Pictures and words…
Blogging will be light for the next day or so. Tons to do for my day job, plus I have a failing hard drive to deal with in our desktop machine – until that’s sorted can’t do much with photos. Editing on a laptop is not my idea of fun…
I will still be keeping an eye on the Newbury election campaigns & plan to write a couple more posts about the hustings, but they might be a bit delayed!
Just got back from the hustings, where all seven local parliamentary candidates took questions from the public. An interesting event and some illuminating answers! I’m shattered so this won’t be a comprehensive write-up – might add some more later, took copious notes.
Overall no candidate had a “Clegg” moment and really seized the initiative. From the occasional applause I suspect the audience – mirroring the constituency – were largely Lib Dem or Tory supporters so I doubt anyone’s changed their mind. Benyon and Rendel, as expected, were in general the better performers.
Questions were delivered through the moderator and covered the following points:
I’ll just pick out a few points of the discussion that I found interesting.
I’d not heard of the Westminster Declaration – follow this link for more information. It’s essentially asking supporters to pledge their commitment to the Christian approach to the protection of human life, marriage, and freedom of conscience.
The candidates were split – all supported freedom of faith but Rendel, Hollister, Yates and Cooper were concerned about the Christian focus, believing that the Declaration implicitly excludes other faiths and creates divides. Benyon, Burgess and Black were unequivocal supporters and happy to pledge their support for the Declaration.
The biggest issues I can see coming out of this are those around marriage. The Declaration’s wording states:
We pledge to support marriage – the lifelong covenantal union of one man and one woman as husband and wife. We believe it is divinely ordained, the only context for sexual intercourse, and the most important unit for sustaining the health, education, and welfare of all. We call on government to honour, promote and protect marriage and we refuse to submit to any edict forcing us to equate any other form of sexual partnership with marriage. We commit ourselves to continue affirming what we believe as Christians about sexual morality, marriage, and the family.
There’s clearly some concern for LGBT people about discrimination in there, to say the least! I wonder if Cameron supports it?
The comments on food security were broadly in agreement and looked at the need to reduce regulation and red tape, and support farmers to actually make money providing good local produce. All candidates agree it’s crazy to import 40% of our food requirements and we need to change this. Benyon – having been a dairy farmer himself – was passionate about this and attacked the EU regulations, “gold-plated” by Westminster, that has made dairy farming so tough as a business.
There was the obligatory discussion about nuclear weapons and Trident. Rendel, Benyon and Cooper essentially made the same arguments as on the radio on Monday – I won’t repeat unnecessarily! The other candidates were split on the issue, Burgess and Black both supported our maintenance of a nuclear deterrent whilst Hollister and Yates opposed it.
The question about a hung parliament became a discussion of whether this would be a good or bad thing. Again the candidates from the main parties very much reflected their national party line – Lib Dems in favour, Tory and Labour opposed. Rendel put the case for making better decisions in a government supported by a majority of the electorate – this went down well and got a big round of applause.
The opening and closing statements from the candidates were all fairly similar – emphasising their local roots, explaining their belief in the power of community and so on. David Yates broke the mold a little in his introduction by focussing on the financial straits the country finds itself in – I was quite enjoying his argument but in the end he was curtailed by the moderator!
None of the candidates disgraced themselves or made any really awful gaffes that I spotted. Brian Burgess did very well and I felt some of his views – particularly on the Westminster Declaration and crime in Newbury – went down well with the audience. Adrian Hollister also made some strong points, particularly on food security.
Probably the most extreme argument of the evening came from David Black, who suggested that with the expansion of European powers this may be the last general election the UK ever gets – and apparently the Queen is no longer the Head of State! I’d be eager to see some disentanglement with Europe myself, but that was all too sensationalist for my liking.
I think future hustings would be better served by having more driving from the moderator – a bit more like the televised leaders’ debates. Getting through only six questions plus opening and closing statements in 110 minutes seemed a bit inadequate.
Still – it was a good event and well worth attending! I’ll probably go into a bit more detail on some of the points discussed when I’ve caught up on some sleep – in the meantime there’s a few more photos of the hustings on my Flickr here.
A much shorter note on tonight’s leaders’ debate – plus a rant! First how the politicians fared. I thought Cameron and Brown both improved from last week, and Clegg looked weaker under a bit more scrutiny. Overall, a lot closer.
I’m eager to find out how polls react over the next week – will the “Clegg Effect” continue? I’d be surprised if the Lib Dems continued to poll quite so high, but we’ll see.
Now for the rant, and it’s about Twitter. Is it making us more closed-minded? I haven’t seen one tweet – not one – which show any evidence of people changing their mind on the #leadersdebate stream. It was hard enough to find any tweets that treated the debate objectively!
Not only that, but the vitriol and abuse against the party leaders was disgusting – and lazy. It appears most people can’t even be bothered to think up their own criticism, but instead simply re-tweet banal and trivial comments to support their own opinions.
It’s especially depressing as the people I follow on Twitter are for the most part delightfully rational and objective. So why when we get onto politics do the knives come out and suddenly it’s bitter partisanship all round?
Nobody’s going to change party allegiance overnight, still less announce it on Twitter! But like the worst of football supporters, it seems that to acknowledge strength in your opposition, or weaknesses in “your team”, is tantamount to treason.
Twitter makes it all too easy to surround yourself with those who echo and reflect your own views, and too easy to dismiss those who disagree. Maybe 140 characters or less are not sufficient, or adequate, for grown-up political discussion.
I’ve found Twitter an enlightening experience in general, and even a force for good. But when it comes to politics, it seems to amplify the worst of sound-bite politics, spin, and negativity, rather than helping people come together and resolve their differences.
I’d be really interested in any of your thoughts about the debates and the live Tweeting that goes on! Do get involved in the comments, maybe I’m just being too pessimistic…
There’s an open hustings planned for the Newbury Constituency candidates – it’s being hosted by Christians Together in the Newbury Area this Saturday 24th April, from 1930 to 2100 at St Nicolas Church Hall. Newbury Weekly News editor Brien Beharrell will be chairing the session.
In a very positive step for a local campaign, the hustings will feature all seven candidates – not just those from the major parties. I think it’s great that the smaller parties and independent candidates also get the chance to put their views forward! Having said that I hope Brien will be able to keep things moving along swiftly, so there’s a chance to cover a good range of questions.
If you’re interested and would like to attend & ask a question, CTNA are asking people to email them with your question in advance. Do get involved – it’s one of the few opportunities we have to ask questions of those who seek to represent us in Parliament!
I’ve just uploaded a couple of election leaflets – one from the Lib Dems and one from the Conservatives – to The Straight Choice. It’s dead easy to do from a scanned copy or just take a picture – if there’s any new leaflets in your area of Newbury, why not add them too?
It’s also worth taking a moment to browse the other leaflets. Fascinating to see what the parties are saying across the country, and how much their message might differ depending where you live!
Quick update regarding the Lib Dem leaflet mentioned in the radio debate yesterday. As I suspected the leaflet is quoting Daniel Hannan on the NHS – I got a copy in my postbox this morning.
The quote in the leaflet is as follows:
“We’ve lived through this mistake for 60 years now… The reality is it hasn’t worked – it has made people iller…”
It is credited to “Top Conservative Dan Hannan on the NHS”, next to a bullet point suggesting the Conservatives support “Privitisation of some existing NHS services”.
Sounds suitably alarmist doesn’t it?
However, this is misleading. Hannan is a Tory, but he is a MEP, not a MP. He is not particularly close to Cameron, and has little input into Tory policies.
Most of all, Hannan does not speak for the Conservative party and does not represent their position on the NHS!
Thus for Rendel to use such a quote to scare the electorate into thinking the Tories would threaten the NHS is pure spin. He’s not lying – but he’s certainly not giving the full picture.
[Note: post now updated from my earlier version with links and the Dan Hannan quote.]
This morning the three candidates from the main parties were on Andrew Peach’s BBC Berkshire radio show – you can listen again here – from 2 hours onwards.
It was a lively session, including discussion on Trident, small businesses, maternity care, immigration, and local traffic. David Rendel and Richard Benyon came across well and did their causes no harm; sadly Hannah Cooper for Labour came a bit unstuck at times. There were cameo phone-ins from the David Black of UKIP, David Yates of the Apolitical Democrats, and Brian Burgess as an independent candidate.
All three candidates were polite, mostly explaining their own policies rather than sniping at the others. There was the odd spark though, such as when Benyon accused Rendel of misleading the public about the Tory policy on NHS cuts. Sounds like Rendel might have been guilty there – haven’t seen the leaflet in question, but apparently it’s citing one Tory MEP (Maybe Daniel Hannan?) rather than official party policy. Benyon rightly pointed out that all parties have some wingnuts on the back benches (not quite in those terms!) and that it’s the manifesto policy that counts.
I was struck by how much consensus there was on Newbury hospital – no real differences between the three parties, all agree that there’s no money to provide a full-service hospital including maternity care. I was interested to learn that apparently a population of 250,000 is required to justify a major hospital, and West Berkshire is only about 140,000 or so.
On immigration there was another clash between Rendel and Benyon, with the latter criticising the Lib Dem’s plans for localised immigration caps – i.e. immigrants receiving a work permit specific to an area in the UK. The Lib Dems plan for this to be enforced through the employer, who must ensure that they only employ workers with a right to work in that region.
I must confess I also have some problems with this policy. It puts a lot of responsibility on the employer and is bound to increase the cost of doing business. I also don’t understand how it will work for skilled and professional immigrants. What if a client assignment requires them to relocate for 12 months? If this policy is implemented, I can see a lot of dodgy dealings with respect to contractural location versus actual location. And what about working from home? Will these work permits dictate where immigrants can live?
None of the three candidates really made sense on how to cap overall immigration – there’s definitely some pandering for votes going on with this topic.
There was plenty more – if you’re a voter in the constituency I’d recommend you give it a listen in a quiet hour. There’s no bombshells in there but certainly helps to understand a bit more about each candidate!
[Update - a good summary of the Trident discussion here. My personal take is the £100 billion figure is somewhat dicey - there's no way we'd save all that money even if we cancelled Trident today! Can see both sides of the argument though - what do you think?]
In another little sanity break from politics, I popped down to Newbury Marketplace on Saturday for the chef’s challenge. This is part of “Feel Good Fortnight“, an initiative across West Berkshire aimed at getting people to think more about their health and wellbeing. The event invited eight local chefs to scour the market for ingredients before preparing two-course meals for a panel of judges in a strict 20 minute time limit. Happily there was also the odd taste for those watching!
In tune with the wellbeing theme, the chefs’ dishes weren’t just being judged on taste & expertise, but also on how healthy they were – something that’s often neglected with restaurant food.
The proper media have already reported on the event if you’re looking for all the details. I can only add it was a really great event – lots of interest from people around the marketplace, a very positive and cheeful atmosphere – and of course some very delicious food!
Some pictures of the event are below…
Jean-Marc Bidegain from the Compton Swan sharpens his knives.
The judges – hard work, but someone’s got to do it!
I’m truly sorry that I didn’t catch this chef’s name, but his dish of scallops on – I think – a wilted lettuce puree looked delicious. Didn’t get the chance to try that one!
Congratulations to Graham White, of the Plough Inn at Eastbury, who took first prize overall for his two dishes.
Yesterday in Newbury I spotted this chap near St Nicolas Church.
“Must be something to do with the election”, I thought, so went over to have a word.
Turns out he’s called Barrie Singleton, and stood for parliament as an independent in 2005. He’s on the interwebs here. Had an interesting chat for ten minutes…
Barrie is unimpressed with our political system, suggesting there’s a sickness in Westminster and that it’s “an incestuous distillation” of all that’s bad in human nature. His “Spoil Party Games” approach is aimed squarely at all mainstream politicians, pointing out how similar the parties are and how little real choice voting really gives us.
Despite the Lib Dems enjoying a sudden surge in the polls, Barrie was equally dismissive of Nick Clegg – reckoning he’s just as much a product of the Westminster system as any of the rest of them!
I enjoyed chatting to Barrie; I didn’t realise he was a poet when we spoke but it certainly helps explain his loquaciousness and snappy turn of phrase. His website has plenty more on his political views.
Barrie’s view of politics speaks a lot of uncomfortable truths. But given it’s almost impossible for independent candidates to win elections, is there any realistic prospect of changing the system?
Well, there are reasons for cautious optimism. All three main parties have promised recall laws, providing measures for constituencies to dismiss MPs who aren’t doing a good job. There’s positive talk about more open government, devolved power and accountability. Meanwhile political blogs and social networks such as Twitter give us less biased – and frequently more accurate – information about what’s actually going on.
But behind the facade of parliamentary process and legislation, will anything really change?
Well, not if it’s left to the politicians, no, it won’t. Unlike some of the more vociferous anti-politics brigade I don’t assume those in politics are especially corrupt or evil – with the odd exception, of course. But once they’re caught up in the Westminster system – like any human who becomes part of a complex system – they begin to lose track of what is normal, or right, in the world outside that system.
So it’s our job to relentlessly, tirelessly remind our elected representatives that we won’t accept dodgy expenses. We won’t accept back-room lobbyist deals leading to flawed legislation such as the Digital Economy Act. And we won’t accept a system that allows MPs to forget who they really work for.
The tiniest of chinks has opened in the closed door of politics; initiatives such as www.mysociety.org and 38degrees.org.uk, as well as many campaigns on social networks, have started to connect the electorate with their MPs in a way that’s never happened before.
Change won’t happen overnight – it will be the work of decades. And it will only happen if many of us stay engaged, stay involved, and keep letting our politicians know exactly what we will and won’t stand for.
So rather than take the nihilistic disengagement or “protest vote” approach, I’d encourage anyone disillusioned with politics to cast their vote for a party with whose policies they most identify. But don’t see that as the end of the process – it’s only the start.
Don’t fall prey to the modern curse of apathy. It might be naive, it might be optimistic, but I honestly think if enough of us listen, educate ourselves and act, then we can make a difference. Get involved – and stay involved!
Not done a photo post for a while and feeling the need for a break from politics – so here’s some of my favourites from the past few weeks. As always, feel free to click through to my Flickr page for more!
When road signing goes a bit wrong… Once again finding that the iPhone is actually a pretty good camera for random street photography.
Claire and a friend were off for a night out in Newbury and were drinking Rose while getting ready. Little did they know that they’d left me a perfect photo opportunity!
We visited Claire’s relatives in Lytham St Annes over Easter – this is St Annes Pier.
Selling olives, I think, at Newbury Market.
Riverboat reflections on the Kennet and Avon canal, on a lovely sunny evening.
Not been a bad month so far – hope there’s more of the same to come!