I doubt is was arranged, but the Greens and LibDems did a lovely stitch up job on Labour over the cuts to the Orbital Bus Route around Norwich. Green Party Councillor Janet Bearman (Town Close) laid down a straightforward question to Labour Executive Member Brian Morrey about the representations made by Norwich City Council to Norfolk County Council over the reduced service. Cllr Morrey, normally one of Labour’s most dependable performers, seemed to waffle a bit and get slightly tongue-tied. Then LibDem Judith Lubbock (Eaton) saw her chance and went for the jugular. Normally Cllr Lubbock’s attacks are blunted by her long winded and rather superior tone. But not this time. She got the attack perfectly timed and savaged Cllr Morrey for failing to put the interests of the City first. Oh dear. Cllr Morrey floundered, spluttered and finally admitted … no representations at all.
A good issue, a good point and bought up in the right way.
Well done Cllrs Bearman and Lubbock, though I can feel the “Focus” leaflet being written from afar…
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Monday, January 29, 2007
EXCLUSIVE: LibDems pull Teather from Catholic schools event
Last week was a Catholic educators conference at which all of the big players were due to hear from LibDem Education Spokeswoman Sarah Teather as the keynote speaker. I have been told by an ultra-reliable source that Ms Teather was pulled, by LibDem HQ, at the last moment because of fears that her party support for the government over the gay adoption row may cause unpleasant scenes. Instead delegates heard from each other as catholic Headteachers filled in the gap left by the Brent MP. What a shame that both the government and the opposition can seem to have a grown-up debate about this but the LibDems cannot. I mean - Catholic teachers aren't like the W.I., are they?
Saturday, January 27, 2007
Will it be the judges, rather than David Davis, who forces out John Reid?
A Labout friend of mine was bemoaning to me last night that the Home Office was becoming the elephants graveyard for politicans, in that all occupants of the hotseat end up resigning over some cock-up or another because the department didn't work properly. She was worried that John Reid, considered to be one of Labour's better performers, could be caught up and lost in the Home Office. Tory Shadow Home Secretary David Davis has a pretty good record of collecting Ministerial scalps. She thinks Reid can't last in the long-term, I'm not so sure. But something where we both agree is that John Reid's biggest opponents aren't across the dispatch box - they are in the courts.
Busy Weekend
Following on from last Sunday's fun, this weekend turns a little more to politics. Today I am heading over to Great Yarmouth to help support their excellent PPC Brandon Lewis and the Conservative council candidates. Yarmouth Borough Council is an excellent Tory-run authority but suffered a few losses last year (showing that being in power locally can be as off-putting as being in power nationally). They've takens ome tough decisions but Yarmouth is changing - for the better - beyond belief. They deserve our support.
After that I am going to campaign in North Walsham for local PPC Trevor Ivory who has made a flying start in the seat. It is worthy of note that Trevor is taking his campaign straight to heart of LibDem support in the constituency - a lot of people are coming today into an area once described to me as a "no go area for Tories." It would be easy for Trevor and his team to retreat into the any very strong Conservative areas but he isn't doing that - this is one fight he's taking to Lamb.
This evening Louise and I will be spending some real quality time together - Emily is off to Nanny & Granddad's house to eat her way through their biscuit tin - so we will be taking some time off! Sunday morning we are going to church and then I have to spend a few hours preparing for next week's full council meeting. The afternoon is a constituency officers meeting, followed by a Group Meeting and then finally (phew!) in the evening we get to see friends.
After that I am going to campaign in North Walsham for local PPC Trevor Ivory who has made a flying start in the seat. It is worthy of note that Trevor is taking his campaign straight to heart of LibDem support in the constituency - a lot of people are coming today into an area once described to me as a "no go area for Tories." It would be easy for Trevor and his team to retreat into the any very strong Conservative areas but he isn't doing that - this is one fight he's taking to Lamb.
This evening Louise and I will be spending some real quality time together - Emily is off to Nanny & Granddad's house to eat her way through their biscuit tin - so we will be taking some time off! Sunday morning we are going to church and then I have to spend a few hours preparing for next week's full council meeting. The afternoon is a constituency officers meeting, followed by a Group Meeting and then finally (phew!) in the evening we get to see friends.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
The Weather
I know that it is stereo-typically British to talk about the weather but there was something glorious about walking out of Blackfriars Hall into the snow.
But what is odd is that the BBC predict fine weather with some sun whilst the Met Office has a sever weather warning. Looking out the window I know who I believe.
But what is odd is that the BBC predict fine weather with some sun whilst the Met Office has a sever weather warning. Looking out the window I know who I believe.
My Unitary Speech in Full...
There can be no doubt, my Lord Mayor, that this Unitary Bid is the stuff of political dreams and represents a romantic ideal of which we can all unite around. But the truth is that the current arrangement with Norfolk County Council gives us in the City access to a wide variety of services, from beacon schools to the award winning library services, all at a recognised value-for-money cost. Norwich and Norfolk go together and have worked as a successful partnership for many years. Unitary threatens our relationship with the county and the first class services that we have come to expect. Cllr Morphew will no doubt point out, ad infinitum, that Unitary would be a new council and the failures of previous Labour and LibDem administrations wouldn’t indicate the future for unitary. But we would be taking a massive gamble – that the same good services could be provided for the same cost by the council, new or old. That is a risk that I, my group and the people of the Greater Norwich Area seem unwilling to take.
This bid sets out a number of factors, which it claims are compelling. In my time limit I can cover but a few of these.
The first is of a clear and focused place-shaping role. Norwich is a thriving City with unparallel growth. With housing and business growth side by side the City will keep on expanding, taking its place as the beating heart of the Norfolk economy. However we should remember that this remarkable achievement has been possible without Unitary. The real growth of the last ten years and of the next ten years was in place without changing the structures of local government. We made this happen together – as a team. There is no evidence that growth is threatened by not going Unitary. Furthermore even the key players in this bid admit that two tier working can carry on and get better. The current scenario is not unworkable and is not untenable. It has put Norwich where it is now. We can build on that, not knock it down.
Of course, this document claims that a Unitary Council will give people in the City a clear sense of leadership and purpose. Yet I don’t think on the estates of Mile Cross, the terraces of Nelson or the homes of Lakenham people are sitting around their kitchen tables pondering the greatest question of our time – is Morphw or Murphy (or, for that matter, your good self my Lord Mayor) the Leader of Norwich? Such political abstract barely interrupts breakfast because what people want are good services in the knowledge that they pay value-for-money council tax. It is without doubt that this Unitary Bid will distract from that very goal.
And the claims of bringing decision making closer to communities really do ring hollow. The surest way of bringing this close to communities and to consult properly would have been a referendum. This bid was presented to this council some months ago. I understand the Labour Group’s desire to avoid public consultation as they knew then what we know now – this doesn’t command public support or confidence at all. The LibDems said that the time for a referendum wasn’t just then – well, when is the time Cllr Cooke? Between the government shortlist and final announcement or maybe the shadow elections. When you voted against you knew the times would be tight and knew the vote could not be taken place. I hope a party with the word “democrat” in its title is happy in the knowledge that they have robbed the people of this City the final say in saying how they are governed instead happy to leave the decision to the 39 of us in the room. This is a political project run by the political elite and the manner and execution of this has been wrong.
Finally, the bid makes much of the supposed boost for education that this would bring. Yet the successful Headteachers in our City are not beating a path to the door of City Hall demanding that they be released from the oppressive control of County Hall. In fact County Hall is considered to be a good employer and has done much to support and help the City groups of schools. How would this “new” City Council match the standards of continued professional development opportunities currently made available? Could the council attract the new teachers that we need when in direct competition with Norfolk rather than working with it? The fact is that school leaders are pretty much content with the current scenario and this bid has picked up a fact which has nothing to do with local government organisation and run with it. Not a single pupil will have their learning enhanced the day Unitary comes into force.
The Conservative Group has long warned that this bid would not, by the government’s own original criteria, be in contention. In fact, if this bid goes forward in either form after March it will say a lot for the government failing to stick to its own roadmap and changing its mind to suit its own political bent.
The government says it wants consultation and the City Council claims it is good at this. So good, it gets Trowse and Thorpe St Andrew mixed up. Interestingly though we do seem to be able to find Chester.
The government says it wants broad stakeholder support. In fact you might have trouble finding any support outside of this room today. Norfolk County Council is against it, Broadland is against it, South Norfolk is against it and North Norfolk is against it. And that isn’t a political point. The LibDems on Norfolk County Council voted against this plan yesterday morning, and the ruling LibDems groups on North and South Norfolk Councils have led the charge against. Labour county councillors may have abstained but their senior party members across the county have gone on record to rubbish the plans. Neither does this have the support of the Independent groups on various councils or vast swathes of independent parish and town councils both inside and outside of the non-compliant bid area.
The Councils can’t agree, the parties can’t agree, the people can’t agree. No doubt Cllr Morphew will point to his MORI poll – which goes to prove that you get what you pay for. I don’t have the time here to into the inherent biases of that poll, but if the senior polling officer of MORI cannot refute my criticisms then you know that I am onto something. No poll – this one or the Evening News online poll – adequately sums up the public mood. It all shows the need for that referendum. Even the “Citizen” magazine bought in a three-figure response rate – lower than our party political surveys. We don’t know what the people want because we haven’t properly educated them or asked them.
I do know something that they want – quality services at value-for-money tax levels. This bid will heap millions of pounds onto the shoulders of local people. There is no argument that the tax burden for the people of Broadland and South Norfolk will rise but the transitional costs and the cost of duplication will be massive and impact on the City. Why, when we have a share in the Adult Services of County Council, should be lumber ourselves with our own version here with the same cost structures in place? There is a wide spread belief this is going to cost us dearly.
And with no corresponding impact on services. In fact they are likely to get worse. The job of unpicking, for example, the library service is massive. Customer contact suffers as a result. Coming from a council that is lacking in so many areas you might have though we’d want to focus on getting our existing service provision right before we look at running more.
This bid asks us to turn away from a system that has delivered strong partnership working, three star public services, and sound, strong and efficient public finances.
This bid asks us to turn away from the system that gave us the new bus station, investment in our City schools, the Forum, transport improvements in places like St Stephen’s and Rose Lane, the running of the most park and ride routes in the country and more housing schemes for our elderly.
This bid is costly, disrupted, opposed by our neighbours and barely thought of by our residents. This political project has gone on too long and cost too much. The bottom line is that the benefits are clearly outweighed by the cost of making it. This serves only to damage our relationships and stop the momentum we have built up.
Norwich and Norfolk go together – we work well together – we should keep it that way.
This bid sets out a number of factors, which it claims are compelling. In my time limit I can cover but a few of these.
The first is of a clear and focused place-shaping role. Norwich is a thriving City with unparallel growth. With housing and business growth side by side the City will keep on expanding, taking its place as the beating heart of the Norfolk economy. However we should remember that this remarkable achievement has been possible without Unitary. The real growth of the last ten years and of the next ten years was in place without changing the structures of local government. We made this happen together – as a team. There is no evidence that growth is threatened by not going Unitary. Furthermore even the key players in this bid admit that two tier working can carry on and get better. The current scenario is not unworkable and is not untenable. It has put Norwich where it is now. We can build on that, not knock it down.
Of course, this document claims that a Unitary Council will give people in the City a clear sense of leadership and purpose. Yet I don’t think on the estates of Mile Cross, the terraces of Nelson or the homes of Lakenham people are sitting around their kitchen tables pondering the greatest question of our time – is Morphw or Murphy (or, for that matter, your good self my Lord Mayor) the Leader of Norwich? Such political abstract barely interrupts breakfast because what people want are good services in the knowledge that they pay value-for-money council tax. It is without doubt that this Unitary Bid will distract from that very goal.
And the claims of bringing decision making closer to communities really do ring hollow. The surest way of bringing this close to communities and to consult properly would have been a referendum. This bid was presented to this council some months ago. I understand the Labour Group’s desire to avoid public consultation as they knew then what we know now – this doesn’t command public support or confidence at all. The LibDems said that the time for a referendum wasn’t just then – well, when is the time Cllr Cooke? Between the government shortlist and final announcement or maybe the shadow elections. When you voted against you knew the times would be tight and knew the vote could not be taken place. I hope a party with the word “democrat” in its title is happy in the knowledge that they have robbed the people of this City the final say in saying how they are governed instead happy to leave the decision to the 39 of us in the room. This is a political project run by the political elite and the manner and execution of this has been wrong.
Finally, the bid makes much of the supposed boost for education that this would bring. Yet the successful Headteachers in our City are not beating a path to the door of City Hall demanding that they be released from the oppressive control of County Hall. In fact County Hall is considered to be a good employer and has done much to support and help the City groups of schools. How would this “new” City Council match the standards of continued professional development opportunities currently made available? Could the council attract the new teachers that we need when in direct competition with Norfolk rather than working with it? The fact is that school leaders are pretty much content with the current scenario and this bid has picked up a fact which has nothing to do with local government organisation and run with it. Not a single pupil will have their learning enhanced the day Unitary comes into force.
The Conservative Group has long warned that this bid would not, by the government’s own original criteria, be in contention. In fact, if this bid goes forward in either form after March it will say a lot for the government failing to stick to its own roadmap and changing its mind to suit its own political bent.
The government says it wants consultation and the City Council claims it is good at this. So good, it gets Trowse and Thorpe St Andrew mixed up. Interestingly though we do seem to be able to find Chester.
The government says it wants broad stakeholder support. In fact you might have trouble finding any support outside of this room today. Norfolk County Council is against it, Broadland is against it, South Norfolk is against it and North Norfolk is against it. And that isn’t a political point. The LibDems on Norfolk County Council voted against this plan yesterday morning, and the ruling LibDems groups on North and South Norfolk Councils have led the charge against. Labour county councillors may have abstained but their senior party members across the county have gone on record to rubbish the plans. Neither does this have the support of the Independent groups on various councils or vast swathes of independent parish and town councils both inside and outside of the non-compliant bid area.
The Councils can’t agree, the parties can’t agree, the people can’t agree. No doubt Cllr Morphew will point to his MORI poll – which goes to prove that you get what you pay for. I don’t have the time here to into the inherent biases of that poll, but if the senior polling officer of MORI cannot refute my criticisms then you know that I am onto something. No poll – this one or the Evening News online poll – adequately sums up the public mood. It all shows the need for that referendum. Even the “Citizen” magazine bought in a three-figure response rate – lower than our party political surveys. We don’t know what the people want because we haven’t properly educated them or asked them.
I do know something that they want – quality services at value-for-money tax levels. This bid will heap millions of pounds onto the shoulders of local people. There is no argument that the tax burden for the people of Broadland and South Norfolk will rise but the transitional costs and the cost of duplication will be massive and impact on the City. Why, when we have a share in the Adult Services of County Council, should be lumber ourselves with our own version here with the same cost structures in place? There is a wide spread belief this is going to cost us dearly.
And with no corresponding impact on services. In fact they are likely to get worse. The job of unpicking, for example, the library service is massive. Customer contact suffers as a result. Coming from a council that is lacking in so many areas you might have though we’d want to focus on getting our existing service provision right before we look at running more.
This bid asks us to turn away from a system that has delivered strong partnership working, three star public services, and sound, strong and efficient public finances.
This bid asks us to turn away from the system that gave us the new bus station, investment in our City schools, the Forum, transport improvements in places like St Stephen’s and Rose Lane, the running of the most park and ride routes in the country and more housing schemes for our elderly.
This bid is costly, disrupted, opposed by our neighbours and barely thought of by our residents. This political project has gone on too long and cost too much. The bottom line is that the benefits are clearly outweighed by the cost of making it. This serves only to damage our relationships and stop the momentum we have built up.
Norwich and Norfolk go together – we work well together – we should keep it that way.
Sunday, January 21, 2007
If any planners want to see the impact of your short-sighted regulations, please visit Bowthorpe
Bowthorpe is three communities within a single community. When it was concieved in the 1970s it was proposed that Clover Hill, Chapel Break and Three Score should be built around a centre with a bigger centre in the middle (current Roys site). And each stage of the development was meant to be an improvement on the last - with each design informing the next and so on. Three Score, phase one, should have been the most satisfactory design for optimum living and Three Score, phase two, should do even more than that. The council is currently debating the eco-rating of the new homes and the use of the green spaces. However, whilst they are keen to learn from Clover Hill and Chapel Break, they don't seem to have realised the biggest design flaw of them all.In all of this nobody has noticed that the roas still aren't wide enough. Mardle Street wasn't wide enough but they still built Bladewater Road. That wasn't wide enough but they still built Caddow Road. That wasn't wide enough but Horn-Pie Road still appeared. What has changed? Nothing. So I am going to use every chance I can as Councillor to press this point before plans are set in stone for the Phase Two development.
What causes this? Parking. The road is wide enough for two lanes but parking makes it impossible for most larger vehicles to manoever around. Why is that ... because planning regs mean you only have to provide one space per home. Hence families with two cars, or couples who work in opposite directions and need two cars, often have to block their roads without meaning to do so.
What does this mean? Well, for a start a lot of people aren't getting their bins emptied because CityCare can't get the lorries down them or around the cars. And more worryingly the emergency services often cannot get past - and in a life-and-death situation every second counts. They want to be saving lives not inching around a Vauxhall Astra.
Now, Chapel Break and Clover Hill do not suffer like this. And, for that matter, do the older roads (such as The Runnell, Fresher Mews and Tippett Close) in Three Score. So what has changed? Well, out the window go common sense, practicalities and public safety and in comes the desire to pack as many houses into a small a space as possible.
I just hope somebody makes the change before the next 1200 homes go in ... I'll be shouting so they can't say nobody raised the issue.
Saturday, January 20, 2007
The Constitution must be sorted, say voters
You cannot read anything into one days canvassing in any particular street in any particular ward in any particular consituency. But where I was today smacks very much of "middle England" and, from the doorstep reaction, boy do Labour have to get the constitutional settlement between the nations of the UK sorted. It was by far the biggest issue.
LDV or just ATV?
ConservativeHom.Com is one of the best political websites around at the moment and goes to prove that a party can have open, honest, robust debate in public without people shouting "split" at every moment. It is stalked by uber-Cameroonies, by the barking right but also by a majority of perfectly sane Tory members all talking about internal party issues, selections, debates and the daily news that involves the Conservatives. As such it has developed a wide audience, is righly regarded by the party leadership and draws an audience from across the party political spectrum.
I was therefore quite excited when LibDem Voice (LDV) started up because I thought the same honesty could now spread to the LibDems who, to be fair, have got a lot of internal policy issues and leadership considerations to be had. I thought it would be interesting and hoped they could have the debates that CH.com had given us.
A few months on and it is quite, quite disappointing. The LibDems, never ones to (normally) air their dirty washing in public have made a sitemore dedicated to Tory-bashing than to reflection on their own party. The majority of the stories are either anti-tory or congratulatory nonsense from the days news. They are obsessed with positive spin. Maybe it should be called Anti-Tory Voice instead (ATV)?
Now I know the LibDems like a bit of Tory bashing, but why not leave that to the blogs and have one site where honesty can prevail? We are always told what a positive party the LibDems are - but check out the current news story list (as at the time of writing this post):
Conservative defection to UKIP
Conservative apologises for e-mail
Blair's director of government relations arrested
Vince Cable on personal debt (a rather loyal video clip)
Ming on Marr (positive)
Cameron fails to grasp issues
Scottish Tory calls on Leader to go
New LibDem Euro Leader announced
LibDem frontbench rehsuffle
Two More Tory defections
So thats more negative stories against other parties than in favour of your own group.
Keeping the real debate hidden isn't honest, open or fair. And quite frankly, it doesn't make the LibDems look like a mature, grown-up party of government either.
I was therefore quite excited when LibDem Voice (LDV) started up because I thought the same honesty could now spread to the LibDems who, to be fair, have got a lot of internal policy issues and leadership considerations to be had. I thought it would be interesting and hoped they could have the debates that CH.com had given us.
A few months on and it is quite, quite disappointing. The LibDems, never ones to (normally) air their dirty washing in public have made a sitemore dedicated to Tory-bashing than to reflection on their own party. The majority of the stories are either anti-tory or congratulatory nonsense from the days news. They are obsessed with positive spin. Maybe it should be called Anti-Tory Voice instead (ATV)?
Now I know the LibDems like a bit of Tory bashing, but why not leave that to the blogs and have one site where honesty can prevail? We are always told what a positive party the LibDems are - but check out the current news story list (as at the time of writing this post):
Conservative defection to UKIP
Conservative apologises for e-mail
Blair's director of government relations arrested
Vince Cable on personal debt (a rather loyal video clip)
Ming on Marr (positive)
Cameron fails to grasp issues
Scottish Tory calls on Leader to go
New LibDem Euro Leader announced
LibDem frontbench rehsuffle
Two More Tory defections
So thats more negative stories against other parties than in favour of your own group.
Keeping the real debate hidden isn't honest, open or fair. And quite frankly, it doesn't make the LibDems look like a mature, grown-up party of government either.
Monday, January 15, 2007
Alas poor Guido ...
It seems that poor old Guido has been the subject of an online asassination by cheeky Tim Ireland. There's plenty of blood on the floor so make sure you have a strong stomach before clicking here. An appropriate end for Mr Fawkes really...
Talking of political marriages...
A little birdie tells me that the lovely Mrs Cllr Simon Wright, LibDem PPC for Norwich South, has suddenly appeared on the Eaton Focus as their new team member.
We'll all miss Cllr Couzens, who despite saying he wants to carry on is now clearly for the chop, because there appears to be a new face in town (for those of you who don't get the reference, when somebody "joins" the Focus Team, it means they are the next candidate).
I don't like to gloat, but I said some months ago that this would happen - backed up by whispers in City Hall from other groups. I just thought it would be Mr Wright that did it, rather than Mrs Wright. Either way - good luck to her, Eaton will be a close race next time.
We'll all miss Cllr Couzens, who despite saying he wants to carry on is now clearly for the chop, because there appears to be a new face in town (for those of you who don't get the reference, when somebody "joins" the Focus Team, it means they are the next candidate).
I don't like to gloat, but I said some months ago that this would happen - backed up by whispers in City Hall from other groups. I just thought it would be Mr Wright that did it, rather than Mrs Wright. Either way - good luck to her, Eaton will be a close race next time.
Congratulations!
It's going to be a busytime to be a Labour Councillor, or rather a boozy one perhaps, with the news that two of their number are to marry soon. Hot on the heels of former Lord Mayor Mick Banham, Sewell Councillor, announcing he is to marry I hear news that Bowthorpe's County Councillor Gail Loveday is also to wed. Hurrah! Both marriages are quite political - Cllr Banham's bride is the widow of Harry Watson and the new Mr Cllr Loveday is Phil Harris, Labour's former candidate in North Norfolk.
Congrats to all - new hats all round!
Congrats to all - new hats all round!
Sunday, January 14, 2007
LibDems take an e-lead on news
Regular readers of this blog (that's John AND Eileen!) will know that two of my most strongly held views are that e-campaigning - the use of e-mail and the internet - will be major determinants of voting intention within ten years and that the LibDems, despite much bragging otherwise, are currently lagging behind both other parties in the use, design and content of their national and local websites.So it was with some dread that I recently signed up to the e-News service of all three major parties and prepeared my inbox for what was to come.
Cameron has, so far, put e-campaigning at the heart of his strategy to sell himself and the new-look party. Why then is the national website offering such a pisspoor e-News service. They come irregularly, mostly out of date and in lots of seperate e-mails making it difficult to read. I actually got quite annoyed by this and ceased even opening them. Still, that was better than Labour whom have yet to send me anything that isn't about the Labour Supporters Network or an offer to join the party.
So who can fill this apparent national e-News void? Step forward the LibDems.
Their website is crap, full of crap and actually getting crapper ... but their e-News is bang on the money. It comes each day (including Sunday) and offers a digest of their news output including some stuff otherwise hidden away on their website. It all comes with a three line summary and then a link to the full story. It may not look pleasing but it is full of news and in a format that I want to recieve it in.
Projects such as Webcameron are great at pleasing a certain section of the online community but I think all parties such offer equal thought to those who want news and policy, as well as podcasts and downloads. Maybe Dave should sign up the LibDem e-News and see what our party should be doing?
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Rural-Urban
One good moment from tonight's Unitary meeting came right at the end. During the presentations various images of Norwich flashed up on the screen - City Hall, St Peter Mancroft, the Forum, Gentleman's Walk and the Royal Arcade for example. At one point in his speech Council Leader Steve Morphew admitted that he was "a City boy" and knew little about the problems of rural areas. "Well", said one rural parish chair, "if you wanted to bring us country folk on side you'd have started by showing some good ol' country scenes on your screen instead of all this city stuff."
It seems that when it comes to Unitary - even the powerpoints - we can't please any of the people any of the time!
It seems that when it comes to Unitary - even the powerpoints - we can't please any of the people any of the time!
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
Parish Councils slaughter Unitary
Tonight I attended a very well attended consultation meeting between the Clerks and Chairs of the parish councils which could be swallowed up by the Norwich Unitary bid. It was well organised and Council Leader Steve Morphew gave a very professional report on the current bid.
However, the assembled masses (who currently reside in Broadland or South Norfolk District) certainly didn't hold back in their vehment criticism of the plans. We were told - on more than one occasion - that not a single member of their council backs these plans. There were worries about the lack of consultation, the shabby state of the polls, the concerns on council tax, the current level of services offered by City Hall and the political direction of unitary. Cllr Morphew and his team of officers did well on some of these points - normally falling back on a catch-all excuse of "ignore the failings of the current Norwich City Council, this will be a NEW council"! Even at one point the meeting was told not to worry because any new council would have lots more conservatives on it and we normally sort most things out. That was nice.
It was a good meeting but I cannot express the strong feelings against this plan - particularly from places like Taverham, Trowse, Drayton, Horsford and Old Catton. These people are happy with the current settup and don't see a reason to change. A lot of the flimsy reasons for unitary were torn to shreds and Steve Morphew did have a bit of a rough time tonight (apparently a similar meeting yesterday went better).
Unitary doesn't need to have unamimous support but it does need to have broad ranging support. The MORI poll won't hide the fact that outside of the City itself, support for Unitary is very, very low. The government will see that and if they go on with the unitary idea still, it will certainly be a political decision being taken where we were promised an economic one.
However, the assembled masses (who currently reside in Broadland or South Norfolk District) certainly didn't hold back in their vehment criticism of the plans. We were told - on more than one occasion - that not a single member of their council backs these plans. There were worries about the lack of consultation, the shabby state of the polls, the concerns on council tax, the current level of services offered by City Hall and the political direction of unitary. Cllr Morphew and his team of officers did well on some of these points - normally falling back on a catch-all excuse of "ignore the failings of the current Norwich City Council, this will be a NEW council"! Even at one point the meeting was told not to worry because any new council would have lots more conservatives on it and we normally sort most things out. That was nice.
It was a good meeting but I cannot express the strong feelings against this plan - particularly from places like Taverham, Trowse, Drayton, Horsford and Old Catton. These people are happy with the current settup and don't see a reason to change. A lot of the flimsy reasons for unitary were torn to shreds and Steve Morphew did have a bit of a rough time tonight (apparently a similar meeting yesterday went better).
Unitary doesn't need to have unamimous support but it does need to have broad ranging support. The MORI poll won't hide the fact that outside of the City itself, support for Unitary is very, very low. The government will see that and if they go on with the unitary idea still, it will certainly be a political decision being taken where we were promised an economic one.
Monday, January 08, 2007
Ruth Kelly? Not a problem.
Poor Ruth Kelly, cabinet minister and former Education Secretary, is under fire from various outraged lefties complaining of her decision to send one of her many children to a private school because they better cope with the Special Needs of that child. Ms Kelly is doing what any parent would do - putting their child first, above her reputaion, her politics and her party. Good on her.David Cameron is spot on for backing her up today. He said it would only be wrong if Labour were in favour of abolishing private education and that Ruth Kelly made the right call - as a parent. The left of politics leaps up and down like they do on such occassions.
Ruth Kelly has made a choice that I would like every parent to have and she should make it her mission in government to make that so.
I hear Hammersmith & Hillingdon are nice this time of year...
Two new Conservative run authorities have recently announced tax cutting measures in their first budgets, being good for the party locally and for ratepayers but I suspect rather difficult for David Cameron.
The London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham was taken by the Tories in the early hours of 5th May last year and they have now said that Council Tax will be cut (yes, that's cut) by 3% from April. In a similar vein, Hillingdon Borough has said that senior citizens will recieve a 2% council tax discount to help them - Hillingdon was won by the Conservatives in a landslide win where both the Labour and LibDem Leaders lost their own seats.
This will all serve to put pressure on the Tory Leader on the issue of tax cuts for the next election. So, what should DC do? Praise them to the hilt. Show this is Conservative councils at their best. But he must be sure to say that national government is different. The national situation is more like Norwich. Let me explain.
The biggest lie in politics is "if you cut tax you have to cut services." Not true at all and only left-wingers believe this in order to justify hike-upon-hike. Now I know that local authorities often face difficult settlements - Norfolk County is a classic example - but there is so much waste in local government.
I am shocked by what I see on the inside of City Hall. We could easily neutralise council tax increases and still, in my humble opinion, spend more on key services by having a cost-saving zeal in the next few years as we did have when the LibDem £2m overspend was announced.
The public quite rightly expect us to be careful with their money. They want a responsive council doing good work for a value-for-money tax.
If Hillingdon and Hammersmith can clear their decks and cut costs (not services) like that AND deliver a tax cut then those local politicans deserve praise. Should Norwich do the same? Not yet ... when the council cuts its costs then more money should go into the woeful recycling system, into environmental services and street cleaning. After they are sorted then we cut tax. Similarly, when the education system, NHS and police service are reformed and working efficiently then we cut tax. Both in Norwich and Nationally I would expect that to be inside a four year Conservative majority term.
Rumour is that the council tax hike will be big again this year. Why are our senior officers not on holiday in west London this year?
The London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham was taken by the Tories in the early hours of 5th May last year and they have now said that Council Tax will be cut (yes, that's cut) by 3% from April. In a similar vein, Hillingdon Borough has said that senior citizens will recieve a 2% council tax discount to help them - Hillingdon was won by the Conservatives in a landslide win where both the Labour and LibDem Leaders lost their own seats.
This will all serve to put pressure on the Tory Leader on the issue of tax cuts for the next election. So, what should DC do? Praise them to the hilt. Show this is Conservative councils at their best. But he must be sure to say that national government is different. The national situation is more like Norwich. Let me explain.
The biggest lie in politics is "if you cut tax you have to cut services." Not true at all and only left-wingers believe this in order to justify hike-upon-hike. Now I know that local authorities often face difficult settlements - Norfolk County is a classic example - but there is so much waste in local government.
I am shocked by what I see on the inside of City Hall. We could easily neutralise council tax increases and still, in my humble opinion, spend more on key services by having a cost-saving zeal in the next few years as we did have when the LibDem £2m overspend was announced.
The public quite rightly expect us to be careful with their money. They want a responsive council doing good work for a value-for-money tax.
If Hillingdon and Hammersmith can clear their decks and cut costs (not services) like that AND deliver a tax cut then those local politicans deserve praise. Should Norwich do the same? Not yet ... when the council cuts its costs then more money should go into the woeful recycling system, into environmental services and street cleaning. After they are sorted then we cut tax. Similarly, when the education system, NHS and police service are reformed and working efficiently then we cut tax. Both in Norwich and Nationally I would expect that to be inside a four year Conservative majority term.
Rumour is that the council tax hike will be big again this year. Why are our senior officers not on holiday in west London this year?
Sunday, January 07, 2007
Councillor "does" recycling - so why isn't my waste bin empty?
I hate New Year's Resolutions because they tend to be broken within fifteen seconds of being made. So this year I discarded the notion of losing weight, drinking less or giving up chocolate. None of those three were going to happen anyway so I thought I'd set myself a far more crucial challenge - recycling properly.
Up until now I consider myself a "Norwich Recycler", that is, somebody who recycles as much as they can on the kerbside without letting it interupt my everyday life, causing me hassle or driving anywhere.
But from the 1st January I became a "Proper Recycler". I have seperated paper and cardboard, even tearing up things to ensure I recycle what I can and throw away what I must. I sorted through things. I even removed the selotape from wrapping paper. I have created, in just a week, over twice the paper recycling that I did in a fortnight. I have been using my three composters in the garden for food waste. I have been cleaning out glass so I can put that on the kerb, not just the empty winebottles! I am keeping my tetrapaks to one side and when I sorted out my wardrobes, I did so with recycling in mind.
This evening I put my waste bin out. Full. Again.
Absolutely no difference. Now either my bin this week would have been massive if I hadn't of recycled or...
The truth is that I was recycling most of what I could have and my extra efforts haven't paid off in terms of the total percentage of waste produced by two adults and two small children in a semi-detached house in Norwich.
Or, and this is my view, the recycling I can do with some ease is so limited that our county and city must do something more as a matter of urgency to improve the situation.
I have tried, and mostly failed, to use my goodwill to improve the situation. Must the council force me to recycle, or should they provide me with extra opportunities to recycle? The Greens would say the former, we Conservatives no doubt the latter.
I am going to carry on and see what happens in the next few weeks. But all those who are planning for our future recycling needs should take heed of my experience. Good intentions won't improve our woeful recycling rates - we must be more radical than that.
Up until now I consider myself a "Norwich Recycler", that is, somebody who recycles as much as they can on the kerbside without letting it interupt my everyday life, causing me hassle or driving anywhere.
But from the 1st January I became a "Proper Recycler". I have seperated paper and cardboard, even tearing up things to ensure I recycle what I can and throw away what I must. I sorted through things. I even removed the selotape from wrapping paper. I have created, in just a week, over twice the paper recycling that I did in a fortnight. I have been using my three composters in the garden for food waste. I have been cleaning out glass so I can put that on the kerb, not just the empty winebottles! I am keeping my tetrapaks to one side and when I sorted out my wardrobes, I did so with recycling in mind.
This evening I put my waste bin out. Full. Again.
Absolutely no difference. Now either my bin this week would have been massive if I hadn't of recycled or...
The truth is that I was recycling most of what I could have and my extra efforts haven't paid off in terms of the total percentage of waste produced by two adults and two small children in a semi-detached house in Norwich.
Or, and this is my view, the recycling I can do with some ease is so limited that our county and city must do something more as a matter of urgency to improve the situation.
I have tried, and mostly failed, to use my goodwill to improve the situation. Must the council force me to recycle, or should they provide me with extra opportunities to recycle? The Greens would say the former, we Conservatives no doubt the latter.
I am going to carry on and see what happens in the next few weeks. But all those who are planning for our future recycling needs should take heed of my experience. Good intentions won't improve our woeful recycling rates - we must be more radical than that.
Monday, January 01, 2007
My Predictions for 2007
Wales: Labour will lose their majority in the Welsh assembly with the Tories becoming the second party winning some surprising seats. At this high Nick Bourne will resign and the party will elect a younger, more Cameronesque leader.
Scotland: Labour will face a difficult election but will remain the large party in the parliament. Other parties will attempt to form a coalition but will fail, leading to a fragile Labour / LibDem administration limping on.
Labour Leadership: John Hutton will be the only candidate to take on Gordon Brown for the top job, with the election coming in June or July. Brown will win by a decent margin and Hutton will then refuse to serve in a Brown-led cabinet. Despite a big bounce in the polls, Labour's finances mean that Brown cannot go for a snap poll.
The cabinet: At least seven current ministers will go - (obviously Blair and Prescott) but I think Armstrong, Straw, Smith, Beckett, Hutton, Jowell and Falconer as well. How about this - Brown is elected Leader and Hilary Benn his Deputy. In a move that angers a lot of people (and the Daily Mail), he appoints fellow Scot Alistair Darling as the new Chancellor. John Reid takes a lower profile role as Leader of the House, which allows Alan Johnson to be the new Home Secretary as a reward for not taking on Gordon. Ruth Kelly is shifted over to somethin like International Development as she is given more time to defend her marginal parliamentary seat. David Milliband will be given a promotion to a major spending department like Education. Hewitt will survive as Health Secretary. Dull but loyal Stephen Timms will creep up the ladder again - maybe to Trade Secretary? Des Browne will move on from Defence into a less potent job like Constitutional Affairs. As he failed to be elected Deputy Leader, Peter Hain is appointed the new Foreign Secretary. Hazel Blears is shifted out of the Party Chairmanship and is replaced by Douglas Alexander. Blears is given a difficult role such as Work and Pensions.
Shadow Cabinet: Cameron will flesh out his version of Conservatism and it will reassure both the right of the party and the Daily Telegraph. David Davis will take on a much higher profile role. Cameron will use the summer as a chance to set in stone the team he wants to go into the next election. Hague will take the title of Deputy Leader byt both he and Osbourne will keep their present jobs. May will be downgraded again but will stay in the shadow cabinet. Grayling will be promoted again, as will Villiers. Some of Cameron's key players such as Gove, Vaizey and Herbert will make the shadow cabinet.
Norwich: Labour will hold on at the 2007 poll but only as a result of a split opposition. The Greens will continue to make gains (plural) and Labour will hold their key seats. Conservatives to hold onto Catton Grove and make further gains.
National: Cameron will score very well across the country, partly because of his strength in England and partly because of the introduction of STV in Scotland. Labour have a bad night - another factor in Brown's decision not to call a snap election. The LibDems will score a net reduction in seats.
LibDems: Following a bad May poll, Sir Ming Campbell will retire citing ill-health. A leadership election will follow that will be fought by Clegg, Huhne and Lamb. Huhne will win - only just and the two losers will be his Home and Foreign Affairs spokespeople. Cable will carry on as Deputy Leader and Treasury Spokesman. They will be forced to repay the £2.4m Brown money but it will not bankrupt the party.
Scotland: Labour will face a difficult election but will remain the large party in the parliament. Other parties will attempt to form a coalition but will fail, leading to a fragile Labour / LibDem administration limping on.
Labour Leadership: John Hutton will be the only candidate to take on Gordon Brown for the top job, with the election coming in June or July. Brown will win by a decent margin and Hutton will then refuse to serve in a Brown-led cabinet. Despite a big bounce in the polls, Labour's finances mean that Brown cannot go for a snap poll.
The cabinet: At least seven current ministers will go - (obviously Blair and Prescott) but I think Armstrong, Straw, Smith, Beckett, Hutton, Jowell and Falconer as well. How about this - Brown is elected Leader and Hilary Benn his Deputy. In a move that angers a lot of people (and the Daily Mail), he appoints fellow Scot Alistair Darling as the new Chancellor. John Reid takes a lower profile role as Leader of the House, which allows Alan Johnson to be the new Home Secretary as a reward for not taking on Gordon. Ruth Kelly is shifted over to somethin like International Development as she is given more time to defend her marginal parliamentary seat. David Milliband will be given a promotion to a major spending department like Education. Hewitt will survive as Health Secretary. Dull but loyal Stephen Timms will creep up the ladder again - maybe to Trade Secretary? Des Browne will move on from Defence into a less potent job like Constitutional Affairs. As he failed to be elected Deputy Leader, Peter Hain is appointed the new Foreign Secretary. Hazel Blears is shifted out of the Party Chairmanship and is replaced by Douglas Alexander. Blears is given a difficult role such as Work and Pensions.
Shadow Cabinet: Cameron will flesh out his version of Conservatism and it will reassure both the right of the party and the Daily Telegraph. David Davis will take on a much higher profile role. Cameron will use the summer as a chance to set in stone the team he wants to go into the next election. Hague will take the title of Deputy Leader byt both he and Osbourne will keep their present jobs. May will be downgraded again but will stay in the shadow cabinet. Grayling will be promoted again, as will Villiers. Some of Cameron's key players such as Gove, Vaizey and Herbert will make the shadow cabinet.
Norwich: Labour will hold on at the 2007 poll but only as a result of a split opposition. The Greens will continue to make gains (plural) and Labour will hold their key seats. Conservatives to hold onto Catton Grove and make further gains.
National: Cameron will score very well across the country, partly because of his strength in England and partly because of the introduction of STV in Scotland. Labour have a bad night - another factor in Brown's decision not to call a snap election. The LibDems will score a net reduction in seats.
LibDems: Following a bad May poll, Sir Ming Campbell will retire citing ill-health. A leadership election will follow that will be fought by Clegg, Huhne and Lamb. Huhne will win - only just and the two losers will be his Home and Foreign Affairs spokespeople. Cable will carry on as Deputy Leader and Treasury Spokesman. They will be forced to repay the £2.4m Brown money but it will not bankrupt the party.
Sunday, December 31, 2006
Happy New Year
Just a quick note to wish everyone a healthy and happy 2007 before we head for the party circuit! Children in bed, red wine open and ready to go...
2006 was a very eventful year - in terms of national politics, my own political experiences here in Norwich and for my family. I wonder what 2007 will hold?
Enjoy!
2006 was a very eventful year - in terms of national politics, my own political experiences here in Norwich and for my family. I wonder what 2007 will hold?
Enjoy!
Saturday, December 30, 2006
Great new blog
Want to combine Tory politics with allotment know-how and gardening tips? Easy, click here.
Friday, December 29, 2006
Blears should resign
I believe in Ministerial responsibility. I believe in Collective responsibility. If an MP doesn't agree with a government policy or its application then they should resign from that government. So why is Hazel Blears (and, for that matter, a few more besides) still in office whilst campaigning against their own side. I'll say nothing more but leave you with Blears-hunter-in-chief Cllr Iain Lindley here and here.
LibDem trio defect to Cameron's Conservatives
LibDems has better reach for that sherry bottle again as news breaks that three more LibDem candidates quit their party and join the Conservatives. Most pleasingly - for Cameron and the Conservatives that is - is that the three make up a union steward, a doctor and the man who wrote the LibDem LGBT manifesto. In a statement that must stick in the throats of all LibDem activists, one of them calls Sir Ming a "has been" and warns that the party is in "reverse gear". Furthermore, another says that only the Conservatives can help the NHS.This makes seven LibDem candidates to join the Conservatives this year, in which some LibDem blogs have been calling their "annus horriblis". However, I have yet to find a single LibDem blogger who has commented yet - as Iain Dale points out, if this was a spate of Tory defections the gloating would be deafening.
I said that the polls didn't matter for the LibDems but the trend does. This latest news certainly adds to that trend. Sir Ming might yet be in trouble.
Thursday, December 28, 2006
How festive are the party websites?
I know that is the question that we have all been asking over our turkey sandwiches. Just how much of a festive theme has each main party thrown into their on-line campaigning?The LibDems are the party who desperately need a sherry-fueled episode to mask their dismal 2006 - a year in which they have dumped a leader and end up rock bottom in the polls. Yet their website - here - seems to have totally ignored Christmas altogether. There is one story about the number of people eating turkey on their own this year but precious little else. You will be aware that I feel the national LibDem website is awful when compared to some really rather better local efforts, but this really is rather poor. Festive rating: 1/10
I am greeted at Labour's site - here - by a pop-up which asks me to join the party so I can vote for the new leader. I wasn't aware that Blair had resigned, but hey-ho. The frontpage has a lovely big festive message that offers us "best wishes for Christmas and the New Year". There is also a flashing graphic of Christmas tree lights that then displays an achievment of the current government. Pretty good, fitting with the current party image, contemporary design. Festive rating: 7/10
Is Christmas too traditional for the modernisers at Cameron's Conservatives? Hardly as their site - here - includes a very flashy graphic which shows snow falling over the hill sides which are littered with Christmas trees. It is a shame that where you would normally expect a message to pop up (like "Merry Christmas") it doesn't and you end watching the graphic waiting for something to happen which then doesn't. A bit disappointing but it is the most technical of all the sites and, somewhat ironically, the most traditional. Festive rating: 7/10
Oddly there is no festive message on any of the sites from any of the party leaders - the Conservatives lead on Labour Chairwoman Hazel Blears challenging her own party's health policy, whilst the LibDems stick to a story about Iraq and Labour advertise their programme of Spring Events.
Come on parties - let's have a bit of Christmas cheer about you all!
Sunday, December 24, 2006
Merry Christmas!
The presents are wrapped, the turkey is stuffed, the stockings are hung and a certain little girl is looking forward to a midnight visit from a very special man.
Merry Christmas everyone and may tomorrow be as wonderful as you dreamed it would be.
Merry Christmas everyone and may tomorrow be as wonderful as you dreamed it would be.
LibDems down to 15% in latest YouGov poll
I don't believe individual opinion polls *at all* and I put my faith rather more in the trends of pollsters. However, the sight of LibDems across the blog-o-sphere squirming about the latest YouGov is too much for a blue-blooded Tory like me to resist.
For a party that stands for "winning here" and being the "growing party", such a rebuff to the dynamic leadership of Sir Ming must be hard to take.
Seriously though my little LibDem chums - calm down, take stock, this is one poll so don't panic. If a 6 or 12 month trend shows you in the 15-18% box you can panic then, but not now.
Happy Christmas!
For a party that stands for "winning here" and being the "growing party", such a rebuff to the dynamic leadership of Sir Ming must be hard to take.
Seriously though my little LibDem chums - calm down, take stock, this is one poll so don't panic. If a 6 or 12 month trend shows you in the 15-18% box you can panic then, but not now.
Happy Christmas!
Friday, December 22, 2006
My top 7...
Iain Dale has tagged me to answer the blog poser - "7 best things I've done this year." I'm only allowed 7?!?! Here goes...
1. Created life - bringing Olivia into our world.
2. My first act as Councillor was to get a family in which the Mum was severely disabled re-housed from a totally unsuitable property in Clover Hill into a purpose built DDA access bungalow.
3. Proved that Conservatives can win in council estate areas ... if we campaign right, work hard enough and prove ourselves to local people.
4. Achieve the best value-added score in our department (again).
5. Change my first fuse on a plug (unbelievably so)
6. Buy a Family ticket to Wroxham Barns.
7. Set up and run the first Government & Politics course in Notre Dame.
I am now tagging Linden Parker, Iain Lindley, Antonia Bance, Gavin Ayling, Norfolk Blogger, James Cleverly and Ali Miraj.
1. Created life - bringing Olivia into our world.
2. My first act as Councillor was to get a family in which the Mum was severely disabled re-housed from a totally unsuitable property in Clover Hill into a purpose built DDA access bungalow.
3. Proved that Conservatives can win in council estate areas ... if we campaign right, work hard enough and prove ourselves to local people.
4. Achieve the best value-added score in our department (again).
5. Change my first fuse on a plug (unbelievably so)
6. Buy a Family ticket to Wroxham Barns.
7. Set up and run the first Government & Politics course in Notre Dame.
I am now tagging Linden Parker, Iain Lindley, Antonia Bance, Gavin Ayling, Norfolk Blogger, James Cleverly and Ali Miraj.
Thursday, December 21, 2006
Ming's reshuffle
Ey, gads! You take a couple of days out with the family, you then find out that in your political absence a major political reshuffle had taken place ... oh, no, sorry it was Sir Ming's LibDems shuffling a couple of people you've never heard of around in jobs that didn't matter.Professor Steve Webb (anonymous rating: who?!?!?!) has been asked to write their manifesto - this is, despite the thick trowl of sarcasm, very significant as Prof. Webb is very much considered to be on the left-leaning SDP wing of the LibDems.
Webb's old position as LibDem Health Spokesman is taken by North Norfolk's Norman Lamb (anonymous rating: haven't I seen you somewhere before deary?!?!). This is a good move for the LibDems as Lamb is one of their better performers but it could be a bit of a poision challace for Mr Lamb as his own constituency faces some pretty deep NHS cuts.
Lamb's old job as Chief of Staff to Grandpa Sir Ming goes to youthful Kingston MP Ed Davey (anonymous rating: ah, it's thingy...). I had heard whispers that Ming was a bit fed up with Lamb's apparent pisspoor efforts and this may be the result of that feeling ... Lamb has certainly failed to give any spark or drive to Ming's leadership but to fair that is a pretty tough task. I don't know if this is true - Lamb does seem pretty good at any job he turns his hand to, but you never know what goes on behind closed doors ... especially LibDem doors.
Davey's old job as Trade Spokesman goes to Susan Kramer (anonymous rating: hmmm, looks familiar but no idea who she is) and her old Internation Development job goes to newly elected London MP Lynne Featherstone (anonymous rating: nope, no idea).
So totally underwhelming then, just like poor old Ming himself.
Anyway what has got my goat a little is the continual use of the phrase "LibDem Shadow Health Secretary". Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. I think not, my little deluded yellow chums. Check the official definition of shadow cabinet or shadow positions - reserved for the principle opposition party, which is ... ah, the Conservatives!
Delusions of grandeur methinks. Get it right LibDems!
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Tragic ... very, very tragic
I got all the answers on the Guardian Political Quiz of the Year correct. Am I more ashamed of being a political junkie or reading the Guardian website? Try it here.
Greens are "ill informed" claims Clarke
Charles Clarke doesn't write to the Evening News often so when he does, it is often on a politically sensitive or crucial issue. Today his letter dominates the paper with a quite remarkable attack on the "characteristically ill informed" Green Councillors.Labour have, for quite some time now, plodding along ignoring the Greens whilst our eco-friends destroyed the LibDem vote and stole their seats. Labour are in power in City Hall now because the Greens have won over a lot of traditional LibDem areas. So for Mr Clarke to bite back like this is quite remarkable - maybe a few jitters over the next parliamentary election but far more likely is that political heavyweight Mr Clarke is fed up of the Greens being allowed to get away with peddling any old nonsense without being held to account.
The Greens now hold 9 out of 39 council seats and, if experts and polls prove to be correct, they will at least hold onto those and maybe even grow again in 2007. They are a major political force in Norwich (at least) and we should scrutinise what they have to say. I know that the LibDems find it hard to attack the Greens, so maybe this Clarke letter is the start of a Labour offensive against City Hall's third party?
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Brown's snap election?
The BBC, amongst others, is current speculating about the posibility of a snap 2007 poll following Brown's coronation as Labour Leader. Labour Chairman Hazel Blears - currently engulfed in her own fight to be selected in a parliamentary seat following the abolishion of her current Salford berth - has even put out the feelers to Labour workers that it could come sooner rather than later. I'm very dubious about this - not for historical comparisons or anything of that like, but for one very simple reason.Money. Labour doesn't have it and neither, to be totally honest, do the other parties. Labour would have to be fund raising much faster (and selecting PPCs too, but that is another matter) than they are at the moment to fill the finanical gap. I have always argued that Brown's best chance is by using the post-Blair bounce that is bound to happen - but a few housekeeping realities may stop that from happening.
Party finances need stability - and that is why all parties run in four year cycles. The bureaucracy loves regularity and snap polls could give a few party accountants heart attacks (on all sides). As money and finance become a bigger and bigger part of each subsequent election campaign the choosing of the date is more a question for the Treasurer than the Prime Minister.
The money men would much rather have fixed term parliaments and, I have to say, that is where my thinking is taking me too.
Last Day at "Skool"
I have been laid up for the last 48 hours as the latest victim of the whole Winter Vomiting thing. Apologies if calls and e-mails have gone unanswered. I was, however, back at school for the last day - if a little like being dragged from my death bed. Now I have just the fortnight to recover! Today is always a special day in schools and most of us with have positive memories of the last day of term. At ND today we had a kind-0f-mass and a carol concert ... always roof raising stuff although for the seven hundreth year running I ballsed up the words to "I'm dreaming of a white Christmas."
Friday, December 15, 2006
Better to stay silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt
If politicans have to stop pretending to be cool then pop stars should stop pretending to be intelligent.The latest celebrity to enter the complex world of politics is Cheryl Tweedy, of Girls Aloud, who said Cameron should stop trying to be something that he isn't. She then went on to treat us to the following words of wisdom with regards to her own political views:
"There should be adverts in the breaks during Coronation Street spelling it out in bullet points: This is what the Conservatives stand for. This is what Labour stands for. You know that basically Labour is the working class and the Conservatives are kind of upper class, and then everything else is... I have no idea ... I only vote Labour because me mam does."
In the same way that I'd never suffer the nation with my signing I wonder if Miss Tweedy could save us all her pathetic rantings on politics in future? Or even better, our media could not report such stupidity. Cheryl ... this says more about you than it does about David Cameron.
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Shaving foam bra (or my first day back at work)
Thanks to my part-time paternity leave, for which I am most grateful, I returned today to work in order to keep up the pressure on (er, I mean, teach) my exam classes. Year 13 were pathetically invovled in something called "panto" ... an excuse for boys to wear makeup and take off their clothes if you ask me. So I launched myself into my Year 12s and got an unexpected treat for my hard work (the title of this post should give you some ideas.) Glad to be home to the relative normality of two screaming babies and, of course, the news of the day!
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Hands-on Dad
Day Three in the world for the new Miss Olivia Little and I rather feel that I haven't seen much of her. Various visitors monopolise her time and even I cannot compete with the lure of her food source. I got a good cuddle this morning and a lovely one this evening but most of my day has been dedicated to Emily who, I fear, is feeling a little bit shoved to one side. Not so, I cry, for she has Daddy on hand 24-7.
Yesterday we went to the Toddlers Christmas Party at St. Albans Church Hall and it was absolutely brilliant. Today we went to Louise's baby club lunch and I finally got to meet some of Emily's friends. Between going out for lunch, changing library books and obsession about advent calendars the day has flown by - and I admit that I have loved every moment.
My two observations for the day are...
1. No wonder sometimes Louise (and other Mums) get little done around the house - playing is far more fun and the washing can (and does) wait.
2. How long is takes to do everything. Even a wander down to Tesco Express take a lifetime when you stop to look at every dog / flower / Christmas decoration on the way.
Louise remarked of me today that I have been much more hands on with Olivia and Emily now than I was when Emily was born. Am I more confident, a bit older and wiser or do I just realise how fast they grow up and how each moment is precious? Even Olivia's nappies seem a treat to me...
Yesterday we went to the Toddlers Christmas Party at St. Albans Church Hall and it was absolutely brilliant. Today we went to Louise's baby club lunch and I finally got to meet some of Emily's friends. Between going out for lunch, changing library books and obsession about advent calendars the day has flown by - and I admit that I have loved every moment.
My two observations for the day are...
1. No wonder sometimes Louise (and other Mums) get little done around the house - playing is far more fun and the washing can (and does) wait.
2. How long is takes to do everything. Even a wander down to Tesco Express take a lifetime when you stop to look at every dog / flower / Christmas decoration on the way.
Louise remarked of me today that I have been much more hands on with Olivia and Emily now than I was when Emily was born. Am I more confident, a bit older and wiser or do I just realise how fast they grow up and how each moment is precious? Even Olivia's nappies seem a treat to me...
LibDems want to abolsih competition in school sports
LibDems around the country who want to be taken seriously as a force in British politics - even one that is a third party - must hold their heads in their hands and weep everytime something like this happens.From the party that wanted rights for fairground goldfish comes the notion of abolishing competition in school sports, just as the rest of the nation finally agrees it is a good thing.
LibDem MP Sandra Gidley made the point in a recent House of Commons debate and I hope that the leadership of her party make her suffer for this. Why, I hear you think?
I am about the only person in my school who doesn't think that sport is the absolute cure-all for every problem in the system - including under-achievement and poor behaviour. I think PE is a nice run around a few hours a week, helps towards health and fitness and gives the kids a much needed laugh. I was the fat kid who was always last to be picked - but I didn't care because generally I enjoyed the sport despite being absolutely awful at it. But that aside I think the one thing it does teach the pupils is that you can't win all the time ... unlike academic subjects where "deferred success" has replaced "failure" in our lexicon, PE remains a bastion of reality. You win some, you lose some. Fact of life, etc etc.
Only the LibDems, who are becoming increasingly illiberal on such issues, want the blandness of "everyone wins a prize" to be injected into school sports.
I wonder what former Olympic runner Sir Ming Campbell would have to say about this...
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
New Addition
Whilst I was typing the post below, my wife was in fact having contractions but failed to inform me of this. When she did inform me of this I failed to believe her thinking it was cramp / indigestion / phantom contractions. By around 11.30 Louise was getting one contraction roughtly every 5 minutes and by 12.30 this was down to one every 3 and a half minutes. It was then I lept into action.
Following a mad dash from Drayton to Trafford Road, the in-laws bravely came round to ensure that the child we already had was safe and sound, whilst Lou and I trundled off to the N&N.
Apparently most women worry about going to hospital in case they aren't really in labour and end up wasting people's time. We were determined not to be those kind of paranoid parents who think that the first twinge is the onset of labour and launch themselves at every passing medical practioner. This could, after all, be the start of many days of unpleasantness and we wouldn't want to block our maternity system. However by the time that Louise had to use the doorframe for support, we thought it best to seek some professional advice.
By 2am we were at the hospital and a lovely midwife called Sue confirmed that Louise was, despite Daddy's best attempts to block this from his mind, having a baby. No need to go home or feel ashamed at wasting precious NHS resources, this was the real thing (copyright, Coca Cola).
Things slowed down between 3am and 8am during which time I was seriously considering some kind of breakfast. Louise, on the other hand, seemed rather more in a hurry than I and decided to get a move on. The poor, unfortunate (but rather good) trainee midwife got the shock of her life when Louise's contractions went on some kind of turbo-charge and by 10.15am the baby was ready to be born. Cue lots of plastic things, a gaggle of women in the room and pain so bad that Louise actually bit the end of the gas'n'air tube off.
10.26am and baby Olivia Grace Little came into the world - much quicker, certainly easier but with the same amount of love as her big sister Emily.
Admittedly, she had a sort of Lord-of-the-Rings Orc like quality, but after a wash and brush up she looks just like Emily, beautiful - although slightly smaller at just 6lb 7oz.
Louise and Olivia were allowed to come home by 5pm and here we have snuggled ever since. Emily is loving her "bubba" almost as much as she loves her advent calendar ... but not quite.
Olivia is going what all good babies should - eating, sleeping and being cuddled. I am very proud of our latest addition, but most of all Louise - who after the trauma of last time took all this in her stride (and, for the record, got through the whole labour without resorting to Thundercats Impressions - unlike last time.)
I will post photos when I get them but in the meantime do excuse my sparadoic posts and general inactivity. I have a baby to love.
Following a mad dash from Drayton to Trafford Road, the in-laws bravely came round to ensure that the child we already had was safe and sound, whilst Lou and I trundled off to the N&N.
Apparently most women worry about going to hospital in case they aren't really in labour and end up wasting people's time. We were determined not to be those kind of paranoid parents who think that the first twinge is the onset of labour and launch themselves at every passing medical practioner. This could, after all, be the start of many days of unpleasantness and we wouldn't want to block our maternity system. However by the time that Louise had to use the doorframe for support, we thought it best to seek some professional advice.
By 2am we were at the hospital and a lovely midwife called Sue confirmed that Louise was, despite Daddy's best attempts to block this from his mind, having a baby. No need to go home or feel ashamed at wasting precious NHS resources, this was the real thing (copyright, Coca Cola).
Things slowed down between 3am and 8am during which time I was seriously considering some kind of breakfast. Louise, on the other hand, seemed rather more in a hurry than I and decided to get a move on. The poor, unfortunate (but rather good) trainee midwife got the shock of her life when Louise's contractions went on some kind of turbo-charge and by 10.15am the baby was ready to be born. Cue lots of plastic things, a gaggle of women in the room and pain so bad that Louise actually bit the end of the gas'n'air tube off.
10.26am and baby Olivia Grace Little came into the world - much quicker, certainly easier but with the same amount of love as her big sister Emily.
Admittedly, she had a sort of Lord-of-the-Rings Orc like quality, but after a wash and brush up she looks just like Emily, beautiful - although slightly smaller at just 6lb 7oz.
Louise and Olivia were allowed to come home by 5pm and here we have snuggled ever since. Emily is loving her "bubba" almost as much as she loves her advent calendar ... but not quite.
Olivia is going what all good babies should - eating, sleeping and being cuddled. I am very proud of our latest addition, but most of all Louise - who after the trauma of last time took all this in her stride (and, for the record, got through the whole labour without resorting to Thundercats Impressions - unlike last time.)
I will post photos when I get them but in the meantime do excuse my sparadoic posts and general inactivity. I have a baby to love.
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Overdue Baby
As predicted by absolutely everyone in the world our second baby is now a full 2 days overdue. As Emily was 12 days we aren't holding our breath for an arrival any day soon. Louise isn't as big as she was with Emily but is now at that uncomfortable stage. I am enjoying time with Emily at the moment so really am not fussed, although I think Lou would like it sooner rather than later. If I disappear from this blog, you'll know why ;-)
Do the LibDems know where Norwich South is?
Apparently not.Now, before I go into this I should say that I did pledge to put less obvious point-scoring posts on my blog and focus more on the work of the council and national politics generally. I have failed miserably on this, and will continue to do so today.
The LibDems appear to have been delivering a newspaper - an awful one to boot - around the place and a neighbour kindly put one through my door this afternoon. Attached was a note which says:
"They don't know North from South and clearly their arse from their elbow."
And ringed on the front of the newspaper, amongst the places this was delivered to (which include Eaton, Bowthorpe, New Costessey etc.) was two words ... Mile Cross.
Oh, dear. Now for the uninitiated, Mile Cross falls into Norwich North, not Norwich South. You might have thought that this was a City wide newspaper then? Well, if that was the case then Catton, Sewell and Crome were mysteriously missing. Only Mile Cross made it into the wrong constituency.
As my laughter drew to a close, after some minutes, I am ready to draw one of two conclusions.
Either the LibDems don't know where the constituency boundary is or the LibDems are as fixated on Mile Cross as Steve Morphew is meant to be. We wonder why ...
Cheap party political point scoring over, begin the angry LibDem posts...
Saturday, December 09, 2006
Are we voting for ends or means?
The level of debate in the pastoral office at school has been raisied this week, as we move on from the future of the penny-sweet industry to political ideology and thought.My good friend, colleague and Eaton resident is threatening not to vote next May. He is classic LibDem fodder (young, caring, pro-environment, basically a bit left wing but hates New Labour) but as I have scratched the surface of his beliefs he shows worrying signs towards authortarian Toryism.
Anyway, his complain was that the parties were "all the same these days." "Nonsense", I declared. I believe that is the lazy answer for people who don't want to think things through. Are you honestly saying, I went on, that all three parties have the same education policies, the same tax proposals or the same ideas on immigration?
"Ah-ha", he quickly rebutted, all of those things are about the micro-management of the system not about broad based ideological differences. Such an arguement got me thinking. In the 80s we had the classic Conservativism versus Socialism debate, personaified (if you like) by Thatcher and Foot. A classic cold-war battle being fought in British politics.
Name any three major party frontbenchers and I'd bet you they'd agree on the projected outcome for the country. We all want a strong economy, good education, a working transport system etc. However, where we disagree is how to achieve that - so politics is becoming about the means rather than the ends.
So, says my friend, he is being asked to vote for slightly differenent versions of management rather than for political leadership. Before he votes he wants to see a real battle of ideas - not the day-to-day policy of school funding, but of where we want British edcuation to go and do.
Maybe he has a point, I concluded. After all, Cameron, Blair and Campbell could probably draw up a "vision statement" on which they could all sign up to. So we, the voters, have no choice about where UK plc is going - just a choice of vehicle to get there.
Any interesting arguement and so much more worthwhile than guessing whatever happened to all those 80s bands you just don't hear of anymore.
She likes the thought but not the reality
Rather like socialism to many people, my daughter Emily has decided that she likes the thought of Father Christmas more than the actual reality.Today we were up early to queue with the multitudes in Jarrolds to meet the man himself. Emily was happy, looking forward to it and very talkative. She pointed at him through the window, she loved the balloons and the decorations. She grinned manically as we walked through the door. She took one look and ... burst into hysterical wailing and tears. Poor old Santa, I thought. How embarrassing for us all.
By the time we had left and shopped around Norwich, Emily was back to liking Father Christmas and had forgotten all about that nasty moment when her greatest hope become a reality and turned into her greatest fear.
Socialism still exists
Last night I was involved in an investigation of the liscence trade in and around Prince of Wales Road. In order to do this, I had to eat and drink rather a lot and involved myself with as many lisenced premises as possible ;-)During one of these in-depth looks at the implications of council policy I stumbled (literally, actually) across a bit of a blog fan ... but it turns out he was a Labour member. During our witty, half sloshed, exchanges I asked him if socialism still existed (I'm a hoot after a few drinks) and he told me in great depth about the red-hot beating heart of the Labour Party waiting for the day that Blair leaves office.
Beware Britain - socialism exists and is alive and well hidden in Norwich.
Thursday, December 07, 2006
Is Martin Amis the stupidest person in Britain?
Novelist Martin Amis has made himself look absolutely ridiculous on several occasions during tonight's Question Time on the BBC. If you don't understand politics, or life, Martin then don't appear on TV pretending you do. You seem to be a rather sad re-tred of life during the socialist soviet era and I had rather assumed that we had moved on. The worst thing is that he has made Ruth Kelly look measured and sensible.
Clarke's hypocrisy on local government freedom
The EDP has an interesting piece today about Charles Clarke's new call for a spirit of freedom to enter local government. In particular he picks out the increased use of referenda as one way of increasing participation and accountability.So when Norwich City Council had a chance to vote on a referendum on Unitary, the single biggest issue facing the council, which political party voted against?
Mr Clarke's very own Labour Party.
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Could a Unitary Norwich be Conservative controlled?
The recent EDP Report that Norwich City Council is trying to include places like Bawburgh, Trowse, Great Plumstead, Little Plumstead, Horsford, Newton St Faith, Postwick, Rackheath, Taverham, Drayton and Thorpe St Andrew raises the interesting prospect that so many suburbs would be included that it would put a massive Tory block back onto the City Council. In fact, given Tory strength in places like Catton, Bowthorpe, Sprowston, TSA and Hellesdon what chance that the Tories might take overall control? And with it being obvious that the Conservatives can beat Labour, even areas like Eaton might fall. Still, this dream aside, I am still opposed ... politican putting people before their own party ... bizarre.
Monday, December 04, 2006
Simon Wright, honesty & ID Cards
Being in local government means taking decisions that you might not always agree with. You can only refuse liscening applications on the 4 liscensing objectives and you can only turn down planning applications based on planning grounds.When the ID Card Centre plans came before the committee, the Greens tried to have them turned down on ideological grounds. However the other parties, led by senior LibDem Councillors, spoke and voted in favour of the plans because there were no planning grounds to turn them down.
So why is LibDem Parliamentary candidate Simon Wright trying to claim that the LibDems were against the plans? He certainly fails to mention that his own Councillors voted in favour of the scheme, and in doing so he suggests that his party didn't approve of these plans.
The public would have far more respect for politicans in general and the LibDems in particular if he told them the truth about these things instead of playing politics and spinning the issue.
The truth is that both Conservatives and LibDems are against ID Cards, but both parties had to vote for this proposal because they had no legal grounds to vote it down.
Why can't Fakenham's Councillor Simon Wright be honest with the people of Norwich?
Now Labour split over Unitary bids
The Chairman of Thetford Labour has made the case against Unitary in Norwich far better than I could have. In the EDP Letters on Saturday, he said that Breckland shouldn't go for Unitary because they couldn't exercise the powers they had currently had - let alone ask for more power and more money.Maybe Thetford Labour should speak to Norwich Labour - because Norwich City Council has a much, much worse record (not least on recycling) than Breckland ... so can we assume that Labour believe that City Hall is as equally unable to command more powers?
The cartoon is from a campaign group, who claimed that Windsor & Maidenhead Council abused their power as a Unitary Council. County Councils and District Councils work as a check on each other - Unitary councils can abuse their power. Absolute power corrupts...
Sunday, December 03, 2006
Steve Morphew accused of being bias in favour of Mile Cross
City Council Leader Steve Morphew had an uncomfortable time on Tuesday night as a combination of the public, the Greens and the LibDems heaped pressure on him for allegedly being bias in favour of improvements in Mile Cross as opposed to the rest of the City.It started when a member of the public, one Brenda Lock, said that the council didn't care about Heathgate Community Centre because it wasn't in Mile Cross and that's where all the money went. A startled reaction from Councillors and the public. Although Steve strongly denied this, it led to some further exchanges later in the evening. Green Leader Adrian Ramsay concurred that a lot of money was spent in Mile Cross, because it was a tough Lib-Lab battleground seat, and LibDem Councillor for Mile Cross Carl Mayhew was also stirring the pot.
At the end of it I feel Steve looked a bit startled by all of this - more from the public than Councillor.
I wonder if it is true - a breakdown of total spending ward by ward would be interesting. Another member of the public told me afterwards that ift felt like all the money went to Eaton. An interesting perspective also.
It is natural to want the best for your ward. We all do it - fighting hard for our communities, sometimes knowing that other areas may suffer as a result. Although I believe Steve hasn't abused his position as Leader of the Council in favour of his ward, I think this line of attack may well come back time and time again.
In response to my Question
You may remmeber that I asked about the Council's work to improve the clearing up of grafitti at Full Council last Tuesday.The Executive Member for Community told me that the Neighbourhood Wardens are able to spot grafitti and reporting it directly to the council via their handheld technology - including taking photos. They have, apparently, had some success in working with the police to catch taggers. They also say that extended CCTV around Norwich will help. Finally they urged people to call 212112 to report any cases.
I then asked if the council believed that control of grafitti was an option - they said that they were providing constructive alternatives.
(And in case you care here are the other questions...)
Cllr Lubbock (LibDem, Eaton) asked if the Council would provide a small, individually wrapped chocolate to all employees who turned off their computer. The Labour Executive Member said the authority had a good record in saving power.
Cllr Collishaw (Con, Catton Grove) asked about the budgets for Dog Bins. Apparently dog bins are no longer provided and people should use normal waste bins.
Cllr Cannell (Lab, Lakenham) asked what progress the council had made since May. It was the most obvious brown-nosed question ever asked at Council and quite frankly both the asker and the answerer should be ashamed for wasting our time.
Cllr Sands (Lab, Sewell) asked why CityCare collected rubbish at 0615 and woke everyone up. The Executive Member, who is a Labour Councillor, said this shouldn't happen.
Cllr Hooke (LibDem, Thorpe Hamlet) asked if the law on cycling on pavements could be enforced. He was told to sod off and do it himself. In a polite manner, obviously.
Cllr Bearman (Green, Town Close) asked what is happening with the land at the corner of Leicester Street and Onley Street. It seemed to me that the council didn't know the answer.
Cllr Read (Green, Wensum) asked if more could be done to get people to Sparks in the Park via public transport. He was told that a lot of people did use the buses and that Green councillors should lighten up and cheer up a bit.
CLlr Llewellyn (Green, Wensum) asked if the bulky items collections were recycled. No.
Cllr Jago (Green, Mancroft) asked about the fence on Mile Cross Road. He was told that Norfolk County Council have the responsibility to sort it out.
Cllr Stepphenson (Green, Nelson) asked about energy saving plans for new homes. She got a lot-done-lots-to-do style answer.
Cllr Watkins (LibDem, Eaton) asked how much it cost to replace one pane of glass in a bus shelter. £313.12
Cllr Mayhew (LibDem, Mile Cross) asked about Eade Road / Patterson Road being made one way. The Council are thinking about it.
Cllr Divers (LibDem, Thorpe Hamlet) asked about traffic calming on Ketts Hill. There is no need, she was told.
Full Council: Attendance Watch
2 Councillors absent this time - Brian Morrey (Lab, Catton Grove) and Jull Surridge (LibDem, Thorpe Hamlet). All Tories and Greens present and correct.The Conservatives are the only party with a 100% record since May's elections!
Who's got the best reycling record in Norfolk? (Clue: It sure ain't a certain City...)
Fascinating statistics released from Norfolk County Council and pass to me via a recycling campaign have led to some red faces around City Hall, I understand. Using the Audit Commission reports from 2002-2005 it plots all of the district council performances in collecting recycling.In 2002 Norwich City came 4th out of 7 districts - beating Broadland, Breckland and Great Yarmouth. Since then, all three Tory authorities have since jumped ahead of the Labour / LibDem run City Council, leaving Norwich trailing in last place - almost exactly where we were three years previously.
Tory run Broadland comes a clear first, followed by LibDem North Norfolk.
David Cameron has clearly grabbed the green agenda and these figures show why - time and time again it is Conservative Councils that are leading the way in such fields, whilst councils dominated by the left (as Norwich still is) do very badly. The Norwich Conservatives take this subject seriously, so why won't Labour and the LibDems?
They are all talk and no action - and on doorsteps, actions speak louder than words.
Well Done Trevor
I am thrilled to say that the latest Tory PPC to be selected in Norfolk & Suffolk is our local association Chairman Trevor Ivory, who will stand for the party in North Norfolk. I attended the Open Primary in Northrepps last Friday and what a good meeting it was. Trevor and Alan Lockwood, the defeated candidate, performed very well but it was so clear that Trevor wanted the seat badly.Trevor and I are honest friends - I think that is a really difficult seat and he has one hell of a fight ahead of him. Trevor needs to work 24/7 on this one, but I have total confidence in him to really take the fight to Lamb. Trevor has been very brave taking a seat like this on, after all he follows the class political act of Iain Dale, and I am sure that local people will warm to him. Trevor and Lisa are now planning their move 20 miles North!
Trevor is a great champion of the Conservative cause ... North Norfolk should be proud to have him!
Monday, November 27, 2006
The future of parliamentary debate
After school I organised the first parliamentary debate for my A Level Politics group and I have to say that all of them did brilliantly - more confident, better prepared, wittier and straight to the point. They made a lot of our current MPs look like amateurs! The subject of debate was "Tony Blair's 10 years in power have been a sparkling success" - the motion was lost 7 votes to 5, which says a lot about the impact of Blair on 16-17 year olds who have only really known a Labour government!Two girls took the role of Labour frontbencher and the Tory Leader of the Opposition. They not only made their own speeches but also took a barrage of interventions from backbenchers and from the other dispatch book. The two whips on either side took on the role of a cross between a cheerleader and a pitbull terrier.
The speeches were thoughful and based upon fact. It was interesting that Blair's fans took his record on crime and public services whilst those who opposed him concentrated on two key issues - Iraq and the NHS. The Labour supporters got rather annoyed by the constant Iraq references. Their frontbencher snapping from her seat: "Don't you lot have anything else to talk about?".
The opposition wanted to stick to Iraq, Labour wanted to move on ... more like real life than you'd imagine.
They soon got snappy as fellow MPs tried to put them off their stride and kept trying to refocus the debate to their point. Just like parliament!
Really this was the best I've seen in many years of teaching and I am now determined to work with these kids and, who knows, ending up at the National Parliamentary Debating Competition?
Best line: Labour whip: "I bet you Tories wish you hadn't had thrown all those mentally ill people onto the streets during your time in power - look, they've all ended up on your frontbench!"
Strangest point to make: Tory Leader: "20,000 years ago there were a fewer people than there are today."
Most disagreements: Labour and Tory frontbenchers: Has crime fallen or risen since 1997? Everyone had statistics to prove their point.
Clarke to stand - and lose - in Norwich South
Here is tonight's press release:Responding to tonight's news that former Home Secretary Charles Clarke will seek re-election to his Norwich South constituency, Tory Leader at City Hall Antony Little said:
"It is right that Charles Clarke puts himself before the electorate so that local people can judge him on his record as both a government minister and a constituency MP."
"With Labour on the ropes nationally and David Cameron's Conservatives ahead in all the opinion polls, Norwich South will be a key seat at the next election."
Councillor Little, who stood against Mr Clarke in 2005, added: "With the LibDems losing council seats across Norwich and the Conservatives winning again, it is clear that only the Conservatives can beat Labour here in Norwich South."
"If people want to pass judgement on Mr Clarke's lamentable record as our local MP, or on Mr Blair's wasted 10 years in power when taxes have risen but services continue to suffer, they should do so at the ballot box by supporting the Conservatives and David Cameron's message of change, optimism and hope."
"The next election is already looking very interesting."
Sunday, November 26, 2006
Council Agenda for Tuesday
Council Agenda for Tuesday, 7.30pm in the Council Chamber at City HallPresentation on Peak Oil
Lord Mayor’s Announcements
Presentation of Long Service Awards
Declarations of Interes
Public Questions
Petitions
Minutes
Questions to Exec Members
Proposed Vision Strategy for Norwich and the Council’s short term objectives (these focus on CCTV, wardens and the environment)
Budget Update
Capital Programme changes
Gambling Act response
Motion – Cllr Morphew on First Buses
Motion – Cllr Holmes on Climate Change
Motion – Cllr Morphew on Growth Point Status.
Enquiries, question and thought (as ever) appreciated.
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Ian Gibson won't stand down
The not-very-surprising news that Labour MP Ian Gibson will contest the next General Election would not normally be note-worthy. But the comments of a close colleague and Norwich North resident bear thinking about. She is a Labour voter and big fan of Mr Gibson and yet on hearing the news declared "great, so we get an old, ill MP whose just hanging around to saddle us with the cost of a by-election."Nice, but with phrases like "going out with my boots on" it shouldn't surprise him!
Capital Programme in Bowthorpe
I have just got the capital budget spending for Bowthorpe. For your interest:1. Lighting scheme for Smeat Street, Clover Hill
2. Park Improvements for Atkinson Close, Chapel Break
3. New Park Equipment for Clover Hill (tba)
4. 5 a side football goals for Fourways (Earlham)
5. Rejuvenating Clover Hill Community Centre
6. Toad Crossings on Chapel Break Road
7. Road surfacing on Dereham Road (between Wendene and Gurney Road)
8. Cycling Scheme from West Earlham to City Centre
9. Pavement improvements on Rockingham Road
10. Play equipment via 106 money for Chapel Break and Three Score
Views on this welcome
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
My Question...
Thanks for the suggestions made for my question including those who e-mailed them. I have just laid down this, based upon the first "annonymous" suggestion:
Councillor LITTLE to ask:
The city's street furniture and many of our suburban areas suffer from a lot of grafitti, including much by a few graffiti gangs. Does the council believe grafitti is a symptom, measure and further encouragement of Anti Social Behaviour? Can the Executive Member tell us what the council can do to help crack down on grafitti across the City, including any plans to speed up the removal of it?
The city's street furniture and many of our suburban areas suffer from a lot of grafitti, including much by a few graffiti gangs. Does the council believe grafitti is a symptom, measure and further encouragement of Anti Social Behaviour? Can the Executive Member tell us what the council can do to help crack down on grafitti across the City, including any plans to speed up the removal of it?
Picture is of a grafitti tag in Norwich.
Sunday, November 19, 2006
What should I ask at the next Full Council meeting?
Every month each Councillor gets the chance to pose a single question which the Executive Member or Committee Chair responsible must answer. To this point each month I have had an obvious question to ask because of various issues that have arisen around the ward. The question could be about a specific issue which the council had so far not answered (e.g. parking on Bishey Barnabee Way) or about general strategic council wide issues (e.g. time spent to improve run down council housing stock).
I believe in avoiding nasty political point scoring (unlike some Labour and LibDem Councillors) and as this really is the "nuclear option" for finding out information I also think the question should be something you couldn't find out easily any other way.
So, with the deadline looming on Wednesday I'd like to know what you would like answered from the City Council. I can't guarantee I'll choose a question from this blog, but it would be good to ask something suggested by a blog reader.
You can, of course, ask your own question at council by e-mailing it to andy.emms@norwich.gov.uk - you'll even get a supplementary question too! You need to be a resident of Norwich to do so and you'll have to turn up at the Council Meeting on the last Tuesday of the month to ask it. It is however your way of getting an answer straight from the horse's mouth!
Ian Oakley selected for marginal seat
Ian Oakley is one of the nicest people in the Conservative Party, if not the country. It also happens that he is one of the hardest workers and best campaigners too - and that's useful because he's just been selected for the country's tightest three-way marginal seat in Watford.I worked closely with Ian for many years in various adventures around Hillingdon Council and I know he'll give it 100% and be a real asset to the party as both a candidate and then as an MP. Ian won't be put off because of the tough fight ahead of him in Watford - it'll make him more determined to fight hard and win.
Ian may not be an A-Lister but he knows Watford back-to-front and I am so pleased for him. The LibDems should have been assured of victory in this seat, but with Ian's selection the whole contest is wide open again.
Go for it, Ian!
Anne McIntosh selected for safe seat
The news from CH.com is that Tory frontbencher Anne McIntosh has been selected for the very safe and newly created seat of Thirsk and Malton. I have always argued that Anne deserves a good berth because of her excellent parliamentary record - just the sort of MP we need. I am, however, sad that another MP whose constituency disappears - John Greenway - is now left without a seat to fight. 'A'-List or no 'A'-List we need to support those who have given dedicated service to the party. I hope that John is given what he deserves by the powers that be at CCHQ.But, well done Anne - I'm sure it was well deserved.
Are the LibDems going to drop their opposition to Tesco ... or are they going to play it both ways again?
One of the big issues that dominated the campaign in Town Close last year was that of the proposed Tesco Express being built on the site of the Arlington petrol station on Unthank Road. The Greens, naturally took against the plans. So too, with little impact, did the LibDems. The Greens subsequently snatched the formerly rock solid LibDem ward and left local activists reeling.Today a LibDem Focus leaflet graces my letterbox - not a particularly good one and now rather irregularly delivered but one story stood out for me. An update on Tesco.
Chris Thomas, the sitting Councillor who faces the fight of his life next year, claims to be pleased that the application was rejected before adding:
I have had letters from residents who are not car owners and who would welcome an opportunity to shop daily at a small supermarket which they feel with complement the specialist shops.
So that's clear then ... not. Are the Town Close LibDems therefore in favour or opposed and, in particular, is Chris Thomas in favour or not? Or, like on so many issues, are they planning to play this one both ways depending on which doorstep they are standing on?
Or is there a more wholesale change on the way? The LibDems have lost voters hand-over-fist to the Greens in the Golden Triangle and many of these residents are unlikely to return to the fold anytime soon. So if the LibDems detect a significant minority in favour of the Unthank Tesco (but who don't like to shout about their opinions) could they switch policies in time for next May and hoover up those votes?
I don't know, but I do know that the Town Close LibDems are desperate.
They may think that the votes of the anti-Tesco lobby are lost to the Greens and political pragmatism draws them to a pro-Tesco position as the only way of holding their seat?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)