UK

Rain (AM and PM) 4° London Hi 10°C / Lo 3°C

Hain breaks ranks to warn Brown he is running out of time

Labour has lost its way under PM, says former loyalist. And it must act quickly to get voters' pulses racing again if it is to win next time

By Jane Merrick and Brian Brady

Mr Hain says the Government under Mr Brown lacks "narrative"

PA

Mr Hain says the Government under Mr Brown lacks "narrative"

Labour discontent with Gordon Brown's leadership bursts into the open today as the former cabinet loyalist Peter Hain breaks ranks to warn that the party is heading towards defeat unless it changes course and rediscovers its core values.

Mr Hain, who has remained studiously loyal since exiting the Cabinet last year, writing exclusively for The Independent on Sunday, says the Government under Mr Brown lacks "narrative" and has lost its way after three election victories under Tony Blair.

The intervention echoes simmering tensions among ministers as polls show Labour continues to suffer from the Government's handling of the recession. It will be seen as a thinly veiled attack on Mr Brown and raise renewed questions over his leadership. The move, along with an interview by Mr Hain in another newspaper, was being interpreted as the first shot in a fresh leadership crisis for the PM.

In a further development, it emerged that Mr Brown has ordered his colleagues to stop any leaks, following a series of damaging revelations of cabinet disagreements. He took the unusual step of issuing the warning amid signs of a concerted briefing campaign against Harriet Harman.

Mr Brown's attempt to reassert his authority underlines the deterioration in cabinet unity as he struggles to hold his Government together during the biggest economic and political crisis since Labour came to power. It also lays bare his fears that the widening splits in his Cabinet threaten his chances of emerging from the crisis with any prospect of winning the next general election.

In his article, Mr Hain, who resigned as Secretary of State for Work and Pensions last year over the Labour donations affair, says Mr Brown "can" win the next election, but only if he imposes radical change and a clear vision of where the party is heading.

"To win, Labour must be seen as the credible force for change, and that means changing itself – and there is not much time left," he writes. "There is no escaping that New Labour has lost five million voters – and not simply because of longevity in power. On basic

core-vote issues of affordable housing, job security, employment rights, crime and migration, Labour has to do much better and much more."

He adds: "Despite all Gordon Brown's best efforts and his excellent speech to the US Congress this week, Labour has not had a clear enough narrative right across government."

Mr Hain says that whatever the "individual policy merits" of ID cards, Trident, nuclear power, part-privatisation of the Royal Mail and Heathrow's third runway, they "do not add up to a programme to get the pulse of potential voters racing. Where is the story in all that, where is the distinctive Labour narrative, where are the Labour values of social justice and freedom?"

Mr Brown opened a cabinet "away day" in Southampton with a remarkable lecture about the dangers of allowing the contents of private discussions to enter the public domain. He ended his 10-minute dressing-down with a stern reminder that the whole Government would suffer critical damage if cabinet confidentiality were not preserved.

"He said we would all suffer if any more details leaked out," one cabinet minister revealed last night.

Mr Brown is believed to have been particularly angry about the revelation that Ms Harman, Labour's deputy leader, had been "slapped down" by colleagues, including Hazel Blears and John Hutton, when she suggested action to claw back bonuses already paid to failed bankers. A subsequent leak revealed a cabinet split over plans for a "moratorium" on any new laws – including moves to increase equality in the workplace – that could impose more costs on businesses.

"This is a time for a bit less Bill Clinton and a bit more Margaret Thatcher," a Downing Street strategist said last night. "The country doesn't want empathy, it wants to be led."

But details of Mr Brown's appeal to his colleagues emerged amid further signs of conflict over the succession if he is forced out. Ministers last night identified the Secretary of State for Children, Ed Balls – a close Brown ally – as the most likely opponent of a Harman leadership bid.

Mr Balls's admission that Labour had not been tough enough when regulating the banking sector in the years before the credit crisis was described as "pure positioning" by his rivals.

Mr Balls also gave a speech at a fundraising dinner for Ms Harman's deputy, Chris Bryant, last Wednesday. He joked that Mr Bryant "has done a good job, I wouldn't say controlling our Leader of the Commons [Ms Harman], but supporting her".

It has also emerged that Ms Harman, while Mr Brown was in the US, referred to herself as "duty prime minister". In a speech to Labour's Scottish conference in Dundee yesterday, she heaped praise on Mr Brown.

Ed Miliband, who is also seen as a possible leadership contender, told the conference that the party faced "testing times" and that the country needed "an economic vision, an environmental vision and a social vision".

Hain in the spotlight: Colourful campaigner who made headlines

* Born in Kenya in 1950, but brought up in South Africa.

* Arrived in the UK in the mid 1960s. studied at the University of London and Sussex University.

* Joined the Young Liberals, becoming chairman in 1971.

* Charged in 1974 with robbing a branch of Barclays Bank. Acquitted at trial.

* Helped to found the Anti-Nazi League, to campaign against the National Front and other far-right groups, in 1977. Joined the Labour Party in the same year.

* Elected MP for Neath at a by-election in 1991.

* Appointed junior minister at the Wales Office in 1997. Later served at the Foreign Office, before joining the Cabinet as Secretary of State for Wales in 2002, and later as Leader of the Commons, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, and Work and Pensions.

* Forced to resign from the Cabinet in January 2008 over the late declaration of deputy leadership campaign donations.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

What planet am i on?
[info]berewic wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 12:45 am (UTC)
Reading this article has led me to believe that NuLabour think they are in with a chance of winning another election.

I come from plant Earth and we also have a political party called NuLabour. On my planet they have done such a bad job of running the country. Everything our NuLabour have done in the last twelve years has cost ten times it's original "quote" and still didn't work. The billions of tax payers money they have thrown away to foreign countries is astronomical. They have invited millions of foreign citizens to our shores and give them shed loads of cash, even though they have contributed nothing to our economy or country. This is strange becouse millions of people that have not only contributed financially all their lives but also fought in wars to protect our land, are being starved by NuLabour. Who claim they are short of cash, although the cash they have for failed banks run by criminal fraudsters seems limitless.
Where I come from our NuLabour lie, cheat and steal from us on every occasion they are given the opportunity. Our NuLabour, rather than teach kids in decent schools run by decent teachers, they fix the exams and dumb-down in order to con us into believing their ideas are a success.
On my planet NuLabour have failed in everything they do or have done in the past twelve years. On my planet NuLabour have no chance of winning the next general election but every chance of spending years and years in a prison cell.
Re: What planet am i on?
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 07:15 am (UTC)
You read above what Downing St. said : 'this is a time for more Thatcher(ism)'; more 'there is no such thing as society'; more unmitigated top-down sociopathy; more selling of the family silver to cronies for peanuts (and under_the_counter personal pension plans like Blair's); more privatisation of the immigration system; more direct corporate welfare and corporate welfare wars; more de-education and de-skilling; more 100 billion subsidies for 'Murkan high tech education and industry systems by buying 'defence' weaponry instead of developing it at home; more indirect rule by organised economic crime syndicates; more planet-busting gluttonous consukerismetcetera... suggesting that the answer to your question is poor ol' planet earth, as it gets ready to toast a malignant virus with boots on
http://news.independentminds.livejournal.com/1181865.html?replyto=5259177
Re: What planet am i on?
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 07:23 am (UTC)
Tsk! One's speech rec. sys. is in a bad mood this morning
...... more planet-busting top-down promotion of gluttonous consumerism ...
"they"
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 07:18 am (UTC)
Have made a significant contribution as cheap fodder for a black economy that kept the Brown economy afloat and rat-brains in power for decades
[info]brethynda wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 02:15 am (UTC)
Hain has the luxury of knowing that he can rely upon one of the most loyal Labour electorates in the whole country... and the one that returned the highest "Yes" vote in all of Wales at the 1997 referendum. Even if Labour is decimated nationwide, Hain will still be a shoo-in in Neath.

Perhaps he imagines himself as the next Labour leader...
Ask not for whom the custard-thrower cometh, Brown - he comes for thee
[info]neil_mcgowan wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 05:20 am (UTC)
You're a hopeless, hapless disaster who takes his orders from Yankee-Doodle. A vile, gutless warmonger who pressed-on with an illegal war at a time the British tax-payers needed that money spent on priorities closer to home.

A shabby failure, utterly hated by the British people.

Custard sales are booming - we're waiting for you, Fatso.
Re: Ask not for whom the custard-thrower cometh, Brown - he comes for thee
[info]tominlondon wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 03:19 pm (UTC)
Neil, I wish you would express your feelings more clearly.
New Council Houses Now
[info]redroseandy wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 06:36 am (UTC)
The Government appears to be allowing Councils to build new council houses, but at a time when so many Councils are run by the Conservative Party this is still not going to happen. The Government must tell the Councils to build new houses for us.
Re: New Council Houses Now
[info]sportingmac wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:03 am (UTC)
...don't really need new council houses - we actually only need one per family! Councils should legislate to 'reclaim' second and homes - nothing like a crisis to push these sort of things through - as Hiliary would say. ;))
Re: New Council Houses Now
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 09:03 am (UTC)
Excellent idea, to which I would add the caution that requisitioning be done at punitive valuations taking into account market trends - unlike the wilfully negligent purchase, with taxpayers' money, of shares in insolvent organised economic crime syndicates at multiples of their real value.
LABOUR HAS RUN OUT OF TIME AND MONEY:
[info]bgarvie wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 06:55 am (UTC)
More signs of this dysfunctional Government falling apart at the seams. With membership numbers collapsed and their popularity evaporated, many Labour MP's know the end is near.

After nearly 12 years of dysfunctional Government, the electorate are angry and unhappy with these champagne socialists. They have lived well on the best perks in the land whilst we have had our pensions ruined, savings ruined, jobs ruined, businesses ruined, life style ruined, retirement ruined.

They have massively abused their Parliamentary powers, become arrogant, greedy and rotten. Whilst preaching to the electorate, they busy themselves grabbing as many perks as possible. The writing is now on the wall and none of them can stop their kamakazi spiral into the wilderness. Brown has put the Labour movement out of business for the next 50 years. The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples' money.
Re: LABOUR HAS RUN OUT OF TIME AND MONEY:
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 02:41 pm (UTC)
res ipsur loquitur
At least he knows how to handle Banks
[info]living_fossil wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 07:42 am (UTC)
Hains is someone who we need. Everyone knows banking is a crooked game and here is Robin Hood himself ready to get the cash flowing again.
Disagrees now only
[info]frenchreader wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 07:44 am (UTC)
That Mr Hain disagrees now implies he agreed along all those years he spent in the Cabinet where Mr Brown had the high rank of Chancellor before being appointed P.M.
Then the Cabinet had a wonderful "narrative" about the banks, the City, the illegal Irak war and the WMD's. All of a sudden this "narrative" is no more likeable. Funny enough.
Re: Disagrees now only
[info]neil_mcgowan wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 09:11 am (UTC)
It's true - gutless twonks like Hain and Charles Clarke only begin to speak out against the leadership whose boots they formerly licked when the conductor checks their tickets and ushers them off the gravy-train. Prior to that they were very happy to sit back as part of the problem, and keep banking the cheques.
What is wrong with a little Protectionism ?
[info]neil121 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 07:50 am (UTC)
I'd just like to comment on the Prime ministers continuing belief in the global economy. I think that blindly following theoretical and academic principles is not always correct. Just look at all the jobs being lost in the UK where we are used to a good salary and good standard of living. Not 100's but 1000's and tens of thousands of jobs are being lost over the past few months in areas that can ill afford to lose them. The split between rich and poor is increasing with jobs moving abroad and all this with Gordon Browns backing under the principle of a global economy and yet there is little chance of the labor in these areas having freedom to move where the jobs are moving to. So I ask what is wrong with protecting our jobs and our income for our familes, isn't this what our forefathers fought for and what we've all worked hard for ? Are we to just give it all up for the sake of an academic principle ?
Re: What is wrong with a little Protectionism ?
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:04 am (UTC)
With due respect, I suggest that generating new 'jobs' is far better than propping up dead wood. A nice example (of many) is cancellation of the 100 billion (Trident) subsidy of 'Murkan hign tech education / industry and its replacement by a home grown / developed capability - if North K, Iran and Pakistan can do it, then the British can do too.
Re: What is wrong with a little Protectionism ?
[info]neil121 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:15 am (UTC)
'New jobs' is a great idea.....but high in principle again and a little short in practice.....ie can we compete ? Why haven't we seen these new jobs over the past ten years ? Everyone would welcome new business and the right kind of new job but there aren't any .
Re: What is wrong with a little Protectionism ?
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 09:38 am (UTC)
Those are fair questions in response to which I suggest consideration of the following (short) answers (the long versions are too long for this space):

1. "can we compete" : North Korea, France, Pakistan, and Iran can (in the area of high tech education / industrial_development of defence systems that I mentioned. Similar considerations apply to other possibilities;

2. why has it not been done during" the past ten years" : for the same reason that Britain was de-educated and de-skilled during the two previous decades;

3. "there aren't any" : agreed. Britain was so thoroughly bananarepublicanised during the three decades of subversive Blatcherist government, that the very serious situation that now obtains is not unlike an actual banana republic that suddenly finds itself unable to produce a crop or an alternative crop either because of seriously dysfunctional government, that instead of investing in high tech education and industrial developments (driven to begin with by developing for example a home grown 100 billion 'Trident' and investing massively in education education education, doles out zillions in direct corporate welfare and corporate welfare wars.

Because of the urgency, I have suggested as an alternative to the long slog towards implosion of the pseudo-democracy, a Cromwellian clean sweep of all snouts, both subversives and others, out of Westminster and Whitehall
Re: What is wrong with a little Protectionism ?
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 09:53 am (UTC)
For example Mandy is broadcasting now via the Marr show, about government intent to dole out your taxes in corporate welfare for dead wood General Motors - while also peddling the 'it wasn't us guv, it was dem horrid foreigners' line.
all the same
[info]someofusknow wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 08:01 am (UTC)
'Mr Brown "can" win the next election, but only if he' rigs the election, Mugabe style.

However, it will not make a scrap of difference which party wins the next election, since all major parties belong to the same 'more globalisatipn, more corporate control, more wars, more transfer of wealth from poor to rich, one wolrd government' club.
Brown is fine
[info]wormery wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 09:37 am (UTC)
I like Brown and think he has handled the economy well - he's one of the few people who can understand economics and the whole world is following his plan! Hain is yet another opportunist. And a hung parliament or a small Labour majority next time would be no bad thing either. And most of all, if Brown goes WE'LL GET MANHATER HARRIDEN HARMAN AS PRIME MINISTER! This must be avoided AT ALL COSTS.
Brown is typical dross of organised political gangs
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 09:44 am (UTC)
PM Harperson... EEEeeeek!
Fell down laffing when Indi Ms. Orr likened something or other to "having Harriet Harman to tea"
Re: Brown is fine
[info]sobatai wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 05:00 pm (UTC)
Excuse me?
Anyone who understands economics wouldn't have claimed to have "abolished boom and bust", would they?
Golem Brown ought to remember the words of another un-elected Labour prime minister James Callaghan who told his colleagues: "We used to think that you could just spend your way out of recession...I have to tell you in all candour, that that option no longer exists".
Racing facts has to be a whole lot better than printing money.
Re: Brown is fine
[info]neil_mcgowan wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 09:18 pm (UTC)
>> WE'LL GET MANHATER HARRIDEN HARMAN <<

No, you'll GET who you VOTE for. No-one voted for Brown and he never stood for office - this half-wit fell into the position when Tony Blair went.

No-one will vote for Hopeless Hattie.

Hain Brown and the rest
[info]fwdinsight wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 09:54 am (UTC)
Mr Hain fought against appartheid yet turns a blind eye to the implementation of appartheid here. The cornerstone of Appartheid was a policy called Job Reservation, (still practiced by the South Africa Government against whites). In Britain we have now have Job reservation the same as the Apartheid version where any colour can apply but Anglo Saxon White men and women and our sons and daughters. They are excluded from all sorts of jobs.We fought for a meritocracy. This is completely unnaceptable in your own country. If war comes they expect the people to fight, for what. Further the EU according to the EU own Accountants has a hole in there budget and have not signed off the books for 14 years because 95% of the money is Unnacounted for Missing. Further this is a Protestant nation joining an 82% dominated Catholic Empire. All the Symbols are Catholic. The Flag is known as the Mary flag with 12 Yellow stars and a blue background. The Artist used the picture of mary with the 12 stars around her head as the inspiration. There are 27 members of he EU why not 27 stars. Because Its the symbol of the Catholic Church, one of the most bloody corrupt powers in history where an estimated 52millions died through her unrepentant actions down the centuries. Why join such an organisation? Because its catholic dominated Empire with all that means. If you look at the EU buildings they are occult. Certainly its a dictatorship. THE MEP's have no power. Its refered to as Post Democratic. This is the course that a Unted Eutrope has always followed and we as a nation have ended up fighting against. As one leader said if we join it will mean us destroying that group or them destroying us. Yes Brown Blair is to Blame they have sat and watched this corruption and theft and said and done nothing. Worse than that news papers are almost banned from saying anything. Part of the Agreement to join signed by heath was the doing away of our manufacturing iindustry. Whether you believe it or not, where is our huge shipbuilding industry, car, engineering.motor bike plants gone to name a few.We need to get out of this nightmare with its Criminal Rights Law, oopps Human Rights Law. The result time after time is Criminals walk. The law abiding asleep in their beds at home end up in prison for defending themselves. A police man attacked by a lout head buttet him to stop the attack. The policeman ended up in Jail. There is so much that has been tuirned on its head because of us joining the EU that you could fill pages. But we have to get out. Phone your MP, write to him, phone. Tell him you want a referendum like the Irish, French and Dutch. We want our country back.
B.I.M.B.O Brains In Minute Bottom Orifice:
[info]zanulabour wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 10:15 am (UTC)
To win, Labour must be seen as the credible force for change: They will be the first British Govt.to be tried in the court for collusion in torture and war crimes.
Mr Balls's admission that Labour had not been tough enough when regulating the banking sector: Was seen as the truth by the voters
"Despite all Gordon Brown's best efforts and his excellent speech to the US Congress this week":we are still bankrupt
Blind leading the Blind

Re: B.I.M.B.O Brains In Minute Bottom Orifice:
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 03:00 pm (UTC)
the true subtext of Brown's speech to Congress was " please can we have som e money"

and they knew it. when one is flattered by someone always ask what do they really want?
[info]dogsolitude_v2 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 10:25 am (UTC)
Ahem...

"Mr Hain says that whatever the "individual policy merits" of ID cards, Trident, nuclear power, part-privatisation of the Royal Mail and Heathrow's third runway.."

MERITS? MERITS?!?!?! These are some of the most unpopular things they've brought in! ID Cards (and the National Identity Register, which is far worse) drove me away from Labour in the first place.

And these guys wonder why we're resorting to chucking custard at the likes of Mandelson to try and get them to listen.

Talk about alienation... Do 'they' ever actually bother to speak to the general public these days?
M.A.D.
[info]swordofalbion wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 10:33 am (UTC)
Dear Gordon,
I realise you're very busy working hard for the destruction of my country and it's people. But I would just like to point out, that if you employ odious little shytes like the terrorist sympathiser Hain, then you should expect to get stabbed in the back. Oh, and no more Labour party. Ever!

Expect more like him soon.

Beware the Ides of March

Regards,
S o A
Abandon Further Legislation
[info]foxtrotuk wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 10:48 am (UTC)
Labour would be well advised to abandon all further legislation between now and the general election because continuing along the same path will just alienate the electorate further still.

There have only been two Labour leaders since 1950 who have actually won a general election - Wilson and Blair. The Brown government is only there at all because of Blair's 2005 victory.

If, therefore, Labour are remotely serious about winning the next general election, what would be wrong with actually reverting to Blair's policies instead of recklessly careering along their present erratic path like a runaway train?
'Scuse one
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 11:28 am (UTC)
But "Blair's policies" varied from day to day - apart from the ones : a) about doing nothing about Britain's bananarepublicanisation (set in motion by Thatcher); b) soliciting secret financial and and sinecure donations to his personal pension plan. The guy was a profesional opportunist, with a 24 to 48 attention span, and a good scriptwriter
Re: 'Scuse one
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 12:13 pm (UTC)
I offer Beatrix Campbell's beaut mini portrait of WonderOne et Mandy in action.
Re: 'Scuse one
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 12:15 pm (UTC)
they're dead but they don't know it
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 12:48 pm (UTC)
there is a wonderful Randy Newman song called"we're dead but we don't know i"- that should be the Zanulabour theme song
Gordon Brown
[info]marinebigmike wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 01:26 pm (UTC)
My suggestion to Gordon Brown is that he would be much better off if he got rid of creeps like Peter Hain.
Irrelevant.
[info]rojaws wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 01:33 pm (UTC)
Whether or not NuLabour win the next election nothing is going to halt the downward spiral our society is in.
The ruling classes may slow the process down a bit, in fact they'll do everything in their power to keep things the way they have been, but nothing is going to stop the collapse of this consumer/capitalist society.
In fact, the harder the ruling classes struggle to maintain this particular social structure, the faster it will disintegrate.
To be frank it might be no bad thing, in the long run, for this country to have total social collapse.
Short term of course it will be very unpleasant but it really would be a splendid opportunity to get rid of this horribly corrupt pseudo-democracy we now suffer from.
Our society has stagnated dreadfully &, like all stagnant pools, the scum has floated to the top.
The question being, if we get the chance to rebuild our society from the ground floor up, will we have learnt anything from the mistakes we've made?
One thing strikes me more than any other.
A society that's sole objective is the aquisition of material wealth cannot help but breed corruption.
Cracks me up
[info]tominlondon wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 03:18 pm (UTC)
The idea of "pulses racing" and Peter Hain cracks me up. Too funny.
BRITISH JOBS
[info]usstate wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 04:02 pm (UTC)
Looking at all these problems mr brown has not sorted the only party in britain to sort this mess out is he BNP VOTE BNP VOTE BNP
Re: BRITISH JOBS
[info]joolzg wrote:
Monday, 9 March 2009 at 01:25 pm (UTC)
well said but you know that people will brand US as racist for saying that we should put british people before others, that we should bring home our soldiers, become self sufficiant in farming, leave the eu and put the money into our economy, get rid of the "human rights" and bring in our laws and common sense, remove ALL illegal immigrants etc

I could go on but all of the above are from "the racist BNP" so we should not give them an ear

joolz
What Are We So Afraid Of?
[info]harmonyfuture wrote:
Sunday, 8 March 2009 at 04:49 pm (UTC)
We should get rid of this government now.
We should install an interim all party National Government.
We have to change our corrupt First Past The Post voting system.
We have to start building an economy from scratch.

We have to do it sometime, why wait until it's too late!

Please if you have a moment have a look at this
http://www.gopetition.co.uk/online/25648.html
[info]rob456 wrote:
Monday, 9 March 2009 at 06:52 am (UTC)
Spot on berewic. The spin carries on - the Government under Mr Brown lacks "narrative" - how about "lacks a clue", "lacks integrity" and "lacks any kind of coherent vision"

The sooner Brown calls an election, and allows the healing to begin, the better. Unlikely to happen as he's more interested in keeping his job than what's good for the country
[info]joolzg wrote:
Monday, 9 March 2009 at 01:28 pm (UTC)
"soon as brown calls an election"

how about for june next year, he will TRY and stay in POWER as long as he can, he his the saviour of the world, and needs the time to feather his nest, job prospect and golden pension.

In 6 months all the illegal immigrants will be given an amnesty, a british passport and a free membership to labour, 1/2 million votes for zanulabour

joolz
Our Right to Public Consultation in Welsh Higher Education
[info]trevormayes wrote:
Monday, 9 March 2009 at 07:16 am (UTC)
We should take Peter Hain to task on the issues he raised especially those in his own back yard

Our Right to Public Consultation in Welsh Higher Education

Peter Hain said

A fourth-term Labour government needs to be active and enabling, rather than centralising and controlling. It needs to empower individual citizens and local communities to take control of the decisions that affect their own lives through a much more radical approach to devolution of power and budgets.

Question

Does that include issues of tuition fees and higher education

Irrespective of peoples opinions, the fact is without public consultation and accountability they count for nothing. The only way you have to express your opinions on higher education is via a blog.

Childrens Minister Ed Balls on the 1st of December 2008 said

where things go badly wrong, people are right to want to know why and what will be done about it.

Surely the same standards apply in Wales

So why did things at the University of Wales Lampeter go so badly wrong that they needed life support via an emergency fund and what is being done about it. Who is being held to account for the failure or to put it a better way, how much were they paid

The response to one disaster is to create another by merging with nearby Trinity College. The leader of the Merger Committee says that everyone will be consulted. He forgot to mention everyone except the public.

The former Adjudicator for Higher Education, which deals with student complaints, said that universities have no sense of natural justice. Its the old adage of power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Thats why we need public consultation and accountability, a political opposition and people who will speak out when the democratic process is abused.
The Constitutional Black Hole that is Welsh Devolution
[info]trevormayes wrote:
Monday, 9 March 2009 at 08:18 am (UTC)
We should take Peter Hain to task on the issues he raised especially those in his own back yard and especially the insult to democracy that is Welsh Devolution

Re: Peter Hain said

A fourth-term Labour government needs to be active and enabling, rather than centralising and controlling. It needs to empower individual citizens and local communities to take control of the decisions that affect their own lives through a much more radical approach to devolution of power and budgets.

The Conservatives in the 1992 Further and Higher Education Act took away powers from the Minister of Education and handed them over to unaccountable QUANGOs. The Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW) and its subsidiary the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA), both exclude any form of public: complaint, consultation or accountability.

The current New Labour government under the Public Audit (Wales) Act 2004 excluded any form of public complaint on financial matters and withdrew the power of the Auditor General for Wales to intervene on issue of value for money and maladministration. It also took away the power of the Auditor General under the Local Government Act 2000 to take over a higher education establishment on the grounds of financial mismanagement.

The result is that the Welsh Assembly now claims it has no jurisdiction and neither does the Public Service Ombudsman or Auditor General. This absurd situation has reached a point whereby academics are themselves worried about the way in which our Universities are governed. They admit that the only way to bring any form of maladministration to light is to publish it in a journal or newspaper; otherwise, you are wasting your time.

Complain to the Welsh Assembly and because of the above situation which prevents any form of public accountability they say they have no jurisdiction. Laws are made in Westminster and so you complain to the Department of Universities Innovation and Skills, they say it is a devolved issue, and refer it back to the Welsh Assembly, and so you go round in circles on a road to nowhere.

That then begs the question what are the opposition parties doing about this situation and the answer is nothing.
LABOUR OUT OF BUSINESS FOR THE NEXT 50 YEARS:
[info]bgarvie wrote:
Monday, 9 March 2009 at 09:57 am (UTC)
Mr. Hain, you are a bit late. Brown has run already out of time. His disasterous policies have virtually bankrupt our country. All this contagion cannot be blamed on the Americans nor completely on a global crisis. This dicredited PM has ruined our pensions, ruined our retirements, ruined our savings, ruined our jobs, ruined our businesses, ruined the economy and you think he is short of time?

After nearly 12 years running our economy, his time has run out and so has patience with your incompetent Party. No wonder your membership numbers have collapsed and your support evaporated. He and his coterie of sleazy Ministers have proved to be an absolute nightmare and the electorate want a change. At the next election, you will experience the biggest vote against your hopeless Party in history. As a result of your Government's mismanagement of the economy, the Labour Party will be out of the running for the next 50 years.
decent enough chap
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Monday, 9 March 2009 at 09:05 pm (UTC)
Hain is a decent enough chap who had his ideals squashed by the Brown/Bliar Thatcherite agenda


now he has seen through Zanulabour and rightly puts hiS finger on the reality.Bit late, Peter, most of us would say

Most popular in UK News



Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date