The Dignity of Difference was the theme chosen by the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust this year for annual Holocaust Memorial Day Service, which was held in the Assembly hall of the Town Hall this evening. The theme was about remembering that many groups were victimised under Hitler’s vile regime simply because they were different.
Jews, Roma and Sinti, Russian prisoners of war, black Germans, trade unionists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, political opponents, disabled people, homosexuals and lesbians all suffered because what made them different was perceived as a weakness to Hitler’s ideal society.
The chosen theme also reflects a desire for us to continue strengthening our communities by promoting harmony with in our community, including religious and racial harmony.
I represented Lambeth Council in hosting the evening and standing at the front throughout I found the programme spiritually uplifting. The creative use of music, readings and reflection I am sure inspired all those who attended to reflect on the atrocities of the past and also our role in making sure they are not repeated.
I was deeply honoured to attend and thank all those who organised and participated in the event. By continuing to remember all those who suffered we show that we have the compassion to listen, reflect and learn from each other. Qualities we in Lambeth endeavour to foster, grow and maintain.
1 Comments »
Displaying results 1 to 1 out of 1
Andy said,
Clapham Town
Fri, 16 Mar 2007 - 4:02 PM
well written and researched piece, it conveys a strong message quite often missed in todays hedonistic world
Thursday, 25 January 2007
Sunday, 21 January 2007
Eid-ul-Adha at the Town Hall
A very well-attended celebration at the Town Hall this afternoon, to mark Eid-ul-Adha, which marks Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his son for God.
I was honoured to meet and talk to a large number of Muslim residents from around Lambeth and beyond.
My name was kindly written out for me in Arabic script, a fascinating memento that I will treasure, though it’s slightly too complicated to use as a signature.
It was a good day, and a good opportunity for Lambeth’s Muslim community to come together in Lambeth’s Assembly Hall to show the wider community a part of what it means to be a Muslim in modern Britain.
I was honoured to meet and talk to a large number of Muslim residents from around Lambeth and beyond.
My name was kindly written out for me in Arabic script, a fascinating memento that I will treasure, though it’s slightly too complicated to use as a signature.
It was a good day, and a good opportunity for Lambeth’s Muslim community to come together in Lambeth’s Assembly Hall to show the wider community a part of what it means to be a Muslim in modern Britain.
Saturday, 20 January 2007
a busy day in Streatham South
We work hard in Streatham South, the three of us. We held a surgery, a public meeting about a major planning issue and a street stall this morning.
It was a bitterly cold day, and at one point it was raining so hard and blowing such a gale we were at risk of floating along Streatham Vale clinging to our upturned stall.
But we persevered and it was good to sit down at Dave Malley’s house with soup and bread, and take stock of everything we had done together during the morning.
It was a bitterly cold day, and at one point it was raining so hard and blowing such a gale we were at risk of floating along Streatham Vale clinging to our upturned stall.
But we persevered and it was good to sit down at Dave Malley’s house with soup and bread, and take stock of everything we had done together during the morning.
Friday, 19 January 2007
Delivering quality and tackling inequality for the LGBT community
I sincerely hope the Government does not buckle under pressure from the religious right and allow a discriminatory exemption for religious adoption agenciesin the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations.
If you look back at the key planks of equality legislation for the LGBT community, most have been introduced since May 1997, or by a Labour government thirty years earlier.
There was the Sexual Offences Act of 1967, which decriminalised homosexual acts between two men over 21. Labour legislation.
Same-sex partners recognised for immigration purposes – 1997. Labour legislation.
The ban on gays in the military thrown out – 2000. Labour legislation.
After years of struggle, the age of consent equalised at 16 in 2001. Whose legislation? Labour’s, of course.
2002 – equal rights recognised for same sex couples wanting to adopt unwanted children into a stable, loving home. Labour again.
2003 – Labour repeals the Tory badge of hate, Section 28, and enacts employment equality legislation outlawing discrimination of LGBT workers.
2004 – The crimes of buggery and gross indecency abolished by Labour’s Sexual Offences Act.
2005 – The insurance industry drops “the gay question”. Labour creates Civil Partnerships.
The Conservatives can, I suppose, take some credit for decriminalising homosexuality in Northern Ireland (1982), and reducing the age of consent from 21 to 18 (1994). But those advances are overshadowed by Section 28, and all the other assaults against equality mounted by the unreconstructed Tories who still exist in the shadows behind David Cameron.
If you look back at the key planks of equality legislation for the LGBT community, most have been introduced since May 1997, or by a Labour government thirty years earlier.
There was the Sexual Offences Act of 1967, which decriminalised homosexual acts between two men over 21. Labour legislation.
Same-sex partners recognised for immigration purposes – 1997. Labour legislation.
The ban on gays in the military thrown out – 2000. Labour legislation.
After years of struggle, the age of consent equalised at 16 in 2001. Whose legislation? Labour’s, of course.
2002 – equal rights recognised for same sex couples wanting to adopt unwanted children into a stable, loving home. Labour again.
2003 – Labour repeals the Tory badge of hate, Section 28, and enacts employment equality legislation outlawing discrimination of LGBT workers.
2004 – The crimes of buggery and gross indecency abolished by Labour’s Sexual Offences Act.
2005 – The insurance industry drops “the gay question”. Labour creates Civil Partnerships.
The Conservatives can, I suppose, take some credit for decriminalising homosexuality in Northern Ireland (1982), and reducing the age of consent from 21 to 18 (1994). But those advances are overshadowed by Section 28, and all the other assaults against equality mounted by the unreconstructed Tories who still exist in the shadows behind David Cameron.
Wednesday, 17 January 2007
Sherlock Holmes and the Streatham Area Committee
I’m a Sherlock Holmes fan. It was a maxim of his, who according to Conan Doyle’s stories visited Streatham once or twice, that “when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
At the Streatham Area Committee this evening, I was quietly reflecting that the Lib Dems should follow the Great Detective’s guidance, instead of posturing endlessly with their own brand of “truth”, which relies on whatever is most improbable, without eliminating anything, except the truth.
As an example of Lib Dem truth management, one of their number said the Area Committee is a great example of local democracy in action, even though members of the public who come to its meetings can usually be counted on the fingers of one hand.
If tumbleweed had rolled through that room, it would not have seemed out of place. Indeed, it would probably have contributed something more constructive than the average Lib Dem councillor.
Why was I thinking about Sherlock Holmes? No idea, but it turns out by freaky coincidence that on this day in 1863, the painter Horace Vernet died in Paris. Sherlock Holmes once told Dr Watson that: “my grandmother ... was the sister of Vernet, the French artist.”
Leaving the fictional great-nephew issue aside, Vernet once refused Louis Napoleon’s request that he erase an inconvenient person from one of his paintings by saying “I will not violate the truth.”
If only the Lib Dems were so principled. Or indeed, principled.
At the Streatham Area Committee this evening, I was quietly reflecting that the Lib Dems should follow the Great Detective’s guidance, instead of posturing endlessly with their own brand of “truth”, which relies on whatever is most improbable, without eliminating anything, except the truth.
As an example of Lib Dem truth management, one of their number said the Area Committee is a great example of local democracy in action, even though members of the public who come to its meetings can usually be counted on the fingers of one hand.
If tumbleweed had rolled through that room, it would not have seemed out of place. Indeed, it would probably have contributed something more constructive than the average Lib Dem councillor.
Why was I thinking about Sherlock Holmes? No idea, but it turns out by freaky coincidence that on this day in 1863, the painter Horace Vernet died in Paris. Sherlock Holmes once told Dr Watson that: “my grandmother ... was the sister of Vernet, the French artist.”
Leaving the fictional great-nephew issue aside, Vernet once refused Louis Napoleon’s request that he erase an inconvenient person from one of his paintings by saying “I will not violate the truth.”
If only the Lib Dems were so principled. Or indeed, principled.
Sunday, 14 January 2007
cutting the cuttings
Lambeth’s communications department has made the sensible decision to save upwards of £5000 a year, and a lot of paper, by going electronic with the council’s press cuttings. Up to now councillors have had a twice-weekly bundle of press cuttings delivered to our doormats.
Cue outrage from the Liberal Democrats, whose experience with electronic voting has clearly left them e-phobic. I can imagine them now, at their next group meeting:
“Down with electronic voting we say! Down with that interweb thing, down with the wireless and anything connected with Messrs Edison, Bell or Logie Baird. Up with the abacus, up with ink and vellum, up with chalk and slate. Up with deforestation and waste paper baskets – those nice wicker ones, nothing too modern.”
One of their number today felt moved to email the communications team to register his protest. I expect that, in his anger, his quill snapped on his last sheet of foolscap and he was forced, with gritted teeth (and everything else clenched) to resort to the “new writing” to make his point.
He said, curtly: “This is not very helpful. Press cuttings are difficult to read on screen. Please continue to send me the press cuttings in hard copy.”
He does not say why the cuttings are difficult to read on screen. I’ve had a look at the new system and it’s so simple that a potted cactus could master it.
I suspect it has more to do with the number of press stories detailing Labour’s positive programme of action in Lambeth since May 2006, and the occasional nod to the floundering Liberal Democrats. That must be difficult to read.
My advice to the Lib Dems is to put their hand in their orange leatherette purses and buy the local papers – two editions of the excellent South London Press per week for the very reasonable price of 50p each (ten bob in old money), available from all good newsagents. The other two local papers are free.
3 Comments »
Displaying results 1 to 3 out of 3
Lambeth pen pusher said,
Phoenix House, Vauxhall
Wed, 31 Jan 2007 - 8:36 PM
The email was sent to all councillors and the reply from Cllr Julian Heather was also sent to all councillors, having a go at an officer. Not a private email and not a very pleasant one neither. What is that in the councillors' code of conduct about "failing to treat people with respect"? If he wanted to show disrespect one to one, he shouldn't of pressed "REPLY ALL".
Rob F said,
London
Mon, 29 Jan 2007 - 2:02 PM
When you say this cllr e-mailed the communications team, does that mean that you reproduced a private e-mail between a cllr and an officer? Did you ask the permission of either party first?
John Lee said,
Mon, 22 Jan 2007 - 10:05 AM
E-phobic lib Dems? Good grief!!
Cue outrage from the Liberal Democrats, whose experience with electronic voting has clearly left them e-phobic. I can imagine them now, at their next group meeting:
“Down with electronic voting we say! Down with that interweb thing, down with the wireless and anything connected with Messrs Edison, Bell or Logie Baird. Up with the abacus, up with ink and vellum, up with chalk and slate. Up with deforestation and waste paper baskets – those nice wicker ones, nothing too modern.”
One of their number today felt moved to email the communications team to register his protest. I expect that, in his anger, his quill snapped on his last sheet of foolscap and he was forced, with gritted teeth (and everything else clenched) to resort to the “new writing” to make his point.
He said, curtly: “This is not very helpful. Press cuttings are difficult to read on screen. Please continue to send me the press cuttings in hard copy.”
He does not say why the cuttings are difficult to read on screen. I’ve had a look at the new system and it’s so simple that a potted cactus could master it.
I suspect it has more to do with the number of press stories detailing Labour’s positive programme of action in Lambeth since May 2006, and the occasional nod to the floundering Liberal Democrats. That must be difficult to read.
My advice to the Lib Dems is to put their hand in their orange leatherette purses and buy the local papers – two editions of the excellent South London Press per week for the very reasonable price of 50p each (ten bob in old money), available from all good newsagents. The other two local papers are free.
3 Comments »
Displaying results 1 to 3 out of 3
Lambeth pen pusher said,
Phoenix House, Vauxhall
Wed, 31 Jan 2007 - 8:36 PM
The email was sent to all councillors and the reply from Cllr Julian Heather was also sent to all councillors, having a go at an officer. Not a private email and not a very pleasant one neither. What is that in the councillors' code of conduct about "failing to treat people with respect"? If he wanted to show disrespect one to one, he shouldn't of pressed "REPLY ALL".
Rob F said,
London
Mon, 29 Jan 2007 - 2:02 PM
When you say this cllr e-mailed the communications team, does that mean that you reproduced a private e-mail between a cllr and an officer? Did you ask the permission of either party first?
John Lee said,
Mon, 22 Jan 2007 - 10:05 AM
E-phobic lib Dems? Good grief!!
Friday, 12 January 2007
school leaving age
Great news that the school leaving age is to be raised to 18. It should provide the extra impetus for a much larger number of young people to get qualifications and skills, including vital life skills, they would not otherwise have gained.
I left school at 17 to work as a hospital porter. It was only later that I went to university, and I feel I got more benefit from doing things that way. I had more experience of life when I eventually pitched up at university at 21, and in the intervening years I had saved enough to be able to manage my finances over three years of study without getting into debt.
My dad left school at the age of 15 in 1955 to work as a labourer, later qualifying as a plumber. His dad left school at the age of 12 in 1917 and went to work digging gravel, later becoming (among other things) a painter and decorator.
It's amazing how opportunities for young people from working class families have advanced over the past century, due in no small part to successive Labour governments, including this one.
I can only speculate what my dad and granddad might have done with their lives if they had been encouraged to learn as young people are today. As a school governor, it's a privilege these days to see youngsters excelling.
I left school at 17 to work as a hospital porter. It was only later that I went to university, and I feel I got more benefit from doing things that way. I had more experience of life when I eventually pitched up at university at 21, and in the intervening years I had saved enough to be able to manage my finances over three years of study without getting into debt.
My dad left school at the age of 15 in 1955 to work as a labourer, later qualifying as a plumber. His dad left school at the age of 12 in 1917 and went to work digging gravel, later becoming (among other things) a painter and decorator.
It's amazing how opportunities for young people from working class families have advanced over the past century, due in no small part to successive Labour governments, including this one.
I can only speculate what my dad and granddad might have done with their lives if they had been encouraged to learn as young people are today. As a school governor, it's a privilege these days to see youngsters excelling.
Monday, 8 January 2007
problem poll
I was curious to read the YouGov poll that was published today in the Guardian, commissioned by Jon Cruddas MP.
It suggests that only 1 in 3 voters have been contacted by Labour since the general election in 2005.
Apparently 62% of people have had no contact with the party since the last election. That's a big worry.
Jon Cruddas, whose hat is already in the ring for the deputy leadership, said: "This poll is a wake-up call, but the debates we will have this year give us a perfect opportunity to turn things around. We're at our best when we have activists on the streets knocking on doors, speaking to people in our communities. Some people may think that clever direct marketing techniques can win us elections, but these results are a reminder that we can't beat the Tories without Labour activists on the doorsteps."
Quite true, but I hesitate to beat myself up about it. In Streatham South, the picture is somewhat different. We work hard and have a good voter contact rate to show for it. Every household regularly gets something from us, which is reflected in consistent waves of calls, emails and visits to our surgeries. Whether or not our leaflets are read avidly is another matter, but I've no reason to think we aren't communicating as much as we should be.
On top of that, we knock on doors all over the ward and make ourselves as visible and approachable as possible with walkabouts and street stalls.
But Jon Cruddas is right that we should never allow ourselves to become complacent. We need to keep Labour in government, and build on the progress of the last ten years.
It suggests that only 1 in 3 voters have been contacted by Labour since the general election in 2005.
Apparently 62% of people have had no contact with the party since the last election. That's a big worry.
Jon Cruddas, whose hat is already in the ring for the deputy leadership, said: "This poll is a wake-up call, but the debates we will have this year give us a perfect opportunity to turn things around. We're at our best when we have activists on the streets knocking on doors, speaking to people in our communities. Some people may think that clever direct marketing techniques can win us elections, but these results are a reminder that we can't beat the Tories without Labour activists on the doorsteps."
Quite true, but I hesitate to beat myself up about it. In Streatham South, the picture is somewhat different. We work hard and have a good voter contact rate to show for it. Every household regularly gets something from us, which is reflected in consistent waves of calls, emails and visits to our surgeries. Whether or not our leaflets are read avidly is another matter, but I've no reason to think we aren't communicating as much as we should be.
On top of that, we knock on doors all over the ward and make ourselves as visible and approachable as possible with walkabouts and street stalls.
But Jon Cruddas is right that we should never allow ourselves to become complacent. We need to keep Labour in government, and build on the progress of the last ten years.
Thursday, 4 January 2007
Home Secretary visits Streatham
John Reid, the Home Secretary, took time to come to Streatham today for a “Let’s Talk” event, to make a keynote speech and meet local Labour activists.
Introduced by Lambeth’s Labour leader Steve Reed, we heard a considered and thoughtful speech, ranging widely from his Home Office portfolio to talk about a bigger picture for Labour supporters and activists as we prepare for challenges ahead, post Tony Blair.
He also took time during his speech to praise what we have been doing in Lambeth since May, mentioning our stated mission of “delivering quality and tackling inequality.” He also highlighted his approval of our decision to invest in more PCSOs to patrol the borough.
He also answered questions from his audience, ranging from human trafficking to the condition of local school buildings.
Some people who weren’t there have seen it as a gauntlet being thrown down for the leadership. I didn’t see it that way – more as a discussion about where the party goes a decade on from winning in 1997, and about the need to adapt to new challenges as we find and face them.
Whether or not people define themselves by New or Old Labour labels, he said our aim must remain “to show that we are as much on the side of those who were getting on, as we are for those who need help."
He said: "Though Tony may be stepping down, the underlying philosophy and direction of New Labour is one shared by all of us in government and all of us who form the leadership and will continue undimmed. New Labour did not and will not start and end with Tony Blair's leadership. It will continue."
"It's important we make that very clear indeed, because otherwise we will allow, by default, the impression to persist that New Labour is, and has been, nothing more or less than Tony Blair. Our opponents will try to sow that seed. They will personalise the whole issue."
"The Tories will try to argue that Tony Blair equals New Labour. Therefore they will say that when Tony Blair goes, New Labour goes. Wrong - and we have to make sure that people understand that that is wrong.
"The New Labour project was not the product of one person nor even a small group of people. It was the product of the efforts and energies of many people over a long period of time.”
Introduced by Lambeth’s Labour leader Steve Reed, we heard a considered and thoughtful speech, ranging widely from his Home Office portfolio to talk about a bigger picture for Labour supporters and activists as we prepare for challenges ahead, post Tony Blair.
He also took time during his speech to praise what we have been doing in Lambeth since May, mentioning our stated mission of “delivering quality and tackling inequality.” He also highlighted his approval of our decision to invest in more PCSOs to patrol the borough.
He also answered questions from his audience, ranging from human trafficking to the condition of local school buildings.
Some people who weren’t there have seen it as a gauntlet being thrown down for the leadership. I didn’t see it that way – more as a discussion about where the party goes a decade on from winning in 1997, and about the need to adapt to new challenges as we find and face them.
Whether or not people define themselves by New or Old Labour labels, he said our aim must remain “to show that we are as much on the side of those who were getting on, as we are for those who need help."
He said: "Though Tony may be stepping down, the underlying philosophy and direction of New Labour is one shared by all of us in government and all of us who form the leadership and will continue undimmed. New Labour did not and will not start and end with Tony Blair's leadership. It will continue."
"It's important we make that very clear indeed, because otherwise we will allow, by default, the impression to persist that New Labour is, and has been, nothing more or less than Tony Blair. Our opponents will try to sow that seed. They will personalise the whole issue."
"The Tories will try to argue that Tony Blair equals New Labour. Therefore they will say that when Tony Blair goes, New Labour goes. Wrong - and we have to make sure that people understand that that is wrong.
"The New Labour project was not the product of one person nor even a small group of people. It was the product of the efforts and energies of many people over a long period of time.”
Wednesday, 3 January 2007
Lib Dems: the Tories who dare not speak their name
If anyone ever wondered whether Lib Dems are really Tories in quaint tangerine disguise, the defection of Richard Porter, a former Lib Dem councillor and parliamentary candidate in Southwark, seems to confirm it.
An LGBT campaigner, he wrote the Lib Dem manifesto on LGBT issues for the last general election.
He said in April 2005: "We must never forget that it was the Conservative government who denied our community basic human rights for so many years."
Yes, quite.
He also said, conveniently ignoring (as Lib Dems tend to do) the long campaign for equality that has gone on in the Labour movement for decades: “in a sense, legislative changes are easy.”
Yes, Mr Porter, how easy legislative changes were in the 1980s and 1990s when the party you’ve just joined held sway. How childishly simple it was for them to introduce Section 28, and what a doddle it was for them to resist equalising the age of consent before May 1997. Looking back, civil partnerships would have been the work of a moment for your party. Gay adoption rights – easy-peasy. Joining the Armed Forces? Gay? No problem, we’ll just pass a little Bill to help you out. Pardon the pun, dear.
Curious then that this same Richard Porter should now be saying: "Ming Campbell is a 'has-been' and since he has been in control of the party, they have been stuck firmly in reverse gear.
He continues thusly: "After the election [which he lost – Camberwell and Peckham, proprietor: H. Harman, Labour] I took time out to reflect on my own personal beliefs and values [losing by 13,483 votes can do that to a Lib Dem]. Previously I thought that these values were best represented by the Liberal Democrats but I now believe that the principles of freedom from state interference, personal freedom, the environment and civil liberties are all areas where the Conservative Party leads the way."
So there we have it. His thinking is all cock-eyed (apart from the bit about Ming Campbell’s leadership), but at least Mr Porter has stepped out of the tangerine closet and declared himself, as every honest Lib Dem should, as a true blue Conservative. Maybe he was just going through a phase.
Curiously, the Conservative gay group, Torche, seems to have tight-lipped on their new arrival. But then their website, which appears not to have been updated since Stanley Baldwin was in Downing Street, is not exactly overflowing with news about any Tory fight for equality.
2 Comments »
Displaying results 1 to 2 out of 2
Mel said,
Streatham
Fri, 12 Jan 2007 - 11:06 AM
I suppose one difference between Mark and Lambeth's Lib Dems is about £3m. That's the amount of fraud that was going on at the town hall before Mark helped to kick them out of office last year.
Ben Russell said,
sleaford - Lincolnshire/north kesteven
Thu, 11 Jan 2007 - 10:50 AM
i'll be honest, i didnt read the bulk of this blog but the point stands that at the little intro piece clearly condemns the lib-dems! you are labour! traditional lefties, steadily becoming more right wing then the conservatives, at what point do you lose all sense of self and criticise the actions of another party who may or may not (as i suspect is really the case) be doing something similar to yourself!
An LGBT campaigner, he wrote the Lib Dem manifesto on LGBT issues for the last general election.
He said in April 2005: "We must never forget that it was the Conservative government who denied our community basic human rights for so many years."
Yes, quite.
He also said, conveniently ignoring (as Lib Dems tend to do) the long campaign for equality that has gone on in the Labour movement for decades: “in a sense, legislative changes are easy.”
Yes, Mr Porter, how easy legislative changes were in the 1980s and 1990s when the party you’ve just joined held sway. How childishly simple it was for them to introduce Section 28, and what a doddle it was for them to resist equalising the age of consent before May 1997. Looking back, civil partnerships would have been the work of a moment for your party. Gay adoption rights – easy-peasy. Joining the Armed Forces? Gay? No problem, we’ll just pass a little Bill to help you out. Pardon the pun, dear.
Curious then that this same Richard Porter should now be saying: "Ming Campbell is a 'has-been' and since he has been in control of the party, they have been stuck firmly in reverse gear.
He continues thusly: "After the election [which he lost – Camberwell and Peckham, proprietor: H. Harman, Labour] I took time out to reflect on my own personal beliefs and values [losing by 13,483 votes can do that to a Lib Dem]. Previously I thought that these values were best represented by the Liberal Democrats but I now believe that the principles of freedom from state interference, personal freedom, the environment and civil liberties are all areas where the Conservative Party leads the way."
So there we have it. His thinking is all cock-eyed (apart from the bit about Ming Campbell’s leadership), but at least Mr Porter has stepped out of the tangerine closet and declared himself, as every honest Lib Dem should, as a true blue Conservative. Maybe he was just going through a phase.
Curiously, the Conservative gay group, Torche, seems to have tight-lipped on their new arrival. But then their website, which appears not to have been updated since Stanley Baldwin was in Downing Street, is not exactly overflowing with news about any Tory fight for equality.
2 Comments »
Displaying results 1 to 2 out of 2
Mel said,
Streatham
Fri, 12 Jan 2007 - 11:06 AM
I suppose one difference between Mark and Lambeth's Lib Dems is about £3m. That's the amount of fraud that was going on at the town hall before Mark helped to kick them out of office last year.
Ben Russell said,
sleaford - Lincolnshire/north kesteven
Thu, 11 Jan 2007 - 10:50 AM
i'll be honest, i didnt read the bulk of this blog but the point stands that at the little intro piece clearly condemns the lib-dems! you are labour! traditional lefties, steadily becoming more right wing then the conservatives, at what point do you lose all sense of self and criticise the actions of another party who may or may not (as i suspect is really the case) be doing something similar to yourself!
Tuesday, 2 January 2007
Lib Dems = Chaos
I’ve been re-reading Ovid’s Metamorphoses in the recent translation by David Raeburn. I only mention this because a particular passage from Book One (Creation) reminds me strongly, on a number of levels, of the Liberal Democrats of Lambeth.
This is Ovid’s description of Chaos, the state that came before order was created (think May 2006):
“A crude, unstructured mass,
Nothing but weight without motion, a general conglomeration
Of matter composed of disparate, incompatible elements.”
A few lines later, Ovid continues:
“None of the elements kept its shape,
And all were in conflict inside one body: the cold with the hot,
The wet with the dry, the soft with the hard, and weight with the weightless.”
Talking of Lib Dem chaos, I was surprised to read the other day that Menzies Campbell had visited the Sackville Estate in Streatham several weeks ago, together with an individual called Chris Nicholson, a former Lib Dem councillor in Kingston (“he’s not LOCAL!!!” – will the Lib Dem leaflets be informing anyone of that I wonder…) who is being hawked as the Lib Dem PPC for Streatham, though he appears to live in Furzedown Ward, the part of Streatham that falls into Tory Wandsworth and Labour Tooting.
He seems to have usurped a youngish Clapham Common councillor who stood against Keith Hill last time round. What furious cataclysm has happened in the Lib Dem ranks in Streatham, can we wonder? Just think back to Ovidian Chaos – “a general conglomeration of matter composed of disparate, incompatible elements.”
I passed Menzies Campbell shortly before Christmas, in St Stephen’s Hall in Westminster, where he appeared to bump into a statue. I’m not sure what or who he bumped into in Streatham, but there was a write-up of his visit in the Streatham Guardian, in which he shared a few pearls of Menziesian wisdom about the pressures on social housing, but curiously nothing, on the face of it, about the daggers-drawn, knickers-knotted position of Lambeth Lib Dems on the ALMO that Labour is proposing to bring Lambeth’s housing stock up to Decent Homes standard.
Mr Kingston, or whatever his name is, could have said something about the ALMO but appears to have said nothing – unless the reporter considered it a waste of shorthand.
Instead, we were treated to the following colourful utterance: “I am delighted Menzies decided to come here … I hope it will be the first of many visits to Streatham.”
Yes, Ming, come to Streatham and campaign for Decent Homes, rather than just talking about them, or allowing councillors from your party to obstruct them.
This is Ovid’s description of Chaos, the state that came before order was created (think May 2006):
“A crude, unstructured mass,
Nothing but weight without motion, a general conglomeration
Of matter composed of disparate, incompatible elements.”
A few lines later, Ovid continues:
“None of the elements kept its shape,
And all were in conflict inside one body: the cold with the hot,
The wet with the dry, the soft with the hard, and weight with the weightless.”
Talking of Lib Dem chaos, I was surprised to read the other day that Menzies Campbell had visited the Sackville Estate in Streatham several weeks ago, together with an individual called Chris Nicholson, a former Lib Dem councillor in Kingston (“he’s not LOCAL!!!” – will the Lib Dem leaflets be informing anyone of that I wonder…) who is being hawked as the Lib Dem PPC for Streatham, though he appears to live in Furzedown Ward, the part of Streatham that falls into Tory Wandsworth and Labour Tooting.
He seems to have usurped a youngish Clapham Common councillor who stood against Keith Hill last time round. What furious cataclysm has happened in the Lib Dem ranks in Streatham, can we wonder? Just think back to Ovidian Chaos – “a general conglomeration of matter composed of disparate, incompatible elements.”
I passed Menzies Campbell shortly before Christmas, in St Stephen’s Hall in Westminster, where he appeared to bump into a statue. I’m not sure what or who he bumped into in Streatham, but there was a write-up of his visit in the Streatham Guardian, in which he shared a few pearls of Menziesian wisdom about the pressures on social housing, but curiously nothing, on the face of it, about the daggers-drawn, knickers-knotted position of Lambeth Lib Dems on the ALMO that Labour is proposing to bring Lambeth’s housing stock up to Decent Homes standard.
Mr Kingston, or whatever his name is, could have said something about the ALMO but appears to have said nothing – unless the reporter considered it a waste of shorthand.
Instead, we were treated to the following colourful utterance: “I am delighted Menzies decided to come here … I hope it will be the first of many visits to Streatham.”
Yes, Ming, come to Streatham and campaign for Decent Homes, rather than just talking about them, or allowing councillors from your party to obstruct them.
Lib Dems = Chaos
I’ve been re-reading Ovid’s Metamorphoses in the recent translation by David Raeburn. I only mention this because a particular passage from Book One (Creation) reminds me strongly, on a number of levels, of the Liberal Democrats of Lambeth.
This is Ovid’s description of Chaos, the state that came before order was created (think May 2006):
“A crude, unstructured mass,
Nothing but weight without motion, a general conglomeration
Of matter composed of disparate, incompatible elements.”
A few lines later, Ovid continues:
“None of the elements kept its shape,
And all were in conflict inside one body: the cold with the hot,
The wet with the dry, the soft with the hard, and weight with the weightless.”
Talking of Lib Dem chaos, I was surprised to read the other day that Menzies Campbell had visited the Sackville Estate in Streatham several weeks ago, together with an individual called Chris Nicholson, a former Lib Dem councillor in Kingston (“he’s not LOCAL!!!” – will the Lib Dem leaflets be informing anyone of that I wonder…) who is being hawked as the Lib Dem PPC for Streatham, though he appears to live in Furzedown Ward, the part of Streatham that falls into Tory Wandsworth and Labour Tooting.
He seems to have usurped a youngish Clapham Common councillor who stood against Keith Hill last time round. What furious cataclysm has happened in the Lib Dem ranks in Streatham, can we wonder? Just think back to Ovidian Chaos – “a general conglomeration of matter composed of disparate, incompatible elements.”
I passed Menzies Campbell shortly before Christmas, in St Stephen’s Hall in Westminster, where he appeared to bump into a statue. I’m not sure what or who he bumped into in Streatham, but there was a write-up of his visit in the Streatham Guardian, in which he shared a few pearls of Menziesian wisdom about the pressures on social housing, but curiously nothing, on the face of it, about the daggers-drawn, knickers-knotted position of Lambeth Lib Dems on the ALMO that Labour is proposing to bring Lambeth’s housing stock up to Decent Homes standard.
Mr Kingston, or whatever his name is, could have said something about the ALMO but appears to have said nothing – unless the reporter considered it a waste of shorthand.
Instead, we were treated to the following colourful utterance: “I am delighted Menzies decided to come here … I hope it will be the first of many visits to Streatham.”
Yes, Ming, come to Streatham and campaign for Decent Homes, rather than just talking about them, or allowing councillors from your party to seek to withhold them from Lambeth tenants.
This is Ovid’s description of Chaos, the state that came before order was created (think May 2006):
“A crude, unstructured mass,
Nothing but weight without motion, a general conglomeration
Of matter composed of disparate, incompatible elements.”
A few lines later, Ovid continues:
“None of the elements kept its shape,
And all were in conflict inside one body: the cold with the hot,
The wet with the dry, the soft with the hard, and weight with the weightless.”
Talking of Lib Dem chaos, I was surprised to read the other day that Menzies Campbell had visited the Sackville Estate in Streatham several weeks ago, together with an individual called Chris Nicholson, a former Lib Dem councillor in Kingston (“he’s not LOCAL!!!” – will the Lib Dem leaflets be informing anyone of that I wonder…) who is being hawked as the Lib Dem PPC for Streatham, though he appears to live in Furzedown Ward, the part of Streatham that falls into Tory Wandsworth and Labour Tooting.
He seems to have usurped a youngish Clapham Common councillor who stood against Keith Hill last time round. What furious cataclysm has happened in the Lib Dem ranks in Streatham, can we wonder? Just think back to Ovidian Chaos – “a general conglomeration of matter composed of disparate, incompatible elements.”
I passed Menzies Campbell shortly before Christmas, in St Stephen’s Hall in Westminster, where he appeared to bump into a statue. I’m not sure what or who he bumped into in Streatham, but there was a write-up of his visit in the Streatham Guardian, in which he shared a few pearls of Menziesian wisdom about the pressures on social housing, but curiously nothing, on the face of it, about the daggers-drawn, knickers-knotted position of Lambeth Lib Dems on the ALMO that Labour is proposing to bring Lambeth’s housing stock up to Decent Homes standard.
Mr Kingston, or whatever his name is, could have said something about the ALMO but appears to have said nothing – unless the reporter considered it a waste of shorthand.
Instead, we were treated to the following colourful utterance: “I am delighted Menzies decided to come here … I hope it will be the first of many visits to Streatham.”
Yes, Ming, come to Streatham and campaign for Decent Homes, rather than just talking about them, or allowing councillors from your party to seek to withhold them from Lambeth tenants.
Monday, 1 January 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
