Produced by a friend of mine a rather amusing explanation of the “alternative vote” electoral system:
I still remain unconvinced that it’d be a change for the better.
Lots of other bloggers have already made far better comments about David Laws than I will, but despite that I’m going to stick my oar in. Mainly because I’d hate for our politicians to get the slightest hint that we’ve lost interest in their expenses.
One thing that does make a nice change is the speed with which Mr Laws resigned, that much at least is an improvement. As many people have observed his sexuality really doesn’t have anything to do with it, that he was fiddling his expenses did. The claim that they weren’t living as spouses would at least from the information to hand be laughed at if anyone on benefits tried the same argument. Were they sharing a bed, a cutlery draw, a letter box etc. Whilst he may not have been claiming as much as he could have and whilst it may have cost us more if he’d not acted with such impropriety that as observed by Charles Crawford is the cost to “uphold honesty”. Iain Dales opinion that he should be let off by the Standards Commissioner is yet again ignoring the fundamental point in the green book rules, that is so consistently ignored by our troughing leaders:
“Members must ensure that claims do not give rise to, or give the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial benefit to themselves or anyone else”.
Mr Laws behaviour certainly has the appearance of having done this, even if in fact it hasn’t in actuality. Mr Cameron and Cleggs responses to his resignation suggest that they too still don’t see a problem with MPs claiming expenses inappropriately and that as ever lessons haven’t been learnt. Though perhaps we can still hope that as these claims all relate to prior to the last election that the current incumbents really have all stopped making claims that might give rise to the appearance of improper benefit. I wouldn’t give you odds on it though.
Now as promised/threatened I’m afraid I’m returning to the matter of the “take back parliament” coalition. Firstly though a correction to my earlier post in that Mark Ross appears to have no connection to Ekklesia except they published a puff blog for Take Back Parliament, so sorry about that.
Anyway onto looking at how they all sort of hang together, I’ve had to be quite restrictive in this as other wise it all spins out into far too wide a web very quickly. so I’m sticking to only looking at one or two degrees of separation. I’m also having to use a rather horrid table as being fairly new to this presenting this information in a useful fashion is quite tricky.
So anyway hopefully this will make sense and shed some more light on the Take Back Parliament coalition, who doesn’t seem to be that keen on open and transparent or that bothered about foreign influence on our democratic system.
This table just tracks down those groups listed at the bottom of Take Back Parliament and pulls out odds and sods of possibly interesting information. Before we get to that though a few facts about “Take Back Parliament”.
Take Back parliament
is co-ordinated by Mark Ross, Head of Campaigns for POWER2010
the media campaign/website appears to being run by Blue State Digitial a mainly American company but with a UK subsidiary BLUE STATE DIGITAL UK LIMITED (Company No. 06873977).
Now onto that coalition:
| Coaltion member | Controlled by | Supporters/Partners in common | Client of |
|---|---|---|---|
| Power 2010 | The Democratic Reform Company Ltd Company No. 07087541 Lord David Trevor Shutt of Greetland |
| Blue State Digital |
| Electoral Reform Society | ELECTORAL REFORM SOCIETY LIMITED Company No. 00958404 | – | Blue State Digital APC SoapBox |
| Enoughs Enough | Domain registered via an anonymising service | – | Athenaeum Limited |
| Ekklesia | EKKLESIA LIMITED Company No. 05831226 | – | – |
| AVAAZ.org | Domain registered by a private US individual – Ricken Patel, organization founded by Move On and Res Publica | – | – |
| Compass | Neal Lawson Jon Cruddas | – | SoapBox |
| Open Democracy | OPENDEMOCRACY LIMITED Company No. 03855274 previous: POWER AND DEMOCRACY LIMITED |
| – |
| OBV | Charter 88 |
| SoapBox |
| Vot for a change | Electoral Reform Society |
| Blue State Digital SoapBox |
| Unlock Democracy | Unlock Democracy Company No. 02440899 Formerly: 09/07/1991 CHARTER 88 LIMITED 02/05/2008 CHARTER 88 |
| SoapBox |
| Hang em | Open Democracy | Ekklesia | – |
| BASSAC Charity number: 1028784 Company number: 2869337 | – | Novas Scarman | – |
| Greenpeace | Without knowing just which bit of Greenpeace not even attempting this | ||
| Friends of the Earth | – | – | – |
| Fawcett society Charity No: 1108769 | – | – | – |
| Democracy Matters Charity No: 1108769 | Titus Alexander – Novas Scarman Group |
| – |
| Social Liberal Forum | James Graham (Secretary and website manager) is currently the Campaigns and Communications Manager for Unlock Democracy | – | – |
| National Union of Students | Not attemtping this one either | ||
| Muslim Council of Britain charity 1084651 | Not attemtping this one either | ||
| British Muslims for Secular Democracy Company No. 05905516 | – | – | – |
| World Development Movement | WORLD DEVELOPMENT MOVEMENT Company No. 02098198 WORLD DEVELOPMENT MOVEMENT TRUST LIMITED Company No. 03188734 charity 1064066 | – | APC |
So there you have it quite a cosy coalition, not quite sure about the grass roots element of it, but there you go.
Just to have a quick look at some of those names, I’ve already mentioned Blue State Digital – who also have as a client those well known “grassroots” campaigners “38 Degrees”. Soap Box are apprently “communications agency for think tanks, campaigns, politicians and NGOs” with an interesting client list, so a lot like BLue State Digital. The other interesting one which cropped up in a few of those groups DNS records was APC – The association for progressive communications who apparently help grass roots movements like say “the elctoral reform society” and have an intersting list of funders.
I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with any of this as such, it’s just a tad obscure and international and not that much that speaks of a ground swell of popular non-activist self-interested involvement. The grass roots bit of thier campaign appears to have gone a bit quiet , despite there still being no-sign of PR on the political agenda, just fixed term parliaments with AV.
Anyway in the interest of our new open and transparent plotics, that’s how the take back parliament campaign and its coalition roughly fit together – at just a very few degrees of seperation.
For those that are interested this data mainly came from domain registration look ups, the various groups websites and then lookups at Companies House, The Charities Commission and the FSA Mutuals Registrar.