David Walker

On 3rd November Liberal Democrat candidate Carolyn Caddick won a Council seat from Lbour in Inversess. On 10th November Liberal Democrat candidate Cathy French won a seat from teh Conservatives in Norwich.

Since the summer, Liberal Democrats have made more gains that any of the other parties.

There is a growing realisation that the Coalition is a much better government than the Conservatives would have been if they they had won the last election outright.

There is also a growing realisation that Liberal Democrats make a significant contribution in Local Government, driven by the three key principles of the party: Efficiency, Equality and Environment.

I remember driving to work in the dark during the experiment of GMT +1 during the winters of 1967 to 71. But I also remember the benefits of coming home in the light and having more time for sport and recreation at weekend evenings. The experiment saved lives on the roads, saved energy and made me and many think that this was a good policy which should be made permanent.

There is now a draft bill, going through Parliament for a renewed trial period to ensure that the benefits are still there. Excellent! Now David Cameron has said that he will allow the Scottish Parliament to veto it. What a wimpish response!

Time and again the potential benefits of a change have been denied to us by opposition from the Scots.

The arguments are overwhelming and can be read in full at:

http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN0379

The three most significant benefits are:

Deaths of Children:

At least 80 deaths (predominantly of children coming home from school in the dark when they and drivers are tired) would be saved and many more injuries in road accidents. I would have thought that this would be a good enough argument on its own. In Edinburgh sunset on Dec 10th is at 3.59 and would change to 4.59, in Leicester it would be 11 minutes later. This means that children leaving school at 4.00 pm would get most of the way home in the light, in Scotland as well as locally.

Tourism:

An extra hour of accessible daylight could add £3 billion a year to an industry worth £76 billion in 2004

Energy:

There would be a saving of 6GWh of electricity per winter day;  and at least 500,000 million tonnes of carbon dioxide saved each year??.

The research indicates a whole range of further benefits.

I hope that the government will allow a free vote on this issue, and that members will read the report and vote for the bill.

It is unhelpful of the Daily Mail to say we would then be on Berlin Time, just what devious mind thinks this would be the right way to influence public opinion. It would also be the same as Paris time, of Copenhagen time etc, and we would not have to change our watches when going on holiday on the Continent.

Interestingly Russia has just decided to abandon the summer/winter shifting of the clocks. Having just spent an hour changing every clock and timer I feel that Putin might have got just one thing right.

Some of the time that I would have been spending in Council Committees has been redirected. I remain active in the Ward and the Division and continue to respond to requests for any problems relating to local issues. However  I have been to Corwall, Somerset, Belgium, France and Ireland since the May elections, and have taken on much more work with voluntary organisations.

Yesterday I came back from  a fascinating visit to Ireland which included a visit to the European Head Office of Google, an amazing organisation which is located in the centre of Dublin and employing over three thousand staff  in an environment that is quite unlike any other that I have seen, with areas to relax and play as well as spaces for meetings and discussions.

Instead of the usual Ryanair jet flight we went by train and boat, which was cheaper than Ryanair (£32 and no extras) and much more interesting.

I was back in time for the AGM of the Garendon Park Countryside Protection Group. The meeting was very well attended and postive in their approach of challenging  the assumption that part of the solution to the “housing crisis” is to designate this last area of green space between Loughborought and Shepshed as building land.

On the BBC website this morning I read:

Steve Turner, a spokesman for the Home Builders Federation, says the planning system has been an obstacle for growth for years. “For decades the planning system has not been delivering enough land to meet the housing needs of our population,”

This really annoys me. I have served on the Planning Committee, and know that this is not the problem. So many applications to build on agricultural land have been granted that it would take nearly five years to fill it. But builders are not building because they claim that they cannot sell the houses, because people can’t get mortgages.

The problem is that house prices are far too high, and that there are not enough houses to rent. The solutions are political and economic, not in allocating even more greenfield land to the housebuilders.

This blog was called my Councillor.

Sadly I am no longer your Councillor, but will remain very active in the Ward and the Division, offering a sensible alternative to Labour and Conservative policies and decisions, and working with local people.

I will keep up with the committees and their decisions and offer my views, and hope to get responses from those who follow this blog.

I am now your Lib Dem Campaigner, and campaigning for sensible policies in Outwoods Ward, Loughborough SouthWest, Loughborough, Charnwood, Leicestershire, the UK and Europe.

It is sad. The swing against the Lib Dems led to the loss of my seat on the Council.

The Labour candidates did well on the grounds that there is no good reason not to carry on borrowing and that the cuts were not necessary. This is madness and would lead us to the situation of the Greeks and the Irish.

The Conservatives candidates did well because they appealed to the solid conservative vote in the ward, and Conservatives feel that they can justify the policies of the government.

Some of the Lib Dem vote evaporated because they support the Labour view that we can carry on borrowing.

Some evaporated because they did not like the Lib Dem support for student fees.

I had enjoyed, and worked hard, in my role as Councillor for the ward, and regret that I will not longer be directly involved.

215658 or 07968745796

It has been good weather for leafletting and I have walked the whole of the ward twice to deliver two leaflets.

I have had a good response from most people, and having lived in the ward since 1974 I do know a lot of people.

There have been a few who blame the Lib Dems for failing to bring the government down on the issue of student fees. But if we had done so the fees would have gone up anyway.

There have been a few who blame the government for the tax increases and the cuts in expenditure.

But the majority think that the Lib Dem Conservative coalition is doing a good job at rescuing the country from a financial crisis.

There is no doubt that I have a great deal of local support and hope that I will be returned in the vote tomorrow.

It is sad that so many say that they will vote agains AV because it will cost £250M – which is just untrue, and that it is too complicated – which is also just untrue. Two untruths spread by the No to AV campaign who have had enough money (about £14M) to post their propaganda to every house in the country. The motive is obvious. In most seats the candidate gets in on a minority  vote because the opposition is split. AV addresses that problem. I hope people will realise the vested interests behind the No to AV campaign and assert their rights to have their choices counted.

It is encouraging that the number of people looking at this blog is steadily increasing.

In the 1980s when I was, for a time, head of the Department of Geography at Loughborough University, I had to deal with a doctoral student who turned out to be a fraudster who was taking money for a studentship in Australia and using it for other purposes (more complex and more devious than that!).

When I knew what was happening I terminated her studentship  and was backed by our then Vice Chancellor, Sir Clifford Butler, and our Registrar, David Alexander.

We got out of it lightly. She wreaked havoc in Newcastle University in Australia. Although she threatened to wreck my academic career she could not, because of the support that I had here. Her supervisor in Australia, Professor Don Parkes was not so lucky. He was not supported and indeed the Vice Chancellor and Deputy Chair of Senate of his university suggested that she should sue him.

I did what I could and am acknowledged in Don Parke’s recent book on the subject

Don kindly says:

“Overseas, David Walker was head of a department that was to become very much involved in the story; he could not have done or risked more to help me.”

You can download the book at:

http://www.bmartin.cc/dissent/documents/Parkes11.pdf

It is a fascinating book running to ove 300 pages.( I do not appear until page 98.)

I risked expensive legal action against me, but I knew I was right and that I should support Don with the truth.

If you have the time you should read the story of this brave and determined academic and his eventually successful campaign against  corrupt and venal  senior academics.

I have the highest regard for Professor Parkes and am pleased that I played a small part in his fight for justice.

The evil and the corrupt will win if there are no brave people to expose and condemn their actions.

I will always campaign for fairness and equality and against the misuse of power.

On Tuesday (19/4/2011) I ran a simulation of an election using both AV and First Past the Post with my (Loughborough) Rotary Club.

It was great fun, and I am sure that it sorted out the confusion which seems to surround the issue. Our President said he would now be able to satisfy his wife(‘s questions).

One of my interests, among other things, is the use of Games and Simulations in Education and Training (SAGSET). I was, for a time, the President of SAGSET, and was a Visiting Professor in a Canadian University in the 1980s teaching this and other educational methods.

The obvious answer was to teach by using a simulation.

So I created an economic crisis. Our caterer wanted an extra £1 for the deserts.

The President’s party policy was to say: No problem, we can afford it.

The Treasurer’s party policy was to negotiate a reduced menu for deserts for 50p.

The Secretary’s party proposed that we gave up deserts and saved the money.

There was another party which suggested we should not worry and that we could borrow the money to pay the extra charge.

On First Past the Post the President got 12 votes out of 26 and was clearly the winner. All the other votes were discarded.

On the alternative vote the President got 10 votes, sorting out the second choices of the smaller groups allcated another 4 votes and he was declared the winner.

What we learned was:

1. AV makes elections much more interesting

2. the end result is likely to be the same.

3. that the effort of the President to get support for an alternative vote from the supporters of the Treasurer paid off.

It made the election much more interesting. I can give you more details and the handout that went with it.

I cannot understand why people would not want to have the opportunity to register an Alternative Vote.

1. It is claimed that it will cost £250 million. This is NONSENSE.

It may take an hour longer to sort out the second and third choices, with a small increase in payments to the officers at the count, perhaps £20 each and a total of £600.

It is claimed that we would need to count the votes by using electronic  counting machines. We already have them in Loughborough and they are a good invesment, but they are not necessary. The Australians do not use them.

It is claimed that money would have to be spend on voter education. What nonsense. All you need is a note on the voting form: “put a “1″ by the candidate that you support, and put a “2″ by the candidate who would be your second choice if your preferred candidate is not elected. You may continue with further numbered choices if you wish.

The leaflet then lists all the things that could be bought for this spurious £250M. It is not clear if this is once every five years; do the doctors and nurses hide away without pay between elections.

2. It is suggested that AV would support fringe parties. NO it won’t and the BNP are campaigning against it. For the BNP to get in you would need to have almost equal votes for the three main parties and for all the voters to have selected the BNP as their second choice, which is inconceivable.

Finally the leaflet says that it has not been funded by the taxpayer. Indeed not, but sending a leaflet by post to every voter costs between £7 and £14 Million. This money has come from Conservative party supporters.

It is really sad that the Conservatives are resorting to lies and confusion to deny people the chance of system that would give the voters more choice and opportunity to be involved.

Quite simply because the Conservatives are afraid that it will mean that they have to work harder as MPs, and they do not want to have to do that.

With the present system there are many constituencies where the Conservatives get 40 % of the votes and the rest are divided 30% Labour and 30% Lib Dem, so Conservatives win. Similarly there are many seats where the Labour party get 40% of the votes and the rest are divided 30% Conservative and 30% Lib Dem.

These are archetypal “safe” seats. All the major parties have to do is to make sure that their voters bother to vote.

With AV in a “safe” labour seat the Conservatives “might” put a second choice for the Lib Dems and Lib Dems “might” put a second choice for the Conservatives. It might then be that the labour candidate would be defeated because there was no majority support, and one of the other parties candidates would be elected.

This would put everyone on their toes to ensure that the second vote went to support them.

Looking at Loughborough last time. It would have needed over 85% of the Lib Dems to have voted for Andy Reed as a second choice for him to be returned as the Labour MP. This would be unlikely, but we do not know, all the votes  UKIP, BNP and Lib Dem were irrelevant, and were wasted. One person one vote only applies in Loughborough if you voted for Conservative or Labour. Otherwise your vote did not count.

Is it any wonder that so many people do not bother to vote.

For a working democracy you should have AV.