Man’s inhumanity to man constantly bewilders most of us but you don’t need to be an animal rights fanatic to believe the extent of cruelty to defenceless animals comes a close second in measuring the progress of human civilisation.

The mistreatment of animals is all around us but particularly in second and third world countries. Much of it also involves endangered species which is particularly depressing.

On the upside, education and protection initiatives are also everywhere. Having just returned from a trip to Thailand, if you find yourself there I would strongly recommend a visit to the Wildlife Friends Foundations Thailand (www.wfft.org). Set up by Edwin Wiek in 2001, it campaigns against all forms of animal abuse including illegal pet trades rife in Asia. It rescues and rehabilitates captive wild animals, provides veterinary assistance, widespread education initiatives and looks to repopulate animals in forest areas where they are already extinct or endangered. They currently look after some 600 animals from elephants to bears, gibbons to even a rogue crocodile!

But here is why it has to exist. Elephants are beaten into submission for tourist ride purposes with scars all over their bodies and spines bent under the weight of carrying tourists who are too heavy for them. Bears are drained of their bile with paws being cut off to make bear paw soup. Gibbons, Macaques and other monkeys are drugged to make them suitable for ‘cute’ tourist photos before they are killed or abandoned as they get too large and aggressive for easy captivity. The list of mistreatments and the reasons why are endless and that is before the erosion of their natural habitats is addressed.

We all have a responsibility to protect the environment and the animals that live alongside us. Human beings are incredibly powerful and therefore potentially destructive to even the most majestic beasts. Dealing with animal cruelty is about legislation, tackling corruption, cross-border policing, education and providing safe places for animals to recover from the actions of ignorant humans. This is an issue refreshingly not about Brexit or party politics. Everyone one of us can do our bit even if it is not on the scale of Edwin Wiek and we should do so.

 

Answer: when Britain is ‘negotiating’ with the EU.

If the leading figures in the Brexit campaign had any conscience (Cambridge Analytica?), they would be filled with remorse. With this latest transition agreement, ‘take back control’ has morphed into ‘same control, no input’. In initial negotiations, the UK wanted no exit payments, held out on EU citizens’ rights, demanded no freedom of movement or ECJ jurisdiction; more recently we wanted our fisheries policy immediately freed from the EU. Oh, and the transition period, a post referendum invention in the first place, needed to be flexible in case we weren’t ready. All this was ignored.

These are just a few items and you could go on. The one major concession is that we can start pursuing our own trade deals before the end of the transition period. Wow. I look forward to reading about the heroic actions of our Trade Secretary, Liam Fox. He, who loves all things American and free trade – yet accuses businessmen of spending too much time on the golf course – will be discussing trade agreements with the protectionist, golf loving President Trump…

Crucially, in the area of financial services, the EU is not committing to ‘equivalency’ from a regulatory perspective, which would have created a free market. The attraction of Frankfurt and Paris biting into this most lucrative of sectors is simply too great for much compromise at this stage. Then, of course, there is Northern Ireland.

Let’s be clear. A deal will eventually be done. But at what expense? What we know is that the terms will be nowhere near the promises made during the campaign to leave the EU.

In some senses that doesn’t matter. The aim of Brexiteers is to achieve sovereignty at any price, even though this is a complete fiction in a globalised world. The economic and social damage to the UK will be slow but cumulative. Boiling frogs come to mind. No wonder the young are angry but they have no monopoly over this emotion!

There is a small hope of initiatives developing to reverse the referendum, or stay within the customs union/single market before the transition period is concluded; but the price paid has to be more visible than it will seem then.

The course is set and unless the consequences are immediately disastrous or there is a long-shot, fundamental realignment of British politics, we leave the EU fully on 31 December 2020. Every promise made by those who wanted to Leave will then be carefully weighed and measured for future political combat. Those leading figures in the Brexit campaign had better be prepared.

 

In China, Russia and the US, populist male leaders with too much testosterone dominate the political landscape with potentially dire consequences. Russia under Putin rots from within (and now seemingly from Salisbury…), China under the new ‘president for life’ Xi aims for world hegemony whilst the US under Trump, with much macho swagger, is unintentionally eviscerated. Never has a stable world order for decades looked so threatened.

Then in Europe populist leaders are triumphing to various extents in Italy, Austria, Hungary and Poland to name but a few countries. Extremists are on the march and clinging on to Merkel and Macron feels like a thin line of defence. The UK sits on the side-lines with its own populist obsession of Brexit. It is starting to look somewhat benign…

Why are we at this point? Commitment to democracy, even in those countries who practice it, is in decline. A recent article in The Times makes grim reading. A fifth of Spanish and Greek citizens apparently believe representative democracy is a bad way of governing, 40% of British millennials no longer think democracy vital and only 30% of American millennials believe it is ‘essential’ to live in a democracy. Trusting the younger generation seems a bit precarious…

Democracy is often taken for granted and its perceived benefits are increasingly doubted. Over-promising, under-achieving politicians, greedy voters and cultural wars fuelled by excessive immigration and disparities in wealth created by globalisation, are the cause. Yet in many respects people have never had it so good.

The solutions? Brave politicians telling it as it is, engagement with younger voters, enforcing the rule of law vigorously in Europe (a key role for the EU here), understanding the cultural impact of high levels of immigration without calling everybody racists and standing up to Xi and Putin in particular on the world stage.

Phew! A huge ask, the detail of which cannot be addressed in a blog. But if we lose our determination to defend democratic principles through open, honest debate and leadership, the strong (mostly) men will win and we will all regret the consequences. Of course, by then, it will be too late even for the young.

The Labour Party has played a blinder in now supporting ‘a’ customs union solution for leaving the EU. Pro Remain campaigners have railed in frustration as Corbyn dragged his feet on this issue or the option of staying within the Single Market. They feared he saw the EU as a capitalist conspiracy and never really wanted to be a member in the first place.

They are probably right but pressure within the Party, combined more importantly with the raw politics of causing the Tories maximum damage, has won out. Perfectly timed, the Tories yet again find themselves in disarray and Thursday’s Chequers meeting to thrash out an agreed stance all looks a long time ago.

Of course, this manoeuvre by Labour was easily predictable but flat-footed Tories torn between their extremities are powerless to swerve out of its way. It is a bit rich for them to respond by saying Labour ‘are playing with our country’s future’!

So what happens now? The EU may of course reject Labour’s proposal immediately on a take it or leave it basis – no bespoke deals – but that would be bad politics from a divide and rule perspective.

There will be a vote in the Commons on remaining within a customs union in the next couple of months, probably April. The scenarios are endless. Labour must back a cross-party motion to get enough Tories on board to defeat the Government. Even Sinn Fein may take up their seats in Parliament to ensure this defeat.

Theresa May could of course make it a Confidence vote; but she should be careful. So disgusted are moderate Tories at the willingness of their right-wing colleagues to abandon the Good Friday Agreement (all related to ensuring a frictionless Irish border between North and South, resolved only by a customs union) that they may let the Government fall.

The Tories’ obsession with Europe has been their Achilles heel for decades, worthy of the great historical debates of the 19th Century. Perhaps they can only prosper in Opposition with a new generation of leaders who do not have to define themselves by their stance on Europe. How did we get here? Ask the European Research Group led by Rees-Mogg… but a few disastrous years of a Labour Government may have to be the price paid for a long term, credible Conservative Party, to emerge.

Oh dear, where have they gone? Representing most of what is sensible in centre, centre left politics, the Liberal Democrats were meant to surge as standard bearers of voters appalled by Brexit and the Tories’ hard line stance on how we depart. But they have flat lined in opinion polls at 7-8%. Why?

Three reasons. First, and foremost, in a polarised world, their weak tone simply doesn’t resonate with voters. Generally anyone interested in politics is angry; angry we are leaving the EU, angry about the compromises being made on the terms of our departure, angry about cuts. The Liberal Democrats simply bore for Britain, and not in a good way.

Second, Vince Cable doesn’t have the energy or charisma to shape debates and none of the other MPs are making any impact either. His leadership also comes hard on the heels of a previous leader with bizarre religious conflicts surrounding homosexuality. You couldn’t write the script about such confusion in such a small political space…

Third, they have lost their PMQ slot, compounding a sense of irrelevance and are losing airtime generally on programmes such as BBC’s Question Time where they often don’t appear, replaced, outrageously, by the Nigel Farage’s of this world (32 slots and counting), and even intentional comedians.

The 2010-15 period for many represented the perfect blend of Conservatism tempered by the Liberal Democrats; fiscal conservatism, social liberalism and pro-European leadership. They were heady days for moderate Tories if not for Liberal Democrat voters who felt betrayed on issues such as tuition fees. So here is an idea for you…

If the current Conservative government supported allegedly by a mere 70,000 Tory Party members continues to inflict damage on the country’s future, why don’t moderate Tories take over and re-brand the Liberal Democrats? They could strengthen its economic stance on government expenditure a la Nick Clegg and David Laws whilst pursuing a pro-EU, social liberal agenda. It would save the high risk option of setting up a new party and meet the demands of the vast majority of centrist voters. Potentially highly attractive to disenfranchised, moderate Labour MPs and their supporters too…

Umm…just a thought…just a thought…

The view through the window doesn’t look good. There are no votes in prisons and the conditions in which prisoners are held is deteriorating. And yet, our justice system and the way we treat offenders, often hidden from public view, is a crucial reflection of how civilised a society we are. And even for those who don’t care, better prisons mean less re-offending and genuine cost savings.

So where are we today? The prison estate is crumbling as real cuts bite to the bone. Add this to the list which includes social care, policing and local authority services generally. The pressures on prisons are exacerbated by rising numbers of prisoners, partly driven by the roundup of sexual offenders, harsher sentencing, so called ‘legal highs’ and falling prison officers.

A few facts from the Prison Reform Trust make startling reading. 68% of prisons are overcrowded with 21,000 prisoners still sharing cells for up to 23 hours a day. We have the highest imprisonment rate in Western Europe with 66,000 jailed in the year to June 2017. Yet 71% had committed a non-violent offence and 47% were sentenced to serve six months or less. Nearly 49% of adults are reconvicted within one year of release with an estimated cost to the economy of between £9.5-13 billion annually. Prison officers have fallen 23% in the last seven years whilst the prison population has risen. Assaults on staff across Britain’s 140 prisons rose by 143% in the last 4 years.

The latest report from HM Chief Inspector of Prisons for England and Wales (and the people who fill this role are no soft touch) highlighted that the percentage of male prisoners held in good or reasonably good conditions has fallen from 78% to 49%. One could go on…

The solution partly lies in new prisons. They are being built but will have no impact on overcrowding until 2022 and, at the current rate of incarceration, a new programme will be needed from 2026. More prison officers are also required (a rapid recruitment drive is on after a realisation the fall in numbers has been disastrous but there is much further to go).

But what we really need to do is jail less people and of course review all those prisoners on shameful indeterminate sentences. Community sentencing is more effective than short prison terms at reducing reoffending, yet its use has nearly halved in the last decade. More of the former please.

Sorting out our jails and sentencing generally strengthens our society and at the same time actually saves money over the longer term. Of all the problems facing this country, this issue actually has identifiable solutions which can be implemented by even this current crop of politicians.

So Trump has spoken and his State of the Union Address wasn’t too bad. In fact it was quite good. Moderate in parts and optimistic in tone, his firm and sometimes dark beliefs were cloaked in unifying words. He stuck to his teleprompter and it worked. The immediate opinion polls were positive. The BBC called him the pugilist President. He would be pleased with that…

We await his next tweet barrage with glee but what if it doesn’t come? What if Trump  acquires a taste for broader popularity?

Let’s look at his record to date and then his speech. After a terrible start with too many mistakes to mention and wild invective, a powering economy and stock market with a record tax cut (the disastrous consequences will take time to arrive) are providing a major boost. It is the economy stupid even if Barack Obama should take the real credit for its current performance.

In his speech he boasted of record low African American unemployment, wants a deal for Dreamers (children of illegal immigrants) but not all family members and is tough on terrorism, drugs and gangs. Keeping Guantanamo open is hardly a vote loser and even the nonsensical Mexican wall which will now be paid for by the US (almost certainly courtesy of the Democrats…) keeps his core base happy. His commitment to infrastructure strikes a chord too.

The Democrats’ response? Churlishly sitting on their hands at too many points of his speech, hand wringing over immigration, not seeing that the game has changed… just look at Brexit and Europe as a whole driven to a frenzy by too much immigration. They could only find a Kennedy to respond averagely. Talk about back to the future…

The Democrats still don’t understand why Trump won the election and still have nothing to say to his core base. Egged on by a largely liberal media, they are too shrill and partisan in their opposition. Torn between the Left and centrists, they have no new alternative agenda and no leading light yet to seize a new presidential mantle. The Democrats should treat Trump more cleverly, embracing some of his more palatable initiatives. Hug your enemy close. If he blows up as they are so certain he will, then they will look magnanimous in victory.

Many issues may (hopefully) derail Trump but if he gets remotely clever, he will have the current Democratic opposition on the ropes. Those November midterm elections seem along way a way…

 

You couldn’t write the script. A bunch of fabulously wealthy elites arriving by private jet to a luxury mountain resort to discuss…the inequities of capitalism…To add insult to injury, Donald Trump is wrapping up the session. Pandering to his POTUS role, they seem to have developed amnesia towards his recent tax bill which slashes corporation tax, rewards the individually better off and inflates the deficit leaving less money to help ease what…oh yes, the inequities of capitalism…

Most sensible people know free markets work and the State should be a facilitator and only a part contributor, aiming to provide equality of opportunity and protecting those who simply can’t manage on their own.

But to limit the role of the State, the rules of economic engagement must be applied equally and they are not currently. The richer you are, the more you can avoid paying tax (global corporations for example, well represented at Davos…). Add to that executive greed, frequently found in privatised industries, exposure to rising property prices and stock markets, all under the scrutiny of social media, and you have a toxic mix that allows the rich to get richer, in full visibility of the ordinary voter.

Making capitalism work fairly involves corporations paying fair taxes globally; executive remuneration based on long term incentives for wealth creation, and the State not over-promising in its role as facilitator and contributor to investment whether it be infrastructure, health care, education, to name but a few services.

The solutions lie partly in active corporate governance. Owners of our pension funds for example need to act in a wider capacity than simply short term gain because in the longer run, it benefits us all. Privatised industries need their monopolies breaking up. Public services under strain also don’t need the exaggerated claims of competing political visions but genuine reform driven by cross-party consensus. There is always a role for government but just think, for example, how valuable free markets are in the area of the environment, where competing firms are driving hugely beneficial technological developments.

When we talk about capitalism and free markets, we really mean a mixed economy. If the tilt is to be away from an ever growing State, the Davos crowd need to step up to the plate and make a few expensive sacrifices. If there is acknowledgement that this is necessary, then through the snow blizzards, you might just see evidence that the system is working…

This has not been a good week for the private sector generally and the role of privatisation in particular. Carillion was apparently a disaster waiting to happen. Its collapse has left a range of public services and smaller company suppliers under threat. Then the Secretary of State for Transport has rescued train operators from East Coast rail franchise terms they willingly signed up to. The political fallout provides further support to the depressing narrative from Corbyn and his team that only state control of public services works.

Can you really imagine the inept Labour frontbench grabbing power over a range of privatised companies and running services better? The collapse of Carillion at least goes to show that civil servants and ministers simply don’t have the skills to oversee complex companies let alone run their services from scratch.

There is a further, long-term narrative from all this however. How far is the private sector and free markets as they stand, serving the wider interests of society? Theresa May once had ambitions to make the governance of companies work better for all stakeholders. Damn Brexit burning up band-width and a barely workable majority put paid to this. A real shame as it could have been her legacy initiative.

Asset managers in alliance with asset owners are at least putting their shoulder to the wheel on companies they invest in, in relation to Environmental, Social and Governance (‘ESG’) issues but is it time to be more radical? Should there be greater, even compulsory, intervention in executive pay deals that are grotesque in size and short-term in nature? Remuneration must be aligned to the long term interests of all stakeholders. Should there be more scrutiny of excessive dividend payments which detract from long term investment? This is often a downside of quoted companies. What is wrong with having employee representation on company boards? It works fine in Germany. Is it time for the Government to wield its influence with golden shares in companies that provide key public services? That’s how many privatisations started.

There is a comprehensive debate to be had. But, in the meantime, what is clear is that there should be at least more business and procurement skills within the civil service. Markets and the way they allocate capital must also work better for all stakeholders (including the tax payer) and shorter term greed and rewarded incompetence must not be allowed to outweigh the manifest benefits of private sector competition. If that takes bolder corporate governance legislation from a Conservative administration then so be it.

If the Conservatives don’t act, Corbyn will, and the results will be very messy indeed for all concerned, not least the consumers of public services.

Oh dear. The best that could be said about the last two days is that reshuffles don’t really matter. Most names are unheard of by the public and it is the longer term, overall perception of Prime Ministerial/Government competence and key policies that matter.

Umm…this week does not contribute to the perception of a Prime Minister in command. At the very least, like a lot of her predecessors, she needs better HR advice/procedures!

How could the mistake be made about Chris Grayling, Chairman of the Party for 27 seconds…? Why wasn’t the disappointing departure of Justine Greening foreseen? Why was Jeremy Hunt’s rumoured promotion allowed to gain legs? Surely it was also obvious he wouldn’t want to be pushed sideways in the middle of an NHS crisis. Why has the awful Andrea Leadsom been allowed to stay on? The list of gripes is endless. Reshuffles are much harder to execute than it seems from the outside but this one involved a series of unforced errors exacerbated by an unpleasant and inaccurate advance rumour mill.

At Cabinet level, there has been a revolving door of Justice, Education, DWP ministers to name but a few. No wonder there is a belief that the Civil Service really runs government.

The good news is that there is a talented cadre of up-and-coming ministers seen on the second day of the reshuffle. If only the public knew some of them, they would realise there is far more depth to the Conservative Party than simply visible around the Cabinet table. Theresa May staying on is good news if it means the next leader comes from this generation.

Lastly, insiderightpolitics (that is me…), will be in the audience (sadly not on the panel…) of this week’s Question Time cheering Gina Miller and booing Piers Morgan. Tune in!