OI! PEDRO! DO YOU DO CHIPS?!

I was supposed to be writing this while I was watching the programme on ITV1 entitled 'Spain: Paradise Lost', but obviously its a couple of hours later now so its not quite as fresh in my mind, but here we go anyway.

I only happened to catch this show by accident as my mom was watching it, but within the first few minutes it got me annoyed; well, enough to blog about it, which I suppose is quite annoyed! It got me thinking about one of those great ironies; that of the Express/Mail/Sun reading type who moans about how Britain is 'going to the dogs' because of the strain immigrants supposedly place on services, and who solves this issue by.... yes, thats right, becoming one of them by moving to Spain! No doubt they lounge by their pool or sit in the 'Irish' Bar lamenting the fact that local councils in the UK offer leaflets in different languages, for example.

I can't blame some of these people for moving to Spain in some ways. I mean, nice weather, relaxing lifestyle no doubt - wouldn't mind it myself one day. But alarm bells rang for me when the programme introduced a small town near Alicante where Brits outnumber the locals by four to one, giving the place the nickname 'Little Britian'. To be honest, I think its a bit sad going to live abroad only to live in a community surrounded entirely by your own countrymen, eating the exact same stuff you did back home, but I can sort of understand why the British expats do this, and they're hardly the only ones to do this; it happens pretty much everywhere with immigrant communities. What really riled me though was when the Brits were asked how much Spanish they knew; 'grande cerveza' was the sum of one gentleman's knowledge of the Spanish language, and 'vino blanco' the sum of another, female, expat's knowledge. What annoyed me as well was the indication that these people had no intention of trying to learn Spanish, as they didn't feel the need to. Additionally, a bloke who had opened a bar/cafe with his wife admitted that he'd be stuck if he had to serve a local, as he knew no Spanish. Part of me wonders if these people deliberately set out to further the stereotype of the ignorant tourist, but the realist in me concedes that its sheer laziness above all.

Now, it seems to me that if you intend to live and/or work in another country, it is your duty to attempt to learn the language of said country. Heaven knows, enough people expect it of people who come to live and work in Britain (and rightly so). I wouldn't at all suggest that these British expats have to be fluent in Spanish before they move there, but surely a basic command of the language, and an intention to become more proficient in the language, would be common courtesy. In my experience, at least attempting to communicate in the local language goes a long way towards winning over the locals and making the stay more enjoyable. For that reason, if I moved abroad I would make every effort to become fluent in the language and assimilate into the community. As it is, I felt it difficult to have any sympathy with the expats who were struggling, when they set up their 'traditional British' bars and clearly had no intention of attracting any custom outside of the bloody expat community!

Iranian elections 09

This is something I've been planning on writing about since I turned on the news last Sunday (14th June) to find that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had been re-elected as President of Iran with over 60% of the vote. My genuine reaction, as my girlfriend will testify, was to remark that if he was going to rig the election, he could at least rig it so the result was at least plausible. I for one am not of the 'Ahmadinejad couldn't possibly have won' argument; I think its perfectly possible that he did indeed poll the most votes, but I remain sceptical that he won by such a huge vote, and I think this scepticism is justified for a number of reasons.

The reports of districts where the number of votes cast was higher than the number of registered voters is one such reason, as are the reports of the other candidates being heavily defeated electorally in their own hometowns. To be sure, it will be interesting to see what the outcome of any investigations into electoral fraud will be.

Nonetheless, what makes me sceptical above all is the widespread suppression of dissent in the aftermath of the elections. I've kept a close eye on the developments in Iran and I've been surprised at the extent to which the authorities have suppressed communications, whether this be mobile phones, broadcasting, or elements of the internet. Iran's leadership may talk about the strength of its democracy, but to me the true mark of a democratic, free country is an abilty to tolerate dissent and allow a reasonable degree of freedom of speech. It strikes me that if the Iranian leadership were confident that Ahmadinejad had won fairly, they would be able to deal with any questioning of the result in a fair manner, rather than resort to violence and threats against supporters of the opposition.

Doing a degree in Politics has made me somewhat wary of always holding up other societies to Western democratic ideals. I don't agree with the presence of religious figures in politics who are there by virtue of their position and not any expertise they may or many not have. Therefore, I'm suspicious of democracies with a strong theocratic element such as Iran's, with a clerical Supreme Leader, but I would add that I respect the right of any nation to work by such a system. Nonetheless, to me freedom of speech and the ability to express dissent against the government is the hallmark of a true democracy, and it disturbs me that such dissent is being reacted to with such a strong hand in Iran.

It will be interesting to see how things develop in Iran. It seems to me that the supporters of the opposition will not stop in their quest to get the result anulled, or the election re-run. As information continues to flow out of the country from a variety of sources, through various types of media that the authorities appear to be struggling to control, one gets the feeling that this issue is far from over.

Follow the leader?

First of all, may I say thank you to my friend Ewarwoowar, blog entitled 'The Rise and Rise of Tim Lovejoy', for a bit of free publicity recently. I was pleasently surprised to see I have four followers now as a result! To those of you reading, I hope my posts continue to be of interest.

Right, so the dust has settled following last Thursday's local council elections and European Parliament elections, and as expected Labour has taken something of a hammering in the polls. I have to admit, before the election I was unaware of just how many councils the Conservatives controlled, and following Thursday's elections Labour lost control of all the councils that were up for election. Unsurprisingly, speculation has been rife over the weekend of a leadership challenge to Gordon Brown, with ministers having resigned left, right and centre prior to Thursday. When I was packing away my possessions at university on Friday, I stopped for a bit to watch Gordon Brown's news conference, having a funny feeling that something big may have been announced. However, Brown made it clear that he was staying on as Prime Minister to meet the challenges that the government faces. This got me thinking a bit more about his position, and that of the Labour Party, and it made me realise how they truly are - to use a popular phrase - caught between a rock and a hard place.

I see there being two options for Gordon Brown and Labour at this moment in time.
1) Stand by their man and stay united behind Gordon Brown
Labour can do what they're doing (just about!) and stick with Gordon Brown. Yes, there have been questions about his leadership but no-one appears to be standing out within the Cabinet who will step up and be the one to 'wield the knife'. If they go on like this, chances are they will weather the storm and limp through to the next general election, whenever in the next twelve months that may be. The advantage of this option is that they appear united (well, as united as they can) and can credibly argue that they are facing adversity and getting on with the job of running the country, mitigating the effects of the recession and reforming the expenses system while David Cameron bleats on about calling an election at Prime Minister's Questions. The disadvantage is that they are portrayed as being out of touch with the mood of the electorate (which delivered a damning verdict last week), Brown's authority is shown as weakening ever further as discontent in the ranks rumbles on below, and public opinion hardens even further against the Labour government. Thus, the result is electoral defeat for Labour and for Gordon Brown.


2) Launch a leadership challenge and force Brown out
This option may seem attractive for some within the Labour Party right now. Either gather the necessary support (and a candidate) to trigger a leadership challenge, or get close enough that Gordon Brown is persuaded by senior figures in the party to jump rather than be pushed. Once Brown is gone, elect a fresh face who can renew the Party and present themselves to the electorate as someone who can bring about change; would this be David Milliband, 'the Johnson', or another? Who knows.
The advantage here is that Labour can claim it is breaking with the past, and an unpopular leader. Also, the party can unite fully behind its new leader meaning that the government can get on with the job without the distractions provided by discontent and continuous leadership speculation.
On the other side, the disadvantage is that the pressure would be extremely high on the government to call an immediate general election. To change leader twice in one term of Parliament without consulting the public would be pretty much unthinkable. Therefore, a general election would be likely. Portrayed as in disarray and lacking in unity and direction, Labour would almost certainly be defeated at the polls through this route.


In my view, the Labour Party are damned if they do, and damned if they don't. Stick with Brown and they will - barring a Tory implosion - face defeat at the next election. Get rid of him now, and they go into an election in disarray and only bring forward the demise of the Labour government. For what its worth, difficult as it will be for him, I think that Gordon Brown is making the right decision in staying on as PM. If a general election is triggered any time soon, any action on the economy or on reforming MPs expenses will take a backseat to campaigning and this, in my view, is not what we need as a country in a time of economic crisis.
However, it is certainly a tricky situation and one thing is for sure; it will be interesting to see how things develop over the coming weeks. I'll certainly be interested to hear your opinions on the prospects for Gordon Brown and Labour in the near future.