Wednesday 12 May 2010

Manifest

What interesting times we're in. Here are some of the excellent transport-y things in the new Con-Lib government's all-important joint working agreement:

• The establishment of a high-speed rail network;
• The cancellation of the third runway at Heathrow;
• The refusal of additional runways at Gatwick and Stansted;
• The replacement of the air passenger duty with a per-flight duty.


No great surprises there other than the shift in air duty from individual passengers to aircraft -- something that will piss off the airlines immensely, but will also force them to use smaller aircraft rather than flying around vast but empty planes.


While it's the tax stuff that is generating most of the headlines, some of the most fundamental proposals are in constitutional affairs and civil liberties, including:

• the establishment of five-year fixed-term parliaments (only dissoluble with a 55% vote in the Commons, rather than current the 50% +1 vote);
• a bill proposing a referendum on electoral reform including the alternative vote system, and fewer and more equal sized constituencies;
• a power of recall, where voters can force a byelection with a petition signed by 10% of constituents;


• proposals for a "wholly or mainly elected" upper chamber on the basis of proportional representation, likely to advocate single long terms of office (this is a huge change, and at last signals the death of hereditary legislators);
• in the interim, lords appointments will be made to make the second chamber reflective of the share of the votes in the last general election;
• implementing in full the proposals of the Wright committee for reform to the House of Commons (this is an extremely technical measure covering the way business is managed in the House -- but it is absolutely fundamental to rebalancing the power between the executive and the legislature);


• establishment of a commission to consider the "West Lothian question" (for my overseas readers, this is an issue relating to devolution of powers from the UK government to the constituent nations -- England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. At the moment, MPs from all countries can vote on things that only affect England, whereas those issues in Scotland, etc, are decided in their own national parliaments -- so under the last government the English constantly had policies imposed on them as a result of Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs voting for them safe in the knowledge their own constituents wouldn't be affected).


Civil liberties:
• scrapping of ID cards and the national identity register, the next generation of biometric passports and the Contact Point database;
• extension of the Freedom of Information Act to provide greater transparency;
• protection of historic freedoms through the defence of trial by jury;
• restoration of rights to non-violent protest;
• review of libel laws to protect freedom of speech;
• safeguards against the misuse of anti-terrorism legislation (the devil in that one is very much in the detail);
• further regulation of CCTV;
• ending of storage of internet and email records without good reason; and
• a new mechanism to prevent the proliferation of unnecessary new criminal offences.


So much for the stated policies, we've also been promised an emergency budget within 50 days (= very significant cuts), plus a comprehensive spending review starting now and reporting in the Autumn (= even more significant cuts).

And there are some disappointments.

Like, for instance, this evil harpie being created Secretary of State for the Home Department:


Theresa May (she of the "fuck-me" shoe fetish) has consistently voted against lesbian & gay equality. I guess she must think we're sub-human: how else to explain such vicious prejudice? Which makes her other appointment -- as Minister for Equalities -- all the more perplexing.

11 comments:

Grogipher said...

"The establishment of a high-speed rail network"

Will it come anywhere north of Leeds?

"a bill proposing a referendum on electoral reform including the alternative vote system, and fewer and more equal sized constituencies"

AV makes me cry. I can't see how moving to a less representative system is anything but a retrograde step.

Although I can easily give a list of 59 MPs we could chop ;-)

"establishment of a commission to consider the "West Lothian question""

Only Labour and LibDem MPs abused this - neither the 7 SNP MPs nor the 1 Scottish Tory did this, to be fair to them :-)

I'm looking forward with sad times to the freeze on the progression of equality and the shite the public sector's away to go through...

LeDuc said...

Hey Grogipher: you asked "Will it come anywhere north of Leeds?"

I guess the answer could be yes, if the Scottish Parliament wants to pay to connect Scotland to the rest of the UK. Up to you, really -- that's what devolution is all about, isn't it?! And, after all, the new lot are also promising to give you new tax-raising powers...

I dunno: Labour was tired and anti-democratic and appallingly illiberal. For us English, the only other choice has been the evil Tories. Maybe, at last, we're seeing the 3rd Way that you in Scotland have had the luxury of for some time. Surely you wouldn't want to snatch that away from the rest of us, would you? Not when so few of the decisions Westminster makes will actually make a scrap of difference to you anyway?

Anonymous said...

It might be fun to have an old-fashioned bit of fun with Theresa then, on the grounds that we simply cry 'foul' to Nick if the bitch misbehaves, don't we?

Anonymous said...

Well let's see how she turns out and hope for the best: after slapping down Grayling maybe DC will expect and demand better of her. Thank goodness we're rid of some dictatorial harridans in the persons of inter alias Harperson, Hewitt and Hodge and that's just the "H for Harpies" team!

Grogipher said...

To be entirely fair, the Tories (pre-election) did seem more up for working constructively with the Scottish Parliament to get the HSL up and running - Labour took the opinion that they were building one to Leeds, and if we wanted to join up to it, we'd have to pay all of the costs down to there :-/

I really hope the Liberals hold out to give us full fiscal autonomy - just now they're talking about implementing the Calman Commission proposals which are just a fudge. Far too messy and complex, and I don't think it'll help too much.

You might think that Westminster doens't decide much for us, but you should have a read of just how much is burried in Schedule 5 of the Scotland Act; rather more than you'd expect! :P

LeDuc said...

You know I'm all for independence: in the years I lived in Scotland I was acutely aware of how big a chip most Scots seemed to carry about how the English were doing them down (have a relook at Renton's speech in Trainspotting if you want to see that view reflected in art). Whereas although I know they exist, I have yet to meet an English person who feels anything much other than warm regard for the Scots. Which, I suspect, pisses off most Scots even more...

So it's a bit of a vicious cycle, and I suspect the only way it will end is if Scotland and England get independence from each other. That would get my vote, anyway. And if it had happened sooner we wouldn't have been lumbered with Brown for the last decade of wasted opportunity.

Speaking of which, it's galling to see even Polly Toynbee admitting that the Lib-Con agreement is vastly more progressive than anything in Labour's Manifesto (how shaming is that?).

And even more galling to learn the first things Labour offered up in negotiations with the Libs were ID cards and the 3rd runway at Heathrow... For fuck's sake -- if those had been in their Manifesto I might even have swallowed hard and voted for them.

Monostatos said...

Funnily enough, the move from passenger centric APD to an aircraft based tax that means aircraft will be newer and run fuller is something that WON'T piss off the airlines - they have been campaigning to go down that road for a long time. The current passenger based system is completely crazy and works for no-one.

LeDuc said...

Monostatos: I'm afraid you're wrong. Here's a quote:

BA attacked proposals to replace air passenger duty with an environmental tax on individual flights, including cargo services. The plan is expected to lead to higher taxes on ultra-long haul flights such as Heathrow to Sydney. BA said: "Increased taxation on the UK aviation industry will create a financial incentive for customers to fly via continental hubs rather than direct from, or transiting through, UK airports, which could actually lead to higher emissions as well as financially disadvantage the UK travel industry."

Nope, that doesn't sound to me like an airline that's been campaigning to have this proposal introduced.

Monostatos said...

BA may be on their own then:

http://news.opodo.co.uk/NewsDetails/2010-05-13/EasyJet_expects_new_govt_to_reform_flight_tax

Just about every UK airline is anti APD. Most of them want it replaced with an aircraft based tax in one form or another.

LeDuc said...

I can't find any references to Ryanair or BMI's position, so that leaves me with one UK airline in favour and one against (I'm ignoring the tiny airlines, just looking at the big four).

Unless you can find statements, I'm prepared to concede that we were both a bit wrong: although I note you're still using hyperbole like "just about every UK airline".

Hmm... I am clearly in a mood to negotiate today. This coalition stuff may be infectious.

Monostatos said...

A fair comment, LeDuc. I would say that just about every airline is against APD, but only a few are in favour of the current proposal. I accept the thrust of your argument, and blame Penderyn for my hyperbole (a lame excuse!)

Looks from your quote as though BA are anti-any-tax, Virgin want a completely different structure, bmi are just hurling rocks at the status quo, and Ryanair, as ever, are just being Ryanair.... so only easyJet may end up happy, on the evidence.

Onwards and upwards, and thanks for a consistently great blog!

M