Saturday, 9 April 2016

Birkdale potholes

As a cyclist I am more aware of potholes than most folk but a couple that have appeared in Birkdale are so big nobody can missed them. We have reported several in recent days but the one in Burlington Rd and the one in Lyndhurst Rd take the joint 1st prize for the biggest. And before anyone tells me I have already reported the state of the road by The Fisherman's Rest

Full review of Lib Party and the Economy , Peter Sloman

Liberal Party and the Economy 1929-1964 by Peter Sloman

Like many academic books it is ridiculously expensive, it is advertised on Amazon for £58 .  
I recall a meeting of the Liberal Party Standing Committee in 1979 which was drawing up the Election Manifesto. We reached the item on the agenda marked economic policy. There was a silence until Richard Moore spoke: ‘I joined the Liberal Party in spite of not because of its economic policy ‘he told us.
Many people hold the opinion that our party gives economic policy a lower priority than say the environment, reform of government, foreign policy, Europe, individual rights or the state of the pavements. Such indifference, it is argued, allows a few well motivated and wealthy mavericks to high jack the party’s policy position. William Wallace has written about one such event.

‘The group of free-trade Liberals that included S.W.Alexander and Oliver Smedley had drive, financial resources, and a clear sense of Liberalism in a libertarian, minimum-state interpretation. The almost anarchic structure of party assemblies allowed for such groups to exert real influence.

The Radical Reform Group (RRG), as I recall, provided the most coherent alternative definition of Liberalism – much closer to the radical Liberal tradition, and to the nonconformist beliefs which a high proportion of its members held. It helped enormously that Jo Grimond as leader was naturally sympathetic to the RRG perspective; but the existence and activities of RRG, and the arguments of its members on the Party Executive, made Grimond’s task in reorienting the party much easier.
My future father-in-law, Edward Rushworth, had for many years been both a member of Radical reform Group (RRG) and of the party executive.

He made little distinction between being a Liberal and being a teetotal nonconformist; his instincts were anti authoritarian and socially egalitarian.’

Some Liberator readers may well join Richard Grayson in seeing the policy coup in 2008 over tax cuts and promoting a vision of small state in a similar vein to the antics of Smedley and Alexander.

Peter Sloman’s book The Liberal Party and the Economy 1929-1964 (OUP 2015) challenges the assumption that the history of economic policy making in the Liberal party is the history of a struggle between classical free market liberalism and interventionist social liberalism. Sloman has gone where no other historian has gone before examining the twists and tortured turns of policy making. It is an excellent account of the party’s history giving some new insights into issues –not all of them related to economic policy.

Sloman identifies four strands of Liberalism and examines the interplay between them. Classical liberalism, Georgism, New (left) Liberalism and constructive Liberalism. The first two are seen as essentially non-interventionist while the latter two see a positive role for the state. The New Liberal tradition stemming from Hobhouse and Green focusses on ethics whilst the constructive liberalism is influenced by professional economists and focused on practical policies.

If you don’t know your Distributists from your Georgists or your Keynesians and are unaware that the Liberal Party under Clem Davies endorsed central state planning then this is the book for you. Here you can also read how the idea of membership of the European Common Market was used to rout the extreme free marketeers at the 1960 Liberal Assembly and of the most successful economic campaign to come out of NLYL: ‘Ownership for All ‘
Some aspects of classical liberalism had a strong hold on the popular imagination. The belief that free trade enhanced worldwide prosperity and peace tapped into the party’s internationalism. The assertion that free trade kept the price of bread low was a key aspect of the Liberal appeal. In the 1906 election here in Southport that was the main message of the successful candidate
Astbury

The Liberal Party never supported pure laissez fair economics. All Liberator readers know Gladstone favoured nationalising the railways. By the time of the 1906 Liberal government, many of whose members were influenced by T H Green, the party had moved decisively away from the small state view beloved by the ideologically pure classical liberals. In the 1920’s Keynes announced to the Liberal Summer School that ‘laissez faire was dead’. Nevertheless the neo liberal corpse has had an after life and each new manifestation has been more grotesque that the previous one. We have already glimpsed the destructive impact that neo liberal activists had on the small struggling Liberal Party of the 1950’s. Many of them decamped to the Institute of Economic Affairs where they acted as midwife at the birth of Thatcherism and which today is an apologist for corporatist capitalism.


With the publication of the Orange Book* a new generation of neo liberals have come and wreaked havoc on the party helping to reduce the parliamentary base from 56 to 8 MP’s. The work of a generation, whose activism rebuilt the party in the years after Grimond, has been wiped out. Sloman has argued that the Orange Book led to the rightward move of the party’s leadership facilitating the formation of the coalition with the Tories. It certainly provided the intellectualunderpinning for Nick Clegg’s disastrous  2010 speech, which worried only about social mobility and dismissed tackling the inequality of experienced by citizens today. David Howarth has identified that speech asone of the triggers for the catastrophic fall in support for the Lib Dems from which it has not yet recovered.

Many things from the classical liberal tradition have been absorbed into the Radical Liberal agenda: individual liberties, suspicion of monopolies and the opposition to the excesses of state power promoted by the likes of Blunkett, Reid and Straw. Sloman points out that ‘Gladstone was as concerned about the integrity and autonomy of the state as about its size. It is difficult to find the same concern among today’s ‘economic liberals ’. Radicals need to be robust in rejecting neo-liberalism- a C 20th heresy of the New Right.

Another strand of Liberal economic thinking identified by Sloman is Georgism. Its anthem‘The Land’ has had pride of place in the Liberator Song Book since before Lord Bonkers was born, as it did in ‘Songs for Paper Tigers’ in the time of his father. It is based on the writings of Henry George who argued that land was a finite resource and that no one had an exclusive right to its ownership and that owners should be taxed to compensate the community for their monopoly use of it. Essential they were classical liberals who believed that once the issue of the land was addressed by imposing a tax on the unimproved value of plots the market would operate effectively and a just society would result. Lloyd George include a modest land tax in the People’ Budget of 1909. 


Left Liberalism inspired by the New Liberals was associated with thinkers like T H Green and L THobhouse. They saw a legitimate role for the state in promoting social justice and did not regard free markets and free enterprise as immutable principles

The final categorisation that Sloman identified he calls Constructive Liberalism and it was the dominant position in the C20th. Essentially this is a conflation of classical and New Liberalism. The Summer School movement and the 1929 manifesto are part of that tradition. It is a very elastic term stretching from a fairly minimalist position for the state up to the peak of intervention in 1943 when Clem Davies and  Tom Horobin’s ‘Radical Economic Policy for Progressive Liberalism’ advocated wide scale nationalisation, export and import controls and a high degree of central planning.

By using his more nuanced classification of Liberal policy and moving away from viewing it as a struggle between classical and new liberalism Sloman has given us a much better understanding. Radicals need to take up the challenge of the RRG and produce a new synthesis for C21st which is anti-authoritarian and socially egalitarian. Drawing on the left/New Liberal tradition of passionate social concern with its starting point of distributive justice we can fashion an approach which offers new hope, answering the challenges that Picketty and others have identified. We must reject the neo-liberal consensus that has led to an unacceptable concentrations of wealth in the hands of a small number of owners of capital and a reduction in the share paid to employees. This global trend is accelerating and will soon impact on all employee as automation and cheap labour undercuts their wage rates and destroys their jobs. 

Throughout most of the C20th employee ownership and industrial democracy have been an enduring feature Liberal policy. They were the signature policy of the Grimond years. By offering a radical interpretation of the distributive ideas promoted by the Ownership for All campaign Radicals have advocated using state power to compel companies to introduce profit sharing and meaningful employee representation at Board level. Economists like Nobel Prize winner James Meade (who once advised our party) came up with many ideas to re distribute capital including legalisation to require companies to issue new shares to employee trusts. David Steel in his 1985 book Partners in One Nation argued that these radical ideas were part of a ‘fundamental economic philosophy distinct from that of socialism and free-market capitalism’ and as the RRG said Radicals aim to distribute instead of concentrating political as well as economic power’. Workers would become citizens of industry, not merely hirelings of private employers or of the state.

In his book Sloman suggests that Georgism, the Ownership for All policy and the Distributive ideas of Belloc are part of the classical tradition. What Radicals identify is that they all challenge the existing rights of owners and argue that the state action should be used to redistribute ownership. In his time Paddy Ashdown foresaw a time when ‘workers would be employing capital’. In that assertion he was echoing the greatly respected Liberal Richard Wainwright for whom employee ownership was the ‘holy grail of liberalism’. It is time to take up the quest 

All the links work in the early version here and here
----------------------------------------------------

This is my review of Sloman's book that I wrote for Liberator. Regrettably it took me so long to get round to complete it that someone else had submitted one before I had finished. As the thrifty Liberals of yesteryear would have said 'waste not want not', so I am posting it here in three instalments

*I am well aware that The Orange Book is a 'mixed bag' containing some interesting and useful contributions . Nevertheless the motivation of some of its key protagonists has been to shift the centre of gravity of economic thinking away from the social liberal consensus within the party towards a more neo liberal position. In light of that I think it is perfectly reasonable to use 'Orange book' as a short hand for that group. Their liberalism was replaced in the early 20th century with a commitment to the welfare state because of the work of T.H. GreenL.T. Hobhouse and the economist J.A. Hobson; the Orange Book writers were seeking to overturn nearly a century of Liberal party history. It is to be greatly welcomed that the recent conference at York passed an excellent economic policy motion promoted by the Social Liberal Forum

Hans Dietrich Genscher RIP

The Free Democrat leader and German Foreign Minister died 10 days ago. A number of obituaries have appeared including in the Guardian  

It is odd how random facts about people stick in your mind. The 'Gencher' fact for me was his penchant for wearing the FDP 's colours. His yellow sweater became his trademark a fact mentioned in the The Scotsman's obituary.

He was a dedicated European who clearly saw that German's role in the world should be acted out in concert with his neighbours.

Tuesday, 5 April 2016

Liberal Party and the Economy 1929-1964 by Peter Sloman concluding section

The first part of this review can be found here





Many things from the classical liberal tradition have been absorbed into the Radical Liberal agenda: individual liberties, suspicion of monopolies and the opposition to the excesses of state power promoted by the likes of Blunkett, Reid and Straw. Sloman points out that ‘Gladstone was as concerned about the integrity and autonomy of the state as about its size. It is difficult to find the same concern among today’s ‘economic liberals Radicals need to be robust in rejecting neo-liberalism- a C 20th heresy of the New Right.



Another strand of Liberal economic thinking identified by Sloman is Georgism. Its anthem ‘The Land’ has had pride of place in the Liberator Song Book since before Lord Bonkers was born, as it did in ‘Songs for Paper Tigers’ in the time of his father. It is based on the writings of Henry George who argued that land was a finite resource and that no one had an exclusive right to its ownership and that owners should be taxed to compensate the community for their monopoly use of it. Essential they were classical liberals who believed that once the issue of the land was addressed by imposing a tax on the unimproved value of plots the market would operate effectively and a just society would result. Lloyd George include a modest land tax in the People’ Budget of 1909.

Left Liberalism inspired by the New Liberals was associated with thinkers like T H Green and L THobhouse. They saw a legitimate role for the state in promoting social justice and did not regard free markets and free enterprise as immutable principles

The final categorisation that Sloman identified he calls Constructive Liberalism and it was the dominant position in the C20th. Essentially this is a conflation of classical and New Liberalism. The Summer School movement and the 1929 manifesto are part of that tradition. It is a very elastic term stretching from a fairly minimalist position for the state up to the peak of intervention in 1943 when Clem Davies and  Tom Horobin’s ‘Radical Economic Policy for Progressive Liberalism’ advocated wide scale nationalisation, export and import controls and a high degree of central planning.

By using his more nuanced classification of Liberal policy and moving away from viewing it as a struggle between classical and new liberalism Sloman has given us a much better understanding. Radicals need to take up the challenge of the RRG and produce a new synthesis for C21st which is anti-authoritarian and socially egalitarian. Drawing on the left/New Liberal tradition of passionate social concern with its starting point of distributive justice we can fashion an approach which offers new hope, answering the challenges that Picketty and others have identified. We must reject the neo-liberal consensus that has led to an unacceptable concentrations of wealth in the hands of a small number of owners of capital and a reduction in the share paid to employees. This global trend is accelerating and will soon impact on all employee as automation and cheap labour undercuts their wage rates and destroys their jobs. 

Throughout most of the C20th employee ownership and industrial democracy have been an enduring feature Liberal policy. They were the signature policy of the Grimond years. By offering a radical interpretation of the distributive ideas promoted by the Ownership for All campaign Radicals have advocated using state power to compel companies to introduce profit sharing and meaningful employee representation at Board level. Economists like Nobel Prize winner James Meade (who once advised our party) came up with many ideas to re distribute capital including legalisation to require companies to issue new shares to employee trusts. David Steel in his 1985 book Partners in One Nation argued that these radical ideas were part of a ‘fundamental economic philosophy distinct from that of socialism and free-market capitalism’ and as the RRG said Radicals aim to distribute instead of concentrating political as well as economic power’. Workers would become citizens of industry, not merely hirelings of private employers or of the state.

In his book Sloman suggests that Georgism, the Ownership for All policy and the Distributive ideas of Belloc are part of the classical tradition. What Radicals identify is that they all challenge the existing rights of owners and argue that the state action should be used to redistribute ownership. In his time Paddy Ashdown foresaw a time when ‘workers would be employing capital’. In that assertion he was echoing the greatly respected Liberal Richard Wainwright for whom employee ownership was the ‘holy grail of liberalism’. It is time to take up the quest.

This is second part of a review of Sloman's book that I wrote for Liberator. Regrettably it took me so long to get round to complete it that someone else had submitted one before I had finished. As the thrifty Liberals of yesteryear would have said 'waste not want not', so I am posting it here in three instalments


*I am well aware that The Orange Book is a 'mixed bag' containing some interesting and useful contributions . Nevertheless the motivation of some of its key protagonists has been to shift the centre of gravity of economic thinking away from the social liberal consensus within the party towards a more neo liberal position. In light of that I think it is perfectly reasonable to use 'Orange book' as a short hand for that group. Their liberalism was replaced in the early 20th century with a commitment to the welfare state because of the work of T.H. GreenL.T. Hobhouse and the economist J.A. Hobson; the Orange Book writers were seeking to overturn nearly a century of Liberal party history. It is to be greatly welcomed that the recent conference at York passed an excellent economic policy motion promoted by the Social Liberal Forum

KGV the ongoing crisis -time to look for a local solution

Councillor Tony Dawson and I have supported dozens of parents and students during the past four years of KGV College's troubles. This is the statement Tony released yesterday:
"When I saw this in the paper, I thought it was an April Fool item. After all, we were assured by the Funding Council at the end of last year that things were getting better. One does wonder if the Funding Council is really fit for purpose, also.
"KGV College is in a managerial mess and has been for a number of years. There is a continuing culture of secrecy which means that important reports and important papers are not publicly available as they are in colleges up and down the country.

"The principal problem right now is funding. There are nowhere near enough students enrolled. So, the numbers just do not add up. 

"KGV had a proud history both as a school and as a sixth form college: two of my brothers attended there. But it is unfortunately now totally unanswerable to the people who matter - the parents of the children attending our town's primary and secondary schools. Due to government meddling, the College has no kind of accountability to these parents' elected representatives either.
"Merger with Hugh Baird might well be an option but it is surely not the only option or the obvious option. Southport parents and teachers, particularly head teachers, need to be involved in consultations and discussions about the best way forward. We have the highly-successful Southport College just a mile up the road and we have highly-successful secondary schools including one right next door to KGV. We also have Runshaw College which appears to be the present destination of choice for hundreds of Southport sixth formers. 

There is no obvious logic to merging with a college in a town many miles from Southport. It must be recognised that the positioning of KGV makes it a natural option for hundreds of students from West Lancashire as well as Southport and Formby."

Tuesday, 29 March 2016

Liberal Party and the Economy 1929-1964 by Peter Sloman

Like many academic books it is ridiculously expensive, it is advertised on Amazon for £58 .  
I recall a meeting of the Liberal Party Standing Committee in 1979 which was drawing up the Election Manifesto. We reached the item on the agenda marked economic policy. There was a silence until Richard Moore spoke: ‘I joined the Liberal Party in spite of not because of its economic policy ‘he told us.
Many people hold the opinion that our party gives economic policy a lower priority than say the environment, reform of government, foreign policy, Europe, individual rights or the state of the pavements. Such indifference, it is argued, allows a few well motivated and wealthy mavericks to high jack the party’s policy position. William Wallace has written about one such event.

‘The group of free-trade Liberals that included S.W.Alexander and Oliver Smedley had drive, financial resources, and a clear sense of Liberalism in a libertarian, minimum-state interpretation. The almost anarchic structure of party assemblies allowed for such groups to exert real influence.

The Radical Reform Group (RRG), as I recall, provided the most coherent alternative definition of Liberalism – much closer to the radical Liberal tradition, and to the nonconformist beliefs which a high proportion of its members held. It helped enormously that Jo Grimond as leader was naturally sympathetic to the RRG perspective; but the existence and activities of RRG, and the arguments of its members on the Party Executive, made Grimond’s task in reorienting the party much easier.
My future father-in-law, Edward Rushworth, had for many years been both a member of Radical reform Group (RRG) and of the party executive.

He made little distinction between being a Liberal and being a teetotal nonconformist; his instincts were anti authoritarian and socially egalitarian.’

Some Liberator readers may well join Richard Grayson in seeing the policy coup in 2008 over tax cuts and promoting a vision of small state in a similar vein to the antics of Smedley and Alexander.

Peter Sloman’s book The Liberal Party and the Economy 1929-1964 (OUP 2015) challenges the assumption that the history of economic policy making in the Liberal party is the history of a struggle between classical free market liberalism and interventionist social liberalism. Sloman has gone where no other historian has gone before examining the twists and tortured turns of policy making. It is an excellent account of the party’s history giving some new insights into issues –not all of them related to economic policy.

Sloman identifies four strands of Liberalism and examines the interplay between them. Classical liberalism, Georgism, New (left) Liberalism and constructive Liberalism. The first two are seen as essentially non-interventionist while the latter two see a positive role for the state. The New Liberal tradition stemming from Hobhouse and Green focusses on ethics whilst the constructive liberalism is influenced by professional economists and focused on practical policies.

If you don’t know your Distributists from your Georgists or your Keynesians and are unaware that the Liberal Party under Clem Davies endorsed central state planning then this is the book for you. Here you can also read how the idea of membership of the European Common Market was used to rout the extreme free marketeers at the 1960 Liberal Assembly and of the most successful economic campaign to come out of NLYL: ‘Ownership for All ‘
Some aspects of classical liberalism had a strong hold on the popular imagination. The belief that free trade enhanced worldwide prosperity and peace tapped into the party’s internationalism. The assertion that free trade kept the price of bread low was a key aspect of the Liberal appeal. In the 1906 election here in Southport that was the main message of the successful candidate
Astbury


The Liberal Party never supported pure laissez fair economics. All Liberator readers know Gladstone favoured nationalising the railways. By the time of the 1906 Liberal government, many of whose members were influenced by T H Green, the party had moved decisively away from the small state view beloved by the ideologically pure classical liberals. In the 1920’s Keynes announced to the Liberal Summer School that ‘laissez faire was dead’. Nevertheless the neo liberal corpse has had an after life and each new manifestation has been more grotesque that the previous one. We have already glimpsed the destructive impact that neo liberal activists had on the small struggling Liberal Party of the 1950’s. Many of them decamped to the Institute of Economic Affairs where they acted as midwife at the birth of Thatcherism and which today is an apologist for corporatist capitalism.


With the publication of the Orange Book* a new generation of neo liberals have come and wreaked havoc on the party helping to reduce the parliamentary base from 56 to 8 MP’s. The work of a generation, whose activism rebuilt the party in the years after Grimond, has been wiped out. Sloman has argued that the Orange Book led to the rightward move of the party’s leadership facilitating the formation of the coalition with the Tories. It certainly provided the intellectual underpinning for Nick Clegg’s disastrous  2010 speech, which worried only about social mobility and dismissed tackling the inequality of experienced by citizens today. David Howarth has identified that speech asone of the triggers for the catastrophic fall in support for the Lib Dems from which it has not yet recovered.

Many things from the classical liberal tradition have been absorbed into the Radical Liberal agenda: individual liberties, suspicion of monopolies and the opposition to the excesses of state power promoted by the likes of Blunkett, Reid and Straw. Sloman points out that ‘Gladstone was as concerned about the integrity and autonomy of the state as about its size. It is difficult to find the same concern among today’s ‘economic liberals ’. Radicals need to be robust in rejecting neo-liberalism- a C 20th heresy of the New Right.

Another strand of Liberal economic thinking identified by Sloman is Georgism. Its anthem‘The Land’ has had pride of place in the Liberator Song Book since before Lord Bonkers was born, as it did in ‘Songs for Paper Tigers’ in the time of his father. It is based on the writings of Henry George who argued that land was a finite resource and that no one had an exclusive right to its ownership and that owners should be taxed to compensate the community for their monopoly use of it. Essential they were classical liberals who believed that once the issue of the land was addressed by imposing a tax on the unimproved value of plots the market would operate effectively and a just society would result. Lloyd George include a modest land tax in the People’ Budget of 1909. 
----------------------------------------------------

This is first part of a review of Sloman's book that I wrote for Liberator. Regrettably it took me so long to get round to complete it that someone else had submitted one before I had finished. As the thrifty Liberals of yesteryear would have said 'waste not want not', so I am posting it here in three instalments


*I am well aware that The Orange Book is a 'mixed bag' containing some interesting and useful contributions . Nevertheless the motivation of some of its key protagonists has been to shift the centre of gravity of economic thinking away from the social liberal consensus within the party towards a more neo liberal position. In light of that I think it is perfectly reasonable to use 'Orange book' as a short hand for that group. Their liberalism was replaced in the early 20th century with a commitment to the welfare state because of the work of T.H. GreenL.T. Hobhouse and the economist J.A. Hobson; the Orange Book writers were seeking to overturn nearly a century of Liberal party history. It is to be greatly welcomed that the recent conference at York passed an excellent economic policy motion promoted by the Social Liberal Forum

Mental health -Government fails to deliver on mental health waiting list promise

Norman Lamb has been out championing mental health care again. He has an article in today's Independent which begins:
Thousands of people suffering from mental health conditions will continue to miss out on timely help, a former minister has said, warning that promised reforms to NHS mental healthcare would be impossible without extra spending. 
Norman Lamb, who served as the minister responsible for mental health in the Coalition government, said that vital new waiting-times targets for a range of mental health conditions including bipolar disorder and OCD "won’t happen" because the plans were not funded. 

You can donate to our local mental health charity Imagine Independence by following this link 
Donate with JustGiving

Saturday, 26 March 2016


James MacMillan's Seven Last words from the Cross is our Easter offering. I have the Hyperion recording with the Craigie Aitchison picture on the CD cover. I noticed that Liverpool Cathedral has another version of the picture in their Chapter House-although there will be some who contest its departure from the biblical story because of the inclusion of the dog at the foot of the cross.

Birkdale Irrigation Allotment new initiative




Richard Hands meeting the Birkdale Irrigation Allotment team, Dave (chair), Linda, (Secretary) and Tony (Treasurer)


Having clocked up over 100 years on the present site the Birkdale Irrigation Allotment Society is launching a new imitative. When we visited the site on Good Friday ( the traditional day for plot holders to plant their potatoes) we learnt that the waiting list for a plot was now 4 years. The scheme that the group have come up with seeks to involve those on the waiting list in  allotment activities whilst they wait. As you enter the site there has long been a vacant plot reserved for people with disabilities which has become neglected. The plan is to bring the plot back into use and erect a poly tunnel on the site. This will be a great asset for the wider community who are interested in growing their own crops.

Birkdale Lib Dem councillors were delighted to support his new scheme with a modest grant from the pot of money set aside for Birkdale we and wish them well for the next 100 years

Now you may ask why to allotment folk plant their potatoes on Good Friday? One obvious reason id that it was the first spring  'holiday' that working men had. Secondly Easter is fixed by the moon and as is well documented alot of people are persuaded to garden by the lunar cycle, Thirdly, of course, despite the lack of a fixed date for Easter Good Friday does fall at the right time of year.

Bank Holidays were introduced by Sir John Avebury by in 1971. He was Eric Lubbocks Grandfather
and Bank Holidays were known as Avebury Days for a while. Good Friday was included in the legislation for Scotland although not for England. Unlike the Calvinists north of the border Christmas Day and Good Friday were established days of rest in England.  

Many readers will be saddened by the recent death of Lord Avebury (Eric Lubbock) a comprehensive tribute to him can be found here  and of course it has triggered one of the most bizarre and nonsensical by elections of all time  let us hope the victor is as environmentally aware as the man he is replacing.



The Union flag on Southport Town Hall flies at half mast


Following my request to the Council the flag was lowered to half mast. The tragedy of the Brussels bombing and attacks elsewhere in Europe are an attack on us. We need to stand together with the citizens in the rest of Europe by expressing our solidarity






No man is an island,
Entire of itself,
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thy friend's
Or of thine own were:
Any man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; 
It tolls for thee. 

Wednesday, 23 March 2016

Time to fly the Belgium flag at half mast on Southport Town Hall

I arrived at Southport Town Hall this evening for the Area Committee meeting. I was saddened to see that the Union flag and the St George's flag were flying a full mast. At the beginning of the meeting I asked the Chair if we could ask that the flags should fly at half mast tomorrow alongside the Belgium flag. I think that at this time it is very important that we show our solidarity with the people of Brussels.  All Europe must stand together. We cannot successfully tackle IS if Europe is divided. We must stand together. IS do not take any notice of national boundaries. We must learn the lessons of the past. Once again the warping influence of nationalism is on the rise. It offers no pathway to lasting peace.

I am pleased to say I got unanimous support from all the councillors present .

Monday, 7 March 2016

A visit to the Pre Raphaelite exhibition at the Walker Art Gallery

William Davis: The river Alt between Ainsdale and Formby
On the recommendation of Tony and Jen Robertson I took some visitors from Kent to see the Pre Raphaelite exhibition at the Walker Art Gallery.  It is well worth a visit. I had not realised that Liverpool was the only provincial city to have its own Pre Raphaelite school. We discovered many artists new to us including William Davis two of whose pictures were amongst the favourites of our group.



William Davies: Speake Hall



A more typical PRB painting also took our fancy.Rossetti's Venus Verticordia a rare nude and obviously not what the person who commissioned it was expecting as he had another, less revealing,  version painted. He explained that for an 'old timer' it was to voluptuous. The poem on which Rossetti based the painting was one which showed women as the corrupter of men.

Rossetti: Venus Verticordia

Saturday, 5 March 2016

Southport LMS poster


I must admit this rail poster in the Atkinson was a new one on me

Monday, 29 February 2016

fed up with the obsession with Tory issues in the EU referendum? There is a better case which must be heard

To judge from most coverage of the EU referendum you would be excused for thinking that the key issues are the fear of immigration, the wholly erroneous assertion that folk come here to claim benefit and how we can make some rich businessmen richer by opting out of rights won for workers actoss the EU

There is a positive case and it was good to hear Willie Rennie Lib Dem Leader in Scotland putting that view:

Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie said: "The United Kingdom's future should be at the heart of the European Union. Next to the NHS it is one of the best creations that this country has built. It has helped build peace, security and economic progress since the Second World War.
"With open markets, partnership between universities and free movement of people it is in our interest to remain a key part of the European Union.
"Our ancestors who experienced a continent of conflict for centuries will be looking on with incredulity that we are even considering leaving the organisation that has helped create a continent of peace

I also like the comments made by the SNP leader


Ms Sturgeon said: "The EU is a coming together of independent states that choose to pool some of their sovereignty to better tackle those issues that don't respect national boundaries - like climate change, energy security and the refugee crisis.

Tuesday, 23 February 2016

Europe was never just an economic project

I guess Farage and his motley crew are working on the basis that if they keep repeating nonsense people will come to accept it is true. .One particular oft repeated bit of nonsense is that in 1975 we were asked to join a free trade area and not a wider political project.

I was about in those days and I have checked my recollections (it is never wise to rely on one's memory) Reader may not know that we left a free trade area EFTA to join the wider political project of Europe. This was not done underhand it was explicit in the negotiations and in the prospectus that was set out.

Here is part of the governments statement:

  But all of us are aware of the long-term potential for Europe, and therefore for Britain, of the creation of a single market of approaching 300 million people, with all the scope and incentive which this will provide for British industry, and of the enormous possibilities which an integrated strategy for technology, on a truly continental scale, can create. I am glad to say that my right honourable friend and I found that this concept has made a great impact throughout Europe.
"But whatever the economic arguments, the House will realise that, as I have repeatedly made clear, the Government's purpose derives above all from our recognition that Europe is now faced with the opportunity of a great move forward in political unity and that we can—and indeed must—play our full part in it.
"We do not see European unity as something narrow or inward-looking. Britain has her own vital links through the Commonwealth, and in other ways, with other continents. So have other European countries. Together we can ensure that Europe plays in world affairs the part which the Europe of to-day is not at present playing. For a Europe that fails to put forward its full economic strength will never have the political influence which I believe it could and should exert within the United Nations, within the Western Alliance and as a means for effecting a lasting d├ętente between East and West; and equally contributing in ever fuller measure to the solution of the world's North-South problem to the needs of the developing world. 

You can read it in full here

I particularly like Frank Byers contribution to that debate:

As the House knows, we have been advocating this for over ten years. We certainly wish them every success. Indeed, if our application succeeds, this could be the beginning of a new era, not only for this country but for Europe as a whole. We might all go forward much stronger as a political entity in the future, and also stronger economically


Thursday, 4 February 2016

Time to Talk day,a mental health initiative making a difference

To the mental health campaign Time to change has its Time to talk day


Time to Talk Day



Time to Talk Day - Thursday 4th February 2016

Join us and let’s get the nation talking about mental health to help end the misconceptions around it. 
Mental health problems affect 1 in 4 people every year, yet too often people are afraid to talk about 
their experiences because they fear it will affect their jobs or relationships. That’s not right and it’s 
why we need your help to break the silence and end the stigma.

A release from a local mental health charity sets the scene
We’ve got lots of things going on to celebrate the day and raise awareness of 
mental health; from here in Liverpool – where our Head Office is based –   
to London and throughout the UK.
Our staff in London are at ASDA with Sutton Uplift, giving people the opportunity 
to stop by and talk to them about mental health issues;
 our Health and Wellbeing Practitioner, Laura Henry, is representing Imagine 
at a Time to Talk event in Central Station here in Liverpool and the
 Redbridge office are hosting their own event… to name but a few!

IMG_0472


To join the conversation on Twitter, keep an eye on our own coverage of the 
day’s events and help to raise awareness of mental health, check out
@ImagineIndep01 and use the hashtag #timetotalk.