Dear Ed

I received a nice letter today from the leader of the opposition. It is part of Labour's 'Fresh Ideas' programme. Mr. Miliband is keen, it would appear, to hear what my hopes and concerns are. Unfortunately the box to put your ideas in is a little small, so I'm hoping that he'll get a copy of my open letter below instead.

Dear Ed,


Thanks very much for your letter which was delivered today. I must say how refreshing it is to have a senior politican contact a member of the electorate in this fashion, it has oft been a complaint of mine that politicians are distant figures, detached from reality, surrounded by an army of SpAds and completely disconnected from those they claim to represent.

I sometimes get a little angry when writing about politics, I suppose it is because I become so frustrated and feel so powerless, it is almost as if my opinon and my voice are an irrelevance. I will attempt to keep my temper in this letter, as I figure you are unlikely to pay much attention if I employ one or two of the more colourful metaphors which can be common in the blogosphere.


So, shall we start with my concerns?


I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm a little scared, Ed. Actually, I'm quite a lot scared. Not by 'hoodies' or 'yobs' roaming the streets, not by the threat of 'cuts' to 'front-line' services, nor by the prospect of a 'privatised' NHS. What scares me is what little voice I do have is being ever more marginalised. I hear talk of a 'post-democratic' age, and it chills me to the bone. It is easy, perhaps even lazy, to draw comparisons with the European dictators of the mid-twentieth century, but I understand why these comparisons are drawn. I'm talking about the European Union, of course. I'm not going to stamp my feet and make demands, but I must point out that we were never really given the option to vote on this political union.


It may be fair to say that this was clear when the referendum on the common market was held, after all, how much more explicit can 'ever closer union' be? But it was hidden in plain sight, there were weasel words used, perhaps the politicians at the time were not being entirely open with us. I'm not demanding we leave the EU, but I think it fair and proper that the electorate be given one last chance to pass judgement on this project once and for all. The Lisbon treaty is the vital link between a trading block and a federal European state.


Now Mr. Cameron gave me, us, a cast-iron promise to give us a referendum on Lisbon. He lied to us, Ed. He looked us square in the eye and lied to us. I will never, ever, trust the Conservative party again. You really could show that you stand for democracy and the sovereignty of the British public and parliament, by allowing us an in-or-out vote, once and for all to decide our fate.


I am also concerned about the levels of spending and debt which has been, is, and will continue to be wildly more than we can afford. I speak as a public servant who did not go on the march in London the other weekend. Whilst I may sound like a turkey voting for Christmas, I cannot in all good conscience support a programme where we condemn our children to penury just so a section of society can continue living in the manner to which they have become accustomed. It is not fair, and from what I gather, Ed, I understand that fairness is important to you. Is it fair that many people will lose their jobs? No. However, I sumbit that it is less fair to saddle our unborn children with a massive debt so we can remain in clover. I've seen your party speak with great passion and strength of feeling about tuition fees saddling young adults with crippling debts when they graduate from university, so why is it fair to saddle those even younger with a greater debt?

What else concerns me?


I'm concerned at the level of interest that politicians take in every aspect of our lives. We cannot seem to do anything without some restriction, prohibition, regulation or advice or suggestion from politicians or interested professionals. It just isn't warranted, Ed. You and your class have to learn that we do not belong to you, the NHS, the LEA, the State or anyone but ourselves. You simply cannot go around browbeating us like this. If history about these islands of ours tells you anything it is that we do not respond well to being dictated to, just ask King Charlie no-head or Tumbledown Dick, or the poor old Roman chap who was stood on the pallisade at Verulamium as the Iceni came thundering into view. I know it is done with the very best of intentions, but you have to let us make our own mistakes. What would have happened if your mother had prevented you from going to Corpus Christi or the LSE because she didn't think it was good for you?


What do I hope for?


I hope that I can be left to live my life in peace, free from interference, free from registration, regulation, licencing, monitoring, evaluation, means testing, investigation, interference, hectoring, nannying and Bono from U2 (I really hate that guy, and Ed, he, Sting, Lennox, Geldof and Chris Martin don't speak for the youth anymore than that mad fellow with the hook speaks for Muslims).


I hope to be given a say, a proper say, not some half-hearted attempt whenever an election, be it national, local or European, rolls around.


I want to feel valued. But I don't, I feel like a serf, I feel like my sole purpose is to toil in the field to ensure the continued prosperity of the lord of the manor. You can change that, but do you have the cojones, Ed?


I see you want some ideas. OK here's a few:


As mentioned before, give us an in/out referendum on Europe. Watch your popularity sky rocket if you make it a stated policy. Your name will be mud in Brussels, but the people in Brussels don't vote for you. If the referendum says stay in, you can devote us to the project with a new vigourous zeal and the Eurocrats will love you, if it says come out, then their opinion will be of no relevance.


We have to cut jobs in the public sector, it is bitter tasting, but true. Set a 3:1 policy, for every front-line worker sacked in national or local government employ (that is someone with regular public facing duties), three people who do not work on front-line services must go. Hit the managers and hit them hard, they are wasterels on a titanic level.


Stop forcing kids through exams if they don't suit the system. It isn't the kids' fault, it is the system. Three GCSE's should do it, get them trained by proper craftsmen and tradesmen, it is industry that made our country great, it can be again, but you can't have cookie cutter children, let the kids play to their strengths.


Abolish Thursdays, I don't particularly like them - I understand that is tough, so I'm going to cut you some slack.


I hope this has given you food for thought. If you want to chat, drop us an email, or friend request me on Facebook, we can chat in real time there.


All the best,


Wolfers.

P.S. - Don't trust Ed Balls, he's a wrong-un and no mistake. Try that nice Mr. Field in your party. He seems like a good chap.

I'm not holding my breath on a response. But then I understand he's a wedding to sort out, so he might be a bit busy.

Laugh? I almost did.

Got a few things to talk about, but seem to be having problems pulling my finger out.

Many thanks to a Twitter correspondent who pointed me in the direction of this website, which has caused me a degree of mirth this evening.

The best efforts thus far (with captions):

The full body search left Ed shocked and unable to walk properly for several hours.

 

*Giggle*

As the minute silence falls around Whitehall and the Cenotaph, Ed realises he forgot to turn his phone on silent.

*Guffaw*

After years of frustration and fantasies, Ed finally got his chance to make the move on Harriet Harman.

*Roffle*

Ooooh, actually, no. That last one made me feel a little queasy.

I'm errm, I'm just going out to get some air.

Confusion or delusion?

I'm a little confused about the election of the work experience boy to the big chair in the Labour party. I guess ageism trumps racism and sexism, eh, Diane?

Anyhow, if Ed is as 'Red' as we're led to believe, and if he lurches to the left, as some have predicted, I can only stand and applaud the wisdom of the trade union members who decided to cast their votes for him. If he's the heir apparent to Michael Foot then Labour really will be unelectable for years to come. Remember Labour have never unseated a leader, it just doesn't happen.

Clegg seems to have divorced himself from the membership of his party, that lot who are neither liberal, nor democratic. I'll hand it to the LimpDim membership though, they do have principles, one of the advantages of never having a decent shout at getting power. Unfortunately for Nick, he seems to have thrown one of the biggest principles (that being an abhorrance of the idea of getting into bed with the Tories) out of the window just so he can have a go at pressing a couple of the buttons that Cameron can't be fagged to press himself.

All we need now is for Cameron to be secretly filmed by the News of the World putting kittens into microwaves and the job will be done.

The Lib Dems will haemorrhage support, they're done before they even start. This coagulation government (as Leg Iron so beautifully puts it) will surely result in the death of the Lib Dems. This is probably not a bad thing, as the Liberals can go back to being liberal (assuming there are some properly liberal people amongst them) while the Social Democrats can go back to. . . well, where?



If Mr. Ed really does want to usher in a new era of swivel eyed socialism, those Social Democrats won't be welcome there. SDP, anyone?


I've always felt quite sorry for Labour members. I thought the way the New Labour agenda was smuggled in without the members' consent was a pretty shitty trick. The euphoria of government after so long out must now be dissipating, and the awful, awful truth dawning. But perhaps I was wrong? Surely if Miliband Minority was the best candidate to reflect what I always thought were the core opinions of the Labour party membership, then the membership would have turned out in their droves for him? They didn't.


Indeed Andy Burnham was probably an even more traditional (?) old (?) new old (?) Labour leadership candidate and he hardly got out of the blocks.


So we now have this odd situation where the person who I thought was the closest to the traditional membership was shunned by the membership and elected by the unions. A fact that I'm sure Woodley, Simpson, Serwotka, Crow, et al will remind him of at every available opportunity. If I heard Boulton on Sky News correctly, turnout amongst the trade union portion of the vote was around 10%. So hardly a ringing endorsement of any of the candidates on offer then.


So it leaves with me four questions:


1. What do the Labour party members want?
2. What are the Labour party for?
3. How does a party abdicate responsibility for their leadership elections to a load of people that don't even care enough about the Labour party to join?
4. Why would anyone vote Labour?


I've been saying for a couple of years that it wasn't the election just gone that was the important one, it'll be the next one. Let's hope that the Lib Dems tear themselves apart, that the Tories disgrace themselves and the coalition falls apart and that Labour go back to their old ways, with the unions cracking the whip. If we can get a snap election in, ooooh, 12 to 18 months, all bets will be off, especially if any AV referendum carries a 'yes' vote.