<![CDATA[Michael Giles - Commentary]]>Wed, 22 May 2013 16:45:56 +0000Weebly<![CDATA['One Nation, One World' pamphlet]]>Tue, 07 May 2013 07:25:52 GMThttp://mikemg.weebly.com/1/post/2013/05/one-nation-one-world-pamphlet.html From: revolutionise.it

(Pamphlet edited by Mike)
]]><![CDATA[Five more ideas for a Labour Queen's Speech]]>Tue, 07 May 2013 07:19:12 GMThttp://mikemg.weebly.com/1/post/2013/05/five-more-ideas-for-a-labour-queens-speech.htmlFrom: Liberal Conspiracy

Tomorrow the Tory-led government’s fourth Queens Speech is being formally announced, and it appears they are adopting a more right-wing approach.

Out are policies on helping the world’s poorest (commitment to spend 0.7% of government income on overseas aid), on reducing the number of deaths from drinking (minimum alcohol pricing), on cutting the number of new young smokers (cigarette packet branding) and on ensuring safety in the workplace (new exemptions for employers from health and safety rules).

Instead, expect policies to ‘toughen up’ on social security and immigration, in addition to appeals to traditional Tory voters such as the elderly with increases to social care and pensions spending.

Labour must not stand on the sidelines while this Coalition circus continues. A major part of this involves developing new ideas which will feed into Jon Cruddas’ policy review and form part of the next manifesto.

An alternative Queens Speech focussed on the economy has already been trailed by Ed Miliband, and much of this is positive – such as introducing a Mansion Tax on homes over £2 million; giving communities the power to reject certain shops from their high streets; and greater help to households with their energy bills.

Our new pamphlet ‘One Nation, One World’, which has been launched today offers some ideas. Here are five of the recommendations:

1) The Council Tax regime is becoming increasingly discredited and often hits the poorest hardest (particularly following the 10% funding cut from the Coalition government). Henry Law of the Land Value Taxation Campaign argues that introducing a Land Value Tax can reduce costs for average families and improve the economy.

2) Prisoner re-offending is far too high and the system itself plays a part in this. While the Justice Secretary focuses on gimmicks such as restricting television in prison, Dave Nicholson of Ex-Cell argues that we need a system of ‘prisoner-led cooperatives’ which encourage work behind bars. Such an approach has already proved successful in rehabilitating offenders in Italy.

3) The criminal justice system is costly and ineffective and a different approach is required to tackle low-level crime. Roma Hooper of Make Justice Work says that an approach where the default punishment is work in the community, rather than jail, can significantly cut costs, improve local communities and effectively punish those committing crime.

4) Social mobility is worsening as the gap between richest and poorest continues to widen. Labour activist Daniel Blythe says that a social security system which improves the life chances of disadvantaged children by paying one of their parents the minimum wage to stay at home to care for them can achieve greater social mobility.

5) The costs of using trains and buses are incredibly high and prices continue to rise above inflation every year. Martin Mayer of Unite believes that a genuine move to renationalisation of public transport can reduce the government subsidy of private transport companies and cut costs for consumers.

The pamphlet contains 14 policy proposals, including from Pamela Nash MP. The recommendations include ideas to reduce the harm caused by illegal drugs, to genuinely help the world’s poorest, and to give British people a decisive say in how the country is run.

Please see www.revolutionise.it for more details.

]]><![CDATA[Rethinking the UK's foreign policy role]]>Tue, 07 May 2013 07:17:29 GMThttp://mikemg.weebly.com/1/post/2013/05/rethinking-the-uks-foreign-policy-role.htmlFrom: Huffington Post

Despite the US-led invasion of Afghanistan starting back in October 2001, around 9,000 British soldiers still remain stationed in the country to this day, with a remit of training up local military forces to take over security by the end of 2014.

Yet 2014 is very much a political deadline rather than a military one. This dubious timeframe led to a questionable application process and it is reported that many of the Afghan recruits are former criminals and militant insurgents. Some of these very soldiers have since committed human rights abuses against their fellow compatriots.

There are also further concerns over security within Afghanistan post-2014, particularly given that after US and British troops left Iraq in 2011, insurgencies and bombings have been frequent and security problems remain.

Nor is regional security likely to be greatly enhanced due to the invasion and subsequent occupation. While a number of senior al-Qaeda officials, including Osama Bin Laden, have been killed, the organisation has been resourceful and devolved power to localised groups.

But more importantly, the reputation of the US, UK and their allies has been significantly diminished. Millions of people have grown up in Afghanistan with the knowledge that their country was occupied and ruled over by foreign military powers.

Meanwhile, the Afghan premier, Hamid Karzai, is regarded by many as a foreign-puppet in all but name. His office are reportedly even receiving millions of dollars of funding direct from the CIA and MI6, news which is hardly endearing to Afghans seeking sovereignty and self-determination.

This 11-year campaign in Afghanistan is just one reason why the UK needs to rethink its entire foreign policy raison d'être. Writing in 'One Nation, One World', the new pamphlet from revolutionise.it, released on 7 May, Sarah Cartin of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament sets out a new course for Britain in the world.

Sarah argues that government plans to renew the £97 billion Trident nuclear weapons system must be abandoned, to 'send a decisive, progressive message to the rest of the world'. Instead, Sarah urges the UK to invest in people and act to reverse the 'devastation caused by climate change'.

In her contribution to the pamphlet, Pamela Nash MP urges a focus on helping people who suffer from HIV and AIDS, specifically the ambitious aim of 'committing the UK Government to creating an AIDS free generation'.

Matt Prescott of the Robertsbridge Group talks up the merits of personalised carbon credits as a mechanism for reducing the world's energy consumption, while providing financial rewards to use who pollute less.

Meanwhile, Andrew Webb of Bleeding in Debt argues that developing world debt should be cancelled through an extension of quantitative easing, a process already used to bail out failing banks.

In total the pamphlet contains 14 policy proposals, including introducing a fairer alternative to Council Tax; giving British people a decisive say in the way the country is run; and cutting reoffending rates by introducing 'prisoner-led cooperatives'.

Please see www.revolutionise.it for more details.

]]><![CDATA[The government must do more to promote freedom]]>Tue, 07 May 2013 07:15:31 GMThttp://mikemg.weebly.com/1/post/2013/05/the-government-must-do-more-to-promote-freedom.htmlFrom: Left Foot Forward

One rare piece of good news from the Tory-led government was Nick Clegg’s decision to block the so-called ‘Snoopers Charter’, a draft piece of fundamentally illiberal legislation which would have allowed the security services to monitor emails, text messages and internet browsing.

However, despite reaching the fourth Queen’s Speech of this parliament, there remains much more that this increasingly discredited government should be looking to do to promote economic, social and individual freedom, with their April scrapping of the 50p income tax rate only likely to make matters worse.

Against this backdrop is the first revolutionise.it pamphlet, called ‘One Nation, One World’, which launched today (Tuesday 7 May). The pamphlet, which includes a contribution from Pamela Nash MP, seeks to address some of the ongoing systemic problems which consequently make the UK and wider world more unjust.

In their article, Juliet Michaelson of the nef and Sorcha Mahony, discuss the importance of measuring the well-being of a society, rather than simply analysing GDP. They establish that well-being is key for long-term policy formulation, but also importantly note that ‘the strongest impacts of income on well-being are for those people with least income’.

In this context is the contribution from Daniel Blythe, who argues that the best way to improve social mobility is to pay disadvantaged parents the minimum wage to stay at home to ensure their children receive a good upbringing.

My contribution to the pamphlet argues that empowering workers and providing people with a share in society can enhance economic freedom. This can be achieved by vastly increasing the number of cooperatives and mutuals, particularly in the private sector.

The pamphlet also discusses two issues where there is a substantial crossover between individual freedom and harm reduction – drugs and prostitution.

Steve Rolles of Transform Drug Policy Foundation explains why the current illiberal system of drug prohibition is creating more harm than it is solving. Similarly, Alex Bryce of the National Ugly Mugs scheme, discusses why policy formulation should be focused on the safety of those choosing to engage in sex work.

Perhaps the most revolutionary policy in the pamphlet is from John Slinger of Pragmatic Radicalism, who proposes to introduce ‘Citizen Senators’ to the House of Lords, selected from the wider population in the same way in which a jury would be. Such a proposal would empower each and every individual, regardless of background or circumstance, to change the way the country is run.

In total the pamphlet contains 14 contributions, including on introducing a fairer system to replace Council Tax; reassessing Britain’s role in the world; and cutting re-offending rates by introducing ‘prisoner-led cooperatives’.

Please see www.revolutionise.it for more details.

]]><![CDATA[Sharing in success: advancing a cooperative society ]]>Sun, 05 May 2013 19:41:10 GMThttp://mikemg.weebly.com/1/post/2013/05/may-06th-2013.htmlFrom: Speaker's Chair

Cooperatives and mutuals are becoming widely recognised as being a force for good – with their impact extending from housing to community shops to football clubs. They are becoming known for their environmentalism, for providing consumers with power, for producing staff with higher levels of happiness, and for delivering high quality goods and services.

Cooperative politics

The Tory-led government promised last January to introduce a Cooperatives Bill in the 2012 Queens Speech, yet a bill never materialised. It's likely that by the end of this Parliament, the Coalition's only contribution to a cooperative agenda will have been the conversion of public services from being state run to being cooperative led. While this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it is an indication that the Coalition views cooperatives and mutuals as mechanisms to disengage the state from the provision of public services, rather than because they genuinely believe in the development of a cooperative economy and society.

'The Coalition views cooperatives and mutuals as mechanisms to disengage the state from the provision of public services'

On the other hand, Labour has a historic connection to the cooperative movement, with the Co-operative Party having been a sister organisation since 1927. In fact, there are 29 Co-operative Party MPs, with further representation in the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and in local government. The MPs range from Shadow Cabinet members like Ed Balls and Stephen Twigg, to members of the 2010 intake, such as Stella Creasy and Luciana Berger. This is a Parliamentary coalition that should be utilised to promote a new consensus on the companies where people work, the shops and services that people use and the places where people live.

Creating a genuinely cooperative society requires more than just a bill (as perhaps the Coalition realised) – it requires direction, policies and an end goal. There are around 13 million cooperative members within the UK, all of varying degree, but the ambition should be to involve almost every person across the country in one way or another. A good start to making this a reality would undoubtedly be simplifying the rules around starting a cooperative or mutual and providing the advice to allow people to do so. But there is a need to go a great deal further.

'There are around 13 million cooperative members within the UK'

Economic cooperation

The first way to achieve this is to focus on the challenges cooperatives may face – such as access to capital, competing in the procurement process and any taxes they pay which may be comparable to those liable by privately-owned businesses focussed purely on profiteering. Labour's plan for a British Investment Bank, with a significant funding stream, could allow resources to be diverted directly to socially responsible cooperatives and mutuals. Prioritisation for cooperatives and mutuals in procuring goods and services from central and local government would be another. Providing tax breaks, perhaps through reduced Employer's National Insurance, might be a way to encourage an increase in their numbers.

However, this is not enough to win the hearts and minds of people across the country. People need to see more than just the possible wider economic merits – it’s about making cooperatives and mutuals work for individuals and communities. Co-operatives UK estimates that 23 per cent of workers are not engaged at their workplace, costing the economy £36 billion each year. At their workplace, people should start to genuinely reap the rewards of their production. While the John Lewis model is to be applauded, their approach to all intents and purposes just provides workers with an annual bonus. A model of radical cooperation would go much further and would directly link individual output to the organisation's success, through share provision at every employment level.

Societal cooperation

When going about their everyday business, people should feel that cooperatives offer high quality goods and services at decent value for money. There are many instances of this – whether it be supermarkets, legal services or credit unions, but again, they can go much further. For example, the tenants of a housing block could form an energy cooperative, and seek to purchase power at a reduced rate from energy companies through collective bargaining. A group of parents from local schools could consider running a childcare mutual which could be structured to meet their flexible needs, while delivering responsive, high-quality childcare at a low cost.

'Housing block tenants could form an energy cooperative and use collective bargaining to secure cheaper power'

Housing cooperatives can also play a key role in delivering the bricks and mortar that is so desperately needed in places across the country. Whilst this is not the only approach to building more homes, models across the country have been proven to make a difference in reducing waiting times for housing. Substantial expansion of this sector can ultimately improve the places in which people live, as those allowed a stake in their communities are often inclined to participate more actively in ensuring it remains a place in which they can be proud to live. Rather than providing existing  property owners with a 'spare homes subsidy' to buy yet another property, the Tory-led government should consider diverting this funding to those keen to start up community housing cooperatives.

Perhaps the example of community owned football clubs is one that can communicate the benefits of cooperatives and mutuals more than any other. AFC Wimbledon was created by fans in 2002 and rose quickly back into professional football after Milton Keynes took over their old club. FC United of Manchester was founded by supporters after the Glazers plunged Manchester United into multi-millions of pounds worth of debt, and have already been promoted three times in their short history. Swansea City, widely acclaimed for their Premier League performances and 2013 League Cup triumph, are 20 per cent owned by their supporters society. In 2011, the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee's report 'Football Governance', backed such arrangements, but legislation has been slow to follow. This must change.

'Swansea City FC, winners of the 2013 League Cup, are 20 per cent owned by their supporters society'

Starting to create a dialogue around how cooperatives and mutuals are a force for good in workplaces, communities, shops and in the places people live is vital to the agenda. Ultimately this is how an alternative vision for the future of the economy and society can be developed. A society in which people have a greater stake will ultimately be one that becomes happier, more productive, more equitable and much fairer. Making cooperatives and mutuals a centrepiece in the political agenda is the way to achieve this.

]]><![CDATA[The political consensus needs challenging]]>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 15:10:49 GMThttp://mikemg.weebly.com/1/post/2013/04/the-political-consensus-needs-challenging.htmlFrom: Speaker's Chair

Over the economy the governing coalition and Labour opposition seek to stress their differences, with the Tories and Liberal Democrats focusing on austerity to reduce the budget deficit, while Labour emphasise the importance of growth in rebuilding the economy and creating jobs.

Yet with many other policies, there is widespread political consensus, regardless of its validity in the face of tangible evidence to the contrary.

We know, for example, that the number of prisoners reoffending is far too high, yet often prisons and the justice system can be a contributing factor towards this. Many of us are aware of the dangers of drug misuse, yet we have a system which actually advances the harms to users. There is consensus on the need to change the House of Lords, yet no agreement on what this should look like. Council tax is often considered unfair and expensive, yet no suitable alternative has been found and implemented.

These are the types of issues being considered in 'One Nation, One World', the new pamphlet from revolutionise.it, which I am editing. There are fourteen contributions in total and they will all be trailed on Speaker's Chair starting tomorrow. The first is from Pamela Nash MP, Chair of the APPG on HIV and AIDS, who is writing about her vision for how an AIDS-free world can be achievable. The final contribution will be published on 7 May, along with the full pamphlet.

Wednesday 8 May marks the Tory-led Government's fourth Queen's Speech since taking office in 2010. So far their programme has been tainted with u-turns, poor communication and most significantly, unfair and divisive policies. Meanwhile, Labour has an ongoing review, led by Jon Cruddas MP, which is analysing a range of policy areas, with the final phase expected by party conference next year.

The hope is that this pamphlet can feed into this political agenda, and bring forward some ideas which can be a part of the 'One Nation' agenda, while remaining outward-looking to the rest of the world.

]]><![CDATA[Voting reform a regressive step]]>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 00:30:57 GMThttp://mikemg.weebly.com/1/post/2012/05/voting-reform-a-regressive-step.htmlFrom: Speaker's Chair

On the face of it, the proposals in the Electoral Registration Bill to introduce individual voter registration seem entirely reasonable. However, the backdrop appears far murkier.

The Coalition already made numerous alterations to the constitution, all without a cross party consensus and all arguably for partisan gain. It’s therefore unsurprising that the latest bill is being treated with scepticism and people are closely checking the small print.

Forcing everyone off the register and leaving individuals to join is invariably going to result in a reduced voting rate. This happened in Northern Ireland after they made the change in 2002, and shockingly the chair of the Electoral Commission believes that this could mean as many as 10 million people fall off the list here.

Those most likely to vote are older and richer people, who are usually inclined to vote Conservative. Those less likely to vote – the young and the less well off – are historically more likely to vote Labour.

The only way to address the potential drop off in those registered is to put strict rules in place. Being given the equivalent of a parking ticket for failing to register isn’t enough of a stick for those lacking the commitment to do so.

Instead, criminal sanctions should be an available option and a legal duty be placed on some public bodies to seek out and move people onto the register.

To further increase turnout, a consultation could also have been held to determine the benefits of making voters attend polling stations on election day. A box on the voting form could have allowed for ‘deciding to opt out of the process’, maintaining this democratic right.

Furthermore, the bill should have been an opportunity to reach out to new groups in society. Those aged 16 and 17 are increasingly politically active and engaged and their right to vote could have been given serious consideration.

Instead of increasing faith in the electoral process, this bill is likely to do the opposite. Voter registration and ultimately turnout are likely to decrease, resulting in a regressive step for our democracy]]><![CDATA[The tightrope that is MPs pay]]>Tue, 22 May 2012 05:55:03 GMThttp://mikemg.weebly.com/1/post/2012/05/the-tightrope-that-is-mps-pay.htmlFrom: Speaker's Chair

Deciding what to pay MPs is a big issue. The expenses scandal from a few years back remains fresh in the minds of many while faith in politicians is at an unhappily low level.

While it is a privilege being a Parliamentarian, they are paid comparatively low salaries to other jobs with similar skill requirements and commitment levels. Alastair Campbell recently commented “MPs should be well remunerated for what they do”.

MPs work a six-day week, sometimes seven, and many face a long commute to their constituency on a Thursday evening away from their family. It’s not infrequent for days to begin at 8am and finish at 11pm.

Empathy with the plight of others has of course been a major driving force. People have had their pay frozen and many others have sadly lost their jobs. The minimum wage has been increased by less than inflation. And income inequality is also directly linked to societal problems such as poor education standards and higher crime rates.

These are legitimate reasons why MPs in the future shouldn’t get pay increases out of step with the rest of the population. However, it shouldn’t preclude a thorough review of the baseline salary in the meantime.

IPSA is currently holding a review into the pay of our MPs and is looking for a range of opinions from across the country, and rightly so. It’s important though that they make final decisions based on hard logic and not emotion.

One sensible suggestion – made by Brendan Barber of the TUC – would be to peg their salaries to an equivalent job within the public sector. This could finally take the politics out of pay that has caused so many difficulties over the years.
]]><![CDATA[The Queen’s Speech needs an ‘Economic Freedom Bill’ ]]>Wed, 09 May 2012 19:54:23 GMThttp://mikemg.weebly.com/1/post/2012/05/the-queens-speech-needs-an-economic-freedom-bill.htmlFrom: Left Foot Forward

Today, the government announces its new agenda for the next 18 months or so in the Queen’s Speech. It comes at a time when their economic credibility is sliding and follows the loss of hundreds of seats to Labour at the local elections on May 3rd.

More importantly, though, millions of people across the country continue to struggle to make ends meet.

Salaries are being frozen and jobs are being lost, while in the background inflation is causing petrol, food, childcare and energy to get ever more expensive.

Ed Miliband recently announced five priority areas Labour would legislate on - tax, energy prices, transport costs, consumer rights and jobs for young people. These are all positive and important proposals, aimed at ushering in an era of fairer capitalism.

However, without addressing the imbalances in work places across the country, pay for those at the top will extend ever further away from those struggling on low wages. Without greater parity, social mobility will remain limited and educational standards will continue to underwhelm.

An ‘Economic Freedom Bill’ in the Queen’s Speech could address these wider economic imbalances, with five key areas to focus on:

1. Reducing the gender pay gap: Forcing everyone to publish their tax returns would ensure people doing the same job earn the same amount (men are more likely to earn more in these instances).

Furthermore, introducing shared maternity/paternity rights would allow women to transfer their leave over to their partner if desired.

2. Fair pay: The minimum wage should be pegged to inflation rates, as this accurately represents the additional costs which working people face each year.

Furthermore, the London Living Wage should become enshrined in law, rather than just being an option for rich multinational corporations. Firms that introduce pay ratios between the highest and lowest earners should be entitled to tax breaks and government contracts.

3. Income transparency: Income Tax and National Insurance should be merged to ensure greater understanding of personal tax rates. National Insurance is too frequently increased by politicians who at the same time make contrasting claims about taxes on wages.

4. Giving workers a bigger say: Since 1976, Germany has successfully had worker representation on company boards, known as co-determination. This now applies to medium and large firms – and works by them having two boards of directors.

Shareholders and trade unions elect members of the supervisory board, which then itself elects a management board. The supervisory board determines the company’s agenda, whilst the management board runs the day-to-day business. This has helped give workers a bigger say, while reducing the number of strikes.

5. Greater employee ownership: 2012 is the United Nations International Year of Cooperatives, which provides a great opportunity to push this agenda. By providing cooperatives and mutuals with tax breaks, advice, access to contracts and an initial investment, this can result in a major uptake in employees reaping the direct rewards of their labour. Cooperatives and mutuals can also be used as vehicles to help reduce bills such as energy and childcare.

Without taking genuine steps to readdress the balance of parity in the workplace, our society will only become more unequal. This is significant because high inequality is directly linked to a wide range of societal problems – such as increased violence, worse health outcomes, less social mobility and poorer educational attainment. And this applies regardless of the wealth of the society in question. In short, economic parity benefits us all.

The recent Sunday Times Rich List showed the wealth of those at the top had recovered to the levels prior to the economic crisis which began in 2008. These five steps can result in a similar development for hard working people who haven’t been shielded from high inflation, cuts and pay freezes.
]]><![CDATA[Election results in Scotland mean all is to play for]]>Mon, 07 May 2012 12:49:06 GMThttp://mikemg.weebly.com/1/post/2012/05/election-results-in-scotland-mean-all-is-to-play-for.htmlFrom: Speaker's Chair

In the lead up to the elections last week, much importance was placed on the events in Glasgow as well as London. Politicians and columnists were undoubtedly ready to pounce had Labour been unsuccessful in both. So what do the results north of the border mean for the key players?

Both Coalition parties had losses in their share of the vote and seats. The Liberal Democrats saw their vote drop by 6.6 per cent, while the Conservatives lost a moderate 2.2 per cent. The Tories unpopularity in Scotland now appears to be shared with the Lib Dems and it may be a long time before the latter sees a recovery

While elsewhere, in Birmingham, the Tory-Lib Dem Coalition was symbolically toppled. The Coalition will now look to apply the sticking plasters of a new legislative programme and a Cabinet reshuffle to seek new impetus. The results also mean that both parties need to very carefully consider any role they may have in the Scottish independence vote.

Labour became the biggest party in both Aberdeen and Edinburgh, while they held firm in Glasgow. Had the SNP beaten Labour in Glasgow in the same vein that Boris Johnson did so in London, the election post mortem may well have been very different. Instead, the results undoubtedly exceeded expectations.

Ed Miliband’s leadership has been strengthened and Labour can look forward. Perceived economic credibility is growing, while these results, particularly in the south and east, have made the Bradford West by-election a distant memory. It’s now important the party develops a clear plan of action moving forward to maintain this momentum.

The SNP made gains in Scotland, collecting the highest share of the vote. Even so, their desire for major success in Glasgow failed to materialise. If that were repeated in a general election, their Deputy Leader Nicola Sturgeon would be in line to lose her seat. This result has to an extent slowed down the runaway Alex Salmond freight train.

When these moderate results for the SNP are combined with the potentially toxic link between Salmond and Rupert Murdoch, Scottish independence appears further away. Indeed, it suggests that leaving Salmond to his own devices may be the way to defeat the proposals.

For now though, the difficulties rest with David Cameron, who needs to balance a backlash from both the Lib Dem left and Tory right. His saving grace is that the election results were so lacklustre that few MPs from either party will be keen for an early election knowing that a P45 may be on the way.

]]>