Quote:The Labour Party has to pull its head out of the sand and get back in touch with working people. I will not settle for being the third-largest party in Kalistan, we have to win. All of the people who support us and who vote for us, desperately want a Labour government and it's our responsibility to provide them with that. I am simply not content to be the leader of a protest movement. We have to win elections.

With that said, we have to find out what the people of Kalistan want and provide them with it. That means that we have to adapt our values to a new era. I don't think it's a betrayal of the working class to say that we want to do whatever we can to support the growth of small businesses. I don't think it's a wrong to admit that we want to be tough on crime. I don't think it's a crime to say that Kalistan has its flaws. We can't close our eyes and put our fingers in our ears forever. For all their admirable qualities, the Socialist Party have been rejected in recent elections and the political theatre they employ by changing their name makes a mockery of our politics. The Kalistani people want change. We have to say to them 'we are the party of change'. That doesn't mean abandoning socialism, it means developing a pragmatic socialism.

The first step in changing Kalistan was to put the Labour Party on the best foundation for achieving success in the next election. We can't win if we aren't united, decisive and modern. Clinging to outdated principles and values at the expense of winning seats in government is the true betrayal of the Kalistani people. The Labour Party has to win elections otherwise we will achieve nothing. I didn't come into politics to change the Labour Party. I came into politics to change the country.

Quote:(Izquierda Reporter) D(iane) T(hompson):  Speaker Al-Khali, many in Kalistan are confused about the snap rebranding of the Socialist Party as the Kalistani Party of the Right.  Would you care to shed some light on the matter for our readers?

O(mar) A(l-Khali):  Sure.  It has to do with this fiction that the Conservatives keep trying to run to suggest that the people of Kalistan are supporters of conservatism.  They argue that they are being rewarded for their conservatism by the people in Kalistan.  Our counter argument was that, no, they are being rewarded because the voters can't tell them apart from the socialists.  We know that the bills they put up are so offensive that they could never get passed, and yet, when it comes to elections, they have defended the status quo so often that there is no daylight between the Parties on the Left and the so-called "Conservatives".  So we are debunking this myth that Parties who CALL themselves conservative, or in our case, rightist, are rewarded for their name.  In fact, it is the long standing support for socialism which is what we, and the CIP are being rewarded for.  You can't claim some constituency just because you call yourself conservative.  So we'll see.  If we call ourselves conservative, but continue to vote the way we always have, we should, by their thesis be able to dramatically take power.  And if we do not change in seatcount overall, their thesis is not supported.

DT:  That seems like a fairly radical thing to do just to prove a point.

OA:  Well, we have been enduring the distortions by the Conservative Party for decades.  And it is time that they just cut it out...  Kalistan is a socialist country.  The laws of the nation are in fact slightly MORE socialist now than when the Conservative Party began their quest to trick everyone into thinking that they are a genuine alternative to decent politics, and despite their holding various percentages of the Assembly on their back bench, nobody is rewarded for taking a conservative stance in Kalistan.  So we'll see.

DT: Moving on.  It would appear that the Labour Party has adopted a new Constitution which some are saying could potentially do damage to the relationship between the Socialist Party and the Labour Party.

OA:  I had read that, but that might be the take of the newspaper more than anything that actually happened.  It appears that there was a democratic coup within the leadership of the Labour Party.  Their regime has been altered pretty significantly.  I don't see it as a real problem:  Our leadership has always been selected by a convention, rather than asking the members their opinion.  Our shadow officers have always been selected by the central committee of the Party.  As speaker, I need to know that at need, the Minister of Agriculture, or whatever will support me.  Why would I leave that open to a vote?  I don't see the Labour Party's move as troubling.

DT:  And what do you make of Labour's comments that it is time Kalistan move beyond outdated institutions?  We presume the spokesperson means dogmatic support for the National industries and the Prerogative.

OA:  I hadn't read that.

DT:  It was in last week's edition of the People's Press.

OA:  Look-  I know the Party Presses like to gin up conflict.  Everyone knows Izquierda likes to run yellow every once in a while too.  If I took my cues from the Party Presses, we'd be at each other's throats.  Look.  I'll say this.  Our relationship is strong.  We are working together on the Terrorism bill the Premier has put forward.  We may disagree on the Prerogative, but we still get along fine.  I just had the old Speaker at my house the other week for dinner.  I can't imagine something that would cause tension between our Parties.  I do wish, sometimes that Labour would work just a little harder to turn out voters for the SP's candidates.  This last election, Jonesy lost by less than a point and a half:  the difference could have been made up by Labour voters who stayed home in Ananto.  But that's neither here nor there, I suppose.  We still have plenty of ground to cooperate on.  And I think we'll still work together in the near future, though if they go full on against the National Institutions and against the Prerogative, we could revisit this...

DT:  Thank you, Comrade Speaker, for your time.

OA:  My pleasure.

Quote:(Rohit Bhattacharya's) Q(uestion): Firstly, thank you for finding the time out of your schedule to talk to us today, I appreciate that you must have a lot happening between Party Congress and National Assembly matters. Now let's not beat around the bush here, is the Labour Party disavowing the SP, or the Kalistani Party of the Right as they are now?

A(na Berg): Absolutely not, we maintain an affinity with the Socialist Party which is unlike any relationship with other parties in Kalistan. However, that doesn't mean we unequivocally support their every action, otherwise, we would simply all be members of the SP! So, whilst we will continue to work together to ensure Kalistan stays a Socialist nation we will also make sure they are held to account where necessary. You correctly refer to one such incident in your question: this business with the changing of the party's name. In my opinion, it is pure nonsense and I've told my good friend Mr Al-Khali as much. I'll be glad to see the return of the Socialist Party of Kalistan in 4101.

Q: Do you intend to support the Socialist candidate in the next elections?

A: It's much too early to discuss such matters as you well know.

Q: I think that sounds like a no, Mrs Berg.

A: It most certainly is not, we cannot even be sure if the SP will run a candidate in the next elections yet. Until we can evaluate who is running, I will make no further comment.

Q: In that case, can you give us some insight into the legislation your government has introduced- starting with the National Agriculture Agency Reform Act?

A: The Reform Act is intended to bring the policy of our nation into line with the consensus of opinion of the population. We know that most people no longer believe that the agricultural industry should be completely state-owned and we therefore argue that it should not be. It's no bad thing for state industries to have competition from the private sector, so long as that encourages them to progress, grow and innovate. This is the kind of bill I mean when I talk about a pragmatic socialism.

Q: What about The Education, Education, Education Act then?

A: Quite simply, Kalistan needs better education and the Act in question provides that. Successive governments, including Labour ones, have failed to improve our education system and that's why we are dealing with it now. A brilliant education is a need, not a want.

Q: Some in your own party have criticised your changes to the Labour Party's structure, do you face a fight to keep members on-side?

A: I don't think that's a fair assessment, over three-quarters of party members voted in favour of the new constitution which provides all members with local representatives who have a tangible impact on the direction of our party. If we are ever going to see a Labour majority, which I think we will, we need to adapt our platform. I've spoken extensively about what needs to change and I will continue to do that but we need everyone in the party to get behind our initiatives.

Q: Finally then, party membership has been in a state of decline for around the past eight years, how will you changes that?

A: I'll show the Kalistani people what a Labour government can do and how we can change Kalistan for the better. We are the party of change.

Q: Thank you for meeting with me and good evening.

A: It has been a great experience!

Quote:We are extremely saddened to hear of the death of a hard-working and committed member of the militia who was giving their life to defend others. We absolutely and utterly condemn the action of the Revolutionary Socialist Militia of Kalistan in this chain of events and we will be informing superiors of the incident so that those responsible can be held to account. This matter could have serious consequences for the party's future.

Quote:In Kalistan, it is now clear that there is only one party who will stand up for working people. If you want the best education for your children, where pupils succeed based on their ability not on their family background; if you want a healthcare system that is there for you whenever you need it; if you want a government that ensures its citizens are kept safe from the threat of terrorism; if you want a society which works for all, if you want all these things then you have to vote Labour!

Don't just listen to me say the words, look at my record! Labour passed the Combatting Terrorism Act, which has put the New Army of Kalistan on the brink of complete annihilation. We are about to see the Education, Education, Education Act passed with support even from the CIP. How can you argue with our track record? We have consistently shown that we will do everything in our power to stand up for the average citizen in Kalistan. Meanwhile, the Libertarian Democrats and Conservative Independence Party refuse to act. They pretend that everything is going swimmingly for the people of Kalistan. That's just not true. The people want change and they want the party of change: that is the Labour Party!

Quote:J(anice) S(carlotti):  How does it feel to be in the Opposition, for the first time in, goodness...  for decades?

O(mar) A(l-Khali):  Eh-  well, you know, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose.  This is the nature of democracy.  We do well in elections, but there are 3 Parties now, and they are all competing for the exact same block of voters, so, I mean, what are we to do?

JS:  Three Parties?  You mean Four, correct?

OA:  No.  The Libertarians just went defunct earlier this month.  But, I've called for a snap election, so our time in the wilderness may be a little shorter than anticipated.  But you know...  what ever happens, we are rather content.  Jones-Terrance is in Ananto.  We'll see what this leads to.

JS:  So what is on the Agenda for the SP this coming term.  I assume the SP will be contesting in the Snap Election for President of the Republic.

OA:  Bet on it.  Jonesey did well in the last election-  one of the top two contenders is out of it, so I suppose we will finish in the top two.  Labour could back Jones if they like, but if we have to do it ourselves again, we will.

JS:  And what if Governor Jones is elected?

OA:  Well, we have something that needs attention, eventually.  Kalistan is in the running for Security Council, so this may be an opportunity for Kalistan to make a splash among the world community.  We also are paying attention to the spread of Brethrenism to a country called Telamon.  They are a small nation in Makon, known I suppose for skiing, and they used to supply naval weaponry to the world.  Some Brethrenists have gained control over the government up there and are attempting to turn it into a theocracy.  But some of the ways they are interpreting the faith when in power are at odds with the testimony of the All-Terra Conference.  That might cause some problems-  Theocracies are, of course not something the SP would ever support, so as it is, we can't endorse those developments...

JS:  Do you think there will be any reconciliation with Labour?

OA:  I don't know.  If Labour takes a march to the right and takes up a spot in the center, of course, that's their choice.  We are going to continue to promote Socialism in Kalistan.  We've made the point that socialist policies are preferred by the people of Kalistan.  We aren't going to move off our spot on the spectrum.  If they want to work together, we are always game.

JS:  You've been leader of the SP for a while now.  Do you have any plans to retire?

OA:  Well, I was pretty young when I started, and I'm a bit older now, but no.  Retirement is not in the cards just yet.  Jonesy may be getting ready to kick off, but I'm in for another couple decades at least.

JS:  Thank you for the comment, Comrade Speaker.

OA:  Thank you for the Interview, Comrade Reporter.

Quote:Q(uestion from Interviewer): Mr Curti, thanks for letting us talk with you today, I'll try to keep it as succinct as possible because I understand you are about to give a speech. Do you think the Labour Party has betrayed your father's legacy?

(Tony) C(urti): Of course not, what a preposterous notion. When my father led the party, Kalistan was a different place, with very different needs. Just as he changed the way the party operated during his tenure, in order to adapt to Kalistan's requirements, so Ana alters it today. If I did not believe she knew what she was doing, or if I felt she was acting in a manner contrary to the values of the Labour Party then I wouldn't serve in her government! Ana has moved the Labour Party into the new century, a century when it seems we are the only reasonable party left in this country.

Q: Your last comment seems to be a swipe at not only the Conservatives but the Socialists too, can the relationship between your parties ever be salvaged?

C: With respect, that is a simplistic interpretation of what I actually said. All I am suggesting is that the two larger parties represent a kind of dogmatic, almost revolutionary, outlook. They see each other as absolutely and completely intolerable. We, on the other hand, believe in pragmatism. This means that we have to work with both sides of the aisle for the benefit of the whole population, not just our own members. I'll give you an example: recall- if you will- the debate on 'The Youth Assembly'. The moment the slightest disagreement occurred, the discourse fell apart completely. It isn't good enough really.

Q: My colleague interviewd Mr Al-Khali, the Socialist speaker, just prior to the last elections and he was quoted saying 'If [Labour] want to work together, we are always game'. You didn't support Mr Jones-Terrance for President, will you be taking up this offer any time soon?

C: I don't think I can necessarily answer that question on my own, I'm only the Foreign Affairs Spokesperson after all. What I will tell you, however, is that we made the decision not to back Michal because we simply didn't think he could win. Unfortunate as it is, until the Socialists nominate a candidate who the Labour Party and our members can become enthused about, we'll be unable to endorse them. You would have to ask Ana for a real answer.

Q: Do you intend to replace her as General Secretary of the Labour Party?

C: Crikey almighty, I don't think so! She's doing an exceptional job and I've no reason to doubt she will continue to do so.

Q: Are you sure about that, Mr Curti? The 'word on the street' if you like, is that you harbour ambitions to take her position?

C: I'm certain. No such ambitions exist, I can assure you of that. We've just seen the Party Congress, of which I am a member, almost unanimously support her. This sounds like a bit of media naughtiness.

Q: What will the party's agenda in the coming term, then?

C: We'll be looking to collaborate with the Socialist Party to repeal some of the repressive legislation that the CIP and LDoK were able to pass at the peak of their dominance. If I remain Foreign Affairs Minister, then I'll be coordinating the nation's efforts to win a seat on the Security Council. Otherwise, we'll wait and see what the government becomes. I'll have to wrap things up now, I'm due to speak in ten.

Q: OK, no problem. Thanks for answering our questions Mr Curti.

C: It's my pleasure, I'm glad you gave me the opportunity to talk with you.