Crooked MP? You’ll only find out after his re-election

So it turned out that Denis MacShane was already under investigation over alleged misuse of parliamentary expense claims before his relection in May this year, yet the Parliamentary Standards Office did not see fit to release this information before the general election. Richard Wilson is right to be annoyed by this:

The Parliamentary Standards Office made a deliberate decision to withhold crucial information from UK voters ahead of the 2010 General Election. The voters of Rotherham – and for all we know many other constituencies around the country – were thus prevented from making an informed choice about the candidates seeking their votes. It’s only now, five months after the election has taken place, that the full picture is beginning to emerge. It may be another four years before Rotherham voters can express their judgement on this at the ballot box.

Knowing that your local MP is a crook –allegedly– seems to me to be pretty basic in deciding whether or not you’d re-elect them. Keeping that information from the public is not helpful.

A progressive narrative on immigration is not needed

In the wake of the Labour leadership struggle, with various candidates grasping for immigration as the explenation for Labour’s defeat, Sunny aks for a progressive narrative on immigration:

here is the dilemma for the left. The public are not easily persuaded by facts. There’s no way of ‘educating them’. The right-wing media exists and it won’t stop printing false stories. And there are lots of traditional Labour supporters who have concerns about immigration (Labour was about 30 points behind in the polls on the issue).

And there is little evidence that those concerns translated into lost votes. Labour had lost millions of voters even before this election, mainly because of Iraq. Nevertheless, Labour was about 30 points behind. So what would a progressive narrative on immigration look like? How do you deal with people’s concerns without sounding like the English Defence League, the BNP or Andy Burnham? How does that narrative offer solutions and hope without encouraging people to be bigots or making them fearful of immigrants?

What’s the narrative? What do you say on the door-step? Thoughts?

Immigration is a red herring. Labour didn’t lose because of immigration, or of not being tough enough on immigration, or because of anything other than a) the shit economy and b) the general public’s slow realisation that New Labour is such a shower of shits even the possibility of a Tory government is no longer quite horrifying enough to keep on voting Labour, as the latter would just do most of the evil the Tories are suspected of wanting to do anyway. That’s it. Now for Burnham, Balls and the Millibands this reality is one that can’t be acknowledged, as they are all part responsible for this. Hence this ridiculous insistence that it was fear of foreigners that led to Labour’s defeat, when the sole good news of the election was the complete and utter defeat of the BNP and its message.

But we on the left do not need to share this illusion. Burnham et all are trapped by their New Labour assumptions, that mixture of private enterprise fetishism and social authoritarianism — we aren’t. We know that if there’s a conflict between “natives” and “immigrants” about council housing the problem isn’t too many immigrants, it’s too few council houses and the solution isn’t to deport more people, but to build more houses! Labour has had thirteen years to address the housing shortage, but chose to bung money at private developers in nebulous schemes rather than allow councils to build new flats, then blames things on those least able to defend themselves, fanning the flames for the BNP.

So what do we need to do? Sunny is wrong to say you can’t educate people — as the anti-BNP campaigns showed in this election, yes you can. This then is the first thing the left in and outside Labour needs to do, to learn from those campaigns and adapt them for use against Labourite bigots and racialist opportunists. We now have the proof that you can racists without pandering, so let’s us that.

The second thing is to hammer the economics. The crisis was not caused by immigrants, nor by the working classes, but one created by the very people New Labour has been courting in the past thirteen years. The core problem is not the migration of labour, but of capital, that people can live In England, work in England and make tmillions in England but do not have to pay taxes in England. That should be hammered into people again and again, together with the radical new idea that gosh, the state needs not be helpless when people need houses, or jobs, or schools or healthcare, but can actually make sure there is enough for everybody, as long as it is willing to actually do so and use its powers for good rather than for illegal wars and petty bullying.

Why Labour? Why now?

Justin asks what has changed in Labour that you should rejoin it:

Can New Labour remodel itself as ‘progressive’ (whatever that means these days) even if it wanted to? This is what puzzled me about the people who crashed the New Labour website the other night in their stampede to rejoin the party. Nothing has changed just because Gordon Brown has shuffled off to spend more time with his sulk. Does a Miliband or a Balls have the emotional intelligence to notice and care about this stuff, let alone point it out?

The rush to (re)join Labour is proof of two things: visceral hatred of Tories in government and the ongoing failure to establish a proper leftwing alternative to Labour. It’s true that all the bad authoritarian, warmongering impulses of New Labour still exist, but I think people felt they had no choice. It is a reasonable assumption to think that bad as New Labour was, the Tories will be worse and with the Liberals in bed with them, the only place left is Labour…

Labour was awful when it came to civil rights, authoritarian and downright evil in places (War on Iraq, treatment of refugees), but for better or worse is still seen as slightly less evil than the Tories — the memories of what they did to the working classes the last time they were in power still remain.Labour quite frankly is the lesser of two evils, despised on what they did in the past thirteen years but few people have any illusions the Tories would’ve behaved better, which why now Labour has been punished people instinctively flow back towards it.

This may be a blessing in disguise, if an organised left can be established in the party to take it back from the Blairites/Brownies, but it will take years. Tony and Gordon’s acolytes are too firmly entrenched, hold all the positions of power in the party to be quickly gotten rid off. The next election will be crucial: if New Labour is still in power in the party and win the election, they will never be removed.

You can compare it with the Democratic Party in the US: after Bush stole the elections in 2000, and especially after 2002/03 when there was a huge antiwar movement with no real political home, there was a chance to move the Democrats to the left, but the centrists won the powerstruggle, sidelined the activists and just waited until the Republicans became unpoplar enough to lose the election.

A leftward turn is needed for Labour, but it can only be forced upon the party. Those who joined out of disappointment with the Lib-Dems need to be politcally active in the party to do so. Now’s the chance to win the party back.

Best news of the election


LOLGriffin

The defeat and self destruction of the BNP:

In the next 12 hours, Griffin’s worst fears were realised – and even exceeded. The party was thrashed in its two key parliamentary constituencies of Barking and Stoke Central. Its record number of council and parliamentary candidates failed to make a single breakthrough; and of the 28 BNP councillors standing for re-election, all but two were beaten.

But the Barking and Dagenham council election result was the most dramatic. The BNP had plans to take control of the authority – instead, it lost every one of its councillors there. Twelve elected in 2006. Twelve thrown out in 2010. A ruthless purge, more shocking because they didn’t see it coming. Neither, for that matter, did their opponents. It was the miracle of Barking.

According to one analyst quoted in the article, Tony Travers, of the London School of Economics, the reason the BNP was so soundly defeated was that Labour pulled its finger out of its ass and started campaigning against them:

“It would appear that the vote for the BNP in 2006 was some kind of political cry of anguish, based on the perception that the Labour party simply didn’t understand the concerns of that part of the electorate. The fact that the BNP has been dropped in 2010 heavily suggests this section of the electorate now believes it has got the attention of the Labour party.” Back in 2006, the morality of supporting an intrinsically racist party wasn’t an issue, says Travers. “The voters simply used the most shocking mechanism they could to get Labour’s attention.”

But there is good and bad in that conclusion. Good because it suggests people in Barking voted BNP for reasons other than racism and antisemitism. Bad because if it was all a means to an end, did no one consider the impact on community relations of voting for the far right?

The BNP vote as a form of protest? Perhaps, but there is a hardcore of racist voters as well, as well as more people who more or less agree with the BNP’s (public) views on immigration etcetera but who usually vote out of other concerns. It might also just be that the more serious economic concerns, as well as the genuine three way race this time made voting for racists a bit of a luxury. Finally, it should always be remembered that defeating the BNP does not matter if it means other parties taking over parts of their rhetoric and political programme. Under New Labour we’ve had a gradual rightward march on immigration and treatment of refugees, which, even if it was just embraced as a tactical measure, has led to real misery on the ground — see Chickyogs passim for evidence.

QotD: Billy Bragg gets his very own Internationale

Facebook friends of Mr Bragg, annoyed at his endless pre-election shilling for the Lib-Dems and his assurances that they would never form a coalition with the Tories, have written their own version of The Internationale for him:

Desert your working class traditions,
Renege on all the hopes of man
For middle class is the position
And consensus is the plan

Forget your history and reason
Servile masses, you know your place
For now class warfare’s the new treason
And the market, we embrace

So to dorset we’ll hurry
And pretend that day is night
And proletarian best interests
Are served by Clegg, that shite

In the final conflict
We now know where we will be
The sordid wasted cannon fodder
For the Liberal bourgeoisie

Found in comments at Unfogged. No Facebook link because we don’t roll that way.