Betting on a general election?

Stephen Bush outlined how there is "sufficient time", despite the prorogation, for parliament to legislate to prevent a no-deal Brexit (A week to stop no deal. No excuses, 30/08/19). That might well be true, but the opposition groups should not expect an easy ride. As soon as they began to form plans for legislation last week, Cummings moved forward the intention to suspend parliament, so you can guarantee he has his next move already worked out.

     What`s the betting, if it looks like the opposition`s bill might succeed, Johnson will call an election to take place before October 31st? Cummings is probably planning the campaign now, with Johnson standing as the man of the people, the only politician capable of carrying out the referendum`s result, and defeating the anti-democracy and anti-Brexit fearmongers!

  We can only hope there are some capable of joined-up thinking in the ranks of the opposition groups, being able to predict what might happen, and to match Cummings!

Lack of balance in the media: where is the outrage?

Johnson will shut down parliament, with the deliberate intention of ensuring opposition to a no-Deal Brexit falters (Yet another sign that an election is not too far away, 29/08/19). Where is the outrage? An unelected prime minister single-handedly by-passing all the constitutional conventions built up over centuries of democratic progress, should be criticised on all sides of the media. Katy Balls actually quotes a Westminster source, describing Johnson`s action as "strategically, an astonishingly good move" ("Astonishingly good move" will divide the Tory rebels, 29/08/19).

   Imagine what the press would have written, and the amount of criticism there would have been on the news programmes, if Jeremy Corbyn as PM, unsure of his majority, had prevented any debate on his proposals, say, to raise income tax on the rich. Even worse if at the same time, McDowell was churning out spending proposals to rescue the NHS and schools after years of Tory neglect without detailing figures and mentioning the huge amount of borrowing needed! The media would have apoplexy!

     Yet Johnson does what is quite obviously much worse, and gets away with it, almost without a word of protest from the media giants. No doubt they will even be supportive of his ridiculous election claim to be on the side of the people, caring for their health and the education of their children!

It is indeed, as the former member of Ofqual, Barnaby Lenon, says "terrible for honest students" when they hear about other examination entrants having previous knowledge of the questions (Tighter school security vital for preventing exam paper leaks, 28/08/19). Imagine then how bad it must be when state school A-level students not only hear about cheating in private schools involving teachers, but when the exams involved are different from the ones they take. 

      Disappointingly, your article did not mention the huge cheating scandal two years ago when teachers at Eton and Winchester were forced to leave their posts after giving students prior information about Pre-U exam papers, the exams favoured by many private schools keen to avoid the newly-reformed A-Levels. Wouldn`t it be much easier to prevent "leaks" if the only qualifications accepted by UK universities were the highly regulated A-level and BTech examinations?

Osborne not fit for IMF job

William Keegan is right to say that Johnson must "act on the advice of the FT" and reject George Osborne`s claim to be the managing-director of the IMF (Business has very good reason to fear Boris Johnson, 14.07.19). Not only has the IMF, as Keegan says, had "second thoughts about short-sighted" austerity policies, the fund`s chief economist Olivier Blanchard over six years ago told the then chancellor of the need for a "reassessment of fiscal policy" less than two months before the March budget (Austerity plan is failing, IMF tells Osborne, 24/01/13). Recent work on fiscal multipliers had shown him the devastating effects tax and spending cuts have on the wider economy, but did the arrogant Osborne take any notice?

        What we saw was the growth forecast for 2013 halved, and debt as a share of GDP to increase from 75.9% to 85.6%, whilst government department budgets were to see cuts by 1% in each of the following two years, £11.5bn further cuts earmarked for 2015-6, corporation tax cut to 20%, and the !% cap on public sector pay extended for another two years.

     Is it any wonder so many people felt aggrieved when it came to the 2016 referendum? With the effects of Osborne`s callous policies still being felt in the UK today, heaven only knows what damage he would do across Europe, if given the chance!

Royals taking us for mugs

Politicians here are frequently, and correctly, criticised for taking the public for mugs. When the royal family takes the same approach towards its "subjects", no one appears to bat an eyelid (Prince Andrew "appalled" by sex abuse claims against Epstein, 20/08/19). Despite the photographs and videos which were taken at least two years after Epstein had "pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution from girls as young as 14", and which show Prince Andrew attending one of his parties and "strolling" with him in Central Park, the Palace expects us to believe that the prince is "appalled by the recent reports of the alleged crimes".

 Just because the royals get away with taking the British taxpayer for a ride with their ridiculous travel arrangements and extravagant lifestyles, even to the extent of our coughing up £2,4 million for renovating Harry`s "cottage", does not mean their disingenuity over Andrew`s behaviour should be ignored.

Analysis of Pre-U results needed too!

The experts will undoubtedly be correct in their explanation that the slight "fall in grades" was because of more students taking A-levels, rather than studying for qualifications more suited to their talents (Top grades in England suffer a dip but Wales and female scientists on the up, 16/08/19). Another factor not mentioned, however, is the increased number of students in mostly private schools who are entered for Cambridge Assessment`s Pre-U examinations, as a way of avoiding the newly reformed and more rigorous A-Levels.

     A breakdown of results for all Pre-U examinations, with percentages of entries getting top grades in each subject, is surely needed!

Guardian letter on Corbyn`s leadership

The truth is that whatever Labour`s leadership team come up with, Corbyn can`t win (Corbyn invites Tory rebels and other leaders to oust PM, 15/08/19). When he finally announces a no confidence vote and a "temporary administration" led by him "on a strictly time-limited basis", he puts the success of the vote in jeopardy because many would vote against, rather than see him being PM, albeit for a short while. Labour`s frontbench apparently think Corbyn is the "only politician who could lead a caretaker government", but they should know by now that he is not going to lead them to an election victory weeks later.

  His domestic and foreign policies are fair and popular, but his leadership has seen too much obfuscation and confusion, and lacked any positive electioneering, aiming to win new voters rather than losing old ones. Making this announcement via a letter rather than at least a press conference highlights the need for stronger and more determined leadership.

    This is not to say the party needs another attempt to oust Corbyn with another right wing candidate, but it does mean Corbyn should hand over the reins to someone on the front bench with the nous to win an election. That has to be the be-all and end-all of Labour policy at this time; if Johnson is not defeated the party will never be forgiven!

Labour`s university admissions reforms

Labour is right to pledge changes to the university admissions process which will avoid relying on A-level grade forecasts and halt the use of unconditional offers, but these proposals clearly do not go far enough (Labour to scrap "unfair" predicted grades for university admissions, 14/08/19). If Labour really wants to "level the playing field", it is essential to ensure the exams all abide by the same regulations and follow the same guidance on assessment; awarding bodies, furthermore, should be forced to compare marked papers with others from different boards so that there is consistency. Schools in the private sector should not be allowed to seek even more advantage for their pupils by using more lightly regulated examinations, like Cambridge Assessment`s Pre-Us. In fact, the only entry qualifications allowed for British universities should be A-levels, described by Ofqual as "national qualifications based on content set by the government", and BTEC`s vocational  qualifications. 

     Universities will undoubtedly claim that Labour`s reforms will not allow sufficient time either for interviews or for considering contextual information about applicants, but this is nonsense, especially as the threat of intimidating interviews often acts as a deterrent to application, particularly in the case of students from deprived areas. If auditions are required, or even a few questions answered, universities could use Skype of WhatsApp video, but generally, ability should be tested after three years of university education, not after eighteen years of disadvantage!

i letter on Tories and elections

Tory propagandist, Mark Wallace, is only half right when arguing that "acting as voters want", and "seeking to win their votes" by making outlandish promises, is what politicians do (Johnson is already in campaign mode, 13/08/19). How many people voted for a decade of austerity in 2010, with real wages falling, the wealth of the rich increasing inexorably, and the least fortunate in society being forced into homelessness and poverty? Did they vote for the rich paying less taxes, less regulation on landlords so that many would be forced to pay around half their earnings on homes unfit for habitation, or callous benefit cuts for the disabled?

     Johnson`s seemingly generous pledges will not even return government spending to anything like it was back in 2010, and will rely on borrowing rather than taxing those most able to pay. Then there is the problem of the prime minister keeping his word, something with which he has huge problems. Heaven help us if enough of the electorate is convinced by Johnson`s electioneering. There will still be austerity, and the UK will be Trump`s poodle, fed crumbs in trade deals, in return for supporting the US`s foreign policy which will inevitably lead to more conflict and unnecessary deaths!

Labour and Germany 1930-33

Polly Toynbee concludes that a no-deal "disaster" "would see the Tories render themselves unelectable for a generation", but if this is all part of Labour`s long-term objective, it is likely to go horribly wrong (A government of national unity can deliver us from no-deal, 06/08/19).

Corbyn`s plan appears now to be to win a vote of no-confidence in Johnson, and force a general election. His campaign would be based on promising to "reopen talks with the EU", presumably with the forlorn hope of a softer Brexit being arranged, with jobs, investment and trade all hunky-dory! The right wing media will have a field day!

   If the election takes place after 31st October, as Cummings plans, Labour will face the wrath of the electorate for not standing up for remain earlier; consequently the anti-Tory vote will be divided, and Johnson could well stay in power. Has no one in Corbyn`s top team studied Germany`s history between 1930 and 1933?

With Labour, to misquote Matthew d`Ancona, "masquerading" as an opposition party, seemingly ignorant of the particularly relevant political lesson history has taught us, that the right thrives when the left is divided, and refusing to adopt a remain position, chances of victory in  any forthcoming election appear slim. There is little point in deselecting MPs to "open the door for more diverse, younger, working-class MPs" when the party`s leadership`s main tactic appears to be suggesting more talks with the EU over a softer Brexit deal (Trigger ballots,not the general election, focus Labour MPs` minds, 05/08/19)Imagine what the right wing media would make of that, come campaign time!

   At least John McDowell has the right idea. By questioning the position of the new chancellor with claims that Javid profited "from the greed which fuelled the financial crisis", and demanding his tax returns be published, McDowell is getting attention focused on the total unsuitability of Johnson`s cabinet to run the country (Javid`s City career "makes him dubious choice for chancellor", 05/08/19). A late summer campaign on why the Tories have done next to nothing about tax avoidance over nearly ten years in power would make a welcome change from Labour`s obvious Brexit problem!

Emily Thornberry is too late with her assessment that the Labour party "would be off our bloody rockers" ("We`d be off our rockers" not to seize chance of referendum, 01/08/19). Corbyn`s plan appears now to be to win a vote of no-confidence in Johnson, and force a general election. His campaign would be based on being against a no-deal Brexit, promising instead to "reopen talks with the EU", presumably with the forlorn hope of a softer Brexit being arranged, and jobs, investment and trade hunky-dory! Are these tactics designed to win an election? The right wing media will have a field day!

         Millions of us, like Thornberry, would prefer an acknowledgement that lies were told in the 2016 referendum, and the full consequences of Brexit were never fully understood or explained; remain, the only sensible option, has to be in the Labour manifesto, alongside left wing policies to drive down inequality and ensure investment is no longer a southern preserve. 

        With Corbyn pledging yet more talks with the EU, the anti-Tory vote would be split many ways, and success handed on a plate to Johnson. There are intelligent, knowledgeable people in Corbyn`s leadership team. Could I respectfully suggest they refer back to the history of Germany, 1930-33? 

Corbyn might well have "spent an awful lot of time listening to people with divergent views", but it`s a shame no one mentioned the possibility of the anti-Tory vote being split (Corbyn "raring to go" as Labour gears up for election battle but declines to come out for remain, 29/07/19). What is the point of "gearing up" for an election, and having excellent policies "about reducing inequality in Britain", when on the key issue of Brexit there is still obfuscation? Surely there is enough polling evidence to suggest that Labour`s lack of clarity does not go down well with the electorate?

      Trying to appease pro-Leave Labour voters with "a Labour-negotiated deal" will do nothing to satisfy the millions of Labour voters dead set against leaving the EU, and gift votes to the nationalist and remain-supporting parties, split the anti-Tory vote, and could even give Johnson a majority as a result. History should have taught Labour`s leadership team the danger of deliberately dividing the left vote, when faced with far-right opponents!