Someday I Will Treat You Good

A Break, I Guess

Posted by: Andrew Brown on: 16 November, 2008

I’ve been thinking about it and now seems like a good time to take a bit of a break from this blog. For how long I’m not sure, but that’s usually the way with these things isn’t it?

But before I go I want to point out this piece from the Times Higher about the lack of links between accedemia and politics which I thought was an interesting read.  Philip Cowley, who knows a thing or two argues:

“The rational decision for young academics is not to engage with government. Nothing in the system rewards it. There is no incentive to present research in a way (that is) relevant to policymakers – indeed, some academics are specifically told not to do ‘policy-relevant research’ because it is less likely to appear in the elite journals. The research assessment exercise (RAE) is a large contributing factor.”

I’d also like to urge you to visit the site of Bodies of Water, a band that those of you who like Their Hearts Were Full of Spring may also like. They’ve been good enough to let you download a number of their songs and I particularly like I Guess I’ll Forget the Sound, I Guess, I Guess.

And finally, those of you interested in hyperlocal blogging should take a look at EveryBlock which looks like a fantastic way that some American bloggers with a local theme can be found.  I’m guessing that Richard Pope’s Streetwire will try to do something similar here and if you blog about local things then you should join up.

links for 2008-10-25

Posted by: Andrew Brown on: 25 October, 2008

Mayor ‘Mare

Posted by: Andrew Brown on: 24 October, 2008

The electors of Stoke have spoken.

I’m sure that’ll (re-)energise a few of you; for the record, my thoughts on this are here and haven’t really changed.

Update: The conspiracies have already started:

Stoke on Trent has voted to get rid of its directly elected mayor, something which a large number of Lewisham residents have been trying to do for years. Can anyone explain to me why the former referendum was allowed but not the latter?

Part of the explanation may be the comparative strength of the BNP in Stoke – Labour might be able to live with the odd Tory or Lib Dem mayor, but a BNP mayor – whose decisions could only be overturned by a two thirds majority in council – is not a prospect they were prepared to face. It’s okay to have elective dictatorships, just not if the people are in danger of electing the wrong elective dictatorship.

Good to see one of our local Lib Dem councillors, Brian Robson, put James right in the comments.

Localism

Posted by: Andrew Brown on: 24 October, 2008

I’ve just come across these slides from William Perrin and thought they made a lot of sense.

links for 2008-10-24

Posted by: Andrew Brown on: 24 October, 2008

Mayor’s Credit Crunch Briefing

Posted by: Andrew Brown on: 24 October, 2008

Steve Bullock has written a piece on his website about how he is asking the council and other partners in Lewisham to react to the economic turmoil of recent weeks.

He sets out four immediate steps he’s got people working on:

  • assessing the immediate, medium and long term effects on the people of Lewisham as well as on local businesses and voluntary organisations
  • providing key advice, guidance and information to people and businesses as to how they might beat the credit crunch – crucially we will work closely with the local voluntary sector on issues such as money and debt advice as well as on advice on how best to cut energy costs
  • working across London (on skills development, training and transport) to secure the best job prospects and opportunities for Lewisham’s residents
  • harnessing the work of all public agencies locally to do what is feasible and sensible to help people overcome the worst effects of the credit crunch

Steve says:

Over the coming months I am willing to work with all Councillors, together with our MPs and our GLA Members to make sure that locally as much as possible is done and that we speaking up for Lewisham.

links for 2008-10-23

Posted by: Andrew Brown on: 23 October, 2008

Perception over Reality

Posted by: Andrew Brown on: 21 October, 2008

Bo D’Or for the image, analysis from Tory Troll and Boris Watch.

Growing Unequal?

Posted by: Andrew Brown on: 21 October, 2008

Interesting looking report from the OECD about inequality across 30 countries.  The press release is suitably gloomy:

Children and young adults are now 25% more likely to be poor than the population as a whole.  Single-parent households are three times as likely to be poor than the population average. And yet OECD countries spend 3 times more on family policies than they did 20 years ago.

But here’s the summary for what’s been happening in the UK, where there is some good news:

Since 2000, income inequality and poverty have fallen faster in the United Kingdom than in any other OECD country. However, the gap between the rich and poor is still greater in the UK than in three quarters of OECD countries.

If you look at the tables they provide you’ll see when most of the income gap openned up during the 1980s.  Also worth noting is that:

Income poverty – that is, a household with less than half the average (median) income for its country – fell from 10% to 8% between the mid-1990s and 2005. For the first time since the 1980s, the poverty level is well below the OECD average.

The number of children living poverty fell from 14% to 10% between the mid-1990s and 2005– the second largest fall (behind Italy) over this period. Even so, child poverty rates are still above the levels recorded in the mid-1980s (7-8%) and mid-1970s (5%).

That said the report also points out that what your/our parents earned is morelikely to determine what we earn than in some other OECD countries.

The Nader Effect

Posted by: Andrew Brown on: 21 October, 2008

Interesting stuff, right down the bottom of this article, about the impact of third party candidates on people’s voting intentions.

The conventional wisdom is that where there’s a third party candidate they usually “steal” votes from the candidate they’re perceived as being closest to, but apparently that’s not the case.

Lowenthal offers some explanations for this counterintuitive finding. She says it could have to do with the popularity effect — what Cialdini describes as social proof — where people who don’t know where their priorities are look to others to tell them what to do. Because two politicians are pushing for the same issue — in this case, more new business — voters assume it must be more important than they originally thought.

I’m not sure how well this theory would translate into British politics – perhaps the arguement could be made that Nick Clegg’s decision to move the Lib Dems closer to the Tories is part of what’s helping Cameron in the polls.

But it seems to me there are also other currents at work in politics which impact on voting intentions; policy positions, media portrayal, circumstances, and the money parties spend on getting their messages across to mention a few.

a

RSS Mayor and Cabinet Papers

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Widgets and Stuff



hit tracker



Join Labour - Join the fight for Britain’s future.

del.icio.us lewisham