e-shootershill homepage

Tagged: politics RSS

  • Tough Times 

    Demonstration outside Woolwich Centre about public sector pensions

    Demonstration outside Woolwich Centre about public sector pensions

    The well-stocked  Amnesty International Blackheath and Greenwich Book Sale gives me a feeling of reassurance that my obsession with books is not as bad as it might be. Other bibliophiles have it much worse than I do; they are already in the queue for the sale when I arrive at the Church of the Ascension about ten minutes before it opens, and they bring along suitcases and cardboard boxes to cram full of their purchases. In the last couple of sales I’ve, fortuitously, come away with books that seems appropriate to Amnesty International’s mission. At the sale a few weeks ago I bought a slim, 119-year-old, battered blue-brown covered hardback copy of John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty. With its yellowed, sometimes stained pages, that so clearly express such powerful ideas, I feel it is a truly beautiful object. OK, so maybe my book obsession is as bad as I suspected.

    In his Introductory Mill writes of the need to protect the weaker members of the community from the “vultures” and “minor harpies” of the governing tribe or caste. Of course that should not be necessary now we elect our rulers, and we don’t have a governing caste …. or do we?

    The members of the unions representing public sector workers who came out on strike last week, some of whom are pictured above demonstrating in front of the new Woolwich Centre, certainly feel under attack. As well as the proposed changes in their pension contributions and retirement age they also have to cope with the effects of a new forecast total of 710,000 public sector job losses and an extended pay freeze. Leaving aside the economics and the politics of public sector pensions, the public sector workers are undoubtedly experiencing tough times, an experience that is perhaps exacerbated by the perception that not all parts of society are experiencing their share of the toughness of the times.

    Another group feeling under attack at the moment are disabled people and those unable to work due to medical conditions. The way in which the current Work Capability Assessments are being carried out has led some vulnerable, psychologically fragile claimants to despair , depression and thoughts of suicide.  Private Eye recently reported claims that these assessments had been cited as factors at 16 suicide inquests; these include Scottish writer and poet Paul Reekie.  Amidst reports that staff at Atos, the company contracted to carry out the assessments, have expressed very disparaging opinions about disabled claimants, the campaign group Black Triangle have called for a boycott of the Paralympic Games because of Atos’ involvement. I’m amazed that there hasn’t been more of an outcry about this failure to protect some of the weaker members of the community. Vultures and minor harpies indeed!

    The FareShare Million Meal Appeal leaflet which was handed out to Sainsburys' shoppers on 26th November

    FareShare Million Meal Appeal leaflet

    The generosity of people in Woolwich, Greenwich and across the country in supporting the FareShare 1 Million Meal Appeal provides a cheering and striking contrast to these attitudes.  FareShare is a charity that is working to relieve food poverty. This is mainly achieved by redistributing quality food that food retailers are unable to sell and would otherwise throw away. The food is distributed through a network of some 700 organisations in the UK, such as church groups, hostels, women’s refuges  and school breakfast clubs. It  feeds about 35,500 people a day, up 20% from 29,000 last year, rescuing 3,600 tonnes of surplus food in the process.

    The 1 Million Meal Appeal, a collaboration with Sainsburys, aimed to collect 1 million meals worth of food items that FareShare do not usually get because it is long shelf-life, such as rice, pasta and tinned food. They recruited hundreds of volunteers to hand out a shopping list of such items, shown above, at Sainsburys’ stores across the country and ask shoppers to donate. When I went in to the Sainsburys in Greenwich to do our weekly shop at around lunch time last week the volunteers’ sign said that shoppers had already donated 5 shopping trolleys full of food, and there was another full trolley on the way out. Across the country shoppers gave enough food for 600,000 meals, which was matched by Sainsburys to make 1.2 million meals in total. FareShare will provide food for about 250,000 Christmas lunches and dinners, so this is good timing.

    Tough times, for sure. What would John Stuart Mill have thought about it? I think that one of his other books, Utilitarianism, puts him firmly on the side of the 99%.

     

    6:03 pm on December 8, 2011
    Tags: , politics,   

  • Turning Blue? 

    eltham-constituency-redrawn

    Old and New Boundaries and the colour of their voting majority, taken from the guardian datablog

    The political map of Shooters Hill has just been redrawn by the Boundary Commission as part of their proposal to reduce the number of MPs from 650 to 600.

    Having previously been part of the Woolwich West constituency from 1918-1983, and the Eltham constituency ever since, Shooters Hill could now, if the commission’s scheme is accepted, find itself part of a larger Eltham constituency that takes in two wards from the Bexley Borough: Blackfen and Lamorbey and Falconwood and Welling. This is highly likely to shift the local turnout in favour of Tory candidates in a seat that currently needs only the 25th smallest amount of swing to turn red into blue.

    In a response that acknowledges the new boundaries help Tories in a seat that Labour last won with a slim majority of 1,663, Clive Efford has commented that he will continue to campaign in this area as he has since the 1994 election.

    For further reading, see the Kidbrooke Kite who picked up this story earlier, and 853 for the bigger picture in the local area.

     

    10:36 pm on September 13, 2011
    Tags: politics   

  • Who would be our AV MP 

    Today is the last day before the referendum on electoral reform, and although it looks like we’re stuck with the old ways (according to the pollsters), I did wonder how the politics in our constituency would now look if we’d voted using AV in the previous ballot.

    I took the votes from the 2010 general election, and then began a process of wild speculation as to second preferences, based entirely on vague notions of the political spectrum: I assumed that right wing second preferences would gradually come in from the extremes towards the Tories (IND→ED→BNP→UKIP→CON); Green Party supporters would do likewise for Labour, and Lib-Dem second preferences would split 50-50 each way for the biggest two parties. Although this is mostly pie-in-the-sky thinking, the Green Party’s Shooters Hill candidate for the council election got more votes than their Parliamentary candidate; and since both elections happened on the same day, this suggests that Shooters Hill voters went for Green in the locals and possibly Labour in the nationals.

    2010 General Election Results
    Name Party Votes % +/-
    Clive Efford Labour 17,416 41.5 -0.7
    David Gold Conservative 15,753 37.5 +2.9
    Steven Toole Liberal Democrat 5,299 12.6 -4.7
    Roberta Woods British National Party 1,745 4.2 +1.6
    Ray Adams UK Independence Party 1,011 2.4 -0.4
    Arthur Hayles Green 419 1.0 +1.0
    Mike Tibby English Democrats 217 0.5 +0.5
    Andrew Graham Independent 104 0.2 +0.2
    Majority 1,663 4.0
    Turnout 41,964 67.0 +8.6

    Well, based on rather crude apportioning of second preferences on a spectrum, and considering that Clive Efford didn’t get more than 50% of the overall vote in the first count, Andrew Graham (IND) dropped out of the competition at the end of round one. Part of his manifesto included bringing back capital punishment, so his second-preference votes got thrown in with the far right, and they went to Roberta Woods in round two, mainly as I’m not entirely sure what the English Democrats were campaigning for, only realising that they existed when I got to the voting booth. This reallocation didn’t make any difference to the overall picture, so Mike Tibby (ED) dropped out, and as before (according to an arbitrary political spectrum), his votes went to Roberta Woods, although she still wasn’t getting anywhere nearer to a 50% share of the vote. In round three the Green party votes went to Clive Efford (LAB), taking him up to a 42.4% share… again not enough for a win. And so to round four, at which point UKIP fell out of the running, and their votes went to David Gold (CON), taking him up by 2.5% to 40%. On to round five… here all the right wingers’ votes went to David Gold, and he nudged ahead of Clive Efford by just over two percent, but still not by enough to become our MP. At this point the Lib-Dems dropped out of the competition, leaving only two parties in the final round. I gave LAB and CON half each of the Lib-Dem votes, and because the CONs had previously benefited from more second hand support from right-wing voting, David Gold ended up as the 2010 (AV) general election winner!

    Overall then, this (imaginary) vote count went right to final round, and was incredibly close in the end – I’m not sure that splitting Lib-Dem second preferences down the middle was a very realistic move. Equally, BNP support often comes from disgruntled Labour supporters having a protest, so giving their secondary support to the Tories may also have been a bad idea…

    Since this whole trifle has been based on wild speculation about voting behaviours in Eltham, it would be a mistake to really make anything of it really. However, this being a marginal seat, it could be the case that voters who don’t initially support Labour or Tory candidates might get more of a say.

     

    11:55 pm on May 4, 2011
    Tags: politics   

  • The Chop-O-Gram 

    Greenwich Council have been releasing some more cuts information. So far £21430000 have been proposed (based on an anticipated cut of £65000000 pending the arrival of central instructions) and partly scrutinised by some of the local blogs (853 and phantom and itm).

    The sheer scale of the cuts in relation to normality (i.e. ignorance) makes them difficult to understand, but I recently watched the joy of stats, and noted the billion-pound-o-gram with interest. I thought a chop-o-gram might help to bring a bit of perspective to bear on this rather unfathomable hatchet job. After scraping data from the newsshopper cuts analysis, here are a few attempts to show the enormity of what’s being done to Greenwich.

    Chop-O-Gram #1
    Here I plot the newshopper selection of £5633000 worth of cuts/hikes, this acknowledges upfront that 14 posts will go. Hopefully that doesn’t equate to 14 people, but to be honest, all this talk about numbers comes down to people’s livelihoods in the end, the human cost. Whether the private sector chiefs (sainsburys, m&s, next etc) prime the recovery by re-employing the newly unemployed, which they indicate they can thanks to national insurance cuts remains to be seen. Hierarchically speaking, the parking permits stand out most; drivers can get very angry, so we’ll have to see how they respond, actually charging for parking at oxleas could help to maintain the gym…

    Chop-O-Gram #2
    This chop-o-gram factors in the £15797000 of currently proposed cuts the newshopper didn’t detail:

    Chop-O-Gram #3
    This chop-o-gram factors in the £43570000 of as yet unallocated cuts. As a ‘conservative’ guestimate i would scale up 14 sackings in 5 million to 183 in 65, but it could be more – please bear in mind that i have muddled figures before, so please correct me if you see anything fishy (unfortunately comments are off indeterminately due to ongoing bot hassles :().

     

    12:32 am on December 12, 2010
    Tags: , politics,   

  • Election 

    The turnout for the local election was a fantastic 80.4% 67.7% (oh dear I just checked and the turnout figure appears to have been revised), almost double that of four years ago. The most interesting thing to come out of this is that decent voter turnout here appears to be very good for labour, and very bad for the tories, with a 7 point swing to labour (I’m not exactly sure if i calculated it right, but here goes):

    lab = sum(total lab vote 2010/total vote 2010)-sum(total lab vote 2006/total vote 2006) = 5% positive
    con = sum(total con vote 2010/total vote 2010)-sum(total con vote 2006/total vote 2006) = 9% negative
    diff/2 = 7%

    On the fringes, the greens got more votes (4%) than the bnp (3%) too, another reversal of national behaviour, so overall, and considering the extremely high turnout, it looks like the residents of Shooters Hill present a fairly socially progressive political outlook compared to the country as a whole.

    The lib dem share went down by 3%, which leads me to speculate that the downturn in con/lib fortunes is probably not for want of trying (the tories look to have spent a small fortune on glossy leaflets) but rather the mobilisation of the left. Certainly it is possible that some of the green/liberal vote went to labour, although it’s curious to note that the local green got more votes than their parliamentary candidate for eltham, who only got 419 votes, losing his deposit… Considering that, it looks like shooters hill greens probably did vote tactically nationally but possibly not locally…

    I haven’t really given much thought to the national election, but now that clive efford has successfully staved of the tories in their target seat #68 (based on the 68th smallest amount of swing needed – 4.1%), i’m looking forward to seeing what happens with his proposals for green flag paths and signs (and gym!) in eaglesfield park. simon emmett, who was very gracious in defeat, has announced that he will be watching labour in the proposed regeneration of swingate lane shops and in the opposition to the tetra mast (but not the other masts?) – i.e. can the emergency services have it moved somewhere else?

    2010 Council Election for Shooters Hill Ward (turnout 80.4% 67.7%)
    Name Party Results
    Phillip Jonathan BECKER Green Party 659
    Mo BURGESS Conservative 1,881
    Richard John CHANDLER Conservative 1,628
    Simon EMMETT Conservative 1,777
    Edward OTTERY Liberal Democrats 1,210
    Harry Drummond POTTER Liberal Democrats 939
    Jagir Kaur SEKHON Labour 2,917ELECTED
    Barry Ian TAYLOR Labour 3,093ELECTED
    Danny Lee THORPE Labour 2,788ELECTED
    Steven Thomas TOOLE Liberal Democrats 1,009
    Eddie Herbert WHITE British National Party 513

    For comparison, here’s the details from last time:

    2006 Council Election for Shooters Hill Ward (turnout 42%)
    Name Party Results
    Linda Susan Cunningham Conservative 1409
    Sylvia Gladys Derrick-Reeve Liberal Democrat 796
    Elizabeth Patricia Drury Conservative 1393
    Denise Hyland Labour 1527ELECTED
    John Kelly Labour 1589ELECTED
    Edward Ottery Liberal Democrats 736
    Simon Lester Tee Conservative 1326
    Danny Thorpe Labour 1540ELECTED
    Michael Westcombe Liberal Democrats 660
     

    5:36 pm on May 7, 2010
    Tags: politics,