Sunday, February 26, 2012
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Lesser-Spotted Europhiles
Tony Blair likes to tell the story of how the suffragette Pankhurst sisters urged Keir Hardie to fight the 1913 election on a platform of “votes for women, chastity for men and prohibition for all”.
Labour’s first leader replied: “Thank you for your advice – the electoral benefits of which are not immediately discernible.”
An ambitious politician is equally unlikely today to run for office as a champion of European integration.
But an intriguing piece of research published yesterday by the IPPR think tank showed there are areas where the British public want to see closer EU co-operation.
Nearly seven out of 10 (67%) wanted greater co-operation to fight terrorism and international crime, with strong support for joint action to tackle climate change (52%), reduce poverty (51%) and address immigration (45%).
The Conservative Party was once divided between Europhiles such as ex-PM Edward Heath, Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine and ardent foes of deeper union like former Welsh Secretary John Redwood. Today, the dispute in the party is about whether to pull-out altogether or just to claw back powers.
No aspiring Tory MP would turn up at a selection meeting with an EU flagged draped across his or her shoulders – but presumably there are some men and women of a right-of-centre disposition who don’t want to see the European project collapse in an orgy of burned sheep and shredded euros.
Isn’t there a populist Conservative case for how the powers of the EU could be harnessed to fight terrorism and poverty?
Likewise, where are the Tory MPs who are excited about the chance to create the world’s most competitive marketplace? If the UK’s 62 million citizens are to compete in the global economy for jobs and trade with 192 million Brazilians, 1.2 billion Indians and 1.3bn Chinese, surely being part of a common market of 502 million people would have its advantages?
With the Middle East lurching towards a frightening era of nuclear-charged instability and Russia sinking into authoritarianism, isn’t there a tactical case for greater defence and diplomatic co-operation?
The United States seems set for one of its periodic bouts of isolationism, with both the left and the right tired of foreign wars and irritated that European states are content to depend on US firepower for their protection but reluctant to pay their way. The Americans have failed to broker peace in Israel and the Occupied Territories and their attention is now focused on China’s Pacific ambitions.
When the EU has both an opportunity and a strategic need to defend its members’ interests voters might not punish a politician with a vision for leadership.
A Thursday Column.
Labour’s first leader replied: “Thank you for your advice – the electoral benefits of which are not immediately discernible.”
An ambitious politician is equally unlikely today to run for office as a champion of European integration.
But an intriguing piece of research published yesterday by the IPPR think tank showed there are areas where the British public want to see closer EU co-operation.
Nearly seven out of 10 (67%) wanted greater co-operation to fight terrorism and international crime, with strong support for joint action to tackle climate change (52%), reduce poverty (51%) and address immigration (45%).
The Conservative Party was once divided between Europhiles such as ex-PM Edward Heath, Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine and ardent foes of deeper union like former Welsh Secretary John Redwood. Today, the dispute in the party is about whether to pull-out altogether or just to claw back powers.
No aspiring Tory MP would turn up at a selection meeting with an EU flagged draped across his or her shoulders – but presumably there are some men and women of a right-of-centre disposition who don’t want to see the European project collapse in an orgy of burned sheep and shredded euros.
Isn’t there a populist Conservative case for how the powers of the EU could be harnessed to fight terrorism and poverty?
Likewise, where are the Tory MPs who are excited about the chance to create the world’s most competitive marketplace? If the UK’s 62 million citizens are to compete in the global economy for jobs and trade with 192 million Brazilians, 1.2 billion Indians and 1.3bn Chinese, surely being part of a common market of 502 million people would have its advantages?
With the Middle East lurching towards a frightening era of nuclear-charged instability and Russia sinking into authoritarianism, isn’t there a tactical case for greater defence and diplomatic co-operation?
The United States seems set for one of its periodic bouts of isolationism, with both the left and the right tired of foreign wars and irritated that European states are content to depend on US firepower for their protection but reluctant to pay their way. The Americans have failed to broker peace in Israel and the Occupied Territories and their attention is now focused on China’s Pacific ambitions.
When the EU has both an opportunity and a strategic need to defend its members’ interests voters might not punish a politician with a vision for leadership.
A Thursday Column.
Distracted Minds
A cynic might suggest that David Cameron is probably delighted to have to deal with a campaign for Scottish independence, a row with Argentina over the Falklands, and howls of outrage about his plans to transform the NHS in England.
Every time he jumps into a debate on any of these topics he is not talking about the economy.
Likewise, last year’s war in Libya, outrage on his own backbenches about Europe, excitement about royal weddings and jubilees, and the upcoming diversionary fantasia of the Olympics have all captured national attention.
Labour has a “plan for jobs” which involves a £2bn tax on bank bonuses to be spent on affordable homes and employment for 100,000 young people, plus a temporary reversal of the VAT cut.
Labour leader Ed Miliband has improved his batting average at Prime Minister’s Questions since the start of the year, and Shadow Business Secretary Chuka Umunna is one of the most interesting figures in the Commons, but I do not sense that recession-battered families are looking at their party with eyes bright with hope.
The economy is no longer viewed as a machine with clearly marked levers that an elected politician can pull. Rather, we look at economic trends with the same rapt horror with which our ancestors watched lunar eclipses.
The downturn and recession has killed banks, felled governments, and brought Rome and Athens to the brink of social disaster.
Voters know it would be ludicrous to pin all the blame for Britain’s miserable economic state on the decisions of Gordon Brown’s Government; but the flip-side is they do not look to any party for salvation.
Rather, just as hungry serfs once watched wintry fields and dreamt of spring, there is the vague hope that the same mysterious forces which sent the economy into the tail-spin will send happier days.
Rows over the Human Rights Act, changes to public sector bureaucracy and train lines can excite greater passions than sheets of statistics which document social misery.
On a bleak day in Britain, a return to full employment can seem as unlikely a concept as a Beatles reunion tour. But radicals emerge in every generation who articulate hopes and fears and present a vision for change – whether it be Bevan or Thatcher, the Chartists or the Tea Party, frustrations do not bubble for long before change-makers emerge.
This is real politics and it is a dangerous game. There is pain at the heart of the UK and if the political class fails to represent those who are suffering there is the real risk, for better or for worse, they will be swept aside.
A Thursday Column.
Every time he jumps into a debate on any of these topics he is not talking about the economy.
Likewise, last year’s war in Libya, outrage on his own backbenches about Europe, excitement about royal weddings and jubilees, and the upcoming diversionary fantasia of the Olympics have all captured national attention.
Labour has a “plan for jobs” which involves a £2bn tax on bank bonuses to be spent on affordable homes and employment for 100,000 young people, plus a temporary reversal of the VAT cut.
Labour leader Ed Miliband has improved his batting average at Prime Minister’s Questions since the start of the year, and Shadow Business Secretary Chuka Umunna is one of the most interesting figures in the Commons, but I do not sense that recession-battered families are looking at their party with eyes bright with hope.
The economy is no longer viewed as a machine with clearly marked levers that an elected politician can pull. Rather, we look at economic trends with the same rapt horror with which our ancestors watched lunar eclipses.
The downturn and recession has killed banks, felled governments, and brought Rome and Athens to the brink of social disaster.
Voters know it would be ludicrous to pin all the blame for Britain’s miserable economic state on the decisions of Gordon Brown’s Government; but the flip-side is they do not look to any party for salvation.
Rather, just as hungry serfs once watched wintry fields and dreamt of spring, there is the vague hope that the same mysterious forces which sent the economy into the tail-spin will send happier days.
Rows over the Human Rights Act, changes to public sector bureaucracy and train lines can excite greater passions than sheets of statistics which document social misery.
On a bleak day in Britain, a return to full employment can seem as unlikely a concept as a Beatles reunion tour. But radicals emerge in every generation who articulate hopes and fears and present a vision for change – whether it be Bevan or Thatcher, the Chartists or the Tea Party, frustrations do not bubble for long before change-makers emerge.
This is real politics and it is a dangerous game. There is pain at the heart of the UK and if the political class fails to represent those who are suffering there is the real risk, for better or for worse, they will be swept aside.
A Thursday Column.
Thursday, February 09, 2012
The Kate Middleton President
US Republican party strategists must watch the Duchess of Cambridge performing her royal duties and gasp in wonder – and flash with jealousy.
Kate Middleton was not a champion athlete, a well-known philanthropist or a Nobel-nominated biomedical engineer before being clutched to the heart of the British monarchy.
But she has strolled onto the world stage with the ease with which her contemporaries might walk into a Chelsea cafe.
Seemingly fazed neither by rapturous crowds of the proletariat nor the handshakes of the mighty, she plays the role of a future Queen with such pitch-perfect poise it is as if she was summoned from central casting.
The United States may be the home of Hollywood but the Republican party has had no such joy in finding someone to audition for the role of president.
Right-leaning voters remember too clearly the genuine movie-star charisma of Ronald Reagan and long for someone who could articulate conservative values with his winsome panache.
Left-inclined voters measure President Obama’s performance against the conviction-driven accomplishments of Martin Sheen’s fictional White House-dweller in the much missed West Wing.
It is Republicans who have the greater dilemma. Obama may have disappointed zealots but he can still perform with panache when behind a podium and he will turn on the rhetorical magic when he hits the campaign trail later this year.
Republicans are still deeply divided about their casting choice. There was an expectation that rank and file activists would grudgingly back Mitt Romney – a man who has prepared for the nomination by making many millions of dollars, governing a state and allegedly rescuing the 2002 Olympics.
He seemed able to stub out periodic surges in support for rival Newt Gingrich, a rowdy former congressional Speaker who wants to build a base on the moon.
But Rick Santorum, a diehard social conservative has just won caucuses in Colorado and Minnesota, and a primary in Missouri.
One might have thought Romney’s success as a Republican in the famously liberal state of Massachusetts would be seen as a shining asset. After all, recent elections have gone down to the proverbial wire in swing states.
But the party is thrashing around, looking for someone with plutonium powers of charisma and an ideology-driven vision so vast and pure it would make an Alpine lake look like a toxic puddle. The perfect candidate is no longer the most electable.
In such a climate, will a new non-aligned candidate decide to leap forward? If Kate Middleton was born to be a princess, surely there is someone convinced he or she is born to run?
A Thursday Column.
Kate Middleton was not a champion athlete, a well-known philanthropist or a Nobel-nominated biomedical engineer before being clutched to the heart of the British monarchy.
But she has strolled onto the world stage with the ease with which her contemporaries might walk into a Chelsea cafe.
Seemingly fazed neither by rapturous crowds of the proletariat nor the handshakes of the mighty, she plays the role of a future Queen with such pitch-perfect poise it is as if she was summoned from central casting.
The United States may be the home of Hollywood but the Republican party has had no such joy in finding someone to audition for the role of president.
Right-leaning voters remember too clearly the genuine movie-star charisma of Ronald Reagan and long for someone who could articulate conservative values with his winsome panache.
Left-inclined voters measure President Obama’s performance against the conviction-driven accomplishments of Martin Sheen’s fictional White House-dweller in the much missed West Wing.
It is Republicans who have the greater dilemma. Obama may have disappointed zealots but he can still perform with panache when behind a podium and he will turn on the rhetorical magic when he hits the campaign trail later this year.
Republicans are still deeply divided about their casting choice. There was an expectation that rank and file activists would grudgingly back Mitt Romney – a man who has prepared for the nomination by making many millions of dollars, governing a state and allegedly rescuing the 2002 Olympics.
He seemed able to stub out periodic surges in support for rival Newt Gingrich, a rowdy former congressional Speaker who wants to build a base on the moon.
But Rick Santorum, a diehard social conservative has just won caucuses in Colorado and Minnesota, and a primary in Missouri.
One might have thought Romney’s success as a Republican in the famously liberal state of Massachusetts would be seen as a shining asset. After all, recent elections have gone down to the proverbial wire in swing states.
But the party is thrashing around, looking for someone with plutonium powers of charisma and an ideology-driven vision so vast and pure it would make an Alpine lake look like a toxic puddle. The perfect candidate is no longer the most electable.
In such a climate, will a new non-aligned candidate decide to leap forward? If Kate Middleton was born to be a princess, surely there is someone convinced he or she is born to run?
A Thursday Column.
Sunday, February 05, 2012
Thursday, February 02, 2012
Embracing the Left
The election of Leanne Wood as Plaid Cymru leader is a real possibility which would cement the party’s position on the left.
She has far more nominations from branches and constituency parties than her rivals and her backers include Plaid heavyweights Dafydd Iwan and Adam Price.
Her election would signal that the party’s faith in socialist solutions in the 21st century goes well beyond a nodding commitment to intellectual theory. Instead, she would be expected to put forward bold proposals for how government, the economy and communities can interact in a new era of uncertainty.
The contrast with Diane Abbott’s bid for the Labour leadership is striking. There was no expectation she would beat either of the Miliband brothers and her presence was seen as a way of ensuring a left-wing perspective was included in party debates.
But bookies are offering identical odds for Ms Wood and former rural affairs minister Elin Jones. The apparent surge in support for Ms Wood shows the party’s membership – up 23% in four months – is not afraid to frighten horses.
Plaid supporters will hope that the election of Ms Wood would help the party win traditional Labour voters in the Valleys. But how will economically and socially conservative Welsh-speakers and supporters of independence react if the party is positioned to the left of Welsh Labour? Will people who admired Ms Jones’ readiness to cull badgers recoil at Ms Wood’s republicanism?
In 1982 a band of Plaid supporters formed the Hydro group to ensure the party’s commitment to self-government for Wales was not diluted by “left-wing ideological dogma”. Now that Plaid is fighting to lead the Welsh Government, will non-socialists conclude there is a need for a nationalist party committed to deregulation and a lessening of Wales’ economic reliance on the public sector?
Just as the SNP, which is led by a former RBS economist, has hoovered up the votes of former Tory supporters, such a group could aggressively court Welsh Conservative backers.
It is just as likely that Tories in Wales will step up efforts to win over right-leaning Plaid supporters.
All parties are coalitions and the goal of self-government has united Plaid members for generations. If today’s explicit focus on outright independence is shared by the grassroots the Welsh nationalist family may continue to share one home.
It is striking how on a personal level she is liked and admired by many well to her right. If Ms Wood wins and can hold her party together while taking votes from both Labour and the Conservatives she will demonstrate political brilliance on a par with Alex Salmond.
A Thursday Column.
She has far more nominations from branches and constituency parties than her rivals and her backers include Plaid heavyweights Dafydd Iwan and Adam Price.
Her election would signal that the party’s faith in socialist solutions in the 21st century goes well beyond a nodding commitment to intellectual theory. Instead, she would be expected to put forward bold proposals for how government, the economy and communities can interact in a new era of uncertainty.
The contrast with Diane Abbott’s bid for the Labour leadership is striking. There was no expectation she would beat either of the Miliband brothers and her presence was seen as a way of ensuring a left-wing perspective was included in party debates.
But bookies are offering identical odds for Ms Wood and former rural affairs minister Elin Jones. The apparent surge in support for Ms Wood shows the party’s membership – up 23% in four months – is not afraid to frighten horses.
Plaid supporters will hope that the election of Ms Wood would help the party win traditional Labour voters in the Valleys. But how will economically and socially conservative Welsh-speakers and supporters of independence react if the party is positioned to the left of Welsh Labour? Will people who admired Ms Jones’ readiness to cull badgers recoil at Ms Wood’s republicanism?
In 1982 a band of Plaid supporters formed the Hydro group to ensure the party’s commitment to self-government for Wales was not diluted by “left-wing ideological dogma”. Now that Plaid is fighting to lead the Welsh Government, will non-socialists conclude there is a need for a nationalist party committed to deregulation and a lessening of Wales’ economic reliance on the public sector?
Just as the SNP, which is led by a former RBS economist, has hoovered up the votes of former Tory supporters, such a group could aggressively court Welsh Conservative backers.
It is just as likely that Tories in Wales will step up efforts to win over right-leaning Plaid supporters.
All parties are coalitions and the goal of self-government has united Plaid members for generations. If today’s explicit focus on outright independence is shared by the grassroots the Welsh nationalist family may continue to share one home.
It is striking how on a personal level she is liked and admired by many well to her right. If Ms Wood wins and can hold her party together while taking votes from both Labour and the Conservatives she will demonstrate political brilliance on a par with Alex Salmond.
A Thursday Column.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
