|
|
By Damian Talbot ( view all posts) Anyone who has seen the news over the past 24 hours cannot have missed the uproar surrounding Lord Ashcroft’s donations to the Conservative Party and the fact that he lives abroad and pays no tax on his UK business interests.
The following quote on why he became a Conservative donor says it all, Ashcroft says that, ‘it was because of my admiration for the policies of Margaret Thatcher.’
We in Blackburn remember the policies of Margaret Thatcher very well – high unemployment and lack of investment – all of which saw our town stagnate during the 1980s.
Lord Ashcroft has since ploughed £5 million into the Tory Party. Effectively helping them to try and buy victory in many marginal seats such as Rossendale and Darwen.
I think it’s about time we brought in a cap on donations – otherwise how can we possibly have fair politics. The current situation is effectively allowing a politics of ‘he/she who shouts loudest wins because he’s/she’s got the most money’.
And where does Mr Cameron, the Conservative Leader stand on this issue? – no comment – even though one of his former Tory colleagues, Sir Anthony Grant has said, ”We want to detach ourselves from this notion that people only have to give money and then they can waltz into what is, after all, part of the legislature.”
The Tories are quite simply insulting the intelligence of the voters. Is this the kind of Party you think is fit to run the Country? I don’t think so!
By Damian Talbot ( view all posts) Am I the only one who can see this through Christine Pratt’s cynical comments on the Gordon Brown bullying allegations? I suspect not.
No one condones bullying of any form and if there have been any cases at Number 10 then these should be investigated. However Mrs Pratt’s outburst appears very conveniently timed given the Conservative Party’s increasing inability to persuade voters to leave Labour.
With the gap in the polls down to 6% on Sunday 21st February it is clear that people are now thinking more seriously about who is most fit to run the country. Gordon Brown’s efforts on the economy have been widely backed – even unemployment has failed to climb as high as predicted (remember that in each of the last two recessions – both under the Tories – unemployment rose to over 3 million).
So lo and behold as the Tories fail to win the political argument they come along with the usual character assassination stuff! Remember the ‘demon eyes’ campaign against Blair in 1997 – yes, we’ve been here before.
The Patrons of Christine Pratt’s charity are former Tory Minister Ann Widdecombe and current Tory Councillor Mary O’Connor. It has been stated that a number of Conservative MPs have called Mrs Pratt offering their support. All sounds a bit too suspicious to me.
Professor Cary Cooper who was on the Board of the National Bullying Helpline has resigned following Mrs Pratt’s comments. This eminent academic is clear that in naming the employer involved in the allegations a confidentiality has been breached.
I think it’s time we had some proper debate about the issues that really matter!
By Jack Straw ( view all posts) “I started life in very straightened circumstances” this lady said very sharply to me, “and now I’ve got my own home with four bedrooms. I’m never voting Labour”.
“Well, I’ve got my own home with seven bedrooms, and I too started life in a family without money, and I am voting Labour” retorted another, equally well-dressed lady of a similar age.
The great thing about my open air soap box sessions in Blackburn Town centre is that you never know what’s going to happen. They are entirely unscripted, impromptu events where the crowd is mainly people who happened to be in that part of town.
Last Saturday’s meeting didn’t start too wonderfully, if you happened to be me. Once I’d done my five minutes’ warm-up, a man with big lungs and a loud voice asked me a “question” – or rather made a very effective speech without pausing for breath about the iniquities of the bonuses the banks were still paying themselves, and the failure, as he saw it, of the Government to ensure that every citizen had a proper shareholding in the banks which they as taxpayers now owned.
Why hadn’t we got a grip, instead of allowing the banks to go on as before?
There is an answer, which I gave. We were controlling bonuses in the banks we owned, but if we had to act in concert with other leading countries otherwise the bankers would simply move, and banks which “we” owned would be worth less to the British taxpayer. The problem however was that my answer was a long and complicated one, whilst the questions and the statements leading up to them were short and pithy. It certainly didn’t convince the man with the loud voice, and it didn’t altogether convince me! I could and should have put it better.
But thanks to the man with the voice the crowd suddenly thickened, and the fascinating exchange between these two ladies began.
The first lady’s central point was that people like me who may have come from a low income family but who now have a very good income and supported the Labour Party were hypocrites especially when they criticised “toffs”. I explained that I’ve always avoided doing so, since none of us can chose our parents. I said that you should judge people not by where they came from, but where they wanted to take society to. But this lady did raise one of the central questions of politics in all democratic countries. How far does the state on behalf of the people try to equalise opportunities, and incomes; or would such intervention simply dull people’s sense of personal responsibility and initiative.
That’s where the second lady came in. She was essentially saying that she’d only been able to do well (and central questions of politics in all democratic countries. How far does the state on behalf of the people try to equalise opportunities, and incomes; or would such intervention simply dull people’s sense of personal responsibility and initiative.
That’s where the second lady came in. She was essentially saying that she’d only been able to do well (and get her seven bedroomed house) thanks in part to the doors which had been opened by others through the state, and though she was now doing fine she wanted others in the future to enjoy similar if not better opportunities. I paraphrase but that was the essence of it. And by the time she’d finished what amounted to her speech, there was a loud and spontaneous burst of applause from the crowd.
Who said that folk are turned off by politics? Not in Blackburn they’re not, if this meeting is a guide.
By Kate Hollern ( view all posts) As the dust settles on the magnificent victory by Labour’s Mustafa Desai in February’s Queen’s Park by-election there were glum faces amongst leading Tories, Michael Lee and Michael Law-Riding at the count. Why could this be?
Sources close to the local Tory party have admitted that they had informed Conservative Party Central Office in London they were poised to win the seat. As a consequence, plans had been made for David Cameron to visit Blackburn on Election Day. However, when by mid morning it became clear that their initial predictions had been a might over optimistic, a mad panic ensued as the visit was hastily called off and a chastened Mr Cameron was told to stay away. In the end the Conservatives finished a poor third with only 15% of the vote. In the supposed Tory stronghold of Guide it is believed that they received barely thirty votes.
The by-election results sent a clear message that the people of Blackburn are continuing to reject Cameron’s Tories. Maybe Mr Law-Riding who previously thought that he had the Blackburn seat “sewn up” will be reassessing his chances after this disaster!
By Jack Straw ( view all posts) I got the shovel out again the other day. It’s been behind the front door for the past four weeks. It had snowed overnight.
There’s a surprise – after all, after the last few weeks it feels as though snow is now a permanent fixture. I cleared our otherwise dangerous steps, and then shovelled some snow off the public footpath outside our house and that of our neighbours.
There was nothing out of the ordinary in my morning exertions. Everyone in our turning has mucked in. As have millions of others who have been working very hard to keep their streets, their schools and their communities going since this extraordinary winter started to bite. We really have seen people acting as good neighbours, following the example of the Good Samaritan, and not walking past on the other side.
We read a great deal about those in our society who are selfish, who commit the most horrible crimes, or who by being simply selfish drive their good neighbours to distraction. But the overwhelming majority are not like that, and there’s something noble about the way in which everyone joins in when faced with adversity. Indeed, some of the stories of people coming to the rescue of stranded drivers and giving them food and shelter – in some cases overnight – have been truly heart-warming. Did someone say Britain was broken? I think not.
The one thing I didn’t think about as I started shifting the snow on the public footpath was whether I was going to be sued by someone who’d walked on my cleared bit, slipped, and blamed me for their injuries. If you read some of the papers you could be forgiven for believing that health and safety experts were instructing people not to clear public paths, for fear of getting sued.
There may have been a little creative reporting here, but it’s also true that when asked by one of the newspapers, the body representing health and safety workers was hardly unequivocal about the risk. If a company gritted beyond their property, but failed to do it well enough and someone was injured in a fall, they “could incur some liability”. The group in question, the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health, was irritated that its full guidance, which said that in the event it would probably be best to grit areas to avoid accidents, was not reported. Such are the perils of dealing with the newspapers.
I hope this flurry of activity didn’t put anybody off clearing the snow outside their houses and on the pavements. The reality is that should someone seek to take action against a householder in these circumstances, the courts would take a sensible view. It’s doubtful that they would agree that one person might sue another for negligence, and I rather suspect that in fact the court would look kindly on a householder who was doing the right thing by clearing the snow from the pavement. It certainly won’t be stopping me getting the shovel out again.
By Jack Straw ( view all posts) Wootton Bassett is a small market town in Wiltshire. A few years ago it would rarely have made the front pages of the newspapers.
But for the saddest of reasons, Wootton Bassett has come to signify the fundamental decency of the British people.
It is through Wootton Bassett that the bodies of British servicemen and women killed in Afghanistan are carried from nearby RAF Lyneham, where the planes carrying their coffins land.
The town has duly become famous for the way local people line the streets to pay tribute to the bravest of the brave, those who have given their lives in pursuit of a better life for others, at home and abroad.
It is moving beyond words. Having family, or close friends, on active service is worrying enough, even where the loved one returns from a tour of duty in one piece.
The pain for those who do lose someone forever is terrible.
Nothing can bring back the father, mother, husband, wife, brother, sister, friend, but the extent to which the rest of us can salute and honour their memory can make a significant difference to the grief of those who lose near and dear.
They need to know that their loved ones died for a purpose, protecting the rest of us; that we recognise their supreme and selfless sacrifice.
So it must surely be some comfort for the bereaved to see so many in Wootton Bassett paying tribute to the fallen.
So I therefore find it repugnant that the radical group “Islam4UK” is planning a protest march through the town.
It shows absolutely no respect for the families of dead troops, or indeed for Wootton Bassett, which has been keen to avoid these solemn occasions being used for political ends.
What I find particularly objectionable is that the proposed march is designed entirely with the intention of creating publicity and inciting anger – there can be no other purpose.
And the views of “Islam4UK” are not remotely representative of the overwhelming majority of British followers of Islam. There are many more British Muslims in our armed forces than there are members of this group.
It reminds me a little of the row in 2006 when there was understandable anger in the Muslim community over cartoons published in a Danish newspaper.
I said then that while we all respect freedom of speech, there is also an obligation on us all not to “insult or to be gratuitously inflammatory” as I felt the newspaper had done.
A similar test applies here. I will defend the right of anyone to protest against the military action in Afghanistan.
I wouldn’t agree with them, but the right to protest and to free speech is the sort of right which the Afghan government is seeking to entrench in its fledgling democracy, with our forces seeking to help them do that, as well as reduce the serious threat of Al Qaeda terrorism which has already killed and maimed people here.
But rights have limits and there is no right at all to insult, or to be gratuitously inflammatory, and that is exactly what ‘Islam4UK’ are trying to do by proposing to march through Wootton Bassett.
By Kate Hollern ( view all posts)  Weather woes, but whose fault is the mess
that has resulted on the streets of Blackburn?
According to the Councils ruling coalition of Tory, Lib-Dem and Darwen independent misfits it’s certainly not them.
“Residents are lazy, not tough enough, whinging, selfish and soft.”
These are just some of the claims made by Tory and Liberal Councillors and spokespeople during this period of terrible weather.
As usual with the Tories and their allies when things go badly wrong on their watch it is everyone else’s fault and not theirs. However, the facts point the blame right at where it needs to be. It shows that due to the lack of planning and penny pinching when it comes to providing adequate services the incompetence of those running the Council has led to the whole Borough grinding to a halt.
The list of problems is endless – schools are closed, businesses are suffering terribly, hospitals are being put under pressure and transport has all but stopped. Vulnerable residents who receive home care are being left isolated cold and hungry as their carers cannot reach them and they can’t get out to the shops.
This has happened despite the bad weather having been predicted for weeks. I mean this is the North of England and everyone knows at least once a year it does snow and we have icy conditions.
As usual the Council has failed to adequately plan for the inclement conditions. Despite the hilly nature of the area they have failed to supply salt bins where they are needed and unforgivably they have failed to fill up the few salt bins there are.
Cynicism has also surfaced as cars have been abandoned all over the Borough and the Council see an opportunity:
Helping the drivers by clearing the snow and ice? No that would need common sense and unfortunately our Council bosses lack that in abundance. Instead they spot a nice little earner and send traffic wardens out to put fixed penalty notices on all the cars stuck in the snow.
Hitting stranded motorists and saving money by keeping grit stocks dangerously low allows them to spend thousands more on their jollies including conference expenses and allowances.
Welcome to a winter wonderland Tory controlled Blackburn with Darwen style!
Happy New Year
By Blackburn Labour ( view all posts) The death has been announced of Jim Mason, a member of Blackburn Labour Party for many years, and a lifelong member of the Cooperative movement and a hugely important influence in the Labour administration that successfully ran Lancashire County Council from 1981 until last year.
In particular, Jim was the driving force behind the establishment of Lancashire Enterprises Ltd which became an example of the way that public authorities could support and enhance socially valuable businesses as opposed to simply allowing market forces to run their course. This was a controversial policy during the years when the Thatcher governments were prepared to blindly follow market forces wherever they led and whatever the consequences but this policy pointed the way forward for some of the Labour governments’ actions from 1997.
Jim died last weekend after a long illness and his funeral will be held at 1.15 pm on January 11 at Silverdale Methodist Church followed by a service at Lancaster Crematorium at 2.45 – Jim’s family would welcome the presence of old friends and comrades.
By Jack Straw ( view all posts) The cry I hear more often than I would like regarding the ‘problem’ of faith schools is: “Close ‘em down. Divisive. Makes segregation worse”.
The critics of our distinctive Anglican and Catholic state schools and our one Muslim faith state school – and, elsewhere in the county, some Jewish and Methodist schools – claim these schools are outdated, as fewer go to church these days, and add the charge they are ‘elitist’.
Church attendances may have fallen, but 70 per cent of the British population in the last census stated they were Christian, and any politician who sought the abolition of faith schools would be consumed by the public uproar which would follow.
There is huge attachment to faith schools because of their faith and because generally across the UK, specifically in East Lancashire, they are good schools.
This is not to decry non-faith schools – both my children went to one.
And, whether faith schools, foundation schools, or community schools are ‘elitist’ depends principally on their catchment area, ethos, and record. Not on their category.
So are faith schools divisive?
In a town like Blackburn, with large Asian communities, and concern about ‘parallel communities’ it’s a reasonable question.
On the face of it, it could well be that faith schools, with a preference at entry for children of that faith, would engender a sense of separateness, and exclusivity, and make matters worse.
Recent evidence, however, points in exactly the opposite direction. It enforces a view that if you respect and celebrate someone else’s faith, they are much more likely not just to respect and celebrate yours, but become inquisitive too about it.
The evidence is from a Church of England report with research by Professor David Jesson of York University, comparing how faith and non-faith secondary schools performed in OFSTED inspections on the promotion of what is called ‘positive contribution to the community’ in their reports. He found that faith schools received average grades 11 per cent higher than non-faith schools.
As the chief education officer for the Church of England, Rev Janina Ainsworth said: “For church schools, community cohesion is more than ticking a box for the government.
“It is about acting out the values articulated in the school’s mission statement in ways that serve and strengthen our human relationship.”
OFSTED scores for Blackburn and Darwen secondary schools – faith and non-faith – are similar, with Pleckgate (non-faith) and St Wilfrid’s (Anglican) rated ‘outstanding’ and all but one of the remainder ‘good’. This latter group included the Muslim Tauheedul Islam Girls High School.
Its inspection was three years ago, just after it was set up. My guess is that the next full inspection will put it in the ‘outstanding’ category, not least because it’s a humanities specialist with citizenship as a core subject, and it’s working hard with non-Muslim schools to improve understanding across the faiths Parents should have a choice between faith and non-faith schools, of course.
But criticism of faith schools as divisive is plain wrong, and the opposite of the truth.
|
|
