Alexander Tumilty

British embarrassment in Libya

Mon, 07 Mar 2011 08:00:07 +0000

One embarrassing cock up after another is all the foreign policy of Cameron and Hague with regard to Libya is achieving. The British government doesn’t seem to realise why the people of the Middle East and beyond are rising up: because they are fighting against dictators propped up by the capitalist World. The rebels do not want the help of British imperialists.

So William Hague should not be surprised when rebels chuck out the MI6 and SAS agents he sent in; these people do not want foreign intervention, they want to run their own country democratically. Likewise, David Cameron was frankly an idiot to suggest arming the rebels; it is not up to the British government to decide the future of Libya.

Imperialism is essentially a form of dictatorship as the people of a country are not in control of their own fate. It is therefore unjustifiable and hypocritical to intervene in the introduction of democracy to a country.

Cameron and his cronies need to stop pretending to take the moral high ground and get their clammy hands out of other people’s business. They’re making us look bad.

More reasons to fear America's Republicans

Tue, 01 Mar 2011 22:32:51 +0000

It is one thing to deny climate change, but purposefully damaging the environment is a whole other kettle of fish. The move by the Republican controlled Congress to reverse green initiatives that replace plastic cups with ones made from biodegradable corn starch. This may seem like no big deal, but it is further evidence of the Republican Party’s immaturely regressive dogma that will inevitably result in the demise of the World as we know it.

They are willing to do the stupidest most pathetic little thing for the sake of scoring political points and pleasing their supporters in the God-fearing heartlands of the Bible-Belt.

These are the people that run the country that runs the world. Oh shit.

The Tories need to grow up

Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:00:06 +0000

I wonder how different your human rights should really be if you live in Britain instead of on the continent. I imagined that they should be pretty much exactly the same for pretty much every single human. One can’t help but question then, what the motive is behind the creation of a British Bill of Rights. It seems like rebellion for the sake of rebellion.

Like a stereotypical teenager clashing with their parents, the Tories at the top of government are creating conflict with the big evil Europe machine. Or at least they’re trying to look like they are.

They never did anything about the Lisbon treaty despite pre-election whinging; their motley coalition of hard-right parties in the European Parliament was pointless from the start and is now failing; and now they’re in bed with the Europhilic Liberal Democrats. They need to do something at least vaguely anti-Europe before people forget about the ultra-patriotic line the Tories used to take (ironically before the ‘national interest’ ushered in a coalition with those traitorous liberals).

Enter the British Bill of Rights. Of course it won’t change anything (unless it does – in which case it will serve only to limit the rights granted to us at a European level, such as prisoners’ voting rights). This bill will be more trouble than it’s worth. It’s time for the Tories to grow up.

My problem with the No2AV campaign

Thu, 17 Feb 2011 14:36:00 +0000

The No2AV campaign tastes undemocratic: its launch earlier this week saw old men clinging onto the duopoly of the labservatives. In many respects the campaign just looks dirty.

The no campaign has been using unclean tactics for a while: they own the domain name yes2av.org and have set it to redirect to their own site. That’s just rude. They have even exaggerated their own support among Labour MPs by producing false figures.

What’s worse is lobbying the BBC so that it will no longer refer to the proposed change to the UK’s voting system as ‘electoral reform.’ This is ridiculous, it is a reform whether you support it or not. I don’t support the use of AV, but I still call it reform; arguably most Americans didn’t support changes to the system of Health Insurance in their country, but they still call it healthcare reform; indeed changing our government into a military dictatorship would be a reform – so why the change of terminology by the BBC? They’re just being silly.

What really gets me about the no camp is the unity between Conservatives and Labourites. There’s something dubious about politicians running a campaign against a change in the system that puts them where they are. Are they worried about the wasted £250 million? Are they worried that you, the voter won’t get what you really want? Or is it perhaps possible that they are worried about their positions of power being eroded?

I don’t like the No2AV campaign. I don’t like the way it’s behaving. I don’t like what it symbolises. In fact I don’t like the ‘first past the post’ electoral system. Maybe I have just been looking at the no campaign from too much of a biased and closed minded viewpoint.

Luke who's talking somewhat hypocritically about left unity

Fri, 04 Feb 2011 08:00:00 +0000

Frankly you’re just being rude. That’s what I have to say to Luke Akehurst after reading his column on Progress Online. He calls upon the British left-wing to unite against the government rather than itself by writing an article that attacks the far-left. Funnily enough, this will not be successful in promoting a sense of unity. In fact, the article smacked of rightist condescension.

You will never gain the support of the student movement by describing students as “naive” or the University of London President Clare Solomon, who students elected, as a “superannuated Trot”. It is not surprising then that the Socialist Worker Party and other ultra-leftist organisations have played such a big role in the recent protests. Students know who’s on their side; and it isn’t the Labour Party, which let’s remember was the party that introduced top-up fees and currently wants to replace fees with a pseudo-fee graduate tax.

It is clear from the language of the article that Luke Akehurst is not prepared to protest and probably hasn’t been to any of the previous protests. He writes of “violent confrontations” without understanding them. If he had been to the protests, he would know of the police’s intimidating tactics: on the day of the tuition fee vote, the police began to form a kettle and sent horses into the crowd, before any trouble had broken out. Not to mention the use of CS gas against peaceful UKUncut protesters in the most recent demonstrations. The likes of Aaron Porter have condemned violent students, because they do not really know what happens. The far-left doesn’t hijack the protests (as Akehurst describes) it is merely handed leadership of the demonstrations by the centre-left, which never shows up.

Having ripped the heart out of the student movement, Akehurst urges the far-left to work with the Labour Party, TUC and NUS leadership. He wants the far-left to sign up to the policy of halving the deficit in 5 years with a greater emphasis on tax rather than the “unachievable”. He forgets though that Len McCluskey, who was recently elected as General Secretary of Unite, the biggest trade union of both TUC and the United Kingdom, opposes all cuts.

This is the consensus among a broad base of the British left-wing, with the Coalition of Resistance backing McCluskey’s call for strike action. The Coalition of resistance is itself evidence of left unity as it includes (among many others) Labour MPs such as Tony Benn, Green MP Caroline Lucas, unionists such as Bob Crow and Mark Serwotka and ULU president Clare Solomon. Other evidence includes the Stop the War Coalition, which was founded by Lindsey German of the Socialist Worker Party and is currently lead by Tony Benn MP.

It seems then that the British left is uniting against the Tory-led government rather than itself: the trade unions, far-left and green parties, the student movement and Labour backbenchers are all cooperating in demonstrations. Who’s missing?

Luke Akehurst is wrong. The left is uniting in this country; it is the upper reaches of the Labour Party that need to join in with this opposition.

January's people

Mon, 31 Jan 2011 08:00:00 +0000

Who’s hot and who’s not this month.

1. (up) Ed Balls

He finally got the position he really wanted in the shadow cabinet. Yes, he’ll still be on Ed Miliband’s tight leash, but his economic credibility is one of Labour’s great strengths and it is finally being put to use. As Diane Abbott (@HackneyAbbott) tweeted: “George Osborne be afraid. Be very afraid. Ed Balls is coming for you.”

2. (up) Arabs

The people of the Arab World are protesting en masse against dictatorial regimes. The Tunisian government has already fallen and President Mubarak of Egypt is caving into pressure.

3. (up) Debbie Abrahams

Congratulations to Debbie Abrahams: she managed to increase Labour’s majority over the Liberal Democrats in Oldham East and Saddleworth. This was the first by-election since the government was formed and thanks to Debbie Abrahams’ campaign there was a clear vote of no confidence in this government.

4. (up) Value Added Tax

Everyone’s favourite regressive tax just got wacked up to 20% - good on you VAT.

5. (down) Andy Coulson

Not the nicest of people to start with, Coulson finally lost his job late this month, because he was making the Conservatives look sleazy.

6. (down) The British Economy

Down by 0.5% to be more precise. Whoops!

7. (down) Nick Clegg

Nick Clegg has depressed the support of the Liberal Democrats all the way down to 12% according to the latest YouGov poll. Maybe he forgot to mention that he’s just helping to clean up Labour’s mess.

8. (down) Zine El Abidine Ben Ali

Forced by the power of the people, the President of Tunisia has resigned and fled to Saudi Arabia having been denied entry into France. Interpol has issued an arrest warrant for him and his wife for their embezzlement of the Tunisian government.

Keep on marching - 29/01/11

Fri, 28 Jan 2011 08:00:00 +0000

The backdoor privatisation of higher education and the scrapping of the Education Maintenance Allowance must be fought against. They are an assault on what little social mobility this country has and it is vital that the student movement does not lose momentum after our defeat in December, when MPs voted for the aforementioned policies. That is why tomorrow, on the 29^th January, as many of us as possible must march in the name of free education, available to all.

The cutting of the EMA is a short-sighted move that puts the removal of the deficit ahead of this country’s future and the livelihood of the next generation; meanwhile the marketization of universities is being implemented in the name of economic sustainability even though fee increases will do nothing to close the deficit and the cuts weighted towards humanities risk a repeat of our recent rocky economic history.

The EMA was not only a ticket to social mobility to many of this country’s disadvantaged youth, it was also an essential investment in the future of this country. Yes, it was abused by a minority who didn’t really need it (and those responsible for making the EMA look a joke should hang their heads in shame), but for the beneficiaries it was often a choice between continuing their studies or dropping out of school. The EMA was therefore a chance to gain A-levels and go on to University where there may otherwise have existed no such opportunity. Its scrapping will make further and higher education a privilege of the well-off and will also deprive this country’s economy and society of the bright people that we need. Should the short term gain acquired from removing our deficit be placed before the long term prosperity in Britain?

As for the increase in tuition fees: this won’t even contribute towards the current fiscal consolidation of this government; it is nothing more than the result of the belief that education is a good that benefits no more than the individual who actively consumes it. In actual fact it is a merit good that benefits all society. Even the neo-liberal viewpoint subscribed to by the Tories and Orange Bookers which states that wealth will trickle downwards implies that education should be encouraged.

The timing of this policy’s implementation will also make it ineffectual in helping to remove the government’s structural deficit within this parliament. Higher fees will not be put in place until 2012 and students will still be borrowing from the government in order to pay the fees. This means that the government will be paying out the same amount that it does currently. It won’t be until August 2015, when the first lot of high fee payers graduate that the government will start to receive the money back. By then, this parliament will be over and (in theory) the structural deficit will have disappeared. If anyone says that the government’s hands have been tied by Labour’s mess and that higher fees are an inevitability, they are either misinformed or lying.

Another important policy to fight is the government’s cuts to the arts and humanities and ring fencing of the sciences. One-sidedness in the UK economy has proved our undoing in the past: the Conservatives often flaunt the fact that Labour presided over one of the deepest and most prolonged recessions in the western world, which was caused by our over dependence on the banking sector. But where will all the graduates in mathematics and astrophysics end up working? That’s right, The City of London. There will also be great damage done to Britain’s world class universities if their wide-ranging academic thought is destroyed and replaced with brain-farms for big business.

We must remember these massive flaws that are inherent in the government’s policies and continue to fight them through the student movement. We have not lost yet. If our protests continue to make inclusiveness and broadness in education an issue, not only will the current government be pressurised to take a second look, the Labour party will also remember to repeal these travesties if and when it re-enters government. Keep marching.

Three party politics is back in town!

Wed, 26 Jan 2011 16:22:00 +0000

Control orders and their so called ‘replacement’ have been all the rage on Twitter today. The curfews have been replaced with “overnight residence requirements”. Meanwhile I have replaced my marmalade with jam that’s made from oranges. What’s great though, is the response of the Green Party. Caroline Lucas (@CarolineLucas) tweets:

Struggling to see much difference between “curfew” of old control order & “overnight residence requirement” of new regime - bit Orwellian…

Criticising the government’s policy and at the same time having a go at the uselessness of the official opposition. Remind you of any particular party pre-May 2010? That’s right the Greens are the new third party. This is good – a truly distinct party, unlike the Lib Dems.

So overall, not such a great day for British civil liberties. But perhaps not so bad a day for British democracy?

It's time to go vegan

Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:17:11 +0000

The dairy and egg industries are just as murderous as the meat industry. That’s according to a recent documentary by Ella Todd that can be found on YouTube. Not only do there exist ethical implications from a regime that is not purely plant based, the environment is also threatened by the rising popularity of the ‘western’ diet. Having been a vegetarian already, Ella Todd’s documentary instantly converted me into a vegan.

The documentary explores the awful impact that our animal based diet has on the environment and the drastic reduction in damage that we can achieve by cutting out animal products. According to Labour MP Kerry McCarthy, if everyone on the planet adopted a western style diet, we would need 3 Earths to sustain ourselves; and that doesn’t even take into account the expected increase in the world population from 6.7 billion now to 9 billion in 2050. This is because of the amount of protein wasted by farm animals just to live. Deforestation, scarcity of water, soil erosion and damaging pesticides all occur thanks to the greater amount of land required to grow feed. This means that both meat and animal based products have a much greater footprint on the planet.

And it is important to consider food, as Trewin Restorick of Global Action Plan does, when reducing carbon dioxide emissions: a staggering 18% of CO2 emissions can be attributed to the meat and dairy sector, meanwhile the aviation industry is only responsible for 2% of emissions.

As interviewees in the documentary discussed environmental impacts, I felt, in the capacity of a vegetarian, able to nod my head in agreement and distance myself from most of the problems involved in farming animals. However when author and poet Benjamin Zephaniah spoke, I saw that even soft-line vegetarianism has a sinister side to it. Male chicks will neither produce eggs nor profitable meat, so are killed on the day of their birth and hens are killed prematurely when their laying frequency falls. In order to produce milk, a cow must give birth and on the day of the calf’s birth it will often either be shot or sent for veal production if it is male. It is Zepahniah’s speech on ‘speciesism’ and the exploitation of animals that tipped me over the edge and converted me to veganism.

It is part of our capitalist human obsession that we should endlessly take from and abuse the environment and animals for the sole purpose of consumption. As humans we need to move towards a society where individualism is not our greatest motivation and in order to truly do this we must reject the exploitation of animals for our own gain. The future of the Earth depends on it.

Ella Todd’s documentary can be found on the Vegan Society’s YouTube channel.

This is not democracy

Mon, 17 Jan 2011 08:07:53 +0000

I was reading a blog by Simone Webb on the misrepresentation of protesters and minorities. This broadly consisted of criticism of a minority of people who ‘commandeer’ movements, which was on the whole a valid point to make. I decided to comment that the main problem (with regard to the student movement) is actually the media’s reportage of protests as riots and the government itself. We should really be more outwardly critical of this country’s biased news providers. I was then attacked as a revolutionary and someone with no respect for democracy by Nils “Nothernheckler” Boray. I want to explain my point of view in full rather than continue a flame all over Simone’s blog and for my sake as well as yours; I hope you are reading this Nils:

We don’t live in a democracy. We live in a capitalist state. The free market creates a disparity in people’s wealth, which automatically makes certain people in our society more powerful and more influential. This ‘money is power’ world is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.

Socialism aims to create a dictatorship of the proletariat instead. This ‘dictatorship’ is often misread as being undemocratic, but it simply means taking power out of the hands of the rich few and putting it into the hands of the wider public: a true democracy in which the government is accountable to the people not their paymasters in the City of London.

Take this analogy: In 2008, uproar followed the Labour government’s decision to remove the 10p tax band and a backtrack by chancellor Alistair Darling resulted in only a partial compensation to those affected. 5.3 million households were affected by the initial removal of the tax band. More recently, David Cameron has decided not to increase taxes on City pay or to restrict bonuses (despite his populist election proimises). I don’t have a statistic for the number of bankers in the UK, but I imagine it’s less than 5.3 million households worth. A minority holds greater sway on government policy than a large section of the population: that, by definition, does not constitute a democracy.

I, therefore, as a socialist, see the current system that we live in and the current government as the enemy. They restrict the freedom of the masses and we have been left in this dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. The far-left is wholly disrespectful of this liberal democracy, but that does not make it anti-democratic.

Vote Labour

Thu, 13 Jan 2011 08:03:00 +0000

A Labour landslide in today’s by-election will have two immediate impacts on the government. First, the government will see that the electorate at large disagrees with its policy of mega-austerity and second, the coalition will feel the greatest pressure it has been put under since its birth last year. This could be one step along the road towards policy changes from the ConDems.

It took the Tories 13 years to shake off the image of Thatcher that stuck in the public’s mind and even then the Conservatives were unable to win a majority in the 2010 election. Today’s election result will be the first signal to them that they will not come back into power for a long time unless they stop these extreme spending cuts. Cameron’s rebranding of his party has not lasted beyond the election campaign and the public are wisened to the fact that his ‘soft’ conservatism was a load of bollocks.

The damage done to the Liberal Democrats will be greater. They would arguably have won the Oldham East and Saddleworth seat had Phil Woolas and his campaign team not produced such false election propaganda. They know that losing this election is a sign of things to come and fear among the Lib Dem MPs will put pressure on the Conservatives to change the course that the government is taking. It is, after all, within the Conservatives interests for the Lib Dems to perform well in public opinion otherwise the second party will see no benefits from remaining in the coalition and the government will fall.

A Labour win in Oldham East and Saddleworth will pile pressure on both of the governing parties to change the government’s destructive policies. For that reason, I urge redidents of the constituency today to vote Labour.

The Hungarian presidency epitomises the European Union

Mon, 10 Jan 2011 08:00:07 +0000

Draconian media laws and a bureaucracy being taken over by the ruling Fidesz Party attracts Hungary much criticism from abroad, especially from its partners in Europe. Many people are now criticising the passing of the Presidency of the Council of the European Union to a government with such scorn for free speech as Hungary’s. Such undemocratic policies are surely incompatible with the rest of Europe? Actually these problems exist in other countries and the very fact that the Hungarian government is able to reach such a position of influence demonstrates why the EU so desperately needs democracy.

Freedoms are being eroded across our continent: control orders still exist in the UK (although they might be stopped); laws have been passed in France and Belgium that prevent the wearing of the burqa in public and Silvio Berlusconi keeps his personal tight grip on the Italian media. European liberal democracies are filled with flawed freedom and it is not restricted to the East.

Meanwhile, we complain that Hungary is able to take control of one of the European Union’s institutions: the Council of Ministers.

Evidently we need sweeping changes to be made to the European Union as it lacks any democracy. A government with an unelected Executive would ordinarily be referred to as a dictatorship; so it is ironic that the EU, whose politicians will readily criticise the running of foreign countries, is just that.

The European Commission, the body that takes the most important decisions and runs the government has its members chosen by national governments instead of the people that they should be accountable to. At the same time, the only elected body, the European Parliament is one of the weakest legislatures in the World, with no power of legislative initiative. Europe’s figure heads, the President of the Council Herman van Rompuy and the President of the Commission José Manuel Barroso are not elected; they are simply stooges of the monopoly of power held by France and Germany.

Brussels is also a place filled with lobbyists offering prizes to favourable politicians. The EU’s laws are certainly not based on the will of the people.

It annoys me that Europe’s politicians complain about the handing of the rotating presidency to undemocratic Hungary when the very workings of the European Union are their creation: national governments draft and approve the treaties that make the EU so unacceptably unaccountable. It is about time they change things instead of whinging.

Building a Roddenberry utopia

Fri, 07 Jan 2011 10:00:07 +0000

In the 1960s the world was facing riots and protests by socialists and feminists, the demise of Europe’s imperial weight and the Cultural Revolution in China. Meanwhile the threat of complete nuclear annihilation loomed over the Earth. It seemed like things couldn’t get any worse (I imagine). Gene Roddenberry wanted to tell humanity that we can change for the better and showed us through the creation of ‘Star Trek’ that the rejection of capitalist materialism can ultimately benefit people.

For the uninitiated among you, ‘Star Trek’ is not just a sci-fi about space exploration; there is a deep humanitarian and socialist message ingrained within it. Earth is part of the ‘United Federation of Planets’, the European Union of the Milky Way, if you will, (just not a capitalist quasi-dictatorship). This federation is a post-capitalist society, as Captain Piccard explains to a woman from the 21^st Century while he is stuck in the past in the film ‘Star Trek VIII: First Contact’:

“The economics of the future is somewhat different; you see: money doesn’t exist in the 24^th Century.”

“The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives; we work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity.”

Whilst the Federation represents a utopian vision of socialism, the main antagonists represent the problematic political and economic structures of today’s world: the ultra-capitalist philosophies of the Ferengi result in terrible oppression of the workers; the fascist dictatorship of the Cardassian Union carries out genocide against the Bajorans and the Stalinist Borg Collective destroys all individuality. This picture is of course simplified and idealistic, but it clearly shows that a liberal socialism is better for the greater good.

Quark: a Ferengi in pursuit of profit (taken from DS9 episode “The Nagus”)

A system of mutual cooperation is more beneficial to humanity than greed driven individualistic capitalism; and a system within which the improvement of oneself is the driving force of progress is ideal. The problem is that this wonderful vision of a perfect future has proved impossible to achieve despite successive attempts in our own history.

Revolutionary socialism has, despite success at first, always resulted in a corrupt government resorting to the abandonment of communism in order to stay in power. It ended with the Stalinist Soviet Union, which the Borg of ‘Star Trek’ emulate and the state-led capitalism that we see today in China.

Meanwhile democratic socialism has systematically failed to achieve its goals as it operates within the liberal democracies that discriminate in favour of wealth creation rather than the improvement of society.

We therefore have to ask ourselves: how can we achieve a true socialist society? In the ‘Star Trek’ canon, it takes hundreds of years of mentoring from the logical Vulcans before humans become the selfless characters of the 23^rd and 24^th Centuries. We as humans need to evolve ourselves before we can change the society in which we live, otherwise our individualistic human nature will always cause us to revert back to capitalism. It is my hope that in real life we can evolve into 24^th Century humans in less than two hundred years and without the help of Vulcans.

Austerity alone will not save the Eurozone

Thu, 06 Jan 2011 10:00:07 +0000

This year, the Eurozone’s ‘PIGS’ (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain) will be plunging themselves deeper into austerity as imposed on them by Germany and the rest of the European Union. This, it is thought, will improve confidence in the Euro and lead to a recovery throughout the currency area. Of course, this is not necessarily true and many of the problems of the Eurozone will remain.

We have already seen the flaws in the wisdom of the unelected government of the European People’s Party thanks to the prolonged recession in Ireland and its need for a second bail-out from the European Union. Deep spending cuts have only destabilised the country’s economy and such problems are a threat to Portugal and Spain as well. By continuing to prescribe austerity, the European Council is taking too big a risk as the European Union probably will not be able to afford to bail-out Spain in the event of an emergency.

During times of deficit reduction a country can usually rely on its Central Bank to keep interest rates low in order to make up for the deflationary fiscal policy, however the European Central Bank is coming increasingly under the influence of Germany and is likely to appoint the German Axel Webber as the next President. He is a known inflation hawk and will focus the ECB even more on the task of fighting increases in the economy’s price level rather than worrying about Europe’s main problem: growth, or the lack of it. The ECB must keep interest rates low and change its inflation rate target in a way that means the quasi-deflationary 0% inflation rate is not acceptable.

The governments of the Eurozone’s big countries, Germany and France, must also stop being so self-centred. It is because of them that the fiscal rules on public debt and deficits were not taken seriously by the ‘PIGS’. In 2002, both France and Germany were required to pay fines for overspending their budget, but the size of the countries meant that they could prevent the fines from being passed through the Council of Ministers. The Stability and Growth Pact immediately became a joke and unsurprisingly has not been taken seriously since.

France and Germany need to accept some responsibility for the situation that the Eurozone is in now and should give financial help to the countries in need. It is surely unfair and incompatible with the ideals of a social Europe for some of the poorest member states to be absorbing such harsh cuts, while the richest economy, that of Germany, remains prosperous.

Greater fiscal solidarity is needed within Europe to protect the poorest countries. This should be paired with the introduction of ‘Eurobonds’, which will greatly reduce the cost to governments of borrowing. Eurobonds backed up by a federal Europe, similar to US bonds, will be more trustworthy and will make it easier for Eurozone countries to deficit spend in times of recession.

There are many more problems in the Eurozone than just profligacy on the periphery and Germany must be involved in their correction.

2010's catastrophes can save the environment's future

Wed, 05 Jan 2011 09:31:06 +0000

2010 began in the aftermath of both the failed Copenhagen Climate Summit, in which absolutely fuck all was achieved, and the ‘Climategate’ emails fiasco. It seemed a tough time ahead for environmentalists and the Earth in general. But things should ironically have picked up a bit after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

This was a dreadful tragedy that saw the death of at least 6,814 animals including 6,104 birds and 609 sea turtles and will scar the landscape of the southern USA for years to come. However, because of all the damage done, Americans finally began to see how much damage our dependence on oil is doing to the planet and what it can even do to the economy. Many Republicans stopped crying “drill baby drill” and there was a massive public backlash against the oil company BP.

So every cloud has a silver lining right? Well, unfortunately this silver lining was quickly covered up by another cloud, when influential Sarah Palin ranted that ‘radical environmentalists’ were to blame for the oil leak as they had prevented drilling on land (of course we ‘extremists’ would prefer to stop all drilling). Even the self-proclaimed ‘green’ coalition government in the UK didn’t learn from the disaster and issued a licence for Chevron to engage in deep water drilling off the Shetland Islands.

Later in the year, environmentalism on the world stage took a moderate upturn, when the Cancún summit turned out not to be quite the disaster people were expecting. This time around, countries cooperated with each other to find a deal instead of doing deals behind closed doors that excluded other countries. Obviously, the deal does not go far enough and is not legally binding, but at least governments the World over have learnt how to work with instead of against each other.

And so in 2010, we learnt two very important lessons: oil is bad, and cooperation is good. The rightist politicians worldwide and the international oil companies will make it difficult for us, but hopefully we can carry these lessons forward into 2011 and have some success in fighting environmental damage and climate change.

Labour's mediocre opposition

Tue, 04 Jan 2011 08:00:00 +0000

Ed Miliband’s first three months as the leader of Britain’s main opposition party has been poor to say the least. As the largest party outside of government, it is Labour’s responsibility to produce a real alternative to the policies spawned by the coalition, but we have not seen much promise from Ed’s team and it does not look like 2011 will be any different in that respect. Their economic policy is too similar to that of the government, Ed’s civil libertarian leanings during the leadership campaign have failed to materialise and the party lacks any radicalism.

Labour’s current economic policy seems to be one of doing what the Conservatives are doing, but just slower. Although, they believe that there should be a greater emphasis on taxes, they still agree with the Conservative viewpoint that the spending cuts are largely necessary. Their statements simply concentrate more on the harm speedy cuts will do to the economy, rather than their effect on society at large regardless of the timetable of their implementation. They ignore the wide range of possibilities, such as a Tobin tax, a land value tax, higher inheritance taxes and cuts to such wastes of money like Trident and the war in Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, Miliband’s policy on funding for higher education is a poorly concocted fudge. Labour has tried to attract support from the growing student movement against fees (despite having commissioned the Browne Review that suggested the increase), but at the same time Ed promotes the idea of a graduate tax, which is largely the same thing as student debt if not more difficult to implement as policy. This is not only a bad idea; it is also one that most of the cabinet do not support.

One of the biggest disappointments this year regarding Miliband’s leadership was his decision to make Ed Balls the Shadow Home Secretary and Phil Woolas (who has thankfully been chucked out of Labour and Parliament) one of his juniors. Miliband proved himself a suitable leader for a reformed Labour party during the leadership election by rejecting some of the more authoritarian policies introduced by the party in the last 13 years of government. However, this liberal standpoint flew out of the window when he put two anti-immigration MPs in his home affairs team.

So far Labour’s opposition has had the worst of both worlds: the ideologically bare stance of New Labour without its fresh faced buoyancy.

It happened to Timberlake and Spears and it will happen to Cameron and Clegg

Mon, 03 Jan 2011 09:31:00 +0000

In human relationships it is just a matter of time before the couple grows bored with each other. Boredom turns to annoyance, annoyance to anger. Eventually a reciprocal bond of hatred, stronger than any known metal, develops between the two. The relationship between the members of the coalition government is no different: it happened to Justin Timberlake and Britney Spears, it happened to Cheryl and Ashley Cole and soon enough it will happen to David Cameron and Nick Clegg.

In 2011 the Liberal Democrats will become increasingly touchy about the number of sacrifices they have had to take in order to make this marriage work: they will feel like their progressive dreams have been destroyed by the hefty Tories huffing and puffing on top of them. More and more, the MPs of the junior party will decide to go their own way, as we saw when over 20 Lib Dems rebelled during the tuition fees vote.

Meanwhile, the Conservative MPs will tire of sharing the same benches as the Lib Dems. They will become agitated that the Lib Dems have to criticise everything they do or embarrass them in front of the public. John Redwood has already been complaining about his partners’ habits of claiming credit for Conservative hard work.

The coalition faces further strains this year when the referendum on the ‘Alternative Vote’ is put to the public in May. This is one of the few things that the Liberal Democrats have gained from collaborating with the Tories and if it fails (though the latest ICM poll shows more people support AV than not) the Liberal Democrats might not see any point in gritting their teeth any longer.

The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have managed to put their policy differences aside: the Lib Dems have sacrificed the vast majority of their economic, foreign, home, education and health policies, while the Tories have accepted some of the Liberal’s reformist agenda. However, they are humans and the cuddly liberals and nasty Tories may find it difficult to get along for another 12 months. It is, after all, all of the little things that can really get on your nerves.

Britain in 2011

Sun, 02 Jan 2011 10:37:00 +0000

This year will be difficult for Britain to say the least: it is when the spending cuts will really begin to snip; most of Europe will be struggling through austerity and the cracks emerging in our coalition government will become gaping holes. But there’s nothing better than starting the year with a few predictions, so here are some thoughts about the year ahead.

January will see a continuation of unrest as students still protest against cuts and fees, and UK Uncut campaigners carry on targeting tax avoiding high street chains. Teresa May will again consider banning such protests and an increasing amount of force will be used against ‘rioters’.

In March, Welsh voters will vote ‘yes’ in a referendum giving full control of the devolved policy areas to the Welsh Assembly.

The wedding between Prince William and Kate Middleton in April will be overshadowed by public sector strikes, which are planned to take place. It has been suggested that the wedding, accompanied by an extra public holiday, will take people’s minds of austerity, but surely it will just remind us how some people will be completely untouched by spending cuts.

The 5^th of May elections in Scotland and Wales will see an upsurge in support for Labour and the nationalist parties. These elections and the local elections in England will also see a collapse in support for the Liberal Democrats. The AV referendum will fail to change the voting system as the ‘No’ campaign, well-funded by big business and supported by most of the media, will be paired with a public desire to punish the Lib Dems. This will result in despair among the party’s MPs leading several to defect and perhaps causing a schism between the liberals and the socials.

In December there will be another UN meeting, probably in Durban, South Africa, that will attempt to find a solution to climate change. The delegates will probably manage to make a snail’s pace of progress.

By the end of the year unemployment will be up by some 200,000 and Britain’s economy will still be bouncing along the bottom, possibly dipping below 0% growth for parts of the year. It’s not exactly looking to be the best of years then – roll on 2012.

2010: A British Oddity

Sat, 01 Jan 2011 00:11:00 +0000

2010 was a tumultuous and strange year for Britain to say the very least: we saw the end of 13 years of New Labour; the first coalition government for 36 years; the end of the recession and the return of riots. The year began with the coldest temperatures that the country had seen since the winter of 1981-2 and ended with severe weather warnings from the Met Office accompanied by up to 25cm of snow in some places. It is during this peculiar period that I, Alexander Tumilty, have decided to step into the blogosphere and begin documenting the events of the coming year. For now though it seems fitting simply to round up just what happened in 2010.

January saw the official end of the recession, when the Office of National Statistics told us that GDP had grown by 0.1%. This was accompanied by the first fall in unemployment for 2 years. A mild high for Gordon Brown then, considering the year he was about to face. We were also reminded of some of the downsides to New Labour as Alistair Campbell and Tony Blair, among others, attended the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War.

February began with bad news as Cadbury was taken over by American giant Kraft Foods, but at least the Northern Irish Assembly was able to reach an agreement on the devolution of Policing and Justice.

A media furore ignited in March as John Venables, who at the age of 11 was one of two boys convicted of the murder of James Bulger, was recalled to prison: this later turned out to be for the possession of child pornography. In the same month, BA cabin crew went on strike, causing the grounding of 80 aeroplanes at Heathrow. The same day saw clashes between the English Defence League and Unite Against Fascism in Bolton.

On 6^th April, Gordon Brown paid a visit to Buckingham Palace for a chat with the Queen. Parliament was subsequently dissolved. Three days into the election campaign the unpronounceable Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajökull erupted causing massive disruption to Northern and Western Europe’s air traffic and leaving over 100,000 Brits stranded abroad, including the couple that got married on a Skype link to the UK. Meanwhile ITV hosted the first of the ‘leaders’ debates’ between Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg. This saw the beginning of Cleggmania and ‘I agree with Nick’ syndrome.

On 6^th May, election night provided us with the most shocking election result in recent history: there was a hung parliament; Cleggmania failed to take hold of the public and the Lib Dems lost 3 seats; Caroline Lucas was the first Green MP and Naomi Long of the Alliance Party won her party’s first seat as well as ousting Peter Robinson, the leader of the Democratic Unionist Party and the First Minister of Northern Ireland. Having promised the electorate that we are the ‘king makers’ throughout the election campaign, Nick Clegg proceeded to make David Cameron ‘king’ and encouraged Gordon Brown to resign as leader of the Labour party in the process.

The ensuing Labour leadership election began in June and saw frontrunner brothers David and Ed Miliband take on long-time rival Ed Balls as well as the moderately surprising Andy Burnham and the extremely astonishing Diane Abbott. Meanwhile, England was humiliated in the World Cup and did not survive the month in South Africa. The new Chancellor George Osborne ended the month on a high by announcing the planned hike in VAT: yippee!

July was a relatively uneventful month. Raoul Moat killed himself after being hunted by the Police.

Silly season began with David Cameron’s foot in his mouth; he managed to offend the President of Pakistan by accusing the country of exporting terror. Later in August Lord Pearson of Rannoch resigned as leader of UKIP (we all thought Farage was still in charge anyway).

In September everyone remembered how much they hate Tony Blair, when he released his cornily named autobiography ‘A Journey’. Later that month the Pope arrived for a four day tour of Britain, during which the Labour conference announced Ed Miliband as the party’s new leader.

If you thought the planned VAT increase was bad, the planned spending cuts unveiled by George Osborne in October were abominable: the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the independent, deficit-hawk think thank rated the cuts, which would cut on average 19% from each department’s budget, as ‘regressive’.

November was the start of the mass student movement against tuition fee rises, education cuts and the abolition of the EMA. Students marched on the Conservative Headquarters in Millbank on the 10^th. Later that month there were a series of occupations in university buildings and on the 24^th protests occurred in university towns across the country.

December was when the snow settled and it seemed like we were back where we started the year. But this month proved itself the start of a winter of discontent: the last and largest student protest of the year took place on the same day that the fee rise was passed in parliament. Meanwhile protesters against tax avoidance caused high street chains such as Vodafone and Topshop to close across the country. On the 15^th, figures were released showing that Unemployment had risen to 2,500,000.

The year began with a slow economic recovery and ended still on shaky legs, what will happen next year only time will tell. Will this winter of discontent worsen or will a painless as possible deficit reduction result in the emergence of a big society stronger than ever? I know what I predict.