Labour: I pity the Foos

The Labour Party - increasingly the Freddie And The Dreamers of British politics - is having a torrid time of it at the moment, as it struggles to try and find a leader who can get through the day without making Theresa May giggle with joy.

In the midst of the current leadership election, the party is beset by the political version of Do You Remember Bagpuss - purges, entryism, jokes about Derek Hatton's suits. I'm half expecting to switch on the Ten O'Clock News to catch a package where Jamie Theakston, Kate Thornton and Stuart Maconie try to remember the lyrics to The Red Flag.

Ah, but purges are awkward things, and apparently a Labour Party member has been suspended for the oddest of reasons. At least according to the Daily Mail:

Labour has suspended a new member from the party and denied a vote in the leadership election after she posted about her love of rock band Foo Fighters on Facebook.

Catherine Starr, a supporter of Jeremy Corbyn, was shocked to receive a letter from the party's General Secretary Iain McNicol telling her that following a vetting procedure she was being refused full membership as she had 'shared inappropriate content on Facebook'.

It said this related to a post on March 5 when she had shared a clip of Dave Grohl's band and wrote 'I f****** love the Foo Fighters'.

We should approach this all with a level of caution - we're living in a weird period of politics where you can't even trust an old man sitting in a vestibule, and this is the Daily Mail whose last honest piece of reporting on the Labour Party was "Kinnock resigns".

To be honest, it's not clear that Starr was suspended over a Foo Fighters post - the Mail does concede she'd been sharing other prime content that day:

That day Mrs Starr, 33, had also shared a friend's inoffensive poster about animal free cosmetics and a cartoon about veganism.

You know how much the Mail loves animal rights, right?

It is possible that the NEC has some ongoing beef with the Foo Fighters. Or maybe they see "Foo Fighters" as some sort of code for those who have recently joined the Labour Party for nefarious purposes.

It's much more likely that a party which has raised the bar on disarray to a level which would be offputting to Ekateríni Stefanídi have made an honest mis... okay, a dishonest mistake. They probably got the day of the offending post wrong, or the name of the offending poster wrong, or maybe confused the Foo Fighters and Noel Gallagher's High Flying Birds.

The party hasn't responded to the story yet, but almost certainly will deny it, admit it but say the details are wrong, look crossly over its spectacles at us, and pretend to never have heard of the Foo Fighters. All at the same time.

Ed Miliband copies EMI's big idea

You'll recall Charles Allen, who was brought in to EMI by Guy Hands. Hands was trying to prop up a hideously-confused, failing institution which - although much beloved, was struggling to find support or a role in the modern world.

Ed Miliband's just brought Allen in to do for The Labour Party what he did for EMI.

I'm not sure that this story is doomed to end with Citibank taking over The Labour Party and selling it to the highest bidder, but I wouldn't rule it out.

Dave Rowntree: Why I fight (elections)

James M emails with a sighting of Dave Rowntree in the Guardian's election coverage:

Having put himself forward, unsuccessfully, for the safe Labour seat of Liverpool West Derby, Rowntree is now contesting a seat which would've been difficult enough in previous elections. Given Labour's current standing, it's best to file it under the "completely unwinnable" category. However, it's refreshing to see a Labour candidate as defiantly off-message as Rowntree.

Dave almost implies he joined Labour because he couldn't sleep:

"It was pretty much a mid-life crisis," the 45-year-old said, swivelling on a chair at his campaign headquarters in the plush offices of a Soho media firm. "There was a fairly well-documented split in the band, I was turning 40, and I was going from having no time on my hands to having rather a lot. And I started waking up with that angsty feeling at four in the morning, going, 'Oh my God, I've wasted my life.' I had to do something about that. And so I started turning up at the local Labour party."

Dave doesn't trust the other high-profile Dave on the campaign:

Rowntree is amused by any politician who tries to turn music into political capital. He chuckles in particular at David Cameron's professed passion for the Smiths. "He's a Smiths tourist," says the drummer, cheeks creased with a knowing grin. "Real Smiths fans dress a certain kind of way, and they have a certain kind of haircut, and they wear certain kinds of T-shirts. But what they probably don't do is have their picture taken outside the Salford Lads Club.

"Politicians," Rowntree admits, "do have to try and present themselves as ordinary people. But you need to do that in a way which makes you look least like an arse."

Rowntree also has a pop at Blair, and the whole idea of New Labour inviting the likes of Alan McGee and Noel to hang out at number 10 - "we never said Britannia was cool" he says. He doesn't mention Noel Gallagher by name.

Rowntree is standing in the Cities of London and Westminster; he'd have to overturn a Tory majority of over 8,000 before he'd get a chance to make a maiden speech.

Lib Dems say no to Digital Economy Bill

Making some amends for their Lord sticking a BPI clause in during its passage through the upper house, the Liberal Democrats have told the government they won't support the Digital Economy Bill:

On Tuesday afternoon, the party's chief whip Paul Burstow tweeted that he had told the government the Liberal Democrats will not support the bill as it is drafted because there is "not enough time for MPs to examine it in detail".

The bill is expected to be become part of 'wash-up', a brief period at the end of a sitting parliament when outstanding legislation becomes the subject of back-room deals between the main two parties, the Conservatives and Labour.

It probably won't be enough to kill it, but maybe it will be enough to persuade the Labour Party that this might not be the way to behave seconds before asking everybody to vote for them.

Labour propose 'liberalisation' of live music laws

If you're generous, you'd call it liberalisation, anyway. It's more correcting some of their gung-ho legislation; the idea being that indoor, evening gigs with less than 100 people attending would be exempt from needing a license.

Let's hope they expedite this, and it doesn't get lost when parliament prorogues.

Government scuppers own initiative

It's a brilliant idea: the government is going to subsidise computers for the poorest families in Britain, acknowledging that access to the internet is a vital part of modern education and citizenship.

What a pity that Mandelson is busily undermining this initiative from the other end, colluding with the music industry in pretending that internet access is a luxury and promotes a plan which will make it impossible for the families receiving the computers to afford to be online.

BPI setting Cameron's agenda for him

There's some good news - even those people who think that going through the motions of putting a three strikes style law on the Statute Book simply to have it thrown out again as illegal don't expect to see anything happen soon. Indeed, it's unlikely to happen in this government:

Industry group BPI, which represents the four big labels and independent music companies, believes the latest proposals from business secretary Peter Mandelson will significantly change consumer behaviour online and marginalise piracy within years.

"Assuming there is an election in May, then we believe the bill will be in the Queen's speech and that it should go through. It's got the full support of government and we believe the opposition will support it," said BPI chief executive Geoff Taylor.

"There will always be people who seek to work around the system. But the average consumer who pays for their jeans, pays for their car, we believe will be brought back into the legal market."

Full support of the government? Really? Although it wasn't part of the government's Digital Britain report?

And hoping for it to be a priority for a new Cameron regime seems to be a little naive - there are important national institutions to be destroyed, dammit. Expecting there to be legislative time for a measure like this to get rushed through would probably take a lot of lunches being bought for the Tories - especially if it doesn't turn up in their manifesto.

By the way: Geoff, you're confusing digital files with manufactured products again, aren't you? How about thinking instead of "people who pay a few pennies for tap water" or "people who enjoy going to see Christmas lights in neighbourhoods without expecting to then get a bill through the post a few days later despite the christmas lights costing money to put up and keep switched on."

Government to musicians: No deal

The New Deal for Musicians, Labour's 1999 attempt to try and replicate 'signing on while getting a band together', is being axed. Not, as the Independent makes it sound at first, because it's been targeted specifically, but because the whole of the New Deal is being replaced with something called Flexible New Deal, which is probably going to be a less-well-funded version of the original.

And has the scheme been a success?

Since its launch in 1999 with the backing of Sir Paul McCartney, it has helped more than 4,000 unemployed youngsters get a foothold in the music industry as aspiring bands, instrumentalists, singers and songwriters. Those helped include James Morrison, nominated for Best Male Artist at last month's Brit Awards, the indie rock band the Zutons, the Welsh singer Jem, Toploader and the jazz saxophonist-rapper Soweto Kinch.

Bloody hell. And we're going to let it go on doing damage until October?

The government insists that it doesn't mean the end of support for musicians:

A spokeswoman for the Department for Work and Pensions said: "If someone has a specific talent in music, their help and support would be geared to music. They will still get all the help they require."

Trouble is, of course, under NDfM, (certainly at first), would-be musicians would be given a mentor who understood the music industry and was able to help them. It's not clear if under the Flexible New Deal a general advisor will be expected to provide support for guitarists and songwriters regardless of if they understand their needs or not.

Sit Down? Shut up, Gordon

Sit Down was a bit of an odd choice for Gordon Brown to come on the stage to anyway, wasn't it? Besides being a song that reeks of student discos from nearly twenty years ago, isn't it a bit of a terse message to be giving the masses?

Anyway, Tim Booth isn't happy that it was used at all:

"We have always been supportive of the Labour Party, as well as Greenpeace, Amnesty and CND, but obviously the machinations of a desperate politician trying to restore unity by using our song is not something we are totally behind."

Oddly, NME.com describe 'organisation playing record' as an "incident" which perhaps overplays it.

Booth thinks that Brown missed the point:

"The song is about unity and that's obviously how Brown is trying to use it. But it's about unity of people and spirit rather than healing the divisions of political parties."

Is unity why Brown chose it, though? Perhaps it's the lines "now I've swung back down again, it's worse than it was before/ if I hadn't seen such riches I could live with being poor..."

Beware of the Dogg

Despite the appeals judge pointing out that the great Snoop Dogg Heathrow fight consisted of him trying to entertain some kids while the police and British Airways staff went in heavy-handed, the government has announced it intends to appeal over plans to let Snoop Dogg come back into the UK. Probably because Brown desperately needs one policy to remain unchanged week to week:

"We maintain that the immigration judge in the initial hearing made a material error in law.

"We will continue to oppose the entry to the UK of individuals where we believe there may be a risk to the public."

Curious they should insist it was an error in law, rather than in judgement, as we're pretty certain the appeal by Mr. Dogg was upheld because the judge didn't think there had been any risk demonstrated, not because of some clever, Alan Shaw style legal arguments from the Snoop team. Does the Labour government really feel that British people would sleep less soundly if Snoop was allowed to take rooms in Hounslow or Havant? Are they that far out of touch?

Vote drummerfromblur

Dave Rowntree has finally found a safe seat to fight at the next election: He's been elected to fight the Cities of London and Westminster seat for Labour.

Unfortunately, while it's a very safe seat indeed, it's not a safe Labour seat, but a safe seat for the Tories. Indeed, it's 116th on Labour's list of targets, which means we're talking about Cameron being caught selling heroin to orphan puppies before we'd be liable to see Dave Rowntree on Prime Minister's Question Time.

Politician admits to using drugs: lots and lots and lots of them

Dave Rowntree - who, apparently, is training to become a barrister, has contributed a think-piece to The Guardian on how we get people off drugs:

So what I'm hoping for in 2008 is a strategy based on research, education and harm reduction. Some evidence suggests that the proportion of people who may be at serious risk of becoming dependant could be as high as one in six. If so, taking drugs is really like playing Russian roulette. Most people will get away with it, but for some it will mean their death. And just like Russian roulette, you won't know which group you're in until it's too late.

However, there's a sneaking suspicion that the real point of the article is this piece:

The problem of dependent users seems equally baffling. Why do they continue using after losing their home, family, job, and even their limbs? Happily I can tell you, because I've been there. Many addicts think mood-altering chemicals affect them in a different way to normal people. Certainly when I first discovered alcohol, and later cocaine, the effect was almost religious in its intensity, and all my problems seemed to melt away. I didn't start using regularly until the 90s, but as my tolerance increased, I used more.

[...]

I managed to get help before they destroyed my life, and these days I'm active in the recovery community. The key point is that all the way along, I thought my behaviour was normal and it was the rest of the world that had gone mad. I had no idea my experience was different to anyone else's because I had nothing to measure it against.

Rowntree - apparently it's David these days, by the way - has been reported to be considering seeking adoption as a Labour candidate for the next election. Could this article be less about floating the idea (that, erm, drugs are bad, mkay) and more about being able to create a clear and honest way to say "Of course Mr. Rowntree has had drug issues in the past, but he has spoken about these and they were a matter of public record before he sought the nomination..."

[Thanks to James McCabe for the link]

ThedrummerfromBlur aims to become the member from West Derby

Having so far managed a record of standing, once, for public office, and losing that council bye-election, the Liverpool Daily Post is reporting that Dave Rowntree is considering running for adoption as Labout Party Candidate for the Liverpool West Derby seat.

Currently, the seat is in the comfortable hands of Bob Wareing - Wareing is currently fighting bids to deselect him on the grounds that he's a bit too much like a Labour MP used to be. Even if Wareing is kicked out, the prospect of a rock-solid safe Labour seat has attracted about a dozen other potential candidates busily trying to find some sort of connection with Tuebrook to help their case, including Stephen Twigg and Tristram Hunt.

Rowntree - perhaps hoping to catch the Party eye with the inability to give a straight answer to fair question - responded to enquiries about his plans with a tart:

“It’s the wrong time to be talking about that.”

[Thanks to James McCabe for the tip]

Rowntree pasted

That Dave Rowntree was unable to persuade Marylebone High Street voters to chuck out the Tories in last night's by-election for Westminster City Council was unsurprising. What is surprising in the result is that he only polled 222 - a drop from Labour's lowest polls in the 2006 election in the ward. The good news for Dave, though, is he increased Labour's share of the vote from 14.6% to 16.5%.

Leeds United

So, after a huge police effort to find the culprits, eyewitnesses describing the scenes as "worse than anything I saw in twelve years in the army", half a million pounds worth of damage - so the court feels that a couple of hundred quid's worth of fine each and a few hours community service is the fitting sentence?

Surely not connected in any way with one of the Festival Riot Boys being the son of an MP, of course. Since (as far as we know) there's been no action brought against the organisers for their rubbish security, we're assuming the authorities are really seeing the whole meltdown as some sort of act of god.

So, planning is going ahead, and since it's hugely unlikely Mean Fiddler will be able to use temple Newsham again, the idea is to move the whole thing to Bramham Park in Tadcaster. We wonder what they're telling the owner of the estate, Nick Lane Fox, because he confidently told the Guardian he was relaxed about the idea of the riotfest moving into his back garden:

"We are talking about the sort of fencing they have at Glastonbury - 18ft high, a barrier no one can get through."

Right, so he really believes that he's going to be allowed to build a permanent structure like that in the grounds of his house? And he really believes that there's the million quid available that Eavis had to invest in his Big Fence? Maybe he will be, and maybe there is. That still doesn't explain how it'll stop a replay of the 2002 and 2001 riots, which were systematic destructions by ticket-holding festival-goers. The Glasto Berlinesque Wall is designed to stop people without tickets sneaking in, not to stop turmoil developing inside the site. That would call for better planning of security.