Back to the 1950s

Over the weekend the government minister Margaret Hodge has said that British families should be given priority for council housing, over the claims of economic migrants. Her comments have been supported by that arch-panderer Hazel Blears.

Essentially what Mrs Hodge is advocating is a re-introduction of discrimination in the provision of council housing, taking us back to the dark days of the 1950s when the first large scale immigration from the West Indies, Pakistan and India began. In the days after the 1958 Notting Hill race riots, when West Indian residents were sought out and attacked by white men who had come into the area specifically to target the immigrants, the local Labour MP George Rogers complained ‘that white people in the area felt that they had been subjected to long provocation by coloured people living disreputable lives in appalling conditions’.* In fact, it was the immigrants that were subject to over-charging in housing and were forced to live in over-crowded conditions with several families living in just one house.

This is the situation we are again seeing in Britain. You just have to visit places like Slough, where Polish and other Eastern European immigrants are being forced into the same cramped and over-crowded conditions that were experienced by the immigrants in the 1950s.

No one can deny that the situation isn’t serious and needs urgent government attention. However, all Mrs Hodge is doing is pandering to far-right elements in her own constituency. It was her blunder that legitimised the BNP candidates standing in her constituency in 2006, which led to them winning enough seats to make them the second largest party on the council. And now, instead of standing up to these people she is pandering to those who preach hatred and advocate discrimination.

Only one criterion should be used for providing council housing – need. In the meantime, the government should pull its finger out and build more council houses, perhaps a new chancellor could do something to stop the explosion in house prices that has forced so many people out of the market (so they can get out of rented accommodation), and perhaps, just perhaps, Mrs Hodge (an immigrant herself) can try and take on the racists in her constituency instead of pandering to them.

*Quoted from The National Archives, PREM 11/2920, minute of meeting between David Renton and George Rogers, 4 September 1958.

Six vying for deputy spot.

Six candidates have managed to muster the 45 nominations needed to run for the deputy leadership of the Labour party. Harriet Harman, Hazel Blears, Hilary Benn, Alan Johnson, Peter Hain and John Cruddas have all been nominated.

Apart from Cruddas, there really isn’t much between the candidates. He seems to be the only one saying anything interesting – and he has made it clear that he doesn’t want to be in the Cabinet should he be elected. As a former special adviser Cruddas certainly isn’t a trouble-maker and, if elected, would give Gordon Brown much greater freedom in choosing his Cabinet while freeing him from some of his party responsibilities.

There really isn’t much between the other candidates. Harriet Harman’s sole pitch is that she is a woman, and a woman should get the job. She seems to forget she was a lousy Cabinet minister, sacked from the Department of Social Security in 1998 and has been rattling around junior minister positions since she was restored to office in 2001. She is also completely accident prone. The Labour MP Austen Mitchell brilliant summed up her obsession for political correctness when he called her Harriet Harperson.

Of the remaining candidates, Hazel Blears is the most irritating person in the government, is too close to John Reid for my liking and is a member of the Labour party’s tap dancing squad. Peter Hain has gone from radical freedom campaigner to sycophantic Blairite – plus he is orange. Alan Johnson made is reputation from doing Blair’s dirty work, whereas Hilary Benn is an amiable bloke with a famous father who has done alright as International Development Secretary.

If I was a Labour member I think that I would plump for either Cruddas or Benn. But I’m nowhere close to being a Labour supporter – so I would love either Harman or Blears to get the job.

Happy Birthday Alan Johnston

BBC Gaza correspondent Alan Johnston is 45 today. Mr Johnston was abducted in Gaza 66 days ago. Hopefully he will be released soon and returned to his family and friends.

In the meantime, happy birthday Alan!

Come in Mr Blair, your time’s up.

As Gordon Brown has secured the Labour party leadership he is guaranteed to be our next Prime Minister. This is no great surprise. For thirteen years we have expected Mr Brown to succeed Tony Blair, despite the Prime Minister’s constant attempts to try and block Brown’s succession.

The question now is why do we have to wait for six weeks before Mr Brown becomes PM? For a couple of years now, and especially since the Labour party conference last year, we have had to put up with a lame duck Prime Minister. The government is drifting along aimlessly just to satisfy one man’s vanity. Mr Blair got his wish of passing his tenth anniversary in office (and two days later the voters gave him a good kicking in the polls). But still he is hanging on. Today he is in Washington for a last meeting with President Bush, and then there will be an EU meeting and a G8 summit. These are important meetings, at which this country should be represented not by a lame duck, but rather by the man who will be leading us for the next couple of years.

Go away now Mr Blair, your time is up.

New First Minister for Scotland

Nearly two weeks after the elections to the Scottish Parliament, Alex Salmond has at last become First Minister. It was a very civil affair, with congratulations coming from out-going First Minister Jack McConnell, and Liberal Democrat leader and out-going Deputy First Minister Nicol Stephen. However, it was Scottish Tory leader Annabel Goldie, in a speech lasting just 52 seconds, who stole the show by pledging to keep the new First Minister in order.

Over the last two weeks, though, we have seen a different Alex Salmond. The tough political operator that we have come to know well has evolved a more conciliatory side – pledging to work to build consensus and trust. But more than that, it seems that Mr Salmond has grown in stature, almost as if he has grown into the post of First Minister and already eclipsing his immediate predecessor.

Sweet n' Sour Conspiracy

It seems that Labour MSPs are already conspiring to replace Jack McConnell as leader of the Scottish Labour party. An entertaining article in today’s Herald has reported that a group of women Labour MSPs gathered at the weekend and, over a Chinese takeaway, discussed how to oust Mr McConnell.

Despite their protestations of loyalty, several of the group apparently aspire to Mr McConnell’s job. Wendy Alexander is perhaps the best known of the group, which also includes Margaret Curran, Johann Lamont, Sarah Boyack and Karen Gillon.

However, by far the most entertaining suggestion is that John Reid, soon to be ex-Home Secretary, should be the next leader of Scottish Labour. One of Labour’s recently elected constituency MSPs, it is suggested, should resign their seat and force a by-election that would allow Reid to enter the Scottish Parliament. The suggestion comes from Labour MP Brian Donohoe, who seems to have forgotten the old dictum that the best way to lose an election is to have one.

Mr Donohoe must be delusional if he thinks that John ‘attack-dog’ Reid would be some kind of electoral asset, or that Labour MSPs would welcome him with open arms. But maybe Donohoe just wants to get Reid out of Westminster and thinks that dumping him in the Scottish Parliament is one way to achieve that. Although, I bet Alex Salmond would love the idea.

Fergusson Elected Presiding Officer

Congratulations to Alex Fergusson who was today elected Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament. Fergie defeated Independent MSP Margo MacDonald by 108 votes to 20. What possessed Margo MacDonald to stand against Fergusson is beyond me.

Last week Ms MacDonald claimed that she had no interest in the job but that she would do it for a year to allow the Parliament to proceed with electing a First Minister and Executive. After Fergusson decided to put his name forward for the post, and in so doing received widespread support, Ms MacDonald decided to stand declaring that she did not want an establishment ‘stitch-up’, whilst claiming that she believed Mr Fergusson was a man of integrity. Whereas Margo had the opportunity to establish herself as a Parliamentary elder statesman, this strange behaviour merely serves to undermine her standing and make her look fickle.

Brown has it in the bag?

My knowledge of, and interest in, Labour politics is pretty limited. As a result I have to struggle to interest myself in the Labour party’s leadership or deputy leadership elections. The problem is that this contest is going to decide who our next Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister are.

In the Gordon Brown versus John McDonnell contest you would have to suspect that Brown has it in the bag. McDonnell is a supporter of a number of left-wing causes, such as widespread nationalisation. On top of that he has troublemaking ‘previous’ as he was deputy to Ken Livingstone when the latter was leader of the Greater London Council in the 1980s. For the Labour party to choose him would be like the Tory party electing Iain Duncan Smith as leader……

Perhaps McDonnell will force Brown to move to the left slightly. Perhaps with John Reid leaving the government Brown will take the opportunity to scrap some of the illiberal measures that have come out of the Home Office of late. Maybe ID cards will be scrapped (with pressure on public spending, surely they would make a sensible cut?), although it says something about how much the Labour party has changed when opposition to ID cards is seen as left wing. But it would be a pure indulgence (and an act of madness) by Labour party activists if they were to elect McDonnell as leader.

Brown is hardly likely to shift the party or the government dramatically. There will probably be a change in emphasis and certainly of style. Yet, no one other than Brown has the chance to deliver the Labour party a fourth election victory. Such a victory will be much more difficult due to the resurgent Conservative party and with signs that Liberal Democrat’s are starting to loose ground – but this was always going to be the case.

Fergusson to run for Presiding Officer

It is good news that Tory MSP Alex Fergusson has decided to run for the post of Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament. Mr Fergusson, who has been a member of the Parliament since it opened in 1999, is well respected across all the parties and combines an amiable personality with the ability to get things done. Elected as a list MSP for the South of Scotland at the first elections to the Parliament in 1999, Mr Fergusson captured the Galloway and Upper Nithsdale constituency from the SNP at the 2003 elections, with a majority of just 99 votes. Last week he managed to buck the SNP trend and increased his majority to a very respectable 3,333 votes.

Given the tight Parliamentary arithmetic there has, of course, been a great reluctance amongst the SNP and Labour parties to put one of their number forward for the post. It could be argued that it is the Tories turn anyway – as the Parliament’s first PO was the Lib Dem Lord Steel, the outgoing George Reid was a Nationalist, and with Labour just one seat behind the SNP it is hardly surprising that they would be happy to see a Tory fill the vacancy. That said, had the circumstances been different, Mr Fergusson would have commanded cross-party support anyway.

There is one question that arises, however. Lord Steel and Mr Reid each served just one term as Presiding Officer before retiring from the Parliament at the subsequent election. Has this now become a Parliamentary convention – one that Mr Fergusson is happy with?

Minority Government

It has been interesting to watch Alex Salmond's attempts to form an administration. The most obvious candidate as a coalition partner, the Liberal Democrats, have ruled themselves out (for the moment) of a formal coalition with the SNP. This is perhaps understandable as the Lib Dems have had their first experience in a long time of how it feels to be on the crappy end of election night. Losing three constituencies that they have held since the 1980s would have stung, especially as one of them was lost to the man who is likely to become Scotland's new First Minister.

Yet the door is still open for them to enter a coalition at some point in the near future. Today's announcement that the Greens and SNP have signed a formal 'agreement of co-operation' is obviously helpful to Mr Salmond. However this is far from being a coalition or even the 'confidence and supply' agreement that had been talked about earlier in the week. It does gain the SNP two extra votes in most Parliamentary debates, but it does not guarantee Green support for Finance Bills or in confidence motions.

Why have the Greens been so reluctant to join an SNP administration? Firstly there is a point of political difference - the Greens do not like the SNP's road building proposals. Yet it does also seem as if the Greens are reluctant to go into a government with the SNP without the Liberal Democrats also being involved. Indeed, Robin Harper has said that the Green's would consider a formal agreement should the Lib Dems change their mind.

It is hard to judge before it has even taken office how stable the new Executive is going to be. However, if we have a turbulent couple of years with the SNP unable to pass its legislation it is possible to envisage Alex Salmond inviting the Lib Dems into a coalition. Perhaps after a few years without their ministerial limos the Lib Dems might be more amenable to such an invitation. The question is, would they join with Mr Salmond or could we see Jack McConnell return?

The Long Goodbye

So it's official. Tony Blair is to leave office on 27 June. Television news programmes have already had their first stab at assessing Mr Blair's premiership and the newspapers will have their turn tomorrow. And then, on 27 June, when he finally does go, we will have to endure it all again.

Of all the things to pick up on though, it is the date of his departure that I find interesting. Wednesday 27 June 2007. Why that date? Well, obviously it will take some weeks for the Labour party to go through its procedure to select a new leader, so Blair has to allow sufficient time for that process. Yet, according to one BBC report that I saw earlier, the new leader will be announced on 24 June. That's a Sunday. Now, we all know that Gordon Brown is likely to be the next Labour leader. Mr Brown is a good God fearing man and a son of the manse. But are his Sabbatarian principles such that they won't let him become Prime Minister on a Sunday? Or maybe the Queen just doesn't want him pitching up at the Palace and ruining her Sunday joint.

And why a Wednesday? I suppose its just coincidence that Prime Minister's Questions takes place on a Wednesday. But who is going to be answering them? Are we going to have PMQs with Prime Minister Blair receiving tributes from grieving Labour MPs, while Mr Brown, the new leader of the Labour party, looks on? Or will Blair resign earlier in the morning and allow the new Prime Minister Brown to take the first questions of his premiership, as the former PM takes his place on the backbenches?

I might be just a little cynical, but my guess is that Blair will do whatever makes Brown most uncomfortable.