A year in Condemnation

The Liberal Demolition shows no sign of letting up. First there were the glory day(s) in the Rose garden at number ten. Then the betrayals, then the bickering, then the elections.

While repeated blows have landed on the Lib Dems and while they have been serious the victim is more likely to suffer a slow and drawn out death than a knock out punch. The Lib Dems will last to 2015 because whatever happens between now and the next election, like John Major's rebel turkeys, his disgruntled party can't risk a general election that would see them wiped out.

After founding of the coalition David Laws did his best to show that this wasn't "Cleggameron's" new politics as he thieved the taxpayer for several years for rent he didn't have to pay. That Clegg placed the his party's integrity at the behest of what he would have known would be a very unpopular Tory government shows how much he wanted to give his party their raison d'etre: electoral reform. He gambled everything for this. He lost. What has he got left? He has his party to save.


How can Clegg do this? Strong words in public but capitulations in private letting the Tories get their way will only weaken their cause. The real test is whether they can stem the Tory zeal for deep public spending cuts, especially as economic indicators worsen in the coming 12 months.

There is little Cameron will want to do to change the coalition. His government retains control of policy, the top jobs and the blame for anything bad always sits with the Lib Dems. After the initial disappointment of failing to get a majority at the general election a year ago, things could hardly be better for Cameron and his Tories.

Boris Johnson = trash

I find it somewhat odd that mayor Boris Johnson today praised the Transport for London management for negotiating an end to next week's planned tube strikes with the RMT.

Remember that this is the mayor which I liken to a boxer before a big bout. Great on the trash talk. Unfortunately for London, he failed to deliver on this. Remember that this is the mayor that promised to end strikes on the tube and has since been too politically pig headed to hold even a single meeting with any of the tube unions. Responsible governing means he should have done this, despite his political hatred of all the RMT stand for.

Today's statement from Johnson was just another load of trash from a mayor who has achieved nothing for London. He deserves to be knocked out in 2012.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Three Tory graphs

After yesterday's disappointing growth figures that showed the economy hasn't grown at all in the last six months, opinion polls continue to show Labour in the lead and strong disapproval for the government's work.


Courtesy of Mark Ferguson at Labour List

AV rows rumble on and I swing

Differences of opinion between the Tories and Lib Dems about AV continue to attract press attention. What was meant to be an apolitical issue has been fashioned into a party political affair. Peter Mandelson has suggested that Labour supporters should vote yes to hinder the Tories' potential electoral dominance. The no campaign have used Nick Clegg's unpopularity to encourage Labour supporters to vote no.

The recent sniping between the Lib Dems and Tories, plus interventions from Labour's heavyweights has added a little oomph to a rather dull and dry referendum campaign that will have passed most voters by.

The "row" has been the story rather than AV. That is much easier to report and shows a media appetite for tittle tattle over trying to educate the readership. There has been a great deal of nonsense thrown about by both sides. The no campaign have dubbed AV confusing, unfair and expensive. The yes campaign have dismissed the no campaign as the Tory old guard hanging onto the levers of power.

Both sides have tried to score party political points on the other. The no campaign calling on voters to deal a blow to Clegg, the yes campaign to David Cameron. If I'm going to be party political about the AV referendum, I'd like to deal a blow to both but voting for short term gain isn't necessarily going to deliver the best political outcome in the long term.

As usual Channel 4's Fact Check comes to the rescue bringing together the claims and demystifying the myths. AV won't be expensive and will ensure all MPs will be elected on some type of 50%+ support. AV wouldn't have altered many recent UK elections and would have exaggerated many recent results, like 1997.

I feel myself becoming a swing voter for the first time in my life. I've never approached an election and not been totally sure of how I would vote, but I am about AV. I want a fair system, a simple one and any change must be fair to all parties. Will AV be that change? I'm not convinced but it might be.

A coalition of convenience

The increasing tensions between the Tories and their coalition lap-dogs the Lib Dems over AV shows all is not as rosy as Dave and Nick like to make out.

'Leading' Lib Dems Chris Huhne and Vince Cable have both been playing to their gallery of party members and upset former voters by breaking ranks and criticising their big daddy. Under normal circumstances such behaviour would be met with a fell swoop of cabinet reshuffle. That isn't possible because the party has been guaranteed a certain number of cabinet posts. When there are only 57 MPs to choose from there isn't much choice. That Clegg himself is getting in on the act means cracks in the coalition will remain.

I still expect the coalition to last because both parties have a vested interest in making it. The Tories want to get their cuts programme through and the Lib Dems are desperate to cling on to whatever power they can. For Clegg needs to wait as long as possible in the hope that his party's plummeting poll ratings eventually reverse. I'm not site try will. They badly need AV to go through to show even a slight glimpse that the future might be even the slightest bit yellow.
Lib Dems won't be winning here for a while but that doesn't really matter as long as they continue to prop up the Tories.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Vince Cable on the slide

Vince Cable is doing his best to get himself sacked from the cabinet. After calling David Cameron's immigration speech "unwise" today he added another feather to his Lib Dem Tory hating cap. The only problem is that he signed up to this in the first place. It is also a problem that the Lib Dems are guaranteed a specific number of cabinet posts and if old Vince is kicked out, who replaces him?

I agree with Vince. Capping immigration could be damaging for business, which needs to recruit the best people to get our economy going again. Setting an arbitrary cap means this might not happen.

His antics remind me of a Channel 4 comedy programme from a few years ago where two contestants, each starting a new job, had to get themselves sacked. The winner got a week's dole money. The only catch was that they were not allowed to do anything obvious, like swear, use violence, steal or not turn up. They had to be creative and provoke their boss to getting rid of them. The winner got sacked from his job in an expensive clothes shop after dressing up in fancy dress and juggling the shoes.

Vince is juggling with his career, I'm not sure he cares. Vince is looking good for his £67.50.

Lib Dems: the indefensible

Poor Warren Bradley has been here before. His outburst at Nick Clegg suggests a man clearly worried about his own future. He is apparently sick of "defending the indefensible" with the latter being the Lib Dem coalition with the Tories.

Is it the VAT rise his party campaigned against? Is it the rise in tuition fees his party campaigned against? Is it the public sector cuts his party campaigned against?



For some time the Tories have had no presence in the north of England, which his Lib Dems profited from. People won't vote Tory there but when Labour has deserved a bloody nose the nice little yellow party has been there to step in. Bradley ended up as leader of Liverpool council, while the party was also victorious in other traditionally Labour strongholds such as Sheffield and Leeds. Now that many voters see the Lib Dems and Tories as a single entity it is highly probable that the pockets of northern support for the Lib Dems will go the same way as that for the Tories.

At least Bradley has been consistent. He might care about his party or he might only care about his own future. Which doesn't really matter at this time. He was one of the first and more high profile members of his party to warn about the effect doing a deal with the Tories nationally might have on the party's future. Speaking in July, just after the coalition was formed he said "we’re in a weak coalition, that will deliver nothing to the Lib-Dems except total electoral decimation. I give you that absolute guarantee, we will be wiped out by Labour in the North and the Tories in the South." In three weeks we'll find out.

Bradleys's current analysis may be robust but he misses a key point that many voters who were fooled into thinking Bradley's Lib Dems were a left wing party. Across England they have repeatedly gone into coalition with the Tories whenever it has suited their ends, as Bradley's email to Clegg points out, to get power

Highlights of Tory-Lib Dem coalition include:

• Lambeth 2002-2006
• Leeds 2004-2010
• Southwark 2002-2010

Bradley needs to look back a bit further into his party's recent history. Perhaps then he'd realise that the "indefensible" has been party policy for some time. Time for a new job Bradley?

Londoners suffer the most from the Tories cuts

As we head into an avoidable cost of living crisis caused by the Tories' tax rises and cuts, evidence shows that Londoners will lose badly. The poorest will be worse off than the wealthy. Yet more evidence that we're not "all in this together" after all, but its much more a case of "I'm alright Jack" from George Osborne.

The cost of living is so much higher in London than elsewhere in the UK that any hits to living standards will be harshly felt. As the graphic shows, Londoners get a raw deal from the cuts. Couples with children will lose 8% of their income by 2014/15. The poorest Londoners will be 7% worse off, the wealthiest only 5%.

Ed Miliband's job is to make this clear, in simple language to ordinary people. The cuts are not fair or even. The Tories hit those who can afford it least in the pocket.

Is Vince Cable a joke?

I don't quite know how Vince Cable can live with himself. He has been absent from the news recently after a series of gaffes relating to News International's attempt to buy back a bigger share of Sky.

Low paid workers are facing a two-pronged hit to their living standards after Cable announced that the minimum wage is increasing by a below inflation 15 pence an hour. Couple this with a 2.5% increase in VAT and the rise in personal income tax allowances will be completely wiped out. Even though food isn't included in VAT, the cost of fuel is meaning the cost of food and essential items increase anyway. 

Recently Cable was responsible for the trebling of tuition fees. He then has the cheek to suggest he will cut teaching grants to universities for poor performing universities that charge the highest fees, ignoring that he has cut the teaching grants meaning fees have to fill the gap. Universities have no choice but to levy maximum fees. They don't get any extra money for this, it just replaces lost central government funding. There are arguments on both sides about the demerits of the new student funding system that are best argued in a dedicated post.

His red tape challenge reminds me of John Major's cones hotline. Surely Cable can use his own scissors to cut business red tape? This is little more than a gimmick.

Cable was once the darling of the Lib Dems for his foresight in predicting the global financial crisis. He was all over their election leaflets as he was seen as more marketable than the then very popular Nick Clegg. How times change. He was given a deliberately difficult ministerial post by the Tories who clearly saw him as a threat. He is still the most likely Lib Dem to resign from the coalition.

Labour by default

Labour's lead in opinion polls remains consistently at a minimum of five points over the Tories with the Lib Dems around or below 10%.



Looking back over the polls between Labour's disastrous 1983 election and resounding defeat in 1987 shows a similar pattern. A year after the election Labour were consistently ahead of the Tories but the failure of the party to earn the trust of voters saw this gradually eroded by the 1987 election day. The same thing happened again between 1987 and 1992. Until Ed Miliband starts to get a strong and positive recognition from voters I fear that 2015 may lead to a similar result as 1987 or 1992.

It feels a bit like the 1980s at the moment. An unpopular Tory government, cuts, protests and a dodgy economy. Miliband's job is easier than Kinnock's though as there is no major internal party strife to deal with. It is an opportunity and a crucial one for the country at a time when the Tories are getting cockier by the day with Climate Change minster Greg Barker saying the current government's cuts are what "Thatcher could only have dreamed of." That's very different to the official line and faux sombre faces of George Osborne and Danny Alexander every time they announce more cuts - this is sad and bad but necessary. Miliband needs to make people realise his feelings are real.

London's never had it so good

According to Mayor Boris Johnson London's never had it so good. The sun shines and everything is fine. He might think it is but I don't share his optimism. He belittled Ed Miliband's chief spin doctor Tom Baldwain for having to paint the world around him as in a "complete mess" whatever the circumstances.

Here are a few reasons why:

• Living costs are going up
• Tax is going up
• Vital government services are being cut
• London tube and bus fares are going up
• Thousands of jobs are going to be lost, hurting families and the economy

Perhaps Boris would like to do the honourable thing and add himself to the rising toll of jobless next year? After all, his pal George Osborne did say, "we're all in this together."

Poor to pay for the Tories

I love Channel 4's Fact Check. IT provides independent analysis of political rhetoric and gets behind the crap and tells it like it is. Like most politicians find it difficult to do. 


Housing Minister Grant Schapps suggested a few weeks ago that councils that make the biggest cuts must be badly managed and those who cut less must be more inefficient. Tosh. What that ignores is that councils like Islington have to pay out more to those on benefits and get less tax in return from council tax payers (as there are fewer of them) than in a place like Richmond. Richer areas have more council tax payers and few benefit recipients. That means Richmond receives a smaller central government subsidy than somewhere like Islington. Thast is quite basic and something I learnt very early on at university. 


Fact Checker sets this and Schapps straight. Councils like Islington and Manchester are facing far more cuts than just that to the main central government grant. This means they have no choice but to cut more severely than councils in better off areas. They say:


"it’s clear that deprived areas are worst affected.


"As a poor inner-city authority that gets more Government money than council tax, Manchester’s spending power is down 8.8 per cent in this financial year and 6.7 per cent in 2012/13. In Trafford it’s only 3.8 per cent this year and 3.4 next year."


The poorest pay most under the Tories. Despicable.

AV: We all dream of a team of Nick Cleggs

I've found the campaign for the alternative vote underwhelming. I really should care much more than I do. Growing up in the 1980s with a dominant Tory party governing on 40% of the vote like they had 100% I looked to a "fairer" voting system to stop that happening again. Labour wanted it, Labour won and no longer cared. I'm not caring that much. I probably should.

The vote presents us a with a critical juncture, to go with change and start to create a much vaunted "new politics" or stick with the status quo. In principle giving more people a little bit of what they want is a good thing. Making more parliamentary seats realistically contested is also a good thing.

On the downside, AV will mean Nick Clegg will always be in power even though he is the least popular of the three leaders Does he deserve to be kingmaker? Neither the Tories or Labour are likely to ever get more than 50% of the total vote ever again, which means the third party will always hold the balance of power. I don't like the idea of smaller parties holding others to ransom.

From a partisan political point of view I like the idea of the referendum failing because it will land a huge blow to the Lib Dems, who have staked their reputation on this single issue. Why do the Lib Dems care so much? Only because it suits their own partisan political ends. They would be the only winners from reform.

I'll vote no because I don't believe that Nick Clegg's desire for AV is one for genuine fairness. I believe it is for selfish political gain. We would be much better off with a full and proper review and the prospect of a truly fair voting system. AV isn't it. AV was a rushed compromise given to the Lib Dems by the Tories to bribe them into coalition.

Nick Clegg put it best himself when he dubbed AV a "miserable little compromise."

Policing of TUC march

Yesterday I gave my comments to the Sunday Times and praised the way that the Metropolitan Police managed Saturday's main TUC march. I know there are other issues regarding the UK Uncut protesters and how they were policed. One problem with the latter is that some people were committing crimes which gave the police an excuse to arrest many of them. Back on the main march there was a family, almost carnival, but serious, atmosphere.

The police clearly tried harder here than they did with previous protests. The Met also tried to embrace social media to give marchers the opportunity to feed back their views on how they were being policed. Commendable, but it didn't work as the survey that they tweeted went down on Saturday morning. It only went up again when the Sunday Times contacted the company running the survey.

The police have moved on and demonstrated willing by opening themselves up to feedback. However, when an organisation takes first steps into social media they have to do it properly. Now the Met have paint on their face, just like their officers, as their foray failed.

If you pay for The Times you can read the article. If you don't, here is what I said:


Labour blogger and social media expert Tim McLoughlin, who was on Saturday’s march and praised the way it was policed, said the Met had much to learn about using the internet to communicate with the public.

“As someone who helps companies embrace social media getting the police to use it to better communicate with the public is commendable. However it is only worth doing if you know how to use it and that the survey site was down at the weekend suggests a lack of thought went into the Met's efforts,” he said.

McLoughlin also criticised the nature of the survey, which is based around multiplechoice questions and offers no opportunity for written answers.

“The survey doesn't give much scope for people to deviate from the small number of set questions asked or to give other feedback. For that the traditional, non-social, channels are the only means to communicate this to the Met.”

Marching on together

I marched on Saturday for the first time in my life. I doubt anything will change, the Tories will hold their nerve and carry on cutting regardless. What Saturday did show was a great resolve and commitment to show that the country doesn't support what is happening.

Living standards are falling substantially. Taxes are going up, which will hit the poorest hardest. The government is putting thousands of people onto the dole. That won't help as taxpayers then become a burden on the state. It is clear that the burden of paying for the deficit to be reduced won't be borne by those with the "broadest shoulders". How can it be when VAT is up and the top rate of income tax will be cut?

I got the feeling that large numbers of the people marching on Saturday, like myself, were not natural protesters. There was a fantastic family atmosphere on the main march with lots of fancy dress and music. That belied the serious issues behind the march but showed that it was nothing like the previous student protests.

What now? There'll be more of the same from the Tories while Nick Clegg will continue to make himself unpopular. In an interview with the Financial Times today he says that a Liberal Democrat budget would have been "very close" to last week's. This hot on the tails of Clegg being caught on microphone saying that there is little for his party and their Tory chums to disagree on.

Labour needs to take advantage of the swell of support for an alternative to the government agenda. According to a YouGov survey the public backs the TUC and the march, with 52% in favour and 31% against. That shows a country divided but one in which the majority is against what is happening. The biggest question is whether this translates to election results in May. It probably will and the government will brush it off as mid-term blues and say they expected the result.

For the march and the elections to mean anything they have to be the start of consistent knock-backs for the government. If that happens their confidence might suffer and the next general election would be much more interesting. Protest was the easy part. The hardest part is keeping public confidence for an alternative and winning that support in the long term.

Dirty Den Dover

The European Parliament gravy train hit the buffers with a huge bang today for disgraced Tory MEP Den Dover. He has stolen £345,000 from the taxpayer. That is fraud on a huge scale. Theft. Dover should be
locked up, though that will cost taxpayers even more money.



After being found guilty two years ago thief Dover refused to pay the money back. Of course he should pay it back. That isn't enough. I can't quite understand how officials, whether they are politicians or other public servants, can steal from the public purse and then just offer to pay it back. I'm quite sure most shoplifters get prosecuted when they get caught rather than just saying: "fair enough, you caught me, I'll just give all that stuff I nicked back and we'll call it quits." Somehow these people think that is OK. It isn't.

Budget 2011: plus ca change

Today's budget has done little more than tinker around the edges of plans already announced by the Tories' emergency budget. The Tories are not about to change tack on the economy and today's budget demonstrated that. There was some window dressing, such as painting changes to personal and fuel tax as reductions when they are far from that. Tomorrow's newspapers with personal budget calculators will show that.

Pickpocket Gideon Osborne has some nerve. When he claims that moving personal allowances for tax will mean we will be better off. We're all paying more in VAT, higher fuel costs and the inflation it causes. Everyone pays VAT. VAT goes on fuel so even though some items like food are excluded the cost of food goes up as the fuel required to get food to consumers costs more. VAT on fuel means any tinkering with fuel duty is more than wiped out.

Ed Miliband's response highlighted the holes in the Tories' strategy. Their medicine is painful. Disposable income, earnings and living standards are falling while unemployment and inflation are rising. Gideon wants people to thank him once this aggressive treatment has worked. I'm not sure it will and whatever happens most people won't thank him for hitting them in the pocket.

If ever there was an example of why you can't afford the Tories, this is it.

Lembit Opik is a joke

Lembit Opik's "Citizen Lem" video is meant to promote his bid to become London mayor next year. It is meant in jest but unfortunately the joke is on and not with Lem.


Citizen Lem from Mancha Productions on Vimeo.


The Lib Dems have never been serious contenders in any of the London mayoral elections and Lembit's "bid" symbolises a party lurching from disaster to laughing stock.

Mark Pack points out that no Lib Dem London assembly members, council leaders or MPs are backing the bid. That doesn't mean much though as there are only three Lib Dem assembly members, two council leaders and seven MPs after poor results for the party in 2010.

Before propping up the Tories nationally the Lib Dems already lost support across London. Before last year's election Lembit could have solicited support from eight council leaders. Give it another year after the regional elections on Soctland and Wales, locals in England and the London assembly elections and we'll see how much is left for the Lib Dems.

Poor Lembit. He makes great video, just not quite on topic.

Do problems lurk for Labour?

Which Ed will succeed in making Labour credible again? Ed Miliband is continuing to grow into leadership and fight for his status while Ed Balls is carrying Labour's fight to the Tories.

Last week saw discussion about whether Miliband's lack of support will damage Labour's chances of success under him. The jury is still out. It is clear that the media will continue to paint Miliband fatal to the party's chances of success. This early into the job and with so many unknowns ahead it is hard to say. There is the reduction in the number of MPs, the AV referendum and the risk of a double-dip recession. It is certain the political landscape will change dramatically over the next two to three years. Many paint this is a huge threat to Labour but Miliband should see this as a huge opportunity.

Much of Tim Montgomerie's weekend Telegraph article resonated with me. Yes, he writes for the Telegraph and runs Conservativehome. Yes, he is also right even though he is a Tory. He highlighted several issues that Labour needs to address to succeed, one of which included Miliband himself, but also:

• Are Labour too reliant on Tory failure to grant them success by default
• How will Labour win in the South? Just as Cameron had to win outside the South
• Ed Balls seems to have the answers that (he suggests) Miliband lacks

The Labour Party has to address these problems. The party cannot rely on the other side messing up - that is not a long-term and stable basis for power. It might work in the short term but will only lead to problems. If you win by default you will have nothing positive to offer the country with your power. 

Continuing to highlight falling living standards and hammering home that it doesn't have to be like this is one part of that strategy. There needs to be more, which includes fighting the claim, that currently sticks, that Labour and not the global financial crisis is to blame for the country's deficit.

Which Ed comes out of that struggle with the most to show isn't clear. They can do it together, or one of them could do it alone. Could it be that another Ed scuppers the other Miliband's chances of leading Labour in the future?

Is the budget the Tories last chance?

The Spectator has suggested that next week's Tory budget as a last chance saloon to pull this terribly unpopular government from the doldrums. The Tory claims to be boosting the economy certainly sound increasingly hollow to the extent that I don't think even they believe it. The realities that change doesn't always happen that quickly in government are hitting home but perhaps this is a good thing if it shields the country from the worst Tory changes for longer.

The public, 71% of whom think their cuts are too far and too fast, will not like next week's budget, or the effect of Gideon Osborne's austerity that will inevitably follow. The Tory government is already incredibly unpopular but none of that really matters because barring a huge fall out with the Lib Dems this government will go the distance. No matter how unpopular the government is it will survive, until 2015 at least.

Does it matter if Miliband isn't loved?

Looking beyond the headline opinion polls that currently show Labour with a healthy ten point lead over the Tories it appears that Ed Miliband is the least popular of the three main party leaders. Even less than Nick Clegg. He hasn't been in the job very long which is certainly a factor, together with him not having been the most high profile minister in the former government.

As Miliband's recognition grows I expect his rating to improve. He will benefit from not being a Tory or Nick Clegg. That isn't enough to sustain him though. He needs to be liked and must be seen as a credible prime minister if he is to take Labour to victory. He has more time though the media will try and put him on the football manager style pedestal and stir up suggestions that he isn't up to the job.

The forthcoming Scottish, Welsh and English local elections provide the first test. The AV referendum is interesting too, for two reasons. First, if Labour are popular but Miliband less so Labour could "win" the next election much like the Tories did in 2010 - without a majority. Second, under those circumstances but with AV he would have to do a deal with the similarly unpopular Nick Clegg's Lib Dems. Right now that seems like a very odd scenario but it could well come to fruition.

Islington Lib Dems win "opposition group of the year"

That the Lib Dems awarded their rump of councillors in Islington "opposition group of the year" at last weekend's spring conference is laughable.

Lets look at their achievments in a bit more detail:

• When I moved to Islington in 2004 Lib Dems outnumbered Labour councillors by 3:1. Last year the Lib Dems were routed and Labour now outnumber the Lib Dem councillors by 3:1, losing what was once their flagship council
• Islington South and Finsbury was the number one Labour - Lib Dem marginal in the country. After a deluge of leaflets from Bridget Fox this is now a reasonably safe Labour seat for Emily Thornberry

Since losing the council Islington Lib Dems haven't achieved very much:

• The rump of councillors have rarely been in full attendance at council meetings
• They have issued what I assume was satirical leaflet stating "Nick Clegg keeps his promises"! - what about tuition fees? Er...
• Celebrated dirty politics: this was one of the best read blogs of the year, which also made the local media and showed the outside world what most of us who have campaigned for Labour in Islington already knew. They are cynical, opportunist and play dirty, as shown by them having to pay Thornberry compensation for telling lies on their leaflets

Lib Dems winning here? No thanks!

Lib Dem bashing: they only have themselves to blame

Nick Clegg shall be hoisted by his own petard. He doesn't want students to graduate with £20,000 of debt. He certainly agrees with that, students will be in at least £27,000 of debt thanks to him. It is so easy to watch video after video of Nick Clegg telling us all before the election of how he wanted to help students and to bring in a new, open politics. It hasn't really happened like that has it?





The Lib Dems are currently on 9%, behind "other."

Ken for mayor?

Ken Livingstone's weekend Politics Show interview gave a taste of the arguments and attacks that will become both more prominent and prevalent as we head towards next year's mayoral election in London.

The Tories will attack and will make it personal. Having been at the top of Labour's London politics for around the same number of years that I have been alive, Ken has a history of achievements and also (perceived) failures. His opponents will attack him and will be quick to highlight that he has already been rejected by London's voters before.

At the Labour mayoral hustings I went to Ken was forthright in stating his campaign would focus on opposing Tory cuts. This will get him so far in picking up votes from anti-Tories and perhaps some from those who deserted him in 2008. Will it be enough? I'm not sure, the media attacks will be strong and will reinforce negative sentiment against him.

Ken was a hate figure for many in 2008 and was tired. To win he needs to get his enthusiasm and energy back. Otherwise he may be too easy to cast off. He says he suffered at association with a then unpopular Labour government. This presents the interesting contrast with Boris Johnson having to fend off attacks of association with an increasingly unpopular Tory government. As Alastair Campbell tweeeted me: the election depends on that - together with Ken having enough energy to convince London he has new ideas.

Ken has a good record, much better than that of the incumbent. Ken has been accused of being a (former) Zone 1 mayor. This is unfair and Ken points out his initiative of neighbourhood policing that gave the same levels of police coverage to all parts of London. Buses got better in the suburbs, particularly night buses. This is something I noticed having grown up in zone 6. Fares were (then) as affordable as they have ever been in London and Ken will seek to do that again. I'd hope that was possible in the face of significant central government cuts though I'm not sure. Having built up a £1.2b of reserves he would use them to protect Londoners from the worst of government cuts.

Fair fares and no cuts to front-line policing will be his flagship policies. These will undoubtedly be popular. That is the easy part. The hard part is convincing a hostile media who have built up several decades of pent up opposition to Ken Livingstone .

Ed Mili-Balls would tax the banks again - divided Britain

I'm sure the headlines will focus on Labour's announcement today that a bankers' bonus tax should be levied for a second time. This was just a part of Eds Miliband and Balls presenting their alternative to the savage cuts of the Tories.

I'm personally interested to see how well this plays with the public. Bankers were a popular and easy target a year ago. The bosses of the main UK banks have called on the media, public and politicians to "move on" and let the industry and economy progress. This has been in the face of fierce and continued criticism from certain politicians, notably Chuka Umuna and Lib Dem Matthew Oakeshott.

I suspect that the extra bankers' tax will come in for some media and political criticism from those on the right. The timing is also interesting though, coming just a couple of weeks before thousands take to the London streets to protest against the current government's programme of cuts.



This all points us in the direction of partisan politics and a divided country. It feels like politics is getting argumentative and Ed Balls will be central to this - a role I'm sure he is relishing.

Does anyone even know what an Oyster Extension Permit is?

Apparently London's train companies have agreed to abolish the totally confusing and bureaucratic Oyster Extension Permit. For those that don't know, if you are travelling through London on an Oyster season ticket and want to use some pay as you go money to top up your journey beyond your zones you have to get one of these permits if your extended journey is on a train. If you stick to the tube or Overground you are fine. Most people didn't know as how would anyone sensible expect to have to do such a thing?

It would be easier to know whether this insane system has been abolished had mayor Boris Johnson stuck to his 2008 manifesto pledge to hold a "public" rail summit. Instead it was held in private so we only know about this from whatever has leaked out. If it is true then it signals progress.

Hopefully getting around London will be much easier and less confusing. Soon. Perhaps. Probably. Bring on 2012.

Lib Dem bashing

Medhi Hasan suggests that the coalition has exposed "Labour's worst tribalist tendencies". To some extent this is true. The party has enjoyed baiting the Lib Dems as a diversion from its own problems: losing power. I admit that I've enjoyed taking part, though that emanates more from having campaigned directly against the Lib Dems in Islington for many years. Locally they have always been my foe.

Hasan argues that Lib Dem baiting is a problem for Labour because it ignores the common ground between the two parties. He highlights rebels in the Lib Dem ranks, such as Charles Kennedy and Lord Oakeshott. Labour should extend an olive branch to disaffected Lib Dems, because the social democratic arm of that party historically derives from Labour and there is some common ground.  That isn't enough for me. Just as the Lib Dems held the Labour Party accountable for the actions of the leadership when in power, I feel we must do the same. We're involved in a competitive electoral fight. The Lib Dems know where we are.

If the "natural home for Lib Dems is on the left" they need to start proving that by their actions in government, at their conferences and if that doesn't work they should find themselves a new home while they still have the chance.

Miliband's momentum?

I had been waiting for Ed Miliband to grow into his role as Labour leader. Watching PMQs today positive signs were apparent. He comes across clearer that in his early days in charge, though there was no killer punch. He has a little bit to go before he is able to match Cameron's wit and ease at the despatch box. None of this matters too much as we can all remember William Hague repeatedly getting the better of Tony Blair at PMQs yet he got nowhere because he just wasn't credible.

What matters for Ed Miliband is whether he and his team can take advantage of the Tories' unpopularity. For that to make an impact a clear and consistent narrative has be repeatedly communicated. His media image is improving with a real test around the corner in May's local elections. That is his first opportunity to gain momentum. All successful opposition leaders need to gain that to show that are heading towards power and that the government is on the way out.


  Labour has opened up a consistent five plus point lead over the Tories. That is the kind of killer punch and momentum Ed Miliband needs. I hope it is reflected in the real opinion poll in May.

Lib Dem wipeout?

Much has been made of the Lib Dems' latest low in finishing sixth in this week's Barnsley by-election. Does this really signal the descent into oblivion for the Tory lap-dogs? The prospects don't look good for them. All those who were duped into thinking Clegg's party were actually of the progressive left and voted for them instead of Labour at the election will surely continue to desert the yellow.

That prognosis could be too simplistic. Boundary changes will take many seats away from Labour at the next election. Couple that with unclear prospects for the AV referendum and there could be a very different political landscape in the near future. The Tories are likely to suffer from being a very unpopiular government.

This presents a huge political opportunity for Ed Miliband. He has to highlight splits within the Lib Dem support, Barnsley showed that many of these will come back to Labour. More crucially he and Ed Balls have to gain credibility for alternative economic policies to the slash and burn from the Tories.

At the moment there is so much uncertainty with the only certainty that the Lib Dems will wretch to more new lows before an election in four years that could be anyone's.

East London Line to Highbury and Islington

The East London Line began running to Highbury and Islington today. This means that I might start to socialise with some of my acquaintances from South London. Not only will it help me get around London it also illustrates a point about political planning.

Boris Johnson unveiled the extension today but it is actually the work of former Labour mayor Ken Livingstone. The new East London Line forms part of his vision for an orbital railway for London. This plan was formed during his first term but has only opened with one year left of Johnson's term. That shows how long it takes for transformational projects like this to come to fruition.



That mayor Johnson has ensured that there are no plans for any similar projects in London at the moment we will have to wait a long time before anything else like this improves the lives of Londoners again.  Crossrail wasn't Boris' to scrap. This leaves me slightly worried that there isn't a sustainable plan for keeping London moving in years to come. At least not with the Tories in charge there won't be.

Australian holidays

I'm now back in the UK after a few weeks visiting the family in Australia.I thoroughly enjoyed my time there and completely understand why so many people rave about the place.

I went to see England lose a One Day International at the SCG, watched Sydney FC play Wellington Phoenix at the Sydney Football Stadium and greyhounds race at Wentworth Park. The A-League is well set up though domestic league soccer still has some way to go in Australia before it becomes officially popular. The 45,000 capacity stadium was about 10% full for a match that I reckon compares to a slower paced English League One.

When I wasn't watching sport inevitably I spent time on Sydney's numerous beaches. Bondi was full of Japanese and English tourists, likewise Coogee. Balmoral was my favourite with its 1920s charm. After leaving Sydney's Taronga Zoo, worth visiting for the breathtaking views of the city alone, I walked along the coastal path and found a completely deserted beach, Whiting, which I then spent the afternoon on, completely to myself. It has views of the harbour, Opera House and when I swam out a little, the Harbour Bridge too. Unbeatable.

I also followed the impending New South Wales state elections with some interest. Labor has held the state since 1995 and is under considerable pressure to retain power. To me looking at it from afar I read both Labor and the Liberal party promising to build new rail new lines in Sydney and arguing over who would build the most. Labor seem to be apologising through their TV advertising for not having done enough with power too. When you get to that stage it looks like you are onto a loser. We shall see.

A rather nice long holiday

As those who know me will be aware I am currently in Sydney visiting the family. I also stopped off for a weekend in Malaysia on the way out for a wedding and whistle stop tour. I've not been blogging because I have been holidaying, but I have noticed a few things of note on my trip:

• The high percentage of female political leaders in Australia is quite striking and very welcome (especially as most of them are Labor!)
• A signer always seems to accompany politicians on TV when they speak, could we do this in the UK?
• Political advertising on TV: I quite like it
• People get drunk at the Sydney Cricket Ground on low strength beer
• Kevin Pietersen gives "banter" back to the crowd: I quite like it

Attack, attack,attack,attack, attack!

Alan Johnson's fall was anticipated by many for some time though it is always disappointing to lose someone of such obvious talent. Every cloud though and the silver lining is that as Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls is going to be a high profile attack dog for Labour.

I've found it difficult to see the Tory government making their most aggressive cuts while Labour and Ed Miliband get their own house in order. Balls is likely to be aggressive and abrasive and will ensure Labour gets heard. This is vital, for there needs to be an alternative narrative to that emanating from the Tories. If not, the Tory narrative could be the one upon which the next election id fought on, and that would be bad for Labour.

It helps of course, that there was a second silver lining for Labour on Friday with Tory media chief Andy Coulson resigning. That makes it just a bit more difficult for the Tories to spin that narrative.

A new airport for London, are you serious Boris?

I underestimated Boris Johnson. I didn't think he was that serious in pursuing plans for a new London airport in the Thames Estuary. I'm sorry for underestimating Johnson and not anticipating the all of the bad ideas he throws his considerable weight behind.

After suggesting that Heathrow cannot meet London's needs into the future he proposes to undertake yet another study into the viability of a new airport somewhere else. Not so long ago he was espousing the virtues of a new airport in the Thames Estuary, Boris Island. This idea was widely panned, by airlines and locals alike for cutting off access to large parts of the UK and for cutting off the jobs supply to west London.

If airlines don't want to move and the government doesn't want to provide any money for a new airport our mayor would be better of spending time and scarce money improving London's current transport headaches. He could negotiate with the tube unions and put a stop to strikes, like he promised, or he could accept that he needs the money from the Western Congestion Charge zone and bring it back, he could introduce a higher charge for gas guzzlers, he could investigate options for future London transport links, like cross-river tram, that he cancelled.

While Heathrow really matters to London, Boris has wasted most of his mayoralty investigating plans for an alternative and has delivered nothing. He has also delivered only one major change to London's transport - higher costs and lower revenues. I really should have anticipated that.

Does anyone actually read election leaflets?

There was a minor media furore when Phil Woolas was booted out of parliament for telling lies on his election leaflets. Last night Labour won Oldham East and Saddleworth and increased a slender majority of the shameless Lib Dems. What particularly struck me is that almost none of the reporting or TV  interviews with voters mentioned the Woolas "scandal". People weren't interested it seems. This suggests that nobody really cares about political leaflets, other than for the nuisance they cause to porches and doormats. If they really mattered there would have been a backlash against Labour, but there wasn't.

The media have also reported the drop in support for the Lib Dems and Tories as "expected" and typical for a government at this stage. When Labour lost by elections it was always magnified to be a huge setback for Brown. The real test, for the media and Miliband's Labour, will come when there is a by election in a Tory-Labour marginal. The result and how that is reported will then give a good indication of both the political and media mood.

Despite everything, Labour expected to win Oldham East and the only "disastrous" result for any party would have been for Labour to lose. Miliband has passed his first test with this by election a good demonstration of the enthusiasm that seems to be back within the Labour Party. Victor Debbie Abrahams reported that there were over 1400 Labour volunteers helping her campaign. That is phenomenal. Onwards to the next one. More of that sort of turnout from the Labour ranks and a win over the deeply unpopular Tories in a future by election is a real possibility.

UPDATE: just to be clear, this isn't a defence of Woolas' actions, merely me noting that despite the gravity of his expulsion this wasn't that important in the campaign.

A year of pain

It was fashionable in the 1980s for our high streets to have closed down shops, for people to be out of work, for there to be regular protests against the government and for each new year to be welcomed with huge increases to the cost of commuting. After the years of plenty in the noughties it appears that we are headed for a 1980s re-run.

Both the Tories and Lib Dems promised us all at the election that they wouldn't put up VAT. The sales tax is commonly regarded as regressive, hitting the poorest hardest.

Instead of a new politics of trust 2011 is already showing to be a year of expensive broken promises. Expect the resentment to continue, the cost of living to rise and the shops to start closing.

Happy New Year.

The end of the SDP?

It is bbvious that there are splits of opinion among Lib Dems. They have always been, in effect, two different parties with two very distinct ideologies. I can't see how ex-Labour Party and SDP members like Vince Cable can really stomach acting as puppets for an incredibly right wing Tory government.

If ministers wholeheartedly disagree with the government's programme and they don't feel that they can fairly argue their case within it, they should do the honourable thing and quit. Perhaps the SDP splitters should think about what happened in the early 1980s and come back to Labour.

Are we in football manager territory?

Ed Miliband has not been Labour leader for very long. I spoke briefly on this morning's LBC breakfast show with Nick Ferrari about whether he is doing a good job or not. Is it too early to be making this kind of judgement?

Of course it is. It feels like we are applying football manager levels of scrutiny to our leaders. This is unrealistic but also reflects the political and media landscape today. Everyone is looking for an immediate response to feed the 24 hour news and Twittering demand.

John Reid said today that Ed needs to show some of his cards now. He is right but I get the feeling that Ed is devising his. plan and is taking a long term view and had picked those as the battles he wants to win.

He is now building a team and has appointed his spokesperson. I want to see Ed hit the ground running in 2011. The coalition have plenty of weaknesses that are ripe for exploitation.

Is it too early to judge? Yes, but those judgements are being made already. The time is ready to start running.

Just what they would have wanted

Reading through the weekend's newspapers it struck me that the Tories are doing quite well out of this coalition. There have been mass protests against student fees, but the Lib Dems and Nick Clegg were the butt of that. Unpopular decision have not significantly affected their poll rating and neither has a new Labour leader. Yet they are driving through a programme of cuts and policies that they will long have dreamed of and are getting the Lib Dems to do their dirty work for them. Perfect?

There could be trouble around the corner with Ken Clarke's relaxing of criminal justice. The cuts will bite and people will lash back at the Tories I'm sure. The Tories are as guilty as the Lib Dems of breaking pre-election promises. David Cameron gave personal guarantees that Child Benefit wouldn't be cut and nobody ever suggested that VAT would go up, yet it has.

The mud hasn't stuck to the Tories, I bet they cant' believe their luck.

Bother for Teather

Lib Dem education minister and former Islington councillor Sarah Teather will be lining up with her colleagues to vote for trebling of tuition fees tomorrow. That much was clear today when she refused to answer questions from Sky News about why she had changed her mind on fees. Like many Lib Dems she probably hasn't and like most Lib Dems hadn't thought there would be any consequences of any of their policies as they all knew they wouldn't  win the election - except Nick Clegg who still hides behind the claim that the policy only counted if they won.

The Lib Dems are being punished on this issue precisely because they made such play of being honest and offering a new politics and because this policy was used at the election to demonstrate this. They are being punished because it was this policy that garnered so many votes for them. They can't have it both ways.

This isn't about voters not understanding the art of compromise and coalition. People haven't forgotten that the Lib Dems specifically targeted the student vote to win university seats.

Teather might not like it but she and her colleagues have to live in their own mess. Her more than many because she chose to raise the issue of student fees in her maiden speech to parliament. She said: 


"tuition fees are serious issues of concern to my constituents. All the evidence suggests that fear of debt will deter those from lower income families and ethnic minority communities."


Finally, a reminder from her own website in 2008, courtesy of the Wayback machine:

Of course, just like the real Sarah Teather, and despite the issue being so "close to her heart", her current site makes no mention of tuition fees at all. If actions speak louder than words, tomorrow she and the rest of the Lib Dems get to show us what they really think.

Judge Lib Dem MPs on what they do, not what they say

I picked up a great letter in Exeter's Express and Echo reminding us all of the specific wording of the Lib Dems' tuition fees election pledge:


'I pledge to vote against any increase in fees in the next parliament and to pressure the government to introduce a fairer alternative.'


Abstention means they will still be breaking their promise as they pledged to vote against. As is rightly pointed out, the pledge doesn't specify that this is dependent on being in government - when even Lib Dem supporters have to admit there was zero chance of them being the largest party after the election. They pledged to vote against increased fees. Full stop. End of. 


For once the language of the Lib Dems was plain. They should be held to that. 

How many straws can a camel's back hold?

This week's tuition fees vote is the first big tests of the Lib Dems coalition strength. I don't expect any major casualties yet as Clegg's belief in himself and the coalition remains strong. Cracks are appearing underneath though with junior ministers looking set to quit the coalition this week. When you only have 57 MPs there isn't a great choice for the party when selecting for government jobs.

Michael Crockart looks set to be the first to go. More are likely to follow. When the coalition was first announced and Tories were just happy to be back in government and Lib Dems couldn't believe their luck I predicted that the biggest tests were then unknown. The coalition agreement could only plan for what the two parties knew would arise, not for the unknowns to come.

That Clegg is facing his first casualties from the "know" policy agenda should be a worry for him.

Tuition fees: what changed for Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems?

Nick Clegg has claimed the reason his party can't stick to their pre-election pledge to scrap tuition fees is that they didn't win the election. He is right, the Lib Dems lost seats. It is an insult to anyone with half a brain to suggest that the Lib Dems were ever likely to win the general election.

Reading the full transcript of Clegg's Independent on Sunday interview reveals him to be a fantasist presenting himself as a realist. If he really thinks that his party could have won the election he deserves to be given his own three hour Sunday evening television show. Everyone knows that Clegg had no chance of being the first election winning Liberal prime minister since Asquith in 1911.



If we all accept that Clegg was never going to win the election that should be discounted as a reason for not standing up for his party's most prominent election pledge in coalition. Clegg could feasibly argue that not winning the election 'changes' everything so much that his party have no policies at all. If that is so why bother voting for them?

Lib Dem credibility hits a new low

Just over six months ago Nick Clegg was basking in the glow of being publicly recognised for the first time after the televised leadership debates. In Islington his party had clung on to power since a knife edge election in 2006, controlling the council since 2000. How things have changed. Islington went Labour in a landslide result and Clegg faces revolt from his party after selling out to take part in a slash'n'burn Tory government. Golden boy Vince Cable can't even work out whether he supports his own policy of hiking tuition fees.

Not content with letting the Tories push through a severe programme of cuts to education funding nationally, in Islington the Lib Dems are up to their old scaremongering tricks (see leaflet, left). Their latest leaflet suggests that the local Labour council is planning to close a range of primary schools.  What is going on? I thought the Lib Dems were in charge of education now as part of a coalition with their Tory chums? Former Islington Lib Dem councillor Sarah Teather runs the education department with Michael Gove and Cable is pushing through the tripling of tuition fees.

Admittedly Islington Lib Dems have mis-spelt the name of "Hugerford" (sic) school so I can only presume that this latest campaign isn't serious. What I expect is the Lib Dems to "campaign" against the fictitious school closures and then claim victory in a few months when, miraculously, the schools don't close. That means at least two more leaflets.

Local councillors, like me, are perplexed at where these allegations have come from. Perhaps this list was written by another Lib Dem activist, just like when Kingston Lib Dem Dan Falchikov admitted he was behind the bogus claims that Kingston Hospital was going to close. Of course, Clegg was quick to jump on that bandwagon and have his photo taken "campaign" there.

Having lived under a Lib Dem council in Richmond and then Islington for many years I've got used to their negativity. I've never got used to the cheek of it all though.

Lets not forget that elsewhere, Lib Dem leaflets are smelling the coffee and encouraging their former voters to go with Labour. At least the Lib Dems have managed to overtake "other" in the latest YouGov poll. There is at least some comfort for the wicked.

No more mister nice guy

The Economist is there to make me feel guilty. Guilty that I don't read it often enough. Guilty that I'd feel a better person were I to read it regularly. I read it today and found two articles resonating with me. One speculating that the Lib Dems are losing their branding as the "nice guys" of British politics and the other suggesting that Labour needs "to find an updated, outline version of Tony Blair’s election-winning Labour philosophy, combining respect for markets with a belief in strong public services, but fitted to the no-money age."


An election is unlikely to take place until 2015 but the fault lines of party politics are shifting already. We have a coalition for the first time since the second world war. The Lib Dems are in power for the first time since the first world war. Labour is out of power for the first time this century.


Nick Clegg went into the election with a sky high reputation, suffered a poor election result but was rewarded with power. The "sacrifices" made to secure coalition already look like proving fatal for the Lib Dems. Sooner or later "ordinary voters start to think of the Lib Dems and the Tories as a sort of amorphous “coalition party”, if that happens Clegg will be the loser.


At the same time Labour have a huge opportunity. A gap is likely to appear which will need to be filled with only one party able to credibly oppose and argue against the coalition. The faster it works out how to do that the better or it may find that the fault lines have shifted yet further, requiring another reinvention.