Voting TaKtiX

Tom Watson asks:

Seriously, I’d be interested to know what people think about this stuff. Is it a new way of communicating or just clever marketing and spin?

Both, I think. As Paul Walter observes:

Does he think we were born yesterday? If you were going to do a videcast would you do it while you were doing the washing up?

It’s obviously staged and intended to make him look like a ‘normal’ person, right down to the flat not being 100% clean and tidy. But, essentially, while it is a little cynical, it’s a sign that politicians are learning and adapting to the new media environment. (more…)

Hmmm…

1. Get elected leader of Conservative party
2. Appoint a respected elder statesman to lead an enquiry into renewing British democracy and the constitutional settlement
3. Make a speech proposing a significant constitutional reform
4. Completely forget to even mention it to said elder statesman and thus undermine his whole efforts.

Well done Dave. You impress me less and less every day.

Mr Clarke said the Tory leader would find it difficult to find lawyers who would agree with his plan to replace the Human Rights Act with the new Bill.

Despite heading a Tory task force on constitutional issues, Mr Clarke said he was not forewarned about the plans.

Not the best of plans methinks. In fact, given that the speech itself was completely half baked, I’m given to drawing the conclusion that he didn’t think this one through very well at all.

Mr Clarke said: “In these home affairs things I think occasionally it’s the duty of politicians on both sides to turn round to the tabloids and right-wing newspapers and say ‘you have your facts wrong and you’re whipping up facts which are inaccurate’.”

Said they should have elected him leader. We’re screwed, arent’ we? To get rid of Blair’s New Labour, we need to get people to vote Tory. How can we do that when Dave just hasn’t got a clue and plays to the gallery?

Ok, I’m swamped at work, and Dave goes and makes a speech promising some radical reform. Except that, well, he seems to have fluffed it. I’ve been trawling around; does anyone have anything good to say about it? Blogsearch gives me nothing. Best I’ve found is Liadnan at NM’s:

I am, nevertheless, hopeful, that this could turn into serious thinking on constitutional matters in general. I see it as a major problem with this Government’s reforms that they have been piecemeal and incoherent.

It appears to me it’s miss informed posturing and playing to the gallery. Obsolete has an excellent summary of the principle objections. Of course, a decent, enforcable Bill of Rights would require a new constitutional settlement. Something I’m wholeheartedly in favour of. With both Brown and Dave posturing on the issue, and the LibDems completely committed to such an endeavour, is it possible that the parties may start competing on who can do the best job of fixing the constitution?

I’d love to think so. Odds? Hmm. “This is your captain speaking, we do apologise for the turbulence, this was caused by a flock of pigs getting caught in the engines…”

If anyone does find someone that both knows what they’re talking about and thinks Dave is on the right lines, throw me a link?

Robert Philpot has an excellent analysis of the need for the Conservative party to adopt electoral reform as a platform (via): (more…)

In an ideal world (ie one where I wasn’t skint), I’d have been in London yesterday for the Power Commission conference. Fortunately, Davide has written an excellent report from which I warm (a little) to Dave (again): (more…)

So, Dave wants to reform the powers of the Queen does he? Remove the PMs power to declare war without Parliamentary approval? Check the prerogative powers exercised by Ministers? Dave mate, are you sure you’re not really a Whig? What are you doing in the Conservative Party? Changing the way the constitution doesn’t work so that people may respect it more?
(more…)

So, Charles Kennedy announces he will not now run for leader:

it had become clear he did not have strong enough support among MPs and had decided to quit with immediate effect.

Good. Having been reading blogs and comments in many locations, it had become clear to me, as with many others, that, no matter how much we like the bloke, his position was untenable. I wish him well, hope he can recover from his problems and, specifically, hope that he can both remain in politics and return to a frontbench position at some point; talent such as his should not be thrown away. So…

Where now?

(more…)

Well, I’ve been thinking of something to write all day, and fiddling with the template a bit. Opening up a random post to see what it looked like, I found this from Gary: (more…)

By way of Robin at Perfect, I had a look at the LDYS response to Cameron’s recruitment site. I despair. Really, I do. Guys? I’m not a techie, I have problems with anything beyond basic html when I’ve got a reference guide, but that’s awful. I could knock up better in about half an hour using M$ Notepad alone. (more…)

So, Dave wants me to join him does he? I appear to be his target audience, a sometime Lib Dem who believes it’s more important to defeat New Labour than to continue the old rivalries. He’s saying the right things, I remain to be convinced if he’s doing them. But, well, I’m not convinced that joining his party is for me. Scratch that, I refuse to consider it. He wants an end to petty point scoring in politics? Fine, let’s talk. Openly, honestly, and with a perspective on both history, the future and on how things work. (more…)

On a purely entertaining level, I like Boris. On a political level, sometimes I read him and agree with every word, othertimes I disagree vehemently. Sometimes, like today, I chuckle at his attempt to play partizan, and note that he, like many others, completely misses the point:

I am slapping a preservation order on Charlie Kennedy, and listing him as a Grade One landmark of our culture

Are the LibDems left wing? Right wing? In the mythical “centre ground”? Boris thinks that the party having disagreements over policy is evidence of doublethink. No, not really Boris, it’s evidence of the party being a broad church coalition. (more…)

So, Dave (or is it DC now, I’ve lost track) wants to make Parliament more representative.:

“Until we’re represented by men and women in the country, regardless of race or creed, we won’t be half the party we could be,” he said in a speech on candidate selection in Leeds.

He said his “positive action” plan was not about “crazed political correctness”, but would guarantee more women and ethnic minorities in winnable seats.

Of course he does. In order to do it, he’s going to take control from the centre and govern his pary by diktat. Hmm, hasn’t that been tried before?

There’s a simple way to get more women in Parliament Dave. It’ll get more minorities in there as well. And, added bonus here, it will give the voters real control over who they vote for and who represents them. What’s this Mat, I hear you say, what’s this simple system?
(more…)