What's the Daily (Maybe)'s theme tune?

AVPS as always has come up with a way of lightening the mood and has asked us, what's your blog's theme tune?

I've had to resist wishful thinking and put aside various T-Rex classics or this classic bit of banjo. Instrad I've plumped for the Bard of Barking's 'Waiting for the Great Leap forward'.



It seems most apt somehow but maybe I should have gone for Lonnie though... oh I don't know!

Don't let the old parties divide our communities

David Cameron may think that the negative debate on immigration is new (or at least he says that, despite having a hand in the notorious Tory slogan "are you thinking what we're thinking?") but dog whistle politics on race is nothing new.

Sadly at this election we have a choice of three flavours of reactionary immigration policies, all working from the same set of assumptions. Immigration, they say, is a problem.

All these nurses and street sweepers and farm workers and plumbers who are coming over here and providing services we've been unable to provide for ourselves are, apparently, people to regarded with suspicion and monitored like hawks.

Even the Lib Dems have proposed extraordinarily illiberal measures to monitor where people are allowed to live and restrict people to specific regions - a policing measure we have not had in this country since feudalism.

All these parties lump immigration in with crime, as if somehow coming from a different place is in some way anti-social in itself. Many of the individual candidates for these parties are not out and out racists themselves but they are all happy to use the fear of immigration to further their own personal political careers.

In this country we detain children for the crime of coming from a different country. Will we hear the leaders denounce this disgusting situation? No, they'll talk of caps, of bad immigration, of how tough their record is.

In this country we deport people to countries where their lives are at risk. Many of these people end up dead, tortured, raped or jailed - all with the complicity of the UK state. You'll not hear the leaders express one note of concern about this.

When you go into the polling booth on Thursday week I'd like to ask one favour of you. Before you place your cross in one of those boxes think about which of the candidates before you has been willing to play along with the right-wing press on their vile immigration rhetoric and which of them has spoken out.

Immigration is not the only issue at this election, but the very nature of the debate has meant that those arguing for more liberal immigration controls have been crowded out by the suffocating consensus at the 'top' of politics that treats migrants as a problem to be managed rather than welcome guests who benefit our country.

Another election video

This time one that directly asks you to vote Green. Very nice.

Very nice little election video

Mind you, I don't know what ll that yellow was doing on the screen... (h/t Caron)

Brown relaunch

Gordon Brown relaunched himself today in a spectacular event complete with an Elvis impersonator. Brown said the campaign had "got my mojo working" before looking moodily into the camera and asking people to "love me tender" before describing his record of fiscal responsibility.

The Elvis impersonator seems apt for a man whose years as chancellor could be summed up by a few verses of suspicious minds.

His solid style is a prime example of a little less conversation but now that the economy is all shook up Labour looks set to take a hit at the polls.

Looking back, perhaps he always thought George W. Bush, the yellow rose of Texas, was the devil in disguise but in the open in was America the beautiful. Everyone involved managed to avoid jailhouse rock, of course, so no doubt that's the vindication of history.

Brown says it's now or never for the economic recovery, but maybe, just maybe the public has lost that loving feeling.

Six election links and one other

• Cooperatives UK assess the Green Party manifesto.
  
  
• The Scottish Green Party have revamped their website.
  
  
• Much of the right-wing press has been printing bilge on the Lib Dems of late. But it isn't all untrue. Bonus track: Paul Foot reviews Strange Death of Liberal England as a timely reminder that while Clegg might keep talking about the 'old parties' it was the Liberals that were once the old regime getting swept away.
  
  
• I think this is an astonishing story about the Murdock empire trying to bully its rivals, in this case The Independent.
  
  
• Bizarre goings on on the campaign trail as someone in a Prescott mask tries to attack Prescott but ends up assaulting two female Labour volunteers instead. Rumours abound that one of the men involved was a Tory council candidate in the area. Weird. Luke has more.
  
  
• Despite the pro-Clegg agenda there I thought this Dr Who inspired election image was rather fun. Then there's the All Nick Clegg's fault song in response to the recent press allegations.
  

Not the election...

• And to cleanse your palette of the election here is the inspiring letter of an ex-slave back to his old master from the 19th century.
  

Quick review of leaders debates

Another long haul of a leaders debate done and dusted - once again I feel exhausted by the whole thing. A few thoughts.

• We had the parties competing on how tough they can be on immigration *again*.
  
  
• We had the parties competing on who is going to cut the hardest *again*.
  
  
• We had less anecdotes this time, but the leaders were still at great pains to point out they had met people. Sigh.
  
  
• Most interesting moment of the night was a question about the Pope, and the Catholic Church's reactionary record. When they went off script it was far more bearable.
  
  
• Once again Cameron was weak.
  
  
• Clegg was quieter and less influential this time. He found it harder to compete against the other two parties once they were taking him seriously. The atmosphere was more aggressive and Clegg seemed to find that more difficult.
  
  
• Brown was, in my view, the winner this time. frankly I'm pleased because he doesn't look like a robot and actually did seem to know what he was talking about - even when I disagreed with him.
  

Over all the overwhelming impression was, once again, that if you don't agree with the consensus on immigration, the economy or want the troops withdrawn from Afghanistan none of these parties will do. None of them.

Politics does not have to be three white men in suits agreeing with each other on how badly to treat workers, immigrants, students - we have to have a different kind of politics because this just will not do.

Election video with a difference

Election Day... Danny Chivers



Word to wise though... do not piss in anyone's moat... repeat... do not piss in anyone's moat.

Six plus one

• Prepared for the next leadership debate? Then you'll need this. From Dawn.
  
  
• Leanne Wood, Plaid Cymru Assembly Member, looks at Clegg's claims on Trident.
  
  
• It looks like the Greens are doing well in the Colombian elections.
  
  
• Just like here people in the north of Ireland are allowed to vote. This video promotes the Green choice.
  
  
• Mr Andy C looks at who the most influential Green tweeters are. The jokes just write themselves...
  
  
• I went to a hustings in St Pancras last night, Guy Aitchenson and Richard Osley report.

Plus one;

• Mish, in the comments of the last misc, points out that Tim Harford of Radio Four's More or Less 'fame' has been doing some election number crunching, fact checking and general stats watch. Really interesting stuff, here.
  

Half a dozen

• Scottish Green Party Manifesto is now available here.
  
  
• Labour refuses to commit to keeping London's A&Es open.
  
  
• Transpontine on unsightly racism in the Lewisham election.
  
  
• AVPS is building a comprehensive list of far left candidates at the General Election.
  
  
• My article in today's Morning Star on a different kind of leadership.
  
  
• The Naval death machine goes green - hurrah?
  

Review: Why Vote Green

Shahrar Ali's Why Vote Green is a well written and interesting book that's worth picking up if you get the chance. I certainly found it a readable and thoughtful read and am happy to recommend it to anyone.

Of course, there are flaws that are worth exploring. I thought it was far more of a book about Shahrar's reasons for being a Green than a clear account of why people should vote Green. That's only a minor problem, and probably one of the reasons I enjoyed it. Personally I'm not in need of rereading Green Party policy again so if I'm the intended audience then excellent.

The second problem I suppose is the academic style. This is something I'm less of a fan of because whilst it's lovely to see Marx and Ghandi and the like in print I've never been a fan of this kind of selective quoting to create weight by association.

Having said that the Marx quote that "the more we find value in external things the less we find value in ourselves" was new to me and, I think, grappling towards the profound.

Shahrar does have a habit though of using six syllable words when clearer language would be more precise, but that aside I would not want to give the impression this was a difficult book to read, far from, it flowed very well.

There were also a number of points that are worth highlighting. I thought his emphasis on the environmental and, specifically, climate change refreshing. It's the most important issue of the our times and there has been precious little discussion of the topic in this election - even from the Greens. This helps redress some of that imbalance, if in a modest way.

Where I disagreed was on his idea of what Green Party politicians are. Whilst I do think the Greens are striving for a more ethical form of politics I totally reject the idea that we're some sort of special, incorruptible breed apart. I think this is unrealistic and untrue.

For example on page eight Ali says that "It is in this spirit of the Green Party to be selfless in one's politics, to put oneself to the service of others, to treat all equally" or on page nine "attainment of our goals for the sake of humanity is our reward in itself, not the false identification of our ego with that potential success..."

Now perhaps Shahrar is a member of a different Green Party from the one I'm a member of (although he attends the same conferences as me) but I don't believe lack of ego or selfless sacrifice are so much more in evidence than in other parties. People work hard for little reward or praise in all parties and the best of us do it because we want to promote our politics not promote ourselves - but to paint any political activist as a paragon of virtue is to set the bar unnecessarily high.

The fact that we are activists not saints is no shame on us. If someone goes home early from leafleting or feels the sting of pride when they win an election - well, that's fine by me. I think this kind of moralism is a little counter-productive to be honest and it doesn't really reflect the majority opinion of members about themselves anyway.

All of this aside I found the book interesting because of its flaws as well as its virtues and am really pleased Shahrar had the time to write it. We need more books like this, from a variety of authors, but without the 'why you should vote' handle which became more of a hindrance than a help by the end.

The Joy of Six

• Why a niche vote is not a waste one. Independent.
  
  
• Cosmetic Dentristry picks up the Green Manifesto.
  
  
• This new party election broadcast from Cruella asks for your vote.
  
  
• Bob from Brockley looks at the left and crime.
  
  
• There's some advise on how to be a successful activist over at the Guardian.
  
  
• Molly writes an interesting post on voting for Baudrillard.
  

Mark Thomas wins pay out from police

Just noticed that Mark Thomas has won over a grand off the police after he was stopped and searched for looking "over confident" after speaking at an anti-arms trade rally. According to the Guardian;

"The Met paid £1,200 for "falsely imprisoning" Thomas for 12 minutes. He said: "£100 a minute is slightly more than my usual rate. If over-confidence is a reason for a stop-and-search Jonathan Ross should never leave his house.""

Nice. I also note that "The officer who carried out the search had received "formal words of advice"." I can't be the only one wondering what they words might have been...

The lefties: who's got mojo?

Next in my series of discussing members of other political parties I admire I thought I'd take a look at some of the lefties standing at this election. I hate to disappoint any Tories reading but whilst I've met plenty of Tory supporters I like I could not for the life of me put together a similar post about Conservative politicians.

My admiration for George Galloway I'll leave aside for the moment as I know some people find him hard to take and I'll focus on three others that I've discussed less often on this blog.

Eamonn McCann

McCann is standing for People Before Profit in Foyle, a seat he got 12.3% in in 1969, and the last time he stood there he managed to beat the Ulster Unionists.

Eamonn McCann is a long-serving socialist warhorse of the most excellent, humane sort. Having been consistently active in politics in the north of Ireland for decades it's fair to say he's been there and done that, this and the other.

From his involvement in the very early days of the civil rights movement alongside the likes of Bernadette Devlin right up to his acquittal after direct action against multinational arms company Raytheon in 2008 he has been a constant radical presence.

I thought his book Dear God: The Price of Religion in Ireland was absolutely breath taking, hilarious and shocking by turns and his attempts to bring socialist politics to Ireland, free from the debilitating sectarianism that has plagued the country, is much to be admired.

McCann argued in the Sunday Journal: "When market forces drive the poor into destitution, we must roll with the punches. But when hard times discomfit the super-rich, the State weighs in to make a mattress for them stuffed with our money."

Salma Yaqoob

No-one will be surprised to see Ms Yaqoob on my love list. After all I've spoken about her before and even interviewed her a little while back.

Salma is part of the New Left camp site (as opposed to big tent) who has been been willing to back the Greens when appropriate (like last year's Euro elections) and has always been someone who has approached others on the left in an open and thoughtful way.

She has rightly received many admirers from outside of Respect in return. As she said in The Guardian a little while ago; "Labour's mantra on the need to make others more "British", rather than making ourselves less racist, has helped undermine concepts of national identity that celebrate pluralism and diversity."

More importantly she points out that; "On the economy, [Labour, Lib Dems and Tories] have for years embraced and celebrated the neo-liberal free market dogma responsible for record levels of wealth inequality and the worst recession in over fifty years. They are also united on the necessity of vicious cuts as the solution to the crisis and are divided only on the timescale for the implementation of those cuts."

That's why she is an important part of the left alternatives.

Colin Fox

Co-speaker of the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) Colin Fox has had a hard decade. Or at least it must seem hard having been part of a team that led the SSP to six MSPs and a real chance to hit the big time he had to see it all fall apart and fall back to square one.

However, where lesser mortals would have given up in despair, and certainly if it had happened to me I'd have been trailing stuffing behind me for years, he's made of far better stuff than me and kept ploughing on. After all he was a leading campaigner against the poll tax and had to go through the indignity of the Labour Party so I guess he'd done it all before.

When I interviewed him a little while ago he said that; "The SSP has been in favour of an independent socialist Scotland since our inception ten years ago. We believe that working people in Scotland will be economically, socially, politically and culturally better off if able to control all our revenues and all our own decision making. It is clear to us that if this were the case then Scotland would be a radically different country from the one we live in today. There is no doubt whatsoever that an Independent Scotland would not have sent troops to Iraq or Afghanistan, would not have nuclear weapons stationed on the Clyde, would not have entertained the privatisation of our hospitals and schools and, since a majority here are in favour of a modern democratic republic, we would not have the Queen as our head of state either."

And I rather enjoyed that - but most of all I admire the man's stamina to keep fighting the good fight, regardless of how hard it gets.

Six London Green links

A few London specific Green stories that some people might be interested in.

• Camden's Naomi Aptowitzer in The Voice. Excellent (Naomi on YouTube).
  
  
• Across the borough in Gospel Oak Constantine Buhayer talks about rebuilding communities.
  
  
• The Guardian's Dave Hill asks how red are the Greens in Hackney?
  
  
• Which you can find out in the Hackney Citizen's interview with Matt Sellwood.
  
  
• Lewisham's Hati Gunes has been receiving some excellent coverage in the Turkish language press, some of which is also available in English in the print editions... but not these 1 2 3
  
  
• Brockley councillor Darren Johnson responds to the shooting at the bottom of his road.

That is all.

Save Anselme Noumbiwa

Anselme Noumbiwa has been detained on 14 April 2010 and is in great danger of being deported on a so-called “charter flight” to Cameroon on Wednesday 21 April 2010.We cannot rely on the Icelandic ash to keep him in the relative safety of Colnbrook Detention Centre forever.

He should not be detained or deported because he is still waiting for the medico-legal report of the Medical Foundation for the Care of Torture Victims to submit as evidence for his claim for asylum. As always the government is in unseemly haste to remove someone before they have had the chance to have a proper hearing.

Anselme fled Cameroon in 2006 because on the death of his father, the village Chief, he was expected to 'marry' his father's wives. He suffered brutal treatment at the hands of the village notables when he would not adhere to tribal traditions, preferring instead to identify himself with Christian ethics.

The Home Office has accepted his story, but he was told that he could relocate within Cameroon and would be safe. This is not the case, as the influence of powerful members of his tribe reaches beyond the area where he lived. If he is sent back to Cameroon, he will be in mortal danger. He must be allowed to stay in the UK.

Please urgently fax the Home Secretary your support for Anselme to have his removal cancelled. Always quote the Home Office reference number N1126839. You can download the model letter here

Send by fax or email to: Alan Johnson MP (Home Secretary)
Fax: 020 8760 3132 (00 44 20 8760 3132 if you are faxing from outside UK)

Email:

• UKBApublicenquiries@UKBA.gsi.gov.uk
• CITTO@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
• Privateoffice.external@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

For updates you can follow him on twitter (from the detention centre) or visit the NCADC website.

Labour: who's a campaign assett?

Following on from my previous post about my fave Lib Dems I thought it would be only fair to do the same, or similar, for Labour. This time I thought I'd go for who I thought was doing a good job in Labour's election battle rather than those I most admire.

This is partly because I've felt that Brown has been swept under the carpet somewhat (leaders' debates excepted of course) and also because Ed Balls is so dismal yet seems to be given the job of fronting the campaign far too often (or not often enough if you're churlish enough to want Labour to do badly, cough, cough).

Also the people I most admire in Labour aren't allowed anywhere near the election campaign.

Mr John Prescott

The only left-wing thing about Prescott (shown here receiving his induction to New Labour) is his accent, which puts him streets ahead of the rest of the cabinet put together.

His other advantage is that he's straight talking and, dare I say it, rather funny. When I heard he was being drafted in to rally the youth vote I have to say it left me utterly non-plussed, however he's pretty good at it.

Prescott is an excellent tweeter for example and has taken to other new media and techno-gizmos in a surprisingly easy way.

Most of all he's one of those Labour politicians who doesn't actually resemble a protocol droid. The more Prescott elbows Balls out of the way the more hard hitting Labour's campaign will be.

Eddie Izzard

When in doubt wheel out an intelligent, much loved personality not particularly known for being a party hack or as a bomber of small children.

You'd feel terrible throwing rotten fruit at Mr Izzard and in his star-turn for Labour he even says right out that Labour haven't been particularly wonderful, but at least they aren't Tories. Honesty runs through him like words through a stick of rock.

However, leaving aside the whole 'there is no alternative' shtick of the LabCon duopoly, Izzard is definitely the kind of person to present an upbeat and fresh face to what could otherwise be a slightly embarrassing 're-elect us for change' campaign.

Harriet Harman

While I've always warmed to Harriet Harman in person I'm well aware that the public and the press are not as keen as they might be about her. However, if Labour do not make more use of Ms Harman there will be a complete absence of experienced female politicians in their election line-up, and no, Sarah Brown definitely does not count.

It's becoming increasingly obvious that this election will be about boring men in suits sniping at each other and, in my opinion, that's not a good look. Labour could do well to try to break it up a little by wheeling out the steely glare of Harriet Harman.

She may be slightly off message at times but at least she's a reminder that Labour used to stand for women's rights and equality. If Gordon really wants to put a bit of mustard on all that fairness talk he'd be well advised to add a few women to his team, and he could do far worse than Harman.


Don't get me wrong, they're all war criminals obviously, and Labour is under no obligation to listen to me on this or anything else - but moving these three further to the front would, in my opinion, give them a stronger election team than the Milibandian Ballsite vacuity they make us put up with sometimes.

World poverty day

Today is World Poverty Day, an initiative to help raise the profile of international development issues during the General Election. I thought Vote Global's coverage of the Green Party Manifesto was interesting, but I was more interested in John Hilary's comments on development over aid.

He makes a telling point when he states that "we must resist any suggestion that aid is the lead issue when it comes to international development." Rather we need to be looking at our policies on trade and investment, the corruption of UK corporations in the developing world and arms exports. I think this is a very strong approach.

Bragging about raising the aid budget is like putting someone on the dole and then raising their unemployment benefit a little. You don't get to boast you're good to the poor when you've actually impoverished people.

The policies of unrestricted free trade, propping up friendly undemocratic regimes and bolstering the enormous power of oil companies, for example, are direct attacks on some of the most vulnerable and poorest people in the world.

Issues like debt are used to reinforce these failed international policies - but that is just one of the sticks we use to make sure that our ex-colonies know their place.

I know it's an old phrase but I'd find it difficult to support any party at this election that was not looking towards a truly "ethical foreign policy". That doesn't just mean natty soundbites and a small increase in the aid budget but a real reappraisal of the British government's approach to the rest of the world.

A half dozen points of interest

As you might expect, there's a general election theme...

• What is it with birds at the moment? Green Shan Oakes sees a Robin, Labour's Harpy Marx a Swan and then there's the Lib Dem pidgeon.
  
  
• Talking of lovely pics... here's one from the Barking campaign at facebook.
  
  
• Some Green responses to the Digital Economy Bill. Adrian Ramsay (Norwich South), Natalie Bennett (Holborn and St. Pancras), Darren Johnson (Lewisham Deptford) and Matt Sellwood (Hackney North & Stoke Newington), Caroline Lucas (Brighton Pavillion), Ben Duncan (Brighton Kemptown)
  
  
• Calling all election candidates. Iain Dale points to the LSE's request for your election materials for their archives. Well worth remembering to pop some in the post.
  
  
• Think politics is more than three men in suits bickering with each other? Check out the Fawcett Society's party comparison web pages.
  
  
• Not the election but just as important. Kiana Firouz, an Iranian lesbian fights against her deportation. Please help her if you can.
  

Right, now to get in gear!

Lib Dems: who's the greatest?

I've been meaning to do a post on party politics for a while now about how parties are generally a utilitarian method for promoting politics you agree with rather than ends in themselves, which are deserving of tribal loyalty - but frankly I've not had the time to think about it properly.

So instead I thought I'd do a short series of posts about people in other parties who I rather admire, despite our differing allegiances. It's a bit of a risk but I do think politics needs to grow up a bit, and not just between election campaigns. I don't think I could trust anyone who cannot admire those that they disagree with. Episode One: the Lib Dems.

David Howarth

David Howarth is the sitting MP for Cambridge and I was genuinely saddened when I heard he was going to step down from Parliament at this election, a decision I still don't understand. Perhaps he just didn't enjoy being an MP?

Regardless of this David had a very good personal reputation in Cambridge and is well liked. He's also been an outspoken advocate of civil liberties. He attended the G20 protests and other events and has been extremely outspoken about the behaviour of the police at these demonstrations.

He was also rather good as Lib Dem energy spokesman where he pushed the party towards an anti-nuclear stance and, every time I lobbied him always left frustrated due to his irritating habit of being in total agreement with greens on environmental issues, even when this put him out of step with the rest of his party.

Always very affable and open minded David Howarth has been a real feather in the collective Lib Dem cap and I really do hope that his decision to step down does not signal his retirement from politics altogether.

Shirley Williams

My next pick, coincidentally, stood unsuccessfully for the Cambridge seat in 1987 (coming second), she's also a surprising choice in many ways given my view that the formation of the SDP was criminal irresponsibility that condemned us to many dark years of Thatcher.

However, the irony is that although she left Labour because she thought it was too left-wing (yes kids, there was a time when it was possible to think of Labour as a left-wing party) they are now a long way to her right simply because, politically, she has stood firm by what she always believed as they slithered their way into Thatcherism.

One of the characteristics about her that I really admire is her willingness to tell ordinary voters that they are wrong. There's no PR in her politics, just passion. Even when I disagree with her I happen to think it's extremely admirable when politicians are willing to look a voter in the eye and remark "What a stupid thing to say."

These days that kind of honesty, which has no truck with "narrative" or "framing", is in short supply. All power to her elbow.

Simon Hughes

My last choice continues the Cambridge connection in that he was a member of the Liberal Society at Cambridge University.

More importantly he is someone who is actually on the left of the Lib Dems. Simon Hughes' journey has probably been as personally bruising as it has been politically frustrated.

Intellectually capable and level headed I was reminded of Hughes' talents a little while ago when he was on Newsnight debating how we deal with the BNP with UAF activist Martin Smith. Despite the fact that Smith was attempting to articulate my own position on combating fascism it was impossible to deny that Hughes wiped the floor with him leaving Smith utterly outclassed and floundering.

It says something of the man that Peter Tatchell, who was grievously wronged by Hughes in the 1983 Bermondsey by-election, endorsed his Lib Dem leadership bid, saying "Simon Hughes is the best of the Lib Dem leadership candidates. If I was a party member, he'd get my vote. I want to see a stronger lead on social justice and green issues. Despite his recent drift to the centre, Simon is the contender most likely to move the Liberal Democrats in a progressive direction."

The Lib Dems would be a far more robust and interesting party today had Hughes won that election, but alas, it was not to be.

P.S. obviously you should still vote for Tom Chance in Bermondsey and Old Southwark though.

Six Green bits and bobs.

Just a few things I've spotted.

• First of all good luck to our Westminster Knightsbridge and Belgravia ward candidate Thomas Bewley who is the sole opposition to the Tory candidates, as the Lib Dems and Tories haven't even stood candidates. This actually is a two horse race. (Marylebone High St. also looks interesting).
  
  
• Thank you to the Telegraph blogger for the inspiring headline "I'm sure the Green Party manifesto sounds better in the original Russia".
  
  
• Top-notch south London Green Darryl Chamberlyn (Greenwich, Peninsula ward) has some good coverage on the way councils are putting out things that look like newspapers, but in effect propaganda sheets.
  
  
• Johann Hari in The Independent chooses Caroline Lucas as his "Best UK Politician". He says that "Lucas has always proposed an optimistic and inspiring vision of how dealing with this crisis can also solve our other sicknesses."
  
  
• The Evening Standard is talking about a "boost [for] the vote of the Green Party" and that "the collective impact of the small parties on the vote could be significant, and even more so in the council elections on May 6."
  
  
• Transform Drugs takes a look at the Green Party Manifesto and, whilst not entirely uncritical, is in my view a very interesting read. (Critical and useful review of our digital strategy here).
  

I'll try to write something less partisan later... if I get time.

Leaders debates: the morning after

I'll keep this short as last night's leaders' debate is getting far more attention than it really deserves. In general though there were no real surprises, the party leaders stated their already existing policies through the medium of tendentious anecdotes and bickering and it was not a pretty sight.

Cameron's performance was very weak and, if he keeps to this low standard over the next two debates he will probably have lost some votes along the way. I quite warmed to Brown at times but any persuasive power he might have had did really rely on the viewer having amnesia. It was genuinely laughable when he advocated PR for the House of Lords - we could have had Lords reform years ago if he hadn't been blocking it consistently.

Nick Clegg was certainly the least worst of the three and he got some solid blows in on trident and the gap between the parties' rhetoric and reality. However that's where my praise ends because the theme of the evening was consensus on the big issues and just a choice of flavourings for our shit sandwich.

It's quite frightening when you consider what it means when all three leaders boasted of the cuts they intend to deliver on public services. Even as they promised tax cuts they unashamedly expressed their intention to add to the growing dole queues. If you think we need investment and a regeneration of public services you shouldn't vote for any of them.

Worse though was the consensus on immigration. Cameron was the most blatant, talking about a "black man" he'd spoken to who thought we were letting in too many (black?) foreigners. Brown was the least vile of the three in his rhetoric but defended his record on keeping people out (this, even as disturbances rock Oakington Detention Center over the death of an 'inmate' whose offense was to have the wrong colour passport).

Clegg rambled on about good and bad immigration, keeping it deliberately vague so the racists can assume he's being racist and those for a *liberal* immigration system can assume that's what he was talking about. He then talked about restricting immigrants to specific UK regions in what sounded like a series of restrictive and unworkable proposals that would inevitably cause great injustice and distress - but I guess that's mainly the "bad" immigrants who'll be on the sticky end so perhaps we shouldn't really care. How liberal.

This is not surprising. All the party manifestos have framed immigration with crime despite the fact that most immigrants are here completely legally and being foreign is not an offense of any sort. If you want a party that does not paint migrants as suspicious and a burden you can't vote for any of these parties.

If politics was just the three parties invited to the debate then we'd all be doomed and it would be time to put your head in the gas oven, but thankfully it isn't. Whoever wins the general election there will be a movement to defeat their cuts - nursery by nursery, service by service, ward by ward there will be resistance to their consensus. I wonder if they're ready?

Those Primark Bikinis

I don't know if you've seen the news that Primark have stopped selling padded bikinis for children (pictured) but this mini-moral panic has thrown up some really interesting issues to my mind.

On PM tonight (about half an hour in) they covered the fact that Primark had taken the item off sale and donated all profits to a children's charity.

Shy Keenan, an advocate for child protection, had been part of the campaign against the bikinis and made a very clear case against. Whilst I appreciated her tone, for example she repeated a number of times that she did not want anyone to live a "risk averse" life, I do think that a few of the things she said was less helpful than they could have been.

However, although the radio interview was conducted fairly sensibly she did say in The Sun "It never fails to amaze me just how many High Street household names are now prepared to exploit the disgusting 'paedophile pound'." In case people think The Sun might have made this up this is a phrase taken directly from her website.

I don't believe there is any phenomenon that is properly described by the phrase 'paedophile pound'. There are some rather tacky and stupid items like lap dancing kits for kids that pop up occasionally but the objection to these is not that they are bought by paedophiles but that they encourage kids to sexualise too early and in a very distorted, commercialised way.

I also believe her statement is intended to give the impression that you can't go into any of these 'many High Street household names' without seeing goods designed for sale specifically to paedophiles. This is not the case at all. It's dangerous hyperbole in an area where we need to encourage a measured response.

I don't want to get too pedantic over the radio interview because, in fairness to her, she may well have been grappling towards saying something that she didn't quite articulate the way she would have wanted, but never-the-less I think it's worth looking at the claims she made about these bikinis.

Here is the most controversial sample;

"We shouldn't be doing anything to help and facilitate [paedophiles] just don't dress your child up like a sexy adult, it's not terribly helpful."

[She was asked whether she thought there was a link between these bikinis and paedophilia.]

"There are paedophiles everywhere, you are never going to find areas where there are children where there aren't paedophiles. I'm suggesting again you have to live a risk averse life but I don't think you have to do things to encourage their attention and certainly a child dressed in extremely sexualised outfits would attract their attention."

Now, it seems to me there are some factual errors here. We can look at the bikini and make a decision about whether we think the pic above is an example of "extremely sexualised outfits". Unwise, yes. Tacky, yes. Extremely sexualised? That's a real stretch and, I think, more a product of her perspective on the issue than objectively true. It seems to me that she's reacting against her idea of the product not the product itself.

Secondly, it is just not true to say there are "paedophiles everywhere". It is not responsible to say everywhere you find children you will find paedophiles. Perhaps she was trying to make a more general, moderate point - possibly - but the effect is to cast a shadow over all adult-child relations whilst ignoring the extremely basic point that "stranger danger" is not the key issue when it comes to child protection, but those adults with direct responsibility for a child's safety.

The key phrase that made my ears prick up here was the idea that the way you dress your child "may help and facilitate" paedophiles. This is a new version of the idea that women who wear short skirts are somehow partially responsible if they get raped. This is plain wrong.

Those who abuse children are not enticed into abusing by kids dressing like adults. They abuse kids because they have a sick and distorted sexuality that makes them focus sexually on children. They are neither helped nor facilitated by a parent's choice of their kids clothing.

Like the ridiculous media furor over the "panic button" for a Facebook we have these campaigns for things that will have absolutely no effect on the number of kids that get abused whilst simultaneously raising the fear of abuse in society and distorting people's view of society as one that is full of dangers and those dangers are other people.

I'm not sad to see these silly padded bikinis taken off the shelves but it is quite wrong to imply that the cause of child abuse is children behaving and dressing like adults. Kids are not to blame if they've been abused, no matter what they wear.

Green Party election broadcast

This is rather funky, which I've just seen at the new Green Party election website.



As an aside you can also check out Darren Johnson's campaign video here.

Also, on a related subject people might be interested in the new Red Pepper election website. Looks good.

The election: in sci-fi monsters

It has come to my attention that very few political bloggers are intending to compare this election to a science fiction epic.

This is very disappointing indeed and so, in order to redress this sorry state of affairs, I thought I'd write a post on what sci-fi monster each party resembles the most. Vital research I'm sure you'll agree.

Tories: The tripods (War of the worlds)

As ghastly alien invaders intent on obliterating every man, woman and child upon the Earth the Conservatives do indeed resemble the tripods.

The tripods are a remorseless and unfeeling bunch who are repelled by humanity, attempting to literally wipe it from the face of the Earth. The Tories sadly may get their hands on the nuclear button but even their stated intention of dismantling public services stone by stone, job by job bears far too much resemblance to the classic sci-fi monsters.

Weakness: The tripods were brought down by an infection. Simply by breathing the same air as the poor it may well be that the Tory war machine will be brought to a shuddering halt as its immune system cannot cope with the contradiction between a society that isn't bothered by gay people and doesn't give much of a shit about marriage and their own innate reactionary perspectives.

Lib-Dems: Sontarans (Dr Who)

The Sontarans are an invincible race of warrior clones who live for the battle and give very little thought to what they may do after they are victorious.

Seeking to obliterate all in their paths Sontarans are consumed with hatred for all non-Sontaran life forms but despite their fearsome reputation can be disabled with a simple ping pong ball and a good eye. Try this on the next Lib Dem canvasser that comes to your door - trust me, it really works!

A Lib Dem canvasser might say to their candidate: "Sire, allow me the honour of covering the Grove Park estate entirely naked save for my bar charts and this enormous laser pistol."

Greens: Ewoks (Star Wars)

We may look fluffy and harmless but we're armed to the teeth with spears and communist ideology.

Consistently under-estimated by Jedis and evil Empire alike the Ewoks are capable of bringing down even a mighty Death Star down at close range.

In Norwich South Green Party deputy leader Adrian Ramsay (pictured) often dresses in traditional East Anglian clothing before embarking on another round of midnight leafleting.

Labour: Vicki (I.Robot)

Gordon Brown's original pick for Labour's election slogan was "Our logic is irrefutable" which was a nod towards Vicki, the revolutionary super-computer from I.Robot.

After thinking through the logic of her guiding principles she comes to realise that humanity cannot be trusted to look after itself and that, in order to serve her higher purpose, it would be necessary to save humanity from itself.

This generally takes the form of smashing up buildings, devouring its own and shooting at black people, more specifically the superbly sculpted Will Smith. But remember, it's all for our own good.

I have heard that only way to truly destroy the Labour Party would be to storm Number Ten and insert a tube of Nano-bots directly into Gordon Brown's brain. However, I'm fairly sure this constitutes a violation of the Terrorism Act and therefore is not to be attempted on a full stomach.

Next week: the political leaders and kids TV characters.

Update: Digital Economy Bill - who did what?

The public whip tells us that the parties voted the following ways on the Digital Economy Bill. Astonishing that just nine Tory MPs (less than one in twenty) bothered to vote on such controversial legislation.
Well done to those Lib Dems who turned up for their unanimous opposition, although due to their low turnout they were outnumbered by the rebel Labour MPs. I thought I'd publish the Labour role of honour;

• Diane Abbott, Hackney North & Stoke Newington
• Colin Burgon, Elmet
• Colin Challen, Morley & Rothwell
• Jeremy Corbyn, Islington North
• Andrew Dismore, Hendon
• David Drew, Stroud
• Neil Gerrard, Walthamstow
• John Grogan, Selby
• Kate Hoey, Vauxhall
• George Howarth, Knowsley North & Sefton East
• Lynne Jones, Birmingham, Selly Oak
• Eric Joyce, Falkirk
• Peter Kilfoyle, Liverpool, Walton
• Mark Lazarowicz, Edinburgh North & Leith
• Andrew Love, Edmonton
• Robert Marshall-Andrews, Medway
• Austin Mitchell, Great Grimsby
• Nick Palmer, Broxtowe
• Andy Reed, Loughborough
• Alan Simpson, Nottingham South
• Mark Todd, South Derbyshire
• Paul Truswell, Pudsey
• Tom Watson, West Bromwich East

After a comment from Modernity I realised that I should have a corresponding hall of shame, I only include a selection of MPs;

• Charles Clarke, Norwich South
• Frank Dobson, Holborn and St. Pancras
• Jim Fitzpatrick, Poplar and Canning Town
• Glenda Jackson, Hampstead and Highgate
• David Lepper, Brighton Pavillion
• John McDonnell, Hayes and Harlington
• Chris Mole, Ipswich
• Bridget Prentis, Lewisham East
• Joan Ruddock, Lewisham Deptford
• Angus MacNeil, Na h-Eileanan an Iar (SNP)

If you go here you can check out whether your MP voted for, against or didn't bother to show up.

Cameron on abortion

Party leaders tend to shy away from abortion and leave anything that comes before Parliament to a free vote. The basic necessity of this is that all the parties contain both pro-choice and anti-abortion supporters and the trick is to keep both sides on board to maximise your support.

However, Cameron has decided to come out in favour of reducing the term limits on abortions and restricting the woman's right to choose. Brave, very brave Dave. Actually I mean stupid. Stupid and wrong.

In fact he had a whole raft of reactionary policies designed to suck up to the most illiberal sections of the Christian communities.

So we have a commitment to allow faith schools to handle sex education as they please, leaving teenagers at greater risk from sexually transmitted disease and unwanted pregnancies. This comes hot on the heels of preventing legislation ensuring that schools are required to provide sex education as a matter of course.

Speaking to the Catholic Herald he said he would defend faith schools saying that “I think parents who have chosen a faith-based education for their children should have that decision respected. I’m a big supporter of faith schools and I think it’s really important that their rights are protected".

What's so puzzling to me is not that a Tory has reactionary views, one look at My Gay Vote (h/t Bob) shows which way the wind blows in the Conservatives. No, it's all the time and energy Cameron has spent trying to convince everyone that the Tories were no longer the nasty party, that they had left their bigotries behind, and then in the space of the few weeks around the election he has gone out of his way to remind us that they cannot be trusted when it comes to issues like abortion, gay rights or sex education. He's undoing all that good work covering up their reactionary instincts and just because his reactionary instincts couldn't be held in check.

It looks like, if the Tories win this election, we'll be fighting the same old battles all over again - and it's not a prospect I relish to be honest. However, if we have to fight to maintain a woman's right to control her own body then fight we will.

Digital Economy Bill: Wrong and Stupid

So MPs have been debating the Digital Economy Bill which has been rushed through at the fag end of this Parliamentary cycle without proper scrutiny, not that any bill ever gets proper scrutiny - but this one has even less proper scrutiny than all the others ones that have been inadequately scrutinised.

The bill was passed with a majority of 142 votes (189 votes to 47) because Labour MPs, who know they should know better, are essentially a bunch of spineless supine careerists. Which is ironic as many of them are reaching the ends of their careers.

The debate was characterised by people not understanding that if someone illegally downloads a tune that is not a lost sale, nor has someone's property been stolen - it is simply someone extra having access to that tune.

The bill, which brings in legislation to further control the internet, has a number of problems. There are certainly concerns that there may be freedom of speech issues and has a hammer to crack a nut approach, but its main problem is that it assumes guilt and then forces people to prove their innocence - reversing centuries of the legal system.

It means that if your ISP address is one that is thought to be involved in illegal file sharing then your net access could be completely removed. Well, goodbye internet cafes then. Goodbye university web access. Farewell to natural justice as families get cut off because one individual has downloaded a few files. What utter idiocy.

This is a very dangerous piece of legislation which is, of course, their starting point on this issue. Who knows where the next government will take us because both likely contenders for largest party supported the bill.

I'm sure public whip will tell us who voted how on the bill when the info comes through, and you can check out on this site whether your MP showed up or not.

Review: Henry Moore

Yesterday I went to see the Henry Moore exhibition at the Tate (which continues until August 8th). This is a fantastic collection of the artist's sculptures and drawings that takes us through a journey from his early luxurious works through his development into a harder edged style which seems to be heavily influenced by his experiences during the war.

Moore's voluptuous works beg to be fondled and licked. Their curves seem perfectly molded for the hand as well as the eye.

Indeed you might be fooled by the galleries constant signs saying that we were not to touch the objects that Moore thought his work should be regarded from afar as some sort of aesthetic wonders. In fact he felt it was essential to touch his work and he'd hoped that people would sit on and lounge across his work.

I've not been to Harlow for a while but certainly it used to be the case that his priceless art works were open to all in the public squares where young people were frequently seen perched atop these multi-million pound objects. I've heard the council has moved them out of sight which, if true, is a real shame as Moore saw his art as something that should physically interact with the community, not stand aloof from it.

Moore's easy abstract style feels like it has welled out of his subconscious conjuring up images both dark, erotic and strong. He once said that he'd refused all psychoanalysis because he'd feared it might disarm his artistic urges rooted as they were below the surface of his mind.

What I hadn't realised is that how clearly influenced by the war his development was. His drawings in the bomb shelters are deeply moving and quite unexpected. After delving into the depths of fear of those days his work moves away from obsessions of maternal and onto darker and more violent themes.

This is certainly an exhibition that's well worth visiting if you're in London over the next few months. Moore's place as one of the UK's most highly regarded British artists is well earned and here we see a wonderful snap shot of his work.

Is it time for the Time Ladies?

Noticed this great letter in the Independent today.

Sorry, but Liz Hoggard (5 April) is wrong. The Doctor cannot regenerate as a woman. There are female Time Lords, but the male ones regenerate as males, and the females as female. We can be certain of that not only because of our previous encounters on Gallifrey with the Time Lords, but also from observing their society, where, if male Time Lords could regenerate into females there would have been more females on the High Council.

Ruth Coomber, Needham Market, Suffolk

It starts off all geek and then, BOOM, in with the glass ceiling point. Nice.

Six of the best

Lunch break - which means I have the chance to do a quick round up of some odds and sods I've spotted over the last week. Not too many sods obviously.

1. Can we take a step back please? A photographer writes about the coverage of the Ian Tomlinson memorial service. Great quote "It is our job as journalists to document events, not orchestrate them."
   
   
2. More on who Jesus would vote for from Scotland on Sunday. great quote from Patrick Harvie, Green MSP. "Politicians shouldn't interfere with people's private faith, and nor should bishops try to distort people's political decisions. Christianity was supposedly founded on peace and social justice, yet the priorities here are the usual culture war obsessions of the wingnut American religious right: anti-gay, anti-abortion and anti-euthanasia."
   
   
3. Glorious bit of campaigning in Manchester for an Ian Curtis memorial bridge. This must succeed! Gayle O'Donovan, whose standing for Parliament in the area said "Renaming the bridge gives Joy Division fans their own part of Manchester."
   
   
4. Rupert Read reacts to the calling of the election. He rightly notes that all the mainstream parties have suddenly forgotten that they all claim the mantle of the being the parties who are best on climate change. "There is an unprecedented ecological crisis gripping our planet, our civilisation: and yet there was simply hardly any talk, in the constant media chatter and interviews yesterday, of this. Our democracy seems incapable of facing up to this, the greatest crisis of all."
   
   
5. I thought Liberal Democrat blogger Max Ink has done a great job highlighting the difference between Joan Ruddock's recent letter to residents claiming to be a vociferous anti-war campaigner and the actual voting record of this minor government minister. "So, I don’t think she’s being straight at all by saying that she voted against the government going to war in Iraq. She didn’t do a Robin Cook or even a Diane Abbott, at the crucial moment she wasn’t in the room."
   
   
6. Ben Goldacre had a really interesting piece on patenting genes in The Guardian last week where he argues "such patents can have a chilling effect on research".

Is the BNP ship sinking?

Leading BNP member Mark Collett has been stripped of his positions within the party and arrested for threatening to kill his lord and master Griffin (pictured together in happier times). As is the way of these things the party is now throwing the kitchen sink at Collett including "financial irregularities", being a mole and being the wrong kind of thug.

A BNP statement reads "Since political, as opposed to allegedly criminal, conspiracies are not illegal, we are able to say that Mark Collett was conspiring with a small clique of other party officials to launch a 'palace coup' against our twice democratically elected party leader, Nick Griffin, and that in order to create the artificial climate of disillusionment necessary for this to stand any chance of success, lies and unfounded rumours have been spread, and were planned to be spread much further."

Intriguing what the "lies and unfounded rumours" might be, and exactly how unfounded they are. The BNP is finding it hard to work as a team in key battle grounds like Stoke and Barking but it doesn't mean they don't still pose a formidable force in these selected areas as they never win votes down to tactical genius and slick campaigning.

There is a growing divide within the far right between those who favour an openly racist, street fighting approach to politics and the facade of a respectable, electoralist approach where the fascists pretend to be normal human beings and just allow their supporters to draw their own conclusions.

Collett has always been seen as more of the street fighting variety and I suspect this hoo ha has more to do with disagreements over strategy than fingers in the till.

Vote Labour or you're going to hell

This article on Labour List is utterly bizarre. Andy Flannagan, the Director of the Christian Socialist Movement, regales us with why he thinks Jesus would vote Labour. What next? John the Baptist on the Euro? St Paul on gay marriage? Actually, probably not the gay marriage thing.

Flannagan even ends the piece reminding people that "Jesus warned against the hypocrisy of speaking on his behalf yet actually turning him away". Self aware at all? No, thought not.

I was tempted to go through the list one by one demonstrating that the piece is based on desperate wishful thinking but I've decided there comes a point where something is so embarrassingly weak people it defies argument.

However, I would be grateful if someone could out the Biblical references that show that "Jesus was passionate about families as the building blocks of community". I have absolutely no idea what the Big J might have said or done to demonstrate his "passion" for SureStart. Maybe it's in the appendix, or the sequel "Bible Two: the gospel according to Lord Mandelson".

My main criticism of the piece though is that the author's left off number eleven. "11. Jesus loved shooting missiles at people and, as the parable of the Sadducee and BAESystems shows, he was a trained bomber pilot who flew on numerous missions over hostile territory." Perhaps Christians are allowed to brush this sort of stuff under the carpet, after all God can't see *everything* can he?

It can't be a coincidence that this piece come out this weekend when we celebrate Jesus getting crucified, which is exactly what's likely to happen to Labour in just five weeks time.

Natalie Bennett: Women and fairness

Natalie Bennett, from Camden Green Party, on women and fairness.

Six more informational nuggets

• Firstly we have the US Publication Socialist Worker, which is commenting on the UK election. "Victories for Respect's Salma Yaqoob in Birmingham and the Green Party's Caroline Lucas in Brighton would be invaluable breakthroughs. Besides providing two new radical voices in Parliament, such victories would make the left appear a more-credible alternative in future elections."
  
  
• Farid Bakht has an interesting piece on immigration and Tower Hamlets. "Bottom line: the main parties have decided to surrender to the bankers agenda, bottle it in dealing with them and instead are going to take it out on the majority of the population. Now, I hate bullfighting. But we all know how it works: wave a read rag in front of the bull and he gores the cloth, not the matador. Immigration is the red rag and we are meant to be diverted."
  
  
• Iain Dale has published his top twenty tips for candidates. They're pretty useful I thought, in particular the last five which can be hard to achieve sometime when you're tired and frazzled. Do I detect the voice of experience in this though? "Your only media focus is local. Ignore Michael Crick. He's not there to help you." Update: Lib Dem Chris Lovell and Labour's Luke Akehurst also have sage advice - all worth reading.
  
  
• On another topic there was an interesting piece in The Guardian musing on the nature of existentialism. Lynsey Hanley states that "Being an existentialist requires being satisfied with the absurd and random nature of events, freeing you to create your own life in circumstances that aren't of your own making." I happen to think that's wrong and much prefer Satre's dictum that "man is condemned to be free". Being satisfied doesn't seem to express the horror of free will to my mind.
  
  
• Darrell Goodliffe writes an excellent reminder to Labour members who are happy with the court decision against the RMT's strike ballot about which side their ideological bread is buttered. "What happened in the courts today is a blow against us all because it’s a blow against democracy. It should appall any democrat who believes in the basics of democracy ie, that majorities have the right to decide their destiny and that a worker has the right to withdraw their labour. Above all it strikes a blow against another fundamental covenant at the heart of a democracy; namely, the neutral status of the law."
  
  
• As you may know people from all over have been buying plots of land near Heathrow to prevent airport expansion.The struggle continues, boosted by events last week, over 73,000 people have already joined the movement and they're having a last push trying to get that over 100,000. Governments be warned - we have Richard Briers!
  

New Job

Just a quick personal announcement: I got the forms through this morning and start my training next month for my new job. Very exciting!

As of May 15th I will be joining the Metropolitan Police Force as one of their newest, keenest recruits.

Crime is a blight on working class neighbourhoods and the fear of crime is something that divides communities, keeping us at odds with one another.

I had to think long and hard about this decision but in the end I felt that if we don't have more socially conscious police officers in this country then the policing problems of the past will just keep repeating themselves over and again.

Six of the best

• Caroline Lucas in The Economist. Excellent write up. Also notable for the fact that the Conservative candidate (who is basically Caroline's internet stalker) describes the Green Party as a "hard-left “eco-fascists”". Joy! She really is bonkers.
  
  
• Hurray for climate change which has stepped in to solve an international dispute. Specifically the 30-year dispute between India and Pakistan over who owns New Moore Island. Luckily climate change has stepped in to diffuse the row, by reclaiming the whole thing for the sea. No more island, no more disputes. Well done rising sea levels.
  
  
• Curiously Plaid and the SNP have issued their demands early in case of a hung Parliament. Alex Salmond wants a wii fit and Ieuan Wyn Jones has asked for Subutio. Good luck gents, good luck.
  
  
• Mark Steel has been quick to point out that Labour's election strategy involves them deliberately throwing the game. Matching fixing at work perhaps? As Mark points out "it's hard to find any other reason for accusing the adored Joanna Lumley of being "silent" about the plight of the Gurkhas, when she was the most vocal campaigner for them, against the government now complaining she's silent."
  
  
• There a very interesting article on the sexualisation of young people at Counterfire. Caitlin J Murch takes apart a recent government report on the subject and finds that the terms of the debate find a lot to be desired.
  
  
• We're all very nosy about when, where and how people have it off, and rightly so. This article highlights that astonishingly sex was not invented in 1984 behind a Bishops Stortford swimming pool. The discovery of a 1892 Victorian Sex survey would make your hair curl. One respondent said that "The highest devotion is based upon [sex], a very beautiful thing, and I am glad nature gave it to us." Sauce!