Yet another example of Labour cronyism today as the Government announced the appointment of Ian Russell as chairman of Remploy.
Russell was appointed by Gordon Brown to head up the Russell Commission on Youth Volunteering in May 2004. He was then appointed by Brown to fundraise for Brown's school cadet projects last February. Russell was the one who picked Mr Rod Aldridge (secret £1 million loaner to Labour) to head up Gordon Brown's new charity on Youth Volunteering. He was rewarded with an honour earlier this month in the ‘non-political’ New Years Honours List. Although he is not a public donor, while he was Chief Executive of Scottish Power (April 2001 to February 2006), Scottish Power gave away nearly £40,000 to the Labour Party.
With the Labour Party your reward rarely comes in heaven, it comes in being appointed to countless quangos and given honours. Nice work if you can get it...
Friday, January 12, 2007
Support for Scottish & English Independence On the Rise
I'm told there is a poll in today's Daily Mail that shows 51% of Scots support Scottish Independence but also 48% of the English support Independence for England.
The ICM survey of attitudes on the Union and nationality was commissioned by the Daily Mail in advance of next week's 300th anniversary of the ratification of the treaty which bound Scotland and England together. It shows that nearly half of those polled think the arrangement is unlikely to survive more than 25 years. Two out of three English voters want an end to the subsidies paid to Scotland, and a majority want to end the anomaly that gives Scots MPs at Westminster a say over legislation which affects only England. Just 31 per cent of people in England say they are British first, and only 15 per cent in Scotland. And despite a decade of constitutional tinkering by Labour, the survey fails to record a significant level of enthusiasm for devolution in Scotland. Fewer than 40 per cent of Scots say it has been a good thing, while the level of approval in England is even lower.
With recent polls showing the Scottish National Party building a lead against Labour in the race for power at Holyrood, the Mail's survey confirms that pressure for Scottish independence is building inexorably. It shows that more than half of Scots - 51 per cent - want Scotland to break away. So do 48 per cent of English respondents, again a clear majority of those who expressed an opinion one way or the other. There is even stronger support for an English parliament, with 51 per cent backing the move in England and 58 per cent in Scotland. And there was solid backing for England to have its own Prime Minister or First Minister - 54 per cent in England and 62 per cent in Scotland. Among the English, 53 per cent want Scots MPs at Westminster to be barred from voting on issues that affect England only, such as health and education. A majority of Scots who expressed a view also want to see Scots MPs' voting rights restricted. Nearly two out of three voters want Mr Brown to call an election within a year of taking over.
The full story is HERE.
The ICM survey of attitudes on the Union and nationality was commissioned by the Daily Mail in advance of next week's 300th anniversary of the ratification of the treaty which bound Scotland and England together. It shows that nearly half of those polled think the arrangement is unlikely to survive more than 25 years. Two out of three English voters want an end to the subsidies paid to Scotland, and a majority want to end the anomaly that gives Scots MPs at Westminster a say over legislation which affects only England. Just 31 per cent of people in England say they are British first, and only 15 per cent in Scotland. And despite a decade of constitutional tinkering by Labour, the survey fails to record a significant level of enthusiasm for devolution in Scotland. Fewer than 40 per cent of Scots say it has been a good thing, while the level of approval in England is even lower.
With recent polls showing the Scottish National Party building a lead against Labour in the race for power at Holyrood, the Mail's survey confirms that pressure for Scottish independence is building inexorably. It shows that more than half of Scots - 51 per cent - want Scotland to break away. So do 48 per cent of English respondents, again a clear majority of those who expressed an opinion one way or the other. There is even stronger support for an English parliament, with 51 per cent backing the move in England and 58 per cent in Scotland. And there was solid backing for England to have its own Prime Minister or First Minister - 54 per cent in England and 62 per cent in Scotland. Among the English, 53 per cent want Scots MPs at Westminster to be barred from voting on issues that affect England only, such as health and education. A majority of Scots who expressed a view also want to see Scots MPs' voting rights restricted. Nearly two out of three voters want Mr Brown to call an election within a year of taking over.
The full story is HERE.
Labour MP Attacks Tony McNulty
This is from Labour MP Tom Watson's blog...
John Reid is getting to grips with the Home Office. Some people do not like his abrasive manner but I suspect, in fact I’m certain, that ‘abrasive’ is the only way that the Home Office can be made to move in the direction of travel parliament expects. If I was John this morning I would be spitting nails. The latest revelation about police records and criminals with convictions from abroad would send me into a fury. Firstly, given what has gone on in recent months I would have expected officials to be pro-active on the matter. Forget dancing around hand bags about whether resources should be found to update the database or not. They (the officials of the Home Office) should have just got on with it. The job should just have happened without the need for grand gestures or detailed political direction. I have to say though, if ACPO had written to me about the matter (whatever the text of the letter) suggesting that I inform the Home Secretary, I wouldn’t have passed it down the food chain like Tony McNulty did. At the very least I would have sought advice from a more senior or experienced minister. Ankle passes don’t help anyone. One thing we all have to understand is that in politics, you can delegate power but not resonsibility. I wouldn’t want to be Tony McNulty this stormy Thursday.
And I wouldn't want to be Tom Watson when Tony McNulty passes him in a dark corridor. McNulty'll chin him. I think an interview without coffee with the Labour Chief Whip might be in order.
John Reid is getting to grips with the Home Office. Some people do not like his abrasive manner but I suspect, in fact I’m certain, that ‘abrasive’ is the only way that the Home Office can be made to move in the direction of travel parliament expects. If I was John this morning I would be spitting nails. The latest revelation about police records and criminals with convictions from abroad would send me into a fury. Firstly, given what has gone on in recent months I would have expected officials to be pro-active on the matter. Forget dancing around hand bags about whether resources should be found to update the database or not. They (the officials of the Home Office) should have just got on with it. The job should just have happened without the need for grand gestures or detailed political direction. I have to say though, if ACPO had written to me about the matter (whatever the text of the letter) suggesting that I inform the Home Secretary, I wouldn’t have passed it down the food chain like Tony McNulty did. At the very least I would have sought advice from a more senior or experienced minister. Ankle passes don’t help anyone. One thing we all have to understand is that in politics, you can delegate power but not resonsibility. I wouldn’t want to be Tony McNulty this stormy Thursday.
And I wouldn't want to be Tom Watson when Tony McNulty passes him in a dark corridor. McNulty'll chin him. I think an interview without coffee with the Labour Chief Whip might be in order.
Site Launched to Monitor Tory Euro Selections
Click HERE. From the blurb...
MEPWatch is a party political campaign aimed at bringing further accountability and higher levels of democratic practice to the Conservative party's European Parliamentary candidate selection process.At the forthcoming hustings when the party membership select candidates to stand for election we hope to provide them with the best possible information to make their final decision. Over the coming weeks and months we will be providing highly detailed research on the performance and suitability of any potential future candidates.
Excellent. All power to their elbows. Hopefully we will get candidates who are actually Conservatives and agree with Conservative policies. I look forward to their monitoring of Christopher Beazley and the other Europhiles who have gone native.
MEPWatch is a party political campaign aimed at bringing further accountability and higher levels of democratic practice to the Conservative party's European Parliamentary candidate selection process.At the forthcoming hustings when the party membership select candidates to stand for election we hope to provide them with the best possible information to make their final decision. Over the coming weeks and months we will be providing highly detailed research on the performance and suitability of any potential future candidates.
Excellent. All power to their elbows. Hopefully we will get candidates who are actually Conservatives and agree with Conservative policies. I look forward to their monitoring of Christopher Beazley and the other Europhiles who have gone native.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
EXCLUSIVE: Prescott, Blair, Anschutz & the David Beckham LA Transfer
There is something a bit strange about the David Beckham move to LA Galaxy Soccer Club and the links that are made between this Prescott, Blair, Anschutz and the Dome etc.
After John Prescott met Anschutz at the ranch in Colorado he flew to Los Angeles with Tim Liewecke, President and CEO of Anshutz Entertainment Group (AEG), to sit in Anschutz's box to watch LA Galaxy play the San Jose Earthquakes on 23rd July 2006 at the Home Depot Center. AEG owns the Home Depot Centre and The Dome in London. Beckham has football acadamies at both the Home Depot Centre and at the Dome, sponsored and supported by Anschutz. In March 2006 Chelsea FC announced a long term committment with AEG. Chelsea FC visited Los Angeles at the end of July 2006 and were staying at The Beverly Hills Hotel on Sunset Boulevard (aka The Pink Palace) when Tony Blair arrived at same hotel after his trip to San Francisco.
So did Blair lay the foundation of the Becks deal with Anschutz ? Would he get an agent's commission on the $250,000,000 deal? Is that why the deal is so big? Just joking...
After John Prescott met Anschutz at the ranch in Colorado he flew to Los Angeles with Tim Liewecke, President and CEO of Anshutz Entertainment Group (AEG), to sit in Anschutz's box to watch LA Galaxy play the San Jose Earthquakes on 23rd July 2006 at the Home Depot Center. AEG owns the Home Depot Centre and The Dome in London. Beckham has football acadamies at both the Home Depot Centre and at the Dome, sponsored and supported by Anschutz. In March 2006 Chelsea FC announced a long term committment with AEG. Chelsea FC visited Los Angeles at the end of July 2006 and were staying at The Beverly Hills Hotel on Sunset Boulevard (aka The Pink Palace) when Tony Blair arrived at same hotel after his trip to San Francisco.
So did Blair lay the foundation of the Becks deal with Anschutz ? Would he get an agent's commission on the $250,000,000 deal? Is that why the deal is so big? Just joking...
WebCameron & WebDale
WebCameron occasionally do guestblogs. Click HERE to view a short piece I did for them this afternoon.
Questions for Peter Tatchell
At 9pm this evening on 18 Doughty Street I will be interviewing Peter Tatchell. Any questions you want me to ask him? The comments section awaits...
"UKIP" MEP Signs up to Racist Grouping
There's a new site putting UKIP under scrutiny called UKIPatHOME. It has a very interesting story about Ashley Mote, the MEP who was elected under the UKIP banner. Apparently he is signing up to the new extremist grouping which includes Alessandra Mussolini and various other racist toerags.
Mote was withdrawn from the UKIP list after financial irregularity allegations were made against him, but he was still elected under UKIP banner. UKIP has been making great play of two 'Conservative' Peers defecting to them this week, despite the fact that both had the whip withdrawn from them in 2004 for urging people to vote UKIP in the European elections. UKIP also withdrew the whip from Mote in 2004. So if they UKIP describes the two Peers as Conservatives, it presumably means they are happy to consider Mote as being UKIP. QED.
UPDATE: UKIP is "appalled and horrified" by Mote's decision and has called on him to resign his seat.
Mote was withdrawn from the UKIP list after financial irregularity allegations were made against him, but he was still elected under UKIP banner. UKIP has been making great play of two 'Conservative' Peers defecting to them this week, despite the fact that both had the whip withdrawn from them in 2004 for urging people to vote UKIP in the European elections. UKIP also withdrew the whip from Mote in 2004. So if they UKIP describes the two Peers as Conservatives, it presumably means they are happy to consider Mote as being UKIP. QED.
UPDATE: UKIP is "appalled and horrified" by Mote's decision and has called on him to resign his seat.
Did Bush Ask Blair for More Troops?
Last night George W Bush announced 21,500 more US troops would be deployed to Iraq, bringing the total number in Iraq to 150,000For many this is seen as too little too late and reinforces the impression that the whole US military strategy has been botched from start to finish.
This strategy of extra troop deployment runs completely counter to the impression given of the British strategy which is to gradually withdraw troops over the next year.
I find it almost inconceivable that the US adminstration has not asked Britain a) to halt any planned troop withdrawal and b) to increase the number of British soldiers in Iraq.
If we were to mirror the proportions, Blair would now be sending an extra 1,000 troops to the region. The trouble is, even if he wanted to send them, Blair couldn't as the military is in a state of complete overstretch.
I do think, however, we are entitled to be told if the request has ever been made. We'll never find out from Blair or the MOD, but if anyone knows how to do an FOI request to the US government, that might provide some useful information.
This strategy of extra troop deployment runs completely counter to the impression given of the British strategy which is to gradually withdraw troops over the next year.
I find it almost inconceivable that the US adminstration has not asked Britain a) to halt any planned troop withdrawal and b) to increase the number of British soldiers in Iraq.
If we were to mirror the proportions, Blair would now be sending an extra 1,000 troops to the region. The trouble is, even if he wanted to send them, Blair couldn't as the military is in a state of complete overstretch.
I do think, however, we are entitled to be told if the request has ever been made. We'll never find out from Blair or the MOD, but if anyone knows how to do an FOI request to the US government, that might provide some useful information.
Congdon's Defection to UKIP is a Blow
Most of the Tory defections to UKIP are put down to disillusion, lack of recognition, fruitcake tendencies etc. The two Peers who defected to UKIP this week were not exactly unexpected and the two people concerned had always been slightly semi-detached from the party. However, the news today that Professor Tim Congdon has decided to vote UKIP is an entirely different kettle of fish and, to be honest, horrifies me.Tim Congdon has been one of the brightest intellects in the Tory Party for years. The Party should be extremely worried about losing him. To dismiss his defection as 'a little local difficulty' would be wrong. His defection is a blow to the Tory Party and no one should argue otherwise.
LINK: Tim Congdon's Telegraph article HERE
FOI Act May Come Back to Bite Labour
The Conservatives have now applied under the Freedom of Information Act to see the correspondence between Joan Ryan, junior Minister at the Home Office and ACPO about the sex offenders who have committed offences abroad but haven't been added to Home Office records. I have just seen two clips of Joan Ryan on Sky News denying absolutely that Ministers knew about this matter until Tuesday. She had all the attributes of a rabbit staring into headlights.
I can see no way that this FOI request can be refused as not being in the public interest.
I can see no way that this FOI request can be refused as not being in the public interest.
Hazel Blears Stands Accused
From the Manchester Evening News...
OuchLABOUR chairman Hazel Blears today faces a twin attack over her support for maternity services in her Salford constituency. In a scathing letter, former health boss Dr Ian Greatorex branded her actions `unprincipled'. He claimed the MP had used the NHS as a tool to further her political career. Dr Greatorex, retired chief of Salford and Trafford Health Authority, claims that in 1998 Ms Blears failed to back a plan to transfer Trafford General's paediatric department to Hope Hospital in Salford and says she welcomed the fact the then Health Secretary personally intervened to stop the move.
Dr Greatorex says this blighted children's health services in Salford for years - and she was now protesting about a situation `she helped to bring about'. Ms Blears' decision to join mothers and midwifes to protest against the closure of Hope's maternity unit provoked a storm last month. Critics claimed she was cynically abandoning her own government's national health policy when it came to reforms that affected her own constituency. There were also claims that her support for the maternity unit was a blatant bid to improve her chances of beating Eccles Labour MP Ian Stewart in a selection battle later this month... The M.E.N. has seen a letter to Ms Blears from Dr Greatorex, retired chief executive of Salford and Trafford Health Authority, who is a supporter of Hope.
In the letter, he launches a scathing attack. He claims Ms Blears, who is also his local MP, has been inconsistent with her support of Hope. Dr Greatorex writes that in 1998, as a newly elected MP, she failed to back a health authority's proposal that Trafford General's paediatric in-patient department should close and be transferred to Hope. At the time, Health Secretary Frank Dobson intervened to stop the move - and Ms Blears welcomed it. Dr Greatorex says in his letter that the decision blighted children's health services in Salford for years and adds: "Your unprincipled intervention in 1998 helped to bring about the unfortunate situation in which we now find ourselves. In my view, you and your government have treated the local health service as a tool in furtherance of your own political careers, which explains why you now protest about a situation which you helped to bring about."Dr Greatorex told the M.E.N: "She gave a promise then that children's services would be developed at Hope. Nine years later, they have not been. I feel badly let down by my MP."
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
David Davis Scents Tony McNulty's Blood
Well the curse of Dale has struck again. This morning I wrote a laudatory post about Tony McNulty and by this evening it looks as if he may well soon have more time to spend at Upton Park. The revelation that he and his junior Minister have known about the problem of foreign sex offenders not being added to police sex offender registers is fairly damning. David Davis is scenting blood..."If this is true, the position of two Ministers would be untenable. We need to see the full copy of this letter. ACPO should now publish it including all replies. It is also the case that any inquiry cannot be carried out by a civil servant. It must be carried out by a Judge".
EXCLUSIVE: Bullying & Mismanagement at LibDem HQ
Earlier today I received an email from someone who clearly knows their LibDem politics. It was sparked by the intemperate reaction to THIS and THIS post among the LibDem supporters who commented...
Dear Iain, I read your blog with interest regularly. As a Liberal Democrat IThe email then goes on to raise questions about the centralising tendencies of LibDem HQ in Cowley Street and the senior management in particular. It accuses them of "consistently undermining autonomous campaign groups, and constantly trying to centralise all funding, regardless of party structure". I am also told that there have been many attempts to reduce the resources given to Women Liberal Democrats and the so-called Diversity Fund. The email continues...
don't always agree but find you measured and entertaining. I know Penny [who resigned as Vice Chair of the LibDems Candidates Committee] well
and have sat with her on the committee she has just resigned from. I'm
disappointed she isn't well enough to continue, but sadly the reaction to
the post on your blog is really missing the point, going into diatribes
about objections to processes. I'm disappointed that the fundamental issues
in Penny's letter and its non-printing are being lost in the debate about
mechanisms. I have first hand experience of a letter in the past that was
also ignored by Liberal Democrat News about funding for small party bodies.
Steve Hitchens was appointed [to run the Diversity Fund] with no reference to any federal body to an unconstitutional body. It angered many many people, but the bullying culture within the party was such that the implication was given that if you dared speak out you'd be ex-communicated. The real failure is the failure to progress as a party. Instead of looking forward and being different, the party has regressed in the last three years - and no-one seems to dare to ask the reason why very loudly. Anyone who has half a brain knows that theresults in 2006 and 2005 were really rubbish and far worse than even Simon Hughes predicted at 'only 70 odd seats'. Yet they were spun as a great success. What codswallop.Make of it what you will. I don't feel the need to add my own comment.
I was in a PCA meeting in which we tried to ask questions about the levels
of support I, and other candidates who were in so-called target seats in 2005
got or rather we did not get. One close friend of mine was a candidate in a seat
which was a decapitation seat and was treated disgracefully. And I suspect
probably 90% of ordinary members believe that it is utter rubbish. However I
have been appeased by some initiatives - I think the diversity fund is a great
initiative but it seems to be developing into something that is not being
presented as quite right. Our campaigning techniques are now so predictable that
you and the Labour Party can predict the leaflet we will release the next day in
by-elections suggest we have a huge problem. I voted for Ming, but he needs to
look and fast at the real problem facing us.
The way people are 'appointed' within the Liberal Democrats needs some
looking into - and as for equal opportunities within the organisation - well it
doesn't exist. Like many other members of the party I'm too frightened of the
bullying that I've experienced first hand to speak out any more. Like Penny I'm
tired and fed up with it. Yet it isn't the party as a whole that is bad, just a
few individuals. We need to look outside more into the real world inhabited by
most people, inside of up our backsides in the Westminster bubble where I've
seen so many decent people discriminated against that it still makes me angry
that no-one has the guts to stand up to bullies.
I've not got rid of my membership of the party. Nor do I want it removed. I
have helped in every by election in person since goodness knows when, and even
though I have experienced first hand in the last few months the complete
inadequacies of our process when not run properly I shall carry on. But not like
I did before. I also wish to say that I regret not speaking in favour of proper
funding for some of the party orgnisations who are vulnerable just now when I
had the chance a few weeks ago and for that I am sorry.
Treasury Published Negative Resolution on APD
Following up on THIS story from last week, there was an Order laid in the House of Commons yesterday regarding Airport Passenger Duty. See HERE.
Excise,—Air Passenger Duty (Rate) (Qualifying Territories) Order 2007 (S.I., 2007, No. 22), dated 9th January 2007 [by Act], with an Explanatory Memorandum [by Command] [John Healey].
The draft Order is subject to negative resolution (i.e. if the House does not pass a resolution against it in 40 days the minister may make an order). I think that this means that the order cannot become effective before Feb 16th, hence the airlines have no right to collect the extra duty before that date although it is supposed to be effective from February 1st.
The government could have tabled an affirmative resolution in the House of Commons, I am told, which would have had immediate effect, but they obviously want to avoid the embarrassment, and are hoping that no-one spots their incompetence. Too late.
UPDATE: I am told by someone who obviously knows about parliamentary prodedure than I do that thius is not quite right. Yesterday's Order apparently only extended the territories to which the short haul rate applies. The Treasury continues to claim that under the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act it can retrospectively validate the 1 Feb implementation date on Budget Day.
Excise,—Air Passenger Duty (Rate) (Qualifying Territories) Order 2007 (S.I., 2007, No. 22), dated 9th January 2007 [by Act], with an Explanatory Memorandum [by Command] [John Healey].
The draft Order is subject to negative resolution (i.e. if the House does not pass a resolution against it in 40 days the minister may make an order). I think that this means that the order cannot become effective before Feb 16th, hence the airlines have no right to collect the extra duty before that date although it is supposed to be effective from February 1st.
The government could have tabled an affirmative resolution in the House of Commons, I am told, which would have had immediate effect, but they obviously want to avoid the embarrassment, and are hoping that no-one spots their incompetence. Too late.
UPDATE: I am told by someone who obviously knows about parliamentary prodedure than I do that thius is not quite right. Yesterday's Order apparently only extended the territories to which the short haul rate applies. The Treasury continues to claim that under the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act it can retrospectively validate the 1 Feb implementation date on Budget Day.
Maggie, Maggie, Maggie
Vote, Vote, Vote (as Tim Worstall so eloquently puts it). And I should inform you that today is Margaret Thatcher Day in the Falklands. For some of us EVERY day is Margaret Thatcher Day... (that should get a few people spewing some venom in the comments...)
UPDATE: This is from the Comments...
I met Maggie in Crossmaglen August 1979. We'd lost our CO in the bomb attack at Warrenpoint and Maggie came to see us. She stormed into the base like a whirlwind, met most of us and spoke to as many as possible. She then stood on then helipad outside the base waiting on the chopper whilst Gen Creasy etc were cowering inside saying "come back in Prime Minister" to which she replied - "This is the UK no terrorist will stop me standing where I want in the UK!" What a girl.PS: She kept saying things would get better to us as she went round - I then appeared on crutches wearing an eye patch (after an incident a month before) and replied "they can't get much worse Ma'am!" More guts in that one woman than the entire Labour Government!
UPDATE: This is from the Comments...
I met Maggie in Crossmaglen August 1979. We'd lost our CO in the bomb attack at Warrenpoint and Maggie came to see us. She stormed into the base like a whirlwind, met most of us and spoke to as many as possible. She then stood on then helipad outside the base waiting on the chopper whilst Gen Creasy etc were cowering inside saying "come back in Prime Minister" to which she replied - "This is the UK no terrorist will stop me standing where I want in the UK!" What a girl.PS: She kept saying things would get better to us as she went round - I then appeared on crutches wearing an eye patch (after an incident a month before) and replied "they can't get much worse Ma'am!" More guts in that one woman than the entire Labour Government!
£206 per Person: The Cost To You of Government IT
Dizzy loves techno-geek things, so when he spies a report on the cost of government IT projects, you know he will be salivating (among other things). He REPORTS this morning that every man woman and child is paying a atonking £206 for government IT projects every year. Dizzy says...
Now you know.
The figures have been revealed in a Cabinet Office report released today into something called "Transformational Government Strategy". You won’t however find the figures in the press release (funny that!). The press release bangs on about
how the Government is making efficiency savings by cutting 551 websites. You
might even be confused into thinking that only around 26 would remain given the
way the release is worded.However, the truth, as ever, is in the detail, and a
quick look at the report here shows that in fact, 551 websites are being cut,
but that is only 51%, leaving 400 to be maintained and run at whatever the cost
is. Further into the report there is a section detailing just how much money is
spent in each area of Government on IT for 2005/06 and frankly, the figures are
staggering. The total IT spend amounts to £12,414,000,000.
Now you know.
Now's the Time for DD to Go in For the Kill
Earlier today I said what a nice bloke Home Office Minister Tony McNulty is. That's as may be but he's a leading light in a government department which is shambolic and incompetent. So far as I can see its incompetence isn't anything recent - it stretches back a long way, but whatever the situation was in 1997 this lot have had ten years to get it right.
The latest shambles revolves around people convicted of sex offences abroad not being put on the sex offenders register. That's something they can't even try to blame the Conservatives for. It's happened on their watch and they'd better take responsibility for.
In the end this is all about leadership. Jack Straw failed to provide it, David Blunkett tried (I am currently reading his diaries) but in the end failed and Charles Clarke was, in the end, overwhelmed. John Reid will make a statement at 12.30pm today and I hope he will be torn apart by David Davis. This is no time for any pussyfooting by the Opposition. Davis should rip him apart, from ear to toe and then devour him for his lunch.
The latest shambles revolves around people convicted of sex offences abroad not being put on the sex offenders register. That's something they can't even try to blame the Conservatives for. It's happened on their watch and they'd better take responsibility for.
In the end this is all about leadership. Jack Straw failed to provide it, David Blunkett tried (I am currently reading his diaries) but in the end failed and Charles Clarke was, in the end, overwhelmed. John Reid will make a statement at 12.30pm today and I hope he will be torn apart by David Davis. This is no time for any pussyfooting by the Opposition. Davis should rip him apart, from ear to toe and then devour him for his lunch.
Lottery to be Raided as Olympic Costs Spiral
This government has perfected a neat trick whenever it needs money. It simply raids the National Lottery. It appears from THIS report that the National Lottery will be used to finance any shortfall in the cost of the Olympics. So the Lottery has become the latest example of a stealth tax, and, as usual, it's the poor who are going to pay.
Labour's last manifesto said this: “Our Lottery bill will give a duty and a power to every Lottery distributor to involve the public more dramatically in decision-making at every level.”
Involving the public in decision making actually means raiding the public's piggy bank rather than anything meaningful. There doesn’t seem to be any suggestion that the DCMS will be consulting the public before taking the cash away from the main lottery fund. Now there's a surprise...
Chris Doidge also blogs about this HERE.
Labour's last manifesto said this: “Our Lottery bill will give a duty and a power to every Lottery distributor to involve the public more dramatically in decision-making at every level.”
Involving the public in decision making actually means raiding the public's piggy bank rather than anything meaningful. There doesn’t seem to be any suggestion that the DCMS will be consulting the public before taking the cash away from the main lottery fund. Now there's a surprise...
Chris Doidge also blogs about this HERE.
Labour Minister Endorses This Blog as "Excellent"
Always delighted when a Labour Minister admits a liking for this blog. Home Officer Minister Tony McNulty was always a good customer at Politico's and is a throughly nice bloke. And what's more a West Ham fan as well. Almost enough to make you vote Labour, isn't it? Here's what he posted last night on my other blog. Top man.FROM: TONY MCNULTY - Not only do I thoroughly enjoy the political blog - but now I must be in heaven . A thoughtful and erudite blog all about West Ham. I have been a West ham fan for 40 years or more. I am a geographic cheat - in the sense that I am a West London boy through and through and should be Chelsea or QPR , but as I grew up in the 60s around Notting Hill/Ladbroke Grove I got heartily fed up with the non-stop spin about how clever, successful and oh-so-swinging sixties these teams were supposed to be (alright I know I was only 8 years old!) So, as I tell friends with relish, once West Ham won the World Cup in 1966 it was the only team for me and has been ever since. Currently, when constituency business allows, you will find me at as many home games as I can and the occasional away game - Dr.Martens Stand Upper Tier season ticket holder. The very best of luck with 'West Ham Till I Die.' The political blog is excellent - once I ignore the 'blue tilt'.
Just had to add that last bit, didn't he? Now, if he could just sort out the dog's breakfast at the Home Office, we'd all be happy...
The Most Senior Politician to Blog?
Carl Bildt, the Swedish Foreign Minister, has a blog HERE. He is the most senior politician I can think of to have a blog - unless, as Cyril Fletcher used to say on That's Life, you know different.
PS I saw Cyril Fletcher in a pantomime in the Arts Theatre, Cambridge in about 1974. He made me play a trumpet on stage. I couldn't get a sound out of it and burst into tears. Scarred me for life.
PS I saw Cyril Fletcher in a pantomime in the Arts Theatre, Cambridge in about 1974. He made me play a trumpet on stage. I couldn't get a sound out of it and burst into tears. Scarred me for life.
Arguing in Favour of ... and Against
There's a super article HERE on ConservativeHome by Graeme Archer about his inner conflicts over the Sexual Orientation Bill. It's very rare that I find an issue where I can happily argue both sides of the argument and Graeme explains the dilemma very well.
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
No Fool Like an Old Fool
HERE'S living proof. Well, I assume he's still alive. From the quality of his writing, it's difficult to tell. Could someone please tell me what Keith Waterhouse has on Paul Dacre to enable him to keep his so-called column?
The Not the Florence Nightingale Award
Danny Finkelstein has a really interesting competition HERE. He wants to know the best person you can think of who has shaken the hand of someone you have shaken hands with. Here are a couple of Danny's own entries...* When I was a little boy, I shook hands with a man who, as a little boy, had shaken hands with Florence Nightingale
* I have shaken hands with Henry Kissinger who shook hands with Chairman Mao.
* I have met Ron Silver (Bruno) who has shaken hands with President Bartlett
I'm trying to think of an entry but I'm having difficulty getting beyond shaking the hand of Margaret Thatcher who shook the hand of Ronald Reagan, or Jeremy Thorpe who shook the hand of Lloyd George.
Of course, if Danny was writing for The Sun and not The Times the competition would be of a rather different nature... So I want to know the best person you can think of who has ******* someone you have *******.
The Smith Institute and Number Eleven
Graphic shamelessly stolen from Guido.Of interest to Mr Guido Fawkes of this parish, from today's Hansard (not yet published...)
Mr Keith Simpson (Con, Mid Norfolk): To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer which charities have held meetings at 11 Downing Street since December 2005.
Mr Keith Simpson (Con, Mid Norfolk): On how many occasions since December 2005 the Smith Institute has held meetings at 11 Downing Street and who attended each.
John Healey (Financial Secretary to the Treasury): I will let the Honourable Member have a reply in due course.
It is hardly rocket science to answer two simple questions like that, is it? Do I detect the sound of shredded attendance lists...? Perhaps we'll get this answer from John Healy...
John Healey (Financial Secretary to the Treasury): The answers could only be obtained by reforming the shredded lists at disproportional cost...
Two Tory Peers Defect to UKIP
Several people in the Comments have asked me to mention the fact that two semi detached (copyright John Biffen 1987) Tory Peers have joined UKIP. There. I just did.
Prevention Better Than Cure? Not in Today's NHS...
This came in from one of my blog correspondents this morning, so I thought I'd share it with you...
I'm diabetic, and every year I get my eyes tested for various things that diabetics are prone to. This time, I went to the optician as usual, to be told that one of the tests (the one where they give you eye drops that dilate the pupils so that the optician can have a good look inside and study the retina for damage) could NOT be given as the local HCT had decided that from Jan 2007 this test should be carried out at hospital. I balked at this. Hospital appointments=lots of wasted time + car parking charges + dodging the rubbish hanging around in the waiting rooms. "Bollocks" I thought, I'll just go without. But then the optician says words to the effect that he was perfectly happy to do the test privately, it would cost just £12.50, which of course I did. So I am £12.50 out of pocket, and Gormless Gordon is better off by a similar amount (the fee to the optician for doing the test having gone down). And I don't have to waste three hours hanging around in the hospital. I know, it's only £12.50, and a lot of people would consider me a wealthy man. I can certainly afford it. It sticks in my craw though, here is the NHS having money fire-hosed at it in prodigious quantities and yet they feel the need to pick on patients like me, and reduce the services in a manner that I suspect the 'target' statistics will not pick up. I could get quite cross about it really.
Now in theory, you could say that this was a good thing - people who can afford it paying a small price for a service. But of course the real issue is the number of people who just won't bother to go down to their hospital and have the test done, thereby storing up more problems for later. I wonder how many more types of tests this applies to. One for the NHSBlogDoctor perhaps?
I'm diabetic, and every year I get my eyes tested for various things that diabetics are prone to. This time, I went to the optician as usual, to be told that one of the tests (the one where they give you eye drops that dilate the pupils so that the optician can have a good look inside and study the retina for damage) could NOT be given as the local HCT had decided that from Jan 2007 this test should be carried out at hospital. I balked at this. Hospital appointments=lots of wasted time + car parking charges + dodging the rubbish hanging around in the waiting rooms. "Bollocks" I thought, I'll just go without. But then the optician says words to the effect that he was perfectly happy to do the test privately, it would cost just £12.50, which of course I did. So I am £12.50 out of pocket, and Gormless Gordon is better off by a similar amount (the fee to the optician for doing the test having gone down). And I don't have to waste three hours hanging around in the hospital. I know, it's only £12.50, and a lot of people would consider me a wealthy man. I can certainly afford it. It sticks in my craw though, here is the NHS having money fire-hosed at it in prodigious quantities and yet they feel the need to pick on patients like me, and reduce the services in a manner that I suspect the 'target' statistics will not pick up. I could get quite cross about it really.
Now in theory, you could say that this was a good thing - people who can afford it paying a small price for a service. But of course the real issue is the number of people who just won't bother to go down to their hospital and have the test done, thereby storing up more problems for later. I wonder how many more types of tests this applies to. One for the NHSBlogDoctor perhaps?
Monday, January 08, 2007
Another Mass Resignation from UKIP Tonight?
You may remember a whole constituency association of UKIP resigning en masse a few months ago in West Dorset. They were followed by the Southend constituency association. According to the ever excellent West Brom Blog the 120 members of the Plymouth constituency will be departing tonight. Three down, 656 to go...
Blogger TV Tonight on 18 Doughty Street
Live programming returns on 18 Doughty Street tonight after the Christmas break. We're now live from 7pm to midnight five days a week and next week we launch a fantastic new website.
Tonight I'm hosting the first edition at Blogger TV from 9pm to 10 (UPDATE: Watch it again HERE). Joining me to discuss bullying on blogs are Alex Hilton from Recess Monkey, James Cleverly, Ben Sherreard and Rachel North. We'll also be looking at the best blog stories of the week.
Tomorrow at 9pm we've got David Willetts for an hour, on Wednesday Edward Garnier MP and UKIP deputy leader David Campbell Bannerman, and on Thursday at 9pm it's an hour with Peter Tatchell. Post your questions in the Comments Section.
Ruth Kelly Has Done What's Right for Her Child
I won't be calling for Ruth Kelly's head. Yesterday the Mail on Sunday revealed that a Cabinet Minister with connections to the Education Department was sending her child to a private school. Today the Daily Mirror has named Ruth Kelly as the cabinet Minister. She is paying £15,000 a year for her child to go to a school that apparently specialises in educating children with dyslexia.This government has closed many special needs schools and slashed the resources from others in the mistaken belief that these children are better off being included in normal schools. That may be right for some, but not all.
I don't blame Ruth Kelly for doing what is best for her child. That's what any responsible parent would do. But she should answer this question: what would someone do if they didn't have the financial resources to pay £15,000 to a prep school? She would also have been wiser to have released this information herself. She must have known it would emerge in the end. These things always do.
So yes, on the face of it she's guilty of hypocrisy. But it's not a resigning issue.
Tory Council Cuts Council Tax - Time for Others To Do The Same
Now that's more like it! Hammersmith & Fulham Council is cutting Council Tax bills for its residents by 3% from April, it has been announced today. It's the first cut for more than a decade.Council leader Stephen Greenhalgh (pic) says: "This is the first budget since the May 2006 election and we are combining lower tax with more cash for things that matter to residents. The council is pumping in £1.5million over two years to pay for round the clock beat policing in our town centres as well as spending more on schools and providing free homecare for our most vulnerable residents. We were elected to cut council tax bills and deliver better front line services and this is what our first budget does. While other councils are piling more tax on their residents we are reversing that trend and turning back the clock so that our council tax is now at 2004 levels. That's got to be great news for everyone, particularly for our pensioners and those on low incomes. Delivering on our council tax promises means cutting waste and bureaucracy and looking to the market to see if services can be delivered more efficiently. We are not ideologically wedded to privatisation but surely it is prudent for in house services to be forced to compete with private contractors to see if the same, or even better, services can be delivered more efficiently. It is important that people understand these tax cuts are not at the expense of frontline services. We are cutting council waste, red tape and bureaucracy and, as councils like our neighbours Wandsworth have proved, it is possible to have excellent frontline services and low council tax. Residents should compare our efficiency to the Mayor of London's tax escalator which will once again go up in 2007/8. He is going to hammer taxpayers with an increase of well over 5 per cent as well as clobbering commuters with a 33 per cent hike."
I hope other Conservative councils take note. They should all be beating a path to Hammersmith & Fulham's front door to find out how they have done it. Too often Tory councils throw their hands up and accept that they have to have a year on rise in Council Tax. If Hammersmith & Fulham can cut Council Tax while also maintaining frontline services it ought to be possible for others.
Sunday, January 07, 2007
New Style Policing? "If You Have No Money You Won't be Charged"
So now we know. In Norfolk there really is one law for the rich and one for the poor. Norfolk Blogger reports that a victim of crime has just received a letter from Norfolk Police telling them that no further action will be taken against the perpetrators, who were caught as a result of CCTV evidence, because they were "unemployed foreign nationals with no income".
As Norfolk Blogger says: This is hardly a statement likely to engender confidence in the legal system or likely to create racial harmony. People are under the misapprehension that the legal system is biased against the law abiding majority, and this sort of police statement plays straight in to the hands of those who want to stir up racial hatred.
The BBC reports that Norfolk Police arerapidly backtracking looking into the incident and that local Labour MP Dr Ian Gibson is taking up the issue.
As Norfolk Blogger says: This is hardly a statement likely to engender confidence in the legal system or likely to create racial harmony. People are under the misapprehension that the legal system is biased against the law abiding majority, and this sort of police statement plays straight in to the hands of those who want to stir up racial hatred.
The BBC reports that Norfolk Police are
More Blog Links Added
Well, what else is there to do on a Sunday night in Tunbridge Wells? Do visit the following blogs, which I have just added to my blog links.
Donal Blaney, Tory PPC Nick King, Nick Wallis, West Midlands Conservatives, Wherever I Lay My Hat Is My Home Secretary, West Ham Till I Die, John Redwood MP, Steve Webb MP, Justin Hinchcliffe, Daily Referendum, Northwing, Tom Paine, Dispatches of a Teen, Citizen Andreas, Rachel North, Further Ramblings,
If you have a blog which links to me, but I don't have a link to you, please leave a comment with the blog address within the comment. I have a policy of only linking to blogs which have a pre-existing link to me.
Now, I want to make sure I have all blogging MPs in the blogroll. These are the ones I have so far. If you think any other are worthy of inclusion, let me know.
Boris Johnson MP (Con), David Davies AM MP (Con), David Jones MP (Con) , Ed Vaizey MP (Con), James Duddridge MP (Con), John Redwood MP (Con), Lynne Featherstone MP (Lib),
Nadine Dorries MP (Con), Richard Spring MP (Con), Stephen Crabb MP (Con), Steve Webb MP (Lib), Tom Watson MP (Lab)
Donal Blaney, Tory PPC Nick King, Nick Wallis, West Midlands Conservatives, Wherever I Lay My Hat Is My Home Secretary, West Ham Till I Die, John Redwood MP, Steve Webb MP, Justin Hinchcliffe, Daily Referendum, Northwing, Tom Paine, Dispatches of a Teen, Citizen Andreas, Rachel North, Further Ramblings,
If you have a blog which links to me, but I don't have a link to you, please leave a comment with the blog address within the comment. I have a policy of only linking to blogs which have a pre-existing link to me.
Now, I want to make sure I have all blogging MPs in the blogroll. These are the ones I have so far. If you think any other are worthy of inclusion, let me know.
Boris Johnson MP (Con), David Davies AM MP (Con), David Jones MP (Con) , Ed Vaizey MP (Con), James Duddridge MP (Con), John Redwood MP (Con), Lynne Featherstone MP (Lib),
Nadine Dorries MP (Con), Richard Spring MP (Con), Stephen Crabb MP (Con), Steve Webb MP (Lib), Tom Watson MP (Lab)
The Devil's Hospital
Click HERE at the Devil's humble abode to see why spending on the NHS has doubled under Labour and output has increased by about 3%. Shocking.
PS If you're shocked by bad language, best not click...
PS If you're shocked by bad language, best not click...
Bob Piper & the Standards Board
The recently revived Bob Piper (by which I mean his blog has been revived, rather than him...although...) has an excellent POST on the uselessness of the Standards Board for England. Rather brave of him really, seeing as my good friend David Davies has made a complaint to the Board about Bob. I very much hope this will be among the first quangos culled when the revolution comes.
Labour MP to Defect to SNP?
The Sunday Herald reckons a Labour MP is on the verge of quitting the Party to join the SNP. Read the story HERE. So who might that be then?
Senator Robert Byrd, Praise the Lord
Dana Millbank's sketch for the Washington Post on the opening of the 110th Congress was a corker...The attention quickly shifted -- to Robert Byrd. The 89-year-old West Virginia Democrat, beginning his ninth term, wore a red-white-and-blue tie and punctuated the opening prayer with shouts of "Yes!" and "Mmmhmmm!" and "Yes, Lord!" and "Yes, in Jesus's name!" When he was sworn in, he twice cried out "Hallelujah!" and then "Amen!" Minutes later, he was installed as Senate president pro tempore, the majority party's most senior member. "Yeah, man! Yeah, man!" he shouted. "Hallelujah!" "I do, so help me God!" he shouted when the oath was administered. "Yeah, man!" His colleagues were amused. Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) at one point pretended to tilt a bottle into his mouth, though it was unclear whether Byrd was the target of that gesture.
Now just imagine the furore there would have been if a Republican had acted in such a way!
Frank Field Slates Brown Over English Devolution
GMTV's Sunday programme had a fascinatingm interview with Labour MP Frank Field this morning. Field blames Brown for his ministerial departure from the Department of Social Security in the early years of the Blair government. But it was what he said about devolution which caught my eye..
FRANK FIELD
Well the problem really is twofold. Firstly, English opinion has changed, and if you look at the polls now it’s not people in Scotland or Wales or Northern Ireland saying they’re wanting independence. The strongest independence comes from people in England, and at some stage that wish will be granted. And for totally grubby reasons, I think the government should leave that debate rather than be frightened of it. The position the government now holds is no change on anything, and that clearly is not acceptable. The second thing is that we live in a world now whereas in the last century capital moved about and became mobile, now people are. And therefore people’s senses of identity becomes more, not less, important, and I don’t think you can have an identity around Great Britain because it’s a bogus concept which has served us quite well of wrapping round the various countries, like a warm overcoat, making the countries feel secure. The real identities are about England, about Wales, about Scotland and Ireland, and I think those identities need to be asserted if we’re going to successfully make this huge transition from a world where people didn’t move around to one where people move around in huge quantities, and make some people feel very insecure as a result of those changes.
STEVE RICHARDS
Although some argue that’s precisely why the Union should be retained, that the world is becoming a bigger place, you’re dealing with China, India, the United States, why suddenly separate into much smaller units?
FRANK FIELD
What’s so interesting, in where you’re chairing this Steve, is you’re the first person that I’ve heard for months put forward a positive reason for the Union being maintained. I always thought the reason why we were in Europe was that the voices of independent nations can be made effective on the national stage
STEVE RICHARDS
So you’d be happy, actually, for Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland, England to be four separate entities?
FRANK FIELD
I think there are two things. We’ve got to settle the English Question as far as legislation goes, and I think we should have an imaginative debate rather than the plonking debate we get at the moment over House of Lords reform, which has not changed for a hundred years. I would see the federal status of the old United Kingdom being trailed through a second chamber, whereas at the first tier level there would be individual parliaments in the interests of the constituent countries.
STEVE RICHARDS
OK, let’s explore why it is, one of the reasons why it’s potentially very explosive in this coming year.
Frank Field, how big an issue is it, given you accept this is a very big, rising, turbulent theme, that Gordon Brown will almost certainly become Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, he is Scottish, at a time when these issues are whirling around Scotland, England and possibly, to follow your thesis, Wales and Northern Ireland too?
FRANK FIELD
Well if I was a Scottish MP wanting to become Prime Minister, I would be endlessly prattling on about British-ness and trying to convince people that somehow that’s what the game was about. That’s been going on for some time, it’s fooled nobody, the polls are leaning in the opposite direction. And I don’t share Oliver’s [Heald] view. I mean, I love England but somehow to think that we’ve got special status in the world because we’re the United Kingdom I just think is tragic to still be peddling that view. I think any greatness that we have comes from other reasons, not because of this artificially engendered union with other countries. And I don’t believe these big constitutional questions should be settled on whether a Scottish Member of Parliament wishes to become Prime Minister or not. I think these are such fundamental questions we ought to settle them on their own merit and not actually think well it would be easier for Gordon Brown if we didn’t raise this question. Or if the electorate didn’t raise the question.
STEVE RICHARDS
Given that assessment, how big a problem has Gordon Brown got, being an almost certain next Prime Minister, Scottish, with all these issues whirling around?
FRANK FIELD
I think he’d have a lot less of a problem if your prediction comes true and he becomes Prime Minister - I don’t quite share your certainty on that - but if he led this debate. And I think there’s huge, as I come back to this grubby reason as I put it forward, put forward this argument, that in part I think we’ve got everything to gain by being seen not frightened to embrace what the electorate might wish, even though in the short run the experts tell us that it would actually operate against the Labour party. I don’t think votes are set in stone, and I think English voters, seeing a Scottish Prime Minister leading a debate on the rightful place of England and its identity, could actually have some very good effects via the ballot box. So I don’t think so negatively. It certainly is negative if not only the next leader but the whole of the government has nothing to offer. The old Mother Hubbard argument – everything is bare, that everything’s perfect, nothing is going to change despite what the electorate think.
STEVE RICHARDS
Just briefly, what do you think, in specific terms, he’s got to offer England if he becomes Prime Minister, and "leads this debate", as you put it.
FRANK FIELD
As the Chancellor, he says we need a huge debate about renewal. But we don’t actually ever get onto the debate, all we have is heraldries: "We want this debate!" Now you couldn’t have a bigger debate than about the nature of our constitution and I would’ve thought the first move is along a Bill that I proposed but Labour members voted it down, and that was that Scottish members couldn’t vote on English matters when they can decide those matters in Scotland…
FRANK FIELD
Well the problem really is twofold. Firstly, English opinion has changed, and if you look at the polls now it’s not people in Scotland or Wales or Northern Ireland saying they’re wanting independence. The strongest independence comes from people in England, and at some stage that wish will be granted. And for totally grubby reasons, I think the government should leave that debate rather than be frightened of it. The position the government now holds is no change on anything, and that clearly is not acceptable. The second thing is that we live in a world now whereas in the last century capital moved about and became mobile, now people are. And therefore people’s senses of identity becomes more, not less, important, and I don’t think you can have an identity around Great Britain because it’s a bogus concept which has served us quite well of wrapping round the various countries, like a warm overcoat, making the countries feel secure. The real identities are about England, about Wales, about Scotland and Ireland, and I think those identities need to be asserted if we’re going to successfully make this huge transition from a world where people didn’t move around to one where people move around in huge quantities, and make some people feel very insecure as a result of those changes.
STEVE RICHARDS
Although some argue that’s precisely why the Union should be retained, that the world is becoming a bigger place, you’re dealing with China, India, the United States, why suddenly separate into much smaller units?
FRANK FIELD
What’s so interesting, in where you’re chairing this Steve, is you’re the first person that I’ve heard for months put forward a positive reason for the Union being maintained. I always thought the reason why we were in Europe was that the voices of independent nations can be made effective on the national stage
STEVE RICHARDS
So you’d be happy, actually, for Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland, England to be four separate entities?
FRANK FIELD
I think there are two things. We’ve got to settle the English Question as far as legislation goes, and I think we should have an imaginative debate rather than the plonking debate we get at the moment over House of Lords reform, which has not changed for a hundred years. I would see the federal status of the old United Kingdom being trailed through a second chamber, whereas at the first tier level there would be individual parliaments in the interests of the constituent countries.
STEVE RICHARDS
OK, let’s explore why it is, one of the reasons why it’s potentially very explosive in this coming year.
Frank Field, how big an issue is it, given you accept this is a very big, rising, turbulent theme, that Gordon Brown will almost certainly become Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, he is Scottish, at a time when these issues are whirling around Scotland, England and possibly, to follow your thesis, Wales and Northern Ireland too?
FRANK FIELD
Well if I was a Scottish MP wanting to become Prime Minister, I would be endlessly prattling on about British-ness and trying to convince people that somehow that’s what the game was about. That’s been going on for some time, it’s fooled nobody, the polls are leaning in the opposite direction. And I don’t share Oliver’s [Heald] view. I mean, I love England but somehow to think that we’ve got special status in the world because we’re the United Kingdom I just think is tragic to still be peddling that view. I think any greatness that we have comes from other reasons, not because of this artificially engendered union with other countries. And I don’t believe these big constitutional questions should be settled on whether a Scottish Member of Parliament wishes to become Prime Minister or not. I think these are such fundamental questions we ought to settle them on their own merit and not actually think well it would be easier for Gordon Brown if we didn’t raise this question. Or if the electorate didn’t raise the question.
STEVE RICHARDS
Given that assessment, how big a problem has Gordon Brown got, being an almost certain next Prime Minister, Scottish, with all these issues whirling around?
FRANK FIELD
I think he’d have a lot less of a problem if your prediction comes true and he becomes Prime Minister - I don’t quite share your certainty on that - but if he led this debate. And I think there’s huge, as I come back to this grubby reason as I put it forward, put forward this argument, that in part I think we’ve got everything to gain by being seen not frightened to embrace what the electorate might wish, even though in the short run the experts tell us that it would actually operate against the Labour party. I don’t think votes are set in stone, and I think English voters, seeing a Scottish Prime Minister leading a debate on the rightful place of England and its identity, could actually have some very good effects via the ballot box. So I don’t think so negatively. It certainly is negative if not only the next leader but the whole of the government has nothing to offer. The old Mother Hubbard argument – everything is bare, that everything’s perfect, nothing is going to change despite what the electorate think.
STEVE RICHARDS
Just briefly, what do you think, in specific terms, he’s got to offer England if he becomes Prime Minister, and "leads this debate", as you put it.
FRANK FIELD
As the Chancellor, he says we need a huge debate about renewal. But we don’t actually ever get onto the debate, all we have is heraldries: "We want this debate!" Now you couldn’t have a bigger debate than about the nature of our constitution and I would’ve thought the first move is along a Bill that I proposed but Labour members voted it down, and that was that Scottish members couldn’t vote on English matters when they can decide those matters in Scotland…
Boring Brown Fails to Say Anything Interesting
I didn't have a very good nioght's sleep last night, but I needn't have worried. All I had to do is tune in to Andrew Marr's programme and listen to the interview with Gordon Brown to be induced into a prolonged zzzzz.I cannot think of an occasion when I have actually heard Gordon Brown say anything interesting in an interview. He uses a kind of language which normal people just do not indulge in. He manages to go for 15 minutes without saying anything at all. Quite a feat, I suppose.
I now understand why the BBC made so much on its news bulletins about Brown's remarks on Saddam's execution. Brown echoed Prescott's remarks, criticising the grisly spectacle. In itself this is not exactly newsworthy, but because Blair hasn't said anything about the hanging the BBC led its news bulletins with Brown's remarks proof of a further split with Blair. Laura Kuensberg was positively breathless in her comments live in the studio.
The simple fact of the matter is that with any political interview nowadays there has to be a"top line" to emerge from it otherwise the interviewer will be seen to have failed. For Brown's remarks on Saddam to be a 'top line' demonstrates what a mind-numbingly boring interview it was.
Saturday, January 06, 2007
My New West Ham Blog
.jpg)
I can already hear you groaning. Stop it. I had thought there must be dozens of West Ham blogs out there, but astonishingly there don't seem to be any at all. Well there are now because I have started one HERE. I'm sure you'll all be regular visitors...Not. If any of you support the Happy Hammers (well, we're happy today, anyway) please do link to it. I doubt whether it'll ever get the traffic this blog does, but you never know...
Phillipa Stroud Selected for Sutton & Cheam
Phillipa Stroud has been selected for Sutton & Cheam tonight. Phillipa is a leading light in the Centre for Social Justice and is a very worthy successor to the exellent Richard Willis, who decided not to fight the seat again. I'm told Helen Grant came second, ahead of Tariq Ahmed and Lynn Hack.
Top Ten Tory Chat Up Lines
Here's the latest in my SERIES of political chat-up lines - it's the Conservatives' turn...
1. Yo Blair! Bend over you're gonna love this...
2. Can I share the proceeds of this growth with you?
3. I've got a unique way of protecting the vulnerable
4. Are you thinking what I'm thinking?
5. How would you like to shadow my portfolio?
6. Is your name Tamzin Lightwater?
7. I’m so depressed about the A List I really don’t think I should spend tonight alone
8. I'm really not gay, no really, no, no... oh go on then...
9. Francis is always urging us to increase our members
10. Would you like to come up and watch the Parliamentary Channel with me some time?
Can you do better? The Comments Section awaits...
1. Yo Blair! Bend over you're gonna love this...
2. Can I share the proceeds of this growth with you?
3. I've got a unique way of protecting the vulnerable
4. Are you thinking what I'm thinking?
5. How would you like to shadow my portfolio?
6. Is your name Tamzin Lightwater?
7. I’m so depressed about the A List I really don’t think I should spend tonight alone
8. I'm really not gay, no really, no, no... oh go on then...
9. Francis is always urging us to increase our members
10. Would you like to come up and watch the Parliamentary Channel with me some time?
Can you do better? The Comments Section awaits...
No Need to Know Prison Escape Numbers Says Prison Service DG
The Director of the Prison Service Phil Wheatley has just appeared on BBC News saying "We don't need to have a central record of people who abscond from category D prisons". Breathtaking, and a clear example of the all atmosphere of apathy that appears to pervade the entire Home Office. The full story is on the BBC website HERE. Surely the reason for collecting such numbers centrally is to detect trends and then do something about any worrying trends. But then, what do I know?
Strange that the Home Secretary hasn't been heard to comment on this yet. He's such a shy and retiring chappy isn't he?
Strange that the Home Secretary hasn't been heard to comment on this yet. He's such a shy and retiring chappy isn't he?
UKIP Faces Electoral Commission Fine
The Political Parties Elections and Referendums Act 2000 requires that parties with a gross income or expenditure of £250,000 or less (and their accounting units with a gross income or expenditure in excess of £25,000 and below 250,000) submit an annual statement of accounts to The Electoral Commission by 31 March and for more than that sum by 7 July.
The deadline for submitting audited accounts was 7 July 2006. UKIP failed to meet it and were given an extension.
If this is true, we might well ask when UKIP do intend to submit accounts and what deadline have they been given by the Electoral Commission. Anyone care to enlighten us?
Friday, January 05, 2007
Maybe I Should Grow Man Boobs...
I support the aims of Women2Win, but if they think they are going to gain any sympathy through THIS initiative they must be having a laugh. The BBC reports...
They (women) were reluctant to "spend their family's money" on travel, childcare and other costs associated with finding a seat, said spokesman Katie Perrior. Men, on the other hand, were "often the main breadwinners and didn't feel so guilty about spending their money."
So no sexual steroetyping there then.
Mrs Perrior said her organisation wants to set up a bursary to help women with such costs, arguing women tend to be more financially cautious than men. "The money does discourage people, especially women," she told the BBC News website.
As ConservativeHome reported recently, it costs an average £40,000 to stand as a candidate in a marginal seat. Believe me, I know. I was one of them and the experience nearly bankrupted me. Would it have been any cheaper or expensive had I been female? Of course not.
Jonathan Shephard from Tory Radio calls it right when he says: If the party is going to go down the route of bursaries (which I wrote about in January HERE) then why should they be just for women? Surely they should be for those candidates irrespective of what sex they are who may well be precluded from following a career in politics due to financial constraints.
I know now why Tony Blair is growing Man Boobs. Perhaps I should follow suit...
They (women) were reluctant to "spend their family's money" on travel, childcare and other costs associated with finding a seat, said spokesman Katie Perrior. Men, on the other hand, were "often the main breadwinners and didn't feel so guilty about spending their money."
So no sexual steroetyping there then.
Mrs Perrior said her organisation wants to set up a bursary to help women with such costs, arguing women tend to be more financially cautious than men. "The money does discourage people, especially women," she told the BBC News website.
As ConservativeHome reported recently, it costs an average £40,000 to stand as a candidate in a marginal seat. Believe me, I know. I was one of them and the experience nearly bankrupted me. Would it have been any cheaper or expensive had I been female? Of course not.
Jonathan Shephard from Tory Radio calls it right when he says: If the party is going to go down the route of bursaries (which I wrote about in January HERE) then why should they be just for women? Surely they should be for those candidates irrespective of what sex they are who may well be precluded from following a career in politics due to financial constraints.
I know now why Tony Blair is growing Man Boobs. Perhaps I should follow suit...
LibDem Candidates System in Meltdown?
Following THIS story a couple of days ago, the comments section was heated to say the least. When that happens a blogger normally knows he is on to something. A reader has alerted me to an editorial in a recent issue of LIBERATOR magazine. It's all about LibDem candidate selection...
The session for key seats representatives at September’s Liberal Democrat conference was proceeding uneventfully until the party’s campaigns director Paul Rainger told them that, to retain this status, a constituency must have a candidate in place by December. Angry protests followed, to the effect that constituencies would be happy to select a candidate were the English Candidates Committee to make this possible (it seems a lesser issue in Scotland and Wales).
Hardly anyone agrees on what has caused the inordinate delay in selections. It is perhaps just as well that the idea of a snap general election appears to be a figment of party fundraisers’ imagination. From the campaigns side, and from approved candidates, come complaints that the candidates committee sees the approval and selection bureaucracy as an end in itself. There are also complaints that, on top of the long-standing and tortuous complications involved, rules aimed at securing diversity have served only to ensure that no-one, of any colour or gender, has been selected for most seats. Tales abound of constituencies that have received only one application but have been barred from adopting the candidate concerned, of regions with too few returning officers having to borrow them from elsewhere in a beggar-my-neighbour process, and of too few selection committee members having completed the obligatory training because there is no-one to train them.
From the candidates committee side comes the response that conference told it to rewrite the rules and it had to wait until after the general election to do that, and that if the party wants greater diversity in its candidates the processes must be in place. Its members also dispute claims that returning officers and trainers are thin on the ground, and are confident that candidates will be in place in good time.
The Parliamentary Candidates Association, which represents approved candidates, thinks it has a solution to this impasse, but it is one likely to infuriate most party members. Its chair Gary Lawson wrote in July to Menzies Campbell to say that only 18 English PPCs had at that point been selected (a number which has since presumably risen) and that the average selection was taking 88 days. The PCA’s solution was to suggest that Campbell should “personally appoint a small central team to identify out 40 to 60 most winnable constituencies and manage the selection process in these seats”. In those seats, the normal selection process would be set aside and replaced by the method used for parliamentary by-elections, where a very short list is approved centrally for local members’ decision. The central team would ‘resolve’ any appeals, while Campbell himself would have the pleasure of writing to all party members to explain the reason for ditching the normal process.
PCA executive members “debated the pros and cons” of identifying a top tier of candidates, similar to the Tories so-called A list, but decided that “the appointment of a central team to manage selections in these winnable seats, as with by-elections, will allow both highly qualified local candidates to apply and enable shortlists to be drafted that clearly demonstrate the party’s commitment to candidate diversity”. How that might be done solely from among candidates already approved was unclear. The ‘accelerated’ process has caused rows in local parties at by-elections, where candidates with strong local support have been excluded.
The application of this process to all winnable seats would be certain to cause uproar among aggrieved applicants and their supporters, particularly if local party members were effectively presented with only one option. Even more startlingly, the PCA believes “in the longer term… there is a case for ‘headhunting’ of suitable candidates within and outside the party, e.g. among students at universities and colleges.” Yes, you read that right. The body that represents the party’s parliamentary candidates believes that people who do not belong to the party should be approached to stand as candidates for it in general elections. The PCA said it looked forward to Campbell’s comments. But, since no change has been made to the selection rules, they were presumably unfavourable. Perhaps Campbell feels that people who wish to be Lib Dem candidates should at least first take the trouble to join the party.
Makes the Conservative 'A' List dilemmas look rather pedestrian, doesn't it? Do check back later. I've just been emailed some very interesting information related to this story, which I want to share with you but it needs careful wording...
The session for key seats representatives at September’s Liberal Democrat conference was proceeding uneventfully until the party’s campaigns director Paul Rainger told them that, to retain this status, a constituency must have a candidate in place by December. Angry protests followed, to the effect that constituencies would be happy to select a candidate were the English Candidates Committee to make this possible (it seems a lesser issue in Scotland and Wales).
Hardly anyone agrees on what has caused the inordinate delay in selections. It is perhaps just as well that the idea of a snap general election appears to be a figment of party fundraisers’ imagination. From the campaigns side, and from approved candidates, come complaints that the candidates committee sees the approval and selection bureaucracy as an end in itself. There are also complaints that, on top of the long-standing and tortuous complications involved, rules aimed at securing diversity have served only to ensure that no-one, of any colour or gender, has been selected for most seats. Tales abound of constituencies that have received only one application but have been barred from adopting the candidate concerned, of regions with too few returning officers having to borrow them from elsewhere in a beggar-my-neighbour process, and of too few selection committee members having completed the obligatory training because there is no-one to train them.
From the candidates committee side comes the response that conference told it to rewrite the rules and it had to wait until after the general election to do that, and that if the party wants greater diversity in its candidates the processes must be in place. Its members also dispute claims that returning officers and trainers are thin on the ground, and are confident that candidates will be in place in good time.
The Parliamentary Candidates Association, which represents approved candidates, thinks it has a solution to this impasse, but it is one likely to infuriate most party members. Its chair Gary Lawson wrote in July to Menzies Campbell to say that only 18 English PPCs had at that point been selected (a number which has since presumably risen) and that the average selection was taking 88 days. The PCA’s solution was to suggest that Campbell should “personally appoint a small central team to identify out 40 to 60 most winnable constituencies and manage the selection process in these seats”. In those seats, the normal selection process would be set aside and replaced by the method used for parliamentary by-elections, where a very short list is approved centrally for local members’ decision. The central team would ‘resolve’ any appeals, while Campbell himself would have the pleasure of writing to all party members to explain the reason for ditching the normal process.
PCA executive members “debated the pros and cons” of identifying a top tier of candidates, similar to the Tories so-called A list, but decided that “the appointment of a central team to manage selections in these winnable seats, as with by-elections, will allow both highly qualified local candidates to apply and enable shortlists to be drafted that clearly demonstrate the party’s commitment to candidate diversity”. How that might be done solely from among candidates already approved was unclear. The ‘accelerated’ process has caused rows in local parties at by-elections, where candidates with strong local support have been excluded.
The application of this process to all winnable seats would be certain to cause uproar among aggrieved applicants and their supporters, particularly if local party members were effectively presented with only one option. Even more startlingly, the PCA believes “in the longer term… there is a case for ‘headhunting’ of suitable candidates within and outside the party, e.g. among students at universities and colleges.” Yes, you read that right. The body that represents the party’s parliamentary candidates believes that people who do not belong to the party should be approached to stand as candidates for it in general elections. The PCA said it looked forward to Campbell’s comments. But, since no change has been made to the selection rules, they were presumably unfavourable. Perhaps Campbell feels that people who wish to be Lib Dem candidates should at least first take the trouble to join the party.
Makes the Conservative 'A' List dilemmas look rather pedestrian, doesn't it? Do check back later. I've just been emailed some very interesting information related to this story, which I want to share with you but it needs careful wording...
Falconer Endorses Brown...Sort Of
From this Sunday's GMTV Sunday Programme...
STEVE RICHARDS
Tony Blair is going this year. You’ve been one of those who’ve yet to endorse Gordon Brown formally, are you willing to say formally that you want him to be the next leader?
LORD FALCONER
He is an absolutely towering figure in the Labour party, he is the person, along with Tony Blair who has most contributed to what the Labour Government has done over the last nine and a half years. He is head and shoulders in achievement, above anyone else within the Labour Party. He is without doubt the strongest candidate to be leader.
STEVE RICHARDS
So is that Lord Falconer endorsing Gordon Brown to be the next leader? Has he got your backing? It sounds as if he has.
LORD FALCONER
Once he became the Prime Minister, or leader of the Party, of course he would have my backing. I don’t know what’s going to happen between now and the time that he actually takes over, which I think is probably the most likely course, he is an absolutely towering figure.
IAIN DALE
So that's a no then.
Court Ruling Could Mean an End to 'Kiss & Tells'
A Court of Appeal Ruling this week could change the nature of our Sunday red tops forever and achieve what the advocates or a Privacy Law never dreamed of. No more exposes about the Beckhams' nanny, no more kiss and tell by the gay boyfriends of MPs. This is from today's Press Gazette...
This really does seem like a landmark judgement, but one which disciminates unafairly in favour of the rich and famous.
The Court of Appeal has upheld the right of Canadian singer Loreena
McKennitt to ban publication of certain passages in a book entitled Travels with
Loreena McKennitt: My Life as a Friend by Niema Ash. The passages covered
personal and sexual relationships, McKennitt’s feelings about her fiancçª who
drowned in 1998, as well as details of her health and diet. Crucially, the
author was not an employee — or someone else bound by a formal confidentiality
agreement — but a former friend of the singer. Author Ash denied she was bound
by any duty of confidence. But Lord Justice Buxton said he backed Mr Justice
Eady’s earlier High Court conclusion that the “confidence” between the two women
was “shared” only in the sense that McKennitt had admitted Ash to her
confidence, which Ash knew should be respected. Explaining the significance of
the ruling, media lawyer Mark Stephens said: “Tabloids are going to have to
reinvent the staple of the Sunday morning and I think we are going to be down to
vicars and choirboys again. “Celebrities who can afford expensive lawyers and
QCs are going to be shielded from rigorous examination whereas Joe Public, who
can’t afford lawyers, is going to be the new victim of the Sunday morning
media.
This really does seem like a landmark judgement, but one which disciminates unafairly in favour of the rich and famous.
Lord Levy: Blair's Envoy to the World
My colleague Donal Blaney has reactivated his ENOUGH IS ENOUGH Blog and has a very good story on Lord Levy HERE. Apparently Blair's Middle Eastern Envoy has been travelling to Latin America and the USA courtesy of the PBT. That's the Poor Bloody Taxypayer...
Jeremy Bowen Wants a Blog
BBC Middle East Correspondent Jeremy Bowen has been musing about his future. He says..."I have strong views about everything I do and I would sometimes like the chance to let off steam. I'd do a blog, but no-one's ever asked me...Maybe someone should make me an offer?
Jeremy, dear, you don't really get blogging do you?
Vote Thatcher!
The BBC Politics Show is running a political heroes poll. Quite how Clare Short or Alex Salmond are included on it is beyond me. Anyway, the point of this post is to point out the left have swung heavily behind Tony Benn (no change there, then) and he is currently outranking the Blessed Margaret.So, time for all Conservatives to do their duty and click HERE to vote for Margaret! Voting closes next Thursday.
Thursday, January 04, 2007
EXCLUSIVE: LibDems in Turmoil over Minority Candidates
At their last conference the LibDems passed a motion setting up a 'diversity fund'. Its aim is similar to the Conservative A list, but rather than having a list there's a fund which gives money to seats selecting women and ethnic minority candidates. Steve Hitchens (former leader of Islington council who lost his seat) has been given the task of administering it. It was her public criticism of him which got Susanne Lamido of Suz Blog expelled from the LibDems a few weeks ago. The fund is obviously very controversial as it means less able minority candidates are being selected in order for local LibDem constituency parties to get the extra money.
This letter from Penny Wilkins (Regional Candidates Chair, East Midlands & Vice Chair English Candidates Committee) was submitted to LibDem News for publication, but for some strangeStalinist reason it wasn't printed. I'm happy to oblige...
Sir, I took on the job of RCC (Regional Candidates Chair) for the East Midlands in September 2000, because no-one else was prepared to do it. I quickly found myself feeling 'at home' in the English Candidates Committee ethos of transparency and fairness in the Approval and Selection of Parliamentary Candidates. Over recent years I have become more and more concerned at the interference (and attempted interference) of the 'great and the good' and now to cap it all we are hearing stories that Steve Hitchins is, allegedly, offering local parties money as long as they pick the 'right' candidate. With my health failing I am unable to continue to fight against those who want to make our party less fair. I am finding it increasingly difficult to administer a system which is continually being interfered with by people who are prepared to compromise our Party's principles in a dash for power. For that reason I am going to stand down from active politics for the next year to see if our party comes back to its senses, values its principles and allows its members to select the most able person for the job without interference.
Yours, Penny Wilkins
Mr Hitchens and the LibDem Candidates Committee clearly have some explaining to do. However, what I am more interested in is the fact that of 69 seats which have selected candidates in the LibDems, only 15 of them are women - a miniscule 21.7%. Compare this with the Conservative equivalent of 38% and you can see which Party is doing better in selecting women candidates. I have no information as to how many ethnic minority candidates the LibDems have selected.
This letter from Penny Wilkins (Regional Candidates Chair, East Midlands & Vice Chair English Candidates Committee) was submitted to LibDem News for publication, but for some strange
Sir, I took on the job of RCC (Regional Candidates Chair) for the East Midlands in September 2000, because no-one else was prepared to do it. I quickly found myself feeling 'at home' in the English Candidates Committee ethos of transparency and fairness in the Approval and Selection of Parliamentary Candidates. Over recent years I have become more and more concerned at the interference (and attempted interference) of the 'great and the good' and now to cap it all we are hearing stories that Steve Hitchins is, allegedly, offering local parties money as long as they pick the 'right' candidate. With my health failing I am unable to continue to fight against those who want to make our party less fair. I am finding it increasingly difficult to administer a system which is continually being interfered with by people who are prepared to compromise our Party's principles in a dash for power. For that reason I am going to stand down from active politics for the next year to see if our party comes back to its senses, values its principles and allows its members to select the most able person for the job without interference.
Yours, Penny Wilkins
Mr Hitchens and the LibDem Candidates Committee clearly have some explaining to do. However, what I am more interested in is the fact that of 69 seats which have selected candidates in the LibDems, only 15 of them are women - a miniscule 21.7%. Compare this with the Conservative equivalent of 38% and you can see which Party is doing better in selecting women candidates. I have no information as to how many ethnic minority candidates the LibDems have selected.
Quotes of the Day
"This wasn't justice. This was a sectarian lynch mob. This was a snuff movie. How dare the Prime Minister pretend that it is somehow nothing to do with him" - Tory MP Boris Johnson on the execution of Saddam Hussein.
"To compensate for my fare going up, the train company has decided to give me more value for money. The journey now takes longer" - Richard Cutler, of Newbury, Berkshire, in a letter to the Daily Telegraph.
"It's very nice but what I see is a silver-haired guy with piggy eyes and not looking quite his best" - Ex-President Bill Clinton, on being described as a sex symbol.
"Ladies! Have a fit upstairs" - Sign on a tailor's shop in Hong Kong.
"Both politicians are gifted in the art of delivering the banal and the obvious as if they have just discovered something really important on our behalf" - Commentator Janet Street-Porter on David Cameron and Environment Secretary David Miliband.
"To compensate for my fare going up, the train company has decided to give me more value for money. The journey now takes longer" - Richard Cutler, of Newbury, Berkshire, in a letter to the Daily Telegraph.
"It's very nice but what I see is a silver-haired guy with piggy eyes and not looking quite his best" - Ex-President Bill Clinton, on being described as a sex symbol.
"Ladies! Have a fit upstairs" - Sign on a tailor's shop in Hong Kong.
"Both politicians are gifted in the art of delivering the banal and the obvious as if they have just discovered something really important on our behalf" - Commentator Janet Street-Porter on David Cameron and Environment Secretary David Miliband.
Bankruptcy Should Never be the Easy Way Out
The level of personal debt in this country will become a huge political issue over the next few years. In the end, individuals have to take responsibility for their own actions. Everyone knows what their income is and what level of debt they can service and they should act accordingly. But the Government has made it so easy to go bankrupt it has taken away bankruptcy’s social stigma. Amazingly, thanks to Labour’s 2003 Insolvency Act you can now emerge from bankruptcy after a mere nine months. Unsurprisingly, the number of annual bankruptcies has now exceeded 100,000 for the first time ever. Just think what the number will rocket to when there’s a recession.
Bankruptcy should never be seen as'the easy way out'. There are even stories of students of are encouraged to go bankrupt as the best way of avoiding paying back loans - they then go travelling the world for a year and by the time they return they are out of bankruptcy.
Bankruptcy leaves a trail of destruction among the debtors. I know few people will have any sympathy for credit card companies or banks who are left being owed thousands, but there are many small companies and individuals who are affected. Bankruptcy should always be a last resort, not a first.
Bankruptcy should never be seen as'the easy way out'. There are even stories of students of are encouraged to go bankrupt as the best way of avoiding paying back loans - they then go travelling the world for a year and by the time they return they are out of bankruptcy.
Bankruptcy leaves a trail of destruction among the debtors. I know few people will have any sympathy for credit card companies or banks who are left being owed thousands, but there are many small companies and individuals who are affected. Bankruptcy should always be a last resort, not a first.
The Demise of the Little Chef
Should we bemoan the imminent demise of the Little Chef chain or treat it with supreme indifference? Some say that it has failed to move with the times and therefore deserves to be consigned to the dustbin of fast food history. I disagree. I’m not a frequent customer but I do like to visit a restaurant where I know exactly what I’m going to get – simple food and reasonably priced. Of course the décor could have been improved, but its 1970s look was part of the Little Chef appeal for me.
Desperate Housewife Says No To...
One of the more bizarre evenings of the 2005 Tory leadership contest was when the two Davids presented an award at the ITV TV awards at the Albert Hall... and were booed. On the way out I heard the two of them discussing Desperate Housewives and which character they both liked the best. At that point I hadn't ever seen an episode, so when they both agreed it was Bree Van de Kamp I didn't bat an eyelid. I was then given the first series on DVD and have been hooked ever since.So when I watched the first episode of the the third series tonight I laughed out loud at this fantastic line from Bree... and then thought of the two Davids...
Picture the scene, Bree is about to have sex for the first time with her newly acquired fiance, Orson (who also happens to be a murderer, but I digress). They rush upstairs into Bree's bedroom and both fall on the bed. Bree takes her blouse off and Orson moves slowly down her body towards... well, you can guess. Bree looks mystified and then horrified as Orson's 'cunning' plan makes itself apparent. She blurts out: 'Orson, I don't do that!' Orson says: 'why not?' Bree, still shocked, replies: 'I'm a Republican!'.
Well, it made me laugh out loud, anyway. I suspect Messers Davis and Cameron did likewise.
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Five Things
I've been tagged me with the five things meme, which should be things you probably don't know about me, and probably didn't want to know :-)...
1. I have horrible feet
2. I used to be a nurse ... and a teacher
3. At the age of 15 I was a member of the Liberal Party... for six months
4. If I had been a girl, my mother intended to call me Emma .... Emma Dale.... Hmmm. Lucky escape, eh?
5. In 1976, on a school visit to Moscow I actually **** my pants in the Kremlin. Long story. I got food poisoning for six months afterwards - we called it Brehznev's revenge.
I nowinflict this on tag Norfolk Blogger, Dizzy, Prague Tory, Kerron Cross and Blamerbell.
1. I have horrible feet
2. I used to be a nurse ... and a teacher
3. At the age of 15 I was a member of the Liberal Party... for six months
4. If I had been a girl, my mother intended to call me Emma .... Emma Dale.... Hmmm. Lucky escape, eh?
5. In 1976, on a school visit to Moscow I actually **** my pants in the Kremlin. Long story. I got food poisoning for six months afterwards - we called it Brehznev's revenge.
I now
What do Ming Campbell & Iain Duncan Smith Have in Common?
Further to my story about Ming below I have now read the BBC report of Ming's Today interview HERE. The interesting bit is the last sentence...
"I will lead the party through this parliament, through the next general election and beyond, and no-one should be in any doubt about that."
Does it not remind you of the time in 2003 when Iain Duncan Smith bounded out of Central Office to tell the waiting media: "I'm in charge"?
It was at that point that we all knew he was not. And so it goes for Ming.
"I will lead the party through this parliament, through the next general election and beyond, and no-one should be in any doubt about that."
Does it not remind you of the time in 2003 when Iain Duncan Smith bounded out of Central Office to tell the waiting media: "I'm in charge"?
It was at that point that we all knew he was not. And so it goes for Ming.
Prescott to Publish Memoirs But Who Will Ghost Them?
The Daily Mail is speculating that John Prescott is saddling up to flog his memoirs to some poor publisher. My advice to any publisher considering offering the old philanderer a huge advance, is this. Save your money. I cannot see what possible market there is for a Prescott retrospective, even if one can conceivably imagine he is capable of writing the book himself.There's no way he will spill the beans on anything sensational and he would view such a book as the best way of ensuring his legacy. I'm in the middle of reading David Blunkett's diaries (a full review will follow when I am finished). Blunkett was paid £400,000 by his publishers and the book has sold fewer than 2,000 copies so far. Work the maths out for yourself.
But I am sure Prescott will persuade some hapless idiot publisher to fork out a six figure sum. I wonder who he will get to ghost it. Having been leaked a few paragraphs from the first draft I think I can safely say he will need one...
"Those f**king bloggers can f**k right off the b****ds I mean what's this bloody internet thingy anyway if it hadn't been for that f**king Simon f**cking Walters in the f**king Mail on f**cking Sunday I'd still be in f**king Dorneyf**kingwood and that's another thing who says I shouldn't play Crockett is that how you spell it I'll spell it how I f**king want to b*****d Tory w*****s..."
Continued on Page 94...
The Danger of Blowing Ming's House Down
My prediction that Ming Campbell will not be leader of the year looks an increasingly good one. Look at the evidence. The PEOPLE ran a story at the weekend headlined NO MERCY FOR MING, three LibDem Candidates have DEFECTED to the Conservatives citing no confidence in Ming - one of them said “Ming Campbell is a ‘has-been’ and since he has been in control of the party, they have been stuck firmly in reverse gear". On BROADCASTING HOUSE on Christmas Eve a number of LibDem councillors expressed their dissatisfaction with their leader. This morning on the Today Programme Ming was forced to DEFEND his leadership, while William Hill are quoting him at 5-1 to fulfill my prediction of a departure by the end of the year. On top of this, the normally uberloyal LibDem Voice, according to Dizzy, is also having an oblique pop at Ming...
"In what seems a rather rose-tinted review of 2006 here, it bemoans the recent downturn in the polls for the party and appears to blame Ming Campbell. It suggests he has failed to "seize the political agenda" and his team needs to find an "issue" in 2007 to get back on track."
Now, far be it from to suggest that this amounts to anything more than a row of beans. But even the most diehard LibDem would surely admit this is not an ideal way to start a new year. OK, I suppose it';s a slightly better way than they started 2006, but that is scant consolation.
But before any Conservatives start salivating at the thought of Ming Campbell's departure, let's just contemplate his likely successors. They are Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne. Either of them would be a far more formidable opponent for the Tories than Ming. So let's not do anything which might tip Ming over the edge. The LibDems will indulge in a lot of huffing and puffing over the next few months - especially when they have a dismal result in the May elections - but it may not be in Conservative interests for them to have enough wind to blow Ming's house down.
PS Having said that, you know I won't be able to resist having the occasional puff...
"In what seems a rather rose-tinted review of 2006 here, it bemoans the recent downturn in the polls for the party and appears to blame Ming Campbell. It suggests he has failed to "seize the political agenda" and his team needs to find an "issue" in 2007 to get back on track."
Now, far be it from to suggest that this amounts to anything more than a row of beans. But even the most diehard LibDem would surely admit this is not an ideal way to start a new year. OK, I suppose it';s a slightly better way than they started 2006, but that is scant consolation.
But before any Conservatives start salivating at the thought of Ming Campbell's departure, let's just contemplate his likely successors. They are Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne. Either of them would be a far more formidable opponent for the Tories than Ming. So let's not do anything which might tip Ming over the edge. The LibDems will indulge in a lot of huffing and puffing over the next few months - especially when they have a dismal result in the May elections - but it may not be in Conservative interests for them to have enough wind to blow Ming's house down.
PS Having said that, you know I won't be able to resist having the occasional puff...
This Life - Outstanding!
I've just finished watching the THIS LIFE reunion. Having seen it poo-poohed in various reviews I wasn't expecting much of it... that is until I saw NEWSNIGHT REVIEW a few weeks ago and saw it being slagged off by Germaine Greer, Paul Morley and someone else equally pretentious (Tony Parsons?).When I heard they hated it I knew it would be great. And it was. It recreated the mood of the original series superbly. Anna was just as screwed up, Warren was still neurotic, Egg was still self obsessed and Milly was such a control freak. And Myles was.... well Myles. Of course we were all waiting to see whether Myles and Anna would finally get it together. And in true THIS LIFE style, they did... but they didn't. A friend of mine emailed me just now and described the THIS LIFE reunion as "just enough punch and not too much cheese." Quite.
PS A special moment for anyone who 'gets' the headline...
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
PoliticalBetting.com Predictions for 2007
Political Betting.com is asking for forecasts. I thought I'd share mine with you...On Christmas Day 2007 who will be…?
1. PRIME MINISTER
David Cameron, in coalition with the Liberal Democrats, after Gordon Brown calls an early election.
2. LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION
Gordon Brown
3. LEADER OF THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS
If prediction 1 comes true, Ming Campbell, if there is no election, Nick Clegg
4. DEPUTY LEADER OF THE LABOUR PARTY
Hillary Benn
5. CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
William Hague
6. PRESIDENT OF FRANCE
Segolene Royal
7. SCOTLAND'S FIRST MINISTER
Alex Salmond (is he standing?!)
8. LEADER IN RACE FOR DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION
Barack Obama
9. LEADER IN RACE FOR REPUBLICAN NOMINATION
Rudi Giuliani
For how many days during 2007 will…?
10. TONY BLAIR SERVE AS PM
31
11. MING CAMPBELL SERVE AS LIBDEM LEADER
212
12. DAVID CAMERON SERVE AS TORY LEADER
365
13. LEMBIT OPIK CONTINUE TO SERVE ON LIBDEM FRONT BENCH
365
14. CASH FOR HONOURS INQUIRY CONTINUE BEFORE CHARGES LAID
76
15. TORY PARTY A LIST CONTINUE IN ITS CURRENT FORM
130
Conservatives Appoint New Conference Company
The Daily Telegraph has followed up ConservativeHome's story about the new company the Conservatives have appointed to run their conferences. It is called Fingerprint Conferences and was only set up in November. One of its principals is Azahar Hussein, who was also a key staff member of CCO Conferences and has effectively run the commercial exhibition at the conference for the last three years. A likeable and cheerful chap, Azahar will bring a great degree of enthusiasm to the task ahead, but one can't help wondering if this is a change of name rather than a change of personnel. Tim Montgomerie is asking questions to CCHQ about how this potentially lucrative contract was awarded, but has so far received no answers.
UPDATE: CCHQ have just made this statement... The tendering of the contract to manage Spring Forum and Annual Party Conferences has been handled by a procurement company which advertised the contract in the events industry magazine 'Event' during September. The tendering process involved face to face interviews with a number of companies, and after discussions to see which model met the Party’s conference needs best, Fingerprint Events Ltd were awarded the contract by the Party Board. Commercial Confidentiality Agreements signed with all companies restrict us from releasing further details other than contained in the original press release. Fingerprint Events were judged to have the most suitable model especially in terms of CCHQ control and the financial return to the Party.
UPDATE: CCHQ have just made this statement... The tendering of the contract to manage Spring Forum and Annual Party Conferences has been handled by a procurement company which advertised the contract in the events industry magazine 'Event' during September. The tendering process involved face to face interviews with a number of companies, and after discussions to see which model met the Party’s conference needs best, Fingerprint Events Ltd were awarded the contract by the Party Board. Commercial Confidentiality Agreements signed with all companies restrict us from releasing further details other than contained in the original press release. Fingerprint Events were judged to have the most suitable model especially in terms of CCHQ control and the financial return to the Party.
Prescott Loses it on TODAY
If you weren't listening to John Prescott on the Today programme this morning at 8.10. it was a vintage Two Jags performance. He just stopped himself saying "for christ's sake" at one point and spent the whole interview attacking Ed Stourton. It will be on the Today WEBSITE Listen Again facility.
Dizzy, meanwhile, has a good STORY of a Gordon Brown 'don't do as I do, do as I say', variety.
Dizzy, meanwhile, has a good STORY of a Gordon Brown 'don't do as I do, do as I say', variety.
Monday, January 01, 2007
December Figures for Iain Dale's Diary
December traffic was marginally down on November October at 130,872 unique visitors and 228,952 page downloads. Bearing in mind that traffic collapses over Christmas, the trend is actually up (good bit of New Labour type spin there!)! Here are my top 28 linking sites (ie incoming hits) for December. All these sites referred at least 100 people here. The arrows denote whether a site has moved up or down or stayed static since November. Interestingly ConservativeHome has overtaken Guido for the first time...
1. ConservativeHome 14.06% ↑ 2. Guido Fawkes 12.56% ↓ 3. PoliticalBetting 6.88% ↔ 4. National Review Corner 3.42% NEW 5. Croydonian ↑ 6. Blairwatch ↑ 7. Prague Tory ↔ 8. Andrew Sullivan NEW 9. An Englishman's Castle ↓ 10. Devil's Kitchen ↑ 11. Witanagemot ↔ 12. Biased BBC ↓ 13. Daniel Finkelstein ↓ 14. Adam Smith Institute ↑ 15. Paul Linford ↓ 16. Archbishop Cranmer ↑ 17. Daily Pundit ↑ 18. W4MP ↓ 19. Dizzy Thinks ↑ 20. Web Cameron ↓ 21. Coming Out From Under NEW 22. Tim Blair NEW 23. Cally’s Kitchen ↓ 24. Campaign for an English Parliament NEW 25. Tory Radio NEW 26. Public Interest NEW 27. Norfolk Blogger NEW 28. Ellee Seymour ↔
Dropping out of the Top linkers are Tim Worstall, EU Referendum, Ginger & Dynamite, Mars Hill, Mikey's Tent of Reality, Looking for a Voice, 18DoughtyStreet.com, Clive Davis, Kerron Cross, Drinking from Home, The Spine, Rightlinks, Hoby Cartoons, Liberal England, A Conservative's Blog
1. ConservativeHome 14.06% ↑ 2. Guido Fawkes 12.56% ↓ 3. PoliticalBetting 6.88% ↔ 4. National Review Corner 3.42% NEW 5. Croydonian ↑ 6. Blairwatch ↑ 7. Prague Tory ↔ 8. Andrew Sullivan NEW 9. An Englishman's Castle ↓ 10. Devil's Kitchen ↑ 11. Witanagemot ↔ 12. Biased BBC ↓ 13. Daniel Finkelstein ↓ 14. Adam Smith Institute ↑ 15. Paul Linford ↓ 16. Archbishop Cranmer ↑ 17. Daily Pundit ↑ 18. W4MP ↓ 19. Dizzy Thinks ↑ 20. Web Cameron ↓ 21. Coming Out From Under NEW 22. Tim Blair NEW 23. Cally’s Kitchen ↓ 24. Campaign for an English Parliament NEW 25. Tory Radio NEW 26. Public Interest NEW 27. Norfolk Blogger NEW 28. Ellee Seymour ↔
Dropping out of the Top linkers are Tim Worstall, EU Referendum, Ginger & Dynamite, Mars Hill, Mikey's Tent of Reality, Looking for a Voice, 18DoughtyStreet.com, Clive Davis, Kerron Cross, Drinking from Home, The Spine, Rightlinks, Hoby Cartoons, Liberal England, A Conservative's Blog
Curbishley Out!
West Ham are 4-0 down to Reading after 36 minutes. Does it get any worse than that? I may have to revise me prediction HERE that relegation will be avoided. Alan Pardew, please come back... Of course the players are to blame, but Curbishley has to answer the question on every West Ham fan's lips: Why on earth won't you start with Carlos Tevez? In each game I've seen him play he has looked the most likely to score. Mascherano hasn't been given a look in and yet he's supposed to be the best player in South America. And he dropped the fantastic Mark Noble (our next big home grown player) and brought in Shaun Newton, a journeyman player well past his best who has just finished a ban for cocaine use. In addition Jonathan Spector, our best defendere this season, has been dropped in favour of the ageing Christian Dailly. Admittedly Dailly played well against Man City, but it's a strange thing to do to drop your best player. I know you shouldn't judge a manager on just a few games, but I am pretty sure this would not have happened under Pardew. Happy New Year!UPDATE: I am embarrased to report that the final score was 6-0.
Tory 'A' Lister in 24 Hour Orgy Shame
I am ashamed of myself. I have indulged in a 24 hour orgy - and not for the first time. In fact, it's the fifth year in a row I have done it over Christmas. I don't know what comes over me.
Yes folks, I've just finished watching Season 5 of '24' on DVD (hah, gotcha!). Normally, programmes like this never live up to the first series but not this one. It has it all - political intrigue of the first order, heroes and villans, a bit of love interest and the brilliant Kiefer Sutherland. However, the best performance of the series must go to Glenn Morshower who plays President Logan's security agent Aaron Pierce. Totally believeable. The only bit of nitpicking I can come up with is the character of President Charles Logan, who seemed to morph into Richard Nixon as the series progressed.
Typical of those Hollywood lefties! The whole thing, like Spooks, rests on the fact that the fate of the whole country seems to rest on the heroism of one person or one group of people. Totally unbelievable, of course, but who cares. '24' is all about escapism and however it may test the viewer's patience from time to time, it leaves you wanting more. Whenever I get to the end of a series of '24', having watched all 24 episodes over three days I get the same sort of withdrawal symptoms I get after returning from an enjoyable holiday.If you have never watched '24' I highly recommend you get the Series 1 Box Set. I guarantee you will be hooked.
Warning: Am About to Change to Beta Blogger
I am going to attempt to move this blog to Beta Blogger today which may result in a permanent temporary interruption of service. Bear with me.
UPDATE: Panic over. Blogger won't let me do it. They say "While the new version of Blogger is still in beta, some users with certain types of blogs will not be able to switch to it. We will be adding support for these blogs as soon as possible, so everyone can join in the fun. But for now, if you have any of the following on your account, you will need to hold off for a bit:
A very large blog. (More than a couple thousand posts + comments."
Well thanks, guys, that more or less makes up my mind for me. Wordpress here I come.
UPDATE: Panic over. Blogger won't let me do it. They say "While the new version of Blogger is still in beta, some users with certain types of blogs will not be able to switch to it. We will be adding support for these blogs as soon as possible, so everyone can join in the fun. But for now, if you have any of the following on your account, you will need to hold off for a bit:
A very large blog. (More than a couple thousand posts + comments."
Well thanks, guys, that more or less makes up my mind for me. Wordpress here I come.
EXCLUSIVE: Brown Costs Tour Operators £47 Million in Illegal Tax Hike
You will recall the two stories HERE and HERE that I have written in the past week on Gordon Brown's ultra vires airport duty hike. Well here's another one.
It appears that the Treasury's failure to anticipate the need for parliamentary legislation for the rise in airport passenger duty has meant that tour operators are facing a £47 million bill for money they cannot claim back from passengers. The industry is expected to pay the duty for passengers who have already booked their flights way in advance.
Regulation 11 of the Package Travel Regs means that tour operators are unable to surcharge passengers who have already booked, unless the amount of the surcharge exceeds 2% of the holiday price, and only then for the amount by which it exceeds 2%. This means that tour operators will have to absorb the full amount of the cost for the bookings already taken. Taking A C Neilsen data, and interpolating this for the entire industry, it is estimated that approximately 4 million holidays have been sold for departures after 1st February. Accordingly, the tour operator industry is being asked to pay a sum that it cannot recover from customers of £47 million, before any sales directly by airlines is taken into account (according to figured calculated by the Federation of Tour Operators). One you include airlines in the figure it could well top £100 million.
Apparently the airlines and tour operators told the Treasury they would consider refusing to pay the money if they couldn't collect it from their passengers, but the Treasury's typically brutal response was to say that if they refused the legislation would be made retrospective anyway.
The tour operators have pointed out that all previous changes to APD have been undertaken with several months notice. This one has been introduced on 7 weeks notice, which also includes Christmas. Their evidence to the Treasury (which I have seen) says:
"The changes need primary legislation, and we need to understand the timescale for introducing that legislation. It will be challenging to make the necessary changes to the law by 1st February, and we would be extremely concerned if any change was effectively retrospective. Time is required to change systems and prices, and technically, it is questionable whether prices appearing in brochures can be changed at all without committing a criminal offence. Trading standards are inconsistent in their interpretation of this rule, but there are certainly some who would regard any price increase from that advertised in a brochure as constituting an offence."
So a measure proposed by Gordon Brown as a "green tax" is nothing of the sort. It's a classic stealth tax on business and one which could send a couple of tour operators over the edge. Well done Gordon!
UPDATE 2 JAN: The Daily Mail has picked up the story on Page 28. Can't find it on their website though...
It appears that the Treasury's failure to anticipate the need for parliamentary legislation for the rise in airport passenger duty has meant that tour operators are facing a £47 million bill for money they cannot claim back from passengers. The industry is expected to pay the duty for passengers who have already booked their flights way in advance.
Regulation 11 of the Package Travel Regs means that tour operators are unable to surcharge passengers who have already booked, unless the amount of the surcharge exceeds 2% of the holiday price, and only then for the amount by which it exceeds 2%. This means that tour operators will have to absorb the full amount of the cost for the bookings already taken. Taking A C Neilsen data, and interpolating this for the entire industry, it is estimated that approximately 4 million holidays have been sold for departures after 1st February. Accordingly, the tour operator industry is being asked to pay a sum that it cannot recover from customers of £47 million, before any sales directly by airlines is taken into account (according to figured calculated by the Federation of Tour Operators). One you include airlines in the figure it could well top £100 million.
Apparently the airlines and tour operators told the Treasury they would consider refusing to pay the money if they couldn't collect it from their passengers, but the Treasury's typically brutal response was to say that if they refused the legislation would be made retrospective anyway.
The tour operators have pointed out that all previous changes to APD have been undertaken with several months notice. This one has been introduced on 7 weeks notice, which also includes Christmas. Their evidence to the Treasury (which I have seen) says:
"The changes need primary legislation, and we need to understand the timescale for introducing that legislation. It will be challenging to make the necessary changes to the law by 1st February, and we would be extremely concerned if any change was effectively retrospective. Time is required to change systems and prices, and technically, it is questionable whether prices appearing in brochures can be changed at all without committing a criminal offence. Trading standards are inconsistent in their interpretation of this rule, but there are certainly some who would regard any price increase from that advertised in a brochure as constituting an offence."
So a measure proposed by Gordon Brown as a "green tax" is nothing of the sort. It's a classic stealth tax on business and one which could send a couple of tour operators over the edge. Well done Gordon!
UPDATE 2 JAN: The Daily Mail has picked up the story on Page 28. Can't find it on their website though...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)