Section:GDN 1J PaGe:2 Edition Date:190731 Edition:01 Zone: Sent at 30/7/2019 18:53 cYanmaGentaYellowbla
- The Guardian Wednesday 31 July 2019
2
time in years, it faces a Conservative party
leader with a clear strategy, a united team
and an open chequebook. However much
he clowns about, Johnson is a serious threat. He must
be taken seriously.
The parliamentary arithmetic for Johnson remains
dire, while Brussels shows no sign of deserting Dublin
over the backstop. And wait until the sliding pound
doesn’t just spoil summer spells in Mallorca but pushes
up the cost of the weekly shop at Morrison s.
Noël Coward once remarked on “the potency of
cheap music”, and politics is no diff erent. Labour’s
campaigning strategy since 2017 has been predicated
on the fact that in Theresa May it faced a mortally
wounded and half-hearted foe. Hell, she couldn’t even
turn a commanding poll lead into a Commons majority.
Of course Corbyn could negotiate a better Brexit! May
might name “the burning injustices” but only Labour
would spend the billions to fi x them. You can’t say the
same of Johnson, who gladly gives Brussels the fi nger.
His strategy is essentially the same as May’s one-time
adviser Nick Timothy urged on her: to turn remain v
leave into the sole dividing line of our times and so steal
blue-collar seats off Labour. Only this time, 11 Downing
Street has a chancellor willing to write his cheques.
Johnson has already scored headlines merely for
reheating old promises by George Osborne and May on
the “northern powerhouse” and on towns – just wait
until he really starts to splash the cash. Trussed up in
a hard hat and hi -vi s jacket he will gambol about the
north, and all the while robbing Corbyn of his leave
voters. H ere’s a few million to electrify your train line,
or for your local car plant. This will go on until Britain
leaves the EU or No 10 calls an election, whichever
comes fi rst. So what if the Conservatives lose Richmond
Park, as long as they gain Crewe and Nantwich?H
ow does Labour fi ght this? First, it
needs to come out wholeheartedly
for a second referendum and
remain. There is no future in doing
anything else against a government
that treats no deal as a test of its
virility. I have been among those
urging Labour not to go along with
this hard-right plot to feed the country to the vultures,
and frustrated as it tweaks its position every fortnight:
enough. If need be, appoint a spokesperson who can
argue the case for remain without physically squirming.
Second, it needs to go bigger and bolder on its
spending commitments, making clear the money
will not be disbursed from Westminster solely on big
infrastructure projects but will be entrusted to local
communities to spend. Every time Johnson promises
spending , Labour should retort: which are you going to
believe, his press releases or the devastation you can
see on your high street and local food bank? We’ll fi x
that – in partnership with you. The shadow chancellor,
John McDonnell, has spoken imaginatively about public
works, but he should concentrate on putting more
money into the pockets of those who have none – by
fi xing our broken social security system. That means
scrapping universal credit and rolling back the meanness
of our means-tested benefi ts.
Finally, Labour needs to shrug off its historic
complacency about its heartlands. The decline of the
trade unions has taken with it a whole tradition of
civic labourism that used to turn workers into voters.
In Momentum, Corbyn has a self-described social
movement that ought to be laying on advice about how
to get the benefi ts you’re entitled to and how to tackle
rogue landlords and predatory bosses.
I share the frustration many have with Labour as it
has dragged its feet over anti semitism and Brexit. It
has been appalling. But if Johnson gets his way with
Brussels and at the next election, that will be the end
of any hope of a left wing government for a generation.
Think through the ructions that could follow, and it may
mean Labour reduced from a mass party to the kind
of shrunken husk German voters now see in the Social
Democratic party. The stakes are that big. I return to my
starting thought: the task is to beat Boris Johnson and
the low dishonesty of his hard-right chumminess.After four decades of war, Afghan civilians have
experienced many forms of suff ering, at the hands of
many actors. It is none the less horrifying that the Afghan
government and its international allies killed more
civilians than the Taliban and other insurgents, including
the local Islamic State affi liate, in the fi rst half of this year.
The number of overall civilian casualties was 27% lower
than in the same period last year, but 2018 saw record
highs; these rates are shocking and unacceptable, the UN
said. Over a third of the 3,812 casualties were children.
It is not a contradiction or even a coincidence that
so many have been killed and injured as talks with the
Taliban gather pace. The US is explicit in its commitment
to military pressure as a means of creating leverage;
the militant group understands the same logic, and
seeks to prove it is not cowed. It is nonsensical to think
that you can create a lasting peace by ending so many
civilian lives, and saying that the Taliban uses civilians
as shields is not a free pass under international law. It
is clear that the pro-government forces lack both the
will and procedures to protect the Afghans they are
supposed to be defending. Without proper recording,
investigations of and accountability for injuries and
deaths, these casualties will continue.
Though the US offi cially ended its combat mission
in 2014, after 13 years of war, more than 20,000 US
and other N ato troops are present to train, assist and
advise Afghan forces and carry out counterterrorism
operations. The US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo,
says Donald Trump wants a deal before the AfghanThe morning after the fi nale of the latest series of Love
Island must have brought a powerful sense of anticlimax
to all those involved in making it – even if such feelings
were mingled with relief. For the past eight weeks the
participants and producers have occupied a cultural
hotspot, their show the talk of water coolers and social
media feeds across the land. Last year’s concluding
episode won the highest-ever audience for ITV2 and
this year’s shock win by Greg O’Shea and Amber Gill
proved that the format retains the power to surprise.
But if a comedown is inevitable following weeks
of dramatic competition, the journey back to earth
was speeded up by Ofcom’s announcement that it
plans to add two new rules to the broadcasting code.
The regulator’s aim is to ensure that reality show
contestants are off ered stronger protection from the
emotional turbulence that can follow from their sudden
celebrity – or indeed notoriety. If agreed, the new
requirements to protect the dignity of members of the
public, and avoid causing them “unjustifi ed distress
or anxiety”, will also make the job of making such
entertainment programmes much more onerous.
This is as it should be, as the viewing public and
ITV surely know following the Jeremy Kyle Show’s
cancellation after a participant, Steve Dymond , took
his own life earlier this year. Even for celebrities, roles
in reality TV shows such as Strictly Come Dancing can
have life-changing eff ects. For very young adults who
have little or no experience of television and who may,
by virtue of having applied to a show such as Lovepresidential election in late September – another
likely trigger for violence (on Sunday, 20 people were
killed in a suicide bombing and gun battle at the vice
presidential candidate Amrullah Saleh’s offi ce) – and
troops reduced before the 2020 US election.
The Taliban refuses to negotiate with the Afghan
government because it does not recognise it as
legitimate. But earlier this month its representatives
met government offi cials at peace talks in Doha,
with all theoretically participating in their personal
capacities. A deal might cover a timeline for the
withdrawal of US troops and Taliban guarantees
not to harbour foreign militants. But it would be
unsustainable without real commitments on other
elements: a Taliban agreement to talk to Kabul
and other political factions and an agreement to
de-escalation, or even a full ceasefi re. It is also
unclear how promises can be upheld and enforced
as US troops are withdrawn.
The hunger for peace in Afghanistan is real and
deep. Yet so is the fear that human rights, of women
in particular, will be sold out in the haste to cobble
together a fi x. Though the Taliban has now sat down
with female representatives , and is more willing to
discuss women’s rights, few believe that its position
has fundamentally changed. Women will look at what
they actually do – and in the sizable areas it controls,
the picture is alarming. Limited but still essential
progress could be undermined.
Afghan leaders and the warlords with whom they
have forged alliances have their own dubious records
and are more interested in defending their own
powers than the advances their country has made,
often despite rather than because of them. But as the
UN deputy chief, Amina Mohammed, observed last
week, echoing many Afghan activists, inclusivity
isn’t only the right thing to do for women and girls;
it is the only way to bring about durable peace and
development. A rushed deal which rapidly falls apart
could cause more damage than no deal at all.Island, reasonably be assumed to harbour longings
for fame (and aff ection, the pursuit of which is
purportedly the point of Love Island), the experience
can be overwhelming. Two former Love Island
contestants, Mike Thalassitis and Sophie Gradon ,
have killed themselves. While their TV experiences
were not comparable to Mr Dymond’s humiliation,
it is right that these events have led to a rethink of
broadcasters’ obligations. While we can never know
to what extent their participation contributed to their
unhappiness, new rules should support contestants,
while ensuring that the makers of current aff airs,
news, and other factual programmes are free to get
on with their jobs. They are not responsible for the
current crisis of confi dence and Ofcom must protect
them from any adverse, inhibiting eff ects.
Broadcasters are not the only media companies
who need to get their houses in order, and will be
understandably frustrated if an uneven playing
fi eld is not soon levelled off. Ofcom’s remit should
be broadened to take in Netfl ix and equivalent
producers, while a separate watchdog to deal with
YouTube and other user-generated streaming and
social media services cannot come soon enough.
Politicians as well as regulators should recognise that
the reason the risk associated with reality television
has grown is less to do with the format’s development,
from Big Brother onwards, and more to do with the
rise of social messaging, video streaming and so on.
Where once a contestant might have enjoyed, or rued,
their several weeks’ worth of fame, but then moved on
with their life, it has become far harder to escape from
the impression they have made.
Reality TV is often derided as cruel and
exhibitionist, but viewers and contestants are often
kinder than such caricatures give them credit for.
We all make mistakes and when young people’s real
lives, bodies and feelings are turned into popular
entertainment, they deserve support from those
who profi t from them. Continued from frontLove Island’s stars need
looking after but new rules
must be well designed
Television
Afghanistan
A peace deal must not
sell out civilians who have
paid so dearly for this war
Founded 1821 Independently owned by the Scott Trust No 53, 787
‘Comment is free... but facts are sacred’ CP Scott
Labour risks wipeout if it fails
to see the Johnson threat
Aditya Chakrabortty
РЕЛИЗ ПОДГОТОВИЛА ГРУППА "What's News" VK.COM/WSNWS
ЛИ
ЗПОДГО
ТОВИЛААГГDemocratic party. The stakes are that big. I return to my ГDemocratic party. The stakes are that big. I return to my Democratic party. The stakes are that big. I return to my Democratic party. The stakes are that big. I return to my РР
Democratic party. The stakes are that big. I return to my Democratic party. The stakes are that big. I return to my УУПof shrunken husk German voters now see in the Social
Пof shrunken husk German voters now see in the Social
Democratic party. The stakes are that big. I return to my Democratic party. The stakes are that big. I return to my Пof shrunken husk German voters now see in the Social of shrunken husk German voters now see in the Social of shrunken husk German voters now see in the Social of shrunken husk German voters now see in the Social ППАА"What'sNews" News"starting thought: the task is to beat Boris Johnson and
News"starting thought: the task is to beat Boris Johnson and
the low dishonesty of his hard-right chumminess.
News"
the low dishonesty of his hard-right chumminess.VK.COM/WSNWSVK.COM/WSNWSthe low dishonesty of his hard-right chumminess.VK.COM/WSNWSthe low dishonesty of his hard-right chumminess.