Friday, 5 June 2009
Three:Sixteen
Some obligatory gaming content in what was meant to be a gaming blog once upon a time - I'll be running a game of Three:Sixteen by Gregor Hutton at club on Sunday. There will be a review of it up sometime next week.
My take on Purnell's resignation
A friend emailed me asking what was going on and saying that Purnell should be drummed out of the party - I've been very critical of Purnell, but I'm more serene this morning, here's my reply:
What's happening? Simple self-interest from Purnell, His constituency is Stalybridge & Hyde, it's safe (maj. around 9,000), not but fireproof. It's the sort of seat where if we lose the election he should still be safe, if we completely meltdown, he'll be out of Parliament. Remember he's got his tax evasion problem. he's got a less expensive home in his constituency and a more expensive one in London. He told the Fees Office that his previous London flat was his second home and got paid out for it, but when he sold his London home he told the taxman that it was his primary dwelling and so didn't pay capital gains on his profit. Now, I did go a little over the top calling him a crook, it seems that he managed to use a loophole in the tax code that meant he didn't have to pay CGT, though he did get the taxpayer to fund his accountancy bill to find it. But for me, that's the sort of thing the Tories would do, not Labour, we're meant to play by the spirit of the rules not find ways to get around them.
I'm not proud of this shower, but I am proud of Labour as an ideal, as an ideology. Ideology is a bit of a dirty word in politics, but it's important to have it because unless you have a vision of what you want to accomplish in politics, how do you know what to do? It's a bit like assembling a flat pack and not knowing if you want to build a bookcase or a desk, what you end up with is a self-contradictory mess.
On the back of the Labour Party membership card it has our new Clause IV.
I was a strong supporter of the new version back in 1994/95, my argument at the time was that while the old Clause IV was a work of poetry, it didn't actually explain what our ideals were because we weren't going administer or control every industry and service so why have in our constitution that we are.
But I don't know how some decisions of this Labour Government can square with our Clause IV ideology. It certainly doesn't fit with my understanding of giving power, wealth and opportunity to the many when we propose to act as loansharks to those citizens below the poverty line (a policy promoted by Purnell and overruled by Brown). It doesn't fit when we try to outsource hospital services to companies that are less efficient but are owned by big money Labour donors (for example the Somerset and Dorset Sterile Services issue). I'm annoyed that these people have discredited the name of the Party for a generation without even following the basic tenet of Labour - is this policy fair?
I don't think Purnell should be expelled from the Party, we are a big tent and should be able to tolerate discussion about what our Party should be about. But the Party is expelling people with views very similar to mine, a friend was expelled just before she was due to attend the Party Conference last year. But if Purnell does love the movement like his claims to in his resignation letter then I'm happy for him to be in the Party.
What's happening? Simple self-interest from Purnell, His constituency is Stalybridge & Hyde, it's safe (maj. around 9,000), not but fireproof. It's the sort of seat where if we lose the election he should still be safe, if we completely meltdown, he'll be out of Parliament. Remember he's got his tax evasion problem. he's got a less expensive home in his constituency and a more expensive one in London. He told the Fees Office that his previous London flat was his second home and got paid out for it, but when he sold his London home he told the taxman that it was his primary dwelling and so didn't pay capital gains on his profit. Now, I did go a little over the top calling him a crook, it seems that he managed to use a loophole in the tax code that meant he didn't have to pay CGT, though he did get the taxpayer to fund his accountancy bill to find it. But for me, that's the sort of thing the Tories would do, not Labour, we're meant to play by the spirit of the rules not find ways to get around them.
I'm not proud of this shower, but I am proud of Labour as an ideal, as an ideology. Ideology is a bit of a dirty word in politics, but it's important to have it because unless you have a vision of what you want to accomplish in politics, how do you know what to do? It's a bit like assembling a flat pack and not knowing if you want to build a bookcase or a desk, what you end up with is a self-contradictory mess.
On the back of the Labour Party membership card it has our new Clause IV.
"The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect."
I was a strong supporter of the new version back in 1994/95, my argument at the time was that while the old Clause IV was a work of poetry, it didn't actually explain what our ideals were because we weren't going administer or control every industry and service so why have in our constitution that we are.
But I don't know how some decisions of this Labour Government can square with our Clause IV ideology. It certainly doesn't fit with my understanding of giving power, wealth and opportunity to the many when we propose to act as loansharks to those citizens below the poverty line (a policy promoted by Purnell and overruled by Brown). It doesn't fit when we try to outsource hospital services to companies that are less efficient but are owned by big money Labour donors (for example the Somerset and Dorset Sterile Services issue). I'm annoyed that these people have discredited the name of the Party for a generation without even following the basic tenet of Labour - is this policy fair?
I don't think Purnell should be expelled from the Party, we are a big tent and should be able to tolerate discussion about what our Party should be about. But the Party is expelling people with views very similar to mine, a friend was expelled just before she was due to attend the Party Conference last year. But if Purnell does love the movement like his claims to in his resignation letter then I'm happy for him to be in the Party.
Thursday, 4 June 2009
Purnell - Good riddance
I shouldn't post while angry, but the resignation of James Purnell has really set me on edge. It's not that he's resigned, Purnell doesn't seem to have the interests of the working class at heart and I'm not sure why he would want to be in the Labour Party, but the hypocrisy of his resignation letter (as leaked to the Murdoch press - surprised it wasn't the Mail).
He says in it
He shouldn't have been given the chance to resign, he ought to have been kicked out of Cabinet long before now. The Labour Party has been damaged long enough by despicable men like Purnell.
Update - The original version of this called Purnell a crook and hoped that he would be in prison soon. That's what comes from posting in anger and I apologise. I accept that Purnell technically obeyed the law, but ethically a Labour supporter shouldn't use taxpayer's money to find ways to avoid paying tax.
He says in it
"This moment calls for stronger regulation, an active state, better public services, an open democracy.This comes from a man who wanted to charge punative interest rates on social fund payments to the poorest in our society. This comes from a man who wants the poorest to jump through bureaucratic hoops in order to get the benefit they are entitled to. This comes from a man who has launched advertising making out that all benefit claimants are potential crooks while engaging in tax evasion himself.It calls for a government that measures itself by how it treats the poorest in society. Those are our values, not David Cameron's."
He shouldn't have been given the chance to resign, he ought to have been kicked out of Cabinet long before now. The Labour Party has been damaged long enough by despicable men like Purnell.
Update - The original version of this called Purnell a crook and hoped that he would be in prison soon. That's what comes from posting in anger and I apologise. I accept that Purnell technically obeyed the law, but ethically a Labour supporter shouldn't use taxpayer's money to find ways to avoid paying tax.
Bad News for Yeovil
Don't know how badly this will hit AgustaWestland in Yeovil but the US Dept of Defense have scrapped the presidential helicopter project known as the VH-71 Kestrel.
The prototype for the VH-71 took it's first flight here in Yeovil on 2007 and as part of a $11 billion project the ending of it will be a big blow for the local economy here.
Productivity or a waste of time and money?
In March, the Department of Health set up an NHS Productivity Unit to help the NHS become more efficient with the spectre of funding freezes and real term cuts approaching.
Now the Health Service Journal has found out what the staffing and budget for the Productivity Unit is. Wait for it, it's £350,000 per year, and they have 2 staff members, the Director and a part time secretary. Even if we take the fact that an NHS Productivity Unit would be useful and given that there's only £350k available for it, is the best way to staff it by having one very highly paid Director and basically nothing else.
Margaret Edwards was at Yorkshire and the Humber Strategic Health Authority on between £180k and £185k in 2007/08. (Source Y&H SHA Annual Report 07/08) With the £12k of benefits she was on and an estimated 5% pay rise in 2008/09 and 2% for 2009/10 then even if she hasn't got any more for the new role she would be costing the DH around £260k once NI and Pension are figured in. Take maybe £25k out for the part time secretary and that leaves £65k for glossy brochures explaining to NHS organisations how to do something that they should really already know.
Assuming that Edwards is going to work full time then that's 220 working days per year to work with the around 500 trusts in England, that's never going to be worth it. Why are we wasting money like this and giving the Tories and the likes of Burning Our Money such an easy target?
Safety Documents now free to all
It was always appalling that workers had to pay the Health and Safety Executive for information about their safety already paid for from their taxes. Now the HSE have agreed to put all their priced items on their website for anyone to download for free.
The newest publications are already on the site free to download and HSE will be putting on all the older documents over the next year. Well done to HSE and to the TUC for calling for it.
The newest publications are already on the site free to download and HSE will be putting on all the older documents over the next year. Well done to HSE and to the TUC for calling for it.
Wednesday, 3 June 2009
Why Gordon Brown should stay
I was a supporter of Brown in 1994 when he didn't stand, and of McDonnell in 2007 when he couldn't stand so that makes me about as good a backer of political winners as Polly Toynbee but here goes:
Brown was the choice of 313 Labour MPs (29 nominated McDonnell, 11 didn't nominate either candidate). If the Guardian is right and 70-80 backbenchers want Brown to go now they must include a large number of people who thought Brown was the right man 24 months ago and now want to stab him in the back. Like a football club chairman who appoints a new manager only to ditch him at the first run of bad results - these MPs need to explain themselves. And if they are doing this in the hope of losing the election by a couple percent less badly, to scrape home with a 1,000 majority instead of losing in their own seat then they deserve to get kicked out by the voters.
And can anyone say that ditching Brown and getting Alan Johnson or James Purnell in his place is going to make the slightest difference? I'm old enough to remember the Tories meltdown in the mid 90s, they stopped remembering what it was like in opposition, they thought that it was all down to presentation. Yes, presentation helps, but integrity is much more important and if you can't be proud about what you're selling, you're not going to be good at selling it. It's the product that's old, saggy and not fit for purpose. I propose that we should give Brown the chance to actually fix it.
UPDATE - Penny Red of course says it better than I could
"It's not about the politics: it's about their own jobs, a sorry attempt to cool down public and press indignation at an expenses scandal in which they are all culpable by attacking the man who, for better or worse, they chose to lead them"Quite right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)