It's interesting: despite his twelve-year history of conspicuous loyalty to New Labour's Whips, my opponent, Andrew Smith, occasionally seems to suffer a rush of blood to the head, and find himself indulging in a bit of strategic rebellion. It happened to him last week - he turned out to oppose the government's decision to build a third runway at Heathrow - and he's lost no time in publicising the fact.
Well, it's nice that Andrew's started showing a little interest in the environment. However, a few well-chosen differences with the whips (on matters where the government is assured of winning anyway) don't suddenly make you an independently-minded MP: in over 2,500 votes he's cast in the Commons since 1997, Andrew Smith has voted against the government line precisely nine times, according to the excellent publicwhip.org.uk website.
Publicwhip also divulges that Andrew voted 'very strongly' for introducing foundation hospitals; 'very strongly' against an investigation into the Iraq War (I'll bet he did); and 'strongly' for introducing ID cards (and 'moderately' for laws to stop climate change, which is odd considering his newly-discovered concern for the environment). That's besides his vote last year to close down hundreds of post offices nationwide having claimed the week before to be trying to save them in Oxford. So nice try - but it'll take a lot more indpendently-minded votes before Andrew loses his status as Gordon Brown's man in Oxford.
Saturday, 31 January 2009
Sunday, 25 January 2009
Bookies: Oxford East a two-horse race
I was interested to find that Bookmakers Ladbrokes have opened a new betting market confirming Oxford East as a knife-edge marginal between the Lib Dems and Labour. Ladbrokes made the Lib Dems narrow favourites at 4/6, with Labour lagging behind on 5/4. Ladbrokes’ odds confirmed the Greens and Tories were clearly out of the race on 20/1 and 33/1 respectively.
We've said for some years now that Oxford East is clearly a two-horse race (good to be able to use that well-worn phrase in such an appropriate context) between Lib Dems and Labour: the Tories have no councillors in the seat - they haven't had for years - and both they and the Greens have chosen candidates based in London, which gives a strong hint how they rate their own chances. But it's still interesting to see it confirmed by the bookies - certainly the people of Oxford East know that if they want to be rid of this fag-end Labour government, voting Lib Dem is the only option.
We've said for some years now that Oxford East is clearly a two-horse race (good to be able to use that well-worn phrase in such an appropriate context) between Lib Dems and Labour: the Tories have no councillors in the seat - they haven't had for years - and both they and the Greens have chosen candidates based in London, which gives a strong hint how they rate their own chances. But it's still interesting to see it confirmed by the bookies - certainly the people of Oxford East know that if they want to be rid of this fag-end Labour government, voting Lib Dem is the only option.
Wednesday, 14 January 2009
History repeating itself...
For anyone yet to be convinced that this is a fag-end government, Baroness Vadera's comments today that she believes she can see "green shoots of economic growth" should provide food for thought. Baroness Vadera may not be a household name, but she's a Business minister and one of Gordon Brown's most important economic advisers - so it's worrying if, on a day when yet more job losses are announced, she's either so out of touch as to think things are on the mend, or so addicted to spin as to pretend they are.
Still, it's a bit rich for the Tories to feign outrage at the Baroness's comments, given that the last politician to detect the "green shoots of economic spring", way back in 1991, was their Chancellor Norman Lamont - the last Chancellor to preside over a recession in Britain.
Still, it's a bit rich for the Tories to feign outrage at the Baroness's comments, given that the last politician to detect the "green shoots of economic spring", way back in 1991, was their Chancellor Norman Lamont - the last Chancellor to preside over a recession in Britain.
Wednesday, 31 December 2008
Here's to a better 2009
It feels a bit artificial to use a blog to wish people a Happy New Year via a blog - nonetheless, to all readers out there, all the best for 2009! Here's hoping for a better year than the one we've had: perhaps we've become inured to the severity of the headlines about the oncoming recession, but it's clear this country and the world face difficult times ahead.
It's rumoured the government may cut and run and hold a General Election this coming year. Personally, after the PM bottled out of a contest in much better circumstances in autumn 2007, I'll believe it when I see it - but if he does muster the courage, I suspect people are going to be less forgiving of Labour than he'd like. If the government tries to take the credit when economic news is good, it's only right that it should take some of the blame for the current crisis: Gordon Brown's economic record, as Chancellor and especially as PM, with his dithering over Northern Rock and his inadequate response of temporarily cutting VAT, leaves a huge amount to be desired.
I'm pleased the Lib Dem response to the crisis, led by Nick Clegg and Vince Cable, is so positive: instead of wasting billions on a pointless VAT cut that makes little difference, we would invest that money to cut fuel bills, create thousands of jobs and deliver what our country needs for the future: warm homes, schools and hospitals, clean energy, public transport we can all be proud of. We shouldn't be forgetting the environment in the current crisis: and indeed, cutting down on our consumption and waste makes perfect sense economically, too.
Here in Oxford, I'd like to see the authorities engaging with BMW to try and limit the impact of the slowdown on their employees in the City; and the City and County Councils working harder to lessen the burden on local families. It's going to be a difficult year, but I'm optimistic that politicians can play some part in weathering the storm: the public will be slow to forgive them if they don't.
It's rumoured the government may cut and run and hold a General Election this coming year. Personally, after the PM bottled out of a contest in much better circumstances in autumn 2007, I'll believe it when I see it - but if he does muster the courage, I suspect people are going to be less forgiving of Labour than he'd like. If the government tries to take the credit when economic news is good, it's only right that it should take some of the blame for the current crisis: Gordon Brown's economic record, as Chancellor and especially as PM, with his dithering over Northern Rock and his inadequate response of temporarily cutting VAT, leaves a huge amount to be desired.
I'm pleased the Lib Dem response to the crisis, led by Nick Clegg and Vince Cable, is so positive: instead of wasting billions on a pointless VAT cut that makes little difference, we would invest that money to cut fuel bills, create thousands of jobs and deliver what our country needs for the future: warm homes, schools and hospitals, clean energy, public transport we can all be proud of. We shouldn't be forgetting the environment in the current crisis: and indeed, cutting down on our consumption and waste makes perfect sense economically, too.
Here in Oxford, I'd like to see the authorities engaging with BMW to try and limit the impact of the slowdown on their employees in the City; and the City and County Councils working harder to lessen the burden on local families. It's going to be a difficult year, but I'm optimistic that politicians can play some part in weathering the storm: the public will be slow to forgive them if they don't.
Thursday, 18 December 2008
Iraq: the legacy
So Gordon Brown has finally announced the withdrawal of British troops from Iraq: and I'm sure he'll try to make the most of getting this electoral albatross from around Labour's neck. There's no doubt that widespread revulsion at Labour's decision to back up George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq played a major part in the government's loss of support at the last General Election, and rightly so: we were taken in to Iraq on a false prospectus, looking for Weapons of Mass Destruction which were never there, and the results of our invasion have been nothing short of disastrous for the Iraqi people.
In fact, of course, Brown has been trying for some time to distance himself from a policy he fully endorsed when the invasion took place: Private Eye's regular skit in which Comrade Brown denounces the actions of the "discredited imperialist warmonger Blair" may be exaggerated, but only just. The truth, of course, is that however much he may wish to obfuscate, the Prime Minister's fingerprints are all over the invasion of Iraq - and especially, as former Chancellor, all over the £8 billion cheque he signed to finance it. As recently as May last year, he defended the invasion in the clearest of terms, saying "I take my responsibility as a member of the Cabinet for the collective decisions that we made, and I believe they were the right decisions".
So now that the end of the British presence is near, what would we as Liberal Democrats - the only party consistently to have opposed the war in parliament - like to see? We still believe that the clear fact that the invasion was a disaster means that an apology - from the government and from every MP, Labour and Conservative, who voted for the war - would still be appropriate. But perhaps more importantly, a full and open public inquiry into how the decisions which led to war were taken, and into the conduct of the war, might begin to undo the damage this invasion has done to public trust in how politics is conducted in this country.
Because the sad truth is this: while the news of the decision to withdraw from Iraq made the headlines yesterday, this piece of news attracted rather less attention: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7787263.stm. The day the PM made his announcement, eighteen people were killed, and dozens wounded, by two bombs in Baghdad. The chaos the invasion has created in Iraq may have slipped from the headlines; but its effects, upon the Iraqi people and the Middle East more widely, will be felt for years.
In fact, of course, Brown has been trying for some time to distance himself from a policy he fully endorsed when the invasion took place: Private Eye's regular skit in which Comrade Brown denounces the actions of the "discredited imperialist warmonger Blair" may be exaggerated, but only just. The truth, of course, is that however much he may wish to obfuscate, the Prime Minister's fingerprints are all over the invasion of Iraq - and especially, as former Chancellor, all over the £8 billion cheque he signed to finance it. As recently as May last year, he defended the invasion in the clearest of terms, saying "I take my responsibility as a member of the Cabinet for the collective decisions that we made, and I believe they were the right decisions".
So now that the end of the British presence is near, what would we as Liberal Democrats - the only party consistently to have opposed the war in parliament - like to see? We still believe that the clear fact that the invasion was a disaster means that an apology - from the government and from every MP, Labour and Conservative, who voted for the war - would still be appropriate. But perhaps more importantly, a full and open public inquiry into how the decisions which led to war were taken, and into the conduct of the war, might begin to undo the damage this invasion has done to public trust in how politics is conducted in this country.
Because the sad truth is this: while the news of the decision to withdraw from Iraq made the headlines yesterday, this piece of news attracted rather less attention: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7787263.stm. The day the PM made his announcement, eighteen people were killed, and dozens wounded, by two bombs in Baghdad. The chaos the invasion has created in Iraq may have slipped from the headlines; but its effects, upon the Iraqi people and the Middle East more widely, will be felt for years.
Tuesday, 9 December 2008
How best to deal with an economic crisis?
We're pretty much allowed to call the 'economic crisis' a recession now, I think - and certainly here in Oxford, signs of economic difficulties have been abundant for some months. I remember people back in the spring talking about the rising cost of living, and in many cases about how badly the abolition of the 10p Income Tax band had hit them - and now, among the signs of the economic slowdown, Oxford's BMW car plant seems to be announcing worse news every day about shutdowns and potential lay-offs (see http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/yourtown/oxford/3957431.Third_closure_for_Mini_plant/).
So with everyone hard hit by rising prices, and in some cases the threat of job losses, the Lib Dems have been arguing for some time that the government should put money back in people's pockets - a cut in Income Tax would be a powerful way to achieve this, giving people the chance to spend or save our money as we see fit; and it could be at least partially paid for by closing tax loopholes for the super-rich. I do find the government's recent response - mainly based on temporarily reducing VAT - unconvincing; and I find Oxford City Council's Labour administration's plans to increase Council Tax next year by 5% almost inexplicable.
The Lib Dems have long been saying we should replace Council Tax altogether with a tax based on ability to pay. But even if Labour disagree with that, they won't get anyone's thanks for increasing the unfair Council Tax by more than the rate of inflation. Oxford City Council should be helping local families and businesses, not putting the boot in harder.
So with everyone hard hit by rising prices, and in some cases the threat of job losses, the Lib Dems have been arguing for some time that the government should put money back in people's pockets - a cut in Income Tax would be a powerful way to achieve this, giving people the chance to spend or save our money as we see fit; and it could be at least partially paid for by closing tax loopholes for the super-rich. I do find the government's recent response - mainly based on temporarily reducing VAT - unconvincing; and I find Oxford City Council's Labour administration's plans to increase Council Tax next year by 5% almost inexplicable.
The Lib Dems have long been saying we should replace Council Tax altogether with a tax based on ability to pay. But even if Labour disagree with that, they won't get anyone's thanks for increasing the unfair Council Tax by more than the rate of inflation. Oxford City Council should be helping local families and businesses, not putting the boot in harder.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)