Tuesday at Conferece

Tuesday is now the day for "the Leader's Speech". Since I first came to conference in 2000, I've seen speeches from Blair, Brown & Miliband - yesterday was different, though shared many characteristics with those. There was great anticipation, and horribly long queues. I was in the queue by 11-30 (previous experience has taught me that turning up late means that the ticket is useless - last year I queued from 11-55 until turned away at 14-00). But being in the queue is interesting. You get the chance for some long conversations with interesting people. This year was no exception - and I got to chat with an experienced councillor from Kent, who lost his seat last May, blown away by Tory & UKIP voters coming out in force; and some students from Oxford and London. It was interesting to discuss different perspectives on what is happening.)

The speech itself was interesting - with some great lines and ideas which caught the mood of the hall. But how did people see it from outside the hall? The answer to that is key - and I'd welcome your comments. My webpage has a contact page - and do share with me your thoughts - www.jdmprogressive.com.

The first meeting of the morning had been on the problem of criminals who run scams - using sophisticated techniques - and who can defraud people of large sums of money - and destroy lives. I will be posting about the issue shortly.

I spent time in plenary - and listened to Lisa Nandy on Energy & Climate Change. I also had some long chats with old and new friends. After the Leaders speech I did another training course - something that will wholly dominate Wednesday.

I'm not much of a "party guy" - so I spent a quiet evening reflecting upon what I have learnt in the last few days - and turning that into plans for the months to come. I'll be leaving Brighton invigorated - and ready to campaign.

Education, Education, Education...

While the programme for the plenary sessions are set by the party, delegates and visitors can choose what subjects they can pursue whilst at conference. For me, Monday was education day. I began with a breakfast meeting which considered "Can the education system close the character gap?". Demos, the think tank, had sponsored the meeting - and as well as an excellent presentation, there were a couple of education reports available, which I'm in the process of reading through. Other presentations and discussions gave valuable food for thought.

At lunchtime, my chosen fringe meeting considered the Education and Adoption Bill currently before Parliament. I have been following that bill closely, in my role as an academic researcher - and sat through every session of the Public Bill Committee. It's a bill which appears small - but has some key elements in it - which could have a major impact on how power is distributed within the education world. It could go far to facilitate Nicky Morgan's stated objective of 100% academisation by 2020.

All this aids my own education - as did the first of five training sessions I have signed up for. The party provides these - and I am focusing on developing my understanding of the computer software that can be used to assist in campaigning.

Tonight I went to the East Midlands reception on the beach (well a cafe on the beach) - it was great to meet up with so many friends, and to make new ones. Then food and music at the "Diversity Night" before a quiet glass of wine and a chat at the "Hotel du Vin"

Review of Sunday

Conference formally began on Sunday, although many delegates had come down for the first fringe events on Saturday evening. Women's Conference was also held on Saturday - so a large number were here for both the Women's and Main Conference.

I only arrived on Sunday, towards the end of the morning session (thanks to a faster than expected journey across London), and immediately bumped into a number of friends. Conference tends to capture you - after your first visit - often as a delegate or a Candidate (my first conference was days after being selected as Parliamentary candidate for Blaby in 2000), you are keen to return. I usually find that I come home stimulated (though tired) after fringe meetings which allow discussion on any issue under the sun; and talking with party members. I also have a worrying tendency to make multiple visits to a bookshop within the conference - and learn much from talking to the various exhibitors - from charities, to unions, to companies across all sectors of the economy. In the plenary sessions we get a range of speeches - from leading politicians to ordinary party members, talking about their own experiences. Over the years you build a number of friendships across the country, which are renewed the next conference you attend.

My first fringe this year was a rally for Europe. Alan Johnson kicked off with an amusing but inciteful sppech - followed by many others pointing out the importance of our membership of the European Union. It was really encouraging to see that this year, there was standing room only.

In the evening, I was being stalked by new leader Jeremy Corbyn and deputy leader Tom Watson. Every event I went to, they both turned up and made speeches act. Many events on Sunday are social - such as the Welsh, West Midlands & Association of Labour Councillor's receptions. There were also serious meetings, such as the one I attended on education.

I finished the evening at athe Brighton Dome Concert Hall. Eddie Izzard gave a bizarre and hilarious monologue for an hour - which was a super end to the day.

This post was written as I prepare for a morning fringe meeting - which will address the question, "Can the education system close the character gap?

I hope to be tweeting during the day using the name @jdm_progressive and hashtag #Lab15

Conference

As I write this, Women's Conference will be starting, the opening event in Labour's Brighton Conference. It will be an interesting week, & I'll be posting as often as I can from the Conference. I arrive tomorrow - and please do get in touch if you are at Conference yourself.

I'll be there as a visitor, and not as a delegate. Perhaps one year? Being a visitor means that you don't have the responsibility of representing your Constituency Labour Party - so can pick and choose what you attend. I'll be in the conference hall most of the time we are in plenary - but I am also looking forward to a rich variety of fringe events - and meeting up with old (and some not so old! friends)

In addition to posts on the blog - I hope to be tweeting using  @Jdm_progressive         

Sugar pushers get away with it, on a technicality.

Sugar (and there's lots of it in confectionery) can cause some miserable outcomes - obesity, diabetes, depression (yes, that short term 'pick-me-up can actually make depression WORSE) and dementia may be the consequences.

 

 

So you can understand why Cadbury's trying to link their products with "joy" is of concern. I love chocolate - but know that there is increasing evidence linking them to the miserable conditions listed above.... We know why they advertise in this way - suggesting their products as 'comfort food' makes them BIG Profits.

 

I put in a complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority (Self regulation). This was their response - "In this case, we considered the joy mentioned in the claim “win a joynormous surprise made just for you” would be likely to be understood by most consumers to be in relation to a chance to win a prize by taking part in the promotion being offered, as opposed to the effects the product may be able to produce when it’s consumed. As such, there doesn’t appear to have been a breach of our rules for the reasons you suggest, and in the absence of a breach of Code, we do not propose any further action
on this occasion."

YEAH, RIGHT - Cadbury's know exactly what they are doing - and know how the consumer will respond to the message. Scientists have been testing this for years. But the ASA seems to swallow this line - a great pity, and at great cost to those of us taxpayers who fund the NHS.

If you feel as strongly about this as I do - get in touch with the ASA - and share this post

Press links to see media articles
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/healthyeating/9987825/Sweet-poison-why-sugar-is-ruining-our-health.html

http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/sugar-problem/refined-sugar-the-sweetest-poison-of-all

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/aug/24/robert-lustig-sugar-poison

 

Tories arguments against the National Health Service Bill, 1946

This is from a speech given by Tory MP, Sir William Wavell Wakefield (St Marylebone) during the 2nd Reading of the National Health Service Bill on May 2nd 1946. The same approach as we see today - be afraid, be very afraid (of progressive proposals)


"The first reason is that the privately owned surgeries of today are to disappear and health centres will take their place. The intimacy of the private surgery will go and people will not be able to go round the corner to see their practitioner. They will have to go to the health centre where there will be group practice and many doctors. That will mean that patients will have longer distances to travel. In these health centres there will he formalities, the keeping of records and the loss of any personal, intimate relationship, and this, I think, will result in a worsening of personal service. The doctors will be there in group practice, and the Government cannot convince me that under a State service doctors will be willing to go out in the middle of the night. They will come to these health services from nine to five and then go home. There will be a duty doctor with duty typists and secretaries. When people ring up and notice is given of urgent cases, I do not believe that the same personal service will be given under this State service as is available now, when practitioners are responsible directly to their patients and not paid by the State, as envisaged in this scheme. That is my view and that is the view of many people with whom I have discussed this Bill. Furthermore, because there is no good will— Because there is no goodwill to maintain, I feel that there is going to be a much more impersonal and less personal service. There is any amount of evidence available on that point. Doctors and dentists during the period of the war went into the Services and had an opportunity of seeing the State service and the private and personal service. One and all say that there is not the same personal regard for patients in a State service that there is in a personal service. There is no use hon. Members shaking their heads. I have got plenty of evidence on it, but I have not the time to give it now. When we come to the Committee stage I hope an opportunity will be given me to prove what I am saying now. As a result of this Bill there will be less quality in the entrants in the medical service. There will be a removal of enterprise, a removal of the taking of risks and responsibility and the carrying out of what a doctor believes to be right in the interests of his patients.   ...    It is because I believe that there will be this fundamental alteration in the relationship between doctor and patient that I submit that doing away with the voluntary principle in our great hospitals, with the exception of the teaching hospitals, will be a retrograde step. I believe there will be an undoubted loss in the spirit of service and voluntary help which has been so vital a characteristic of the life of our nation for hundreds of years past. I deeply fear that this Bill, instead of being a great Bill which could immeasurably improve the health of our people, will not lead to the better service and better health which the Minister and everyone wants for the great majority of our people."

History Matters

Tristram Hunt wrote in a Guardian article in 2011 -


"Our national story is being privatised, with 48% of independent pupils taking the subject compared with 30% of state school entrants. And academy schools, so admired by government ministers, are among the worst offenders.


This elimination of the past is nothing short of a national tragedy. We can rehearse the arguments about the "competencies" history provides – the ability to prioritise information; marshal an argument; critique sources. But such utility fails to do it justice. History is so many things: the material culture of the past; understanding lost communities; charting the rise and fall of civilisations.

Yet history also provides us with a collective memory; it gives us a sense of connection to place, time and community. And that sensibility is being lost. As Eric Hobsbawm has put it: "The destruction of the past or, rather, of the social mechanisms that link one's contemporary experience to that of earlier generations, is one of the most characteristic and eerie phenomena of the late 20th century. Most young men and women at the century's end grow up in a sort of permanent present lacking any organic relation to the public past of the times they live in.""


The current government is happy to see children brought up with the myths of British history - Kings (and Queens) and Generals. Celebrations of the great events which saw power taken away from an elite by those who sought freedom have been sanitised and appropriated by the very people who are now taking away rights! What an irony that Cameron has been celebrating the Magna Carta which is significant because of the principle that no one is above the law. The extension of the franchise is being celebrated by the very people who are making it more likely that fewer people will appear on the electoral roll.


There is a great deal in British history that we should be telling our children. Ours in not a country which has been submissive. Power was not benignly given to the people by generous Kings - our forefathers and foremothers fought for the rights we now take for granted. Read Parliamentary history for the story of the resistance to abolishing slavery; to extending the franchise - and look at the family history of some of our current MPs! Let's not forget that the creation of the NHS was opposed by the party which , while today claiming to be the protector of the NHS, is quietly letting it fall apart.


This blog will not shy away from retelling the history of the British people - and of the heroes who stood up against tyranny.

Arm Yourself with the facts

There are so many grossly biased sources of "facts". It is perhaps little surprise that some Americans have such a distorted view of the world - and of Washington itself - when they rely almost exclusively on Fox News. Similarly, here in Britain, many people rely on the Daily Mail, the Daily Express and the Sun to explain events.




Left wing sources of 'information' may be unreliable too. So where can we go to get  quality, non-partisan, information?




The House of Commons Library is one place. It doesn't serve the government of the day - and provides information to users across the political spectrum.




"The Library provides an impartial and confidential information and research service for individual Members and their staff." But many of its publications are available to the public - for free - on the internet. I've used them for many years - and many of my students (in law and politics) have been introduced to them - and value this free source of excellent material.




There are "Briefing Papers" on all manner of subjects. Currently 5730 papers are available online (that number will probably have changed by the time I finish writing this post). They provide "in-depth and impartial analysis on every major piece of primary legislation and on other topics of public and parliamentary concern. Regular statistics papers are also published."




Do have a look at the range of material available at http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/.




Research briefings can be downloaded as pdfs - and can be saved to read on a tablet on the train, or read on your PC. Do resist the temptation to print out these briefings - your supplies of paper and ink will be used up quickly (I speak with experience here).


When you are fighting disinformation - and we meet it every day on the doorsteps - we can make our arguments based on the facts. We can challenge the assertions of those with a political axe to grind.

Greek Election Results

The Coalition of the Radical Left (SYRIZA) gained 35.47 percent of votes cast and will have 145 (out of the 300) seats in parliament. The New Democracy conservatives came in second with 28.09 percent of the vote and 75 seats.

The extreme-right Golden Dawn is Greece’s third political power with 6.99 percent and 19 seats. The centre-left PASOK-DIMAR alliance received 6.28 percent and 17 seats, with the Greek Communist Party (KKE) following at 5.55 percent and 15 seats.

The Greek Parliament's website (in English) can be accessed here.

Survey

I posted a survey about political preferences on the jdm_progressive website yesterday. Please do visit the website and take part. The survey does NOT ask for any of your details - it's not "that kind of survey". Unlike most surveys - which are interested primarily (or in most cases, I'm afraid, exclusively) in harvesting data - either for marketing purposes, or for use in political campaigns - this survey is aimed at getting a general picture of jdm_progressive readers.

If it goes well, I hope to introduce further surveys - some to get a picture of general opinions - others to invite more detailed information about views on issues or bills which Parliament is considering.

That was the week that was!

No - I'm not going to be writing about a programme broadcast when I was just a child. Instead I shall write of this last week in British politics - hardly time to catch one's breath!

Central, of course, was the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party. I had walked past the QE11 Hall a couple of hours before (and saw Ben Bradshaw and Sadiq Khan arriving) - but while I will be going to the full conference in Brighton, I didn't have a ticket to the special conference. I had arrived in Putney by the time the result was announced.

During the leadership campaign, I had supported Andy Burnham - and had done some work to encourage others to vote for him. It's always disappointing not to be on the winning side - but politics is always competitive. Now, Jeremy is the Leader.

We've seen the events which followed, with the Right Wing media relishing the hunt - and the Tories running their "be afraid, be very afraid" line - A couple of comments here. First, the Right always resorts to this type of approach. Fear trumps hope - but they should note the story of the little boy who repeatedly cries wolf. In any case - Cameron's claim that Corbyn is a threat to "our economic security and your family's security" is rich coming from the Prime Minister who has overseen the explosion in zero-hours contracts; the bedroom tax; cuts to Working Tax Credits; who has already reneged on his promise to cap care costs...

One of the reasons that the Conservatives dislike Corbyn - is that he is seen as too much of an ideologue. A left-winger blinded by his own ideology. Yet the most fanatic ideologues today are INSIDE the Government. IDS pursuing his Victorian fantasy that threats and punishment are the best motivators for the poor - Nicky Morgan and her team who, despite no evidence to back their claims, believe that academisation is the ONLY way to improve school standards - the Europhobes who believe all our evils stem from Europe - but most of all those who assert that market forces, unfettered by controls, will bring about the best of all possible worlds.

Jeremy hasn't had a perfect week - he's made some mistakes, appeared "unprofessional" at times, but has also stepped away from some of those things most people find irritating about politics. PMQs was unusual - but better than the slanging match that brings Parliament into disrepute.

The noise of the last week should settle down - the new frontbench team will be developing policy - and Jeremy, like other leaders before him, won't win every battle (just ask Cameron, Brown, Blair and major about that). As good progressives, we look to the future...

Some Radical Thinking

On the train down to Westminster this morning, I was reading "A Remonstrance of Many Thousand Citizens", one of the leveller tracts that was discussed at the Putney Debates. There are some excellent statements there - worth repeating ...

Addressed to MPs were these comments -

"We are well assured, yet cannot forget, that the cause of our choosing you to be Parliament-men was to deliver us from all kind of bondage and to preserve the commonwealth in peace and happiness....but you are to remember this was only of us but a power of trust (which is ever revocable, and cannot be otherwise) and to be employed to no other end than OUR well-being"

Perhaps it's time to revive this idea of MP's being here to improve the lives of their constituents - and not to visit upon them austerity, intrusion and misery.

Debate about Freedoms

 

I'm a strong advocate for thoughtful debate about the form that government should take - and the rights of citizens. Such a quality debate took place in Putney in the autumn of 1647.

On Saturday I headed for St Mary's Church in Putney, where the so-called "Putney Debates" took place. The "Festival of Freedoms" website says "It was a pivotal moment in our nation’s democratic past, as men came to discuss the rights of the people, and the fate of the King."

Professor Justin Champion outlined the history and significance of these debates. Some very modern ideas were discussed at the debates. Geoffrey Robertson has written that "The civil war years, 1641-49, first established what today are regarded as universal values - the supremacy of parliament, the independence of the judiciary, the abolition of torture and of executive courts, comparative freedom of speech and toleration of different forms of religious worship." The Putney Debates were informed by, and discussed, ideas from a group which has come to be known as the Levellers. Tony Benn has written about them - and that piece is available here.

There are some excellent books about the debates. I've been reading the book "presented by" Geoffrey Robertson (as opposed to written - he has written a superb introduction. but the bulk of the book is material written by the levellers themselves).



I also picked up Dorian Gerhold's book at the church.



The transcripts of the debates, a (in effect, civil service) clerk was in attendance to record what was said! To read more go here.

More events are planned in the coming days at Parliament's Festival of Freedoms - see the pdf of the Festival Guide here.

"Education, Education, Education."

Quentin Letts absolutely hated it, so it must have something going for it! He has dismissed it as "leftie tosh". Well I'm not surprised, he attended preparatory school, a leading public school and Cambridge - before going on to enjoy power and influence as he would feel his right. This play makes a good case about the Powerful and the powerlessness of those affected by the power players in Education.

On Friday evening I went to the Old Vic to watch "Future Conditional". Starring Rob Brydon, it is enjoyable - at points hysterically funny - but with some important issues about Education to think about. As I am currently researching scrutiny of Education in the House of Commons, and take a keen interest in education policy (as well as being a fan of Rob Brydon), it was a must see play. Having now seen it - I would thoroughly recommend it - you will laugh - as well as be forced to think. Writer Tamsin Oglesby takes aim at many aspects of Education, no one is spared - but a key message is the domination of those who have power over those who don't.

BBC Review
Guardian Review
Independent Review

Lett's rant

The Old Vic - for booking tickets.

Charles Bradlaugh MP

 

Charles Bradlaugh provoked many controversies, and many myths have grown around him. On Tuesday evening, Deborah Lavin demolished the myths, and presented an absorbing story of a persistent man, who attracted some very powerful enemies. The talk (which will be repeated at 11.00am and 2pm on Sunday 25th October - as part of the Bloomsbury Festival - and I would thoroughly recommend attending) covered the life of the MP for Northampton. I had always understood it to be case that Bradlaugh was kept from taking his seat by the parliamentary manoeuvres of the Tories, who seized an opportunity to embarrass the incoming Liberal Government of Gladstone. But Lavin made a persuasive case for Gladstone himself being the culprit, eager to be rid of a "supporter" he detested.

It was an ugly fight. As an atheist, he sought to affirm rather than take the oath on a Bible. That had been allowed in courts as a result of legislation - which  Bradlaugh had used as a Solicitor's clerk, prior to the change in law he had complied with the requirement to take an oath. He made it clear that he was prepared to take the oath in Parliament if required, but his enemies denied him that, on the grounds of his atheism. He was sued for voting before he had taken such an oath, in an attempt to disqualify him from parliament - by bankrupting him (the fine was £500 for each vote). His seat was declared vacant a number of times, but he succeeded in winning re-election each time. But as a result of one attempt to enter the chamber he was imprisoned in the Clock Tower beneath the bell of Big Ben. It was Tory pressure that led to his release.

As suddenly as the controversy arose - it died. Lavin asserts that it was because Gladstone now needed Bradlaugh's vote, in a more tightly balanced House of Commons.

While we may recognise Bradlaugh's progressive views on some subjects - on economics, he held views which most of us would reject. One of his enemies was Karl Marx, who rejected his views on the need to bow to the "free" market.

An interesting subject - in an engaging presentation. Don't miss it in October! (for more details, and to book - press here.)

Welcome

...to my new blog. I intend it to be a forum for the promotion and discussion of progressive ideas. I hope you'll join in that discussion - and respond to my comments and suggestions.

Let me make one thing clear, I regard the most important obligation for progressives, is to seek power - not for our own enrichment, or to have power for its own sake - but to promote the sharing of power.

Our main criticism of the current state of the world must be that too much power is concentrated in the hands of too few people (and the corporations or governments they run). There is too much powerlessness about - putting vast numbers of people at the mercy of 'economic forces'; the chance of ill-health, and vast difference in educational opportunity.

Sometimes I will aim to provoke - please respond. Other times I will share items of interest from progressive (and other history). I am always open to suggestions.

This blog is linked to a number of jdm_progressive sites on the internet.
Website - http://www.jdmprogressive.com/
Twitter - @jdm_progressive
Pinterest - @jdavidmorgan
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs3i-D1qdLk
jdm_progressive Daily - https://paper.li/e-1441096835