tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26386256442609842592024-03-13T07:58:32.287+00:00The PoliblogsThe Ultimate Round-up of the Political BlogosphereGarbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.comBlogger338125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-77104007141954187052009-01-21T15:59:00.006+00:002009-01-21T16:29:05.896+00:00Better late than never!As the keener readers amongst you will have noticed, I have not posted in a time on the Poliblogs. You can (and have been able to for quite some time) <a href="http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/author/garbo/">still read my blog posts</a> over at The Wardman Wire.<br /><br />Garbo<div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-54323309747308468772008-02-20T17:02:00.004+00:002008-02-20T17:15:08.145+00:00The PMQs Battle 20 February 2008<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxVg8160Oxd6AGMBZtqbpD24HXLd-Oq5GCXRLlHlz8njoZ054drysbLXQy9_U8CxC50YMMIxMYRK0iZf9fU-RzgVQa3YLUKhqxsnWCLPqJ-1cNOo2r3wBM0TLCx7GCpFc4iGZUBO0G/s1600-h/PMQs.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxVg8160Oxd6AGMBZtqbpD24HXLd-Oq5GCXRLlHlz8njoZ054drysbLXQy9_U8CxC50YMMIxMYRK0iZf9fU-RzgVQa3YLUKhqxsnWCLPqJ-1cNOo2r3wBM0TLCx7GCpFc4iGZUBO0G/s400/PMQs.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5169108974645559154" border="0" /></a> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">PMQs - The Verdict</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">You can bet there were many places Gordon Brown would rather be on his 57th birthday than in the chamber for prime minister's questions. There was little evidence of Brown letting his hair down - apart from cracking a joke about asking the prime minister of China about Wigan - but at least the leader of the Opposition took the time to wish him many happy returns. And, reflecting on some of the PM's disastrous early performances at the despatch box at noon on a Wednesday, it is hard not to conclude that he has got a lot better at the weekly joust.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.epolitix.com/EN/Blog/200802/3baeee59-52a9-44a2-a649-82963d6fff89.htm">ePolitix</a></p><o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Northern Rock And DNA Dominate PMQs</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Given the Speaker's refusal to allow a Conservative request for a statement, it was perhaps unsurprising that David Cameron chose his opening salvo to be on the Crown Prosecution Service. The Government stands accused of inaction following a request from Dutch police to compare thousands of DNA profiles against the UK's own database - and possibly catch some serious criminals in the process.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91211-1306127,00.html">Niall Paterson</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Point-by-point: Question time</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The main points from prime minister's questions on Wednesday, 20 February, from 1200 GMT:<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Prime Minister Gordon Brown sent his condolences to the family of Corporal Damian Lawrence who was killed in Afghanistan. <span style=""> </span>Answering a question from Labour MP Ann Begg, Mr Brown said all of the money lent to Northern Rock would be paid back. He said the government would only return the bank to private ownership when it could get the "best deal" for taxpayers.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7254713.stm">BBC</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7254713.stm"><br /></a></p> <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(51, 102, 255);">The Verdict</span> <p style="font-style: italic;" class="MsoNormal">I am pushed for time today, so going to have to make it short and, hopefully, sweet...</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The opening Labour planted spoiler question<span style=""> </span>was there as is becoming the new Brown tactic – Brown got a dolly of a question on Northern Rock.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Cameron wisely steered clear of Northern Rock – wisely because Brown has nearly as much ammo to throw at the Tories on this one as they do at him.<span style=""> </span>Also Brown would have been expecting it and easily prepared.<span style=""> </span>Instead Cameron went for the “missing” Netherlands data disc, containing DNA profiles from crime scenes, sent to the Crown Prosecution Service [CPS] in January last year, to be checked against the UK's database.<span style=""> </span>Cameron won this encounter, but only used three questions up...</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Clegg then stepped up, delivered a couple of good’uns: one on Northern Rock where he managed to discredit the government and Tories and one on energy prices.<span style=""> </span>Good show from Clegg.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Brown gave a cheap shot about the Tories not asking about Northern Rock – which was a bit dumb considering Cameron had only asked three questions and it obvious what his next three would be about!<span style=""> </span>And they were.<span style=""> </span>Only Cameron decided to talk about Northern Rock’s Freedom of Information status.<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I am not really sure where Cameron was going with this.<span style=""> </span>At first I thought that maybe he knew something explosive and exciting and that he would drop the bombshell on Brown with the damage being so bad the Prime Minister would have had little opportunity but to resign there and then.<span style=""> </span>Instead he had no insider information, no scandal, nothing at all.<span style=""> </span>Just a bit sensationalist conspiracy theory about the government trying cover something up (though Dave had no idea what).<span style=""> </span>It could have worked out, but to have a convincing conspiracy theory he should have at least had something up his sleeve about what Brown was trying to cover up.<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Cameron, at this point, had blown it.<span style=""> </span>Brown was batting away Cameron’s full tosses like Don Bradman might have seen my pathetic attempts at bowling had the extremely unlikely chance of him facing up to me on at the crease ever happened.<span style=""> </span>Brown was in full throw and Cameron was going nowhere.<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The real problem with the Northern Rock issue for the Tories is that ecomonics is Brown’s specialist subject – in fact I think it is his only subject.<span style=""> </span>While they should be making good capital out of all this, Cameron is no match for Brown in a one on one dual.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">It was a PMQs of two halves today, but with Brown finishing far the stronger I have to give him the points. In Cameron's defense, however, he will probably get in to the evening news with his questions on the DNA discs - so maybe I am being harsh but...<br /></p> <span style="color:red;">Brown 1</span><br /><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 255);">Cameron 0<br /></span><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-20861421483920122432008-02-20T16:02:00.000+00:002008-02-20T16:03:35.306+00:00The Late Lunch Briefing<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYI14UuiaCWIqcU-wncoJ-i54nyEjdwF45Jm8nMGZQwtpbHpPkFZkEBhc15OFtDwi-M6k0vqmkx6w5_KzJOWsMXjOB33KYSIk4uEfTxjrXHwlCdOg2_oLlxz2GtBdO1x2wH7t6yH-E/s1600-h/Ploughman's.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYI14UuiaCWIqcU-wncoJ-i54nyEjdwF45Jm8nMGZQwtpbHpPkFZkEBhc15OFtDwi-M6k0vqmkx6w5_KzJOWsMXjOB33KYSIk4uEfTxjrXHwlCdOg2_oLlxz2GtBdO1x2wH7t6yH-E/s400/Ploughman's.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5169093615842508642" border="0" /></a><i style="">I will be taking a couple of weeks out after today, so my postings will become far less frequent, though I do hope to get the odd thing up – not least the PMQs Battle on Wednesdays.<span style=""> </span>Today’s Late Lunch Briefing is just a quickie...<o:p></o:p></i> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">The Latest Poll – Bad News for the Tories<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">ICM has released its latest polling figures – the first pollster to do so in light of the nationalisation of Northern Rock – and it makes miserable reading for the Tories.<span style=""> </span>They are unchanged on 37%, but Labour are actually up two points on 34%.<span style=""> </span>ICM, it should be noted, have been the harshest on the Tory share of late, but the fact Labour has gone up post NR is a telling story in itself.<span style=""> </span>All this ties in with the growing perception that the government have handled this latest episode of the Northern Rock debacle fairly well; and that their decision making has been far more sensible than the option that the Tories want to pursue.<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">To Cut or Not to Cut<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The same poll has said that a significant number of people want to see some sort of tax cuts or sustained spending.<span style=""> </span>The obvious thing for the Tories to do is promise tax cuts therefore you might think.<span style=""> </span>But it is an absolute minefield for them and really sums up the difficulties the Tories face if they are ever to get a serious, general election winning lead over Labour.<span style=""> </span>As soon as they start to promise tax cuts the first thing everyone thinks about is the NHS.<span style=""> </span>Get the Tories on the NHS and they become the nasty party again.<span style=""> </span>In fact, get them on tax cuts and they are easily painted as the nasty party again because everyone assumes cuts in key public services.<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">However, unless the Tories do something they are simply unelectable – as poll after poll, month after month has shown.<span style=""> </span>They are going to have to be very clever in how they position any public spending policies or they will be taken to the cleaners.<span style=""> </span>But Cameron and Osborne will sooner or later have to take a risk – when they do this very much depends on when an election is going to be called and how itchy the right of the party get about the Cameron leadership.<span style=""> </span>If the right start to sense that they are on to another hiding with Cameron in charge, expect them to become more and more vocal and the Tories to become more and more un-electable.<span style=""> </span>But, a 3% lead in the polls is simply not good enough for the Tories.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">Dangerous times ahead<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Forget Labour being “in between a Rock and a hard place” with their banking issues, long term it is the Tories who are firmly wedged between the rock and hard place – they are damned if do and they are damned if they don’t.<span style=""> </span>I will be very interested to see what effect NR nationalisation has had on the other pollsters’ polls.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-1891359821617593152008-02-20T10:45:00.002+00:002008-02-20T10:47:16.284+00:00The Poliblogs 20 February 2008<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgmhDF9tq4s-CBXZv0sb7KiM9Xyq5m85q2u98r4XnHBtn-MbyyyBB_xX2mxCFwkSZ_jcU0OZiHcoPOGvmBN75LaYffZS9HLfFZPUvWsj1jYLTjJZ_TZe5_rSBUSBBLCvwnIn11exUvI/s1600-h/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgmhDF9tq4s-CBXZv0sb7KiM9Xyq5m85q2u98r4XnHBtn-MbyyyBB_xX2mxCFwkSZ_jcU0OZiHcoPOGvmBN75LaYffZS9HLfFZPUvWsj1jYLTjJZ_TZe5_rSBUSBBLCvwnIn11exUvI/s400/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5169012144607870802" border="0" /></a><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Are the Tories wrong on Northern Rock?</span><o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal">Have the Tories got their policy and tone right in their response to the nationalisation of Northern Rock? The jury is out.<span style=""> </span>For understandable reasons, based on their desire for voters to see this as a cataclysmic event, they have turned up the rhetoric against Darling and Brown to quite abusive levels. However, there is a creeping sense that it is not working. Voters are entitled to ask: what on earth would the Tories do differently at this point? Cue Conservative mumbling about the Bank of England, not starting from here and private sector solutions.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/arethetorieswrongaboutnorthernrock.htm">Three Line Whip</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">From a rock to a hard place</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">At last, after four months of dithering, the UK government has finally decided to nationalize the failed bank, Northern Rock. To their credit, and as if to show how far they have grown from their Old Labour roots, they declare that this nationalization will be "temporary". But as the economist Milton Friedman once noted, "Nothing is more permanent than a temporary government programme".</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/economics/from-a-rock-to-a-hard-place-20080220933/">Adam Smith Inst.</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Darling/Osborne Fiscal Policy Meets The Smurfs</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Yesterday, the TPA's Corin Taylor picked him up on one point he made, which was that cutting spending growth below Labour's planned 2.1% pa would be to "head off onto the margins of the political debate," chasing a target that "would be lower than anything Margaret Thatcher achieved during the economic turbulence she faced in her first parliament". Corin sets out the history of real public spending growth for the last 35 years so we can see the whole picture. He argues that although spending did indeed grow by more than 2.1% pa during Thatcher's first parliament (2.3% pa to be precise), it was an extraordinarily turbulent time. Over her whole period in office she got spending growth down to 1.5% pa, even taking account of the higher growth in the early years.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2008/02/darlingosborne-fiscal-policy-meets.html">Burning Our Money</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Northern Rock: History Will Vindicate Darling</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">So says Hopi Sen here. LOL agree 100% with all three predictions.<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>1. Northern Rock will be a money spinner;<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>2. Natasha will have time limited effect on Five;<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>3. Gordon will edge PMQs tomorrow.<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Five are going to be on an upward swing anyway because of factors other than the lovely NK so it may be a little difficult to analyse the out turn.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://chrispaul-labouroflove.blogspot.com/2008/02/northern-rock-history-will-vindicate.html">Chris Paul</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Don't worry Darling</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">David Cameron is calling for his head, the City has lost confidence and the bookies are offering 5/2 that he will be gone from the Treasury by the end of the year. Yet, I suspect that Alistair Darling has more job security than most. Darling was a temporary appointment; no one believes that Brown will keep him in post after the next election which explains why some young Brownites were so keen on an early election. But to move Darling before polling day would be a huge risk. First of all, it would call into question Brown’s judgement in appointing him in the first place. Second, it would add considerably to the feeling that this is a government on its last legs. Finally, there is no guarantee that Darling would go quietly.<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/512706/dont-worry-darling.thtml">Coffee House</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Cuba after Castro</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Stay in one of the five star hotels, and Cuba is a fabulous place for a holiday. Sit down by that swimming pool and bask in the Caribbean sunshine, light up a cigar from beyond the wilder shores of Freudian symbolism and knock back cocktails blended from the finest rum on earth. And if it’s nightlife you want, there’s hot jazz and salsa clubs that stay open until four am. That’s on the weeknights. Convertible pesos only, of course.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.davidosler.com/2008/02/cuba_after_castro.html">Dave’s Part</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Yes, it was dodgy</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The long-awaited release of an early draft of the British government's Iraq dossier has produced a smoking gun</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/chris_ames/2008/02/yes_it_was_dodgy.html">Chris Ames</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">The selfishness of the Council Tax non payers</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Let's get one thing straight immediately. I don't like the Council Tax and I want to see it replaced by a fairer system based on people's ability to pay. What else would you expect from a Liberal Democrat.But I do object strongly to people who deliberately refuse to pay their council tax in order to "make a point". I say this in relation to a gentleman in Norfolk who is now being sent to prison for 34 days because he has again refused to pay his council tax.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://norfolkblogger.blogspot.com/2008/02/selfishness-of-council-tax-non-payers.html">Norfolk Blogger</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Ken Clarke rejects English Parliament</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Former Chancellor Ken Clarke, Chairman of David Cameron's Democracy task force, gave evidence to the Commons' Justice Select Committee yesterday.<span style=""> </span>The Committee is taking evidence on the impact of devolution.<span style=""> </span>Within his evidence he said that...</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://conservativehome.blogs.com/parliament/2008/02/ken-clarke-reje.html">Conservative Home</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Should we have more politics on TV?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Jon Bright (London, OK): Mark Bell of CentreForum has an interesting piece in CiF today asking the above question. I had a rather ingrained resistance to the idea, but he might have turned me round. The case against, which he deconstructs, runs as follows:<span style=""> </span>Here in the UK, political parties are banned from advertising on television or radio - with the exception of occasional five-minute party political broadcasts. The logic is seemingly that political advertising encourages negative attacks, reduces politics to soundbites and superficiality, and increases the political influence of the corporations and vested interests whose money would be needed to fund such advertising.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://ourkingdom.opendemocracy.net/2008/02/19/should-we-have-more-politics-on-tv/">Our Kingdom</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Council Tax pensioner jailed</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Meet Mr Richard Fitzmaurice, a 76-year-old pensioner who has devoted his life to his country, who served 22 years as a soldier in the Royal Army Ordnance Corps, and who yesterday was handcuffed and led away to prison for non-payment of his council tax. The humiliation of handcuffs was a bizarre decision for someone has never threatened anyone or exhibited any signs of resistance to his fate. He was there, he said, ‘on a matter of principle’, because ‘the way old age pensioners are being treated is shameful’.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2008/02/council-tax-pensioner-jailed.html">Cranmer</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Only three Daves from ICM in the Guardian</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The poll that caught me by surprise. My apologies for not getting a thread up earlier but the latest Guardian ICM poll has taken me by surprise - I wasn’t expecting it until next Tuesday which would have followed the paper’s normal pattern. Also the fieldwork took place at the end of the half term week in many places when a lot of people are away. Pollsters tend to avoid such periods because they have thrown up odd results in the past. The shares are with changes on the last ICM poll CON 37% (nc): LAB 34% (+2): LD21% (nc). So good for Labour and the Lib Dems but disappointing for the Tories.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/02/19/only-three-daves-from-icm-in-the-guardian/">Political Betting</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">67% tell ICM that their taxes are too high</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Guardian suggests that voters prefer "continued spending at the next election over tax cuts" by 51% to 36%.<span style=""> </span>We'll need to look at the exact question ICM asked but that seems a pretty useless finding if that was the question asked. <span style=""> </span>What really would be interesting would be to identify voters' reactions to pledges of specific promises of, say, a reduction in council tax, paid for by slower growth in spending.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2008/02/67-tell-icm-tha.html">Conservative Home</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Tories 3 points ahead in latest ICM poll</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">ICM’s monthly poll for the Guardian has topline figures of CON 37%, LAB 34%, LDEM 21%. The changes from the last ICM poll are Labour up 2, with the other two parties unchanged. The poll was conducted between the 15th and 17th of February. The poll continues the pattern we’ve seen since September last year of Labour doing comparatively better compared to the Conservatives in ICM polls done for the Guardian than in polls done for other clients. As I said when I first commented on this apparent pattern, I can find no obvious explanation for it, but as the months go past the patten seems to be consistent. </p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.blogger.com/Tories%203%20points%20ahead%20in%20latest%20ICM%20poll">Polling Report</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-1027406937932169592008-02-20T09:37:00.002+00:002008-02-20T09:44:57.404+00:00A View Across the Pond<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjHdxqJqtwqYf_XzNqEICDvRvdb9pKLYdY-savNc_exitJZyIPiHGwRSMq9-1xl3KSh6LLUgi-Cr6F9UwvPpC22iZguz9L4QjcEAsbDHJOZJRjmc8gHepdbYcpdjx-VRjWw4llAbcR/s1600-h/us_flag.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjHdxqJqtwqYf_XzNqEICDvRvdb9pKLYdY-savNc_exitJZyIPiHGwRSMq9-1xl3KSh6LLUgi-Cr6F9UwvPpC22iZguz9L4QjcEAsbDHJOZJRjmc8gHepdbYcpdjx-VRjWw4llAbcR/s400/us_flag.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5168994552421826370" border="0" /></a><b style="">The fall of Casro<o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal">Yesterday came the news that Fidel Castro is standing down as leader of Cuba.<span style=""> </span>It was swiftly followed up by a statement from Mr Liberty and Democracy himself, George Bush, saying that he wants a democratic transition to come over the small island.<span style=""> </span>Now, I am not just about to defend Castro or his regime nor am I going to criticise it.<span style=""> </span>The focus here is with George Bush and it goes right to root of why the popularity of Americans has suffered so badly in past few years.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">In defence of the US<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">First thing first however, I am not a US basher.<span style=""> </span>If I had a choice between the US and any other of the emerging super powers running the world it is a no contest for me.<span style=""> </span>The lazy, stereotype myths that Americans are dumb are extremely ill-founded.<span style=""> </span>The US could teach Britain a thing or two about many areas of politics and standards.<span style=""> </span>I am sure that in twenty years time, or however long it is before the BRIC countries start to really have an impact on world affairs, all those ill-informed righteous bigots will be longing for the day when a true democracy had the base of power.<span style=""> </span>However, there is a good reason why the US has got a growing band of haters and critics and it is best exemplified by the situation in Cuba.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">The stinking hypocrisy<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The call for the US to have democracy installed in Cuba absolutely stinks of hypocrisy.<span style=""> </span>This is the country that has a small corner of Cuba solely used for the imprisonment of hundreds of inmates for as long as they want without trial.<span style=""> </span>They don’t do this in their own country because it is against their constitution and against International law.<span style=""> </span>The very poor standards and lack of human rights that the US criticises Cuba for having are the very same poor standards and lack of human rights that the US is taking full advantage of for their own means.<span style=""> </span>Who the hell is George Bush to tell Cuba what political avenue to pursue when it is, de facto, practicing exactly what it is preaching against and much worse?</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">For Example<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Take the case of Omar Khadr, a 15 year old boy.<span style=""> </span>Now I don’t know what this guy has or hasn’t done and quite frankly I don’t care – it is up to a court to decide.<span style=""> </span>However under US and International law he is a minor and should be tried in a juvenile court.<span style=""> </span>But as the US is using Cuba as its base to torture and hold suspected terrorist subjects, it can do whatever the hell it likes.<span style=""> </span>Thus, Khadr will be tried without any specialist juvenile judge, despite the trial focusing on his actions and words between the ages of ten (the age he is alleged to have been forced to join al-Qaeda) and 15.<span style=""> </span>He is treated as an adult prisoner of war, interned with adults while he faces trial.<span style=""> </span>This could not happen in America, but can and does in Cuba. Then there are the stories of water-boarding and other torture methods, poor living conditions; and remember not one of these men have been found guilty of anything nor are they likely to stand trial at the type of court that the US would demand for its own citizens and for other countries to adopt.<br /></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">Hope for the future<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Until America practices what it preaches, what position is in to tell other nations to adopt certain standards?<span style=""> </span>I am all for the standards that they do preach, but they are so ill-equipped to be preaching right now.<span style=""> </span>This is a George Bush issue currently, let’s hope that a McCain, Clinton or Obama clamps down on this desperate hypocrisy and makes the US a nation that has the integrity as well as the compulsion that the world will want to follow.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-57954191514739361712008-02-19T11:14:00.001+00:002008-02-19T11:15:36.721+00:00Politics Decoded... is up at the <a href="http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/2008/02/19/the-problem-with-politics-and-ken-should-be-ashamed/">Wardman Wire</a>.<br /><br />I have finally worked out why I am so negative about politics at the moment<br /><br />And, I give Ken's so called congestion charge a good, logical kicking.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-33482719772688425852008-02-19T10:28:00.002+00:002008-02-19T10:31:13.905+00:00The Poliblogs 19 February 2008<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiR0iB-O1Dk-RuXhv9trqz1BYxVTR6cQRF517dI93oMqpLcpXpByxu8MJzxWpEoaTCLOltwk95wGO3yU65K_jphQ46Ay1X5ufzb_oDw_2jl8JUKwBigvnjoFp30T69U2zq2MyTnY78g/s1600-h/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiR0iB-O1Dk-RuXhv9trqz1BYxVTR6cQRF517dI93oMqpLcpXpByxu8MJzxWpEoaTCLOltwk95wGO3yU65K_jphQ46Ay1X5ufzb_oDw_2jl8JUKwBigvnjoFp30T69U2zq2MyTnY78g/s400/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5168636867545415474" border="0" /></a><br /><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Darling surely has to go</span><o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal">It was always said during the Blair years that the worst job in politics would be Chancellor under Gordon Brown. After ten years in total control of the Treasury, there would be no way that Brown would tolerate a mighty Chancellor - let alone one of near equal status. Darling, when he began, was touted as being essentially a safe, dull pair of hands. Having risen without a trace through cabinet, Darling would be unexciting but competent. His talent for keeping his departments out of the news was just what Brown wanted.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://partyreptile.blogspot.com/2008/02/darling-surely-has-to-go.html">Conservative Party Reptile</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://partyreptile.blogspot.com/2008/02/darling-surely-has-to-go.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Getting there slowly</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The government has finally done what it should have done months ago with Northern Rock; but many questions remain</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/vincent_cable/2008/02/getting_there_slowly.html">Vince Cable</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/vincent_cable/2008/02/getting_there_slowly.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Hague set to replace Osborne</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">He may be a smug git but give Vince Cable his due, not only has he demolished the Tories almost amateurish proposals for Northern Rock, he's almost certainly ended George Osborne's tenure as Shadow Chancellor. Osborne has never before looked so out of his depth as he did today. Cable's comment that the Shadow Chancellor was in danger of castrating himself as he straddled both sides of the fence summed up the incoherent strategy adopted by the Shadow Treasury team ever since the Northern Rock crisis began.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://the-daily-pundit.blogspot.com/2008/02/hague-set-to-replace-osborne.html">The Daily Pundit</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://the-daily-pundit.blogspot.com/2008/02/hague-set-to-replace-osborne.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">The Government is right on Northern Rock</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">And tremendously courageous, in my view. In this day and age, even much of the left, including myself, is decidedly dodgy about nationalisation. My brand of social ownership and democratic control is a decentralist one; though if government didn't have a role this would be little more than foolish economism. I still think however that the role of the state is not to own resources, but to secure ownership and distribution of those resources across society.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://newerlabour.blogspot.com/2008/02/government-is-right-on-northern-rock.html">New Direction</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://newerlabour.blogspot.com/2008/02/government-is-right-on-northern-rock.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Northern Rock and the case for extending social ownership</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">£25bn here and £25bn there, and pretty soon you’re talking real money. It has been absolutely apparent for at least five months that nationalisation represents the only realistic means of safeguarding the astonishing sums of taxpayer cash shovelled into Northern Rock to rescue the bank from the consequences of managerial incompetence. Finally Alistair Darling has gotten the message. The erstwhile bearded Trot himself has brought the UK’s number five mortgage lender within the ambit of proletarian property relations. Only another 199 of the top 200 monopolies to go and Britain becomes a workers’ state, comrade.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.davidosler.com/2008/02/northern_rock_and_the_case_for.html">Dave’s Part</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.davidosler.com/2008/02/northern_rock_and_the_case_for.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">In defence of Darling</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Remember, the Northern Rock crisis was not caused by the government. In light of that, the chancellor has done a pretty good job</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/martin_kettle/2008/02/in_defence_of_darling.html">Martin Kettle</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/martin_kettle/2008/02/in_defence_of_darling.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Has anybody thought about Scotland?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">One can only revel in the disarray experienced by the "colleagues" as they struggle to come to terms with the self-proclaimed independence of Kosovo. Continually vaunting its unity, whenever a crisis emerges, the EU somehow always fails to step up to the plate, each nation state adopting its own position until a formula is found to paper over the cracks and give some uneasy semblance of common purpose.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/02/has-anybody-thought-about-scotland.html">EU Referendum</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/02/has-anybody-thought-about-scotland.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Why the Archbishop got it wrong</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Whether Rowan Williams is a good man or a bad man; an intellectual or an academic; a highly sensitive soul or a machinating demagogue or whether or not he deserved the tabloid-led backlash is irrelevent to the position that he took when he delivered his speech, Civil and Religious Law in England: a Religious Perspective.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/1715">Pickled Politics</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/1715"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">What are Cameron's Conservatives for?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Gordon Brown stood for the leadership of the Labour party on a platform that argued that the renewal that was undertaken in order to gain power needed to be repeated if Labour was to keep power. The fact is that by successfully occupying the centre ground, by modernising and reaching out beyond its own activists Labour ended up turning the Tories into a replica of what it used to be itself – a party with a narrow base, a party obsessed about the wrong things and a party seen as old fashioned and out of touch.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.labourhome.org/story/2008/2/19/44849/8649">Labour Home</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.labourhome.org/story/2008/2/19/44849/8649"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">What are TfL hiding?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Last week Mike Smithson broke the story of a BPC investigation into an Ipsos MORI poll carried out for Ken Livingstone. In the Evening Standard today Andrew Gilligan picks up Mike’s story and has got some comment from John Curtice and Ben Page of MORI. The story begins back in December with this press release from the Mayor’s office, claiming to show that a poll for Transport for London showed two thirds of respondents were in favour of the new emmissions based congestion charge.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1121">Polling Report</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-86845522441301437512008-02-18T16:36:00.002+00:002008-02-18T16:37:39.746+00:00The Late Lunch Briefing<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNtXL5jsyK0qec6C3_rTfjk3ULWGyipxxk5zNVqUq0v-YeYRFEv2LMmguM0mU8P_ZG2ROGZjdNgdhO76SQF6u-iP5ZgXYlDVa9VEfMG5iTuxLgUTx05yNvqqGzDUJ1IJkDGI7GhhGp/s1600-h/Ploughman's.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNtXL5jsyK0qec6C3_rTfjk3ULWGyipxxk5zNVqUq0v-YeYRFEv2LMmguM0mU8P_ZG2ROGZjdNgdhO76SQF6u-iP5ZgXYlDVa9VEfMG5iTuxLgUTx05yNvqqGzDUJ1IJkDGI7GhhGp/s400/Ploughman's.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5168360048313253666" border="0" /></a><b style="">Are we approaching the tipping point?<o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal">Northern Rock, up to now, has not seemed to have caused any serious damage to the government.<span style=""> </span>Even this weekend’s polls only put the Tories on a nine point – which may sound like a lot, but in the grand scheme of things is nothing that would be seriously worrying those behind the door at No.10.<span style=""> </span>However, today’s news that the bank will be nationalised could well be a tipping point.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">More Dithering<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The decision to nationalise the bank in itself is not a major disaster – it was always the most likely and sensible option given the run of events.<span style=""> </span>However, the way this debacle has been handled is starting to become a major, major embarrassment.<span style=""> </span>The accusations of the Brown government “dithering” have never been more appropriate.<span style=""> </span>It seems, and it is only a perception, but it does seem that the Treasury not only is dithering and wavering on what to do, but it has no conviction in what it is doing.<span style=""> </span>One minute we are definitely going to have a nationalised bank, the next Branson will definitely buy it, then we wake up to a sort of temporary nationalisation that might well become permanent.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">Perceptions have been damaged<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I suspect the long term financial impacts of all this are not going to be nearly as bad as many of the more vocal right wing commentators would have us believe.<span style=""> </span>We’re not all just about to be £25bn out of pocket.<span style=""> </span>However, the question is still not so much whether this will cost the tax payer, but how much it will cost the taxpayer.<span style=""> </span>It won’t be £25bn, but we will pay.<span style=""> </span>Much worse however, is the perceptions that are being formed over all this.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Firstly there are the voters.<span style=""> </span>Almost no –one from either side of the political spectrum is giving praise for the way Darling has handled all this.<span style=""> </span>There has to be some sort of impact on the polls after all this, even if only temporary.<span style=""> </span>If the Tories cannot make big gains out of this, then I’m not sure they ever will –and I mean in to double figure leads across the polls.<span style=""> </span>If this does happen, there will be a very precariously balanced axe hanging over Darling’s head.<span style=""> </span>If he goes, the Tories will be able to move on to phase two of the Cameron mission.<span style=""> </span>They are currently at a stage where people are willing to accept them; the next phase is where there actually start to listen.<span style=""> </span>If the government really do make things any worse over this, then people really start to listen to the Tories – the only phase after that is voting them back in to power.<span style=""> </span>A long way, but these next few weeks could well be giant steps for them.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Secondly, it is the overseas perceptions.<span style=""> </span>What must the traders and investors in New York be thinking about all this?<span style=""> </span>Probably quite pleased actually – just when London looked liked it might succeed in becoming the number one financial centre on planet earth, it gets its pants pulled down by a goon of chancellor in front of the whole world.<span style=""> </span>The damage is done on this one – it is now just a question of how bad the damage will be.<span style=""> </span>For a country that has put all its eggs in to industries such as banking and moved completely away from manufacturing, this could well be disastrous.<span style=""> </span>Again, it’s too early to tell, but just how bad are the impacts going to be on all of us?<span style=""> </span><a href="http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-world-is-viewing-northern-rock.html">Iain Dale</a> has some cuttings from the world press and they do not make good reading.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">Sack him or back him?<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Things continue to go from bad to worse for the government – I just do not know how much more it can take before the polls start to really reflect the mess they are in.<span style=""> </span>If they do, it will be very hard for them to turn things round.<span style=""> </span>Brown now faces a very difficult decision: does he back Darling or sack him?<span style=""> </span>Backing him may prove to be one step too far for the electorate; on the other hand, sacking him may well fan the flames.<span style=""> </span>Whatever he chooses, it is a critical decision.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-2747706368987264802008-02-18T11:58:00.003+00:002008-02-18T12:12:49.344+00:00The Poliblogs Blog of The Week<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0y5Tax32s0ZvwBmMRMWOilemAu5Q0hoyZ2fsRXJGG9MvK8Xk9xKvlBiAtJjZeAVi9jyrA1camzE69we_-lr8W9dzDDe3u8UxraH9ilJFsv0ObeTx9OCHVPF5GWrT7qtuAaiZfYXj6/s1600-h/PB+BotW.png"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0y5Tax32s0ZvwBmMRMWOilemAu5Q0hoyZ2fsRXJGG9MvK8Xk9xKvlBiAtJjZeAVi9jyrA1camzE69we_-lr8W9dzDDe3u8UxraH9ilJFsv0ObeTx9OCHVPF5GWrT7qtuAaiZfYXj6/s400/PB+BotW.png" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5168290800555540242" border="0" /></a><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">I am going to be posting intermittently from Thursday onwards for a couple of weeks as I take a hard earned break. I will try and get things up every other day, but the roundups and blog of the week award will be on hold after Wednesday. Therefore, this week's winner will be up for two weeks!</span><br /><br />Now, cries of cronyism are sure to fly at this week's winner, but it's my blog and I don't care! This week (and for the next two!) The Poliblog's most favourite is <a href="http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/">The Wardman Wire</a>!<br /><br />OK, so I write a column at the Wardman Wire every Tuesday so of course I am going to back it - but I only do it because I think Matt has great blog. The Wardman Wire is probably the most complete political blog there is at the moment, covering a range of topics (though mainly focused on politics and current affairs) from all angles of the spectrum. Matt gets a regular host of guest columnists which provides a great range across the political spectrum. The most recent of which has been following the MPs allowances scandal - which has not only provided some excellent and and at time heated debate, but also some great ideas of what Parliamentary procedures should follow in the future.<br /><br />In the coming weeks Matt will also be focusing on the Mayoral elections, with another host of supporters and opponants of the main candiates putting their case forward. It will be an asolute must read to anyone with an interest in the Mayoral elections on 1st May.<br /><br />In short, you get brillaint insight from Matt Wardman, guests posts from blogger such as The <a href="http://www.thethunderdragon.co.uk/">ThunderDragon</a>, <a href="www.mikerouse.net">Mike Rouse</a>, <a href="http://davecole.org/blog/">Dave Cole</a>, <a href="http://davidkeen.blogspot.com/">David Keen</a> and of course, myself. What more could you want?<div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-24268371381677744002008-02-18T11:49:00.002+00:002008-02-18T11:53:44.920+00:00The Poliblogs 18 February 2008<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzNgKcQmhV7V89f8mVQUyF5m2SCxZlXrU_0EPh8-AkzsJMyrKxEKXe_ADoE_zdQ-D0BqCfhNLQ1SNiJN5jqt2k4bifKpieMojD-SsVir44tTmkKAxhCU1C0TatIU5fKIy8m93gHqXl/s1600-h/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzNgKcQmhV7V89f8mVQUyF5m2SCxZlXrU_0EPh8-AkzsJMyrKxEKXe_ADoE_zdQ-D0BqCfhNLQ1SNiJN5jqt2k4bifKpieMojD-SsVir44tTmkKAxhCU1C0TatIU5fKIy8m93gHqXl/s400/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5168287098293731074" border="0" /></a><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Return to the 'N' word</span><o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal">Imagine, just for a second if you had suggested to Gordon Brown, before he became prime minister, that he would nationalise a bank in his first year in No 10. He would have laughed, then snorted but, if you'd persisted, you might have seen the colour drain from his face. The N word - nationalisation - is so toxic to Brown's generation that they never wanted it to be heard in the same sentence as the Labour Party again. That is, no doubt, one reason he has delayed so long before taking this decision.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2008/02/return_to_the_n.html">Nick Robinson</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><o:p> </o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Crock- Three Questions From Taxpayers</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Now that our dithering "government" has finally pulled the trigger on nationalising Northern Rock, taxpayers are formally and irrevocably on the hook for up to £110bn (we don't know how much because we haven't seen any proper accounts for months). For taxpayers, there are three key questions.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2008/02/crock-three-questions-from-taxpayers.html">Burning Our Money</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Where are we with Northern Rock?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">It seems to me that the fundamentals of this problem have left policy makers with few sensible choices. The Government was right to step in last autumn to save Northern Rock - protecting depositors and stopping its problems spreading to other parts of the banking system. Alastair Darling was right to properly test all options for the future of the bank. The Treasury had two detailed proposals on the table and they are now taking a hard-headed choice in the best interests of the tax payer. The Chancellor has clearly decided that under current market conditions the private equity options failed to deliver sufficient value for money for the tax-payer. So bringing forward legislation to take Northern Rock into a period of temporary public ownership is the right decision.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/?p=1879">Tom Watson</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Darling and Brown go mad; Northern Rock Nationalised</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Well it is all over the news and I am quite shocked that it has come to this. Sadly, I have to eat my hat (hat-tip istockphoto) as I was sure that Virgin would win the bid. Instead, the Government has decided it knows how to run a bank better than private sector bankers. The decision really beggars belief and although I will post on this later this week, but here are 5 key points to remember:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://cityunslicker.blogspot.com/2008/02/darling-and-brown-go-mad-northern-rock.html">Capitalists@Work</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Sifting through the Northern Wreckage</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Perhaps, the greatest political danger for the government from yesterday’s nationalisation of Northern Rock is that it fits so neatly into the narrative of a government that is incapable of making a decision. On The Today Programme this morning, Alistair Darling was repeatedly pressed on the question of why this step was not taken earlier and had no adequate answer.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/510981/sifting-through-the-northern-wreckage.thtml">Coffee House</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Vince Cable was right - Lib Dems show better understanding of Northern Rock issue than the government</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Vince Cable was right after all. Despite government dithering and trying to avoid the inevitable, it has been announced that the Northern Rock will be nationalised after all. Despite Tory claims that this shows a catastrophic failure on the government's part, at least the government have finally made a decision on this. Remember, the Tories have absolutely no stated policy in this topic and whilst opposing nationalisation have produced no alternative policy with which to lead on.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://norfolkblogger.blogspot.com/2008/02/vince-cable-was-right-lib-dems-show.html">Norfolk Blogger</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Northern Rock nationalised</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Cranmer is not going to bore his readers and communicants with allusions to the wise man who built his bank on a rock and the unwise man who built his bank on sand, but the decision to nationalise Northern Rock does demand a little analysis beyond that presently being served up by the mainstream media. This is, after all, the first nationalisation of an industry since the 1970s, since those heady days when the likes of British Leyland, British Aerospace, or Rolls Royce were in public ownership so that profits may be shared ‘for the benefit of all’.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2008/02/northern-rock-nationalised.html">Cranmer</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">How Mr Darling lost the government’s economic reputation</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Northern Rock crisis has undermined this government’s economic reputation, and deservedly so. They have made mistake after mistake in responding the Credit Crunch and the run on the bank. I have put the main blog entries on Northern Rock from this site together so people can remind themselves of the way the crisis unfolded from last summer. The main errors (highlighted at the time on this site) were:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2008/02/18/how-mr-darling-lost-the-governments-economic-reputation/">John Redwood</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Punters unmoved by the Northern Rock announcement</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Is nationalisation really going to have no electoral impact? Even though some are calling it “Labour’s Black Wednesday” there has been very little movement in the general election most seats betting following yesterday’s announcement by Alistair Darling that Northern Rock. The chart showing betting prices as implied probabilities has hardly changed on the past week. It’s the same with the spread betting markets where punters buy and sell the number of seats the parties will get at the election as though they were stocks and shares. There was a minuscule move to the Tories yesterday but that was prompted more by the latest YouGov poll showing Labour 9% behind rather than Northern Rock.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/02/18/punters-unmoved-by-the-northern-rock-annoucement/">Political Betting</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Are the Tories doing well enough?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Even David Cameron’s most enthusiastic backers in the 2005 leadership contest might have thought it unrealistic to imagine that after a little over two years in the job he would have opened up a nine point lead over Labour. But despite having done this, Cameron is still plagued by the question of whether the Tories should be further ahead.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/509726/are-the-tories-doing-well-enough.thtml">Coffee House</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Lib Dem nasties challenge Clegg</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">"It's delicious to watch another party suffering European difficulties," writes ConservativeHome's Tim Montgomerie. He's referring of course to David Heath's threat to defy the Lib Dem Whip over the revised EU constitution - a "u-turn on policy that has never been debated at conference," according to Linda Jack.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://the-daily-pundit.blogspot.com/2008/02/lib-dem-nasties-challenge-clegg.html">The Daily Pundit</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Children with fathers do better</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">On 21 January Peers voted in favour of a change in the law which undermines the importance of the father to a child born after in-vitro fertilisation. The law currently refers explicitly to a child's 'need for a father', which doctors must consider before providing fertility treatment. But the Government proposes to replace this with a reference to 'the need for supportive parenting' in order to give lesbians and single women easier access to IVF.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2008/02/children-with-fathers-do-better.html">Cranmer</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">The latest moral corruption of society is mineral water?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Jesus wept. That is all you can say when you hear that the Environment Minister, Phil Woolas, has said that the amount of money that people spend on bottled water "borders on being morally unacceptable". What a complete idiot. All those people that go a long journey and find themselves thirsty are now it seems morally reprehensible. Why.. doesn't anyone know they should be drinking coca cola? Diet of course so that we can stave off the obesity epidemic, and caffeine free too so that you don't have a heart attack and cost the state lots of money as well.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://dizzythinks.net/2008/02/latest-moral-corruption-of-society-is.html">Dizzy Thinks</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">How Goes The War On Ken? (Part 2)</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Friday’s decision by Ken Livingstone to suspend his equalities adviser Lee Jasper and invite the police to investigate the many claims made against him by the Evening Standard was a calculated gamble at the end of another awkward week for the London mayor. His and Jasper’s wish must be that the move will persuade the capital’s voters that there is nothing to hide and result in Jasper’s exoneration. Livingstone will also be hoping that some of the heat will now go out of the story and that the media will talk instead about the issues he would prefer to debate.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/02/17/how-goes-the-war-on-ken-part-2/">Liberal Conspiracy</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">In defence of supermarkets</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Jay Rayner argues in The Observer that supermarkets have made our lives better. It is a odd thing to say, but I think he has a point. Politaholic is no spring chicken. I can remember a time when most shopping was done, certainly in the working-class area in the city where I grew up, in corner shops. This was before the rise of the super and mega markets. In those days if you asked the corner shopkeeper for parmeson cheese he would have looked at you as if you were mad. An avocado? I didn't know what one looked like until I was in my 20's. Wine was for posh people; and was expensive (now one can buy a reasonably quaffable bottle for around a fiver).</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://politaholic.blogspot.com/2008/02/in-defence-of-supermarkets.html">Politaholic</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Kosovo's giant mosh pit</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Mother Teresa Street in central Pristina has turned into a giant mosh pit. The crowd surges one way and then twists back the other and, for a while, you have to give up all hope of independent movement. From time to time people will clear a small circular space for a spot of traditional dancing to the sinuous local pop music, as the crowd flows either side of them.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2008/02/kosovos_giant_mosh_pit_1.html">Mark Mardell</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">YouGov reports nine point Tory lead</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">A new YouGov Poll for the Sunday Times tomorrow, according to the Press Association has some good news for the Tories. <span style=""> </span>“…Questioned on their voting intentions, some 41% of those taking part said they would back the Tories (down two points on a similar poll last month), 32% Labour (down one) and 16% the Liberal Democrats (up two). The overall Conservative lead was down marginally from 10 points to nine compared to the last comparable poll.”</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/02/16/yougov-reports-nine-point-tory-lead/">Political Betting</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Parties steady in latest YouGov poll</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">After almost a fortnight without any voting intention polls there is a new poll from YouGov in the Sunday Times. The topline voting intention figures, with changes from YouGov’s last poll back in January, are CON 41%(nc), LAB 32%(-1), LDEM 16%(nc). The poll was conducted between the 14th and 15th of February and clearly shows no significant change in party support over the past two weeks.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1118">Polling Report</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-81086657010713221442008-02-15T16:29:00.003+00:002008-02-15T16:48:47.864+00:00PMQs GoldThere was no PMQs this week, hence no roundup. Given the lack of quality of late in the chamber, it is probably just as well. Take a look at this clip from PMQs back in the days when they knew how to perform for the crowds...<br /><br /><object height="355" width="425"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0dRrD8mO9VM&rel=1"><param name="wmode" value="transparent"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0dRrD8mO9VM&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" height="355" width="425"></embed></object><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-43809495054219309042008-02-15T10:38:00.006+00:002008-02-15T16:52:27.370+00:00Iain Dale's Boris article<a style="font-style: italic;" href="http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2008/02/telegraph-column-boris-must-win.html">Iain Dale</a><span style="font-style: italic;"> has a piece in today's Telegraph about Boris Johnson's chances of winning the Mayoral election on 1st May. Below I have added my own comments to key sections of the article. I implore you to read the whole thing however over at </span><a style="font-style: italic;" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/02/15/do1505.xml">the Telegraph website</a><span style="font-style: italic;"> so as to get the full story too...</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Iain's words are in black, my fisking is in red:</span><br /><br /><p class="MsoNormal">Instead of ignoring his opponent, as most incumbents would, Ken talks about Boris all the time. He launched personal attacks on him from the off. As an electoral strategy, it was bizarre. He dubbed Boris a racist, yet the charge failed to stick. Why? Because no one who has ever met Boris, seen him on TV or read his books would ever believe him to be one.<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red;">Iain is absolutely right on this point in my opinion – why is Ken so obsessed with the Boris campaign?<span style=""> </span>The “Look at him” strategy designed to make everyone look at the opponent and see how terrible they are usually only results in everyone looking at the opponent and ignoring the incumbent.<span style=""> </span>This has been Livingstone’s biggest mistake so far – and also the attempts to paint Boris as a racist are simply unpalatable and patently untrue.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Ken failed to understand that, in Boris, he had met the Right-wing equivalent of himself - a politician seen by the electorate as independent of party politics and with a Teflon-type ability to deflect attacks.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red;">Boris independent of party politics?<span style=""> </span>More on this further down...<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">But there the similarity ends. Boris unites people, whereas Ken revels in division. His political strategy is based on class, and setting people against each other.<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red;">Greatly simplified – while many of us do love Boris, there is a significant number out there who do not like him.<span style=""> </span>Worse of all, the biggest uniting factor behind Boris is a belief that while he is a nice chap, he is not necessarily up to the job of running the world’s premier city.<o:p></o:p></span></p><o:p></o:p> <p class="MsoNormal">Since then Boris has started to develop some clear thinking in several policy areas, not least crime. But it still doesn't amount to a vision.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red;">This is the catch 22.<span style=""> </span>If Boris focuses on policy he loses what is his greatest selling point – his personality.<span style=""> </span>If he focuses on his personality is will not be seen as a credible candidate.<span style=""> </span>In a straight contest between Ken and Boris on policy and vision for London, Ken will win hands down.<span style=""> </span>What is Boris’s policy on crime exactly?<span style=""> </span>What will he do about transport except get rid of bendy buses?<span style=""> </span>What impact will he have on business in London where Ken is seen as having such success?<span style=""> </span>What will he do for poverty?<span style=""> </span>We know where Ken stands on these issues, whether we like where he stands or not.<span style=""> </span>While Boris can “out-personality” Ken (which is no mean feat), he has yet to show that he can “out-vision” him.<span style=""> </span>I doubt he can and even trying may well have a detrimental effect on his campaign.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Ken did this in 2000 - less so in 2004 - but his ability to appeal to non-Labour voters has now been dented, not least by the scandals that emerge from City Hall.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red;">There is absolutely no evidence what so ever for this.<span style=""> </span>In fact, the immediate poll after the Channel 4 programme went out showed Ken had stretched his lead.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Mobilising the Tory vote is incredibly important. In 2004, turnout was 70 per cent in parts of Labour-dominated Lewisham, while in parts of Kensington & Chelsea it was little more than 20 per cent. Steve Norris lost by only 100,000 votes. That's why Boris's "get out the vote" operation will be crucial to his success. Boris's success is also crucial to David Cameron. If Boris wins, Cameron will be seen to have passed his second big electoral test - and, more important, Gordon Brown will have failed his first.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red;">This works both ways.<span style=""> </span>If Boris cannot even win in the Tory’s back yard, what hope have they got in the rest of the country?<span style=""> </span>The Tories should be cleaning up in the South East by now and Cameron knows if he associates himself with a loser here, then it will discredit the Tories.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red;">I also disagree that Boris is seen in similar terms as Ken, i.e. not partisan.<span style=""> </span>Ken left the Labour party; he is often seen as a thorn in New Labour’s side.<span style=""> </span>Boris is seen as Cameron’s old pal from school intrinsically linked with Cameron’s attempts to modernise the party.<span style=""> </span><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red;">I think the damage would be greater to the Tories if they lose in London than to Labour if Ken was to lose.<span style=""> </span>The SE is just a corner of Britain, albeit an important one.<span style=""> </span>But we all know the Tories have this area sewn up – what does the North care about a Mayoral election?<span style=""> </span><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red;">If Ken loses it will be seen more as his loss than Labour's and Labour shouldn't be winning in London anyway given the larger Tory numbers in the SE right now. On the other hand - if Ken does win it will be seen as a Ken win rather than a Gordon Brown and Labour win.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal">This election will not be won on first preferences. A key part of the Johnson campaign strategy will be to love-bomb Lib Dem voters into giving Boris their second preferences. It will be tough, as London Lib Dems are a little more Left-leaning than their country counterparts. But if anyone knows the way to attract second preferences, it's Boris's newly imported Australian campaign manager, Lynton Crosby. His appointment signalled the seriousness of the campaign.<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red;">Spot on – and the key reason why Boris will lose.<span style=""> </span>Paddick supporters are far more likely to go with Ken that Boris.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">His campaign managers have resisted the temptation to de-Boris Boris. Any attempt to turn him into a robot politician will end in him losing.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red;">The catch 22 point.<span style=""> </span>Either he is Boris with no policies or he is the robot with policies that cannot compete with Ken.<span style=""> </span>Unless he can find a third way he has a fundamental problem that he cannot overcome. <span style=""> </span>I don’t see how he can overcome this. Iain is calling for Boris to focus more on policy and vision, but he himself recognises that the biggest mistake would be to move away from Boris's biggest strength - his personality.<br /></span></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-2042595857113886432008-02-14T10:16:00.001+00:002008-02-14T10:18:27.675+00:00The Great Archbishop DebateAre you <a href="http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/2008/02/13/archbishop-rowan-firestorm-was-started-by-the-bbc/">Backing The Bishop</a> or <a href="http://sinclairsmusings.blogspot.com/2008/02/matt-wardman-accuses-bbc-of-stirring.html">Bashing The Bishop</a>?<div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-72924819188244968512008-02-14T10:14:00.001+00:002008-02-14T10:16:36.520+00:00The Poliblogs 14 February 2008<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0CEz9DqPQD4ZHfjLTYkWVkr2js3l-pWp-SywjeWR4TycIHrfp2Xr0-Auyg779EYZJOwpseaHafN6lYkqUsvaa5RLCgn-waA6VdrmCGyz28xq5YYXruuaTW8hT51Rb7vUIiDeeH38w/s1600-h/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0CEz9DqPQD4ZHfjLTYkWVkr2js3l-pWp-SywjeWR4TycIHrfp2Xr0-Auyg779EYZJOwpseaHafN6lYkqUsvaa5RLCgn-waA6VdrmCGyz28xq5YYXruuaTW8hT51Rb7vUIiDeeH38w/s400/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5166777528958336754" border="0" /></a><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Why isn't Michael Fallon in the Shadow Cabinet?</span><o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal">Has anyone - apart from ConservativeHome - noticed that the Member for Sevenoaks is pound for pound one of the most effective operators on the Tory benches? He offers a consistently robust Thatcherite critique of Labour's economic failings. As vice-chairman of the Treasury Select Committee, where he plays a nifty bad cop to John McFall's good cop, he has repeatedly skewered Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling, most recently on Northern Rock. Mr Fallon is a canny media operator who manages to generate more coverage than half the Shadow Cabinet.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2008/02/why-isnt-michae.html">Ben Brogan</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2008/02/why-isnt-michae.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Northern Rock: Spin cycle begins</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Late last night, (ignoring traditional rules about making announcements prior to the stock exchange opening, but who in the Treasury cares about that) the Government announced that unless Virgin and the Northern Rock management improved their bids, then Northern Rock will be nationalised. Given that the Rock is already on the public accounts, this is a mis-statement at best. The Rock is already nationalised, all the government are saying is that they will exclude private sector intervention from the future unless the terms are improved.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://cityunslicker.blogspot.com/2008/02/northern-rock-spin-cycle-begins.html">Capitalist@Work</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://cityunslicker.blogspot.com/2008/02/northern-rock-spin-cycle-begins.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">The case for a written constitution</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Does Britain need a written constitution? Traditionally, this isn’t an issue to which the left has paid much attention. Either it has been written off as being of little importance, or else the very concept has been seen as favouring conservative forces in a society. As a result, the ruling class has essentially been able to make up the rules of the political game as it goes along. But with the latest hint from justice secretary Jack Straw that such a development is likely over the next decade or two, it is clearly time to sharpen up our ideas on this one.<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.davidosler.com/2008/02/the_case_for_a_written_constit.html">Dave’s Part</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.davidosler.com/2008/02/the_case_for_a_written_constit.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">The government tears up the Bill of Rights</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">It is typical of this government that Parliament should not be meeting on this day of all days. On 13th February 1689 “the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons assembled at Westminster” presented a declaration to the new sovereigns, King William and Queen Mary. This declaration, known as the Bill of Rights, established Parliamentary supremacy over the Crown in important areas, and guaranteed Parliament’s freedoms .It did so that the people could practise the religion of their choice, avoid arbitrary manipulation of their laws and require redress of ills before they had to pay taxes.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2008/02/13/the-government-tears-up-the-bill-of-rights/">John Redwood</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2008/02/13/the-government-tears-up-the-bill-of-rights/"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">What's driving Ken?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Ken Livingstone's congestion charge policy was established to reduce congestion; now it seems it's about what car you own</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/daniel_moylan/2008/02/whats_driving_ken.html">Daniel Moylan</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/daniel_moylan/2008/02/whats_driving_ken.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">This is Gordon Brown's mistake</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The chancellor is taking the heat for a U-turn on tax-avoidance by non-doms: but it is the prime minister who should have resisted City bullying</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/will_hutton/2008/02/the_news_is_that_in.html">Will Hutton</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/will_hutton/2008/02/the_news_is_that_in.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Spin is alive and kicking at the Treasury</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Treasury spin machine went into overdrive yesterday afternoon to try and water down the significance of Alistair Darling’s u-turn on the taxation of non-doms. Throughout the afternoon, journalists were subject to a range of explanations from supposedly impartial civil servants. First the rules to gain access to offshore trusts and the other assets of non-doms were drawn up by an overeager official who had gone too far. Then, in another call, we were told to believe that there was, in fact, no change to what was originally proposed and yesterday’s announcement was “just a clarification” of what had been said all along.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/spinaliveandkicking.htm">Three Line Whip</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/spinaliveandkicking.htm"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">I wish I could fly</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">This intriguing, if badly-scanned, graph appears in today's Guardian. It's a stark illustration of the pollution caused by the global shipping industry. The darker the area, the more particulate pollution its suffers from - and some of the darker patches overlay major shipping lanes very precisely.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.paulkingsnorth.net/2008/02/i-wish-i-could-fly.html">Know Your Place</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.paulkingsnorth.net/2008/02/i-wish-i-could-fly.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Archbishop Rowan Firestorm was Started by the BBC before Interview was even Broadcast</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Archbishop Rowan Firestorm was Started by the BBC before Interview was even Broadcast<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>[Update: It appears that this article had a glitch or two in publication, and so there is some undisciplind pinging going on. My apologies.] There’s been a huge media firestorm after the Archbishop of Canterbury’s lecture to lawyers in London, as we all know - and it’s all been blamed on “Rowan’s naivity” or “Rowan’s bad press team” or “what did he expect, mentioning Sharia” or [insert random Rowan-bashing reason here]. After a bit of digging, it turns out that the Beeb was reporting inaccurate statements about “ABC says Sharia is inevitable” even before the interview was broadcast. Rowan (and a well-tempered debate) never had a chance - whether you agree with his line or not.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/2008/02/13/archbishop-rowan-firestorm-was-started-by-the-bbc/">The Wardman Wire</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/2008/02/13/archbishop-rowan-firestorm-was-started-by-the-bbc/"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Matt Wardman accuses the BBC of stirring</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Matt Wardman accuses the BBC, in fairly strident terms, of encouraging an unnecessary storm over the Archbishop of Canterbury's words. His evidence for this is pretty weak. Essentially, he has two points. First, that by publishing the story on their website before the interview they pre-empted his interview and thereby prevented people getting the balanced and nuanced account of his opinions that the interview provided. Second, that the website article was distorting.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://sinclairsmusings.blogspot.com/2008/02/matt-wardman-accuses-bbc-of-stirring.html">Sinclair’s Musings</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-16932126591976892672008-02-13T15:24:00.002+00:002008-02-13T15:25:11.031+00:00The Late Lunch Briefing<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpluN_KO2-aBj3SAzvgQI3WwarEX5lSq4BB-iq_ltdCNqR3p-kUkcCvVywrV-t5Ku4jH4uwgo0QaEV4OOJ3ex1b8HXATzJDJbvJjMoc4Pd3sNu53xHfICskMxKj-9fcYLD02fpNQI_/s1600-h/Ploughman's.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpluN_KO2-aBj3SAzvgQI3WwarEX5lSq4BB-iq_ltdCNqR3p-kUkcCvVywrV-t5Ku4jH4uwgo0QaEV4OOJ3ex1b8HXATzJDJbvJjMoc4Pd3sNu53xHfICskMxKj-9fcYLD02fpNQI_/s400/Ploughman's.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5166486145492074210" border="0" /></a><b style="">Darling In Circles<o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal"><i style="">You put your left leg in.<span style=""> </span>Your left leg out.<span style=""> </span>In. Out. In. Out. You shake it all about.<o:p></o:p></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">What is going on at the Treasury?<span style=""> </span>Are we witnesses the most incompetent Chancellor this country has ever seen?<span style=""> </span>So Non Doms won’t be taxed to the back teeth on foreign income or gains not sent to the UK.<span style=""> </span>In fact, apparently it never was going to tax these people.<span style=""> </span>Oh no, the only reason we ever thought that the Treasury would is because they said so... but that was only because of “careless drafting” of an HM Revenue & Customs consultation paper.<span style=""> </span>Careless drafting?<span style=""> </span>You are supposed to running the most important department of in the country – we cannot be doing with careless drafting... or even worse: dithering!</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">It is no surprise that Darling has changed his mind on this one.<span style=""> </span>It is reported that the change of heart came following a call from George Osborne for Labour to adopt the Tory plan.<span style=""> </span>The Tories driving Labour’s economic policy?<span style=""> </span>Surely not.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">The Wooden Chancellor<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Of course this isn’t the first U-turn of the “Wooden Chancellor”, Alastair Darling.<span style=""> </span>We have had Northern Rock and the “will it or won’t it” be nationalised drama (for clarity, right now it won’t be nationalised, though it is unlikely that they will accept the Virgin deal, so it probably will be nationalised, but actually no-one has a clue).<span style=""> </span>There has been inheritance tax u-turns.<span style=""> </span>We’ve had the about turn on Capital Gains tax.<span style=""> </span>This list goes on.<span style=""> </span>When you add all this in to the boiling pot that is economic recession and falling house prices, you have to question how long this born loser has left at No.11.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The press, the city, parliament, they are all full of gossip about how Darling might be moved in a Spring/Summer reshuffle.<span style=""> </span>It is something I suspected at my New Year predictions.<span style=""> </span>Even the most ardent of New Labour supporters who has any interest in the well being of the British economy as an International super-power must be worried about this buffoon running our economy.<span style=""> </span>But will he go?</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">Party Politics before Economics<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The problem with Darling going is that it will inflict serious damage on the government.<span style=""> </span>It will be seen as a major scalp by George Osborne and the Tories.<span style=""> </span>It will be reported as a failure of Gordon Brown’s premiership.<span style=""> </span>It will be seen as a clear sign that the economy is in trouble and will only make the situation less stable, purely on lack of confidence driven by a perception.<span style=""> </span>I fear that Brown will save this numskull purely for political reasons – i.e. to save his government and his own bacon.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">A plea to you all<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The truth is, in the short term there will be damage.<span style=""> </span>But in the medium to long term it surely can only be good for the government and the country.<span style=""> </span>Things are only going to get worse economically and with such a halfwit in charge of our money it will only be magnified.<span style=""> </span>We need a tough, iron chancellor at No.11 and we need it before things spiral out of control.<span style=""> </span>The only way this can happen, however, is if we all applaud Brown doing getting rid of darling rather than make political capital out of it.<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">So I make plea right now:<span style=""> </span>all anti-Browns, all Tories and Lib Dems, all anti-Darlings and people with half a brain: applaud when Brown sacks this man, encourage him to do so in fact.<span style=""> </span>Make him feel like it is the greatest decision made since Henry V made a few expert judgments and gave the French a jolly good hiding at Agincourt.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Of course, the Tories are such an excitable lot that they will make Brown look like a complete bonehead if he does sack him – and you can hardly blame the Tories for all this mess anyway.<span style=""> </span>So it looks like Darling is here to stay and free to really mess things up... but we can all still hope.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-19252867889662568052008-02-13T11:09:00.001+00:002008-02-13T11:11:20.301+00:00The Poliblogs 13 February 2008<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitC3VRmfxQ6F7jY3eouPazrxGGr3AUPslp4vD21t5MIdgZ6KK925b4IWlOt3nCg2nfOeCZRHAHGs4rZARKelKXgXaKGFW7eOjWAa-AKX8fffd3ncgjvqJ1glLOmzJ483plQQVGPNM9/s1600-h/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitC3VRmfxQ6F7jY3eouPazrxGGr3AUPslp4vD21t5MIdgZ6KK925b4IWlOt3nCg2nfOeCZRHAHGs4rZARKelKXgXaKGFW7eOjWAa-AKX8fffd3ncgjvqJ1glLOmzJ483plQQVGPNM9/s400/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5166420599996169938" border="0" /></a> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Darling getting it wrong again</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Under Blair, Labour was never so foolish as to come into direct conflict with the City. The government tiptoed around it in an effort to nurture the powerhouse of the British economy. But led by Brown, with Darling as Chancellor, they are now clumsily treading on the collective toes of many in the business community.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/tax-and-economy/darling-getting-it-wrong-again-20080213900/">Adam Smith</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Time to go on the offensive on Europe?</span> <o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">It’s pretty much a given in the Liberal Democrats that the party doesn’t talk about Europe in its leaflets. It’s with good cause too. Firstly, it isn’t actually one of the top concerns of voters when they are asked in opinion polls what their biggest issues are. Just like electoral reform, it comes well down the list after all the big ones like health, education, crime, transport and so on. But also, there is an understandable reluctance for Lib Dems to talk about an issue on which it is perceived that the party is out of touch with the voters.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://andershanson.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/time-to-go-on-the-offensive-on-europe/">Anders Hanson</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Spreading democracy...</span> <o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Foreign Secretary David Miliband today makes the argument for military intervention to 'spread democracy'. So, according to The Guardian (although it is less than clear in the text) Britain and its partners have a 'moral imperitive' to use force to 'spread democracy'. Gone is the requirement for some sort of facade, no more humanitarian intervention to defeat tyrants terrorising their own people, not even a 'sexed-up' excuse to wipe out fantasy weapons of mass destruction... no, the moral argument for spreading democracy will be sufficient for us to send our forces off to die, and to kill.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.bobpiper.co.uk/2008/02/spreading_democracy.php">Bob Piper</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">They really don't want you to have a referendum</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Labour is clearly rattled by the row over it reneging on its promise of a referendum on the EU Constitution. Not content with threatening to withdraw the whip from Labour MPs who support honouring this manifesto commitment, Labour is engaged in a desperate attempt to discredit the cross-party ‘I want a referendum campaign’.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/500451/they-really-dont-want-you-to-have-a-referendum.thtml">Coffee House</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Should we subsidise the arts?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Should there really be tax breaks for donations to the arts, as Paul Myners and Nicholas Serota demand here? The Pigovian case for such tax breaks is well-known; without them, there’d be an under-supply of such public goods. However, the egalitarian case for such breaks is very shaky, as this recent paper discusses. It argues that donations to the arts can actually increase inequalities of well-being<span style=""> </span>in two ways - even leaving aside the possibility that such donations are really intended to boost the ego of the donor.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/02/12/should-we-subsidise-the-arts/">Liberal Conspiracy</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Frank Field: Right theory, Wrong practice</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Labour MP Frank Field has had to put up with a lot over the years - not least being ousted from Blair's first government for being too radical and since then being treated by his own side as if he's about to defect to the Conservatives. Well, today Frank launched rather interested reform plans that would charge people who earn over £150,000 a year an extra 10% tax which could be offset totally through donations to charity. You can read the BBC report here.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://antonylittle.blogspot.com/2008/02/frank-field-right-theory-wrong-practice.html">Little’s Log</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Foul emission in London</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Up in London the Livingstone beast is at it again. He is going to charge the owners of Chelsea Tractors £25 a day for taking their gas guzzlers into “town”. It will not affect me. I have only driven in London twice in the last six months and the Crippen Toyota Previa (four children, Ken, what else can we do?) has relatively modest emissions. As Iain Dale vehemently points out, the charge will not apply in some of the most congested parts of London, such as Crouch End and Willesdon. The people most affected will be voting for Boris anyway.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://nhsblogdoc.blogspot.com/2008/02/foul-emission-in-london.html">NHS Blog Doctor</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Prime Minister Balls?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">In a fascinating post, Robert shows how the Tories are doing Alistair Darling harm by sympathising with him. The Chancellor may be replaced by Ed Balls so they present Darling as a decent man treated awfully by bossy Brown. They want to spread discord and paranoia because it suits their own ends. But at the root of the Balls for Chancellor movement, is a prospect even more worrying for the nation: it is that Ed Balls appears convinced he is the natural next Labour leader. Can I be alone in finding this idea preposterous?</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/pmballs.htm">Three Line Whip</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Voodoo polling corner</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">A sudden outbreak of voodoo polling this morning, or more to the point a sudden outbreak of serious newspapers reporting a voodoo poll as being meaningful. What’s a voodoo poll? It’s what Bob Worcester calls the little “press the red button to vote” polls on Sky News, or the little readers’ votes things on the BBC website. They are entertaining enough, but they mean nothing whatsoever, they don’t measure the opinion of a representative group of people, they only measure the opinions of people who wander past that particular website (or are directed to said website by people trying to influence the poll) and care enough about the issue to vote…often several times if they know how to delete cookies from their computer.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1117">Polling Report</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-44842479325709176352008-02-12T10:51:00.000+00:002008-02-12T10:55:37.763+00:00Politics Decoded...... is up at <a href="http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/2008/02/12/cunning-clegg-cheating-chambers/">The Wire</a><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-47461578966961648782008-02-12T09:50:00.001+00:002008-02-12T09:51:46.678+00:00The Poliblogs 12 February 2008<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRNDqUugodMokSOAOSnzgd2MswsE9Hiq4BRaXZJAUazwcjiWPnB8kP4ujCp2aUrA5TuejRv6VepjCB2uqVlBwqhbw2zmAD88gzfJlZwzmtICbs3PdviFfiaCmzxf1b48PzmQDVpqqU/s1600-h/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRNDqUugodMokSOAOSnzgd2MswsE9Hiq4BRaXZJAUazwcjiWPnB8kP4ujCp2aUrA5TuejRv6VepjCB2uqVlBwqhbw2zmAD88gzfJlZwzmtICbs3PdviFfiaCmzxf1b48PzmQDVpqqU/s400/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5166028967698251458" border="0" /></a><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Will Gordon speak up for his Chancellor?</span><o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal">This is a dangerous week for Alistair Darling. It's half term at Westminster, not much is going on, and when things are quiet there's mischief about. Put together the dire headlines for the Chancellor yesterday and today (Not just "Knives out as Darling loses trust of City" - Sunday Times; "Why Darling is a menace to Britain" - William Rees-Mogg; "Darling's confidence seems misplaced" - Anatole Kaletsky; but more importantly the FT/Telegraph pincer movement on non-doms) and you get a picture of trouble.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2008/02/will-gordon-spe.html">Ben Brogan</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2008/02/will-gordon-spe.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Booze: Is Bottler Brown Dithering?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">On the day three scumbag yobs were jailed for kicking Garry Newlove to death in what the judge called a night of "drunken aggression", you might have expected the Government to signal a crackdown on cheap booze. But you'd be wrong. My narks in the Treasury tell me the Chancellor, Alistair Darling, is unlikely to hammer cheap beers and lagers sold in supermarkets with big tax increases in his Budget on March 12.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://adamboulton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/02/booze-is-bottle.html">Boulton & Co.</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://adamboulton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/02/booze-is-bottle.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Sharing The Proceeds Of Growth</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Take a look at the chart. It shows how much of our GDP has been spent by government under each of our last six Prime Ministers (counting the 1974-79 administration as one). 44 years ago when Harold Wilson first took the controls, government spent 38%. This year, it expects to spend 42% (£589bn), but the path from 1964 has been extraordinarily bumpy, and back in the mid-70s they spent 50% (we're using HM Treasury's figures on Total Managed Expenditure- TME).<span style=""> </span>Where will the line go next?</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2008/02/sharing-proceeds-of-growth.html">Burning Our Money</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2008/02/sharing-proceeds-of-growth.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">And the brass neck of the year award goes to...</span> <o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">If there is an award for a brass neck of 2008, George Osborne has just done enough to win in. First, he proposes a tax on the non-doms (which I critiqued at the time). Then, Darling nicks it in his infamous magpie budget. Then, it becomes clear this daft proposal will simply drive away the highly-mobile millionaires resulting in a net loss to the Exchequer. Today Osborne has written an “open letter” to Darling asking him to repeal this proposal for all the harm it will do. A proposal which he was complaining was nicked from him. Of course winning parties tend to have brass necks – and Osborne’s cheek is far preferable to the pusillanimous approach of previous Shadow Chancellors. But what a cheek it is.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/498711/and-thebrass-neck-of-the-year-award-goes-to.thtml">Coffee House</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/498711/and-thebrass-neck-of-the-year-award-goes-to.thtml"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Dr Martin Parsons: Gordon Brown’s hypocrisy in condemning the Archbishop's sharia comments</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">On Thursday Gordon Brown’s spokesman denounced Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams’ claim that the introduction of sharia to the UK was inevitable. However, Gordon Brown himself has been quietly seeking to appease certain aspects of the agenda of 'peaceful' Islamist groups in the UK - including what amounts to a partial implementation of sharia.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2008/02/dr-martin-parso.html">Conservative Home</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2008/02/dr-martin-parso.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Should Labour adopt all-black shortlists?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">If not positive discrimination, then what? An internal Labour Party report on increasing black representation in parliament – written by Simon Woolley of Operation Black Vote – is recommending that current law be changed to allow all black shortlists for parliamentary selections. This is a proposal I am instinctively uneasy with, largely because I can remember the way positive discrimination worked in local government and the voluntary sector in the 1980s, before being subsequently outlawed. In particular, I recall watching one young Asian woman – a pleasant enough human being, as it goes, who co-habbed with a pal of mine for a while – enjoy a string of rapid promotions to jobs that were on any fair judgement beyond her capabilities, until she predictably came rather spectacularly unstuck. </p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.davidosler.com/2008/02/should_labour_adopt_allblack_s.html">Dave’s Part</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.davidosler.com/2008/02/should_labour_adopt_allblack_s.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Clegg's first 50 days</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The new leader of the Liberal Democrats has made a steady start but he should now exploit Cameron's weaknesses</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/james_graham/2008/02/cleggs_first_50_days.html">James Graham</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/james_graham/2008/02/cleggs_first_50_days.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Censoring the interweb</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I was stuck at the back of an inordinately long queue in the central Post Office yesterday so naturally I picked up the in-house magazine, put there to divert customers' attention from the fact that their lunch break is being frittered away, whilst half of the counter positions remain unstaffed. Inside was a feature asking people's views as to whether the internet should be censored. Presumably, the editor felt that it would make a good talking point. Unfortunately, none of the proffered arguments convinced me.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://peterblack.blogspot.com/2008/02/censoring-interweb.html">Peter Black</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://peterblack.blogspot.com/2008/02/censoring-interweb.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Why Lynton Crosby will encourage me to bet on Boris?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Is Ken being ousted the best bet around at the moment? Cards on the table straight-away: quite simply I believe that the 1.84/1 that’s available on Boris Johnson to win the London Mayoralty is by far the best value political bet that’s currently available. Last October I pocketed £3,400 on Gordon’s general election U-turn and in the coming eleven weeks I’ll be investing at least half of that on Boris - when the prices are right. As Sean Fear observed in his excellent analysis on Friday Ken won last time thanks to the fact that many non-Labour voters in the GLA election opted to split their ticket and vote for Ken in the Mayoral race.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/02/11/why-lynton-crosby-will-encourage-me-to-bet-on-boris/">Political Betting</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/02/11/why-lynton-crosby-will-encourage-me-to-bet-on-boris/"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Do the Tories need a change of tactics?</span> <o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Mick Fealty at Brassneck has a very good take on the Tories' discussion on whether or not they should be bolder in taking on Brown. "Cameron and Osbourne are in tight, working hard and lacing the Brown Government with short body blows, none of which looks remotely like taking down the old Scots slugger. It may be that they need to stand off and offer a fresh perspective on that most ancient and pivotal of political arguments, tax."</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/tory-tactics.htm">Three Line Whip</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/tory-tactics.htm"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Mayor unveils programme to transform cycling and walking in London</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Ken Livingstone today announced the most ambitious programme to transform walking and cycling in London’s history. The package of measures will create a new network of quick, simple, and safe routes for cyclists and pedestrians that will change the profile and priority of walking and cycling on London's streets.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://regentsparklabour.blogspot.com/2008/02/mayor-unveils-programme-to-transform.html">Theo’s Blog</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-67353083290250761082008-02-11T15:53:00.000+00:002008-02-11T16:33:59.920+00:00The Late Lunch Briefing<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRZz2hHee3jhhC_nabbiaYck4xaEcwV7PEdPaXgty87qOdhQtxN4FrgIsZpHMsbP-6RocusvL40z7dK29DgfDuqoW7Biunl3UYKFi6PyWwL4hLXDhtCKX7RXDrlDfpy69i4dCA1Fkl/s1600-h/Ploughman's.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRZz2hHee3jhhC_nabbiaYck4xaEcwV7PEdPaXgty87qOdhQtxN4FrgIsZpHMsbP-6RocusvL40z7dK29DgfDuqoW7Biunl3UYKFi6PyWwL4hLXDhtCKX7RXDrlDfpy69i4dCA1Fkl/s400/Ploughman's.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5165751538580733618" border="0" /></a> <p class="MsoNormal">A month to go before Alastair Darling presents his first budget to the Commons.<span style=""> </span>This year, as all years, we can expect the any of the pleasures that we get in life a good hammering – e.g. alcohol.<span style=""> </span>Say what you like about it, yes it may well be worse than a cocktail of heroin and crack cocaine that is taken while sharing an audience with the devil himself, but the fact is most of can handle it and don’t need the kind assistance of our government to make it so expensive that only an absolute addict would risk financial ruin from buying it.<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Where is the logic in all this?<span style=""> </span>Firstly the government says that we are nation that is dying because of extreme alcohol abuse so we must be encouraged to stop drinking it.<span style=""> </span>Anything more than 21 units a week is likely to cause a slow and miserable death.<span style=""> </span>Absolute nonsense!<span style=""> </span>Please can someone show me the evidence that say we should only be drinking this much alcohol a week?<span style=""> </span>It is a completely arbitrary figure plucked out the air.<span style=""> </span>Yes drinking a lot is not good for you.<span style=""> </span>But to actually get liver damage you have to drink a serious amount of booze – the sort of levels that most of the population do not embark on.<span style=""> </span>This 21 units a week figure is a smokescreen and con.<span style=""> </span>So why the majority should be told that we should pay more is beyond me.<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Secondly, we are told that that binge drinking is a problem.<span style=""> </span>Yes it is.<span style=""> </span>But how many people in our town centres are getting in brawls have been sat at home on the sofa with a nice bottle of Rioja before deciding that actually they are bit bored of watching the Channel 4 news and get the bus in to town for good punch up with the nearest passerby?<span style=""> </span>Not many I suspect.<span style=""> </span>No, I suspect that most of the brainless fools have been down the pub drinking a load of alcopops and spirits.<span style=""> </span>So why are the government focussing on the booze from the supermarkets when it the booze in the pubs that (in the town centres) that are attracting all the trouble is beyond me also.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Then we are told it is underage drinking that is the real scourge on our society?<span style=""> </span>Well isn’t there a law against this already?<span style=""> </span>Why should all those people legitimately buying alcohol have to pay more because a load of kids aren’t be held to account by the law?<span style=""> </span>Crack down on the shop keepers or landlords that do it, crack down on these kids’ parents – hell, arrest the blighters themselves and dish out a bit of justice.<span style=""> </span>Don’t make me pay for it though.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Why are we be told that these are all the reasons for raising the tax on alcohol even though when you actually think about it, there is no logic in the premises whatsoever?<span style=""> </span>Because it sounds like it makes sense and is a nice little earner for the Chancellor.<span style=""> </span>And, after all, it fits in with the worst mantra that New Labour ever had – “<i style="">it is better to be seen to be doing something than nothing at all – even if that something does nothing</i>”.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-88185789281891311812008-02-11T12:28:00.000+00:002008-02-11T12:42:12.806+00:00The Poliblogs' Blog of the Week<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_n_PK1NpwOAZu6LbsdCQzct8oUQutaOoWnCSl3OpXcMGMyMg2LEbaIus6Xqe-PAg6qP79Etvtw0VnGj3YpOnqU3CNn2ClZ00Y1rvhrJORITNWTG94hMkQMOp68o_TMXKoQFr_wauO/s1600-h/PB+BotW.png"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_n_PK1NpwOAZu6LbsdCQzct8oUQutaOoWnCSl3OpXcMGMyMg2LEbaIus6Xqe-PAg6qP79Etvtw0VnGj3YpOnqU3CNn2ClZ00Y1rvhrJORITNWTG94hMkQMOp68o_TMXKoQFr_wauO/s400/PB+BotW.png" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5165701003995528866" border="0" /></a><br />This week's Poliblogs' Blog of the Week is <a href="http://croydonian.blogspot.com/">The Croydonian</a>. <br /><br />This past week alone, The Croydonian has made me laugh out loud like only <a href="http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/">The Daily Mash</a> can normally do. Take a look at the brilliantly observed "<a href="http://croydonian.blogspot.com/2008/02/survey-of-week.html">Survey of the Week</a>" - which has to be the most pointless piece of government research in a very long time with the least surprising results ever. Or how about "<a href="http://croydonian.blogspot.com/2008/02/great-typos-of-our-time.html">Great Typos of Our Time</a>"... I can see the Commission now just belting out the ways of the EU set to Mozart.<br /><br />Croydonian is brilliantly observant, laugh out load sarcastic and punchy to the point - the sort of blog you go back to a few times a day in those spare few minutes between "real work". That is to say, he's in my favourites, not just my bloglines.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-18264742230161178562008-02-11T12:11:00.000+00:002008-02-11T12:16:59.165+00:00The Poliblogs 11 February 2008<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiqUSpQFRacHWJ4uSp1iNgdeGnCgSWLTY4wxGrahBRD-luF7gtAjBgEVNBuIK5y-qwc5axx1fQ_Iqam5aVRHNsp_IUGT4QjmvXs_Fiz-0-tmzHfzE9eKKaMQYeyXtpGbOMsheRn0GS/s1600-h/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiqUSpQFRacHWJ4uSp1iNgdeGnCgSWLTY4wxGrahBRD-luF7gtAjBgEVNBuIK5y-qwc5axx1fQ_Iqam5aVRHNsp_IUGT4QjmvXs_Fiz-0-tmzHfzE9eKKaMQYeyXtpGbOMsheRn0GS/s400/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5165695051170856594" border="0" /></a><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Dr. Rowan Williams.</span><o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal">How on earth is one to react to the latest musings of the Archbishop of Canterbury. I was a bit lucky that I was heading out of the country today when BBC Wales rang me. I was boarding the plane when they invited me on to talk about Dr. Rowan Williams' lecture to the Royal Courts of Justice. It would have been walking on very thin ice indeed. It would have been easy if I didn't have such great respect for the man - as a theologian and an academic. But he is not much of a politician. I cannot think of anything more designed to wind up the British people than to suggest that sharia law should apply in some circumstances in our country.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://glyndaviesam.blogspot.com/2008/02/dr-rowan-williams.html">A View from Rural Wales</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://glyndaviesam.blogspot.com/2008/02/dr-rowan-williams.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">The fluoride state</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">As the Government finds more and more ways to curtail our liberties, the Health Secretary chips in with his own brand of interference in the way that we live our lives. The problem, as Ben Goldacre points out in his Guardian Bad Science column, is that there is no evidence that the addition of fluoride to our water supply will have the beneficial effects claimed for it:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://peterblack.blogspot.com/2008/02/fluoride-state.html">Peter Black AM</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://peterblack.blogspot.com/2008/02/fluoride-state.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Watch your back, Darling</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The whispering campaign against Alistair Darling just went public. The Sunday Times carries an article today that is packed with devastating quotes from government insiders, albeit anonymous ones. We are told by an MP close to Number 10 that Brown’s team are openly considering moving Darling out of Number 11 in a reshuffle while a Treasury Civil Servant bemoans that Ed Balls is not in charge and claims that there wouldn’t be any of these problems if he was. You don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to work out who might be hoping from this briefing against Darling.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/496971/watch-your-back-darling.thtml">Coffee House</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/496971/watch-your-back-darling.thtml"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Charles Clarke - Gordon Brown is a Ditherer</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Charles Clarke has made my prediction of Gordon Brown being given the boot by May, a whole lot more credible today. Speaking to Petronella Wyatt of the Daily Mail, Clarke has launched into what can only be described as a scathing attack on the Prime Minister. Not only that, he even has the bottle (I wonder if he has a spare one for Brown) to praise David Cameron for his decisiveness over the expenses fiasco. This is just a small taste of the Clarke's criticism of Brown:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://dailyreferendum.blogspot.com/2008/02/charles-clarke-gordon-brown-is-ditherer.html">Daily Referendum</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://dailyreferendum.blogspot.com/2008/02/charles-clarke-gordon-brown-is-ditherer.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Charles Clarke denies sour grapes</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">.....after he broke into Downing Street, sneaked into Gordon Brown's bedroom and chopped a sleeve off each of the Prime Minister's suits. There is some good news, however, and it concerns Clarke's health: he's out of the coma. Bear in mind he said the following a day or two ago and not a year or two ago:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://the-daily-pundit.blogspot.com/2008/02/exclusive-charles-clarke-arrested-after.html">The Daily Pundit</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://the-daily-pundit.blogspot.com/2008/02/exclusive-charles-clarke-arrested-after.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Public Finances</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Philipa has asked me what I think of the James Purnell "second home" funding "scandal". Well, first of all I would like to express my total lack of surprise at this "revelation". Every MP who has a constituency outside London does this. They get £22,000 a year each to help them fund a pied-a-terre for those evenings when they have to be in London. Rather disgracefully, many MPs with constituencies very close to London also take advantage of this subsidy. Guido has been chipping away at this particular trough for a good while, and he knows more about it than I do.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://edclarke.blogspot.com/2008/02/public-finances.html">Edland</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://edclarke.blogspot.com/2008/02/public-finances.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Will others follow the Wallace example?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">On Sunday I drew attention to Tory MP Ben Wallace and his unilateral decision to put all his expenses online, for all to see. What to you and me seems an obvious and praiseworthy step for a parliamentarian was actually a risky one for Mr Wallace. David Cameron may be striking the right poses on transparency, but behind him the Tory ranks are seething with anger at the mess they find themselves in.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2008/02/will-others-fol.html">Ben Brogan</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2008/02/will-others-fol.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">FT interview with Clegg: LibDems could back Conservatives</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Due to my self-denying ordinance, I missed this one on the tickertape machine when it came through:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://paulwalter.blogspot.com/2008/02/lib-con-pact-talk.html">Liberal Burblings</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://paulwalter.blogspot.com/2008/02/lib-con-pact-talk.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Campaign against 42 days extension</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The government will try and push its Counter Terrorism Bill through parliament in the next few weeks. This bill includes the provision to hold someone in detention, without charging them, for 42 days - a two week increase on the current limit of 28 days. Unsurprisingly, New Labour has been trying to paint this extension of police powers in benign terms. But we should not be fooled. Why? Because:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/02/11/campaign-against-42-days-extension/">Liberal Conspiracy</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/02/11/campaign-against-42-days-extension/"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">How Do Y0u Solve A Problem Like Sharia</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Cassilis is always a good read although he is a bit of “Seeing-all-sides-and-must therefore be right “ merchant. I always like CS Lewis on this when he pointed out there are endless answers to a question until you know the right one and then there is one. Anyway, on the Bishop bashing issue he has pointed out that in a previous Church state row ( forcing Adoption agencies to consider gays ) those who are incandescent about Sharia law encroaching on the secular hegemony felt that religious considerations should take precedence over the states universal edict. I like the comparison because I think it takes us to the heart if what is going on here.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://iznewmania.blogspot.com/2008/02/its-about-more-than-sharia-law.html">Newmania</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://iznewmania.blogspot.com/2008/02/its-about-more-than-sharia-law.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Labour's parallel universes - Part 2 - London</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Saturday 9 February was the second of two all-member consultations about the Labour manifesto for the forthcoming Mayoral and Greater London Assembly elections on 1 May 2008. A beautiful morning tempted me onto my bike to cycle down to the Lilian Bayliss Technology School at Vauxhall, in the London Borough of Lambeth.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://petergkenyon.typepad.com/peterkenyon/2008/02/labours-paral-1.html">Peter Kenyon</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://petergkenyon.typepad.com/peterkenyon/2008/02/labours-paral-1.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Should Brown be worrying about the Clarke onslaughts?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Could the Prime Minister really “obliterate Labour?” While all the focus that has been on the US elections we have not really looked at the growing attacks on Gordon Brown from his long-standing foe within the Labour movement, Charles Clarke. <span style=""> </span>In an interview with Petronella Wyatt in the Daily Mail this weekend the former Home Secretary and still-loyal Blairite issues one broadside after another against his party leader.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/02/10/should-brown-be-worrying-about-the-clarke-onslaughts/">Political Betting</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/02/10/should-brown-be-worrying-about-the-clarke-onslaughts/"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">This country is politically dead and I am frightened</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Dead countries almost always give birth to dictatorships. Remember that old one about for evil to prosper, all that's needed is for good men to do nothing? When it comes to voting, most good men (OK, and women... yada yada) under 35 are doing nothing. They know of no reason to vote. They see politics and politicians as nothing to do with them.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://prodicus.blogspot.com/2008/02/this-country-is-politically-dead-and-i.html">Prodicus</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://prodicus.blogspot.com/2008/02/this-country-is-politically-dead-and-i.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Wendy: from the frying pan into the fire</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Just as Wendy and her team think she has got off with it **Fuc&ing Brilliant**, now the real issues of Wendy's leadership will come to the fore. But not before she defends herself in a new donorgate scandal that is brewing over the funding of a constituency organisation by a 'front organisation', the Scottish Industry Forum. Now some of the Tory-supporting donors to SIF are making formal complaints to the Electoral Commission that they were deceived into making donations to her Paisley North election campaign - and not the economic renewal of Renfrewshire!</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://tartanhero.blogspot.com/2008/02/wendy-from-frying-pan-ino-fire.html">Tartan Hero</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://tartanhero.blogspot.com/2008/02/wendy-from-frying-pan-ino-fire.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">The danger with Darling</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Patrick Hennessy says Charles Clarke has gone too far this time. There is surely no way back for him under the Brown regime after his interview with the Daily Mail yesterday. He described the PM as a "ditherer", echoing David Cameron's line of attack. The problem for Clarke is that he has had so many goes at Brown that they long ago lost impact. He is the Blairite lounge bar bore: "And another thing..." Smarter Blairites are keeping their powder dry. John Reid is a "volcano waiting to explode", according to one observer who spent some time with him recently. However, Reid will know he has one shot at doing his old enemy GB any serious damage and will pick his moment.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/thedangerwithdarling.htm">Three Line Whip</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-90918021547586585182008-02-08T10:33:00.000+00:002008-02-08T10:37:30.142+00:00The Poliblogs 8 February 2008<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhT1w-K0u_8dlEt84zVbDe3DsAfaMvaRYEjUu9K1-v1ebYQ0mTNkvdTsE_B2TZiJEbb-48_7E-NM2ipl3NG-pw5Drm4gIm5TgJnzmEcDLT5zqXtK3Sfst9D7QbsFveCCK2StZ2ewBui/s1600-h/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhT1w-K0u_8dlEt84zVbDe3DsAfaMvaRYEjUu9K1-v1ebYQ0mTNkvdTsE_B2TZiJEbb-48_7E-NM2ipl3NG-pw5Drm4gIm5TgJnzmEcDLT5zqXtK3Sfst9D7QbsFveCCK2StZ2ewBui/s400/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5164556606345868146" border="0" /></a><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Time to beat the Archbishop</span><o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal">It will come as no surprise to regular readers of my blog that I am spitting blood at the remarks of the Archbishop of Canterbury in his call for sharia law to be adopted in Britain. He has managed to get the three main parties - including Baroness Warsi, of all people - to condemn his remarks, as has Trevor Phillips.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://donalblaney.blogspot.com/2008/02/time-to-beat-archbishop.html">Blaney’s Blarney</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://donalblaney.blogspot.com/2008/02/time-to-beat-archbishop.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">£2bn Down The Tubes</span> <o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">We've blogged the Metronet fiasco before (see here), highlighting the risk of a serious taxpayer loss. Yesterday we got the bill for £2bn as Metronet's bank creditors called in the government's guarantee. Let's remind ourselves of the key features. Metronet was a special purpose vehicle (spv) established and owned by five construction companies to manage a £17bn contract to renovate part of London's tube sytem. The contract was Public Private Partnership deal bulldozed through by Gordon Brown in 2003. Transport for London had argued strongly against the PPP contract, wanting instead to fund the work via US-style municipal debt issuance. But that would have blown Brown's tricksy Golden Rule fiscal targets, so he insisted on the PPP.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2008/02/2bn-down-tubes.html">Burning Our Money</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2008/02/2bn-down-tubes.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Should al Qaradawi be allowed into Britain?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Qaradawi_ban.gif I’ve tried listening to those on the left who repeatedly try to tell me that I should see the utterances of Yusuf al Qaradawi ‘in context’. I really, really have. But the man widely regarded as one of the world’s leading moderate Muslim clerics openly argues that it is permissible for husbands to beat their wives and that gays should be killed, and let’s just say that I remain enough of a wimpish liberal to have one or two difficulties with this.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.davidosler.com/2008/02/should_al_qaradawi_be_allowed.html">Dave’s Part</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.davidosler.com/2008/02/should_al_qaradawi_be_allowed.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">We have a problem</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">This blog has pointed out on numerous occasions, for instance here and here that Western Europe is in danger of becoming completely dependent on Russian gas for energy. The way things are going in that country and given President (soon to be Prime Minister and Chairman of Gazprom) Putin’s tendency to use gas supplies to bully his nearest neighbours, this may not be the smartest of political moves.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/02/we-have-problem.html">EU Referendum</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/02/we-have-problem.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">An underground scandal</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Taxpayers will have to pay billions after the failure of Gordon Brown's finance initiatives for London's tube. It's an outrage</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/christian_wolmar/2008/02/an_underground_scandal.html">Christian Wolmar</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/christian_wolmar/2008/02/an_underground_scandal.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">QT review</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">So what of QT? Well, new Culture Secretary Andy Burnham had the job of keeping the government's end up and he was deeply unimpressive. He particularly struggled when asked to defend Caroline Flint's bonkers idea to chuck the unemployed out of their council homes - a suggestion which seemed to have little support in the Liverpool audience - and also when put on the spot about Labour's potty plan to expel the four MPs who are demanding a referendum on the EU Treaty. Burnham does at least seem to have a bit of passion about him, as well as an element of Northern grit, but the overall impression is of an intellectual lightweight. I was left wondering what on earth Telegraph pol ed Andy Porter sees in him.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://paullinford.blogspot.com/2008/02/qt-review.html">Paul Linford</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://paullinford.blogspot.com/2008/02/qt-review.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Worried</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">It was while I was reading this in the FT that it dawned on me that I am in serious trouble. I don't know quite how to tell you this so I'll type it quickly. The fact is, I am missing Tony Blair. Worse, I am beginning to think of him as a heavyweight politician, a proper Prime Minister.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://prodicus.blogspot.com/2008/02/worried.html">Prodicus</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://prodicus.blogspot.com/2008/02/worried.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Privy Council Chilcot Review report on Intercept Evidence - more ***</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Government has now published the Privy Council Review of intercept as evidence: report to the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary (.pdf 64 pages - censored) produced under Rt. Hon, Sir John Chilcot GCB. This review makes the recommendation. that Intercept Evidence should, vaguely, at some undermined time in the future, be permitted in Courts in England and Wales (but not in Scotland or in Northern Ireland), for terrorism and serious crime cases , but not for Civil cases,. It is unclear if the recommendation for "terrorism" cases also include other national security cases such as espionage.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://p10.hostingprod.com/@spyblog.org.uk/blog/2008/02/chilcot_report_on_intercept_evidence.html">SpyBlog</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://p10.hostingprod.com/@spyblog.org.uk/blog/2008/02/chilcot_report_on_intercept_evidence.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Listening For Evidence</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I can see no real problem at all with using phone-tap evidence in court. After all, they can only record them, not make them say anything. It shouldn't be used instead of other evidence, and shouldn't be used as the sole source of evidence of any particular fact, but rather to strengthen circumstantial evidence gathered in another way. Also, if any phone tapping evidence is to be used in court, the defence must be provided with all secret recordings made.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.thethunderdragon.co.uk/2008/02/listening-for-evidence.html">The ThuderDragon</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.thethunderdragon.co.uk/2008/02/listening-for-evidence.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Principles of policing</span> <o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">With today’s publication of the Flanagan report on policing, there will be a lot of talk about civilians taking over the back-room tasks of the police. Today's police uniform is quite a change from the top hat and tail coat. However, it should be remembered that police ARE civilians. It is the one thing that differentiates our police from most of their continental counterparts, whose gendarmeries are quasi-military outfits. <span style=""> </span>It was to stop them looking like soldiers that the first recruits to the Metropolitan Police when it was established by Robert Peel 175 years ago were issued with uniforms of top hat and tail coat.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/policingprinciples.htm">Three Line Whip</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/policingprinciples.htm"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">MPs and Democracy: We The People</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Wardman Wire has seen some very good articles over the past week on the subject of MPs and the money they claim, both as salary and expenses. It’s not my intention to weigh in on that debate, but use the opportunity to examine the role of MPs in our democracy.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/2008/02/07/mps-and-democracy-we-the-people/">The Wardman Wire</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/2008/02/07/mps-and-democracy-we-the-people/"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Wendy Alexander cleared but the back-stabbing goes on</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to the Scotsman there were 'shouts of joy and celebration among embattled Labour MSPs at the Scottish Parliament' yesterday after the Scottish Labour leader was cleared of any wrongdoing in the undeclared donations row. It won't last.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://the-daily-pundit.blogspot.com/2008/02/wendy-alexander-cleared-but-back.html">The Daily Pundit</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://the-daily-pundit.blogspot.com/2008/02/wendy-alexander-cleared-but-back.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Milk with your iPod?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The fact that MPs can claim expenses of £250 without a receipt has already been greeted with widespread incredulity. The fact we learnt today is likely to be greeted with even more. MPs can, apparently, also claim £400 a month for food without receipts.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2008/02/milk_with_your.html">Nick Robinson</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-28131223372445680032008-02-07T14:50:00.001+00:002008-02-07T14:53:32.006+00:00The Late Lunch Briefing<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhM4wdsrtJ8zx45dVkIIhIkJ7VPXkCO08dIoHHK3sGribW55is1HDTCHInq0TOB4M7auQXoRafy_4zYPgF23wOm1iPeXbYQijlqjbR0cFWfxTPfInNNx8FMiodspaFQ8QcMwxIcdL70/s1600-h/Ploughman's.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhM4wdsrtJ8zx45dVkIIhIkJ7VPXkCO08dIoHHK3sGribW55is1HDTCHInq0TOB4M7auQXoRafy_4zYPgF23wOm1iPeXbYQijlqjbR0cFWfxTPfInNNx8FMiodspaFQ8QcMwxIcdL70/s400/Ploughman's.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5164251105322103634" border="0" /></a><br /><b style="">Metronet: A Failure of PPP?<o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal">It was announced yesterday that the government would be picking up the bill (i.e. the taxpayer is picking up the bill) for the massive £2bn hole Metronet blew in the PPP contract they were operating on the London Underground.<span style=""> </span>It is being reported as a deep embarrassment for the government as it was forced upon Livingstone and former TfL Commissioner, Bob Kiley.<span style=""> </span>The Mayor wanted a bonds based scheme while the government insisted that it wanted to put the risk and debt on the books of the private sector.<span style=""> </span>So who was right and why did it go wrong?</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">Metronet:<span style=""> </span>The Failure of PPP<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Firstly, to try and paint the collapse of Metronet as a failure of PPP is disingenuous and playing politics.<span style=""> </span>The reason Metronet failed is not because the government used a Public Private Partnership, but was down to the consortium members of Metronet.<span style=""> </span>WS Atkins, Balfour Beatty, Bombardier, EDF Energy and Thames Water have effectively cost the tax payer £2bn and suffered very little in the way of penalty.<span style=""> </span>Instead of sub-contracting out the work like Tubelines (which is a very successful PPP deal and working fine on the rest of the Underground), Metronet decided to divvy up their contracts between them.<span style=""> </span>In effect they were paying themselves to do the work.<span style=""> </span>The incentives to actually do the work was immediately reduced. <span style=""> </span>So while Metronet has gone into administration, guess who is still getting paid to carry out the work on the Underground...</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style="">The Government played their role too<o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The government and Gordon Brown do not get off scot free here, however.<span style=""> </span>The big myth that handing out PPP and PFI contracts means that the risk of a project rests with the private sector has been shot wide open here.<span style=""> </span>Metronet as a firm may cease to exist, but the companies that made up Metronet are still going strong and have not had to pay up a penny of the £1.7bn – because when all is said and done the risk sits firmly with the tax-payer.<span style=""> </span>While PPP is in my opinion a good tool for getting major projects done, it by no means shifts the risk away from the tax payer.<span style=""> </span>Nor is it the solution to all projects.<span style=""> </span>Then again, Ken’s bonds scheme had its flaws to and was, at the time, by no means the better option.<span style=""> </span>The big failing from the government in all this is that they allowed a contract to be signed without realising that Metronet would keep it all in house and shaft the tax payer when it all went wrong.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">If you are angry by having to shell out for part of this £2bn fiasco, by all means direct it towards Gordon Brown – but the real culprits here are WS Atkins, Balfour Beatty, Bombardier, EDF Energy and Thames Water aka. Metronet.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-67619813028142877072008-02-07T10:06:00.000+00:002008-02-07T10:07:56.068+00:00The Poliblogs 7 February 2008<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWMDNiVeOAak2lRSpZYsd1LlsvUbUu7KtEn6Osr8P4LsycEixSdyjD195G7Z7m4PsuHXT__Mq-L93d9NEJwhYphTXqi8b169kMo5rVXXvekX-wrZcxUUUNzuaS9nVg-0GVcYn_aFaq/s1600-h/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWMDNiVeOAak2lRSpZYsd1LlsvUbUu7KtEn6Osr8P4LsycEixSdyjD195G7Z7m4PsuHXT__Mq-L93d9NEJwhYphTXqi8b169kMo5rVXXvekX-wrZcxUUUNzuaS9nVg-0GVcYn_aFaq/s400/PalaceOfWestminsterAtNight.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5164177751575655234" border="0" /></a><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Tory Splits</span><o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal">The Planning Bill committee held its last session yesterday. Sixteen sessions in all, lasting a total of something like 100 hours. It has, for the last month, dominated my life, some of which I now hope to reclaim. As it turned out, yesterday was dominated by matters Welsh. The Government had, disgracefully late, tabled a clause giving additional legislative powers to the Welsh Assembly in relation to development plans. Three additional “Matters” were to be added to the devolved competence provisions of the Government of Wales Act.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://davidjonesclwydwest.blogspot.com/2008/02/tory-splits.html">David Jones</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://davidjonesclwydwest.blogspot.com/2008/02/tory-splits.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Phone tapping evidence could help convict Britain’s terrorists</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The sooner phone tapping image evidence is permitted in our courts to help secure convictions of terrorists the better. How can anyone argue against presenting evidence to show we are serious about locking them up? The safety and security of our citizens should be the first objective of any government. Yet Britain is one of few countries in the world to ban the use of evidence from intercepted phone calls, emails, letters and faxes as part of a prosecution case in court. Phone intercept material from intelligence services in the courts are commonly used to secure convictions in America, Australia and countries in the European Unions. It’s time we did the same.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://elleeseymour.com/2008/02/06/phone-tapping-evidence-could-help-convict-britains-terrorists/">Ellee Seymour</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://elleeseymour.com/2008/02/06/phone-tapping-evidence-could-help-convict-britains-terrorists/"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">David Cameron cannot be bold enough in increasing accountability of politicians</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">24 hours after the Derek Conway report was published David Cameron took decisive action against the disgraced MP and he has kept up the momentum over the last week with welcome requirements for greater openness from his frontbenchers with regard to their taxpayer-funded expenses. It's also fair to say that Mr Cameron, with considerable support from Ken Clarke and Andrew Tyrie, has been working on many other proposals that aim to restore the public standing of politicians.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2008/02/time-for-more-b.html">Conservative Home</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2008/02/time-for-more-b.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">PMQs - 06/02/08 Gordon Brown, just answer a bloody question - part two.</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I've had to force myself to write something about this week's PMQ's. It was, all in all, a total repeat of last week's pathetic performance. David Cameron can't be blamed; he's doing his job i.e. asking questions that the public want answers to. Unfortunately Gordon Brown now sees it as perfectly acceptable not to answer them. The speaker seems not to care and even allows Brown to question Cameron - it's a sodding farce. We've got Labour back-benchers asking questions like "I think the Prime Minister is more super than Super-Duper Tuesday, will the Prime Minister agree with me?"</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://dailyreferendum.blogspot.com/2008/02/pmqs-060208-gordon-brown-just-answer.html">Daily Referendum</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://dailyreferendum.blogspot.com/2008/02/pmqs-060208-gordon-brown-just-answer.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Does Brown suffer from selective deafness?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I missed PMQ's yestedray as I was out, but when I read the sketch by Simon Carr this morning in the Indy I couldn't quite believe it was as he said it was, but now that I have checked Hansard and it's true. Nick Clegg asked Brown some questions and Brown's answers were ona completely different subject. A truly bizarre exchange of words.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://dizzythinks.net/2008/02/does-brown-suffer-from-selective.html">Dizzy Thinks</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://dizzythinks.net/2008/02/does-brown-suffer-from-selective.html"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Brown’s terrible performance at PMQs</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The point about Gordon Brown and PMQs is that he is supposed to be getting better at it, not worse. In recent weeks he had developed a certain dogged style which David Cameron could find no way round. It was inelegant but effective.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/brownsterribleperformaceatpmqs.htm">Three Line Whip</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/brownsterribleperformaceatpmqs.htm"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">How Brown could revolutionaise PMQs, improve Labour's standing, polish the image of politics and make the Tories look like silly - all in one go</span> <o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Another Wednesday, another PMQs (Prime Minister's Questions) in Parliament. What to make of today's Punch and Judy show between Cameron and Brown? First - I guess, as Nick Robinson points out, that Cameron has forgotten his professed distaste for Punch and Judy, you say one insult, I'll say two back more loudly style of politics. Perhaps he genuinely meant it when he said it, but if so he's long since changed his mind. Second -Gordon Brown really ain't that sharp or fast when it comes to PMQs. He was always going to have a tough act to follow after Blair who, love or loathe what he said, was a master of the art of question time.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2008/02/how-brown-could-revolutionaise-pmqs.htm">Lynne Featherstone</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2008/02/how-brown-could-revolutionaise-pmqs.htm"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Fixed rate mortgages for all? - The Chancellor turns mortgage salesman</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Today I learn that the Chancellor has become a mortgage salesman again. He is lecturing us to take long term mortgages at fixed rates. Has no-one reminded him that his government has made mortgage selling a regulated activity? I doubt if the Chancellor has bothered to fix himself up with the necessary regulatory approvals to start selling the fixed rate proposition so actively.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2008/02/07/fixed-rate-mortgages-for-all-the-chancellor-turns-mortgage-salesman/">John Redwood</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2008/02/07/fixed-rate-mortgages-for-all-the-chancellor-turns-mortgage-salesman/"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Tony Blair and the race for the presidency</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I’m told Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have discussed the possibility of Mr Blair becoming President. That’s President of the Council, the new top European job created by the Lisbon Treaty. Some want to find a high profile president to represent the European Union on the world stage at events such as the G8, the Bali summit and for meeting heads of state.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2008/02/tony_blair_and_the_race_for_th.html">Mark Mardell</a></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638625644260984259.post-56998321451555271352008-02-06T17:41:00.000+00:002008-02-06T17:55:02.827+00:00The PMQs Battle 06 February 2008<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrVWxHoLAd_cwC8DJO_zoLnhAI3iAR_HVVwIJ8zpjlPRMux1YP-UzxcLm3h3JZRr4uB5G00nM2W6SEYsfqJ9KQLoKiGymisuINEzmlJbbl4_9Kp_Rx3zAPeUcrjFcSxtpMTxbam8jo/s1600-h/PMQs.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrVWxHoLAd_cwC8DJO_zoLnhAI3iAR_HVVwIJ8zpjlPRMux1YP-UzxcLm3h3JZRr4uB5G00nM2W6SEYsfqJ9KQLoKiGymisuINEzmlJbbl4_9Kp_Rx3zAPeUcrjFcSxtpMTxbam8jo/s400/PMQs.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5163924052152447794" border="0" /></a><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">PMQs - The Verdict</span><o:p></o:p></b> <p class="MsoNormal">Normally politicians like nothing better than an attentive audience but not when it is the security services listening into a private conversation with a constituent, as was apparently the case with Sadiq Khan MP. And with Ann Cryer, Willie McCrea and Nick Clegg all asking the prime minister about surveillance, it became one of the proceeding's key themes. Brown reassured Cryer that a review into bugging was underway and that until it reports, "people should not play the game of speculation." It was a reference to shadow home secretary David Davis calling Brown a liar in relation to what he knew of the bugging of Khan. Having mentioned the bugging probe, David Cameron revealed that the prime minister had established another 52 reviews during his brief premiership.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.epolitix.com/EN/Blog/200802/0a6f75b4-5e1b-4b15-9f86-58c58948a076.htm">ePolitix</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><o:p> </o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Sense Of Deja Vu Descends On Commons</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">You would be forgiven a sense of deja vu. Again. The questions this time round were about Government reviews and the future of A-levels, but the weekly clash between the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition is becoming as predictable as yet another Amy Winehouse freak-out. In one corner, David Cameron, asking for a straight answer to a straight question. In the other, a Prime Minister surely now delighting in failing to provide one, and instead choosing to ask some questions of his own.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91211-1304248,00.html">Niall Paterson</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">"Dithering" Brown stumbles on Cameron's attacks</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">When they didn’t mention MPs expenses last week, it was odd. This time it was downright embarrassing – and adds to the impression that they all have something to hide. Which, of course, they all do. First thing’s first: Ed Miliband seems to have a new job. He now sits next to Brown making theatrical grimaces and facial expressions of mock astonishment when Tories speak. Quite fun to watch. Oxford, LSE, Harvard – and he ends up as the highest-paid mime artist in Britain.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/488861/dithering-brown-stumbles-on-camerons-attacks.thtml">Coffee House</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">What is the point of PMQs?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">It's somewhat strange, I thought that the point was that the Prime Minister answered some damn questions, not ask them. Before this, Cameron's first question was to do with the government's reviews: after the Monocular Fuckwit's lack of answer, Cameron then pointed out there had been 52 reviews—fifty-fucking-two!—since Brown took over. The Gobblin' King then pointed out that NuLabour had created 3 million jobs. No, you fucking haven't, you cunt. Private businesses create the jobs in spite of your high-taxing fucking government, you fucking little shit. Good question on the "surveillance state" by Clegg though.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://devilskitchen.me.uk/2008/02/what-is-point-of-pmqs.html">The Devil’s Kitchen</a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Could Gord get away with abolishing PMQs?</span><o:p></o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Another Wednesday and another PMQs for Gordon Brown to have to endure. He clearly doesn’t like them and being open every seven days to the fierce blasts that Cameron is able to master cannot be very pleasant. Ever since a piece appeared in the Indy a couple of weeks ago about Brown’s views of the weekly ritual I’ve been pondering over whether we are being softened up for a proposal to change the structure.<span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span>Maybe they could find a way of blaming Cameron for the need for change because of the way the Tory leader handles the event.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/02/06/could-gord-get-away-with-abolishing-pmqs/">Political Betting</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/02/06/could-gord-get-away-with-abolishing-pmqs/"><br /></a></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(51, 51, 255);" class="MsoNormal">The Verdict</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><i style="">“They say we're young and we don't know, We won't find out until we grow.<span style=""> </span>Well I don't know if all that's true, 'Cause you got me, and baby I got you<o:p></o:p></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><i style="">Babe!<o:p></o:p></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><i style="">I got you babe!”<o:p></o:p></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><i style=""><o:p> </o:p></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><i style="">IT’S GROUNDHOGDAY!<o:p></o:p></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">PMQs is back and Brown is at it again.<span style=""> </span>Refusing to answer the questions, accusing Cameron of learning his lines, dribbling out facts and figures about the past ten years that could mean anything to anyone.<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I have been very critical of Cameron at PMQs of late and I think I am quite right to be.<span style=""> </span>He is up against an absolute numbskull of a performer at the dispatch box, yet has not really landed any heavy punches for weeks.<span style=""> </span>Well this week was an improved performance.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">For a start he didn’t fall in to the trap of asking about the bugging of Khan.<span style=""> </span>The government are employing a new desperate tactic at PMQs of late – the spoiler question.<span style=""> </span>This week Labour backbencher Ann Cryer was the patsy. <span style=""> </span>She asked a very soft and leading question on bugging that the PM could easily bat away and look good with.<span style=""> </span>Had Cameron then gone on to ask about the bugging case it would not have had much impact.<span style=""> </span>Secondly, the government do not appear to be at blame for any of this and the only impropriety that we can be certain of is David Davis' completely wild statement that the PM had lied over the matter.<span style=""> </span>Brown would have had a field day asking (as he does at PMQs) if Cameron backed up Davis’s claims.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Instead, Cameron was far more shrewd, though it was a little bit Groundhog too!<span style=""> </span>He tried, and to a certain degree succeeded, to paint the PM as an indecisive dithering.<span style=""> </span>Heard it before, though this time it was done masterfully and in a way that Brown could not have predicted.<span style=""> </span>He claimed the PM has established 52 reviews—one every four days!<span style=""> </span>Yet no decisions.<span style=""> </span>Ouch.<span style=""> </span>It struck the bad tempered old bear right on his wobbly jaw.<span style=""> </span>For the first time in weeks Cameron had the clunking fist shaking and stuttering.<span style=""> </span>He made him angry – only for a few seconds did it show – but it showed.<span style=""> </span>Brown never looks more undesirable, less statesman like, less like a man that you'd want as Prime Minister than when he loses his temper.<span style=""> </span>It is lovely to watch, but an all too rare sight because of Cameron’s inefficiency of late.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Again, it wasn’t by any stretch of the imagination a classic performance from Cameron nor was it the battering of Brown that these affairs should be.<span style=""> </span>But it was effective and so much better than anything Cameron managed in January.<span style=""> </span>Clegg’s half decent show was made to look all the more good for Brown’s illogical response – something about not supporting CCTV or something.<span style=""> </span>He was starting to bore me by this point and I was switching off. It had little to do with Clegg’s question anyway.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">All in all a win for Cameron and something to build on maybe.<span style=""> </span>He still has such a long way to go before he can truly say he is a great Commons performer though.<span style=""> </span>Brown on the other hand never will be.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:red;">Brown 0</span><br /><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 255);">Cameron 1<br /></span></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">Garbo</div>Garbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14140355134125830862noreply@blogger.com0