lord of the blog

« April 2005 | Main | June 2005 »

Tuesday, May 31, 2005

Heathrow

Extract from Sunday Business (Via http://static.highbeam.com/k/knightriddertribunebusinessnews/february162003/amster )

"Amsterdam's Schipol airport will come a step closer to usurping Heathrow as Europe's premier hub when it opens a fifth runway this week.

The Dutch airport,the ninth largest in the world, is targeting the UK as one of its key growth markets. It will even start promoting itself as "London's third airport" in a marketing campaign in the belief that many Britons want to bypass their capital when going abroad."

Monday, May 30, 2005

Middle East politics

The elections in Lebanon build on the success of the elections in Palestine and Iraq.

I suspect Hizbullah and Hamas will continue to build on their political success as long as they avoid the reputation for corruption that so damaged Fatah.

So watch this space for moves towards political dialogue especially with Britain. In Northern Ireland quiet contacts developed with Sinn Fein and the Unionist paramilitary groups and became more formalised when they entered the democratic arena.

Dealing with terrorist groups is always difficult and gets very messy when they create both a political and military wing but it also provides a real opportunity to move away from violence.

French economics

The economic performance of the French economy must account for some of the dissatisfied voters in the referendum.

I note from the recent OECD report that unemployment is 10.2% compared to Britain's 4.7%.

Almost a quarter of young French people including graduates are unemployed. France only has 62% of its adult population in work. (That compares with 75% in the UK).

Who said Labour isn't working!

EU Referendum

We could analyse the French referendum vote for many hours. I would have preferred them to have voted 'yes' but I am not as despondent as some.

I could see the value of the constitutional document but I always felt it was a profoundly unwieldy document.

As Britain has muddled by for centuries without a constitution I am not convinced they are essential.

What does matter is embedded and accepted rights along with the rule of law and democratic structures. Written constitutions are not always as benign as their wording suggests!

I suspect the process of integration in Europe will continue as it is being driven by the economics of the 21st century.

Friday, May 27, 2005

Responses

Ingrid will be pleased to see the latest moves on Sudan. There does seem to be a serious attempt to help the African nations develop an interventionist/peacekeeping force. NATO logistical support will be particularly important.

Zimbabwe is now in dire trouble. Watch South Africa on this. They have tried the appeasement approach (and I don't use that word in its derogatory sense) but I suspect they will have to intervene more directly if things continue as they are.

Dan, I am very sympathetic to your comments on the technology of voting. We have got by in the past because people did not abuse the system.(With certain exceptions in Northern Ireland). That may be changing.

Certainly we do not meet the criteria laid down by such groups as International Security and Co-operation in Europe or by the UN or the Commonwealth. If the prison sentences given recently have the effect of stopping abuse then we can probably continue our fairly relaxed system but I think we do need a reform.

A joint Select Committee (Deputy Prime Minister and Constitutional Affairs) looked at this just before the last election. I only made one contribution because I was chairing another committee at the time. I asked that we reviewed the whole voting system to bring it up to the international standards that we encourage elsewhere. Alas, They did not accept my advice!

Heathrow responses

Thanks for the comments. There is now a link to: http://www.futureheathrow.blogspot.com (Thanks to peter McClymont). It is probably best to conduct most of the Heathrow discussion on that site but let me respond to a few of the points here.

Nick has some pretty impressive arguments to deploy but I think the overall competition for Heathrow's premier position is really hotting up and without the development to provide a modern hub meeting the points that Nick rightly raises but also offering a wider range of destinations I do think the airport is at risk.

My point about the London docks is essentially that we did not see the way things were changing and just assumed we could continue as before. London dockers saw themselves as the centre piece of  international docks but were blind to the way the technology and economic forces were changing. So they argued for no change.

I think the decline of the docks was inevitable (the lack of a deep water port for example). The factors might differ with Heathrow but the general principle of not looking at the changes taking place elsewhere and planning a suitable response is very similar.

That does raise the question of proper compensation and environmental factors. We could let Heathrow decline but we would have to find a 'replacement' economy for the area. (See my speech on the sidebar). If we decide to expand it then the key question is what constitutes proper compensation for local people who are badly effected.

France and other European countries are, I think, better at this then we are. The French built the high speed rail link much quicker then we did  partly because they compensated generously. I hope BAA (who are not part of Future Heathrow) will do this whole business of consultation/compensation better then they did it on Terminal five.

Some of the environmental requirements have been laid down by both the Government and the EU. Those conditions have to be met or the third runway can't go ahead and Future Heathrow agrees with that.

There also has to be better provision of rail transport and we should take the opportunity of planning this whole development so that we end up with an enhanced area. If other countries can do it so can we.

Heathrow cannot deal with global warming on its own. Moving flights from Heathrow to other airports obviously doesn't reduce global warming. This has to be a wider policy.

It does raise very difficult issues but unless we think the position is now so desperate that we ought to ban flying except in very limited circumstances then surely we have to address it by wider measures. Emissions trading is helpful but not a long term answer.

Pricing lower income groups out of flying is also the wrong answer. New technology and wider national and international measures are more likely to be the right direction. ( Is anyone else thinking of buying a wind generator for their house?)

Future Heathrow is funded by all its members and I don't put any one member  above any other. The unions are important to me because of my politics and my concern about unemployment. They are firmly on board and so are the TUC who spoke at the launch.

Finally my offer to speak and meet with residents groups and groups of objectors remains. The agenda can be as wide as they wish to make it.

Tuesday, May 24, 2005

Future Heathrow

I have posted my speech made yesterday at the launch of Future Heathrow on the side bar (Thanks to Jennifer in Canada!)

You can keep track of events by looking at the web site.

http://www.futureheathrow.org

Sunday, May 22, 2005

Africa

Some good news from the Horn of Africa. Ethiopia seems to be running a free and fair election. It is too early to be sure but initial reports are good.

In Somalia warlords are pulling out of the Mogadishu. The African Union is hoping to secure the area before sending in more peacekeepers.

NATO, the West and other countries are giving additional help to the African Union thus helping to build up an indigenous force.

Responses

I shall post the speech I anticipate making on Heathrow tomorrow.

The core issue is whether Heathrow will decline or expand. It cannot stay as it is.

There are arguments which say it should be allowed to decline. If that view is accepted it is important to say what the economic impact would be, particularly on west London and the Heathrow region. There are well over 100,000 jobs dependent on Heathrow and it is a major economic driver for the region.

As I announced at the creation of Future Heathrow I am paid £28,000pa and the job will probably last for 12 to 18 months. There is no conflict of interest.

I will not be paid as a member of the House of Lords although I will receive the attendance allowance. I think the rules are similar to the Commons and therefore all financial interests have to be declared.

I make no apology for campaigning for jobs and prosperity and for proper compensation for those most effected by any development. I expect the argument to be conducted on the question of judgment about the economic benefits and the environmental impact.

I have already offered to meet all the opposition groups and hope to do so because the issue is very important in this area.

Several of you have given good advice to 'someone' and I don't want to add too much as I feel at times that I'm doing counseling work rather then running a political blog!

Just a couple of points. Firstly, if I had stayed in the job I had prior to becoming an MP and taken the promotion that awaited me I would now be well over £200,000 richer because the pay was always in advance of what I got as an MP. The same is true for many other MP's.

Secondly if 'someone' is so dissatisfied with the political process he has a duty to get more involved and try and change it. He could join a party to change it; he could form his own party; he could stand as an independent; or he could  work through pressure groups. What is painfully embarrassing is to listen to him shouting abuse at people like a confused adolescent.

So 'someone' please take your anonymous hoodie off, leave your hang ups behind and focus on the arguments.

Two final points to 'someone'. Buy a copy of Animal Farm by George Orwell and read it! And  please, please stop posting such long entries. They probably aren't being read and you can link to Guardian articles without taking up space here.

Dan. I didn't pursue a privacy law because I think it could inhibit press freedom My Bill covered accuracy and what was in effect a right of reply. This is a difficult area. (See my book Regulating the Press by Tom O'Malley and Clive Soley - I got paid for writing that too! £42 so far! Close all university libraries I say!) 

Thursday, May 19, 2005

Future Heathrow

I shall post more comments later but what follows answers some of the questions about Future Heathrow and my views on a third runway.

Mr. Clive Soley (Ealing, Acton and Shepherd's Bush): May I remind my right hon. Friend of Heathrow's importance as a premier airport to jobs and the economy in west London? If it were to decline seriously, the impact on the region would be at least as devastating as was the closure of the docks on east London. People need to understand that when making this judgment on air transport. As one who has lived under a flight path for much of my life, I admit that it is not easy to live with the noise, but I think that if Heathrow went into decline, the devastation wrought on west London would be extremely serious.

Mr. Darling: I am grateful to my hon. Friend because he has put his finger on the problem. He rightly draws attention to the concerns of people living at or near Heathrow and its flight paths, but that airport employs, directly or indirectly, more than 100,000 people. It is therefore critical that we get the decision on the future of the London airports, in particular Heathrow, right, and we need to get it right fairly soon. To leave the decision to someone else—to say that I want nothing to do with it—is not the right approach, so I welcome my hon. Friend's comments.

Hansard 23.7.02

I had put a similar point to the previous Secretary of State on the 20th November 2001.

The local paper (Gazette) also carried my views on a number of occasions including a report on the 17th May 2001 when they correctly pointed out that (contrary to some comments made recently) I had refused to sign the letter against a third runway.

I have never joined a group of MP's against the runway and I was probably the least popular speaker at a lobby against a third runway because I drew an analogy with the docks in east London.

Thursday, May 12, 2005

Future Heathrow

Some of you eagle eyed blog watchers have spotted that I have accepted a part time job as Campaign Director for Future Heathrow.

Future Heathrow is an organisation set up by the trade unions, business, airlines and other groups concerned about the future of Heathrow.

Contrary to some comments here I have said for many years that Heathrow must not be allowed to decline and therefore a third runway probably was necessary. That can be confirmed by reading my comments in the local paper over several years and also by looking at the questions I asked in the House of Commons.

I will return to this important subject but let me just make the following points.

I was brought up in East London and remember the arguments about the London docks. People said they would never close and that business would never transfer to Felixstowe or  Rotterdam. A couple of years later the docks were virtually closed and 50,000 jobs went with them. Unemployment went through the roof and house prices went through the floor and the economy of East London has only recently recovered.

If you don't think Heathrow is at risk look at the regional connecting flights from the modern competing airports of Paris and Amsterdam. There are actually more connecting flights now to British regional airports from Amsterdam and Paris (excluding Heathrow itself) then there are from Heathrow.

Heathrow is declining. Whether or not it would go so far as to result in closure is difficult to know but I don't think we should allow it to decline. I think we should invest in it and find ways of compensating and protecting the local people who are close to it. I should add that I live under one of the take off routes so I know about the noise. I would rather I didn't have the noise but not at the expense of unemployment and economic decline in the Heathrow region.

Responses

Would some of you tyrants give me a break! I haven't been away. I've been resting! It's only been five days since I last made an entry and one of those was my birthday! (No cards thank you!)

In the past I have made the point that I could only guarantee a response to constituents. In fact I have been responding to as many as reasonably possible and I will try and continue that.

I am not yet in the House of Lords so at the moment you have a humble Labour activist of some 45 years membership!

Our new MP should be given time to get to grips with the job. It is not easy and he must decide if and when he wants to start a blog. The recent posts will put off some MP's because of the difficulty I and others have had in avoiding attempts to swamp it and also the fact that the number of people who engage in conversation is relatively small

In fact I have many more visitors to the site then people who post comments. The rough total of visitors is 1500 per week which I think is encouraging. If we want to encourage legislators to blog then I think there is a duty to try and make it as constructive as possible.

I hope we don't get bogged down in arguments about old versus new Labour and certainly not about leadership changes now. Think about it. We went into this election with a clear statement that Tony Blair would remain as leader for some years. If having won that election with a majority of 67 we turned round and said "Well. We didn't mean it". Does that win back trust?

The reason the spate of calls for Tony to stand down got nowhere over the weekend was because Gordon Brown  had no intention of supporting it. Quite right too.

Saturday, May 07, 2005

General election + 2

To everyone who is interested in the success of the Labour Party I would say skim read all the papers post election. The Tory ones more then any other want us to start a debate on the leadership.

The Sunday Times were on to me asking when  I thought Tony Blair should go. Other media have been doing the same. Remember that not only is this the first time in history that we have won a third term but it is also the first time that we have not torn ourselves apart arguing about our leaders betraying the Labour Party.

This Labour Government is the first to have gone into any election with rising employment instead of rising unemployment and we have done it twice now. It is also the first time we can claim to be giving real help to low income groups without an inflationary consequence.

Our Conservative opponents (and our Liberal ones who want to drop the baby bond amongst other attacks on low income groups) don't like this and are not used to Labour winning and staying united.

Do not underestimate the renewed relationship between Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. It has been a very successful relationship and it did go off the rails some time ago. It is now back on the rails and the Parliamentary Labour Party played a role in that.

So don't play our opponents ball. They want a leadership fight. We want to avoid it. Gordon is likely to be the natural next leader and he is unlikely to play into the Tory game. So we shouldn't either.

Finally, I will continue this blog from the Lords but please, please continue to call me Clive!

Friday, May 06, 2005

General election + 1

That was a long night!

I've just watched the Simpson's to  help get everything back into perspective!

Clearly a strong message to the Government and Tony Blair's initial remarks are on the right lines. The British system has the curious strength of being presidential when a leader has a big majority and a strong base but Prime Ministerial when that authority is weakened.

Immigration,Iraq, trust and the quality of public services were some of the key problems.

There is still something pretty magical about Labour winning three terms in a row. For the last 100 years it has been one or one and a half followed by defeat and bitter in fighting.

The Tories did better then I expected and in those marginals round London the immigration issue was particularly powerful - a bit like 1992.

I think the Tory Party has now taken the first step on the road to recovery but they still have a long way to go.

The Liberals had a good night but it again raises the problem of where they are heading in the long run. If they can't win Tory seats then the danger for Liberal and Labour alike is that we split the radical vote and that could be a very big problem in a few years time.

It is also the historic problem of the radical wing of politics.

A quick word to Someone about his earlier complaints. I knocked his earlier comments off because he was posting them twice. Others were doing that as well with the intention of flooding this site. It might get easier now the election is over but I recommend one post only!

At a later date I will try and return to the role of politicians in a free society.

Thursday, May 05, 2005

General Election 2005

Thought for the day:

When the progressive vote is divided the Tories win.

Vote Labour Today.

Tuesday, May 03, 2005

Blogging

It seems there is a concerted attempt to drown out political discussion on this site. I know from other comments I am receiving that there is a strong desire to see this new form of communication  succeed and I believe it will.

Meanwhile you can expect more frantic attempts to drive out discussion.

Guardian editorial

The Guardian editorial really is well worth reading today. It is one of the best argued and most strategically intelligent that I have read for years.                 

Blogging

Hassan. I have deleted your comments about the sexual orientation of an individual just as I would delete one referring to your sexual orientation. It is not relevant.

Other commentators on this site get deleted if they libel other people or if they are racist or extremely offensive against others who cannot be expected to answer back on this site.

Others who just try and repeat their arguments and bore the pants of everyone else will normally stay on but they really ought to try and see themselves as others see them. (Which is one of the reasons I leave some of them on!) The vast majority of people who read this site are not daft!

Monday, May 02, 2005

Housing

One recent visitor to this site has been homeless since the age of 15. He has also had a drink and drugs problem.

See:  http://www.jamiesbigvoice.blogspot.com

His site is well worth a visit, I should declare a past interest as many years ago (over 30 years actually) as a probation officer I met John Healy who, after many years as a vagrant alcoholic, became the first person who I am aware of to write an autobiography. (The Grass Arena by John Healy. Faber and Faber ISBN 0-571-15170-1)

It also won the film of the year award and had in it an actor who played my rather minor role. I didn't like the image. My frequent warnings to John about further offences was translated in the film from "If you do that again John, you're ****** nicked"  became "I must warn you John that you could be arrested for that"! That was truly the wrong type of poetic licence!

Anyway John is still in touch and well off the drink so good luck to Jamie too.

Jamie is clearly politically street wise as well. He has spotted that Labour is the best vote even though he is not entirely satisfied with our record.

I don't know how many people are aware of it but the homeless can now vote - Labour gave them that right. We also have housing policies that are much more effective then in the past although it is always particularly difficult to assist people who have drink and drug problems in addition to homelessness.

House of Lords

Thanks for the congratulations and commiserations to those who would like to strangle me but haven't got within range!

My appointment was not a great surprise because the ex chairs of Parliamentary Parties normally do go to the Lords.

Those of you who are interested in my views on reform can track back to my comments on this blog in 2003/4. In summary I want a hybrid House, part elected and part appointed. The elected part should be on a regional basis and the appointed members should be selected either through the Independent Appointments Commission for non party members and the Party ones by the Parties themselves.

Although I did wonder if it wouldn't be better to fully retire (YES!YES! I hear you cry!)  I thought I could still make a useful contribution especially on the Arab-Jewish Forum and on House of Lords reform and perhaps on the continuing argument about UN reform as well as other issues.

Can I now become the first blogging Lord? And should I be Lord Soley of the Blog?  It is Tam Dalyell's ancestor who has the best title. It is Black Tam O'The Binns. Now that is a title to dream about!

Any suggestions on a Lord's blog?

Iraq

It will come as a great disappointment to some of my readers that the comments and alleged revelations of the last few days have not changed my basic view about Iraq although it does reinforce what I argued a year ago that the case for war was much more than WMD and that the US has troops ill trained for peacekeeping.

It also reinforces my view that the reformed UN needs a more coherent policy for these situations then it has at present and that applies to the individual states including Britain.

Those who think Tony Blair lied need to ask why he put so much emphasis on WMD when the other arguments were at least as powerful unless he really believed it. If he knew it wasn't true it wouldn't be too bright to invade largely on that basis.

Finally those who invade this site with the intention of swamping it and trying to force closure need to ask themselves why they support democracy - or perhaps they don't.