Lib Dem, Labour and Conservative 2010 Election Manifestos

The article was first published in Palatinate Issue 718 on 6th May 2010.

Oh, if only policy was paramount. Can you imagine an election where manifestos actually mattered? A vote where objectivity reigned over popularity? A fairytale where people voted on issues, rather than personality? “No” is the answer which springs to mind. An election invigorated by sensible policy fuelled debate? Don’t be daft. Anyone who seriously believes that a party’s proposed programmes for government critically affect the outcome of the election either has failed to notice the vast influence of the media furore or is idealistically deluded.

I am not wishing to underestimate the intelligence of the British people or to overestimate the ability of the media to influence the masses. It cannot be doubted however, that our electorate is fundamentally lazy.

The apathy of the voting public is astonishing and incredibly worrying. In 2005, only 37% of 18-to-25 year olds voted in the general election. This translates to more than three-fifths of potential votes in this age group alone being lost in the ether of indifference which has anaesthetised many elections of recent years. So many people, rightly or wrongly, are so disengaged and alienated by politics that voting is just no longer on the list of things to do. With all three major political parties (and several of the more minor parties too) squabbling over a narrow strip of centrist ideology, it becomes easy to claim that any vote is a wasted vote, as the differences between the three leading parties are negligible. This could not be further from the truth. Yet, the only way to discern clear difference between the parties is to closely and astutely analyse policy.

Being realistic, how many people sit down and objectively read each party’s manifesto in order to conclude which candidate will best represent them in Westminster? I imagine very few. Furthermore, how many people carefully consider their local candidates policies for representing a constituency?

Estrangement and a lack of knowledge seem to be a common, yet under-reported phenomenon in British politics. Take the party leaders, for example: Nick Clegg was born and raised in the Home Counties, went to school in London, studied at Cambridge and yet is MP for Sheffield Hallam.

David Cameron, born in London, raised and schooled in the Home Counties is MP for Witney in West Oxfordshire. Prior to winning his seat, he had previously stood for election in Stafford, which is even further removed from his home turf.

Gordon Brown does represent a constituency which is not too far from his home town; however, this is all too often the exception to the rule rather than the norm.
Quite how any MP can fairly and sensitively represent a constituency when they have little empathy with the local electorate is a bafflement frequently overlooked in our political system. No amount of research, polling or canvassing can substitute genuine knowledge and concern for a constituency.

The purpose of a General Election is not simply to choose a Prime Minister to be the face of Britain on an international stage. It is also an opportunity to choose an MP to represent the collective interests of a constituency in Westminster. Yet, I think it is all too likely that at the ballot box, the names of local candidates will have been forgotten and instead, Messrs Brown, Cameron and Clegg will be at the forefront of the electorate’s decision.

The leaders’ debates have added a whole new dimension to this election. Suddenly the public and the media are closer to their leaders than has ever been possible before. For the first time the electorate have been given the opportunity to question their leaders about the issues that matter most to them (well that is the theory, the “representative audience” and the questions asked are carefully selected by TV producers – a truly free debate would be a bit too risky, one would imagine).

Yet, this newfound freedom on behalf of the electorate has only succeeded in adding further confusion to the fray. Some would argue that the TV debates have allowed the politicians to be quizzed on policy and grilled on their political approach more than in any other election. However, as a swing voter and as a TV viewer, instead of concrete policy all I have heard is the same old rhetoric from all parties and nothing to really make anyone sit up and listen.  It seems I am not alone: 9.1 million viewers tuned into the first debate, as opposed to only 4.9 million for the second debate, a shocking downturn if ever there was one.

The so-called “Clegg Effect” following the first debate has been churned over in the British press for weeks now. Yet, I would argue that it is not his policies that caused the surge in support but the fact that the public were able to encounter a fresh face on the scene.

I suggest that it is not the differences in policy which point towards a hung parliament, but the perceived similarity between parties which makes it impossible to choose between the parties.

It seems as though all campaigning between debates has ground to a halt. People now wait in earnest anticipation of the next debate, where they can listen to policy being made up on the spot, hear important decisions glossed and spun to the hungry media and follow snapshot popularity polls on a minute-by-minute basis.

By the time this edition is in print, the third debate will have been aired and the country will be going to the polls. It will be interesting to see if the electorate has finally decided to put policy at the forefront of their decision-making, or if, instead, they have succumbed to the X-Factor style popularity contest the TV debates have engendered.

The original online publication of this article may be found on the Palatinate website by clicking here and scrolling to the second article on the page. The opposing side of the debate, “Manifestos are an integral part of  the election”, may be found following the same link to the first article on the page.

© Alexandra Bottomer 2010

The article was first published in Palatinate Issue 718 on 6th May 2010.

The podcasted interview between myself and Tony Moss, owner of the shop, is exclusively available on this blog.

The Picnic Basket has long been a favourite haunt of Durham students lunching between lectures.

Following nomination by a customer, the bustling New Elvet sandwich shop is one of three finalists in the running for a prestigious Smooth Radio ‘Love the North East’ award in the ‘Best Delicatessen/Sandwich Shop’ category. They are the only Durham business to be nominated in any category.

Owner and founder of the popular lunch spot, Tony Moss, said it was “fantastic” to be nominated for an award which seeks to recognise the North East’s hidden business gems. “The award will put my business on the map – I’d like to thank customers for their continued support”. The winner will be announced at a ceremony on 20th May.

Click the play button below to listen to the full interview

© Alexandra Bottomer 2010

David Miliband

Written for Purple Radio News on 4th May 2010

In a calculated response to the visit of Nick Clegg, the Foreign Secretary has chosen to vist Durham before the general election. At the weekend, it was announced that Nick Clegg was making his second visit to Durham in recent months. In a tactical response and in a bid to secure Labour votes, the Foreign Secretary David Miliband has chosen to visit Durham on the day before the general election.

Durham has been highlighted as a potential swing seat after consistently supporting Labour since the Second World War. It is currently Lib Dem target seat number 23.

David Miliband will be treading the boards at the Union Society’s Palace Green Debating Chambers from 12 midday tomorrow, accompanied by incumbent Labour MP for Durham, Roberta Blackman-Woods. Alongside his duties as Foreign Secretary, David Miliband is MP for South Shields.

Nick Clegg will be answering student questions at the Debating Chamber from 4pm.

Due to the high profile nature of the politicians in attendance, there will be a significant police presence around the chamber throughout the day. It is also expected that there will be representatives from both local and national media present on Palace Green.

Both events were open to any university student, however, all places have been allocated on a first-come-first-served basis.

The candidates standing to be elected as MP for Durham are: Roberta Blackman-Wood for Labour, Carol Woods for the Liberal Democrats, Nick Varley for the Conservatives, Nigel Coghill-Marshall for UKIP, Ralph Musgrave for the BNP and Jonathan Collins as an Independent.

The original online publication of this article may be found on the Purple Radio website by clicking here.

© Alexandra Bottomer 2010

As a higher density volcanic ash cloud moves south from Iceland, more UK flights could be grounded

It has been announced this evening that all airspace over Scotland and Northern Ireland will close from 7am tomorrow morning. The announcement from the Civil Aviation Authority comes following the latest assessment of the risk posed by the continued eruption from the volcano in Iceland which caused widespread disruption across Northern Europe in late April.

In a statement, the CAA said that “Met Office forecasts show that levels of ash in the atmosphere over Scotland and Northern Ireland will exceed the concentrations that engine manufacturers have agreed are safe for operations”.

Forecasts are expected to show the new, higher density ash cloud moving south, which could result in the “No Fly Zone” being extended to cover more UK airports. Passengers are encouraged to check their flights and to stay in contact with their travel providers as the situation will be regularly reassessed.

The original online publication of this article may be found on the Purple Radio website by clicking here.

© Alexandra Bottomer 2010

During the 2010 UK general election campaign, Palatinate ran a blog which analysed the campaign on daily basis. The following article is the contribution for Day 19 of the campaign.

The article was first published on the Palatinate website on 24th April 2010

The media has hijacked this election campaign more than any other. Or has it? Could we instead say that the main parties (and the lesser ones to an extent) have prostituted themselves to the media more than ever before? Undoubtedly, in this multimedia, multiplatform, communication driven and information hungry world in which we live, work and vote – the media has an enormous influence over the outcome of this election, for better or for worse.

Before this election was officially announced, the internet was being bandied about as the tool which could win vast swathes of the electorate over. Obama demonstrated the potential of the micro-blogging service Twitter for reaching out to hundreds of thousands of potential voters. David Cameron has ventured into the world of the vlog with his cheesily named “WebCameron”. Campaigns, propaganda and a great deal of satire have sprung up all over the internet. My personal favourite has got to be “slapometer.com” where you can metaphorically slap one of the leaders online in real time alongside the election debate (the results of the nationwide slapping then produce a popularity poll). The powers that be even utilised Facebook, producing advertisements encouraging people to register to vote. This must be applauded in a country where voter apathy is one of the primary concerns of all who seek to win the election. Of course, the Facebook generation has wholeheartedly jumped on the bandwagon with a variety of groups, pages and profiles to cater for every single political persuasion, anti-persuasion, passion or indifference.

All of this information comes at a price. And all too often, the price paid is objectivity.

Fifty years ago, polls changed on a weekly basis; ten years ago they changed on a daily basis; at the beginning of this campaign they could even be said to change on an hourly basis. Now however, nearly two-thirds of the way into the 2010 campaign, the media frenzy is such that polls can change on a minute-by-minute basis. One gaffe, one slip up, a minor syntactical error by anyone politically affiliated – from the party leaders down to the humblest campaigner knocking on doors – and the mistake is plastered over the internet for the world to see. Every move can be watched, replayed and analysed in more detail than ever before.

The media has become lost in the minutiae of presentation and has forgotten about the big picture. The televised leaders’ debates have become the focal point of this madness. Nick Clegg was rebuked for standing with his hands in his pockets, David Cameron scorned for not maintaining an alert stance when the camera was no longer pointing at him and Gordon Brown forever mocked for his grimace-like smile. How on earth is this helpful for choosing the next government? And yes, I say government, for this election is about more than choosing the next Prime Minister. It is this over focussing on the trivial, more than anything else, which has caused the polls to point ominously towards a hung parliament. Popularity has caused more of a three-way split than policy.

Yet, as newspapers, television channels and the blogosphere earnestly examine “the Clegg effect”, “the Cameron fight back” or the “Brown bounce” engendered by the TV debates, much of the rest of the campaign has been lost. It seems that between debates, the country simply holds its breath in anticipation of the next one.

The “local” dimension of this election seems to have been forgotten amongst an X-Factor style popularity contest between the main three parties’ leaders. It is not the face of their local candidate who people envisage when they mark an X on their ballot paper, it is instead the party leaders. How many amongst us could actually name our local candidates? How many are aware of the local issues candidates are battling over in the constituencies they are vying to represent in Westminster?  A Prime Minister may represent the face of Britain to the world, but it is our local MPs who present the voice of the individual to Westminster.

I am not for one moment arguing that the leaders’ debates are a bad thing.

They have given us the opportunity to see the leaders of the three main parties show some passion towards the policies they feel are the most important. They have also given the public the opportunity to question their leaders like never before. Even in the strictly controlled forum the debates present, live on air anything can happen. It is thrilling to see the leaders thinking on their feet whilst the masses respond via their red buttons, Facebook, Twitter, or even the election slapometer. Never before has an election given rise to such ready analysis on behalf of the people, rather than far removed political commentators or journalists. This forum has opened the door to real three-party politics in a way never previously seen in the UK, which may only be considered a positive move.

It cannot be doubted that the face of British politics, or rather, British political campaigning, has been monumentally altered in the wake of the media revolution which gathered pace in the closing years of the Noughties. Ultimately, it is likely to prove a facelift which was greatly needed and highly beneficial. This great tide of information however, must not be allowed to cloud our views. It must not make us lazy in forming our opinions. The information and analysis generated by the media furore online, on television, in newspapers and on the radio must be used as a tool to aid our decision making, rather than making our decision for us.

Personally, I think it would benefit us all to take a step back from the frenzied media muddle and take stock; to zoom out from the detail and see the whole political panorama. We must not become preoccupied with how stylishly, intelligently or assuredly three men perform on camera, or with the latest political trending topics on Twitter, or even how many “slaps” a politician has received. Objectivity and clarity of thought must not be lost in the great gift of modern technology. The public should be empowered by information and choice, rather than enslaved by propaganda and stylish rhetoric.

We must each carefully and astutely consider what is of greatest importance to us, the voting public; else, we may as well have the election decided by “slapometer”.

The original online publication of this article may be found on the Palatinate website by clicking here.

© Alexandra Bottomer 2010

Fighting fit and raring to go, will Yamouchi give Radcliffe’s record a run for its money?

Often, little is heard of Mara Yamouchi, she has for many years run in the shadow of Paula Radcliffe, Britain’s most famous marathon runner. After the announcement of Paula Radcliffe’s second pregnancy at the beginning of April, it has been confirmed that Radcliffe is now pinning her hopes on 2011 and the 2012 Olympic Games.

Yamouchi, originally from Oxford, has gone from strength to strength in a vigorous training regime in Abuquerque and is confident that she will make produce a challenging performance in the London Marathon on Sunday. It has not however, been a smooth road to the start line.

Yamouchi, like thousands of others, was stranded in America due to the Icelandic volcanic ash cloud. For high endurance athletes, who’s every calorie is counted and every hour of rest and training carefully planned, a six day journey to London was not the best preparation. Undeterred, Mara Yamouchi, who left her career as an intenational diplomat to realise her dreams as an athlete, is determined to wow the crowds in London this year.

This marathon is set to be as close as ever with the weather not going in the athletes’ favour. Winds of ten miles an hour, high humidity and temperatures as high as 21 degrees are sure to push many runners to their limit. Nevertheless, the event is set to be as successful as ever, as the top athletes in the world compete alongside “fun runners” who each year raise millions of pounds at the world-famous event.

The original online publication of this article may be found on the Purple Radio website by clicking here.

© Alexandra Bottomer 2010

All British athletes are eager to demonstrate their sporting prowess in the run up to the Olympic Games. There is no better forum for our young gymnasts than the European Artistic Gymnastics Championships which are happening in Birmingham over the next week.

Great Britain’s junior team have secured the gold medal and have retained their position as leaders of the European rankings. France received the bronze with a score of 24.375 and Switzerland took silver with 248.525, meanwhile, Team GB stormed into the lead and won the gold medal with 254.200.

The championships are taking place at the NIA in Birmingham, where Sam Oldham, Reiss Beckford, Cameron Mackenzie, Max Whitlock and Frank Baines completed their routines cleanly.

The original online publication of this article may be found on the Purple Radio website by clicking here.

© Alexandra Bottomer 2010

UK GDP has grown by just 0.2% in the first quarter of 2010, according to the Office of National Statistics.

Growth is much weaker than the 0.45 predicted by economists earlier this year.

Tony Cleaver, Senior Teaching Fellow in Economics at Durham Business School, said: “Modest growth in the first quarter of this year is to be welcomed but this represents a very fragile recovery from the greatest recession we have experienced in our lifetimes.

“Personal incomes must rise more and for longer than we have seen so far before we can be assured that the economic recovery will be sustained.

“The news of an overall growth in the British economy of 0.2 per cent for the first three months of the year must be contrasted with the fact that unemployment has recently risen to a 15 year high and shows no sign yet of falling.

“Growth in UK manufacturing output is certainly encouraging but even that, a 0.7 per cent rise in the first quarter, is not outstanding and exports in particular are dependent on growth in foreign markets, where the outlook, especially in Europe, is also uncertain.”

The original online publication of this article may be found on the Purple Radio website by clicking here.

© Alexandra Bottomer 2010

A rescue package from the EU International Monetary Fund has been formally requested by the Greek government to ease the country’s economic crisis.

Tens of millions of Euros will be provided by Eurozone countries in loans which should help to bring Greece’s debt-burdened economy out of its crisis. Last month’s promise of EU support has not been enough to steady markets and aid recovery.

Greece needs to borrow 54 billion Euros this year alone and is in debt to the tune of €300 billion. German popular opinion is strongly against the loans and Chancellor Angela Merkel has ststed that any bail-out would come with “very strinct conditions”. Athens has introduced huge spending cutbacks and austerity measures to help deal with the crisis.

The original online publication of this article may be found on the Purple Radio website by clicking here.

© Alexandra Bottomer 2010

Al-Qaeda has been blamed for a series of bombs which exploded near Shia mosques during Friday prayers in the Iraqi capital.

The explosions have killed at least 58 people and over 100 have been wounded. Whilst unconfirmed, it has been suggested that the bombs were part of a revenge attack following the recent killing of three senior al-Qaeda figures, by security forces.

The original online publication of this article may be found on the Purple Radio website by clicking here.

© Alexandra Bottomer 2010