PAINFUL OR POINTLESS: CALL IT OFF

WILL MAY COMPROMISE?

On Tuesday I walked through the media tents and contending Brexiteers and Remainers outside Westminster on a darkening January afternoon. I’ve reported from that patch of grass on and off for over 40 years, often urging people to take more interest in politics. I should have been more careful over what I wished for. People are interested now as they shout and tweet from wholly divided camps. The nation is ripping itself apart.

As Downtown’s Chief Executive explains eloquently in his blog, our parliamentary system is unable to cope. A system designed to give all power to a government cannot deal with the compromises needed in the current situation. The proportional representation that Frank calls for would result in coalitions requiring compromise. Just like our democratic participation in the European Union requires compromise. We aren’t shut out. Our voice is heard. Sometimes we win, sometimes we don’t but we are there with our democratically elected MEP’s and our democratically elected ministers.

Quoting Tony Blair approvingly has become the crime of the century according to Brexiteers, so here goes. The former Prime Minister says we are faced with a choice between a painful No Deal Brexit, and a pointless one where we have a close relationship with the EU but with no say.

The latter possibility is more real now as the Prime Minister is forced to hold talks with her political opponents. I am not optimistic they will go well.

Up to now she has only been interested in appeasing the Democratic Unionists and the European Research Group. At the last minute to seek the support of people who’s job it is to oppose the government, is unlikely to end well.

This is particularly because those stupid red lines all seem still to be in place. Jeremy Corbyn is right to say that No Deal must be off the table. The Chancellor, Philip Hammond and Business Secretary David Gauke are right to hint that a Customs Union can be discussed.

If the talks fail, then we are faced with several possibilities. Even though there is more support for stopping No Deal than anything else, it might just happen. The size of Mrs May’s deal defeat amazed me. I said I might get egg on my face and I apologise for thinking the majority against her could be under a 100. Bloody-mindedness is rampant in the House of Commons so don’t dismiss us crashing out. The idea of the Liaison Committee stopping a hard Brexit has just collapsed. The suggestion that MPs could take control is silly. Surely no government could stay in office as a bystander whilst the Commons ran things. Furthermore, will Labour want such a precedent for when they are in office?

Let us hope there are enough members of the Cabinet to force Mrs May to take an open approach to the talks which might lead to suspending Article 50 or a very soft Brexit. The latter would help those of us who will hope to point out soon that the whole project was wrong, and we can begin the campaign, with young people, to re-join an EU that is likely to be radically reformed by the challenges it will be forced to face.

POWER TO THE NORTH.

I haven’t time to discuss this in detail today, but I note that Jake Berry, the Northern Powerhouse Minister is talking about a Department for the North with tax raising powers! It seems to lack democratic accountability, but it looks like John Prescott’s turn of the century Northern Way with bells us.

It’s a pity that the Tories, with the shameful connivance of their Lib Dem partners, scrapped the regional structure in place in 2010. It sent out a message that the North doesn’t matter that partly led to the Leave vote in 2016.

Follow me @JimHancockUK

 

 

THE CHANCELLOR IN THE IRON MAIDEN

 

LABOUR’S DILEMMA.

The Chancellor’s economic bondage fetish continues! During the election he bound himself in pledges not to increase income tax, national insurance and VAT by law. Last night at the Mansion House he pledged a new fiscal framework to achieve permanent budget surpluses.

This is a major development in the finances of the nation. In only seven of the last fifty years have governments run a budget surplus. George Osborne is convening the first meeting in 150 years of the commissioners for the reduction of the national debt.

Business is likely to welcome this determination to tackle the national debt but its political implications are profound. Labour has always believed in the need to run deficits during difficult times to boost the economy and support public services. How will they respond to this? If they support it, the prospect of a Labour Party coming to power with ambitious visions for the NHS, housing and social care will be almost impossible. If Labour oppose Osborne, he will say it is evidence Labour are committed to running deficits and never tackling the National Debt currently running at 80% of GDP.

This move shows the Tories are determined to press home their advantage at a time when Labour is engaged in a tepid leadership election to which I will return in later blogs.

EURO HONEYMOON OVER.

It is a good job the Chancellor is able to divert attention from Tory divisions on Europe. I thought the “better off out” brigade now disguised as Conservatives for Britain might have come to have a little more respect for David Cameron after his election victory. Not a bit of it. We are back to the nineties with these Tory backbenchers making impossible demands on banning freedom of movement in the EU so that they can campaign to get Britain out.

MANDELSON ON NORTHERN DEVOLUTION.

Peter Mandelson is hoping to be elected Chancellor of Manchester University shortly and wants that institution to play its part in the Northern Powerhouse.

During the campaign he has made some painful observations about how Labour was completely outflanked on devolution during the last few years.

Labour council leaders across the North were left with no alternative but to go along with the Northern Powerhouse because of a complete absence of an alternative by Labour. They were reluctant to promise to abolish the Local Enterprise Partnerships but their vision of how the North South divide would be narrowed remained opaque. They should have returned to John Prescott’s vision of regional assemblies holding recreated Regional Development Agencies to account. Only this time they should have given them real powers, like Osborne is giving Greater Manchester.

Mandelson says he was hugely frustrated by seeing the Tories seizing the devolution agenda whilst Labour stood back. The former cabinet minister says Labour had the language but not the policies to rebalance the UK economy.

Labour got this wrong but the Tory plan to allow groups of councils to come together, each with a different model isn’t the answer either to the really big question of how England responds to the call for a federal UK.

 

MILIBAND RIGHT ON ONE THING-DEVOLUTION.

 

 

HANG ON MANCHESTER!

 

It has been a significant week for the future governance of the North of England. Exactly ten years after the people of the North East rejected the weak elected assembly on offer at the time, we now have the two major parties vying with each other to devolve real power to parts of the North

 

The Chancellor has promised major powers to Greater Manchester. Meanwhile the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, has set out a more measured approach offering powers to the whole of the north of England and House of Lords reform to address our current under representation in the upper chamber.

 

My sources in Manchester tell me they have become exasperated by Ed Miliband’s approach of awaiting a constitutional convention. Although Manchester is a Labour authority it finds it easier to deal with the fast moving Tory George Osborne. However the Manchester leadership needs to recognise that city regions aren’t the whole north, that the Tories may not be in a position to deliver their promises come May and a convention with everyone having their say is the right approach.

 

It has always been a weakness of the city regionalists that they don’t see the need for democratic accountability. They have been dragged into accepting an elected conurbation mayor in 2017 if the Tories get back. Sir Richard Leese is the favourite to take this role but I don’t think that will happen. The Greater Manchester Police and Crime Commissioner Tony Lloyd (who’s post will be taken over by the mayor) is a possible contender or possibly Jim McMahon, the leader of Oldham.

 

ED’S FULL CONSTITUTIONAL SOLUTION.

 

Some weeks ago I suggested a considered approach to the many constitutional issues that have arisen in England since the Scottish referendum vote. Ed Miliband’s plan provides for this.

 

He is looking at the wider picture- not just the city regions. He wants an English regions cabinet committee so that our problems are put at the heart of government and not forgotten by Whitehall civil servants. He also wants to address reform of the House of Lords once and for all by bringing the regions into the process. There is a crying need for this. It should be called the House of the South East at the moment. 31% of peers have their main residence in London and 23% in the South East. Just 5% of peers list their main residence in the North West and 4% in the North East. Miliband wants to create an elected Senate with representatives drawn from the nations, regions and cities of the United Kingdom.

 

At a time when the alienation of the people from politics is reaching dangerous proportions, this might be a way of turning things round. There are many misgivings about Ed Miliband and his leadership qualities but on this subject he has adopted a comprehensive approach to constitutional reform.

 

TORIES’ PIECEMEAL APPROACH.

 

Greater Manchester has been well run in the last few years. Its Combined Authority has been an exemplar of how councils with different political colours or aspirations can work together. One can understand the Chancellor’s wish to reward such progress, but he needs to look at the wider picture. The other city regions like West Yorkshire and Liverpool are promised powers, although not necessarily the same powers and on a different time scale. Then there is the suburban and rural North not covered by this. In other words if the Tories get back we will have a hotchpotch. This is intentional. The one size fits all approach is openly criticised but the Osborne way could also be a recipe for confusion and debilitating rivalry.

 

So if the Tories win we will have disparate devolution to some city regions, English votes for English laws and no reform of the House of Lords.

 

Labour’s constitutional convention approach should be supported.

 

 

 

 

 

RAIL IN THE NORTH:WHAT DO THE PEOPLE WANT?

 

 

UP THE JUNCTION

 

The travelling public of the North deserve a proper say on what they want from their rail services.

 

This week we’ve had more announcements from on high about HS2, and backing for HS3 from Manchester to Leeds. Sir David Higgins, Chairman of High Speed Two Ltd is an excellent man but who is he talking to before he makes this pronouncements? City region leaders but is that enough? Not if you look at the rows that have broken out across the North in the wake of Sir David’s announcement.

 

Why is Liverpool being left unconnected from HS2 and HS3? Where should the stations be located in Leeds and Sheffield? On the very day eyes were focused on what will be happening in 2027, there were protests about current services between Lancaster and Barrow. And fundamentally whilst one must respect the overwhelming view of city region bosses that HS2 is good for the North, there are the doubters who believe it will just make it easier to work in Borisland (the South East).

 

So how do we solve the democratic deficit? Sir David himself calls for northern cities to speak with one voice forming a new body called Transport for the North. The problem is Sir David not everybody in the north lives in the city regions. We need an elected Council of the whole North to allow the people a chance to formulate policies on rail, the economy, the environment etc.

 

CHESHIRE DYNAMO.

 

Michael Jones will be a happy man following the announcement that Crewe is to be an HS2 hub rather than Stoke. The leader of Cheshire East council takes no prisoners in his drive to bring investment and jobs to his authority. Indeed he may harbour ambitions to lead the whole of Cheshire. He recently called for a unitary authority to be restored for the county. I understand the demand did not go down well with his near namesake Cllr Mike Jones, the leader of Cheshire West and Chester and a leading figure in the Local Government Association. Conservative Party rules may have been breached.

 

It is an unfortunate spat between the Tory politicians but Cheshire is fortunate to have two leaders who, in their different ways bring good leadership to the county.

 

LABOUR PARTY CENTRALISATION.

 

The complaint by the outgoing leader of Labour in Scotland that the party treated her organisation as a branch office had me reflecting on the party’s organisation in the North.

 

When I started as a journalist in the seventies the North West Labour Party was headed up by a fearsome gent by the name of Paul Carmody. He was master of all he surveyed in the region and had no fear of Prime Ministers. He told Harold Wilson where to go when the PM objected to Carmody’s plans to change the boundaries of his Huyton constituency and berated Jim Callaghan for being late for a factory visit. Regional officials should be given back some of those powers as they know what’s going on in Lancashire and Yorkshire.

 

OUTSTANDING BROADCASTING.

 

Brave Huddersfield doctor Geraldine O’Hara is reporting every day on the Today programme about her experiences treating Ebola patients in Africa.

 

Her reporting is of the highest standard as she vividly describes her life amongst those suffering from this dreadful disease. She gives us a full picture of the tragedy but also the rare moments of joy as some patients recover.

 

Although she will not seek it, I hope her reports are acknowledged by multiple awards in due course.