get the luxury of such treatment.

Policy is the right way to judge Cameron - but this moment is fast approaching. I suspect that there will be far less "I don't know"s about him in six months time. If not, he is in trouble.

Pinochet's Death

I suspect that there'll not be many tears - apart from those of Margaret Thatcher - at the death of General Pinochet. What is sad is that he never properly faced justice for the 3,000-odd people who "disappeared" during his dictatorship.

In this country, Pinochet will be remembered for definining the high point of New Labour's "ethical foreign policy" when he was placed under house arrest in the UK. And then the end of it when he was released by Jack Straw.

ID nightmare

Where the Government's new ID database might just take us...
http://www.aclu.org/pizza/images/screen.swf
Make sure that you have the sound turned up.
(hat tip to Iain Dale)

... And for some political balance here's one on the same subject recommended by Labour blogger Recess Monkey
http://eclectech.co.uk/clarkeidcards.php

Camden triumph

Great news for the Liberal Democrats in the Kentish Town bylection where we came through to victory last night. Two key results: Labour's rout continues in Camden, once a flagship Council; recovering from this will be hard. Secondly, the Greens' candidate Sian Berry is their "national principal speaker" [translation: Leader] - so this makes for a pretty high profile defeat.

The full result was:
Ralph Scott (Lib Dem) 1093
Green (Sian Berry) 812
Labour (Reverend Sam McBratney - who I last campaigned against when he lost to the Liberal Democrats in the Bunhill ward in Islington earlier this year) 808
Conservative 198

So well done Ralph and team (amongst many others Ed Fordham, Janet Grauberg, David Simmons, Jeremy Ambache, Dominc Mathon, Pete Dollimore, Nick Russell, Philip Thompson and Patricia Hutton). The campaign had a great feel to it, good literature, massive support from across London (Islington got a special thanks for Marisha Ray's telecanvassing operation) and - it is apparently on the market - the fanciest campaign HQ I have ever seen.

Unsung soldiers of democracy

Running local parties must be one of the least lauded jobs in Britain.

Its hard work. There are (rightly) increasing numbers of checks (especially on the money), some with potential legal implications. Its not as glamorous as being a Councillor, and there is no allowance attached. And if you're a Tory, there's a high chance that CCHQ will come down on you if you fail to live up to their view of the world http://conservativehome.blogs.com/goldlist/2006/12/cchqs_action_ag.html

I was reminded of this when I attended the London New Local Party Officer training yesterday. I was impressed by both the calibre of the trainers - in the case of Treasurers the estimable David Allworthy - and the enthusiasm of the various participants (its still early days!).

Ultimately getting good local party Execs is critical to both the ability of a party to campaign -but also to the political health of the UK as a whole. They are the ones who sweat to make things happen, who ensure that the right candidates get selected to (ultimately) run the country and whose day-to-day activity keeps the whole democracy show on the road. And these are often the same community-minded people who might also run a local charity or the village fete.

One of my real concerns about state funding of parties is that it will strengthen the central party political machines. This may have many benefits: clearer development and articulation of policy (and 'narrative'; the Blairite offering to modern political philosophy), less room for inappropriate financial shennanigans, more unified campaigning and - frankly - less hassle with the occasionally oddball behaviour of the Chair of the Little Duttlington Party. Party centralisation has been at the core of both the Blair and Cameron projects; and key to their media success. However, the long term damage to British democracy is only now beginning to be seen.

Less need to rely on local parties for money, and (in these days of VoterVault and centralised Voter ID call centres) even campaigning will mean that they have less and less influence. They will increasingly become a channel to communciate (and discipline) local parties. The risk / reward for dedicated local people will get even worse. That role on the village fete committee might suddenly look rather tempting.

And the long term decline in party membership that has partially triggered the current political funding scandals (the other being the escalating cost of campaigning) will continue.

It is rather like (and not unrelated to) the centralisation of Government. Giving local bodies freedom will create embarassing results ("postcode lotteries" in tabloid parlance). But simply reducing that freedom creates a downward spiral where reduced freedom means less interesting oppportunities means talent moves elsewhere means more embarassing outcomes means less freedom. The death loop that Councils have been following for much of the 20th Century.

Clear national, annual limits on spending are far more likely to ensure that we get the politics that we need. And perhaps the occasional pause for thanks to long suffering Local Party Execs.


PS I had a follow-on question for David Allworthy today to which he responded incredibly quickly (if not yet with the answer I was hoping for!). This sort of thing makes all the difference when you are a volunteer Treasurer trying to get the fiddly paperwork done in the spare moments between campaigning and the day job. It will mean some extra time for Kentish Town over the next day or two.

One last push

Another visit to Camden yesterday. One final push - hopefully there'll be something to celebrate this Thursday.

If you can get there to help in the last week of the Council by-election then contact the team at campaign HQ, Flat 17, Apollo Studios, Charlton Kings Road, London, NW5 2SB. The views from HQ make the visit alone worth it.

A year of spin

Its the anniversary of David "call me Dave" Cameron's election as leader of the Tories. Much has been made of both his various PR stunts (some of which have hilariously back-fired such as the chauffeur-driven car that follows his bike to work) and the difficulties Labour appears to be having deciding how to deal with him. As an admirer of Tony he has definitely copied those subtle arts of spin.

He has had an impact in Islington. The rise in Tory support at the last Council Election - although never within a million miles of electing a Tory - definitely helped the Labour Party. Dave promised 'Vote Blue, Get Green'; in Islington that was very clearly a case of 'Vote Blue, Get Red'.

And he has moved some political journalism on from yet another retelling of the latest developments in the ongoing soap opera that is the Tony-Gordon relationship.

However, the simple question that I find it impossible to answer is this: whatever your view on the set of problems facing the next Prime Minister - and there are many - how can the answer ever be someone whose only discernible skill is PR?

World AIDS Day

I used to be an English Language and Literature teacher in a rural school in Zimbabwe. Every morning I used to read out a roll call for my classes, names eagerly answered by kids who might just have run several miles barefoot to be in class.

Since then Zimbabwe has been through a rough patch. But overshadowing the combination of poor weather and disastrous government has been the terrible curse of AIDS. Even when I was teaching there nearly two decades ago we were aware that AIDS was a menace – but now around 1 in 5 people in Zimbabwe are infected with HIV. Today is World AIDS day: http://www.worldaidsday.org/default.asp.

The uniquely devastating impact of AIDS is that it hits the most productive, dynamic and attractive segments of society – quite literally those most able to have multiple sexual partners. So attractive, well educated and rich young people are the group with the highest chance of suffering. Most historical diseases by contrast – like the medieval plagues or the 20th century influenza – would typically cut down the old, the very young and the weak. AIDS does the opposite.

So a country that desperately needs economic development, that has invested so much in the education of its youth faces the tragedy that these are the very ones being cut down. The children I taught were the ones most likely to move to the cities in the hope of getting a job to match their new education, the ones whose lifestyle changes left them most open to this most insidious of killers. And abject misrule means that anti-retroviral drugs that could keep people alive are just not getting through. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2441-2005Apr19.html

A couple of years ago I was working in Africa again and I went back to my old school for a brief visit. It was at the time of an election so signs of Mugabe’s misrule could be seen in scorched patches on the road (from tyre-burning road blocks) and the occasional burst of tear gas as the ZANU-PF Womens’ League rampaged across Harare.

But infinitely more chilling was the huge sign that had been erected over the local township where I had taught. It only had three words: “Coffins For Sale”.

A former student told me of some of the people who had ‘passed away’ – some I knew, some I did not. I dread to think what would happen if I started that roll call today.

Russian risks

We hosted Pizza and Politics last night. Dr Alan Riley http://www.city.ac.uk/law/LawStaffCVs/alanriley.html came and delivered a most learned speech on the effect of the Russian energy situation. He argued that Putin's Russia is attempting to use her vast reserves of natural gas to build up her great power status and influence over neighbouring countries. The danger for Russia was that a fall in energy prices, possibly compounded by a decline in Russian production driven by under-investment, would greatly weaken Russia. This would be Russia's 'Suez' moment and would help expose her decline as a world power. The impact of that on the country would be bleak.

His paper on this can be downloaded from http://shop.ceps.be/BookDetail.php?item_id=1389


Recent events involving poison have obviously made everyone far more aware of Putin's Russia but I was still delighted by the turn out to discuss the topic. A spirited conversation covered everything from the impact of Russia's energy situation on the rise of China, to the future of Qatar's gas fields, to new technology's impact on the environment to how we could use less energy in Islington.

I am especially concerned about the impact on Russia's democracy. Rising national wealth means that the population are more willing to turn a (short term) eye to the Government's increasing illiberal ways, whilst the sheer volumes of cash associated with natural resources will increase corruption (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse). In Russia this is compounded by the nature of the corporations in the energy industry who have been snapping up the Russian media to make them more biddable to the Kremlin. I used to work with Izvestia - a then-independent Russian newspaper - it is now part of the Gazprom group. That one potential Kremlin candidate for the Presidency is rumoured to be the current Chair of Gazprom (Russia's quasi-Governmental energy titan) tells its own story.

However, Russia's greatest wealth is its people - who are energetic, often embarassingly well-educated and not shy about saying what they think (my wife is Russian...). They will not put up with poor Government for ever. On those grounds at least I am less pessimistic that Alan.

Still the fact that I took away from the meeting was that Russia is estimated to flare (the burning off of surplus gas produced when oil is being pumped from the ground) nearly as much gas as the UK consumes. Thats a lot of energy conservation in Islington...

Afghanistan matters

Had dinner with a couple of (civilian) friends recently returned from Afghanistan, where they have been working in pretty tough circumstances. Not only are there the obvious threats from hostile action - and appalling traffic safety - but there are more insidious dangers. There is little to do but work - so work they do every hour that God gives. When usually energetic people fall asleep on your sofa mid-sentence you know that they may just have been pushing themselves a little bit too hard. Or, alternatively, I really need to brush up on my conversational skills...

Although there is much press concern at recent casualties in both Afghanistan and Iraq it is important that we do not treat the two engagements in a similar way. The Iraq invasion was a misconceived, illegal and foolish act of over-reaching arrogance on the part of the US and UK Governments. In Afghanistan by contrast, there was some justification for external involvement (if nothing else there was a link to September 11th terrorists), and this was a country that desperately needed a fresh chance.

The tragedy is that the urgent race in to Iraq means that we wasted critical years (and resources) better devoted to helping the new Afghan Government. Afghanistan's strong clan system, weak central institutions and multiple (bribe-able) guerilla warlords means that it is a place where to overthrow and replace the central Government is remarkably easy. But to then hold everything together is almost imposible. The Soviets, various warlords including the Taleban and now Americans have discovered this to their peril.

Everything from historical antecedents (one 19th Century British army had but one survivor - a doctor - when they tried to fight their way back to India from Kabul) to what is amongst the most rugged (and beautiful) geographies in the world suggests that we are in in for hard time. But try we must. The last time we abandoned Afghanistan - after they had forced the Soviet withdrawal (and added a pretty huge nail to the coffin of the Eastern Bloc) - we ended up with the rise of the Taleban - and the road to September 11.

The challenge though is to decide what we are aiming to do: is it to stabilise the country, to defeat the drug-traffickers, to destroy what remains of Al-Quadea, to capture Osama bin Laden or to bring development and support to a nation that badly needs it? Clarity on objectives - and a sense of humility and understanding that we can only achieve what the Afghan people want us to achieve - is vital if this is not to turn in to another Iraq.

The Council can manage Housing, Only Gov can fix it

As a Liberal I welcome diversity. And Islington is one of the most diverse places in London, possibly the world. But it is possible to have too much of a good thing.

As the Guardian reminded us last Friday http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,1955770,00.html the rising cost of private housing and the shortages of social housing mean there is a real divide opening up in the borough. On current trends only richer and richer people can afford to move in to new private homes (although the costs of mortgages mean that they get considerably poorer). Meanwhile the point system run by Islington Council rightly rewards those most in need, those furthest away from the average. So Islington gets more 'diverse' - read 'divided'.

This is exacerbated by the refusal of successive Governments (Tory and Labour) to fund renewed Council house building. Those that do go up are usually the end result of developers being forced by the Council to build them as part of planning permission (now expected to be 50% of new units for developments over 10-units large).

All this means that the Islington I grew up in - with lots of people "in the middle" - is increasingly far away. And this is true all across London - the net effect of being a key hub in the global economy (with huge increases in the numbers of wealthy people from all over the world attracted to the City), strong limits on housing development and poor transport links (which mean that everyone wants to live as close to the centre as possible).

The Council does what it can. According to Terry Stacy, responsible for housing on the Council, there is no one in temporary accomodation and key public sector workers are OK. Although the Council point system rewards those who grew up here it is only a way of rationing what there is a shortage of: housing. We still have 13,000 people on the waiting list for better accomodation. And only the Government has the financial clout to deal with that.

I am lucky, I can afford to remain in Islington. Many others who grew up here cannot - and that is not good enough. Islington needs a Liberal MP who will fight for proper Government investment in new housing stock. And a little less diversity.

View from the top

Visited the Camden Council byelection again today. I went to a nearby comprehensive so its good to go back to the neighbourhood. A good candidate, a great team and the most amazing campaign headquarters perched on the rooftops of London. Also a real chance to build on all the great work that the new Camden Council are up to.

Write to your MP, maybe

Our local New Labour lawyer MP, Emily Thornberry, is not yet famous for her love of hard work. http://www.writetothem.com/stats/2005/mps is a site that allows people to write to their MP - and get an answer.

Their published statistics for 2005 show that Emily managed to come 679th amongst the MPs for her ability to reply to letters. And they only ranked 687 of them...
Even Tony Blair - for this at least he has an excuse - managed to pip her to the post at 678th.

This means that she answered 8.9% of the 152 letters she received within 2-3 weeks. Not quite sure what she spent £13,169 of postage and stationery on then for last year's expenses. Anyone have any ideas?

Tory Campaign To**er

You could not make it up.

The rise in personal debt is a really important issue that Vince Cable, the LibDem Shadow Chancellor, has been campaigning about since before the last Election. As with many LibDem issues the Tories have recently caught up with it and - in typical Notting Hill style - have launched a "Toss out the Tosser Inside" web campaign at http://www.sort-it.co.uk/

According to the Press Association report, cited by Iain Dale http://iaindale.blogspot.com/:

"David Buonaguidi, creative director of Karmarama - the advertising agency which created the film - said: "Every Christmas we toss away millions of pounds on things we don't really want or need. We wanted to confront people with this behaviour and help them realise that this kind of spending just isn't very smart. "The Tosser Inside is a wake-up call designed to appeal to an audience that usually screens out this sort of message.""

What exactly does Mr Buonaguidi think that he is in advertising to do?

Letter in the gazette

I had another letter published in the Isligton Gazette this week, talking about the November 15th article in the Evening Standard about rises in London Council tax. Apparently it has risen by 86 percent in the past decade - which is more than double the rise in pay over the same period.

What the sidebar added was that Islington Council has had the second lowest rise in London over that period - coming in at 37.2%. Labour controlled Camden was 65.6% and Hackney was 43.8%. Just shows how sensible management can make life more bearable for the people of Islington. According to these numbers Islington Council tax grew more slowly than pay rises.

A world of haves and have nots

I'd like to recommend the Gapminder website. This includes a brilliant presentation that lays out the huge development gaps that continue to plague the developing world.

http://www.gapminder.org/

It illustrates two things very clearly:

As East Asia pulls itself forward through rapid economic expansion (the largest single surge out of poverty in a single generation that history has ever seen) the development challenge is increasingly focused on Africa. I used to work as a teacher in rural Zimbabwe. This was a hands-on education on both the path forward for Africa (increased education, a diversified economy backed up by clear ownership rights, the roll out of basic health provision, provision of clean water and enough infrastructure to allow access to markets and services for all) and the challenges (particularly governance issues in the form of an increasingly corrupt and autocratic governing elite, the dangers of foreign entanglements - i.e. the civil war in the Congo in search of plunder - but also the external factors of world commodity prices and poor weather that can hit agriculture- based economies). The world owes Africa all the help it can get. But African leaders owe their people even more.

The second thing it shows is that differences (economic and health) within countries are at least as large as those between countries. The income differential between the bottom 20% and the top 20% in Namibia, for example, is the same as that between Sierra Leone (one of the world's poorest, war-torn countries) and Japan (where robots are increasingly being primed to take over household duties). I remember hitch-hiking on UN vehicles through the beauty of Namibia as it got its Independence from South Africa; its sad that that so much remains to be done.

What strikes me even closer to home though is that in Islington we face the same issue: the rich are getting richer and the poor, poorer. Tony Blair's Government has presided over increasing wealth disparity. It never was right in Zimbabwe - and it sure is not going to create a healthy society in the UK.

I look forward to a UK version of gapminder.com.