The blame game and our schools

There’s a by-election campaign underway in Kentish Town in another close fight between the Lib Dems and Labour, so the fact that the Tories made an effort to get something out this time is very novel indeed. However, their lack of campaigning experience in the area is noticable from the poor quality of their leaflet.

Most bizarely of all is this odd section on Ed Miliband’s apparent betrayal of North London football:

Now I’m hardly one for defending the new leader of the Labour party, as a previous post shows, but seriously, who knew his apparent footballing flirtations were such a burning issue among the residents of Kentish Town? I mean, that always come up on the doorstep. Definately. All the time.

For more information about the only party with a record of campaigning for – and delivering – improvements for Kentish Town’s residents take a look at Nick Russell’s campaign at the Kentish Town Liberal Democrats website or the Nick Russell 4 Kentish Town facebook page.

Tim is most certainly the right choice for this role. Since the Lib Dems entered Government he has achieved some great news coverage, and has been very effective at helping the party to promote its distinctiveness from our Conservative coalition partners. He is also a popular, hardworking and successful campaigner. After all, he turned his constituency of Westmorland and Lonsdale from one of the most marginal in the country into one of the most secure Lib Dem majorities at the last election (from 267 in 2005 to 12264 in 2010).

Furthermore, having personally spent almost a year in his Westminster office between 2006-07, I know that he is a genuine, honest and kind bloke. He certainly changed my view of what we can expect from our public servants.

You can read his statement announcing his candidacy on Lib Dem Voice here.

If you’d like to find out more or want to give his friendly campaign team a helping hand, contact details are:

Email: timforpresident@timfarron.co.uk

His campaign page on Facebook is here and on Twitter here @Farron4Pres

That would be the same Audley Harrisson who ranks only 13th in the WBA’s own ranking system. Not Wladimir Klitschko (current WBO, IBF and IBO heavyweight champion) or Vitaly Klitschko (who returned from almost four years of retirement in 2008 and retook his WBC heavyweight belt). It’s now looking increasingly unlikely that the fight we all want – Haye vs A Klitschko Brother – will never come to pass. Frank Warren is even claiming that Haye, despite signing a contract to fight one of the brothers, is avoiding them due to a paydeal dispute.

The Klitschko Brothers

Admittedly, Haye vs Harrisson represents Britain’s biggest boxing bout since Lennox vs Bruno in 1993, which is some consolation. But is it the fight most boxing fans want to see? I doubt it.

As an entertaining alternative, now is the time for the Klitschko Bros to put their titles on the line and go head to head. Now that would be a fight worth watching. It’s not as stupid as it sounds either. They’ve talked about this happening several times in the last couple of years – but the final decision appears to rest with Mother Klitschko. Seriously.

We know that boxers and their clever promoters are adept at pushing such stories to generate publicity, but now really is the perfect time to make this fight happen. I kind of get the impression that the heavyweight division needs it.

A very angry idiot has terrorised Lincoln City Council with an axe. The man rampaged through the Customer Services department, smashing computers and windows in his rage at the council (it’s unclear exactly what his gripe was). He finally stopped when the head fell off his axe. Thankfully, no staff were injured during the incident.

This guy caused considerable damage, to the extent that the council is now operating only limited benefits and housing services this week - causing absolute chaos for numerous people relying on these services.

And the real joke about the whole violent episode? This dangerous man got the wrong building – he had meant to vent his rage on Lincolnshire County Council.

Anyway, back to my coffee and dissertation…

He has written a Guardian column aimed at winning over Lib Dem voters. This follows the nonsensical silly-season rumours about Charles Kennedy defecting to Labour. Some of Miliband’s comments have tickled me. In particular, the bit where he writes that the Liberal Democrats are

…a party of proud traditions: of Keynes, Lloyd George and Beveridge. But it is increasingly clear that these traditions are being abandoned by Clegg as he goes along with damaging cuts in public spending undermining economic growth, tax rises hitting the poorest hardest, and a clear threat to the universal welfare state.

Oh get a grip, Ed! As a member of the most profligate Government of modern times he’ll be fully aware of the reality: public spending cuts are absolutely necessary given the appalling deficit left by the previous Government. The deficit is forecast to hit £163 bn this year, which could see the UK’s credit rating downgraded unless cuts are made. Perhaps he also forgot that he was part of the Labour Government whose last Budget also planned to make cuts of £50bn (without telling us where the cuts would be made, naturally). I’m sure that innocently slipped his mind.

The comments about hitting the poorest hardest are equally laughable. Clearly he doesn’t remember that the taxation policies of the last Labour Government disproportionately hindered the poorest (think of the 10p tax debacle) although Labour’s policies often benefited the richest taxpayers, for example by lowering Capital Gains Tax. Personally, I’m proud that the Lib Dems have ensured that the lowest earners in this country are being taken out of tax altogether – that’ll be almost a million of the poorest not paying tax.

He also amused me with this comment:

Our society is at risk of being reshaped in ways that will devastate the proud legacy of liberalism. We see a free market philosophy being applied to our schools, wasteful top-down reorganisation of our NHS, and the undermining of our green credentials with cuts to investment.

Free market philosophy applied to schools? Hmm, perhaps he has forgotten (again) that it was Labour who started the ball rolling here, for example by the introduction of academies. And as the Guardian itself has already highlighted, there is really very little that’s new and controversial in current Coalition education legislation.

Also, what is this nonsense argument about ‘wasteful top-down reorganisation’ of the NHS? Presumably none of the periodic reorganizations of the NHS that occurred under Labour were top-down at all. Oh no. Not at all. And ‘undermining our green credentials’ with cuts to investment? I think Ed’s getting a bit carried away here. Yes, DECC is having to make some cuts, but as a former Energy Secretary he’ll be the first person to realise that the Coalition’s plans for reducing carbon emissions and greening our economy are far more ambitious than anything Labour ever set out. Furthermore, for the first time we now have Annual Energy Statements which will set strategy and guide investment for energy – the kind of strategic thinking that was so woefully lacking under Ed’s command at DECC.

To top it off, Miliband writes that he wants to make the Labour party ‘liberal in our respect for individual rights.’ Sure. After ID cards, the DNA database, child detention and the proliferation of inappropriate CCTV (to name just a few examples) I’m sure Lib Dem members will now trust Labour to protect civil liberties. That’ll definitely happen. Absolutely. No doubt about it.

What I find most laughable of all though is that these attacks on the Lib Dems come at the same time as Ed Miliband’s beleaguered leadership rival, Andy Burnham, set out his vision for Labour yesterday. Obviously, it was mostly nonsense (at one point he talks about the need to help the ’50% of young people who don’t want to go to university’…where the hell did that figure come from?) but at least this was an attempt at a serious, strategic policy-focused direction for his party. By contrast Ed Miliband’s Lib Dem-bashing, whilst entertaining for some of us, simply demonstrates that his campaign has remarkably little to say.

From now on the venue, one of the best in London, will be able to open until 6am on Fridays on six special Friday events a year. The Forum’s management had argued that it was losing out to other venues which could stay open later, adding that it was a realistic possibility that the venue could go out business.

However, this decision will affect a large chunk of residents in the immediate vicinity – myself included (I live on the end of Fortess Road, about 30 second’s walk away).

During the appeal process some very real concerns were expressed by local residents about noise from party-goers. I’ve personally lost count of the times I’ve woken up in the night due to shouting, singing or the occasional drunken fight. In the morning when I step out of my flat I often find vomit and urine stains strewn along the pavement. Once I even found a (very friendly but confused) young night clubber curled up on my doormat.

So at first glance the prospect of even more of this isn’t too appealing. However, as already mentioned, the Forum will only be allowed to stay open late on six Fridays a year. They had also requested permission to keep the Forum’s doors open until 6am on Saturdays, but this was refused by the Committee. And it could be argued that the streets are already noisy anyway, with vehicles and revellers walking to and from other venues at the weekend regardless of whether they are going to or from the Forum itself.

It’s also worth remembering that the infamous Sunday day-time event, ‘The Church’ – which provided the sometimes-entertaining-but-mostly-annoying spectacle of hundreds of drunken Ozzies and Kiwis in fancy dress stumbling about Kentish Town in the afternoon – was moved away from the Forum this January. I’m sure ’The Church’ must have been a profitable venture given the lack of competition for clubnights afternoons on a Sunday, so losing it must have hit the Forum’s revenue pretty hard. The knock on affects of losing the Forum altogether would be disastrous for a number of local pubs, restaurants, takeaways and cornershops which benefit from the high volume of customers it attracts.

So, am I happy that I’ll be woken up more often and with my neighbourhood a bit dirtier than usual? Of course not. But it could have been much worse for local residents. I think a sensible middle-ground has been reached between the quality of life of the local community and the needs of local businesses.

I’m hoping to get down to the Lane to see Spurs more often this season, which should be easier now that I’m a club member again (thanks Dad!). I might even invest in a new homekit. Well, just the jersey. This will be the first time I’ve done so in ages. About nine years ago I realised it was costing me a stupid amount of money each year for a new kit that basically just had an altered collor and different piping on the sleeves.

Now obviously I’m disappointed that Spurs still haven’t made any big signings this summer, but there’s still plenty of time before the transfer window closes. However, judging by pre-season form alone, it appears that the return of a rejuvenated Robbie Keane and Giovanni Dos Santos will more than make up for the lack of big new signings. But now I’ve said that, they’ll probably get sold!

Anyway, I thought I’d stick my neck out and make one or two predictions for the Premier League, which kicks off next week. It will be interesting to see if any of these come true in ten months’ time!

1. Chelsea will win the Premier League

2. Man City will have their best season since the ’60s yet come May they’ll still be considered underachievers

3. John Terry and Joey Barton will be the most booed players in the top flight

4. Ledley King and Jonathan Woodgate will not play a full 90 minutes together in the Champions League

5. Arsenal will commit many, many fouls but when questioned Arsene Wenger won’t have seen any of them

Last week it was revealed that the Labour administration is set to spectacularly u-turn on its election promise not to sell council homes. Housing was the centre-piece of the Camden Labour manifesto, and this ill-thought out and blinkered promise undoubtedly had a big impact on both the local and parliamentary elections across Camden. 

For anyone unfamiliar with Camden’s housing crisis, there’s a chronic shortage of council homes and a waiting list of over 17,000 and much of the current stock is in desperate need of repair. Many thousands of tenants require work on their homes to bring them up to the previous Labour government’s Decent Homes standard. This was the appalling inheritance bequeathed to the new Lib Dem-led council in 2006 by over 30 years of Labour administration.

But it got worse. Back in January 2004 Camden’s tenants had voted not to transfer the council’s housing stock to an ALMO (arms-length management organisation). As a result the Labour Government withheld £183 million worth of Decent Homes funding for repairs (at a time when it still had the money to spend on such necessities).

Government funding or not, Camden’s tenants still needed new kitchens and bathrooms. So after the election of a Lib Dem-led council in 2006 the decision was made to raise funds through the sale of around 50 council homes which were ‘voids’ (e.g. untenanted properties) which the council couldn’t afford to repair. The money raised from these sales was used to carry out some of the desperately-needed repair work for current tenants. In all nearly 10,000 kitchens, bathrooms and wirings were repaired.

Needless to say, Labour opposed this all the way – without actually proposing an alternative method for funding the Decent Homes work.

The Lib Dem manifesto for the 2010 local elections promised that the party would “install or repair another 7,000 kitchens and 7,000 bathrooms for Camden’s council tenants over the next four years” funded by the sale of 100 empty council homes, as well as committing to “build 1,000 new affordable homes across the Borough by 2014.”

By contrast, the Labour manifesto simply stated they would “Stop the council housing sell offs immediately and work with tenants and leaseholders to develop an improvement programme that meets their priorities.” Again, did the Labour manifesto suggest how they would pay for improvements to tenants’ homes? No.

What a surprise then that now Labour  are running the council again they appear to have broken their promise on “ending the sale of council housing.” Labour look set to sell off or rent out council homes from the Holly Lodge Estate in Highgate on the open market – a complete reversal of their key manifesto commitment!

This follows on from the Labour administration’s first major u-turn two weeks ago: its decision to sell off part of the Town Hall and build offices for Camden Council on the King’s Cross railway lands. When this idea was first planned by the previous Lib Dem-led council it was, once again, aggressively attacked by Labour in opposition, describing it as a needless “vanity project.” Local Labour MP Frank Dobson even went so far as to ask the then Labour Local Government Minister John Denham to investigate the proposed sale. I wonder what his view is now.

So much is being made of how the Lib Dems have somehow “betrayed” their voters by forming a Coalition Government with the Conservatives. Increasingly, many of Labour’s voters in Camden will be wondering how the party they trusted could base an entire election strategy around one key policy issue, only to renege on it once in office.