• The series is available to listen to here: Battle for the Airways

The eight 15 minute programs each look in turn at particular incidences of conflict since the founding of the corporation, taking in Suez and the Falklands, up until the present day.

There is a lot of value in it. Some great archive footage and interviews with key players. And it doesn’t tell a simplistic story of nasty politicians attempting to censor and restrict the freedom of courageous journalists either. It is noticeable that often the conflicts are caused or fuelled by poor journalistic judgement.

Also, given the potential for interference, I was struck by how restrained politicians in the past have often been.

One of the more formidable early opponents of the BBC’s independence was Winston Churchill. Episode 2 includes a wonderfully caustic and sarcasm laden recorded extract from a critical speech he made. But Churchill had a point. It was the case that in the Thirties his anti-appeasement views, and those of other critics of the foreign policy of the time, were being deliberately kept off the airways.

I noticed in Episode 6 that even Margaret Thatcher, who you might imagine being the most combative critic, goes some way to moderate her criticism –- “some of the programs, I don’t say all” –- of aspects of the BBC’s reporting of the Falklands conflict.

Robinson’s emphasis in this series is on conflict. It is essentially a collection of snapshots of “battles”. Yet despite this it left me feeling optimistic.

I think you have to accept that to a certain extent the BBC will always work within broad parameters set by an essentially establishment outlook. It is after all the British Broadcasting Corporation established by Royal Charter. It is also true that the BBC’s independence seems to have been as often preserved by skilfully bending to pressure as it has been by resisting it.

Yet in accepting those things, and after listening to the story of these rows and clashes, I can’t help but conclude that the relationship overall between the Government and politicians and the BBC has been one that has worked and been healthy. The really damaging conflicts have occurred mostly at times of war, particularly the more controversial wars, when the stakes have been so much higher.

Outside of those times it has been less a battle for the airways — more taking pot-shots and the occasional skirmish. The boundaries between broadcasters and politicians have largely been established and accepted by all sides, and seems to have largely worked in the public interest. I am not convinced the same be said of the print media.

Robinson’s series highlights the conflicts – but for me the story is one of success. Indeed, it could have been so much worse.

Berlusconi anyone?

This is the latest in my series of Random Thoughts posts with links, things found on the web and other stuff that has occurred to me between 30th April 2013 and 9th May 2013:

Historical Figures for the 21st Century – Telegraph

This gallery shows portraits of historical figures updated as if they were alive today. It is a really interesting and thought provoking idea — although I think in most of these examples they’ve got it wrong. For me the one that really does work is Nelson. The updated portrait is striking and seems to make him appear even more heroic.

Liberal Mondays 2: Conrad Russell – The Liberal Cause

Alex has written a cracking second post in this, what I hope will be a sustained, series of articles — although quality writing on liberalism is easier to do when you are quoting extensively from Conrad Russell.

What The Hell Have The Lib Dems Done?

Newly updated with achievements.

What Nick Clegg should have said after Thursday’s elections

An alternative message from the leader via Gareth Epps.

Baby penguins

Hand-reared penguin chicks prove best of friends at ZSL Whipsnade Zoo.

South Shields by-election: Labour wins as UKIP makes big gains

No surprise Labour won. Good result for UKIP — bad result for everyone else. With the outcome not in doubt it was safe for people to use UKIP as a vehicle for protest — and they did.

ALDC Elections Results Service

A summary of the results from last Thursday’s local elections.

How the Liberal Democrats should respond to UKIP

I’d put it more strongly than Mark but he’s one the right lines.

A while ago I noted this post which pointed out the correlation between which political parties people vote for and the geology of an area. So if you live where there is chalk you are likely to have a Conservative MP. It turns out that this is largely true.

This got me thinking about the nature of the political representation of the chalk hills that surround where I live — the Chiltern Hills. I wondered who were the MPs who had constituencies that covered The Chilterns and so would have an interest in its conservation.

After a bit of research I came up with the following list which I make available in case anyone finds it useful:

These are the constituencies that as far as I can tell have boundaries that overlap with the area that The Chilterns covers. I don’t think I’ve missed any. None of these constituencies are wholly in The Chilterns and some only cover a small area.

True to form they are mostly Conservative held seats. The exception being the two Luton seats and that of the Speaker of the House of Commons, who by tradition is not opposed by the main political parties at an election, but who was originally elected as a Conservative.

See also:

• Chilterns AONB
• Visit Chilterns
• The Chilterns Society

Liberal Democrats for Electoral Reform

The Liberal Democrats for Electoral Reform have set up a new website as part of the Reform Groups Network.

Burn our planet or face financial meltdown. Not much of a choice – Will Hutton

This is one of the more depressing things I’ve read recently. But what is for me more depressing is that current political discourse — including most of the time amongst liberals — is so far away from considering the challenge that Hutton outlines;

“Contemporary capitalism faces both a crisis of legitimacy and effectiveness…..What is needed is a new vision of how to do capitalism in which enlightened self-interest is hard-wired into its operation, saving us from decades of austerity and environmental disaster. There are instruments at hand…and they mesh with larger arguments for stakeholder capitalism. The political task is to bind them together to underpin a new consensus and a new narrative. There is no time to lose.”

Liberal Mondays 1: Alfred Russel Wallace

Alex on the Victorian naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace’s liberalism.

Memorabilia: Kelvin Hopkins MP

My local MP is featured in Total Politics magazine talking about a favourite piece of political memorabilia. Not that he is in any way predictable — but — he has chosen a copy of the Labour Party’s 1945 general election manifesto.

Local elections: it’s not just the Tories who should beware Ukip

The big unknown factor in the forthcoming local will be the impact of UKIP. Andrew Rawnsley looks at what might lie behind their appeal. I thought this part instructive:

“All the main parties have cause to be anxious about Ukip and so all have been trying to understand the rise of the Farageists. One way they do this is to put together focus groups of voters who have switched to Ukip to try to fathom why these people are attracted to Nigel Farage’s gang. One senior party strategist says he listened in some wonderment as his focus group of Ukip voters spent an entire 90-minute session wailing and gnashing their teeth about the state of Britain. Not a good word did they have to say about the country today. At the end of the session, he thanked them for their time, and said he had one more question. Was there anything about Britain that made them feel proud? There was a silence. Then one man leant forward and said: “The past.” The rest of the group nodded in agreement.”

The ERS have launched a ‘Rotten Boroughs’ campaign to highlight what they see as being wrong with the state of local government in England and Wales. New analysis that they have undertaken shows that 21 million people are living in the local government equivalent of One Party States’, which they define as;

“authorities with a single party holding over 75% of council seats, leaving opposition incapable of providing any checks of council decision making.”

The choice of 75% is because this figure gives the ruling party a two-thirds majority which means that they have the ability to change the rules by which a council is run without needing the support of any other party. A practical example of this is if the majority party don’t like the way the opposition is asking awkward questions in council meetings they can change the “Standing Orders” so that there are fewer opportunities for those questions to be asked.

All of the three major parties have examples of these one party states. The Liberal Democrats run Eastleigh with 86.36% of the councillors. This is not so much a problem of how the system is unfair to certain political parties, but about how our ‘First Past the Post’ voting system can give winning parties a disproportionate majority and in doing so make impossible proper scrutiny. As I have said many times — democracy is not just about voting — it also requires debate and challenge. If one party nearly always ends up running the council and the opposition is nearly always powerless to do anything that debate and challenge doesn’t happen and bad government results.

Luton is not the worst example of a ‘Rotten Borough’ but it does just fit within the ERS’s definition of a ‘One Party State’ given that Labour have exactly 75% of the seats on the Council.

I noted also that next door Central Bedfordshire is also a ‘One Party State’. Here the Conservatives have 83.05% of the seats.

I think this partly explains the polarised nature of politics in southern Bedfordshire. We have two unitary councils — each partly responsible for the welfare of the Luton/Dunstable/Houghton Regis conurbation — but each in turn dominated by a different and opposing political party. Scrutiny of both administrations is difficult and cooperation between the two made impossible because of the lack of a middle ground. For instance, the 36 Luton Labour councillors can’t establish working relationships with Central Bedfordshire Labour councillors because..er…there is only one.

What is the solution? Simply to introduce a fair voting system for local government elections in England and Wales — just like the one introduced into Scotland.

Does any of this strike a cord with you? The ERS are asking people to share their experience of how local democracy has failed them.

Whipsnade Zoo: Lemur Island welcomes new residents

I know I should be more mature about this — but lemurs are just the coolest things ever!

Naval strategy lessons for the NHS

David Boyle on why Nelson’s “Band of Brothers” leadership style should be applied to the management of public services. Great stuff.

How Liberal Democrat MPs voted against making it far harder for companies to misuse libel | Jack of Kent

Liberal Democrat MPs have been getting themselves in a mess over the reform of libel law that is currently passing through parliament. Another reason to shake ones head in pained embarrassment.  IANAL but the case for the extension of the so-called Derbyshire principle to private companies providing public functions seems difficult to argue with.

Simon Singh on why libel reform is needed to stop companies bullying their critics

However, all may not be lost. The Government have given some vague indications that they might re-introduced into the bill the missing measures tackling corporate power. We will find out next week how genuine this is.

Photos: Lady Thatcher’s lasting Downing Street legacy

Mostly been ignoring all the Thatcher stuff – although not entirely. One legacy of Thatcher that I don’t have an argument with is the mark she left on the fabric of Downing Street.

Dr Alun Wyburn-Powell: Want to know the politics of an area? Dig a hole

If you find chalk you are in a Conservative area – that’s the theory. Hang on I thought, not around here. Luton being built on the chalk downland of the The Chilterns. But then I realised Luton’s Labour held constituencies are really the exception that proves the rule.

GOV.UK wins Design of the Year 2013

You might not immediately look to central government for sexy design on the web – but actually the Government Digital Service is doing some pretty impressive stuff.

What do you mean the by-election hasn’t happened yet?

I know that — but so what?

There is a vote scheduled for the 2 May. There will be a campaign. Doors will be knocked on. Leaflets printed. Hustings held. The main parties, and some of the fringe parties, will put up candidates. Those candidates will valiantly fly the flag for their party, its policies, and their personal commitment to the area.

And then the people of South Shields will do what they’ve always done and vote Labour.

Apparently South Shields is the only seat in existence since the Great Reform Act of 1832 to have never elected a Conservative MP. The Labour party have held the seat without interruption since 1935. Although the Labour vote has declined from their high point in 1997 when they won 71% of the vote, Miliband still won with 52% of the vote at the last General Election. A Labour majority of 11,000. In addition the make up of South Tyneside council is 48 Labour, 4 independent, 1 Conservative and 1 UKIP. As far as I can work out all the Councillors in the constituency are Labour (although there might be one independent).

In short, South Shields is the very definition of a safe Labour seat.

The truth is that the vote that mattered in deciding who the next MP was to be was the one held by the local Labour Party. Lewell-Buck was quoted as saying;

“Over the next few weeks, I’ll be out in every part of the constituency, knocking on doors and talking to local residents. I want to meet as many people as possible, and hear directly from them what they want from their new MP.”

I know nothing about her except what I’ve read and so have no reason to doubt her sincerity or commitment to her community. In all likelihood she will make an excellent constituency MP. However, in terms of what difference it will make to the result, she could just as well spend the next few weeks researching what she will say in her maiden speech.

I’m sure after the count somebody will say how the result “sends a message to David Cameron and this Conservative-led Government”. It won’t.

I am a democrat — the right to vote is precious — and I want the people of South Shields to have their voice heard. If that voice largely wants to speak about issues and values associated with labour politics then so be it. But the reality is, because this is such a safe seat, outside of the local area, the Labour Party will take those voters for granted and the other parties will largely ignore them. Very few national journalists will make the trip up to Tyneside to cover the result. So, unless there is an extraordinary political earthquake on 2 May, nobody will pay it much attention.

The reality of our political system is that those living in safe seats, whichever party holds them, are less important than those living in marginal seats. And South Shields is about as far away from a marginal seat as it is possible to get.

Does any of the above piss you off?

If yes, why not join one of these:

• Electoral Reform Society
• Unlock Democracy
• Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform
• Conservative Action for Electoral Reform
• Liberal Democrats for Electoral Reform

_{Picture from the BBC News website}

This is a brilliant book. Like “Wolf Hall” it feels rich both with scholarship and with a deep understanding of human nature. Also, like “Wolf Hall” it is a Booker Prize winner. Although it is a different book to the first, with a different and older Cromwell, and it seemed a harder edge.

“Wolf Hall” told the story of the rise of Henry’s second wife Anne Boleyn and his divorce from Catherine of Aragon. In doing so it created a vivid, richly detailed and multi-layered picture of Tudor England. In comparison “Bring Up the Bodies” seems narrower in focus and more psychological, although no less vivid. The story takes place within the claustrophobic world of court politics, where the public and private are deeply entwined and gossip can be made a deadly weapon. We watch as Cromwell manoeuvres to secure the downfall of Anne Boleyn and witness the events leading to her eventual execution.

This book is about lots of things. One strand I particularly liked was where it touched on chivalry and the knightly tournament. One key scene is the impact on the court of Henry being seriously injured in a joust. It has interesting things to say about sex and about friendship, and the limits of friendship.

But at its heart this is a book about power. The use and abuse of power, and the effect that the exercise of power can have on people. It talks of the soft power of rumour and reputation and the hard power of law and force. It explores power in the relationships between men and women. There is nothing quaint or “olde worlde” about the Tudor court that Mantel describes. There is also much here that I felt had a resonance with contemporary politics.

As we watch Thomas Cromwell going about his business it struck me that he was in many ways living the life of a modern cabinet minister. He seems always to be travelling to and from meetings or working late into the night on his paperwork. Many a modern professional politician would also recognise his constant worries. The need to square away colleagues and keep an eye on rivals, the difficulties in sifting through a mass of talk and gossip to find the relevant information, and above all there is the pressing need to keep in with the “boss” and anticipate his desires.

The story is told from Cromwell’s viewpoint and so we sympathise with him. This I think is at the heart of the cleverness of the book. My experience in reading it was to go along with Cromwell, to become a kind of accomplice, as he plots and schemes and the story builds. Yet I didn’t really fully register the reality of what he is about until the emotional impact hit home suddenly in the last third of the book. In seeking to accommodate King Henry’s whims and desires and to safeguard the interests of the state and the nation as he saw it, as well as pursuing his own agenda of ambition and revenge, Cromwell is engaged in engineering and finding justifications for the deaths of several, largely, innocent people. That is not to say that Cromwell reaches the end of the book unscathed by the events that have taken place.

This is a story of court politics, and a deadly one at that, so I am worried about taking the comparison with our democratic politics too far. I’ve tried to think of other parallels. Who are the modern Cromwells?

Given the mix of the personal and political I’ve played with idea of the career of a corporate lawyer working for a contemporary Russian oligarch or media mogul. Perhaps the trusted adviser who smoothed the way for Wendi Deng to enter the Murdoch clan and arranged Rupert’s divorce from first wife Anna, which is apparently the most expensive divorce in legal history. But that doesn’t really work.

In looking for a modern Cromwell the comparison I kept coming back to was with Tariq Aziz, Saddam Hussain’s Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister. The sophisticated “man of business” respected for his political skill in diplomatic circles around the world but something of an outsider in the court of the charismatic but capricious tyrant he, willingly, served. A man with blood on his hands without question — but blood in the form of ink stains on the hands of a diplomat and administrator.

Yet, I wonder if that comparison is quite fair to Cromwell — or indeed to Henry VIII.

In “Bring Up the Bodies” Mantel gives us Thomas Cromwell’s verdict on Machiavelli’s “The Prince”. He finds it wanting;

“The book seemed almost trite to him, nothing in it but abstractions – virtue, terror – and small particular instances of base conduct or flawed calculation. Perhaps he could improve on it, but he has no time;”

A treatise on politics written by Thomas Cromwell, the blacksmith’s son who rose to be the right-hand of a king and a founder of the Church of England, would make a fascinating read. But would it contain a warning to beware of princes? That was a lesson that Machiavelli knew well, suffering as he did at the hands of the Medici. And it was one that Cromwell was to learn — suffering a worse fate at the hands of his Tudor prince.

But that fate will be dealt with in Hilary Mantel’s next book in this series. I can’t wait!

5 stars

Buy ‘Bring Up the Bodies’ by Hilary Mantel

The by-election was held after the sad death of long-standing local campaigner Roy Davies.

I am really pleased. Not least because Alan was a colleague of mine when I was on the council — he was previously a councillor in Round Green ward — and I know what an asset he will be to the Lib Dem group.

But also because this was a really positive result for the Liberal Democrats in Luton. I think the local party was always hopeful of retaining the seat — but I am surprised at the size of the majority. This was a very bad result for the Tories — in effect dropping from second to third — and the Labour challenge was not as strong as I expected it to be. This actually represents a 3.1% swing from Labour to Lib Dems.

It is only one result and in a relatively strong area — but after the bashing we took in the last local elections — this does give some hope that the worst is over.

Credit must go to the small team who worked really hard to get this result. Myself, I didn’t really do much to help — but I did do a little — which is the most active campaigning I’ve done for a long while.

The full result was:

Total Votes 2,102

Turnout 24.2%

(I gave the result from last time the ward was fought in May 2011 here)

More coverage of the result here:

• Luton on Sunday: Liberal Democrat Alan Skepelhorn wins Wigmore by-election
• Luton Today: Lib Dems triumph in Wigmore by-election
• Liberal Democrat Voice: By-election watch: 10/11 April… Luton bringing me sunshine…
• Independent: By-elections boost for Lib Dems ahead of 2 May county council elections
• Luton Borough Council: Wigmore by-election results 2013

Look at the tracks of lost railway lines

On the 50th anniversary of the Beeching Report a look at its impact on Bedfordshire.

Why Monty Panesar should be the next leader of the Liberal Democrats

I fully approve of Mark’s inspired idea. Only the best people come from Luton you know!

Early Easter treat for cheetah cubs

Cheetah cubs playing with Easter eggs at Whipsnade Zoo.

A sensible reform to Lib Dem selection rules – giving a warmer welcome to returning lapsed members

Last November Mark Pack was developing some proposals to change the internal rules of the Lib Dems with regard to the rights of lapsed members to vote in selections. Proposals to which I responded.  While his proposals haven’t been adopted, Mark reports that the English Candidates Committee has decided on a sensible reform to relax the rules.

Should Britain let go of London?

An interesting and challenging film from the BBC’s economics editor, Stephanie Flanders, looking at the wider consequences for Britain of the power of London. The essential arguments will be familiar to most Liberal Democrats, but I thought it was an interesting way of looking at the issue.

Yes, George, It’s An Elephant….

A good post on the budget from Gareth Epps. Essentially a plague on all your elephants – but Vince is still the biggest beast.

Who won?

Mark D’Arcy argues that the winner in the debate over the Leveson report was Parliament. I think this is right. Whatever your views on the outcome, we have seen an assertion of the will of Parliament against (at least part of) the Executive and the Press barons. This is partly a function of coalition – but also greater assertiveness and willingness to work across party lines amongst members of both houses of Parliament.

Press regulation: who has won?

Guardian columnist Michael White regularly irritates me, but when he is right he is very good. This is a superb summary of where things stand after the parliamentary manoeuvrings over implementing the Leveson Report. a good antidote to some of the ridiculous hyperbole the issue has generated.

House of Lords blocks ‘shares for rights’ plan

Having Liberal Democrats in Government doesn’t stop all Tory nonsense – but sometimes that is what the House of Lords is for. Here I quote, the excellent, cross-bench peer Lord Pannick:

“Employment rights were created and have been protected by all governments – Conservative and Labour – precisely because of the inequality of bargaining power between employer and employee.”

“To allow these basic employment rights to become a commodity that can be traded by agreement frustrates the very purposes of these entitlements as essential protection of the employee who lacks effective bargaining power.”

Watch Paddy Ashdown’s cracking speech to the Lib Dem spring conference

Paddy nails it.