Hung like a...

You have probably heard a lot in the press recently about a ‘hung’ parliament- and what this would mean in the UK.


So what is a hung parliament? This is when no one political party has an outright majority. It rarely happens in the UK (because our voting system isn’t very proportionate)- the last one was in 1974 but it lasted less than a year.

The way that the polls are looking at the moment means that a hung parliament is likely. This perhaps surprises many people who thought that the Tories were way out ahead in the lead- and whilst they are still beating Labour in the polls- they are not far enough ahead to command a majority. Of course this can all change...

For many, a hung parliament would be a disaster. A period of uncertainty where Parliament is paralysed and unable to pass legislation would follow, and possible another election campaign soon after, as happened in ’74. There is also a fear that the economy would not react well to this uncertainty, particularly the credit markets that the Government is relying on to fund Government debt.

So keep your eye on the polls to see which way the vote is swinging... but if you want to affect them... make sure you vote



Poli-Chick xx

The Anna Wintour of UK politics...

Gordon Brown. Bully or Bad-tempered? Is there a difference? Is he either? As he both? Does it matter?


These are all questions that have crossed Poli-Chick’s mind this weekend as it was alleged in a book that Gus O’Donnell, the Head of the Civil Service, has reprimanded Brown.

Pratt, head of the National Bullying Helpline then waded in, stating that the helpline had received calls from people working at Number 10, but that they had not mentioned Brown specifically.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of Brown’s behaviour, it raises to crucial questions. Firstly, when does behaviour in the workplace become bullying? Is Anna Wintour bullying her Vogue co-workers? Does Gordon Ramsey bully chefs in his kitchens?

Personality is important but so is policy. Time the parties all showed theirs. Best anti-bullying policy submitted by the end of then week wins…

Poli-Chick xx

In the words of Lily Allen...

For most people, the five year anniversary of the hunting ban this week will have passed by without being noticed. In 2005, the Hunting Act banned dogs being used on hunts to kill foxes by a large majority.


This week, Labour called on the Tories to clarify their position on this issue. Previously, they had doubted whether the ban had worked with Nick Herbert, a Tory MP, calling the ban an ‘affront to civil liberties.’ They had also said they would vote on this issue again in Parliament if they won the election.

Whether or not you care about hunting (Poli-Chick doesn’t) this is a symbolic issue of personal choice for many. Why should the state tell you what activities you can and cannot pursue? Why is hunting seen as worse than fishing, or any other method of killing an animal? Even if it is worse, why should the state decide?

Interestingly this all comes in the same week that Cameron spoke about the need to ban products that sexualise children- picking on one Ms Lily Allen in particular...

‘It’s not fair and I think you’re really mean’ could make an interesting pro-fox hunting slogan...



Poli-Chick xx

Sick of trains stopping at Newark Northgate?

As I write this blog from my very slow train from London to Leeds, a political storm is brewing over the future of high speed rail.


All the main political parties used to support a high speed rail link between the North and South. Slight difference between them being that Labour also supports expansion at Heathrow whereas the Lib Dems and Tories see high speed rail as an alternative to this. There is also debate over whether the line itself should stretch to Heathrow, or whether there should be a shuttle between London and the airport, with Labour favouring the latter.

A new high speed line will take years of planning and building, so cross party agreement is essential. Today, the Tories turned down Labour’s offer to see the plans at an early stage- saying they wanted to reserve the right to change them should they win the election.

The Lib Dems suspect that this is a delaying tactic, stating that the Tories cannot be trusted with the UK’s railways. High speed rail is an expensive proposition, and as noted on this blog before, we ain’t exactly swimming in money.

So another day, another set of cross-party talks scuppered by a Tory. Are they really out to destroy long term planning, or is there a real objection to the route Labour is consulting on?

Either way, high speed rail is crucial to reducing congestion on the UK’s roads and making travel easier and greener for all of us. Who do you trust with the UK’s railways?

Poli-Chick xx

Oh Darling... not in January

When it gets to the end of the month, and payday is a distant memory, there is often a time when a Poli-Chick has to borrow money- either from the nice people Mastercard, a friend or perhaps the Bank of Mum and Dad. What is perhaps more worrying is if, the day after payday, you still can’t afford to pay your rent.


That is the position the Government found itself in today. January is their bumper pay packet when tax receipts come in. Yet they still had to borrow £4.3billion last month-the first time a Government has had to borrow money in January since figures began in 1993.

That’s bad.

So what do we do going forward? Our Chancellor, Darling, has promised to halve our deficit levels in 4 years. Not quick enough for some, including the Tories, who called this month’s figures appalling. According to their maths, each this year’s borrowing is equivalent to £4,800 per UK family.
So what should we do? Start tightening public spending now or wait until next year? If we wait, will the debt rise to high? If we do it too quickly then will this harm economic growth?



Poli-Chick xx

Working 9-5 what a way to make a living

Hurrah! For the second quarter in a row unemployment in the UK has fallen. Not by very much (3,000), but a fall nonetheless.


Presuming that unemployment has already peaked, it is interesting to understand why it never reached the levels some expected. Most economists predicted that unemployment would rise to over 3 million, but in reality the number did not go over 2.5 million.

The Government claims that the many policies they put in place over the course of the recession - from increased support to job seekers to the car scrappage scheme to VAT cuts to keep demand for goods up - all helped employers hang onto their staff. It is difficult, perhaps impossible, to say how many jobs were saved by each initiative but the work of Job Centre Plus (JCP) and the new back to work schemes are often cited as crucial.

Today, the Conservative’s claimed that JCP was under staffed and left without enough resources to cope with the increased number of jobseekers. They state that JCP’s were still being closed in 2008, when unemployment began to grow, and that this placed a large burden on the system. Labour, meanwhile, accuse the Tories of painting a one sided picture- and further accuse them of opposing the extra £5bn that the Government invested in JCP services.

What is clear is that the number of people losing their jobs was not as high as feared. However, this has left many people ‘under-employed’- i.e. working fewer hours than they would like or in a lower skilled job than they were trained for. The next Government will have to support these people to boost the UK’s productivity, and JCP will be a key part of this.


So who do you think would do the best job?



Poli-Chick xx

I like the UK- please don't kick me out

Slightly off the beaten track for today’s post. The problem when people are either a) disillusioned by the main parties or b) do not vote at all is that smaller, less mainstream parties increase their share of the vote. The British National Party (BNP) actually got fewer votes in this EU election in the North West than in the last, but a higher share- blamed on less labour voters turning out at the polls.


Yesterday, the BNP was forced to admit non-whites to its membership- with Nick Griffin stating that he expected a trickle rather than a flood of applicants. Can’t imagine why he doesn’t think this change in the law will result in a huge rise in members... yes quite.

But thankfully- in case anyone had forgotten how nasty and thuggish the party actually is- the BNP forcefully ejected a Times Journalist from the meeting. He had, incidentally, been invited. Saved me a lot of time. Was going to have to write a post saying ‘Don’t be fooled by the BNP, they are still the same’ but now, I can end it hear.

So please vote, otherwise, like the journalist ejected from the meeting... many of us will be ejected off this island...



Poli-Chick xx

and next on Strictly Come Dancing, dancing the Tango, Gordon Brown

What do Katie Price and Gordon Brown have in common? Sounds like the start of a joke- but actually the answer is that they have both done an interview with Piers Morgan on ITV1- and both cried. GB’s showing is on ITV1 tonight at 10.15.


Brown certainly isn’t the only party to leader to have been accused of overshare. Nick Clegg (Lib Dems) once boasted that he slept with ‘less thn 30 women’- how many less wasn’t clear, but neither was why the public needed to know about Clegg’s 1-29 lovers.

Cameron has frequently allowed the cameras into his family’s life, with photo spreads documenting his home life. At the time, Brown said he would never exploit his family in the same way. He has now turned a kettle that has been called black by the pot.

So is it an overshare or a welcome insight into the life of our leader. Miss it or Miss out.

Poli-Chick xx

T is for Tax

No political party likes talking about tax rises, especially so near a general election. Rarely do voters go into a polling booth and think- I’m going to vote for a party that is going to take more of my hard earned cash. However, in our credit crunched, debt busting age, there is a feeling amongst many votes that the new Government needs a credible plan to get us out of this hole.


Today it was reported that both the Tories and Labour are planning a V AT rise of 2.5% to 20% should they win the next election. Doesn’t give you much of an option when you go to cast your vote if you don’t think VAT should rise.

So why have they picked VAT? Well, the average VAT rate in Europe is also 20% so there is a feeling that we could afford to pay a little more. And to be honest, it is probably the tax rise least likely to cause offence. National Insurance Contributions is already rising by 1% in 2011 and a new higher rate income tax level of 50% will squeeze high earners (who also tend to complaint the loudest). An increase in direct business taxes would send a bad message to the private sector- the Government is relying on entrepreneurs innovating and creating jobs.

Then there are the indirect taxes- smokers and drinkers are normally picked on for tax increases but these small amounts won’t fill the sort of hole that the Treasury currently has. Fuel Duty is another popular one, but motorists in the UK already pay more tax on fuel than most other countries.

So VAT does seem like a bit of a no-brainer, making all our goods and services more expensive- but risking reducing consumer demand in our still weak economy.

I know they say that ‘what comes up must come down’, but that doesn’t look likely to happen to our tax levels in the near future.

Poli-Chick xx

3 men sat round a table... then 1 got up

In my university holidays I sometimes used to go to my Grandma’s house on a Wednesday and we would watch Prime Ministers Questions together. She would always say the same thing- ‘ooh turn it off. I don’t like listening to them shout at each other. Why do they have to be so mean?’ I don’t think that it was only my grandma who had that reaction, many people find the adversarial nature of politics a turn off.


Poli-Chick was pleasantly surprised to learn that all three main parties were working together to reform medical care for the elderly. Long term policies such as this work much better with a consensus so that different Governments don’t keep chopping and changing the care system.

Unfortunately, the talks collapsed today. The Tories not only walked away from the negotiations but started a noisy ad campaign blasting Labour for considering a ‘death tax’. All parties agree reform is needed to prevent old people having to sell their homes to fund care. The Lib Dems suggested that all three parties had agreed a set of policies before the Tories pulled out. The Tories disagreed, with Andrew Lansley MP, their shadow Health Minister, stating that although they agreed on a solution, they could not agree on how to fund it.

So no solution yet- but a new Tory poster campaign has been created. Do I hear general election bells ringing?

Poli-Chick xx

When is a PIG not a PIG?

Say the word PIGS and the most likely responses are probably either ‘mmm bacon rolls’ or ‘percy and friends’. But bless those Europeans for giving the word a new meaning-


P-ortugal

I-reland

G-reece

S-pain

And what do the ‘PIGS’ countries all have in common, huge budget deficits* and more debt than you can shake a stick at.

The EU member states all met today (in a lovely looking library) to discuss the crisis and what should be done to help Greece in particular. All four countries have the Euro and their economic woes have threatened to destabilise the currency- which has lost 9% of its value since December.

So what does that mean for a Poli-Chick? Cheaper holidays to Europe is a plus point. But there is a real danger that these economies could drag the other European states back into recession. And with the UK’s growth at a teeny tiny 0.1% less quarter, it’s not really a risk we Brits can afford to take.

And what do our UK parties think about this issue? Well the EU states (including our labour Government) recently issued a statement saying they have reached a deal to help Greece. The Tories unhelpful contribution so far has been to state that the UK risks a ‘Greek-style crisis.’

So watch out for the PIGS- or we could all end up in the mud.

Poli-Chick xx



*they spend more than they earn

Election night has been saved!!!

Jack Straw MP has ridden to the rescue of traditional election night counting by introducing an amendment, unopposed, to the Constitutional Reform Bill.

Traditionally, councils count the votes received when the polls close, on election night. The, the television channels makes huge spectacle of counting the votes, analysing the swing and interviewing those who have just gained or lost seats. Kind of like Superbowl night in the United States, but with cheaper advertising slots.

Many councils had threatened not to begin the count until the following day, denying the electorate the traditional drama filled night.

But election night is all the more exciting if you have voted. Poli-Chick has set up a new poll to see what you think about the party leaders at this stage in the game… cast your vote wisely….

Poli-Chick xx

Wage Rage: How should we fund the BBC?

The BBC was under fire today for the organisations seemingly out of control spending. £70m goes in salaries to employees earning more than £100,000 per year. £229m goes to performers on the television and radio channels.


It isn’t only salaries that are under scrutiny. BBC allows top executives to take business class long haul flights- as the Director-General, Mark Thompson did recently to Korea at a cost of £5,600. One also wonders how the Technology Director managed to spend £4,750 on taxis in 3 months, unless he joined his boss in Korea by taxi.

The BBC is an important national institution, and Poli-Chick enjoys Eastenders, Chris Moyles and Mock the Week as much as the next bird, but in our new post-recession world, can all this public expense be justified?

No, says the Tories. They want to freeze the license fee and use some of the proceeds of the fee to fund new broadband infrastructure in the UK. Labour have considered ‘top-slicing’ the license fee, but didn’t go through with it. The Liberal Democrats have said they are committed to an independently funded BBC- although they do say that want it to enter into more private partnerships, where possible.


So, how do you think the BBC should be funded?



Poli-Chick xx

From Town Hall to Whitehall...

When you think of local Government you probably think of council tax, bin collections and running out of salt during the blizzards. All the main parties have different policies on how much responsibility local authorities have and which decisions should still be made nationally. Obviously the people in Westminster have given this its own word – ‘localism’.


The Tories are particularly keen on localism, broadly believing that too much power in the state results in poor decision making and waste. Which is why it was surprising to see that their new schools policy will mean that, instead of local authorities deciding when and where new buildings are built, these decisions will be made by the Government.

The Conservative’s argue that this is necessary to facilitate their national schools policy- but it does seem rather odd to take power away from local people on education when your overriding aim is more local decision making. This was certainly the view of the Liberal Democrats who take this is an opportunity to state that they were the only party truly committed to localism. Labour’s main concern was that school standards would drop if this policy was implemented.


So who do you want making decisions on your local services?

Poli-chick xx

All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others

You know when something is really controversial when the Pope gets involved in politics. The Equality Bill has divided the UK- but not our two main political parties, who, as David Cameron has said, agree on 95% of the Bill’s content. The Liberal Democrats take a different view however, believing the Bill does not go far enough.


It’s hard to be negative about the Equality Bill- who doesn’t like equality, right? But the Bill makes some important changes and clarifies the law, in ways that will affect all of us.

Positive discrimination will still be illegal (nightclubs that allow girls in free might want to rethink their policies...gulp) but positive action will be allowed. This is where, if there are two equally qualified candidates, an employer may choose to hire the one that is from an under-represented group. Supported by all main parties, though the Tories think the law is a bit messy and unclear.

The pope was less concerned with whether Poli-Chick can still enter a club for free. His concern was that religious organisations would be forced to hire homosexuals and women as priests. In his view, the exemption for religious groups was not wide enough. It is a tricky balance for any government- the right for freedom of religious belief and right to a private life must co-exist.

On gender, the parties’ views split slightly. Labour want all large businesses (with more than 250 staff) to report on their gender pay gap. The Conservatives want this requirement to only be on businesses that have been found against at Tribunal for discriminating against women. The Liberal Democrats think all businesses with more than 100 staff should have to analyse their gender pay gap.

Poli-Chick isn’t convinced that such calculations work- pay can easily be manipulated depending on what is included. And it isn’t all about money- flexible working, holidays and opportunities for promotion are also important. But what is clear, is that on the 40th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act, women still get paid less than men.

Mind the gap...

Poli-Chick xx

Immigration- whose line is it anyway?

I do have some sympathy with Culture Minister, Margaret Hodge MP. Fighting for your seat at the General Election against BNP Leader Nick Griffin can’t be a pleasant prospect. Out of the 51 local council seats in the area, 16 are held by the far right organisation- Griffin cannot be underestimated.


Of the explanations for the surge in BNP support is the perceived lack of willingness of the main parties to discuss immigration. But today, Hodge came out with the line that new immigrants should be banned from claiming benefits.

Labour policies on immigration mainly focus on kicking out illegal migrants more effectively, rather than disincentivising people from coming here in the first place- which presumably was what Hodge was suggesting. By contrast, the Tories propose a cap on the numbers allowed to settle here. The Lib Dems make the interesting observation that it is not overall numbers that is the issue, rather the numbers that settle in a particular region. They propose a regional points based system to distribute migrants to areas where particular skills are needed. None of these policies are particularly fleshed out- nor, in truth, does Poli-chick think they are that different from each other.

The mainstream parties risk being drowned out by BNP screams if they are not more upfront about their immigration policies. Hodge shouldn’t feel she has to fight the BNP on their terms – whilst they may have clear policies on migration; they are less forthcoming on their education, health and economic policies. If the main parties clear the fog, the BNP will be exposed...



Poli-Chick

Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies

Can’t resist a quick pre-weekend swipe at the Conservative’s latest announcements on crime. Law and order is an important issue for Poli-Chicks everywhere... especially violent crime. We have to be able to trust politicians when they tell us how safe the country is- and how they would make it safer.


The seriousness of the issue makes the Conservative claims here more outrageous. Chris Grayling, Shadow Home Secretary, claimed that violent crime had risen dramatically since 1997. In fact, as the UK Statistics Authority pointed out, the figures were not comparable stating,

“(We) must take issue with what you said yesterday about violent crime statistics, which seems to likely to damage public trust in official statistics."

And if a Poli-Chick can’t trust an official statistic, how is she meant to know who to vote for? This isn’t the first time the Authority has rebuked an MP for misrepresenting statistics- Harriet Harman was pulled up earlier in the year on her use of gender pay reporting stats.

Shame on you both...



Poli-Chick xx

Interested in interest rates?

In 1997, one of Labour’s first policy decisions was to give control of all decision relating to money supply to the Bank of England. This separation was meant to ensure a more stable monetary policy, and is supported by all parties.


Yesterday, the Bank of England decided to hold interest rates at a record 0.5% low for the 11th month in a row. This is meant to make it cheaper to borrow money, primarily to help encourage businesses to invest.

However, since the recession began, another important policy instrument has been used by the Bank- quantitative easing. The Bank has pumped £200bn into our economy- sometime called printing money, but in these modern times it is more like an electronic transfer. Imagine looking at your account one day and seeing a credit of £200bn- happy times. Yesterday, the Bank announced they would not be increasing this supply.

But where is this money going? Is it being stored by the banks, or used by the banks to help businesses? Is it helping economic recovery?

Perhaps these are questions best answered in the aftermath. What is clear is that if we had joined the Euro, we would not have had this control over money supply. Our interest rates would have been set by the European Central Bank- which are currently 1%, and have been for the last nine months.

Our main parties have been rather quiet on the Euro recently- but it is always an issue that comes round at election time. Almost certainly any Government that wanted the UK to join the Euro would have a referendum first. How would you vote?

Poli-Chick xx

Find out what expenses YOUR MP claimed

Imagine you are a smoker. You know cigarettes are bad for you but you do it regardless. Now- skip ahead to 2012 and cigarettes are made illegal. Not only that, but you get fined for smoking in 2010, 2 years before the law came into force.


This is the argument some MPs are making on the day that Sir Thomas Legg produced his report into MPs expenses. They argue that it is unfair to penalise them for claims that were perfectly legal at the time. Yes, they say, claiming thousands of pounds for cleaners may have been unethical, but it was within the rules.

So how much does it all matter? Well- if you want to know what, when and why your MP was claiming you can search using this link: http://mpsallowancesdb.parliament.uk/

In general, poli-chick doesn’t think it is a good idea to impose penalties on people for things that were legal at the time they did it. But lets be honest, some MPs claimed for duck-houses, porn pay-per-view, 88p bath plugs and moat cleaning… how much sympathy can we have?


Poli-chick xx

Defence- where is it in your priorities?

It isn’t controversial to say that the public finances are in a mess. Next year, the Treasury will spend £44.4billion alone on interest repayments on public sector debt- which puts my Topshop store card in perspective. To put this in context, the Department for International Development only gets £5billion per year- and it is this Department which gives aid and funding to the poorest countries in the world. Looks like the Haitans will have to wait a bit longer for financial aid…


The £44.4billion is coincidentally also the exact amount we spent on Defence in the UK. None of the major political parties have committed to keeping up this level of spending, and today the Government announces changes in Defence strategy.


First on Labours agenda is closer working with EU allies, and an important realisation that we do not have money or manpower to fight all battles. However- none of the ‘big ticket’ items have been cancelled- such as Trident (our nuclear deterrent). The Liberal Democrats think the money used for Trident could be better spent elsewhere whereas the Tories have committed to Trident.

So it all depends where you think our priorities should be? What is for certain is that spending cuts have to come from somewhere- and with transport, police, school and hospitals already protected, the defence budget will have to work smarter to protect us.
 
Poli-Chick xx
 
PS- a lesson from the Tories in why you should always do your research....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/conservative/7144801/Lord-Stern-denies-he-will-be-a-Tory-adviser.html

What kind of popularity contest is this?

Today Gordon Brown will announce plans to change the voting system in the UK from ‘First Past the Post’ to ‘Alternative Vote system.’ Our current system is the second most used in the world, why change it?

The answer is best expressed by two words- George Galloway. George became an MP in 2005, despite winning only 18% of the vote. In fact, only 3 of the current MPs have received more than 40%.

And why is Alternative Vote better? Well, perhaps it’s not… but it is different. The best way to explain it is by using a bad analogy of Italian restaurants.

Let’s say I am going out for dinner with a friend and she says where do I want to go out of Ask, Bella Pasta and Carluccio’s. I really want to go to Ask, wouldn’t mind, Bella Pasta but HATE Carluccios’s. Ideally what I want to do is to say, I want to go to Ask, but if that doesn’t work for you, then let’s go to Bella Pasta. In other words, I want to express a second preference to make sure we don’t end up in Carluccio’s.

The current voting system forces you to put all your eggs in one basket and vote only for your favourite. The new proposals would allow you to vote for your favourite, but then also state what your second and third preference is- meaning it is less likely you will be forced to go to Carluccio’s against your will.


Labour want to switch to Alternative Vote

Tories want to keep First Past the Post, because they believe it creates more stable Governments

Liberal Democrats want voting reform- but not the system Labour has proposed



Perhaps they should all be concentrating on the economy…

Welcome

This blog started when I gave up convincing two of my housemates how important their vote was. I'd gone through the motions- it is your democratic duty, the suffragettes died for this right, many people in the world don't have the right, or ability to vote- and none of it worked. I started to wonder how many other bright twenty-something year old women don't vote because politics doesn't connect with them, because the MPs all look and sound the same and because they think 'nothing will change.'

This blog will track the policy announcements before the general election that matter to these women in the hope that the 'high heel vote' may become as important to the politicians as the 'grey vote'

Poli-Chick xx