THE LEFT HAVE CREATED A CULTURE OF EXTREMISM

By Shabnam Nasimi

Who knew that there was so much hate within the Left?

I grew up listening to my dad, a refugee from terrorism in Afghanistan teach me the evils of hatred and prejudice. And that led to me, as a teenager to become active in political and social activism determined to fight extremism. I would never have believed that the party of equality and social justice has become a racist party. It is because of Jeremy Corbyn and the people around him that the party has turned what was a mainstream political party into something really very different. They have created a culture of extremism, intolerance and bullying and it’s unbelievable that decent people, who have devoted their entire lives to mainstream politics are being driven out.

The Left no longer debate: they try to annihilate the other side, destroy opponents and get them fired from their jobs. It’s barbaric and it is profoundly illiberal. Our discourse has mutated into a holy war, with the Left convinced that the other side is not just wrong but also self-evidently morally inferior. It’s a horrendous, civilisation-imperilling regression.

Jeremy Corbyn routinely claims Conservative policies are “killing people”. John McDonnell talks about “lynching” female Tory MPs and in 2010 he praised violent thugs as “the best of our movement” for “kicking the shit” out of Conservative Campaign Headquarters.

Other Labour MPs use similar language every day while turning a blind eye to anti-Semitic and misogynistic bullying in their own party. Lib Dems sing about killing Tony Blair at their conference, promise to “decapitate” Boris Johnson in his constituency, and proudly say “bollocks to Brexit.” And Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, poses for photographs with campaigners in “F*ck Boris” t-shirts.  

Just three years after the killing of Labour MP Jo Cox on the streets of Britain, the depiction of a murdered politician has no place in British politics.

Britain and our political system were reputed around the world as the cradle of democracy, tolerance and downright decency. No longer. The Left has destroyed our civilised and tolerant political discourse to violence in our streets directed at people who have different points of view.

The threat is no longer Brexit, but Labour. In my opinion, Britain will survive leaving the EU, especially with a deal. But even the danger of crashing out would be nothing compared to that of rule by an extremist Labour Party. I dearly hope Brexit is delivered but the political crisis will not end until the hate and contempt of the extreme Left towards other political views is resolved. This has to change if we want people, particularly young people, to have faith in politics and Westminster again.

DON'T JUST VOTE, RUN!

By Pranav Bhanot

Whether you love it, hate it or love to hate it, one thing is clear, politicians and elections are not going anywhere, anytime soon, even if political and electoral fatigue looms across global democracies.

Whilst many sectors and industries such as banking, law and engineering are being disrupted through technological advancements, the process of electing a politician and the traditional methods of campaigning associated with it remain largely unchanged. Many politicians will confirm that even in the age of social media, there is no substitute for pounding the streets and knocking on doors when trying to convince someone to vote for you. Similarly, voters will be all too familiar with lining up in long queues to then be given a blunt pencil used to mark a box on a ballot paper to communicate their preference of next leader.

Many people appear fed up of our politicians and democratic processes, however, I continue to be a huge advocate of the power of liberal democracy to provide effective governance. Consequently, I am keen to see more people take a proactive interest in public service representation, in particular, groups of individuals who may not be as well represented in their legislature or decision-making body such as young people, ethnic minority groups and women.

Over the past two years, I have felt the bitterness of losing an election and the sweet victory having won an election which led me to write a book called “Get Me Elected. Tips, Tactics and Strategies for Election Success.” The aim of the book is to encourage more people to take an interest in public leadership through campaigning and winning elections. Many argue that the quality of our politicians and leaders is starting the deteriorate. To those who argue such a viewpoint, I challenge you to do something about this and consider throwing your hat in the ring next time your school, university, workplace, local council or Parliament are looking for candidates.

But before you do, ask yourself the following questions:

Why are you running for election? It is amazing, how many people want to run in elections without having a satisfactory answer to why they wish to run in the election in the first instance. It is important to remember that running for office is not an end in itself but a means to an end. The end should be the change or difference you wish to make and the role of elected office is the vehicle to achieve that end. The question originally posed will require a succinct and simple response and no one will be able to answer this question better and with more conviction than you.

What issues matter to your voters? To be successful you should identify the important issues that actually matter to your voters and instead of assuming that your views are the same as the group you want to serve. it is important that candidates understand the needs and demands of voters which should, in turn, shape your manifesto.

How will you stand out? Whether you look at President Trump in the United States, Prime Minister Modi in India or Prime Minister Johnson in the United Kingdom, each of these leaders have spent significant time analysing and refining how they will communicate their messages in a way which is different and can resonate with the maximum number of voters. It is your job to capture their attention effectively, communicate the message efficiently and eventually engage your voter to support you. Therefore, it is worth giving some serious thought about how you can uniquely position yourself from your competition.

Do you have good quality data? It is important that you identify exactly who your potential voters are, as soon as possible in your campaign. This will allow you to identify how you will reach the maximum number of voters in minimum time and as often as possible prior to the election. This process of finding out how the potential voter will vote is known as ascertaining the “Voting Intention”. Once you have got a Voting Intention, you should carefully record this data. As polling day draws closer, you should focus your efforts on communicating and consolidating support from those who have indicated an interest in voting for you or on those who are undecided. Generally speaking, it would not be effective use time for you to try and persuade someone who has pledged their support for your competitor. Your efforts could be better spent on converting someone who is undecided to vote for you instead.

Will they vote for you as promised? Good campaigning before the polling day does not guarantee election success. After all, a supporter saying they will vote for you is nothing more than a theoretical nicety until this actually translates into a reality. Try and empower a team of volunteers to assist you on polling day to contact your supporters to ensure that they have voted. Once you have reminded your supporters to go out to vote, if time permits, you could focus some energy on a final persuasive push to encourage those who have not decided their ideal candidate to consider you. It has been said that elections have been won and lost in the final few hours of a polling day, therefore, this final stretch requires a great deal of effort and energy to try and secure the maximum number of votes.

I hope the above provides some guidance when navigating the murky waters of standing in an election. Being an elected representative who can make a positive difference to a society is one of the most satisfying achievements. I recommend that everyone attempts standing in an election once in their life. More tips, tactics or strategies for election success can be found in my book available on Amazon called: Get Me Elected. Tips, Tactics and Strategies for Election Success.

CAN BREXIT DELIVER A FAIRER IMMIGRATION SYSTEM?

By Syed Kamall

The Windrush debacle is a stain on our record as an open, tolerant and welcoming society.

But if we fail to learn from it, it will be something worse than a stain - it will be destructive influence with the potential to drag our community relations back to the resentment and tension of the 1960s and 70s. As the child of a father who came to London in the 1950s to work on the railways then the buses, and a mother who followed in the 1960s, I am just grateful that my parents got themselves passports - otherwise, we might have faced the problems so many others did.

I regret the fact that the Labour Party is using it as an opportunity for playing party politics. After all, former Labour Home Secretary Alan Johnson has admitted the decision to destroy the records was taken in 2009 while he was in office, even though records were destroyed later. And by the way - didn’t anyone think of scanning or microfiching these documents?

If you ignore the fake news of The Economist, which blamed Theresa May for the “hostile environment” at the Home Office you will see it was, Labour Ministers such as Liam Byrne and Yvette Cooper who initially used the phrase, “many people believe we should be tougher on tackling illegal immigration”. I believe part of the mess is due to targets over immigration. Since so-called “freedom of movement” from the EU means that we cannot put caps on EU migrants, most of whom happen to be white, it means we put restrictions on non-EU migrants, most of whom happen to have dark skin. This leads to a racist immigration system.

During the referendum campaign, I met a number of people who voted Remain who told me they were in favour of immigration but wanted to see “the right sort of immigration.” What they really meant was they preferred “the white sort of immigration.” So what is a fair immigration system? I believe there are three types - but only one makes sense.

The first is to close our borders and to let no-one in. Most companies and most reasonable people know this would be an act of economic self-harm since not all vacancies could be filled by the unemployed - despite the improvements in training offered - or by technology.

The second would be to let everyone in. In fact, the UK had an open-door policy in the Blair years. Andrew Neather, a former advisor to Blair admitted this when he wrote that Labour’s plan “to open up the UK to mass migration” was a deliberate attempt “to rub the Right’s nose in diversity”.

The result was a backlash as white working-class Labour voters deserted the party and voted BNP. In 2009, the former Labour voters helped propel two BNP MEPs into the European Parliament. As I remarked at the time, as in other countries, abandoned socialists crossed the thin line between socialism and national socialism.

While the election of BNP MEPs, BNP London Assembly members and BNP local councillors provided white metropolitan liberals with another subject to debate at their dinner parties and further opportunity to feel morally superior, the real effect was felt by millions of black, ethnic minority and Jewish voters who were worried about their future safety. Open door migration leads to hostility to immigration and immigrants.

The third solution for fair migration is to treat all potential immigrants the same, regardless of where they come from. Then we should decide immigration policy on what skills gaps they fill. An exception should be made on humanitarian grounds for apart for genuine refugees fleeing persecution.

Let’s look at a points-based system where the criteria are clear and regularly reviewed, say every 6 months, as certain sectors fill their skills gaps while others open up. And we could look to technology to help us. With the advent of big data, computers can scan jobs boards, university application data and economic performance data in fractions of a second and assess where the skills shortages lay. Smart automated systems can also make complex tasks much simpler. Such as today’s labyrinthine application systems for visas, often still designed for an age of filing cabinets and paper forms.

Today we can access academic qualifications online. We can look at whether someone’s personal history is real or not. Did they really live where they say they did? In some countries, some credit agencies even scan Facebook for credibility indicators to issue credit cards. If someone is willing for their references to be checked we can increasingly do that. And better, more credible data would also make explaining immigration policy easier. Instead of crude targets, we could show how industries or companies which genuinely need to fill vacancies from overseas are able to attract staff to help our economy grow. Of course, there will always be some who want no immigration and claim that migrants take jobs (even though these may be jobs they would not want to do themselves). However, I believe that a points system based on the needs of the economy could change the narrative on immigration from a crude focus on numbers to filling the skills gaps to grow our economy so that we are all better off.

We should acknowledge that there are genuine concerns to be addressed as to whether rather than filling vacancies, immigration would reduce the wages and standard of living for existing workers in some parts of the country, as we saw after 10 countries joined the EU in 2004. However, if we move to a genuinely fair and transparent immigration policy post-Brexit, no longer giving preference to mostly white Europeans, as a country we can be seen to have learned the lessons from both the EU referendum and the shoddy treatment of the Windrush generation.