The Nether-World

The Launch of Liberal Conspiracy

2007-11-05T07:01:00.000Z

Do you keep hearing that there is a vast liberal conspiracy running Britain? Well there isn't much evidence of one is there? In fact these days there is more evidence to support the contrary with right-of-centre sites like ConservativeHome, 18 Doughty Street, Stand Up Speak Up, Platform 10 and CampaignTogether.com.

As New Labour lurches ever more to the right using the Conservative 'opposition' as a repository of 'new' ideas, the British liberal-left is increasingly disenfranchised. Although there are plenty of left-wing bloggers, they rarely join forces. Most organs of the British liberal-left only have traditionally static websites or blogs attached to existing websites. So perhaps it's time to create a genuine Liberal Conspiracy. This is an idea who's time has come. In fact it's long overdue. Liberal Conspiracy is a new on-line project. It's more than a blog with a collection of bloggers, its aim is to foster an intellectual revival of the liberal-left and be better organised when campaigning. Its long-term aim is to help build national and local grass-roots organisations in order to re-connect with people. Along with bloggers, there will be input from think-tanks, media organisations, websites, analysts, academics and journalists.

Liberal Conspiracy is the brainchild of Sunny Hundal of Pickled Politics. Over to him:

As times change, so does the nature of politics. New generations grow up, global conflicts come and go, the world keeps evolving and technology turns everything topsy-turvy. But if there’s one thing remarkable about our generation in Britain, it’s how badly Politics has become a dirty word.
People are less interested in political parties than they have ever been. As old loyalties start to fray, people are becoming more passionate about issues rather than being on the left or the right. And as the world gets smaller and more accessible, they demand more from their politicians. And even if party affiliations don’t matter as much - values, ideas and beliefs continue to be popular.
And so a new Liberal Conspiracy for a new era is born today. We plan to do things slightly differently here.
We want to discuss and promote traditional liberal-left ideas and values than political parties. We want to challenge the old order, discuss where Britain needs to go from here and make it happen. We want to campaign and push for our values: more equality, a better democracy, better standards of living, social justice, eradicating poverty, promoting non-violence etc, to be higher up the political agenda.
And this is where the internet comes in - we want you to get involved in this Conspiracy. We want to pioneer a new de-centralised approach to discussion and campaigning for these liberal-left ideals. We want to take advantage of everything from blogs, Facebook and YouTube to grass-roots mobilisation and campaigning to change Britain for the better.
The title of the site is obviously a mischievous take on the constantly promoted idea that there is a vast liberal conspiracy running Britain. Of course there isn’t. But while we’re here, we might as well create one.

Liberal Conspiracy will have contributions from some well-known left-of-centre bloggers and writers including:
Aaron Heath, Alan T, Chris Dillow, Daniel Davies, Dave Hill, Dave Osler, David T, Donald Strachan, Garry Smith, Henry Midgley, Jamie K, Jess McCabe, Justin McKeating, Kate Belgrave, Natalie Bennett, Olivia Skinner, Padraig Reidy, Paul Linford, Robert Sharp, Unity and Sunny Hundal, Oh, and me.

Also contributing will be:
Cath Elliott, aid worker Conor Foley, online campaigner Paul Hilder, aspiring politician Kerron Cross and policy officer Zohra Moosa.

Media organisations taking part include:
The Guardian, New Statesman magazine and openDemocracy.

And there will be input from think-tanks including:
Demos, Fabian Society, Runnymede Trust, New Jewish Thought and New Generation Network.

Sunny Hundal will be on BBC Radio 4’s PM programme this afternoon discussing the project and there will be an article in the Guardian about it later in the week.

Liberal Conspiracy aims to be the network hub where other organisations sharing its ideals are promoted and their campaigns highlighted. Curious? If so, do check out the new site, link to it and spread the word.

Tags: Liberal Conspiracy, UK Politics, Democracy, Blogging

The Burmese Junta's Accomplices

2007-10-27T07:37:00.000+01:00

There's a new article in the Guardian by John Pilger that I've just read. It's about Burma and it's called 'The politics of hypocrisy'. It seems to be an edited version of an address he gave to a London meeting, 'Freedom Writ Large', organized by PEN and the Writers Network of Burma, on October 25. It's an interesting piece and I urge you to read it in full. Here are some highlights.

In Britain, the official PR line has changed; Burma is a favourite New Labour "cause"; Gordon Brown has written a platitudinous chapter in a book about his admiration of Suu Kyi. On Thursday, he wrote a letter to Pen, waffling about prisoners of conscience, no doubt part of his current empty theme of "returning liberty" when none can be returned without a fight. As for Burma, the essence of Britain's compliance and collusion has not changed. British tour firms - such as Orient Express and Asean Explorer - are able to make a handsome profit on the suffering of the Burmese people. Aquatic, a sort of mini-Halliburton, has its snout in the same trough, together with Rolls-Royce and others that use Burmese teak.
When did Brown or Blair ever use their platforms at the CBI and in the City of London to name and shame those British companies that make money on the back of the Burmese people? When did a British prime minister call for the EU to plug the loopholes of arms supply to Burma. The reason ought to be obvious. The British government is itself one of the world's leading arms suppliers. Next week, the dictator of Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah, whose tyranny gorges itself on British arms, will receive a state visit. On Thursday the Brown government approved Washington's latest fabricated prelude to a criminal attack on Iran - as if the horrors of Iraq and Afghanistan were not enough for the "liberal" lionhearts in Downing Street and Whitehall.
And when did a British prime minister call on its ally and client, Israel, to end its long and sinister relationship with the Burmese junta? Or does Israel's immunity and impunity also cover its supply of weapons technology to Burma and its reported training of the junta's most feared internal security thugs? Of course, that is not unusual. The Australian government - so vocal lately in its condemnation of the junta - has not stopped the Australian Federal Police training Burma's internal security forces.
Read the whole article.

Other crises have shunted Burma further down the news agenda but the problems are obviously still there. We knew that despite protestations from the Government that British companies are supporting the regime, as are French and American companies. So it's no surprise that Chevron and Total are part of a consortium with the junta and that Halliburton was involved in the construction of the gas pipline which was built with forced labour. Thanks to the Burma Campaign UK we can easily find out which companies are still propping up the vile regime in Burma and learn of the lamentable lack of meaningful action from the EU. And blogs like Ten Percent have done an excellent job in helping to keep the issue alive with active campaigning. What isn't being as widely reported on is the arming of the regime and the countries which are involved. It seems that the EU arms embargo on Burma has been compromised by India by their selling of European made military helicopters to the junta. Russia, China and Ukraine have also been arming the regime supplying it with everything from small arms to surface-to-air missiles. Israel too is playing a role in keeping the junta armed so that it can slaughter defenceless monks. Israel and Burma have developed a military pact. And when it comes to supporting despotic regimes, Israel has plenty of previous.

It could be that the Myanmar troops who've been shooting demonstrators to death were using Uzi submachine guns that Israeli arms dealers sold to the country's military dictatorship. According to Jane's Intelligence Weekly, Israeli "security companies" are believed to have sold Uzis and parts from Galil assault rifles to the junta. Israeli mercenaries are also said to have trained Myanmar's infamously repressive police force.
"Given its sensitive nature, it is difficult to see how this assistance could be given to Myanmar without the active involvement, or at least the full knowledge and support, of the Israeli government," reported Jane's in 2000. Myanmar, formerly Burma, has been one of the world's worst police states since 1988.
[...]
To the list of military clients Israel never liked advertising, you can add the dictatorships that once ruled Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Nicaragua and other Latin American countries, as well as past and/or present military dictatorships in Congo, Angola, Sierra Leone and other African nations.
The sadistic Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega owed his life, and his power, to Mike Harari, the ex-Mossad agent who led the team of mercenaries that was Noriega's palace guard. The Israeli arch-mercenary Yair Klein and his boys trained Colombia's right-wing death squads, drug cartels and whoever else would meet his price. When the apartheid regime of South Africa was having problems with black demonstrators, Israeli "security companies" sold the white rulers electrified fences and gravel-spraying trucks.

Back in March questions were asked in Parliament about Israel's help to Robert Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe which took the form of advice on demonstration control and supplies of tear gas. Isolating and starving the Burmese junta of revenue is obviously the best way to get it to stop its crackdown on protesters and take steps leading to democratic reform, but as long as so many countries are arming the junta to the teeth then there is little incentive for it to co-operate.

Tags: Freedom, Burma, Myanmar, Protest, Democracy, Israel, Arms Trade, John Pilger

Leader of Banana Republic Criticises Cuba

2007-10-25T04:02:00.000+01:00

I realise no one is going to fall off their chair at the news that George Bush is a hypocrite, but it is worth noting every instance of his hypocrisy. The latest episode took the form of his ramblings over Cuba.

George Bush, the US president, has urged Cubans to push for democratic change, insisting Fidel Castro’s government was a "disgraced and dying order".

Well, look who's talking! Time to bring out the old 'Pots & Kettles' cliché again. He goes on...

"America will have no part in giving oxygen to a criminal regime victimising its own people,"

Really? Does this mean that America is withdrawing its support for Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Israel and Colombia? No, of course it doesn't. The difference is that Cuba has an oppressive government that has a different ideology to the oppressive governments America likes to support. And worse still, Cuba has had the audacity to survive despite America's 45 year embargo on the country and numerous botched attempts to destabilise it.

Bush also described Cuba as "a tropical gulag". Well, here is is at least partially correct. There's an area of Cuba called Guantanamo Bay 'leased' by America. That can certainly be called a gulag.

Bush's rhetoric could also be used to describe his own country. Take a look at this list:

Spying without court warrants on Americans in violation of both the US Constitution and the FISA statute.

The denial of habeas corpus, attorney-client privilege, due process, and Geneva Conventions protections to those, American or foreign, designated without evidence as terrorists or enemy combatants.

The justification and use of torture to coerce confessions and the kidnapping of foreign nationals who are sent to be tortured in foreign prisons.

The initiation of military aggression against states based on intentional deception by the Bush administration of the US public and the United Nations, and the intentional fabrication of "evidence" to justify unprovoked aggression against sovereign states, which is a war crime under the Nuremberg standard established by the US.

Violation of the oath of office to defend the US Constitution by practically every member of the Bush administration and Congress.

Bush has assaulted the separation of powers and the rule of law with "signing statements" and "executive orders" that President Nixon’s White House Counsel John Dean says are commands that treat the co-equal branches of government and the electorate as subservient to executive authority. In April 2006, Boston Globe reporter Charlie Savage listed 750 laws "challenged" by the Bush administration. Not even the demonized president of Iran claims to be above the law.

Genocide against the people of Iraq where one million Iraqis have died as a result of Bush’s invasion and several million Iraqis are displaced persons.

Massive civilian casualties in Afghanistan, which is a form of genocide in which military force is routinely applied to unarmed noncombatants.

Massive corruption in which no-bid contracts are issued to Republican corporations in exchange for kickbacks to political campaigns.

The theft of two national elections as documented in books by Mark Crispin Miller and Greg Palast.

And this is without going into any great detail about America's international atrocities before Bush came to power. There is a lot wrong with the Cuban regime. It certainly can't be called a democracy and it's no bastion of liberty, but when Cuba's failings are compared with the crimes committed by the good old US of A, we get a sense of perspective. And Bush's hypocrisy isn't lost on those Cubans who are wondering why America is harbouring a known terrorist, Luis Posada Carriles, who is allowed to roam free in the USA despite all of Dubya's anti-terrorist rhetoric. You don't suppose it's because he's an ex CIA operative who has consistently targeted Cubans and even tried to assassinate Castro? No, surely not. It is apparently because America is concerned that his extradition might lead to him being tortured. You couldn't make this up could you?

*UPDATE*

More on this topic from Mask of Anarchy.

Tags: Cuba, Castro, George Bush, Guantanamo, Democracy, Torture, US Politics

Free Burma

2007-10-04T03:32:00.000+01:00

Click on the banner to learn more. Oh, and there is this (via Justin):

MARCH FOR BURMA
GLOBAL DAY OF ACTION

SATURDAY 6th OCTOBER 2007

Join us for a march and rally in solidarity with the monks and peaceful demonstrators in Burma and demand international action.

Assemble at Tate Britain, SW1P 4RG at 11.00am
Nearest tube Pimlico

March to Trafalgar Square for a rally at 12.45pm

For more information visit www.burmacampaign.org.uk, call 020 7324 4710 or email demo@burmacampaign.org.uk or call Crisis Action on 020 7324 4752/4758

Organisations supporting this march include: Amnesty International, Avaaz, British Muslim Forum, Burma Campaign UK, BDMA UK, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, Crescent Network UK, Federation of Student Islamic Societies, GMB,GNNSJ UK, Hindu Council UK, Human Rights Watch, Muslim Council of Britain, NUS, Prospect, Sikh Aid, Sufi Muslim Council, ‘Support the Monks in Burma’ (Facebook), TUC, United Nations Association of the UK, Unison, Unite the Union, Waging Peace.

For the latest news on the situation in Burma I urge you to read the excellent series of posts by Ten Percent.

Tags: Freedom, Burma, Myanmar, Protest, Democracy

The Crisis In Burma

2007-09-27T08:58:00.000+01:00

I was going to write a long link-laden piece about the situation in Burma but I don't think it's really necessary. You'd have to be from another planet to not know what's going on over there and I doubt I could add much more to the excellent series of posts by Ten Percent and Mask of Anarchy who have covered this crisis comprehensively. I urge you to read them and also the information in the useful set of links compiled by Mr Eugenides.

I've been watching the events unfolding in Burma with a growing sense of alarm. It was apparently too much to hope for that the peaceful protests led by the monks would not be put down with the brutality we've come to expect from the thuggish Junta running that country. The people of Burma (Myanmar is the name given to the country by the Junta) have been crying out for democracy for years (silently because of the awful repression) and have largely been ignored. All they ask is that the West stops investing in the corrupt regime and applies strong diplomatic pressure to secure change, something that so far hasn't really happened. The pathetic hand wringing and rhetoric we've heard from the UN and the EU is just that. We can be grateful, however, that the media is reporting reasonably well on the crisis and Burma is now getting the attention it deserves. But the momentum has to be kept up otherwise some other crisis will push Burma down the news agenda and an opportunity to achieve a relatively peaceful regime change will have been lost.

Of course there isn't that much we can do other than to pressure our leaders to isolate the regime and to force the companies investing in Burma to stop. Another (admittedly very small) thing we can do is to sign this petition to Chinese President Hu Jintao and the UN Security Council and get others to do so.

To Chinese President Hu Jintao and the UN Security Council: We stand alongside the citizens of Burma in their peaceful protests. We urge you to oppose a violent crackdown on the demonstrators, and to support genuine reconciliation and democracy in Burma. We pledge to hold you accountable for any further bloodshed.

China is an ally of Burma and both countries have atrocious human rights records. China, however is in a difficult position. Because of the Olympic Games soon to be hosted in Beijing, the country is trying to buff up its international image and supporting a violent crack down on peaceful protesters isn't going to help. China is also keen to be seen as a major player on the world stage and is even sending peace-keepers to Darfur. India too has a role to play in resolving this crisis as does Russia. Both China and Russia are, at the moment opposing meaningful sanctions.

Even president Bush now seems to be belatedly taking the matter a bit more seriously (though he needs to go much further) and Gordon Brown is also calling for tougher sanctions but we've heard Gordon wax lyrical about Burma before without any noticeable effect.

There has been some debate recently about the amount of investment British companies have in Burma. The Foreign Office denies that Britain is the second biggest investor in the country.

Contrary to some reports, the UK is not the second largest investor in Burma. The State Peace and Development Council’s investment records are far from transparent, but we believe the figure they quote for the UK is cumulative, and includes investments by companies such as Premier Oil and British American Tobacco who have since withdrawn. It also includes investments that were agreed but never occurred. The DTI figures for current active UK investment are very low. For example in 2003, the DTI recorded UK foreign direct investment flows into Burma as negligible (i.e. between £0 and £500,000).

This statement is however, misleading as there are British companies abroad trading with Burma. From the Burma Campaign UK (a good source for the latest news) there is a long list of companies (some British) which support the military regime. Among them are:

Abercrombie & Kent
Chevron
Rolls-Royce
Siemens
Suzuki
Total Oil

One thing we can do is to write to some of these companies and pressure them to stop supporting such a vile regime.

The protesters in Burma are showing incredible bravery by continuing with their peaceful protests despite the worsening violence inflicted on them by the authorities who are now launching raids on monasteries. They deserve whatever support we are able to give. This situation is urgent and could turn into a bloodbath very quickly.

*UPDATE*

Much of the news coming out of Burma has been because of bloggers or reporters using the internet. Now the Burmese junta is trying to cut off communications with the outside world by closing off internet access and telephone links. This is bad news and an ominous sign of things to come. So is this.

*UPDATE 2*

One of the monks holed up in a monastery surrounded by soldiers stated what the protesters are asking for. They want three steps to be taken:

The first step is to reduce all commodity prices, fuel prices, rice and cooking oil prices immediately.
The second step – release all political prisoners, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and all detainees arrested during ongoing demonstrations over the fuel price hike.
The third step – enter a dialogue with pro-democracy forces for national reconciliation immediately, to resolve the crisis and difficulties facing and suffered by the people.

Not too unreasonable under the circumstances.

Tags: Freedom, Burma, Myanmar, Protest, Democracy

The War On Democracy: Another Chance To See This Film

2007-08-24T05:07:00.000+01:00

Last Monday ITV showed John Pilger's latest film, The War On Democracy. I posted about this film back in June but unfortunately neglected to mention that it was about to be shown on television. So, for anyone who missed this interesting documentary (here is a trailer), it can be viewed or downloaded from Google or watched here (Complete film 1h 34min).

Thanks to RickB from Ten Percent for the heads up.

Tags: John Pilger, The War On Democracy, Latin America, US Politics, Film, Entertainment

The War On Democracy: Another Film To Go And See

2007-06-10T20:50:00.000+01:00

While I was in Brixton yesterday to watch the film Taking Liberties, I noticed a poster advertising another film which sounds like it might be interesting. It's called The War On Democracy and it opens on June 15. The film is the latest offering from the veteran campaigning journalist, John Pilger. The film is set in the Latin American states known as "America’s backyard" and it's about the relationships between these states and the USA. Other than what I've seen on a few websites and the trailer below, I don't know much about this film but I'm intrigued. Here is the trailer on YouTube:

On his website, John Pilger talks about the film:

'The War on Democracy' is John Pilger's first major film for the cinema - in a career that has produced more than 55 television documentaries. Set in Latin America and the US, it explores the historic and current relationship of Washington with countries such as Venezuela, Bolivia and Chile.
"The film tells a universal story," says Pilger, "analysing and revealing, through vivid testimony, the story of great power behind its venerable myths. It allows us to understand the true nature of the so-called war on terror".

Green Left has an interview with John Pilger in which he reveals more about The War On Democracy. Here is an excerpt:

I happened to watch [US President] George Bush’s second inauguration address in which he pledged to "bring democracy to the world". He mentioned the words "democracy" and "liberty" 21 times. It was a very important speech because, unlike the purple prose of previous presidents (Ronald Reagan excluded), he left no doubt that he was stripping noble concepts like "democracy" and "liberty" of their true meaning — government, for, by and of the people.
I wanted to make a film that illuminated this disguised truth — that the United States has long waged a war on democracy behind a facade of propaganda designed to contort the intellect and morality of Americans and the rest of us. For many of your readers, this is known. However, for others in the West, the propaganda that has masked Washington’s ambitions has been entrenched, with its roots in the incessant celebration of World War II, the “good war”, then “victory” in the Cold War. For these people, the “goodness” of US power represents “us”. Thanks to Bush and his cabal, and to [British Prime Minister Tony] Blair, the scales have fallen from millions of eyes. I would like The War on Democracy to contribute something to this awakening.
The film is about the power of empire and of people. It was shot in Venezuela, Bolivia, Chile and the United States, and is set also in Guatemala and Nicaragua. It tells the story of "America’s backyard", the dismissive term given to all of Latin America. It traces the struggle of indigenous people — first against the Spanish, then against European immigrants who reinforced the old elite.
Our filming was concentrated in the barrios where the continent’s "invisible people" live in hillside shanties that defy gravity. It tells, above all, a very positive story: that of the rise of popular social movements that have brought to power governments promising to stand up to those who control national wealth and to the imperial master. Venezuela has taken the lead, and a highlight of the film is a rare face-to-face interview with President Hugo Chavez whose own developing political consciousness, and sense of history (and good humour), are evident.
The film investigates the 2002 coup d’etat against Chavez and casts it in a contemporary context. It also describes the differences between Venezuela and Cuba, and the shift in economic and political power since Chavez was first elected. In Bolivia, the recent, tumultuous past is told through quite remarkable testimony from ordinary people, including those who fought against the piracy of their resources. In Chile, the film looks behind the mask of this apparently modern, prosperous "model" democracy and finds powerful, active ghosts.
In the United States, the testimony of those who ran the "backyard" echo those who run that other backyard, Iraq; sometimes they are the same people. Chris Martin (my fellow director) and I believe The War on Democracy is well timed. We hope people will see it as another way of seeing the world: as a metaphor for understanding a wider war on democracy and the universal struggle of ordinary people, from Venezuela to Vietnam, Palestine to Guatemala.
Read On

I was surprised that a film by such a well-known documentary maker has received such little publicity. I haven't seen it mentioned in the media or on many blogs until I started searching so I thought I'd give it a plug. The War on Democracy will be released in cinemas in the UK, starting with the Curzon Soho, the Ritzy Brixton, the Barbican and the Cornerhouse in Manchester from Friday 15 June. Booking details will be on John Pilger's website shortly. The ITV network will show the new film following its cinema debut so at least it will eventually be seen on television.

*UPDATE*

To see the documentary on-line, go here.

Tags: John Pilger, The War On Democracy, Latin America, US Politics, Film, Entertainment

Light Posting

2007-03-11T10:35:00.000Z

Apologies for the scarcity of posts here of late. I've been a little busy with a few things, but hopefully 'normal' service will be resumed sometime soon. In the meantime, here are a couple of things I've been writing over at Blairwatch to keep you occupied.

Firstly, it seems that Tony Blair's statement about him knowing nothing about Extraordinary Rendition and CIA black sites is a load of bollocks (yes, I thought that would surprise you). What seems to be emerging is that he is not only complicit in this programme but actively participating in it. We now learn that that America and Britain asked Poland to host a secret CIA gulag and Blair requested that the Polish Prime Minister to keep this secret from his government. Nice eh?

Secondly, tonight (March 11) the first part of Adam Curtis' new three-part documentary, "The Trap – What Happened To Our Dream Of Freedom?" is being shown on BBC 2 at 21:00. This will be well worth watching. It is about freedom and how the concept of freedom seems to have changed since the Cold War and how that change came about. As Britain and America go around the world 'liberating' oppressed people, and as they try to 'liberate' us from the old bureaucracies of the past, they replace what was there before with a strange kind of freedom which bears little resemblance to the freedom we knew before. This series examines how this came to happen and looks at the mechanisms behind this paradox which is, in effect, the losing of our freedom in the name of freedom, replacing it with a new form of social control which entraps us all.

Adam Curtis has generously agreed to do an interview with Blairwatch next week and in order to prepare for it, I managed to get the first two installments of this three part series and I was blown away by what I saw. So I posted a synopsis of the first episode here for those who will be unable to catch the program. I'll post a synopsis of the second episode once the first has been screened.

Lenin's Tomb and Ten Percent have also posted stuff about it and from those sites I've found reviews of the documentary in The Guardian and Socialist Worker.

Back soon hopefully.

Tags: Torture, Extraordinary Rendition, Black Sites, Media, Democracy, Freedom, Adam Curtis, The Trap

The February Stop The War Protest In London

2007-02-25T02:59:00.000Z

All in all, the Stop The War protest was a fun day out as well as a serious exercise in democracy and (it seems) the only way to get heard these days. I emerged from Hyde Park Corner tube station into pouring rain thinking that it would be as miserable an experience as the tube journey (no Northern or Victoria lines so the Piccadilly line was very overcrowded). Anyway the weather cleared up shortly after I met up with Rachel and the rest of the day was very pleasant.

It was obvious from the beginning that this was going to be a very large demonstration, there were hoards of people at Speakers Corner and the march didn't get started until about 1:30 PM and people were still arriving. We positioned ourselves close to some excellent drummers to keep our energy up and we were entertained by some performers dressed in funky day-glow skeleton costumes, a bit like a 21st Century Danse Macabre I thought, only funnier.

The route the march took was down Park Lane then down Piccadilly into Haymarket and finally into Trafalgar Square for the rally. That short distance took over two hours which should help give an idea of how many people there were. Sky News was apparently reporting 'several hundred people', I heard that the police said there were 10,000 protesters while the organisers claimed 60,000 (George Galloway said it was 100,000). From the ground it was impossible to tell but based on previous demonstrations I guessed (and this is just a guess) between 40,000 and 50,000 people turned up. Both Rachel and I had the foresight to take our hip flasks with us. Mine had Cognac and Rachel's had whiskey and when you're shuffling along a few swigs definitely helps. We also had whistles so we could contribute to the drumming and chanting.

Meanwhile, back at Blairwatch H.Q., Tom had the good idea of live blogging the event, the plan being that I'd send pictures from my camera phone and he'd put them on-line. So I put away my digital camera and tried taking pictures on the mobile. I then spent what seemed like the best part of an hour fiddling with the settings in previously unseen menus because although my phone has a nice 1.3 mega pixel camera, you can't send any picture via MMS which is more than 100 kb in size. Luckily Rachel came to the rescue and sent a steady stream of photos to Blairwatch with her phone until I sorted mine out.

Trafalgar Square was totally packed when we arrived and it was very difficult to move about. However, we did eventually manage to find a way to the top of some steps where we watched some of the speeches. The best speech by far was that of Mark Thomas.

Mark Thomas

George Galloway too made a rousing speech. The organisers had erected a large video screen so even at the distance we were at, we could see whoever was speaking. The sound was very clear too, so well done to the organisers for that.

George Galloway

When Yvonne Riddley started speaking we took that as our hint to call it a day and locate a nice cosy pub for some refreshment (after a bit of a search we settled on Le Garrick and very nice it was too). After that it was time to brave the tube again and it was even more crowded than before.

I didn't watch any news reports on television about the event but you can see the BBC report on-line here. You can also see more photos on my Flickr site. Hopefully the demonstration succeeded in showing the Government just how much opposition there is to the Iraq war and to the renewal of Trident. I hope it also sent a warning to Blair about involving himself in the coming war in Iran. The people are no longer buying the bullshit he's been peddling and they are sick of the continuous wars that will be his legacy.

Anyway it was a fun way to make the point, all the more so by having such good company.

More Bloggage and some nice pictures over at Lenin's Tomb. There are also good reports from The Disillusioned Kid, The Heathlander and Devises Melting Pot. If I find any more reports I'll post the links. Feel free to let me know in the comments of any more reports.

Tags: Stop The War, Protest, Iraq, Blair, Bush, 24 February 2007, London

Parliament Under New Labour

2007-02-21T04:47:00.000Z

The recent resignation of Labour MP Alan Simpson from Parliament, is a loss to British politics. The Labour party now has even fewer politicians with the conviction to stand up for its principles. When I read the reasons Alan Simpson gave for his resignation, I was reminded of some of the things Tony Benn said when he retired from Parliament in 2001. There is a similarity in their statements and the reasons given are a damning indictment of what Parliamentary politics has become under Nu Labour.

Tony Benn on his retirement from Parliament:

“It is difficult to get this [the issues Benn had pledged to fight for that brought him into conflict with his party] across inside parliament at the moment because politics is reported in such a shallow way... The issues that face us are difficult, challenging and interesting—and the level of political discourse is shallow, abusive and personal...
"I am not retiring from politics, but I believe the work that needs to be done now to rebuild the Labour Party is best done from outside. If you are in parliament at the moment you are asked to do a lot of things that run absolutely contrary to the pledges I gave my constituents and to my own convictions. All progress has always come from outside parliament,"
Source

Alan Simpson MP on the announcement of his resignation from Parliament:

"I never went into Parliament to have a career. I went in to change the world. I'm leaving because I still want to change the world, and I don't think you can do that in this Parliament," he said. In a letter to his Nottingham South party, he said: "My worry is that it has become a comfort zone in which MPs are paid more and more to stand for less and less...
"There are good people in the Parliamentary Labour Party; just not enough of them. Many MPs complain of a government that no longer listens to the party, but they dutifully walk through the division lobbies to vote for whatever regressive measures Downing Street asks for. At times I feel that colleagues would vote for the slaughter of the first-born if asked to."
Mr Simpson is giving up a relatively safe Labour seat with a majority of more than 7,000 at the last election. Asked why he does not stay and fight, he said: "Because I don't think the changes are going to be driven inside Parliament. There is a desperate short-termism that consumes you. Parliament is dominated by playground games: who's gang are you in?
"I think the danger is that Parliament becomes a politics-free zone, where people are more interested in their careers than the issues that really matter to people outside. People position themselves around loyalty and career opportunities and the debate is arranged around short-term options - should we lock up more prisoners, not should we be looking at alternatives to prison?"
Source

If politicians of conviction feel that they can no longer fight for the issues they believe in inside Parliament and think they have a better chance of affecting change from outside, what does this tell us about Nu Labour and our Parliamentary system at the moment? And what danger does this pose for the future? For me this highlights an urgent need for change in our political system. Perhaps things might improve once Tony Blair has left office but I doubt Gordon Brown will be much different. As Alan Simpson says:

Choosing between Blair and Brown is like choosing between Saddam and Uday ... They're as bad as each other.

Another interesting quote from Tony Benn illustrates part of the problem with Nu Labour:

It's very interesting to me that some ex-communists in the Labour party have been able to shift from Stalin to Blair and it hasn't been much of a shift... the shift from Stalin to Blair is a minor adjustment.

Tags: Nu Labour, Blair, UK Politics, Alan Simpson, Tony Benn

Mass Lone Demonstration and Carol Service

2006-12-21T07:54:00.000Z

The last Mass Lone Demonstration of 2006 was as much fun as the others I've attended only much, much colder. It really was freezing but that didn't stop a bunch of die-hard democracy fans assembling in Parliament Square once again to make a mockery of the idiotic SOCPA law which forbids protest in the vicinity of the Prime Minister's office without written permission from the police which has to be obtained a week beforehand. There was the usual amusing array of diverse protests; from "Fair Pay For Elves" to my own "Stop the Surveillance Society".

After protesting for an hour, we gathered under the statue of Winston Churchill to break the law by singing Christmas carols, an event organised by Tim Ireland of Bloggerheads. Veteran peace protester Brian Haw was presented with a new and more powerful loudspeaker and then the singing commenced in candle light, and very tuneful it was too. Pausing only briefly for some mince pies, we sang:

O Come All Ye Faithful
Away In A Manger
Little Drummer Boy
The Twelve Days of Christmas
Deck The Halls
Good King Wenceslas
The First Noel
Joy To The World
We Wish You a Merry Christmas
Jingle Bells
Rudolph The Red Nosed Reindeer
Santa Clause Is Coming To Town
Amazing Grace
God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen
Hark! The Herald Angels Sing
Silent Night

Sorry, I didn't record any of it. Christmas carols aren't usually my sort of thing but this was really quite charming and it again highlighted the utter stupidity of a repressive law. A collection was made for sick children in Iraq and we also had a minute's silent reflection. The police were nowhere to be seen. Obviously they decided to keep an even lower profile than they did last year.

By eight o clock it was all over and we took our frozen bodies down to the Red Lion to thaw out before moving on to another pub to continue the festivities. Among the revellers were Rachel, Gareth from D-Notice, the Disillusioned Kid and of course Tim. As soon as they post something on the Mass Lone Protest, I'll link to it. You can see higher resolution versions of these photos here and Gareth has some more over here. I expect Indymedia will have some more pictures soon.

*UPDATE*
Here are the links to the reports from some of the other bloggers who attended:

If I find any more I'll update this post again. Oh, and we managed to raise £85.93 (and 70 euro-cents) for Medical Aid for Iraqi Children.

Tags: Mass Lone Demonstration, Protest, Democracy, Civil Liberties

A Little Vignette of 21st Century Britain

2006-12-17T20:27:00.000Z

Regular readers will know that I attend the Mass Lone Demonstrations in Parliament Square as often as I can. Not only are they a terrific way to highlight how stupid and pointless the SOCPA laws (.pdf) are, they're also a lot of fun. The next one is on December 20th and will be followed by a carol-singing session (how subversive can we get eh?).

Anyway, in order to be able to protest legally these days, it's necessary to get police permission which for me usually means trotting down to Charing Cross police station and handing in forms a week before the protest. At Charing Cross the police are used to us now and are good-natured and fairly efficient despite large numbers of people turning up and various pranks being played. It is also possible to go to your local police station to get permission but this seems to invite a somewhat different experience as this post clearly shows (via Rachel who was also there).

I'm not going to include any of the post here as I think it's so good you should go and read the whole thing (it's basically a time-line of an interminable wait in a London police station). For me it seemed like a snapshot of life in 21st Century Britain as inefficient bureaucracy meets a determination to stop people exercising their right to protest, but the other details paint a vivid tragicomic picture.

Tags: Protest, Mass Lone Demonstration, Democracy

Message to the Government

2006-07-04T16:01:00.000+01:00

Photo from Bloggerheads

Democracy is rule by the people. We elect OUR Government to carry out OUR bidding. If a government fails to do what has been asked of it by the people, then the people are entitled to elect another government that will.

On the whole what the people ask of their government is not unreasonable. We ask to be kept safe, to have OUR money sensibly managed and for OUR public services to be maintained. In return we give the Government a mandate to carry out OUR wishes and we pay taxes so that those aims can be achieved.

If we, the people ask for OUR Government to hold a public inquiry into an attack on us that killed 52 of us and maimed many more of us, then the Government should do just that. We should not be forced to fight for it even though we are quite prepared to do so. On July 7 last year the Government failed in its duty to keep us safe. The people who elected it were fairly forgiving, after all, the security services cannot be expected to foil every single plot against us, and we also demand from our Government the protection of our civil liberties which have been fought for over many generations. However, we did ask for an inquiry into the atrocity in order to be better able to prevent a similar attack and to learn from any mistakes that may have been made so that if, God forbid, anything like this does happen again, we will be able to deal with it more effectively. Is that so unreasonable?

As everyone knows by now, we were denied our request. Instead we were fobbed off with a handful of conflicting reports that cleared the security services of any failings despite them not even being interrogated properly. The causes of the disenfranchisement of the people who carried out this horror have not sufficiently been explored. Worse still, we were lied to when we were told the attack came “out of the blue”. More and more information is emerging that shows the security services were at least suspicious of the bombers, and had been bugging them. We have learned that we were warned by other governments that they intended to attack us.

We are still demanding an inquiry and the pressure will not cease until we get it. The excuse that the fourth or fifth largest economy in the world cannot afford the resources to conduct an inquiry is, frankly, ludicrous and insulting to our intelligence. The arguments in favour of an inquiry are overwhelming and have been made many times and each new piece of evidence that emerges further reinforces those arguments. But even if the evidence didn’t support the argument for an inquiry, we still have the issue that the people are demanding one. It’s our government, our money and if we want to “waste” it on an inquiry, that is our choice and should be respected.

If the people of this country voted for the Prime Minister to address Parliament dressed in a pink tutu and a deep-sea diving helmet, then that too would be the will of the people and would have to be obeyed. As it is all we are asking for is an inquiry into an issue that affects us all. If our government is unable to carry out that simple request, then the solution is simple, we will elect another government that can.

Tags: 7/7, London Bombings, July 7, Terrorism

Power to the People Conference

2006-05-07T02:55:00.000+01:00

I have just returned from a very interesting day at the Power Inquiry Conference held on Saturday in London where the issues of participation in the electoral process and electoral reform were thoroughly explored. The conference was chaired by Helena Kennedy QC, and the main speakers were David Cameron and Sir Menzies Campbell, the Labour leadership declined to attend for some reason.

After an introduction by Helena Kennedy and vice chair Ferdinand Mount, David Cameron gave a speech and then took questions from the audience. I did record the speeches but I’m afraid the quality is appalling as I used a mobile phone and an MP3 player which really weren’t up to the task, so apologies for that. I have asked someone who filmed some of it to send me a file, and the event will be covered next week on BBC Parliament. I have also asked the Power Inquiry to send me any video and audio they have and they have said they will try. In the meantime I will attempt to outline what was discussed.

Helena’s introduction covered the basis of the problem, the low turn out at elections and the myth of ‘voter apathy’. What is called ‘voter apathy’ is actually disenchantment with, and alienation from the political process. People no longer feel their vote counts any more and that politicians don’t listen to the electorate. Despite this many people are involved in politics on both local and national levels. From being involved on school governing boards to protesting at demonstrations, people do involve themselves in politics, they just abstain from elections. The wide-ranging research done by the inquiry involved talking to people of all political persuasions and none, and from all walks of life. The inquiry also conducted experiments in participatory democracy. The findings were that people were no longer satisfied to defer to a political elite and just cast a vote every few years. They want more engagement. Nor are people happy any longer to be presented with a ‘menu’ of choices in the political parties which are broadly similar to each other. The political system needs to be updated to something more relevant to the well-educated 21^st Century electorate even if that means taking some power away from the politicians.

Respect has to be mutual so politicians need to listen more closely to the people in order to earn the respect they demand. Helena outlined 3 areas for change:

We have to redistribute power from the executive, from Downing Street to Parliament.
We have to restore Cabinet Government.
We have to have a redistribution of power from the central to the local.

One of the recommendations is to have a written constitution rather than the unwritten constitution we currently have which can be ignored when found to be inconvenient. A written constitution should set in stone, the relationship between the executive and Parliament, the relationship between the judiciary and the executive and the relationship between the centre and the local.

House of Lords reform was another much-needed change that was highlighted; the system of appointments no longer being acceptable to the public, but at the same time we need to have the expertise and independence in the lords so there is a problem in squaring that particular circle.

Helena also brought up the issue of party funding and suggested a cap on donations to political parties to stop the rich having too much influence. She recommended that when we go to vote, we should be able to tick a box so that £3 of taxpayers' money went to a political party of our choice paid at a local level to invigorate local grass roots politics, rather than be used for paying for suits and hairdressers. Finally the public should have the power to call for public inquiries.

After Helena Kennedy’s speech, vice chair Ferdinand Mount spoke briefly about the need for electoral reform, highlighting the lack of legitimacy a government has when it is elected to power with just over 20% of the vote. The Tories won the recent local elections with just 15% of the vote. What Jack Straw called ‘executive democracy’ ends up looking more like elected dictatorship. Representative democracy becomes less representative as the worst off disappear from the political radar and no longer engage in politics. Apathy entrenches political inequality affecting the young, the poor and ethnic minorities and this has been found in their voting patterns. Again, Mr Mount stressed that people stay away from the polls not because they can’t be bothered but because they think voting won’t make any difference.

Politicians are waking up to this problem but are offering poor solutions such as making voting compulsory, which will change nothing. The system can’t be tinkered with; it needs wholesale reform right across the board. People need to start engaging with politics while they are still young otherwise they will remain disengaged later. He also stressed that no political system was perfect and the Power Inquiry was not dogmatic about its ideas. Proportional representation has its merits and weaknesses, but in order to make a real change it must be an ‘open list’ PR system rather than a ‘closed list’ system. A degree of direct democracy is also needed in order to keep people engaged. When people become disenfranchised with the political system, they tend to gravitate towards extremist parties as we have seen. In the last 25 years, just about everything has been reformed in Britain except the political system.

The first speaker was David Cameron. It pains me to say it but he came across really quite well. Enthusiastic and eloquent, he endorsed most of the Power Inquiry’s findings and where he didn’t he gave his reasons (no Dave the Chameleon nonsense). His main disagreement was on the need for proportional representation. He prefers the first-past-the-post system even though he accepted it had its problems and thought they could be remedied by having primaries to choose candidates like in America. The reasons he gave was that the link between an MP and his constituency was important and it was a clear decisive win that led to a stable government that could be easily thrown out at a later time. I beg to differ.

However, he recognised the problems with current political system and pointed out that many in Westminster still don’t get it and play lip service to political reform while being in denial. He repeated Helena’s observations that the ‘apathy’ line was a myth and added other examples of the political engagement away from voting. He disagreed that people were put off because the parties are all the same and that there was no choice and said that consensus was a good thing provided that genuine differences are expressed and that there are other mechanisms for making choices. Again, I disagree, although I take his point that a wide gulf between the political parties is not a reliable indicator of political health.

Mr Cameron is strongly opposed to compulsory voting. “Voting, to me, is a right, and not voting should never be a crime. The state is our servant and not our master and to me compulsory voting ranks along compulsory identity cards as being a danger...” The rest of that was drowned out by applause.

David Cameron said he has set up a democracy task force that will look in to the findings of the Power Inquiry. He also suggested that free votes in Parliament would help the situation of rebalancing the power between whips and backbenchers. He also wants to reduce the Royal prerogative and let Parliament vote on issues like going to war. Another idea he had was to have elected police chiefs to spread democracy at a local level.

After his speech, Mr Cameron stayed on to take questions from the audience before the conference broke up for a coffee break and various breakout sessions. I went to the Charter 88 Direct Democracy: Ideas for Citizen Power. It was held by Ron Baily (Charter 88), Douglas Carswell MP (Conservative Party), Pam Giddy (Power Inquiry), Chris Huhne MP (Liberal Democrats) and Bruno Kaufmann (Institute for Referenda & Initiatives). I have to say, it wasn’t particularly illuminating.

After Lunch it was Sir Menzies Campbell’s turn to speak. Obviously, he was not as dynamic as Cameron but, I did find myself agreeing with him more. He embraced pretty much all the recommendations in the Power Inquiry, and he was far more angry with the “creeping authoritarianism” of the current government.

The Lib Dems have a much better track record for campaigning on issues like proportional representation so Ming was on safe ground here. He too argued for a Parliamentary vote before going to war and greater use of referenda. He also argued strongly for ending central party control over funding and caps on donations, stating that parties would work harder if they knew the tax payer was funding the campaigns at the ballot box by nominating which party or none gets some cash as the Power Inquiry recommends.

Unsurprisingly, Ming too announced that his party was setting up a new working group on “citizenship and better government” which would be looking into the findings of the Power Inquiry. He also argued for the right of citizens to set up hearings and public inquiries into public bodies. One new thing that Ming announced was his intention to use technology to bring these issues to a wider audience. In the week before the next party conference, the Lib Dems will hold an on-line virtual conference to which everyone is invited to discuss these issues. What Sir Menzies seems to be advocating is a mixture of representative democracy, proportional representation and a bit of direct democracy thrown in for good measure. While this might sound messy and well, lets face it, quite Lib Dem, it is actually a realistic proposition. Electoral reform isn't going to happen overnight. It will be a slow continuing process, and no one system has all the answers; all three systems have their stregnths and weaknesses. This is also what the Power Inquiry recommends.

Ming too, stayed after his speech and answered questions from the audience, before a tea break. The Afternoon wound up with a 'question time' session on the subject of Prospects for Democratic Change. The Panel consisted of nick Boles(Director, The Policy Exchange), Helena Kennedy QC (Chair, Power Commission), Saira Kahn (Businesswoman, TV Presenter, Author), ED Milband MP (Former Advisor to Gordon Brown and the only New Labour representative there) and Peter Tatchell (Human Rights Campaigner). It was an entertaining way to wrap up the conference. I wish the audio I recorded wasn't such bad quality because I would have liked to have posted it here, but unlike the 'real' question time there was more agreement that things need to change. I almost felt sorry for Ed Miliband being the only Labour MP.

It really is appalling that neither Tony Blair nor Gordon Brown accepted the invitation to join the other party leaders at the conference. It was a case for once of the elephant not being in the room, and speaks volumes about their commitment to democracy and electoral reform. I might not necessarily always agree with David Cameron or Menzies Campbell, but I respect them for giving up a Saturday to come and discuss important issues with real people. And Helena Kennedy QC is a star.

*UPDATE*

I should have mentioned this before, but I'm doing it now. The last thing that was said from the Power Inquiry Conference was that their work is done. The report is out. They will still do more conferences but now it is up to us the people to spread the word. Politicians don't like giving away power, it has to be taken back, not violently, but by spreading the word and campaigning ourselves. We can use the media, blogs, and yes, politics to get the message across that reform is long overdue. Eventually it will become an unstoppable force, but only if we make it happen. That's democracy!

*ANOTHER UPDATE*

For those who were unable to attend the conference, there will be an opportunity to see recorded highlights on BBC Parliament on Saturday 13 May from 9:00 pm - 11:00 pm. If you can't receive BBC Parliament, you can still watch it on-line from the BBC Parliament website.

More bloggage here, here, and here.
Media coverage here and here

Tags: Democracy, UK Politics, Power Inquiry

Labour's Grim Night

2006-05-05T06:12:00.000+01:00

At the time of writing this, results are still coming in but there can be no mistaking the overall direction that these council elections went in. It was a serious drubbing for Labour. For a quick glance at the results click here and here.

It will be interesting to see how the Labour Party spin meisters will dress up last night's results as some kind of major victory for them. Labour has almost been cleared out of London and has lost well over 200 council seats nationwide. The surprise winners were the Conservatives who took most of the seats Labour lost (maybe it wasn't so surprising after all; Labour has stolen so many Tory policies, perhaps people thought they might be better off with the originals). The Liberal Democrats made hardly any progress at all with a small net loss. The BNP did do well but their share of the vote is too small to have much impact in the country. Margaret Hodge MP is being blamed for the BNP gains in true 'shoot-the-messenger' style. The predicted percentage of the vote is: Conservatives 40%, Liberal Democrats 27%, Labour 26%, Others 7%. (including those councils that went to 'no overall control').

Tony Blair is said to be having a cabinet reshuffle today in the hope that this will deflect attention from Labour's disastrous results and give the impression that Blair is still in control. It won't! This reshuffle looks like being the cosmetic farce that has been predicted with DPM John Prescott singled out as the main fall-guy and Charles Clarke moved to another department instead of being sacked. Frank Dobson MP said the reshuffle would be like rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic (see video); just about every politician being interviewed today is using this old but very apt cliche. Blair's smoke and mirror tricks just won't work any more. We now impatiently wait for a change of leadership.

Tags: Blair, Nu Labour, UK Politics, Democracy

Local Elections Day - Don't Vote Labour

2006-05-04T06:30:00.000+01:00

Yes, its May 4th and the Local Elections are upon us. While it may seem unfair to punish hard-working local Labour councilors for the mistakes and abuse of power of the scandal-ridden Labour Government, the unfair electoral system in Britain leaves people with little choice. If Labour does do well, or even if it doesn't do as badly as predicted, Tony Blair will proclaim that he has been vindicated and spin the result into an endorsement for his illiberal policies.

After the General Election Blair told the country that he was listening. Either he was lying again or he needs a hearing aid. He carried on as if having his majority slashed meant nothing to him. The Labour Party should have forced him out, difficult though that might be. They didn't even try. Tony Blair and his party are expecting bad news today, the party has desperately been spinning the line that we should only concentrate on local issues and ignore the war in Iraq, torture, extraordinary rendition, draconian legislation that removes our civil liberties, incompetence, selling peerages in exchange for 'loans' and failures in most other departments. Blair used a new soundbite yesterday "Nine days' headlines should not obscure nine years of achievement." Except it hasn't been nine days' headlines, its been nine years headlines of sleaze, spin, lies and knee-jerk legislation.

Tony Blair is unrepentant, and intends to carry on pushing through his agenda no matter what the people say. He believes that he is only answerable to God and not the electorate. Hopefully the the voters today will show him that he is wrong. New Labour can be punished severely without removing the Government from power. If the electorate hit him hard enough, Blair might finally be forced from power which will benefit everyone except his sycophants in the cabinet. And this can be done without allowing in racist thugs like the BNP as Labour is so keen to scare us into believing. There are plenty of political parties and independent candidates to choose from in most wards. And if there really is no party that reflects your views, then you can always spoil your ballot or stay at home.

For those people living in London, which will be the main battleground in these elections there is a handy guide to tactical voting which you can see here.

*UPDATE*

Justin over at Chicken Yoghurt has a great Cut out and keep guide to New Labour. A must read. Also, Backing Blair has Some Polling Day Advice.

Tags: Blair, Nu Labour, Democracy

Power Inquiry Conference

2006-05-03T10:15:00.000+01:00

On May 6th (this Saturday), The Power Inquiry is holding a conference in London. For those that don't know, The Power Inquiry was set up in 2004 to explore how political participation and involvement can be increased and deepened in Britain. Its work is based on the primary belief that a healthy democracy requires the active participation of its citizens. This is something that I have always believed is part of the problem in British politics.

Tomorrow an angry electorate will go out and vote against a government that has abused its position, and in the process, unfortunately, throw out of office some good and capable councilors. Why? because they have been left with no other choice. Its either vote against Labour, spoil the ballot or stay at home. Not an ideal situation at all. And politicians wonder why people are becoming so disillusioned with politics and voting. Some are actually thinking that making voting compulsory will solve their problems.

There are numerous political theories around, but the Power Inquiry came to its conclusions by simply asking people their opinions. Go ahead and read it's report, its interesting stuff. It is completely independent of any political party or organisation. The Commission is made up of people from the left, right and centre of politics, and mostly of people with no particular party political affiliation.

POWER TO THE PEOPLE CONFERENCE
Saturday 6th May 2006, 9.30am-4.30pm
Queen Elizabeth II Centre, London, SW1P 3EE

I intend to go, but if anyone else is going and intends to record or make notes, please drop me a comment because I will only have my mobile phone, small digital camera, and MP3 player with which to record some of the event and I probably won't get very good results (and I'm lousy at making notes). It would be good to spread views that probably won't get much media attention.

Thanks to Blairwatch for the timely reminder.

Tags: Democracy, UK Politics

Damage Limitation

2006-05-02T08:58:00.000+01:00

Tony Blair is desperately trying to plug the holes in his sinking New Labour ship. Knowing that his party is going to do very badly in Thursday’s elections, the Prime Minister is out on the campaign trail in an attempt to improve Labour’s prospects. He’s got his work cut out. Labour is expecting its worst results since 1968.

Tony Blair wants us to think about Labour’s achievements. Well, that shouldn’t take too long. He also wants us to put aside the Government’s current difficulties, you know, sleaze, incompetence and sex scandals, and focus on the “bigger picture” before the vote. I wonder what he means when he speaks of the ‘bigger picture’. Iraq? Extraordinary rendition? Support for and complicity in torture? Or maybe ID cards and the loss of our civil liberties are part of “bigger picture” along with the curtailing of democracy. No, I doubt he wants us to think about those things. Maybe he wants us to think about his successes with the NHS and education. Hmm, that might be a bit tricky too.

No, it has to be purely local, ‘bread and butter’ issues that we must think about. Things like Council Tax, or crime perhaps. Oh dear, not much luck there either. Maybe he should just call the whole thing off.

Tags: Blair, Nu Labour

Depressingly Predictable

2006-04-28T00:48:00.000+01:00

This really pisses me off. The BNP are trying to make political capital out of the London bombings of July 7th. I suppose it was only to be expected, but are people really so stupid as to fall for their “all Muslims are terrorists” crap?

THE home town of a suicide bomber is being targeted by the British National Party in next week’s local elections. The former mill town of Dewsbury, in West Yorkshire, had been identified as fertile ground by the far Right long before four home-grown terrorists gained bloody infamy on July 7…

The town is part of Kirklees Metropolitan Council and BNP activists have no need to speak aloud the name of Mohammad Siddique Khan. Every resident knows that the leader of the 7/7 bombers lived here. It is a stain that has turned him into the BNP’s invisible poster boy.
Full article

The BNP have traditionally done well in the north of England, playing on vulnerable people’s fears of immigration. And they are expected to do even better in next weeks Local elections for a variety of reasons including; fear of terrorism, understandable dissatisfaction with New Labour, employment minister, Margaret Hodge, giving them such useful publicity last week and the Home Office incompetence in not deporting foreign prisoners after they had served their time. A huge protest vote is expected and there are plenty of other small parties to vote for that won’t stir up the racial hatred that the BNP thrives on. Their plan is obvious; polarise the communities to the point where integration becomes impossible, provoke a violent backlash and then use that as ‘proof’ that immigration is wrong with their message:

“They’ve all betrayed you; we’re the only ones who truly represent white, working-class Britons”

They sound like the Ku Klux Klan. New Labour bears much of the responsibility for creating the conditions for these racists to thrive, but it is voters who ultimately let them in. They won’t take over the country anytime soon, but they can spread even more unpleasantness around if we let them. Despite New Labour's scare mongering, there are plenty of ways of giving the Government the kicking it deserves on May 4th without giving any power to the BNP.

Tags: Britain, London Bombings

Remember This?

2006-04-04T21:34:00.000+01:00

This poster campaign was done nine years ago. Before the Iraq war and the threat of a new war in Iran, before 'Extraordinary Rendition', before Guantanamo and before the most draconian attacks on Civil Liberties, democracy and justice seen in this country for a very long time.

This is just a little reminder before the 2006 Local Elections on May 4th.

For another reminder watch this video.

If you live in London and are looking for a way to kick Blair out using strategic voting, then please click on the button below.

Tags: Democracy Britain Blair

Elected Dictatorship

2006-04-02T10:04:00.000+01:00

Anyone hoping that the House of Lords will be able to save us from the irreperable damage that will be caused by the introduction of the ~~Abolition of Parliament Bill~~ Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill will be severly dissapointed.

After finally capitulating over the saga of ID Cards and the 'glorification of terrorism' issue , the Government is launching a full assult on the House of Lords, intending to prevent the Lords ever again blocking the bad legislation coming from the House of Commons. It is ironic that it has been the unelected Upper Chamber which has done the most work to save British democracy from the worst excesses of Tony Blair's junta. But New Labour, vindictive as ever, is now going to punish the House of Lords with what The Telegraph is calling "biggest assault on the powers of the House of Lords for more than 50 years".

Now the Earl of Erroll, the lord high constable of Scotland has warned that Tony Blair is in danger of becoming an “elected dictator” by dismantling some of the most important constitutional checks on government.

“There has been a dismantling of checks and balances over the past few years and the Lords has become the last bastion of those,”

He also said that by trying to get rid of the position of Lord Chancellor, "the prime minister has elevated himself to be the second person under the Queen and is in effect an elected dictator. It’s a very dangerous position".

Full atricle

The argument against a fully elected House of Lords is that you end up with something exactly the same as the House of Commons, and we all know how successful that place has been in protecting our freedoms.

The constitutional expert Lord St John of Fawsley said:

“We don’t want a facsimile of the House of Commons. There is at present a constitutional check of some sort on the dictatorship of the government.”

With the current Government behaving the way it is, I tend to agree.

Tags: Democracy Britain

Time For a Change

2006-02-27T21:33:00.000Z

The publication of the Power Commission’s final report today gives a clear idea of what so many people think of our political system. It is a damning indictment of Tony Blair’s style of government and our political system as a whole. It explains why so many of us feel disenfranchised and why so few people think voting changes anything. Blairwatch summarises the findings of the inquiry very well. The Independent, clearly contrasting with Tony Blair’s desperate and patronising article in last Sunday’s Observer, also gives a good account of this report:

“Democracy faces meltdown in Britain as the public rejects an outdated political system which has centralised more authority than ever in a tiny ruling elite, the Power inquiry warns today.”

This report spells out what so many of us have been saying for years, that our political system is in desperate need of radical reform. While journalists and bloggers have been criticising the system, few of us have actually come up with a viable alternative or a good suggestion of what to do to change things. I too have been guilty of this. So how can we change our deeply flawed political system for the better?

Over the last few weeks I have detected a change of atmosphere in the blog world where more and more writers have been asking the same questions as they express exasperation with the current situation. While having access to information that is not reported in the mainstream media is very helpful and important, ranting it seems, is as ineffective as demonstrating or voting. What may be starting to emerge is a coming together of diverse groups in order to discuss ways to instigate genuine change. If this is indeed the case then it is an interesting and welcome development.

True democracy should involve everyone and opinions should count. For this reason I encourage readers to get involved with groups like the Power Commission or Liberty Central where ideas for positive change can be pooled and discussed. I have tried to suspend my usual cynicism and have subscribed to both organisations and even contributed an article to Liberty Central which I shall reproduce here in order to demonstrate that I can also make positive suggestions as well as criticise.

A New Political System

After briefly reading through the findings of the Power Inquiry, and broadly agreeing with its conclusions, I want to address the far trickier problem of what to replace our current political system with.

Leaving aside for the moment the even harder problem of how to instigate change in Britain, let’s look at some alternatives. Proportional representation is probably the most realistic idea, despite dogged resistance from the two political parties who have the most to loose from the introduction of this system. Proportional representation would give smaller parties a better chance of entering the political process and may address the huge problem of disenfranchisement from politics that the Power Inquiry highlighted. The most common argument used against this system is that it causes instability with deadlocked discussions and consensus rarely being reached. Italy is often held up as an example for this instability, where weak coalitions often collapsed and where there is a constant threat of the government falling. However, Italy is a successful country and the Italian parliament usually manages to muddle through. Many other countries in Europe and beyond have proportional representation and although it does have its problems, it seems to be a perfectly viable system.

Whilst I don’t see proportional representation as the last word in political systems, I think it would be a vast improvement on our current “first-past-the-post” system, where a party like New Labour can win with such a small percentage of the vote. Proportional representation would address this unfairness which is largely acknowledged by politicians and the media.

Another system I would advocate is Direct Democracy. This is hardly a new idea as the title of this article implies. The first ever democracy worked this way. In ancient Athens in the fifth century BC there were no political parties; citizens voted on every issue put before them and there was a mechanism for citizens to put issues up for discussion. While this system too was imperfect (only free, male Athenian citizens of a certain age had any say), I believe it can be the basis of a real change in British politics. Is there any way such a system could work in the modern world? I believe there is and we don’t have to look very far to see a variation of this system in action.

Switzerland uses a system of direct democracy. For more information on Swiss democracy I recommend a look at this website which explains the system in some detail:

“Voters have a range of rights which give them a direct influence on policies at every level. Citizens who want to put forward proposals of their own or who object to legislation already passed by Parliament can use the popular initiative and the referendum to oblige the authorities to put the issue to the people as a whole.
The popular initiative gives voters the opportunity to formulate their own proposals and put them to the electorate. It acts like an accelerator. The referendum, on the other hand, is more like a brake. The optional referendum gives voters the chance to object to laws already passed by Parliament. These two tools - the popular initiative and the referendum - are the ones available at federal level. At cantonal and commune levels the opportunities for having an active say are far more varied.”

This, to me, looks like the ideal direction to head for. We don’t hear much about Switzerland, its government seems to be stable and there is quite a high standard of living. I’m sure introducing a similar system here in Britain would not be impossible. There would be difficulties, of course (mainly the resistance from those who benefit from the status quo and traditionalists), but if we want a really radical alternative to our current ineffective political system, then I think the Swiss system is at least worthy of closer examination. It would encourage everybody to take part in the democratic process, which, after all, is what we all want. With modern technology it should be possible for citizens to have a real say in what the government does with minimal possibility of fraud. With a system of direct democracy, a country can only go to war if the majority of the people decide to do so. The role of Prime Minister or President is restricted to that of a facilitator. Surely in a true democracy this is the ideal.

Hamas, Democracy and the Future

2006-01-27T02:29:00.000Z

To the amazement of everyone (including Hamas), Hamas has won the Palestinian parliamentary elections. Predictably, this result has caused consternation around the world. Israel, America, Britain and even Fatah have gone into a full-on sulk and are refusing to have anything to do with the organisation. It remains to be seen how viable this position can be.

Last month when I reported on this issue, I mentioned that in a democracy, obviously the party with the most votes’ wins and everyone has to accept the results and work as best they can with the new reality. Threatening to cut off aid and refusing to negotiate with the new administration is not going to help the situation at all and is more than likely to make things much worse. It certainly will not encourage Hamas to engage more fully in the democratic process.

There are several reasons for Hamas’ victory: the endemic corruption in the Palestinian Authority; the perception that peace with Israel has not significantly improved the lives of Palestinians and the continuing building of illegal Jewish settlements on Palestinian land. None of these issues were being addressed properly. And, of course, it served Israel’s interests to have a weak Palestinian Authority plagued with corruption and in-fighting and unable to move the peace agenda forward.

So it is a little disingenuous of Israeli politicians and their friends to lament the victory of Hamas, a militant Islamic party labelled as terrorists when they did almost nothing to help the moderate, secular administration that was there before. Indeed the Palestinian politician most likely to further the peace process is currently serving five life sentences in an Israeli jail on trumped-up murder charges because of his leadership in resistance. It is also interesting to hear Israeli politicians wax lyrical about terrorism. They seem to have forgotten about their own terrorist past in the creation of the Jewish state. And some of the members of terrorist organisations like the Haganah and its spin-off groups like Irgun Tsvai Leumi and Lohamei Herut Israel (The Stern Gang) are well known Israeli figures.

The creation of a state rarely happens without violence and until the state is established the fighters are frequently treated as terrorists. This happened with the creation of the USA and more recently in East Timor. While there is a probability of more violence in the Middle East in the short term, the shake-up of the status quo with the exit of Ariel Sharon and a new administration in the Palestinian Authority may possibly herald a new era in the regional politics where some sort of progress can be made. But this can only happen with the support of the international community, not the withdrawal of it.

A Little Lesson in Democracy

2005-12-18T20:13:00.000Z

Rather than welcoming Hamas into the democratic process, the European Union has decided to follow Israel and the USA and threaten the Palestinians with cutting off all aid to them if Hamas wins a place in government in the upcoming elections. This seems to be a very strange way of exporting democracy to the Middle East which, we are constantly being told, is the aim of America.

This sort of behaviour is only to be expected from lawless regimes like those in Israel and the USA but for the EU to follow suit is an alarming development. The message this sends to the Palestinians and other Middle Eastern states is that they must embrace democracy and that democracy is what the Western powers tell them it is with only leaders sanctioned by these powers allowed to participate. This is not democracy. Democracy can take many forms but the underlying principal is people power or majority rule. In other words, if the majority of Palestinians want to be governed by Hamas, then in a democracy Hamas should govern. The decisions of the Palestinian people have absolutely nothing to do with the whims of foreign powers like Israel, America or the EU. They might complain but at the end of the day they have to respect the wishes of the electorate and work as best they can with the government the Palestinians choose. To do otherwise is to abandon any pretence of being supportive of democracy.

After years of bullying the Palestinians into embracing democracy (something they already had as Yasir Arafat was elected) it is appalling that the Western powers should decide who “leads” the Palestinians. The argument about terrorism is bogus as well. Numerous Israeli leaders including Ariel Sharon are notorious terrorists and The Bush administration’s actions since coming to power also fit a definition of terrorism. It is certainly true that Hamas has conducted terrorist acts, but it has also conducted legitimate resistance to occupation as well as opening and running schools and clinics (something the Palestinian Authority has had a poor record in doing). This is, however beside the point. The Palestinians should choose whoever they want to lead them. Telling them who they can and cannot vote for and threatening consequences is only going to exacerbate an already tense situation, whereas an organisation like Hamas coming into power might well moderate some of their more extreme actions.