Tuesday, 19th February 2008
5:54pm
Lembit Opik calls up to set me straight. Here was I portraying him as a principled rebel true to his manifesto by pledging to abstain, rather than vote against, the totemic issue of whether the British public should have a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. Au contraire, he says. 'On this occasion, I am being a good corporate citizen' because Clegg has decided to allow his 65 MPs to abstain on the issue of a referendum after all. So people like Lembit are off the hook.
Rather endearingly, Lembit admitted he wasn't 100% sure but would call back if he found out any different. Good luck to him finding out anything. For reference, here is Clegg last month:
"We would vote against a referendum on the treaty and vote in accordance with our long-held position that the real referendum which needs to be had is whether we stay in the European Union or not."
Has this now changed to a whole party sitting-on-the-fence on the referendum question? The Lib Dem position remains mired in confusion. The tragedy is that they could end up standing between the public and the referendum which all three parties offered at the last election.
Email to a friend |
Permalink |
Comments (5)
5:08pm
The number of
NEETs – that’s those young people Not in Education, Employment or Training – has swollen over the past decade. There were 154,000 NEETs aged 16-18 in 1997, and some
206,000 at the beginning of 2007.
To tackle the problem, James Purnell yesterday announced
a crackdown on young benefit claimants. 18 year-old NEETs will have to look for work or face having their benefits stopped, and if they haven’t found work after six months of JobCentre Plus supervision then they’ll be drafted into private/voluntary sector programmes (this contrasts with a one-year period for the unemployed members of most other age groups).
It exemplifies the tough-love brand of welfare reform espoused by David Freud, and continues the Government’s
recent progress in this area. But we shouldn’t get too excited just yet – after all, linking rights and responsibilities hasn’t exactly been Labour’s strong suit (see p54 of
this report). And there are signs that Brown is countering Purnell’s reform agenda with some
(centralised, high-spending) welfare measures of his own…
Email to a friend |
Permalink |
Comments (3)
4:51pm
Ron Sandler, the Treasury appointed chairman of Northern Rock, is a non-dom, Robert Peston confirms. Add to this the brewing row about how much the new management team is being paid and the political connections of some of those appointed to the board and you can see how Northern Rock is going to be a constant irritation to the government. The bad news for Alistair Darling and Gordon Brown is that they probably won't be rid of Northern Rock before the next election.
Email to a friend |
Permalink |
Comment
3:25pm
It's curtains for the “King’s Party” – the PML (Q), President Musharraf’s political prop – which has all but lost its power base after
key figures were felled in yesterday’s vote.
The PPPP, (the Benazir Pakistan Peoples’ Party adds a P for Parliamentarians to distinguish it from separate Bhutto family member-run factions) has taken the National Assembly seat lead, with 86 announced at the time of reporting, followed by Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League (N), currently at 65.
Schools and educational institutions remain closed for a second day while all election results are compiled. They await confirmation.
The Provincial trend commenced at the beginning of Monday evening has continued, with the PPPP taking Sindh, the PML (N) leading in Punjab, the PML (Q) with Balochistan, and, significantly, the moderate Awami National Party in the tribal North West Frontier Province, heartland of radicals, militants and Islamic extremists.
On Sindh, S.G.A. Shah – Party Province President for the PML (N) – told Coffee House today that since the PPPP have the most seats, the choice of candidate for Prime Minister lies with them. Yet Shah’s own suggestion would be the PPPP vice-chairman Makhdoom Amin Fahim. The former Sindh Chief and Pakistani Defence Minister told me his workers were regretting his absence (he is in London for unavoidable reasons), saying they would have fared better in Sindh if he had been there to lead. He also revealed that his party felt compassion at the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, and quite understood that some of their own supporters would want to vote for the PPPP in sympathy. He said he didn’t mind – so long as they didn’t vote for the PML (Q).
Nawaz Sharif held his first post-election press conference today in Lahore. He appeared calm and content, choosing his words carefully, his voice slightly hoarse after days of intense speech-making and rallying. He said the lawyers and judges must be restored and reinstated.
He told the press that he is due to meet with other political leaders in Islamabad on Thursday, where they will discuss “options.”
“Once the judiciary is restored, they will have to give a judgement on the legitimacy of (Mushrraf’s) candidature,” Sharif commented. Note the word “restored.” It appears at this stage to be a point of divergence from the PPPP’s Co-Chair Asif Ali Zardari, who has called for judicial “independence.”
Reports say that Zardari announced today that he is in contact with political parties to form the next government. One of his chiefs said, “The PPP is not a solo flight, we will take everyone along with us.”
A press conference by American Senators John Kerry, Joe Biden and Chuck Hagel is just finishing in Islamabad. The last said, “We hope the new Government is committed to working with us.”
I wonder if they really care. The Washington Post reports this week that two Hellfire missiles struck Pakistani soil without that country’s official permission in January and killed an al-Qaeda commander. The operation, say US officials, “Involved an unusual degree of autonomy by the CIA inside Pakistan.” The Post writes:
“It is an approach that some U.S. officials say could be used more frequently this year, particularly if a power vacuum results from yesterday's election and associated political tumult.”
Americans don’t need to worry if their pal Pervez is off the scene; they’ll just do what they wanna do anyways!
Email to a friend |
Permalink |
Comments (2)
1:30pm
Hamish McRae writes
an excellent article in today’s Independent; reminding us that the Northern Rock debacle pales in comparison to the Government’s mishandling of public finances:
“The much more substantial charge is that the Government has mishandled public finances, borrowing far more than it planned, year after year. We are heading into a global downturn, with a bigger fiscal deficit of more than 3 per cent of Gross Domestic Product. That is bigger than that any other large developed nation. We have a government that spends £11 for every £10 that it receives in taxation, borrowing the balance at higher interest rates than the US, Germany or France. And there is every prospect of our national finances getting worse as our economy slows. Northern Rock is a cock-up; our public finances are a disaster.”
However, I disagree with McRae’s other contention that “nationalisation is … the least bad outcome to this sorry tale”.
There are two particularly strong arguments against fullscale nationalisation. Firstly, there’s the
irreparable damage it will do to Britain’s global business reputation. The likely loss of foreign investment could suck £billions from the British economy, regardless of whether Northern Rock eventually results in a profit or a loss for the Exchequer.
The second argument is half-stated by McRae himself. With the current Government being such a poor custodian of the public finances, why should we trust them to both run a bank and safeguard some £100 billion of taxpayers’ money? A
Northern Rock shareholder gets it right, over at the BBC website:
“The Government is totally financially inept and I certainly wouldn't give it the keys to my piggy bank.”
The Government’s mishandling of public finances backgrounds the Northern Rock debate, and it contributes massive weight to the
Tory opposition of nationalisation.
Brown and Darling are keen to lay the blame for Northern Rock’s troubles at the feet of global forces, but it’s their taxation-spending-borrowing spree which has most exposed Britain to the credit crunch’s effects. And it’s that same spree which has closed off many of the avenues of escape…
Email to a friend |
Permalink |
Comments (9)
12:26pm
A cheeky little bird has leaked me this text, from a letter Lembit Opik sent to a constituent - saying he will defy Nick Clegg and abstain from a vote on a referendum for the Lisbon Treaty:
“The question of a referendum on the Treaty itself is a hard question. As you well know, others say that the treaty is so much like a Constitution that it warrants a referendum on its own. I think the best thing I can do is abstain on the specific vote about a referendum on the treaty, while pushing for a vote in accordance with our position that the real referendum that needs to be had is whether we stay in the EU or not.”
Many Coffee Housers may consider the phrase “principled Liberal Democrats” an oxymoron, but Nick Clegg’s line on the EU Constitution is flushing them out. Opik and the other 65 LibDem MPs were elected on a manifesto to bring about this referendum - about half the party thinks as Opik does. Remember on current polls, half the LibDem 66 MPs are scheduled to lose their seats. This tends to focus the mind. And, who knows, the Lisbon Treaty debate
may be interesting after all.
Email to a friend |
Permalink |
Comments (4)
11:09am
David Cameron is calling for his head, the City has lost confidence and the bookies are offering 5/2 that he will be gone from the Treasury by the end of the year. Yet, I suspect that Alistair Darling has more job security than most.
Darling was a temporary appointment; no one believes that Brown will keep him in post after the next election which explains why some young Brownites were so keen on an early election. But to move Darling before polling day would be a huge risk. First of all, it would call into question Brown’s judgement in appointing him in the first place. Second, it would add considerably to the feeling that this is a government on its last legs. Finally, there is no guarantee that Darling would go quietly.
For the Prime Minister sacking Darling would—in the Yes Minister sense of the word—be the courageous thing to do. It is hard to see Brown being this reckless.
Email to a friend |
Permalink |
Comments (15)
11:01am
A few months ago, I rather unkindly suggested that Alistair Darling is no more a Chancellor than Captain Scarlett was an actor. This may now be his salvation. Reading Rachel Sylvester’s column, we learn that Brown watered down capital gains tax reform and made his volte-face on Scottish tax proposals without consulting his Chancellor. If Darling is letting it become known that the strings are indeed being tugged from No10 then he’s also saying that if this puppet goes down, he’ll take the puppet master with him. A stand-off to savour.
Email to a friend |
Permalink |
Comment
8:36am
It has just been confirmed that Fidel Castro – leader of Cuba since 1959 – is to retire as President of his country.
Whilst it's certainly a moment for the history books, it's difficult to see what his stepping-down will change in the short-to-medium term. After all, Castro “temporarily” handed over power to his brother Raul in 2006, and – despite some vague overtures to America – the latter has failed to stamp his mark on either Cuban politics or society. With the National Assembly expected to elect Raul as Fidel Casto's full-time successor on 24th February, the stasis is set to continue.
(If anything, US-Cuban relations may deteriorate even further; especially given the bad blood between John McCain and the Cuban leadership.)
Meanwhile, it's been an eventful evening in the Pakistani elections. Be sure to catch-up with Rani Singh's Coffee House coverage, which discusses all the power-broking – violence – vote-rigging – and shock defeats. So far, unofficial results show that the PML(N) and PPP opposition parties are well ahead of the ruling, pro-Musharraf PML(Q) party, although no group has attained an overall majority. One of the more likely outcomes, then, is a coalition between the PML(N) and the PPP; a coalition which would hugely undermine Musharraf's grip on power.
UPDATE: The pro-Musharraf PML(Q) party has conceded defeat.
Email to a friend |
Permalink |
Comments (1)
7:55am
Staunch Musharraf allies and Pakistan Muslim League (Q) supremos, Party President Chaudhry Shujaat Hussein and former federal Railways Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed both lost their supposedly safe seats.
According to reports, former federal minister and former PPP Secretary General Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar has comfortably defeated the PML (Q) Chief Chaudhry Shujaat Hussein by at least 13293 votes. Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi, the former Chief Minister of Punjab, cousin and brother-in-law of Chaudhry Shujaat Hussein, and President of the PML (Q) party in Punjab, has lost too - a huge blow to the pro-Musharraf party and a slap in the face for the three feudal politicians. The news is making top story on bulletins.
The uncharismatic Shujaat Hussein has been a key figure in this campaign, leading rallies and appearing on posters as the party has sought to distance itself somewhat from the unpopular policies of President Pervez Musharraf. With three mainstays of the PML (Q) deprived of their seats, the party begins to look dangerously close to collapse.
Meanwhile, BBC reporters have been describing their experiences of Election Day with stories of delayed voting, mis-sited polling stations and a low turnout.
While the PML (N) and PPPP vote is indicative of the unpopularity of the Musharraf regime, either of the parties currently leading still needs a clear majority of around 170 to form a government in the 342 -seat National Assembly. The way things are going, this doesn’t look likely, and a hung Parliament is a possible outcome.
The PPPP’s Asif Ali Zardari and the PML (N)’s Nawaz Sharif’s pow-wows happened because they calculated this scenario, and didn’t want to be caught out. A third coalition partner in this unlikely grouping of former rivals could well be the Pashtoun-based nationalistic Awami National Party.
There seems to be a sense of “now or never” both among politicians and among the people. Competitors have realised that in order to survive and maybe change the shape of things to come, they have to leap into bed with the strangest of partners.
If the election results play out the way they have started, commentators like Kamran Khan are saying that Musharraf may emerge with at least one brownie point. The President promised the world “The mother of all elections” and as some old faces fall off the wall to be replaced by other old faces, there may be something interesting emerging from all of this.
Email to a friend |
Permalink |
Comment
Previous
