La Gauche a gagne en France

06 May 2012 by Dave.

Francois Hollande, the PS candidate for President du Republique has won today. 6th May 2012.

I am at home in my flat in London.

I also remember when I heard that Mitterand, the last socialist to hold the post won, I was at CPSA conference in 1981, I think it was the Ship Hotel, and Dennis Skinner MP was speaking, he’d just been heckled, he asked what Williams, Jenkins, Owen & Rodgers had ever done for the Labour Party; the reply being they’d left it. He riposted, “I’ll use that next time”.

Posted in france, elections, europe, politics | No Comments »

May 3rd, 2012, London

06 May 2012 by Dave.

I was pounding the streets in Deptford with @VickyFoxcroft and @Joe_Dromey on Thursday, campaigning for Ken in his campaign to replace the Tory Johnson as Mayor for London.

Thanks to all the people I met, those who voted for Ken and the Labour Party, those who campaigned with me, and those who didn’t but remained polite.

It was a close run thing in the end, and I even had my hopes raised between 16:30 and 21:00 when what became three Labour “constituencies” had yet to declare but it wasn’t to be.

I met several people, who just cheered us on in Brockley, but also one in New Cross, who while saying he had voted for Ken, thought he needed,

to remember where he came from

and those who are still there. I did challenge him, as I personally recognise this criticism of many of Labour’s leaders, I didn’t think it included Ken Livingstone. I promised to repeat it, and I shall remember this advice when choosing our next candidate.

Posted in London, elections, Labour, politics | No Comments »

London votes tomorrow

02 May 2012 by Dave.

Tomorrow/Today we elect a Mayor and Council in London.

Labour’s candidate is Ken Livingstone, he is fighting to replace the right-wing tory, Boris Johnson.

I was planning to summarise my feelings but if you check out my internet spore, I think you know how I feel. Nicky Gavron, a GLA Assembly Member summarizes brilliantly, why Ken is right for London, and Johnson is wrong in her blog article, Ken v Boris.

Johnson has been a disgrace as London Mayor, I don’t even thinks he wants to be Mayor, and Ken has always been a great public servant and Londoner. Once again, read Gavron’s article.

The key powers of the Mayor are Transport, Police and Planning. Ken’ll reduce the fares, bring stability to the Police and use the planning powers in the interests of Londoners to build affordable housing.

Johnson will increase fares at above inflation, sack policemen and Comissioners and built 56 houses in the last six months.

There’s only one sensible choice. Vote Labour for London.

Posted in elections, London, mayors, voting, uk, Labour | No Comments »

Something’s got to change! (In London)

24 Apr 2012 by Dave.

Should have been out on the #labourdoorstep tonight with people, but had family things to do. So I watched last night’s London Mayor debate on bbc iplayer.

I can’t believe that Boris stated the Thatcher Government had to abolish the GLC and that Ken’s original Fares Fair was in some period of pre-history. If he want the pensioner vote he’d better get his London history right, but then he’s not a Londoner. The comment/fact that Boris isn’t a man for detail shone through on the transport/police debates. He hasn’t a clue. He’s increased fares and cut the police. He claims that the money isn’t there to meet Ken’s Fare deal; only TfL who work for him say this, every independent expert says that its do-able. I hope so, every time I pass an oyster card reader, I am reminded of what Johnson’s making me pay.

Housing is a late to the table issue. Historically the Mayor’s powers are limited but the next Mayor will take ownership of London’s landbank. This is the opportunity to build more houses. In the canvassing I have done in Deptford, I have almost cried when meeting families trapped in in small council houses, their children sharing bedrooms because there is no family social housing, no affordable private sector rented accommodation. All the candidates said they’d build affordable, and sustainable (in Jenny Jones case), social housing; but until we stop foreign money using the London property market as a safe haven there will remain two pillars of unaffordable prices in both the rental and purchase markets, insufficient housing, and too much money driving up prices. They all need a demand management policy.Air Quality wasn’t mentioned on the debate programme. If you want to see what’s happening, check out http://www.londonair.org.uk/LondonAir/; why’s it important, because the Mayor takes over responsibility for the fines negotiated by Westminster with the EU, people are dying and he can make a difference. The congestion zone, and public transport fares all make a difference. It’s a bit shit that it wasn’t mentioned on the programme.

Londoners have the second worst air quality in Europe, and the highest public transport fares in the world.

In the words of the song, “Something’s got to change!”

You get three ballot papers, vote Ken for Mayor, vote Labour for your local GLA Councillor, and vote Labour for London.

---

You know Brian Paddick is quite interesting, some good policies, he obviously knows his stuff on Police and Housing, but at the end of the day he’s a Liberal. Won’t take sides in the real debate between Labour and Tory in London, so just irrelevant!Jenny Jones, the Green candidate wasn’t given a fair chance on the programme. Some of my Labour party comrades’ll be suspicious that http://www.votematch.org.uk/ recommends I vote for her, but that’s what’s marvelous about democracy, I get to choose. (I was curious as to why they said I should, and it came down to their weighting, or my weighting of what I consider to be peripheral issues, but the site is a great toy and helps focus the mind on policy.)No-one mentioned Johnson’s Council Tax saving over the last four years, just to remind you, here’s Boris Johns-hen.

Posted in elections, London, mayors, uk, Labour, politics | No Comments »

Banish the poor from the electoral register!

19 Sep 2011 by Dave.

The development of the politics of the Boundary Commission review is moving with immense rapidity. In the area I live, we have a rather awesome local web site called Brockly Central which has reported on the Boundry Commission’s review in an article called “Deptford & Greenwich”. The Tory/LibDem coalition have decided to reduce the number of MPs in the House of Commons. While this may on the face of it be poplar, it’s a ruse to disguise the rewriting of the rules in their favour.

The Brockley Central article talks about the splitting of Lewisham Deptford constituency represented by Joan Ruddock MP and the lumping of the North of the area in with West Greenwich. Some of the comments on the article, about Joan are either “willfully blind” or merely malevolent since she is the hardest working MP that has ever represented me and I have had 9 MPs. Joan is in the process of recruiting a new constituency assistant since the growing case work caused by the cuts and incipient recession requires more effort to effectively represent her constituents, and this is in addition to her effective parliamentary agenda in defending the people of Lewisham Deptford.

The impact of reducing the number of MPs is to increase the number of voters per MP. This strikes me as exactly the opposite of what we require.

The decision to reduce the number of MPs is a partisan manipulation of the electoral system in favour of the Tory party and their voters and supporters; it has been taken in the context of the House of Commons, No consideration has been made as to how it impacts the MP/Voter relationship. I acknowledge that the numeric relationship as represented by the average number of votes it takes to elect an MP by party has been studied, but the wrong conclusions have been drawn because the Tories want one answer, and its not about fairness. Smaller constituencies mean

• more chance of a decent personal relationship with your MP. Over nine MPs I have met only two, including Joan
• a lower case work load for MPs which should mean higher quality
• would also lead to fairer voting, since it would be easier for geographically concentrated minorities to win seats (Greens in Oxford), and large majorities would be exercised over more than one seat (Tory Shires and the inner cities).

Basically this is “arse about tit”. We should decide how large we want our constituencies to be, and let that decide how large the Commons is.

Furthermore what gives the lie to the idea that this is about fairness is the additional ’small’ changes being made, which resurrect the old Tory tactic of driving the poor off the electoral register. The vote belongs to the citizen, not to those registered; I actually met a person who couldn’t vote last year because he didn’t have a home he could register in, the small detailed changes in the current law are even more anti-democratic . They propose individual applications, not household based. Co-operation with the electoral registration officer will no longer be mandatory. These petty, partisan reforms expose the heart of the reasons that Labour believe that constituencies should equalise on residents, not voters, the less well off and less educated are less likely to register. The proposed laws will create a vicious circle, they deny non registrants representation, drive the marginalised off the  electoral register, then redraw the boundaries, reinforcing their advantage. Rinse and repeat!

Posted in elections, uk, politics | No Comments »