tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32284717010270952912024-03-13T00:03:53.600+00:00Chris Davies MEPChris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.comBlogger213125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-2110973411569364722011-02-23T15:24:00.000+00:002011-02-23T15:25:14.933+00:00BRITAIN’S NON-VOTERS INSULT FREEDOM FIGHTERS IN LIBYAAnyone who has ever knocked on doors seeking support for their party has heard the words: “I’m not interested in politics or in voting; I never vote; you politicians are all the same, you’re just out for yourselves.”<br /><br />I have sympathy for those who don’t believe that their views are properly represented, or who feel that their vote can have little influence in a first-past-the-post voting system, but I have none at all for those who can’t be bothered to vote even as a gesture of protest.<br /><br />Hearing the news each day from the Middle East brings home the stark contrast between those in Britain who hold our democracy in contempt and those who fight for it elsewhere.<br /><br />People in Tunisia, people in Egypt, people in Libya have taken to the streets and laid down their lives for the sake of having what the complacent non-voters in our country appear to despise so much – the chance to influence the way they are governed through the ballot box.<br /><br />I doubt that I would have the courage to face the wrath of authoritarian regimes as those seeking democracy in the Middle East are doing now, but I cherish what we have in Britain. It is very far from perfect but, in the words of Churchill: “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”<br /><br />Some 37 years ago I joined the Liberal Party and first knocked on a door to ask for support. Over the years I have grown to respect supporters of all political parties who have done the same. Politics in Britain is tame by the standards of many places elsewhere but those who try to influence the decision-making process are standing up for the fundamental values of freedom all the same.<br /><br />Maybe it’s time that the candidates of all parties, the people who put their heads above the parapet and engage with the democratic process, got together to tell the non-voters what we really think of them.<br /><br />I cannot be alone in finding that a great many non-voters tend to be smug, superior and disdainful. So often they give the impression that they think it’s clever not to vote. In their arrogance they express the view that politics and politicians are simply beneath them. Some simply have no appreciation of the idea that anyone could be motivated by concepts of public service, or by a desire to achieve change for the greater good, probably because the thought of doing the same has never crossed their minds.<br /><br />Non-voters can despise practising politicians all they like, the reality is that they have cast aside their chance of having any influence and have opted instead for impotency. The vote is power, and we who use it are pretty contemptuous of those who do not.<br /><br />So, non-voters, hear it from one practising politician:<br /><br />“You insult the memory of those who fought for the vote in Britain and who are fighting across the world for it now. Our law gives you the right to emasculate yourselves by choosing not to vote but don’t imagine that this wins you respect.<br /><br />“We live in a democracy and while the views of voters matter the views of non-voters do not. By not voting you have made yourself irrelevant.<br /><br />“We don’t care what you think. You have made the decision that you want no influence. So be it, you have none.”<br /><br />I feel so much better for writing that. Maybe I’ll get some cards printed that I can carry with me to give to non-voters when next I go knocking on doors.<br /><br />“SORRY,” they might read. “Sorry for having disturbed you and sorry too that I wasted my time. Perhaps if you suffered under authoritarian rule you might appreciate why the chance to vote is something to value and use.<br /><br />“Fortunately we live in a democracy, but please don’t expect politicians to take any notice of your views, we serve at the whim of voters and you have chosen not to be one..<br /><br />“If this annoys you there is always something you can do about it. USE YOUR VOTE!”Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-9942403237765244532011-02-12T09:15:00.001+00:002011-02-12T09:20:48.943+00:00AWAYDAY‘Team Davies’ has been on our annual Awayday; two of them in fact. Staff from my Stockport and Brussels offices got together at a Tudor mansion in the Peak District National Park to talk about just about every aspect of our work. We combined the work (and occasional heated dispute) with some hearty breakfasts, substantial evening meals, and an afternoon walk in Dovedale.<br /><br />I have always thought these occasions useful, but perhaps this was the best. Maybe the fact that there was no signal for mobile phones helped concentrate the minds; it certainly made it difficult to follow developments in Egypt.<br /><br />Grudgingly I now accept, as someone who long regarded a simple word processor as the most advanced aid to communication that I ever wanted to master, that times are changing even faster than I had appreciated. Perhaps one day I shall even read a ‘tweet’.<br /><br />Most important, we agreed my campaign priorities for the year ahead. They are, in order:<br /><br />Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy and introduction of sustainable practices while we still have fish left in our seas to save;<br /><br />Better implementation of EU environment laws in every Member State, and securing the adoption of correlation tables in new legislation;<br /><br />Advancing measures to curb climate change, especially development of carbon capture and storage technology;<br /><br />Identifying measures to protect biodiversity, particularly to arrest the decline in insect numbers;<br /><br />Championing the case for legislation to permit medically assisted dying.<br /><br />By the way, the Tudor mansion was Hartington Hall. It’s a Youth Hostel, and great value.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-84797015751386453412011-01-17T09:46:00.001+00:002011-01-17T09:48:45.394+00:00LESSONS FROM THE BY-ELECTION THAT COULD NOT BE WONIt reveals naivety on my part that it was only after the polls had closed in Oldham East & Saddleworth that I learnt that no opposition party had lost a by-election in a seat it held since 1982, when Labour was beaten by the Conservatives at a time when the latter were riding the crest of the wave after Britain had recaptured the Falkland Isles. Had I known this beforehand I would not have placed a small bet on the Liberal Democrats to win, even with the odds at 10-1 against.<br /><br />We campaigned to win OE&S. There may have been some in the organising team who realised from the beginning that a respectable second place was the best that could be achieved but if so they did a remarkable job at maintaining morale by keeping such sentiments to themselves. They showed great dedication to the job, leading from the front and working themselves into the ground. For weeks on end they also braved the lowest temperatures that most of us have ever experienced in an election campaign.<br /><br />If the election had taken place in the immediate aftermath of the Court case that saw the MP disbarred then all might have been well. But parliamentary by-elections are not mere local affairs, they command national attention, and it was inevitable that the agenda would move on quickly from Phil Woolas to the record of the Coalition Government.<br /><br />Labour and the Liberal Democrats were neck and neck last May, separated by just 103 votes. Since then, according to the polls, Labour’s support has risen by 10 points and ours has fallen by at least 13. The tide hasn’t simply turned since May, it has raced out in a torrent. How could we possibly have won such a by-election in these circumstances? <br /><br />The challenge was clear enough on the doorstep. During every canvassing session I met a couple of people who had voted Lib Dem in the past but who were not going to do so this time. The mere fact that we were in coalition with the Conservatives was repellent to some, the impression of broken trust over tuition fees saw off the rest. Each time I would return to the campaign HQ feeling that a few more grains of sand had slipped through our fingers. <br /><br />Anyone who assumed that Labour supporters might feel betrayed by the actions of Phil Woolas were quickly disabused. However bad the nature of the divisive and racist (“make the white folks angry”) campaign he ran, Woolas’s past supporters didn’t like him having been thrown out by the Courts. That said, I’m still pleased that Elwyn Watkins mounted his legal challenge; his success drew a line that candidates and agents everywhere may be reluctant to cross in future elections. <br /><br />On the other hand we DID mount one of the most effective third party squeeze effort in the history of parliamentary by-elections. The Tory vote collapsed as their supporters took the tactical decision to back the Liberal Democrats. But we needed to gain two votes from the Tories for every vote we lost to Labour, and that was too tall an order.<br /><br />Political commentators question whether the Tories pulled their punches and mounted a campaign that was less than wholehearted. It’s true that they didn’t launch an all out assault on their coalition partners but the Tories don’t have a single borough councillor in the constituency and no party organisation worth mentioning. They were always going to come third, and a more vigorous Tory campaign would have had only one consequence – to increase the size of the Labour majority over the Liberal Democrats. How would that benefit the Coalition Government?<br /><br />We didn’t win, and realistically we couldn’t have won, but Liberal Democrats secured a creditable result in the circumstances. The question that has to be asked now, as it should be after every such event, is what could we have done differently and better? The OE&S campaign left me convinced that we need to review our approach and learn some lessons for the future. <br /><br />I have no complaints about the organisation; administratively it seemed close to flawless. Campaigns Department pulled together a team of dedicated young people, some of whom were not born when I set about the task of turning derelict wards in the constituency into strongholds of local Liberalism. Amongst them was a great esprit de corps, with apparent rivalry to demonstrate who could go without sleep for the longest period and drink the greatest amount of Diet Coke. Their efforts and tactical planning suffered initially from having too little outside support (it was before Christmas and weather conditions across much of Britain were terrible), yet even with the pavements covered in snow a great many leaflets got delivered.<br /><br />My concerns are not with the organisation but with the politics, and particularly with the belief that in some quarters seems to have taken on the mantra of religious doctrine that elections are won by pushing out more paper than our opponents, and that sheer hard work will win the day. I do not share this view. Good graphics and technical wizardry (“look, we are so clever that we can produce individual leaflets with the elector’s own name on them”) do not make up for the lack of effective political content. <br /><br />Too much of our election literature in OE&S was simply vacuous, and for all that the Tory squeeze was effective there were some examples (‘personal’ letters in particular) whose content made me squirm with embarrassment. On a number of occasions I delivered pieces of literature that I thought would not persuade a single extra person to vote for us, and sometimes I feared that they might do us actual harm. Voters complained that they were assaulted by the sheer number of leaflets, but a criticism of greater concern is that too much of the paper we distributed said nothing worth saying. If electors felt that our approach was condescending they had good reason.<br /><br />Why do we do this? I learnt many political lessons in Liverpool from Sir Trevor Jones (‘Jones the Vote’), who used to tell me never to underestimate the stupidity of the electorate. By this he meant that we should distil the messages, keep them simple, and repeat them often. But he countered this by telling me that at the same time I should never underestimate the intelligence of the electorate, by which he warned not to patronise the voters and to make sure that I had something worthwhile to offer and that would hold their attention. I’m not convinced that our present strategists have got the balance right.<br /><br />It might be argued that Labour’s campaign literature in OE&S was wholly negative; they attacked us for broken pledges on tuition fees and imposing excessive cuts. But if the position had been reversed we would have done the same. We didn’t confront criticisms that found a strong resonance amongst the voters. More importantly, we did very little to counter them by promoting the achievements of Liberal Democrats in office. I know the arguments about not allowing opponents to dictate the agenda but if we are not to celebrate the role of the first Liberal Democrat ministers in our lifetimes then what is the point of us fighting elections in the first place? We surely should adjust our mindsets, treat the voters as adults, and be prepared to address serious issues - while doing it in a way that ensures that the appearance of our literature secures sufficient attention to pass the doormat to dustbin test.<br /><br />It’s difficult to write these words without implying criticism of people I like and for whose efforts I have admiration, and I am well aware of the rebuttals that can be made. Whatever flaws I might suggest, surely the fact that we not only held our own against the outgoing tide but made a tiny advance in percentage terms speaks for the success of the strategy? How can I prove that the result would not have been worse had we done differently?<br /><br />It’s possible that we would have done less well if we had devoted more space in our election literature to putting across the arguments of Liberal Democrats in government. It is indeed a risk, but it’s not a question that can be answered because we have not attempted to convey the achievements of our party in an attractive manner. Now we are in government we must start to do so.<br /><br />I want Liberal Democrats to do well in elections. I also want us to be proud of ourselves and of the political messages we convey. There are lessons to be learnt from the Oldham East & Saddleworth campaign, and there are new approaches that must be explored.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-60293268676233842742010-12-24T10:13:00.001+00:002010-12-24T10:15:09.156+00:00THIS IS A GREAT REFORMING GOVERNMENTI don't have a problem with the indiscrete things that Liberal Democrat ministers have said about their Conservative opposite numbers within the Coalition. I expect most Liberal Democrat party members will be reassured to learn that their ministers have not been subsumed into Conservative culture, and despite an amicable working relationship the two parties within the government remain very definitely distinct.<br /> <br />In fact the indiscrete comments will help us in all sorts of situations: "You think we LIKE having to work with the Conservatives? Well now you know, we don't, but it's the price that has to be paid for having Liberal Democrat influence within the government of Britain."<br /> <br />I DO have a problem with Vince Cable losing himself influence over the decision as to whether Murdoch and News International should gain control of BSkyB. Not because I disagree with Vince's views one iota, but because the consequence of their expression is that the Murdoch bid has been given a massive step up. That can only be bad. If I had my way Americans/Australians would not be allowed any control whatsoever over the British media.<br /> <br />I am very familiar after 11 years in the European Parliament with working across parties to try and build consensus for particular changes. It doesn't mean I have suddenly embraced another party's philosophy that I am able to do a deal with opponents as individuals with a different approach to my own; I think it's an honest and healthy demonstration of democracy in a open society. Coalition governments are the same, only with knobs on.<br /> <br />But I DO have a problem with our insular and immature media that presents all this as somehow revelational, when it is in fact just 'normal'. I don't expect a majority of the public to understand this; too many people appear to think that the artificial public expression of unity is 'good' and honestly expressed differences ultimately resolved through negotiation are somehow 'bad'.<br /> <br />And I have a really BIG problem with what people too often appear to think of as 'proper' government, viz. the elected dictatorship of one party that has formed a government despite having secured a minority of votes - in the case of Tony Blair just 35% of the total cast.<br /> <br />Britain has been ruled by governments that have not commanded a majority of votes for decade after decade, Tory after Labour after Tory. An electoral system that would be worthy only of a Banana Republic may have given them a huge majority in the House of Commons, but in truth they have never represented the country.<br /> <br />The Coalition Government is formed of parties that secured 60% of the votes last May. It is the first true majority government that Britain has had since 1945 (ok - Labour then only won 49.7% of votes, but it was near enough).<br /> <br />It has the potential still to be one of the great reforming governments of all time, and I believe that Liberal Democrat influence will ensure that those reforms steer us towards a society that is more fair, more free, more democratic and more green. <br /> <br />It continues to have my strong support.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-60664721783257115732010-12-22T21:13:00.000+00:002010-12-22T21:14:25.188+00:00ADVICE FROM A BY-ELECTION WINNERI contested and won the Littleborough & Saddleworth by-election in July 1995. The weather during the weeks of campaigning was glorious. The summer sun beat down, cracking the pavements.<br /> <br />What a contrast with the record low temperatures being experienced by campaign workers helping now in the Oldham East & Saddleworth by-election. If the pavements are cracking it can only be because the ice is breaking them up. Not that we would know as the pavements are covered in snow, although for the moment it is at least nice and crisp.<br /> <br />On the basis of my experience I can offer the Liberal Democrat candidate, Elwyn Watkins, one useful piece of advice.<br /> <br />I spent the last two days of my election campaign touring the constituency in shirt sleeves, waving cheerily at potential voters from the front of an open top double decker bus.<br /> <br />Elwyn, when our campaign organisers suggest that you spend two days waving from an open top double decker bus, just say "thanks, but no thanks"!Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-27683253318830197192010-12-19T11:08:00.000+00:002010-12-19T11:09:06.124+00:00WARM WEATHER FOR THE TIME OF YEAR!After returning with frozen fingers from a twilight run on snow covered moorland I turned on the computer. Jim Hansen at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies provides data each month on global temperatures. These are his latest conclusions:<br /><br />"This has been the the warmest January-November in the GISS analysis, which covers 131 years. However, it is only a few hundredths of a degree warmer than 2005, so it is possible that the final GISS results for the full year will find 2010 and 2005 to have the same temperature within the margin of error.<br /><br />"The cold anomaly in Northern Europe in November has continued and strengthened in the first half of December. Combined with the unusual cold winter of 2009-2010 in Northern Hemisphere mid-latitudes, this regional cold spell has caused widespread commentary that global warming has ended. That is hardly the case. On the contrary, globally November 2010 is the warmest November in the GISS record."Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-13795178821355891602010-12-18T17:46:00.000+00:002010-12-18T17:47:31.718+00:00DRUGS POLICY HAS FAILEDThere is a certain familiarity to the words used by Bob Ainsworth, the former Labour Home Office and latterly Defence Minister, who has announced his conversion to the belief that possession of all drugs should be decriminalised.<br /><br />“Prohibition has failed to protect us,” he said. Billions of pounds are being spent on enforcement policies “without preventing the wide availability of drugs.”<br /><br />“Leaving the drugs market in the hands of criminals causes huge and unnecessary harm to individuals, communities and entire countries.<br /><br />“We must take the trade away from organised criminals and hand it to the control of doctors and pharmacists.<br /><br />“It is time to replace our failed war on drugs with a strict system of legal regulation to make the world a safer, healthier place.”<br /><br />The words sound familiar to me because, in speeches and in articles over the past decade and more, I have used them all myself.<br /><br />It’s a pity that they are expressed now only by a FORMER Home Office minister. The emperor is not wearing any clothes, but his serving ministers never dare say it.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-84210485180593274672010-12-16T16:22:00.001+00:002010-12-16T16:24:24.308+00:00CHRISTOPHER DAVIES KILLED IN AFGHANISTANMy namesake, Christopher Davies, was killed in Afghanistan last month, The 22 year old from St Helens served in the 1st Battalion Irish Guards; he was hit by small arms fire while taking part in a security patrol in Helmand province. By all accounts, and there are many of them, he was a model professional soldier and a very popular man with all who knew him.<br /><br />The European Parliament has just expressed its views on the need for a new strategy in Afghanistan. It says nothing that can't be found from other sources but is still worth citing.<br /><br />It says that a revised strategy should face up to the deterioration both in security and in socio-economic indicators in Afghanistan despite almost a decade of international involvement.<br /><br />The insurgency is financed largely by the money extracted by war lords and local mafia bosses to protect the US military supply chain. We are paying for the weapons used against us.<br /><br />The number of people living below the poverty threshold has more than doubled since we commenced military operations.<br /><br />Up to 80% of international aid has never reached the people of Afghanistan. Most US aid never leaves the USA.<br /><br />Scant regard has been paid by the international community to the involvement of Afghan people.<br /><br />Afghanistan is today the source of 90% of the world’s illicit opium yet when coalition forces entered Kabul in 2001 no opium poppies were being grown in the country. The opium trade now accounts for 26% of Afghan GDP, with most of the money going to government officials and regional brokers (only 4% to the Taliban).<br /><br />Of 94,000 men in the Afghan National Police 90% are illiterate and 30% go missing within a year of joining.<br /><br />Parliament recognised that negotiations with the Taliban are essential for a political solution.<br /><br />If we had really tried very hard indeed, would it have been possible for us to have made an even worse mess of things than this?Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-86180275240721158122010-12-15T17:47:00.001+00:002010-12-15T17:49:10.417+00:00CAMERON WAS RIGHT – PARLIAMENT BLINKS FIRSTWhen David Cameron announced that he had agreed with other leaders an EU budget increase of 2.9% , and that was that, I accused him of not having read the Lisbon Treaty. “Was he not aware that the European Parliament had equal powers in the making of the budget?” I asked.<br /><br />Whether or not he has read the Treaty the Prime Minister got the politics right and I got them wrong. In the face of the European Council’s refusal to change its position, the European Parliament simply backed down.<br /><br />So much for my assertion last month that the Parliament was “united and determined” in demanding future negotiating concessions. <br /><br />A majority of MEPs supported a 6% budget increase by way of an opening gambit, but negotiators abandoned this almost immediately. The real battle was to try and secure arrangements for involvement of the Parliament in preparing long term budget plans, and for discussing transfer of funds between different budget lines. These ended up being shunted off into the long grass for debate at another time.<br /><br />Why did the Parliament give in so easily and so meekly? Our negotiators argue that they secured an increased level of future expenditure commitments, but I'm not convinced that this is worth a great deal. In my view, faced with the option of no increase in the budget at all, no new External Action Service, and payments to farmers and for regional development being curtailed, a majority of MEPs simply backed down. <br /><br />A 2.9% increase and nothing definite on negotiating rights suddenly seemed attractive when compared to hearing David Cameron utter the words: “No budget increase at all? Make my day!”Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-65485842255828133752010-12-14T23:09:00.001+00:002010-12-14T23:09:52.413+00:00DON'T PLAY GAMES WITH CLIMATE CHANGEI thought the opening of my climate change speech was rather good. "I have no interest in football," I said, "but I have seen pictures of the manager of a team playing its last game of the season, 2-1 down, and facing relegation, and in considering the outcome of the Cancun conference I thought of our Climate Action Commissioner.<br /> <br />The manager is saved by the scoring of a goal. The result is a draw. A vital point is secured and relegation avoided.<br /> <br />"It's not a triumph. But it's not a defeat. The manager lives to fight another day."<br /> <br />Guaranteed to maintain attention I thought. <br /> <br />Commissioner Connie Hedegaard responded: "Let me first respond to Mr Davies. I'm very sorry but I follow football even less than he does, and I did not quite understand the analogy."<br /> <br />Oh well. Back to the writing desk.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-44611260824585295202010-12-13T21:03:00.000+00:002010-12-13T21:04:20.009+00:00ISRAEL HELPS HAMASOne of my Italian colleagues, Niccolo Rinaldi, has just returned from Gaza. He reports that Israel's partial lifting of the blockade has ensured that there are plenty of goods in the shops, although with 70% of the population receiving UN food aid there aren't many being bought. Worryingly, he also reports that there are very few women now to be seen on the streets of this teeming conurbation - in stark contrast to the situation in the more secular West Bank townships. His comment reminded me of a conversation I had in Gaza nearly 5 years ago with the wives of two Palestinan businessmen. It was soon after the elections that had brought Hamas to power, and they were both in tracksuits having just returned from the gym: "They'll have us all in burkas," they predicted.<br /> <br />Niccolo told me that, at their peak, there were 1,400 smuggling tunnels in operation between Gaza and Egypt, the entrances on both sides plainly visible and swarming with people and goods. Since the partial lifting of the blockade these had been reduced to 400, with some of them big enough to drive a car through. "And at the entrance to each there is a Hamas man, collecting "tax" on the goods in transit. Israel's blockade presented Hamas with its major source of income."<br /> <br />"It is, without doubt," he said, "the most stupid policy I have come across in all the years that I have followed foreign affairs."Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-91037607396153925742010-12-12T14:16:00.001+00:002010-12-12T14:18:44.700+00:00CLIMATE CHANGE – THE BALL IS STILL ROLLINGEven if every country does what it says it will do, world temperatures will rise by 4 degrees centigrade over the next century. That’s the best-guess scientific prediction. <br /><br />A temperature rise of this magnitude would force hundreds of millions of people to move or risk death, so it’s extreme in itself. (Where do these people move to without giving rise to enormous political unrest?). But it also gives rise to the prospect of run-away climate change, leading, for example, to the release of methane from frozen tundra that will accelerate the process of global warming. <br /><br />All this sounds fanciful when it’s cold outside. It’s hard to appreciate that across the world 2010 will go down as one of the warmest years on record, and that average global temperatures just keep going up and up. The climate change sceptics have an easy time arguing their case to a shivering public.<br /><br />So one of the most important things to have come out of the UN’s climate change conference at Cancun is a reminder that every government in the world is expressing concern about climate change and saying that we must take action to curb it. Only Bolivia registered its reluctance to support the final document – because it didn’t go far enough.<br /><br />The European Union had a minimum objective for these talks, it was to keep the ball rolling. The result has exceeded its expectations by quite a margin. UK environment secretary Chris Huhne can take a share of the credit for this by hammering out an agreement on the future of the Kyoto Protocol (which places obligations on only a limited number of countries) that kept everyone on board. I didn’t have the impression that my former MEP colleague took much interest in the global warming debate when he was in the European Parliament, but he’s proved himself a quick learner and an effective practitioner.<br /><br />It’s been a miserable year for all those involved in trying to persuade governments across the world to recognise the need for action. The failure at Copenhagen sucked momentum from a negotiating process that requires the consent of every nation on the planet. It strengthened the resistance of those who would argue, not unreasonably, that the EU cannot take measures of its own in isolation without the risk of losing more jobs.<br /><br />But now the process has new life. The USA is still failing to provide leadership but it has joined with other developed countries in agreeing to start helping poorer countries meet the costs of climate change, and to curb the destruction of forests. Both India and China have shown a willingness to take the agenda forward, and they have agreed to international monitoring of emissions; this represents a major retreat for the notion of national sovereignty and acceptance that we are all in this together and must be able to trust one another. Who knows, maybe my meeting in China with key environmental legislators a month ago contributed a little bit to the change in mood.<br /><br />The agreed target is to stop temperatures rising above 2 degrees centigrade. It’s a target that is probably already too late to achieve, and the measures announced so far are nothing like sufficient, but the agreement means that we can return to this year after year with new proposals for taking the agenda forward. We can ratchet up the requirements and obligations.<br /><br /> Next step for European politicians will be to consider raising our CO2 emissions reduction target for 2020 from 20% to 30%, setting an example and helping to promote low carbon investments. A month ago I would have said that prospects for securing agreement for this from EU governments were minimal. Now they are better – I go no further than that.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-59108212334886712862010-12-09T18:44:00.001+00:002010-12-09T18:48:36.209+00:00WHAT NICK CLEGG MUST DO NEXTThe Liberal Democrats have been damaged by our divisions over tuition fees. The strongly held views of different MPs couldn’t be reconciled, and our role in government meant that we couldn’t share with Labour the luxury of being able to criticise without explaining how we would fund higher education.<br /><br />Nick Clegg’s authority has taken a blow, but it is one from which he can recover. He will appreciate as never before that the inescapable rule for all political parties is that whether they do things well, or do things badly, they must do them together. Our influence over government policy depends upon us being reliable partners and our leader being able to deliver the votes. <br /><br />Within the party Nick is unchallenged, but a lot of our MPs will be saying: “please don’t put us through that again.”<br /><br />Morale has been shaken, and Nick needs now to rally the troops.<br /><br />He should start with some mea culpa. It’s clear that the situation has not been handled well even if it’s unclear how it could have been handled better. Nick will need to provide reassurance that similar situations will be avoided in future, that elephant traps will be identified before we fall into them, and that MPs will have a greater chance to influence decisions before they are announced.<br /><br />He can remind the parliamentary party that this is our first opportunity in generations to shape government policy. Liberal Democrats can be proud of measures that take the lowest paid out of tax, of commitments to democratic reform, and of helping some Conservatives (think Ken Clarke) release their ‘inner Liberal’. We can be pleased to have forged a pragmatic policy on Europe, halted the renewal of Trident, and stopped the Tories widening the income gap between generations by raising the inheritance tax threshold.<br /><br />Nick can admit that there is bound to be more pain to come, but this is the price to be paid for being in government at a time of financial crisis. He can urge them to take no sanctimonious nonsense from a Labour Party that destroyed the country’s finances in the first place.<br /><br />And, of course, he can lift the spirits of our MPs by being positive about the future. The hard bits have to be done now so that the good bits can follow.<br /><br />A week is a long time in politics and there are 4 years to go before the general election. Liberal Democrats will be judged by our record over the lifetime of the Government, not by a single decision.<br /><br />Nothing that has occurred in the debate over tuition fees will prevent Nick from being able to claim with good reason that that the record will prove to be a proud one.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-45286552952154257822010-12-07T12:45:00.000+00:002010-12-07T12:46:43.714+00:00TUITION FEES: THIS IS NO TIME TO ABSTAINSplits weaken parties, and sometimes destroy them. The reputation of the Liberal Democrat brand is being undermined with each passing hour as the impression grows stronger that on the issue of tuition fees we are not only divided but clueless.<br /><br />The case for supporting the recommendations of the Browne inquiry is strong, and if I were in the Commons I would be voting with Nick. The real damage to the party comes not from our adjusting course to take account of changed conditions, nor from rebellion by backbenchers on grounds of individual conscience, but from the impression we are now giving of being all over the place. <br /><br />Some Liberal Democrats will vote for the recommendations, some against. Some want to defer the vote, others want to abstain. In short, we are creating the impression not just of being weak, but of being a joke. <br /><br />I would rather us have a reputation for being tough (but fair) bastards than for being indecisive.<br /><br />Liberal Democrat MPs must now decide how to vote. If they want to limit the damage there should be only two options for them to consider . Either they vote for the recommendations, recognising that they provide funding for higher education in a progressive manner that protects those on lowest incomes, or they vote against on grounds of individual conscience.<br /><br />There are times when an abstention is an honourable third option. This is not one of them.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-16530311435510862042010-12-07T10:15:00.001+00:002010-12-07T10:25:20.806+00:00ARGENTINA AND BRAZIL RECOGNISE PALESTINEWithin days of each other Argentina and Brazil have each recognized Palestine as a free and independent state within the borders defined in 1967.<br /> <br />Good for them. Israel is said to have reacted with "sadness and disappointment" to the declaration. I bet it has. <br /> <br />Will the Europeans follow the South American's example in due course? Many of them have suggested that they will, but when push comes to shove they won't rock the US-Israel consensus.<br /> <br />The US will block any attempt to secure UN ratification. From Britain, from our/my Coalition Government, and from the rest of the EU, there will be nothing more than weasel words.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-55522912692469901872010-12-03T15:48:00.001+00:002010-12-03T15:50:09.895+00:00PHIL WOOLAS JUST DOESN’T GET IT!He’s hurt, of course. He’s lost his career, his income and his reputation. His name will be known for years to come as the MP who was disbarred for having “knowingly” lied about his opponent. It’s hardly surprising that Phil Woolas wants to claim that it’s all unfair.<br /><br />But his interpretation of events just doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.<br /><br />He implies, just as he did in the hearings before judges, that what he did what just part of the run-of-the-mill of political knockabout, and that others have dealt with him in the same way over the years. “It is now unclear what is political and what is personal,” he says.<br /><br />No, it is NOT unclear, and his opponents have not treated him in the same way as he treated them. <br /><br />In the past his actions, the reason for them and the likely effects of them, have been subjectively interpreted– this happens to everyone in politics, it’s the difference between the Daily Mirror and Daily Telegraph view of events - but no-one invented those actions or put words into his mouth.<br /><br />Phil Woolas says that the voters should be given the right to judge him. But those same voters have been deceived by him in the past. He told them lies, and he knew he was doing it. The judges who condemned him were able to hear what he hoped the voters last May would not - both sides of the case.<br /><br />He was desperate last May. He faced election defeat and was ready to do anything to avoid it. So he listened to the words of his election agent, Joe Fitzpatrick, who thought that Woolas’s best hope was “to make the white folk angry.” Together, they bet everything on influencing opinion and swinging the votes with just a couple of leaflets. They were humdingers, quite vile. <br /><br />The Immigration Minister of the United Kingdom didn’t just tell lies to try and secure his re-election, he told racist lies, intended to pander to the fears of white residents. That’s why what he did was so utterly beyond the pale.<br /><br />I don’t feel personal animosity towards Phil Woolas. I hope he will pick up the pieces and get an alternative career; I am sure there are plenty of people in the Labour Party who will give him a helping hand.<br /><br />But what he did was despicable, and democracy in Britain is the better for his defeat.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-71153859968674904492010-12-02T16:10:00.000+00:002010-12-02T16:11:21.156+00:00TALK TO HAMASThe man who leads the Hamas-controlled Palestinian administration in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, has given a press conference. The words he used are worth repeating.<br /><br />He told journalists: “We accept a Palestinian state on the borders of 1967 with Jerusalem as its capital, the release of Palestinian prisoners, and the resolution of the issue of refugees.<br /><br />Haniyeh said that a priority of his government was to avoid a military escalation with Israel by persuading other militant factions to preserve a de facto ceasefire.”<br /><br />Now here is an opportunity, is it not? You can’t make peace without talking to your enemies, and here is one of Israel’s enemies talking in terms that should delight European governments. Anyone seriously interested in securing a just settlement in the Middle East would surely be beating a path to Haniyeh’s door, but it won’t happen. Hamas will stay on the list of terrorist organisations because Israel (and therefore the USA) would be upset if we tried to remove it.<br /><br />I met with Haniyeh in Gaza in 2007, when he was Prime Minister of the short-lived Unity Government. He spoke then words not of terrorism but of diplomacy, but when the message was communicated no-one in London or Brussels took any notice.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-13835914982798067782010-12-02T14:23:00.001+00:002010-12-02T14:24:48.882+00:00FREE PALESTINEIsrael’s absorption (or dismemberment) of the West Bank continues apace, and the European Union does nothing to give practical form to its criticisms of a country with which it has a very close relationship.<br /><br />Meanwhile, Palestinian Prime Minister, Salam Fayyad, says that Palestine (or the West Bank at least) will be “ready for statehood” no later than August next year. Presumably he will then call upon the UN to recognise a Palestinian ‘state’.<br /><br />It’s a great idea but I can’t see it getting very far. The USA is alleged already to have told Netanyahu that they will use their veto. European Union foreign ministers have indicated their support in the past, so it will be interesting to see how long it takes for them to wriggle out of any such commitment. <br /><br />Past evidence suggests that Hell will freeze over before Britain and the rest of the EU dissents with the USA on matters to do with Israel.Chris Davies MEPhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10330519316049397531noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-36665740991978571312010-11-30T11:09:00.000+00:002010-11-30T11:10:13.967+00:00WARM AND FLUFFY ISN’T ALWAYS RIGHTMaybe my green credentials have been blown to pieces.<br /><br />I have just voted in the European Parliament’s environment committee against calls to take action to combat ‘speculation’ that may lead to extreme price volatility in food prices, against the insistence that environmentally-friendly farming practices will increase the income of the agricultural sector and improve food security, and against demands that EU agricultural policy should focus on providing support for small-scale and organic farming systems.<br /><br />On the agenda was a non-legislative report about food security. Italian and French colleagues within my group had sided with Green, GUE (far left) and some Socialist members to table a series of amendments that prompted a lively debate when we met before the meeting to discuss the Liberal Democrat (ALDE) voting intentions.<br /><br />Emotionally I am opposed to the idea of ‘speculation’ in food, and I don’t have much time for commodity brokers (I always recall the film ‘Trading Places’ whenever they are mentioned), but I couldn’t agree with my French colleague who said that food could not be considered as just another product. What’s the alternative – some kind of state intervention, market control or limit on food prices? Speculation by traders may be nasty but the alternative is usually worse.<br /><br />I support the idea that payments from the Common Agricultural Policy need to be linked to environmentally-friendly farming practices, but that’s a different matter from accepting that this will certainly increase the income of farmers or guarantee food security; I don’t think these claims can be accepted as a matter of faith.<br /><br />Maintaining small scale farms is a nice idea but primarily is surely a matter of social policy. I don’t see that small scale farming contributes any more to guaranteeing food security than large scale farming. The same applies to organic production, which I welcome for a variety of reasons but food security is not one of them.<br /><br />The sentiments behind the amendments were warm (and fluffy!), but I didn’t believe they stood up to scrutiny. We need to ensure that our agricultural policies are sustainable, but we also need to ensure that our cities are fed.<br /><br />By a small majority, and with the ALDE Group split 4-2 my way, the committee rejected the amendments.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-77196513529348216012010-11-29T11:40:00.000+00:002010-11-29T11:41:32.452+00:00AND THE BLIND SHALL SEEI have no doubt that a couple of weeks ago, in the weakened state in which he was left after putting off death for a while, 18-year old Paddy cat had gone blind. The evidence was convincing - he kept bumping into things, and he had difficulty finding his food dish. The vet couldn't make up his mind: "it's hard with cats."<br /> <br />A steroid injection, a daily kidney pill, and some (apparently very tasty) paste in his food and he is now much restored and enjoying a healthy appetite.<br /> <br />And he can see again. His sight is back - or at least some of it. He can follow my movements. He looks out of the window. He avoids obstacles and can find his food. What more does an elderly cat need?Chris Davies MEPhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10330519316049397531noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-4810654549799218832010-11-26T09:00:00.001+00:002010-11-26T09:00:08.487+00:00BY-ELECTION IN OLDHAM EAST AND SADDLEWORTHOldham East has had no MP since Phil Woolas was disbarred and the result of last May's election was declared null and void, but we still don't have a date for the by-election. A writ could be moved at any time in the House of Commons but no-one plans to do so until High Court judges have given their ruling on whether the decision of the Election Court is open to judicial review.<br /> <br />The Oldham Evening Chronicle reports that this is expected within the next few days, which probably means at the beginning of the week commencing 29 November. The legal opinions being heard by Liberal Democrats suggest that the way will then be clear to move the writ later in the week, but that now means a by-election early in January.<br /> <br />Oh good! Just what we need to work off Christmas excesses.<br /> <br />Meanwhile the Liberal Democrats are working well and there is a very cheerful atmosphere in the HQ set up in Tanner's Mill, Greenfield, just a field or two away from my home in Saddleworth. We want volunteers through the door NOW. As the campaign will be a little longer than expected the work underway is quite measured, and while leaflets are being delivered the concentration is on canvassing - which also keeps down the costs.<br /> <br />A lot is getting done, and we've had a good sprinkling of MPs through the HQ doors. My colleague from the European Parliament, Baroness Sarah Ludford, came up from London last week. She told me that she went canvassing with a little trepidation, wondering what the reaction would be to the Coalition Government. "It was fine, no problem at all except from people who were hard Labour and who always had been hard Labour" she reported. "I enjoyed it."Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-29636163766744782932010-11-25T12:54:00.000+00:002010-11-25T12:55:58.975+00:00COLD WINTERS CHALLENGE GLOBAL WARMINGIt’s cold this week, but at the beginning of the year it was even colder. Snow lay on the ground, temperatures chilled the bone but warmed the hearts of climate change sceptics. They were derisive about global warming.<br /><br />So maybe it will come as a surprise to learn that global temperatures during the first 6 months of 2010 were the warmest on record. There are a few weeks to go before we learn the results for the entire year, and as it’s a time of low solar irradiance maybe the record for the year will not be broken, but NASA reports that there has been no reduction in the global warming trend that began in the late 1970s. <br /><br />'Weather', after all, is not the same as 'climate'.<br /><br />Incidentally, has anyone noticed the uncanny connection between frothing-at-the-mouth europhobes and climate change deniers? In the European Parliament the overlap is obvious; it's the same UKIP, BNP, and Conservative right wing nutters, plus the Polish nationalists who sit with little flags on their desks in front of them, who denounce everything about the European Union who also dismiss with much aggression the very idea that global warming is taking place.<br /><br />Apparently it's all a plot to put up taxes on 'ordinary' people and establish world governance. But then, everything is a plot to these people.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-9030226937322393232010-11-24T20:33:00.000+00:002010-11-24T20:34:06.970+00:00UKIP CAN'T GET RID OF BLOOMUKIP's Godfrey Bloom may indeed be a national embarrassment, as the Liberal Democrat leader in the European Parliament described him today, but he must also be a huge embarrassment to UKIP. Still, he's here to stay.<br /> <br />Bloom's heckling of Martin Schulz, the German leader of the Socialists & Democrats Group - "EIN REICH, EIN VOLK, EIN FUHRER!" was out of order by the standards of any Parliament, but what gets me is the way in which he pretends that the European Parliament practices different standards to that of other democratic assemblies.<br /> <br />I have little doubt that his words would have got him ejected from the House of Commons, especially if he had been heckling an MP with a Germanic-sounding name, and once ejected he would have been out for at least a day. Bloom was complaining again later in the day when ushers wouldn't let him return to participate in another debate. As he likes to wrap himself in the Union Flag he should learn how the UK Parliament works.<br /> <br />Nigel Farage, the UKIP leader who tries to present his party as a respectable alternative, should get rid of Bloom, but that would be difficult. The UKIP delegation arrived in the European Parliament last year with 13 members. Defections have already reduced their numbers to 11. Farage can't afford to let anyone else depart.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-72141011866269944462010-11-24T11:19:00.001+00:002010-11-24T11:21:08.125+00:00MORE EU LAWS LIKE THESE PLEASEEU directives and binding regulations do not get a good press, but at best they can drive forward innovation, reduce costs, and benefit the environment.<br /><br />For years the car manufacturers maintained a voluntary agreement with the European Commission that aimed to reduce average CO2 emissions from new cars to 120g by 2012. Nothing much happened; the car makers instead made big profits by building 4WD ‘Chelsea tractors’ and the like.<br /><br />Eventually, at the beginning of 2008, and with MEPs like myself shouting at them, the Commission lost patience and proposed binding legislation. The car makers lobbied intensively to weaken the proposals; “we shall all be ruined,” they claimed, ignoring the reality that the EU single market provides a degree of protection from competition as every car made here or imported here has to meet the same standards. The law that emerged at the end of the year set the target at 130g by 2015.<br /><br />Guess what? Once the law was in place the manufacturers finally got around to doing what the engineers always said in private that they could do, designing cars that are more fuel efficient so cheaper to drive, and that emit less CO2. Toyota has already met the 2015 target, Fiat and Peugeot Citroen are close. The German manufacturers of big cars are a way off yet but emission levels of their new cars are falling fast each year.<br /><br />I haven’t forgotten being lambasted in a radio interview by the boss of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders when I claimed that the industry could meet tougher standards. Now the Society has admitted that its members “had overestimated the difficulty of cutting emissions.” Too right!Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3228471701027095291.post-6990568828941788402010-11-23T19:16:00.002+00:002010-11-23T19:20:11.990+00:00POWER WITHOUT THE EMISSIONS“Every little bit helps,” was the message from Chris Huhne, the Energy and Climate Secretary, when he gave his support to Saddleworth residents who want financial backing for a mini-hydro scheme they hope to see built at Dovestones reservoir in the Peak District. Using overflow water it could put enough electricity into the national grid to supply the needs of 100 homes, (assuming that they are very well insulated homes that is). It’s a good scheme, not least because it will promote the technology for mini-renewable projects and raise levels of public awareness. But with the planet’s population growing by 200,000 every single day I reckon that if it is completed it will meet the increasing world demand for electricity by only one minute.<br /><br />I reflected on this when I spoke at a carbon capture and storage (CCS) conference organised by the European Commission in Brussels. As a means of preventing the emission into the atmosphere of CO2 from fossil fuel power stations and major industrial installations, CCS is the only game in town. The cause for celebration is that the Commission has, at long last, published the call for tender for developers seeking financial support to build a number of CCS demonstration projects across Europe. The financial mechanism to be used is the one I was the first to propose and makes use of ‘surplus’ carbon allowances from the EU emissions trading scheme. Alas, with today’s low carbon price it will not provide nearly as much money as was once hoped.<br /><br />CCS is essential if we are to reduce the level of CO2 emissions by the 80-95% regarded as necessary, but progress is painfully slow. The call to tender was much delayed, and it is now suggested that most projects won’t be in operation until past the 2015 deadline (“No, no, no,” I said). Across Europe very few governments are on track to transpose the EU directive for the storage of CO2 into national law on time, and very few have made any independent financial provision to support CCS development. The UK is one of the few honourable exceptions on all counts.<br /><br />We have two front running projects. Scottish Power looks set to win the ‘UK competition’ and will separate a small portion of the CO2 that would otherwise be discharged up the chimneys of the coal power station at Longannet, transporting it by pipeline for injection into former fossil fuel bearing rock beneath the North Sea. Then there is Powerfuel Power’s project at Hatfield, near Doncaster, where construction of a 900MW integrated gas combined cycle power station is proposed, with the CO2 separated pre-combustion and transported to the North Sea by a pipeline that could also serve many other power stations and industrial plants. <br /><br />The new factor on the UK scene is the possibility that the CO2 might not only be stored but also used for enhanced oil recovery. The pressurised gas would push more oil out of depleted North Sea reserves, making better use of these resources, pleasing HM Treasury, and creating a much stronger financial incentive for CCS development. Equipping a conventional power station with CCS could effectively double the cost of the electricity it generates, making it about as expensive as heavily subsidised offshore wind generation. Coupling it with enhanced oil recovery would bring down the extra cost to only as much as the subsidy paid for onshore wind power, making CCS much more attractive, especially if the price of carbon rises from its present €15/tonne. If enhanced oil recovery developments take place as I have privately heard they might, listen out for a very big announcement in months to come.<br /><br />Do we really need CCS, with all its related costs? Britain gets 35% of its electricity from coal and even more from gas, Germany gets more than 50% from coal alone, Poland nearly 90%. China, India, Russia, the USA, South Africa and Australia have all got huge coal reserves and intend to generate the majority of their electricity from this carbon-intensive fuel for many decades to come. If we don’t develop CCS, there is no chance at all of the world achieving a 50% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050, the minimum amount needed to prevent average global temperatures rising by more than 2 degrees centigrade.Chris Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02085962417807014940noreply@blogger.com0