NICK CLEGGWe Have Brought the Country

Back from the Brink.

CABINET RESHUFFLE REACTION

THE UNITED STATES OF EUROPE

Issue 1 Oct 2012

The Month that was... Welcome to the first issue of Steel View!

This isn’t your conventional politics magazine, we are not going to talk down to you, use big fancy made-up

words to confuse you, and lie to you to fit in with the editorial line – because there isn’t one. Each edition will have the lat-est news, a featured writer, a designated special, with some satire and international news thrown in. The articles are concise, sharp and easy to digest.

Although some of you may have little to no interest in politics, give it a chance! Behind the Oxbridge degrees, and fancy tailored suits is quite an interesting subject, and some of the things you read may both intrigue and surprise you.

The views in the magazine will change from writer to writer, and we will do our best to vary the articles to give a broad range of differing opinions. If you find yourself disagreeing with something you read, then write to us, send us your views and we will publish it – within reason of course!

We set up this publication to give a political voice to our generation. There appears to be a belief that we all love going out, getting pissed and missing lectures... and I won’t dispute that. However the presumption that none of us care what-so-ever for politics is misguided – and for those of you that do, read on and see if we can change your mind a little.

Hopefully by the time you have finished reading the mag you will have a new respect for politics, a subject that affects everyone of us each day.

You want cheaper cigs and alcohol? Cheaper petrol? More money? Less student debt? Better graduate jobs? It’s all politics, so it’s all worth talking and thinking about!

The magazine will be available free on campus each month – probably lying exactly where you found this one! When you have finished with it, pass it on to a friend, give it to a flat mate, or just throw it on a desk for someone else to read.

This months designated special is the involvement of our generation in politics and the political system, with articles from Tom Connell, Mitesh Mistry and myself. Oliver Beatson and Tom Brookes look at big news from the month that was. James Thompson provides us with some lighthearted satire, before Tom Brookes takes us around the world in 5 minutes. We want to hear what you have to say. Any comments – positive or negative – are welcomed and healthy debate is encouraged. Please send responses to: editor.steelview@gmail.com

Sam Harris – Editor.

The start of September saw David Cameron’s first cabinet reshuffle in

Government, as he put into place the line-up that, barring any catastrophes, will lead the Conservatives into the next election. Cameron’s reshuffle has succeeded in creating quite a few talking points.First of all, there is the apparent shift to the right that the cabinet has taken. Ministers who have traditionally stayed close to the centre ground, such as Ken Clarke, have been moved and replaced by people likely to satisfy the Tory backbenchers. The man that has replaced Ken Clarke as Justice Secretary is Chris Grayling, who will be a lot tougher on sentencing and will also be determined to resist any perceived interference from Europe.Perhaps the biggest surprise of the reshuffle was the promotion of Jeremy Hunt. It came as no great surprise that Andrew Lansley was removed from the position of Minister for Health, but the appointment of Hunt could prove to be very risky after the fall-out from the disastrous

BSkyB takeover bid by News Corporation, especially given that Lord Justice Leveson is yet to announce his final decision on Hunt’s role in the affair. One reason Cameron may be so keen to keep Hunt on side is that he knows where the bodies are buried. However, it does still seem a bizarre decision to promote someone who has been so consumed by controversy recently, especially into such an important position.Another important sub-plot to have emerged is that of the third runway at Heathrow. It appears that all the Ministers who opposed the building of a third runway have either been demoted or dropped altogether. This is probably summed up by the replacement of Justine Greening, as Transport Secretary, who was strongly against the idea. This view hasn’t escaped the attention of Boris Johnson who has slammed, what he believes to be, a change of stance from the pre-election Conservative stance.

Oliver Beatson

Eurosceptics and Europhiles were given food for thought following the actions

of the European Central Bank (ECB) and comments from Manuel Barosso - EU President - who suggested a European federation is an intended and natural outcome of the bloc’s current political and economic union. A federal EU would be a continent-wide governance system, akin to the US state government model and implying the centralisation of a greater array of powers and practices. There is little cause for immediate concern, as changes to the EU constitution would be required to so alter the continent’s levers of power. Constitutional changes auto-trigger referenda in several members nations - including the UK. If EU history is any guide, consensus federalism will take years and be vastly diluted by the time reforms reach statute books.. It is important to note that EU members aren’t states, they are nations with populations resistant to unnecessary outside interference; yet deeply interconnected. It is undeniable that member states operate in an international economic system; and

that coordinated supranational action has blunted some impacts of the world recession.EU economic action recently moved beyond conditional bailouts, instigating a bond-buying initiative. The ECB is buying essentially unlimited amounts of government and bank bonds to inject capital into the banking systems of Europe’s worst-off economies at lower interest rates than they can get from anywhere else. The intended upshot of the federation rhetoric and bond scheme seems to be the restoration of confidence and stability to the bloc’s markets. Talking about the EU’s potential federal future at least implies it has a future, while more cheap money may devalue the Euro, pushing up exports. Textbook economics; though the problems the EU faces may be too deep-seated to solve with such initiatives, requiring longer term fundamental reforms. It is also worth noting that an EU turnaround would pour cold water on the UK government’s rationale that EU instability is hampering British recovery.

Tom Brookes

The Cabinet Reshuffle

The United States of Europe

We all have the right to vote, so why do most of us decide not to? A lack of young people in the political

process is now more recognisable than it has been for many years. Figures from recent elections show that as few as one in four 18 to 24 year olds choose to make use of their vote. When this is compared to three in four over 60s, it is clear just how uninvolved our generation is. What does it mean for our future, when more people voted in The X Factor final than for the most popular party in the 2005 general election?

Young people, when it comes to politics, perhaps feel left out. It doesn’t involve us, it doesn’t appear to affect us and voting doesn’t actually change things. Recent political changes have made this situation worse. The huge leap in university tuition fees and the demise of educational maintenance allowance are just two examples of setbacks for under 25 year olds.

For many, the lack of interest and involvement appears to be because they do not understand the influence of politics. A survey by the BBC’s Newsbeat programme showed that there is a general lack of trust in politicians. Further research showed that two thirds of young people have little or no trust in political parties. One of the survey participants explained his reason for not voting, “I would have been voting for the party I hate the least rather than the one I wanted to have power.”

A potential solution to the lack of interest in politics is including the subject in the National Curriculum. Politics being a compulsory subject in schools for students from the age of 11 would improve knowledge and interest, and therefore

make lowering the voting age achievable. If this change was made it would surely be inevitable that the number of 16 to 24 year olds voting in elections would increase.

The issue of young people not involving themselves in politics needs to be taken seriously. It is vital that we all take part in local and general elections, as failure to do so will result in our generation losing our political voice. The next opportunity to be involved in a local election is May, make sure you use your vote.

Tom Connell

Our Generation, Our Politics

Corruption, dishonesty and false promises. These are a few popular

terms that help to describe how society at large views politics, and at a glance they seem justifiable. In recent years we have seen Members of Parliament, once trusted to help champion our views in the House of Commons, take advantage of their positions and abuse the expenses system by using public money to pay for their luxuries.We have seen Politicians lie in order to gain votes and popularity. The Liberal Democrats made the headlines for the wrong reasons; instead of abolishing tuition fees, they caved in to their Conservative coalition partners and trebled tuition fees, leaving many wondering if university is an affordable option - a travesty of a reason to choose a life path. Many such decisions principally affect the young in society, not to mention their families, it therefore makes sense that the disaffected youth re-engage with politics to stand their ground. The politics of today has evidently been shaped by senior members of society with dated, traditional values. Although sometimes this isn’t a bad thing, it does mean there isn’t much room on the

Parliamentary timetable for new ideas suited to a modern society. It stands to reason that one of the best ways to remake society to suit today’s needs is to re-ignite the connection that keeps the next generation actively interested in politics in order to bring fresh new ideas, new blood and new life into the political system.A problem facing the political sphere is that the youth regard politics as trivial, insignificant or irrelevant. Consequently when it’s time to vote, the youth ignore mainstream politics and show support for ‘fringe’ parties if they vote at all. These types of parties have no real aim other than to derail the main political parties, or spread simplistic bigotry. This is a big problem in places like Bradford, where the population has been misled by the Respect Party into bringing George Galloway back to the Commons - a man who’s recent comments on sexual etiquette are anything but respectful. To stop such distasteful politics and change the nature of our national debates it is vital the alienated in society not only re-engage with politics but get involved. It’s the only way to end a dissatisfactory status quo and make positive, lasting changes.

Mitesh Mistry

It seems somewhat undemocratic to ask the electorate to vote for a candidate

they most likely know nothing about and for policies that will never be enacted. The lack of interest, particularly among our generation, is clear to see. Over the last 15 years figures show that 18-24 year olds are roughly 20% less than the national average. In the 2010 general election the youth turnout was a lowly 44%, this is despite research showing over 60% of 14-25 year olds have the intention to vote, so why don’t we?Is it because we’re too lazy, we don’t think its worth our time, or we’re rebelling against the system? Or rather that we don’t understand, forgot to vote or just plain didn’t realise there was a vote? Whatever the reasons, the solution appears pretty simple. Give students a basic education in politics. Reinvent the PSHCE (Personal, Social, Health and Citizenship Education) and sex education lessons,

and combine them with a new life skills class. This would teach subjects including managing bills, home and day-to-dayemergency handling, how to get a job relevant to your skills and basic political knowledge. It seems a certainty that skills from such a class would be more relevant to everyday life than those acquired from many subjects students are currently compelled to take.If we want change, and we want a better country now and for future generations, then we need to get involved in politics, even if its just voting at each election - and involvement starts with education. The irony is, if every person who thinks their vote ‘won’t change anything’ took part in the next election, the collective voice would have the ability to instigate huge change. Every vote counts, but an informed vote is an even better ideal to work towards - the health of UK democracy depends upon it.

Stand Your Ground

For the Sake of Democracy

In Focus:Nick Clegg

I am proud of the resolve we Liberal Dgfffffemocrats have shown over the last two and a half years. We’ve had

some real disappointments: tough election results, a bruising referendum, my song not making it into the Top Ten. But through it all, we have remained focused, determined, disciplined. It hasn’t always been easy, and, when we’ve made mistakes, we’ve put our hands up. But we’ve stuck to our task – and to the Coalition Agreement – even as others have wavered. The received wisdom, prior to the election, was that we wouldn’t be capable of making the transition from opposition to government. The choices would be too sharp, the decisions too hard.

The Liberal Democrats, it was said, are a party of protest, not power. Well two years on, the critics have been confounded. Our mettle has been tested in the toughest of circumstances, and we haven’t been found wanting. We have taken the difficult decisions to reduce the deficit by a quarter and have laid the foundations for a stronger, more balanced economy capable of delivering real and lasting growth. But conference, our task is far from complete, our party’s journey far from over.

I know that there are some in the party – some in this hall even – who, faced with several more years of spending restraint, would rather turn back than press on. Break our deal with the Conservatives, give up on the Coalition, and present ourselves to the electorate in 2015 as a party unchanged. It’s an alluring prospect in some ways. Gone would be the difficult choices, the hard decisions, the necessary compromises. And gone too would be the vitriol and abuse, from Right and Left, as we work every day to keep this Government anchored in the centre ground.

But conference, I tell you this. The choice between the party we were, and the party we are becoming, is a false one. The past is gone and it isn’t coming back. If voters want a party of opposition – a “stop the world I want to get off” party – they’ve got plenty of options, but we are not one of them. There’s a better, more meaningful future waiting for us. Not as the third party, but as one of three parties of government.

There’s been a lot of discussion on the fringe of this conference about our party’s next steps; about our relationship with the other parties; and about what

Excerpt from Nick Clegg’s speech at the Liberal Democrat party conference, September 2012.

-

-

Photo’s courtesy of the Liberal Democrats.

in 2015 talking to someone who hasn’t de-cided who to vote for. This is what you’ll be able to say: we cut taxes for ordinary families and made sure the wealthiest paid their fair share. We put more money into schools to give every child a chance. We did everything possible to get people into work - millions of new jobs and more apprenticeships than ever before. And we did the right thing by our older people too - the biggest ever cash rise in the state pension. But most importantly, we brought our country back from the brink and put it on the right path.

Then ask them: are you ready to trust Labour with your money again? And do you really think the Tories will make Britain fairer? Because the truth is, only the Liberal Democrats can be trusted on the economy and relied upon to deliver a fairer society too. And to help get that message out there, I can announce today that Paddy Ashdown has agreed to front up our campaign as chair of the 2015 General Election team. He’s pretending he doesn’t like the limelight, he loves it – come on. I must admit, I’m not quite sure I’m ready for all those urgent e-mails and 5am phone calls. But I can’t think of anyone I’d rather have by my side. Paddy, it’s great to have you back.

Fifty, sixty years ago, before I was born, small groups of Liberal activists would meet up to talk politics and plan their campaigns. Stubborn and principled, they ignored the cynics who mocked them. They simply refused to give up on their dreams. They refused to accept that Liberals would never again be in government. And they refused to accept that Liberalism, that most decent, enlightened and British of creeds, which did so much to shape our past, would not shape our future. We think we’ve got it tough now. But it was much, much tougher in their day. It was only their resolve, their resilience and their unwavering determination that kept the flickering flame of Liberalism alive through our party’s darkest days.

At our last conference in Gateshead, I urged you to stop looking in the rear view mirror as we journey from the party of opposition that we were, to the party of government we are becoming. But before we head off on the next stage of our journey, I want you to take one last look in that mirror to see how far we’ve come.

we should do in the event of another hung parliament. It’s the sort of discussion politicians love – full of speculation and rumour. But I have to tell you, it is all based on a false, and deeply illiberal, assumption: that it is we, rather than the people, who get to decide. In a democracy, politicians take their orders from the voters.

So let’s forget all the Westminster gossip and focus on what really matters: not our relationship with the other parties, but our relationship with the British people. Imagine yourself standing on the doorstep

Around the Worldin 5 Minutes

The big trends in international news at present are currently dominated by economics. Brazil, Russia, India

and China are representative of a group of nations which the financial papers worry is a stalling engine of the world economy’s growth. However there is cause for optimism in some areas. Infrastructure development, increasing living standards and political, economic and social stability are works in progress in many nations, slowed by recession but ongoing. The oil industry is booming due to high global prices, an American shift towards increased domestic energy supplies, arctic oil exploration and increases in natural gas extraction suggest resource security and relative stability for at least fifty years while renewables expand, albeit slowly. Personal technology companies are also doing extremely well - smartphone use is booming in the developing and developed world.

Equally there is cause for concern. Political unrest abounds internationally; in Egypt, Pakistan and Libya extremist clerics gained a platform and incited a small minority to angry protest using an offensive video. In Afghanistan and Iraq bombings and shootings are depressingly commonplace, while Israel makes warmonger rumblings at an uncooperative Iran. In China the murder of a British man organised by a high-ranking politician’s wife is unfolding a web of conspiracy, and in Syria the death toll continues to rise. Finally the USA presidential elections are coming up; it is to be hoped jingoism and demagoguery do not rule that roost.

The advice inspired by this whistle-stop look at international events and the trends implied by them is intended to be general in nature and its relevance will depend upon your intentions post-university. Learning a language, willingness to travel and being comfortable with a range of technology are standard advice points which will enhance any graduate’s range of opportunities post-university. Given current world events, the biggest degree-linked industries of the next decade are likely to be energy, personal and medical technology, development logistics, art, education, and dispute resolution.The organisation of global resources and the correct maintenance of societies is at the heart of many modern debates; and it is this generation of students who will shape this century and the next - I suggest that thought gives us something of a responsibility to understand and learn as much as we can about whatever area takes our interest, so we can do the most good.

Tom Brookes

International Summary and Student Opportunity Advice

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! HALLAM DEBATING SOCIETY

Find us on Facebook

WaxingSatirical

New health secretary Jeremy Hunt has caused scandal by announcing he is selling the NHS to News

Corporation.The deal, said to be worth in the region of £2billion has caused great controversy and accusations are flying suggesting this is a ploy for the Murdochs to hack celebrity patient’s ultrasounds. Closer and Reveal pay up to £100,000 for info on a celebrity baby’s gender. A spokesperson for Closer said the magazine’s staff were ‘scandalised that the Murdochs would do anything so underhanded; they’re trying to cut us out of the bullshit and tittle-tattle market’.

However, Hunt, who is also Minister for Appeasing Murdoch (affectionately shortened to ‘MAM’ at cabinet meetings), denied this and said that News Corporation’s running of the NHS would benefit the health service in numerous ways, announcing the launch of a new show: ‘transplant death match’, in which transplant patients will fight to the death over donated organs. Hunt said this was an ‘efficient and fair’ way to divvy up these limited resources, saying also that it introduced an ‘element of real competition’ into treatment.

News Corp described further proposed changes to the Health Service. All hospitals will be closed, to be replaced by one specially built super hospital in Wapping with links to every TV in the land, allowing doctors to perform revolutionary ‘video surgery’ - talking patients through their own procedures using kitchen utensils. Hunt said this would cut waiting times in half, provide considerable cost savings and limiting patient exposure to the MRSA hospital superbug, as ‘they won’t be anywhere near our nice clean

wards, the scruffy infectious scum’.

Critics denounced the sell off as a national tragedy. Labour MP Tom Watson criticised the fact that the deal wasn’t referred to the competition commission, but indicating his approval of the new TV shows. ‘Sounds thumping good stuff’, he was heard to comment on a third show where the audience at home can vote on designer babies’ genetic makeup - provisionally called ‘The XX/XY Factor’. James Thompson

Hunt Sells NHS ..... to Murdoch