The Political Village

Class Crusaders

2010-01-14T05:18:00.000-08:00

If Labour are not bashing the bankers they are criticising the classes.

Today's intervention by John Denham (Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government) is anachronistic and an admission of failure.

If wealth inequalities pose a barrier to the progression of individuals why is that? After 12 years of a Labour government it is not good enough to flag the problem. Solutions are needed.

But ministerial monologues such as the one to be delivered later are not, and will never be a solution.

For the full story see:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8458298.stm

Brown Ballot

2010-01-06T07:02:00.000-08:00

Former Ministers, Patricia Hewitt and Geoff Hoon have called on all Labour MP’s to march into the voting lobby of the Labour Party HQ and by means of a secret ballot hopefully give Brown the boot.

Ignore the fact that removing a Labour leader is technically difficult (hence why a Labour leader has never been ousted by their own party). Ignore the fact that this is the latest attempt amidst Labour ranks to say bye bye to Brown.

What would the benefits of having a Brown ballot now be (other than to settle old scores)?

Would it mean Labour would be able to postpone the local elections in May? Would the general election be able to be put on ice until any new Labour leader had got their feet properly under the desk? Would the deficit suddenly disappear under a new Chancellor, or a Prime Minister who had the grit and determination to take the decisive action required? Would the chronic challenges being faced by Britain be waved away?

Of course not.

Labour had their chance to change the leadership and they blew it. Labour had their chance to change the country and they blew it. Now their fate and the fate of the opposition parties is in the hands of the electorate. Hewitt and Hoon should therefore go home and focus on being their people's representatives rather than their own.

Calamity Clarke?

2010-01-02T16:17:00.000-08:00

Do today's comments in the Sunday Telegraph, by the Shadow Business Secretary, Ken Clarke about tax rises not being inconceivable if the Conservatives win the next election, undermine the Party?

On the one hand, the answer would seem to be yes. As Conservatives the last thing we want to be told is that we may have to pay more tax. Conservatives are the party of lower taxes....................aren't we?

Historically speaking, not in every year of a Conservative government. As two prominent examples there was Howe's budget tax rise in the April 1981 budget and then the upping of VAT under Lamont in 1993.

When Cameron talks of collective pain for collective gain, this is not a party political necessity. Conservatives will have to swallow the bitter pill of the June/July 2010 budget for the tax burden to come down over the course of a first term Conservative government.

To this end, Clarke has confirmed what senior Tories are considering and what senior economists believe is crucial to Britain's economic recovery.

Cameron's Charge Commences Conservative Change Campaign

2010-01-02T15:34:00.000-08:00

Before posting the full text of today's speech by David Cameron at the Oxford School of Drama in Woodstock, Oxfordshire, there are four aspects of it which demand further dissecting.

First and foremost this is going to be one of the longest election campaigns in British political history. There were some (including at today's news conference itself) who were suggesting that Cameron's long campaign strategy could turn voters off rather than on. Cameron was right to say that providing there is variety in the campaign this will not occur. However what we must avoid, is the soundbite swamping the substance and cosmetics crowding out the convictions.

Secondly the speech signalled that for all the hype over the Obama 08 campaign, Team Cameron has recognised that there were flaws in the campaign. The clearest sign of this recognition came with Cameron emphasising over and over again this was change with a purpose, and not just change for change's sake.

Thirdly Cameron emphasised the progressive and modern nature of the Conservative Party. This rightly takes the fight to an arrogant Labour Party and government who believe there are certain words that only appear in their political dictionary.

Fourth and finally Cameron's speech reaffirmed the mission statement for any future Conservative government: to support aspiration and reward responsiblity. Of course if you reward responsiblity do you penalise the irresponsible? This is an issue which Cameron, the Shadow Cabinet and all our candidates need to lay out clearly and confidently.

David's Speech

It's a brand new year.

A new decade is fresh before us.

This time always comes with a sense of hope.

Hope that successes can be built upon; failures can be learned from...

...new ideas started; a new course charted.

But in 2010, we can do more than just hope.

The next general election is no more than 153 days away and I don't think it can come soon enough.

Let's make this the year for change – the year when the positive defeats the negative.

Because we can't go on like this. We need change to get the country back on its feet

And that change must be based on the values of responsibility and aspiration.

We can’t go on with the same irresponsible economic policies that gave us the biggest boom, the biggest bust…

…and now threatens our recovery with higher debts, higher instability, higher taxes, higher interest rates and higher unemployment.

We can’t go on with an old-fashioned left-wing class war on aspiration from a government that has seen the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

We can’t go on with the old style of politics that divides our country instead of uniting it.

We can’t go on with Labour's bureaucracy, running everything from Whitehall, denying people control over their lives and undermining the professionals in our public services.

We can’t go on in these difficult times with a weak Prime Minister and a divided government.

We can’t go on with another five years of Gordon Brown.

We can't go on like this.

This is no time for more of the same.

We need change to get our country back on its feet.

And it’s the modern Conservative party that has the plans, the ideas, the energy, the people, the unity and the leadership to bring that change…

…we are starting our campaign to win the general election today…

…and we’ll be spelling out exactly what that will mean every day from now until polling day.

On Monday, we will be publishing the first chapter of our draft manifesto and announcing new plans.

ECONOMIC CHANGE

We need change in our economy, because we can't go on like this.

Britain needs responsible economic policies that deal with our debts, so we have stability to create jobs and keep mortgage rates and taxes lower.

Since I started speaking today, more than half a million pounds has been added to our national debt.

Left alone this is the greatest single risk to sustained economic recovery.

That’s why we’ve been clear about our intention to cut public spending, and clear about where some of those cuts will come – from a one-year freeze on public sector pay to bringing forward the planned increase in the state pension age.

But it’s not enough just to deal with the deficit.

To have a hope of competing in the decades to come, our economy needs a complete overhaul.

We need to build an enterprise economy.

We need to create opportunity through green growth and new skills.

We need change right across the board: tax, regulation, banking, infrastructure.

And that’s exactly what we're planning – from a cut in the main rate of corporation tax…

…to a new high-speed rail network…

…to the creation of 100,000 apprenticeships.

If we win this year's election Britain will be under new economic management.

We will send out the loudest signal that this country is back open for business and ready for investment.

Decline is not inevitable. Confidence can return.

If we take action now – to get a grip on the public finances and unleash enterprise – Britain can have a bright economic future.

SOCIAL CHANGE

A strong economy gives us the foundation for a better life.

But the mission that drives this party is building a stronger society.

We are progressive Conservatives.

Our goal is to create a fairer, safer, greener country where opportunity is more equal.

It’s because we are progressives that we will protect the NHS.

In its bricks and mortars, care and compassion, it is the embodiment of fairness in our society.

We recognise its special place in our society so we will not cut the NHS; we will improve it for everyone.

It’s because we are progressives that we will support aspiration so that people from every background, not just the rich, have the chance to get on in life.

A pupil premium that gives the poorest children the chance to go to the best state schools.

Welfare reform that helps those in long-term poverty move into long-term employment.

Strengthening families with practical and financial help to give parents time with their children and keep couples together.

We will fight back against the root causes of deprivation – drug addiction, alcoholism, indebtedness, failing prisons.

It’s because we are progressives that we will support responsibility and strong families so we help mend our broken society and tackle the crime and misery it brings.

A decade of big government and blunt, bureaucratic control has undermined responsibility and made our social problems worse, not better.

We are determined to forge a new direction.

We will use the state to help remake society by encouraging people to take responsibility for themselves and for one another.

We will provide new opportunities for community groups, neighbourhood organisations, charities, social enterprises to help rebuild our civil society.

We will create incentives and use the best technology to encourage and enable people to come together, solve their problems together, make this society stronger together.

As we do this we will redistribute power from the political elite to the man and woman in the street.

Within months of a Conservative victory there would start the most radical decentralisation of power this country has seen for generations.

Government will enter a new era of transparency.

And a strong, unbroken line of democratic accountability will be restored between the people and those that make the decisions that affect their lives.

It is a future barely recognisable from the present, but this party is determined to take us there.

A Conservative Government will send the clearest possible signal to everyone in Britain...

...if you take responsibility, we will back you; if you aspire to a better life for you and your family, we will support you; if you play your part in building the big society, we will reward you.

POLITICAL CHANGE

These are the changes our country needs.

These are the changes that will help get Britain back on its feet.

But I know people have heard this sort of talk before.

Yet nothing ever happens and nothing ever changes.

So why now?

Why should people trust this change?

It’s because of the changes we have already made…

…because of the leadership the Conservative Party has shown.

We have shown over the past four years that we can make change happen.

We are showing today the leadership the country needs to get the change it so clearly wants…

…leadership that is modern, strong, decisive, united.

We have opened up our party and have more women candidates and candidates from ethnic minorities ready to bring their expertise to help change this country.

Up and down the country today, Conservative candidates aren’t just talking, they’re doing, setting up social action projects, helping the communities they hope to serve.

We have argued for fiscal responsibility from day one of my leadership.

We have argued for social responsibility from day one of my leadership.

We have campaigned consistently to put the environment and civil liberties on the political agenda.

We have argued that difficult economic times are not an excuse to drop our commitment to the poorest in the world, but to reaffirm that commitment.

When the expenses scandal broke, we were the first to pay money back, first to publish our expenses online and first to commit to cutting the cost of politics.

And over the past four years, we have always tried to work with other parties rather than looking for political dividing lines where none exist.

We backed Tony Blair’s school reforms and renewing Trident even though on both occasions we could have inflicted a damaging defeat on the Government.

And we worked with the Liberal Democrats to get justice for the Gurkhas.

We called for TV debates more than four years ago…and have stuck to that whether ahead in the polls or behind in the polls. It is our consistency on this issue that has made it happen.

In that spirit of unity, of a greater purpose than the simple pursuit of politics, I have an announcement to make.

We have said that from day one of a future Conservative Government, a national security council, with the key ministers and defence chiefs, will sit as a war cabinet.

And I can announce today that if we win this year's election, I will invite leaders of the main opposition parties to attend the war cabinet on a regular basis so they can offer their advice and insights.

When a nation is at war, it needs to pull together.

I am determined that with a Conservative government, it will.

CONCLUSION

Our plans are not timid – but the truth is they can’t be.

The problems of today demand more.

They demand real change – and that can’t come soon enough.

We can't go on like this. We need change to get the country back on its feet.

A better NHS; an aspirational economy; a big society; a new politics.

We have a four year track record of delivering change in our party.

Now we are impatient to change our country.

We are determined to make a difference.

We are all in this together, and we know that if we all pull together then this country can have great hope for the future.

So let's face this new year with confidence, optimism and hope.

And let's make 2010 the year for change.

The Year for Change!!

2010-01-01T11:22:00.000-08:00

Happy New Year!!

The next five months will be the most exciting (and no doubt exhausting!) for decades! 2010 will see the Labour nightmare continue or the Conservative dream begin.

We must be the change we wish to see!

Music to the ears?

2009-11-18T11:42:00.001-08:00

What is remarkable about this year’s Queen’s Speech are the omissions and the repeated admissions of failure.

Let’s take the omissions first. Labour’s legislative agenda is woefully inadequate in terms of its remedial measures for the economic and social situation we are currently in. Labour seem intent to remain a passenger on the bash the banker’s bandwagon (as their Financial Services Bill shows) and not switch to the construction cart. This is not opinion. Excluding the Jobs Bill from the Queen’s speech means Labour are once more talking a good talk about preventing the emergence of a lost generation but not walking the walk.

In the same vein, it was only a few weeks ago that Brown stood up at Labour’s annual conference and announced a whole raft of health measures. With the sidelining of the Health Bill, once again we see a government that seems to be all talk.

The exclusion of the Housing Bill for consideration in the forthcoming Parliamentary session is further proof that this government has no real solutions to the real issues facing this country.

What do the Child Poverty Bill, Children, Schools and Families Bill, Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill, Crime and Security Bill, Energy Bill, Equality Bill, Fiscal Responsibility Bill, Personal Care at Home Bill have in common?

They all signal that the government has raised the flag of failure.

Labour came in, in 1997 seeking to take significant steps in reducing child poverty. The fact that this Bill has been reintroduced in the final Parliamentary session of a third term government is lamentable.

The fact that legislation has been introduced to ensure parents can legally ensure their children receive a decent standard of education highlights the government’s gross misunderstanding about their failures. The government are essentially turning around and saying to our schools and school staff that they were not given the tools they needed to do the job and are now being sued for a job conceived to have been done badly in some cases. If anyone is to be sued it is the government.

The Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill does nothing to address the issues of the past 12 months or the past 12 years.

We have yet another Crime and Security Bill. After 300 new offences, countless initiatives to tackle low level crime and a multitude of legislation Labour have failed to match their mantra from the 1990s, that they needed to tackle the causes of crime and not just the crimes themselves.

The Energy Bill highlights how Labour have let the most needy in British society down. It should not be the job of OFGEM to do the government’s work for it. They are the regulator not the rule maker.

Since 1997, British society has become the most unequal in any period in our history. Discrimination is reprehensible in all forms but you cannot put everyone onto a level playing field. That is what the Bill seems intent on doing by placing an obligation on the entire public sector to “narrow the gap between rich and poor”. Are we going to see Equal Opportunity forms peppered with questions like; How many bedrooms do you have in your house? What is your combined income? and so on? Does that matter a jot when it comes to doing the job? Of course not.

The introduction of a Fiscal Responsibility Bill is not just lamentable. It is laughable. If government needs a legal obligation to balance the books then they are not worthy of being our government.

No one would dispute that we need to look after the older generation in Britain. But again we need to look at the evidence of the past 12 years. Labour have badly let down our older population. The fact that so many have to sell their homes to survive is but one manifestation of this.

So by all means introduce a Personal Care at Home Bill but ensure that the care can be carried out at the person’s home and not a care home or other establishment.

Then ensure that the tax burden on our older generation is reduced.

Ensure that they get what is rightfully owed to them and do not have to go around with a begging bowl.

Restore dignity to old age.

Invest more in researching the diseases which afflict the older generation.

Ensure that the State pays for homes to be habitable for the older generation rather than force them to pay for any alterations themselves.

Allow relatives to look after their older loved ones without having to use their annual holiday entitlement to do so or sit at their desk wondering how their relative is.

It is clear from the omissions and admissions of failure in this Queen’s Speech that Labour, as a party and a government are stuck in a time warp.

Unfortunately for the electorate this is not going to last three minutes but 168 more days.

Waiting for the next song is no longer an option. We as a country need to change the record now.

Another Day, Another Death, Another Defence

2009-11-16T05:18:00.000-08:00

When Gordon Brown stands up tonight and mounts a defence of our involvement in Afghanistan he will be hammering in the final peg of the tent of trouble he has assembled for himself, the government and this nation.

The issue is not how many syllables Brown or ministers can utter in favour of the Afghan war or against the terrorists. The issue is that support for the Afghan war has diminished in part because our Prime Minister and government have allowed a vocal void to emerge.

Wars cannot be won by rhetoric but results. Brown must stop talking the talk and start walking the walk. Sending reinforcements to Afghanistan would be a start. Pressuring Karazi to cut the corruption in that country would be another step in the right direction.

The stakes are too high for the cycle of deaths and immediate defence to continue. We must have a proactive Afghan policy rather than one that is remorselessly reactive.

Queen's Speech 2009: Labour's third term lorry is stuck in third gear

2009-11-15T10:15:00.000-08:00

When the spectacle of Wednesday's Queen's Speech is over, what will be left on the surface?

From the various reports in the Sunday media, the answer seems to be precious little. Now this is not just because we have little or no financial capital (although of course we do), but more to do with the fact that we have a government that has spent all of its political capital.

Now you can debate when this process started. Some might say it started under Blair and accelerated under Brown. Others might say it firmly began under Brown and gained an unforgiving speed thereafter. But the fact this process has occurred is surely beyond doubt and debate.

For this reason we are not going to see a radical shift in this Labour government's attitudes or actions come Wednesday afternoon.

There are numerous examples that one could pick to illustrate this. The touted Bill to beef up the FSA is one example. It is not just too little. It is too late and in terms of State intervention in bad banker's contracts may very well be illegal. It also misunderstands the fundamentals of the economic earthquake which shook our nation violently 13 long months ago. Misunderstanding the problem will mean the solution is misdiagnosed.

Labour's Fair deal for our armed forces is another example. Of course all of us in this land should ensure that this is a land that is fit for our lads and ladies who sacrifice so much for us in foreign fields. But why are we at this point?

Treatment abroad and at home are not mutually exclusive but mutually inclusive.

Again Labour's announcement on Wednesday will be too little, too late.

For these and a myriad of other reasons, Wednesday will highlight once again that the Labour third term lorry is stuck in third gear in the middle lane of the political motorway.

The longest hangover in history?

2009-09-07T23:51:00.000-07:00

Last night's news that Alan Duncan has been demoted from Shadow Leader of the House of Commons to Prisons Minister suggests that the expenses hangover is still lingering.

He could possibly have chosen his words more carefully and been savvy to the fact that in the existing febrile environment a camera may have been working its media magic.

But perhaps Duncan's biggest mistake was allowing his private remarks to become public when others have not.

That is not to say that many MPs do not share Duncan's views. He is certainly right to allude to the fact that the House of Commons runs the risk of becoming a Chamber of suspects and that the Parliamentary stewardship that has seen this nation through so many of its darkest hours runs the risk of ending or being fatally undermined by knee jerk reactions to the expenses situation.

The right man?

2009-09-07T23:42:00.000-07:00

The appointment of a spokesperson by Speaker John Bercow lends increasing weight to the theory that his appointment may have been a politically motivated misstep. This misstep can be ill afforded at a time when everyone needs to be singing from the same hymn sheet.

The key question still remains unanswered: why does Bercow need a Speaker when no other Speaker has?

Comatose consensus

2009-08-14T05:02:00.000-07:00

Our National Health Service is one of Britain's key institutions.

How many people would have died without the hundreds of helping hands across hospitals all around the country? How many births may there not have been?

We should be proud that this country is committed to providing a health safety net to its people. But we should not let sentimentality about the past obscure the reforms necessary for future success.

Reform will not come by name calling or by foreigners intervening in a key domestic policy matter. Reform will only come when we accept the absolute truth of what choice in the provision of health care in modern Britain means.

It means that we should not all be shepherded into a stategarchy. But similarly it does not mean that we move to a system where you pay or die. That is morally and socially repugnant. There is such a thing as a middle road. This middle road is to allow those who wish to pay for care to do so without removing a penny from the National Health purse. Who loses?

Similarly we must move away from the ABBA-isation of our policy processes. We must move to active prevention of preventable diseases rather than relying on the responsiveness of one organisation. Why should a doctor be responsible for one’s unhealthy habits?

We must ensure that the NHS does not suffer from a brain drain. We need the brightest and best doctors and nurses to provide care to our people. We must pay these people a commensurate salary. Our emphasis as a society must be on the practitioners and not the pen pushers.

But how we define health care also has to change. Healthcare is not just about cancer and heart disease. It is also about mental well being and social care. How we treat these elements also says a lot about our social morality.

Above all else the debate about the NHS’s future cannot end come the end of the present “war of words”. In fact we should see it is the beginning of ending the comatose consensus that has existed since the NHS’s conception in the rubble of 1948 Britain.

Primary colours

2009-08-11T05:43:00.000-07:00

Open primaries seem to be in vogue. To sure the Conservative open primary worked splendidly in Totnes and gave the Conservative candidate a whiff of Westminster which she might otherwise not have had.

But let us be clear: open primaries are not and should not be seen as a panacea to fix all of Britain’s political ills.

Cost is a concern but it comes way down the list. Why have an open primary? That question must be answered before they are rolled out across the country.

All of those involved in politics have encountered the wall of disinterest, suspicion and scepticism at some point (and if you have not you must share your secret!)

But these feelings cannot be banished by a wave of the reform wand. To some extent open primaries are a knee jerk reaction to the lingering expenses situation. There is no way that the Totnes "experiment" would have occurred were it not for the revelations in May and June. But reform is not and cannot be, or become a fashion accessory.

We must avoid the temptation to jump on the Open Primary bandwagon but more importantly must move away from this culture of mistrust, second guessing and rubbishing of those who govern us. For if we don’t we shall rue the day.

Fixing Britain's Political Grid

2009-07-26T06:28:00.000-07:00

Cast your minds back to May 3rd 2009. This was the first day of the so-called "Expenses-gate" when the lights across Westminster went out in Britain's worst ever political blackout and stayed off for weeks.

Since then we have heard numerous platitudes, various diagnoses and a Parliamentary Standards Act aimed at "restoring public faith and confidence in the system".

Yet none of this will fix Britain's political grid in the long-term. There is only one thing worse than bad policies and bad legislation. That is knee jerk policy-making and legislating. The Parliamentary Standards Act was a classic example of the bar being put on the stable door after the horse has bolted, and a rotten bar at that.

Those men and women who govern us need to realise that we do not restore public trust and confidence in the system by creating a culture of mistrust and confidence complex in the corridors of Parliament itself. That is the danger we face.

The recess is a prime example of where meaningful reform can be executed. The propagandistic move by organisations such as 38 degrees has the reverse effect to that which they are seeking. Our MPs should not be chained to the Green Benches for 365 days of the year. But nor, should they not be sitting for 82 days of the year.

A balance needs to be struck. MPs should be able to scrutinise the programme presented by the government for longer than they currently are. The Parliamentary Standards Act was a prime example of this. The Bill was commended to the House and reached Royal Assent within 7 days. That is an absurdly short turnaround time for such an important piece of legislation.

This has to be changed. Reducing the length of the recess would mean that we can put an end to late sittings and late votes.

At the same time there should be more Opposition Days. More time should be given to Private Member's Bills. PMQ's should be extended to an hour on a Wednesday. This would allow more backbench MPs (who are the backbone of the Legislature) the chance to question and indeed challenge the Executive.

There should be a minimum attendance rate introduced for MPs. If you have ever watched the five minutes after an important vote (or indeed PMQ's) you will have seen how quickly the chamber empties. That cannot be good for our democracy. Of course one of the reasons the chamber may empty so quickly is that backbench MPs feel sidelined. So a "dual carriageway" policy needs to be invented and implemented.

In terms of MP's salaries it is quite simply wrong for our MPs to have to hang around the salary bin. Their salaries should be increased by 50% and all expenses abolished. MPs should have an office supplement of £10,000 and that should be the end of it. Salaries and the office supplement should be increased commensurately for Shadow Cabinet members, Cabinet members and Ministers.

Whatever structural changes are made to the House of Lords in the medium to long term, we cannot allow Secretaries of State (other than the Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Chancellor) to be from the Red Benches. We did not build in House of Commons supremacy in the early 20th century just for it to be reversed a century on.

Above all those who govern us should not be brow beaten into forgetting that they have much to be proud of. Lives have been been vastly and practically improved over the decades. We must not lose sight of that light in the current darkness.

If we do we shall rue the day.

Phone tapping, politicians and the public interest

2009-07-09T02:36:00.000-07:00

Last night's revelations about the bugging of former politicians and others and the consequent row deflects us from the real issue.

Phone tapping is required in the thwarting of terrorism. But should journalists be using it? Absolutely not. A law must be passed with appropriate speed to ensure that this is the last row of this nature.

Trying to find a scapegoat is the easy option. But it is nothing more than a delaying tactic and should therefore be resisted wholeheartedly.

It’s the economy, stupid

2009-07-01T07:56:00.000-07:00

That’s the reason being given for the mothballing of plans to part-privatise the Royal Mail. The question however has to be is this the conditions in the finanical economy or the political economy?

2009-06-30T08:05:00.000-07:00

The plan to scrap ID cards for airport workers marks yet another nail in the coffin of this unaffordable and ineffective policy.

When will the Government start governing on the basis of reality and not reality TV?

Deju vu

2009-06-30T05:07:00.000-07:00

Do these words remind you of anything?

“Local homes for local people”

It should remind you of Brown’s now infamous “British jobs for British workers” comment. We saw the reaction that got. Now it seems like Brown has turned on his tin ear again and come up with a soundbite rather than an effective solution to the chronic housing shortage in this country. This may sound daft but surely the past twelve years should have seen decent and affordable homes built and derelict homes taken over and refurbished?

Cut if you want to

2009-06-30T04:46:00.000-07:00

So bellow Labour to the Conservatives. Yet it is nothing but white noise. The British political and financial economies are way beyond being able to choose cutbacks. They have become an imperative.

The issue now is which areas should be cut. All departments are rightly going to be defending their budgets and indeed jostling for more money. It goes without saying that more money is not, and cannot, be an option on the table if we are to be serious about bringing Britain’s books back from the brink.

Aside from the white noise, however, there is another fundamental flaw in the debate thus far. This is that the focus so far seems to have been on which departments will be spared and which will suffer. Should the focus not instead be on intra-departmental cuts? For example do we need all the managers? All the quangos? All the Whitehall writs?

Let us put the rah-rah rhetoric away and start delivering results.

Building Brown’s Future

2009-06-29T08:30:00.000-07:00

That is the reality of today’s uninspiring, insufficient and long overdue statement by Gordon Brown. It is simply not good enough to blame events for the delay. Governments have to weather storms, not wait for them to pass.

Not since 1979 has a government had such a wave of goodwill and failed to ride it, triggering such a tsunami of failure.

Labour's Late Deal

2009-06-29T03:56:00.000-07:00

Today Gordon Brown will stand up in the House of Commons (no bad thing in itself given that it is a policy announcement he is making) and present a raft of proposals for “Building Britain’s Future”. There will be a time to debate the practical manifestations of Brown’s vision for Britain’s public services. But let us be clear: is the last year of a government that has been in power for 4380 days the time to radically transform public services? Where is the parliamentary authority? Where is the democratic legitimacy? Where is the goodwill of the country? Will old Labour really vote for such a raft of proposals?

Freudian slip?

2009-06-24T04:14:00.001-07:00

Was Gordon Brown's slip of the tongue, where he said that the Liberals want to cut public spending, the Conservatives don't, a slip of the tongue or a real admission of his hyerbole over the past three weeks?

Bercowmeter

2009-06-24T03:58:00.002-07:00

How will the new Speaker perform at PMQs?

We are two minutes away from finding out..........

Doing the right thing (eventually!)

2009-06-24T03:58:00.001-07:00

That is the result of Gordon Brown’s announcement to give his evidence to the Iraq Inquiry in public.

Ready, Speaker, Go!

2009-06-22T07:40:00.000-07:00

Polls have opened in the election for the next Speaker of the House of Commons.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the next Speaker of the House of Commons is likely to be from the blue corner with Ann Widdecombe and John Bercow the frontrunners.

However it is also a three horse race between Margaret Beckett, John Bercow and Ann Widdecombe.

As for when we are likely to know money could perhaps be put on an early decision being reached.

Spot the difference

2009-06-15T23:46:00.000-07:00

After 134 minutes of debate and diagnosis, the blunt assessment has to be that you would struggle to spot a difference between the candidates. In defence of the Speakers-to-be this is unavoidable given the race for reform that is currently underway in the Houses of Parliament and the country.

All of the candidates are proposing overhauling the expenses system, de-Westminsterising the House of Commons and rebalancing the Executive-Legislature seesaw in favour of the latter.

In this vein, the only discernible difference between the Speakers-to-be, is the rate at which they would enact reform.

Our MPS face an unenviable choice six days from now.

Speaker Beckett?

2009-06-10T08:11:00.000-07:00

Somehow it doesn't seem plausible but within the past ten minutes she has thrown her hat into the ring.

In one way it is good for Parliament. All of those who were offically in the race this morning were male. Parliament is predominantly male and it is for that reason that Beckett's candidacy is good. But the champagne should remain on ice.

For Mrs Beckett has been at the heart of governmental failures for the past twelve years. Not only that but she has been embroiled in the expenses scandal. For these reasons she should stand but not be successful.

Dhanda's Day?

2009-06-10T06:31:00.000-07:00

At first glance it may seem not. But do not be too sure. After all Michael Martin was not the favourite to win in 2000 and the underdog won.

You can read more on this story here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8092913.stm

Can a roadblock be reformist?

2009-06-10T06:30:00.001-07:00

You would think not but given Gordon Brown’s apparent constitutional enlightenment over the past 14 days, you could be forgiven for thinking that it may well be.

However, a mirage is always going to be a mirage. We as a country cannot afford the long march through yet another desert only to find that there is no water at the end of it.

Reality based reform

2009-06-09T13:19:00.000-07:00

Ever since the Telgraph broke the first expenses story at the start of May we have seen the emotional pendulum swing from one extreme to another.

Reports that Gordon Brown intends to unveil a raft of constitutional reform proposals tomorrow, are but the latest swing.

Let us be clear. Expenses is the issue here. Voting reform is precisely the knee jerk, ill conceived reaction to a problem that is not there.

We can clear the expenses system up quite simply. Let us give dignity back to our MPs by ending the system of deferred payments and top-ups. Let us abolish the expenses system. In its place let us increase MPs' salaries by 50% and provide them with a £10,000 office supplement. Let us increase Ministerial and Cabinet salaries appropriately also. And let us recognise that the British PM's renumeration should be far above £150,000.

Soul searching

2009-06-08T02:05:00.000-07:00

That is what we as a nation must do. We did not fight the Second World War against fascism just to see it rear its ugly head here in Britain. All three main parties must take collective responsibility for the surrender of ground which has now been occupied by the vitriolic and vile extremists.

But so too must society for allowing this disease to grow and become entrenched. There are battles that are absolutely vital to fight and win and the beating back of the BNP is one such battle.

Democracy darkened

2009-06-07T11:31:00.000-07:00

If the chatter is to be listened to and the rumours believed, a BNP victory in the European elections is imminent.

Yet let us be clear. The whole democractic landscape will be darkened if this happens and it will not be sufficent to finger point or retreat into the shell of party politics.

Euro Millions

2009-06-07T11:25:00.000-07:00

375 million to be precise. Yet rather than a lottery between the public this is a lotery amongst Europe's political parties.

It is not long until they find out who has the winning tickets.

Unapologetic

2009-06-05T08:49:00.001-07:00

That is the resounding message that can be taken from Brown's emergency news conference.

Cabinet House of Cards

2009-06-05T08:37:00.000-07:00

Paul Murphy is the latest Ministerial card to fall................

By-election time

2009-06-05T08:19:00.001-07:00

Dr Ian Gibson, the long-serving MP for Norwich North is to stand down with immediate effect triggering a by-election. We have a fantastic candidate in Chloe Smith and this is an opportunity that we must seize with both hands to turn this part of the city blue.

Departure lounge

2009-06-05T07:35:00.001-07:00

Geoff Hoon has resigned as Transport Secretary.

Culture shock

2009-06-05T07:21:00.000-07:00

That is what will be confronting Ben Bradshaw, the new Culture Secretary.

Facing the nation

2009-06-05T07:16:00.001-07:00

*Gordon Brown is to hold a news conference at 16.00 hours*

The musical chairs continues

2009-06-05T06:59:00.000-07:00

Andy Burnham moves from Culture to Health and Peter Hain returns as Welsh Secretary.

Hit the ground running

2009-06-05T06:53:00.001-07:00

That is what Bob Ainsworth as new Defence Secretary will need to do. Indeed given his previous ministerial portfolio as a junior minister in the Ministry of Defence that is probably why Brown has appointed him.

Bleeding love?

2009-06-05T05:51:00.000-07:00

The bewildering events of the past four days have cut several of Brown's political veins. But a cut vein does not have to be life threatening.

However, cutting an artery is far more serious. There are three people who could cut Brown's:

(1) Ed Balls;

(2) Harriet Harman;

(3) Sarah Brown.

So why would they?

Quite simply in Ed Balls' case it would be revenge. Harriet Harman would cut the artery in order to save her own political life. Sarah Brown would take her husband to one side and tell him to think about the children. At this moment it seems that Sarah Brown is the most likely candidate to perform the operation.

Pensions problem

2009-06-05T04:29:00.000-07:00

The BBC is reporting that the Work and Pensions portfolio, and subsequently the pensions problem, is now Yvette Cooper's.

Community companionship

2009-06-05T04:02:00.000-07:00

John Denham is to be the new Communities Secretary.

A better Cabinet?

2009-06-05T02:42:00.000-07:00

Ken Livingstone's view is that the departure of "ultra Blairites" will result in a better Cabinet. Only time will tell.

Numbers game

2009-06-05T02:38:00.001-07:00

Tessa Jowell has just said that Labour has a Parliamentary majority of 66. How true is that given all the rumours circulating?

And how much of a Cabinet majority does Brown have?

Number 4?

2009-06-05T02:22:00.000-07:00

John Hutton has announced that he is leaving the Cabinet. Is his departure a warning shot across Brown's bow or something more innocent?

Poetic justice

2009-06-05T02:13:00.000-07:00

For the deserters, Shaun Woodward and Quentin Davies it is ironic that they are facing political annihilation once again.

You're hired!

2009-06-05T02:11:00.000-07:00

Alan Sugar is to be a new Enterprise Tsar for the Government according to reports.

Pre-emptive strike

2009-06-05T01:34:00.001-07:00

Gordon Brown's rapid reshuffle appears to have nipped the brewing rebellion in the bud......................for now!

Welcome Home Alan

2009-06-05T01:14:00.000-07:00

Reports are coming through that Alan Johnson is the new Home Secretary. Is this an attempt to bind Johnson's hands?

Another Balls up

2009-06-05T00:47:00.001-07:00

So yet again Brown has bottled it: Darling is to remain Chancellor. Let us be clear: this represents a failure not just of political will but of national connectivity. Darling should not go for the mistakes made on Brown’s watch but he should go because he is simply not suited to the economic portfolio.

Election Day 2009

2009-06-04T00:43:00.001-07:00

So after the political turbulence of the past month, the days and nights of campaigning, planning and preparation, today the people of Britain have their say.

Let us hope that the blue sky of democracy and decency is not replaced by the grey skies of extremism.

Another day, another resignation

2009-06-03T02:37:00.000-07:00

This time it’s the turn of Communities Secretary Hazel Blears. This is starting to look and feel very surreal.

Summer nights

2009-06-02T11:59:00.000-07:00

As the temperature soars outside of Westminster so too does the temperature inside. There aren't many House of Commons moments which can genuinely be labelled as historic. The no confidence vote of 1979, the Iraq war debate of March 2003 and the removal of the speaker, Michael Martin, are three prominent examples.

But next week's vote on the dissolution of Parliament will be historic.

However it would be all too easy to get lost in the novel nature of the situation we find ourselves in.

After all a dissolution motion has never before been laid in this manner or in such a feverish environment.

But for this, the mechanics of government do not cease to work. All the parties will be "whipping" their members from dawn until dusk for the next week. Government will not let those in its Westminster quarters sleep in the run-up to the vote.

There is also a world of difference between laying a dissolution motion and winning a dissolution motion. Labour knows this and if the motion were to be successful they would not want to say that they went down without a fight.

There may also be greater urgency to Brown's weekly audience with the Queen later this week. For it should never be forgotten that ultimate constitutional hegemony lies with the sovereign. Whilst it is unlikely, perhaps inconceivable that Queen Elizabeth II would refuse to recognise the will of Parliament, she may well choose to follow the Brown/Governor Jean of Canada's line of argument. This argument states that when the boat is rocking from side to side you try to steady it rather than upturn it.

It will be a long week for the nation's governed and those who govern.

The nuclear button

2009-06-02T08:44:00.000-07:00

Plaid Cymru and the SNP seem set to press the button with all their might when they table a dissolution motion in the near future.

Now is the time to see the Party leaders put their money where their mouth is and either support or oppose the motion.

An interesting situation just became an intriguing situation.

P is for Perception

2009-06-02T07:45:00.000-07:00

In politics, perception is king and realism takes a back seat to impressionism.

It may be that Jacqui Smith and Tom Watson are resigning their ministerial portfolios for personal, rather than political reasons. But given the much trailed reshuffle it gives the impression of panic and scurrying.

In the midst of economic turbulence both inside and outside of the Houses of Parliament, this is a disaster.

What was the straw that broke Jacqui Smith’s back?

2009-06-02T05:29:00.000-07:00

With the news that she is set to resign in the pending reshuffle, this is the £1 million question.

Into the unknown

2009-06-02T05:10:00.000-07:00

For all the scrabbling around to find the light switch, it is clear that the next 72 hours will be no like other in British politics.

We are potentially on the cusp of a very dark chapter in the book of British democracy, with parties that prey on hate and prejudice eyeing electoral gains across the country.

Expenses gate has rightly upset, hurt, bewildered and angered the general public and those MPs who have behaved properly and in some cases taken thrift to a new level. Yet how are the BNP, Greens, UKIP and the other smaller parties going to be able to rectify this situation?

Enforced repatriation, exiting the European Union, pitting class against class, deunionising Britain or any of the other policies offered by these smaller parties are not an answer to the challenges of our time. They belong in the history books.

It is all very well to finger point and play the blame game but our electorate deserve better.

We are facing nothing less than a “Red Riding Hood” moment in Britain’s democratic journey. If the smaller parties are able to worm their way into the House of decency, liberty, tolerance and fairness that will be something from which we cannot recover.

The question for every single voter on Thursday is this: is it better to vote for the candidate who can actually change things or vote for the candidate who talks about change but can’t find the word in the dictionary?

Fever Pitch

2009-05-30T13:07:00.000-07:00

Tonight's ICM poll for the Sunday Telegraph will only increase the thermometer result for the political patient.

No one knows what June 4th will bring for the patient or indeed what emergency treatment may be administered. But before any emergency surgery is undertaken let us give the patient a proper diagnosis that will serve it in the long term.

The Bigoted Nasty Party

2009-05-28T13:46:00.001-07:00

That is what the BNP really stands for. They offer hate when what we need is unity and common purpose. They offer an agenda of hopelessness when what we need in these turbulent times is hope. They trade in vicious attacks on our fellow citizens when what we need is a vision for the future.

Their incessant playing of the immigration, immigration, immigration track, leaves only them dancing to it. We need a whole policy album in these turbulent times.

But let us imagine that the BNP were ever able to implement their one policy. How would it be enforced? Would we witness dissent in the ranks of the police and army? Would we see riots on the street that would make the Poll tax riots or the riots of 1981 or 2001 look insignificant? Would the Queen allow the BNP to enter a coalition government (if Britain ever adopts a PR electoral system)?

Let us imagine that they were able to implement it. Who would protect us? Who would look over the sick and elderly? Who would educate our children?

The reality of the BNP's narrow-minded policy is that it would make the current shortages in frontline service staff worse and leave some of the most vulnerable in our society even more vulnerable.

There are 7 days until the polls close in the European elections. We must not allow the sun to rise on June 5th to BNP gains. But at the same time we must take this message to those places that, for right or wrong, feel abandoned, forgotten or sidelined by the mainstream political parties. We must shout down the BNP chants until we are hoarse and fight them with every fibre in our bodies.

MP Count

2009-05-28T05:55:00.000-07:00

So another two MPs have been squashed under the expenses bulldozer.

But the political scalps will not, and cannot, be a substitute for abolishing the expenses system. To think otherwise would only be to store up greater problems for ourselves in the future.

Back in vogue

2009-05-26T23:46:00.000-07:00

This season's must have seems to be constitutional reform.

It used to be the case that our political parties stole each others clothes (which has always been something of an invented nonsense).

Now our political parties are positively rushing to throw all the clothes away and invest in new ones.

As Spring turns to Summer this is a process that is being repeated up and down the country. We cannot ignore the premise that a wholesale clearance of the political wardrobe is firmly back in fashion.

However any constitutional changes must be put to the great British public through a referendum or series of referenda. That really would encapsulate the true democratic power of Britain's governed.

Gurkhas day

2009-05-21T04:24:00.000-07:00

There have been many over the past two weeks who have come close to saying Britain cannot hold its head high to the world.

The British government's three-point turn on the right of all Gurkhas to settle in the UK is an act of which we can all hold our heads high.

Nothing is impossible

2009-05-21T04:23:00.000-07:00

Ranulph Fienne’s conquering of Everest should demonstrate to us that nothing is impossible. It may be that we feel helpless, oppressed, overwhelmed or scared at the prospect of action or inaction. But these are emotions that can be overcome with the right approach.

Youth disengagement is one of the issues that people increasingly wring their hands over. But it does not need to be like this. People often say that the young are not engaged in politics enough, or at all.

Yet is political participation the only way to engage the young? Of course not. We need to move away from this view and embrace civic participation wholeheartedly. What happens to those young who are not involved in politics, but at the same time are not roaming the streets? Do they disappear into a black hole? No. They are playing sports, learning to play a musical instrument, attending a youth club, doing charity work or some other commendable activity.

We need to get away from expecting all young people to be the same. It is this enforcement of our expectations rather than other’s aspirations which leads government to introduce absurd and unworkable policies such as 50% of young people going to university.

Yet government should not take all the flack. Society needs to value every individual contribution made.

Only after realising that we all have a shared role to play can we start to progress. The government’s closure of playing fields was lamentable but what was more lamentable was their failure to introduce a replacement. Education should not just be seen as an exercise in the art of the academic but as an emotional enlightenment.

For this reason let us take steps to implement a full civic participation programme and turn the page on the hand wringing.

The speakerscreen

2009-05-20T00:56:00.000-07:00

Michael Martin may be going but the expenses system needs more than a token head on the floor. It needs to be thrown out. Not tinkered with.

This moment offers both the politicians and the public an opportunity to be bold. Let us pay our MPs the wage they have been denying themselves for so long. Let us abolish the expenses system. But above all let us all take a deep breath and get some perspective. British democracy is not dying or dead. This is not the rotten Parliament, or the “moat” Parliament as one Labour MP in a moment of attempted humour dubbed it.

Parliament does not need a revolution. It needs its members to realise that expenses is the issue and deal with it head-on.

Martin's last stand

2009-05-19T06:34:00.000-07:00

So there it is. Michael Martin to resign the office of Speaker on the 21st June and a new Speaker to be elected on the 22nd June.

Martin’s march

2009-05-19T03:52:00.001-07:00

So Michael Martin, the speaker of the House of Commons for nine years, is to stand down “soon”.

This may satisfy Parliamentarian’s thirst for blood but will it satisfy the electorate? It has been interesting throughout this whole furore, that public opinion has not been canvassed. Any action Parliament takes should be based on the will of their constituents.

Speaker’s Corner

2009-05-18T04:04:00.000-07:00

Or should that be speaker in a corner?

For right or wrong, Michael Martin has proved to be one of the most unpopular Speakers in the history of that position. Resentment and anger have been simmering for a long time. The turning up of the Parliamentary hob now means that the emotion pot is boiling over.

Martin may (and indeed should) avoid the third degree burns of enforced resignation but he shall not escape unscathed from the fire that now engulfs him.

Sanctions v solutions

2009-05-16T11:26:00.000-07:00

Gordon Brown's News of the World article, is the latest demonstration of our political leaders' collective failure to grasp the reality of the present situation. It is absurd to say that repayment of money incorrectly claimed is a "sanction".

Simarly, to rely on sanctions, such as suspensions, expulsions, deselections and so on, alone, is absurd.

We need to solve the expenses situation in the long term and not just in the short term. All the proposals so far seem to have failed to have grasped this.

Change is not just for this Parliament. It is for the life of all Parliaments.

If it's broke, don't fix it?

2009-05-16T07:18:00.000-07:00

That's the position we seem increasingly to be drifting towards.

For all the anger, hurt and dismay that is whirling around at the moment, addressing expenses reform is not mission impossible. We should never allow ourselves to think that it is.

However, we should also not base our mission on raw emotion. If we do, we shall come to rue the day.

Democracy decimated?

2009-05-15T06:33:00.000-07:00

Is our democracy being decimated as outgoing Justice Minister Malik claims?

No has to be the answer. Ministers may moan about being politically ambushed and targeted. They may moan about a media bloodfest. They may bang on about acting within the rules. Ministers need to grow up and stop pretending they are victims of a terrible system. They are not.

The constant abdication of Ministerial responsibility and the arrogance demonstrated by those MPs who have done wrong yet refuse to apologise for individual and systematic failures does more harm to our democracy than anything else.

In search of a Speaker

2009-05-15T00:07:00.000-07:00

Let us asumme that the furore surrounding Michael Martin results in his resignation. Who would replace him?

Sir Menzies Campbell seemed to be in the running. Likeable, untainted, principled. However his expenses confession on Question Time last night probably excludes him from the list of likely candidates.

So who should be the next Speaker of the "Mother of all Parliaments"?

Back to earth?

2009-05-14T07:02:00.000-07:00

For eight days now the only story in town has been "expenses, expenses, expenses".

The response from Westminster has made MPs look like they are from another planet.

However we may finally be witnessing the shuttle's return to earth, with the suspension of Elliot Morley from the green benches and the Labour Party.

This should be just the start and not the finish though.

Beware the sacrificial lamb

2009-05-14T04:30:00.000-07:00

With the news of Andrew Mackay’s resignation and the inevitable “freezing” of his political career, for the time being, there may be some in the House who believe they can breathe a little easier, or sleep a little better tonight.

Such beliefs would not only be foolish. They would be presumptive and out of touch. Mackay should not bear the burden for all those MPs charged with malfeasance.

In the same vein, discontent with the Speaker is understandable and long-standing but the expenses situation should not be the straw that breaks his back. The public would see it, rightly or wrongly, as attempting to pass the buck.

Neither of these men should become a sacrifical lamb.

Dousing the flames

2009-05-13T13:00:00.000-07:00

Whilst Ann Widdecombe's semantics may be the story tonight, the substance should not be lost.

We do not need a macho contest between the toughest of them all. We do need disciplined and durable reform. Cutting the number of MPs is not a solution. It is in fact the reverse. Constituents do not need even more distance between them and their MPs. Similarly MPs should not be even further distanced from their constituents.

Abolishing the communications allowance is also not a solution. MPs have to communicate with their constituents. Unlike cookers and cabinets, communication is a necessity, not a luxury. However whether the level of the communication allowance needs to be £10,000 is an issue that should be urgently examined.

There is no doubt that a ferocious fire is burning at the present time around Westminster but the last thing our MPs should do is join the fire dance.

Too little, too late?

2009-05-12T14:37:00.000-07:00

That is the situation we could be facing as expenses dominates our national press coverage for a sixth day.

The issue is not about the minutae of the claims, nor indeed the repaying of those claims (which incidentally is meaningless as MPs are only making such moves because they were rumbled), but about how the system that emerged, was allowed to do so.

Nothing today changes the fact the principle needs addressing and not the practices. It seems we are further away from this today than we were yesterday. There is a time to address confidence in the Speaker and to examine claims. This is not the time. Seeking to bar "extravagant" claims is an interpretational and implementational nightmare. It also introduces yet another subjective element into the "Westminster bubble".

Further why should MPs be allowed to claim mortgage relief on their homes? By framing the debate in this way we are devaluing the principle of work and a solid work ethic.

So are developments today, too little, too late?

It's only words

2009-05-11T11:59:00.001-07:00

Sorry only means something if behaviour changes. It seems unlikely that we are going to see a long-term change in behaviour from Westminster. To be sure we are seeing a lot of dust and dirt kicked up in the immediate aftermath of the car skidding off the road, but the car that is not fit for purpose, will just be pushed back onto the road and driven onwards.

How can we tell this? By the fact that all MPs are talking about is an independent auditing body and the Kelly review. Both of these just place more checks and balances on a flawed system. The problem is not the regulation, or lack of it, but the root.

For this reason any apology uttered by a politican is worthless until it is accompanied by decisive action.

1832 revisited?

2009-05-11T05:26:00.000-07:00

Is the British political system, as Sir Christopher Meyer suggested yesterday, in need of an 1832 cure? This was the year of the Great Reform Act which criminalised the ‘cash-for constituencies’ culture which had emerged and partially extended the franchise.

The ‘Great’ in the title is slightly misleading. The Act did not represent a scythe through the wilted political garden, but rather a pruning instrument.

In the case of universal suffrage, for example it was another 96 years before women were given the right to vote and the process of change is still ongoing, with a debate emerging over whether or not all prisoners should be prohibited from voting.

For this reason 1832 is probably not a template we should consider using. There are undoubtedly serious constitutional issues to address but MPs expenses should not be the catalyst for a catch all Constitutional Reform Act 2009/2010 or indeed another Great Reform Act.

The expenses earthquake

2009-05-10T09:03:00.000-07:00

Westminster is reeling from an earthquake that has spared no side of the House. As with many earthquakes, complacency and poorly constructed structures have exacerbated the impact.

However, despite the current aftershocks, Westminster is still standing and will continue to do so until the end of time.

For all the hand wringing and finger wagging, something good can and should come out of this massive tremor. First and foremost the Kelly review should be mothballed. A system that has not worked for so many years cannot see out the month. The time for tinkering and trimming is over. When the roots of the tree are rotting away you cut the tree down. For this reason the idea of an Independent Auditing Body for MPs expenses should not be pursued.

The problem is not the practice of claiming for expenses but the principle.

Similarly now is not the time for emotionally charged decisions. Of course we are angry and disappointed in those individuals who have stretched the system to the max. But do not forget that the spending balloon cannot be allowed to balloon even further. Do we really want to pay millions of pounds for by-elections when that money can and should be put into our pockets? The answer seems to be a deafening no.

That does not mean that you do not take assertive action. There are a number of options whih can and should be explored further.

The first two options could be dubbed the "in-house approach". First and foremost, the Parties should consider putting their offending MPs through a vigourous re-selection battle or forcing their resignation (the Conway option). A slap on the wrist for those who have broken the Parliamentary covenant is not good enough.

Secondly explusion from the party should be an option on the table. It is not fair or reasonable for the selfish minority to affect the progress of the majority.

The third and final option is to pursue the criminal sanction route. Parliamentarians have the power to impeach MPs who commit misdemeanours. Or the police, off their own backs, or at the request of consituents could commence criminal proceedings against the wrongdoers.

Whatever option, or combination of options is chosen, the time for "business as usual" is well and truly over. The stakes are too high to leave the road of governance ruptured for long. We all have a shared responsiblity to ensure that it is rebuilt as soon as possible.

HMS Clueless

2009-05-08T07:19:00.000-07:00

It seems Gordon Brown is not the only one on the ship deck. Nigel Farage’s suggestion that UKIP could bump Labour into fourth place in next month’s European elections is optimistic at best and out of touch at worst.

Is this government or a bunch of money grabbing gibbons?

2009-05-07T14:56:00.000-07:00

We should all be worried that this is what we are witnessing with policy seemingly being made on the hoof and ministers seeming to be more concerned with their own nest eggs than the nation's nest.

We should also be worried that this situation has no end in sight.

Happy Birthday?

2009-05-06T02:59:00.000-07:00

As the Welsh and Scottish mark 10 years since the dawn of devolution can we wish them a happy birthday?

It is arguable that we can not.

Devolution has been and will continue to be a disaster for the United Kingdom. Rather than taking the sting out of the Nationalist tail, the approach of the current British government has allowed a much more dangerous creature to be born.

We can see this in the clamour from Cardiff for primary legislation-making powers and the earful emanating from Edinburgh with an SNP-led minority government.

The devolution disaster can and should be tackled by whoever forms the next government.

Heads in the clouds

2009-05-03T11:58:00.000-07:00

What links Clarke's shame, Blunkett's antidote, Byers' criticism, Hazel's "help" and Miliband's plane shopping?

They are all symptoms of "Clouditis".

If Clarke is really ashamed he should resign the Labour whip and sit as an independent.

If Blunkett really wants to cure the ailment-inflicted Labour government he should sit down with Gordon and devise a cure.

If Byers really thinks the 50p tax rate is "cynical", he should vote against it in the budget votes.

If Hazel wants to help she should quit banging her head against the Cabinet table and get back to communicating in her constituency.

And what about "Miliband Force One"? This is proof, if proof was needed, that Miliband is not qualified to be Prime Minister. Does he not understand that cutting back means you do not go plane shopping?

Labour has a choice: get real or get out.

No win

2009-04-30T11:45:00.000-07:00

The expenses reform proposals approved by MPs today, however transitory, marks a bad day for the cradle of democracy.

Not only have MPs who voted in favour, failed to improve their image amongst their constituents and the wider population, but they have arguably taken a great leap backward.

Ignore the fact that these proposals mark an undermining of the Kelly review and seem to show MPs more preoccupied with protecting their money, than ours.

MPs have managed to create a two tier system where if you have a London seat you are automatically worse off than if you have a Liverpool seat (even though it is more expensive to live in London than Liverpool).

They have also managed to add an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy to the vast workload already faced by MPs, with the adoption of plans to get MPs to account for every penny they spend and send job applications to the Commons authorities for vetting and approval.

Labour's obsession with class has also once again reared its ugly head with adoption of plans to get MPs to account for second job payments.

Noone, least of all the British people, gain from today's vote.

This Ole House

2009-04-29T08:30:00.000-07:00

For all the smoke coming out of Westminster and the surrounding area you could be excused for thinking that the fire of decline was burning strongly inside. With today’s vote to defeat the government’s unjustified Gurkha’s policy it is true to say that a fire, the fire of decency and democracy, is burning strongly.

Biting the hand that feeds

2009-04-29T08:14:00.000-07:00

That is essentially what this Government is doing by taking the Gurkhas policy line it is.

It is of course in the foreground about the Gurkhas.

But it is at the same time about so much more. Do we honour our armed forces or cast them aside? Do we recognise sacrifice or do we reward scrounging? Do we instil a sense of duty into our society or a do-nothing attitude? Do we recognise the value of others to contribute to our society or batten down the hatches?

If we want a decent, dedicated society where we have a dialogue and not a monologue then it must start with granting ALL Gurkhas the right to live in the United Kingdom. We do not need a review to tell us what the right thing to do is.

The reverse Midas effect

2009-04-28T00:57:00.000-07:00

It would be nice to cheer at the news that Brown’s misconceived MP’s expenses reform proposals have not seen the light of Westminster’s hallowed corridors.

But consternation is all that can be felt. Brown did not need to go ‘over the top’ on this issue. By doing so he has not only done himself a disservice, but our entire Parliamentary system.

Blown Budget

2009-04-24T01:51:00.000-07:00

The Budget of April 22 2009 was not just a bombshell. It was a blown budget. Ignoring the increased action that could and should have been taken in the medium to long term on borrowing and spending, this budget failed to help (amongst others):

—Our pensioners. Increasing the winter fuel allowance is not good enough. Our pensioners should not have to ‘bureaucracy bargain’. Where is the dignity in that? Instead our pensioners should see their state pension increased up front. Pensioners should not have to dig as deep as the working population when it comes to income tax and council tax. No pensioner should ever have to count the pennies at the supermarket checkout. They should not have to live in one room during the winter months. It is time for a proper ‘Pensioner's package’.

The budget also failed to deal effectively with the issue of credit. That is not surprising given the example being set at the top. But for all the furore over the traditional banks where is the outrage over the supermarket’s ‘finance packages’ and the store cards? Banking’s problems are not just about dividends but diversification. You should not be able to pick up credit and cabbage in the supermarket.

Happy St George's day!

2009-04-23T00:09:00.001-07:00

Let us not be shy in celebrating this day.

Whatver you are doing, enjoy!

Conservative conundrum

2009-04-22T07:13:00.000-07:00

Labour did not so much pull a rabbit out of the hat today, as a red kangaroo, which then proceeded to kick its way across the Conservative front bench and onto the backbenches.

Every so often a totemic issue rears its head in politics. The question of how much tax should be charged and who should pay is the totemic issue of our time.

We should not allow the haze of last autumn to guide future taxation policy.

The ‘Burnout’ budget

2009-04-22T05:33:00.000-07:00

That is how Budget 09 will be remembered.

Off to lie down.............................................

They will never forget

2009-04-22T05:25:00.000-07:00

Here here!

2010 can't come soon enough!

Parliamentary procedure

2009-04-22T05:21:00.000-07:00

Why does the Leader of the Opposition give the official reply to the Chancellor's Budget statement?

Budget overstretch?

2009-04-22T05:17:00.000-07:00

Has Darling gone so far to provide something for everyone in this budget that he has actually helped noone?

Priorities, Priorities, Priorites

2009-04-22T05:13:00.000-07:00

Noone wants to see climate change go unchecked but was today the right time to announce a groundbreaking Carbon budget when so many Britons are choking financially?

The usual suspects

2009-04-22T05:03:00.000-07:00

Duty on alcohol up by 2%;
Duty on tobacco up 2%.

Bitter budget

2009-04-22T04:58:00.000-07:00

Labour cannot get us out of the current turbulence because they are fighting the battles of old. We should not rob the rich to give to the incompetent. This 50% tax rate should not be allowed to pass into law.

Spend, spend, spend (and don't say sorry!)

2009-04-22T04:54:00.000-07:00

That is the government's attitude towards the public finances.

£175bn this year or 12.4% of our GDP...........................................

Green shoots?

2009-04-22T04:52:00.000-07:00

Going ‘green’ will not fly Britain out of the economic turbulence.

This car scrappage scheme should never see the light of day.

Legally viable?

2009-04-22T04:46:00.000-07:00

Will the Government's plans to aid those who are under 25 and unemployed for > 12 months breach the Age Discrimination Act?