Political LOL

From politicalbetting.com a few days ago; how true ..

Brown Trouser Time At Cowley Street

The Sun YouGov poll tonight has the LibDems down to a new low of just 7 percent - seven percent.

If this goes on and the party holds together then they have much, much bigger balls than I ever gave them credit for.

The Unthinkable

When a friend text to say that the unthinkable had happened I had no idea what he meant. Then I was directed to this.

Absolutely nothing so far has made me miss being at City Hall, but the thought of not being in those Group Leaders Meetings now has made me very depressed indeed. What fun!

For Cllrs. Morphew, Stephenson & Wiltshire I have a deep sense of Schadenfreude.

The Government Can't Lose The Fees Vote ... Can They?

As the media scramble from one MPs declaration of voting intention to another, it is worth putting the whole issue the fees voting into the context of the whole House of 650 members. The winning post - assuming no abstentions would be 326, so the whips on both sides will no doubt be working out how to get to that figure.

Presumably the Speaker and his team will not vote; knocking out John Bercow (Buckingham), Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley), Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley) and Dawn Primarolo (Bristol) from the vote. In addition, the 5 Sinn Fein MPs will no vote either. In addition there is one vacancy in Oldham East & Saddleworth. Which leaves us dealing with Coalition strength of 362 and a total opposition strength of 278; so the anti-fees MPs would have to solidify all of their own MPs and overcome an 84 vote lead (which is, essentially, switching 43 MPs).

Are the opposition united on this? It is difficult to imagine many or any of them not voting against the government; Labour sense an opportunity here and have even drafted in Gordon Brown (Kirkcaldy) to vote. If any Labour MPs did agree with the policy I suspect they were lept on froma great height a long time ago. It also looks very likely that the DUP, SNP, Plaid and SDLP will all fall into line too. Alliance MP Naomi Long (Belfast N), Green MP Caroline Lucas (Brighton Pavillion) and the three Independents (Lady Hermon, North Down; Dennis McShane, Rotherham & Eric Illsley, Barnsley Central) all look solid too. So short of illness or some other disaster (snow?) it should be a united front from the opposition; 278 in the bag.

Despite his own claims, it looks like David Davis (Haltemprice) will not be a rebellion of one; so far Illford's Lee Scott, New Forest's Julian Lewis and Shipley's Phillip Davies have said they will vote no too. In addition, Bob Blackman (Harrow E) and former teacher Andrew Percy (Brigg & Goole) may yet vote no too. Six Tories in total; bringing the vote numbers to 356 to 284.

And then the question is which LibDems will break ranks and vote no and which might abstain (even an abstention impacts the total votes). Today Tim Farron (Wesmoreland & Lonsdale), LibDem President, has come out against. In addition to Tim, we have on record former Leaders Ming Campbell and Charles Kennedy. Plus Mike Hancock (Portsmouth), Julian Huppert (Cambridge), John Leech (Manchester), Ian Swales (Redcar), John Pugh (Southport), Bob Russell (Colchester), Mark Williams (Bristol), Simon Wright (Norwich S), Roger Williams (Brecon), Martin Horwood (Cheltenham) & Greg Mulholland (Leeds). Total, so far, of 13. Before abstentions that leaves the vote 343 to 297; a government majority of 46.

So it is going to take one massive earthquake; even if all the non-government LibDem MPs vote against, and even the PPSs, it would still take a mass Tory rebellion to bring this down.

I admire anybody who is willing to take to the streets for what they believe in (as long as it is non-violence), but for all the excitement that student leaders and the media are trying to whip up about the vote I cannot see a way, at this moment, that the government can lose. That may all change but with 24 hours to go, the fees vote looks a lot less exiting than we are lead to believe.

Could Coalition be the end of Collective Responsibility?

The sight of LibDem squirming over the tuition fees vote has not been a pleasant sight. First Vince Cable, and now Nick Clegg, have been been done over by the media and (to a lesser extent) by Labour MPs over their apparent discomfort over what to do in the lobbies. In particular the sight of Mr Cable not voting for a piece of legislation that he co-wrote and will be piloting through the Commons is bizarre to say the least.

Some LibDems are, of course, being more straight forward and honest. Jon Leech, one of Manchester's LibDem MPs, has announced he will oppose the move as has Cardiff LibDem MP Jenny Willmot. The difference is, I suppose, that Ms Willmot is a PPS and thus technically covered by collective responsibility - the idea that all Minister must back the government in a vote or resign their position. PPSs quitting is nothing new and many will simply be recycled in a few months time, so why is Ms Willmot holding on like this?

Regulars will know that I am not a fan of collective responsibility on the whole. If the legislation is yours (a la Cable) then yes, you must be duty bound to vote for it. But why can't our politics to be grown up enough for somebody to say that they disagree with X policy but still want to remain part of the government because they back the other 99% of the programme? If we know this in advance, why shouldn't MPs do the adult thing? Will be see David Lidington and Cheryl Gillan quit the government over High Speed Rail links that threaten their constituencies? I hope not; they should be free to speak and vote against that part of the government programme but work had to deliver the rest of it.

Controversial, maybe, but might the coalition agreement weaken the doctrine of collective responsibility? I hope so.

UPDATE; a friend points out the CR seems to be a problem for this government only, the previous lot used to regularly, for example, campaign against hospital closures in their areas without quitting the government that imposed them

Oldham East & Saddleworth by-election: First Dodgy Bar Chart Spotted!

... and I am thrilled to say that the LibDems have given us our first dodgy bar chart of the new "dodgy bar chart season" (i.e. a parliamentary by-election). Even though we haven't even got a date for the Oldham seat vacated by former Labour MP Phil Wollas, this gem has appeared on their website. Notice how the Conservatives don't even get a bar? Wow! They must be so far behind they don't even warrant the extra graphic or ink on the page. Surely those honest souls at the LibDems aren't trying to cover something up are they ...

Phil Woolas	Labour	14,186	31.9	-10.7
Elwyn Watkins	Liberal Democrat	14,083	31.6	-0.5
Kashif Ali	Conservative	11,773	26.4	+8.7

Gosh. Would you believe it - a three way marginal seat where the Tory vote rose considerably and the LibDem vote went down in 2010! I would never have been able to tell that from the bar chart ... thank goodness for Google. I'm sure the LibDems wouldn't want to mislead people either, so no doubt this little error will be cleared up soon ...

Come on LibDems, this election is being held in the interest of clean and fair elections. Maybe your campaign ought to reflect that too?

LibDem PPC defects to Labour (but just make sure you get his age right)

There is a, frankly, hilarious debate going on at LDV at the moment (see here) regarding the news that a 2010 PPC (somebody who failed to become an MP but who was a flag bearer for the party) has quit to join Labour. He did this because of the way he feels about the coalition.

However the LibDems have fought back - taking the Independent newspaper, who carried the story, to task for ... erm, getting his age wrong. Talk about missing the point; this kind of diversionary tactic may work in LibDem Blog World but they'd do better talking about the politics and the motives of the defection rather than the minute details of the newspaper story.

Anyhow, as regular readers will know I am not a big fan of defections; I think anyone who jumps straight from party-to-other-party will find it difficult in their new home and impossible to settle back in their old one. And usually there is some back story to them. Individual defections tend to be meaningless, and as I never tire of saying - you need to look at the pattern and flow of defections. If this was one of a string of PPCs, councillors, activists etc defecting then you have a problem ...

Ridiculous Claims Pt. 133

Most people in politics really dislike LibDem campaigning tactics; and of all of them, the way that they claim to be able to win in every ward, division, council or constituency in the country irrespective of the previous results, is the biggest irritant. Bar charts being flung here and there - if you stats don't prove your point, use a dodgy scale that will or even in some cases use stats from a completely different area!

But now I think the mantle for bonkers claims of electoral success should be handed onto the Green Party. With their massive tally of ... erm ... 1 MP they are now predicting big gains in the Scottish Parliament including winning seats in every region (see here). Most people in the country aren't even bothered by the Greens but here in Norwich we've had years upon years of idiotic claims of them about to make an historic breakthrough (that never happen). Be it the parliamentary seat or the local council, there is no claim too big for them to make.

LibDem Bar Chart Comeback - but it's still inacurrate - Shock.

Judging from my email inbox there is more hubbub about the LibDems using the whole Norwich South result to prove "it's a two horse race" between them and Labour and no point in voting Conservative or Green - sadly, though, they used this argument in places like Eaton (where the Tories and LibDems are around 200 votes apart with Labour fourth) and Town Close (where the Greens have a 20% lead over the LibDems with Labour in fourth).

After all we hear about "new politics" and "I understand why politicians are not trusted", surely this kind of campaigning is partly to blame? Luckily (for us) confused electors don't believe the party that mis-lead them.

LibDem concern over PMQs lock-out

I had two different but connected moments today; the first is actually having the time to watch PMQs live (well, streamed over the net) and the other was meeting a local LibDem worthy on the way home from work who also watched the weekly parliamentary contest.

I hadn't realised when watching (we have now had 3 PMQs since the election) but my LibDem friend pointed out how much this event is now back to a Lab-Con battle and how the voice of the LibDems has been phased out. I doubt it will, but if the clashes make the news they will be without the voice of the LibDems; they have no spokesperson waving their flag - Cameron's 30 seconds on the news will meet Harman's (or whoever) 30 seconds with no LibDem. I never thought Clegg was a great PMQs performer as Leader, although Cable showed what could be done with just 2 questions and a few minutes of primetime news. Now this has all gone.

I pointed out to my LibDem friend that their MPs had as much chance of catching the Speakers eye as anybody else. Aside from getting a lecture on the mathematics which suggested this wasn't true (it did make sense afterwards) I was told that LibDem backbenchers would never line up alongside Cameron and Harman on the news.

I left thinking all thise was very true; I note that new LibDem Deputy Simon Hughes has promised to keep the party distintive. I wonder how they can do this without PMQs?

Did Kennedy speak up at the time?

The Independent on Sunday today carries the news that Charles Kennedy, former LibDem Leader 1999-2006, abstained on the vote to enter a coalition with Cameron's Conservatives. Yet at the time we were told it was passed with all parliamentarians in favour?

Now Mr Kennedy has revealed his unease and suddenly it brings into question those LibDem claims. So who is not being honest here - the LibDems after the meeting or Mr Kennedy now?

Rank Hypocrisy

Anybody spot an hypocrisy here;

LibDem Leader Nick Clegg appears on the BBC telling people to vote for the party they believe in and says no politicans should tell you to support a party you don't wish to.

LibDem candidate Simon Wright issues a newspaper to people in Norwich South that has fourteen (yes, 14) references to tactical voting, telling people that some parties can't win and so you ought to back the party that can beat Labour.

Hypocrisy?

I am proud of our positive campaign here in Norwich South, I wonder if Mr Wright will look back and think the same about his?

Campaign Diary - Day Eighteen (the day Newsnight rolled into the City)

Well, today was eventful and have just finished watching myself on Newsnight and that 30 second clip sort of dominated the day.

It began with a Group Leaders meeting at City Hall, a sharp reminder that life goes on outside of the election and I still have an important job to do representing the people of Bowthorpe and Earlham and also the Conservatives in Norwich.

By 10.30 we were all at the Age UK / Age Concern Hustings held at the Vauxhall Centre. It was a great meeting and the Labour, LD, Green & UKIP candidates were there. Funnily enough the questions weren't all about older people's issues (which you might have expected). It kicked off with Britain's member of the EU but soon covered immigration, skills, the Lisbon Treaty & the funding of the voluntary sector. I was told by two of the audience that they felt I had "won" but I am not clear what that means in terms of these local debates where there is more agreement (yes, even between Tories and Greens) than you might imagine.

In the afternoon I did a quick interview for Heart Radio about the election campaign and then the whirlwind that is Michael Crick came to town. It was quick but fairly intensive. He just throws questions at you, plus the camera is always on. He made the critical error of thinking Mike Gillepsie - my agent, and somebody whom the party ought to employe PDQ after the election - was my brother and then went on to criticise the spelling of my name (no "h", you see) so that set us off well! He was stunned to note I was wearing a rosette - no idea why, I wear it pretty much all the time so people know who I am and can come up and chat if they want to. We then had a persistent Green heckler, although he soon got bored. Crick just raised an eyebrow. I think that said everything. Interestingly his questions focused on the campaign and the debate last night and yet the clip they used was my attack on Charles Clarke and his attempts to re-package himself as a Labour rebel rather than take responsibility for the last 13 years of government. Crick asked questions about my current career and if I had declared it on leaflets; the answer is yes and I am proud of being a teacher and proud of my school. Apparently some candidates don't tell people what they do for a living and don't put it on leaflets. Others - like Green Adrian Ramsay and LibDem Simon Wright - are "career politicans", which means they don't have jobs. Crick also asked where we recieved our funding from and seemed a little stunned to note we had raised the spending limit from small local donations. He then probed every bit of election material we put out - including our 2 latest leaflets for this week - and found nothing to raise. I am not moaning about this, I thought Mr Crick was very, very thorough in what he did and it was impressive to see what happens close up. The report itself was very fair and balanced, clearly stating the 4-way marginality of the seat and included clips of supporters of each parties. I think Newsnight did the job well, and Crick's scrutiny was detailed (I wonder if the other candidates got this??). The funny bit was the mess up with the name tags - they called Adrian "Simon", then corrected themselves but still spelt his name wrong!

After the fun and games we sorted ourselves out and started to deliver our letters to people who have Postal Votes, with several teams across the City. I joined our Eaton group to help and we ended up doorknocking as well. The feeling was good and we felt people moving over to the Conservatives. Two people mentioned Cameron's debate as their reason for switching to us, but yet more voters turned off by the negative LibDem campaign. I also met the owner of a significant local business who had decided to vote Conservative this time on the issue of wanting to pay down the debt quicker. I think the issues and debates are getting through.

Got home to find 2 different LibDem tabloid newspapers delivered - why together, unless they were struggling to get material out. Perhaps they don't have enough activists? Hmmm, I also wonder how close they are to the election spending limit?

Tonight Cameron faced Paxman and I thought he was calm and detailed in his answers. Cameron is looking more and more Prime Ministerial in the way in which he conducts himself -I thought it was impressive and certainly Paxman didn't get a knock out blow. People have picked up on the cuts for the North East and NI, but I would assume that all regions would share in the painful decisions to come - after all, "we're all in this together".

Tomorrow is a big day with plenty of letters to deliver and doors to knock on as Postal Votes hit the mats in Norwich South!

Greens Killer Instinct

Rupert Read lays into Clegg, Wright and the LibDems.

Dont click here if you are politically squeamish!

Campaign Diary - Day Fifteen

Who are these people that are switching to the LibDems?

No, really, who are they? I am not disbelieving the polls but if there had been a sea-change of opinion you might have thought we would be feeling it on the streets by now. I spoke to a Green canvasser I met today and also to a friend of mine on the Labour campaign and none of us had picked it up, so it isn't just us. Yes, more people are being "out and out" LibDems but most of those said they were LibDem anyway. OK those people who say "I'll read all the stuff and see how I feel on the day" are usually LibDem but we're not having Conservatives switching. In fact, today we found several Liberals coming the other way. As I say, I'm not doubting the movement but it does seem like a media-poll narrative that hasn't hit the streets (yet).

I spent the morning teaching and then the afternoon helping a team canvassing in Sunningdale and then doing two areas of Town Close in the evening. Response was very good indeed and issue raised included public sector pensions, immigration, Europe and differences in experiences on the NHS in different areas of the country.

p.s. Best thing about today's canvassing was knocking on the door of an old uni friend I haven't seen in years and didn't even know was living back in Norwich! Funny old world, sometimes!

Campaign Diary - Day Fourteen

And today it was back to work ... well, for half the day. We had training in the morning about Safeguarding Procedures and then coursework moderation. After all the campaigning it was an odd - but subtly pleasure - to do some schoolwork.

In the afternoon we headed to Thorpe Hamlet where we discovered a surprising number of people in to talk to. My favourite was a lady who is now voting Conservative because she was pleased to have a candidate who shared her thoughts on educational inclusion practices. There was a lot of movement amongst the left-wing candidates (including former LibDems voting Labour) but a steady and growing number of Conservatives. Other issues raised were transport and road layout in the City!

Then after I joined the other Norwich South Candidates (except the BNP) at a Trade Union meeting. It was enjoyable - the audience was, of course, challenging. The only applause of the night went to the Revolutionary Workers Candidate. I felt a little like groundog day - the RWP candidate said every issue was a symptom of capitalism whilst the UKIP candidate blamed everything (and, I mean, everything) on the EU. The LibDems were challenged about their policies on Trident and tax cuts, the Conservatives about homophobia in the party and Labour about Clarke's external work above being an MP. He stunned us all when he said he took on extra jobs to make up the salary he lost when he quit the cabinet - amazing! As always, the Greens had little or no scrutiny.

And home, to lesson planning, marking, blogging and a film called "Adam" about a couple where one of them has Aspergers. Fascinating film that really highlights the issue.

Revolution on the Streets!

Take a look at this very funny film on Telegraph TV of a student apparently burning a Tory leaflets after listening to a Nick Clegg speech. 2 things spring to mind.

Firstly they seem totally incapable of actually burning the leaflet. When the video starts it looks like they've had several goes already and failed! They then fail to set it alight for the camera and their revolutionary moment ends with one of the students weakly tearing up the semi-chargrilled leaflet and stamping on it. It's hardly a Vietnam-style protest effort and the pair of them look ridiculous by the end!

And secondly, what on earth could Nick Clegg have possibly have said to prompt this sort of action? Are LibDems now in favour of revolutionary Tory leaflet street burning efforts? (Don't worry, Tory-leaflet burning students everywhere, under LibDem plans you won't be sent to jail for your insurgency!)

Now this is the real advantage of hand held cameras - we all get to share in these wonderful moments!

The LibDem Manifesto --- According to Eric Pickles

Says it better than I could, taken from ConHome:

Nick Clegg swapped the photocopying room in Cowley Street for much more stylish surroundings of a news agency to launch his manifesto today, complete with blue backdrop and green parrot. After the cartoons of the Labour Party and our more serious tomes, they adopted a homage to a West Yorkshire 1970’s bus timetable. The old West Riding had a great affection for that post modernist look when it came to imparting vital transport information.
I had a much loved copy of the timetable, so it was with much excitement I started to turn the pages, to find to my disappointment that it didn't give me the quickest route from Heckmanwike to Todmorden, but contained some "fully worked out pledges". Within minutes this "fully costed manifesto" started to dissolve before my very eyes like the foresaid timetable left out too long in the rain.

I won’t bore you with all the detail but needless to say there is £11.6 billion black hole in their calculations. The one of the more bizarre overstatements is the amount of tax avoidance which they claim they will save £4.65 billion through ‘anti-avoidance measures’ on income tax, National Insurance Contributions (NIC), Corporation Tax and Stamp Duty. However, HMRC estimates ‘tax avoidance’ in income tax, National Insurance and Capital Gains Tax is only between £0.8 and £1.6 billion. Perhaps Lib Dems know more about tax avoidance than we had previously anticipated.

I expect you might have come across the odd example of Lib Dem’s varying their message for different audiences but how about this for a ‘u-turn’. For weeks, Vince Cable and Nick Clegg have come out in support of Labour’s anti-business jobs tax and attacked businesses supporting Conservative opposition to the jobs tax. They were unkind enough to call our refusal to implement Labour’s job tax as “school boy economics" and "voodoo economics.” Compare that with "the increase in National Insurance Contributions is a damaging tax on jobs and an unfair tax on employees, so when resources allow we would seek to reverse it.’ (Liberal Democrat Manifesto 2010, April 2010, pg. 97).

It just reinforces my view that if you want to see Liberal values in a Government, if you want to see improvements in the environment or pull back on the way in which the state is oppressively intruding into personal freedom and liberty, the sensible thing to do is vote Conservative. That is why Liberal Democrat voters are going to switch this time to the Conservatives to remove, rather than prop up Mr Brown in Number 10. Interesting that one of the first telephone calls that I took was from a Liberal Democrat County Councillor in the South of England who has chosen today to leave the Liberal Democrats and join the Conservatives. More on that later but suffice to say, she is very welcome

LibDem blunder on VAT

I thought that the LibDem poster, unveiled last week, which decried the Tories for a VAT rise was completely made up. Yet nobody in the media picked up on it ... until this morning when LibDem Treasury Spokesman Vince Cable got stuck on the issue on the BBC:

JON SOPEL: I mean let’s leave aside whether or whether not there is a black hole in the Tories' finances. Leave that to one side. You don’t know factually, that they are going to raise VAT. That is your conjecture.

VINCE CABLE: It is a conjecture and it’s a reasonable assumption and I wouldn’t claim anymore than that.

JON SOPEL: And that £389 is a rough figure plucked –

VINCE CABLE: It’s a ball park estimate of what it would require in order to fill that gap, and it seems a reasonable way of expressing that argument."

...JON SOPEL: Would you rule out raising VAT?

VINCE CABLE: No, I don’t. It’s something –

JON SOPEL: So therefore your position is no different to them."

So, in short, the LibDems completely make up a Tory policy, attached a fantasy figure to it and try (again) to scare people. I don't know if I find their behaviour more or less worrying than the journo's who failed to dig deeper on this earlier in the week.

LibDems Finally Make A Pledge

At last - the LibDem candidate for Norwich South has issued an "honesty pledge" over expenses; I now look forward to his response over the Clean Campaigning Pledge too.

I am gald that the LibDems have finally got around to recognising this issue, although I understand many people are cynical that now we are in an election suddenly the local LibDems seem to care about the expenses issue.

In September 2009 I issued a strong honesty pledge which I have had on my website since them, that I have delivered to every home in the constituency. I stand by that pledge and believe I was ahead of the curve on this issue.

However what concerns me about the LibDem version is that it is massively watered down from what I would like to see.

I have now written to the LibDems with three very specific questions about the use of public money.

Will you accept the Communications Allowance or will you, like me, refuse public money to produce promotional propaganda for you and your party?

Will you, like me, ensure that your parliamentary office is totally separate from your constituency party office to ensure that there are no accusations of using parliamentary expenses to supplement a party cost?

Will you, like me, not employ anybody on a part-time basis alongside party political employment to ensure there are no accusations of using parliamentary salaries to supplement a party wage?

The Conservatives have been right to put the repair of our politics at the heart of this campaign. I am genuinely pleased that the LibDems have done this pledge but hope it can now be part of a wider debate about improving the reputation of politics.