Week 8 2012 23.2.2012

Tendring Topics.....on Line

Where are we going?

          Did you know that we are all to be invited to take part in an election in November of this year?   It is to decide who, in the future, is to appoint Chief Constables and to have strategic control of the UK’s Police Force in our area.  I have to confess that I had only the vaguest idea of who exercises this control at the present time.  I did know that a relatively small proportion of our Council Tax payments is earmarked for the ‘Police Authority’ and, as Police Authority boundaries generally coincide with those of the county, I thought that the Police Authority must be something to do with the County Council.

            In fact, Police Authorities are quite separate organisations.  Typically they have seventeen members, nine of whom are nominees of the County and District Councils in their area and eight are ‘independent’ councillors, nominated by the Police Authority itself.  Of the independent councillors at least three must be Justices of the Peace.  I don’t think that anyone would claim that an organisation of which almost half its members are self-appointed could claim to be ‘democratic’.    Alternatives might be for all the members to be directly elected in the same way as councillors, or perhaps for them to be nominated by the county and district councils in the Police Area. Justices of the Peace in the area might be invited to elect their own three representatives on the Police Committee.

             Those however are not the choices that we shall be invited to make in November. The Government, which has abolished ‘committee control’ of local government and now requires local councils to have all-powerful elected Mayors (the preferred option) or ‘cabinet control’ by a small majority party clique, as in the central government in Westminster, is introducing an even more dictatorial system of control for Police Authorities.  Police Authorities will be abolished and replaced by an elected full-time Police Commissioner for each area who will appoint the Chief Constable, allocate funding, and decide on strategic police policy.  Candidates for these posts will not be required to have any previous police experience and political parties will probably put their own candidates forward.  I understand that the only party so far to have selected a candidate is UKIP – though I have just learned that Lord Prescott (former Deputy Prime Minister) hopes to be Labour’s candidate for South Humberside.  Oh yes – there is one requirement.  Each candidate will be required to find a £5,000 deposit to be forfeited if he or she doesn’t achieve a certain proportion of the total vote.

             The new idea may be more efficient than the present arrangement.  It may be less expensive – though that I doubt.  It will certainly be easier for central government to persuade one man (or woman) rather than a committee to toe the government line. It won’t be more democratic.  And all of this from a government that says it is promoting localism and power to the people! 

            Directly elected all-powerful Mayors! Directly elected all-powerful Police Commissioners!  Where are we going? Perhaps we should have a directly elected all-powerful Prime Minister.  He could be given a new title – National Leader perhaps?  I am old enough to remember that something of the sort was tried in mainland Europe during the last century – in Germany, Italy, Spain and the Soviet Union!

‘One Nation’ Conservatism?

          A few years ago I was amused when one Conservative MP told us proudly that to him ‘One Nation Conservatism’ meant keeping England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as one United Kingdom.  That isn’t its meaning of course.  It derives from a novel written by Benjamin Disraeli, the founder of the modern Conservative Party entitled Sybil or The Two Nations. In it he claimed that early Victorian Britain was not one nation but two – the rich and the poor; possibly not a message that today’s Conservatives want to hear.

            It is a novel remarkable for its realistic description of the living conditions of  working class people in England at that time; a description remarkably similar to that of Frederick Engels who, with Karl Marx, was a founder of the Communist Party, in his ‘Condition of the Working Classes in England in 1844’. The two books were published in the same year – 1845.

            I think it likely that David Cameron, despite his old Etonian background and his millionaire-packed government, would claim to be a ‘One Nation Conservative’.  He genuinely believes that he speaks and acts for the welfare of the whole population of the UK, rich and poor alike.  Of the current financial crisis he claims ‘We’re all in this together’.

 That is something that many would question.    I don’t think though that anyone would doubt his devotion to that other, incorrect, meaning of One Nation Conservatism.   He made clear in his recent speech in Scotland which he had visited to have face-to-face talks with Scotland’s First Minister and Leader of the Scottish Nationalist Party Alex Salmond that he would do his utmost to maintain the union of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom, even though Scottish independence would be to his own political party’s advantage in England.  Unable to prevent a referendum on Scottish independence (after all, he does claim to believe in local autonomy) he is determined to achieve a resounding ‘No’ vote when it takes place.     

Did the public speech that David Cameron made on that occasion further or hinder his cause?   The first part of his speech could well have come directly from the Scottish tourist office, listing the illustrious Scots who have played a part in shaping Britain’s destiny. This was followed by an exposition of the reasons why he believed the Scots should reject independence. Most of these (a United Kingdom can play a larger part on the international stage than a fractured one, for instance) are also good reasons for our becoming an active member of a more closely integrated Europe!  There was as well, a promise and a not-all-that-veiled threat.   After the referendum had taken place he (no word about Parliament being in any way involved!) would consider the possibility of transferring other powers to the Scottish parliament and government that are currently held by Westminster.   That would, of course, depend upon there being a clear ‘No’ vote to Scottish Independence in the referendum.

            I don’t know how the Scots may have reacted to all that.  I do know, as an East Anglian, that if a Politician from elsewhere in the UK visited us to make a speech telling us what a wonderful contribution to British history had been made by, for instance. Hereward the Wake, Fr. John Ball,  Cardinal Wolsey, Lord Nelson, Mother Julian of Norwich, Elizabeth Fry and Edith Cavell, I would have thought he was being patronising and trying to teach his grandmother how to suck eggs!  Had that politician been David Cameron I would have been amazed that someone who had imagined, even momentarily, that in 1940 Britain had been a junior partner to the USA in the struggle against Nazism, could have had the effrontery to deliver a homily on British history to anyone at all!

            As for the threat (or possibly ‘promise’), nobody with any sense believes politicians promises and my admittedly limited knowledge of Scotland and its inhabitants suggests to me that the Scots don’t take kindly to threats. 

            If I were a resident of Scotland I would unquestionably vote YES in the forthcoming referendum on Scottish Independence.  I would certainly have much more confidence in Alex Salmon’s Scottish Nationalist government in Scotland than in David Cameron’s coalition.  They have been more successful too.  Despite Glasgow’s one-time reputation for violent gangs, there were no summer riots ‘north of the border’, and I think that, given independence, the Scots would get rid of that nuclear submarine base within their territorial waters.

            However as a resident in England (I’m too old to emigrate northwards and I don’t really think I’d care for the climate!) I have mixed feelings.  I certainly wish our Scottish neighbours and their government well – but I fear that, as David Cameron predicted, independence for Scotland would be to his party’s advantage in England.  It really wouldn’t make much difference to me.  I can hardly expect to live to see anything different.  I would be sorry though to think of my sons and grandchildren condemned to years – perhaps decades – of Europhobic ‘market obsessed’ governments with the gap between rich and poor becoming ever wider, wider….and wider still!   

‘Essex Works’ – so they claim!

            Since falling in a hotel bath on Boxing Day and having to summon help, I have been rather more conscious of ‘health and safety’ than in the past.  I am ninety, I do live alone and I am vulnerable!   I make sure that I always have my Tendring Helpline pendant and my mobile phone within reach while I am having my morning shower.  I never venture out of the house without my walking stick and mobile phone.  I have been looking round my bungalow for potential danger spots.

            One possible hazard that I have identified is just outside my front door.  There is a fairly deep step down to the concrete path.  Several years ago a kind neighbour made a wooden ramp with a non-slip surface to make it possible for me to push my wife in her wheel-chair in and out of the bungalow.  Since her sad death, now nearly six years ago, I have retained it.  I may one day need to get my mobility scooter in and out of the bungalow in the same way!   In the meantime I do find the easy slope of the ramp rather easier than using the step.

 However I realize that I am in my greatest danger of falling as I step down that ramp. I always have my stick and I descend very slowly and carefully.   There is no doubt though that I’d be much safer and more secure if I had a hand-rail to clutch as I come in or go out. 

The observant viewer will note a ‘key safe’ fixed to the wall to the right of the door. It affords the local police means of entry in an emergency.

This, I thought, is where Essex County Council’s Social Services Department will be able to help.  Promoting safety in the homes of old people living alone as I do must undoubtedly be one of the activities to which the County Council is referring in the  claim on all its printed material that Essex Works!  I surely had only to give them a ring and an expert would visit, assess my need, and arrange for a hand-rail to be fitted.  While he or she was with me I’d ask them to look round and let me know if they could see any other potential hazard that I might have missed.

            It hasn’t worked out quite as simply as I had imagined.  First came the problem of contacting the Social Services Department. One morning four weeks ago I dialled the number. Very promptly a mechanical voice told me that my call might be recorded for training purposes and that I’d be put through to one of their trained staff as soon as one became available.  Then, I waited – and waited – and waited. Eventually, it was at my second attempt on the following day, a human voice rewarded my patience.

            I explained my situation to a helpful lady who told me that before I could be helped I would need to be ‘assessed’ and that part of that assessment would, with my agreement, take place there and then by phone.   Why not?   She asked me my full name, address and email address and my date of birth – 18 May, 1921. At that she became more solicitous.  Was I able to get up unaided, wash, shave and shower and dress myself?  Feed myself?  Could I prepare my own meals? Could I do my own shopping, house cleaning and gardening (I already arrange outside help for the last two of these)?  Could I, perhaps with a washing machine, do my own laundry?  As I gave affirmative answers I could almost hear any priority that my age might have afforded, disappearing into the distance.  I was asked if I minded the information I had given being shared with other departments. ‘Not in the least’ I replied.  I would be hearing from them, I was assured, within the next few days.

            And so I did.   I received a communication telling me that I would be told the time and date of my on-the-spot assessment ‘shortly’. That was over a fortnight ago and I haven’t heard yet.  Enquiries suggest that there are three stages still to come; the on-the-spot assessment, delivery of any equipment agreed at the time of the assessment, installation of the equipment.

            It seems quite possible that, at some time or other, I’ll be able to confirm from experience that Essex Works – though not at a breakneck speed!    

           

           

Week 20.10

Tendring Topics……..on Line

We can’t have Democracy ‘on the cheap’

Events since the general election have been so newsworthy and have moved so swiftly that shameful situations that arose during that election appear to have been all-but-forgotten. Have we all, except for those directly involved, forgotten that scores of our fellow citizens were denied their right to vote for no other reason than that the local authorities whose duty it is the organise the poll hadn’t made adequate provision for the numbers who turned up at the polling stations on election day?

For years those concerned with the democratic electoral process have bemoaned the apathy of the public and the low turnout at elections. This time, crowds did turn out to vote and, in at least two large cities, they were turned away!

During some three decades of local government service I have, on occasion, performed every task there is, in both local and national elections. I have helped prepare the electoral register. I have counted the votes and have acted as both a poll clerk and as a presiding officer at a polling station. I have even, on just one occasion, performed as Acting Returning Officer, announcing the result of a parish council election to a ‘cheering crowd’ of perhaps half a dozen passers-by! Never once was any registered elector denied the right to vote. Nor did I ever hear of such a thing happening elsewhere.

What was so different about the election of 2010? Simply, I think, that economy has become local authorities’ top priority; cost effectiveness and productivity their main objectives. During previous elections it had been noted that there had been occasions during the day when presiding officer and poll clerks had been idle, perhaps for as long as an hour at a time! Dozens of ballot papers had been unused; wasted manpower! Wasted paper!

The techniques of direction of human resources (we used to call it ‘personnel management’) will have been brought into operation. Take the average number of voters voting at each polling station. Reduce these figures by the expected number of postal voters. Add say ten percent to allow for emergencies. Calculate how long it takes the average elector to register his or her vote and you can calculate the cost- effective requirement of human resources (presiding officers and poll clerks) at each polling station. A similar calculation will reveal how many voting papers should be needed at each station.

Such calculations are valueless because electors are humans, not machines – nor even sheep. The number of people turning out to vote depends upon the weather, the local and national news headlines on Election Day, and on such local issues as the threatened closure of a school or hospital. Polling is not spread evenly throughout the day. Last minute decisions bring in voters at the last minute. There is usually a surge during the final hours of polling.

We need to decide whether our top priority is a cost-effective election, or one that truly reveals the will of the electorate. It is unlikely that we can have both.

Hung Parliaments, Coalition Governments

Today we have a ‘hung parliament’ and a coalition government. I think that we shall be better governed as a result, just as I thought (and the national Audit Commission agreed with me) that Tendring District Council performed better with the Tendring First coalition administration than under single-party – any single-party – rule. During the general election campaign, most of the national press and a great many of the contending politicians assured us that ‘hung parliaments’ and coalition governments were a recipe for national disaster.

One of the comments on government that I have heard most frequently in recent years from ordinary people (as distinct from political zealots) is, ‘Why on earth can’t those politicians stop slanging each other off, and get together to solve the nation’s problems’. How could that possibly happen except in a coalition government?

It is, in fact, precisely what politicians do when they are convinced that our country is in real and immediate peril. Have we so soon forgotten the coalition government, headed by Conservative Winston Churchill with Labour Clement Attlee as his deputy that we had in World War II; Britain’s ‘finest hour’? There were, of course, strong, decisive one-party governments existing at that time – in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy for instance!

Did you realize that modern Germany, the Netherlands and the Scandinavian countries, probably the most stable and prosperous countries in Europe, customarily have coalition governments? Greece, Portugal and Spain, like us, struggle along with single-party ones – and are in an even worse financial muddle than we are!

Recently I watched a tv programme about New Zealand’s political system. There, it seems, they replaced their archaic and discredited first-past-the-post electoral system with proportional representation in 1996. Since then they have had nothing but coalition governments. Throughout that time they have surely set an example of stability and civilised democracy to the whole of the southern hemisphere.

Proportional representation works! Coalition government works! Don’t let self-interested politicians who would like a free hand to carry out their own hare-brained schemes (like introducing poll tax! like invading Iraq!) persuade you otherwise

How about the current Conservative/Lib.Dem Coalition?

I wish it well – though it is a somewhat unexpected marriage of convenience. In so far as ‘Left’ and ‘Right’ still have any meaning in politics the Liberal Democrats were to the ‘Left’ of the Labour Party, which has moved steadily towards the ‘Right’ since World War II. It is fair to add though that David Cameron’s views seem well to the ‘Left’ of a great many Conservatives – of our own Clacton MP for instance.

David Cameron is said to be a great admirer of Benjamin Disraeli (founder of the modern Conservative Party) who, in his early years at least, had some very radical ideas. His description of the squalor and poverty of the working classes in his political novel ‘Sybil, or the Two Nations’ bears remarkable similarities to that in ‘The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1844’ by Frederic Engels, friend and collaborator of Karl Marx. Both books were published in 1845. The secondary title of Disraeli’s novel is the origin of the phrase ‘One Nation Conservatism’ meaning a Conservatism that hopes to appeal to every class in our Society. Some years ago I was amused to hear a very right-wing Tory announce that he was a ‘one nation Conservative’ because he was opposed to Scottish, Welsh and Irish nationalism!

I had hoped to see a rather stronger Lib.Dem Party emerge from the election so that they could have retained more of their policies (their opposition to Trident for example) in any coalition that they entered. I had feared though that the Conservatives would have an overall majority. I think that most ordinary people will welcome the new coalition government, while watching it somewhat warily.

Strongest opposition is likely come from the right. I can’t imagine the ‘Withdraw from the European Union now! Stop all immigration now! Stop all this alternative energy nonsense! Britain for the true Brits! Brigade being satisfied with what they’ll get. I certainly hope that they won’t be.

I don’t imagine that they’re very happy about Ken Clarke, a Tory Europhile, being made Lord Chancellor. Nor will they be happy about the number of Lib.Dems becoming Ministers and Cabinet Members. It must be remembered that for every Lib.Dem who gets such an office, there will be an ambitious Conservative MP who had been considering it to be his (or her) job.

The watchword of Lord Asquith, a Liberal Prime Minister of the past, was ‘Wait and see’. I am content to follow that advice.

A Weekend ‘up North’

On Friday, 7th May, while the results of the previous day’s General Election were still unfolding, Andy and Marilyn, my younger son and daughter-in-law whisked me away to Sheffield to spend a politics-free few days with my grand-daughter Jo and her partner Siobhan. It was a thoroughly enjoyable weekend.

We went to Sheffield’s Lyceum Theatre, a beautifully restored (though I thought the seats needed a little extra padding!) ‘Old-time music hall’ type theatre, to see the musical ‘Oh what a lovely war!’ a sometimes savagely satirical musical on the theme of World War I. I had seen the film version many years earlier, but on the stage the proximity of the action (in the theatre steel helmeted German soldiers walked through the audience to meet the British squaddies in no-mans-land for the unofficial Christmas truce of 1914) gave an added immediacy to the performance.

Andy and Marilyn at a restaurant in Eyam

On Sunday we visited Eyam. The Derbyshire village where, when stricken by plague in the 17th Century, the villagers cut themselves off from the rest of the world. While village folk died all round them they remained in isolation to prevent the plague from spreading further.

We also visited the Parish Church of St John the Baptist in Tideswell, which has been called ‘The Cathedral of the Peak’. It certainly is a remarkable church, dating from the 14th Century, with a magnificent stained-glass windows, choir stalls embellished with figures carved by Suffolk craftsmen in 1800, and some very noteworthy tombs.

One placed squarely in the middle of the chancel was that of a locally very important person indeed. Sir Sampson Meverill, who died in 1462, had been a famous warrior in the Hundred Years War against France. Known to have been in battle against Joan of Arc he was probably one of the ‘ band of brothers’ who fought with King Henry V at Agincourt.

Siobhan (left) and Jo

One of the carvings by Suffolk Craftsmen, on the choir stalls

I found the life of Bishop Robert Pursglove, whose burial Brass is to be found outside the Sanctuary, of particular interest. I'm inclined to think that it is only folk of my generation who are likely to be familiar with the ballad of the Vicar of Bray – to be found in every Community Singing songbook in the ‘20s and ‘30s. He was a 17th Century vicar who had changed his faith a number of times, to match the faith of succeding rulers. The chorus went:

And this is the law that I’ll maintain until my dying day sir
That whatsoever king may reign I’ll be the Vicar of Bray sir!

Bishop Pursglove seems to have been an earlier Episcopal equivalent of that vicar. Originally a priest of the old Undivided and Unreformed Church, in 1538 at the age of 38, as Suffragen Bishop of Hull and Prior of Gisbourne, he embraced the Reformed Faith and assisted Henry VIII in his dissolution of some of the northern monasteries. For this he was awarded a pension. He continued in office from 1548 to 1552 under the strongly reformist King Edward VI. When Henry VIII’s fanatically Roman Catholic daughter Mary came to the throne, he had no intention of following his fellow-bishops Latimer and Ridley, and Archbishop Cranmer to martyrdom (and who can blame him!) He reverted to his former unreformed (Roman Catholic) faith and continued to prosper. When Elizabeth came to the throne in 1552 he decided that to revert again to the Reformed Church would be a change too far. He retired, using his considerable wealth to found Grammar Schools in Tideswell and Gisbourne. His brass memorial shows him in all his pre-Reformation Eucharistic Vestments, with his Bishop’s mitre and staff.