British Politics in interesting times.

Posted on by
Reply

It’s certainly interesting to follow British politics these days. It also challenges my notions of good and bad, red, green and blue, libertarian, conservative and socialist, autocracy, democracy and tyranny. With the British parliament a confrontational slugfest arena, this makes it even more interesting, especially compared to the rather sedate German federal parliament that’s of course in the iron fist of a majority of teachers and lawyers.

Picture courtesy of accrama on Flickr

So yesterday parliament decided that the executive and judicative powers in this country can lock me away without a charge for up to 42 days. I find that hard to defend and – being of rather simplistic nature – understand. If there is a suspicion that somebody is planning a terrorist act (or is a terrorist) the police will do what the police (and the secret services) in every country do what they do best: they investigate, research the facts and then arrest the individual, present him with the charges and get him in front of a judge who will then decide whether the charges are founded enough to bring him to trial.

So easy, so normal.

So, lets follow the British Government’s argumentation. The police/MI5 pick up that some bad person is planning a really nasty deed threatening human life. They are quite sure but lack the hard facts, so they arrest him under the counter terrorist bill and put him in a cell while they investigate further before charging him. I can understand that as well. But does is really have to be 42 days? And why 42? Is Jacqui Smith – the British Home Secretary –  an avid Douglas Adams fan and finds that within 42 days she might find the answer to life, the universe and terrorist activity? And why did only 36 Labour MPs vote against this. And who knew that the DUP was actually still in parliament?

It makes me feel profoundly uncomfortable. This is a country that already has the highest number of CCTV cameras per capita in the world (one camera per 60 inhabitants) and easy access to ISP’s records. Together with wideranging powers of arrest without charge this is more than a little bit creepy.

And here’s where my confusion begins, but not ends. Being a left leaning liberal, plenty of ideas that the labour party stands for I support wholeheartedly: a (more or less) comprehensive health insurance for all, a commitment to excellent state education, egality in front of the law regardless of your sex or ethnicity, a safetynet for these not being able to thrive in society and who need support by the state. All these are goals I am happy to pay my taxes for. But then I look at the current labour government and I start becoming uncomfortable again. There are some policies that have profoundly backfired: Privatisation of the NHS? Polyclinics? Primary Care Trusts (don’t get me started)? No incentive for microgeneration? 10 pence income tax evaporation? Iraq? Still in Iraq after what, 5 years? Then I look at the policies of the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats and start recalibrating my political compass.

And this morning David Davis, Shadow Home Secretary for the Conservatives resigns from parliament to express his outrage about the 42 days issue with some of the most stringent arguments on personal freedoms I have heard for some time.

My political compass is all over the place.

Hillary Clinton says ‘Goodbye’. With an excellent speech.

Posted on by
Reply

I have just read Hillary’s valedictory speech, and by jove, it’s a cracker. It reminded me while I was wanting her for president in the first place, before her bizarre policy mistakes.

Anyway, the team of speechwriters who came up with this masterpiece should really pat themselves on the back.

Here’s the link.

Let the footyfest begin. But who to cheer for?

Posted on by
Reply

Picture courtesy of Phreak2.0 on Flickr

It’s a gorgeous day up here in Scotland, and the European Soccer Championship has begun. While I am writing this, Group B has begun to play, with Austria and Croatia hard at it. The big problem for the Brits and the Irish is of course to choose which nation to cheer for (btw, Croatia leads 1:0 via a penalty). While it would be obvious to cheer for your closest neighbours (The Netherlands, France or Germany) it looks like the UK has chosen Poland as its favourite footynation (no wonder, with half a milion polish migrants prepping up the economy). Apart from the general move towards the poles, each pub wil probably chose its own nation, depending on the ethnic mix of its neigbourhood, though I find it unlikely that a pub in Sutherland will suddenly sport a plethora of German flags and serve Weissbier.

Nevertheless, since the Worldcup in 2006 the tone in the red tops here in the UK towards Germany has become much more conciliatory. Must have something to do with millions of tipsy Brits having a smashing time in German town centers during the tournament. Which of course proves what Charlemagne, one of The Economist’s columnists once said:

Brussels is full of monuments to the “builders of Europe”. There is the Schuman district, the Monnet circle, the Spinelli building. It may now be time for a Stelios Square or a Boulevard O’Leary. For in recent years, Stelios Haji-Ioannou and Michael O’Leary, the two pioneers of Europe’s low-cost airlines, have done more to integrate Europe than any numbers of diplomats and ministers.

With dozens of European players featuring every weekend in the lineup of Premiership teams, it can’t be hard to find your favourite team.  Maybe even distribute one team to every homenation? The Scots could prop up the auld alliance and cheer for the French, the English could swallow their pride and support a nation that doesn’t have a problems with penalty shootouts (e.g. Germany), Northern Ireland could pick a nation that has had an eqaully galling civil war, for instance Croatia, and the Irish could take up a hopeless cause, like Switzerland.

There. All sorted out. Now go get your drinkies, phone your friends and settle down in front of the TV, watch some footy and cheer for the Germans.

Prost!

Goodbye Hillary. I don’t know whether I’ll miss you.

Posted on by
Reply

And so the inevitable, though 18 months ago unthinkable, has happened: Barack Obama has grasped the candidacy of the Democratic Party for the presidency of the US. I am not qualified enough to play political journalist and will never posess the beautiful prose with some of these people write, but I can tell you that 12 months ago I was a commited Hillaritarian: I wanted a woman to be president (I still [maybe foolishly] believe that women [even in politics] rather talk about shoes than wage war, making the world an inherently safer place), and I wanted it to be Hillary. She was committed to universal healthcare, had significant experience in policy making and as a European I wanted her to bring Bill along (always called the most instinctive politician of his generation but who damaged her campaign from the sidelines so badly that he needs to take some of the blame for her downfall) who would have made a great foreign policy advisor and all around good guy. I had a soft spot for Joe Biden and thought that Obama was a ballsy, inspired orator, but for me it was the Hill and Bill show all the way.

Then, 2 months ago, I switched allegiances. What went wrong? It’s not like that Obama has presented a detailed set of policies that I can subscribe to and he still sounds terribly vague on most fronts, but it was really Hillary herself that made me leave her camp.

The first time I rolled my eyes and thought ‘oh my god’ was during her interview on ‘Good Morning America’:

“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m the president, we will attack Iran (if it attacks Israel). In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them.”

Hello? Haven’t we had enough hawkish morons in the US administration over the last 8 years? As soon as that goon Ahmadinejad is gone it’s going to be easier to talk to the Iranians anyway. But now, she had to do a McCain.

And then there was the environmental own goal of proposing to give the most energy inefficient nation on this world a ‘tax holiday’ on their enormously subsidised fuel.

Duh.

Obama (or that ‘Muslim Guy’, as I heard a lady from Arkansas call him) makes more conciliatory noises on foreign policy and was not prepared to support that idiotic and populistic tax holiday thing which strikes me as a better plan if you want to steer a globally despised nation in times of 145$ per barrel of crude.

So, if I would be a resident in that country south of Canada (which I’ll [touch wood] never be), my vote would go to that brave new hope of the Democratic Party.

Can he do it ?

Yes, he can.

P.S. Although he should really lose the ‘Bob the Builder’ references.

P.P.S And Hillary? She would make an excellent Secretary of Health. And Bill could become the American Ambasador in Paris.