Politics Watch

Unless you’ve been hiding under a rock for the past couple of days, or try to avoid the political section of the media, you will probably have heard about Labour’s disaster in Glasgow East, where they lost the seat in a by-election to the Scottish National Party. Whilst the SNP only won by a small margin (365 votes), they still managed to overturn a huge Labour majority, in scenes reminiscent of the last general election, where Manchester Withington (my constituency) fell to the Liberal Democrats. Interestingly, a similar percentage swing in Brown’s own constituency would lead to him losing his own seat.

After three by-election defeats (Henley, Crewe and Glasgow East) and the London Mayoral elections disaster, the key question on the lips of most people is: “Does this spell the end of Gordon Brown as leader?” At the time of writing, no leadership challenge has been issued, so presumably the result wasn’t quite bad enough to warrant an immediate backstabbing, but it does leave Brown in a precarious position. If one believes the papers, senior ministers are being urged to get rid of Brown, giving him two months to “shape up or go“.

However, fortunately for Brown, he has the rest of the summer in which to boost his support within the Party, as many MPs will be returning to their constituencies or going on holiday during the recess, so the focus on his leadership skills will be diminished for a month or so. He also has the advantage of there being no obvious successors in the way he was clearly meant to follow Blair—though various names have been touted in the press. Furthermore, replacing the leader so soon before a general election is a risky strategy, and Labour may well prefer to keep their existing man—“better the devil you know” and all that. On the other hand, they could simply accept that their time is up—most parties do not win more than three consecutive general elections—and that people are willing to give the Conservatives another chance to run the country.

My personal verdict is that Brown will survive until Labour Party Conference, which will be the tipping point. If a leadership challenge is going to be issued, that is where it will happen, with all the press and public attention focused on the conference. If nothing solid happens at conference (grumblings and mutterings aside), then Brown is safe until the next election—at which point the public will decide whether his party deserves to hold office. A defeat there will definitely spell the end of his term as Labour Leader.

Further reading

• Times Online
• BBC News (with video of results being announced)
• Guardian Unlimited

The Guardian reports that Ladbrokes has cut the odds on Boris Johnson succeeding Ken Livingstone as mayor of London, as polls last night appeared to swing in favour of the bumbling blonde MP. Whilst the betting shops don’t always get it right, they’re certainly not stupid and won’t offer odds that they think don’t reflect a realistic assessment of the outcome. I’m not surprised that it’s turning out to be such a close race though, as both candidates have strengths which oppose their opponent’s weaknesses. Livingstone has the advantage of being the incumbent and well-known to the people of London, but this could backfire given that he’s bound to have upset a lot of people whilst he’s been in office. Johnson, on the other hand, is a new face, has lots of energy for campaigning, and, so far, doesn’t appear to have trodden on the toes of too many Londoners.

Personally, I really couldn’t care less who gets elected as Mayor of London, as I don’t live in the city and only visit it about once a month on average. However, given that London’s mayor actually has a significant budget and a say in matters such as public transport, it’s an important decision for Londoners to make. Also, given the radically different personalities of Livingstone and Johnson, I suspect this will be an interesting race to watch over the next few weeks.

Here’s something you don’t hear every day, a Liberal Democrat defecting to the Conservative party. Not only is this an unusual switch—what with the Lib Dems consisting largely of rejects from other parties—but it gives the Tories their first council seat in Manchester for over a decade. Admittedly it’s only one councillor rather than a wave of defections, but given the strategic nature of Manchester and the need for the Tories to make inroads in the inner cities if they want to regain their lost status as a meaningful political force, I can imagine Conservative Central Office making a big song and dance about this news story.

Further reading

• Lib Dem councillor defects to Tories in Manchester

New animal rights party launching

There’s a new party called Animals Count about to launch into the UK political arena. It’s linked to a Dutch party which won two seats in the last elections in Holland and it’s policies appear to be about protecting animals but without the violence used by some anti-cruelty groups.

Personally I think Animals Count are a bunch of loonies and I doubt they’ll get very far in UK politics. Having an existing party with a policy on preventing cruelty to animals is all well and good, but starting a political party which states its mission as “To establish a voice for the animals through a dedicated political party” is taking things a bit far. I can’t see how any group of people who want to give cows voting rights in Parliament can be taken seriously by the general public. They may have won a couple of seats in Holland, but that’s probably one of the most liberal countries in the world and I don’t think that they’ll repeat that success over here, especially when minority parties such as the Greens can’t even manage to win a seat in Westminster.

Conservative leader David Cameron has announced new measures to bolster his existing plans to get more female MPs into the party. He has already been pushing pro-female measures for some time, but the new rules go even further than before. The main change is that a minimum of two out of the final four candidates shortlisted for selection (from whom the local party executive will choose the constituency’s Prospective Parliamentary Candidate) must be women.

Whilst I generally support the principle of encouraging people from underrepresented groups to get involved in politics, I think Cameron is using the wrong methods to achieve this. First of all, his policy is basically one of positive discrimination, and is the same as that used by my local students’ union to ensure that at least half the delegates to the NUS conference are women. Note that this restriction does not work both ways, as under these rules you could have a selection of candidates who were all female, but not a selection consisting entirely of male candidates. I’m not a fan of quotas in general, but if you’re going to insist on imposing them then at least make the figures fair to both sides. A better way to ensure a more even gender distribution would be to have a rule stating that one of the candidates must be female, another must be male, and the gender of the remainding two candidates is not an issue. This would ensure that both sexes would be represented by at least one candidate, whilst at the same time eliminating the possibility of the list comprising of candidates from one gender only.

One consequence that I fear may come about as a result of the application of this rule is the selection of candidates based purely on their gender. This could be manifested in two ways. Firstly, there is the possibility of women being put up as so-called “paper candidates”, where they are not expected to win but are on the ballot paper just to make up the numbers and keep Mr Cameron happy. The other possibility is where there is a choice between a male and a female candidate, and the woman is chosen because of her gender rather than her ability to do the job (I’m not implying that the female candidate wouldn’t be a better choice for other reasons, but the decision should be made on the basis of ability, not gender).

The other problem with this method of selection is that, in my opinion at least, it comes across as being somewhat patronising and degrading to female candidates. I don’t think any woman would like to be told or made to feel that she had been selected just because she was female, any more than a male candidate would want to find out that he had been turned down because there weren’t enough women on the shortlist.

In fact this whole debate, as is often the case in British politics, sounds suspiciously like an episode of the popular sitcom, Yes (Prime) Minister. The episode in question, ‘Equal Opportunities’, begins with Jim Hacker’s (the Minister for Administrative Affairs) plan to introduce more women into the top jobs in the civil service. As is usually the case, his plan is defeated by Sir Humphrey Appleby, and the final moments of the episode show him being admonished by one of the women he tries to promote, who accuses him of being patronising and treating her merely as part of a quota. Perhaps something similar could happen to David Cameron in the coming months?

Further reading

• Tories plan for more female MPs
• Cameron tries again to get more women selected
• Cameron to party: choose more women candidates

There has been some speculation over the last week about the possibility of the Conservative Party adopting a new logo to replace the symbolic hand carrying a torch that has been used since 1977. The torch itself underwent a makeover in 2004, but it was still the same recognisable logo, although personally I think it looked a bit less symbolic afterwards. The actual details of the new logo have not been officially released, but a scan of the image has appeared on the BBC website and the general consensus seems to be that it will consist of an oak tree in some form.

My thoughts on the proposed new logo are somewhat mixed. First of all, I think the party really needs to concentrate on developing and publicising new policies, rather than embarking on a quest to find a new logo, which will probably create internal rumblings within the party—something to be avoided at all costs. Ditching the torch will almost certainly antagonise the older members of the party grassroots, but then again it’s probably about time that they were pushed to one side to an extent anyway.

However, I do think that a new logo will help move the image of the Conservatives away from the Thatcher era, the shadow of which still hangs over the party to an extent (I remember asking at a party meeting if it was about time to cast off the spectre of Thatcherism and get young people involved—it resulted in a round of applause but of course nothing came of it). With a new leader and more liberal policies, the party does seem to looking forward to the future instead of back to the past of the 80’s heydays. A new logo might be the final nail in the coffin of the old “home guard” Conservatives and the bridge to a prosperous future for a party that is starting to once again look like it could win a general election.

As for the logo itself (as opposed to whether a new one is actually needed), I think the oak tree is a bit of a strange choice. A tree is not a symbol that I would associate with politics in general (except perhaps with the Green Party), and certainly not with the Conservatives. It does appear that some of the logo will feature the traditional Tory blue though, but I remain unconvinced about how the general public will see an oak tree logo and think “Vote Conservative”—which is presumably the overall aim. Time will tell though, as it always does.

Further coverage

• Thatcher’s torch extinguished as Cameron’s Conservatives carve new logo out of oak
• Tories favour ‘oak tree revamp’

Greens outline electoral campaign via BBC News – Politics

With a degree of confidence not normally held by minority parties, the Green Party has announced that it will be fielding over 1,300 candidates in this year’s local elections, contesting over a quarter of the 4,000+ council seats that are up for grabs in May. They are apparently upbeat about making gains in several of the London boroughs, and are targetting areas such as Oxford where they already hold the balance of power and also performed better than any other minority parties in the 2005 general election.

My personal view is that this may be the first chance that the Greens have at gaining enough seats to be considered a proper political force instead of their current status as a left-wing minority party. I can’t really comment on their chances in other areas, but I think that there’s a real possibility of them gaining a seat in one of the Manchester areas if they mount a good campaign and target the right wards.

Related links

• Green Party

After a bitter leadership contest lasting two months and dogged by various revelations about the candidates, Sir Menzies Campbell has emerged as the new leader of the Liberal Democrats. The current Party President, Simon Hughes – initially thought to be one of the strongest contenders, was knocked out in the first round and his votes were transferred under the Single Transferable Vote system. The second round involved a close stand-off between the two remaining candidates, but in the end Campbell came out on top with 57% of the vote, beating economic affairs spokesman Chris Huhne to the post. Both defeated candidates pledged their immediate support to Campbell following the result.

Personally, I’m not sure exactly what to make of the whole leadership contest. If you’d asked me for my thoughts at the beginning, I would have probably put my money on Simon Hughes – as his role as Party President has already given him a lot of media coverage and he was generally well regarded within the party as far as I could tell. His admission that he misled people over his sexuality seems to have hurt his campaign more than I would otherwise have thought – I certainly didn’t expect him to come last out of three candidates. Huhne, on the other hand, did a lot better than I initially expected, especially for someone who only became an MP at the last general election. He’s certainly one to watch over the coming months, and could possibly use his success to bolster his chances for victory at the next leadership election, should Campbell decide to step down in the next four to five years.

It now remains to be seen whether Campbell can repair the damage done to the party over the last few months, although the recent by-election victory in Dunfermline and West Fife will help to an extent. Unless there any more scandals about to come out, the media will drift away now that the contest is over, although coverage hasn’t been anything like as much as it was for the equivalent Conservative leadership race before Christmas.

On a somewhat lighter note, it looks like it might be Gordon vs. Ming at the next general election (not really sure how Cameron fits into it, perhaps he can be Klytus?), although I’m sure Private Eye and other satirical publications have made that comment a dozen times already.

Media coverage

• Sir Menzies wins Lib Dem contest at BBC News – Politics
• Campbell wins Lib Dem leadership at Guardian Unlimited – Politics

Mark Oaten, who was at one point a contender for the position of leader of the Liberal Democrats, quit the front bench last night over allegations of his involvement with male prostitutes during the last six months. The announcement came after reporters from the tabloid News of the World confronted Oaten at his house with evidence of this area of his private life.

Assuming these allegations are true (I rarely automatically believe everything I read in the papers, especially not sensationalist rags like the News of the World), it is a major blow to the Liberal Democrats, and to Oaten personally. With Charles Kennedy recently admitting to having a drinking problem and the subsequent leadership contest that came about as a result of that announcement, the Lib Dems could only hope for a quick and untainted contest (or preferably the immediate appointment of one candidate without needing an election). Now they face not only the trials and tribulations of a leadership election, but also damaging stories about two of their most prominent members appearing in the national press.

What interests me most about this story though is that with the potential for defections as MPs attempt to distance themselves from the embarrassments surrounding the party, I think this is the best time for the Conservatives to make a serious return to the UK political scene. With a new leader who boasts a reasonable amount of clout and charisma without being seen as nasty, evil or a member of the Old Guard (Cameron wasn’t an MP when Thatcher was in power, which I suspect helps him to shake off the old traditions), the Tories have an excellent opportunity to steal some of the ground that the Lib Dems have taken in previous elections, and possibly even some of their MPs as well. It will certainly be intreresting to see how this all pans out in the days and weeks to come.

Media coverage

• Leading Lib Dem quits over sex scandal at Guardian Unlimited – Politics
• Oaten resigns over rent boy claim at BBC News – Politics
• Oaten scandal puts Lib Dems in crisis at Manchester Evening News

After several days of speculation, allegations (and later acceptance) of drink problems, murmerings of discontent within the party and finally an ultimatium of “you go or we will” from 21 MPs, Charles Kennedy has finally stood down from the position of leader of the Liberal Democrats.

I’m not very surprised or shocked to hear the news though, Kennedy’s time was limited the moment he came out and publically acknowledged a drinking problem. Whilst I applaud him for admitting to the problem and seeking help for it, the admission caused him to lose a lot of confidence from the MPs that he is supposed to lead and inspire. As soon as questions start to be raised about your leadership (in any area, but particularly politics) you have to either take direct and conclusive action to quash them and the perpetrators or stand down and let someone else take up the reigns of command. Kennedy failed to deal with the rumours over his drink problems quickly enough, and he has paid a heavy price for his lack of response.

Media coverage

• Kennedy resigns at Guardian Unlimited – Politics
• Embattled Kennedy quits as leader at BBC News – Politics
• Charles Kennedy resigns at Liberal Democrats official web site