Sunday, 25 May 2008

Political escapism

I could give you a long post on my thoughts on Crewe based on my experience on the doorstep but there's lots of that and the result is the result at the end of the day. I could pontificate about political scenarios, urge caution, demand action, be optimistic, pessimistic, frustrated, resolute or reckless. I could recommend going into political hibernation for a while. But I'm  not going to do that.


If British politics is just too painful and you still need your political fix why not try something different? Become an honorary US citizen for while. Start off at realclearpolitics.com then watch Meet the Press on MSNBC later. You're off. It's fun, uplifting, unpredictable. There's stats, personality, scandal, laughter, tears, pain and joy. Try it- it will be good for your health and well-being.

Alternatively, kick the habit altogether. Pick up a book. Meet some friends. Get off the internet. Go down to the pub. Do the garden. Don't go to the park- the weather is horrible (glad I'm not a Hay-on-Wye trendy, lefty drowned rat.)

Whatever you do. Relax and take it easy for a while.

Tuesday, 20 May 2008

Clegg riding the tax waltzer

Nick Clegg describes the tax regime under Labour as a 'tombola tax system.' Good line. But the tax system he proposes is akin to a waltzer tax system, just as you think it's spun one way, it spins back again. The whole thing ends up in a dizzying mess.

Let's leave aside his claim that some people on low incomes are paying 'effective' tax rates of 90% (did he mean 'marginal' rather than 'effective' by any chance? Are you telling me that someone on £10,000 pa could be taking home just £1,000 pa? Nonsense.) The mishmash of proposals will have all sorts of bewildering effects. Let's just take those on low incomes:

- Basic tax down to 16%. Good.
- Tax shifted to pollution (the poorer you are the higher proportion of your incomes in consumed by energy costs and the like). Bad.
- Reducing taxes further after tax avoidance clamp-down. Goodish. If tax avoidance was so easy to cease someone else would have done it by now so probably won't happen. Remember the non-doms saga?
- Scale back tax credits. Bad- Clegg is right that it would be simpler to take people out of tax altogether. Simpler but I'm afraid more costly and less targeted.
- Introduce a local income tax system. Good or bad. If you are single and working could be good depending on the rate. If you are a working couple would be bad. If you are on a fixed income, undeniably good.

So overall, if you are on a low income I think you would rightly be concerned about the overall Lib Dem tax package. The most amazing thing is that having castigated Gordon Brown for the complexity of the current tax system, it would be just as difficult if not more so to calculate whether you were better or worse off under the Lib Dem proposals.

The one thing that the Lib Dem tax waltzer isn't is simple. Dizzying, quite fun, politically opaque, yes but simple, no.

Monday, 19 May 2008

Obama and McCain spat continues

The war of words between Senators Obama and McCain has continued into today. John McCain accused Senator Obama of 'inexperience and reckless' judgement.

I find two elements of the McCain position confusing:

i) President Ahmadinejad is in power and it really is irrelevant whether the US hands him a 'propaganda victory' by meeting up with him if that is indeed all it would be. A meeting doesn't change things with regard to Ahmadinejad's position in Iran in the slightest either way. The bellicose approach has failed so what exactly is there to lose?

ii) What is McCain proposing instead? Do what we say or else? What if Iran doesn't comply? Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran (as McCain once hilariously sang to the tune of Barbara Anne by the Beach Boys)?

In no way am I suggesting that any recourse should be taken off the table or under-estimating the threat posed by Iran (in the Middle East at least) but I just don't see how the McCain strategy leads to anything other than embarrassment for the US, an uneasy and probably unsustainable deadlock, or a military strike on Iran. If stand-off diplomacy is the way we are going to continue, then the options and outcomes are narrowed drastically.

The only amazing thing about this spat, is that Senator Obama's position is portrayed as so extreme. It has its risks but there really is very little to lose and everything to gain.

Will 80,000 people be watching the Champions League final live?

Maybe, just about. Well 80,000 people spent their Sunday afternoon going to listen to Barack Obama.

I'm not sure at times whether he is still a politician or he has become U2. Well, I guess that Bono has tried to make the opposite journey...

Bush's neo-McCarthyism is now failing

I have a contribution on The Independent's Open House today on Bush's failing neo-McCarthyism that I alluded to in the post below.

The article is here.

Sunday, 18 May 2008

Neo-con history

Chris Matthews of MSNBC is quickly becoming a hero. He stood up to a dotty neo-con, right wing talk show host a couple of days ago on his Hardball show. Kevin James, his clueless guest, made a historically inept reference to Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler and Barack Obama's approach of constructive engagement with Iran.

Watch the clip, and it is worth watching, believe me:



It was great to see one these characters finally called to task. Kevin James is a pretty weak example of how to play the neo-con straw man game. You know, the one there where you escalate risk assessment, mis-quote and misuse history, define anyone who is a sliver to your left as some form of innocent, appeaser, or traitor, you define your international adversaries as pure evil, and then demand the most aggressive response imaginable. But the basic game plan is the same no matter how skillfully it's played.

There can only be hope that Chris Matthews has shown the way to stand up to this and that will allow the debate to breathe in this critically important Presidential election.

Saturday, 17 May 2008

The British Obama?

Fraser Nelson is a very talented commentator. I don't think that this line, good though it is as a journalistic construction, will be seen as his finest hour:

"Cameron has plenty heavyweight ideas, he just needs a good slogan. Obama has the reverse problem."

Hmmm. Let's compare. Here is the Conservatives' policy page:

http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=people.opportunity.page

Three pages, three basic areas, not many actual policies and certainly very few costed policies.

Now compare Barack Obama's policy-rich agenda:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

There is no comparison. Just take one critical area, both America and Britain are both facing difficult economic times. Barack Obama's economic plan (notice the link), whatever you may think of its merits, is clearly something that is thought through and actionable. The Tories' economic plan (notice the absence of a link)? Do they have one apart from the usual platitudes? It's certainly not any of the 'policies' listed on their website.

It's interesting watching the US elections- the early attacks on Obama for lacking substance have completely disappeared from the terrain. Experience is now the dividing line. Clearly the collective conclusion of media commentators, political opponents and friends alike is that Obama is a candidate of substance.

The off-the-mark attacks on Obama's lack of substance of a few months ago still ricochet around the UK political landscape. It's time that the bullet hit the ground- how on earth could anyone get through the most gruelling political process in the world without having solid and defensible policies? It just doesn't make sense.

The suggestion that David Cameron has the substance where Barack Obama just has rhetoric is just a tad fanciful. OK, it's utterly ridiculous. David Cameron's challenge is to find the slogan AND the heavyweight ideas. We'll wait with bated breath.

Thursday, 15 May 2008

Scruffy McDuffy

"Who do we want? We want Scruffy. When do we want him? NOW!" Ah, a seminal moment of my childhood where 'Scruffy McDuffy' a Grange Hill teacher is fired for....being scruffy (dressing like Lofty Holloway in Eastenders.)

It seems that it also had a deep impact on Michael Gove, the Tory Education Spokesman. OK, a bit of respect, the Shadow Education Secretary. His latest eye-catching and profound policy is to support schools that crack down on scruffy teachers. Well done Michael, keep getting your homework in on time.

As it happens, a few days after the 'Scruffy Mcduffy' episode aired, I found myself caught up in a march to restore football to the school playground after it was banned slightly over-zealously by a dinner lady. 'What do we want? Football. When do we want it? NOW!" The march included all the girls who had the chance of liberation from macho 8 to 11-year olds taking over their entire play space but gallantly marched with us because they had a broader understanding that if you deny one kid of their liberty, you deny all.

The Headmaster soon had the entire march in the school. Put it this way, it was dealt with (quite brilliantly as it happens.) I'm sure that Michael Gove would have sat the whole thing out, maybe grassing up one or two ring-leaders. But it's quite clear that the march happened because of the scruffiness of the teachers of the school. I hope they were all disciplined.

What is the point of the BBC's Justin Webb?

John Edwards has been flagging the fact that he was about to endorse Barack Obama for a few days now through his appearances on a variety of political agenda-setting shows. And now he has actually endorsed Obama.

The BBC's Justin Webb says....it helps Obama. Genius. Justin you had to put your reputation on the line there. Some might question what you are doing apart from watching US TV and looking at US political websites. But not me (I'm doing the same.) We know that you're there to be Mr BBC: boring and slightly patronising and very much behind the curve.

If the BBC doesn't raise its game on political reporting, surely there should be a franchise system to enable other broadcasters to provide a genuinely high quality service (and this does not mean audience numbers.....) In fairness, Matt Frei is excellent. The fact that the BBC messes around with Justin Webb shows that the organisation isn't.

Mike Smithson of www.politicalbetting.com is equally perturbed at the BBC's political coverage.

Wednesday, 14 May 2008

Istanbul

As will be obvious from my half-hearted and rather superficial post about Frank Field on Monday, I am currently enjoying a break. Though I had good intentions to maintain a daily blog and could easily do so given that I have wi-fi access in my hotel, I just haven't been able to motivate myself to do it.

In fact, I'm going to indulge in this mesmerising city, Istanbul instead of writing about how Hillary Clinton's win in West Virginia changes nothing or how it is fascinating that Obama has moved his campaign to general election footing signalled by his decision to speak in the swing state of Missouri rather than West Virginia last night or how the draft Queen's speech contains some really good measures not least a cheeky little proposal on buying up surplus housing for redistribution or the welfare reform measures and a strong idea on the introduction of an NHS constitution.

The reason I'm here is quite simple. Orhan Pamuk. I've been a fan of his writing for some time (I would particularly recommend 'Snow' and 'My Name is Red') and his 'Istanbul: memories and the city' has been on my bookshelf for a while. Cheesy but what better than to read it in Istanbul?

The threads of Turkey's identity crisis, East and West, Kemalist and Ottoman, flow through Pamuk's literature just as the Bosphorus and Sea of Marmara collide and separate in Istanbul. In 'Istanbul', Pamuk becomes curator, poet, archivist, social historian, and autobiographer. Istanbul becomes his history, his canvas, his personality. Like Hugo, Dickens, and Joyce before him he allows himself to be defined by a city and in turn hooks us into accompanying him on an archaeological dig of the soul of place.

Pamuk's personal history and that of his family has an uncanny entanglement with that of his subject. His family's fortunes turn upon the death of his paternal Grandfather, a 'magnificent man', whose fortunes are frittered away by the hopelessness of his father and uncle's business acumen. A decaying family fortune reflects the decaying seat of the Ottoman empire, a city neglected, bellowing up nothing but darkness and painful memories of past greatness.

He never met his Grandfather just as he never saw Sultanate Istanbul, but each is omnipresent in his upbringing. His Grandmother, wise and charismatic, never surfaces until after midday, rarely leaves the family home, waiting for their family greatness to return (she sees omens of this in little Orhan, the 'crow') and Istanbul is gripped by huzun, a kind of collective melancholy induced by dispossessed greatness, power, and wealth.

The embers of this melancholic shabbiness remain in modern Istanbul but this is not the same city that Pamuk grew up in. It had just about reached a population of a million when Pamuk began school, its population now stands at ten million. The old city, Pera, and Bosphorus communities have been swallowed in mass migration and development. Romantic as the crossing from the West to the Asian side sounds, the Asian side is nothing of the sort. Rather it is a sea of modernist medium rise tower blocks. Rather than a bridge from West to East or vice versa, the trip across the Bosphorus is more akin to crossing from 1920 to 1965.

There is much discussion about whether Turkey can ever be part of Europe. Istanbul is not typical, I'm assured, but on the evidence of this city it absolutely can be. It has the feel of a modern, European city with an Islamic hue rather than an Islamic city. Islamic architecture (sometimes subsuming Orthodox Christian architecture as in the spectacular Haghia Sofya) provides the city's best moments. However, much as the Sultans left for the hills and then extinction quite a while ago, Ottoman Istanbul remains as a relic rather than a threat. Even Haghia Sofya is now just a museum (though I can't remember being in a more breathtaking structure.)

So where does Turkey's destiny lie? The Government of Tayyip Erdogan seems to want have its cake and eat it, supporting a fusion of modern economic reform and conservative Islam. It is patently obvious that the only way to combine these two things is hypocrisy- liberalism will leave religious conservatism in its wake. The only question will be if and what kind of backlash this approach will provoke. For now, the EU's most sensible course of action is to continue an engagement with Erdogan. The mono-creed vision of European politicians such as Valery Giscard d'Estaing needs to be challenged just as areas where Turkey falls short, freedom of speech, Cyprus, and the potential entanglement of religious with secular law need to be tested. It should be noted that despite the approach of Erdogan's AKP, Turkey is perhaps more aggressively secularist government than any in Europe with the possible exception of France.

Orhan Pamuk's city of black and white has been replaced by a sparkling city, self-confident in its future, released from its past. It is as Europoean as Napoli, Athens, or Seville. Old Istanbul, the city of Pamuk's youth was given its energy by the Bosphorus. New Istanbul, this city of new train lines, stadiums, affluent housing developments, and high-rise office blocks, has an energy of its own. Ataturk has won- in Istanbul at least. Is the EU to reverse the city back to its history or allow its destiny to be European? On the evidence of Istanbul at least, Turkey is already well on its way to a European destiny.

Postscript: Pamuk collects some newspaper columns that he has read over the years (see what I mean about being a curator?) Two quotes particularly amused me:

From 1946:

"We're tired of seeing every square in the city flooded every time it rains. Whoever is supposed to fix this, should fix it soon."
From 1927:
"Yesterday it snowed and did anyone in the city board a tram from the front or indeed show any respect to their elders? It is with regret that we note how quickly the city forgets the polite rules of society that so few of our inhabitants knew in the first place."
Anyone who has been here will be able to vouch for that!

Monday, 12 May 2008

Frank Field

I'm getting very bored of Frank Field now. He's over-stepped the mark with his criticisms of the PM today.

And now Bryan Gould is being given a platform as well. Didn't he bugger off to New Zealand after being humiliated in a Labour leadership election by getting less than 10% of the vote in a two-way fight? Some voice of authority that.....

Sunday, 11 May 2008

Bobbies on the beat

Has anyone else noticed the phenomenal police presence in London in the last week? I must have seen up to twenty police officers of various types in London Fields on Friday evening. I can barely remember seeing more than the odd one previously. Is Ian Blair trying to show that he's responding proactively to a new Mayor?