Archive for the ‘Current Affairs’ Category
Hi, my name is …
As an iPhone owner and Playstation Network user, this week has certainly not been the most comfortable of my life.
As if it wasn’t enough finding out late last week that Apple are saving a 2mb file on my phone and computer which contains location information, tracking every move I make, Sony announced this week that much of my personal information has been compromised.
This includes – name, address, email, password, password question, username, and they could not rule out (although have now said the details were encrypted) credit/debit card information.
Great.
Subtly, probably everything there is to know about me could now probably be found somewhere in the Headquarters of Amazon, EBay, WordPress, Microsoft, Facebook, MySpace, AOL, Skype, PlayStation, Play.com, iTunes – and a whole lot more.
This isn’t information that a company or government has forced out of me in some sort of dictatorial, totalitarian swoop – it’s information that, through whatever level of persuasion, I have voluntarily handed over, but to who? What computers have such a fine level of information about me stored on them, and where are they? How long do they keep the information for, and who do they share it with?
Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Russia used brute force to compile lists and databases, attempting to know everything there was to know about their people.
It may genuinely be necessary for us to enter all of our personal and banking information in order to download the latest Fifa 11 squads, but collectively we may just be seeing the most peaceful, most effective, and most successful form of personal identity collection the world has ever known.
WilliamTomaney2011
AV you had enough yet?
AV or FPTP is not the real issue this country faces.
As politicians and the media fill their speeches and pages with arguments about the electoral system, goodness only knows what is ACTUALLY going on in Westminster.
The public’s minds are being focused on the most idiotic political debate I can remember – and one that quite simply does not matter.
As a registered voter, I have tried to persuade myself many times to get involved, but I just don’t have any feeling strong enough to put me on either side of the fence.
The best thing I feel I can do, is tell people the truth about this referendum – it’s a political front. Clegg and Cameron aren’t losing sleep at night over which system wins because neither of them will really care – all they know is that the bigger deal they make of it, the less they have to talk about the REAL issues that, yes, would exist whichever electoral system we use.
The systems are not all that different. The Liberal Democrats and campaigners for constitutional reform have long argued Britain’s current system – First Past the Post (FPTP) – is grossly unfair, and doesn’t represent what the public ACTUALLY vote for – the argument is that a party can win an election with just 30% of the vote, and when only 60% of the population actually vote anyway, you have a government that, really, about 15-20% actually want.
Therefore, they have, for many years, pushed for a system which provides Proportional Representation (PR) – the most proportional of which is widely accepted to be the Single Transferable Vote.
However – in this referendum, people will only be able to choose between FPTP and the Alternative Vote (AV) – this is a joke because finally, after all these years, the LibDems have secured a referendum to change the voting system – but PR isn’t on the ballot.
In the 2010 election, the Conservatives won the most seats (307), Labour second (258), LibDems third (57). Neither party won a majority. Under AV, it would have been Conservatives (281), Labour (262), LibDem (79). Not a shedload of difference.
So what actually IS the difference?
FPTP is the system we know – one person, one vote. Candidate with more votes than any of their opponents, wins.
In AV, you will rank the candidates in order of preference. An MP would have to receive more than 50% of the vote to be elected. If no one gets that, the candidate with the least amount of first-preference votes is eliminated, and the second-preference votes on those ballot papers are redistributed – and so the process continues until SOMEONE has over 50%.
The “No” campaign are making out like it’s rocket science – but it’s not – it’s like standing in line at an ice cream store, you make a second and third choice in case they don’t have your favourite. If the British public really are too stupid to understand it then maybe we shouldn’t be voting at all.
My original point is this – whichever system wins, we will still be voting for the same people, who will handle the same issues, in the same way.
That we are constantly facing corruption, being made poorer, being sent to war, being asked to make sacrifices to something that “we are all in together,” and being told we are extremists for protesting a little, etc., has absolutely nothing to do with our electoral system.
It’s whom we are voting for, and whether you get one vote for one person, or get to rank people in whichever order you like, nothing will change.
So, it quite simply doesn’t matter – so don’t lose sleep over it, because trust me, no matter how sweaty Nick Clegg’s forehead looks when he talks about it, they’re not.
WilliamTomaney2011
Crazy enough to make you think
It was announced this week that Glenn Beck’s 5pm Fox News Channel show will soon come to an end.
Predictably, most of the American media (other than Fox of course) had a field day.
Again, I must remind you – Beck is CRAZY. When I hear him talk about politics, ideology and America, believe me, I want to throw my laptop out of the window. I thought I would be jumping for joy the day they took him off the air.
BUT … there’s a side of him I like. If you look beyond his stupid political rallies and the sound-bites and clips you hear on other shows and YouTube, there is one essential message he promotes that almost NOONE else does.
He investigates and presents, for will of a better phrase, conspiracy theories. He knows what is coming and he asks people to educate themselves, not just take his word for it.
Human beings do not like being told the truth when it hurts. They deny it, they become aggressive, and their actions try to help them hide from it for as long as possible.
That is why almost everything in society, from the wide acceptance of alcohol to shit, generic songs that don’t even make sense, is geared towards taking our minds off what is really happening.
But it’s his warnings that make him worth watching.
Prepare to be the leader.
Educate yourself.
Be the mouthpiece.
Never rely on anyone else to spoon-feed you.
Don’t just listen to him, or read what I write, and go away persuaded.
You could be being told something which is 100% fact, don’t just believe it, but do open your mind and take it in, UNDERSTAND what is being said even if you don’t agree with it.
Go home, Google it, read everything that comes up on the topic. Go to the library, read every book. Talk to your friends and family, and watch every video on YouTube. Look at every argument and every side then make YOUR mind up.
I don’t align myself to an ideology or a political party because NO information should be discarded as “it’s a socialist/conservative/whatever principle.”
True faith is in the unseen. It’s easy to believe in the existence of my computer because it’s visibly, physically, and 100% scientifically right in front of me.
But don’t close your eyes. That’s why we are on this planet. That’s why it’s impossible to envisage pure nothingness. Close your eyes and think of nothing. You see a black space right? That’s something.
Our brains tell us that “nothing” doesn’t exist.
Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it isn’t true and just because you can’t see it doesn’t mean it isn’t there.
His “news,” of course, shouldn’t be branded as “news” which, being on the Fox News Channel, it is.
But in this world of fast moving, instantaneous, 24-hour news, we’re not encouraged to read or think for ourselves enough … and watching the Glenn Beck show certainly makes you do that – even if it’s because he’s talking complete shit.
WilliamTomaney2011
Nick Clegg is not a punchbag
In an interview with the New Statesman this week, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg gave a very personal response to attacks directed towards him.
“I’m a human being, I’m not a punchbag – I’ve got feelings,” Clegg told the magazine.
He says that media representations of him are outlandish “cardboard cut-outs” and sometimes people come up to him to express support in a whisper – “as if it’s a guilty secret saying anything nice about Nick Clegg.”
So you know what, because I like to show there are other ways of looking at things, I’ll say something nice about him.
This time last year, we were talking about Cleggmania. He was perhaps the story of the election campaign.
Most people who had kept half an eye on the election knew that we were heading for a hung-parliament and a coalition government.
I voted for the Liberal Democrats, as I said at the time, because I wanted to support the notion of a change from the two traditional parties always running the show. I don’t regret it. The Labour candidate won in my constituency and was ALWAYS going to win. My vote for her wouldn’t have mattered, so I wanted to make it count in at least some small way.
My question is this – did we come to expect far too much from Nick Clegg?
I find it very surprising that people are surprised (pardon the repetition) at how this coalition is being run. It is and was always going to be a Conservative government. The Liberal Democrats have neither the weight nor experience to be as affective as everyone thinks they should be.
That’s why I don’t buy in to the argument that “Oh, the Lib Dems said this in their manifesto but we’re not seeing it happen, it’s a total democratic disgrace.”
Let’s not forget something – the Liberal Democrats won just 57 seats compared to 258 for Labour, and 306 for the Conservatives. While we are talking about a “democratic farce,” would it really be democratic to implement a manifesto that won just 8.8% of the seats? I don’t think so.
And many people seem to forget that the Deputy Prime Minister is a complete nothing job. John Major did not even appoint one.
Nick Clegg, essentially, is on strings. (In fact, I have a nice theory (those of you who know me, know I like to come up with stuff) that the microphones hanging down from the roof of the House of Commons represent the strings of our puppet politicians).
Anyway – not only that – the tuition fees problem has now over-shadowed everything Clegg has done and will ever do in government. Good or bad.
Clegg’s biggest mistake was individually supporting the rise in tuition fees. It was a PR blunder, and the bill was ALWAYS going to be passed anyway. In fact, the Liberal Democrats helped soften it (very, very slightly). But by supporting it, the 24-hour news, instant-results demanding generation saw it in one way and one way only – that Clegg raised tuition fees to £9,000. He’s that guy now, no matter what.
He’s lost the student vote forever, and he has slapped democracy in the face by so blatantly saying one thing and doing another. But would he have done it in a Lib Dem majority government? We will never know, but I suspect not.
My point is however, that Clegg has been responsible for some nice touches in the last year or so. Raising the Personal Tax Allowance to £8,000 being one. However because of the tuition fees, it will never ever be good enough.
Will he ever be popular again? No. His face and his name are associated with everything that is happening right now. It wasn’t what he got in to politics for, but it would have been naïve of him to think that it would have been anything but torment when entering one of the fiercest arenas in the world.
WilliamTomaney2011
Stop using the protests to promote socialism!
The protests against cuts are becoming boring and repetitive, and I believe it’s because of ideological hijacking.
Whether you agree with the cuts or not, they are affecting, or will affect everyone – white, black, asian, poor, rich, conservative, liberal, religious, atheist, public worker, private worker – so opposition to the cuts, or opposition to individual cuts, is widespread and not exclusive to socialists – however you wouldn’t know this turning up to one of the events.
Whilst covering a protest in Leicester city centre this week, organised by public sector and weight-throwing organisation Unison, I realised that there were two kinds of people there.
The first kind were in a slightly smaller majority – normal people, with normal concerns. Mothers and fathers who havelost their jobs or much-needed benefits, students or students-to-be concerned about the safety of their financial futures, and a group of disabled people fighting the closure of their care home. A place that one lady described as her “second home,” – it gave them something to do, and relieved family and friends of the weight of responsibility, if just for a few afternoons per week.
The second kind were anoraks holding “The Socialist” newspapers, handing out “The Socialist Worker” leaflets, signs and banners, and generally standing there looking smug. Facial expressions said “We are winning!” It occurred to me that this small group of people have seen an opportunity and very much grabbed it by the scruff of the neck.
Maybe it’s a good idea – what better time to put forward an alternative idea to capitalism at a time when capitalism is at it’s worst.
However, I just wonder – might this backfire on the socialist movement?
Many of the everyday individual people and families who have been affected by the cuts are being put off attending the protests for fear of being grouped in with extremists, and being labelled socialists, or in unity (or “solidarity”) with them.
This hit me when speaker Tony Church, from Leicestershire Against the Cuts enthusiastically bellowed – “… we stand with our comrades from the care centre!”
Comrades?
Is that what we are if we believe that a care centre, vital to the lives of a local community of disabled people, should be saved?
These people were there to campaign for their ”second home,” not for socialism.
Labelling them as “comrades” is inaccurate, possibly offensive.
The hijacking is also causing a growing lack of enthusiasm from the media and the general public towards taking the protests seriously. Considering the importance of stopping cuts to the wrong areas, this is dangerous. Writing, and hearing, about the same predictable message – pushing an idea that we know doesn’t work (see various history books/ countries for reference) – is not newsworthy to report nor interesting to read.
There are two options -
One is to offer a REALISTIC alternative … just what do these people want – a revolution? Just saying “Stop the Cuts” is not enough. Furthermore, we all know that pulling troops out of Afghanistan would save billions, and that the nuclear trident costs even more than that – and wouldn’t we all love it if it was just the simple case of placing £X million from trident in to schools. Anyone who has kept half an eye on politics knows that this won’t happen.
Two is to stop using the events to advertise the ideology, and instead join the vast majority of the public in voicing concerns about real issues in everyday lives. It is the touching and tragic stories of the disabled people losing their care home, the father of three losing his job, and the small business closing down that need to punch the government in the face.
Those in charge need their feet put back on the ground, not whisked away to another fantasy wonderland in the proverbial political sky.
WilliamTomaney2011
Abortion
Uh oh … it’s the “A-word”.
This is an outrage.
Now, before I continue – those of you who are about to stop reading in a huff because you think this is just another ignorant, dull, this country is going to hell pro-life argument … my basis for calling this an outrage isn’t the “is it murder, is it not” argument (which, for the record, I believe that it is) … this is simply not an argument worth using because people will never agree on it, although whatever you think, the fact is that it IS ending human life.
My basis is that I am completely and utterly embarassed by the following statistics, I hope you will take the time to read them -
- 1/3 of British women have had an abortion
- 195,296 officially recorded abortions in 2008 There were 198,499 in 2007
- 19-20 peak age for having an abortion
- 91% of abortions are NHS- funded. Just over half are in independent clinics such as Marie Stopes (The “charity” running the ad)
- About half of the 42,000 teenage pregnancies each year end in abortion.
- The availability of abortion has encouraged more teenagers to have sex without contraception, and prevented progress in reducing the number of teenage pregnancies – of which the British rate is amongst the highest in Europe.
Ok, the last point isn’t a statistic, but is nonetheless a sad consequence.
On the back of these, this advert must be stopped. To allow abortion providers to advertise on TV, as though they were no different from car companies or detergent manufacturers, is grotesque. By suggesting that abortion is yet another consumer choice, it trivialises human life and completely contravenes the spirit of the 1967 Abortion Act – which rightly protects genuine rights of women who have been raped , or to whom giving birth would be life threatening.
The culture needs to change – we’re so busy advertising abortions and condoms, where are the advertisements to encourage people to stop being sluts, think of the consequences of having sex, or even dun-dun-dun to just wait to have sex. The number of teenage and unwanted pregnancies in this country is embarrassing. People being told that abortion is an option and suggesting that it is an alternative to using contraception is going to make it worse and waste more precious, beautiful human life.
The purpose of an abortion commercial is clearly to “sell” abortion. This is hardly conducive to making the “informed sexual health choices” which Marie Stopes claims to provide.
For now, this is all I will say on the matter. As a man, who has never and will never have to go through the process of making a decision on having an abortion, I could never imagine what women in this situation have to go through … I’m sure it’s not simple, or easy, and every road should be considered – but there are some roads that should be encouraged, and some that should be discouraged … terminating a life is one of those.
WILL
Election 2010: Guide to Election Night!
As I did with the American election in 2008, here is a guide to the most important times during tonight’s election coverage – if you are planning on staying up, you can use this to organise your sleep breaks and coffee boosts! Have fun, and may the best party win!
Election Results – where to watch:
BBC: BBC One, BBC HD, BBC News Channel: 9:55pm – 6am
ITV: ITV1: 9:55pm – 6am
Sky: Sky News, Sky News HD: 9pm – 6am
Channel 4: 9pm – 1am
Outcomes:
There are five likely outcomes in this election: at the moment ALL polls strongly point to a Hung Parliament – so what is likely to happen as we wake up on Friday morning?
Scenario 1: Conservatives win with overall majority – David Cameron Prime Minister (Con: 40%; Lab 27%; LibDem 25%)
Scenario 2: Conservatives win but just miss overall majority – Hung Parliament (Con 37%; Lab 26%; LibDem 29%)
Scenario 3: Conservatives largest party, but need the Liberal Democrats to get into power – Hung Parliament – Con/LibDem coalition – David Cameron Prime Minister (Con 35%; Lab 28%; LibDem 29%)
Scenario 4: Lib Dems put Labour back in to power – Gordon Brown Prime Minister (Con 33%; Lab 30%; LibDem 29%)
Scenario 5: Liberal Democrats to deal with Labour to put Nick Clegg in power – Lab/LibDem coalition – Nick Clegg Prime Minister (Con 33%; Lab 29%; LibDem 30%)
Time Table:
It’s going to be a long night, so if you need to take a break and sleep at any point – make sure you keep these times in mind:
22:00: Polls Close. The BBC, ITV and Sky will produce the results of an exit poll, projecting the winner. It’s not always accurate, but in 2005 they predicted the result perfectly.
22:42: First to declare. In 2005, the record was set for the fastest count in Houghton and Sunderland South. With Sunderland aiming to be first to declare this year, it could be around this time that we get the first result.
23:30: Sunderland Central could produce the first big result of the night. With the Conservatives needing a 12.8% swing, a win here could be a dangerous sign of things to come for Labour.
00:45: Birmingham Edgbaston – another swing constituency where the Conservatives could turn another seat away from Labour early on.
01:00: Durham City – With the Liberal Democrats needing just a 0.17% swing to win this seat, it could be the first indicator that the LibDems will be taking seats from Labour. Tooting could provide some indication of where undecided voters have gone – during the election campaign, the constituency has changed it’s voting intentions three times – from undecided to LibDem, then to Labour.
01:30: Rochdale – The constituency where the now famous Gillian Duffy was called a “bigoted woman” by Gordon Brown – will this have cost him the seat?
02:00 (194 seats will have been declared by the end of this hour): In the last two elections, the most seat declarations were made between 2am-3am, so get the coffee on the go and expect this to be a busy hour! Blackburn, Redcar, Norwich South, Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath, and Renfrewshire East – the Torries, the SNP and the LibDems are all challenging for Jack Straw, Gordon Borwn and Charlees Clarke’s constituencies. In Redcar, the Liberal Democrat candidate, and chancellor should they win power, Vince Cable, needs a huge 15.6% swing to win the seat.
03:00: Morley & Outwood could provide a huge twist in the election with Ed Balls’ seat within Conservative reach. Dorset West could also be an important gain for the Lib Dems.
03:30: Gordon Brown spent part of his week in Strethem, will Labour hold on to it. Somerton & Frome could go from yellow to blue as the Tories try to take seats from the Lib Dems and avoid a hung parliament. In Brighton Pavilion, the Green’s need 6,479 votes to win – could they get their first EVER Parliamentary seat at the expense of Labour?
04:00 (By now 538 seats declared): My home constituency Worcester and the constituency in which I voted Leicester West, are both projected to be declared at around 4am. Dagenham & Rainham has been on the BNP’s list of realistic seats – can a big vote for them help the Tories overturn this Labour seat? Barking is also declaring – this is the BNP’s top national target – will they win their first ever Parliamentary seat in London? Other marginal seats declairing this hour include: Southampton Itchen, Harrow West, and Richmond Park.
05:00: Chorley could be the seat that sees the Conservatives bring home an overall majority if they manage to overturn their target seats successfully, meaning that David Cameron will be confirmed as the new Prime Minister. Jaquie Smith is trying to hold on in Redditch, and the Tories will look to overturn Westminster North.
06:00: Wells is a seat that the Liberal Democrats can take from the Tories, if they manage to, it could complete an excellent night for Nick Clegg and British democracy.
Friday May 7th: 20 Constituency’s will start counting at 9am, and the election in Thirsk & Malton has been delayed until May 27th following the death of a candidate during the campaign. Norwich North and Morecambe & Lunesdale will be the last seats that are likely to change hands during the election, and in Buckingham the convention of not challenging the Speaker of the House of Commons for his seat has been broken by a challenge from UKIP’s Nigel Farage – will it be successful?
A full list of constituency declaration times is here on the Telegraph website.
WilliamTomaney2010
Election 2010: The Undecided Voter
Tomorrow, we all have a choice to make – who will form the next government of our country? As the sun goes down and the polling stations prepare to open, I am still an undecided voter.
It’s kind of ironic, I’ve been studying politics for five years and I’ve taken an interest in it for years before that – yet, here we are with one day to go and I’m not certain which box I’ll be putting my X in to.
Some people align themselves to a party. I don’t for one simple reason – I think it blinds people. In this constituency, Leicester West, I know plenty of people who are hardcore Labour voters. They have always been going to and will vote Labour tomorrow – posts on Facebook and Twitter show that they clearly believe that the modern Labour party is something it is not. There are people here, and largely amongst my parents generation that will never vote for the Conservative Party because of the 1980’s Thatcher government. Then there are the Liberal Democrats – and I’m afraid to tell you – it will be an anti-climax tomorrow. Yes, we’ve got a little excited and a little carried away, but as ever, when we wake up on Friday morning we will not have a Liberal Democrat majority government. Whatever Cleggmania has told you there will be many who still see a Lib Dem vote as either wasted, or a vote for the Conservatives in some areas, and Labour in others.
The first advantage of being open minded is that it allows me to see all of the above points, and secondly, it means my vote won’t be wasted tomorrow. So why have I not decided yet?
The main reason is this – I don’t like, trust or want any of what is being offered tomorrow. A candidate to win my vote has to offer the following – pro-European Union. The EU is not perfect, but it will remain that way as long as we are negative about it. A properly structured, working EU would be excellent, and having someone who believes in it would put British interests at the heart of it. I want someone who offers political reform – this voting system simply is not fair and favors the Labour Party, who could still technically form the next government with the least amount of votes out of all three main parties. And finally – I want a written constitution. It just makes sense to organize our country properly, to embed certain rights and identify who we are as a people. It would stop anything as appalling as the expenses scandal from happening again. These are my main issues, and on a smaller scale there are many other things I care about, but no one candidate seems to be offering them all.
So where do I stand?
I don’t trust the Conservatives, I honestly don’t. I think they would be bad for Britain in Europe, I think their big society is unfair (although theoretically a good idea if people weren’t so lazy), and David Cameron’s general lack of ability to communicate his policies properly have put me off the party – “We would save £6billion in the economy” … yes David – BUT HOW!?
I like my local Labour candidate as a person, and it’s clear that although uncharismatic and boring, Gordon Brown knows what he wants to do and how to do it. However – I just had an awful vision the other night of a massive anti-climax to this election. Waking up on Friday morning with things exactly the same as they were – going back to something I was unhappy with before. Brown keeps telling us we want a New World Order, his blatant lying to the Iraq Inquiry, his inability to deal with corruption, benefit after benefit to people that are equipped for so much more with a little encouragement. The reason I have struggled to find comfort in Labour’s campaign this year is because I keep hearing the words “We will do …”. “We will reform the voting system” etc. etc. Ok – well you’ve just had 13 years to do it, why should I believe that you would do it now? It’s simple – I don’t.
Then there’s the Liberal Democrats – the talking point of this election campaign. Finally, the idea that we could have another choice from the two old parties that have failed us for so long has emerged. It’s something I love – as a neutral – as someone who has no allegiance to any party and makes up his mind on election day – this is great. However – it’s meant that Nick Clegg hasn’t explained himself very well. He has an Obama-like character, he speaks well and looks strong on TV, but do the LibDems really know what they are doing? I don’t think so. Their manifesto (because you have to look there to find out any of their real policies), is kind of like an “If I were Prime Minister I would …” children’s activity book. They promise a lot of things that make sense, but you can tell they don’t know what it’s like to be in government. This worries me.
The most likely election result is a Hung Parliament. Which means that we will probably reform the electoral system and have another election later on this year. Maybe that would be the best option – a fresh, working, modern British political system that really can represent the people. The problem with this option is that a Hung Parliament lacks any sort of concrete, decisive leadership and would most likely swing the economy in to a double-dip recession (no, I don’t know what that really means either but I heard Gordon Brown say it so it must be clever).
That’s, in short (but probably long for a blog post) – is what is happening in my head.
And finally – if I had to vote this second who would I vote for?
I’ve always said – if I voted in Worcester I would vote for Mike Foster (Labour) – I like him and I think he’s doing a good job in my home city. Worcester is a Labour/Conservative marginal seat – so voting for any other party would let the other one in, and I don’t think the Conservative candidate, Robin Walker, is the man for Worcester.
HOWEVER – I’m voting in Leicester West. A Labour “safe seat” – although how safe any seat really is at the moment is yet to be seen. At this moment in time, I will vote for Peter Colley of the Liberal Democrats. Which is ironic because I don’t like him (having met him only once), and I do like Liz Kendal the Labour candidate. However, seeing as the Tory’s won’t get in anyway in Leicester, and the seat is pretty set on being won by Labour – I thought instead of vote for a party or a candidate as such, I will vote for the approval of choice. Whether they would make a good government or not – I applaud what the Liberal Democrats have done this year – finally someone else, realistically, to choose from.
Unless someone in the next 12 hours convinces me otherwise – I will be using my vote to say yes I want change, yes, I want another option to choose from, and yes – I want that Hung Parliament, which may see us suffer in the short term, but in the long term will set us up with a fairer, more democratic country.
WilliamTomaney2010
Who is Nick Clegg?
Nick Clegg talks to the BBC at DMU, Leicester
Today I managed to catch up with the Liberal Democrat campaign as Nick Clegg stopped his big yellow bus outside De Montfort University here in Leicester.
In a campaign overshadowed by third year assignments for me, it was great to be able to meet one of the candidates and listen to them speak.
As a journalism student, it was fascinating to experience the pre and post-speech and interview buzz from the press, and push through crowds of people trying to get to the man himself.
Clegg made a speech to the crowd first, which attracted many people including a group of fellow students brandishing “Vote Labour” signs in the background – behind Nick Clegg and in full view of the camera. It was extremely irritating – I haven’t decided whether my vote will go to Labour or the Liberal Democrats yet, but to see this on my university, I thought, was a shame. Where we trying to tell Clegg that we didn’t want him there? I would love to see leaders and politicians debate at our extremely politically active university – but are they going to want to when they get harassed like that? Gordon Brown didn’t make the effort to come and talk to us.
Fortunately – I happened to be filming during the moment that one student jumped up, grabbed the sign, ripped it up and throw it away. It was a fantastic moment – Clegg turned around, confused, and continued talking.
As the speech came to an end, I ran to where I thought he would be going, I didn’t want to miss out on the front row again … I managed to stop right in his path. When he had finished talking there, Matthew Bunn called me over and we were pushed out of the way by the BBC News camera team who set up right next to us. It was the perfect opportunity for me to thank Clegg for coming to our university, and for giving us another choice in this election.
As I said – I’m still slightly undecided – but there’s one thing that’s swinging me in favour of voting Liberal Democrats at the moment – there achievement. I think that it’s truly remarkable how in this race they are. Yes there popularity has risen from a carefully choreographed TV Debate, and no they won’t be forming the next government, I don’t they would be capable of doing so. It’s finally given Britain a realistic third-choice though – because let’s face it, everyone is tired and disillusioned with the current government, and no one trusts the Tories – but one of them, or both of them, will be leading our country from May 7th 2010 onwards. I’m proud of Clegg and the LibDems, and what they’ve done!
Now on to the negative side of things – Clegg really has not explained his manifesto properly. He’s spent a lot of time telling people that the two “old” parties (Labour and Conservatives) have spent the last 60 years taking it in turns to mess things up … which is true. It’s easy for him to say what the Liberal Democrats will and won’t do because they won’t have to, and have never had too. There’s a huge uncertainty for me – having them form a government, I think, would be a huge risk. They don’t know how to handle the economy, or foreign policy – I think that’s clear from listening to some of Clegg’s policies. They also have many policies that they never talk about – lowering the drinking age, legalising marijuana and weed, and the Liberals are extremely sympathetic to the idea of a one world government – this is not in the interests of the average British person.
Looking at the United States is a good example of electing an unexperienced leader on hype. Now – I like Obama, and I like Clegg, but politics is a game – and the “leader” isn’t the one pulling the strings.
Before you vote Liberal Democrats next Thursday, read in to their manifesto and some of there pet projects. Look at some of the bills Obama has passed in the United States – all great ideas (Healthcare), but in reality – it’s a 2,000+ page, unread bill beefed up with risky side projects that hand over a lot of power and freedom to not many people (those right at the top). There are some dangerous people that would take a Liberal Democrat Britain for a ride if they got in and that worries me.
WilliamTomaney2010
Why I do not support House of Lords reform (although I want to)
with 2 comments
The paperback release of Tony Blair’s memoirs, A Journey, sees the former British PM write a new foreword and intro for the publication.
In this, he outlines six key problems with the British political system, and I agree with 100% of his points.
What I find most interesting is that when looking at the issues he does outline, you can see why Blair outright refuses to comment on this government.
Not only does he know what it takes to be Prime Minister, and therefore the position politicians are in with regards to decision making, you can also see that the coalition are making these problems bigger, not solving them.
Nick Clegg’s latest project is to get people on board with his House of Lords reform.
Forgetting the fact that Clegg would probably have to hand out money to get anyone on board with anything he does at the moment, I just don’t think it’s a good idea, and doing so would make Blair’s key problems even bigger issues.
The Deputy Prime Minister is trying to reduce the size of the Lords to about 300 people and make 80% of its members elected, using the STV system, for 15-year terms from 2015.
The argument, when put simply, makes plenty of sense – in a modern democracy, should we have an unelected upper chamber? It doesn’t sound very democratic.
But let’s consider the point of having the House of Lords in the first place.
The most important function of the chamber is to revise legislation, scrutinise it, and hold the government to account.
Politicians aren’t experts in anything – other than speaking and debating.
If the government are trying to push through a law on climate change, I would like experts in the House of Lords – scientists, geographers etc. – to suggest changes, and to vote on it.
Reforming the Lords in this way, will mean that one group of professional party politicians will vote on a law passed by another group of professional party politicians.
It’s also likely that the balance of an elected upper chamber is going to mirror the balance of the elected lower chamber – if Labour win a large majority in the Commons, it’s unlikely the Conservatives are going to take the Lords – meaning effective scrutiny could be put aside in favour of towing the party line throughout Parliament.
And to consider how disastrous the process of law making can be when it gets too politicised, look at the US healthcare reform debate. Instead of asking the experts – doctors, medical professionals and university professors – politicians campaigned according to their ideology. The argument was based around how companies could retain their power and make the most money off of people’s health – rather than how the most expensive health system in the world could become the most affective.
Blair points out that politicians are too similar to each other, describing the political gene pool as “frighteningly limited.”
He also worries that bright outsiders are not involved in politics, and the system is almost incapable of allowing leaders to take good decisions.
Not only would none of these problems be solved with an elected House of Lords, they could actually be made worse, and I agree with Blair that they are genuine concerns.
It’s a shame, because I want to like Nick Clegg – it was just over a year ago when his offer of such a fresh and exciting approach seemed so promising, and becoming the poster-child of £9,000 per year tuition fees, I feel, is a little harsh.
So I wish I was able to support him on this, but I just can’t get on board with the idea.
WilliamTomaney2011
Written by William Tomaney
July 1, 2011 at 16:45
Posted in Current Affairs, Opinion/Comment, Politics, UK