Reality vs Rogers

Bristol Lib Dem mayoral election spin (some might say lying) says 'Dr Jon Rogers is quickly emerging as the only serious challenger to Labour' in their latest leaflet, rather deceptively presented in a newspaper style entitled 'City News: Community News for Bristolians'. The spin goes on, saying 'Dr Rogers odds to be Mayor have rocketed reaching a high of 3/1 and second favourite to Labour'. It says that the Conservatives are out of the race and refers to a 'Jon Rogers surge..' describing how many Conservative voters are turning to the Lib Dems. It says the independent vote is split and many voters may turn away from Bristol 1st's  George Ferguson.

The reality is completely opposite to the spin, as the latest survey of voter intentions shows. Jon Rogers is still saying (here) 'any of the next 4 candidates could still overtake him [Rees] on a combination of first and second preferences' but the Lib Dem is not even in third place let alone second place on first preference votes! There are many undecided but even so this report says 'Labour's Marvin Rees...clear favourite, with 21 per cent. But this is nowhere near the 50 per cent required to prevent the election race going to a second round.The second and third favourites on first choice votes were George Ferguson (Bristol 1st) with nine per cent and Geoff Gollop (Conservative) with seven per cent'. The Greens Daniella Radice is in joint fourth and may be set to beat the Lib Dems in the way that Green Jenny Jones did in the last London mayoral elections.

Misleading mulling

We have an erroneous way of thinking about land and using figures relating to it. This erroneous thinking is used to 'justify' unsustainable building over green spaces, the green belt, parks and playing fields, allotments, farmland...In Bristol, despite the fact that our eco footprint is several times the land area available, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Tories on the council all orginally backed a policy of flogging off our green spaces. This was despite widespread public opposition across the whole city. The Lib Dem council adminstration are still incentivising flogging local green spaces now and several Mayoral candidates have plans that will cut city green spaces and green belt land. We need a Mayor who will listen to public opinion, genuinely involve people in decision making and not bow down to any party political line.

On the Daily Politics a while back Claire Fox from the Institute of Ideas (who you'd think should know better) attempted to justify the liberalisation of planning laws by saying that only 10% of land in England is developed. A New Statesman leader said this back in March this year:  

‘Only 10 per cent of England (and 6 per cent of Britain) is developed... The UK is 60 million acres in size, of which 41 million are designated "agricultural" land, 15 million are "natural wast­age" (forests, rivers, mountains and so on) and owned by institutions such as the Forestry Commission and the Ministry of Defence, and four million are the "urban plot", the densely congested land on which most of the 62 million people of these islands live...’ http://www.newstatesman.com/society/2012/04/land-government-million

In terms of whether to build on green land or not crude land area is not really the way to consider this issue. Look at these figures: average biologically productive area per person globally was approx 1.8 global hectares (gha) per capita in 2006. Average ecological footprint in the UK is 5.45 global hectares per capita (gha) (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_footprint). This means that not only have we used up all the available biologically productive land in the UK we are actually drawing greatly on large amounts of land from abroad as well as allowing carbon levels to build up in the atmosphere because there is insufficient productive land and water to absorb it fast enough. Our 5.45 gha/person ecological footprint is three times greater than the average productive land per person available worldwide.

Halfbaked Hopkins

In the ongoing online discussions on this Post story about the mayoral election Lib Dem Councillor for Knowle, Gary Hopkins chips in this spin,

by gary_hopkins ...Polling shows
1 Non voters and genuinely undecided in a clear lead.
2 Mr Rees in a narrow first preference vote in front of Jon Rogers.
3 The Tories nowhere with their voters either giving Jon First or second preference to keep out Labour.
The other overwhelming stat that comes back is that, liked or not ,George Ferguson is known to that tiny % of the chattering politically active classes but 95% + are completely unaware of him...__________________________________________

My reply: What polling is this? Who is it conducted by? Please give actual figures and the source(s) - otherwise what you say is not backed by facts we can check out. Its quite a common practice for Lib Dems to state a so called 'fact' or a quote in the 'Focus'  newsletters without giving the source for it. Lib Dem materials very often skew figures via very dodgy bar charts and illustrations. If its deliberate its unethical if its not its very poor and sloppy thinking and communication.

By choosing to have a dig at George Ferguson the Lib Dems, a) show they have something to be concerned about and, b) reinforce Ferguson's credentials as a candidate independent from party politics.

[Update 14 Oct: Cllr Hopkins has been challanged three times to produce figures and sources but has not done so - in fact he's made things worse through more party politics and attempted point scoring. No surprise there then.]

Predictable unpredictable?

If the result of the Bristol mayoral election is really 'completely unpredictable' (as this Post story says) how come the bookies can come up with betting odds? Or is it that we know from past voting patterns and current polls and political developments that the most likely outcome is a Labour or liberal-minded independent candidate winning? In other words Marvin Rees vs George Ferguson because both are broadly progressive and not being blamed for current problems. Surely we can count out Tories and Lib Dems because of the ongoing recession and the cuts/austerity program. The Tories dont have the votes needed across the whole city in any case and the Lib Dems are taking the brunt of the criticism of the coalition govt (thus they are at 10% or so in the polls). Hard to predict the final result between two particular candidates: yes. Completely unpredictable: no. 

Fair fares

The Post reports that, 'A Mayoral candidate has promised to introduce £1 and £1.50 bus fares in Bristol if he is allowed to take control of the city's bus services. Liberal Democrat Jon Rogers, a cabinet councillor who used to be in charge of the city's transport department, wants to see a "Transport Bristol" authority set up to run them – in the same way as London.'. If this is a good idea now then why was implementation not started a few years back??? Jon Rogers and his Lib Dems have been and are running the city! Yes to lower bus fares and yes to a transport authority for Bristol but yes also to judging politicians by actions and outcomes and not just words.  

Political possibilities

My response to the view, expressed in an online debate here, that there will only ever be two political parties (ie either Labour or Tory) running the country: Given the huge and interwoven economic, social and environmental problems the country and the world has, new political thinking is now more needed than ever. New political movements, like the Green Movement, do come along and new parties do get into government at a range of levels. Liberals have a share in govt now and they currently run Bristol City Council and other councils - and Liberals have been in govt in the past, albeit a long time ago.The labour movement developed over the last 100 yrs, so there is no reason why other movements and parties cant do the same or better. 

The Green Party addresses the real world where other parties wish 'for exponential economic growth and endless population growth on a finite planet with dwindling resources' (see online comments here). Greens are making political progress - they have their first MP in Caroline Lucas in addition to Green members of the Scottish Parliament, they are now runnning the council in Brighton and Hove, have two MEPs (Jean Lambert in London and Keith Taylor in the South East), and have two councillors in Bristol (Gus Hoyt in Ashley and Tess Green in Southville) in addition to hundreds more on other councils around the country

Poll of polls

Take a look at this poll tracker from the BBC website, especially the poll of polls. Now tell me the chance Lib Dem candidate Jon Rogers has of becoming the first elected Mayor of Bristol this November. Not looking good for them/him is it, struggling at around 10% nationally. Some people take a bit of convincing of the fact of Lib Dem present unpopularity (see this mini online debate here following a letter I had published in The Post). I think the Mayoral election will come down to Labour's Marvin Rees vs independent George Ferguson (pictured).

Liberal lacerations

A recent Lib Dem leaflet promoting their mayoral candidate Cllr Jon Rogers says, 'Jon has taken a leading role [note - he's one of the people responsible then] in turning around the city's services...'. It goes on to say, 'The Lib Dems have protected local services from the kind of cuts we've seen in other cities.'. No mention whatsoever of the £28 million they/he cut from the budget last year or the £21 million they/he cut from the budget this year. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-17197392. These cuts are pretty liberal lacerations, so how does one square them with the claim to have 'turned around' and 'protected' local services? The Lib Dem interpretation of the whole truth here, is, well, very liberal - and loose!

Dishonest Democrats?

Just had a Liberal Democrat leaflet through my door 'Local doctor stands for Mayor...'. Its once again completely empty of how the aims of job creation, fixing transport and safer streets will be delivered. Large and full colour, the leaflet concentrates largely on the general background of mayoral candidate Jon Rogers [pictured], with a bit about Pete Levy for Police Commissioner. It says 'It's time to put people first not politics' on the inside but fully engages in party politics on the back by saying 'It's between Dr Jon Rogers and the Labour Candidate...'. Clearly this is an inaccurate and not completely honest statement because: it make no mention at all of any independent candidates of which there are several; independent candidate George Ferguson is said to be second favourite to Labour to win; this election is the first of its kind and uses a different electoral system where voters can choose both first and second preferences and so cant be fairly compared to previous council elections in the way they have done; the Lib Dems are struggling to get into double figures in the polls at the moment now that they are in coalition with Tories in the Government. Do the Lib Dems think that voters wont notice their skewing of reality?

Pavements for pedestrians

Mayoral candidate Jon Rogers has called for Bristolians to name and shame anti-social cyclists...But Dr Rogers said he did not feel there was anything wrong with people cycling on pavements if they were not causing a danger to pedestrians...(story here).

Anyone who is really pro-cyclist should be saying cyclists should not ride on the pavements and amongst pedestrians.  Its what the highway code says and its what good sense says - cycling on the pavement carefully (Jon Rogers position) is in fact anti-social. In shared spaces cyclists should dismount and walk, pushing their bike. Cyclists doing the wrong thing gives cycling a bad name, when it needs a good name. Jon Rogers should be advocating a network of cycleways dedicated to cyclists alone - safe, effective, clean, healthy and away from cars, lorries and walkers. http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_069837

By the way, whatever you think on this issue is it not pretty illiberal of Liberal Jon Rogers to advocate 'naming and shaming' as his policy? Is consistency too much to ask for in a mayoral candidate?

Realistic Rogers?

Lib Dem deputy leader Jon Rogers, right, has been chosen to represent his party in November's mayoral elections...asked if the Lib Dems could mount a realistic challenge to the favourites, he replied: "Of course. Just in terms of support we have got more seats in the council than anyone else. They [Labour] think it's going to be easy, but we are going to give them a run for their money."(full story plus comments here).

Has Dr Rogers not seen that the Lib Dems are on just 12% in opinion polls this summer? http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jun/20/david-cameron-liberal-democrat-poll

Though he offers little or no indication of what his policies might be - following the pattern of almost every candidate so far - as Lib Dem mayoral candidate Jon Rogers would just be offering Bristol voters more of what they have already been getting from the council. As Lib Dem Deputy Leader and a cabinet member he is an intimate part of the way the city has been and is currently run and is most unlikely to depart from the policies of the current administration.

Bristolians want change and rejected the current system by voting to have an Elected Mayor – and by the criticism of and large scale lack of enthusiasm they have expressed about the council for years. With former Liberal George Ferguson likely to take many votes standing as an independent and coalition govt unpopularity and failures on top of this, no Lib Dem stands much chance of becoming our first elected Mayor. In any case Jon Rogers has neither  the  vision, policies, profile, standing or stature needed in an elected Mayor.

Status quo candidates

Only two Liberal Democrats have been short-listed to become the party's candidate for Bristol's mayoral elections in November (details). Selecting either Simon Cook (right in picture) or Jon Rogers (left in picture) as mayoral candidate would be offering Bristol voters more of what they have already been getting from the council - they are both an intimate part of the way the city has been and is currently run. Bristolians want change and rejected the current system by voting to have an Elected Mayor – and by the criticism of and lack of enthusiasm they have expressed about it for years. Neither, therefore, stands much chance of becoming Mayor. -
The appeal of these two is negative and undemocratic, suggesting that Bristol should continue to be governed as it has been in the past. I voted no to a mayor but also oppose the way the current city council works and what it stands for, so the appeal of Cook or Rogers for me is zero. Now that we have a different system I think people are likely to vote to make the best use of that system and choose a candidate accordingly - neither of these has the vision, policies, profile, standing or stature needed in an elected Mayor.

An endorsement of either Jon Rogers or Simon Cook from Nick Clegg - in Bristol today - would have been the final nail in the lid of the coffin that is the Lib Dem campaign for Mayor of Bristol - and it's already quite firmly nailed down! Clegg is so popular in Bristol that even his own side are calling on him to resign! See story on prominent Lib Dem John Kiely's message to his party leader here.

Limited, limiting Liberals

Bristol's Liberal Democrats have drawn up a shortlist of potential candidates for the role of Bristol mayor – but have refused to say who is on it...(full story here). Not a very open approach from Nick Clegg's party, whose constitution begins by saying' The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society...' !!

I'd like to to see the evidence that backs this statement on the [high on humility!?] Lib Dem MP for Bristol West Stephen Williams too '...my name recognition is incredibly high, and polling we have done shows people have a positive opinion of me in Bristol...'. Be open and release this information Liberal Democrats!!

Petty politics

The mud has begun to fly in the race to become Bristol's first elected mayor, says this Post report.Where is the substance in this bit of local politics? Nothing that Bristol Labour Party are saying is evidence based. Only Mr Ferguson knows exactly why he resigned when he did  - and I have to say, as someone who is not one of his fans, that he has always been an independent person.
*
Purely personal criticism as in this story is hardly going to take the debate forward at all. Its policies and leadership that should be the focus. This may be a problem for months yet though because no potential candidate is talking much about policies at all !!

Council cuts

Cuts in services locally and nationally have originally and primarily come about through gross errors and greed in the private sector, enabled and encouraged by a corrupt political system. Public money still props part of the banking arm of the private sector up. Money can be found for banks but not a whole range of public services - and meanwhile the rich in the banking system continue to be rewarded with high pay plus a bonus.

Despite the tough economic situation Bristol City Council need not have gone for a council tax freeze, resulting in spending cuts in health care and children and young people's services - and yet more job losses. This is not only wrong but will continue to help our economy to stagnate. There is, in effect, a local Conservative/Liberal Democrat Coalition that matches the national one it seems. 

Bristol's Council tax will be frozen for another year after Bristol City Council approved its budget for 2012.

An average band D homeowner will still pay £1,569.75 from April – the same as they did in 2011 and 2010.

As a result...there will be £27million of cuts to services and around 350 jobs are set to go, after an amended budget was agreed at a meeting last night.

A large chunk of the cuts – £8 million – will come from making savings in the council's "back office" operations.

There will be around £5 million less for health care, which includes moving increasingly towards privatisation, and another £5 million less for children and young people's services. A range of charges are also set to go up, including parking and pest control...(full story)

Caring, compassionate capitalism...contradiction

Capitalism, favouring private ownership, maximising private profit, decisions made by a free market, economic growth as the primary aim – is currently the subject of many party leader speeches. Reference has been made by Tory PM Cameron, Lib Dem Deputy PM Clegg and Labour Opposition Leader Miliband to making capitalism, as it currently works, more: responsible; moral; compassionate; caring – and thus popular and acceptable. This, at least, is an acknowledgement that capitalism is now operating: irresponsibly; immorally; uncaringly; without compassion – and that its popularity and public acceptability has suffered. However, along comes a chance for action that would send out a strong signal that significant change in the whole system is coming – and absolutely nothing is done, just as nothing was done by previous governments.The already very wealthy RBS boss Stephen Hester is allowed by the Govt to receive a bonus of about £1 million on top of his £1.2 million annual salary. RBS was saved using many billions of taxpayers money and is 82% publicly owned, the PM has said we are all in difficult economic times together, has said he wants to tackle excessive pay and bonuses...words, words, only words. See here, here and here for more.

The solutions offered up by the Tory/Liberal Govt, previous Tory and Labour Governments and the current Labour Opposition are those of capitalism – the very thing they have all described as deficient in some way. Coalition Ministers talk of: the importance of finance; the deficit and its ‘correction’ through cuts and freezing public sector pay; economic growth as essential; how we must remove obstacles to growth; how growth should be led by private enterprise; their pro-market, pro-business, pro-competition agenda. They say high taxes on rich people and companies could send them abroad. Private, market incentives are to operate in Royal Mail, the NHS and Higher Education. Has it occurred to them that solving the problems of capitalism with more capitalism may well be like solving the problems of alcoholism with more alcohol? Show me a version of capitalism that is or can be developed to be socially sustainable because it shares wealth fairly and environmentally sustainable because it does not rely on and run down finite resources and you will get my attention!!   

More posts on capitalism:

http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2010/01/when-will-bankers-like-this-get-their.html

http://bristol.indymedia.org/article/697599

http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2010/10/capitalist-ideology-dominates-cuts.html  

http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2008/09/cabot-circus-consumerism-capitalism.html
http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2010/11/house-of-cards-economics.html

Council Consultation Codswallop

Excellent letter from Anne Lemon Secretary of the Bristol & District Anti-Cuts Alliance here. Reproduced below,

BRISTOL City Council's process of scrutiny and consultation on the budget cuts proposed for 2012/13 is a sham. Discussions are taking place based on the absolute minimum of information that the Lib Dems think they can get away with publishing.

Unless there is a major fightback the budget, which includes the expected savings from closing and privatising care homes and day centres, will be agreed on February 28. But the details of the closures/privatisation and the impact on users and the community won't be announced until mid-March. You can already hear Barbara Janke and Jon Rogers telling us "It was agreed in the budget" if anyone suggests the facilities should stay open. Similarly over £1 million is to be saved by privatising Youth Services, yet no detailed proposals are available.

Either the detailed proposals on these important services must be published now, or the closure/privatisation policies should be removed from the budget. Any attempt by the council to approve the policies as part of the budget without being prepared to discuss the details in public is nothing less than underhand.

Lose a local election, continue to run the council

Despite election losses the Lib Dems will continue to run Bristol (see link at end*). No surprise there, especially given the electoral arithmetic when we elect only a third of councillors at any one time. I doubt that any other party relishes taking on running the city in a time of cuts in any case (no doubt they are happy that their opponent will continue to take the blame).

I'm pleased to see the green spaces sell off halted subject to review, though I'm someone who opposes the principle of selling off green spaces whether the decision is taken by the council or more local Neighbourhood Partnerships. We need more not fewer green spaces for a wide variety of economic, health, social and environmental reasons.

I also welcome a prompt decision on the town green in Ashton Vale, though I have grave doubts about the basis on which some councillors will be deciding, given the fairly frequent and commonplace statements about wanting to see a football stadium on this greenbelt land. The matter will end up in the courts.

The new group set up to consider major transport issues like tram proposals, the bus rapid transit schemes and the Temple Meads transport interchange is a good idea. Should have been set up before now. I'm not yet clear on what its full role is and what power it will/can have to propose and enact changes though. This is a vital issue given the heavy traffic and poor public transport and integration is one key reason why Bristol is far from being a green city.

*http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Lib-Dems-stay-control/article-3568496-detail/article.html

Also see: http://www.bristolgreenparty.org.uk/News/greens-celebrate-new-influence-on-council.html

Lib Dem discussions with Labour, Tory AND Green groups on the council

Interesting update on goings on at Bristol City Council in this* Post report, particularly on the town green and on green spaces. One correction: it says
'Her [Barbara Janke's] statement comes after discussions with the Labour and Tory groups after the Lib Dems lost their majority in this month's local elections.' when discussions were in fact held with Labour, Tory AND Green groups - we do exist y'know - and in larger numbers than before - though you'd rarely know it given the Post's coverage.

*http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Janke-Ashton-Vale-stadium-decision-month-green-spaces-sell-halted/article-3564838-detail/article.html

Very rich to make frequent use of the term green in her statement I thought. There is little evidence at all that Bristol has in general become a greener city over the decades - and plenty of evidence that we've become less green eg much larger total carbon footprint per person and per city, just like the UK on average, larger divsions of wealth between rich and poor... Plus of course conventional politics barely seems to recognise the economic and social dimensions of being green much of the time - it still needs to make the jump that green is far beyond trees, cuddly animals and recycling... (one of the reasons conventional politics has failed to really address deep rooted interconnected problems).

Who will voters in Knowle go for?

The Lib Dem vote share in the polls has fallen. The Greens poll share has risen. Cuts, broken promises and the huge compromises of being in coalition with the Conservatives are turning people away from the Lib Dems. In my ward, Knowle, the Lib Dem vote is likely to reduce for these reasons in addition to local reasons and it will be very interesting to see where votes go. As the Evening Post has said, the extremely unpopular and controversial policy of selling off green spaces, including part of ‘The Jungle’ in Salcombe Rd, Knowle, could cost the Lib Dems votes. Hundreds signed a petition opposing the sell off and the man in charge of the sell off policy, Knowle Councillor Gary Hopkins, dismissed these concerns, controversially suggesting that local people were pressured into signing. Cllr Hopkins has seriously upset campaigners working to save their green spaces all over Bristol. As a long term and consistent campaigner for the protection of and increase in green spaces I hope people concerned about this issue will vote for me.

The Post also says that the regeneration of Knowle West is another big issue. A small slice of Knowle West (from Salcombe Rd to Newquay Rd) falls within the Knowle Ward, with the majority in Filwood Ward. This issue may be on the minds of some voters, though it has not become a matter of much party political debate. Political parties have not really involved themselves in the issue very much except where they are in direct decision making roles eg on the council Cabinet or in some cases being the local councillor. I have had some involvement in the issue and contributed in some detail, ideas on sustainably developing the area, where I spent my primary and secondary school days and where both my parents were also brought up. I’m a strong and consistent supporter of the detailed – and pretty green – regeneration plans put forward by the Knowle West Residents Planning Group which I was directly involved with for a period. The council should actively be helping this group bring their ideas to fruition but instead have often been more a part of the problem than the solution! I hope anyone who wants to see the principles of community-based regeneration and sustainable development truly put into practice will vote for me as a long term and ongoing advocate.