MP Who Campaigns Against Second Jobs Holds Second Job

Here’s one for those who like the stench of a politician’s hypocrisy in the summer months.

Paula Sherriff was elected as MP for Dewsbury in May. During her election campaign was that she pledged not to hold a second job as an MP and there is even a page on her website dedicated to a petition to stop MPs holding second jobs. So what is she currently doing? You guessed it.

Sherriff has not resigned her role as district councillor for Pontefract North since winning her parliamentary seat. This would trigger a by-election for a seat that’s up for election in May next year so, I suppose, the idea is just to not bother. However, are the people of Pontefract North getting a fair deal out of this? I somehow doubt it.

What would be the defence? That because each ward has three councillors that it doesn’t matter if one of them suddenly does a disappearing act on her constituents? Well, then, the logical question is whether each ward needs three councillors. If Sherriff is adamant she won’t resign her post (at least until after the point where it would trigger a by-election) then I think we need a fundamental discussion about what our councillors in Wakefield are actually doing to represent their wards.

Alternatively, Sherriff could stick to her promise not to hold two jobs and resign with immediate effect. That would be the sensible and democratic thing to do.

EDIT: Paula Sherriff has just responded to one of my Yorkshire First colleagues on Twitter saying that she no longer draws an allowance for the role nor acts as a councillor for Pontefract North. Still unclear whether this means Pontefract North is being under-represented though…

Mary Creagh Standing for Labour Leader

The news that Mary Creagh, my local MP, has thrown her hat into the ring for the job of Labour leader didn’t exactly surprise me. In fact, reading back over a post I wrote in November about the bizarre decision to move Creagh from the transport brief, I’m wondering if I stepped into a time-machine for a little while. I certainly made some apt predictions:

Well, as a Wakefield resident, I believe that Creagh will be re-elected on an increased majority because of the split in the vote caused by UKIP standing against the dedicated Eurosceptic Tory. They didn’t stand in 2010 and he was only a few thousand votes away from taking the seat. I can see it being messy this time. Equally, I think Miliband needs to worry more about his own seat and that of his shadow chancellor. The other possibility is that Miliband sees Creagh as a threat – don’t discount that one. Finally, it could just be that Miliband’s incompetent. Place your bets, folks. Place your bets.

So Creagh did increase her majority because of the UKIP/Conservative split (though the Eurosceptic candidate I expected to stand did not) and Miliband should’ve worried more about Ed Balls’s seat (if you listen to news stories today, it seems he might’ve seen it coming but that’s a thought for elsewhere). Did Miliband see Creagh as a threat? Well, I’m still not sure given his loose grip on reality in the last few months. However, it’s pretty obvious that she saw herself as one and that she certainly considered the top job.

As I wrote in that post in November, I have respect for Creagh as a hard-working minister, whether I agree with her policies or not. I also do admire her recent support for the family at the inquest of the two Wakefield children who died of carbon monoxide poisoning in Corfu in 2006. She’s articulate and dedicated but, despite that, I don’t feel like I ‘know’ her.

I’ll have to think long and hard about the pros and cons of all the candidates in the coming months. I have to say, though, I’m not sure I can see the benefits of having a Labour leader as my local MP. I don’t think it’s done a lot for Doncaster in the last five years.

The SNP’s Latest Command

I know I witter on a fair bit about democracy and accountability, call it a bug-bear. I don’t believe, for instance, that a coalition agreement should be implemented following the 2015 election without being put to the voters. You can sense, then, what my attitude on Nicola Sturgeon’s latest comments about the possibility of an SNP-Labour coalition might be.

Sturgeon has said that the SNP would be prepared to join forces with Labour, even if they didn’t have more MPs than the Tories following the election. It’s not a rule that the party with the highest number of MPs form the government, but it’s a standard that hasn’t been broken since the 1920s. Of course, this comes with a price – at the moment that’s a £180bn spending spree, though I expect that to increase the more desperate Labour look as the election nears. Whatever your view on austerity, it’s a pretty neat subversion of democracy on the part of the SNP.

The trouble with Labour at the moment is that they simply reek of desperation. That means the SNP can name their price (don’t be fooled, they’re aiming for independence either via another referendum or by the back door) and the Lib Dems too. The prospect of a Labour/SNP/Lib Dem coalition is terrifying, not least because it will have no legitimacy in the eyes of much of the country. We’ve had five years of back-room deals between the Tory-Lib Dem ‘quad’ and it’s left a sour taste. If anything, it’s served to distance the electorate further from their MPs – after all, does it matter who we all vote for if they decide what’s ‘best’ for us in the end? It stinks, and the stench is only going to get worse until May.

Politics Has a People Problem

The figure Harriet Harman draws attention to of 9.1 million women who didn’t vote in 2010 is alarming but not at all surprising. However, I don’t think political engagement has a ‘woman problem’ as much as a ‘people problem’. The public are disengaging – from the major parties at least – and, while I can understand the urge to drag them back kicking and screaming into the fold, I don’t think Labour’s ‘pink bus’ is going to do the trick on the women front.

The word being bandied about is ‘patronising’. I’d agree with that. I don’t think seeing a pink bus in my town centre would encourage me to vote Labour. In fact, I’d just be asking why they’re making so much effort to appear colourful when, really, the way to win votes is to create effective and economically literate policies. Those seem to be the things that women pay attention to. There was a lot written during the Scottish Referendum about how women were thinking with their heads while men were more focused on their emotional reaction to the prospect of independence. I don’t know how right that analysis is but, surely, the best way to achieve an election victory is to fight on both of those fronts?

For me, this pink bus is a gimmick, and one that’s been ridiculed pretty comprehensively already. This close to an election, is this really Labour’s strategy?

Mini-Reshuffle Madness: Creagh to International Development

My local MP, Mary Creagh, was moved from her post as shadow transport secretary last night to take up the role of shadow international development. To be honest, I was astounded then more than a little irritated.

Most of the time my views don’t exactly correlate with Creagh’s. I’ve discussed that on this blog before so I won’t go into detail but one thing I will say is that, aside from perhaps Andy Burnham, Creagh is one of the hardest working and most knowledgeable members of the shadow cabinet. She fully immerses herself in her portfolio and, while I sometimes regret the fact that since she’s a part of the inner circle she won’t utter a word of dissent, I respect her hard work and dedication.

When she knocked on my door a year or so ago it was just after Miliband’s energy price freeze promise and she was shadow environment secretary. While I didn’t agree with the policy, her championing of it, both on the doorstep and through other mediums, was high profile and involved. Then, in a move I found bizarre at the time because she was working hard with that announcement, she was shifted to the transport role.

In the last year she’s made it her own. I read a very interesting interview last week (no links since I have the memory of a goldfish) where her enthusiasm for her job shone through and she’s just launched an initiative on buses. In fact, yesterday she was hosting a ‘bus summit’ at Westminster. Then…suddenly she’s been shifted again.

Of course, this is how modern politics works but I can’t help but feel it’s counter-productive. I’ve got no doubt that she’ll throw herself into her new role as enthusiastically as she has the others but, given all her talk of how transport links could prove pivotal in some seats, it seems stupid to move somebody obviously so immersed in her brief a few months before an election.

I suppose there could be a couple of ‘reasons’ alongside the actual necessity for a mini-reshuffle to free Jim Murphy up for his Scottish adventure. It could be that Miliband’s concerned about Creagh’s meagre majority collapsing at the next election and thinks transport is too important to be sucked into that. Well, as a Wakefield resident, I believe that Creagh will be re-elected on an increased majority because of the split in the vote caused by UKIP standing against the dedicated Eurosceptic Tory. They didn’t stand in 2010 and he was only a few thousand votes away from taking the seat. I can see it being messy this time. Equally, I think Miliband needs to worry more about his own seat and that of his shadow chancellor. The other possibility is that Miliband sees Creagh as a threat – don’t discount that one. Finally, it could just be that Miliband’s incompetent. Place your bets, folks. Place your bets.

Some Recent Political Thoughts

Yet again, events are occurring faster than I can write about them in any depth so I thought I’d do another round-up post briefly detailing my thoughts on recent issues. I may well go into more detail in future posts but I wanted to get these down.

  • The scuppering of the EU referendum bill – This irritates me, of course it does. However, it was always going to be scuppered one way or the other and, naturally, it wasn’t going to be voted down in a debate where voters could actually hold their MPs accountable. This is politics at its worst and I live in hope that the Westminster bubble will pay for it at some point. If they don’t think we can tell what they’re doing then they think even less of us than I supposed. Talk about being ruled by your inferiors! But the fact is, apathy will win. Apathy always wins.
  • Ideas for HS3 – Yes!! I’ve detailed my hatred for HS2 on numerous occasions, both here and elsewhere. I think it’s a colossal waste of money which will only benefit the south. I think the first stage will prove so calamitous that the second will never be built. I also believe that the cost benefits are vastly over-estimated and the money would be better spent on other aspects of the rail network. However, HS3 is designed to link northern cities together. In that respect, it steps away from the London-centric attitude which permeates planning in this country. Trimming time between Leeds and Manchester and freeing up capacity on other routes in the area could actually be useful. I could defend the differences between the two projects in detail if you want me to but my stance is this: No to HS2, Yes to HS3. Scrap the first. Or at least build the latter before it. If the government is really serious about these rail projects benefiting the north of England and not just sucking more oxygen down towards London.
  • UKIP’s voting in the EU Parliament – I’ve seen a lot of criticism floating around about the things UKIP have voted against in Brussels as a form of attack, mainly from the left. My understanding of the UKIP voting policy is that they vote against everything. Anyone who’s watched a voting session in that parliament knows how confused it is. Items are lumped together and it’s said that nobody knows what they’re voting for. UKIP’s decision to vote against stems from that and, also, a reluctance to engage with the bureaucracy they want to detach us from. I don’t see much wrong with that in all honesty.
  • PCCs – With a turnout of less than 15% for the recent PCC by-election in South Yorkshire, I don’t see how these pointless roles can continue to be justified. Fair play to the Lib Dems though – they think the roles should be scrapped and so didn’t field a candidate. Labour, on the other hand, think the roles should be scrapped and DID field a candidate. Do as I say, not as I do?
  • Recent EU rhetoric – Do they want rid of us? I can only hope. The language around the bill demand and the free movement issues has been strong and, really, I think those are areas of resonance with average voters. People are waking up to the fact that it’s not racist to worry about the impact of immigration on schools, the NHS and other services. Only a minority of people demand that all immigration be stopped – the majority want us to have control of our own borders. That means we can’t exist within the EU. When/if a referendum comes, the EU will throw the kitchen sink at us – they want us to stay on their terms or not at all. It could be an interesting few years.
  • Labour’s Scottish problems – Are they trying to self-destruct? Personally, I find the reach of the Westminster elite to be problematic in Yorkshire as our MPs are parachuted in at the behest of London-centric politicos. In Scotland, this seems to be have been taken to the extreme and I don’t blame Lamont for stepping away. It’s ironic, really, that Labour’s response to this is to back a Westminster MP who is arguably part of the problem as her replacement. There’s stupidity and then there’s Labour’s stupidity. On the plus side, they might as well scrap their opposition to ‘English votes for English laws’ since there won’t be enough Scottish Labour MPs for it to make a tangible difference to their prospects.
  • Fiona Woolf – This may be an unpopular one but I think the child abuse inquiry should’ve gone ahead under the leadership of Fiona Woolf. I honestly don’t think you’re going to find somebody with the expertise required who hasn’t got links somewhere along the line with someone who’s potentially involved. The process is going to be a transparent one – if things weren’t progressing as expected then the inquiry could’ve been halted. As it is, it’s not even getting started. I’ve seen no suggestions (others might have) of who Woolf’s critics would actually want to lead the investigation, there just seems to be incessant complaining. Without a compromise, this inquiry is going nowhere and that’s a travesty for the victims.

Propaganda and Spin

I receive a weekly newsletter from my MP, Mary Creagh, which is sometimes fascinating and sometimes so crammed with propaganda and stupidity that it makes me cringe. Yesterday’s newsletter slid firmly into the latter category, mainly due to the section that covered the by-elections last week. Creagh – or whoever writes this thing – is falling into the trap of spreading lies about their enemies and not saying much about themselves, which seems to be Labour’s line at the moment. Here are the offending paragraphs:

Last Thursday we saw a Tory Party in retreat, losing in their own backyard in Clacton and losing ground on what used to be their frontline in the North West. David Cameron has seen the worst Tory defeat in a by-election ever, with a huge swing against them and a 28% fall in the Tory vote in a seat that was one of their safest.

This seems to me a regurgitation of Ed Miliband’s statements on the by-elections. Fair enough, I suppose, if you’re trying to spin a coherent party line. (I don’t believe in ‘coherent party lines’ but that’s another matter.)

UKIP are more Tory than the Tories. UKIP want to introduce charges to use key NHS services, including your GP. Tim Aker, UKIP Head of Policy has said he wants to abolish the top rate of tax – giving the wealthiest another tax break, while raising taxes for working people. UKIP want to abolish your rights as a worker, including parental leave, maternity pay, holiday pay, sick pay, and even redundancy pay.

Okay, now we get to it. The NHS charges lie that Labour keep throwing around here has been repeatedly refuted by UKIP. The quotes Labour use from personal views, not policy documents. And are Labour folk forgetting that it was one of their own advisers who said just a few months ago that GP visits should be charged at £20 a go? That’s not their policy, of course, and I’m not suggesting it is but that fine distinction between rhetoric and actual policy has bypassed some Labour supporters as they foam at the mouth about the UKIP threat to the NHS.

On the tax issue, Labour comes from as ideological a standpoint as they imply UKIP do – if tax receipts can be increased by having a more punitive top rate of tax then, by all means, go ahead, but the evidence has shown this isn’t the case. There’s a threshold where the people targeted believe it’s too punitive and actively look for ways to avoid it. Perhaps the answer here is cracking down on tax avoidance. Perhaps but let’s not forget that France’s ridiculous 75% top rate of tax led to an exodus of the rich. Oh, I know some people will say ‘good riddance’ but, for a start, those tax receipts will disappear too. Also, while we’re on the subject, Labour only raised the top rate to 50p prior to the 2010 election, knowing full well a Tory government would lower it and therefore give them a stick to beat the government with for five years.

I’ll give them the ‘rights’ line. My understanding is that UKIP want to cut red tape, though I don’t agree with the specific proposals on this one. However, I think Labour’s hypocrisy on employee rights is risible given the number of people their MPs and councils employ on zero-hours contracts. Barricade your own houses before throwing stones.

I understand people are worried that their hard work isn’t rewarded, they fear their kids will have a worse life than them and they see their public services under threat. But UKIP isn’t the answer. I support Ed Miliband’s new approach: change in our economy so that it works for working people, change for our party on immigration.

The fears here are real. I know they are. However, I’m seeing very little from Miliband and company to combat either the economy problem or the (rather tagged on) immigration issues. You can’t forget to mention the economy in a conference speech and still expect people to believe it’s top of your priority list. Equally, you can’t make appeasing noises on the one hand and condemn your ‘racist’ supporters on the other. That’s exactly the thing that’s driving Labour voters to UKIP.

You know, I personally like my MP. I met her when she came to deliver a leaflet a year ago and she comes across very well. I want to be able to vote for her but I can’t bring myself to vote for Labour. The latest edition of this newsletter just reiterated why.