Skip to main content

Day: 8 February 2016

Is Clinton feeling the Bern?

Last Tuesday, Iowans awoke to a morning that was hotter than usual for the cold and snowy rural state—they had of course, felt the Bern.

The preceding night signalled the beginning of the 2016 presidential race, The Iowa Caucuses. An event which was the first opportunity for American citizens to select the candidate they want to be the next President of the United States.

On offer? A crowded Republican field containing the Cuban-American Senator from Florida, Marco Rubio, the Canadian-American Texas Senator, Ted Cruz, and of course the rambunctious tycoon Donald Trump—just to name a few. For the Democrats, veterinary political elite, Hillary Clinton; Governor of Maryland, Martin O’Malley; and last but certainly not least, a Senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders.

And the results? For the Republicans, Ted Cruz with a decisive 3.3 percent victory. For the Democrats, what may only be described as a ‘virtual tie’ between Hillary Clinton (49.9 percent of the vote) and Bernie Sanders (49.6 percent of the vote). The rest went to Martin O’Malley, who has now decided to end his campaign.

To come this close to drawing with the lead candidate is an achievement. In the last five elections (1996-2012), the candidate who obtained the Democratic nomination was at least 6 percent above the second place candidate in The Iowa Caucuses. The results were so close that the remaining delegates (those individuals responsible for selecting the Party’s nominee) were decided on the basis of a literal coin toss—of which Clinton won.

Many polls are predicting more success for Bernie Sanders with a projected landslide victory in New Hampshire next—and if such a prediction becomes a reality, is it safe to say that the Clinton machine is feeling the Bern?

But it was not always this close. After Clinton announced her candidacy and Sanders shortly after, a poll by The Huffington Post on May 4th 2015 asking who was likely to win the Democratic Primaries saw a substantial majority in favour of Clinton with 61.5 percent to Bernie Sanders 9.5 percent. However, when the same poll was conducted on September 22nd 2015, Clinton’s majority had decreased to 44.1 percent, yet Sanders’ had risen to 25.6 percent. Tuesday’s Iowa results suggest that there is now very little between the two candidates.

To explain why the gap has been steadily eroding, we must refer to the three cornerstones of candidate success: appeal, finances and policies.

Both candidates certainly have an appeal. Clinton as the potential first female president making gains in support from women voters and Sanders the outspoken and unafraid reformist, unnerved by embracing the socialist label who is invigorating the younger voting class with talk of a revolution.

Both have demonstrated their abilities to raise campaign funds. Hillary has amounted a huge war chest with an end of year total for 2015 of over $112 million, including a recent $6 million donation from George Soros. Bernie Sanders, despite rejecting donations from billionaires and working with a super PAC (Public Accounts Committee: a committee with the ability to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money by bending campaign finance laws), has surpassed expectations. Sanders boasts a record $3.25 million individual contributions with more incoming. The challenge for the Sanders campaign will be how they can expand on this without compromising his anti-corporate political agenda.

These first two factors give us little to work with, but it is their policies where we find a degree of traction. This is not to say that Sanders and Clinton are opposed on many issues—they are both Democrats after all; but Bernie’s passion and ambition is taking them all one step further.

While Clinton plans to build on Obamacare, Bernie Sanders wishes to replace it with a single payer system. Where Clinton will increase grants for states to invest in education and lower interest rates for students repaying loans, Sanders aims to make college tuition free through a tax on Wall Street speculation. While Clinton plans to tax banks more, Sanders will break them up. Where Clinton intends to raise the minimum wage to $12, Sanders is calling for $15—the list goes on.

Regardless of the economic viability of Sanders’ proposals, they are working wonders on the public.

In a time of political disconnect, staggering inequality and a frustration with the establishment, it is the Sanders’ brand of politics that is preferred: a socialist war cry that is unapologetically radical, audacious and—to use a slogan which helped a little known Senator from Illinois to a victory in 2008—hopeful.

Despite both candidates upholding the core values of the progressive wing of the Democrats, Sanders’ ‘political revolution’ message is contrary to the establishment Clinton. Whether or not Sanders gets the nomination, one thing is certain—his success is hurting the Hillary Clinton campaign.

However, the United States presidential election is renowned for being likened to a marathon, not a sprint. It is not safe to say that if Sanders takes New Hampshire that he will cripple the Clinton campaign beyond repair; after all, a narrow first place finish for Clinton is a huge step forward from her ‘08 campaign where she had finished in third place.

Only if Sanders avoids his passionate ideology being translated into hollow rhetoric and defends against the scrutiny of the Republicans (who are likely to intensify in the coming months)—while at the same time capitalising on the demands of the American people and expanding his grassroots network of support—will he be able to truly pull the plug on the Clinton machine.

Mandelson loves Manchester: Reasons not to be cheerful about the new MMU chancellor

Last summer the General Assembly of Manchester University was offered three candidates for the post of Chancellor: a distinguished poet, a distinguished conductor, and Lord Mandelson. Over 17,000 members voted, placing the poet first, the conductor second and Lord Mandelson third. Although Lord Mandelson has enjoyed over a decade of political power and influence in the United Kingdom and the European Union, he has not won an election since 2001.

Very few students were eligible to vote in the General Assembly, but the ballot nonetheless gave the student body some opportunity to say what they expected from the figure who acts as the ceremonial figurehead of their University and the emblem and custodian of its values. They had the chance to campaign for a candidate and try to influence the University staff and alumni who comprised nearly all the electorate.

In spite of his rebuff, Lord Mandelson just cannot keep away from Manchester. A week before Christmas it was announced that he would become Chancellor of the city’s other university, Manchester Metropolitan. No democratic hazards for him this time, no pesky poets or meddlesome musicians in the field… he was chosen by just twenty governors of the university, and he was the only candidate.

The appointment was accompanied by an outpouring of official spin. Some of this was frankly hilarious. The University’s pro-chancellor, Vanda Murray, called Mandelson a “world-class statesman”. Many alternative epithets to “statesman” leap lightly to the lips. The Students’ Union President, Jordan Stephenson, one of the governors who chose him, said that Mandelson “has demonstrated that he understands the particular challenges MMU students face”. Indeed, Lord Mandelson does have a unique understanding of the problems of students who live in £11-million houses and spend vacations on oligarchs’ yachts.

But beneath the accidental comedy were clear indications of why Mandelson had been chosen—to build relationships with business and policymakers. To help Mandelson in this role, the University has appointed an experienced journalist, Michael Taylor, who had earlier assisted his unsuccessful campaign to become Manchester University Chancellor. Mr Taylor has promised “to embed MMU in every conversation where it would be useful”, which gives fair warning to the rest of us. If I ever encounter Mr Taylor at a Wedding Feast, I will rush to the nearest Ancient Mariner.

Now, if all you want from your university Chancellor is to procure money and influence, you could not choose a better procurer than Peter Mandelson.

But if you also want some commitment to the basic values of your university, particularly a commitment to truth, his appointment might raise a few questions or even protests. Apart from a few rude comments in social media, I have seen no reaction against him from MMU students or faculty since term began. As a veteran of the dizzy Sixties, I find this disappointing. Lord Mandelson may be disappointed himself and worried that he no longer has the power to excite controversy. A few years ago he posed as a pantomime villain to promote his unmemorable memoirs. It is a terrible experience for a pantomime villain when no one goes “Boo! Hiss!” at his appearance.

The students and faculty at MMU can make up their own minds about their new Chancellor. They are perfectly entitled to share the glowing views of the university governors and spinners. But before they do this, I would urge them, politely, to make some study and assessment of the following issues.

One: Peter Mandelson’s conduct in 1996 over his huge undisclosed loan from his fellow MP, Geoffrey Robinson, to buy a house, which ultimately led to his first enforced exit from government. They do not have to accept the mild judgement on this by the House of Commons Standards and Privileges Committee. What do they think about it now? They might take the time to compare the account he gave to that Committee with the one given years later in his memoirs. Are these two compatible? Can both of them be true?

Two: his stewardship of the “Millennium Experience”, the expensive year-long celebration of year 2000. Did this show any intellect and imagination, and create any lasting cultural legacy to match the Festival of Britain in 1951, under the supervision of his grandfather, Herbert Morrison? They might study in particular Mandelson’s promises about the Christian content of the “Experience” (minimal) and about an attraction called “Surfball, the sport of the 21st century”(non-existent) and decide whether these promises were honestly given.

Three: the admiring article he published on the Syrian dictator, Bashar Assad, “a decent man doing a difficult job”. Was this a reasonable view to take when the article was published, in November 2001, to coincide with a meeting between Assad and Tony Blair?

Four: Mandelson’s record towards the Third World as an EU Commissioner and his relationships with lobbyists for big business.

Five: Mandelson’s relationship with the toxic American financier Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted paedophile.

Six: Mandelson’s openness over the sources of his personal wealth, which cannot be accounted for from his political and public career. Why has he been so eager to withhold the names of clients of his opaque consultancy, Global Counsel, from public view in the House of Lords Register of Interests? The bare mention of their names could not possibly damage the clients, so one can only assume it would embarrass him. His declarations may satisfy the House authorities—but are they good enough for MMU? Students and faculty deserve to know more about who is paying their new Chancellor—and how much and what for.

Seven, and most important: Mandelson’s relationship with the Putin regime and with at least two oligarchs who support it. What do they make of his regular visits to Putin’s annual economic “vanity summit” in St Petersburg, his association since 2004 with Oleg Deripaska, the aluminium magnate, and his service since 2013 to Sistema, a Russian group which includes one of Putin’s top defence contractors, RTI?

MMU is a busy place and both students and faculty may well think that they have many other things to worry about. However, a study of all these issues in their Chancellor’s career would make an excellent contribution to many academic programmes, including politics, international affairs, media studies, economics, business, accountancy, law, language and logic, and, above all, ethics.

 

Richard Heller is an author, journalist and speechwriter. His most recent book, The Importance of Not Being Earnest, is available to buy now.

Cambridge student found murdered in Cairo

A Cambridge student was found murdered in Cairo last week after a widespread international search.

The body of Italian Ph.D. student Giulio Regeni was found in a ditch near the Egyptian capital after disappearing on the 25th of January—five years to the day since the Tahrir Square protests. His body showed “clear signs of torture,” according to an Egyptian Prosecutor.

Egyptian officials had suggested that Mr Regeni had been killed in a road accident, but Italy summoned the Egyptian ambassador to express its “bewilderment over the tragic death.”

Regeni was studying for a Ph.D. at Girton College Cambridge and was a visiting scholar at the American University Cairo (AUC) to carry out research into Egyptian labour movements. Recently tensions between the working classes and the government have been particularly high, and according to Amy Austin Jones, Head of Sociology at the AUC, researchers have been denied entry to the country or arrested.

Photo: Twitter

The prosecutor said that while the cause of death remained unclear, Regeni’s body had bruises, burns and knife wounds that covered “all of his body, including the face.” He appeared to have suffered a “slow death.”

The Italian government has learnt of the probable tragic end to this affair,” said the Italian Foreign Ministry. “The Italian government has requested the maximum effort from the Egyptian authorities to find out the truth of what happened.” Investigators from Italy are expected to join the search for the killers.

First female Master appointed at Peterhouse college Cambridge

On the 1st of February, Cambridge’s oldest college, Peterhouse, established in 1284, elected its first female Master, Bridget Kendall. On top of this, Kendall is also LGBT* which students at Peterhouse believe will improve their reputation as being too staunchly conservative.

In his statement to the press, the LGBT* representative at Peterhouse, Julian Sutcliffe, said that Kendall’s election was “an historic moment for a college that will hopefully mark a change from Peterhouse’s reputation as the most conservative college.”

Kendall has worked for the BBC for over 30 years and served as a diplomatic correspondent. Between 1989 and 1995 she was the BBC Moscow correspondent where she reported widely on the tensions within the Soviet Communist Party, as well as the internal conflicts in Georgia, Chechnya and Tajikistan. She later became the BBC correspondent in Washington D.C. in 1994 and is currently the host of the radio talk show The Forum on BBC World Service.

In her statement about her recent appointment on the Peterhouse website, Kendall says “I feel very privileged to have been chosen by the Fellows of Peterhouse to be their next Master. This is an exceptional College with a distinguished history and record of academic excellence. It represents all that is best about Cambridge University.”

Out of the 31 colleges at Cambridge, nine women currently hold positions as “Head of House”. While the newly elected women’s officer at Peterhouse, Stevie Hertz, is thrilled at the prospect of another woman joining the ranks, she nonetheless admits that the college and university still have to make significant improvements to gender inequalities. She says: “We can do better with access, we can do better with the cost of living and we can do better as a gendered institution,” she said. “It is still an inherently masculine space but steps like this, where we are actively showing that we care about gender, are heading in the right direction.”

The outgoing Master of Cambridge’s Peterhouse, Adrian Dixon said: “This is a great day in the evolving history of Peterhouse. Bridget will bring to the College her exceptional skills in communication and knowledge of international affairs. She also provides an outstanding role model for students and young academics alike.”

While staff and students have expressed that Dixon will be missed in the future, there is an overwhelming excitement particularly expressed by LGBT* representatives as well as women’s officers across campus at the prospect of working together with Kendall.

University IT Director resigns soon after outsourcing conflicts

The University of Manchester’s Director of IT has resigned from his position after three years, soon after the last of the 68 staff, who were offered voluntary redundancies, left the university.

Gerry Pennell OBE, 56, joined the university in July 2013 having worked as a Chief Information Officer at the Co-op group. He will leave with effect from the 31st of March following a period of handover to interim Director Adrian Ridpath.

Pennell was tasked with implementing the university’s ambitious Manchester 2020 transformation programme, the aim of which is to become one of the world’s leading universities by 2020.

A University of Manchester spokesman said: “Gerry Pennell has resigned from his position as Director of IT with effect from 31 March 2016 and will be leaving the University of Manchester. As a consequence, an interim Director of IT has been recruited and Adrian Ridpath will join the University on 15 February. The process of recruitment to the permanent Director of IT position will begin immediately.”

Pennell was head of the department during the university’s outsourcing of IT services, which led to anger amongst the campus unions when 219 staff were told their positions were at risk if 68 did not take voluntary redundancy. At the same time as this announcement, Manchester academics published a book called ‘What a Waste: Outsourcing and how it goes wrong’.

The proposed Framework Agreement was meant to fulfil IT requirements using third parties, as opposed to from in-house, in order to achieve integration, simplicity and value for money. The expected investment required was between £50 million and £150 million. It has now been put on hold, as was announced in an e-mail to IT staff last month.

“In light of the University’s current position, it is now likely that the required significant IT investment will be spread across a longer period of time than the 3 to 4 years originally envisaged,” it read.

“Therefore we will not be progressing with the Framework Agreement at this time but instead will, subject to any required procurement process, appoint a partner to assist with the implementation of Student Lifecycle systems.”

Martyn Moss, UCU North West Regional Official said: “Staff have experienced a difficult and expensive programme of change in IT at the University of Manchester, including losses of jobs and subsequent involvement of private sector contractors.

“UCU were never shown a business case for the change, or even its cost, and we now want the university to transparently audit that process. We are not opposed to innovation, but we feel this particular project needs to be properly scrutinised and a much better case made in the future.”

Living Wage for University of Manchester catering staff

As of the 1st of February 2016, the University of Manchester Conferences (UMC) Limited now pay its staff a minimum of £8.25—the living wage as set by the Living Wage Foundation.

UMC is owned by the University of Manchester and runs Chancellors Hotel, The Chancellors Collection, FoodOnCampus, FoodInResidence and BarsInResidence on behalf of the university.

The company have said that the pay increase is just one of their planned actions within catering services, aimed at “developing and improving their financial performance and service quality.”

The new rate is £1.05 per hour more than the National Living Wage to be introduced by the government from April 2016. The government’s Living Wage will be paid to all UK employees over 25 years old. UMC have, however, announced that they will pay £8.25 to all staff regardless of their age.

In responses to this decision, the University of Manchester’s Student’s Union’s Living Wage Campaign told The Mancunion that they “are delighted by the news.”

The campaign organisers added that “this is a massive win for fair pay in the work place here at the University of Manchester, as over 300 members of staff will benefit from this change.”

However they urged the whole university to follow in UMC’s footsteps stating that they need to “follow its commitment to social responsibility and become an accredited living wage employer for all its staff and subsidiary companies.”

Student charity shop ‘The Closet’ trashed at Pangaea

Located in the old RBS Building next door to the Students’ Union, ‘The Closet’ (Formerly known as the ‘Upcycling Project’), is a charity clothing shop run by students, for students, with all proceeds supporting local mental health charity Manchester Mind.

The rebranded shop opened its doors to the students of Manchester last Wednesday evening with an exciting launch event, featuring music from Bilderberg and Lord of the Tings residents, plenty of freebies from popular coconut water brand Vita Coco, and showcasing the work of several young Manchester fashion designers.

However, the launch event was put into jeopardy when organisers found the shop to have been trashed after Pangaea. First thought to have been left open for students to roam around, the shop was left messy with cigarette butts and used drinks cups, and was also found to have had several donated items of clothing stolen.

It was later discovered that The Closet was in fact used as a designated green room for several Pangaea artists. The Closet’s organisers were not informed of this, and Students’ Union staff even failed to move donated items to a safe place before allowing artists to have free reign in the room. One security guard reported there being up to 20 people drinking and partying within The Closet at one time.

Despite the upset, The Closet’s organisers managed to clean up the room in time for the launch event, attracting around 250 students, and raising around £400.

The Closet aims to promote sustainable fashion, promote awareness for Manchester Mind, and promote youth entrepreneurship. If you would like to support this student action project, the shop will be opening Wednesdays – Fridays this term from 1 – 5pm.

A Students’ Union spokesperson said: “The University of Manchester Students’ Union General Secretary, Naa, spoke with The Closet offering our apologies for the breakdown in communication with our intentions of using the venue as a Green Room for Pangaea Festival.

“The venue operates as a space for students, campaigns and events and efforts are always made to ensure the venue is accessible to all whilst protecting anything contained within the space to the best of our ability. Therefore we will be working closely with the Closet to identify any items that are missing and will look into the matter further.

“Every effort was made to clean the room following the Festival and we liaised closely with The Closet seeking their feedback in the lead up to their event.

“On behalf of the Students’ Union we would like to congratulate the on-going efforts of The Closet and their successful launch event.”