David Cameron

“Give our public sector workers a pay rise!”

The big news this week in the world of British Politics has been over the 1% pay cap on public sector workers. If you’re wondering what the heck is a 1% pay cap, take a seat while this blog post gives you the lowdown…

What is the 1% pay cap on public sector workers?

The cap, first introduced by then Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, in 2013 replaced a two-year pay freeze as part of a wide-ranging austerity package introduced by the coalition government. What this means is many public sector workers since the introduction of the pay cap have not seen a rise in their wages as the cap permits a 1% per cent annual increase in public sector pay. However the wages of those in the private sector has increased ever so slightly in comparison. Take a look at the diagram below…

AVERAGE EARNINGS GROWTH: 

AVERAGE EARNINGS GROWTH: 

Graph depicts percentage changes between the private and public sector. Source: Source: ONS – Annual % changes in three month average regular pay

 

So why all the fuss now? 

In line with recent tragedies in Manchester, Westminster, London Bridge, Finsbury Park and the fire at Grenfell Tower, our emergency services have been praised by politicians and civilians alike. Everyday and especially in dire times, our public servants go above and beyond which is why many politicians have called for their hard efforts to be recognised by lifting the 1% pay cap to ensure all public servants receive a pay rise.

Senior MPs such as Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson and Environment Secretary, Michael Gove are amongst many Conservative cabinet ministers and backbench MPs  who are calling on Prime Minister Theresa May to consider lifting the 1% pay cap for public sector workers. Although Johnson and Gove did not out-rightly suggest the cap should be lifted for all 5.1m public sector workers, they have encouraged Theresa May to listen to an upcoming report by pay review bodies, which most likely will recommend the government lift the cap when it is published later this month. In the  Conservative Party manifesto, they had committed to keeping the cap until 2020.

The Labour Party  have also called for the cap to be lifted as they proposed an amendment to the Queen’s speech calling for an end to the pay cap, however it was rejected by 323 MPs in a vote in the House of Commons as the DUP voted in line with the Conservative Party as part of their informal coalition. In response to Labour’s defeated amendment, the leader of the Party, Jeremy Corbyn, commented:

“Tonight, the Conservatives had an opportunity to put their money where their mouth is, by ending cuts to our police and fire service and lifting the public sector pay cap.

“Although government ministers said they had learned the lessons of the general election and were listening to voters, it is clear that nothing has changed.

They had the perfect opportunity to walk the walk, but instead they marched through the lobby to show Tory austerity is business as usual.

While the money is there when the Conservatives need it to keep themselves in office, the rest of the country now face more devastating cuts to our emergency and other vital services.

The Conservatives clearly plan to keep working for a privileged few. Only Labour is ready to form a government that will work for the many.”

 

Despite pressures from the two major political parties, No. 10 Downing Street (where Prime Minister Theresa May resides) have confirmed there will be no changes to the pay cap. The Prime Minister’s spokesman has said they are “working through recommendations” from the public sector pay review bodies and would respond to those recommendations “in due course”.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies has estimated that increasing public sector pay in line with the private sector would cost an extra £6.3bn a year. Some might say if Theresa May can find an extra £1.5bn to keep her position as Prime Minister, she could surely offer the same courtesy and allow public sector workers to have some stability through their pay. But hey, it’s not like we don’t have nurses and teachers leaving the profession, seeking employment across the pond and risking the future of our younger generation…

In addition to the 1% annual rise, some NHS staff also get gradual increases in their pay as they progress in their roles.

The public sector employs millions of people both within central government and local government. This includes:

  • NHS workers (domestic staff, porters, administrators, nurses, doctors etc)
  • Teachers and those who work in education
  • Law enforcement and security
  • Social Services
  • Armed Forces
  • Police
  • Fire Service
  • Justice

And many more…

Shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth said the pay review bodies should consider a pay rise for public sector workers in line with the rise in average earnings across the economy.

Other things you may have missed…

Along with Brexit negotiations, the UK government has decided to pull out of the London Fisheries Convention which allows foreign countries to fish in British waters. The Convention was signed in 1964, before the UK joined the EU; withdrawal will take two years. Under the convention, vessels from France, Belgium, Germany, Ireland and the Netherlands are permitted to fish within six and 12 nautical miles off the UK coastline. British vessels will also lose the right to fish in the waters of other nations. Environment Secretary Michael Gove says the withdrawal will let the UK “take back control of our fishing policies”. But Greenpeace UK warned the move alone would not deliver a better future for the UK fishing industry. Looks like the UK really is ‘taking back control’…

 

On the subject of ‘taking back control’…

The government has reportedly dropped its ‘have cake and eat it‘ approach to Brexit, as ongoing negotiations have caused the Department for Exiting the EU (DexEU) to now accept that Britain must choose between privileged market access and political control in Brexit talks with the European Union. This change of thinking within the government represents a clear departure from the early negotiating position set out by the Prime Minister in her Lancaster House speech in January. May suggested that Britain would be able to negotiate a Brexit deal based on full access to the European single market without concessions over immigration and payments to the EU. Civil servants have reportedly since told government officials they face a choice between a deal based on preferential access to the single market but surrendering demands for independent immigration and leaving the ECJ, or a “taking back control” agreement cutting all ties with the EU but with a less favourable trade deal.

 

Pensions minister, Guy Opperman, has been criticised for his suggestion that millions of women under the age of 60 who face cuts to their state pension should take up apprenticeships in order to re-enter employment. His comments were made at a debate in Westminster Hall to discuss the changes to the law which will mean the state pension age will rise from 60 to 66 by 2020, delaying access to pensions for women born in the 1950s. SNP minister, Mhairi Black has campaigned frequently against the change in law and had told MPs if the Conservatives could find £1bn to strike a deal with the DUP, they could afford to give women the pensions they are due. Despite many ministers across the political parties arguing the changes are unfair, Mr Opperman says the government is committed to “life-long learning” and will make no concessions.

 

The German Green party, which had pushed for LGBT rights for decades, finally got their victory after the German parliament voted in favour of legalising same-sex marriage by 393 votes to 226 with four abstentions. As it was a free vote, lawmakers were permitted to vote according to their conscience rather than obeying party lines. The vote which permits LGBT people to marry and adopt was called by Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition allies the Social Democrats (SDP). However, Merkel voted against the move. Congrats Germany! 🇧🇪🌈

Who says this blog only comments on British Politics eh! 😉

May’s Coalition of Chaos

Hello readers! Before you say anything, I know, I am terrible at maintaining what is meant to be a weekly blog – don’t judge me! 🐵🙃 In all fairness I have been dealing with some heavy personal stuff these last 6 months but I have still been following the world of politics. All my commentary can be found on my Twitter – @JasziieeM

On the subject of politics….

This week Theresa May finally sold her soul, nope sorry, signed an informal coalition with the Democratic Unionist Party, or as commonly known DUP. This follows after May’s abysmal election result and failure to win the 365 seats needed in Parliament to form a government. If you’re puzzled, or have no clue what is going on, bear with as this post will try to explain EVERYTHING you need to know in bites-sized portions. Hold onto your seats folks!

Brexit negotiations 

It’s been exactly a year since the majority of the British electorate (well, only with a narrow majority) voted to leave the European Union. Article 50 – the official process which kick-starts the divorce proceedings – was triggered earlier in the year and official talks have begun in Brussels. As Article 50 has already been triggered, it means the UK has two years to negotiate and leave the European Union so we won’t be leaving just yet.

Last week Theresa May and her government set out their legislative proposals in the Queens Speech (see details below). One of the central pieces of legislation which was included in the speech is the ‘Great Repeal Bill’, which would convert EU regulations into UK law and grant parliament temporary powers to amend or appeal this legislation when Britain has left the EU and the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Other measures the government have committed to do for the next two years include customs and trade bills, which put in place the legal framework to ensure the UK has an independent customs system in place and can make trade deals with other nations after Brexit. The proposed immigration bill would end European freedom of movement and make the status of EU nationals and their families subject to UK law. These bills serve as guidelines for the government’s intentions for Brexit and are due to be expanded once negotiations in Brussels have progressed.

Many EU nationals residing in the UK have pondered their position post-Brexit and Prime Minister May aimed to provide reassurances this week as she revealed plans to allow around 3m EU citizens living in the UK to stay after Brexit under a new “UK settled status” that would grant EU migrants who have lived in Britain for five years the right to stay permanently, with access to healthcare, education and other benefits. Those who have lived in the UK for less than five years will be allowed to stay until they are eligible for settled status, while those arriving after the cut-off date – expected to fall somewhere between April 2017 and March 2019 – will have two years to either obtain a work permit or return home. May described the proposal as a “fair and serious” offer, as it was announced at a summit of EU leaders in Brussels. German Chancellor Angela Merkel also described it as a “good start” in the Brexit negotiations. However, the plans are dependent on EU nations guaranteeing the same rights to the estimated 1m Britons living in Europe.

Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party however, has accused the Prime Minister of using people as “bargaining chips” in Brexit negotiations.

General Election 2017 

After appearing on many interviews stating she would not call a snap election, Theresa May did a u-turn (one of many) and called a snap election, at the advice of her advisors, Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill who have since resigned after many Tory insiders blamed them for the tragic election results.

#GE2017 took place on 8th June 2017 with Theresa May and her advisors wanting to take an opportunity for the Prime Minister to increase her majority, and in her words ‘strengthen her hand’ ahead of Brexit negotiations. This comes as before the announcement of the snap election, Labour’s popularity ratings in the polls were low.

Screenshot 2017-06-30 at 02.05.16

Voting intention, Source: BBC GE2017 Poll Tracker

It was anticipated that Theresa May and the Conservatives would win the snap election with a landslide majority (that is 74 seats), possibly bigger than that of Thatcher’s premiership but the polls got it oh so wrong yet again. You’d think these journos and pollsters would learn their lesson from 2015 General Election!

During the campaigning in the run up to polling day Labour aimed to turn their position around in the short period of time they had and by George did they do just that! The Party adopted the slogan ‘For the many, not the few’, secured endorsements from Grime artists such as Skepta, and Stormzy and even from friends across the pond like Bernie Sanders and Danny DeVito. Their use of social media worked a treat too, with many of their campaign videos and work from the group Momentum gaining millions of views. Some of their manifesto pledges included:

  • Scrap student tuition fees
  • Nationalisation of England’s nine water companies.
  • Re-introduce the 50p rate of tax on the highest earners (above £123,000)
  • Income tax rate 45p on £80,000 and above
  • More free childcare, expanding free provisions for two, three and four year olds
  • Guarantee triple lock for pensioner incomes
  • End to zero hours contracts
  • Hire 10,000 new police officers, 3,000 new firefighters
  • Moves to charge companies a levy on salaries above £330,000
  • Deliver rail electrification “including in Wales and the South West”.

Full details of the Labour Party Manifesto can be found here.

Meanwhile the Conservative Party’s election campaigning took a toll for the worst when Theresa May announced she would scrap free school meals and introduce a dementia tax* in a bid to tackle the demands of social care across the UK.

Dementia Tax: a proposal to make elderly people pay for care in their own home unless they have less than £100,000 in assets, as it would force them to use up the value of their residential property for the first time. At the moment, if you have more than £23,250 in assets you have to pay for your own care. This means pensioners’ life savings can be drained while they languish in a home. The Tory policy will replace this with a much higher ‘floor’ of £100,000 instead.

Theresa May had failed to mention the higher floor of £100,000 when the social care policy was first introduced. When questioned by members of the press as to whether this was another u-turn, she denied it was such.

Some of the other manifesto proposals by the Conservative Party include:

  • Deliver a smooth and orderly departure from the EU
  • Increase NHS budget in England by £8bn a year by 2022/23
  • An extra £4bn on schools in England by 2022
  • Restating commitment to bring net migration down to tens of thousands
  • Balance budget by 2025
  • Replacement of triple-lock pension pledge after 2020 with double lock

Full details of the Conservative Party manifesto can be found here.

She had also gone as far as to accuse European leaders of interfering with the General Election (possibly a way of saving her own back?).  She had accused leaders in Brussels of trying to sabotage Brexit and that the European press had misrepresented Britain’s stance on the issue.


Throughout the campaign, commentators had noted the personality politics that was emerging; the constant comparison between Theresa May and her team vs. Jeremy Corbyn and the coalition of chaos. It was also an election filled with soundbites: strong and stable; no deal is better than a bad deal; me and my team; coalition of chaos; strengthen my hand; Brexit means Brexit. It was so bad that many on social media where even playing Theresa May/Conservative Bingo during live debates:

Image result for theresa may bingo

Source: The New European

It seems beyond Brexit, Theresa May wanted to secure her own mandate – remember, she wasn’t really elected by the public, nor her own party in all honesty as she was made Prime Minister by default after Andrea Leadsom had pulled out of the leadership race after David Cameron resigned over the Brexit result. And of course, with the Labour Party still under strains with questions over Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership prior to the election, it would have been a wasted opportunity if May didn’t call the election. But it was a decision that would cost her dear…


Post Election Results

Election results began to come in throughout the early hours of 9th June 2017 and exit polls suggested a hung parliament. Exit polls are an opinion poll of people leaving a polling station, asking how they voted. In British politics, they are usually accurate and this time around there were because lo’ and behold, we have a hung parliament!

Hung Parliaments occur when no political party has secured enough seats form a majority government – in the UK 326 seats are required for a party to outright form a government and in this case, the Tories had only managed 318 seats whilst Labour secured 262 seats, 30 more than they had previously had, increasing their percentage of the vote to 40%.

Although Labour had lost this election, it was still a victory for them in many ways as Jeremy Corbyn as well as many other Labour MPs increased their majority in their constituencies, more young people than ever before turned up to the polls swaying the vote with traditional Conservative areas like Canterbury going to Labour for the first time in history. The election also proved Corbyn’s agility to remain as leader of the Labour Party, suppressing any doubts in his opponents and many of the media’s minds.

With hung parliaments, a number of scenarios could happen…

  1. The previous government (in this case the Conservatives) may decide to remain in position whilst they try to form a coalition with another party in order to make up the numbers and thus command a majority government.
  2. The previous government (or the party with the most votes) may decide to govern with the minority of Members of Parliament (MPs) – this is known as a Minority Government and what Theresa May has currently decided to do. Well partly. More on this in a bit…
  3. If the incumbent government (the Conservatives) is unable to command a majority and the PM decides to resign, the leader of the largest opposition party may be invited to form a government and may do so either as a minority or in coalition with another party or parties.
  4. If no party is able to command a majority to govern, another vote may be put forward to the electorate. Yes, another General Election.

As Theresa May was short of 14 seats to gain the majority she so desired, she decided to enter an informal coalition with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP). The DUP are a unionist (pro-UK) political party based in Northern Ireland and is now the fifth largest party in Parliament; its 36% share of the vote in Northern Ireland resulted in 10 MPs being returned to Westminster. The party is led by Arlene Foster and are traditionally (c)onservative on many social issues in which they oppose same-sex marriage, and are anti-abortion.

The alliance between the two parties has caused much controversy with the opposition party in Northern Ireland, Sinn Fein, arguing a deal with the DUP goes against the Good Friday agreement and would “jeopardise the neutrality, the non-partisan stance, that a prime minister and a secretary of state must have in relation to Northern Ireland’s politics”.

More on the history of the DUP can be found here.

Queen’s Speech

Ahead of the Queen’s speech last Wednesday, Prime Minister Theresa May promised to run her minority government propped up by the DUP with “humility and resolve”.

“The election result was not the one I hoped for, but this Government will respond with humility and resolve to the message the electorate sent”

Her legislative plans which were outlined in the Queen’s Speech is as follows:

  • A bill will be introduced to repeal the European Communities Act and provide certainty for individuals and businesses.
  • New bills on trade and customs will help to implement an independent trade policy, and support will be given to help British businesses export to markets around the world.
  • Legislation will be introduced to ensure the United Kingdom remains a world leader in new industries, including electric cars and commercial satellites. A new bill will also be brought forward to deliver the next phase of high-speed rail.
  • Reform of technical education to ensure people have the skills they need for the high-skilled, high-wage jobs of the future.
  • Increase of the National Living Wage
  • Legislation will be brought forward to protect the victims of domestic violence and abuse.
  • Reform of Mental Health legislation.
  • Proposals will be brought forward to ban unfair tenant fees, promote fairness and transparency in the housing market, and help ensure more homes are built.
  • A new law will ensure that the United Kingdom retains its world-class regime protecting personal data, and a proposal for a new digital charter.
  • Legislation will also be introduced to modernise the courts system and to help reduce motor insurance premiums.
  • A full public inquiry into the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower to ascertain the causes, and ensure that the appropriate lessons are learnt.
  • Ministers will continue to invest in our gallant Armed Forces, meeting the NATO commitment to spend at least two per cent of national income on defence.
  • Proposals to ensure that critical national infrastructure is protected to safeguard national security.
  • Review of counter-terrorism strategy.
  • Continued support for international action against climate change, including the implementation of the Paris Agreement.

The package outlined above, is primarily dominated by Brexit with many of the Tory manifesto’s most contentious proposals abandoned, including the plan to to cut winter fuel allowances and the proposal to get rid of free school lunches. Many critics and commentators noted the thin nature of this years Queen’s Speech. Jeremy Corbyn told MPs  it was a “threadbare legislative programme for a government that has lost its majority and apparently run out of ideas altogether”.

 

An article in the Economist also describes the Queen’s Speech as ‘scaled down’, highlighting the strains Theresa May will have to face in the next two years, particularly with Brexit negotiations. However, more attention was given to the Queens choice of attire which resembled the EU flag…

Image result for queens speech 2017 attire and eu flag

It seems the Queen paid more attention to her choice of outfit than to the speech she was reading! Considering she was in a hurry to get to the Ascot races in time, perhaps Dennis Skinner’s annual quip was welcomed…

Theresa May has also taken the unusual step of having a two-year parliamentary session on the grounds that it covers the timetable for leaving the European Union. Still clinging onto the notion of strong and stable eh? The Prime Minister insisted in her statement that it would be a “busy legislative session with a number of Bills geared towards making a success of Brexit”.

This week, MPs have voted with a majority of 14 to support the Conservatives in their agenda for the next two years with the DUP giving the Conservatives their backing following the ‘confidence’ and ‘supply’ or informal coalition (whatever you want to call it) deal that was struck earlier this week (more on this below…)

Meanwhile, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, has shown his no-nonsense approach with his new found confidence after the election result a few weeks ago by sacking shadow ministers Andy Slaughter, Catherine West and Ruth Cadbury followed by the resignation of shadow transport minister Daniel Zeichner after they defied the leadership to back an amendment put forward by Chuka Ummuna on Brexit. The amendment had called for Britain to remain in the EU’s Single Market and Customs Union, in defiance of official Labour Party policy.

DUP Deal – signed, sealed, delivered

Earlier this week, the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) agreed to support Theresa May’s minority government on a vote-by-vote basis – a ‘confidence and supply’ arrangement – on the condition that £1bn in extra funding goes to Northern Ireland over two years.

Of course the arrangement faced backlash from politicians in Scotland and Wales as well as within May’s own party. Seems like Theresa May found that magic money tree after all…

The informal coalition means the DUP’s 10 MPs will vote in favour of the Conservatives’ Queen’s speech later this week, giving the Prime Minister an effective majority of 13 and ensuring her government’s legislative agenda passes in the House of Commons. Remember, this is not a coalition like that of 2010 with the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. This agreement with the DUP means they are only tied to supporting the government in key votes, such as the Budget and Queen’s Speech, but not necessarily in other measures.

So where will the DUP’s new found income go?

 

  • Health: A minimum of £250m, with £200m directed to health service transformation and £50m towards mental health provision. It will also receive £50m to “address immediate pressures”
  • Education: £50m to “address immediate pressures”
  • Infrastructure: £400m for projects including delivery the York Street Interchange, plus £150m to provide ultra-fast broadband across Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland’s capital budget is currently about £1bn per year.
  • Deprivation: £100m over five years targeted to deprived communities
  • VAT and Air Passenger Duty tax: Agreed to further consultation
  • Corporation tax: Agreed to work towards devolving the tax to Stormont
  • City deals and Enterprise Zones: Agreed to “comprehensive and ambitious set” of city deals and “limited number” of Enterprise Zones

 

 

Other things you may have missed…

Tim Farron resigned as leader of the Liberal Democrats following what he called his conflict between his politics and his faith.

His resignation comes as he was repeatedly pressed by the media during the general election campaign over his position on varying issues including homosexuality.

“From the very first day of my leadership, I have faced questions about my Christian faith. I’ve tried to answer with grace and patience. Sometimes my answers could have been wiser.

“The consequences of the focus on my faith is that I have found myself torn between living as a faithful Christian and serving as a political leader,” he said in a televised statement.

“To be a political leader – especially of a progressive, liberal party in 2017 – and to live as a committed Christian, to hold faithfully to the Bible’s teaching, has felt impossible for me.”

Favourites to take over the leadership include Lib Dem veteran, Vince Cable and Ed Davey.

 
A cyber attack on Parliament has compromised up to 90 email accounts, prompting the Westminster digital security team to shut down access to MPs and peers’ accounts. While the attack was contained, early investigations suggest “significantly fewer than 1% of the 9,000 accounts on the parliamentary network” have been targeted. The 9,000 email accounts belong to government ministers and other MPs and peers, as well as other staff and civil servants, but it is not yet known whose accounts have been compromised. A parliamentary spokesperson has revealed the affected accounts “did not conform to guidance” regarding password strength.

 
After all the efforts from public sector workers, especially in recent tragic events, the Labour Party bid to end the 1% cap on public sector pay but were defeated by the government by 323 MPs to 309 – giving the Prime Minister a majority of 14 as all 10 DUP MPs voted against the amendment, in line with the ‘confidence and supply’ deal agreed with the Conservatives. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn had tabled the amendment to the Queen’s Speech in the hope some potential Conservative rebels who opposed the pay cap would vote against the Prime Minister.

The vote followed confusion over the future of public sector pay after Downing Street earlier signalled it could lift the 1% cap. A senior Number 10 source said the Prime Minister had “heard the message” of the General Election and the Government understood “people are weary” of austerity measures. But, within hours of that statement, Downing Street insisted there had been no change to the Government’s policy.

 

Phew, that was a lot to get through! Be sure to hit the ‘Get involved’ button and let me know what areas of British politics you’d like covered in next week’s blog post.

May-Day! May-Day!

Andrea Leadsom pulled out of the Conservative Leadership race this week, leaving Theresa May as sole contender and the new owner of the keys to No. 10 Downing Street.

It may or may not have come as a shock to some of you, but Leadsom did come under a lot of pressure for her remarks on her suitably as PM last week. But, there are now some disputes (as there always is in politics) over the way in which May has become PM, questioning democracy in Britain. Bear in mind even Conservative members have not had a say in May’s sudden leadership, never mind the electorate. This causes some to question whether we should have an emergency general election to legitimise May’s premiership?

Let’s take a look at Theresa May’s policy record:

 

At least Cameron seems happy.

On Tuesday, Cameron chaired his last Cabinet meeting, with May taking over the reigns after Wednesday’s PMQs.

Labour’s leadership battles continue – with Angela Eagle launching her leadership bid. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depends on your stance) was overshadowed by the Leadsom’s decision to stand down from the Conservative leadership race. Poor Eagle was left in an almost-empty room with journalists fleeing her leadership launch to attend to Leadsom’s front steps as she announced her resignation, thus making Theresa May the Prime Minister-in-waiting.

Oh dear oh dear. What an awkward sight. If things weren’t already awkward for the leadership hopeful, on Tuesday evening, it was announced that Jeremy Corbyn WILL in fact be on the ballot in the Labour leadership contest. Has the #chickencoup failed? Well with thousands of Corbynistas and Labour’s increasing membership (again, Corbynistas perhaps?) it is likely that Mr Corbyn may be elected with an even bigger mandate, a way to show the Blairites within the party that ‘New Labour’ is well and truly dead.

If divisions within the party weren’t prominent before, they sure are now. With Eagle’s constituency office vandalised and Owen Smith also launching his own leadership campaign, it is an understatement to say the party is going through one bumpy ride. The question is, what happens if Corbyn is elected with a much bigger mandate? One alternative scenario is ‘Momentum’ becomes a new party in itself, with Corbyn as its leader and thus rival to Labour centrists. But let’s not speculate eh.

Needless to say, May’s cabinet reshuffle did gain a lot of attention, with Boris Johnson being brought back into the limelight with his appointment as Foreign Secretary. Yes, BoJo is now the man who will represent the UK to the rest of the world. Hm. May’s other cabinet appointments include:

It is important to note the new role of ‘Brexit Secretary’ held by David Davis – the creation of a new department suggests May’s intention to act swiftly in Britain’s negotiations to exit the EU. Mr Davis, a firm brexiteer commented that Article 50 could be triggered as early as next year, allowing the UK “to negotiate free trade deals with the world’s biggest economies could allow the public to see some of the economic benefits of Brexit before the likely date for withdrawal from the EU around the end of 2018”.  If you were hoping for a second referendum, then you’re out of luck i’m afraid.

 What will May’s leadership bring over the next four years (that’s if she lasts that long the way British politics is going!)? Is this the beginning of the end for the Labour Party as its internal woes continue?

After yet another week of speedy politics, sit back, relax and reminisce over Cameron’s legacy as leader of the Conservative Party for 11 years and PM for 6 years. How will you remember him?

Life after Brexit…

Another week full of drama in the world of politics. After the electorate went to the polls on Thursday 23rd June, the results were shocking as the UK voted to leave the European Union. What followed the #brexit result was celebration on the leave side, heartbreak and turmoil for remainers and uncertainty as the UK market fluctuated mirroring a roller-coaster.

The results which came out on the early hours of last Friday morning shocked Britain, and undoubtedly the rest of the world as it was announced 52% of British public has voted to leave the European Union. Of course, many had rightly predicted the result would be close, however with the remain vote just standing at 48%, it wasn’t the result some had predicted or wished for.

Northern Ireland, Scotland and London were the only regions to overwhelmingly vote remain whilst the rest of the UK, including Wales and the rest of England voted to leave (quite strongly – see above for stats). There are many reasons as to why a majority of Brits have voted to leave the European Union, but the one topic that comes up time and time again is immigration. We’ll back to that in a bit, but it is also important to highlight other factors which altered the referendum result, including the generation gap and social cleavages – those belonging to the working class especially, may have voted to leave as a protest against the establishment. Take a look at the data below…

Source: YouGov – https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/06/27/how-britain-voted/

So what does the referendum result mean? Well since Britain has decided to leave the EU, steps will now be taken to terminate the UK’s membership of the Union. To do so, Article 50 – Lisbon Treaty, needs to be triggered which states:

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.

The question on everyone’s lips now is who will lead the discussions for our #brexit now David Cameron has resigned? His resignation last Friday sparked rumours and debacle over who would next replace him in October, but more on that later.

Now, back to the topic of immigration. During the referendum campaign, the ‘Leave’ campaign had talked a lot about the need to limit free movement, arguing the alleged £350 million paid into the EU could be better spent on public services such as the NHS and building new schools. However, just days after the referendum result, members of the leave camp have already regressed on this debate, the very same debate in which some voters based their decision on.

In life after #brexit, there was also some concern for Chancellor George Osborne who was not seen since the day of the referendum, but don’t worry, he finally emerged on Monday during his treasury speech. The brexit vote had plummeted the UK’s shares in the stock market, leaving many economists and business owners concerned – his treasury speech aimed to halt their concerns and give us all a sense of hope. Needless to say, he tried.

Remember the debacle within the Conservative Party? Well it’s about to get a whole lot complicated. Not just over our EU membership, oh no. There are now questions as to who will now replace David Cameron as leader of the Conservatives, and thus Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Favourite to win the leadership contest was Boris Johnson (supported by Zac Goldsmith no less!), but you’ll all be pleased (or not, depending on your take on things) to know that Michael Gove, who campaigned alongside BoJo has decided to run for the leadership after claiming Johnson hasn’t got what it takes. Ouch! Talk about backstabbing your mate!

Jeremy Hunt had also stated he would run for the leadership race but it seems he missed the deadline so we can all breathe a sigh of relief there. Also vying for the leadership contest is Theresa May, Liam Fox, Stephen Crabb and Andrea Leadsom. For more information on the candidates, click here.

According to Conservative Home, as of July 2nd, the running tally of Conservative MPs who are supporting the various declared candidates for the Party leadership is as follows:

  • May – 102
  • Gove – 21
  • Crabb – 21
  • Leadsom – 21
  • Fox – 8

Does this Home Secretary Theresa May is set to become Britain’s second female Prime Minister? It certainly looks promising but as the Conservative Party try to fix their own internal problems, it seems the opposition, the Labour Party haven’t had it easy either.

Following from the Brexit result, members of the Labour Party, including the Parliamentary Labour Party, have called into question the role and future of their leader, Jeremy Corbyn after many of the party’s heartlands, including Wales and the North East of England voted overwhelmingly to leave the EU, despite the party’s position to remain. As a result of the shocking outcome, former Shadow Foreign Secretary, Hilary Benn had voiced his concern to Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn in which he was then sacked. What followed was a series of resignations from Corbyn’s shadow cabinet

These resignations were not helped by the vote of no confidence motion passed by Dame Margaret Hodge and the PLP in which 170 Labour MPs who voted they had no confidence in Corbyn’s leadership. Whilst many in and outside of the party have called for his resignation, especially with speculation over an upcoming general election as early as October once the Conservatives have elected their new leader, it has called into question Corbyn’s ability to hold onto power and re-inspire core voters in the very same heartlands that had voted to leave the EU. Corbyn has remained defiant that he will not be resigning as party leader – it is worth noting that Corbyn has the highest mandate than any other Labour Leader in the party’s history with just over 60% of party members. After the shadow cabinet fall-out, Corbyn appointed a new set of shadow cabinet ministers in the hope of allowing him to carry out his role as leader effectively. Well as much as he can given the bias by our *liberal, non-bias* media. With talks of another Labour Leadership contest and Corbyn promising to stand as a candidate against possible front runner, Angela Eagle, it won’t be easy for those wanting to get rid of the man who can’t be moved. There are some questions that do need to be answered, for instance:

  • What happens if Corbyn is re-elected with a larger mandate in another leadership contest?
  • Will the Labour Party split (again)?

Maybe George Galloway is onto something…

Back to the Conservatives. It is safe to say Cameron is now sitting duck as we await to find out who our next PM will be come October. Bit rich for him to call for Jeremy’s resignation then huh?

Since the referendum results were announced last Friday, it has been a hectic week for British politics; uncertainty as to when or if Article 50 will ever be triggered, will a general election be called in the Autumn? Will the Labour Party survive? Although EU members want the UK to trigger Article 50 pretty soon, it will take a long time yet; there are also questions on whether discussions around Britain’s departure from the EU would be cross-party – could you envisage Corbyn working alongside a Tory? Just look what happened in Scotland over #IndyRef…

With all this uncertainty and tension within the two main political parties, it seems Nicola Sturgeon, leader of the Scottish National Party (SNP) is the only British political leader to have a plan following Brexit. The leave campers did not expect to win and have thus left the country in a mess.

 

Nevertheless, it’s an understatement to say that the #brexit vote has caused divisions within the UK, not just within our political parties but amongst the people themselves, with many regretting their decision…

…and others even signing a petition calling for a second referendum! Oh, and lest we forget the effect the result had on the stock market.

The rapid changes to the political sphere have caused many, including Labour MP, David Lammy to consider Parliamentary intervention to overturn the referendum result. Constitutionally (or unconstitutionally rather, considering our’s is unwritten), Parliament remains sovereign and the PM has prerogative powers – what this means is that the PM has the power to implement policy, or in this case, a referendum result. A referendum is essentially a means of asking the electorate about their opinion in order to make a final political decision; as such, the narrowly close 52% of voters who chose to leave doesn’t have to upheld. But of course, this would cause an uproar if it wasn’t. Maybe democracy shouldn’t be about sitting down and doing as you’re told. That’s tyranny, no matter who and how many people are expressing it.

Whilst it is unfortunate to see Nigel Farage being all smug in his first speech in the European Parliament after the referendum…

It’s good to see politicians like Alyn Smith who do not stoop to the (albeit low) standards upheld by Farage.

The next chapter ahead is not only uncertain, but bleak; when even our own elected politicians are unable to stay united, what hope does the rest of society have? It is disappointing to see a rise in the number of xenophobic incidents since #brexit – is this the legacy of the ‘Leave’ campaign? Let’s hope not. Whilst the result may not have been what you may have hoped for, we must remain comradely. Let’s not hurl racist, fascist abuse at our fellow citizens, no one is above anyone, no matter someones race, religion or immigration status. The arguments put forward by the Leave camp should have been more about immigration and maybe the Remain camp should have addressed the topic of immigration even moreso. Nevertheless, what’s done is done and it is now about moving forward, ensuring that negotiations are fit for purpose and benefit not only us but future generations.

And with that, i’ll leave with a quick summary of events this last week. As ever, drop a comment, or tweet a topic you’d like covered in the next blog post.

Useful Links:

The EU Referendum: All you need to know – http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-heartlands-give-huge-backing-8271074

Labour Heartlands support Brexit – http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-heartlands-give-huge-backing-8271074

Corbyn’s Cabinet: Who’s in & who’s out – http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/sacking-backing-cracking-jeremy-corbyns-8286407

Consequences of Brexit – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2S_5jIovXk

 

 

 

To leave or not to leave, that is the question

Hello readers and fellow bloggers! It’s been a while (six months to be exact) since i last posted – apologies for the absence. I know a lot of you have been wondering where i’ve been but as i’m sure you’ll understand, i’ve been very busy with uni life and personal responsibilities. But with all that aside, Britain has also been busy in the world of politics, and yes, i am talking about the upcoming EU referendum. Now a lot of people have asked for my input on the matter or to explain to them what the referendum is actually about. This blog post will (hopefully) answer all your questions about the referendum, and as ever if there is something i have not addressed, feel free to comment.

So, what is this whole referendum about you ask? Well, arguably, it boils down to debates around immigration and the anti-immigration stance proposed by the ever growing popular UKIP party. The argument is that Britain should stay true to its power and sovereignty and should (in the words of the Vote Leave campaign) take back control not only of its borders but also of its economic management.

voteleave

The official ‘Vote Leave’ campaign logo

During the 2015 General Election, David Cameron had promised to offer the electorate a referendum on Britain’s membership in the European Union if he won the election. But why now? Last time the electorate had a say on our membership in the EU was in 1975 under the premiership of Labour leader Harold Wilson. Of course since then, a lot has changed and many on the Leave side, including Nigel Farage have argued the EU has gained too much power in controlling people’s lives. Hence Cameron calling for a referendum as a means for the British public to make a decision and settle the ‘European question’ – should we stay or should we go.

As you can imagine, there are several debates on both sides as to why we should remain and why we should leave, but first of all, let’s establish what exactly is the European Union and why this debate is so important…

The European Union (EU) was established after the second World War in order to create an economic and political union to prevent further international conflict. At the time of its creation, it was believed that countries which trade together are more likely to avoid going to war with each other. It has since grown to become a “single market” allowing goods and people to move around, as if the member states were one country. It has its own currency, the euro, which is used by 19 of the member countries (Britain uses the pound), its own parliament (we elect MEPs who sit in the European Parliament) and it now sets rules in a wide range of areas – including on the environment, transport, consumer rights and even things like mobile phone charges. The video below explains a bit more about the workings of the EU:

Why are we being asked to remain or leave the European Union? Well, it is partly democratic – as mentioned before, Britain has not had a say on our membership of the EU since 1975. It is thus very important, particularly for the young generation to participate in the debate and ultimately vote. The referendum question being asked this Thursday, 23rd June is as follows: “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”.

tweet_3559201b-xlarge_trans02yd2pnm6u-cd_ta9bszzbq3ila_dnbiixkpqirx-ys

Make sure you have your say this Thursday, 23rd June!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The last few months, it’s been very difficult to establish the key arguments – with too much focus on immigration and not enough on the actual democratic make up of the European Union, it’s been hard to distinguish the advantages and disadvantages which would occur if Britain were to leave. Here are a few pointers to help you make an informed decision on referendum day:

The argument to remain

  • The official campaign –  ‘Britain Stronger in Europe‘. There are other campaign groups supporting remain, including ‘Labour In‘ and ‘Another Europe is Possible
  • Led and supported by senior politicians across the political spectrum, including Prime Minister David Cameron, Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn and Nicola Sturgeon.
  • US president Barack Obama also wants Britain to remain in the EU, as do other EU nations such as France and Germany.
  • Those campaigning for Britain to stay in the EU we get a big boost from membership, making it easier to import and export goods to other EU countries.
  • The flow of immigrants, most of whom are young and keen to work, fuels economic growth and helps pay for public services.
  • Britain’s status in the world would be damaged by leaving and that we are more secure as part of the 28 nation club, rather than going it alone.

The argument to leave

  • The official campaign – ‘Vote Leave‘. Of course, there are other campaign groups supporting leave, including ‘Leave.EU‘ and ‘Grassroots Out (GO!)‘.
  • Led and supported by some senior politicians across the political spectrum including Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage, Michael Gove and Iain Duncan Smith.
  • Those campaigning for Britain to leave the EU argue we are being held back by the EU, which they say imposes too many rules on business and charges billions of pounds a year in membership fees for little in return.
  • They want Britain to take back full control of its borders and reduce the number of migrants coming here to live and/or work. One of the main principles of EU membership is “free movement”, which means you don’t need to get a visa to go and live in another EU country. The argument made by leave campaigners is that the influx of migrants puts a strain on our public services, notably the NHS.
  • Leave campaigners object to the idea of an ‘ever closer union’, arguing if we remain in the EU, it would lead to a United States of Europe.

As the EU debate has mainly centred around the issue of immigration, it has led some to argue whether this is referendum is really about conflicts arising out of the right-wing political parties such as the Conservatives and UKIP rather than what would be in the best interest of the British people and the future generation. The EU debate not only affects the ‘everyday’ electorate, but also those who own big and small businesses. Here’s what some entrepreneurs have said…

[there are] “no credible alternatives” to staying in the EU” – BT chairman Sir Mike Rake

“an EU exit would allow the UK to negotiate trade deals as our country “rather than being one of 28 nations” – Lord Bamford, chairman of JCB

Although it is uncertain what Britain would look like if it left the EU, it is important to note the negotiations Cameron made way back at the start of the year. This was done to silence the growing number of MPs from his party who he feared would defect from his party to UKIP (as was the case with Mark Reckless and Douglas Carswell). But, the reforms made were also proof that Cameron was serious about addressing the immigration rhetoric which had been floating in the air for so long. The deal made will take effect from when (or should i say if) Britain votes to remain in the EU, but in summary they are:

  • Child Benefit – Migrant workers will still be able to send child benefit payments back to their home country but the payments will be set at a level reflecting the cost of living in their home country rather than the full UK rate.
  • Migrant welfare payments  – New arrivals will not be able to claim tax credits and other welfare payments straight away but will gradually gain the right to more benefits the longer they stay, at a rate yet to be decided.
  • Pound v. Euro – Cameron has said Britain will never join the euro. He secured assurances that the eurozone countries will not discriminate against Britain for having a different currency. Any British money spent on bailing out eurozone nations that get into trouble will also be reimbursed.
  • Sovereignty – For the first time, there will be a clear commitment that Britain is not part of a move towards “ever closer union” with other EU member states – one of the core principles of the EU. This will be incorporated in an EU treaty change. Mr Cameron also secured a “red card” system for national parliaments making it easier for governments to band together to block unwanted legislation. If 55% of national EU parliaments object to a piece of EU legislation it will be rethought.
  • Economic Security – Safeguards for Britain’s large financial services industry to prevent eurozone regulations being imposed on it.

 

Ultimately the decision as to whether Britain should remain or leave the EU comes down to YOU, the electorate. What do you think would be better for Britain? Should we remain in our role as key influential players, or leave, uncertain of Britain’s future outside a union we’ve been a member of since 1975? It’s a tough choice but it is one that has to be made.

The last few days has been tough, with the passing of Jo Cox MP and the recent divisive, racist propaganda published by UKIP. Let’s try to educate ourselves rather than scaremongering people into voting a specific way. Britain’s public services are not put under strain by 15% of migrants who seek residence here for a better life, it’s the 1% who fail to pay their fair share of taxes but think it’s right to scrounge off the system because they hold a red passport. It’s our elected politicians who fail to invest in the services that truly matter and instead invest in unnecessary wars. It is a shame that this referendum has not covered the democratic functions and practices of the EU as a body but hopefully this blog post has done its part by showcasing what the EU is and the different debates that have emerged.

On a final note, in the words of the late Jo Cox MP:

                “We are far more united and have far more in common than that which divides us”

RIP. X

Useful Links:

For a more detailed overview of how the EU works – http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/zgjwtyc

To leave or not to leave? – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32793642

EU FAQs – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887

2016 New Year Messages

HAPPY NEW YEAR! 2015 was an eventful year with many things happening in the world of politics; from the re-election of a Conservative government to the election of Jeremy Corbyn as the Leader of the Labour Party, and of course, who can forget the terrible loss of Liberal Democrat MPs! It is without doubt then that 2016 is a year which all across the political spectrum will be hoping to be embarrassment-free and bring about new change and perspectives.

On the first day of 2016, already there is something to talk about and that is the New Year messages offered by David Cameron and Jeremy Corbyn.

In Cameron’s New Year message, he mentions the promise of delivering a chance for Britons to vote on the UK’s place in the EU, tackling social mobility, the fight on ISIL, and poverty. Some may find it ironic on what Cameron calls ‘this turnaround year’ the Conservatives aren’t turning around on their policies such as the cut on child tax credits which would see thousands of families worse off and austerity cuts which would see 2 million more children fall under the poverty line. Arguably, there isn’t much to celebrate when air strikes are still in Syria, bombing innocent civilian. But you know, it’s for the greater good.

Meanwhile, Jeremy Corbyn also offered his New Year blessings…

In Corbyn’s New Year message, he reflects on the achievements that have occurred since his election such as that on tax credits, cuts to police and the prison service in Saudi Arabia. He acknowledges Labour need to do much more to ensure the UK economy is prosperous and is ‘enjoyed by all, not just the few’. At least he didn’t try and put an dampener on things by slagging of Cameron and co eh.

With two quite different New Year’s messages, it’ll be interesting to see what the two leaders will offer this 2016…

Labour in decline?

Ok, so i haven’t posted in quite a while and recent news coverage of Osborne’s budget and Labour’s response (or shall we say Harman’s support) of the cuts to child tax credit for working families ignited a new post i needed to put out there so here it goes.

HOW CAN HARRIET HARMAN SUPPORT THE TORIES BUDGET, ESPECIALLY THE CUTS TO CHILD TAX CREDIT!? (Apologies for the caps, but i’m sure you can tell that really angered me). Labour, a traditionally left-wing party, are meant to be a party for WORKING PEOPLE. Now, how does supporting a policy that penalises families for having children, support working families? If anything, it will put more and more working families into the poverty line. But let’s also remember, Cameron and Co recently changed the meaning of poverty as recent statistics show the rate of poverty in the UK has increased significantly since the Conservatives were elected back in 2010. If we rewind back to May, just before election day, Cameron said on a special edition of Question Time that his party had no plans to cut child Tax credit. Here’s a little reminder…

Fast-forward a couple of months, and already the Prime Minister (elected by only 24% of the electorate!) has broken that false promise. Many spectators, including Harriet Harman, have said Labour lost the election because they are not trusted by the electorate to protect our economy but what about the lives of working people? Many don’t trust the Tories to protect the services that REALLY matter to ordinary people such as welfare, education and the NHS. Meanwhile, Harriet Harman has succumbed to the palms of the Tories and just accepted their plans to cut child tax credits for millions of families who have more than two children. This leaves me wondering as to why Harman has just accepted defeat?

This is the moment where she should be standing up for those who didn’t vote for a conservative government and oppose the budget announced by Osborne. But instead, she fails to oppose the cuts proposed with many now wondering what Labour stands for. Is Labour a party for working people or is it a party that succumbs to the voice of the minority, abandoning its historic roots? And the inevitable question, is socialism dead? Even the Tories are saying they are in fact the party for working people, so surely there’s nothing more for the Left movement?

There is a question over whether there’s going to be a rebellion within the Labour Party after Harriet Harman’s shocking support of the proposed cuts by the Tories, including those standing for the leadership contest. The whole Labour leadership is what inspired the headline of this post. Personally, i don’t think any of the Labour MPs standing for the leadership are really what Labour needs (apart from one – i’ll discuss this in a bit).

Let’s start with Liz Kendall. She’s too Tory (you’re probably thinking that would be a good thing) but its not. You see, Labour needs a leader that can oppose and advocate the needs of ordinary folk, not a copy cat Cameron. Some have gone as far to say that she’s in the wrong party. Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with using the strengths of your opponent to your advantage, but whether that’s enough to convince a great number of Labour supporters, i’m not entirely sure.

Next up, there’s Andy Burnham. Where do i begin? I was put off by him when i saw this so for me, there really isn’t much to say. If it was a Tory, i would react in exactly the same way so bye bye Burnham, you’re not getting my vote.

Then we have Yvette Cooper. Now, this one really got me thinking. Married to Ed Balls, notable MP, quite possibly the underdog within the leadership contest. Personally, i could definitely see her as leader of the Labour Party, particularly if it is modernisation and re-direction to centre-left that is required.

But, Jeremy Corbyn. He entered the leadership contest at the last minute and boy has his campaign taken off! He’s the only candidate that truly has a movement which attempts to redefine the party and take it back to its roots. Not in an attempt to go back to a time where Trade Unions were the life of the Labour Party but to a more modern era of where true working people are at the core of Labour’s values. Where austerity is challenged by a true opposition party and a leader who has the guts and bravery to not succumb to the trickery of the Conservative Party. Whether Labour win or lose in the next general election, Labour needs a leader that will gear it in the right direction, a direction which consists of listening to the people – its supporters and non-supporters alike – as well as mapping out its economic agenda. Most importantly, Labour as a whole need to learn to adapt the tactics of its rival – that is embracing its past achievements, being confident to tell the story of the financial crisis back in 2008 (and how it was the BANKERS AND NOT THE PARTY ITSELF) that caused the crash, but finally not biting more than it can chew. What i mean is that the party needs to be able to identify the key aims it wants to establish whilst also not giving too much away. It seems this is a tactic done all too well by the Tories and in order to win, well it needs to start taking notes.

Many of you who may have studied politics would know all too well that time and time again, the question of whether socialism is dead always arises. What is socialism? A leftist movement? An attempt to overthrow capitalism and return the means of production to community level? Welfarism? All these are issues which we deal with everyday and i don’t think its a matter of ‘socialism is dead’, but more a case of whether ‘elitism has become too powerful for us to control’. I’m going to leave that for you to think about.

Feel free to comment on your thoughts about Osborne’s budget and the Labour Leadership contest. Whilst your thinking, here’s a little video of the (quite) recent Labour Leader’s debate in case you missed it like i did. Enjoy!

Reflection on the General Election

So since my last post, Britain (well 24% of the electorate) voted for a Conservative government, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband both resigned as party leaders and Nigel Farage didn’t win Thanet (Oh and he stepped down as leader too, but only for 3 days). With all that happened, many questions emerged like why did Labour lose the election? Why were the opinion polls so wrong? Many politicians and observers have given their opinions since the election results were announced but its fair to say, there are things which need to be investigated, particularly within the Labour Party. Did they lose their sense of direction? Is socialism dead?

It’s worth reading this commentary on Labour’s defeat.

To be fair, the campaigning Labour did throughout the course of the election was overwhelming, but as the results have shown, it didn’t extend beyond London. The party most importantly failed to defend their role in the 2008 financial crisis and allowed Cameron and crew to spit all over them. That is important because Labour is traditionally seen as economically incompetent. However, the message that Labour failed to deliver was that the financial crisis occurred on a global scale, and most probably would have happened if there had been a Conservative government in office at the time.

After the party’s defeat, many turned to Ed Miliband as the cause of the party’s failure, but that may have been a but too harsh. The thing is, everyone (including Labour party supporters and politicians) were quick to come up with the reasons why the party failed to win a majority, but if we all noticed these issues, why weren’t they addressed sooner rather than later? Whether it’s Miliband’s lack of persona or the awkward #Edstone, the party’s failure, it seems, lay at their inability to emulate their predecessor, Tony Blair. Now, i know many do not like to talk about Blair because he led us into the Iraq war and all, but you cannot question his leadership style. It was under Blair that the Conservatives had to go through three leaders (William Hague, Iain Duncan Smith & Michael Howard) before it found David Cameron who tried and succeeded in emulating Blair’s style, politically and charismatically. Let’s also not forget Blair’s ability to get Murdoch eating at the palm of his hand. But seriously, Blair is the only modern political leader in Britain who had been able to resonate with everyone, irrespective of social class. Miliband on the other hand created a campaign based on an ‘us vs them’ which could have worked, but there is the small issue of people wanting to appear better off than they actually are. In short, in order for Labour to be a successful opposition party, it now needs to learn how to emulate the Conservatives (not by being an upper class snobbish party) but by recognising why the electorate seem to stick to the devil they know, and how they would create change for everyone, not just the working man.

We’ve all voted. We know who’s in government, but what now? What does a Conservative government mean for all of us? Well, for starters we no longer have Nick Clegg and the liberals to halt the passing of legislature that would be detrimental to ordinary folk like the axing of the Human Rights Act which would be replaced by a British Bill of Rights according to the party’s manifesto. If this specific mandate were to become law, it would mean that citizens would no longer be able to go to the European Court of Human Rights to appeal a court decision made by the UK Supreme Courts, giving legal sovereignty to UK courts. The idea of the UK Supreme Court having the final word has also evoked fear of corruption between politicians and judges.

Other Conservative Party policies that are likely to go ahead include:

  • Referendum on the UK’s membership in the EU
  • More devolved powers to Scotland – ‘The Scotland Bill’
  • Reducing the annual benefits cap by £3,000 to £23,000 and removing housing benefit from under-21s on jobseeker’s allowance
  • Taking out of income tax anyone working 30 hours a week on minimum wage by linking the personal allowance to the national minimum wage
  • New education bill to “force coasting schools to accept new leadership”
  • A housing bill to extend the right to buy to 1.3 million housing association tenants
  • A bill to double free childcare for working parents of three- and four-year-olds.

One thing’s for sure, Labour and other anti-Tory individuals and groups have to become more united than ever over the next five years as more cuts and austerity measures are expected to be rolled out. It will also be interesting to see how the Labour leadership contest plays out. It is disappointing that Chuka Ummuna pulled out of the contest as i think he would of been a great candidate, but what Labour now needs is someone who can shake things up a bit like Tony Blair. The leader of the Labour Party needs to be able to know what direction the party is going in, defend its economic history and fight for the people – the working and middle classes. Does it need to be centrist? Possibly, considering the left stance Miliband had clearly didn’t resonate. In short, Labour needs to redefine its political position in terms of what and who it stands for. And fast.

Let the General Election commence!

The first official day of campaigning began this week, and of course began the torrents of confusion, insults and misinformation.

On Monday, Cameron handed in his notice to the Queen to begin 38 days of campaigning ahead of May’s general election. With polls suggesting another hung Parliament, which party will lead the way?

Here’s a quick explanation of who the main contenders are in the upcoming election:

Let’s start with current Prime Minister,  David Cameron’s party, the Conservatives. Known for their love of tradition and pragmatism, will they jeopardise the future of the NHS and continue to target families on low incomes with more cuts? Or are they going to finally do something about those controversial tax avoidance loopholes at the expense of the rich 1%? Will the recent news of economic growth work in their favour? There is no doubt when people feel worse off, and wages fail to meet the increased rate of food prices, a lot of questions become unanswered. It also doesn’t help their ‘favouring the rich’ image when George Osborne fails to rule out a tax cut for Britain’s highest earners.

Then we have the Labour Party, a party traditionally for working people, but historically associated with their economic incompetence. Could Ed be the one to transform the party’s stereotypical image? Let’s not forget his promise to lower tuition fees to £6,000; we all know how that turned out for Nick Clegg…

Is this issue of tuition fees a subject which shouldn’t be promised in election manifestos and only delivered when a leader is in office?

Talking of tuition fees, Nick Clegg’s party, The Liberal Democrats, are set to lose most of their seats in London, with Vince Cable (Business Secretary) as the sole MP.

Credit: ITV News

Are the Liberal Democrats a party that can no longer resonate with people? There is no doubt many past Lib Dem supporters felt betrayed after Clegg and Cameron created a coalition government, so it’ll be interesting to see what alliances are made in May…

What about the ‘rise of UKIP’? Farage already has a growing team of 2 MPs who defected from the Conservative Party. But, is this a real threat to the majority two party system here in the UK? Probably.

There’s no doubt that the upcoming election is hard to call, with minority parties such as the SNP and Plaid Cymru also getting involved in the TV debates and conspiracy over who might do deals with who.

On Thursday, there was also that all-important leaders’ debate in which all leaders of the seven political parties got the opportunity to scrutinise each other as well as answering questions from audience members. If you missed it, sit back, relax and enjoy 🙂

So now you’ve watched the showdown, who do you think won? More importantly, who has a better vision for Britain? I shall refrain from being biased of course…

But if you are unsure of what each party is exactly promising to deliver on May 7, here is a detailed manifesto brief courtesy of BBC News – Manifesto watch: where parties stand on key issues

Whatever your political views, this is sure to be an election you don’t want to miss. So make sure you get involved and if you haven’t done so yet, register to vote before 20th April 2015!

Britain returns to Iraq

Two weeks ago, MPs voted overwhelmingly for the launch of air strikes against Islamic State targets in Iraq. It comes after many hostages, both from the United States and the United Kingdom have been brutally murdered by the extremist group. Cabinet ministers told the Commons that Isis would only be crushed if the group was pursued to its bases inside Syria. Unsurprisingly, America had welcomed the vote, considering it was Obama that insisted Britain needed to intervene. As a result of the vote, Downing Street confirmed that six Tornado jets would be in the skies of Iraq, also stating that the Commons had permitted the sending of UK military advisers to Iraq to train the army.

But here’s my concern as a global citizen: what good does violence do but just create more retaliation? By sending in these air strikes, is the government not giving in to the trap of Isis? Think of it like this: A person comes in your house and steals your stuff. In turn, you do the same, to make them feel the same terror and anger you felt. But then that person then takes one step further and steals your cat or something. The acts of retaliation continue, creating a never-ending circle of theft – but in this case, a circle of violence. Prime Minister David Cameron and President Obama have already made it clear that it is impossible to negotiate with such barbarians – that may be the case but how will this issue ever be resolved without knowing the true cause? Do we go back to the Iraq war under Blair? The assassination of Saddam Hussein? Or do we go as far back as to the 8th Century with conflicts between Islamic empires and the rest of Europe and the West? Whatever the cause, i’m sure violence is not the answer…

It is also surprising that only 43 MPs voted against the return of air strikes in Iraq, especially after the public outrage towards Blair as the Iraq war emerged. Although defence secretary, Michael Fallon has said they will be careful as to “avoid civilian causalities”, how can we be sure innocent people will not be caught in the crossfire. We have already seen innocent citizens lose their lives in the middle of this ‘war’ so how can we be sure these western leaders will not do the same? The MP for Tower Hamlets, Rushanara Ali, who expressed a similar concern resigned as shadow education minister in order to abstain before the vote. She feared “further air strikes will only create further bloodshed and pain in Iraq”

Now what happens? Well Britain is still set on its defensive against IS as RAF jets have joined US-led bombing missions. Please note the following video may be of a sensitive nature.

The Conservative MP and former defence secretary Liam Fox said it had been a mistake to exclude Syria from air strikes saying: “Isis operates from Syria. It attacks individuals, communities and the Iraqi state itself from Syria. There is a clear legal case for attacking Isis bases in Syria.”

Labour MP John McDonnell said: “This is madness and an absolute disaster. We are already talking about mission creep and a strategy that could last three or even 10 years … the war on terrorism will be brought to our streets as a result.”

I would like to think the decision made by the Commons wasn’t taken lightly, but at the same time, i would like to believe there could’ve been an alternative to stopping violence with violence. Either way, it looks like neither the West nor IS will halt their attacks on each other.