Rupert's Read

  ‘The really ethical PR agency',  a new protest group targeting the unacceptable face of the PR industry, was born today, in a protest this morning against Bahrain’s PR agency, the British firm Bell-Pottinger, at Bell-Pottinger’s HQ on High Holborn. Here is TREPRA’s 1 st communiqué, that we handed to passers-by and to B-P employees (one of whom stopped to congratulate us and to tell us, “I agree with you”!), outside B-P’s HQ:   Bell-Pottinger needs to stop trying to spin the unspinnable… The Bell-Pottingers of this world need to wake up: the world is changing. As tyrants fall across the Middle East and North Africa, it becomes more and more clear that it makes no sense for Britain to 'lead the world' in representing the last ones standing. So, we in 'The really ethical PR agency' urge B-P to drop its business-relationship with the murderous Bahraini regime; but also to pre-emptively take the same step with regard to al...

The Green Party is currently selecting who to nominate from within our ranks for House of Lords. Unlike other Parties, we do this democratically. Greens ! Here's a few reasons why you might want to vote RUPERT READ (that's me! ;-) for the House of Lords selection: Experience: An elected Councillor living in my own mostly working-class ward. One of the top Green bloggers: The only Green in the Top 10 ‘Total Politics’ Councillor blogs: www.rupertsread.blogspot.com . A key player in the team that has seen Norwich Greens reach such heights of success over the last decade. Green Party’s candidate in 2009 Norwich North byelection. We achieved the highest-ever Green byelection result. Green Party’s candidate in 2009 Euro-elections: we in Eastern-Region achieved the highest vote-increase anywhere in the country outside SE, and came within 1% of getting me elected. Hugely-experienced media performer; many times on nati...

      I am so proud of having been a small part of this (the renewable energy on Council buildings success): this is a real achievement that will make a big difference to people's lives in Norwich:   Green Party City Councillors expressed delight that the Council has supported Green Party plans for a major new investment in renewable energy. Tuesday night's budget meeting voted in favour of the plan to spend £250,000 of an otherwise unused £5 million capital fund on renewable energy generation on council buildings. The move could lead to solar panels being installed on the roof of City Hall and other public buildings in Norwich. Green Councillors were also successful in proposing £12,500 to increase the activity of the council's planning enforcement service, and the same amount to purchase and install more than 50 new grit bins, some of which could be bought by businesses and community groups as part of a new scheme. The ruling Labour...

This superbly intriguing exchange between @Medialens and Larry Elliott is a must-read for any #green: http://medialens.org/index.php?option=com_acymailing&ctrl=url&urlid=149&mailid=46&subid=5609

My latest piece on BGS: http://brightgreenscotland.org/index.php/2011/02/lets-stop-backing-dictators/     Let's stop backing dictators!   Away from the view of journalists, Gaddafi is attacking his own people ferociously in Libya, to try to win back control over towns and cities which have been freed by acts of incredible bravery. It is time the international community acted decisively: at a minimum, we need a no-fly zone over most of Libya now, to stop Gaddafi bombing and strafeing his own people. This is what the many former Libyan diplomats who have resigned from the Libyan government are saying. The world needs to act on this now !    Meanwhile, I wonder if Gordon Brown is (now) regretting having taken the extensive actions that he did and his government did, as we now know ( http://politics.caledonianmercury.com/2011/02/08/megrahi-revelations-show-yet-again-that-gordon-brown-just-didn%E2%80%99t-get-devolution/ ), to get Megrahi the Locke...

Myself chairing a debate between Tom Greaves and Angela Breitenbach:

This is the banner of the Libyan people, rising up against Gaddafi and his murderous acolytes.

This is very inspiring: an interview with the man who wrote this bible of #Tahrir Square. A key text for many in the successful Egyptian revolt: a guide to how to win, non-violently. Non-violence works! http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00ym9ls/Broadcasting_House_20_02_2011  Go 13 minutes in, and listen.

http://www.sabanews.net/en/news236113.htm This seems to come from some sort of parallel universe...   What on Earth is going on here? How utterly insane, how sickening, for our govt to be talking this way while Yemeni protesters are being killed by govt-backed thugs...

Introduction: House of Lords reform is next Now that it is certain that the AV referendum will take place on May 5, coinciding with local election day and elections in Scotland and Wales ( incidentally, this date is one which I first broke to the nation, scooping the BBC and everyone else: http://www.leftfootforward.org/2010/07/av-referendum-to-be-announced-next-week-held-in-may/ ), it is a good time to reflect on the strange beast that is the House of Lords, that almost scuppered this referendum (albeit not without some good reason!: see http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/michael-wills/house-of-lords-is-right-to-challenge-coalition-on-where-we-vote ). There is of course a lot to be said for the House of Lords, at least as compared to the conduct of many of those who have won election to the House of Commons! In respect of this latest example, for instance, it is clear that in some respects they have intelligently improved the bill that will allow the AV referendum to...

There is an obvious reason for being unimpressed with the current efforts of the 'No To AV' side in the referendum campaign to turn the referendum into a popularity contest concerning the LibDems in general and Nick Clegg in particular (see e.g. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3cd7b944-3937-11e0-97ca-00144feabdc0.html & http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1357379/Alternative-Vote-Nick-Clegg-power-years.html ). Namely, that it is the most short-sighted and dirty form of personality politics to try to get people to vote against a seminal proposal for constitutional change -- the reform of our electoral system, the very heart of our democracy – so as merely to be able to give one in the eye to our unpopular Deputy Press Minister. But there is also a much less obvious – a hitherto-unnoticed -- reason for being unimpressed with these efforts, and with the rash of media stories that continue to accompany them (see e.g. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12...

The NOtoAV campaign are trying to turn the AV referendum into a referendum on Nick Clegg's popularity. This is obviously a petty and cynical way to treat a constitutional question of huge importance, but there is another reason, less obvious, why it is wrong. Namely, that actually Nick Clegg's Party will not benefit from AV. Under AV, you no longer need to vote tactically, and can give your first preference to whoever you want to win. The Lib Dems may gain votes in areas where they are weak, under AV, as they will no longer be perceived as a "wasted vote" in those areas. But they will lose first preference votes in areas where they are strong, as people will no longer be compelled to vote for them tactically in order to cast a vote that is not "wasted". Losing votes where you are strong loses you seats, whereas gaining votes where you are weak does not. Councillor Dr Rupert Read, Green Party http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/letters/lette...

In response to my piece criticising Charlotte Vere, earlier today. Read UP from the bottom to the top, to follow the correspondence:    Guido; It will not lead to pandering to the BNP because, for the reasons I have explained below, which you seem surprisingly reluctant to debate or to acknowledge, the BNP will be WORSE off under AV than under FPTP. AV is probably the worst of all possible systems for Parties (such as the BNP) that genuinely deserve the descriptor, 'extremist', that is, Parties that are hated by a majority of the population. The BNP will be seriously hit by AV (especially if AV later gets introduced into Council elections). Again, that might have something to do with the fact that, as apparently you did not know when this correspondence began, the BNP are virulently opposed to AV, and claim (not without some reason) that it is a conspiracy to stop them ever getting elected...  Rupert.   On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 15:40 +0000, "Guy Fa...

From: "William Hague" < bulletin@news.conservatives.com > Date: 17 February 2011  Subject: Help us win the AV referendum Reply-To: "William Hague" < support-bxu6bu1b2c8xdzau6cew7aajhzx59q@news.conservatives.com >   Dear_________, Without your help, Britain's traditional voting system could be ditched for something that is unfair, expensive and allows candidates that finish third to win elections. On May 5th, there's a nationwide referendum on whether to replace the system of First Past the Post with the 'Alternative Vote' - or AV. The Liberal Democrats demanded this referendum as part of the Coalition agreement - but the Conservati...

This exchange ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12491641 ) between the excellent Jonathan Bartley of #Yes2AV and the spinning sneering smearer Charlotte Vere of #No2AV was on the BBC this morning.  As you’ll see if you watch it, in the course of a general swipe at ‘minor Parties’, Vere comes pretty close to suggesting that Green voters' second choice is likely to be…the BNP! Specifically: The ‘example’ Vere gives of how AV is ‘unfair’ (!) to large Parties and partial (sic.) toward small Parties is of a voter whose first preference is Green and whose second preference is BNP and so on...           She's a repeat offender regarding this sort of thing, as Greens know from her often-dreadful campaign against Caroline Lucas in Brighton, and as anyone knows who follows for instance the seemingly-endless string of misrepresentations on her twitter-feed in the course of this AV referendum ca...

Yesterday, I went to a massive #nocuts rally at Norfolk County Hall, and then watched Simon Hughes MP on television saying that there 'of course' have to be cuts to voluntary services at a time of large-scale government cuts. That kind of apologia really does make a complete nonsense of the Government's alleged 'Big Society' agenda. The reality is as follows: The government is forcing through big, rapid cuts. It is trying to target most of those cuts onto areas where public outrage at the cuts will not be too rapid or drastic. One obvious target has been local government (in complete contradiction with the government's alleged 'localism' agenda): local government is a soft target, because money that goes to local government does not go direct to citizens, and so central government can always shift blame onto the local governments themselves. In the most cynical of ways, this latter is what Eric Pickles, the Local Government Minister, has n...

PHILOSOPHY AND PUBLIC POLICY: MAKING AN IMPACT Seminar 2: Friday 25 February 2011 Programme   10.30am Tea and coffee 10.45am Welcome and introduction 11.00am Should we promote patriotism in schools? Dr Michael Hand, Institute of Education, University of London 12.15pm Guardians of the basic needs of future generations: A modest Platonic proposal? Dr Rupert Read, University of East Anglia 1.30pm Lunch 2.30pm Policy and the future of the family Professor David Archard, Lancaster University 3.45pm Plenary discussion Tea and coffee provided 4.30pm Close   Abstracts David Archard (Lancaster University) Policy and the Future of the Family Within modern Western liberal societies there is an increasing diversity of family forms. Law and policy can make a significant difference to which forms flourish and which do not. Conservative defences of the traditional nuclear family are set against the liberal, or libertarian, tolerance of familial diversity. Philosophy can contribute to this...

As a #Yes2AV supporter, I am sometimes asked this question: ' Will there be an option, in AV, to just vote for one party when not wanting any of the others in at all?' The answer is YES. Under AV, if you simply place a '1' next to your favoured candidate (rather than a cross), then you are voting as if it is FPTP (the current system), and that is completely allowed. In fact, there is a very important point here: It really is unnecessary for FPTP-lovers to oppose AV at all. FPTP is 'contained within' AV. FPTP-supporters can simply vote using a '1' instead of a cross, and could lobby for everyone else to do so too. There really is no need and no reason for them to oppose the new system... It would just be nice if they were to let those of us who would like to rank candidates by preference to be allowed to do so... It is really rather illiberal of them to stop us from doing this, when we are perfectly happy for them NOT to list candidates in...