2013-05-24T03:08:24-04:00 Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=callum-jones Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Callum Jones Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1909288 2012-09-24T19:00:00-04:00 2012-11-24T05:12:01-05:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/
Making as many voters up and down the country believe this is, above all else, the party's fundamental target for the next two years. Of course, the party elite is still very much - to use a word coined by Browne - 'proalition'. But that doesn't mean the on-going Lib Dem project to put forward their individual party identity before 2015 has lost the slightest bit of ambition.
From the moment the 2012 Liberal Democrat party conference began, Clegg's two aims for the event were clear.

Firstly, distance from the Conservatives. "It is no secret that we have different priorities to our coalition partners", he affirmed at a rally on the opening night. The Tories, he suggested, were only interested in improving the economy, whilst his party wants to "make it fairer and greener".

Secondly, amelioration of the Lib Dem image. The party wants to be seen as caring, whilst a competent and credible political force. The theory is that this would give them an edge in the public eye which Labour and the Tories don't have. Easier said than done? No, easier to do than say. Creating policies which fit this bill is a lot more straight forward than explaining to voters exactly how they meet the criteria.

Communication is an undeniable problem for the Liberal Democrats. It always has been. They are in government without the formal support of a single national news outlet. (A quote from a Polly Toynbee piece is enough to turn even eternal optimist Tim Farron slightly sour.) This would certainly explain the emphasis on doorstep campaigns in the top speeches and fringe events here in Brighton.

This idea of direct campaigning was pushed last year in Birmingham, but failed to take effect in the 12 months that followed. Although it's clearly an important strategic technique, it has seemed more dated than ever this week. In the digital age, over a million people watched Clegg's tuition fees apology - original or remixed - in four days. If a single lesson can be taken from the Deputy PM's chart success, it's that the power of the internet is not to be underestimated.

What have they got to shout about, though? The focus here in Brighton is firmly on the areas that the party has achieved, as delegates try to move away from the failure of tuition fees. In education, schemes like the pupil premium and the halting of Michael Gove's two-tier exam plan slightly soften that blow. The green deal and tax threshold increase are two other policies which have been championed over the weekend. The specific policy isn't entirely relevant, though - what matters is that the party finds a voice to speak to disenfranchised voters.

Delegates here in Brighton are entirely aware of their party's dire statistical position. However, many are quick to put forward a particularly valid counter-argument. For the first time in the history of the party, they have escaped the confines of opposition. Right now, the reality of government is proving too much for its electoral health, but for the first time in history, the Liberal Democrat party is actually in government.

Popular support is falling by the week, but credibility as a genuine force for power is rising each and every day this party works in Whitehall. Will this help in 2015? It's currently looking doubtful. Will this help in the broader future? Only time will tell.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1860458 2012-09-07T06:48:22-04:00 2012-11-07T05:12:01-05:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/
Another key aim was to improve the way that policies are communicated by ministers. Former Health Secretary Andrew Lansley was demoted to Leader of the Commons and ex-Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman was removed from the cabinet all together for poor performances on Newsnight, Boulton & Co and Today. The new faces at the top of government- Grant Shapps, Chris Grayling, Maria Miller- are of a different mould. Shapps was sent on the breakfast rounds from the crack of dawn on Wednesday, and as I type mid-morning in a Westminster coffee shop, he's still at it a few tables away.

Tuesday's outright winner was almost certainly Jeremy Hunt. His walk from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in the morning was nothing short of a leap of faith. A swift axe from the government was not by any means out of the question, but Hunt's successful Olympics work won him a promotion. He later arrived at the Department of Health to fill the Lansley-shaped void. The position is hardly the most sought after in the Conservative Party - the new Health Secretary is now tasked with packaging the most controversial policy rock of the parliament into golden chunks for voters.

Meanwhile, the biggest loser of the day was probably Justine Greening, who was demoted for the despicable political offence of following her party line on the Heathrow third runway. She was subsequently shifted off from the Department of Transport to International Development - a clear step down for such a bright ministerial mind. Her strong opinions on airport expansion clearly formed a significant vested interest, but the PM knew this when he hired her last October. Why remove her now, unless a substantial policy change is on the cards?

Nick Clegg ensured the yellow cabinet chairs didn't even move an inch, as he glued the Liberal Democrat coalition cards firmly into place. Movement between big players was sidelined, as David Laws returned to government to take up a dual-department position with both ministerial and advisory responsibilities. The return of the respected Lib Dem was the Deputy PM's fundamental priority in the reshuffle, but the subsequent lack of frontbench amendments may cause problems in the future.

The general consistency of the junior coalition party's ministers was mirrored by the top flight of the Tory party. The Foreign Secretary maintained his position to continue his responsibility for UK's international affairs, the Home Secretary stayed put to implement her broad reforms to British society and the Education Secretary was spared to move forward his plans for schools. Most significantly though, the Chancellor stayed to oversee the government's economic policy. This reshuffle swapped around lower personnel, but the general policy sheet for the economy, society and global relations has remained.

In reality, the events of the past few days will send out little more than a ripple outside the Westminster village. For one of the key problems with modern British politics is that, at the end of the day, the vast majority couldn't care less. We live in a society where people are much more likely to watch contestants enter the Big Brother house than watch new members of the political elite walk up Downing Street.

Whilst the world shrinks due to technological advancements, more people than ever before are living in incredibly regional bubbles. The NIMBYist culture against the proposed Heathrow extension and high speed rail network prove that most voters couldn't care less about politics until it affects them in the most direct way.

Cameron's big challenge over the second half of the parliament dwarfs the predicament of faces around his cabinet table. He has to get the economy back on track, whilst creating a legacy that will make the coalition's many calamities worth the hassle. More woeful economic facts and figures are spewed out each day, but the potential political damage caused by going into the next general election without a rise in living standards is overlooked.

Mitt Romney's strongest presidential campaign moment yet was a moment in his speech at the Republican National Convention last week. He asked the American people to fundamentally question whether they were better or worse off today than the day President Obama took office. This black and white view might demonstrate a brutal ignorance to detail, but it is incredibly common - incumbent candidates are blighted by it on almost every electoral stage.

With somewhat inharmonious current relations between coalition members, this reshuffle gave Cameron a chance to look forward. He's now selected his key representatives for the next few years. They'll face their fair share of peril of the coming weeks and months, with aviation already exploding on the Downing Street doorstep. The clear post-reshuffle line from the government has been that the focus has shifted to the communication, not creation of policies - their practical success will be vital for a Tory victory in 2015.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1845884 2012-08-31T06:40:03-04:00 2012-10-31T05:12:02-04:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/
"This is the time when we can start spreading our wings", Clegg told The Guardian on Wednesday. He's flying straight towards Britain's most wealthy, having confirmed that this year's Lib Dem Party Conference will focus on fiscal equality. "People of very considerable personal wealth have got to make a bit of an extra contribution", he declared. This broad initial statement is hardly a controversial call from Clegg. He might be almost guaranteed to face stiff opposition when a specific policy is tabled, but he's up for the fight.

Cast your mind back to April 2010 when the Lib Dem election campaign ran three main pledges - major reforms to Westminster, the abolition of student fees, and a fairer tax system. Nowadays, the junior coalition partners are too often denied credit for their smaller achievements in government, but it's not unreasonable to point out that two of their three fundamental aims for this country have fallen. The proposed Alternative Voting system and House of Lords restructure have been ruled out by the sharpest of pencils by grassroot Conservatives, and it's probably best we don't get on to student fees. If David Cameron called a snap election tomorrow, which major post-election accomplishment could the Lib Dems champion?

So, it's time to talk about tax, apparently. Over the next month, Clegg will try hard to put it right at the top of the political agenda, with conference speeches and editorials outlining plans to pick up more money for the government. Talking's not the difficult bit, though - acting is where the slip-ups occur. For decades, party leaders have spoken so much and done so little about taxation. This year alone, tax avoidance has been prominent on front pages and yet the government seems to be doing little to tackle it.

Will the plans ever go ahead? MPs on both sides of the Commons will argue that the negative social impact of a steep wealth tax will be overwhelming. If Clegg calls for the treasury to move forward with his ideas, he must do so without slurring the rich. Whenever tax is put at the forefront of discussion, the fear of friction between the rungs of the class ladder lingers. This snag would be patchable if the Chancellor was on board. "We have to be careful as a country that we don't drive away the wealth creators that are going to lead our economic recovery", he said this week - hardly a triumphant endorsement.

Yet, there is another question- does Nick Clegg even expect the plans to go ahead? The specific proposals will be outlined in Brighton next month, but it is incredibly unlikely that the controversial political elephant of taxation will suddenly spew a successful policy out of its trunk through a coalition. George Osborne wasn't even informed of the plans before Clegg'sGuardian interview went to press. Surely the Deputy Prime Minister would consult the Chancellor of the Exchequer before putting forward a serious fiscal strategy?

He would. The fact is- providing the leading Lib Dems play their cards right- it doesn't matter if this plan flops or flies. As helpful as enshrining a key party position into government policy would be when turning around his woes, the deputy prime minister has another ambition on his mind - independence. Proposing a distinctly un-Conservative idea and waiting for the inevitable fallout is a smart move. Tory backbenchers have given Clegg enough headaches by now - it's probably about time he used them to his advantage.

One rumour about the ever-looming reshuffle predicts that David Laws will return to lead a department made up entirely of Liberal Democrat ministers. This could be a good idea for the party, as it would separate the two coalition partners and allow the Lib Dems to be seen working as an individual force. The high chances of deterioration in inter-party cooperation might mean this will never see the light of day, though.

The same potential benefits lie behind the deputy prime minister's grand proposals this week. If he and his party colleagues were seen as the proactive half of the coalition partnership with the initiatives and ideas to sort out the economy, the prospective electoral prizes would put them firmly back in the right direction. If Tory MPs knock this one - like so many others - out of the park, it might even give the Lib Dems a boost. 2015 may be a while off, but the Liberal Democrat election campaign is slowly underway - with Nick Clegg at the helm.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1771847 2012-08-13T19:00:00-04:00 2012-10-13T05:12:11-04:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/
With 29 gold medals, our athletes impressed the world. That's more than Australia managed at the 2000 Games in Sydney, or the Greece at the 2004 Games in Athens. In fact, excluding the United States and China, it's the best Olympic performance of a host nation in living memory.

With over a billion pairs of eyes looking on, our country impressed the world. London's transport swiftly and safely carried over a million people around the capital each day. 70,000 volunteers greeted Olympic visitors with enthusiasm and kindness. The British capital, and the British people, came alive in a way not seen in recent history.

Forgive the cliché, but these Games have demonstrated just what is great about Great Britain. As a nation, our spirit, talent, and reliability have been proved on the grandest of stages. There is no time like the present to discuss how we can take the lessons we have learnt over the past fortnight, and ensure we remember them forever.

The question mark over legacy is daunting. It's loomed at the back of our minds throughout the seven years of preparation for this past fortnight. Now, after waking up with bleary eyes and realising the clock has stopped and the medal count has halted, the future of London 2012 is at the forefront of every head in the country.

Most bloggers and commentators are suggesting we channel this inspirational Olympic spirit is through school sport. At children's paper First News, we disagree. We think the best way to continue London 2012 is through local sports clubs and leisure centres - the places which lie at the centre of communities all over Britain.

Some of Team GB's most amazing medal moments at London 2012 were in sports like sailing, swimming, rowing and cycling. Most schools can't even contemplate accommodating these activities.

However, there are many sites around the country which provide excellent opportunities for ambitious and talented kids to shine in the sport of their choice.

Not a single person could deny that young people have been left inspired by the last two weeks. Yet, there's a blockade in the way of our dream for these motivated kids. If they want to get into these places, membership fees are steep. If a single ambitious child was prevented from getting active due to a lack of money, wouldn't it be a massive failure on our part?

First News is calling for free leisure centre and sports club memberships for all under sixteen year-olds in the country.

The aim of the last 17 days has been to inspire a generation. We have unequivocally succeeded with this aim. The aim of the next 17 years is to give this newly-inspired generation the chance to get active. We can totally do this too. In the midst of an obesity crisis, Britain can take the most obvious step towards solving it.

Whether two weeks of sport, no matter how fantastic, is worth £9billion during economic austerity is debatable, but whether an era of inspiration and achievement is worth that money is unquestionable.

You can sign the First News e-petiton for free sport for kids here.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1503244 2012-05-09T12:27:50-04:00 2012-07-09T05:12:04-04:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/
David Cameron responded by accepting that there were two different parties within the coalition but stating that the government was still "making difficult decisions" and "getting the job done". His answer was an almost word-for-word recital of the standard Downing Street briefing on the matter.

However, it must be pretty tricky. The Conservative right and Liberal left are getting increasingly rattled. Even the most straight-forward corners of the coalition agreement have caused huge rows between backbenchers, and ministers. So, as Cameron met with Nick Clegg to write the 2012 Queen's Speech, the pressure on the negotiation table was high.

The result was simple, but disappointing. In terms of important legislation actually included in the speech, it was pretty thin on the ground. After weeks of accusations that the coalition is losing momentum, was I the only hoping for a much more substantial beginning of "phase two"?
Overall, only fifteen bills made the cut. Even the most comprehensive reforms, like those to the banking sector, energy market and the House of Lords, seem to lack detail and direction at the moment. This is the biggest political problem for the coalition right now.

Without direction, a government lacks drive. We've seen how far this can deteriorate, in the final years of New Labour. There's a fine line between treading carefully and not being seen to tread at all.

I accept that it's incredibly hard to be radical when you don't know which direction to head towards. No matter what Downing Street does, Tory backbenchers will say they're being ignored, and Lib Dems will remind them of the coalition deal.

This issue is only magnified by the re-gathering of the Labour Party. I've hardly been quiet about the Opposition's struggle to prosper under the Miliband leadership. Yet- the party has been improving for weeks. Its journey has been by no means consistent, but the contrast between Autumn 2010 and today is almost unrecognisable.

After a strong, genuinely witty introduction into his Queen's Speech response, the Leader of the Opposition made his strongest parliamentary contribution yet. Content is still an issue for him, but a slicker style and more confident delivery saw his performance receive resoundingly good reviews. Even his corny jokes began to trend on twitter.

It should probably be noted that on Wednesday 9 May 2012, Ed Miliband's party leadership came of age.

What can the government do, though? My suggestion is to forget about politics, and focus on the people that vote. Last Thursday's elections could have been worse for the government, but they weren't great. This isn't a pattern of tradition- it's individual voters turning their backs on parties they were passionately supporting two years ago.

Both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats need to step outside of the Westminster bubble and get some air.They should regian their focus, and direct it towards things that matter to real people.

http://www.noticeboarddaily.com/]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1393447 2012-03-31T10:06:24-04:00 2012-05-31T05:12:02-04:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/
Even without the investigative work of The Sunday Times or the public blunders of various cabinet members, the Tories would have still been struggling to control the budget reaction. As it turns out, if you cut the top rate of tax and a pensioner's personal allowance within the same parliamentary statement, the following day's press isn't going to be great. The commentators tore apart the government's "all in this together" mantra, and the front pages were hardly kind to Dave and George.

This was to be the least of their worries, though. Last Sunday, secret filming revealed the Conservative Party co-treasurer offering government influence for the measly sum of £250,000. A bit of dosh for a Downing Street dinner. Quite lot of cash for Cameron. Hundreds of thousands of pounds for (allegedly) political sway. What a bargain.

Before the donor story blew over, the budget backlash returned, fiercer than ever. It seems that a government can privatise the NHS, raise student fees and tax pensioners with relative ease. However, when they propose a price jump for hot pastries, things really kick off. Britain answered North Africa's "Arab Spring" with a "Greggs Revolution".

Things only went from bad to worse. When covering a sensitive issue, "strong but subtle" is widely accepted to be the best approach. However, the government's response to the potential fuel strikes was weak, bewildering and controversial. What's more, it could not have been less subtle. Imagine an angry bull in a very delicate china shop. The shambolic public response by Downing Street did not provide the calm and collected leadership needed on the eve of such a large-scale prospective domestic dilemma.

To say the government confused the matter is an understatement. The episode of Borgen I tried to watch without subtitles was easier to comprehend than the contradictory briefings issued by five different ministers. First it was fill up and stock up, then just fill up, then fill up slightly, then don't fill up, then fill up if you can, and now we're being told not to bother again.

Right now, we're heading towards a fuel shortage crisis due to people fearing heading towards a fuel shortage crisis. Although unlikely, the tanker drivers may not even strike. If they don't, they've gained all the attention they would get from a large-scale disruption, without doing so. On Monday, they will battle from the high ground at the negotiations table. The government only has itself to blame for this.

It's irresponsible to approach an issue that will affect so many people to such a drastic extent from a political angle. This is where the government went so badly wrong.
However, all of this is extremely significant when looking at the bigger picture in Westminster.

The majority of these mishaps will probably be forgotten by time people vote in the next General Election. Scandals come and go as time ticks on. What will be remembered, though, is the general reputation of the Conservative Party. Up until now, they've cut public spending, bickered over Europe and cosied up to newspaper proprietors. Nevertheless, before last weekend, with an opposition still yet to gain enough momentum and a struggling coalition partner, the Tories were still riding high.

The Cameron ministry is now blighted by the gravest of political injuries; an incompetent image. Downing Street has simply not been in control. The electorate could see this, and the Conservatives are paying the price for that. Opinion polls are showing Labour now has the largest lead over the Tories since David Cameron won the leadership of his party in 2005.

The fight back begins right now, as government big-wigs deal with the reality of cash-deprived pensioners, fuel-deprived drivers, and a cheap pasty-deprived population. After tumultuous week in Westminster, the Prime Minister will certainly not be deprived of his fair share of challenges over the coming days.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1369810 2012-03-21T11:07:11-04:00 2012-05-21T05:12:01-04:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/
Dalton's post-war leak is a droplet when compared to the ocean of budget snippets Westminster has been swimming in for weeks. Coalition budget discussions have not been carried out behind closed doors. They have been testing the waters during these conversations by 'briefing' the press. This is obviously nothing like leaking, which has a completely different name.

So we knew what to expect at lunchtime. Who cares? It was time to get down to business, and although I was personally disappointed the Chancellor didn't opt to use his budget day privilege of drinking in the chamber like so many of his predecessors, the actual statement he delivered was pretty strong. With this morning's announcement that annual government borrowing figures rose above £100 billion in February, it had to be.

He conceded that borrowing had hit a new high, but forecasted that it will fall annually until 2017, when it will reach the low of £21 billion. He insisted that figures predicted the UK would avoid recession, and that one million new jobs would be created over the next five years.

After an unnecessarily confusing debate over the past few weeks, the top rate of tax will gradually be cut from 50p to 45p next year. This cut will be partly funded by what Nick Clegg wants called a "tycoon tax". All that really needs to be known is that the Chancellor has proposed a new top rate of stamp duty of 7% on properties worth over two million pounds, and Nick's jazzy name hasn't caught on. Additionally, Osborne took the opportunity to announce a clamp down on the avoidance of tax, after the controversies of the past few years.

With such a headline-grabbing feature of this year's budget assisting the rich, the government has been incredibly careful to be seen helping families and the poor. Last year the income tax threshold was raised to £7,475. The coalition pledged to gradually raise it to £10,000 by 2015, but with Liberal Democrats keen to speed up the process, so it was today promised that it would be elevated to £9,205 next year. This will leave the average tax-payer with around an extra £200 in their pocket.

The initial proposed alterations to child benefit in a year's time involved any family with an individual earning more than £42,475 losing it all together. The Chancellor has today attempted to soften this blow, by increasing the maximum income boundary above £50,000. Furthermore, this block on benefits will be gradual, falling by 1% for every £100 earned above £50,000. Anyone earning above £60,000 won't receive any child benefits.

It was also just as important to the government that businesses, of all sizes, were kept happy. Corporation tax was already set to be cut to 25% at the start of the next fiscal year, and the Treasury has previous promised to cut it to 23% by 2014. The Chancellor selected to accelerate this to 24% today. Shops will be able to stay open for more than six hours on eight Sundays from July 22nd, to cash in on the predicted Olympic boom. It is hoped that this will give a major boost to the retail sector. Finally, George Osborne seemed to catch political buzzword fever as he assured he would cut 'red tape' and 'regulation', promising this would save hundreds of millions of pounds.

He took the opportunity to reveal that the British exit from Afghanistan in 2014 will save almost two and a half billion pounds before the end of the general election. This money will be partially used to fund accommodation improvements and give further help to families of serving military men and women.

George Osborne argued that the 2012 budget "supports working families" and "backs businesses" whilst "dealing with debts". He endeavoured to get the balance right between supporting high earners to promote British business, and taxing them to raise funds. The BBC's Nick Robinson pointed out that what the Chancellor didn't announce was just as significant as what he did. He failed to alter his approach to fuel duty, ignoring calls from a number of tabloids and prominent e-petitions. However, the way he polished over the controversial smudges on child benefit reforms will be popular, as will his decision to raise the income tax threshold.

This was not enough to appease Labour, though. Ed Miliband declared that "millions will pay more, whilst millionaires pay less". His tone was poor at the outset, and his use of repetition failed to obtain the response that was intended. However, when he picked up pace, few could top his performance. He accused George Osborne of being "out of touch" and awarding "the government's very own bankers' bonus". It took the Leader of the Opposition a long time to get the ball rolling, though. His "hands up" moment, although bizarrely hypocritical, will be repeated for years to come and do damage to the Conservatives. He relied too on quite a poor script, but I've never written this before; at times this afternoon, I was left impressed by Ed Miliband.

As heated as the argument got at times in the Commons, this battle is still going on right now and will continue over the coming days and weeks. The government has to be seen helping the sizable low and middle income earners, whilst getting the economy back on track. George Osborne's message today was that the coalition is full steam ahead with this mission. The opposition's response, however, entirely refuted this. In the eyes of Ed Miliband, the government is disregarding those who need the most help, and the Chancellor's economic strategy is firmly off the rails.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1339264 2012-03-12T19:00:00-04:00 2012-05-12T05:12:01-04:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/ Newsnight, before settling down with a cuppa to read The Spectator and preview the next morning's papers.

Politics isn't cool. Politicians are drowning with banking executives and traffic wardens at the bottom of the occupational barrel. You're probably not oozing with sympathy for your local MP right now, and I don't blame you for this. Let's face it- some who grace the corridors of power really don't help themselves.

In the pecking order of society, it's all about images and stereotypes that are built by media-exaggerated minority incidents. When in the public eye, if you're not Gary Barlow or the Queen, it's pretty hard to avoid the British obsession with tabloid scandals. One or two can prove damaging to a reputation, and two or three can prove catastrophic for a career. Yet- three or four dozen of these firestorms can cause on-going issues on a cataclysmic scale that last for generations.

Westminster is currently a victim of the latter scale of bombardment. It may house 650 different MPs of varying calibre, but in the simplistic, stereotypical world of the public eye, "they're all the same". If one takes a bullet, they all go down.

No matter how talented and compassionate some in the commons chamber are, the collective reputation of British politicians as a whole is tainted by a small group of fools who make nonsensical mistakes every few months. Looking at the way they seem to take it in turns, you'd be forgiven for assuming they have some sort of pre-arranged rota. Of course, the rota was abandoned and they all took a few months off after the expenses scandal of 2009 (to be fair, they had outdone themselves on this occasion).

This pointless rant about political slip-ups is relevant due to an incident that took place almost three weeks ago in the Strangers' Bar in the Palace of Westminster. A politician named Eric Joyce was arrested late in the evening by police after drunkenly assaulting MPs from rival parties, and his own. He treated officers at the Central London police station in which he was held in a similar manner. Windows were smashed, and noses were reportedly left bleeding, by a man who is meant to be a figure of authority and respect.

Let me take you back to August of last year. As London smouldered after four consecutive nights of violence, politicians of all parties stood up and condemned the rioters. Our prime minister made the bold move of labelling some sections of British society as "sick", and he was right to say this. However, he probably thought he was pointing the finger a lot further away from home than he actually was.

In a perfect democracy, Members of Parliament should represent their constituents in every sense of the word. They should act as role models and do what is right. They should set the bar for standards in ethics and behaviour. This may be somewhat tricky in the aforementioned current media climate, but it is doable.

Every single scandal frustrates me for the single fact that not all our MPs are bad. Westminster currently homes some of the best politicians in the world. But the culture of tabloid scandal we love to live with means that the small number of fools that slip up overshadow the high standard of the rest. The truth is that British politicians are generally of an extremely high calibre. Most in the commons chamber are in politics for the right reasons, doing the right things for the right people. My hope is that the minority of members who cannot be described in this way won't continue to drag down the reputation of the majority.

www.callumjones.blog.com]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1250961 2012-02-02T17:17:02-05:00 2012-04-03T05:12:01-04:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/
The cosy relationships between political parties and media barons may have been broken last summer, but the fact they previously existed shows something. It shows that both sides understood how the media can make or break the career of a politician and success of a party. Gone are the days when journalism just acted as a middleman between an event and the public. In their place is the modern era of reportage. Today the mainstream press is fully aware of its impact, and it uses it to its advantage.

One piece on one day in one publication can change history. Think back to 14 February 1997. The Daily Mail did not report the inquest into the death of Stephen Lawrence; it involved itself in it. By publishing the names of five men it believed to have murdered a teenager in Eltham four years beforehand, it fundamentally altered the criminal investigation. This isn't writing about the news, this is writing the news. Some journalists don't just incorporate their judgements into the text of the story; they attach their opinions to the story itself.

There are certain areas that the press regularly uses these methods to affect. General on-going examples include the running of the BBC, Britain's European membership status and even the lives of celebrities. Recent topical examples include super-injunctions, the safety of social networking websites, and bankers. I want to talk, specifically, about the final instance.

The banking crisis of 2008 left the global economy in tatters. We are still feeling the consequences today, and the seas aren't expected to calm for a number of years. At the height of this crisis, the Royal Bank of Scotland received a multi-billion pound bailout from the Treasury. At the helm of RBS at the time was its chief executive, a man by the name of Fred Goodwin.

Goodwin's expansionist attitude quadrupled the bank's assets over his seven-year executive tenure. It was his policies that saw him awarded a knighthood in 2004 for services to banking. However, many argued that it was the same aggressive approach that eventually brought RBS to the brink. It would have been a balanced debate, if it wasn't for the one-sided press coverage. It wouldn't have mattered if Goodwin was a knitting enthusiast who enjoyed nothing more from life than a cup of tea in front of Countdown; the newspapers were gunning for him, and their target was hit and destroyed.

The water droplet effect meant that the stigmatisation of Goodwin placed the entire banking industry under just as much scrutiny. After over three years of constant picking from the press, being a banker has become almost socially unacceptable. When was the last time you read about a banker working a 14-hour day and earning peanuts? Don't tell me it doesn't happen; it does. It just doesn't fit into the convenient stereotype.

All this is currently significant due to slight hints at looming events from the likes of Laura Kuenssberg and Robert Peston. With the uproar over the proposed bonus for incumbent RBS CEO Stephen Hester still fresh in our minds, we are now told to expect larger rewards for other top-tier bankers.

I should stress that I, personally, am against excessive bonuses for any executives whilst Britain and the outside world stumble through a recession. However, if Kuenssberg and Peston are correct and the bonuses are handed out, I don't plan on using any news or analytical report I write about the action to voice this view. That's not telling the news; that's manipulating it.

Such a divisive event should be met by an intelligent debate, not a witch-hunt. When the front pages latch onto someone, they will persist until the person is brought down. Russell Brand, Ryan Giggs, Lindsay Lohan, Stephen Hester. Quite a contrasting list, with one underlying thing in common; the British papers obsessed over criticising each of them, and they all fell on a sword in their own way.

I wish the best of luck to any banker who is to be offered an extortionate reward. I don't sympathise with someone for obtaining a multi-million pound pay packet, but I do sympathise with someone if they are bombarded with a constant stream of abuse on an unfair basis. For a subject dissected in such detail for so long, I find it odd that a fundamental factor of bonuses is so often confused; they are awarded, not requested. I'm not denying that they are probably expected within the megabucks city culture that exists today.

However, when the next ginormous bonus is uncovered, Britain has a choice. Should we allow our press to spoon-feed us emotions of outrage and scandal, leading to an outcome dictated by the opinions of a few writers? Or should we have a rational discussion, which would lead to a compromise created by the opinions of our entire nation?

www.callumjones.blog.com]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1171877 2011-12-30T19:00:00-05:00 2012-02-29T05:12:01-05:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/
Sky News correspondent Mark Stone, who posted video updates on YouTube during his time in Tripoli earlier in 2011, described to me just how odd some of Gaddafi's propaganda methods were. "Think fake blood sprayed on sheets in hospital to fool us", he said, before explaining how journalists "were only allowed out of the hotel with minders". Tripoli fell on 23 August.

Stone was reporting from another turbulent scene in August. This wasn't a protest for freedom from tyranny, though; this was a riot in his local town centre. "As a journalist, I needed to film what I was witnessing and question the looters", he said, "but as a resident it was genuinely upsetting to see the street I shop in being comprehensively destroyed".

After five nights of violence, an estimated £200,000,000 of damage was caused and five were killed. As Tottenham smouldered, Britain reflected, discussing the drawbacks of its society.

Autumn came quicker than ever, bringing with it the decadal anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. All eyes were on Ground Zero as the names of the 2977 victims were read aloud. It was an opportunity to think back to the terrible day, and the events that succeeded it. It was equally a time to look forward, though; before 2011 ended, the final American troops would leave Iraq after almost nine years.

Days later, Manhattan drew attention for a different reason. A hundred people camped out in cardboard boxes in Zuccotti Park near Wall Street, and the Occupy movement was born. Their fight for economic equality went global; as 2011 concludes, there are 2751 Occupy camps. It wasn't long before a camp was set up in London, outside St Paul's Cathedral. The protesters say that they are a part of 99% against fiscal inequalities, but critics of the movement have panned it for not suggesting alternatives to the systems it fights against.

As the days became shorter, we mourned a great technological pioneer of our time. Steve Jobs - CEO of the company that created the Macintosh computer, iPod, iPhone and iPad - died of cancer.

In a blog post, Stephen Fry said of the genius: "Jobs didn't invent computers...but he saw there were no limits to the power that creative combinations of technology and design could accomplish". His final words were as fascinating as the products of his imagination: "oh wow, oh wow, oh wow."

In Westminster, a storm was brewing. Evidence was uncovered suggesting Defence Secretary Liam Fox had been accompanied by his friend Adam Werritty to government meetings around the world. The snowball started rolling. When question marks appeared over false business cards and finances, the story grew murkier. Fox stood down as Secretary of State for Defence, and the PM oversaw a minor cabinet reshuffle. At the height of the scandal, Fox was asked what he thought his greatest achievement in cabinet was. "Libya", he replied. He would miss the Gaddafi regime's final chapter by six days.

On 20 October, Muammar Gaddafi was captured by rebel forces outside his hometown of Sirte. Images of his brutal final moments alive were beamed around the world. This marked the end of a civil war, but the Libyan Revolution was only just beginning.

World affairs failed to distract David Cameron from troubles on his own doorstep. Cracks were beginning to re-emerge within Conservative Party foundations over - yes, you guessed it - Europe.

On a damp Monday evening, parliament witnessed the biggest rebellion since the last Tory government. The debate over a proposed referendum on the British EU membership saw Conservative MPs ignore the government stance, voting in favour. UKIP Leader Nigel Farage told me the debate was "an absolute travesty", before saying it displayed "a huge disengagement between Westminster and the people."

In November, the Leveson Inquiry - a result of the hacking scandal - opened its first hearing.

Those that have appeared since include the parents of Milly Dowler, Hugh Grant, the parents of Madeline McCann, Piers Morgan, Alistair Campbell and Christopher Jefferies. When I asked him for his thoughts on the inquiry so far, David Wooding raised the issue that "too much time has been given to dodgy or failed ex-Journalists who have left the profession and celebrities with axes to grind". The inquiry is on-going and expected to conclude next year.

The Chancellor's Autumn Statement preceded the largest strikes Britain had seen in a generation. 60% of schools shut as over 2,000,000 public sector workers walked in reaction to proposed reforms to their pensions. If this day did nothing else, it informed me of the political influence of The One Show.

In March, host Matt Baker seemed to become Jeremy Paxman's replacement when interviewing the PM. On the evening of 30 November, a guest on the show attempted to make a topical joke about the day's events. His name was Jeremy Clarkson, and I don't think he was expecting the reaction he received. Beware, Newsnight...

Meanwhile, Egypt was about to learn how long a revolution can run after the toppling of a dictator, as mass protests returned, months after Mubarak's removal. Jeremy Bowen described it to me as the "hangover effect of power". "Severe economic problems, a lack of political stability and the military hanging on to power have caused this", he said.

Things were looking equally bleak in Syria, as the estimated death toll rose to 5000. In an undercover report from Homms, Sky News Chief Correspondent Stuart Ramsay stated that "the Arab Spring has turned to winter."

After another disastrous year for the euro, December brought a chance to safeguard the currency and the economies of its nations. Still shaken by the EU debate a month beforehand, the PM headed to Brussels to vote on a new treaty. If he signed, he would have to answer to dozens of his MPs. If he didn't, the global bonds he had built since gaining office would break. He vetoed, choosing the latter. In refusing its signature, Britain was accused of holding back the eurozone. Yet, doubts have been cast over the treaty's success anyway. Nigel Farage told me that it "will only drive southern centres into deeper depression". Only time will tell. Despite vast efforts, 2011 was certainly not the end of the euro crisis.

The global stage did not just alter in Europe, North Africa and the Middle East, though. As the year undertook its final moments, so too did Kim Jong Il. The passing of North Korea's leader means it is now officially led by his son Kim Jong Un, but history shows that communist political transitions are never that straight forward.

This year, we've feared the doom and felt the gloom. We watched as people battled for democracy abroad, whilst battles took place within our democracy at home. I knew when I began penning this piece that I would regrettably have to miss out some important events. I can only apologise for this, but there is one event I am yet to mention which I could not forgive myself for disregarding. This year, East Africa has witnessed a famine on an unimaginable scale. 2012 will bring one of two developments in this crisis; its continuation, or its conclusion. Please help it be the latter, by donating to the Oxfam appeal.

For me, 2011 was the year that I was given the opportunity to write for The Huffington Post, and what a year to start. Out of interest, I asked MPs from each of the three big parties to summarise their political year in one word. Tim Farron (Liberal Democrat) chose "rollercoaster". Tessa Jowell (Labour) opted for "activist". Louise Mensch (Conservative) said "responsibility". I, personally, would have gone for "unpredictable". Having said that- as 2012 commences, how much will we know about the year ahead?

www.callumjones.blog.com]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1171859 2011-12-28T19:00:00-05:00 2012-02-27T05:12:01-05:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/ As fireworks lit up the skies and 2011 began, we knew little about the year we were welcoming. Of course, we were preparing for a royal wedding and predicting our chapter of austerity had barely begun. Yet, we had no idea that the global stage would alter so drastically. We had no idea that one of the biggest scandals of a generation would hit the industry that normally creates them. And we certainly had no idea that Downing Street would welcome its most enigmatic strategist in decades; Larry the Cat. Sit back, relax, but take a deep breath, as we reflect over 2011.

The political year began tempestuously when Whitehall waved goodbye to a government advisor. A good friend of the prime minister resigned because increasing media attention was "making it difficult to give the 110% needed for this role". His name was Andy Coulson, he was stepping down as Number 10's communications director, and 2011 hadn't finished with him yet.

Coulson wasn't the only one to lose his job in January. Thousands of miles away, a revolution was brewing in Tunisia. After weeks of demonstrations, President Ben Ali was ousted from his position. He would not be the last; this was only the initial link in the Arab Spring's elaborate chain.

As the Tunisian regime fell, uprisings began in Egypt. A million people set up camp in Tahrir Square. When President Mubarak responded with force, these protests only grew. He didn't last for long; on 11 February, he resigned after 30 years. Egypt rejoiced.

Days after the second dictator fell, Libyans signalled their wish that the same would happen to their leader. As demonstrations against Colonel Gaddafi's regime began in Benghazi, protesters were fired upon by government troops. It wasn't long before the unrest spiralled into civil war.

In New Zealand, a season of devastating natural disasters began, as a huge earthquake struck Christchurch. "It felt like a warzone for forty seconds" a local told me, "I honestly feared for my life". A series of subsequent aftershocks saw much of South Island left in ruin. Nevertheless, the nation still came together in October, welcoming visitors from around the globe for the Rugby World Cup. Their hospitality was rewarded when the Kiwis won the championship.

As March began, another earthquake - this time in the North Pacific - created a tsunami. Within minutes, a wave of 40 metres reached Japan. Over 15,000 died, and the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant was put on high alert.

It wasn't long before the eyes of the world returned to Tripoli, when external forces implemented a no-fly zone and carried out airstrikes. "The NATO bombing and foreign assistance was the moment that the tide began to turn for the Gaddafi regime", BBC Middle East Editor Jeremy Bowen explained to me, "but it was still a slow process until the last week or two". These weeks would come, but only after months of combat. Meanwhile, mass protests were underway in Syria.

The title of the Chancellor's 2011 budget nicely compiles the political buzzwords of the year: "a strong and stable economy for growth and fairness". The document delivered in March made no major changes to the plans of its predecessor, but gloomy alterations to growth forecasts were thrown in for good measure. Days later, thousands took to London's streets, protesting against public spending cuts. A morose atmosphere descended. What could possibly pick us up?

A royal wedding, perhaps? Whether you met the romance of Prince William and Catherine Middleton with scepticism or enthusiasm, we all enjoyed that double Bank Holiday. 25 million Brits tuned in to watch the couple get married on 29 April. The media here in Britain may have got a tad over-excited, but it's safe to say our coverage had nothing on that of the USA. It's been quite a year for the Royal Family, with another royal wedding- of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall- taking place in July.

As the incumbents of Buckingham Palace recovered, White House staff were working around the clock on President Obama's biggest task yet. Shortly after midnight on 2 May, Osama bin Laden was killed by American Special Forces. Nearly a decade after that fateful day in New York, Tony Blair said that "the operation shows that those who commit acts of terror against the innocent will be brought to justice, however long it takes".

Three weeks later, on a state visit to the UK, Obama stayed at Buckingham Palace and addressed Westminster Hall. Whilst the President seemed particularly upbeat, the same could not be said of some MPs. The triumphant month in America was a far cry from the disappointment that had engrossed British politics.

May brought a referendum regarding the proposed Alternative Voting system. Nick Clegg fought for this vote when forming the coalition and it was the first real challenge of Ed Miliband's leadership, as he came out in support of AV. The result was a resounding rejection- 68% - of the modification. Both Labour and the Lib Dems had lost a vote that, weeks before, polls predicted they would win. "To think that elections used to be...predictable", the BBC's Nick Robinson wrote in a blog entry.

This statement was also used about the same night's Scottish Parliamentary Elections to Holyrood. For the first time in the assembly's 12 year history, a party was able to command a majority. As the SNP celebrated, a single word began to resonate around Britain; "devolution?".

On 19 June, the US Open crowned its youngest champion since 1923. 22 year-old golfer Rory McIlroy won his first major, much to the delight of his native Northern Ireland. Fellow golfer Chris Wood wrote that he, alongside many of the sport's competitors, was left "totally inspired by watching McIlroy's performance".

2011 was the year that newspapers attempted to quash super-injunctions, claiming they blocked their journalistic intent. As spring wrapped up, tabloids hounded celebrities from Andrew Marr to Ryan Giggs about their use of injunctions. When summer arrived, it dawned on some journalists that they might have bitten off more than they could chew.

July saw the credibility of a global media organisation plummet, the tabloid industry placed under scrutiny, and the closure of Britain's most-read newspaper. Ever since a News of the World journalist was caught tapping into Prince William's voicemail messages in 2005, the paper's reputation had been marred. However, the scandal intensified on 5 July when it was alleged that the phone of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler had been hacked whilst she was missing and some of her messages were deleted to free space in her inbox. In the following days, former News International journalists were accused of commissioning the hacking of phones of 7/7 victims and soldiers' families.

When I spoke to David Wooding - final News of the World Political Editor- he described the Milly Dowler revelation as a "game changer" in the hacking scandal. "I have never before felt so ashamed to be a journalist", he said, "even though my colleagues and I had done nothing wrong". He was right; most of the Sunday tabloid's staff in 2011 weren't employed by the paper at the time of the apparent illegalities.

Nevertheless, on 7 July, James Murdoch announced that its next edition (#8674) would be the last. After 168 years, the final News of the World front page read "Thank you, and goodbye".

Under a fortnight later, a particular favourite of the paper passed away. Amy Winehouse died at her home after a consuming a fatal amount of alcohol. When paying tribute to the icon, Russell Brand wrote "not all of us know someone with the incredible talent that Amy had, but we all know drunks and junkies...they all need help and help is out there."

With a royal wedding down and one tabloid less, what could the second half of 2011 bring to the table? Rioting on the streets, a resignation in the cabinet, rebellion of Tories and the removal of yet another dictator.

To be continued...

www.callumjones.blog.com
]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1125375 2011-12-02T09:38:26-05:00 2012-02-01T05:12:01-05:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/ The One Show on Wednesday was disgusting and wrong. Granted- even in context, the entertainer's choice of vocabulary didn't make the joke particularly entertaining. However, does anyone else feel like yet another anti-BBC bandwagon has hit the road?

The gag was simple. Clarkson initiated it by complementing the strikers and saying of Wednesday's actions: "They've been fantastic. Absolute fantastic. We've had airports...people streaming through with no problems at all. It's also like being back in the seventies ...feels like home, somehow!".

However, he then pointed out that "we have to balance it though, because this is the BBC", going on to say that "frankly, I think they should all be shot. I would take them outside and execute them in front of their families". The blatant joke was that the BBC has to display both sides of an argument, however extreme, to maintain its impartial reputation.

Nevertheless, the criticisms began to roll in the next morning. No doubt you're wondering which reliable and respected newspaper was first to splash its front page with this supposedly awful controversy? The Daily Star. Without being too cynical, it's pretty easy to make the link between the Star and Channel 5- a direct rival to BBC television. Both are owned by Richard Desmond, who is known to have, in the past, strong controls over his newspapers' agendas. Naturally, not long after the Desmond press had started the ball rolling, a power-assisting fan was put behind it by the Daily Mail and other tabloids.

Less than a week ago, the BBC was blamed for the lack of sportswomen that made the shortlist for its annual Sports Personality of the Year award. On the surface, this denunciation sounds reasonably justified. However, what the majority of reports about the nominations failed to mention was the way they are complied. The BBC does not create the shortlist; hundreds of sports journalists from dozens of media organisations do. The Beeb was subjected to the harshest of criticisms from its rivals, for the precise reason that they are its rivals. Call it jealousy, call it smear, or call it a plain obsession, but the constant barrage of abuse that the BBC is subjected to is categorically wrong.

This time, the unions jumped at the chance to enhance the story with tales of how disgusted they were. Why? Because otherwise, they would have left the news bulletins and been long forgotten by Thursday evening. I'm sorry, but the outcries of Ed Miliband and the union leaders against Jeremy Clarkson on Thursday were purely for publicity. I fully accept the unions need to fight for their cause right now, and equally that Clarkson is a very well paid celebrity. However, the way they collectively jumped on a single person to gain a few column inches in the Friday press was plain wrong.

Jeremy Clarkson is one of the BBC's most prominent and, admittedly, highest-paid presenters. The One Show is one of the network's most popular programmes, which links it to Clarkson's hit series, Top Gear. Its rivals jumped at the opportunity to denounce the two simultaneously in the same report. I'm pretty sure "two birds with one stone" is the phrase. This whole affair is aimed to aggressively attack the BBC and feed the desperate tabloids with material. Yet again, it seems like the real scandal is about the way scandals are created in this country's press.

If you don't believe my quotes or you feel I've misrepresented Jeremy Clarkson's comments, I'd urge you to watch the clipping from "The One Show" in question here.
]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1084449 2011-11-09T14:17:22-05:00 2012-01-09T05:12:02-05:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/ News of the World. The hearing - his second in four months - will see him face some of his harshest critics, including Louise Mensch, Committee Chair John Whittingdale, and Tom Watson.

The past decade has seen Murdoch Junior climb up the executive ranks through News International, BSkyB and News Corporation. In 2010, he was placed at number eight in MediaGuardian's annual power and influence ranking. He was starting to win his ongoing battle against the BBC and it's presence in the UK media industry. He was seen as the outright contender to takeover his father's position in the future. In fact, before July of this year, James Murdoch's future could not have looked more bright.

However, July arrived. And it brought with it one of the biggest scandals Britain has seen in decades; about a publication that thrived from scandals. The fire started burning under the watch of James Murdoch in a corner of News Corporation under his control. When he decided to shut down the News of the World, he did so at a time when the affair was still shrouded in a great deal of mystery. In the heat of the moment, the public were handed the head of Rebekah Brooks, the Leveson Inquiry was established, and Rupert Murdoch was pied in the face. Surely that's enough vapour from the smoking gun? Well, only if it's out of ammunition, and it seemingly isn't.

The past few months have shown the media participate in a bizarre turn of events. The initial reaction of the press was to deprecate themselves. Yet, it was only a mere number of days before they were defending their methods of self-regulation. Since then, countless rumours have been flying about regarding illegalities taking place at publications outside of the News International portfolio. The broadcast media industry, together with The Guardian, seem to be the main outlets that are keeping the ball rolling. The BBC's Newsnight conveniently leaked a dossier of evidence just this week suggesting that News of the World journalists built up a huge network of covert surveillance on public figures.

For News Corporation, this is the story that simply won't go away. The likes of Kerry Katona, Max Mosley, and Hugh Grant were subjected to the persistent shame of scandals brought upon them by News of the World. The paper was closed for business before it met a similar fate. The Murdochs dreamt of that being the end. In reality, it wasn't even the beginning. All hostilities have since been directed towards the former publication's owner, News International, and its parent company, News Corporation. The discovery of corruption in a mere 1% of News Corporation has caused immense damage to the foundations of its entire empire. James Murdoch has been receiving a huge amount of blame for the extent of this harm.

Nevertheless, you didn't think various dressing-downs from his directors would stop his critics from continuing to speak out against him, did you? James Murdoch, once a man presumed by all to takeover one of the most powerful media empires on the planet, has been brought to the brink. At 11am on Thursday, he has a chance to turn his luck around. The odds in his favour may be tiny, but his potential gains are colossal.

www.callumjones.blog.com ]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1026424 2011-10-22T13:02:33-04:00 2011-12-22T05:12:02-05:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/
A significant number of those wishing to stay within the EU agree that Britain's membership does have countless disadvantages that prove problematic for the nation. Nevertheless, they believe that the negative constraints are outweighed by the positive economic assistance offered up by our involvement. It is fair to say that, at a time when the global economic outlook is so bleak, the decision to leave such a strong financial support system would have to be justified by only the most serious of reasons.

Those wishing to leave Europe believe that we see these reasons on a daily basis. They consider the control that the European Parliament has over Westminster to be excessive. They think that unemployment levels are, partially but significantly, down to workers coming over from Europe to work in our place. Some have even said that, at this rate, the British Parliament will soon be dwarfed by its continental counterpart. The fight to leave the EU is old and strong; it began shortly after we won the fight to join it.

Of course, back then, it wasn't called the European Union. Nope, it was called the European Economic Community; a simple economic collective of nations. We turned our nose up when it was first formed. Why would we, Great Britain, need the financial support of six nearby countries? We were taking a slight different approach by the beginning of the sixties, when we were economically stalling and EEC's founding nations were thriving. Then, we'd noticed our biggest downfall on the world stage; obstinacy. It took us twelve years' and four Prime Ministers' worth of meeting, haggling, and, at times, begging before we were included in Europe.

If this was a basic political story in a simple world, that would have been the end of it. But neither of those things exist, I'm afraid. It started to grow. In 1993, the European Economic Commission became the European Union. Not many people would have objected to a mere alteration in name. Yet, it symbolised more than that. It has expanded in size and influence ever since. When we joined, we were one of nine countries supporting each other economically. Now, we are one of twenty-seven states under the rule of Brussels.

This throws up a colossal dilemma. We are both assisted and hindered by our continued relationship with Europe. Little over a month ago, should a referendum have popped out of nowhere, I would have been clueless as to which outcome to route for. This was before I hit the road for Conference Season. In Birmingham, at a Liberal Democrat fringe event, Paddy Ashdown was asked directly about Europe. Days had passed at the Conference, and no one had dared mention the "E" word so far. It was treated with the same neglect at the following party conferences.

However, Ashdown hit the nail on the head when answering the question. "I've no idea why people are forced to decided one way or the other", he said. He suggested that we stay within the confines of the EU, but cut the ropes of influence that are currently tying down British political powers. Granted, merely staying in and reforming the terms of our membership is a considerably vague proposal, but, if it worked out, wouldn't it provide a the exact middle-ground solution that this argument so desperately seeks?

The referendum being proposed in Monday's parliamentary debate would not force the public to decide from two extreme options. It would be a three way battle between "yes", "no" or compromise. Ed Miliband told The Guardian that he doesn't believe now is the time to have a referendum on UK involvement in the EU. William Hague wrote in The Daily Telegraph that he believes in compromise on the topic of Europe, but that the Tories are taking the same approach to a referendum as Labour; that it's not the right time. They're taking identical approaches, yet they are working frantically to look so different.

The likelihood is that the outcome of Monday's debate will reject a referendum. Frontbenchers are arguing that the time isn't right. But when will it be? This economic crisis is not going to end overnight, and there will always be something else taking the spotlight. Meanwhile, that damned elephant will continue to linger in the corner of every room in Westminster, Whitehall, and the country.

Callum Jones' blog is available to read here.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1012250 2011-10-15T06:59:34-04:00 2011-12-15T05:12:01-05:00

Callum Jones http://www.huffingtonpost.com/callum-jones/
Yes- the MPs' Expenses scandal is in the past, but in recessionary times it's fresh in the minds of the tightly-squeezed, hard-working citizens that the Tories take pride in fighting to represent. National trust in politics is at a generational low. The Prime Minister knew this when forming the coalition less than eighteen months ago, and he is equally as aware now.

He can deal with Theresa May and Ken Clarke bickering over feline anecdotes. He can even deal with Oliver Letwin's comprehensive filing system for cabinet documents. These sorts of developments simply act as food for political satirists and headline-draughters.

Nevertheless, when your Secretary of State for Defence is caught globe-trotting with his friend to official meetings, the jokes begin to dry out. On almost half of Mr Fox's visits abroad since took the helm of the Ministry of Defence, he was accompanied by Mr Werritty. The blurring of a minister's personal and professional relationships is precisely the kind of scandal that a single-party government dreads, let alone a coalition as complex as the one that presently leads our nation.

If Adam Werritty acted solely as an unofficial advisor to Liam Fox, this whole kerfuffle would never have arisen. Unofficial advisors assist Secretaries of State with their portfolios in a way that members of the civil service are unable to. They are a positive addition to the British political system, as long as they are not using their role for personal gain.

Yet, we already know that, using business cards with the parliamentary emblem, Mr Werritty was able to gain credibility as a supposed member of Liam Fox's office. There is currently a large question mark over whether Mr Fox's friend gained commercially from his dealings with official state business. It may not be proved by evidence, but the gossip was enough to bring down a Secretary of State.

On Monday, it was clear that Liam Fox had broken the ministerial code. On Wednesday, it was suggested that illegality had taken place within the financing of his relationship with Adam Werritty. On Friday, trusted Whitehall sources began to predict what the highest civil servant in the land would say in his report on the matter. He was expected to describe the Defence Secretary's position as "untenable".

If Liam Fox didn't resign, the Prime Minister knows he would have had a problem. Would he have acted on behalf of the majority of the country, who opinion polls suggested were routing for Mr Fox to go, or would he have backed the view of the majority of his party, who were outspoken in their support for the Defence Secretary?

David Cameron was battling with those simple, bland terms that form the over-used vocabulary of politics; honesty, trust, and credibility. It's what his government needs in a time of austerity, and it's what all parties, on both sides of the chamber, have been battling for during this era of media scandal.

Fox was widely acknowledged across the board as a good Secretary of State. He was a good addition to the cabinet, and made a positive contribution to the coalition. Nonetheless, he was aware more than anybody else that if he was to maintain his position, he could have only looked on as his career and parliamentary reputation were burnt to cinders.

When he resigned on Friday evening, Liam Fox escaped the heat. However, the oven's just been turned up a notch for David Cameron and the remaining members of his cabinet.

www.callumjones.blog.com]]>