Labourhome - Back to the roots...

[Blogs] Woolworths

2008-12-04T15:18:47-05:00

Woolworth's is starting a 'firesale' in the next couple of days. 50% off I kid you not.

That will start the worst scenario - a high street price war.

[Blogs] Tories sack 10% of party HQ staff

2008-12-04T12:46:28-05:00

...according to the Guardian Apparently they are blaming the "credit crunch" for it - though not sure how the Krunch affects things. After all political parties are not engaged in commerce, they simply depend on donations, and I thought the Tories were awash in those. (Perhaps it's down to all those bankers not getting their bonuses and hence not making donations?)

According to the Guardian:

"The casualties include members of the party's policy section, which provides research and ideas for the next general election manifesto"

....

Most of the staff facing the sack are footsoldiers, brought in to strengthen the party's work to win the next general election.

None of the highly paid big hitters, including former News of the World editor Andy Coulson, the party's director of communications and planning, and marketing guru Steve Hilton, the director of strategy who is still helping the leader while working from California, are affected. "

Gives you an insight into Tory thinking, doesn't it? If they can't be good to their own footsoldiers, no wonder they think it's a bad idea to cut VAT, to let struggling business spread out their tax payments and to let struggling householders spread out their mortgage payments.

[Blogs] Stealth DNA database a breach of human rights - ECHR decision

2008-12-04T06:30:20-05:00

The European Court of Human Rights has just issued its decision in S. and Marper v. The United Kingdom.

Jacqui Smith lost.

Conclusively.

In fact it was the unanimous decision of a court of seventeen judges!

S was 11 years old when he was charged with attempted robbery. He was acquitted but his DNA and fingerprints were retained.

Marper was charged with harrassing his partner, but the case was discontinued after they were reconciled. Again his DNA and fingerprints were retained.

The Court found there had been a breach of Article 8, that is the right to respect for private and family life:
In conclusion, the Court finds that the blanket and indiscriminate nature of the powers of retention of the fingerprints, cellular samples and DNA profiles of persons suspected but not convicted of offences, as applied in the case of the present applicants, fails to strike a fair balance between the competing public and private interests and that the respondent State has overstepped any acceptable margin of appreciation in this regard. Accordingly, the retention at issue constitutes a disproportionate interference with the applicants' right to respect for private life and cannot be regarded as necessary in a democratic society....Accordingly, there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention in the present case.

This decision is excellent news.

[Blogs] Time to get Tory Tanks off Mr. Speakers Lawn. Stop this bullying or pick on someone your own size!

2008-12-04T05:56:02-05:00

Guido Fawkes' show trial ,(the real one not the Tory blogger) followed by his barbaric execution is a vile custom even now pursued by the clerical fascist regimes and their terrorist mercenaries. There must be security in the mother of parliaments. Mr. Speaker may have erred but it was, as he surely believed at the time , to be in defence of the realm. For him to be pilloried for an error by the Tory Public School elite is wrong. They should know better after all they have through their educational advantage a sound understanding of the Constitution, Monarchy and our increasingly fragile Parliamentary Democracy . The Tory Poll Tax was an error after all and one which threatened the system and caused riots on the streets. They never intended to destabilise democracy- it was however a frightening consequence of their incompetence. The Tories expect the entire electorate to forgive this divisive tax. Double standards ? ---or just business as usual from the Tories?
more at johns blog

[Blogs] How many senior Civil Servants are Tories?

2008-12-03T18:35:37-05:00

As a youngling, I loved the story of 'A Very British Coup.' The story of a brave and radical outsider government being fought at every turn by the establishment who wrote the rules of the game to ensure no-one else could ever win- enthralling stuff.

Of course, we assume modern civil servants are just people like us. Some of us might even have gone through the rigorous application process to get on to their FAST STREAM (for the record, I considered it, looked at the website, and thought it looked too much like hard work. I want to make policy, not carry out someone else's).

However, the Tory mole story brings up uncomfortable questions. The background of your average high level civil servant is still infinitely more likely to be a background of privilege than of poverty. And that privileged background is again more likely to make someone a Conservative supporter- perhaps so they can keep more of mummy and daddy's inheritance money, perhaps because they just cannot understand or empathise with a life where money and security don't come easy.

Now if Civil Servants keep their politics to themselves, and respect the results of the democratic process, I suppose their personal politics doesn't matter too much. But when a senior civil servant, which is what this pipsqueak tory boy sadly was, start to take politics into their own hands, and use their insider status to damage one party and promote another, then the political views of civil servants are very much a valid topic for scrutiny.

As I understand it, the top bureaucracy in the US is hired and fired along with the administration. Should we consider doing the same here? It might be the only way to truly dislodge the hidden agents of privilege that the Tory mole story shows still lurk at the heart of the British state.

[Blogs] The Arrogance of Conservatives

2008-12-03T16:39:58-05:00

One of the things that I find most concerning about this furore over the arrest of a Tory MP is the total double-standards of the Tories.

Now I know I should never really be surprised by the Tory predisposition to have double-standards wherever possible, but I was still taken aback this week.

Let us not forget that it suits the Tories perfectly to blow this issue out of all proportion in Parliament and in the press in order to keep less important issues, such as the economy and the fact that the Tories do not actually have any policies that might address the current credit crisis. Such is their (mock) indignation at this perceived abuse of power - mainly because they believe that they should be the party in office abusing power. Naturally.

And one of the phrases we hear time and again is the alleged "arrogance" of Labour politicians. We have become used to this attack-line for it was used against Tony Blair (for having the arrogance to have a large Parliamentary majority [three times] and putting his Party's manifesto commitments into legislation); Gordon Brown (for arrogantly taking over as Prime Minister without calling a General Election, then for arrogantly considering calling a snap General Election, and then again for arrogantly not calling a General Election...but most of all, and most offensively, for arrogantly not being English and still thinking he should be allowed to govern the UK); and the Commons' Speaker, Michael Martin.

Indeed, the Tory arrogance is best displayed by their attacks on Michael Martin.

I have never met a less "arrogant" man than Speaker Martin, in fact from my experience he is an extremely humble and approacheable man, even when we have bumped into him in the past!

The Tories' main problem with Michael Martin is that he is not an Establishment figure, he is a working class Scot from humble origins, and they don't like someone from the outside being allowed into their gentleman's club. This is often characterised by looking at the many references by Tories to Martin as "Gorbals Mick", even though he wasn't born in the Gorbals and never lived there.

And let us not forget that this is not the first time that they have tried to depose Speaker Martin. The Tories feel they are born to rule and woe betide anyone who gets in the way...such as the electorate of the UK, for example.

I am particularly surprised by the Tories harping on this week about:

1) Political interference in the police by the Government.
2) The Speaker/Leader of the Commons not being fully aware what has been happening in advance ahead of this arrest.

It would seem to me rather commonsense to accept that the Tories can't credibly claim both of these points at the same time, however credibility is something that has long since evaporated from the Conservative Party.

The announcement today from the Speaker, following all Parliamentary protocols btw, seemed to make clear that no member of the Government or the Speaker (who for Parliamentary purposes is not considered to be a member of any party political group on taking the Speaker's chair in the Commons) had or has any influence over the police investigation - which is entirely proper.

In fact the suggestion from the Tories that the Government somehow engineered the arrest of Damian Green for political purposes is grossly offensive, and only used to chime in with negative themes that may play in the public consciousness of all politicians being somehow corrupt by nature and Government's being open to Orwellian Big Brother tendencies.

Let us cast our minds back to the arrest (and subsequent clearing) of Lord Levy. Did the Tories then say the actions of the police against Labour were politically motivated? Did Labour claim they were the victims of a politically motivated attack? No, mainly because this was clearly not the case.

Sometimes the police have to investigate politicians for criminal/alleged criminal actions - for example like the Tory Parliamentary candidate in Watford who harassed his opponents - this does not mean that the operational decisions they take are politically motivated.

The police are separate from the state and separate from political interference - and long should this remain so. And the same should be said of civil servants.

Surely the story here should be about how this former Tory local Council candidate was, apparently, systematically leaking confidential Government information to those not entitled to view it. Some may describe those actions, taking it upon himself to decide what should or should not be in the public domain, as "arrogant".

And then we have all the arguments about the rules of the House. Lots of ridiculous statements about police "not being allowed" in the Commons, for example. Anyone who has worked in Parliament will know that there are hundreds of police working inside the Parliamentary Estate on a daily basis (many carrying rather large machine guns) - in fact I am surprised that the Tories haven't noticed them.

There have been probably better founded arguments about the rule of law not applying inside Parliament as it is a Royal palace, but there is no reason why the House authorities cannot invite the police in to carry out their duties...I would have thought the Tories would be pleased that the police should be allowed to carry out their duties without obstruction, but obviously not.

The Tory arguments seem to suggest that they think MPs should have different rules and laws applying to them than any other UK citizen working outside Parliament. Some may think that to be slightly "arrogant".

But, no, argue the Tories, that is not the reason for them wanting a set of special rules that apply only to them (and anyone else born into the ruling classes). Oh no. These Parliamentary rules have been set down for years, with good reason, to protect the work of everyone in the Parliamentary Estate.

As of course is the Parliamentary rule, one would have thought, governing the use of cameras within the Parliamentary Estate? This is only allowed when expressly approved by the House authorities (the Serjeant at Arms and/or the Speaker). But not when you are a Tory, obviously, where you can decide which of those Parliamentary rules apply to you and when - as this video from Webcameron suggests. Then again, it would not be the first time the Tories ignored Parliamentary protocols. Isn't that "arrogant" too?

All that Webcameron video shows us is that the Tories have scant regard for Parliamentary rules when it suits them - and that Andrew Mackay has little backbone when faced by a couple of burly police officers who do not seem impressed by his don't-you-know-who-I-am claims of being a Tory MP who works as a PPS for David Cameron!

I am afraid that the Tories have not really changed from being a collection of Hooray-Henries and Alan B'stards more interested in themselves than democracy, the rule of law, or the rest of the country. The only thing is they think if they jump up and down enough people will forget.

Sadly for them, some of us won't.

[Blogs] A way to defuse the ID card problem

2008-12-03T13:46:03-05:00

The Tories are right on one matter: we need to cut wasteful spending.

Getting rid of ID Cards would be much appreciated.

But how do we u-turn on this issue?

Well, the Tories have done so, so we could accuse them of hypocrasy, but in a time of economic fear, the politics of fear is not wise.

I have a better way. It is a creative way of dealing with identity fraud and would be particuarly welcome during a credit crunch: credit freezes

Empowering credit users by allowing them to control their own data, and being able to shut the fraudsters out would take power away from the state and put into the hands of the consumer, also taking power from corporations.

It would help us look less authoritarian and also defuse the 'database state' charges levied at Labour. We could save billions of pounds per year on the cost of identity fraud and there would be no need for ID cards.

Consumer groups would support the measure, as would most voters. Best of all, it would annoy the banks as it would dampen easy credit and big profits.

We need creative, new, progressive ideas for our fourth term like this. We need to figure out what our purpose is. Persuing populist, social-democratic and radical ideas like this may just help answer this question.