mmckay395

FTPT Vs AV

On Thursday evening Leeds Town Hall hosted a debate over the issue of the voting system in Britain and whether a move should be made from the first past the post (FPTP) to the alternative vote (AV).

FTPT refers to the current system in which an MP with the highest number of votes is elected for their constituancy and the party with the highest number of elected MP’s forms the government in power.  AV on the other hand utilises preferential voting of candidates and requires the winning candidate to achieve 50 percent of the vote. If no candidate achieves this then the candidate with the least votes is eliminated and their votes are redistributed between the remaining candidates. This process continues until one candidate acquires the necessary votes for election.

The debate was organised by the ‘No to AV’ campaign and featured Labour MP Emma Hoddinott and Conservative MP Chris Philp who presented their arguments against such a scheme. Primarily this was on the basis of cost. It was stated that converting the UK to the AV system would cost £250 million with money being spent on electronic voting counters and voter education campaigns. The AV system was also presented as complex, that it would introduce what was refered to as a ‘losers charter’ and result in more hung parliaments.



 

The ‘Yes to AV’ campaign picketed outside the town hall entrance and claimed not to have been invited to the debate, one member stating,

“The reason why the ‘Yes to AV’ campaign are not participating is because No to AV have chosen the time and have chosen the place…we want to debate but we want a debate that’s organised by a third party and not by No to AV.”

‘Yes to AV’ also accuse the No campaign of hugely overestimating the cost of such a system. Of the £250 million which ‘No to AV’ claim a switch to AV would cost around £130 million would be spent on vote counting machines, however ‘Yes to AV’ say that Australia, who also use the AV system, do not use them and The Electoral Commission have no plans to buy such machines.

At present the AV has a clear lead in support over FPTP according to the latest Reuters/Ipsos Mori poll which illustrate 42 percent backing AV while 35 percent oppose the move. However the remaining 23 per cent mean that a shift in public opinion could occur before the British public head to the ballots to decide on the future of the British voting system on May 5^th.

On Tuesday this week the Parkinson Building foyer was the setting for a display of demonstrative art in opposition to the cuts made to education and the public sectors by the Liberal Conservative coalition government.

From nine o’clock Tuesday morning until well into the afternoon up to six art students from various educational institutions in Leeds stood with tape over their mouths in silent opposition to the proposed increased in student tuition fees and austerity package that has been proposed by the current government. A flier handed out by one of the gagged students states,

“…the acts of this movement are being falsely reported on and our message is being misrepresented by the mass media…even if our actions are falsely reported andour (sic) words twisted we will still be here.”

One of the students, a Mr. M. Ainsworth from the University of Leeds, communicated via a pen and sheet of paper so not to break the silence. He was eager to stress that this was neither a protest nor did it have political motive but was simply an artistic display opposing the cuts.

“We are a group of art students from institutions in Leeds who oppose the disgusting cuts to education and the public sector. HOWEVER This is NOT A PROTEST. It is a piece of art about these cuts. There is no political stance being made here just art. M. Ainsworth THE UNI”

The scene on Tuesday was reminiscent of a silent display of opposition against government plans to scrap the Educational Maintenance Allowance (EMA) made by Leeds students a month ago when students gathered in Dortmund Square and wore tape across their mouths.

A way that I have always been kept up to date with EDL protests is through announcements made on the Unite Against Fascism (UAF) website and wherever there is an EDL demonstration there is likely to be a counter demonstration held by the UAF as well. The UAF are an amalgamation of left wing organisations which protest against the far right having clashed with the British National Party (BNP) and claim that the EDL are no more than violent Nazis. At the EDL demonstration in London in March 2010 there was certainly a belligerent and racist reaction towards black members of the UAF who heckled the EDL and it could appear that the EDL hold the racist element that is so prevalent in the nomenclature of far right movements. Despite this there are members of the EDL who deny any allegation of racism or pertaining to Nazism and claim that the EDL offers an alternative to mainstream political parties who are ignorant of the descent of British values.

The EDL have always been eager to counter these claims by showing off non white members and in particular Abdul Salaam. Abdul, from Glasgow, by his own confession was born and bred a Muslim but does not practice his religion. More prominently there is Guramit Singh who holds position within the EDL leadership. It is members like these that are used by the EDL to claim that they are not a racist organisation. However there would appear to be a lack of coordination in ideology between those who claim the EDL is non racist and Mr Singh, the below quote is verbatim from the London demonstration in March,

“God bless every single person in this country of all religions creeds and cultures, and you know what, even God bless them the Muslims, they’ll need it for when they’re burning in fucking hell.”

This does not attack the niche of militant Islam but is aimed at all Muslims.

The immediate causal factor for the formation of the EDL can be viewed as the protest held by right wing Muslim extremists against the march through Luton town centre by the Anglican regiment in March 2009 after its tour of Iraq. The protest by the Muslim extremists provoked many who had come to witness the Regiments homecoming. In attendance was one of the founding members of the EDL, Kevin Bishop, described the incident as having, “nothing racist about it, it was pure outrage.”

Kevin along with others founded the group the “United Peoples of Luton” shortly after and gained considerable press coverage and, more significantly, support. Through social networking sights support was fostered throughout the United Kingdom and the group became known as the English Defence League in September 2009. The EDL have never been known for their fondness of the media, at the press conference which they held to announce their formation all members’ donned balaclavas. In this conference they again denied that the EDL was a far right wing ‘Nazi’ organisation.

There has always been support for far right groups such as the BNP in places such as Stoke-On-Trent. Here the use of traditional industries has diminished and been replaced leading to long term unemployment among the working class. The decline of these industries and poor job prospects has led some members to claim that there is simply ‘no future’ for Britain while perceiving the British government as having favouritism towards minorities such as the Muslim communities. Combine immigration into the mix and the result is a greatly disaffected and discontented underclass that is composed of young, white, working class males who feel aggrieved and that their plight is unrecognised. However this does not necessarily mean that they are racist and violent hooligans.

It would appear that membership of the EDL is fractured into different segments. While some members view the organisation as a voice for what they perceive to be national injustices, there is a definitive militant element. The more militant element has certainly been displayed at protests with broad anti-Muslim chants, Nazi salutes as well as cheering the BNP with little attempt to reprimand those responsible. The leadership was also exposed of having made racist remarks in an undercover operation by The Guardian newspaper in which Mr Singh was quoted to have said that he, “...fucking hates the pakis.”

The leadership of the EDL do claim to carry out peaceful demos, however there remains a hardcore element that is extremely sensitive to provocation and at least some level of violence occurs at almost every single demonstration. It is these skirmishes with either the Police or the UAF that dictate the nature of news headlines and are all that will be remembered by those reading them. This leads to an association by those not involved with the EDL to link all members to these violent images of clashes with riot police and associate the organisation with hooliganism that was intrinsic to the National Front movement of the 1970’s.

I can’t help but view that many members of the EDL do not associate themselves with the causes that their demonstrations supposedly promote or are in aid of. For many it would appear to be about having a day out with other people who have similar grievances to themselves rather than having any malicious intent. The existence of EDL divisions which are essentially groupings of members from a certain area enables a group mentality to exist and the demonstrations play an important part in many members’ social calendars.

However despite this it has to be accepted that in any other organisation, any member who was found to be making comments which could be deemed as racist or incendiary would be forced out. Although the EDL may be split into factions some of which are more contentious than others, so long as there exists an element which advocates inflammatory behaviour such as violence and racists chanting, these actions will heavily influence outside opinion.

Violence has occurred at demonstrations at which there was no provocation such as the ones in Dudley this summer as well as Preston last weekend. It is impossible to refute the statement that a significant part of the EDL are composed of those who wish to cause uproar be it in the form of violence and racism rather than debate about militant Islam and this will perpetuate the segmentation of society. So long as this continues to be the case I think it is highly unlikely that the EDL will be able to present themselves as a tolerable, appropriate and warranted activist group. Even if they do achieve this, the question has to be asked of how many members the EDL would retain.

Mark McKay

November 30^th 2010

At the end of 1917 the Allies could reflect back on a depressing year with the knowledge that their situation in 1918 could get a lot worse before it got better. Mutiny had reverberated through the French army in the spring and had affected almost half its units, the offensive burden thus had to be carried by the British who suffered enormous casualties from operations at Arras, Passchendaele and Cambrai. The Italians had been routed at Caporetto and needed Anglo-French assistance in shoring the line while the Russians had dropped out of the war altogether. There was one glimmer of hope for the Allies however, in April of that year the United States had entered the war on the Allied side, yet it would take some time before their contribution became a deciding factor.

While it may have taken many months to bring American forces in France to notable strength, the entry of the United States created a problem for Germany. Once trained and in the line, it would be highly likely that American presence would swing the war in the Allies favour. Germany was running out of time to win the war, however it had one last lifeline in the form of a million battle hardened men coming from the Eastern Front fresh from their victories over the Russians. These were to be used in the west before the Americans had time to let their strength show.

Haig had agreed to take over a further forty miles of line from the French, up to the St Quentin sector despite Britains dwindling manpower reserves. This reduced ‘men to frontage’ ratio led to a new defensive system of redoubts being adopted. The idea being that the front line would be comprised a few strongly held points with the majority of the forces in the rear. However in early 1918 this new defensive doctrine was neither popular nor was it complete with two of the three lines of defence still under construction. The spring of 1918 was to be a critical phase of the war for the British Army as it would now have an increased length of front to hold, less men to hold it with little prospect of reinforcements and the highly likelihood of a German attack that aimed to deliver a knock out blow.

Ludendorff had noted a decline in the ranks of his own army and there was concern that the German Army was fast becoming nothing more than a militia. To combat this, the Goose Step was re-introduced and decorations freely handed out. It was widely hoped that the coming offensive, der Kaiserschlact, ‘The Kaisers Battle’, would bring victory. The aim was to drive a wedge between the British and French where the two armies met at St Quentin and bring defeat from a decisive engagement before American forces could play an active role.

Operation ‘Michael’ began on the foggy morning of the 21^st of March 1918 some three million high explosive and gas rounds were fired upon the British Fifth Army along a fifty mile front. German storm troopers meandered between redoubts, their aim was to penetrate as deeply as possible into the British lines and leave strong points to be moped up by the follow up infantry. By the end of the day the Germans had inflicted 38 000 casualties of which 21 000 were prisoners. The loss of many prisoners combined with increased defeatist sentiment among the retreating British made for a concerning situation that threatened to go right the way up to the top of Allied command. Haig wished to fall back to defend the rail centre of Amiens while Petain, the French commander, who feared an attack on his own positions was saving troops for the possible defence of Paris.

When the Allied commanders met at Dullens on the 26^th the situation was dire for the Allies, Ludendorff’s intention to split the two Armies seemed to be working. To rescue the Allied forces, desperate measures were to be taken. A concept of a united Allied Command was set up, suggested by Haig which would put all Allied forces on the Western Front under the command of Ferdinand Foch and French forces were promised to the defence of Amiens. United, the Allies may just survive, divided they would surely perish!

Problems were also mounting for the Germans. The further they advanced the more stretched their supply lines became, it is what Clausewitz identified as the ‘friction’ of battle. Discipline was beginning to falter among the German ranks and the advance was held up due to plundering and drunkenness. While the Germans had succeeded in advancing many miles and capturing great swathes of territory, they had gained nothing of strategic value.

By the 25^th of April, ‘Michael’ had captured 90 000 allied prisoners and 1000 guns. More territory had been taken by the Germans in the past month than the entire amount taken by Allied offensives in the war so far. However, Ludendorff had failed in his objective, the allied armies had not been split, and the war had not been won. Ludendorff would attack many more times over the summer, ‘Georgette’ would target Flanders, ‘Blucher’ attacked along the Chemin Des Dames and German guns would fire upon Paris. However time had run out for Germany, after the ‘Gneisenau’ offensive along the Aisne in June they began to encounter a new enemy, the Americans.

While American military doctrine meant the engagements were more representative of 1914 than 1918, US forces successfully repelled the Germans at Chateau-Thierry and famously at Bellau Wood which would become synonymous with the American Marine Corps. They were inexperienced, naïve fighters and lost half their officers, yet they won the battle.

The lift in spirit that the Americans brought was accompanied with the knowledge among the German troops that they had failed. Back home the nation was starving from a result of the British blockade and food riots were common. From August onwards the ‘Hundred Days’ offensive of the Allies pushed the Germans back right along the front. It was almost symbolic that the last Allied combatants were killed while taking a small town in Belgium where the first British casualties had been inflicted over four years previous, at the town of Mons.

5^th November 2010

Mark McKay

In April this year, the then Home Secretary Alan Johnson announced that the recreational drug mephedrone, along with other similar products was to become a controlled substance under the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act. This act came in the wake of several deaths which were given a high profile by the media and were linked to the use of the drug, albeit with dubious evidence to support such a claim. Almost as soon as it was announced that mephedrone and related substances were to be banned came other announcements that replacement chemicals, ones that would not be covered by the Misuse of Drugs Act were being readied in preparation to fill the ensuing void. This writer remembers a particular news broadcast in which a Sky News spokeswoman spoke directly to suppliers in China who had two new chemicals ready to unleash upon the UK market. However, it has to be noted that in the six months since mephedrone was outlawed there has been an underwhelming impact made by these so called replacements.

The possibility of similar replacement chemicals being manufactured originates due to the fact that the Misuse of Drugs Act outlawed a batch of chemicals known as synthetic cathinones. Cathinone is the active chemical in mephedrone and many of the other substances banned. However it was argued that minor molecular tweaks to these already existing chemicals would spawn new chemicals. These new chemicals would have similar effects and would have the dual added bonus of legality and therefore also availability.

One of the earliest chemicals marketed as a replacement was a chemical known as naphyrone which was commonly known as NRG-1, and which has since been outlawed. Similar to a substance known as MDPV which was banned at the same time as mephedrone, naphyrone acts as a stimulant upon of the central nervous system of the user. The potency of naphyrone contributes to the danger this drug possessed and helps explain the lack of popularity among users. In particular, reports of prolonged anxiety and panic attacks were common in online forums. While mephedrone and other cathinone derivatives are active from around 20mg the family of chemicals known as pyrovalerones, of which naphyrone is a part, are active from 1mg making it twenty times more potent than mephedrone. A single milligram equates to 0.1% of a gram. In order to judge this amount correctly scales are required that display weights to the nearest hundredth of a gram, however if judging by eyesight it could be dangerously simple to overdose especially in the setting of a nightclub.

Another potential substitute was MDAI. Developed as an anti-depressant in the 1990’s this drug primarily stimulated the release of the neurotransmitter serotonin which can lead to increased empathy and the ‘loved up’ sensation. However unlike mephedrone, MDAI had little stimulant effect and there are reports of MDAI causing drowsiness, again indicating a reason for the drugs lack of popularity within the club scene.

5iai is a chemical related to MDAI as they both belong to a group of chemicals known as aminoindanes. This particular chemical was marketed online towards the end of summer as one that would succeed where the previous two chemicals mentioned among others had failed. It was claimed to completely mimic the effects of ecstasy on tests on rats. However the sale of this chemical was accompanied by reports that the product sold was not 5iai at all but was in fact either mephedrone or other banned substances. This was not an entirely new phenomenon, it had also been reported that sale of NRG-1 contained chemicals other than simply naphyrone. This should hardly be surprising given the sheer quantities of chemicals that were available to buy over the internet. Some websites could guarantee a 25kg drum, yes 25 kilograms, of mephedrone at your front door within a week, with a sum of £22000 going in the opposite direction of course.

However while it is unsurprising that test batches of 5iai were being found to contain banned substances this creates a new problem for users. The lack of regulation in the market of legal highs can now manifest a situation in which a person intends to purchase a legitimate substance but will end up in possession of one that is very much illegal. This creates a scenario in which it must be accepted that the potential illegality of ‘legal highs’ presents the user with a paradox in which they may always be the victim.

While only three other chemicals have been mentioned, the internet provides a dearth of others. Many are similar in chemical structure to mephedrone however none have had the popularity or attention that mephedrone did. We could conclude that although only fine molecular tweaks have occurred the effects have been altered enough to put people off. The after effects of NRG-1 led to increased anxiety in the user, MDAI would have the serotonergic qualities often found in recreational drugs but lacked the stimulation and 5iai has often been found to be either inert or simply illegal substances marketed as a legal one. For these reasons the market for legal highs has diminished and goes a long way to explain the lack of success that so called mephedrone replacements have had in the wake the drugs move to a classified substance.

© Mark McKay October 15^th 2010