For the first time in many years, I have not made it to Lib Dem Annual Conference, but I can hardly say that I’m missing it. My observation from afar, from reading the newspapers and following the TV coverage, is that the leadership has shown little leadership and that the Party has no clear political direction or message as we head towards the election.
Meanwhile, the recession seems to have passed party activists by. The reality of the public finances has had no effect on curbing the appetite of the Party’s social(ist) liberal wing for unaffordable and undeliverable policy commitments.
Perhaps the most dispiriting aspect has been the pointless abuse thrown at the Tories: that Cameron is a con-man and the Tories are a bunch of Nazi sympathisers. When Chris Huhne was delivering his comments about ‘Skinhead Hague’ cuddling up to ‘Adolf Hitler’s Waffen SS’, I received a personalised email from Eric Pickles calling for Liberal Democrats to work with the Tories to build a progressive alliance against Labour. I know which message works best with me, and I can only imagine what ordinary voters think.
I welcome Cameron’s conversion to liberal conservatism. I hope he sticks to it when in Government. And I would much prefer to see the Lib Dems position themselves to voters as the only way of holding Cameron to this commitment.
If the Lib Dems continue with the abusive language against the Tories, Cameron’s love-bombing strategy will be even more effective at squeezing the Lib Dem vote.
Tuesday, 22 September 2009
Thursday, 27 August 2009
Has Brown given up?
Matthew Parris writes in today’s Times that Gordon Brown has resigned. Before you hurry back to your constituency to prepare for an election, let me clarify. Parris writes:
On Tuesday night, when Brown was on the telly answering (or not answering) questions about the al-Megrahi affair, my wife turned to me and said “he looks like he’s given up.”
Maybe he has. Maybe he is resigned to losing. If so, it looks like being a slow and painful death which won’t be over until May next year. Does he really want nine more months of internal squabbles, leadership speculation and a lame duck premiership? I wonder if he’s contemplating a way out, like calling a General Election at Labour Party Conference. Yes, he will lose, but he will lose next May. Better to go out with a bang than a whimper.
Weird-sounding to say this, I realise, but I have the strongest of impressions that Mr Brown has already resigned. I’m not sure on what level I mean that — whether perhaps I just mean he is resigned; or that he has taken a mental step still to be followed up by action; or that an agreement has been reached but has yet to be disclosed. But of one thing I’m strangely sure: that in some way, and on some level, Mr Brown has gone.
On Tuesday night, when Brown was on the telly answering (or not answering) questions about the al-Megrahi affair, my wife turned to me and said “he looks like he’s given up.”
Maybe he has. Maybe he is resigned to losing. If so, it looks like being a slow and painful death which won’t be over until May next year. Does he really want nine more months of internal squabbles, leadership speculation and a lame duck premiership? I wonder if he’s contemplating a way out, like calling a General Election at Labour Party Conference. Yes, he will lose, but he will lose next May. Better to go out with a bang than a whimper.
Wednesday, 26 August 2009
Build on the greenbelt
Britain needs more new houses with gardens. That’s the finding of a new YouGov poll conducted for the New Homes Marketing Board. The survey found that from a list of over 20 attributes offered by new homes, a massive 53 per cent of respondents chose a garden as their main priority.
It is rather sad and indicative of how government social policy has lost its way. Ninety years ago, the Lloyd George government launched its homes fit for heroes. All these government built, social rent homes had generous gardens (as well as generously sized homes). Today, even so-called executive homes built for the private market have postage stamp sized gardens. Most new homes don’t have any gardens at all – they are pokey one and two bedroom flats with no open space.
The blame for this sad state of affairs is Britain’s planning system and the desire to build homes at higher densities. It is a policy that suits developers because they can cram in more flats helping profit margins. It suits local authorities, because they can demand higher levels of affordable housing. And it suits environmentalists and countryside campaigners, because it helps ease the pressure to build on the greenbelt. Indeed, it seems to suit everyone bar the consumer – the people that have to live in these new rabbit warren homes.
There is nothing wrong with high densities. If you want to live in a successful urban community with vibrant shops, bars and restaurants, well-designed, high density living is essential. But for those people that want to live in a more rural or suburban setting, we should stop building homes on top of each other and give people generous gardens with more space.
Sadly, this is impossible with the current planning system that restricts the availability of land for development. The only way to address this matter is to lift the restrictions on developing greenfield and greenbelt land. There is nothing special about the greenbelt - it does not necessarily mean that it is attractive or ecologically important land.
The idea of the greenbelt was born out of the 1947 Planning Act. Instead of cities growing organically and of urban areas converging into one another, the Labour Government felt it would be better to plan new towns away from the existing cities to accommodate a growing population.
Personally, I think organic growth and villages being subsumed by a larger neighbour works better than New towns. Islington and Wimbledon are certainly better places than Bracknell or Basildon.
But at least Atlee’s Labour Government was prepared to provide homes for a growing population – in recent years, planning policy has banned development in either New towns or the greenbelt. With some demographic predictions suggesting Britain’s population will rise to 71 million by 2031, this is no longer a credible position.
The perception among most people is that the South East has been concreted over and that we should protect what small green space we have left. This is nonsense. The next time you fly into London, take a look over the Home Counties and you’ll see it remains mainly green and undeveloped.
If we want to build homes (with modest gardens) fit for ordinary people in the 21st century, we need to abolish the planning rules which impose minimum density levels and prevent greenbelt development. John Prescott may not have literally meant it, but he was right – we should build on the greenbelt.
It is rather sad and indicative of how government social policy has lost its way. Ninety years ago, the Lloyd George government launched its homes fit for heroes. All these government built, social rent homes had generous gardens (as well as generously sized homes). Today, even so-called executive homes built for the private market have postage stamp sized gardens. Most new homes don’t have any gardens at all – they are pokey one and two bedroom flats with no open space.
The blame for this sad state of affairs is Britain’s planning system and the desire to build homes at higher densities. It is a policy that suits developers because they can cram in more flats helping profit margins. It suits local authorities, because they can demand higher levels of affordable housing. And it suits environmentalists and countryside campaigners, because it helps ease the pressure to build on the greenbelt. Indeed, it seems to suit everyone bar the consumer – the people that have to live in these new rabbit warren homes.
There is nothing wrong with high densities. If you want to live in a successful urban community with vibrant shops, bars and restaurants, well-designed, high density living is essential. But for those people that want to live in a more rural or suburban setting, we should stop building homes on top of each other and give people generous gardens with more space.
Sadly, this is impossible with the current planning system that restricts the availability of land for development. The only way to address this matter is to lift the restrictions on developing greenfield and greenbelt land. There is nothing special about the greenbelt - it does not necessarily mean that it is attractive or ecologically important land.
The idea of the greenbelt was born out of the 1947 Planning Act. Instead of cities growing organically and of urban areas converging into one another, the Labour Government felt it would be better to plan new towns away from the existing cities to accommodate a growing population.
Personally, I think organic growth and villages being subsumed by a larger neighbour works better than New towns. Islington and Wimbledon are certainly better places than Bracknell or Basildon.
But at least Atlee’s Labour Government was prepared to provide homes for a growing population – in recent years, planning policy has banned development in either New towns or the greenbelt. With some demographic predictions suggesting Britain’s population will rise to 71 million by 2031, this is no longer a credible position.
The perception among most people is that the South East has been concreted over and that we should protect what small green space we have left. This is nonsense. The next time you fly into London, take a look over the Home Counties and you’ll see it remains mainly green and undeveloped.
If we want to build homes (with modest gardens) fit for ordinary people in the 21st century, we need to abolish the planning rules which impose minimum density levels and prevent greenbelt development. John Prescott may not have literally meant it, but he was right – we should build on the greenbelt.
Thursday, 20 August 2009
Monday, 17 August 2009
Wanted: Single women for socially awkward young men
A colleague circulated details of a Young Countryside Alliance event. It could provide some ideas for boosting the membership of the Lib Dem Youth & Students organisation:
The Young Countryside Alliance - London is holding an informal BBQ to celebrate our official partnership with Aragon House.
Next Thursday, 20th August, please join us for a (very informal) burger and glass of wine or beer at the credit crunch busting price of £10. The deal will be available from 7pm onwards, and we look forward to meeting many of our London based supporters, introducing ourselves, and finding out exactly what you want from the Young Countryside Alliance. Any ideas would be most welcome!
**Date for your diary** many of our supporters want to meet like minded people in the local area for love and romance (!!!) Due to high demand for singletons at our events, we have decided to group everyone together and in one place. Aragon House and the YCA will be holding a 'speed dating' evening on THURSDAY 3rd SEPTEMBER, with some of the proceeds going to Help for Heroes.
For further information please contact xxx@countryside-alliance.org or 07738 XXX XXX. We are still looking to hold events in other areas....if you are interested in helping organise something, please get in touch!
We look forward to seeing you!
The YCA team
Friday, 7 August 2009
Beetroot on my mind
I love beetroot. Last weekend, my neighbourhood popped over with some fresh beetroot that he’s been growing in his garden. I thought what could I do with this beetroot? So, I consulted the web-pages and found you could do quite a lot. It can find its way into a load of recipes – it’s not just for pickling!
Since then, I haven’t stopped reading about beetroot. It’s everywhere; in my morning paper and online. Everyday, I seem to come across a beetroot story. Even Jeremy Clarkson is writing about them. The latest story is on BBC online and tells you that drinking beetroot juice boosts your stamina by up to 16% longer.
There is even a Love Beetroot campaign, which lists some of the benefits of beetroot:
The Romans knew about love!
The Romans considered beetroot an aphrodisiac (it’s rich in the mineral boron which is important in the production of human sex hormones). The belief persists to this day that if a man and a woman eat from the same beetroot, they will fall in love (with each other, presumably.)
Beetroot benefits
Beetroot contains betaine, a substance that relaxes the mind and is used to treat depression. It also contains trytophan (also found in chocolate!) which contributes to a sense of well being.
Keep calm
Don’t be alarmed, if after eating beetroot, there are pink side effects! It’s the red pigment in beetroot which passes harmlessly through the digestive system.
Colour by numbers
Betanins, a substance obtained from beetroot, are used industrially as red food colourants – e.g. to improve the colour of tomato paste, sauces, jams and ice cream.
Whoever is running the consumer PR campaign for the Beetroot Growers Association is doing a great job. It is becoming the vegetable of 2009.
Thursday, 6 August 2009
Have the Tories given up on Yeovil?
Over the last few months there has been a steady flow of Tory Parliamentary Candidates joining the ranks of the public affairs world. Although this will no doubt be viewed by some as sleazy, I can think of no better training for a wannabe national politician – no other job can provide a better understanding of how Government policy and public issues impact on businesses from a breadth of sectors.
But Kevin Davis, the Tory Candidate for Yeovil, has gone one better – he has set up new public affairs agency. Now what would a parliamentary candidate be doing setting up a business just months before an election, unless of course you don’t expect the voters to give you that new career at the election?
Over the last few days there has been a lot of coverage about the Tories targeting Lib Dem seats in the South West. I have to say I’m not very confident about the Lib Dems prospects generally in the region. But let’s hope the Tories have given up on Yeovil. David Laws is to the Lib Dem Parliamentary Party what Charlotte Gore is to the Lib Dem blogosphere – one of the few that I actually agree with!
But Kevin Davis, the Tory Candidate for Yeovil, has gone one better – he has set up new public affairs agency. Now what would a parliamentary candidate be doing setting up a business just months before an election, unless of course you don’t expect the voters to give you that new career at the election?
Over the last few days there has been a lot of coverage about the Tories targeting Lib Dem seats in the South West. I have to say I’m not very confident about the Lib Dems prospects generally in the region. But let’s hope the Tories have given up on Yeovil. David Laws is to the Lib Dem Parliamentary Party what Charlotte Gore is to the Lib Dem blogosphere – one of the few that I actually agree with!
Thursday, 30 July 2009
Who the hell is Sean Rushforth?
I have just posted a blog entry on swine flu. Within minutes of the post, I received a response from Sean Rushforth with a link taking me to the NHS swine flu web page. So who is Sean Rushforth? Well click on his name and you are taken to the NHS swine flu web page. Spooky. The NHS Swine Flu campaign is clearly monitoring political blogs. But why post the comments from Sean Rushforth? Who the hell is he?
UPDATE: Sean Rushforth is from a company selling flu drugs – I foolishly mistook the website for the NHS site – which I accept is not very bright of me. Note to self: don’t write about health issues again. For those that are interested in purchasing Tamiflu, I recommend Flubay.
UPDATE: Sean Rushforth is from a company selling flu drugs – I foolishly mistook the website for the NHS site – which I accept is not very bright of me. Note to self: don’t write about health issues again. For those that are interested in purchasing Tamiflu, I recommend Flubay.
Swine flu strategy called into question
I caught the tail end of an interview on the Radio 4 Today Programme on Wednesday with a London Doctor on the Health Service response to swine flu. He made three very pertinent points:
1. For the vast majority of people, swine flu is a mild version of ordinary winter flu. Far more people will die from general flu than from swine flu.
2. Tamiflu, the drug given to those that have illness, has little impact – it may cut the duration of the illness from five days to four. The Doc said he wouldn’t take it.
3. Most of the Hospital’s time is spent in monitoring the illness than on treating it. He receives about 8 emails a day from the Department of Health and other health bodies asking for information relating to swine flu.
So we have an illness that is relatively harmless, with no effective way of treating it and processes that are more focused on administrative niceties. Now I’m no Doctor, and perhaps this chap is a bit of a maverick who underestimates the danger of swine flu and the effectiveness of the medicine. But if true, it certainly calls into question the way the Government are dealing with the outbreak.
The Government keep telling us that we should not panic, but then take out double page adverts in national newspapers that create the opposite effect. It would be fascinating to know what advice the Chief Medical Officer and other health officials gave to Ministers on how to deal with this. Have Government Ministers deliberately over-egged the illness for some politically inspired reason? Maybe time to submit a few Freedom of Information requests.
1. For the vast majority of people, swine flu is a mild version of ordinary winter flu. Far more people will die from general flu than from swine flu.
2. Tamiflu, the drug given to those that have illness, has little impact – it may cut the duration of the illness from five days to four. The Doc said he wouldn’t take it.
3. Most of the Hospital’s time is spent in monitoring the illness than on treating it. He receives about 8 emails a day from the Department of Health and other health bodies asking for information relating to swine flu.
So we have an illness that is relatively harmless, with no effective way of treating it and processes that are more focused on administrative niceties. Now I’m no Doctor, and perhaps this chap is a bit of a maverick who underestimates the danger of swine flu and the effectiveness of the medicine. But if true, it certainly calls into question the way the Government are dealing with the outbreak.
The Government keep telling us that we should not panic, but then take out double page adverts in national newspapers that create the opposite effect. It would be fascinating to know what advice the Chief Medical Officer and other health officials gave to Ministers on how to deal with this. Have Government Ministers deliberately over-egged the illness for some politically inspired reason? Maybe time to submit a few Freedom of Information requests.
So much for localism
One of the few policy areas where the Tory Party has issued quite a lot of detail is the idea of localism. Under the Tory plans, local councils will be empowered to make decisions on planning and all the national levers which put pressure on councils to support development will be abolished.
The development industry is understandably terrified. The recession may have brought construction to a halt, but there is little chance of it getting going again if it’s reliant on local councillors giving planning approval. Anyone who has been to a Council Planning Committee will know that Councillors refuse the smallest of schemes (porch extensions or roof conversions) on the flimsiest of excuses. Localism will be a charter for NIMBYism – the opportunity to say ‘NO’ to anything and everything.
So there may be some smiles in the development industry with today’s announcement that Tory Central Office is not allowing local parties to choose the next batch of Tory candidates. Eric Pickles, the Tory Chairman who did so much to develop the Tory Localism plans when he was Local Government spokesperson, has ruled that Central Office will decide which candidates will be shortlisted.
My guess is the Tories will do the same in Government. There will be a Localist Bill in the new Government's first Queen Speech but by the end of the Parliament they will be centralising powers in the same way that Government’s always do.
The development industry is understandably terrified. The recession may have brought construction to a halt, but there is little chance of it getting going again if it’s reliant on local councillors giving planning approval. Anyone who has been to a Council Planning Committee will know that Councillors refuse the smallest of schemes (porch extensions or roof conversions) on the flimsiest of excuses. Localism will be a charter for NIMBYism – the opportunity to say ‘NO’ to anything and everything.
So there may be some smiles in the development industry with today’s announcement that Tory Central Office is not allowing local parties to choose the next batch of Tory candidates. Eric Pickles, the Tory Chairman who did so much to develop the Tory Localism plans when he was Local Government spokesperson, has ruled that Central Office will decide which candidates will be shortlisted.
My guess is the Tories will do the same in Government. There will be a Localist Bill in the new Government's first Queen Speech but by the end of the Parliament they will be centralising powers in the same way that Government’s always do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
