Should politics be left to the politicians?
http://ping.fm/JC47g
Thursday 26 November 2009
Should politics be left to the politicians?
I didn't intend to post anything else relating to the Glasgow North East by-election. It was just that after spending the best part of an hour with John Smeaton I was fascinated by last week's BBC Scotland documentary on him.
John did much worse than he expected. Perhaps when he first threw his hat in the ring with The Jury Team he had hopes of winning. By the time I spoke with him he was hopeful of coming third. In the end, more people, in one of the poorest parts of Britain, voted for the Tories rather than this "man of the people".
How come?
The documentary told me a lot more than my interview did about John. To be honest, the interview with John, as with all the other candidates, was pretty apolitical. On the stump, John's selling point to be an MP was the fact that was a "normal guy", as opposed to the other, "career" politicians.
My first concern about this approach is that I'm not sure that John any longer is a "normal" guy. "Normal guys" don't get showcased at the Labour Party conference, invited to Congress, gigs with the First Minister or get a column in The Sun. Underneath the celebrity status, John may well still be a normal guy, and he was great company when I met him, but he won't be "normal" again any time soon.
John's political stand, that he wouldn't put his views forward, but would support "the people's" views, was also a bit suspect.
How was John to work out what "the people" wanted on the many many decisions an MP has to make, day in day out? Who are these "people"? Are they Sun readers? Guys who turn up at his surgeries? Randoms who stop him in the street? Are their opinions any better or more representative or than anyone else's?
John had one popular policy; that he would get MPs' noses out of the public trough. But all the other parties committed themselves to doing that as well. And Labour (possibly the Tories soon) will actually be in a position to do this.
Other than that he is/was a normal guy, John struggled to come up with any other plausible reasons for voting for him. How he would bring in jobs was never really explained. I'd guess there's another 648 MPs committed to the same thing and it isn't really happening for them, so how John can do it needed to be spelled out.
Ultimately voters want a bit more from their politicians than just simply offering themselves to stand up for, er, whatever, you want me to. If people are going to elect an MP, that MP or his/her party, has to have credible policies on a wide range of issues. One of the inescapable laws of politics is that you can't please all of the people all of the time. Voters appreciate a bit of honesty about this.
Another political fact is that money and organisation goes a long way too. I really didn't know that John's team was pretty much him, his mate and his mum and dad. The Jury team appeared to chip in when they got annoyed with John, and perhaps the film did the Jury Team a disservice, but John seemed to be easily brushed aside by the big boys' machine.
The moment which really captured my attention though was the comment by one of the voters. Exhibiting that classic, awful, Scottish cringe, she commented "he's just a baggage handler, he's got carried away with himself".
Presumably she'd rather be represented by "Robo-MP", the kind of MP/MSP we see far too much these days. Guys and gals straight out of uni or party research who've never done any real job in the private sector or the sharp end of the public sector, but see politics as a career just like any other. They say what they're told, voter as they're told, dress as they're told and never depart from the script. I'm sure you can name loads of them.
My hope is that with the reform of MPs pay and expenses we do get more baggage handlers, nurses, police officers, fire fighters as well as teachers, doctors etc getting involved in politics.
John's experience proved that its very hard for a guy on his own (especially one allied to a fringe political party) to beat the party machine. Its to be hoped that those within the major parties who have selected the candidates of 2010 have selected people who are both representative of the public and are committed to the public.
John did much worse than he expected. Perhaps when he first threw his hat in the ring with The Jury Team he had hopes of winning. By the time I spoke with him he was hopeful of coming third. In the end, more people, in one of the poorest parts of Britain, voted for the Tories rather than this "man of the people".
How come?
The documentary told me a lot more than my interview did about John. To be honest, the interview with John, as with all the other candidates, was pretty apolitical. On the stump, John's selling point to be an MP was the fact that was a "normal guy", as opposed to the other, "career" politicians.
My first concern about this approach is that I'm not sure that John any longer is a "normal" guy. "Normal guys" don't get showcased at the Labour Party conference, invited to Congress, gigs with the First Minister or get a column in The Sun. Underneath the celebrity status, John may well still be a normal guy, and he was great company when I met him, but he won't be "normal" again any time soon.
John's political stand, that he wouldn't put his views forward, but would support "the people's" views, was also a bit suspect.
How was John to work out what "the people" wanted on the many many decisions an MP has to make, day in day out? Who are these "people"? Are they Sun readers? Guys who turn up at his surgeries? Randoms who stop him in the street? Are their opinions any better or more representative or than anyone else's?
John had one popular policy; that he would get MPs' noses out of the public trough. But all the other parties committed themselves to doing that as well. And Labour (possibly the Tories soon) will actually be in a position to do this.
Other than that he is/was a normal guy, John struggled to come up with any other plausible reasons for voting for him. How he would bring in jobs was never really explained. I'd guess there's another 648 MPs committed to the same thing and it isn't really happening for them, so how John can do it needed to be spelled out.
Ultimately voters want a bit more from their politicians than just simply offering themselves to stand up for, er, whatever, you want me to. If people are going to elect an MP, that MP or his/her party, has to have credible policies on a wide range of issues. One of the inescapable laws of politics is that you can't please all of the people all of the time. Voters appreciate a bit of honesty about this.
Another political fact is that money and organisation goes a long way too. I really didn't know that John's team was pretty much him, his mate and his mum and dad. The Jury team appeared to chip in when they got annoyed with John, and perhaps the film did the Jury Team a disservice, but John seemed to be easily brushed aside by the big boys' machine.
The moment which really captured my attention though was the comment by one of the voters. Exhibiting that classic, awful, Scottish cringe, she commented "he's just a baggage handler, he's got carried away with himself".
Presumably she'd rather be represented by "Robo-MP", the kind of MP/MSP we see far too much these days. Guys and gals straight out of uni or party research who've never done any real job in the private sector or the sharp end of the public sector, but see politics as a career just like any other. They say what they're told, voter as they're told, dress as they're told and never depart from the script. I'm sure you can name loads of them.
My hope is that with the reform of MPs pay and expenses we do get more baggage handlers, nurses, police officers, fire fighters as well as teachers, doctors etc getting involved in politics.
John's experience proved that its very hard for a guy on his own (especially one allied to a fringe political party) to beat the party machine. Its to be hoped that those within the major parties who have selected the candidates of 2010 have selected people who are both representative of the public and are committed to the public.
Sunday 15 November 2009
Wednesday 11 November 2009
Willie Bain (The Labour Party) - The North East By-Election
Willie Bain, The Labour Party candidate talks to Modernity Scotland about his priorities for Glasgow North East as well as what ringtone he has on his mobile phone, his favourite film and other personal interests.
John Smeaton (The Jury Team) - Glasgow North East By Election
John Smeaton, The Jury Team candidate talks to Modernity Scotland about his priorities for Glasgow North East, what he would ask the Prime Minister the next time he met him as well as other personal interests.
David Doherty (Scottish Green Party) - North East By-Election
David Doherty, Scottish Green Party candidate talks to Modernity Scotland about his priorities for Glasgow North East, his favorite film, album and other personal interests.
North East By-Election Nov 2009
2009-10 is a big year in UK Politics. We plan to have a lot more video content, to hopefully, heighten our young people's interest in the political process. I'll do some video myself, we'll interview some teachers/pupils (please get in touch if you're game for an interview) and we'll also profile many of the candidates. We couldn't ignore the Glasgow North East by election, which takes place tomorrow. We couldn't get all the candidates to respond back to us, but the ones we did get; Willie Bain, David Doherty, David Kerr and John Smeaton were all fantastic.
Thanks guys!
Tuesday 10 November 2009
Why I Love Country Music
I know I took the micky out of country music at the MSA conference but I really do like the good stuff. This is my current fave, from a great new album (Bruce even sings along on this track on the album).
Sunday 8 November 2009
Modern Studies Association conference 2009
The Modern Studies Association (MSA) held its annual conference at the University of Strathclyde (Jordanhill)on Saturday.
The first thing I'd like to say about it is an enormous thanks to the MSA conference organisers. An event such as this, which attracted an incredible 230 teachers, requires months of (unpaid) planning. There are speakers to be invited, halls and classrooms to be set up, catering to be booked, goody bags to be packed, all of which takes an enormous amount of time. All of the organisers are full time teachers who do this kind of work in their own time. So, from one guy who had a great day on Saturday, thank you to Alison, Gordon, Guch, Henry, Irene, Jayne, Jim, Melanie, Pamela and Ruth, hope I never left anyone out!
I'd like to thank the teachers who stayed on for my talk on teaching the USA in the afternoon. The MSA conference is a demanding day. Its a packed programme. So, I'm indebted to the USA workshop teachers for being in such good humour. I'm particularly indebted to the two (any others?) American teachers present; Ted Hall at St George's, Edinburgh and John Zehner at Holy Cross High School, Hamilton.
At the end of the talk I had a little bit of fun at President George W Bush's expense, which the two Americans, thankfully, took in good spirit. If you know me at all, you know I love the USA so the last thing I'd want to do is offend any Americans over here, especially in John's situation as he is a Fulbright teacher, here for a year. How would I feel if I was in America and teachers were all laughing at Alex Salmond or Jack McConnell?
I didn't get to any of the workshops as I nipped out in the morning to interview the Labour candidate for the Glasgow North East by-election, Willie Bain, for Tuesday's blog. I'm interviewing John Smeaton, the Greens' David Doherty and, hopefully, the SNP's David Kerr and the SSP's Kevin McVey tomorrow night. The post will be a light hearted one. It won't be heavy political analysis, just a showcase of the more human side of people who want to represent you.
I spent most of the conference trying to get people to support Cross Out Poverty. Neil Galbraith, who is the main organiser of COP, had to go away to do a funeral. I suppose that's what happens when you have a Minister running a campaign. You'd be mistaken though if you think COP is some kind of mad religious thing. It's not. Neil is the kind of guy who is danger of getting organised religion a good name. You can do something for COP, whatever your religion or none.
Its all about a) celebrating, in the best possible way, Scottishness, on St Andrew's Day. Not party political and certainly not in any way anti anyone else, just the many things Scots have done and are doing. It can be the Modern Stuides dept, the Art dept, the Music dept, any part of a school, on 30 November, celebrating Scottishness.
But, then b) while we're doing this, asking, why are there still children living in Scotland in poverty? Why is this scandal still happening? What can be done? What can I do and what should others be doing?
This year's COP is really a dummy run involving some Glasgow schools in Neil's parish. But, next year, I really think this campaign will be very high profile. Children in Need is alright, but there is no political focus at all. It's almost as if the event is a core BBC show itself, part and parcel of the organisation like Strictly or MOTD. Our Children in Need raised more millions this year than last year! Wey-hey! Next year will be even better! Its a disgrace that there's any need for Children in Need at all.
I'm all for helping children in need, but let's ask why they have to be in need in the first place and what can be done, rather than just ask people, who already pay plenty in taxes, to hand over even more of their money.
The first thing I'd like to say about it is an enormous thanks to the MSA conference organisers. An event such as this, which attracted an incredible 230 teachers, requires months of (unpaid) planning. There are speakers to be invited, halls and classrooms to be set up, catering to be booked, goody bags to be packed, all of which takes an enormous amount of time. All of the organisers are full time teachers who do this kind of work in their own time. So, from one guy who had a great day on Saturday, thank you to Alison, Gordon, Guch, Henry, Irene, Jayne, Jim, Melanie, Pamela and Ruth, hope I never left anyone out!
I'd like to thank the teachers who stayed on for my talk on teaching the USA in the afternoon. The MSA conference is a demanding day. Its a packed programme. So, I'm indebted to the USA workshop teachers for being in such good humour. I'm particularly indebted to the two (any others?) American teachers present; Ted Hall at St George's, Edinburgh and John Zehner at Holy Cross High School, Hamilton.
At the end of the talk I had a little bit of fun at President George W Bush's expense, which the two Americans, thankfully, took in good spirit. If you know me at all, you know I love the USA so the last thing I'd want to do is offend any Americans over here, especially in John's situation as he is a Fulbright teacher, here for a year. How would I feel if I was in America and teachers were all laughing at Alex Salmond or Jack McConnell?
I didn't get to any of the workshops as I nipped out in the morning to interview the Labour candidate for the Glasgow North East by-election, Willie Bain, for Tuesday's blog. I'm interviewing John Smeaton, the Greens' David Doherty and, hopefully, the SNP's David Kerr and the SSP's Kevin McVey tomorrow night. The post will be a light hearted one. It won't be heavy political analysis, just a showcase of the more human side of people who want to represent you.
I spent most of the conference trying to get people to support Cross Out Poverty. Neil Galbraith, who is the main organiser of COP, had to go away to do a funeral. I suppose that's what happens when you have a Minister running a campaign. You'd be mistaken though if you think COP is some kind of mad religious thing. It's not. Neil is the kind of guy who is danger of getting organised religion a good name. You can do something for COP, whatever your religion or none.
Its all about a) celebrating, in the best possible way, Scottishness, on St Andrew's Day. Not party political and certainly not in any way anti anyone else, just the many things Scots have done and are doing. It can be the Modern Stuides dept, the Art dept, the Music dept, any part of a school, on 30 November, celebrating Scottishness.
But, then b) while we're doing this, asking, why are there still children living in Scotland in poverty? Why is this scandal still happening? What can be done? What can I do and what should others be doing?
This year's COP is really a dummy run involving some Glasgow schools in Neil's parish. But, next year, I really think this campaign will be very high profile. Children in Need is alright, but there is no political focus at all. It's almost as if the event is a core BBC show itself, part and parcel of the organisation like Strictly or MOTD. Our Children in Need raised more millions this year than last year! Wey-hey! Next year will be even better! Its a disgrace that there's any need for Children in Need at all.
I'm all for helping children in need, but let's ask why they have to be in need in the first place and what can be done, rather than just ask people, who already pay plenty in taxes, to hand over even more of their money.
Saturday 7 November 2009
Tuesday 3 November 2009
Great Political Studies guide in this week's New Statesman, print version only. The website is excellent as well. http://ping.fm/h2VhP
Sunday 1 November 2009
Fun in Glasgow North East
The Glasgow North East by-election will be held on Thursday 12 November. It promises to be fun, even, as First Minister Alex Salmond says, "a brammer".
The by-election is the result of the elevation of sitting MP Michael Martin's to the Lords after his resignation as Speaker of the Commons over the expenses scandal.
In 2005, Michael Martin won 53.3% of the vote and a majority of 10,134 over his SNP rival. Glasgow North East should be a safe Labour hold. But will it be?
I love by-elections. General Elections, to use a football analogy, are a bit like league championships. Generally, over the 645 games, the best team wins. Yes, there's the odd dodgy result, injustice or slip up along the way. But, usually, the party with the best leader, the best ideas, the best campaign and the most money wins.
By-elections though are like cup games. Surprises happen. The big teams cannot guarantee a result. The outcome cannot be taken for granted.
Labour, struggling as it is nationally, should still win. In Willie Bain, it has an able candidate with no expenses baggage to hide. While opposition parties have questioned the depth of his "localness", he knows the constituency and appears to be, as they say, a safe pair of hands. How much of a kick back Labour will receive from the expenses scandal remains to be seen.
The SNP, likewise, are fielding a strong candidate. David Kerr is a former BBC journalist. As you would expect, he is media savvy and presents himself well. After winning neighbouring Labour heartland Glasgow East in 2008, the SNP would dearly love to triumph over Labour again.
But, the Scottish Government's decision to abandon support for the Glasgow Airport Rail Link (GARL) cannot help the party's cause. Glasgow is proud of hosting the 2014 Commonwealth games. GARL is seen by Labour controlled Glasgow city council and its articulate leader, Steven Purcell, as central to its success. The city, and this constituency in particular, could do with the jobs GARL would create. Labour are sure to go to town on this issue.
As in Glasgow East 2008, the Conservatives have unearthed a strong female candidate in the shape of Ruth Davidson. The problem is, there's as much chance of the Conservatives winning this seat as nearby Partick Thistle have of winning the Champions League. Last time around, the Tories never even bothered putting up a candidate in Glasgow North East (neither did the Lib Dems or the Greens). But, this is the new, de-toxed, poverty tackling Tories. Glasgow North East won't be on the hit list for the Tories winning the next General Election, but the party won't want a humiliation either. If it saves its deposit, it'll be a result.
The real fun comes in the shape of two Scottish media darlings who are standing; Tommy Sheridan and John Smeaton.
"Smeato" is representing the newly formed "Jury Party", a political party which doesn't believe in, er, political parties. The appeal of The Jury Party is obvious. There is widespread public resentment towards professional politicians, in particular at the lifestyle many of them live at public expense. The appeal of John Smeaton is obvious too. Local Glasgow guy who sorted out the airport terrorists in time honoured Glasgow style.
Smeato's credentials are good, but, I suspect, his chances of election would have been better if he'd stood as a white suited Martin Bell style "clean up politics" campaigner rather than as a candidate of the Jury team. Apart from criticising MPs over their expenses (which everyone is doing anyway), no-one really knows what the Jury Team stands for on a whole range of issues affecting the constituency.
Tommy Sheridan, as always, provides more intrigue. The former Celebrity Big Brother star will, along with his Mrs, be back in the High Court in January. Who needs Celebrity Big Brother when there's the Sheridans Trial! In the meantime, Tommy is standing as a candidate for his Solidarity Party which he formed after leaving the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) after the last court case in 2007. His appeal is, largely, the Tommy Factor. His is asking the voters to elect him on a "try before you buy" basis, before the General Election of 2010.
I don't think Tommy Sheridan or John Smeaton will win. What will be of interest is who they take votes from. The SNP would have hoped, like in Glasgow East 2008, to hoover up all the anti-Labour votes. But, the anti-Labour votes will now go in several directions. Labour itself will be content to retain most of its "core" vote. It can afford to lose several thousand and still win. But, how many of its core vote will take the chance, always offered by by-elections, to give the governing party a punch on the nose?
Tommy Sheridan's chances will also be curtailed by the other socialist parties. Tommy's former comrades, the SSP, are running. The Socialist Labour Party (SLP) are also standing. You may well ask what the actual differences are between any of these parties?
Curiously, the SLP actually finished third in this election back in 2005, beating the SSP quite comfortably. Unlike the SSP, the SLP really has little presence in Scotland. It's performance underlines, at this political level, the effect a party's name has. Everyone knows who Tommy Sheridan is. The SSP and the SLP would, in their heart of hearts, settle for beating Tommy, but his brand recognition will see him win this particular battle of the smaller parties.
The Greens and the Lib Dems are, of course putting up candidates, this time. They will do their best to get whatever votes they can, but I suspect the cheque for their lost deposits has already been written. Glasgow North East is not fertile territory for environmental politics or liberalism. Perhaps it should be. But its not.
So, my prediction is, with 12 days to go, a Labour win, albeit with a reduced majority. Labour will settle for this. To return to football-speak, its all about the result. It won't be pretty and it won't be spectacular, but Labour will pick up a much needed three points at home.
PS, Just for a laugh, my wider prediction. 1 Labour, 2 SNP, 3 Solidarity, 4 Jury Party, 5 SSP, 6 SLP, 7 Conservatives, 8 Lib Dems, 9 Greens, 10 Others.
The by-election is the result of the elevation of sitting MP Michael Martin's to the Lords after his resignation as Speaker of the Commons over the expenses scandal.
In 2005, Michael Martin won 53.3% of the vote and a majority of 10,134 over his SNP rival. Glasgow North East should be a safe Labour hold. But will it be?
I love by-elections. General Elections, to use a football analogy, are a bit like league championships. Generally, over the 645 games, the best team wins. Yes, there's the odd dodgy result, injustice or slip up along the way. But, usually, the party with the best leader, the best ideas, the best campaign and the most money wins.
By-elections though are like cup games. Surprises happen. The big teams cannot guarantee a result. The outcome cannot be taken for granted.
Labour, struggling as it is nationally, should still win. In Willie Bain, it has an able candidate with no expenses baggage to hide. While opposition parties have questioned the depth of his "localness", he knows the constituency and appears to be, as they say, a safe pair of hands. How much of a kick back Labour will receive from the expenses scandal remains to be seen.
The SNP, likewise, are fielding a strong candidate. David Kerr is a former BBC journalist. As you would expect, he is media savvy and presents himself well. After winning neighbouring Labour heartland Glasgow East in 2008, the SNP would dearly love to triumph over Labour again.
But, the Scottish Government's decision to abandon support for the Glasgow Airport Rail Link (GARL) cannot help the party's cause. Glasgow is proud of hosting the 2014 Commonwealth games. GARL is seen by Labour controlled Glasgow city council and its articulate leader, Steven Purcell, as central to its success. The city, and this constituency in particular, could do with the jobs GARL would create. Labour are sure to go to town on this issue.
As in Glasgow East 2008, the Conservatives have unearthed a strong female candidate in the shape of Ruth Davidson. The problem is, there's as much chance of the Conservatives winning this seat as nearby Partick Thistle have of winning the Champions League. Last time around, the Tories never even bothered putting up a candidate in Glasgow North East (neither did the Lib Dems or the Greens). But, this is the new, de-toxed, poverty tackling Tories. Glasgow North East won't be on the hit list for the Tories winning the next General Election, but the party won't want a humiliation either. If it saves its deposit, it'll be a result.
The real fun comes in the shape of two Scottish media darlings who are standing; Tommy Sheridan and John Smeaton.
"Smeato" is representing the newly formed "Jury Party", a political party which doesn't believe in, er, political parties. The appeal of The Jury Party is obvious. There is widespread public resentment towards professional politicians, in particular at the lifestyle many of them live at public expense. The appeal of John Smeaton is obvious too. Local Glasgow guy who sorted out the airport terrorists in time honoured Glasgow style.
Smeato's credentials are good, but, I suspect, his chances of election would have been better if he'd stood as a white suited Martin Bell style "clean up politics" campaigner rather than as a candidate of the Jury team. Apart from criticising MPs over their expenses (which everyone is doing anyway), no-one really knows what the Jury Team stands for on a whole range of issues affecting the constituency.
Tommy Sheridan, as always, provides more intrigue. The former Celebrity Big Brother star will, along with his Mrs, be back in the High Court in January. Who needs Celebrity Big Brother when there's the Sheridans Trial! In the meantime, Tommy is standing as a candidate for his Solidarity Party which he formed after leaving the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) after the last court case in 2007. His appeal is, largely, the Tommy Factor. His is asking the voters to elect him on a "try before you buy" basis, before the General Election of 2010.
I don't think Tommy Sheridan or John Smeaton will win. What will be of interest is who they take votes from. The SNP would have hoped, like in Glasgow East 2008, to hoover up all the anti-Labour votes. But, the anti-Labour votes will now go in several directions. Labour itself will be content to retain most of its "core" vote. It can afford to lose several thousand and still win. But, how many of its core vote will take the chance, always offered by by-elections, to give the governing party a punch on the nose?
Tommy Sheridan's chances will also be curtailed by the other socialist parties. Tommy's former comrades, the SSP, are running. The Socialist Labour Party (SLP) are also standing. You may well ask what the actual differences are between any of these parties?
Curiously, the SLP actually finished third in this election back in 2005, beating the SSP quite comfortably. Unlike the SSP, the SLP really has little presence in Scotland. It's performance underlines, at this political level, the effect a party's name has. Everyone knows who Tommy Sheridan is. The SSP and the SLP would, in their heart of hearts, settle for beating Tommy, but his brand recognition will see him win this particular battle of the smaller parties.
The Greens and the Lib Dems are, of course putting up candidates, this time. They will do their best to get whatever votes they can, but I suspect the cheque for their lost deposits has already been written. Glasgow North East is not fertile territory for environmental politics or liberalism. Perhaps it should be. But its not.
So, my prediction is, with 12 days to go, a Labour win, albeit with a reduced majority. Labour will settle for this. To return to football-speak, its all about the result. It won't be pretty and it won't be spectacular, but Labour will pick up a much needed three points at home.
PS, Just for a laugh, my wider prediction. 1 Labour, 2 SNP, 3 Solidarity, 4 Jury Party, 5 SSP, 6 SLP, 7 Conservatives, 8 Lib Dems, 9 Greens, 10 Others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
