Liam Carr

Free HIV

2012-02-28T09:11:00.002Z

The words Free HIV were trending earlier. The government has done something sensible and are giving free HIV treatment to foreign nationals who are in the UK. This is a straightforward decision with a sound medical basis but the media in particular the Telegraph has condemned the action.

Offering free treatment for HIV should increase testing rates and will lead to fewer infections. That is reason enough for changing the policy so it is in line with Scotland and Wales. It has a long term economic basis as well; HIV causes AIDS which is an acute life threatening condition that would be treated by the NHS anyway at a cost to the taxpayer.

Apart from the cold logical reasons for treating all treating HIV patients on the NHS the is a moral argument that we can not, regardless of our political views on immigration allow a person to develop AIDS in our country while there are drugs available that would help them. I would go further and say that the UKs African aid budget should be used to set up an anti retroviral pharmaceutical factory in central Africa and the the owners of the anti retroviral drug recipe should gladly provide the recipe free of charge (with the proviso that the drugs are not exported)

The Telegraph won't suggest this, I think they are another paper in need of a new name "The Broadsheet Daily Mail"

Trap, Not Springboard

2012-02-13T00:02:00.040Z

Clegg should take advice from Miliband on coalition government... Ralph Miliband:

"Social-democratic ministers have generally been able to achieve little in these hybrid formations. Far from presenting a threat to the established order, their main function has been to contain their own parties and and to persuade them to accept the essentially conservative policies which they themselves have sanctioned. For the most part, participation on this basis has been a trap and not a springboard." ¹

These words ring true today, particularly with reference to two bills that are ping-ponging their way through parliament; the welfare reform bill (WRB) and health bill. The bills are examples of truly awful legislation, the consequences of which have been poorly thought out or completely disregarded. I will not bore you with details, but the essence of the WRB is an attempt to balance the books by targeting the most vulnerable in society for cuts. The WRB has been widely reported as stopping benefit cheats, which if it was, it would be welcomed. Cutting benefits to disabled children, and declaring cancer patients who are still undergoing chemotherapy, fit for work, is not the same as tackling fraud.

An alternative would be to draft a 'fraud prevention bill'. This would build on the progress of the Labour government in reducing benefit fraud and errors: The bill could be a dual purpose bill addressing both large-scale as well as this small-scale fraud. The bill could close loopholes, tighten up regulation relating to non-domicile status and address tax evasion which is really defrauding the exchequer, or to put it another way, stealing from budgets that should be used to educate the young and heal the sick.

The £26,000 cap is really a smoke screen which lets Tory boy Grant Shapps in the Department of Housing off the hook. The only reason that anyone would ever receive £26,000 in benefits is because there is an abject lack of social housing. This problem has never really been addressed since Thatcher began selling off housing stock 30 years ago. The majority of this £26,000 goes directly into the pockets of private landlords, so who exactly is sponging off the taxpayer? In the North East of England private landlords now own a large proportion of former council housing stock, collecting rent from the taxpayer in the form of housing benefit. The ironic thing is that it was the taxpayer who paid for the houses to be built in the first place. The council stock is largely better maintined, particularly in terms of energy efficiency with loft insulation and double glazing. Those in private rented 'council houses' are at greater risk of high bills and fuel poverty.

It is difficult to offer an alternative to the health bill; it is toxic. Giving GPs a greater strategic role was already labour policy and Shadow Health secretary Andy Burnham offered to talk with Tories if they wanted to drop the bill but still pursue the idea of GP commissioning, as it would not require legislation.² The Health bill is now so unpopular that even some Tories are against it; some backbenchers may even defy the whip and vote against the bill or abstain. (Traditionally you can count on the odd Tory to defy the whip in a big vote; they really have no concept of collective action).

It is the Lib Dems who will push these reforms through. Clegg wants them to go through; he is furious that they might be stopped.³ This shows that he really has turned blue, putting the interests of private health care providers ahead of patients. I suspect that the real reason he wants them to go through is so that he can take credit every for every amendment made to this shoddy, needless legislation, painting himself as the moderator of the Nasty Conservative Party.

It is a trap, Nick. Destroying the NHS is the road to electoral ruin, and if Lib Dems are keen to play a part in this privatisation of the NHS then they deserve the consequences that will follow at the ballot box. Miliband was right. Participation in a Conservative led coalition was a trap 1969 and remains a trap today.

1. From 'The State in Capitalist Society' R. Miliband 1969
2. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17002166
3. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/47bcc354-53f8-11e1-bacb-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1mDU8GUG8

Location, Location, Location.

2012-01-26T23:02:00.004Z

I have decided to blog about a very local issue; the building of a new school in Consett. The school building has not started yet but when finished it will serve the Consett area, replacing two smaller schools, both of which are need of significant investment. An agreement has been reached that the new school will be built. Many parents were initially cautious, wanting to keep their respective schools, but public opinion is now more supportive.

There is a very real need for a school with state of the art facilities to serve the young people of the Consett area. Good facilities have a tangible positive effect on the learning and behaviour of the children in a school. Good design can change kids' attitudes as they step from their Outside world into what will be a safe and exciting learning environment. Effective Science teaching is definitely easier in a modern teaching Lab. I am not saying that it is impossible to teach Science well in room with no facilities, it is. But trying to convince kids that Science is relevant, current and new in a room with old wooden benches is more of a challenge than in a modern lab.

Consett's sports facilities are good but could do with some improvement and the school is being planned so that members of the public have the opportunity to make use of the sports facilities. There will clearly be some restrictions, at certain times when students will be using the pool or sports facilities. For me at least this is a price worth paying. The argument, which I heard at a meeting last night from an Independent local Councillor that we can't have a school and a leisure centre on the same site because adults will not be able to go swimming when ever they want, is both selfish and ridiculous. The young people of the area must take priority as they do anyway when the existing pool is closed for lessons and training.

I was, like many people, was disappointed that the school is not being built on the old steelworks site. The steelworks site is within walking distance of one of the original schools. The chosen site, which incorporates the now disused old council offices, increases the distance between one of the existing schools and the new school. Young people who are used to walking to school having to be bussed in has the potential to increase the likelihood of truancy. I'm sure that the staff at the new school will be aware of this issue and address it.

The argument about location should be over. The decision has been made to put the school on the Belle Vue site. Some local people object to the location so vehemently that they have set up a group opposing the building of Consett's new school, yes you have read that correctly, a group not to save a school but to prevent a brand new school being built on what they believe to be the wrong piece of land. The group and a local Lib Dem councillor have instigated a judicial review. This has the potential to further delay the new school meaning that an entire cohort of current year 7s (11 year olds)² could miss out on the opportunity of taking their GCSEs in surroundings more conducive for success. Just because a few people don’t want a new school and leisure facility near to their houses. The location argument has already cost the children dearly¹. There can be no further delay; Improving the education and life chances of the next generation must be our priority.

Some parents in Consett have set up a petition which calls for a prompt start to building work, please take a minute to add your support: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/building-a-future-for-consett/

Pat Glass MP writes about the cost of delay in the Chronicle: http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/get-involved/your-letters/2012/01/26/chronicle-letters-make-school-a-success-72703-30203574/
http://malcolmclarke.blogspot.com/2012/01/start-build-for-consett-academy.html

Potter Politics

2012-01-22T11:54:00.003Z

If there was remake of the Harry Potter films where politicians of any era could play the characters, who would play whom? Sounds like a down the pub discussion with the other geeks who attend CLP meetings. If you have any thoughts then drop me a comment below or tweet with the hashtag #potterpolitics.

The Harry Potter books have been compared to many things. But you have to be careful. Be wary of comparing Harry Potter with Twilight on twitter, people take such comparisons pretty seriously. As far as I can see Twilight is for people who have grown up with Harry Potter and now need something a bit more risqué, vampire lust clearly fits the bill. I had intended to make a comparison between Hogwarts and Parliament, the architecture is similar, and even the colour scheme is reminiscent of Gryffindor house colours of red and gold in the house of Lords and and the Green of Slytherin in the Commons. Whitehall is like the Ministry of magic. Some MPs in the Westminster village might see themselves as part of a rarefied, wizarding world, looking down on us muggle voters. But it not that simple.

Start to make comparisons between political and Harry Potter characters and you are left with a staggering number of tricky choices. For example is Dumbledore the occasionally magical Dennis Skinner or, a more obvious choice the legendary Kier Hardie. This blog post, like the film The Deathly Hallows will be done in 2 parts, mainly because I couldn’t make up my mind. In part 1 I will describe a scenario in which, like in Hogwarts, little attention to is paid to the passage of time: some people are immortal and the dead can show up at any moment in a picture frame. Part 2 will be a more up to to date analogy.

Politics and Harry Potter Part 1: A Historical approach.

The House of Gryfindor and the Order of the Pheonix are the Labour Party and the Trade Union Movement, they fight the evil forces the evil forces of Voldermort and his Slytherin Cronies (the Bankers and the Tory party).

The leader of the Tolpuddle martyrs, George Loveless would play Godric Gryffindor. Godric was one of the four famous founders of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, and an enlightened fighter against Muggle-discrimination1. Coincidentally they both hail from the countryside, Godrics hollow said to be somewhere in the west country2, and Tolpuddle is not too far away.

Kier Hardie would have to play Dumbledore, a true giant of both the trade union movement and the Labour Party. He still marches with us at the Durham miners gala, carried on several banners (Pictured²) casting a watchful eye over proceedings.

Nye Bevan; Welshman, thinker, socialist: The architect of the NHS would play a character that only true Potter fans may be familiar with; Mungo Bonham was the founder of St. Mungo's hospital for magical maladies and injuries, The name 'Mungo' is possibly derived from Welsh mwyn meaning gentle or kind ³. Couldn’t be more apt.

Thatcher is a difficult character to cast, my first thought was Bellatrix Lestrange. She is ruthless enough but more of a follower than a leader so I settled on former Minister for Magic Delores Umbridge. A strong women who punished her enemies mercilessly, notably giving out lines that had to be written in the blood of the victim. She was highly intelligent, driven and despite her evilness she always believed what she was doing was right, and showed no remorse. Thatcher is definitely Umbridge.

Nancy Astor the first female MP could be Rowena Ravenclaw, as a Tory you might expect her to play a Slytherin, but she because of her role as a true pioneer it seems appropriate that she is one of the founders of Hogwarts. Ravenclaws are famous for their intelligence, creativity and wit, qualities Nancy would have needed in abundance when she entered in the the House back in 1918.

Churchill is Mad Eye Moody, a bit obvious and perhaps disrespectful, but apart from the physical similarities both were at their best in times of war. Clement Atlee who succeeded Churchill is Sirius Black, the moustache is not the only similarity. Sirius came from a noble pure-blood family, but chose to fight against elitism and was a supporter of both the order of the Phoenix and later Dumbledore's army. Atlee was also from a privileged background, attending prep school, Haileybury boys school then graduating form University College, Oxford. He advocated policies of investment, job creation and redistribution of wealth;

“Charity is a cold grey loveless thing. If a rich man wants to help the poor, he should pay his taxes gladly”

Atlee's words are still true today, maybe Phillip Green and other 'rich men' should take note.

The main characters are the most difficult to decide upon, Neil and Glenys Kinnock are Mr and Mrs Weasley. Mr Weasley is hardworking, has compassion and values but when it comes to a fight he will not back down. The same could be said about the former Labour Leader.

Voldemort represents for me, not any one historical figure but, the break up of communities. He is the spectre of unemployment in the 80s and the the rise of a more selfish society in the early Nineties. I have not mentioned mentioned John Major in this histrorical account but he can be Kreacher, a house elf loyal to his former master. Micheal Heseltine can be Fitch and the caretaker squib who wanted to cast his spells but never quite managed it.

Harry Potter, the wizard who defeated Voldermort when he was just a boy is in this historical account could easily be Tony Blair. A bit of a wizard, talented and with a touch of celebrity, Tony fits the bill. There is another character however who Tony could play equally well, the dashing and popular Gilderoy Lockhart; a hit with the ladies, always on hand with a signed copy of his book about his past adventures.

Politics and Harry Potter Part 2. The Current Cohort

The sorting hat is a hat that reads your innermost thoughts and puts you into a house based on deeply held beliefs. I wish there was a real life political one. When MPs go into the house they have to put the hat on and it would shout out which party you truly belong to. That really would be interesting...

...Back to the casting call, I will start close to home. My MP Pat Glass is one of the new cohort of Labour MPs elected in 2010. She is a great constituency MP and is an asset to the Party. She comes from a background in education so she won't mind me casting her as one of Hogwarts finest teachers: Pemona Sprout. Ms Sprout uses her considerable horticulture skills to defend Hogwarts against the relentless attacks by Voldemort's death eaters. Pat makes every effort to defend North West Durham against the relentless attacks on the most vulnerable in our region by Cameron and his coalition partners.

Media figures do no escape: Andrew Neil is Professor Flitwick: intellegent, quick witted and probably likes a bit of polyjuice potion (or blue nun) on a Thursday night. Nick Robinson is Cornelius Fudge, subconciously succumbing to pressure from Malfoy and Voldemort, all the while trying to convince himself, and others, that he is impartial. Rita Skeeter will do anything for a story and so, is Rebekah Brooks. Murdoch could play Voldemort but instead the whole of News Interational organisation will roam the land, as soul-sucking Dementors.

John Prescott is one of the most straightforward casting decisions: Mad Eye Moody. A fighter who always stuck to his principles and stayed true to the cause. He also had a softer side and would always do his best to pass on his wisdom to others. Another deputy prime minister who gets a starring role is Margret Beckett as Professer McGonagall, highly competent, dependable, steely but at the same time, compassionate.

Neville Longbottom, the unlikley hero could be played many Labour politicians, Middlesborough's Tom Blenkinsop perhaps but I think Tom Watson fits the bill perfectly. Chris Bryant also easy to place, he is one of the Weasley twins, Fred I think, they both use humour to good effect and are brave enough to take on the Dark Forces of the Murdoch Empire. Luna Lovegood is played by Stella Creasy, tenacious in highlighting a cause, and fighting for those forgotten by the mainstream, Stella publicised the Credit Regulation Bill and continues to fight for those trapped in a viscous cycle of high interest debt.

Ed Balls would be a Quidditch player who doesn’t mind launching a bludger or two, I thought of Viktor Klum, but he sounds a bit too Marxist for Balls so I have settled on George Weasley, beater in Gryffindors Quidditch team. Which means unfortunately Yvette Cooper can't be Hermione which is a shame. David Miliband is Cedric Diggory, popular, good looking, charming, at times heroic with exemplary manners.

Hermione's part is a difficult one. There are quite a few forthright, able women MPs on the Gryffindor side of the House but I'm sure that Rachel Reeves would play the part well. On the opposition side, Sayeeda Warsi would have to be Bellatrix, she follows the party line with gusto and seems fiercely loyal, good traits for a party chairman.

Eric Pickles and Ken Clarke are Crabbe and Goyle; it's a no brainier, real heavyweights who protect their leader. George Osborne is Wormtail; obedient but envious of his master. Andrew Lansley has to be Lucius Malfoy. He has a sense of entitlement, but wants to be seen as if he is a fine upstanding pillar of the community. The fact is that he strives to create an unequal world where pure-blood wizards like himself can look down (from their pay beds) on those they deem to be less worthy.

The Liberal Democrat party are not to difficult to place either. They are like Hufflepuff house; the house of tolerence, they play a bit part in the story but crave a more central role. Nick Clegg is talior made to play the part of Minister for Magic, Pius Thicknesse. We don't get to know much about the true nature of Thicknesse because he is placed under a powerful spell called the Imperius Curse. This unforgivable piece of dark magic causes the victim of the curse to obey the spoken/unspoken commands of the caster. The experience of being controlled by this curse is described as a complete, wonderful release from any sense of responsibility or worry over his actions, at the price of his free will.⁴ Clegg displays all the symptoms of being under this spell. Symptoms which are all too which are common in Westminster where Lib Dems are frequently spellbound by even the whiff of the leather in a ministerial car. Tim Farron is Professor Quirrel, making a good show of appearing free from the control of the dark forces, some even believe that he is not, but we find out in the end that he is just another puppet.

Which brings me to the two main characters: Cameron is Voldemort. I understand that it could be cast that Voldemort is the interest of big business and Cameron is just another Death Eater but that would miss the point. Voldemort co-ordinates the attack. He is the mastermind and he doesn’t care how many Muggles die on his path of destruction. Voldemort controls all the rest of his squad and there is only one person that can defeat him.

Enter Ed Miliband, our Harry Potter. He steps out of the shadows of his famous wizarding father. In the early chapters you think he is too weak that he's got no chance, but he survives everything that is thrown at him. Over the course of a few years he gains strength though twists turns and tortuous tribulations. He builds an army around him who challenge the dark forces of Voldemort wherever they show themselves. We know how the story must end. Harry can, and will defeat Voldemort.

The Wikipedia articles on Hogwarts are extensive, fun and written as if it is a real place. Long live Wikipedia!

Learning Needed

2012-01-21T20:08:00.000Z

I have read in the news that a child who has Downs Syndrome has been told that he can not receive his first holy communion with the rest of his class in his school in West Yorksire because he “has limited concentration, doesn’t really access the RE curriculum and does not enjoy going to Mass”¹. His parents are understandably upset.

I have been going to Mass all my life; I received my first Holy Communion while I was still at primary school along with the rest of my class. I understood that I had to be reverent and that it was a very important and holy event. I don’t think I was really aware of the Eucharist. Some of my old school friends come to church at Christmas. For some, it was their first and last time they ever took communion. A few, like me, still attend Mass and receive communion regularly. I have since developed a deeper understanding of the Eucharist, although I don't think that I will, in my lifetime actually fully understand Holy Communion. Receiving Holy Communion in itself is an act of faith.

I do not know the circumstances of this particular case and I do not know the child but the published reasons for the Church's refusal to give this child communion seem strange to me. Most children take communion at around age 8 and most 8 year olds have limited concentration. It is difficult for anyone of any age to concentrate solely on the words and meaning of the Mass for 60 minutes. Not accessing the RE curriculum is not valid, as the curriculum should be made accessible. As for enjoying Mass, surely this can not be a prerequisite as the purpose of the mass is not entertainment.

The only questions that in my opinion should be asked are: Does the child himself want to make his first Holy Communion? Does the child understand what the Eucharist actually is? If the answers to these questions are no then the Priest and the Bishop are in a difficult position but they are justified in asking him to wait.

1. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-16626123

Blue Media

2012-01-12T23:22:00.000Z

In this post I will accuse the sections of the media of being biased. But before I do that I would like to state that my view is biased, the difference between the television media and this blog is that blogs usually share something that tells the reader about the writer, and most bloggers do not give the impression that they are impartial. Anyone who reads this blog can see that I am supportive of the Labour Party. I lay my cards on the table. If you read the tag line at the top of the page it reads “Socialised, Unionised, Labourised” If you are on this page then you are in no doubt about my political position. It is assumed by many that TV is totally unbiased, people are more aware that the papers support one party or another.

The Labour Party have accused the BBC of bias this criticism can be justified both in terms of how and what is reported. A recent example of a lack of reporting of the Spartacus report¹ (#spartacusreport) which has taken Twitter by storm just days after Ed Miliband spelled the name of a 90s game show incorrectly and Dianne Abbot made a sweeping generalisation about white people. The report which was written by disabled people is highly critical of governments welfare reform bill, and exposes that the governments ’consultation’ of disability living allowance claimants was deeply flawed, the media have been slow on the uptake but the BBC appear to have listened and invited the disability campaigner Sue Marsh onto Newsnight to debate the issue with the Department of Work and Pensions Minister Chris Grayling. The presenter Emily Maitlis was feeding Grayling lines and easy questions and cutting Sue off. She even started quoting the Prime Minister and the Telegraph making it easy for the Tory minister to simply agree with her! Where is Paxo? and more importantly where is the balance?

We do not see a balanced critique of Tory (or Labour) policy on the news. The Coalition government are failing to deliver the growth they were promised, failing to deliver the jobs that they promised the private sector would provide and failing to keep their promise to eliminate the deficit in the life of one parliament, which was a damaging promise which they should never have made. Public services are in decline, the fate of the NHS hangs in the balance, and there are over 1 million young people out of work. University applications are in decline the aspirations of young people from normal backgrounds have been dented. If stories such as these are reported they are not the prominent headlines.

Despite this the Prime minster enjoys quite favourable media coverage. Cameron was interviewed this week on BBC Radio Fours Today Programme, the interview finished, not with a grilling but with a friendly chat about what actor would play Cameron in his equivalent of the Iron Lady. The media like Cameron: Where we see 'slimy' they report 'slick'. Where we see 'arrogant' they report 'confident' and worst of all where we see 'the pure evil in ideologically targeting the most vulnerable for cuts' the media reports, 'doing what is necessary for the good of the country in these times of austerity' .

What are the reasons for this preferential treatment? Is it because Labour did what was right in backing the phone hacking enquiry. Is it because there are some in the Labour party are vocal in their criticism of Ed Miliband. Were many current editors in the Bullingdon Club? Are there other more mysterious forces at work?

Most people get into politics for ideological reasons, to make a difference. Although we may not be totally comfortable with it, opinion-makers are just as important in politics today as change-makers. Governments clearly have more influence in the Media than opposition parties. Ed Miliband has been described as ‘Harry Potterish’², Maybe Labour need someone skilled in the Dark Arts of media manipulation to even up the game, is Professor Snape available?

1. The Spartacus Report
2. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/8791622/Can-Ed-Miliband-do-it.html

Bidding War

2012-01-08T13:08:00.007Z

It seems like both the main political parties have found some common ground. Both Ed Miliband and David Cameron are trying to get across that they are tough on executive pay. Some people on the Left are complaining that the two main parties are getting too similar and there is little difference in policy.

The public share these concerns; when discussing politics either on the doorstep or in the pub, the perception is that all politicians are the same. It is true that politicians are becoming a 'political class' with many MPs on both sides of the house taking a route similar to this;
PPE Degree → Intern → Researcher → Campaigner → Parliamentary Candidate.
The old system of working class heroes like Kier Hardie and Nye Bevan vs public school toffs like The Viscount St Aldwyn and Harold MacMillan no longer applies. While there are still plenty of men from privileged backgrounds on both sides of the house, the class divide between the parties is less pronounced.

I am uncomfortable with the parties competing to be the toughest on the poor. Labour must emphasise the fact that benefit fraud fell by at least 24% under the last Labour government.¹There is a distinction that must be made between welcoming new measures to reduce fraudulent claims but we must condemn attacks on the sick, disabled and people who have been made unemployed as a consequence of the government's failure to mitigate against the effect of the global economic downturn which was caused by the banking crisis. The government continues to allow companies to evade tax, preferring to implement policies that force the most vulnerable into poverty rather than compelling large corporations to pay tax owed to the treasury.

There is a similar message coming from both Labour and the Tories on executive pay. This is a Good Thing. I hope they get into a bidding war:

Ed: "We will cut executive pay"
Dave: "We will cut it more"
Ed: "No, we will cut it even more AND tax it properly AND use the revenue for job creation"
Dave: "No, we love cuts so much that we are going to make all executives work for the minimum wage.
Ed: "OK"

It's not going to happen. The government could however implement the recommendations of the high pay commission which include having a more diverse group of people on remuneration committees, and a simple transparent system of awarding executive pay. That would be a start.

1. http://www.nao.org.uk/news/0203/0203393.aspx

Call for Unity

2012-01-04T22:16:00.017Z

Maurice Glasman has given some advice to Ed Miliband: Nothing wrong with that. He has put this advice in the New Statesman and that's fine too. He has also added that he is backing Ed Miliband: Great. All of this will be missed. What is on the news and what will be in the papers are the following nuggets:

"There seems to be no strategy, no narrative and little energy... He has not broken through... He has flickered rather than shone, nudged not led.... Ed has honoured his responsibilities but has not exerted his power."

It is true that Ed is not the most showy of leaders, and sometimes it is better to provide constant lumination than shine brightly like a star and then implode. As for a lack of strategy, I don’t agree that this is the case. Opposition is very different from government in that the opposition has the luxury, at least early on in the five year life of a government, to be able to engage with Labour supporters and the public. There will be a time when the policies needed for government will be formed. Now is a time when policies must be concerned with damage limitation, particularly in the NHS and Education, where the Tories seem intent in transforming the landscape to suit their own interests, with a complete disregard for the most vulnerable in society.

There are different ways to exert power. One is to be arrogant enough to think, "I know I am right" and force the agenda. Another way of exerting power is to listen to people from all sides of the Party including those on the right like Glasman and then decide what is best for the Party and the for the future of Britain. There are different ways of getting things done, you can shout "I have decided we are doing this" and tell the press before you tell Parliament (the speaker quite rightly has picked up on this recently) or you can make a decision based on what you have heard and tell competent trusted colleagues who will implement what has been decided. Power can be exerted in more than one way.

Glasman has been unduly harsh to write in public that there is "no strategy, no narrative and little energy". If he wants to give some ideas to the leader and the shadow cabinet then I'm sure that he has access to them. Debate is good, it is how we form policy and make progress. Differences of opinion are good, they allow many views to be heard and taken in to account. But there is a fine line between discussion and open criticism that harms the Party. If a Labour activist wants to be in the newspaper then there is an easy way to do it: Just say that Ed is dreadful and someone will print what you have to say. Supportive articles are written on blogs but are not really news.

I think that Ed should be given time; he may well grow into his position. The Labour Leader should be given more time than the average football manager. It seems that some Party members think the two positions are similar. In the premiership after a few bad games the pressure mounts. In the Labour Party a few bad headlines and there is a leadership crisis. After the Labour-led phone hacking enquiry good headlines are as hard to to come by as wins in football matches in the most competitive league in the world.

The Tories are the real enemy and now is the time to give a united voice in support of Ed Miliband and direct our energy to trying to make sure this coalition is a one term government.

A Year in Blog Posts

2011-12-29T14:34:00.002Z

I have been writing this blog since January. In 2011 I have been; to China, opposing an opencast coal-mine, on strike four times, rallies, demos, looking back at industrial past of my local area, writing about change in the Labour party and the trade union movment, relfecting on my time in India, Campaigning for Labour both on local issues and against cuts especially to NHS and Education. its been a busy year. Here is my year in blog posts...

An opencast coal mine will prevent future generations from experiences that might shape their future. The woods are where we form our ideas about our place in our environment, It is wrong to deprive future generations of that opportunity, just as it is wrong to deprive future generations of a University place or a free hospital bed.

Manchester Disunited ... Pro Egyptian chants were common, I was relieved to demonstrating in Manchester rather than Suez or Cairo ... In Unity

I wouldn't ask an economist to decide whether a mole on my back was cancerous or not. Nor would I ask my doctor for help with my tax return ... The coalition NHS reforms are about making a first step in the wrong direction, towards the privatisation of a healthcare system which is (or was) the envy of the world.

Do not let multiculturalism fail. Don't let it fail in your school, college or university. Don't let it fail in your city, town, village or estate. If you do then racism and intolerance have won.

Charity begins at home, my home was India. We are global citizens, our home is the world.

Being in a union is about more than paying your 15 quid every month and complaining. It is about being united as a workforce, and campaigning for the rights of all workers whatever their role.

Met Chris Mullin, left the meeting with one foot firmly in the in the Yes to AV camp.

Every time Cameron repeats his lies about Labour causing the Global economic crisis, Clegg is there nodding like an insurance-selling dog and smiling like a the cat who's got the cream. I hope that rank and file at the Lib Dem conference let him know that he is supposed to be the leader of a struggling political party, not just another one of Camerons school chums.

My employer is making redundancies; a lot of them. Somewhere between 150 and 200 jobs are to go.

The Consett/Stanley 'thing' is a perceived, mild type of hostility between the people of the two towns. The thing may not exist. It is their perception of the 'thing' that can cloud the decision making process.

Are the government just going to keep upping the retirement age for those who cant afford early retirement..? Will we just all work until we die..? Chilling thoughts on chilly mornings.

That our children have a better life with more opportunity than we had is an aspiration of all parents. Grandparents make this aspiration a much more likely reality.

"...but the Scousers never buy the Sun"

For some the steelworks is a symbol of a bygone industrial age but for some it is a memory; of a time when hard work paid well,when earnings were enough to keep a family, and when plans could be made for the future because employment was not fixed term, it was permanent.

The banner carried by those steelworkers to London on the 9th of July 1980 could be loaned to Newcastle College staff almost 31 years later, it would need no modification; it simply read IN THE BLACK FACED WITH THE SACK

When people crossed the picket line I smiled, gave them a leaflet and politely told them that we were on strike over redundancies. Then they went to work. A picket line is easy to cross; physically and, it seems, emotionally.

I am probably a bit more red than blue, purple is a mixture of the two. Definitely not yellow but maybe a bit green, if I add that to the the mix then I would just end up with a shade of muddy brown. Which is exactly what you get, on football pitches as well as in politics if you try too hard to occupy the crowded centre ground.

Anti cuts groups have been formed and they march alongside unions and politicians with a common purpose in protest against the disproportionate effect that cuts have on the most vulnerable in society.

The Telegraph are like the lower end of the tabloid press in their insistence to never miss an opportunity to bring up World War II?

Young, internationally educated graduates are returning to India determined to do their bit. The State education system is becoming globally competitive and improving in terms of access. I hope that this new generation can reform the political landscape and address some of the stark inequality in their beautiful and amazingly diverse country.

The riots were portrayed as "look what happens if you allow peaceful protests to get out of hand" which fits Chinas policy of tightly controlling protests and may not have been totally inaccurate; I don't know I wasn't here, but I missed Twitter that week.

The real news is not that school meals are going up by 25% but that there are many parents needlessly spending limited resources on buying a weeks worth of dairylea dunkables for their childs lunches.

Sexism combined with ineptitude; Cameron joked that she was 'clearly frustrated' and then laughed at his own joke as he refused to answer her question.

Coal is our heritage not our future.

The problem is that you can't always take the friends who helped you along for the ride, especially if that ride is in the 1st class cabin of a plane flying to meetings with heads of state.

It is good to hear my MP speaking up for the young people of Consett in Parliament. The government need to be reminded of the effect their policies (or lack of policy) has on the lives of people who exist outside of the claustrophobic 'Westminster bubble' … The Liberal Democrats, after 18 months in 'power' are still standing shoulder to shoulder with their Tory friends in pushing though policies that have a disproportionate effect on the lives of ordinary people who call towns like Consett home.

It will be easy for an employer to not make adjustments when someone returns to work after sickness and easy to dismiss them without a tribunal when they again become sick.

We don't go on strike for a laugh or a day off, we are fully aware that in striking we are in breach our contract and that our pay will be docked. And that the people we serve will have to do without. We are forced to withdraw our labour because of injustice.

Unions have always been catalysts for change in the workplace, so much has been achieved. The next big achievement must be to effect change within the trade union movement itself.

“Religion is the heart of a heartless world”

Religion and Politics

2011-12-20T21:36:00.003Z

Religion and politics: I usually keep them fairly separate. I think about them with different parts of my brain and I see them as separate parts of life. In the the past year I started this blog and a Twitter account. This has been an interesting time in that it has enabled dialogue with people across the political spectrum. Twitter really is like one massive focus group. You can instantly see a view of public opinion on any matter. I use the term 'public opinion' quite loosely because on Twitter you only get the public who have a Twitter account. The twitter village is a bit like the Westminster village in that everyone who tweets about politics has more than a passing interest in it; you can tell by the level of insight shown in just 140 characters that most political tweeters are acutely aware of the political environment.

As a member of the Labour party and a trade union rep I could be described as being on the Left of the political spectrum. I have discovered that many people who have similar political views to me are also anti religious, not just not believing in anything but vehemently against religion.

People who are extremely tolerant about most things have an intolerance of all things religious and in particular all things Christian. I understand the absolute condemnation of David Cameron's speech about Christian values simply because he blamed a lack of these values on riots, MPs expenses and worryingly Islamic terrorism. The only values that are going to stop Islamic terrorism are Islamic values. He could have just said terrorism but he chose to leave in the Islamic bit. He must realise that comments such as these are on news channels and websites all over the world. Not helpful.

What I find more difficult to understand is the condemnation not of the Prime Minister but of religion itself. I can see the distinction between political and religious aspects of life but I was talking to a neighbour of mine; an interesting, older chap, who happens to be a Methodist/Leftist. He said that you can't separate the two, and that he disagreed with his Marxist father who thought that religion was the opiate of the masses. This often quoted sentence does not show the complexity of the passage it is taken from;

“Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people”

.
Nobody ever quotes Marx as like this

“Religion is the heart of a heartless world”

To do so would make people think that Marx was rather more devout than he probably was.

There are criticisms of religion and of Christianity in particular that I can see the reasons for: Christianity offers an explanation and even some would say a justification of human suffering; you may suffer in this life but you will be rewarded in the next. This assertion suggests that because suffering in this life can be justified there is no need to address it. This criticism ignores the goal of modern day Christianity which is to is to reduce human suffering across the Earth. There are many examples of selfless charitable work organised and carried out by faith groups. I saw a couple of examples when I lived in India. I have seen first hand fishing boats provided by churches across India following the 2005 tsunami this has allowed people how had lost everything start to make a living again. The missionaries of charity, a group made famous by the work of Mother Theresa in Kolkata but carrying out less well recognised work, across India, to help some of the world's poorest people to escape what some would see as inescapable poverty.

The other criticism is that religion is authoritarian. This criticism is harder to shake off than some. It is my instinct to challenge authority where it stands in the way of social justice. The church should be a catalyst for social justice so on these grounds I would not challenge it. I do however accept that many people, especially those on the Left of politics would see this lack of questioning of authority an uncomfortable concept.

I do not know a lot about the Anglican tradition but it has been said that the 'Church of England is the Tory party at prayer'. What I do know is that we have become more ecumenical in my lifetime and I would never want to insult Anglicans by calling them all Tories. As previously stated, I have kept politics and religion separate but to use a playground phrase he (the Prime Minister) started it. The Prime Minister blames a lack of Christian values for a bad society. I would blame the government's lack of Christian values on some recent bad policy decisions. Removing benefits from disabled children doesn't sound as if it was formulated in a coffee morning after the Sunday service.

I have also heard that the Catholics especially in the North East are traditionally Labour voters (this is purely anecdotal – most people in the North East vote Labour at least in general elections). I can see some similarities between values shared by most Catholics and traditional socialist values. There most vulnerable in society need our help. Churches address this need through charity and encouraging a charitable mindset. Political parties can address this need through policy.

I did not think that I would ever share my own religious faith on a blog but I will finish this post by doing so. I am tolerant of all ways of life, all religions and all denominations. My own faith is something intensely personal but I am not ashamed to share that I have faith in God. One of the ways I choose to express this faith is by going to Church. I am a Catholic, I have been brought up a Catholic, went to Catholic school, I go to Mass on Sunday. I have at times questioned my faith but have always come back to it. I don't agree with all of the Church's teaching on everything; contraception particularly in the context of AIDS prevention, being an example. I am ashamed that some leaders in the Church have, at times, done a truly appalling job of protecting young people, and have neglected their duty of care. But despite these real problems, I believe that the Church is a force for good and a catalyst for positive change in the world.

Refounding Trade Unionism

2011-12-16T18:45:00.003Z

I have been reading some policy type books recently, and I have noticed something about the style of writing. It is the use of the word 'should'. In The Purple Book (2011 Ed. Robert Philipot) one chapter contained 'should' in 15 consecutive sentences. I don't feel totally comfortable writing in that style and don't often do on this blog but on this next subject I'm going to try out this policy style.

Trade unionism is the subject, one that I believe passionately in, but I also believe that reform is desperately needed.

There has been a steady decline in union membership which has coincided with the decline of heavy industry. All that really remains from those days is the language; union reps are still often referred to as a shop stewards, some still do work in in workshops and look after a section of a larger organisation but this is rare. There is one, now obsolete, aspect of the shop stewards’ role that is worth a mention; collecting subs. Once a week the shop steward would go around and collect the subs from the workers. This would mean that every week the steward would talk to every union member and this would be a chance to raise issues. You can imagine that it might go something like this;

Steward “You got your subs?”
Member “What are you doing about that unpaid overtime?”
Steward “I met with management; we are getting time and half from next month”
Member “Here's my subs”

Even if in this example the steward was unable to get an agreement on the paid overtime issue, at least the member would know that their voice was being heard. Members now pay by direct debit; this is progress. But paying by direct debit leads to the belief that the union is a simply a service that is paid for, and, in some ways it is like a safety net for when things go wrong. But being in a union is so much more than that. It about being part of a bigger, grassroots led organisation that acts in the interests its members both collectively and as individuals. There are several misconceptions that arise from the belief that union membership is simply a service that is paid for by a monthly direct debit. One is more common that you might think, union representatives are not paid out of members subscriptions. In fact they are not paid at all. They give their time freely, and freely given time is how all duties and activities are carried out. This includes collective bargaining, negotiation to prevent and minimise redundancies and the everyday work of accompanying members to meetings. This is the least publicised bread and butter work that is the bulk of what trade unions do. What the public see is union leaders making statements on TV or meeting with ministers in Westminster but those things are just the tip of a large iceberg.

Money

Subscriptions must be progressive. Some unions still charge a flat rate for membership. All unions should have sliding scale based on wages, starting at a nominal fee for part-time workers rising to more substantial contribution from better paid members: From each according to their means, or to put a figure on it from £4 to £40 a month. Retired members should be engaged, and members who are made redundant should be kept on the membership list for free and supported not only through the redundancy process but contact maintained during periods of unemployment. This would mean that the member would not have to be re-recruited when they find another job.

Union leaders are well paid; some union leaders do earn substantial salaries. This can make them seem distant, like a separate entity. (Some union leaders don’t help themselves in this respect). This distance can be at least partially reconciled by the fact that you would hope that union leaders have started out doing the same sort of job as the people they represent. You could assume, for example, that they must have been elected first as a rep then as branch secretary or chair and maybe also elected on a regional or national committee or the National Executive Council. In other words they have earned their stripes. What happens at the top however is not ideal and we have a situation in some unions where the some people are promised roles. For example the vice president is the president elect and will automatically take up the role without a new election. There are structural changes that could make the leadership more accountable to the membership and also enable them to lead with a clearer mandate.

Structural reform

Structural reform takes time and it is right that it does. A trade union should be a member led organisation. Unions are member led in a lot of ways and the portrayal of union leaders in the press is unhelpful. Despite what some politicians, newsreaders and columnists will tell the public, union leaders do not decide to take strike action. Industrial action is both a last resort and it is democratic; ordinary members are balloted and it is the membership, not politicians, who decide if and when industrial action, for which a day’s pay is lost, is necessary. A lot can be said about low turnout, but the mechanism of balloting members is both complex, outdated and most critically requires a change in legislation in order to modernise it. Online voting is not permitted. To vote for (or against) strike action the members have to sift the ballot paper from the junk mail, vote, then find time to post the ballot paper, all within a tightly controlled time frame which if not adhered to would make strike action illegal. Online voting would increase turnout. This should be discussed in parliament; politicians who have criticised strike action because of low turnout should be keen to debate the issue. Even with low turnout strike action is still justified. The claim is that the majority of members don’t support the action. The counter argument is the majority of members did not object to strike action strongly enough to do the sifting and posting required to democratically register an objection.

If significant structural reforms were to take place motions would have to drafted, seconded and voted though. Structural change should not be imposed on the membership of any organisation, but if the members are asking for structural change then their voice must be heard, even by those who may have a vested interest in an unchanged structure.

There should be far more elected, paid union officials who are afforded the same support in terms of secretarial and IT provision as current appointed officials. The full time official would be on a sabbatical from work for as long as they remain elected, with elections taking place every year at a regional or national AGM or by ballot. There would no longer be a divide, which does exist, between the paid officials and the membership, as the paid official would still be 'one of us'. This accountability and direct link between the members and their officials would promote a better working relationship. Many paid officials were once activists and most have worked hard for the union before crossing the floor and being paid out of members’ contributions. There is a perception that some paid officials lose the work ethic they had when they were active in the workplace and somehow are on a 'cushy number'. Elections would ensure that paid officials not only were backed by members and had a clear mandate, but also would ensure accountability.

Changes such as these are not an untested model. The Fire Brigades Union have a structure similar to this where most positions are elected and held by serving fire officers who are afforded facilities time to carry out their role for as long as they remain in post. The FBU have put in place a structure that is paid for by the employer. The employer is providing a valuable service which has mutual benefits including the potential for improved industrial relations.

It is to be acknowledged that the concept of having elected paid union officials remaining in post or on sabbatical could be criticised. Would the official be restricted by the fact that they are still employed by the same management team that on occasions they would be completely at odds with? The relationship between unions and management should not always be adversarial, but clearly if an employer decides to attack employees’ rights or make redundancies, then there will have to be negotiation and the union officials will take a hard line. The fact that the official is an employee may be awkward, but awkward is not the same as impossible. Managers should understand that unions look after the interests of their members and that union officials should act with integrity.

Challenges

The challenges facing trade unionism are many. One of the obvious challenges is the recruitment of members. Membership numbers have fallen from their height in 1979 when there were 12 million trade union members. This has fallen to around 6.5 million today. The fact that in the intervening period anti trade union legislation was passed by the Thatcher government which was left unmodified on the statute book during years of Labour is not helpful. The trade union movement is exactly that; a movement, and if it does not move with the times the government will feel the need to do the moving. It is true however that if there was no power in a union then unions would not even register on a politician’s radar. Trade unionism is distinct from socialist politics in that union leaders act not in the interest of the general public but in the interest of their members. Union membership is however greatest in the public sector, so in standing up for public sector jobs, the trade unions are acting in the public interest, protecting not only their members but also the users of public services. Everyone uses public services, but it is the most vulnerable in society that make most use of them, and have the most to lose from indiscriminate public sector cuts.

One of the reasons that public sector workers are more unionised is that at the time when employment in the mining, steel, shipbuilding and other large industries ended, many workers found themselves working 'for the council' and brought the trade unionism with them. The lack of union membership in the private sector is a challenge that can only be overcome by change in attitude. But trade unions can’t wait for a cultural shift to happen. There are people whose job it is to change attitudes and to effect cultural change. They are not politicians; they are marketing experts. Trade union membership is not a product, but we could learn something from their tactics: Increasing brand awareness and selling trade union membership like a product would improve membership in the private sector. The benefits of the trade union product must be explained. The cost is minimal so it is a good value product. It must also be pointed out that the more people who buy this product the better it becomes.

The structure of unions needs to adapt to the private sector where businesses employ few staff. There could be for example an industrial estate or business park which could have one representative. The rep would have facilities time from their employer and any remaining time used in trade union duties elsewhere on the estate of business park. The other employers should also make a contribution towards this time. For example a representative is granted a 0.25 reduction in hours to carry out duties. This might equate to about 10 hours per week. Each employer in the area would then reimburse the employer of the representative. The cost to each employer would be minimal. This is one example of something that could work. Local solutions need to be put forward. It is up to the membership to put in place a structure in the workplace that is then facilitated by the employers concerned.

Giving reps facilities time, in addition to the statutory time reps are entitled to for duties, offers employers good value for money; examples of reps saving employers money include agreeing a phased return for an employee coming back after long term sickness, reduction in tribunal legal fees by intervening early and avoiding legal action and by increasing safety and well-being thereby reducing staff absence.

Politics
There are many facets of union activity, but they can all be categorised into big stuff and small stuff. Small stuff is representing members, negotiating pay offers and restructures, trying to prevent compulsory redundancy and trying to get the a fair deal for members if redundancies are made, and also ensuring the safety and wellbeing of staff in a workplace. Big stuff is what we see in the press, meeting with ministers about pay and pensions and trying to influence government policy or lobbying.

The actions of lobbyists is under scrutiny and rightly so. It should be impossible to have favorable legislation passed because you buy a minister a few expensive lunches. Unions also employ lobbyists or political officers and while having a person with a parliamentary pass and access to MPs is useful it may not be the most effective way to effect change. At present we have a Conservative led coalition government and ministers of that party are not likely to be swayed by an employee of a trade union, no matter how persuasive they are. There is a better way; ordinary union members should be encouraged to write a letter or e-mail to their MP. Parliamentary procedure then dictates that the constituent should get a reply outlining what action has been taken. If enough members write, or even if one member writes with an issue that is pressing enough, the MP will then contact the employer, without naming the constituent if there is any danger of victimisation. If required or if the MP thinks it pertinent the MP may write to the government minister concerned. The minister can then act. This method of member led lobbying requires no parliamentary pass and no expensive lunch, and is particularly effective where employees of an organisation live in several constituencies. A minister will find a significant number of MPs difficult to ignore and an employer will find a letter from a minister demanding answers or even requesting information equally difficult to ignore.

Many large Unions are affiliated to the Labour party. The history of the trade union movement is the history of the Labour party. It is no bad thing that the unions fund the party. Some will complain that funding buys influence and that it is a valid statement but parties must be funded and it is better to raise a million pounds by taking one pound off a million union members than the whole million from one business-person. In this way any influence that is gained is gained for the many rather than the few. More unions should affiliate and more unions should put forward candidates for election. But there should be another form of affiliation which would be open to all union members; call it a sort of “affiliation-lite”. On every membership form there should a box to tick to make a monthly donation to the party, the donation again would be based on income perhaps between one and five pounds. Members who tick the box members would be asked each year if they want to carry on with the political levy. Non-levy payers if they want to start. The levy payers could then be afforded voting rights in Labour leadership elections.

Conclusion

It is ok to be nostalgic at events like the Durham miners Gala as we march behind banners with the faces of past heroes, but we can’t ever go back. Workers’ rights need protection today and there will always be those willing to stick their head above the parapet and do the protecting, but structures must be in place to facilitate this protection. If trade unionism is not pro-active and pre-emptive then movement will be susceptible to further attacks in the form of unfavorable legislation. When an organisation is under attack it is understandable that it bunkers down and retreats to its core values. Unions have always been catalysts for change in the workplace, so much has been achieved. The next big achievement must be to effect change within the trade union movement itself.

Lower Than Vermin

2011-12-12T19:24:00.000Z

"No attempt at ethical or social seduction can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin."

Nye Bevan

Mayor

2011-12-10T02:03:00.002Z

Should decision be made by the many or the few? its a big question and one that I wont really attempt to answer. But while everyone is blogging about the prime minister occupying an isolated protectionist position on Europe desperate to try and make sure that bankers in the city can keep on banking, I read a facebook post about directly elected mayors and it got me thinking about local government in general.

We have city councils and they have cabinets now like central government where decisions that would at one time be debated in full council, and minutes then be made available to the public are now decided by a cabinet. I appreciate that our leaders have a mandate to lead and can see the value in terms of having fewer people who can be held to account on a variety of matters. However in the case of an elected mayor too much power would be held by just on person, this reduces the effectiveness of bringing up an issue with your local councillor who would be powerless to take it much further. I feel the change to mayors in cities is not progressive, we need to engage more people in local government, elected mayors I feel, will not achieve this. my final point is simpler: The Tories want it = It's probably bad.

The Blame Habit

2011-11-26T12:15:00.000Z

Should we cut the youth club or the old peoples home? Should we buy salt for the roads or help the elderly with insulation this winter? Should we close the sports centre or the library? Whose bus should we cancel the subsidy for? Should we reduce provision for under 5s or cancel the employability scheme for 18-25 year olds?

These are the questions that must be answered, and it is not Clegg or Cameron who must answer them. It is your local councillor. These decisions are not easy to make and unfortunately the answer will probably be 'we need to cut in all areas'. Difficult choices however must be be made, and made quickly; Durham County Councils funding has been cut by £65 Million this year¹ followed by further cuts over the next 3 years.

Tory and Lib Dem Ministers start, and finish, every statement regarding the cuts with a now familiar phrase 'the mess Labour left' and it remains a clever tactic, but ignores several facts.

1. The UK economy was growing when Labour was spending.

2. Spending = Investing in jobs and public services.

3 The global banking crisis meant that banks had to be bailed out with billions of public pounds, a move that at the time, was supported by the the opposition.

The other often repeated line that if Labour were in power cuts would still have to be made. This is true, but the cuts would not be front loaded and the choices would not be so stark. The Coalition have chosen to cut funding to local authorities in such a way that councillors are left making decisions that they know will directly effect the people they live with. There are many reasons why a person might get involved in local politics; explaining and apologising for the loss of a relied on service is probably not high on the list.

The Tories can only impose these cuts on Councils in such a fast acting venomous manner because of support from their close friends, the Liberal Democrats. Lib Dems have voted with the government on almost every motion put forward. They claim to have moderated the Tories; The current cuts disproportionately target women, the young and the old leaving the rich to carry on as usual. These cuts are extreme, not moderate in any aspect.

Lib Dem councillors are creatures of habit and are well used to being able to criticise both Labour and the Tories. Few Lib Dems survived the recent Newcastle elections. In County Durham local elections are not until 2013 and remaining Lib Dems are finding that old habits die hard. It is easy for them to blame Labour councillors for every difficult decision that effects services in the County. It is however, Liberal Democrats who nod, shout 'hear hear' and make this unnecessarily rapid budget reduction a grim reality.

1. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/18/coalition-cuts-consett-country-durham

Remember, Remember the 30th of November

2011-11-22T22:02:00.000Z

I was asked to outline to the Students Union why lecturers are going on strike, I think they wanted a rabble rousing speech on why they should come and join us, this is what they got instead...

The first thing I going to do is to disappoint you. This is not a call to arms. As an employee of this college I can not ask you to join me on the picket line or march with me to a rally. I can tell you that the college will be open as normal.

To be fair what would have some effect would be for you to turn up to lessons as normal if your lecturer is on strike then go find a manager who will have had to actually cross a picket line to get to work and ask them to teach you something about the subject that you have.

What I can do is outline some the reasons we are taking this action.

Going on strike is a last resort, Public sector workers get into the public sector to serve the public by teaching them, nursing them back to health, and doing day to day tasks that people take for granted like collecting rubbish and recycling and administering housing benefit and child tax credit. In stark contrast to the financial services sector we in the public sector and in we are not motivated by money, we are motivated by a desire to help others. We don't go on strike for a laugh or a day off, we are fully aware that in striking we are in breach our contract and that our pay will be docked. And that the people we serve will have to do without. We are forced to withdraw our labour because of injustice.

It is unjust that in order to pay off a deficit that was accrued in bailing out banks after bankers took insane risks in pursuit of their next bonus, should be paid for by raiding the pension pots of people who had no part in creating the problem, This is a crisis of capitalism yet capitalism is not changed by the crisis; it is the people who suffer.

Its important to realise that The government are not proposing changes to new pensions but wholesale changes to existing pensions which public sector workers have paid into for years and in some cases almost all of their working lives. A strike on pensions is pretty good value for money, you lose a days pay but if we stand aside and the government change the terms of our pensions then we are set to lose much more than that, for the whole of our lives after retirement. Just some figures

A 26 year old lecturer A who has paid into the pension for 4 years could lose £176,000

Pension cuts don’t make much economic sense either, pensioners spending power actually boost the economy, ask anyone who runs a B+B or a coach tour company.

Politicians will object to the strike and I relieved that Labour have not said these strikes are wrong this time around: what I would say to politicians who try to cast doubt on the legitimacy of Industrial action is that strike action is democratic; it is members who are balloted and it is us, not politicians, who decide if, and when industrial action is necessary.

I will now share some of the reasons why staff have voted yes for strike action, you might think that the reasons for balloting and striking are one in the same but the reasons behind balloting for strike action and the reasons for putting an X in a box on a ballot paper are seldom the same

I am a trade unionist I will always vote yes if strike action is balloted for simply because if a union ballots members and the members don’t vote for strike action then the union would appear weak and negotiation form a position of strength is clearly more effective than negotiation from a position of weakness. This can be seen that in that the government refused to budge on the pension reforms until the main public sector unions had balloted their members (incidentally Lecturers already voted in favour of strike action before the pension dispute even hit the news).

Other reasons for putting an X in the strike action box could be to send a message not only to the government but also to management, Staff are angry about restructures regrading leading to pay cuts and redundancies so they vote yes out of anger. Another reason that staff may strike is in solidarity. Public sector workers are not massive wage earners, our pensions are better than in the private sector for the same level of pay, it takes no account that private sector wages and therefore end salaries are better in the private sector logically this should trigger legislation to make private pensions better.

The public/private debate is a smokescreen anyway. A smokesrceen peddled by a government desperate to drive a wedge between the public and private sector because if they can paint public sector workers as being lazy and having gold-plated pensions then it will garner support for the wider cuts agenda which remember we are in the at the start of a 4 year onslaught of cuts to services that are relied upon.

The changes being made difficult for any subsequent government to reverse. I don't really think about my own retirement much but on on strike days I get up unfeasibly early in the morning, for a pensions strike, the mind has a tendency to wander: I wonder about your pensions Are the government just going to keep upping the retirement age for those who cant afford early retirement..? Will you just all work until you die..? Chilling thoughts on chilly mornings.

There are however reasons to be optimistic, reasons to be cheerful even, People who stand up for what is right, people who speak out and people who protest have always been a disparate bunch, small gangs of people saying thing like...'Equal rights for women' 'Ban the Bomb' 'Give Peace a Chance' Save the Fox' Save the Whale' 'Save the polar bear' 'Anarchy in the UK!' 'save mining jobs' 'Stop the poll tax'. It is rare that 'the people' speak with one voice, the protest movement that we are seeing grow around the world approaches this rather idealistic vision of one voice.

These cuts are so wide ranging that a wide range of people have responded. If we look at the cuts in chronological order from birth to death then there are Cuts to maternity provision, cuts to children services, cuts to EMA Cuts to tuition fees, cuts in number of jobs leading to high unemployment cuts to pensions and cuts the effective cuts to the NHS and to old people homes though privatisation so that shareholders can make a profit out of tax revenue.

For the first time in my lifetime there IS one voice. For one day on Wednesday next week we will stand together in solidarity, For one day we may have found a temporary cure from that most persistent and damaging of human conditions that is apathy. And I would love to stand here and finish with something like 'students of the world unite and join us' but we all know, I can't do that.

Doctor Doctor

2011-11-19T19:23:00.002Z

The much maligned NHS health and social care bill is on its way though Parliament: The government want GPs to spend time looking at budgets and balance sheets. They have now got it wrong in another way; they want civil servants to decide who is sick. A government backed report summarises "People should be signed off for long-term sickness by an independent assessment service and not GPs"¹ In the same report they also offer tax breaks for employers as a reward for taking on the long term sick.

It goes without saying that GPs are best placed to decide who is sick. They have a broad understanding of health and can take a holistic approach, and importantly they can look at each case individually. They do not have targets on how many people to send back to work. An 'Independent assessment service' may not be afforded such freedom.

The report also states that "77% of GPs had admitted they signed people off sick for reasons other than their physical health"¹ In this category there will be people off sick with work related stress, without significant adjustments not only to working conditions but also management attitudes towards stress in the workplace. There are still managers that are of the opinion that staff who are suffering from work related stress are simply incompetent. By blaming the employee the managers wash their hands of all responsibility and fail to make changes that could be of benefit to all.

The government could take a different approach: Employers, Unions and doctors could work together to action to reduce levels of sickness absence. A union rep, member and manager can easily have a meeting to agree strategy for a return to work after a Doctor has decided a person is fit for work. Reasonable adjustments to the workplace, flexible working hours and a phased return could be agreed. It is for the employee and the employer to agree the terms of a return. Legislation already exists to make this a reality 'reasonable adjustments' as outlined in the Equality Act could be applied to all long term sickness cases. In my experience managers are more than willing to have these meetings but less than willing to make sure that real adjustments are made and followed up on. This inaction on the part of the employer can lead to deterioration of health, wellbeing and further sickness.

On its own this change is worrying if we add it to other recent Tory proposals we can see that if they become policy there will be a real erosion of workers basic rights. Another proposal; removal of the right to a tribunal if you have been at a place of work for less than two years, is a cynical move. Industrial tribunals are thankfully rare, (which begs the question why legislate against them) they only needed if a dispute is completely unresolvable by conventional negotiation. For some workers however, for some workers is the only means of justice. The right to a tribunal is a right which we should all have but hopefully, and usually, one that we will never use. Some people go through working life not staying at the same place of work for more than two years, following the work and going from one fixed term contract to another. These workers will never have the right to a tribunal, regardless of how they may be treated by an employer.

These two issues are not unrelated, It will be easy for an employer to not make adjustments when somone returns to work after sickness and easy to dismiss them without a tribunal when they again become sick.

The Coalition government will say that these changes to sickness and tribunal legislation are are needed for economic recovery. What they should be more concerned about are the million young, healthy unemployed people who are sick of the lack of policy to address this very real and immediate concern.

1. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15801515

Speaking up for Consett

2011-11-13T08:00:00.000Z

In 1987 I was 9 yearsold. Hilary Armstrong the former MP for North West Durham and now Baroness, was making her maiden speech in the House of Commons, she brought up the issue of unemployment in North West Durham. Pat Glass is now our MP and 23 years later in hermaiden speech, she addressed the same concern. In an opposition daydebate about youth unemployment Pat had this to say.¹

“Anyone looking atthose two speeches could be forgiven for thinking that is a deeplyentrenched problem that cannot be dealt with, but actually, that isnot true. Between 1997 and 2010, North West Durham, like most of thepost-industrial north, underwent an economic and social revolution,with the support of the previous Government, but it is amazing howquickly the clock has turned back to the 1980s. Under a previousConservative Government, male unemployment in Consett, in myconstituency, reached [almost] 100%. Can people now imagine what itis like to live in a place with 100% male unemployment?

Youth unemployment inmy constituency has doubled in the last 12 months and now stands at35%. Unemployment generally has increased by 20%, and it is a directresult of Government policies... If the Government are serious about delivering on unemployment in places such as the north-east, they need to be serious about a growth strategy. We do not need enterprise zones andshort-term grants. We have had those before and they do not stay: assoon as the grants run out, the jobs disappear and everybody runsback to the south-east. We need instead proper infrastructureinvestment, so that private companies are attracted to the area andstay...

… But what have theGovernment done? They have cut public expenditure for infrastructureand jobs, and cut investment in skills. The abolition of the EMA hasled directly to falls in participation rates at 16 to levels that wehave not seen since the 1990s, and the tripling of tuition fees hasled to a 12% reduction in university applications this year.

Young people are havinga hard time from this Government and it is due not only to theabolition of the EMA and the rise in tuition fees, but to the cuts inhome-to-school transport, home-to-college transport, careersservices, youth services and local bus services. Young people arebecoming more cynical now than they have ever been about politics andthe role of the Government. I am pleading with the Government now tolisten to the suffering out there and start putting in place a properplan for growth and jobs for young people”.

It is good to hear myMP speaking up for the young people of Consett in Parliament. Thegovernment need to be reminded of the effect their policies (or lackof policy) has on the lives of people who exist outside of theclaustrophobic 'Westminster bubble' The Issues facing Consett also havegained national media attention in a recent Guardian article.²

I welcome both Patsspeech and the Guardian article, fighting for real investment andraising awareness of the fact that Consett is still on the map even without itssteelworks are vitally important. Both the speech and the articlehowever, have been vehemently criticised by a local Liberal Democrat;Pat for inadvertently missing out the word 'almost' at the start ofher speech and the Guardian for what is described as 'povertytourism'

Maybe the realobjection however is that such speeches and articles make itdifficult to hide the plain fact that the Liberal Democrats, after 18months in 'power' are still standing shoulder to shoulder with theirTory friends in pushing though policies that have a disproportionateeffect on the lives of ordinary people who call towns like Consetthome.

Consett is my home townand I am extremely proud of where I come from, in an previousblogpost about Consett and Stanley I describe this area withaffection; 'Old industry is etched in to the fabric of communities,people are proud of where they come from and have traditional values.Neighbourhood communities are still strong as are family ties'.Consett is a good place to live, work and bring up a family and sitsin some magnificent countryside. It is right however that MPs and themedia try to highlight the lack of jobs and opportunities wehad to face under the Tories in the 1980s and are facing again underthis coalition Government.

1. Original speech by Pat Glass MP: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2011-11-09a.388.2

2. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/18/coalition-cuts-consett-country-durham

Staff Governor

2011-11-11T00:56:00.001Z

I am standing for election to the board of governors at Newcastle College, below is my 200 word statement. Employees of NCG are eligible to vote. NCG incorporates Newcastle College, Skelmersdale and Ormskirk College and Intraining.

"I am applying for the role of staff governor because I feel that I can make a difference. I am a Biology Lecturer in the Sixth Form. In the Science department I work closely with support staff, both technical and learning support, I am aware of the vital role that these essential support staff members play in the college as well as the issues which impact upon them.

Skills I have developed while carrying out my duties as a UCU representative are transferable to a role on the board of governors. I have negotiated with the college leadership to reach an understanding of our position on a number of occasions. I have resolved disputes between members and management.

The relationship between managers and staff need not be adversarial; there is so much common ground. We all want our students to reach their full potential and be successful. We all want the opportunity to progress and to develop, whatever our role. We want the College to move forward and to remain a leading provider in FE, HE and work based learning.

If elected to the board I will make every effort to work collaboratively so that the College continues to progress, and also to ensure that the interests of staff members are considered in the decision making process.
Please vote".

I addition I would like to add that I believe there is a balance to be made:

Student achievement can be increased without increasing staff stress.
Staff retention is of equal importance to student retention rates.
The College can have financial stability and a stable workforce.
For the College to be truly successful it must successfully take into consideration the welfare of all staff.

Voting is easy: Just log on to your work computer, open internet explorer, click on the governance tab at the top of the red NCG homepage, hover the mouse over the voting button at the side then follow the links to vote from there.

I'll get by with a little help from my friends

2011-10-15T21:15:00.004+01:00

Much has been written this week about Liam Fox, the now former defence minister and his friend/advisor/lobbyist/arms dealer? and I'm not really going to add to the column inches or gigabytes of material already on the internet about this other than to say it is right that he has resigned.

The thing that the whole episode highlights for me is a more general point about tory ministers; they seem think that they are somhow entitled to thier position. I'm sure they got to where they are with a little help from their friends and they think nothing of returning those favours. We heard earlier this year about internships being sold to the highest bidder at a dinner party with David Cameron and Clegg, doing a good impression of an old fasioned tory, subsequently stated that he saw 'nothing wrong' with helping his friends kids' get work experience in governmnent departments.

I remeber a conversation I had with a close friend of mine who is now a lawyer in the City of London. He was lucky enough to attend one of the best private schools in the country, and I was saying that I went to my local comprehensive then to University and now I have a job that (most of the time) I love. My question to him was, you went to school, University and you also have a similarly good job so where was the advantage in paying for education? He said that his teachers were top notch, fair enough, but most interestingly, he mentioned that the friends he has are influential. Now this friend is talented and works incredibly hard and I wouldn't for a minute suggest that he has not earned his position but for somone who needs to rise through the ranks of the Tory party having influential friends would hardly be a hindrance.

In getting a ministerial position a politician has reached the top of the political roller coaster, and it is difficult if not impossible to get to the top with out a helping hand or leg up. The problem is that you can't always take the friends who helped you along for the ride, especially if that ride is in the 1st class cabin of a plane flying to meetings with heads of state.

We all need a little help from our friends and having recieved that help we might hear ourselves ask 'what can I possibly do to repay you?' If the answer is 'how about a pint down the club?' then you will never get anywhere near breaching any ministerial code.

The Pont Valley in Pictures

2011-10-03T07:29:00.003+01:00

The area marked out for opencast is varied in terms of habit and geography, the pictures are all taken on the site. Please sign the petition against the opencast For full size images view on flickr

The Pont Valley is Worth Saving

2011-09-28T21:00:00.003+01:00

One thing about UK Coal that should be admired is their relentless tenacity in trying to decimate the varied habitats that make up the Pont valley to get at the coal seams beneath. Since the painful end of the Mining era in the North East in 1986, they have applied for planning permission to opencast at various sites in the Pont valley on several occasions. This is the third time they have applied to opencast this very patch of land (although they have used a different name to describe it each time). All applications have, until now, been unanimously refused by both the planning officers who work for the council and by elected representatives.

This most recent application was little different than the any of the previous ones other than in name. UK Coal have called it the 'Bradley' site. Bradley is an area on the opposite side of the valley. A cynic might think that this is a deliberate attempt to confuse the public. It may have worked on the planning officer who was not in post at the time of earlier refusals and chose to break with tradition, this time recommending the application for approval. The communities surrounding the proposed site were understandably outraged and the council overturned the decision. UK Coal have seen a chink in the armour of previously impenetrable opposition and seized the opportunity to appeal this decision. A public enquiry starts on the 25^th of October and is expected to last for 3 weeks; after this a final decision will be made.

There are many valid arguments against coal as an energy resource and against its methods of extraction. These avenues will be explored in the process of enquiry. Some of these arguments are familiar territory. There are the impacts on biodiversity and genetic diversity.¹ There is the impact in the lives of the young people; children who are primary school will be preparing for their GCSEs by the time extraction of an estimated 500 000 tonnes of coal would be complete. Some of the lucky ones (who think they can live with the debt) will have left the area to go to University by the time the area starts to look like a viable habitat. Their childhood will be spent with plant machinery rather than plant life. The opportunity to play out in a wild magical place only a small-persons-leg-friendly walk from my back gate will be denied. The site will never be the same. Unlike the men from the area who risked their lives down the pit, the landscape will not retain its rugged character.

The argument I am least comfortable with, may be one of the most effective. The application was recommended for approval on the grounds that the economic benefits to the area outweighed negative aspects. This is an argument about money. The price of coal is going up which makes it a valuable commodity. The reason UK Coal keeps coming back to this area is because the Pont Valley contains a profit for its shareholders. The price of coal is artificial. It seems ludicrous but globally fossil fuels receive 10 times the subsidy of renewables.² If carbon capture and storage was a precondition of all newly mined coal then I’m not sure the Pont valley would be such a huge attraction for UK Coal. Maybe their shareholders could take a long-view and invest in fledgling renewable based start-ups in the North East instead. It would be better for the region than fixed term security jobs on minimum wage that will end when the coal is out. Investment in new green technology is better for the world economy too. Scientists and economists have agreed and it is now widely accepted that mitigating for and reducing the causes of climate change is cheaper than doing nothing, waiting for it to happen and then dealing with the resulting chaos.

But even with the price of coal as it is today the economic argument for opencast coal-mining does not make sense. UK Coal has pledged 10p per tonne of coal for community work to be shared between three former pit villages. To compensate for 3-4 years of increased traffic, noise and dust, then a recovery time which cannot really be determined accurately, the villages will get around £16000 each, assuming their extraction targets are met. That is £4000 per year of disruption. The untouched land is worth more to the communities than that and it will continue to be for all of our lives. This statement about the land being worth more is not a throwaway line. It is a quantifiable fact. The Pont Valley Network was not set up to oppose the opencast. The Network will fight UK Coal’s appeal with the relentless tenacity required but the Network existed before this application was made and it will exist for long after the outcome of the appeal is decided.

The Pont Valley Network is a group of individuals who put countless hours of their own time into all sorts of activities in the valley; from stimulating young minds to exercising old bodies and from Archaeology to Zoology. Tourists are visiting the valley and walking, the Coast to Coast cycle route overlooks the site. People passing through bring not only money but also an appreciation of the beauty of the landscape that some of us, who have overlooked the valley all of our lives may sometimes take for granted. I use the phrase 'countless hours' loosely because time freely given can be counted. A capitalist must have coined the phrase 'time is money' and it this case it is: A Volunteer Investment and Value Audit³ puts a value in pounds on this freely given time and the time given by volunteers is worth far more to the community than 10p per tonne of coal which amounts to scant compensation for what is a grievous assault on the landscape. The economic argument is clear, literally the Pont Valley is worth saving.

So now, a very unusual call to arms: If you think that 'the market should decide on these matters' then join us in trying to prevent the senseless intrusion into an area of great ecological and economic significance.

Coal is our heritage not our future.

I took some photos on the site; The Pont Valley in Pictures

1. http://liamrcarr.blogspot.com/2011/04/succession-genetic-diversity-and-coal.html

2. http://think-left.org/2011/09/25/the-black-stuff-was-our-heritage-green-is-our-future/

3. http://www.ivr.org.uk/Institute+of+Volunteering+Research%2fMigrated+Resources%2fDocuments%2fV%2fVIVA+bulletin+%28second+edition%29.pdf

Some further arguments against the opencast have been edited and posted on Think Left. Thanks to Pam and the team.

If you havn't already then please sign this petition against the opencast

Education for all

2011-09-10T15:18:00.003+01:00

It may seem strange for me to start a blog post with praise for the Prime Minister but the strength of Cameron is that he has successfully managed to hide the traditional right-looking ugly face of the tory party and shake its 'Nasty Party' image. His weakness however is that you do not have to dig too deep to uncover that both he and his party are driven by a sense of superiority and ownership of government, rather than a sense of equality and stewardship.

The Prime Minister has shown the true image of himself and his party on a few notable occasions. Early on and when pressed on detail at PMQs he resorted to angry personal attacks, he has subsequently tried to hide his 'Flashman' school bully side. Another not very well hidden aspect of his character is his sexism. I have not forgotten his disdainfully sexist tone in the calm down dear episode. He was arguably worse in the way he spoke to his own MP, Nadine Dorries, when she tried to raise her well-publicised abortion amendment. Sexism combined with ineptitude; he joked that she was 'clearly frustrated' and then laughed at his own joke as he refused to answer her question. In his return to blogging Malcolm Clarke wrote quite correctly that on this occasion Hansard will not tell the full story.

The most worrying aspect of Cameron’s character, for me at least, is his and his government’s attitude towards Education. They have taken the academies agenda which was a policy designed to give fresh starts to struggling schools and are using it as a means to take even small schools out of local authority control. Academies have been criticised and I do think that local authorities are sometimes better placed to make decisions than individual schools in that they have an overview of primary, secondary and further education in a region. The Tories have kept the academy system but they seem to be intent on making primary schools academies. There are 239 nursery and primary schools¹ in County Durham. I do not believe that having this many autonomous schools acting independently of each other would increase the standard of education in the county.

The Tories have added publically funded 'free' schools to the mix which are an unknown quantity. With management being able to do what they want, pay what they want and not follow nationally agreed pay structures you can see why teachers and their Unions are worried. What is most revealing however is Cameron’s elitist attitude: He opened a free school in Norwich at the end of last week and in his speech talked about an intolerance of failure and reinstating discipline, typical, meaningless sound bites from the tory leader but he also added this...

"If you can get 70% of children to get five good GCSEs, including English and Maths, in parts of inner London, you should be asking why aren't we doing that everywhere in parts of the country that are wealthier like Oxfordshire where I represent."

He really thinks that 'wealthier' kids in Oxfordshire should do better than kids in inner London. I am aware that economic background is still the best indicator of examination performance but I was not aware that kids in inner London were automatically less able than kids in Oxfordshire.

Education is the driving force of social change and has the potential to vastly increase social mobility. Good, inclusive, comprehensive education can achieve this lofty ambition. Free schools will not, perhaps because they were never intended to.

1. Thanks to @LynneyJC for the info

School meals

2011-08-30T22:04:00.001+01:00

I'm not sure if enough people care about this to even read this blog post; even Jamie Oliver has lost interest, but in time for the kids going back to school here's my take on the real tragedy of school meals.

The Independent has reported today that the price of school meals will go up by a quarter this year¹. I remember being on free school meals at school and then I remember having to bring in money for them. I have a faint recollection of the lady who handed the free school meal cards out saying "your daddy's got a job now" when I went to get mine by mistake. This would have been a few years after the steelworks shut. And there lies the root of the problem. There was then and still remains a stigma attached to taking up free school meals.

My old school is now the school that my daughter attends and the local council have been taking part in a trial set up by by the Labour government in 2009 where all children were given free school meals for the entire year². Even then there were some children whose parents would still send them with packed lunches citing allergies or fusiness as reasons. The trial has ended and although it's a bit unscientific of me I will pre-empt the outcome of the study: Children who eat a school meal will show greater levels of attentiveness than those who eat packed lunches. I recognise that measuring attentiveness or even achievement at primary school age is difficult and I couldn't even predict if the results would be statistically signifiant but I believe that a school meal is better than a packed lunch and when the new term starts we will pay for my daughters' school meals.

However, the price increase exacerbates a problem. It means that the price of a school meal will approach the price of a basic packed lunch. This should never be the case. A kitchen ordering food form a wholesaler should be able to provide a meal that is both healthier and cheaper than a parent shopping in a supermarket. The reasons they can't are complex; the old school leftie reason why they can't is that private companies now provide school meals need to make profits for shareholders. The equation is simple: The greater the number of children on lunches the less likley parents who are entitled to free school meals are to take them up. There is not only peer pressure on kids to do what their friends are doing but school gate pressure for parents on low incomes to follow the crowd of packed lunch providers.

The real news is not that school meals are going up by 25% but that there are many parents needlessly spending limited resources on buying a weeks worth of dairylea dunkables for their childs lunches.

1. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/school-meal-prices-rise-by-a-quarter-2345869.html

2. http://www.durham.gov.uk/pages/service.aspx?ServiceId=4

China

2011-08-27T19:44:00.003+01:00

I have been in China for the past month on a visit with some of my students and doing some teaching in a summer school. I could speak in cliches about my time there "It was a good experience" "I learned a lot" and all of them would be true, but I will try to give some superficial insight without being too cliched.

There is more freedom than I had expected, you can travel without restriction, you can discuss politics, talk about Tibet - they always add the word province after Tibet when referring to it. You can openly discuss relations with Japan and be critical of government policy. I think where political freedom might end is if you try to organise and build a following. There is not however the freedom to access the whole of the internet. Facebook and You Tube are blocked, but there are Chinese equivalents of these, Youku the video sharing website is particularly usful for teaching. Twitter is blocked but there is some talk of a Chinese equivalent and I think that will become popular soon. This blog is also blocked which was a bit frustrating. Chinese students seem to accept this censorship and make use of the Chinese versions of social networking sites.

Chinese television is worth a look. There are loads of talent shows aping the X-Factor. There is a channel dedicated to showing off Chinese military prowess; just non stop drill squares with rousing music. There is even an English news channel. The news consisted of mainly business; America's debt was high on the agenda with the reporters emphasising the billions worth of US debt owed to China. There was also news of the riots with terrifying pictures of burning buildings. I had to look twice thinking it must be another Middle East uprising before realising that I was looking at pictures from home. The riots were portrayed as "look what happens if you allow peaceful protests to get out of hand" which fits Chinas policy of tightly controlling protests and may not have been totally inaccurate; I dont know I wasn't here, but I missed Twitter that week.

Education is also interesting. According to one friend I made "The Dalai Lama is a slave owner and he wants to take over Tibet province so he can have more slaves" There is also an objection on the level that any position that is passed on is undemocratic or unearned. I can see his position in that I think that their government controls education and the media he may think the same about ours.

Everyone wants to have their own business. Talk to young people and businessman is like the astronaut, train driver or footballer of Chinese culture. I don't know who is going to work for all of these people who all want to be their own boss. As a biology teacher I was also dismayed that almost all students have dropped biology in favour of physics and maths. I don’t know where the next generation of doctors, medical professionals, agricultural and environmental scientists are going to come from.

China and India and often mentioned in the same breath in geography and economics lessons. They are very different. In China there are armies of people employed to sweep the streets, roads and motorways, mainly on nightshift. Most places look polished. Although both have huge populations China seems busy but perhaps less chaotic. English is more widely spoken in India but one thing they have in common but which seems even more stark in China is the massive inequality between rich and poor. There are so many rich people and rich companies who are not heavily taxed by the state. This does not seem very left wing at all; the argument is that at this stage in China's development wealth can not be shared and somehow in the future everyone will benefit. The poor may be waiting a very long time.

The history of China is fascinating. The old city walls of Xi'an with its 5000 year old bell and drum towers is truly spectacular, the Great Wall is great but you can't really see it from space. And the terracotta army, also near Xi'an is monumental. What is also interesting is the fate of the farmer who discovered the intact life-size figures whose faces are all different. He dug a few up and informed the governemnt; his land is now one of the most popular historical sites in China and the Government get £12 for everyone who visits. The farmer sells signed copies of his book and he gets to meet the great and good most recently Tony Blair and Bill Clinton. The farmer's son was given a taxi drivers licence to make up for the fact that he would not take on the family farm. I couldn't help thinking that he must have wished that his dad hadn't dug so deep that day.

There is so much I could add but I won't. The education system in China is of some interest and the sense of appreciation for the opportunities provided to the young by the work of their parents is heartfelt. I enjoyed my time in China but I can't help thinking that I didn't even scratch the surface of this most complex of places.

When we think of China we think of Tienanmen Square. I wasn't expecting the hairs to stand up on the back of my neck when I walked through but they did. We think of the one child policy which has in effect ended as the children born during its enforcement are the same age as me and can have a second child. We we are right to be concerned about a lack of human rights. What I think of is the people I met; extremely welcoming, proud of their country and keen for me to return home and tell people how great China is. Well they can't read this blog but I hope if they did they would not be too disappointed.

Two Englishmen Discussing Indian Politics

2011-07-25T23:17:00.006+01:00

A well respected friend I have know since school wrote this on his blog

"In considering the rise of India, we must be mindful that we are not necessarily dealing with India as we have known her.

The BJP is now about as likely as the Congress Party to be the principal party of government, within and allied to it are violently fascistic elements such as the Shiv Sena and those who massacre Christians in Orissa, and the party centrally is increasingly seeking to join forces with political Islam around such causes as the strong nationalism that has always been expressed by the Darul Uloom Deoband, the conduct of Waqf Boards, and the recognition of Urdu as one of the “authentically” Indian languages to be promoted at the expense of English. However, the BJP has little or no understanding that patriotism must include economic patriotism.

If there is a third force in India, then it is made up of Far Left parties, it is led by the party that followed Chairman Mao when he broke with the Soviet Union, and it includes the successors of Subhas Chandra Bose, who raised an army in support of the Japanese during the Second World War.

All in all, India’s nuclear weapons, like those of Israel and perhaps also those of the United States, should be regarded with no less trepidation than those of Pakistan or North Korea, and with considerably more so than those of China, Russia or, purely hypothetically, Iran."

And I replied

There are two highly complex coalitions in India: a left one and a right one.

The BJP led right coalition lost power to the Congress led left coalition in 2004 when Manmohan Singh was elected as PM. The complexity of these coalitions means that the only way that smaller parties can make their voice heard is by giving support to (and then sometimes withdrawing support from) their respective coalitions which has happened on several occasions. Shiv Sena are not a national party they are almost exclusively Maharti (from around Mumbai) and they only affiliated with the BJP recently. Both are Hindu nationalists, but the in terms of policy on immigration for example the broadly progressive, pro-western outlook of India is unlikely to change significantly. There are also influential far left parties and in true far left style, there was a split in the Communist party. Now there is the Communist Party India and the CPI (Marxist) their influence is greatest in Kerela and West Bengal.

Mahatma Gandhi’s message still rings in the ears of most Indians and I like to think that his ideals of religious tolerance live on across India. I found this to be the case in when I lived in Kodiakanal (Tamil Nadu, South India) with fairly equal numbers of Christians (many of whom are Catholic), Hindus and fewer Muslims living together in harmony. Across the whole of India there are very isolated cases of religious extremism but in a country of over a billion people this would be expected. India does have nuclear weapons but I find this no more or less terrifying than the existence of nuclear weapons in any other country.

Corruption at all levels of government is a much more widespread problem than extremism and this will require a new generation of state ministers, police chiefs and civil servants. If you described the MP's Expenses Scandal to some Indian politicians they would not understand what all the fuss was about. I am far more optimistic than pessimistic about the future of Indian politics: I think there is appetite for change and a sense of national pride. Young, internationally educated graduates are returning to India determined to do their bit. The State education system is becoming globally competitive and improving in terms of access. I hope that this new generation can reform the political landscape and address some of the stark inequality in their beautiful and amazingly diverse country.

I have been away in China for a month where Twitter, Facebook, Youtube and this humble blog are all blocked. News of a widley supported hunger strike started to filter through the English speaking chinese press. Is this the very begining of a long road to a corruption free India? One of the benefits of living in the largest democracy in the world should be that if enough people ask for somthing [an end to corruption] then they should have at least a chance of getting it.

Why Even Mention the War?

2011-07-24T01:33:00.006+01:00

I clicked on a tweeted telegraph article and I was mildly annoyed. Not unusual, but I was not bothered by bias or at the analysis of the European economic situation but Peter Obournes ridiculous title "The euro crisis will give Germany the empire it’s always dreamed of" and constant references to the second world war.

Are the Telegraph like the lower end of the tabloid press in their insistence to never miss an opportunity to bring up World War II? The tabloids normally do it in reference to football matches. You would expect such references in the run up to an England v Germany match however out-dated and unnecessary they might be. I do not expect to see the war shoehorned in to an article about the European economic crisis on the website of a respected newspaper.

I could have some sympathy with Obourne however: He may have written the article but not the headline: I wrote a piece for a website and I have reposted it here on my blog, They gave it the title "The Left Must Unite! Because the Capitalists are United in their Worship of Money" I did not once say The Left Must Unite: Who am I to tell the Left this? What I did say is the the Left is united in its condemnation of the effect that the cuts have on the most vulnerable in society. Then the next bit - "Because the Capitalists are United in their Worship of Money" I didn’t even talk about 'The Capitalists' so headlines, if not written by the author can give a misleading impression.

I am not of the the opinion, as some in education are, that the curriculum focusses too much on World War II. It does make up a large part of the history syllabus and the war poets are still studied in English literature and I have no problem with that: We do not have to forget about the war, we should remember those who died and learn from our past. There is a very real need for education as those grandparents and great grandparents who experienced the war die and no longer pass on their memories. What we do not need is this 'old enemy' rhetoric in the tabloid or 'respectable' press.

Reasons for Optimism on the Left

2011-07-23T19:58:00.002+01:00

Can you plagiarise your own blog? Well I did, in this article for another website on why, the Left should look on the bright side...

The spending cuts which governments are imposing following the global banking crisis will affect most people with the possible exception of the uber rich. Already jobs are being cut, people are being made redundant and others are facing massive pay cuts. If the non-uber rich think “what spending cuts?” it is only because they have not been affected… yet.

Employment is no longer permanent, a public sector pension may not guarantee a comfortable retirement and youth unemployment is rising. My employer, a large further education college is making over 180 redundancies: Uncertainty, for me at least, leads to a negative state of mind.

The economic meltdown in some European countries will have no effect on the lives of those that caused the global financial crisis and it is the people of those countries that the billions pledged in bailouts should go to help. This is a crisis of capitalism yet capitalism is not changed by the crisis; it is the people who suffer.

So why should there be cause for optimism? Well it seems that the political landscape has changed recently. Earlier this year I went to student protests and wrote this about the many different groups I saw “The Left should really get together and work on the [Fees Issues] At the student protests I have attended I could have bought newspapers from about half a dozen different groups"

This factionalism of the Left is not new and the reasons for it are deep seated in our psyche. People need to belong, or more specifically people need to feel as if they belong. Belonging features highly in the psychologist Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs. In biological terms belonging is a very basic need; belonging to a group has clear evolutionary advantages: Groups of early humans would be more likely to hunt successfully and therefore eat. Reproduction would also be more likely in mixed sex groups. One feeling that appeals to many is the feeling of belonging to an exclusive club; I believe that it is this need for exclusivity that can lead to division.

Something has changed. People are getting together, the cuts, however horrific we find them, have united the centre Left with the far Left because they both have something in common, they are both affected by spending cuts, there is a common enemy that brings them together. Anti cuts groups have been formed and they march alongside unions and politicians with a common purpose in protest against the disproportionate effect that cuts have on the most vulnerable in society.

Something else has changed and I can’t write an article at this time without mentioning it. The phone hacking scandal. Much has been written on this but politics has changed, for the better. Political Parties will not have to lean to the Right in order to find favour with the Right wing press. This could be a game changer for UK politics. There are reasons to be optimistic and as always we will have to wait to see if our optimism is justified.

Geoffery Boycott Quote

2011-07-21T16:24:00.001+01:00

Mervyn King is the guest at tea time on test match special Boycott wants to ask him this...

“Ask him why the bankers aren’t all in jail. Ask him this: if it’s private enterprise, how come when they make a profit, they get the money in their pocket, but when they make a loss, we all have to pay for it. The bankers should all be in jail.”

Brilliant!

Grand Great Parents

2011-07-18T00:21:00.004+01:00

I have been on holiday from work for the past week. It is unusual for me to take holidays in term time but this summer I am going on a college visit to China so I have my holidays early. I have therefore been taking my childeren to school and picking them up (Nick Clegg has been doing the school run too and I think he was trying to make some political capital out of it recently - I know MPs work hard but it must be nice to have the time every morning)

I have been struck by the number of grandparents at the school gate waiting for their grandchildren to emerge form school. The financial contribution that UK grandparents make has been estimated in 2010 to be £12.5Bn¹ in childcare savings, but I beleive that their contribution to child development is underestimated.

When a grandparent picks up a child form school the child is met by a loving, familiar face and a person they know will always have time for them. They spend time reading stories, encourage kids to count everthing in sight and impart not just knowledge but wisdom, as only people who have been there seen it and done it can.

It is difficult to quantify how much we gain from the input of our grandparents but I will try to briefly summarise the qualities for which I should thank each one of my four grandparents: An acute awareness of the local environment. A work ethic. How to care without mollycoddling. Generousity of time, money and spirit. Without them I would not be the person I am today and I am greatful that my Grandfathers lived long enough to influence my life in this way, my Grandmothers are still an inspiration today.

The Grandparents at the school gate are doing a service not only to thier children and their children's children but to society as a whole and long may it continue. I don't really think about my own retirement much but on unfeasibly early mornings, on the picket line, for a pensions strike, the mind has a tendency to wander: ...Are the government just going to keep upping the retirement age for those who cant afford early retirement..? Will we just all work until we die..? Chilling thoughts on chilly mornings.

Ed Miliband may have said 'these strikes are wrong' but in a less famous YouTube video² released before the election but he outlined the promise of Britain "That every generation should do better than the last" The present government policy on tuition fees and lack of policy addressing rising youth unemployment are making this a difficult promise to keep for all but the very richest parents.

That our children have a better life with more opportunity than we had is an aspiration of all parents. Grandparents make this aspiration a much more likely reality.

1. http://www.livehappier.com/grandparents-continue-making-major-contributions-to-their-families-and-the-economy
2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Zl4Mmgrph8

2011-07-14T00:03:00.001+01:00

I was going to blog about the News of the World but I'm bored and annoyed in equal measure. Billy Bragg must be a quick songwriter, he tells it as well I could...

The Consett Stanley Thing

2011-07-08T20:13:00.007+01:00

If you get into local politics you find out things you knew but didn't realise you knew. An example is the Consett and Stanley 'thing'; Consett and Stanley are two towns in the Northeast of England in the North West corner of County Durham. If you are reading this and you are not local then they are inland, to the west of Sunderland and Newcastle.

The Consett/Stanley 'thing' is a perceived, mild type of hostility between the people of the two towns. Hostility is perhaps too strong a word, mistrust and envy are also words that are also too severe to describe something that may or may not exist. The problem this 'thing' creates one that affects the communities not directly but because it is perceived by local decision makers; councillors, officials and community leaders. It is their perception of the 'thing' that can cloud the decision making process. For example
"You can't do that because of the Consett/Stanley thing" "The Constituency boundaries can't be there because of the Consett/Stanley thing." "We cant have a sports complex there because of the the Consett/Stanley thing" and possibly the biggest barrier to progress "YOU cant have one of those in Stanley/Consett because WE haven't got one in Consett/Stanley"

The 'thing' goes back generations and comes out of geographical differences. People from old pit villages near Stanley like Anfield Plain and Dipton will go to Stanley when they need something. People from Delves Lane and Blackhill will go to Consett, there is the small lump of geography called Pontop Pike between the towns - not a mountain - but takes some effort to walk over, when walking was a more common form of transport. There are historical differences like the respective main employers. In Consett there was the Steelworks, Stanley was mining hub surrounded by pits. Both employers paid an honest day's wage for an honest day's work but the mines started to close before the steelworks shut down so for a period of time Consett was more prosperous than Stanley.

Local government reform may also have contributed to the 'thing'. In 1974 Consett Urban District Council and Stanley Urban District Council were abolished. Derwentside was born, named after the river Derwent which divides County Durham from Northumberland, meanders through majestic countryside, and holds wild brown trout (with brains no bigger than a walnut; although they seem clever enough to evade the fly on the end of my fishing line). The decision was made to build the new council offices in Consett. This may have made people from Stanley feel like they had no voice, a compromise may have been to have two chambers one in each town but that would have caused its own set of problems. The tables have now turned, in 2009 Derwentside District Council was abolished in favour of a unitary authority, Stanley has its own Town Council and Consett is governed from Durham City.

This 'thing' is no more than that; something that affects decisions. If we leave aside the movers, shakers and decision makers and consider instead the population of the two towns then the 'thing' might cease to exist. If people from both towns got together for a pint they might have more in common than expected: There is so much common ground. Consett and Stanley: Two predominantly working class towns, where old industry is etched in to the fabric of communities, where people are proud of where they come from and have traditional values. Neighbourhood communities are still strong as are family ties. This sense of local pride, identity and affiliation can be seen even in small villages, and can be misconstrued as tribalism. I feel a sense of solidarity with all people of the region never-mind one single town, football differences notwithstanding!

I was trying to explain the 'thing' to my wife who is from outside the region (when she first met my Gran she was called a foreigner) In my explanation I referred to Consett as 'up here' and Stanley as 'down there'. She said "what are you on about? They're only 6 miles apart". Sums it up really.

Post Script: I cant see why Consett and Stanley aren’t in the same constituency. It seems that the Boundary commission do not agree with me. Under the proposed changes, Stanley is now part of Chester le Street. The old Crook/Consett Constituency of North West Durham is abolished in favour of an even less likely marriage between Consett and Barnard Castle.

In The Black

2011-06-29T00:03:00.004+01:00

This post is a conclusion to Steel Yourself - a look back at the Consett Steelworks

On the 9th of July 1980, Steelworkers went to hand in a 20,000 signature petition to 10 Downing street but no minister form the Thatcher Government would come and meet them. Its not surprising really the attitude of the government towards the steelworkers was one of utter contempt. Tory journalist Auberon Waugh sums this up in the Spectator in 1979, just 6 months before the steelworks closed

"I have been making forays into the North East to taunt the 'workers' there... there would be plenty of work in the North East if anyone thought they would do it properly... Politicians should visit the region to remind themselves of the immovable stupidity envy and hatred"

Despicable writing, but Tory attitudes really changed? With cuts imposed on Surrey Council at approximately £4 per head of population and cuts to Gateshead council at £48 a head the answer is that they may not come out and speak publicly in the same terms as they did in the 1980s but actions such as this speak as loud as words.

There are similarities between the situation at the steelworks and the situation at my employer Newcastle College, I am not in any way suggesting that 200 people being made redundant from the largest FE College in the country causes the same level of hardship and misery as 4500 redundancies and the closure of a towns main employer, but the individuals made redundant will feel just as rejected, dejected and frankly, ejected from a workplace to which they have given several years of dedicated teaching/hard graft.

One striking similarity between the steelworks and Newcastle College is the level of profit/surplus involved. In each month leading up to the closure of the steelworks the Consett site made profits of around £900 000. Last year Newcastle College made a surplus of around £10.4M which is about £867 000 per month; depressingly close. The banner carried by those steelworkers to London on the 9th of July 1980 could be loaned to Newcastle College staff almost 31 years later, it would need no modification; it simply read IN THE BLACK FACED WITH THE SACK

Response to Ed Balls on Pensions Strike

2011-06-18T22:20:00.030+01:00

It is only fair that after criticising Ed Balls for his response to the earlier pensions strike that I should give credit to him and Ed Miliband for not getting into "these strikes are wrong" territory this time around. The shadow chancellor gives a much more measured response this time and some of what he said made me wonder if he actually read my blog post (although I doubt that he did)

"We don’t want strikes. They’re a last resort. We want talks and a fair deal on pensions. But what George Osborne wants to do is blame a flat lining economy and rising unemployment on the trade unions. It is his decisions which are getting us into this mess, not the trade unions... Of course. It’s their right to ballot their members"

Not exactly joining us on the picket but an impovement on last time:

18th June 2011: Ed Balls has suggested in his blog and in the Mirror that unions shouldn't strike because that is what the Tories want us to do... http://www.edballs4labour.org/blog/?p=1651 Here is my reply;

Going on strike is a last resort. Are you suggesting that we never use it? Is that not what Cable told the GMB? As a Labour Party member and a union rep I fully recognise that there may be a parliamentary solution to this problem and you correctly state that change is needed

The government are not proposing changes to new pensions but a change to existing pensions which union members have paid into for years and in some cases almost all of their working lives.
A strike on pensions is pretty good value for money, you lose a days pay but if we stand aside and the government change the terms of our pensions then we are set to lose much more than that, for the whole of our lives after retirement.

Industrial action is democratic; Osbourne and Cable may be goading union leaders but it is ordinary members who are balloted and it is us, not politicians, who decide if, and when industrial action is necessary. If, and when we do go on strike I would expect a ’spirit of solidarity’ from the Labour Party.

Steel Yourself

2011-06-12T18:15:00.002+01:00

I am from Consett, a town famous for not very much at the minute, we have had our moments however. A few years ago Consett was famous for Phileas Fogg snacks. Some people even thought we had an airport thanks to this rather sarcastic TV ad circa 1995 which describes Consett as a cultural centre for Europe! Derwent Valley foods still make snacks but I'm not sure if the Phileas Fogg line is still going. I think its more cheesy puffs and onion rings these days.

Before the 'crisp factory' there was a larger employer in the area; one which left its imprint on the landscape and the psyche of the local area: Consett Iron Company known as the Steelworks or just as 'The Company' started around 1840. It was an ideal location for making steel; there were and still are large coal seams in the area and some of the local rock is rich in iron ore. As the Steelworks developed however steel was being produced on such a huge scale much of the resources came from outside the region. What Consett had was a quality product, an experienced workforce and a huge facility. Steel from Consett was the stuff of the late industrial revolution. It was used to build the High level Bridge in Newcastle, the Blackpool tower and even sections of the Syndey Harbour Bridge.

I have very little personal experience of the Steelworks; it closed in 1980 when I was 2 years old My Dad and around 4500 other steel workers were made redundant. There was now a steel town that had been making steel since 1840 with its heart ripped out. I have always assumed that when people talked about how good life was at 'The Company' that it was a standard case of looking back through rose tinted spectacles at a bygone golden age. There were objections to some dubious working practices. My Dad's Dad was a strong and hardworking man: Family say I am like him if I work hard or if I am being stubborn and unmoving in my views; he like many others, left the mines to work at the steel works and bemoaned the lack of solidarity between workers when compared to the pit. This lack of solidarity originated in a system of rules laid down by management that you would think would be objectionable to a unionised workforce. For example if one man was off sick, his pay was docked and shared out between the workers who were shorthanded on that shift. It was also a dangerous place to work, men died, one fell into a smelting pot, or more often sustained horrific injury. Some of the work like filling the hoppers with coke and ore was repetitive back breaking labour. but the Steelworks offered a living wage and job security for several generations.

If I had been born 20 years earlier I would have worked at the Steelworks. I have some aptitude for science so if I had shown that at school then it is possible that I could have worked in the labs, the steel works had its own R&D department. I like to think I would have been grafting with the lads but a career in metallurgy may have been more likely. I have now come round to the idea that despite the pollution and the famed red dust, life was better in the Consett area before the steel works closed. I am a child of the 80s not the 60s and as life turns out I am now a lecturer at Newcastle College. I had taken my own job security for granted but now that my own post is at risk of redundancy I understand how job security being taken away impacts on your life, uncertainty for me at least, leads to a negative state of mind.

The steel works has left an indelible mark on the area both on the land and on the people. The perimeter is 9 miles around and the land is a now wide open space. There has been little investment into the site in my lifetime save for a McDonalds, and planning permission, which has been granted for a large Tescos - scant progress for 31 long years. Project Genesis was often discussed in council meetings between the years when I was 8 and 11 - there was talk of theme parks, ski slopes and all sorts of exciting things. I know this, not because of any extensive research I have done but because I was there. Not in the meetings with my Mam; who was a Chair of Planning at Derwentside District Council, but because I was hiding and seeking in the corridors of power, mucking about on the staircase with my twin brother and, if we got exceptionally bored, we would listen in to what was being said in the chamber like a pair of secret agents. We were never neglected; Mam assumed we were colouring in, in the members room: Good Times.

People of Consett of all ages feel something about the steelworks, for some it is a vast empty space to walk your dog, for some it is a topic they are sick of hearing about in the workingmens club, for some it is a symbol of a bygone industrial age but for some it is a memory; of a time when hard work paid well,when earnings were enough to keep a family, and when plans could be made for the future because employment was not fixed term, it was permanent.

This blog post is long enough but there is so much I have not written about here. The dispute leading to the closure of the steelworks will have to wait for another time - Consett: In the black, faced with the sack.

Extreme Funding Cuts

2011-06-07T23:57:00.004+01:00

Cutting funding to youth clubs and provision of youth services can never be welcomed. The coalition attack on public spending will undoubtedly hit these areas, this may lead to antisocial behaviour and increase 'children hanging out on streets' something that the tory daily mail readership do not like. I don't mind seeing groups of kids chilling on the street but I can see why some people might find such groups intimidating.

Today Theresa May, the home secretary for women and equality made a distinction and chose to cut funding to youth groups attended mainly by young Muslims. She implies that instead of preventing radicalisation these youth groups promote it and this is a reason for cuts. If state funded projects fail to prevent the inculation of terrorist ideals then they need to be better managed and not wiped out. In the same way that cutting any youth club increases antisocial behaviour; targeting the youth work of one religious group for disproportionate cuts will increase marginalisation, division and extremism.

Memories and Veggies

2011-06-01T23:26:00.002+01:00

The world would be a better place if we were all vegetarian. I am not a vegetarian, It is far too boring to be a veggie here in the UK. Every veggie meal is a meal with something missing: Sunday dinner becomes Yorkshire pud and veg. And it gets worse, sausage and mash becomes... mash, fish and chips is just chips and an English breakfast becomes a tomato with a slice of fried bread and maybe an egg if you're not a vegan.

Being a veggie in South India on the other hand is easy and tasty. Almost all street food is vegetarian, puri, pakora, idly, vada and other delightful goodies. Contrast that with fast food over here and you can have fried chicken or a burger. The restaurants even have levels of vegetarianism; there’s 'non veg' which means they serve meat but probably have a separate cooking facilities for vegetarian food. Then there 'veg' which means you can get the most fantastic paneer curries and the best masala omelette that you've ever tasted. Then there is 'pure veg' which is what we would understand as vegan. South Indian vegetarian food is not just a meal with something missing, nor is it just the best vegetarian food I have ever tasted, it is the best food, meat containing or otherwise that I have ever had the pleasure of eating. I miss it so much, that the last time I was in London for March26 I made a special visit 'Chennai Dosa' an extremely authentic Dosa cafe in Wembley, not fine dining but much better than that; £3 buys a mouthful of good memories.

Enough reminiscing back to the main point. Put simply; meat needs space. In one year a field of grass will support 20 cows, those 20 cows will provide meat for 100 people. We can not get all the energy that the cows got from the grass, in fact we cant get anywhere close. The cows use most of it to move, grow and go about their daily business. There is also a large portion of the cow that can't or prefer not to eat, only a tiny fraction of the energy in the cow is available to us. If you were to plant a crop in the same field you could feed 1000 people because there is one less step in the food chain. Cows are a bit of a bad example because meat is a by product of the dairy industry but the argument still stands that growing grass for livestock takes up far more space per human fed than any vegetable crop.

The Tory press would have us believe that if you don’t buy meat then you are not supporting British farmers. There are other ways of supporting British farmers however, like by buying potatoes. I am not going to turn veggie but I think by limiting meat intake to ever other day or to once a week would have long term health benefits. Cultures with lower meat intake have fewer incidences of bowel cancer but there are few too many other factors involved to say 'meat causes cancer'; It may be a contributing risk factor. I there is no biological need for a portion of meat every day: The human digestive system is has evolved to be unbelievably efficient at extracting nutrients from food, this evolution would have occurred over centuries of hunting - which is a bit hit and miss, and gathering - which is a little more reliable. Buying the less fashionable parts of an animal (I'm talking chicken with bones in, not offal or tripe) has obvious monetary benefits too. So be a vegetarian or a part time veggie, if everyone did if then world would be a better place.

Fishing is Class

2011-05-28T11:00:00.002+01:00

I am in a hotel room overlooking the North Tyne and I have got no mobile phone signal. But the hotel has got wireless so I thought I would try another blog post from my phone. It's my birthday tommorow and my wife has treated me to a days fishing. I have fished since I was young and always found it a very working class pastime especially 'mackie bashing' on Blyth pier.
Tommorow will be a very different kettle of fish, fly fishing1, maybe for salmon but brown trout more likley. When I go fly fishing I feel a bit out of place it is a bit posh for me; My grandad was a gamekeeper rather than a landowner. The different types of fishing are becoming less class orientated, Traditionally the rich would fly fish, and take a ghillie with them to point them at the fish. Sea fishing or fishing on tidal stretch of river is free and was practiced by the working classes, the large industial cities in the north east, newcastle sunderland and middlesborough all have tidal streches of great rivers running through them, the Tyne, Wear and Tees respectivley. The class system in fishing is now less pronounced. You can buy a fly rod in Boyes for less than a tenner (if you're outside the north east then Boyes is a bit like the old woolworths) and you can pay £300 for a sea fishing rod that manufactures will claim will help you to cast miles.
When fishing it doesn't matter what 'caste' you belong to or how much money you have, everyone has the same chance to catch fish. Society has got some catching up to do. Your wealth should not effect your chances of recieving good healthcare, a univesity education or an internship.
1 J.R. Hartley 1994

Not Super and not injuctions

2011-05-26T00:26:00.001+01:00

Superinjuctions are not super and thanks to Twitter they are not injunctions either. The ending of these gagging orders imposed by the rich and famous is probably a good thing, not because what a footballer does with a big brother contestant is in the public interest but because it is fair. If someone who is not a premiership footballer has an affair then they cannot get an injunction to stop a rumour or nosey neighbours gossiping about it. Why should footballers be any different? The only differences I can see are:

Nosey neighbours = Followers.
Gossip = Tweets
and Rumour = Trend

I don't really object to the coalition MP John Hemming using the footballers name in the houses of parliament everyone knew by this point who Giggs was anyway. I do object however to his reasons behind using his parliamentary privilege in this way. I had not heard of John Hemming before yesterday and it is possible that neither had some of his constituents; I know that most of the people reading this blog are acutely aware of their political environment. Many people are not and it is the politically unaware that this desperate Lib Dem is trying to appeal to by gaining publicity. I have two words of warning to any Lib Dem MP who thinks fame will make you more electable and they are "Lembit Opik". Even if Hemming is on a one man crusade against superinjunctions then he is in the right line of work as an MP to legislate against them. Stunts like this are transparent; Labour MP John Cryer accurately describes Hemmings behaviour as "an act of gross opportunism by a politician on an ego trip." that is exactly what it is.

I don't really want to read anything more about the Lib Dems in the papers. That is until Clegg leads them through the opposition lobby in a meaningful vote; the NHS bill would be a start...

What's Your Labour Flavour?

2011-05-15T11:25:00.002+01:00

Blue Labour, New Labour, Purple Book Labour, Old Labour and Red Whoever [insert name here]. These different Labour flavours could be seen as divisions. There are are divisions in all political movements and division can lead to significant progress; there are probably many progressive ideas in the purple book, 'blue' labour may have something valid to say on economic development. While the Labour Party is progressive really divisive division should be avoided. The Labour leadership election was undoubtedly necessary but I think the Tories made some savage, harmful decisions while the Party was divided over the leadership. It is still my opinion that the Party should have been more united behind Ed Miliband on AV dispute its subsequent rejection in the referendum.

People need to belong, or more specifically people need to feel as if they belong. Belonging features highly in the psychologist Maslow's hierarchy of human needs. In biological terms belonging is a very basic need; belonging to a group has clear evolutionary advantages: Groups of early humans would be more likely to hunt successfully and therefore eat. Reproduction would also be more likely in mixed sex groups.

One feeling that appeals to many is the feeling of belonging to an exclusive club, I believe that it is this need for exclusivity that can lead to division. If you are reading this and you are a member of the Labour Party and you feel the need to belong to an 'exclusive club' then you could in a few years time, become the Prime Minister and join Brown, Blair (and Miliband?) in the 'Surviving Labour Prime Ministers club', or maybe that involves a few too many uncertainties. Alternatively you could just pop along to the next branch meeting of your local Labour party, I can almost guarantee that you will be in a very small, exclusive club of broadly like minded activists who are trying to make a difference in the local area.

Many divisions exist but the Labour party should not be about division. We are not defined by the North/South divide despite the fact that government cuts hit the North hardest. We are not defined by Old and New Labour or by clause IV, although the present version does read rather well; I quote it here because with the threat of redundancy looming large in many lives; I can't remember a time when a 'spirit of solidarity' was needed more.

"The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect"

I am probably a bit more red than blue, purple is a mixture of the two. Definitely not yellow but maybe a bit green, if I add that to the the mix then I would just end up with a shade of muddy brown. Which is exactly what you get, on football pitches as well as in politics if you try too hard to occupy the crowded centre ground.

If you believe that when a decision is made at any level of government from Parish to Parliament, consideration should be given to its effect on the most vulnerable in society, then we agree on at least one thing. If you believe that it is the job of politicians at every level to speak up for those who have no voice, then we agree on two. If you believe that the fortunate should not help other fortunate individuals but instead help the less fortunate then there's three. And I'm sure if we stopped arguing about what flavour of Labour is best we could agree on a few more things, and more importantly, act on them.

AV Only

2011-05-05T21:21:00.002+01:00

This will (probably) be my last blog post about the Alternative Vote. I have been and voted for Yes to AV. The AV Referendum was the only ballot in County Durham. Turnout has been pretty low in the village, I was the 105th person to vote at about 6pm. I took my two daughters along they are 3 and 6 years old. They understand AV perfectly well, they can both count which is a start. We stopped off at the sweet shop in the village which is run by one of the few Sri-Lankan Tamil speakers in the North East. We shared a few words I cant remember that much; its a few years since I left Tamil Nadu. Anyway he had no Freddos - that was their first preference so I asked them if they wanted anything else so they chose lollies instead. Voting in an election under AV is just about that simple.

Reform is a good thing, I hardly ever subscribe to the if it ain't broke don't fix it view on anything. If everyone did then there would be no progress in Science or any other field for that matter. Newtonian Physics isn't broken but that didn't stop Einstein. Old nokia phones still work but the iphone is better. I could carve open your knee to sort out your cartilage but keyhole surgery is better.

I think AV would help the Labour Party a bit, I don't want to sound complacent but I don't think that second preferences would ever be taken into account in my constituency - North West Durham, It traditionally is a safe Labour seat. That is of course, while North West Durham still exists; the coalition will gerrymander the boundaries regardless of the AV result. AV might help the libdems take a few seats off the tories in the South and make a Labour government more likely. I also stand by my other arguments in my previous post AV or not AV; The tories do not want it, I think it might be fairer and it is already used successfully for selection of Mayors, MPs and party leaders.

If the result is Yes to AV then great. If it is No then electoral reform will have to wait and I will have the words of the CLP Chairman (who is voting No) still in my mind "The Labour party should fight the LibDems and the Tories in every part of the country and we should do this under the first past the post system"

After the result the focus will shift, from AV back to campaigning for Labour; both locally in the Durham County Council elections two years from now, and nationally to make sure that the coalition government can not continue to inflict ideological cuts and dismantle public services.

Calm Down Dear

2011-04-27T22:10:00.002+01:00

I watched PMQs today and expected it to be rather boring to-ing and fro-ing about whether 0.5% growth is actually 0.5% growth (as the tories would put it) actually 0% growth becuase of Osbournes 'snow slump' or as I saw on Twitter a tiny fall of 0.025% "@Tristan_Cox: A 5% fall followed by a 5% rise is not neutral. 100 minus 5% is 95. 95 plus 5% is 99.75, not 100. The economy has shrunk."

I was suprised therefore that to hear the Prime Minister again doing the speakers job and telling another shadow minister to calm down. He did the same to Ed Balls a couple of weeks ago but this time he added sexism. Outwardly the PM seems to handle PMQs quite well; he repeats lies over and over again in the hope that the public will start to belive him, he even got another 'the mess this lot left' in today, his hedge-fund-managing chums are seemingly blamless on planet Dave. The main lie he repeated today was that the tories won't cut the NHS. Giving even part of NHS funding to the shareholders of private companies is an effective cut. Lansley has put his plans for NHS reform - which amounts to partial privitisation - of the NHS on hold, I'm hoping in vain for a U-turn like the one on forests.

Appearances can be deceptive. Despite appearing calm during PMQs the Prime Minister is clearly rattled; his outburst at Ed Balls showed this, his outburst at Angela Eagle was even worse. She simply pointed out that the former parlimintery candidate Dr Howard Stoate stepped down rather than being beaten by a tory. Cameron is usually patronising; today he added a disdainful sexist tone. "Calm down dear" is not an appropriate way of addressing anyone in the house of parliament. It is the speakers job to calm people down. It is an MPs job to debate the issues and address each other as 'right honourable'. He repeated the line then refused to apologise; arrogant enough to think that flippant, disrespectful remarks are OK.

There are not many female MPs in the tory party, in percentage terms half the number of female Labour MPs 16% vs 32%. The Conservative party still appears to be a 'boys club' and with comments like this from their leader we can expect this to continue.

Succession, Genetic Diversity and Coal

2011-04-23T23:44:00.004+01:00

I have been blogging mainly about politics, a field in which I have no formal qualification, I dont feel that this is a major disadvantage. I hope that politics is never an area that becomes completely overrun by politics graduates. I also hope that more science graduates find a way into politics, a more logical, pragmatic and scientific approach would be most welcome in government. I also find it strange that most of the MPs that sit on the Science and Technology select committee do not have Science degrees. A quick wikipedia search throws up more history degrees than BSc's. It is slightly patronising when MPs make speeches about how Science is vital to our future and urge students to study more STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) when they have no experience of what scientific study actually entails. Vince Cable made such a speech and claims to have started out as a scientist;

"I’m one of few MPs to have at least started a science degree – well, it began as natural science and ended up as economics"

Well I stuck with natural science; Biology to be exact and I love it. I am still fascinated by almost every aspect of the subject and I feel privileged to be a Biology Lecturer. So today I'm going to blog about something I really do have some understanding of: Succession, not succession in the House of Lords or Royal family, but ecological succession which can be described as the gradual increase of biodiversity over time until a climax community is reached. Succession just happens, its is an absolute certainty, a bit like a biological version of chaos theory in physics.

Succession happens in the absence of human interference, it is a slow process by which communities of organisms become less dominated by single species, more diverse and more ecologically stable. The most often cited example of a climax community is a rainforest but an example closer to home is mature deciduous woodland. Most woods these days are managed by humans and so are not true climax communities (these managed climax communities are known as plagioclimaxes). One of the environmental science lecturers at work introduces sucession by telling her classes that a few thousand years ago woodland coverage in the UK was so extensive that it would be possible for a red squirrel to get from John O' Groats to Lands End without ever touching the ground. If a squirrel did make such a trip I wonder if it would stop off in Pont wood for a bit of foraging?

The Pont Valley1 is under threat. It is a beautiful valley the North East of England which lies between three former pit villages Leadgate, Medomsley and Dipton. You may have read in previous blog posts (Down the Woods and The Coal-ition) that UK Coal want to start a surface mine (opencast) in the Pont valley, this area comprises both coniferous and deciduous woodland and one less common type of habitat; ponds. Ponds are forgotten havens of biodiversity. Hedgerows got a bit of publicity a few years back, people have camped in trees to save them from road expansion but to my knowledge there has never been a Save Our Ponds campaign. In the planning application for opencast UK Coal said that they would relocate several mature ponds to a location in the valley that does not lie over a coal seam. Recovery would take decades. It would be impossible for plant species and invertebrate populations to be relocated effectively and the gradual increase in biodiversity over time would need to start all over again this is known as secondary succession.

Biodiversity is not the only type of diversity that is under threat. Genetic diversity would also be reduced. Genetic diversity is vital for the health of a population. it can be described simply as 'how wide the gene pool is' but more accurately it is the total number of different alleles in a population. A gene is a section of DNA that codes for a characteristic and an allele is a form of a gene2. If there are several forms of a gene within a population then genetic diversity is high, this makes the population more resilient, more resistant to disease and less vulnerable to extinction.

The genetic diversity of the already rare great crested newt would be particularly threatened by being moved to a newly constructed pond. Relocation would, in effect, act as a 'genetic bottleneck' This term is used to described what happens when a population must restart from a small number of individuals. There are only a few alleles in the small number of individuals that would moved. They would be the only ones that could breed in the new habitat. It would be impossible to move anywhere near the whole population: newts send a lot of time literally buried in silt and even under turf. Needless to say surface mining would wipe out these individuals along with any unique alleles which will never be passed on and disappear from the gene pool forever. The relocated population would be more closely related to each-other and more vulnerable to disease and extinction.

There are no cheetahs in the Pont valley. They are however an excellent example of an organism with very low genetic diversity. If you compare their DNA then every cheetah on this planet is as closely related as two human siblings. Amazingly they are so genetically similar that all cheetahs will accept skin grafts from all other cheetahs. It is thought that the population was reduced around
10 000 years ago3 Damage to genetic diversity is a problem that never really goes away.

I really love Biology, Genetics, Biodiversity and the Pont Valley.
The Coal-lition must be stopped. Coal is our heritage not out future.

1. http://www.pontvalley.net/
2. Example; There is a gene which codes for a protein which is found in the iris of human eyes. This gene has several alleles eg; brown and blue
3. Dating the genetic bottleneck of the African cheetah. Mennoti-Raymond and O'Brien: Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 90, pp. 3172-3176, April 1993

The Coal-ition

2011-04-20T01:57:00.003+01:00

My first ever blog post was called "Down the Woods" It was about the forest sell off (that was subsequently abandoned) and an opencast planning application (that was subsequntly refused) I claim no credit for either postive outcome. but a happy coincidence nontheless.

UK Coal are back, and they want to opencast the Pont valley, A planning application to opencast was refused a few months ago thanks to the work of councillors and local activists. UK Coal have appealed the decision and are trying to get the decision to refuse planning overturned.

They will say that we [the activists] are NIMBYs. Well the pont valley is my backyard and I don't want an opencast coal mine in it so yes I am a NIMBY but I don't want an opencast coal mine in your backyard either, or in anyone else's for that matter - there are other ways to generate electricity there are other energy resources and if it comes to it, and carbon capture takes off and I think it might just be burying the problem - then there are other ways of extracting it.

They will say that the opencast will not adversely effect the environment, What an absolute load of utter rubbish. The layers of soil and rock have taken millions of years to form, they will be dumped back in no pariticular order when UK coal have finished. Industrial scale opencast coal mining is relatively new, we are not fully aware of the long term environmental effects but one thing that I am sure of is that it will have an negative impact on biodiversity in the region. It is impossible to move an entire habitat, abiotic factors will not be the same in the new location, succession (the gradual increase in biodiversity over time) will have to restart. UK coal want to relocate mature ponds so they can mine underneath them. You don't have to be a great crested newt, a mayfly or a Biology lecturer to know that it will never work.

They will say that the opencast will create jobs, this is true - fixed term contract jobs that will be disappear just as quickly as the coal does. UK coal will also bring their own staff, which will do nothing for the local economy. We need long term investment in new technology and renewables that will create skilled, long term jobs for the future in the region.

They will say that they spend millions on improving the roads. That amounts so another roundabout to allow trucks and heavy machinary to turn into the coal field. The last thing we need is another roundabout 200yds from a one with 5 exits, they only vehicles that would ever turn right at this 'road improvment' would be those going to the Stanley area, the road has recently been widened and is now fine without a roundabout. The people who will be infuriated by the roundabout would be commuters who will face further potential delay when driving into Gateshead/Newcastle from the Consett area

But really it doesn't matter what highly paid executives and lawyers from UK Coal say. We the people of the local area must fight the appeal as effectively as we fought original application.

Coal is our heritage not our future.

A picket line is easy to cross

2011-04-13T23:31:00.003+01:00

I was on strike yesterday [12th May]; the picket started before 7am, when people crossed the picket line I smiled, gave them a leaflet and politely told them that we were on strike over redundancies. Then they went to work. A picket line is easy to cross; physically and, it seems, emotionally.

This hasn’t always been the case. In 1915 Jack London (Call of the Wild, White Fang) described a Scab like this. The ‘pool of water’ bit and comparisons to Judas are uncomfortable reading and sound unduly harsh in today’s more tolerant world. I have posted it here only to provoke thought;

“After God had finished the rattlesnake, the toad, and the vampire, he had some awful substance left with which he made a scab.

A scab is a two-legged animal with a corkscrew soul, a waterlogged brain, a combination backbone of jelly and glue. Where others have hearts, he carries a tumor of rotten principles.

When a scab comes down the street, men turn their backs and angels weep in heaven, and the devil shuts the gates of hell to keep him out. No man has a right to scab so long as there is a pool of water to drown his carcass in, or a rope long enough to hang his body with.

Judas was a gentleman compared with a scab. For betraying his master, he had character enough to hang himself. A scab has not.

Esau sold his birthright for a mess of pottage. Judas sold his Savior for thirty pieces of silver. Benedict Arnold sold his country for a promise of a commission in the British army. The scab sells his birthright, country, his wife, his children and his fellowmen for an unfulfilled promise from his employer.

Esau was a traitor to himself; Judas was a traitor to his God; Benedict Arnold was a traitor to his country. A scab is a traitor to his God, his country, his family and his class.”

Striking, isn't it?

2011-04-06T02:21:00.003+01:00

I will be on strike next Tuesday. My employer is making almost 20% of Teaching and Lecturing staff redundant despite, in the opinion of the Union, being in surplus, taking on new managers, and paying the chief exec a salary in the region of £300K, if you want the full story you can read all about it in my previous post "I've been putting this off..."

I am a branch rep for the UCU, and I am often told that the Union does nothing ect ect, it can be quite disheartening. My standard reply is "You are the Union" but maybe I (like John Gray) should just quote an American lawyer circa 1925

"With all their faults, trade unions have done more for humanity than any other organization of men that ever existed. They have done more for decency, for honesty, for education, for the betterment of the race, for the developing of character in man, than any other association of men." Clarence Darrow

If that's too old school for you then check this out; its an Australian board meeting on the same topic: What have the Unions ever done for us? (Really good vid but mind the language at the end!)

I've just noticed that I've got more links in this blog post than a spammers Twitter feed on a "follow friday" so while I'm on a roll... Follow me on Twitter and sign this online petition against the redundancies.

In Unity,

Liam

Why March in March?

2011-03-27T02:41:00.003+01:00

It's 5.45, I'm on a bus and have been for the past two hours. But I'm not going fishing or climbing or any of the other daft things I normally get up at stupid o'clock to go and do. I'm on my way to London to demonstrate against government cuts to jobs and public services. This march has been called the 'March for the alternative' and we need an alternative to the coalitions policy of axing council workers, NHS staff, teachers, care home workers, and others.

Spending cuts are often talked about in terms of millions or billions of pounds, I prefer to think smaller. Every job cut represents a person; a husband who has to go home and tell his wife that he is now redundant, a mother who has to tell her kids that they can't afford some weekend or after school activity. Good People do not choose to work in the public sector because of the 'gold plated' pension or huge wages offered. I, like many others get into the public sector to make a positive difference in the lives of others.

The tory coalition are cutting the public sector in order to pave the way for private companies to fill the gaping hole in provision that will be left after Cameron, Clegg and Osborne are finished. The Good People of the public sector may be able to apply for job, with worse pay, rights and conditions, working for SERCO or any other private provider. Executives are no doubt, waiting in the wings, schmoozing with coalition leaders.

There are alternatives, Invest in The Good People and the services they provide - They did nothing to cause the global economic crisis. Tax revenues must be raised from bankers pay and from corporate tax avoidance. This plan is however goes against current and past tory policy of not taxing the rich (enough) and turning a blind eye to corporate tax avoidance, especially if it is practiced by donors to the party.

My other alternative will take longer than the 5 year term that politicians work on; Invest in science education in order to create a generation of creative scientific thinkers, then provide them with the opportunity to use their skills for the benefit of society and economy as a whole. Let them fly; Develop truly renewable resources and efficient technologies. Adopt a 'we can cure this' attitude to drug development. Students in this country may not be renowned for doing complex algebra from the age of 5, but give them a problem to solve and watch light bulbs flick on in brains. My students will solve the problems of the future, provided they can afford to pay for the level of education needed to gain the skills required. I will finish with a line that I might hear repeated in London today: NO IFS, NO BUTS, NO EDUCATION CUTS!

I've been putting this off...

2011-03-21T22:44:00.001Z

I've been putting this off... out of fear maybe but I should not live in fear of being sacked so here goes. My employer is making redundancies; a lot of them. Somewhere between 150 and 200 jobs are to go. I do not work at a local council however, I work at one of the most successful FE colleges in the UK. My employer provides a very high quality of education to students, lecturers are talented and committed; teaching is rated outstanding by OFSTED. Financially the College is in good shape; year on year a surplus is made so you may find it strange that jobs are under threat. The College, like many organisations will find that it's funding from government will be cut, the size of those cuts is not yet known so the College could be accused of cutting too far, too fast and rushing into making almost 20% of teaching staff redundant. The thing I find most alarming about the situation is that college management seem to have adopted a 1980's attitude to negotiation with Trade Union officials, meaning that they won't negotiate at all and do appear to be very anti-Trade Union.

The story so far; I will try to be succinct.

The management of the college announced the redundancies - middle managers then gave a prepared statement and presentation to staff about possible future cuts in government funding. The government should not be blameless in this, they are cutting funding to FE colleges, these are the very institutions needed to re-train the workforce who are being made unemployed by Osborne, Pickles and co.

Union officials met with the Chief Executive of the college and some senior managers. The Union offered to work with management to mitigate the effect of the cuts provided that the notice of redundancies was withdrawn. This offer was refused. The Union also stated that staff can not work effectively with the threat of redundancies hanging over them. The reply was "we accept your view but it is not one that we share" The union asked for financial evidence to back up claims that the redundancies were necessary and were given no figures in the meeting but were told that accounts were publicly available. After this meeting the Union then announced that they were in dispute with management.

The Union then did some research into College finances, using published accounts and found the following; (To avoid confusion it is important to understand at this point that the college itself will be referred to as 'College' this is different from 'The Group' which is a national enterprise including colleges outside the region and a work based learning provider which operates out of many different offices across the UK). The College made a surplus of over £10M. The Group made a surplus of only £6M this means that the parts of the Group outside of the region made a loss in the region of £4M and that loss was taken from money that could have been re-invested in the region. The rather dark irony of the situation is that the estimated cut in government funding is also around £4M. We don't know what the actual cut will be and we also don't know how many students we will have next year but still management rushes ahead with redundancies. These seem like vast amounts of money but when you consider that 'The Group' turnover is in excess of £150M the cut is (relatively) small and should not result in a 20% reduction in numbers of teaching staff.

The next thing that the Union uncovered in the published accounts was the Chief Executives pay scandal. A 'Golden Handcuffs' pay rise of over 30% was given to the Chief Exec. taking the pay packet for the last financial year to over a quarter of a million pounds - about double what the Prime Minister earns. To put this into perspective the Chief Execs pay increase was equivalent to the annual salary of two experienced lecturers. I agree that, as is the case in football, the very best individuls are paid very well but it is the timing of the pay increase that causes anger. The college is also pushing ahead with costly new builds, these may be necessary but again, the timing couldn't be worse. The latest news, is that the Union was ordered by management to cancel Union meetings, because permission to meet was not sought in advance.

I could go on but I think I have made my point. When I got involved with the Trade Union movement I hoped to work with managers and decision-makers to make changes that would benefit both staff and the College as a whole. I had hoped that management styles have moved on from a time when the workers had to unite in the the face of repression. I also hoped that in the 21st Century, we had reached a point where the adversarial approach had been left behind and that managers would welcome a more collaborative method of settling disputes. Evidently this is not the case. We are still fighting for our livelihoods.

Cement for the Coalition?

2011-03-13T00:44:00.007Z

Not all constitutional reform is as well publicised as AV, most is far more mundane. A few weeks ago I said on a friends blog that the Tories and the Lib Dems would start doing each-others campaigning. It now seems that they have actually changed the law so that they can do just that. The Guardian reports that the Coalition (specifically the cabinet office minister for constitutional reform) has pushed through changes to allow two parties to field a candidate using a single emblem on the ballot paper. The law now reads as follows;

"If a candidate who is the subject of an authorisation by two or more parties so requests, the ballot paper must contain, against the candidate’s particulars, the registered emblem of one of those parties."

They want this new rule to be used in mayoral elections and then in the next general election. Is this so tory candidates can masquerade as lib dems in the North? I hope so because they would get just as many votes as they would if they stood as tories: Not very many (as the recent bye-election in Barnsley shows). Is it so that well-heeled, well-connected lib dems can hide their yellow bird in the branches of the tory tree? Maybe, but I suspect that the electorate isn't as daft as the coalition hope. (They must hope that we are daft enough to forget about these savage cuts in four years time as well.)

Whatever the reason is, it probably is not, as the coalition claim, an altruistic decision designed to help joint Co-Op/Labour candidates. I am too cynical to believe that a tory cabinet office minister would pass a new law in order to help the Left.

This is a tactical decision that may result in us not knowing the difference between a tory and a lib dem; not much change there then. Every time Cameron repeats his lies about Labour causing the Global economic crisis, Clegg is there nodding like an insurance-selling dog and smiling like a the cat who's got the cream. I hope that rank and file at the lib dem conference let him know that he is supposed to be the leader of a struggling political party, not just another one of Camerons school chums. Chris Bryant, Labour MP for the Rhondda suggests that the tories and the lib dems need a new joint logo: "They could have a bird in a tree" He suggests a Dodo. Judging by current policies I suggest that another old bird might be better suited... you can guess who she is.

AV or not AV

2011-03-06T20:37:00.005Z

I went to a Labour party debate on the alternative vote today in Willington, North West Durham. Before I went in I was very much a floating voter on AV and emerged from the debate with my mind pretty much made up. I also asked for an explanation of what AV actually is. You can read my explanation in my previous blog entry: How to AV (Scientific Edition)

Chris Mullin (former MP and under-secretary of state) the 'Yes to AV' speaker started the debate. He spoke very well on the matter. There was supposed to be someone on the panel from the 'No to AV' camp but that person did not turn up and so there was was an empty chair (very nobel-prize-like). I left the meeting with one foot firmly in the in the Yes to AV camp, these are my reasons.

I think it might be fairer. People can express their true opinion giving their first preference to the candidate they think will do the best job. It will mean less tactical voting, and hopefully discourage negative campaigning.

AV is already used successfully. Not only in strange far flung corners of the globe like Australia (which doesn't really count because voting is compulsory) and Papua new Guinea, but in London which I agree is a strange place but a bit closer to home. One argument against AV is that it will produce bland politicians. The elections for London mayor resulted in Ken Livingston and Boris Johnson. Bland they are not. AV is also the method by which Labour MPs are selected. My MP is anti AV, one member pointed out that if AV is good enough for selection then it is good enough for election.

The Lib Dems want it. This seems like a truly ridiculous reason to be for AV and I cant really believe I just typed it... in bold! It should really be a reason for voting no so I will try to make things clearer. I hate the Tory coalition. I don't trust the Lib Dems for all their broken promises and I would love to see the coalition fall apart leading to the demise of this government before the next general election. In the run up to the meeting I considered voting No solely on the basis that a No vote will destabilise the coalition. I am however a realist and as unpalatable as this sounds, Labour need the Lib Dems to take seats in the South in order to win a general election. Unless there is a sea change in centre left politics this will continue to be the case. There was some opposition from the floor to a Yes vote mainly from the Constituency Labour Party Chairman, who is opposed to AV. He is an inspirational character and believes that the Labour party should fight the Lib Dems and the Tories in every part of the country and we should do this under the current first past the post system. The Lib Dems are on the ropes; their party may now take years to recover and they will be made to pay for being dishonest with the electorate. However the UK no longer has a two party system whether we like it or not and voting reform is a necessary step.

The tories do not want it. That's better. I was Lib dem bashing at a meeting with three North-East MPs in February and I asked the question: What are is being done to in parliament to lobby the Lib Dems and have them vote against the tories? The MP for Sedgefield Phil Wilson made it clear that the tories are 'The Enemy' and he is right. Some tories are against change because they are traditionalists that is a fairly valid reason but as always with the tories; they look after their own interests. AV will harm the tories; they have less chance of being elected under AV and less chance of damaging the country further with ideological cuts. The systematic dismantling and subsequent privatisation of all public services including the NHS must be stopped. Reversing years of development in education back to a time when a University was only for the rich must also be stopped.

On its own AV will not defeat the tories in the next election. The Labour party is in need of strong leadership and active membership for this. The tories know how their party wants them to vote on AV as do the Lib dems. Labour supporters have to make their own mind up. We are perfectly able to do this but that is not the point. Campaigning for a Yes vote makes Labour visible at grass roots level. Getting behind the Labour leader Ed Miliband (who has voiced his support for AV) will make the party more coherent and stronger at National level. So for what its worth I will be voting Yes to AV.

How to AV (Scientific Edition)

2011-03-06T20:36:00.004Z

I went to a Labour party debate on the alternative vote yesterday in Willington, North West Durham. Before I went in I was very much a floating voter on AV and emerged from the debate with my mind pretty much made up. I am relatively young and I have voted in a couple of general elections and some local ones and I have never really been uncertain about who to vote for; I vote Labour, end of. Even when Blair took us into war with Iraq I may not have been totally comfortable when marking my X but it still went in the box with the rose next to it. (I found out today that an X will still be counted in an AV ballot)

Anyway back to the point. Before we started I apologised for my naivety then asked what AV actually was and got a good explanation of how AV works I will try to summarise it (in a science experimental method sort of way)

1. Turn up to vote.
2. Rank candidates in order of preference using 1 for most preferred then 2, 3 and so on.
3. If you find step 2 too complex or just don't feel like expressing 2nd preferences and so on, then just put 1 or X and your 1st preference will be counted.
4. Fold paper and pop it in the box. (If there are any party leaders reading this then you may want to pause for photos at this point).
5. Go home and feel lucky that live you somewhere where democracy is so peaceful.

Then the returning officer and volunteers get to work;
1. Count all the 1's on the ballot papers.
2. If a candidate has more than 50% of the vote then that candidate wins. The returning officer and the polling volunteers can go home early for a nice cup of cocoa with poppy rebel John Snow on the TV.
3. If a candidate does not have 50% of the vote then the polling volunteers may need coffee instead of cocoa.
4. Count all the 2s and add them to the 1s.
5. If a candidate still does not have 50% of the vote then crack open the energy drinks keep counting the preferences until one lucky candidate has 50% of the vote.
(If I have made a mistake here then please do comment).

Like Nick Clegg I still can't really explain how this is different from single transferable vote (STV) but I think that it is something like this; in STV all but two candidates are deleted after the 1's are counted. (Correction; see Imogens comment)

Maybe you can predict, from reading the above method, if I left the debate thinking Yes to AV or No to AV. You will have to read my next blog entry to find out... AV or not AV

You are the Union

2011-02-23T21:53:00.000Z

The Guardian newspaper is collecting opinions about trade unions for their 'Anywhere but Westminster' film, there were a couple of posts about my union, UCU which is is the Universities and Colleges Union. (UCU is the largest trade union and professional association for academics, lecturers, trainers, researchers and academic-related staff working in further and higher education throughout the UK http://www.ucu.org.uk/ )

The posts went something like this: "UCU doesn't do anything," "UCU has NUS style debates instead of doing proper work," and "the C in UCU stands for crap."

I was pretty much infuriated and a little bit apprehensive, my apprehension was for the following reason. This sort of attitude will kill trade unionism. It is more dangerous that the anti trade union laws brought in by the Thatcher government and this is why: If that attitude is allowed to permeate a workplace then new staff won't join and cynical staff will leave the union. The outcome is simple; a de-unionised workforce that is open to exploitation.

The 'union does nothing attitude' is an attitude with which I am very familiar, I find it in my conversations with some colleagues whenever they find out I am a rep. My reply to those colleagues is similar to the one I wrote to Guardian forum users:

"I am also in UCU. I work at an FE college which is planning to make between 150-200 people redundant. I have recently become more active in UCU and I am now a rep. I'm reasonably young for a rep, and I would encourage every worker in every sector to join a union and become active.

Just a quick response to [the two people who left anti UCU comments], as you are members YOU are the union, not the reps or the officials, they give their time freely, and are just the same as you. Having debates is a good thing, if it raises the profile of the UCU in the college, so instead of criticising, get involved and do something about it. You could make a change, you could make links with Unison but if you are not willing to do it then who will?

Being in a union is about more than paying your 15 quid every month and complaining. It is about being united as a workforce, and campaigning for the rights of all workers whatever their role".

You are the Union, do something about it... Join UCU

Guardian forum

Aid to India

2011-02-14T23:41:00.001Z

Some people are uncharitable, they will always question the need to give to charity. It is unsurprising that they will object to aid to India or anywhere else for that matter. Others say things like "Charity begins at home". Children in Need make a big deal of the fact that all of the money raised is spent in the UK. Comic relief emphasise that forty percent of money raised goes to help people in the UK. These statements encourage people to give and both charities do great work. But should the fact that the money is spent in the UK actually matter? Is it not more important that money is spent where need is greatest?

As I mentioned in my earlier blog; Multiculturalisn't. I worked in India for three years. I feel privilleged to have worked in such beautifully diverse country but I never got used to the level of poverty that I encountered on a daily basis. It is a "development paradox"1 There are very rich people and there is a new and growing middle class, the parents of the fee paying students at the international school were in those categories. The rich are vastly outnumbered by a highly aspirational working class who work tirelessly in order to provide education and a better life for their children. The level of personal sacrifice families endure for the sake of their children is not often cited as a reason for economic development in India but it is playing a massive part. Ask the young IT consultants and call centre managers in Chennai and they will tell you how utterly grateful they are to their parents. Ask my old students, now graduates of US and UK universities; their gratitude towards their parents is immeasurable.

There are huge numbers of extremely poor people in every part of India they are malnourished children forced to work, the mentally ill living naked in open drains, rag pickers who could be picking through your recycling (if it is collected by councils in Leeds, Nottingham or North Wales) and I could go on and on with examples of people living in utter desperation. People need our help even though their economy is growing: Social mobility in India is difficult or impossible for a variety of reasons; the caste system is one, corruption is another.

India does spend 20bn a year on defence, it maybe needs to because of not often talked about internal problems with paramilitary groups in the north east and the rather more publicised problem of Kashmir and the all nuclear weapons pointed (terrifyingly) at Pakistan. I often wonder if the British really needed to draw that line before Indian independence. With the population at 1.15bn defence is at per £17 per capita, a huge amount when you consider that my ayah (full time child-minder and home help) would take a fortnight to earn that. By comparison UK defence spending is obscene £39bn divided by 55 million is a staggering £710 per capita (I think). India also gives aid to Africa despite the fact that there are more poor people in India than in the whole of sub-Saharan Africa and to Afghanistan despite the abundance of riches in the beleaguered nation. It also has a space program which reflects the aspirational nature of the population.

We can question the need for spending on weapons and space programs, what is unquestionable however is that India needs our aid. The UKs £280 million will be spent in India's three poorest states Orissa, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar. There are people there who need it more than we can imagine.

Charity begins at home, my home was India. We are global citizens, our home is the world.

1. http://t.co/sYQsqDj

Multiculturalisn't

2011-02-06T20:00:00.000Z

A few years ago I was privileged to work in a multicultural International school in Tamil Nadu, India. (http://www.kis.in/) I stayed there for three years, met great people, enjoyed teaching there and I miss the place.

For those 3 years in India I was a foreigner, I stood out, I was a 'Vellai Karan': I know what it feels like to be a minority. The welcome I received made me feel just that, welcome. I was treated differently, mainly when I visited other places as a tourist. Occasionally I would have to pay over the odds for things but that was the only downside; people were always interested in what I was doing in India, I was often interrogated on train journeys about why I taught biology instead if practicing medicine (somehow my parents would have been prouder of me if I had have been a doctor). If my motorbike wouldn't start I was surrounded by a group of 'helpful experts' who would beep my horn and turn my fuel tap on and off. I was always fascinated by the people I met and the stories they had to tell. If this all sounds like a gold-tinted, rose-coloured look back at my time there then I don't apologise, it was a good three years. I was never intimidated for the colour of my skin or my religious beliefs.

Multiculturalism is not a strategy or a party political policy. It is an ideal not an idea. Multiculturalism cannot fail. We must work towards it, we have only failed in that we have not reached a truly tolerant multicultural society yet. There are no real alternatives to multiculturalism. Hatred is one and the Far Right should not get any help from the Prime Minister on peddling that idea. A single party state is another alternative and the Far Left should really get together and work on that one; at the student protests I have attended I could have bought newspapers from about half a dozen different groups (you can't smash the state if you are too busy trying to out-smash each other) Both extremes are clearly not multicultural.

If Gandhi had said 'multiculturism has failed' after every riot between religious groups at the time of partition then India would not be the country it is today (if they had privatised the railways in the early 90s then it would not be the rising tiger economy that is becoming either)

Do not let multiculturalism fail. Don't let it fail in your school, college or university. Don't let it fail in your city, town, village or estate. If you do then racism and intolerance have won.

I will end on a lighter note. 'Muscular Liberalism' is not an alternative either, but who writes this stuff? When I heard it it made me think of Nick Clegg on steroids - not a pretty sight; http://www.twitpic.com/3xinay

Medicine with Economics

2011-02-01T20:40:00.000Z

I am a Biology Lecturer. I am proud to say that several of my students have gone on to study medicine and now use some of the biology they have learned to help others.

Doctors are very talented individuals. Entry requirements are high and for good reason. Many doctors, including GPs make life and death decisions every day.

A good biology student will use maths, I teach my students several aspects of it in my lectures: The understanding of molarity and concentration and how it is applied to drug dosage. How statistics can be used to critically analyse their research and the findings of others. Doctors also need knowledge of stats to avoid being conned by drug reps. Will doctors now have to be subjected to further advertising and hassle by 'services reps' from private companies who want a slice of the NHS Budget? I hope not.

I have never taught economics in biology, I love my subject but I never get round to teaching balance sheets and budget statements, I can't find a chapter in any human biology book on it. Which brings me to my point.

Doctors time is not cheap and it should be spent making diagnosis decisions not monetary decisions. There are better qualified people who love balance sheets and budget statements, they come out of the economics department. Some of those become managers and that is great but I wouldn't ask an economist to decide whether a mole on my back was cancerous or not. Nor would I ask my doctor for help with my tax return.

I find myself in the strange position of defending managers. Maybe they are too many of them in the NHS, maybe doctors do need a greater input into budgeting, but NHS reforms in England are not about these issues. The coalition NHS reform is about making a first step in the wrong direction, towards the privatisation of a healthcare system which is (or was) the envy of the world.

Manchester Disunited

2011-01-31T01:05:00.000Z

I attended a demo and rally in Manchester on Saturday, to protest against the coalition cuts to education and public sector funding. It all went fairly smoothly, there were literally hundreds of police present and it seemed that the march was organised to in order to cause the minimum impact and gain the minimum amount of coverage possible. We started at the Manchester museum then marched out of town not through it, to a field, where an angry mob of students gathered They were most angry however not about coalition cuts but about their leader, Aaron Porter and his lack of backing for the London protests.

Porter prefers a softly softly approach, writing to coalition MP Simon Hughes to politely ask why the fees are going up to £9000 rather than £6000. The students he has been elected to represent do not approve of this 'roll over and die attitude' as they see it. They had brought eggs to pelt him with during a speech he was due to make at the end of the march but they did no get their chance: Before the march some students chanted "Aaron Porter we know you, you're a ****ing Tory too" (a chant normally reserved for Nick Clegg) The NUS President then left surrounded by a police cordon. At the end of the rally Aaron's eggs were thrown at other speakers who were heckled for not being Aaron Porter, it was a messy end to what had been an interesting day.

Pro Egyptian chants were common, I was relieved to demonstrating in Manchester rather than Suez or Cairo. There was a disproportionate police presence, we were hemmed in by police for short periods of time but I was not in fear of being tear gassed or shot in the face by a 'rubber' bullet.

I learned a lot in Manchester; in every Union (and in every political movement) there are sub groups. They all want basically the same thing; fairness for their members, but they still feel the need to disagree with each other. Eggs are not the way to solve these disagreements. There have been two votes of no confidence in the NUS President. Aaron Porter is a politician, if the majority of students are like the students I met in Manchester and feel as if he does not not represent them then political methods are best ways in which to remove him.

I will sign off in same manner as a trade union studies lecturer who is also the branch chair of my Union,

In Unity,

Liam

Down The Woods

2011-01-27T20:08:00.000Z

Forests are all over the news, especially the Forest of Dean (Which I think is somewhere that cabinet ministers have second homes). The Coalition wants to sell forests to make some cash and it appears that dog walkers do not like it. They are right to object. It is a bad idea. Once you sell something, you can't really control what happens to it. Thatcher sold off the council houses; now there is a lack of affordable housing. The coalition wants to sell forests it will result in a lack of open places for the public to enjoy, the only people that benefit are a privileged few, who would own what once belonged to many.

I am equally worried by another coal-ition; UK Coal. A planning application has been received by Durham County Council for an opencast coal mine in the Pont Valley. This area of woodland may be smaller than the Forest of Dean but it is no less important to the people of the surrounding area. I have always loved going 'down the woods' it was always an adventure, and still is. An opencast coal mine will prevent future generations from experiences that might shape their future. The woods are where we form our ideas about our place in our environment, to deprive future generations of that opportunity, just as it is wrong to deprive future generations of a University place or a free hospital bed. But more on those later...

Object to the Pont Valley opencast by writing to Claire Teasdale, Durham County Council, County Hall, Durham, DH1 5UL or add to the Pont Valley network website