Please, Mr Postman!

Once again we seem to be drifting into macho politics, mind you were we ever out of it? And in the middle of it all, what a surprise, is Peter Mandelson, First Secretary and Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, blimey if these politicians give themselves any more titles there going to need bigger paper sizes to get it all on their letterheads! Still I suppose it makes them feel bigger, and our poor politicians need all the metaphysical hugs they can get, poor dears. Well the Post Office strike seems to have given Peter the chance, once again, to show what a big player he really is. He has told the Post Office workers exactly how counterproductive their action is and how it is damaging British industry, whilst he tries to sell part of the Post Office to Dutch firm TNT. Personally, I have to say that I remain amazed and bemused that anyone in Britain is prepared to jeopardise the excellent door-to-door service the Royal Mail currently provides for the sake of some inane worship of market systems, but this does appear to be the case. Let us hope the Post Office workers, and their union, can protect enough of the service and maintain it as a public service to at least give us all an edge over those many, many countries where such quality of service is not provided by the private sector.

Being British

Meanwhile another great defender of Britain and Britishness, BNP leader Nick Griffin, has been comparing former British Generals to Nazi war criminals. What did these Generals do to bring down such an awful comparison on themselves, well they pointed out, through the Nothing British about the BNP campaign, that the BNP’s attempts to hijack military symbols and images for their campaigning was not only illegitimate but insulting to the vast majority of our armed forces who defend the traditional values of the British democratic system of tolerance, inclusion and equality and that these values are rather at odds with the BNP’s narrow, xenophobic and exclusive values. My father fought in the Second World War in Europe, North Africa, the Middle East and the Far East and whilst he had his fair share of dodgy ideas (from my perspective) it was clear that he and his comrades (at arms) were fighting against foreign, anti-British ideas of fascism and the intolerance that it breeds, not for it. The fact that the BNP used a Spitfire piloted by a polish ex-expatriate in their campaign just exemplifies the lack of intellectual value in their stance against entry of Polish and others into our society. Britain has always been a place for international movements of people, it is why we became a global trading nation, and we should be proud of our open and tolerant, genuine, British history. Mind you, you can’t help feeling that it might be useful for someone to remind politicians from our mainstream parties about British values of tolerance, inclusiveness and democracy as well. Perhaps the abandonment of such values over the past few decades has been a crucial factor in the rise of those who live by them.

Posted by grtaylor | Tagged with bnp, cwu, nick griffin, nothing british, peter mandelson, post office strike

Democracy

Political concepts are a funny thing, fluid, open to interpretation and yet sometimes promoting the most passionate responses, war for instance. Democracy, for example, is claimed as the great benefit of the war in Iraq. In the past few days the ‘mother of Parliaments’, the House of Commons, sometimes called ‘the most sophisticated electorate in the world’, though usually by themselves, has been at it, electing a new Speaker.

The Speaker, of course, is not only chosen democratically, but has an important democratic function in that the Speaker is charged with maintaining the position of the House of Commons as a debating body independent of Government and capable of arriving at its own decisions. Given that the choice of John Bercow is perhaps an interesting one. After all many of his Conservative colleagues, who sat stony faced as he was ceremonially dragged to the Speaker’s chair ritually protesting along the way, feel that he is too close to the present Government, and have threatened to remove him after their, of course, inevitable victory at the next General Election. Which raises the question why did so many Labour MPs vote for Bercow?

The most obvious reason is to get up the noses of their Conservative counterparts, which they certainly managed, but it may also be the case that some on Labour’s backbenches regard keeping in with the Party leadership as more important than safeguarding the independence of the House of Commons, which would mark another stage in the dreadful sycophancy which has engulfed Labour since the first arrival of Blair. A third possibility is that they voted Bercow to keep others out, again perhaps others less to the liking of the Party’s leaders. Whatever the reason it suggests that Bercow was the choice not because of his own attributes but because of how his election will affect others. Watching an institution which is prepared to defend the occupation of a country on the grounds of democracy, but which then treats its own democratic procedures as something of a game may help to account for why both the Commons and democracy are held in such poor regard in Britain today.

Iran

Meanwhile Iraq’s neighbour, Iran, is having a few problems with its democracy. In this case its not so much voting behaviour, how the electorate voted, that is the issue, but rather the way the votes were counted. Whilst the winners claim all was above board and hunky dory, or at least nothing was sufficiently wrong to make a difference, the losers claim widespread fraud and vote-rigging. The problem is that with the count behind closed doors nobody, beyond a very select few, can be certain. Incidentally, isn’t it curious considering all the whingers who go on and on about proportional representation and ‘fairness’ essentially being about electoral systems that most problems with elections are not about the particular system used.

What Iran’s problems do indicate is that a proportion of Iran’s population do not seem to trust their democratic system. Of course it is, anyway, a limited democracy with the Guardian Council and the Supreme Leader having overall power with a complex system to guarantee theocratic rule. What has become extremely interesting is the insistence of the Iranian leadership that their problems have been fermented, if not created, by the United Kingdom. This must come as a joyous confirmation to the old heads in the Foreign Office wishing for the days of Empire and Britain’s power around the globe, if they are still alive that is, but for most impartial commentators the idea of Britain having, or, indeed, wanting this kind of influence seems somewhat removed from reality. No doubt this will not stop many people from constructing elaborate conspiracy theories supporting and advocating the position of the Iranian leadership, and by no means all of them will be either Iranian or Muslim.

For us in Britain it is difficult to be clear about the significance of all this, all we are seeing is hazy views of events in Tehran, it is not even clear whether the unrest goes beyond the borders of the capital. One thing, though, is clear, for the country’s leaders to either have rigged an election in favour of their preferred outcome, or to assume that a significant number of their own people are being shamelessly manipulated by ‘foreign powers’ of whatever hue, seems somewhat insulting to those people at best.

One last point on Iran which is also worth mentioning is that good old hobby horse class. The election ‘winner’ Ahmadinejad is a ‘man of the people’, supported by the ‘working classes’ of Iran, particularly the rural working classes (proletariat or peasantry?) whilst Mousavi appeals to the more urbane, or at least urban, middle classes and aspirant middle classes such as University students (proletariat or bourgeoisie?). Is this a revolution or counter-revolution? Again I have no doubt many earnest Marxists will be penning learned papers on such matters, on both sides of the argument. One thing which this does raise is that Islamic revolutionaries seem to want both Islamic culture and politics and also the consumerist benefits of western culture, but are they compatible? After all , it took a Christian revolution to develop the Protestant work ethic, will Islam need to go through something similar?

Elections

Finally we have had our own elections to, eh, crow(?) about. And historic elections they were as well with the BNP returning two members to the European Parliament. Admittedly the BNP weren’t the biggest winners on the night, that was the Conservatives, though Labour will no doubt be taking some consolation from the fact that their amazingly poor performance was not eclipsed by any great rise in the Liberal Democrats or, for that matter, anyone else. So the next General Election will still be a Labour-Conservative run-off and if you don’t want David (Cameron that is) you know where to come. Of course here we come back to where we started, what is the worth of a democratic system where people vote against what they don’t want because nobody is actually standing for anything they do want. Hence Labour’s ridiculous campaign trick of getting Harriet Harman recorded messages played to supporters warning about the dangers of letting the BNP in through not voting Labour. This from a party which has spent the past decade warning how dangerous foreigners, those nasty illegal immigrants, are to us and who wanted to prevent foreigners who had served in the armed forces, Ghurkhas, from settling here, a policy not even countenanced by the most jingoistic of the British press.

It might be suggested that it is about time we all realised how much immigrants contribute to our country, and have done so throughout its history, and not confine such sentiments to bullet points in the A-level curricula. It might further be suggested that if those whom we elect want us to take democracy seriously then they should do so too, not just in the way they practice it in their own institutions, but by actually encouraging debate rather than stifling it, by actually making political choices rather than preventing them, by actually taking responsibility rather than avoiding it, and in total by giving us something we want to vote for rather than just something we are marginally less inclined to vote against.

Posted by grtaylor | Tagged with democracy, elections, house of commons, iran, john bercow, speaker

Michael Jaber

With the Twelve Days of Christmas just having come to an end a few weeks ago, it seems that the world has been surprised with a unique ‘festive’ season for most of the first third of this year. Instead of French hens and golden rings, however, we are gifted with presidential orders and a $787 billion dollar stimulus package. The media attention surrounding this festive season seems to be even more intense and widespread than the one that usually exists around holidays such as Valentines and Mother’s Day. The “First 100 Days of Obama”, as it is sold by the majority of news broadcasters, seems to be ample proof that after two and a half years of US primaries and elections, the global media still has not gotten enough from covering the phenomena of Barack Obama. It its undeniable that the electoral victory of President Obama in last November’s US general election carried immense historical and political significance and unquestionably deserved the hype it had created. The election of an African American to the office of US president, in itself, justifies the fascination the media has shown with regards to these developments. Add to that the extremely volatile economic situation that the world finds itself in, and eight years of blundered US leadership, and the explosion of interest that the world has shown in the domestic political developments of the sole world superpower does not seem surprising at all. However, now that the concerts and parties celebrating the election victory have been over for a while and the reality of the massive difficulties facing this presidency are starting to become clear, one has to ask the question whether this high amount of media attention will benefit or harm Obama’s presidency and approval ratings in the long run?

Before attempting to answer this question, it is essential to look at some of those very complexities and problems facing President Obama, which, ironically, seem to have been brought so clearly to our attention through the immense media coverage of this young presidency.

On the domestic front, the thought of bipartisanship has quickly faded since those promise filled days in the aftermath of the presidential election last year. Just over a month into his presidency, it seems that Barack Obama is faced with a similar partisan divide that had paralyzed the Bush administration in its final two years. Although a ‘lame duck’ presidency seems improbable, as the Democratic Party holds the majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, the notion of a unified US leadership under President Obama seems unlikely. The intense media coverage of the debates and difficulties preceding the passing of the economic stimulus package in the Senate earlier this month seemed to verify that party politics, rather than a need for unity, will be dictating the tone Washington for, at least, the next two years.

This increasingly publicized partisan divide, coupled with the high media coverage of the “tax issues” facing some of the new president’s cabinet picks, has slowly started to eat away at the feeling of anticipation and optimism that had gripped the world in the weeks and months before and after the 2008 US election. The jitters of uncertainty that have affected international relations since the 2008 ‘Credit Crunch’, and its subsequent global economic downturn, seem to have been given a new impetus as, to the eyes of the international community, the global superpower fails to take the lead. With other global and regional powers taking uncoordinated economic action, and developing nations turning towards different sources for assistance, it seems that, after two decades of searching for a reason to legitimize its global leadership role, the USA is failing to make use of the opportunity being provided by the international despair caused by this economic downturn.

Apart from seemingly failing to take a leading role in tackling the global economic troubles, our attention has also been brought to the various problems and difficulties facing the proposed foreign policies of this administration. While symbolic initial steps in the first few days of the presidency were highly promising, such as the executive order to shutter the Guantanamo detention facility or the appointment of George Mitchell as a new Middle East envoy just two days after Obama’s inauguration, the media has been quick to highlight to us the remaining areas of contention facing US foreign policy and, more generally, international relations. Although the new administration has been vehement at disconnecting itself from the policies of the previous administration, the reality on the ground has not changed. The improved security situation in Iraq, demonstrated by the successful democratic elections in early 2009, has paved the way for Afghanistan to take the position of being the primary concern of this new US administration. At the same time as troops are being withdrawn from Iraq, which realistically speaking has to be seen as a “post-office” success of the last administrations, the number of soldiers is being steadily increased in Afghanistan. The hopes of some, of decreased US foreign meddling, seem to be dashed as the general public is increasingly informed of the growing dangers in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region.

Just a little further to the west from that region, in the Middle East, the Obama presidency is faced, maybe not surprisingly, with further foreign policy difficulties. In the aftermath of the Israeli Gaza operation, and with the election victory of the right and far-right in Israel, the above mentioned Mitchell led mediation attempt in the Arab-Israeli conflict seems to be faced with more complexities than other similar attempts in recent history. These complexities are enhanced by the growing skepticism that exists in the Arab street, and among some governments in the region, of the ‘changes’ this administration can really bring with regards to U.S. foreign policy towards the region. Fuelled by the failure of Barack Obama to comment on the Israeli offensive in Gaza, and the selection of Rahm Emanuel, an American-Israeli, as White House Chief of Staff, the massive support enjoyed by Barack Obama globally seems to be lacking in a region which, ironically, might be in most need of believing in some of the messages of his election campaign. Similarly, the message emitting from Iran, another major foreign policy issue faced by the new administration as the Iranian nuclear energy standoff continues, seems to also be a cautious one. The Iranian president has made it clear that Tehran will initially observe the Obama administration before deciding on how to deal with it. This, he claims, will enable Iran to decide whether this change in government truly represents a change of policy, or merely one of tactics.

The next few pages could easily be filled with a continuation of the domestic and foreign obstacles facing this young presidency. From the overhaul of the healthcare system, to a still nuclear armed North Korea, the material for potential difficulties and troubles is never-ending.

In watching the coverage of the Obama presidency since his inauguration on January 20th, it becomes clear that the media, political analysts, bloggers, and anyone else debating the future and ‘success’ of this administration, have primarily taken their stories and material from this seemingly endless pool of possible problems. While the very nature of good journalism requires the uncovering of potential issues and the raising of contentious points, one has to be aware of the potential harm this intense coverage of the early days of the administration can have on the global perception of President Barack Obama. It would be ludicrous, and potentially even dangerous, to suggest that one, in an attempt to savor the global image of the US president, tip-toes around the controversial aspects of this presidency. On the contrary, this US presidency should be treated with the same journalistic and public scrutiny as any other presidency. And that is what the media and others have failed to really do – treat the Obama presidency just like any other presidency.

Ironically, it seems that the very hype that had existed around Barack Obama from the primaries up to his inauguration might now be the source of difficulties for this young presidency. While various forms of media continuously brought the message of change and hope into each of our living rooms, it might be the continued excitement around Barack Obama which robs us of those very illusions. The different media sources are right to carefully study and report on the U.S. presidency, however, it is the sheer amount of publicity received by their findings which needs to be questioned. The media and the public have to start to treat President Obama as the 44th President of the US and realize that, just like the forty-three presidents before him, he is bound to make mistakes and be faced with difficult situations. Furthermore, a realization has to be made that, in the first one hundred days of his presidency, it is highly unlikely that any drastic indications of the successes or failures of his policies will become evident.

Many of us were quick to believe and identify with the slogans that carried Senator Barack Obama to victory in the 2008 election. “Change we need” and “change we can believe in” were his rallying calls to power. Now that he is here, we need to comprehend that change needs time, and if it truly was “change” that the world was yearning for while cheering for Barack Obama to win the presidential election, then it is exactly that what we should give this presidency – time. There really is no need for such vast and close media scrutiny of every move made by President Obama. No need to point out every possible hurdle and mistake that could be made, and, most importantly, definitely no need for “The First 100 Days of Obama”.

Posted by grtaylor

Come on Torquay!

Well, what an exciting time it has been since I was last able to post on Read My Lips. For a start Torquay United nearly gained promotion out of the Blue Square Premiership at the first time of asking, but took pity on local rivals Exeter City and allowed them to win the second leg of play-off semi-final. Still we seem to have got our act together this year as well, despite a dodgy start, and the diagnosis of leukemia for defender Chris Todd. I hope to see a fit again Chris playing for Torquay in Division 2 in the near future!

Apart from getting my sons in to The Goons, Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, and Dr. Who I have also been taking them to see Wales play a bit of football, usually only a little bit though! This picture shows them cheering on the lads against Lichtenstein whilst pretending to be Japanese!

We have also had some fun at the University, whilst involved in a Welsh Baccalaureate taster day brought to an early end by our wonderful summer rain I was able to watch an impromptu water feature develop on campus as water cascaded down the campus’s various steps. Below is a picture of the new swimming pool created outside the entrance to the campus Library.

And here is the disastrous effect it had on University parking.

I found myself forced to walk home that day and took this picture of the confluence of the Rhondda and Taff in Pontypridd.

Just don’t mention global warming! Or is that climate change?

Anyway, a few weeks later we congratulated our latest set of graduates at congregation. The picture below shows the eager gathering in our Sports Hall.

And below are some of our graduates in Politics and Public Policy.

I must genuinely say that this year’s graduates have been a joy to teach and I will be, in fact I am, severely missing students pictured here and their colleagues (honestly!). One of them, not actually a BA Politics student unfortunately, was so good we had to create an undergraduate dissertation prize, our first, to mark his excellence! And I am indebted to Zenab Barry for the pictures of graduation above.

We are now close to the end of term and I am looking forward to two masterclass sessions with Llanishen High School in a couple of weeks, I will try and record them on posts as is my habit in the coming weeks, and a trip I have organised down to the Senedd, which I also hope to report back on.

However, what has been of real interest over the past few months has been the collapse of capitalism, well the most recent one anyway, and that will be the subject of my next post coming soon!

Posted by grtaylor

Visits From Friends

Since I last posted anything on Read My Lips a number of things have been going on. Martin Shipton, Political Editor of the Western Mail visited us to talk about freedom of information.

Martin was welcomed by a select and enthusiastic group of students and staff.

We followed this with a visit from Labour MEP Eluned Morgan, here, as with Martin, talking to the Head of Politics, Policy and Philosophy, Catherine Farrell.

As with Martin it was good to see a healthy crowd of staff and undergraduates from across the years.

We would like to thank Martin and Eluned for their time and their contribution to and provocation of interesting debates.

We also maintained our links with local Schools, notably Llanishen High, and we also contributed to the Welsh Bacc tasters organised by our Marketing Department. These photos were from last year’s Masterclass for them as I forgot to take my camera along to the one I did this year and then was sick so unable to offer the second, but I haven’t posted them before so I hope you don’t mind out there!

Goodbye to Another Friend

I would also like to pay my own tribute and respects to a friend of mine and the University’s, the former Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police Force, Michael Todd, who tragically passed away recently.

Michael was a personal friend and on my invitation visited the University a couple of years ago (see earlier article for a more substantial account). Staff and students were saddened and shocked to hear of his premature death, and Michael was intimately concerned with issues of public leadership, an area which is becoming a growing interest here. Many at Glamorgan, including myself, will miss Michael.

I’m the Face

In my continuing desperate attempts to appear hip, cool and ‘tuned-in’ to a youthful audience I have started my own Facebook site, obviously you will need to register with Facebook to see these sites, and I have also started a Politics@Glamorgan site which all current and former Politics students, even if it was only one module, are welcome to join. I am hoping that in time this will become a valuable discussion site for students taking Politics at Glamorgan. I am pleased, and impressed, to say that some of my more enterprising students have created their own Facebook group University Glamorgan Politics students are surely the best upon which they have also placed a number of enterprising photos, usually featuring me! Below are a selection

I make no comment about the choice of my associates! However, I have not been the only victim, my colleague Alan Jones has also come in for some of this treatment, albeit somewhat more respectfully.

I am told that the above montage has promoted inquiries from all over the world, including the USA, as to whether Alan is a genuine Presidential candidate. I can exclusively reveal that he is, as yet, not. Still far too young for the Republicans really.

They have also been busy producing Glamorgan Politics promotional posters and even a short film. Below is an example, for more why not go an have a look at their Group?

Posted by grtaylor | Tagged with eluned morgan, facebook, llanishen high school, martin shipton, michael todd

10% of Nothing

Isn’t it amazing how politicians who voted for a policy over a year ago can suddenly have a collective memory seizure when it comes to implementing that policy. Such seems to be the case with Labour’s abolition of the 10% basic (or is that ‘sub-basic’) rate of income tax. All of a sudden MPs who were praising Gordon Brown’s financial acumen as Chancellor have suddenly discovered that this will have an effect on their constituents. Bad at the best of times such events are certainly not helpful when the PM is seeking to calm markets, always jittery about being economically ‘soft’ on the poor, over the economic crisis rather jovially nicknamed the ‘credit crunch’. Of course this is no joke for the ‘global’ economy, or for first time buyers or those seeking to renew fixed rate mortgages. Meanwhile as governments, chief amongst them a distinctly panicked USA, slash interest rates, banks restrict their offers to potential customers, demand higher deposits, provide lower mortgages per income and increase their interest rates on mortgages. So, as lending gets cheaper for banks it gets more expensive for their customer, well, after all, if they didn’t then maybe their shareholders might actually have to pay-up for the risky investments banks have been making all these years. Meanwhile back at the Westminster ranch MPs who are now exercised by the plight of young people without families have, as the Joseph Rowntree Foundation have pointed out, been remarkably unconcerned with growing poverty amongst this group since 1997. Indeed whilst Labour has improved the absolute position of the poorest, particularly those with children, relative poverty is no better ten years after Labour came to power then it was at the end of the Conservatives period in office – a record to be proud of? But then being rich is now a thing of ‘celebration’ for Labour ministers, after all without the rich who would pay for their reelection?

Holding a Torch

I must confess to some mixed emotions about the protests during the Olympic torch relay over the past few days. On the one hand having some sympathy for the tibetan protesters, and concern over the Chinese government’s treatment of its own people, I feel uneasy at the attack on the Olympic torch itself given the centuries of symbolism of the Olympic movement, far older than the contemporary Olympic games. The sight of the unfortunate Konnie Huq, having the torch grabbed from her hands (I refrain from making cheap comments about ‘holding a torch’ for Konnie myself, after all I am old enough to remember ‘Auntie Val’ and ‘Uncle John’ when they were Blue Peter presenters), and the actual extinguishing of the torch in Parist, just doesn’t feel right to me. After all in forcing a reassessment of Olympic practice, the protesters have arguably done more damage to the Olympics and its future then the terrorists managed at the Munich Olympics. Neither am I particularly impressed by the feudal claims to fealty represented by the Dalai Lama. Of course, this is not to deny the culpability of the International Olympic Committee in awarding the Games to Beijing, but whilst the IOC is certainly these days a very commercial organisation, and perhaps attempting to arrange an event like the Olympic Games every four years in our capitalist world, inevitably so, it could also be argued that even though the Olympics is fundamentally a political event, just look at the Berlin Olympics, or those in Moscow and Los Angeles, is it right that the IOC should be acting as a force for the political values of the West, rather than, as it likes to see itself, an organisation which brings the world together without prejudice

Posted by grtaylor

Ideology Masterclass 1st December 2006

One of the interesting aspects of this job is meeting different people, and amongst the more interesting of those is putting on Masterclasses for local Schools. This is something I genbuinely enjoy doing, though I wish I could get someone else to do the preparation. At the beginning of term I was contacted by Jon Pontin of Llanishen High School, who has previous experience of our Masterclasses, and despite this he asked if I could put on a couple more for his students this year. The first of these, for his final year students on ideology, we delivered on the 1st December.

As you can see everyone looked engaged and thoroughly enjoying themselves! During the day we looked at how ideology can be applied to actual events, including the IPPR report on youth behaviour and the Treasury's Stern Report on global warming, and went through the spectrum of ideologies in these contexts.

Group working was the main part of the day, and te groups came up with some useful perspectives.

We rounded the day off with the groups presenting different ideological responses to the Stern Report, although some proved less supportive of their colleagues than others.

I still like that red tractor!!

 For me, though an interruption to my usual routine, the need to think about presenting my perspectives and views in a different context to pupils who are not studying on my modules is a useful discipline which enhances my ability to deliver for students here and keeps a contact with a wider audience. So my thanks to the pupils of Llanishen High for engaging with all this and challenging some of my suppositions.

I am due to be providing another Masterclass for Llanishen High School on the 15th December and I will try and provide another post for that!

Posted by grtaylor

Choose Your Calamity

Yet another set of reports predict he potential results from our wanton abuse of the ecosystem on which we depend. The BBC report that the WWF have warned of imminent (in geological terms) ecosystem collapse, whilst the start of Energy Saving Week has been marked by a report from the Energy Saving Trust claiming that the UK are the biggest wasters of energy in Europe.

The WWF Living Planet reports contend that the 'ecological footprint' of humanity is now outstripping the ability of the Earth's ecosystem to replenish itself. Given our rapid diminution of resources, such as fossil fuels, laid down over many millions of years some may say that this happened some time ago. Nonetheless the report acts as an update on the old Club of Rome, Limits to Growth reports which have recently had their own update.

Meanwhile the UK Government fund the Energy Savings Trust to berate us for not being more energy efficient. At the same time the review of building regulations can do no more than recommend better insulation and efficient heating systems in new builds. A whole range of design and other features, such as micro-energy production, which would have been introduced are ignored, and home improvements, even energy efficient ones remain subject to VAT. Whatever happened to the days when you could get government grants for insulation and lagging?

Meanwhile the Government has yet another of its panics over migration, this time for new countries joing the EU. Apart from rather begging the question as to why we are letting countries join the EU if we have a problem with migration, not to mention the obviously hollow promise of the EU to allow the free movement of labour, there is also the issue of what Governments will do when faced with the enormous mass migrations which may be the inevitable result of global warming and climate change.

... And here's One I Made Earlier

So let's dig ourselves deeper, why don't we. After our glorious (or should that be vain-glorious) exploits in Iraq, let's all get fired-up for Iran, or even North Korea. So North Korea has, apparently, conducted a nuclear weapons test, and we are all offended and upset. Still;, there's nothing new in North Korea's nuclear ambitions. The Northe Korean nuclear threat is certainly a regional one, but hardly global in reach. Unlike our own nuclear weapons, which have far greater power, are greater in number, can reach anywhere in the world, and are now due for a replacement which has been supported by our new Prime-Minister-in-waiting, Gordon Brown. Mind you we, of course, will be able to debate the issue in our democratic country, before we agree with the Government's decision that is.

While we seem determined to commit many £billions to a 'defence' system which is only any good if we don't use it, nuclear power has been resurrected as the new solution to all our woes. I have often thought that the UK has had several opportunities to take a moral stance and reject nuclear defence by giving up our militarily useless nuclear weapons, thus becoming the first nuclear power in history to get rid of such weapons. Unfortunately it woudl appear that our moral stances on the world stage are limited to those occasions when we use our considerable arsenal of weapons, rather than setting an example in rejecting the worthless and dangerous ones. As for me I'm thinking of renewing my active membership of CND, and joining the Welsh Anti Nuclear Alliance.

Posted by grtaylor | 1 comment

We have been welcoming our new intake of first year students, and our returners at levels 2 and 3 to the University over the last week and beginning to get teaching underway. Despite a series of unforseen issues, everything seems to be settling down and sorting itself out and students are already getting into a groove.

Amongst the 'delights' of Induction Week was our, now established, Study Skills module, led by Jennifer Law, which mixed together students from Politics, Social Sciences and Public and Emergency Services. Below are a few of them hard at work.

Now all they need to do is get their short essay in and they will have completed their first module at Glamorgan.

Politics students also had to make their module choices, and once again options were faced with a wide-rnage of choice of options constrained by timetabling. Nonetheless, so far they are managing with this new environment and new challanges well, and we in the Politics Team are looking forward to supporting their development over the coming years. Below they consider their choices.

Finally, on a personal note, I cannot resist sharing with you a picture from home. Earlier in the summer one of our two rabbits, Toffee, decided that a hole in the knee of an old pair of white jeans I had put in their hutch, looked interesting and burrowed into it only to get himself stuck, with his head sticking out the bottom of the jeans' leg. Below is how I found him in the morning, before having to cut him out with a pair of scissors, a process with which he was not impressed.

Posted by grtaylor | 0 comments

I just thought I would spend a little time welcoming our new students who will be suffering, I mean enjoying, InductionWeek this week, and to welcome back our returners.

The Politics team shows a few changes from recent years, particularly with the loss, and it will be a loss, of Julia Edwards, who has decided to leave us for travel and adventure. We all wish Julia well, as I am sure those students who know here will as well, and hope that she has some great experiences to which she can look forward. Julia leave a big gap in our teaching provision, and this means the remainder of the team in Politics and Public Administration have stepped into the breach to ensure our varied programme will be delivered.

 And here we are, from the left: Colin Morgan, Award Leader for the HND in Public and Emergency Services, who will be teaching Trends in British Politics; myself, who you will be regally sick of by the time of graduation, and who you will meet most immediately teaching core modules at levels 1 and 2; Catherine Farrell, Head of Public Policy, Politics and Philosophy who will be teaching Publi Affairs at Level 1; Alan Jones, our Head of Social Sciences, who will be teaching our International Relations and Global Politics modules; and Jennifer Law, Award Leader for the BA Social Sciences, who is teaching Public Policy-Making at Level 2. Thanks to our Philosophy colleague, Sebatien Odiari, for taking the photo.

We look forward to meeting all out new level 1 students, and to welcoming back level 2 and 3 students who have already suffered at our hands. For example:

 Three of our Level 2 students 'anxiously' awaiting their Comparative Politics exam. They will be amongst our Level 3 intake this year. And ...

Some of our Level 1 students awaiting their Government and Governance exam. In fact they got so fed up of me asking if I could take their picture they insisted on taking mine:

 I don't look any better on my own then I do in the 'Team'.

The Team will be working hard to support your study and we hope that you will enjoy your study at Glamorgan.

 This is the Team working hard, you can tell that because I'm not there!!

I also thought it might be useful if I posted to the blog the outline for what our new students need to do in the coming week to ensure they make a flying start. So here it is:

Politics at Glamorgan

Contact:    Dr Gerald Taylor

                   Room FH201

                   Tel: (01443) [65]4076

                   e-mail: grtaylor@glam.ac.uk

                   weblog: http://readmylips.weblog.glam.ac.uk

                   student website: http://glamlife.glam.ac.uk/

What you need to do this week:

Choose your modules: (120 credits, normally 6 modules)

Required Politics modules:

PO1S08     Government and Governance

PO1S09     Political Ideas and Actions

PO1S13     International Relations I: Theory and Organisation

PO1S06     Public Affairs

Module options – subject briefings Tuesday (see list).

Get module choice form signed by Gerald Taylor, Wednesday 11.30, B201.

Enrol on course – Wednesday 12.30.

Open Computer Account (self-entered at any campus computer lab, staff in labs will help if asked!). Important for access to Blackboard information and support.

Attend Study Skills session (provides 4 credits towards Award), Wednesday 10.00, G607. Provide Computer Account details to Gerald Taylor.

Attend Study Skills feedback session (Q&A), Friday 10.00 D119.

Attend Library Induction, Wednesday 15.00, G219.

Attend ‘Managing your finances’ talk, various times, H102.

Posted by grtaylor | 1 comment

Conferences are upon us once more, and this brings to an end the so-called 'silly season'. But those who believe that Conferences are the end of silly season have clearly never attended one. I have attended several Labour Party Conferences, the first in 1983 when I voted for Neil Kinnock as Leader in the days when he looked dynamic and innovative, attributes he soon seemed to lose as Party Leader. I can still remember the Tribune Rally, traditionally a major left-wing event at Labour Conferences, when he was being heavily criticised from the left because of his failure to vote for Tony Benn in the Deputy Leadership election against Denis Healey, and he com pletely floored his opposition on the left by beginning his speech with a quote from Lenin. An inspired political move the like of which he never seemed to produce again.

Party Conference

At the time of writing the Liberal Democrats have just finished their Conference, as have Plaid Cymru, whilst Labour's is just commencing and the Conservatives are waiting in the wings. For the Liberal Democrats the issue is still Ming the Magnificent, their Leader Menzies Campbell, and despite having a raft of new, and interesting, policies (notably the commitment to 'green' taxes and abandonment of a 50p top rate) Campbell still struggled to negate his age and it will be interesting to see how he fares in a General Election when the British press make their, of course, perfectly fair and balanced commentary on his performance. The question remains whether he will end looking like Michael Foot in 1983.

Leadership is also the issue Labour and the Conservatives, in different ways. For Labour, now that Blair has declared he is definitely going, honestly, you can trust him on this, the focus has moved from actually trying to do anything to the succession and the legacy. For the Conservatives Cameron still needs to establish himself as something more substantial than a pretty, news coverage friendly, face.

For Plaid, and the SNP in Scotland, the focus is elections next year for the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament, but they have struggled to compete with distractions elsewhere.

Bye Bye Tony

 Well, Tony is off. He's told us so and he's a 'pretty straight sort of guy' who we can certainly trust on this. But, like Lenin on his deathbed, the real problem now is ensuring a successor who will keep the faith. So will it be Trotsky or Stalin, Brown or Johnson (oh, and which one is which?). Not leaving things to chance, or personality, Tony is also busily preparing policy groups to settle policy 'for the next decade'. This sits alongside the policy debate to 'renew' the Labour Party, which essentially seems to require the annihilation of the party itself. Meanwhile, John McDonnell remains a rather forgotten and ignored figure, despite having actually declared his intention to stand againt Brown. Incidentally, is it me or do you wonder why we should be debating the 'legacy' of a Labour Leader who has won three landslide election victories, implemented constitutional reform on a scale unseen since the 17th century, along with the US made international conflict a legitimate tool of international relations again, and dominated his own party to such an extent that there now seems hardly to be a party left.

 Enjoying the 'Legacy'

Meanwhile we can all enjoy the benefits of Blair's government. The US are now suggesting that the Iraq War is fueling terrorist activity, in Iraq itself there is talk of Civil War, with deteriorating security and human rights abuses as its precursor, in Afghanistan the Taliban refuse to admit defeat and go quietly, and at home the continuing issue of climate change gains no concerted or coordinated response from the Blair Government, social housing is becoming more difficult to obtain as house prices become more and more absurd, education and health services continue to undergo permanent revolution with the intention of creating commercial if not privatised organisations, and fewer and fewer people are interested in even the minimal participation of voting in the elections for the 'democratic' state that we leave in, but how cares as long as Blair is winning?

Posted by grtaylor

Well a bit late for May Day, but that's what a few in politics may be shouting at the moment, followed perhaps by 'man overboard'?

BAFTAs 

I have long held the view that everything in life is political, and, like Aristotle, I have tended to see humans as politikon zoon. I often use references to popular culture in my lectures, notably TV sci-fi. The TV Bafta awards, then, gave me some joy seeing The Thick of It, best of admittedly some rather poor fair from TV concerning politics at the moment, and The Government Inspector, Channel 4's documentary on the Kelly affair, both doing well. In addition the BBC's excellent dramatisation of Bleak House, Charles Dicken's novel of power and the inanities of the law was another winner. What gave me most pleasure, however, was Wales' own Doctor Who, which was, of course, demolished by a former DG because it didn't fit the perceived political priorities of the BBC then, and has been revived because it does seem to fit the BBC's political remit now! Of ocurse this history doen't stop the BBC from axing the 'currently unpopular amongst the elite' progarmmes, as the treatment of Grandstand has demonstrated. I'm looking forward to the revived version of Grandstand winning its BAFTA award in about 2026 when it is revived by a future DG with future politicians falling over themselves to endorse its brilliance and wonder why it was ever axed in the first place. Meanwhile, expect the BBC to throw away many more trademark programmes which have the kind of popular support and cache for which many commercial organisations would give the right arms' of several of their Directors.

Do you think he looks tired?

Meanwhile, back on planet Blair, our own one-and-only Prime Minister has been undergoing his own tests of character. Following hard on the heels of a dreadful local election campaign and a rushed and panicky-looking Cabinet reshuffle, questions about Tony's leadership and his time of departure have simply refused to go away. This has led Tony into a defence of 'New Labour' and Blairism, though no clearer outline of what these actually amount to, except that those who support alternative views could 'lose Labour the next election', singled out in this respect were Labour ginger group Compass. Compass itself seems rather mild in comparison to Labour left organisations of old, another mark of the pathetically supine nature of the Labour Party under Blair and the fawning, sycophantic following that Blair has inspired, but, of course, he has won three elections, so as long as he has kept Labour backsides on green leather all is well with the world.

 Talking of Elections

Of course, past glories have limited credibility for contemporary politicians, particularly those seeking to maintain a worthwhile income after the boss has departed to his round of after-dinner speaking and US lecture tours. The present is what counts, and presently Tony does not look like the fortunate Prince he once appeared. The local election results were an unmitigated disaster for Labour not just because they lost control of 17 councils and over 300 Labour councillors lost their seats, but also beacuse the vote didn't split between the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives, but re-established the Conservatives with their best overall result since Black Wednesday in 1992 (a significant event in British psepsological history. Increasingly the personal vitriol against Blair is looking like mainstream politics. Meanwhile the Conservatives increasingly look like a potential future government and the more Blair hangs on the less time Brown will have to distance himself from the 'old' regime.

There is also a wider point here, with another fall in electoral turnout, down from 36% to 40%, the Labour Government's authority ad popularity is certainly questionable. The Electoral Reform Society have already referred to the 2005 General Election as the worst ever with regard to British democracy, and as I have pointed out elsewhere, and as can be seen in the table below, a smaller proportion of the Welsh electorate voted Labour in 2005 then voted for Michael Foot's Labour party in 1983, and only a smidgen more of the UK electorate voted Labour in 2005 than voted for Foot. Does this mean Foot was really a great Labour success?

Table II.3 % Share of Electorate Won by Labour at European, General and Assembly Elections 1979-2005. Source: Gerald Taylor ‘Disaster? Whose Disaster? The National Assembly Election 2003’ Contemporary Wales, Volume 17, and House of Commons Research Paper 05/33, General Election 2005, available at: http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2005/rp05-033.pdf.

Musical Chairs

 The local election disaster for Labour was followed by a very speedy Cabinet reshuffle.This had been well advertised in advance, but what shocked was the speed (the reshuffle was brought forward from the Monday to the Friday - the day after the local election) and scope of the changes. A number of aspects of the reshuffle caught various eyes, mosy obviously the departure of Charles Clarke.  Whilst it had been predicted that Clarke would fall on his sword to assist the PM, it was clear that he did not go willingly and that he had turned down other Cabinet posts. Beyond this the move of Jack Straw away from the Foreign Office, widely seen as demotion; the appointment of Margaret Beckett is his place, the first woman Foreign Secretary ever; and the stripping of John Prescott's office, but not his title of Deputy Prime Minister, his salary and perks, grabbed predictable attention. I was interviewed on Bridge FM about the reshuffle and pointed out Blair's innate awareness of deflecting public, or at least press, attention from his own issues and problems by providing a positive story in the first ever appointment of a woman to a senior Cabinet Post: Beckett as Foreign Secretary, but even this has backfired on him as Straw's 'demotion' has been the main focus of attention. In addition Prescott's loss of occupation without loss of status or salary has also been questioned, but, of course, if Blair had removed Prescott, Deputy Leader of the Labour Party and loyal second in command, then this might well have raised eyebrow's amongst the party 'faithful' as well as amongst backbenchers. Despite the optimism of some about the 'success' of the reshuffle, it is far from clear that Blair is out of the woods. Watch this space!

But are we happy? 

 Meanwhile, I have been interested to see the BBC's series on happiness, The Happiness Formula, which, amongst other things, is questioning hwether the kinds of policies championed by Blair and his acolytes, and pursued by UK governments, not tom menbtion exported around the world, actually make us happy. Maybe we don't want to be happy, jut to look down on those we feel better(-off) than. Or maybe, as Rousseau suggested, we don't really know what's good for us at all!

Posted by grtaylor

The Politics Year

We're coming to the end of Politics teaching for 2005-6, and just coming up to exams, and I have high hopes of some good results from our Politics students this year. We've had a strong first year with some students of real potential, and our second and third years have worked well for their results. 

Our first years, above, will now follow through on new options and new modules available for them at Level 2, and I am looking forward to the experience of teaching them and developing this new teaching for them.

Visit from the 'Cop Who Nicks Crooks'

A personal highlight of this year for me, and for students and staff who took part, was the visit of my old University friend Michael Todd, now Chief Constable of Greater  Manchester Police, named 'the cop who nicks crooks' by The Sun (apparently the others just nick drunken and speeding drivers, not, no doubt, emerging from Sun office parties).

For me it was a great chance to see Mike again after many years, and to give students the opportunity to hear the ideas and perspectives of one of the top Police Officers in the UK. I also got my photo taken with him, I think for the first time.

Yes, that's me looking vaguelly like a refuge from a Harry Secombe lookalike contest. My students seemed most surprised to see me wearing a suit, not a usual sight I have to confess!

But the students themselves were engaged, as this photo shows.

Local Elections 

The local elections (not in Wales though) reminded me of the last local elections in Wales, and here I am on the streets of Aberdare with Abercynon Cllr Alby Davies, and National Assembly First Minister, Rhodri Morgan.

Perhaps the suit and looking like Harry Secombe is not so bad after all! 

Posted by grtaylor | 0 comments

A Question of Debt

 Perhaps one of the most striking features of economic change in my lifetime has been the switch from public debt, owed by governments, to personal debt, owed by us. The revelation that 500,000 are at least £20,000 in debt out of 2 million at least £10,000 in debt emphasises the current problem. It certainly makes me feel a lot better about my current level of debt, particularly when I consider my low mortgage level, but it also makes me wonder how, and when, all this money (in excess of £20 billion owed by these 2 million alone) will be paid back. A Conservative Party report has identified personal debt as a 'time bomb', without, of course, mentioning the Thatcher governments' role in loosening credit restrictions. 

 Part of this increasing debt includes increasing student debt, which itself has implications for student recruitment. One factor affecting this rise in personal debt has been the Blair governments' unwillingness to increase tax, particularly income tax, levels. This followed the perceived problems of the Shadow Budget Labour presented in the 1992 General Election, and high profile campaigns from think tanks like the Adam Smith Institute. The latter frequently neglect to mention that taxes were actually at their highest under the 'economic restructuring' of Margaret Thatcher. This 'economic restructuring', which also swallowed the proceeds of North Sea Oil and privatisation, amounted to the expenditure necessary to maintain the levels of unemployment exacerbated by Thacher's economic policies.

Currently we have a government increasing expenditure on public services, but not enough to address the serious problems the public services face. Hence the need for 'public service reform'. So we, as individuals, borrow more to finance our expenditure on the latest computer software, electronic accessories, and leisure activities, and meanwhile education, health, housing and other public services are stretched whilst the government seeks new, that is non-tax based, methods of financing them. Is this what we want? Not according to ESRC research, but it is what we have chosen.

Our Environment

 One result of this is the failure to address a number of related environmental problems around climate change and energy use. This issue surfaced recently with the Commons Environmental Audit Committee arguing that not enough has been done to ensure energy efficiency. Part of this is a failure to encourage investment in renewable energy sources, not just in terms of large scale wind farms or wave energy, but also doemstic based micro-renewable sources. In addition planning for energy saving, such as ensuring proper insulation, and building standards in new build housing, and improving standards in existing housing, or planning to reduce the need for travel to work or leisure facilities, has simply been ignored.

Not everyone believes that this is an issue of immediate importance. Some academics, like University of Virginia's Patrick J. Michaels, believe that global warming and climate change have been overdone.  Such views depend on technological solutions and the operation of the free market. This is interesting given that environmental damage is usually seen as a problem of market failure. In the end those who have the market power, the rich and the northern hemisphere, are precisely those who can afford to insulate themselves against the effects of climate change, unlike those who are poor and/or live in the southern hemisphere. How much environmental damage, affecting the climates and livelihoods of the people of Africa, Asia or Latin America, will we rich northeners put up with before we see climate change as our problem?

Posted by grtaylor

Being old enough to remember the 1960s hit by Hedgehoppers Anonymous it seems an appropriate title for the first post in the News Watch category at what has been a busy time for news at the start of the New Year.

A Question of Leadership

Political leadership seems likely to loom large as an issue in UK politics over the next twelve months. David Cameron, having followed Iain Duncan Smith as the second leader of the Conservative Party to be elected by its membership, has begun setting out his agenda for Conservative politics. Meanwhile Tony Blair’s slow departure from office has found him losing authority in his own party and using his New Year’s message to defend his record and establish his legacy. Finally, the beleagured Charles Kennedy finds himself the subject of persistent news reports whatever he does to quell the speculation of his own demise as Leader of the Liberal Democrats. Will 2007 see new leaders for all of the major UK parties, and how will this affect their electoral chances? Perhaps what we should really be asking is why the fate of a democracy is apparently so dependant on the individuals who happen to lead our political parties?

The Health of the Nation

Speaking of David Cameron’s Conservative agenda, his speech today promoting Conservative support for the NHS has been seen, by the BBC at least, as a bit of a gamble. The Conservative website features the story with a picture of a somewhat surly and disgruntled looking individual in rather non-descript medical garb, probably modeled to impart the feelings of NHS employees who are thinking what the Conservatives are thinking. Interestingly despite these apparent feelings about the NHS nothing much is going to change should they form a government, only get better. The real message may be that the centre ground of British politics is becoming more and more crowded and voters have been provided with even less real choice. Interestingly Cameron’s leadership of the Conservatives may itself unite Thatcherite supporters of supposedly ‘free market’ policies, with Conservative pro-Europeans upset by Cameron’s approach to the European Union.

A Lot of Hot Air

Once again energy and its supply across international boundaries have been central to news coverage. This time focusing on the dispute between Russia and the Ukraine over gas prices which could have affected gas supplies to Europe. Of course, once again energy is a cover for international political machinations. Russia is less than happy about the western leaning nature of the current Ukranian government, and the West less than happy about perceived Russian harrassment of said Ukranian government. Amidst all this it was amusing to see prominently featured on the Russian gas suppliers, Gazprom, website features on the new Baltic gas pipeline, intended to meet ‘the united Europe’s soaring needs in Russian gas’, and conveniently by-passing the Ukraine. So will Russia just wait until the completion of this new pipeline before implementing its proposed fourfold increas in gas prices on the Ukranians? And if it does how will the European Union react then? For the moment the EU energy website admonishes us all not to ‘take energy for granted’. In the UK our Energy White Paper focuses on the ‘fuel mix’ and aims for reliable energy supplies with energy efficiency being consigned to the margins. The Second Annual Report on its implementation provides notice of £2billion to be spent on energy efficiency, but again the pressure is on developing sources of energy such as sustainable energy sources and nuclear power. Whilst we seek to reduce carbon dependency rail fare increases threaten to push transport off the railways and back onto the roads increasing fuel use. Are we really doing enough to encourage and ensure greater energy efficiency in the UK? Why is this not a central feature of twon planning, building regulations and transport policy?

Step on the Gas (the US kind that is)

In the US car manufacturers are themselves hitting hard times. Thei ability to earn the kin dof profit levels which keep board and stock markets happy are being eroded by foreign competition. How will this affect US attitudes to energy consumption in the future? Of course the car industry is an area where profits have been traditionally high. Interestingly this is not something which is often noted by proponents of market forces who prefer to view markets as having the characteristics of perfect competition, under which, according to the Wikipedia article ‘it is impossible for a firm … to earn abnormal profit in the long run, that is to say that a firm cannot make any more money than is necessary to cover its costs’. Of course some economists, J K Galbraith for example, recognise the fact that many industries do provide, and perhaps require, ‘abnormal’ profits, but perhpas that means that we cannot rely on the market to regulate such sectors and such companies but rather have to rely on governments and politics to do so instead, however imperfect these means may be.

Posted by grtaylor | 1 comment