Can goverment change old habits and give up control? Insights on govenment on the web

Repeating Mick’s question Is Our Politics too Big for the Net? I thought I’d show what the Hansard Society I’m associated with has been doing with parts of the UK Government to shake up their interactive communication and accountability. There are ideas here that could be adopted by Stormont.  Digital Dialogues is part of the Society’s wide ranging e-democracy programme. It was a three phase “review of ways in which central government can use new technologies to promote public engagement and democratic renewal.” The tone of that formal-sounding mission statement reflects the pretty stilted approach of the official mindset – old habits die hard - but they’re making a big effort to hit the market.  And I’m confident that the exercise holds the germ of greater accountability and direct democracy to come. 

Brian Walker @ 02:36 PM | Comments (0)

Misleading arguments 3 and 6..

Northern Ireland Environment Minister, the DUP’s Sammy Wilson, [Sarah Palin in drag? - Ed] is partly right in that hysterical media coverage linking every extreme weather event to climate change is counter-productive - the general media has never been very good at reporting science after all.  But if he really wanted a “reasoned debate” he needs a new play-book.  Misleading arguments on solar activity and rises in CO2 occuring after global warming, not before, are just that - misleading arguments. And whilst I’d encourage scepticism on all things, scepticism doesn’t include Sammy Wilson’s previously stated conspiracy theories. It’s not Somebody Else’s Problem.

Pete Baker @ 02:23 PM | Comments (0)

Ireland’s still special, honest. Obama can U turn too

Hardly the most startling U Turn in history as the Democrats’ powerbrokers assert themselves.  From the way the story is written up in Irish Voice Niall Dowd and co are still smarting. ....“..to shore up Obama’s somewhat frayed relationship with Irish America....” Was it really only a week or so ago since the Obama camp announced:  “He will consult with the Taoiseach, the British prime minister, and party leaders in Northern Ireland to determine whether a special US envoy for Northern Ireland continues to be necessary or a senior administration official, serving as point person for Northern Ireland, would be most effective.”

Now it’s all “I am delighted to be able to call upon a ‘Dream Team’ of leaders who cherish the U.S.-Irish bond as I do,” said Obama, “I look forward to putting in place policies that will fortify this indispensable relationship.” Fortified also by Obama’s ( rather thin) Irish portfolio.
So no surprise here.  The guy has to wear the full mantle of The Candidate now, he’s not just some intriguing, original, changing.... Some things never change.

Brian Walker @ 12:16 PM | Comments (6)

Brown fight backs with shock U turn on tax powers

You would have missed it. While the UK national media were preoccupied with Gordon Brown’s climb down on a winter fuel payment, the really memorable part of his speech addressed the future of Scottish devolution.  In what the Times calls “ a seismic event” Gordon Brown has performed a U turn and flagged up his willingness to give the Scottish Parliament tax raising powers. He talked in code, but the message was clear: “while he would do nothing to put the economic union of the UK at risk, that should not be confused with “unthinking opposition to change and development in how our union governs itself. “The constitution of the Union has always evolved to meet the changing needs and rising hopes of our people as it did most notably when we created the Scottish Parliament 10 years ago.”
Changing the political habits of a life time, Brown is taking the fight unto Alex Salmond’s own ground in a stunning response to the SNP’s leader’s challenge of using the Parliament’s powers to levy local income tax to replace the hated council tax.The devil now is in the detail. Brown has to explain how if at all, he intends to give more than the tax varying powers the Parliament already possesses but has never used and how his scheme would change the UK’s unified tax structure. He cannot leave it all up to the Calman Commission. In doing this, Brown is sidelining his own stumbling Labour party in Holyrood and moving to regain the initiative in Scottish politics he has been losing so comprehensively to Alex Salmond since last year. His aim is “to strengthen Scotland’s place within the Union.” and in the meantime to rally support around himself. Whatever else, it is the first bold stroke of his premiership. 

Brian Walker @ 11:36 PM | Comments (22)

The Lengths A Mayor- And Some Senior Council Officers- Will Go To….

The case of the UUP Mayor of Lisburn, the leading loyalist and the Stoneyford beacon continues to rumble following the revelation that Mayor Ronnie Crawford invited loyalist Mark Harbinson into his chamber to help fill in his application form for money for the controversial 11th Night event in the village (Andersonstown News story not yet online.) The Mayor also called on the services of two senior Lisburn Council officials (Director of Leisure Services, Robert McKnight and Good Relations Officer, David Mitchell) to assist the leading loyalist figure in completing the form, which secured £2,400 worth of funding from the Community Relations Council (CRC) for the beacon gathering in the village. Mayor Crawford then attached a personal letter of recommendation to the application and arranged for a courier to collect the application form from Council premises (the issue of whether ratepayer’s money was used for this courtesy has not yet been confirmed by the Council.)

Chris Donnelly @ 10:14 PM | Comments (22)

“OK, you can say that the governments didn’t extract that from everyone in writing…”

Frank Millar has a book out from the Irish Academic Press called ‘Northern Ireland – A Triumph of Politics’ coming out this Autumn. In it he has a series of candid interviews with figures from Northern Irish politics over a considerable period of time. One of the most interesting is one with former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, who throws him a particularly juicy line of argument regarding that controversial deadline/timetable controversy:

Mick Fealty @ 08:45 PM | Comments (48)

“If it is no longer an obstacle..”

At the Guardian’s CommentisFree, Malachi O’Doherty picks up on an interesting detail in the IMC report.

The BBC flatly reports as fact that the IMC has said that the army council is “defunct”. Actually, the IMC’s assessment includes the largely unnoticed detail that the IRA is still gathering intelligence on dissident republicans but that the means by which it is doing so are not necessarily illegal.

So it does exist, it does function and it does have a project in hand. Its wider project, even if it does nothing, is to maintain an old and revered republican tradition.

So, more than just symbolic then? Malachi goes on to argue

I suggest that if the governments are so confident that the IRA does not function illegally they have a hand to play. They could simply legalise the IRA on both sides of the border. Well why not? Why should it be illegal to be a member of an organisation which does not function in any perceptible illegal fashion?

If it is no longer an obstacle, in the eyes of government, to the devolution of policing and justice powers, then let it be a legal organisation and that will remove from the DUP much of the reasoning by which they continue to regard it as a problem.  If the governments can’t do that, then surely they are conceding that the DUP has a point.

Pete Baker @ 01:40 PM | Comments (36)

“falls a semantic mile short of a deadline..”

The DUP and Sinn Féin meet for talks, lead apparently by the First and deputy First Ministers..  Meanwhile in the Belfast Telegraph, SF MLA, Mitchel McLaughlin tells us that

In any event, the issue of whether the DUP agreed to the May 2008 deadline for the transfer of policing and justice powers, or indeed subscribed to the introduction of the Irish Language Act, is a red herring.

Which is partly correct.  Leaving aside the Irish Language Act, which the UK government stated it would introduce - before devolving the power to do that to the Northern Ireland Assembly.  Let’s focus on the real issue here, the devolution of policing and justice powers.  After all, why aren’t there more concerns about the absence of the promised Bill of Rights?  Mitchel McLaughlin goes on to claim

The real issue is that the DUP, by endorsing the conditions for the restoration of the Assembly, were explicitly accepting the outcome of both sets of political negotiations. The DUP cannot credibly claim that it did not accept the political principles and the legal requirements of both the GFA and St Andrews.

On policing and justice powers, the DUP have accepted the outcome of the political negotiations at St Andrews - the timing of the devolution of those powers is conditional, as I pointed out at the time. The real “real issue” is why, as Mitchel McLaughlin does again, have Sinn Féin continually lied about misrepresented what they actually negotiated at St Andrews? Even the DUP can see that. Eamonn McCann in the Belfast Telegraph spells it out, again.

It’s when you accept the police force that you’ve accepted the State. Herein lies the reason the Sinn Fein ardfheis which last year gave the go-ahead for acceptance of the PSNI added a condition: that control of policing be transferred from Westminster to Stormont — from British to Irish politicians, the Irish politicians including as a crucial element representatives of nationalism in the shape of Sinn Fein. To back the police without securing a share in control for nationalists would be to accept the authority of a State defined by Britishness, not a State which could be represented as being in transition from Britishness to Irishness.

This is what makes devolution of policing a more critical issue for Sinn Fein than for any other party. Which raises another question: why didn’t SF negotiators at St Andrews insist on the issue being tied down? Given its enormous importance for the party, why didn’t they insist on last May as a deadline rather than a target? Why didn’t they get it in writing?

The statement by the two governments which the party is now relying on — “It is our view that the implementation of the (St Andrews) agreement published today should be sufficient to build the community confidence necessary for the Assembly to request the devolution of criminal justice and policing from the British Government by May 2008” — falls a semantic mile short of a deadline.

One school of thought has it that the SF negotiators just had an off day at St Andrews. This hardly seems likely. But what, then? Could it be that they misread their own rank-and-file’s adherence to the ideology they’d fought the war on?

Possibly, Eamonn, possibly..

Pete Baker @ 11:40 AM | Comments (15)

US politics outpaced by media/blogs combo?

A couple of months ago, I took part in a Spectator even that asked: Is our politics big enough for the net? (write-up here) It looks like we’re getting an early answer from the US. Last week the Republican party pulled a fast one on the US press and got a reaction it may not have been not expecting. Mickey Kaus posits three models in how the media has gone about the business of reporting politics. Local politicians, take serious note!

Mick Fealty @ 08:41 AM | Comments (17)

Take Salmond seriously

Alex Salmond’s bold stroke to propose replacing council tax with an extra 3p on the basic rate of income tax is the real business of government the main parties in Stormont should turn to once they’ve got over their crisis of confidence and the other parties come out of deep freeze. Powers to raise taxes which Stormont doesn’t have but could bid for, matter far more to people’s real lives than the macho struggle over P&J.  There are two ways of responding to Salmond’s gambit. One is to do what the Treasury foolishly did yesterday and threaten to withhold a £400 million payment to Scotland. This looks peevish. After all, it was New Labour which legislated to allow the Scottish government to do precisely what the SNP are proposing when they set up Home Rule in the first place. The Conservatives are cannier than the increasingly panicky Brown government and are prepared to enter the game. And it’s looking more and more likely that it’s with them that Salmond will deal if as is equally likely he wins the next Scottish election.  In the meantime the Stormont executive might start getting their heads around what to do when the ticking time bomb of the rates freeze goes off.

Brian Walker @ 08:03 AM | Comments (20)

Economic recovery plan postponed, fresh doubt about Brown’s recovery

Whatever he says about making sure the devolution of policing and justice goes ahead, Gordon Brown will have other, bigger things on his mind over the next few days.  First he has to cope with the humiliation of having to postpone today’s planned announcement of phase two of his economic rescue plan, a one-off payment of £100 to the poorest families to help with soaring fuel bills. As the FT puts it: “Ministers are locked in a high stakes negotiation with the energy companies in an attempt to wring enough money out of them to satisfy 90 Labour MPs who want to subject the sector to a windfall tax”.  The writing was on the wall as long ago as last week, when the utility companies failed to bow to Brown’s threat of a windfall tax. The companies hold all the cards: The government wants utility companies to keep the lights on, to build thousands of wind farms to meet new renewable energy targets - and now to stump up for a windfall tax to cut prices for the poorest customers. Something has to give. A spokesman for Eon says: ‘We can’t do it all.’ And if that wasn’t enough, Labour ex-home secretary Charles Clarke seems to be sounding the trumpet for a revolt to ditch Brown just in time to cast a deeper shadow over the other part of recovery - the Prime Minister’s survival.

Brian Walker @ 12:09 AM | Comments (1)

“The greatness about McCain is no cynicism. And this was cynical…”

Who said it? Mike Murphy. And Murphy was until very very recently an ‘outside advisor to John McCain. Peggy Noonan, doyen of the thinking conservatives also agrees. The TPM transcript is below the fold:

Mick Fealty @ 11:32 PM | Comments (28)

“…I don’t believe that issuing threats against anyone is a good idea…”

Antrim Sinn Fein councillor, Annemarie Logue, has been warned by the PSNI that loyalists intend on shooting her. She was also warned that loyalists had intended on ”carrying out an action” against her on a specified night last week.
DUP MLA and Antrim councillor, Trevor Clarke, thinks he knows why. Apparently, the Sinn Fein councillor’s “provocative language” was responsible, “no doubt motivating such actions.”
The ‘offending’ language allegation refers to criticism of a ratepayer-funded loyalist 11th Night bonfire which had a ‘KAT’ banner on it, as well as a ratepayer-funded kiddies bonfire in Antrim which culminated in a good ol’ flag burning.
And this on the day that First Minister Robinson claimed that “the Unionist community needs to be convinced by the republican leadership that the IRA is out of business for good.”
What chance that the DUP would end its equivocal relationship with loyalist paramilitarism any time soon?

Chris Donnelly @ 11:28 PM | Comments (30)

Brown to turn screw on Robinson?

Interesting use of language from Downing Street tonight, with British PM Gordon Brown declaring, “In the next few days, I will use all my efforts to make sure that the devolution of policing and justice can go ahead...”

Brown also suggested that he “believe(d) that this will provide reassurance and hope for everybody,” referring to the IMC Report earlier in the day.

So is the British PM sending a message to Peter Robinson and what prospect a resolution in the days ahead?

Chris Donnelly @ 10:53 PM | Comments (22)

“If you want to be president, I suggest you enunciate.”

There’s room for serious political discussion [and reporting] and there’s room for satire - just try not to confuse the two. Via the Prof again. Btw, probably not safe for work.

Pete Baker @ 07:07 PM | Comments (15)

“the symbol is almost as important as the substance..”

The Guardian’s Henry McDonald on the competing interests behind the ‘are they/aren’t they’ question of the Provisional IRA army council that the IMC report attempted to resolve.

The trouble with Northern Ireland politics is that the symbol is almost as important as the substance, if not more so. Unionists such as Peter Robinson need the symbol of the army council’s dissolution to convince supporters they are not selling out. Conversely, the men who run an IRA that is no longer active do not want their members to perceive disbandment of the body once believed to be the true government of Ireland as being a humiliating defeat.

Pete Baker @ 06:48 PM | Comments (21)

Palindrone

More on the psychosis front. Forget the “uterine activity”, mother and daugther, forget the sexism fightback. It’s hard to dig out from front line comment but it’s in there somewhere.

Is everybody happy with this then? 

Creationism

“It is hard to tell whether Palin herself is a creationist or not and, frankly, that’s far less important than the policy positions she holds in the matter. (Though, of course, having a Vice President who is deluded about basic aspects of reality would not be exactly reassuring).”

“Palin said during her 2006 gubernatorial campaign that if she were elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add creation-based alternatives to the state’s required curriculum, or look for creationism advocates when she appointed board members.”

Global warming
“Q What is your take on global warming and how is it affecting our country?

Palin A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I’m not one though who would attribute it to being man-made.”

Brian Walker @ 06:10 PM | Comments (31)

Quote of the Week…

Comes from Eddie Mair in a question to Gerry Adams on the PM programme just now, with respect to DUP demands that the IRA Army Council be disbanded before Policing and Justice can be devolved:

“Isn’t that a bit like saying your never going to drive for the rest of your life and then keeping the car in your garage?”

Mick Fealty @ 05:55 PM | Comments (52)

“just a small town mayor, just a hockey mom, just a beauty pageant queen..”

For the benefit of those suffering political psychosis when contemplating the US Presidential campaigns - Republican Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin was not, it seems, a member of the Alaska Independence Party after all - there’s a brief interview with Palin here. And, via the Professor, Christopher Orr at The New Republic offers some timely advice for “those [like himself] inclined to take Sarah Palin lightly”.

Sarah Palin is a living reminder that the ultimate source of political power in this country is not the Kennedy School or the Davos Summit or an Ariana Huffington salon; even now, power emanates from the electorate itself. More precisely, power in 2008 emanates from the working class electorates of Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Sooner or later, the Obama camp will realize that the beauty pageant queen is an enormously talented populist in a year that is ripe for populism. For their own sake, it had better be sooner.

Go read the whole thing.

Pete Baker @ 03:57 PM | Comments (22)

Lieberman backs McCain’s attempt at a political coup…

Joe Lieberman opened his speech by stating the question that must have been in the minds of most of those watching and listening: What’s a Democrat like me doing at a Republican National Convention like this? That’s a very good question.  He didn’t actually leave the party of his own choice, he was forced out by party activists and yet has voted consistently with the party in the Senate ever since. He sits as an independent Senator after defeating the party rival who replaced him, Ned Lamont. So what was he doing? Apart from the obvious task of trying to pull in disaffected Dem voters, I’ve argued over at Brassneck that he’s helping re-brand McCain as the anti Republican Republican candidate. Bush, on the other hand was reduced to an eight minute telelink scheduled outside prime time viewing. Party’s are traditionally much weaker operations in the US than in Europe. But by anyone’s calculation Lieberman’s (who ran in the the acrimonious campaign of 2000) endorsement of a Republican is an extraordinary turn of events.

Adds: There’s been rioting going on in St Paul, not that you’d pick that up from the mainstream press. Here’s an excellent and relatively detached piece of citizen journalism from Aaron Landry. 

Mick Fealty @ 02:44 PM | Comments (18)

“The mechanism which they have chosen..”

You can take your pick of the coverage of publication of the 19th IMC report - BBC, RTÉ, Irish Times, The Guardian, or Northern Ireland Secretary of State, Shaun Woodward, MP. From the report itself [pdf file] Adds More reaction here

2.14 We are aware of the questions posed about the public disbandment of PIRA’s leadership structures. We believe that PIRA has chosen another method of bringing what it describes as its armed struggle to a final close. Under PIRA’s own rules the Army Council was the body that directed its military campaign. Now that that campaign is well and truly over, the Army Council by deliberate choice is no longer operational or functional. This situation has been brought about by a conscious decision to let it fall into disuse rather than through any other mechanism. We now have a context where there are no longer the emotional drivers which caused the IRA to be resurrected in 1969 and the leadership which created and moulded the modern-day PIRA has turned its interest and attention exclusively to politics as the means of furthering its objectives. The mechanism which they have chosen to bring the armed conflict to a complete end has been the standing down of the structures which engaged in the armed campaign and the conscious decision to allow the Army Council to fall into disuse. By taking these steps PIRA has completely relinquished the leadership and other structures appropriate to a time of armed conflict.

In the meantime, Jim Allister has been pouring scorn on today’s report, which he reckons is full of “Jesuitical verbiage”. With the Stormont Execuitive having failed to convene since mid June, the Traditional Unionist MEP argues that it too is no longer “operational or functional”, yet, he points out, one would hardly deny that it exists.

Pete Baker @ 02:35 PM | Comments (28)

IFA: no egos and no prawn sandwiches…

Nice innovation from the IFA, in the shape of a podcast interview with Caroline Menary the new marketing bod behind a vigorous billboard campaign to get people to come to Irish League matches for the first time… Good start, look forward to hearing more…

Mick Fealty @ 02:24 PM | Comments (19)

Benefits of cross-community joking?

A University Of Ulster study argues for that banter in the workplace helps with cross-community relationships:

“banter, which included references to one’s community background, was a potentially very useful communication practice in many organisations, in facilitating and easing relationships.”

It calls for an end to no banter policies.  Full report here (pdf file).

Fair Deal @ 12:50 PM | Comments (22)

Republicanism’s RUC moment?

Peter Robinson has made his position crystal clear:

“We still take the position that the structures must be removed completely. There is no purpose of having a structure if you do not intend to operate in a paramilitary fashion.”

The Belfast Telegraph editorial agrees arguing:

“The IRA needs to be definitive and decisive.  Why? Consider the transformation of policing as an example. Disposing of the RUC’s name was largely a symbolic matter — a painful one for most unionists — but one that was considered utterly necessary to win the support of nationalists and republicans. And so it proved to be.”

Ending with the instruction:

Go back to the plough. Slán abhaile.

Fair Deal @ 10:29 AM | Comments (63)

Discuss (minus the squabble)

Unionists have in effect been squabbling over a diminishing share of the cake. They often appear to be largely oblivious of this reality.
• Improve the quality of unionist electoral organisation
• Improve voter registration
• Provide people with a reason to vote unionist.

Please discuss these key issues (preferably without turning it into another ‘squabble’).

Fair Deal @ 09:53 AM | Comments (52)