Candidates’ debates

Hustings round 3: North London Muslim Community Centre debate (2 May 2010)

[Hustings Rounds 1 and 2 reports are below this article]

North London Muslim Community Centre hosts Hackney election debates

Report by the Hackney Citizen, 3 May – see http://www.hackneycitizen.co.uk/2010/05/03/north-london-muslim-community-centre-hosts-hackney-election-debates/ [3rd report down]

With the Liberal Democrats and the Green Party relying on different measurements as they argue over who is the second choice party to Labour’s 7,427 majority in Hackney North and Stoke Newington (the Liberal Democrats point out that they won the second highest number of votes at the 2005 general election, the Greens argue that they came second in 2009’s European elections) it can be argued that the Conservatives are firmly in fourth place.

However, in response to a statement made at hustings hosted by the North London Muslim Community Centre in Stoke Newington on Sunday (2 May) that the Conservatives had no chance of winning in Hackney, Conservative candidate Darren Caplan urged that the audience should vote for the party that they want to get into government.

“If you want to get rid of Labour, then you have to vote Conservative,” he said.

With less than a week to polling day, it was noticeable that this third public debate between the four main parties in the constituency was concerned more with national issues than local ones, and on the whole each candidate’s presence was more party representative rather than as an individual.

Indeed, the structure of the debate was such that the Chair took questions from the audience on particular topics – foreign policy (Iraq war, a solution for the Middle East); immigration (from inside the EU as well as outside, a possible one-time amnesty) ; environment and so on – all issues that are decided at national level which an individual MP can, at most, only influence.

However, Labour candidate Diane Abbott was quick to point out that as the local MP she had voted against many of the Government’s more unpopular motions, including the Iraq War and 90-day detention without trial, and that she would continue to do what she thought was in the best interests of her constituents.

Allying himself with Abbott was Green party candidate Matt Sellwood, who was only invited to the hustings following a late U-turn on the part of the organisers as reported in the Hackney Citizen on Saturday 1 May.

In the same friendly and agreeable manner that he has displayed in the previous debates, Sellwood noted that he and Abbott stood for many of the same things, with the exception that Abbott seemed to be working against the ideas of her party, whereas a vote for Sellwood would also be a vote for the policies of the Green Party.

And, considering the setting for the debate, it was of little surprise that the candidates agreed with majority of the concerns highlighted by the audience.

Liberal Democrat Keith Angus was not alone in noting that there was a need for a clear strategy on Afghanistan, although he also highlighted the Liberal Democrats’ pledge to bring the troops back in the course of the next Parliament.

Indeed, the opportunities for real debate were limited. Unless of course you were Darren Caplan.

Clearly resigned to the presence of the Lib Dems and Greens (“the reality is that they won’t get elected”) in what he sees as a straight two-horse race for Government, Caplan reiterated the Tory message on an annual cap for immigration, the need to investigate whether Iran has nuclear weapons and the need to incentivise people to behave in a more environmentally friendly way.

His argument that Lib Dem and Green policies will likely never see the light of day may be true, but under the current electoral system means that Caplan’s chances of representing the constituency are limited.

The outcome of the general election will likely come down to how Brown, Cameron and Clegg are perceived in the national media, and whilst the influence of each individual MP on how the country is run is somewhat limited, yesterday’s debate did give an insight into some of the personalities that could be representing Hackney North and Stoke Newington in Parliament.

==========================

Hustings round 2: Friends of the Earth debate (27 April 2010)

Hackney Friends of the Earth hosts green hustings

Report by the Hackney Citizen, 28 April – see http://www.hackneycitizen.co.uk/2010/04/28/hackney-friends-of-the-earth-hosts-green-hustings/

The four invited general election candidates for Hackney North and Stoke Newington were put through their environmental policy paces yesterday evening at a ‘Hackney Green Hustings’ at Millfields Community School, Lower Clapton.

Organised by Hackney and Tower Hamlets Friends of th Earth together with Hackney Environment Network, the event kicked off with candidates being quizzed on their own personal efforts to be ‘green’.

Long-standing Labour MP Diane Abbott set the tone by noting that she has never driven a car; she also boasted of her active use of the green, brown and blue recycling boxes helpfully supplied by Hackney Council.

Conservative candidate Darren Caplan was somewhat of a fish out of water on this question. He began with the hesitant claim that he didn’t think he “contributed much to global warming”, before effectively admitting that his two-car family and two overseas holidays a year weren’t likely to meet the expectations of most green-minded folk.

Mr Caplan seemed nevertheless relatively comfortable with his admission, evidently resigned to losing on this particular question. Sure enough, he found his feet when the debate turned to issues such as the budget deficit and how to help business.

Keith Angus of the Liberal Democrats delivered what might be described as a ‘Clegg Lite’ performance. With several of his sentences punctuated with long pauses, he certainly seemed the most nervous of the candidates.

He came into his own, however, when asked whether he was committed to reducing carbon emissions by 40 per cent by 2020, confidently declaring his party’s intention to do just that. The audience loudly approved.

The genteel crowd grew rather rambunctious during Darren Caplan’s answer to this question. The questioner herself delivered a Paxo-esque grilling to the Tory, who dithered for several minutes before admitting that his party supported emissions reductions of only 34 per cent by the specified date.

Green Party candidate Matthew Sellwood then calmly outbid his rivals by promising 90 per cent reductions by 2030.

Diane Abbott’s inimitable drawl and tendency to mash her words made some of her finer points difficult to decipher. Nevertheless, her general line was clear – green issues were important but not central to her overall agenda.

When it came to economic questions, all the candidates save Darren Caplan were falling over each other to claim that they were most in favour of redistributive taxation and introduce ‘green deals’ to create planet-saving jobs.

The Conservative, by contrast, appeared to think that properly ‘incentivising’ people was the answer to most problems. His confident statement that “the free market is the best way of delivering for most people” generated subdued twitters from sections of the floor.

The debate heated up again when discussion moved on to the topic of poverty. Diane Abbott tried to trade on her left-wing credentials by using a question about fuel poverty to address the more general issue of deprivation, before Darren Caplan intervened to point out that Labour had been in power at national and local levels for 13 years and had therefore had ample opportunity to address this particular problem.

Diane Abbott rounded on her opponent, eventually winning a round of applause for suggesting that regardless of whichever wastrels had usurped power in her party (she referred at one point to “Gordon Blair”), she was personally committed to dealing with poverty.

It was undoubtedly Matt Sellwood who had the easiest job of the evening, however. Confident and composed, he was also the clear winner if the clap-o-meter is to go by; the Green received five rounds of applause to two for Diane Abbott, two for Keith Angus and one for Darren Caplan.

Yet not all the questions dwelt on esoteric environmental matters, and when the conversation turned to politician-bashing, Diane Abbott won general assent with her comment that unlike her many grey-suited fellow parliamentarians “I’ve never been the same old thing, and even today I’m not the same old thing”.

The evening ended with a laugh when Darren Caplan referred to his fellow candidates as “all three guys”; and Diane Abbott pulled a face.

==========================

Hustings round 1: Shakespeare Residents Association / Butterfield Green Users Group debate (25 March 2010)

Darren Caplan, Conservative	Diane Abbott MP, Labour	Keith Angus, Liberal Democrat	Matt Sellwood, Green

On 25 March, the Shakespeare Residents Association / Butterfield Green Users Group hosted a Hackney North & Stoke Newington parliamentary candidates debate. Conservative Darren Caplan debated with Diane Abbott MP (the current Labour Member of Parliament for HN&SN), Lib Dem Keith Angus and the Green party’s Matt Sellwood.

Seven questions were asked from the floor, and the event was moderated by the Editor of the Hackney Citizen, Keith Magnum. None of the candidates had prior notice of the questions; and it is understood that the Shakespeare Residents Association / Butterfield Green Users Group will be circulating a report of the debate shortly (as at 29 March). For those who can’t wait(!), here’s a short précis of both the questions and  Darren’s answers.

1. What did you feel about your party’s result in the Hackney North & Stoke Newington constituency at the last general election?

• Absolutely dreadful!

2. What are your basic beliefs and who are your favourite political thinkers ?

• The state is too large at the expense of the individual, and this has to be fundamentally redressed in light of the shifting balance towards a bigger state in recent years
• Political thinkers: Edmund Burke – ‘little platoons’ or local communities are the building blocks of society; JS Mill – freedom from government and freedom of speech are to be cherished in Britain and defended; and Michael Oakeshott – a conservative ‘disposition’ begets a politics which goes with the grain of human nature, and this is the best form of politics for Britain

3. How would you take local community issues and influence national government?

• Practical campaigning:  ensure local concerns are properly understood through MP surgeries; coalition-build – through local politicians, stakeholder/community groups and local media – to ensure a strong case and powerful voice is presented in parliament; and, in parliament, lobby select committees and all party parliamentary groups (the former of which should be more independent than is currently the case) for them to raise the profile of issues where possible
• Take away the need on some issues for national influence at all, by appropriately decentralising power – away from national, regional and local politicians to, for example, doctors, head teachers and policemen

4. How should local youth projects continue to be funded?

• Facilities which can train young people and play a part in preventing them joining gangs play a significant role; however, in these uncertain economic times people should be under no illusion that cuts are likely across the board and facilities such as these may find it difficult to retain their full funding levels in future

5. What are the candidates’ views on the banking system and the recent banking crisis?

• Banking and the City should not be talked down, as the revenues and jobs provided are crucial to London and the UK economy; however the banking system does need to be re-modelled, including considering whether the investment and high street arms of banks should be split up to reduce the chances of this type of crisis happening again; also, taxpayer-bailed banks  have every right not to pay bonuses until the taxpayer has been payed back, as it was the taxpayer which saved them in the first place
• We shouldn’t just concentrate on banking; Labour have let down the UK manufacturing sector – which figures shows has declined three times faster than under Margaret Thatcher – and whereas the Conservatives have produced a Technology Manifesto, spelling out exactly where new sectors and high tech jobs could come from, Labour has very little to offer in this crucial area

6. What are the candidates’ views on schools?

• Despite all the money which Labour says has gone in to local primaries – and despite some improvements in some local schools -  SAT tests for 11-years olds have remained the lowest in the country for over six years now; with a local Labour MP, Labour Council, Labour Mayor, Labour GLA member and ultimately a Labour Government, the audience could hardly blame the Conservatives for poor schooling results in Hackney!
• Conservatives have some great policies on education, from supporting Academies through to giving local parents and teachers the powers to set up new schools, which would have the effect of raising standards for all schools in the area; given the recent record, it must be worth giving new ideas such as these a chance

7. What would the candidates do on knife crime?

• Everyone is doing their best – for example, Operations Blunt, Curb and the Diamond Initiative show the local community and police coming together to reduce knife crime – and the answer doesn’t lie in party politics
• Conservatives are making a positive contribution too, with London Mayor Boris Johnson’s ‘Time for Action’ programme, and the work of the ‘Centre for Social Justice’ on gangs
• The police need assistance to do their job, and less red tape and a supportive and a more efficient local Crown Prosecution Service would certainly help
• Communtiy groups, which Darren had visited – such as the Pedro Academy, Windsor Fellowship, Leaside Trust and Catch 22 – play a valuable role in helping prevent young people getting into trouble
• Darren also made the point that from conversations he’d had with local young people, there was a feeling that ex-offenders and former-gang members who become mentors  were the best sources of inspiration for those seeking to avoid trouble and get a better life,  as they had a real understanding of the issues involved