I’ve just uploaded my latest article to my website – on the PR battle in the Middle East.
If you’d like to receive my columns by email in future, I’ve got a dedicated email list. Members of this list only get emailed my columns and articles – usually around three a month.
To join the list, just email lynnecolumn-request AT lists.libdems.org.uk
Al Jazeera calls it the ‘Sixth War’ of the Arabs against Israel. Israel calls it a defensive military operation which comes under the umbrella of ‘having the right to defend itself against terrorism’. Whatever you choose to call it, the terms of the Middle East crisis are pretty much all interchangeable.
Depending on who you ask, the ‘terrorists’ are also the ‘saviours’ and the ‘attackers’ are also the ‘victims’. Though there is a distinct asymmetry here, Lebanese and Israeli civilians have paid dearly with their lives in this latest round of Middle-East muscle-flexing.
Upon closer inspection however, it is clear that there are other layers to this conflict, which are of a more subtle nature than all the senseless death and destruction. A huge public relations battle is going on here, a war in which the weapons are not rockets or missiles but instead are images, prejudices and emotions. This is the war for the hearts and minds.
Israel, for its part, is only too aware of this. When the crisis started and the Israeli and Lebanese ambassadors to the UN were summoned in front of the UN Security Council, the PR war had begun. The Israeli Ambassador’s speech was a plea to the hearts and minds of the Lebanese people, serving almost as an offer to rid them of the scourge of Hezbollah. The Lebanese Ambassador, on the other hand, cited Israeli aggression without mentioning Hezbollah’s kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers. Furthermore, the Israeli Foreign Minister has openly stated that the high number of Lebanese civilian casualties is ‘problematic’ for Israel’s image abroad. Then, a major Israeli newspaper reported that the Israeli Prime Minister has met with some 50 spokespeople from the Israeli Foreign Ministry, the Israel Defence Forces and other Israeli government agencies, to instruct them on the principal messages that they should be delivering in appearances before the foreign media.
The principle Israeli message in this PR war being that when Israel kills civilians, Israel views this as a failure – but when Hezbollah kills civilians, Hezbollah see this as a success.
However, even by the most conservative of estimates, Israel seems to have failed a lot more often than Hezbollah has succeeded.
While the Hezbollah PR machine may not be as polished and sophisticated as the Israeli one, the importance of the PR war has not been lost on Hezbollah either. Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah’s leader has become something of a poster boy and indeed a hero in popular Arab thought. In fact, Nasrallah has spawned a souvenir industry churning out everything from tapes and CDs of his speeches to posters, key rings and T-shirts in the wake of this latest conflict. Shopkeepers and stall owners in Arab towns are reporting that sales of Nasrallah merchandise have risen.
The reasoning behind this is that for many in the region, Hezbollah have done what Arab leaders seem to be incapable of doing, and this is standing up to the mighty military and political machine which is Israel. So, while they have been adopted as a voice for the Arabs against oppression, various Arab leaders are not impressed. Saudi Arabia drew a clear distinction between Hezbollah and Lebanon, and blamed the former for sparking this crisis. This might be down to a very real fear that Hezbollah has emerged to Arab masses as a champion for Arab causes, as an agent with the ability to rectify perceived injustices in parts of the Arab world, and, importantly, has the potential to create revolutions and challenge the leaderships.
But what if this PR fails? Things are suddenly not so black and white when we realise that nearly 20% of Israel’s population are actually Sunni Muslim or Christian Arabs. Add to this the fact that nearly 40% of the Lebanese population are Christian. Then consider the way in which Hezbollah rockets have hit Israeli Arab towns and villages, causing death and destruction. Israeli air raids have targeted Lebanese Christian and Sunni Muslim areas that are not affiliated with Hezbollah.
So, if we strip away the labels of Israel, Lebanon, Jew, Shia, Sunni, Christian, there is only one thing we are left with in this situation – human suffering and the loss of humanity itself.
Lib Dem Leader Neil Williams has condemned Haringey Accord for its continuing failure to get on top of the rubbish collection problem following the recent strike, and for its derisory treatment of local residents.
In some cases, streets have not received a collection for four weeks, with Talbot Road, N15 a particular problem area. Cllr Williams has condemned as outrageous the treatment of Haringey residents phoning up Accord, who do not even log complaints on the telephone. Worse still, they refuse to consider priority cases where the situation is particularly bad – despite officially advising that residents can do so.
Collections are now falling further and further behind, with residents who were due a collection early this week being told they may not get one until the end of the week.
Cllr Neil Williams comments:
“Despite the end of the strike, the situation is still terrible in many areas, and collections seem to be slipping further and further behind. Why couldn’t contingency plans be brought in to speed up collections at this late stage?
“It is also terrible that even now there is no system in place for prioritising acute problems in specific streets, despite the Council advising us that this is in place. It is an appalling treatment of council tax payers who deserve a proper service.”
Reacting to Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair’s recent comments that London is now safe enough to leave doors unlocked, Haringey’s Lib Dems are urging caution.
As The Times reported, the Met chief’s comments followed a visit to a Haringey tower block. “How long is it since police patrolled the corridors of a tower block?” Sir Ian asked.
“It’s as if, when the slums they replaced were flattened, the police stopped patrolling. People are opening their doors, leaving their doors open now, or leaving them unlocked, certainly, in a way they haven’t done for 25 years.”
Haringey’s Liberal Democrats are urging residents not to take the Met chief seriously in this case. Lib Dem spokesperson for Crime, Policing and Community Safety, Councillor Ron Aitken, comments:
“While we very much welcome the enormous benefits of the community policing that the Safer Neighbourhood Teams bring to the borough, it is too early to be nostalgic about home security.
“There were 3782 burglaries in the last year in Haringey. People should still take plenty of precautions to secure their home, and I know that local police agree.”
Note:
The Times article reporting on Sir Ian Blair’s is at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2321643,00.html
Residents and councillors alike are calling for Labour councillor Brian Haley to come clean on the CPZ consultations in Haringey.
Lib Dem councillors claim that they are being stonewalled by Labour over the CPZ consultation proposals, and that the people deserve answers.
Labour’s lead councillor on the controversial parking plans, Cllr. Brian Haley, has not responded to requests to provide specific information on the “second stage of communication” he promised residents in late July.
Liberal Democrat group leader Councillor Neil Williams wrote to Cllr. Haley on the 9th August, asking that he “set out clearly and precisely what form any further consultation on the CPZ/stop and shop schemes will take place, including a detailed time line that takes us through to the Executive decision making process.” Cllr. Williams pointed out that, “There is considerable confusion about what you intend.” The Lib Dems have received no response.
Councillor Williams comments:
“Councillor Haley really must make clear his plans. It is clear he had no idea how to proceed when he made his promise. We worry that Councillor Haley is floundering on this issue. If plans have not yet been drawn up, then residents will rightly draw the conclusion that Labour are still not capable of conducting a meaningful consultation, and that they have no intention of listening to the people of the borough.”
Councillor John Oakes, Lib Dem spokesperson for Community Involvement, adds:
“Once again, Labour are dodging the bullet and failing the people of Haringey. Residents are beginning to believe that Cllr. Haley promised further consultation simply to save his skin and buy himself some time, following his descriptions of residents as ‘selfish, abusive bullies’. He must come clean and present his plans as soon as possible.”
Haringey’s Labour councillors are coming under fire due to Haringey Council’s poor record on investment in the borough’s roads and footpaths, as it emerged that the estimate for outstanding claims for compensation for injuries due to poor road maintenance is a staggering £1.7 million.
A report submitted to a meeting of the Council’s lead members confirmed that underinvestment in the London Borough of Haringey’s roads and footpaths was a crucial factor. Labour members are being criticised for the level of neglect.
Deputy Lib Dem leader Cllr Wayne Hoban comments:
“The report states that £300,000 has been paid out in compensation for injuries suffered through poor maintenance over recent years. Worse still, the estimate for outstanding claims is an incredible £1.7 million. This money would have been far better spent on ensuring that Haringey’s footpaths and roads are properly maintained so that accidents do not happen in the first place.”
Cllr Martin Newton, Lib Dem Spokesperson for the Environment comments:
“It is incredible and completely unacceptable that Haringey Labour has historically chosen to spend so little on footpath and road maintenance. This is yet another example of their poor record on funding regular and effective maintenance programmes, which is ultimately costly to Haringey ratepayers.”
Note:
To view the Executive Response to the report of the Scrutiny Review of Repairs to Highways and Footpaths, please see http://www.minutes.haringey.gov.uk/Published/C00000118/M00001441/$$ADocPackPublic.pdf (pages 389-436). (This is a large file and may take some time to display).
Prime Minister’s Questions – the bear pit of Parliament. What to say? I could just get sniffy and say what a load of rubbish and it has no bearing on the real world or indeed, the success of the party. William Hague was tip top at PMQs – but a flop everywhere else and as Conservative Leader. But this is the arena where the media get their kicks. They just love it – this macho test of testosterone. And as the media love it – this is the bit that gets the most coverage of all we do in Parliament – and so for many people “Parliament” pretty much equals PMQs.
So although it can make good entertainment, I doubt it helps politics (reputation and practice of) much. I have to say – when Blair is in full flow and horns are locked with the opposition – it does have that same excitement as a bull ring (not that I’ve ever been) or a heavyweight-boxing match (to which I have been and am totally ashamed of my liking for it).
However, after the general excitement and blood lust has worn off, I am now left totally unmoved by the theatrics. It has lost the thrill of the new – and when you hear Blair’s mantra – the mantra he uses in response to almost any question is to talk about £x being put into y public services, with a few other statistics thrown in, and he says we’re on the side of the clichés – oops, sorry – we’re on the side of the many, the law abiding and those who like apple pie. Whatever the issue – it comes down to Labour have spent money on it, so all must be ok.
Even where it may be the truth – it is soured by its frequent repetition and the tangential (if any) relationship it had to the question. And the questions are the one shot a backbencher gets at the Prime Minister – so the least he should do is have the courtesy to answer.
What never ceases to astonish me, however, is how many questioners come to grief because their question is too long. Mr Speaker’s tolerance for burbling on is strictly limited and he is wont to stand up and tell off the rambling questioner – who then sits down abruption with ruddy flushed and embarrassed face. You would think, would you not, that if you know that you are going to be called to ask a question because your name is on the Order Paper – you would have prepared for your 60 seconds in the limelight. You know the other members will start to jeer if you ramble on. You know Mr Speaker will cut you off. And you know that the Prime Minister will then cut you down to size because of your incompetence in questioning. And yet – time after time – I see really experienced members make this mistake – obviously carried away by the spotlight they forget how cruel the House is to those who stumble.
Boy Dave Cameron does the opposite. He over prepares. His soundbites are sometimes well worked out – but so studied that they fall flat. He has had some good moments – but to me – comes over as completely false – with no sense of belief behind his nifty nips at TB.
Does this all achieve anything other than the damage it does to the public standing of politics? The favourite answer of insiders is that it does have a big administrative effect – because everyone working in government knows that once a week, at PMQs, the Prime Minister may have to stand up and explain away their mistakes – and so in preparation for PMQs civil servants search out possible problem areas and demand explanations on behalf of the PM. Being put on your toes like this every week most of the year may help improve services at the front line, but I’m doubtful this is really the best way of doing things.
So can it change? Doubt it as long as the boys run the show. It is too close to their public school ya boo bullying for them to give it up. It obviously makes them feel like big boys with their ‘friends’ shouting them on from behind and jeering and making rude remarks about the other side. Some women join in – but to a much lesser extent. I think it is absolutely ludicrous. But as long as the media take their lead from this weekly ritual – it will persevere.
Haringey Council has been forced to admit Labour broke the Council’s rules when approval was granted for a controversial planning application.
Uploaded my latest local column to the website today – it’s about the good news on policing in Highgate.
You can sign up to get my columns by email by dropping a message to lynnecolumn-subscribe AT lists.libdems.org.uk
Local campaigners and local Lib Dem councillors have been vindicated today, as Haringey Council has now ruled invalid the hugely controversial planning decision on the backlands site at Cecile Park, Crouch End. The July decision by the Planning Committee caused outrage among local residents, and resulted in an appeal by local MP Lynne Featherstone and Lib Dem councillors to have the decision scrapped.
Lib Dems and local residents had accused Labour of outrageous shenanigans over the chairing of the Planning Committee, and flagrantly disregarding the Council’s constitution.
The Labour Chair, Cllr. Peacock was forced to step out of the meeting because of a declared personal and possible prejudicial interest with the developers. The Deputy Chair was absent for the same reason. In what is supposed to be a politically neutral body, the Labour chair of the committee Cllr. Sheila Peacock on leaving the meeting simply ‘ordained’ another Labour councillor as chair rather than letting the committee decide for itself as set out in Haringey Council’s constitution.Lynne Featherstone MP and Lib Dem councillors wrote to Haringey Council, urging it to suspend the issuing of permission certificates, rule the decision “non-determined” and allow an already scheduled Planning Appeal into two previous refusals to determine this application.
Local MP Lynne Featherstone comments:
“We have been vindicated entirely in our claims that the decision was made improperly. Haringey’s Planning Committee has been exposed to ridicule over the way it conducts its business, potentially exposing the council to enormous costs. Labour’s disregard for the rules has been simply shocking as they try to push this terrible development through.”
Lib Dem councillor for Crouch End, David Winskill, adds:
“Thankfully this development has been stopped for now, but we believe that the decision should now be being made by an external planning inspector through the appeal process. It is clear that the planning process has been brought into disrepute here, and when the application comes back to the committee on 11th September, the Committee must be scrupulous in demonstrating to residents that they will listen to their arguments and take them into account. “
Lynne Featherstone 