Laura J's profileThe Talking PointPhotosBlogListsMore  |  Tools Help |
The Talking PointDissecting the news stories we should all give a damn about.
|
May 26 David Cameron pledges radical political reform
Conservative leader David Cameron (Image © PA) What’s happening? Conservative leader David Cameron has promised a radical reform of the political system to restore public faith in British democracy in the wake of the MPs’ expenses scandal. Writing in the Guardian, he declared he would trim back the powers of the prime minister and government and give MPs more influence over legislation. Cameron’s proposals to decentralise power would prompt the biggest change in the way Britain is governed in the modern era. What are people saying? “I believe the central objective of the new politics we need should be a massive, sweeping, radical redistribution of power,” Cameron wrote. “From the state to citizens; from the government to parliament; from Whitehall to communities. From the EU to Britain; from judges to the people; from bureaucracy to democracy. Through decentralisation, transparency and accountability we must take power away from the political elite and hand it to the man and woman in the street.” Why should we give a damn? Cameron said a Tory government would:
Your thoughts?
Share It
May 21 Gurkhas granted right to live in Britain
(Joanna Lumley with Gurkha VC veterans Lachhiman Gurong (left) and Tul Bahador Pun/Image © John Stillwell/PA)
What’s happening?
Gurkhas have been granted the right to live in Britain in a dramatic u-turn by the government. About 36,000 Nepalese soldiers who left the British Army brigade before 1997 had previously been refused citizenship. Ministers were forced to rethink following the government’s humiliating defeat in the Commons last month. Veterans will now be given the same settlement rights as Commonwealth soldiers who fought on behalf of the UK.
What are people saying?
In a statement to the Commons at 12:15pm today, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said all Gurkhas who retired before 1997 and served more than four years would be able to bring their spouses and children with them to Britain. There will be no time limit on the policy and resources will be made available to the UK Borders Agency. "I'm delighted we have now been able to agree new settlement rights that all of those who have served us so well rightly deserve," she said. Gordon Brown previously said he had a “great deal of sympathy and support” for veterans. “I believe it is possible for us to honour our commitment to the Gurkhas and to do so in a way that protects the public finances,” he said during Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday.
Why should we give a damn?
The original policy was “blatantly discriminatory,” said Labour MP Martin Salter, who chaired a group of MPs calling for Gurkhas’ rights. In an interview with BBC News, he said the campaign had “encapsulated the British sense of fair play.” Joanna Lumley spearheaded the campaign, famously cornering Immigration Minister Phil Woolas in a TV studio after veterans’ applications were rejected. Speaking after today's announcement, she said: "This is a day for celebration. A great injustice has been righted." The actress also paid tribute to Gordon Brown: "a brave man who has made a brave decision on the bravest of the brave."
Your thoughts?
Gurkha factfile:
Share It
May 19 Speaker Michael Martin quits "to maintain unity"
(Image © PA)
What’s happening?
Michael Martin has resigned as Speaker of the House of Commons over the MPs’ expenses scandal – the most high-profile victim of the crisis and the first speaker to be forced from office in more than 300 years. Twenty-three MPs signed a motion calling for him to step down for his role in trying to keep parliamentary expenses secret. When campaigners first tried to uncover details under the freedom of information act, the Commons Commission – of which Martin was chair – fought the case in the high court. It eventually lost and agreed to publish details later this year. When the Daily Telegraph published leaked claims, however, Martin drew further criticism by calling for a police investigation.
What are people saying?
Addressing the House of Commons at 2:30pm today, Martin spoke only briefly to confirm he would stand down on June 21 “in order that unity can be maintained” in the House. After the announcement, Tory MP Douglas Carswell told BBC News: “The key is that the next speaker owes their position to the legislature as a whole. There is a duty to create a House of Commons that works. Changing the speaker is the beginning of a far-reaching process of reform.” Labour MP Sir Stuart Bell, a close ally of Martin, said: “He paid a heavy price for trying to be an establishment figure when the establishment was corrupt.” Angus Robertson, leader of the SNP in Westminster, reiterated calls for a general election. “This is a much bigger problem than one person,” he said. Harriet Harman, leader of the House, described the decision as “an act of great generosity to the House of Commons that MPs from all parties will respect.”
Why should we give a damn?
Some say Martin’s departure will herald the beginning of the end of the current crisis gripping Westminster; others say the issue of how to restore public faith in politics is yet to be resolved. Blogger Guido Fawkes describes Martin as “one of the most outrageous examples of personal enrichment at the public’s expense while pretending to be a public servant.” Guardian political commentator Michael White disagrees: “It is wrong to blame him for the decay of parliament; he has been a symptom, not the cause.” Either way, the move is expected to pave the way for a radical reform of parliament. Senior Labour MP Sir Stuart Bell told the Press Association: “I can tell you the Cabinet... will approve a series of reforms which will place the House of Commons in the hands of independent regulators rather than the House itself. The nature of the role of the speaker will change. There will no longer be a speaker who is in charge as chief executive. He will be procedural and ceremonial.”
Will that be enough to clean up Westminster? Your thoughts...
Share It
April 23 Brown’s future post-budget: “defeat or humiliating defeat” MSN Money's post-Budget poll shows voters were unimpressed
Yesterday’s Budget won’t save the Labour government at the next general election, political analysts say. Pollsters on both sides of the aisle gave dire predictions, ranging from manageable defeat to humiliating defeat, for the party after yesterday’s bad-news Budget. If Labour can’t convince voters it has a grip on the recession in the coming months, the analysts say, it risks being “completely wiped out” at the polls.
Andrew Cooper, founder and strategic director of polling firm Populus, is a leading interpreter of political opinion. I asked him whether Chancellor Alistair Darling’s plans could help the government survive. “The short answer is no,” he said. “Voters are profoundly sceptical and won’t be swayed by what he has said. They’ll want to wait and see what happens.”
‘They give one and take two’ is a phrase he frequently hears in focus groups. “Although it sounds as though people are going to be better off, they actually end up worse off.” To make matters worse, this year’s Budget was delivered during a global recession and it is that recession, Andrew says, that will decide the government’s fate.
Wiped out
“In the weeks and months to come, the concern will be does it feel like the chancellor’s announcements are working?” he told me. “If yes, Labour may experience a manageable defeat. If not, they could be completely wiped out.
“For example, there was a blip bump for Labour immediately after the collapse of the Lehmann Brothers last autumn. The government sensed terrible things were happening all over the world and seemed to have a plan. By December, the polls suggested a general election would have produced a hung parliament and Labour would have had the biggest majority.
“Now, the polls indicate Labour would only have a majority of 40 to 50, when what they need is a converted majority of 50 to 100 or more. If they can’t persuade voters they’ve got a grip, they risk being wiped out completely.”
Economic populism
The Budget did, however, offer clues to Labour’s general election strategy. Increasing taxes on high earners is an attempt to define Labour as the party of the masses, rather than the privileged few – a philosophy put forward by legendary pollster Stan Greenberg after he joined Labour’s ranks in 1995 (Tony Blair wasn’t convinced by the political power of economic populism at the time; Gordon Brown was).
Will voters buy it? Elizabeth Truss, deputy director of right-of-centre think tank Reform, doesn’t think so. “(Labour) have failed to address voters’ concerns about the high level of debt and public spending,” she told me. “Many voters are having to cut back on their own household budgets. They want to see the public sector do the same.”
Darling must change direction in November’s Pre-Budget Report if the government is to avoid a debilitating defeat, she said. “He needs to address the deficit and reduce spending in the key departments. How well Labour does in the next general election depends on whether the government continues on this course of overspending or decides to make the difficult decision and rein it in.”
What did you think of the Budget? Did it win your vote, or will you be backing someone else at the general election?
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Send a private message
Subscribe to RSS feed
Tell a friend
Add to My MSN
Add to your network
Sign up for alerts
|
|
