Tonight, despite my raging hayfever, was spent in the company of the RSPB at a public meeting about Climate Change, although it soon widened out to other issues too. It was, I think, the first time that Charles Clarke, Adrian Ramsay, Simon Wright and I have shared a platform and is the first of a number of pressure group meetings due to take place.
I thought the topic may lead to some lively debate but there was plenty of consensus on the panel and the audience were clearly converts to the cause. There were a number of people there - maybe 50 - but many were Green members and I doubt if anything of what was said really changed any minds. The questions were varied and detailed though.
However the quiet and thoughful questions and answers would certainly confound those who believe politics is yah-boo and punch'n'judy.
Thank you to those who organised and attended.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Labour plans £4bn worth of NHS cuts
The small print of the budget shows a £4bn reduction in the NHS budget.
Why is it that if this were a Conservative budget, the media, Unions and the Labour Party would call them "CUTS". There would be protests, direct action, campaigning & scare stories of vulnerable people dying.
But it's OK, because this is a Labour budget, so they are only "efficiency savings".
Phew.
Why is it that if this were a Conservative budget, the media, Unions and the Labour Party would call them "CUTS". There would be protests, direct action, campaigning & scare stories of vulnerable people dying.
But it's OK, because this is a Labour budget, so they are only "efficiency savings".
Phew.
It passed me by
Was there a Budget today? Really? That was it?!?
I had been keen to know how the government was going to tackle our record debt, support business, encourage enterprise and get people back to work. After all, this is what people on doorsteps want to know. But I don't think I am any further forward tonight.
The Chancellor spoke for an hour, but said nothing.
He whacked up the cost of cider (thanks Darling - he knows what I drink now!)
He stole a Conservative policy about Stamp Duty.
He admitted (I think) that his growth forecasts were wrong.
Petrol up, cigarettes up, booze up - again.
No rabbits. No hats. What was the point of this budget? Wouldn't it have been better to have held a General Election?
UPDATE: I know you can't fit every piece of economic news into the budget, but why on earth didn't the Chancellor mention billions of pounds worth of tax rises. I wonder why, in such a long speech with so little else to say, that was forgotten?
I had been keen to know how the government was going to tackle our record debt, support business, encourage enterprise and get people back to work. After all, this is what people on doorsteps want to know. But I don't think I am any further forward tonight.
The Chancellor spoke for an hour, but said nothing.
He whacked up the cost of cider (thanks Darling - he knows what I drink now!)
He stole a Conservative policy about Stamp Duty.
He admitted (I think) that his growth forecasts were wrong.
Petrol up, cigarettes up, booze up - again.
No rabbits. No hats. What was the point of this budget? Wouldn't it have been better to have held a General Election?
UPDATE: I know you can't fit every piece of economic news into the budget, but why on earth didn't the Chancellor mention billions of pounds worth of tax rises. I wonder why, in such a long speech with so little else to say, that was forgotten?
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Stories from the doorsteps
The LibDem campaign - costly and glossy thought it is - seems to be hitting the buffers somewhat as panicky canvassers come up against a truth on the doostep; their support is in freefall.
And tonight we were talking to one voter who said that when she said to a LibDem canvasser that she was voting Conservative this year, the canvasser immediately became very rude and aggressive, saying "you absolutely must not vote Tory or Green." The voter, shocked by this suddent turn in attitude, retreated inside.
This isn't the first case of this; we had a resident from Bowthorpe who said that the LibDem "wouldn't take no for an answer" and "seemed intent on having a fight" about their decision to vote Tory.
However the good news is that they aren't always as direct. Another resident tells us that when he challenged the assertion that the Conservatives couldn't win, the canvasser became flustered and retreated quickly. And again, this time on the telephone, when another resident retorted that she wouldn't have her democratic choice limited by the LibDems saying that only 2 parties could win here, then the canvasser hung up on her.
I believe that canvassers are the face of your party - a question for all of us in this election is about courtesy to residents. Maybe we ought to have a "decency promise" on how we deal with people on doorsteps? I wonder if the other candidates would sign?
And tonight we were talking to one voter who said that when she said to a LibDem canvasser that she was voting Conservative this year, the canvasser immediately became very rude and aggressive, saying "you absolutely must not vote Tory or Green." The voter, shocked by this suddent turn in attitude, retreated inside.
This isn't the first case of this; we had a resident from Bowthorpe who said that the LibDem "wouldn't take no for an answer" and "seemed intent on having a fight" about their decision to vote Tory.
However the good news is that they aren't always as direct. Another resident tells us that when he challenged the assertion that the Conservatives couldn't win, the canvasser became flustered and retreated quickly. And again, this time on the telephone, when another resident retorted that she wouldn't have her democratic choice limited by the LibDems saying that only 2 parties could win here, then the canvasser hung up on her.
I believe that canvassers are the face of your party - a question for all of us in this election is about courtesy to residents. Maybe we ought to have a "decency promise" on how we deal with people on doorsteps? I wonder if the other candidates would sign?
Monday, March 22, 2010
Parliament in Chaos
Tonight we have the sight of 3 former Ministers being suspended from the Labour Party over a lobbying scandal and MPs from all parties being accused of breaking the code of conduct regarding overseas trips (including LibDem MP Norman Baker who has led the charge against so many others).
Doesn't all this lead us to only one conclusion - a General Election now, and the chance to deliver us some desperately needed change?
Doesn't all this lead us to only one conclusion - a General Election now, and the chance to deliver us some desperately needed change?
"LibDems not playing fair"
The public really are becoming wise to the tactics of some parties who seek to mislead. I have just had a very angry email from one local resident who asked: "I am just wondering if you are aware of the 'dirty tactics' the Lib Dems are using with election figures. I feel they are using the last set of figures unfairly because it reads as it they are fact for the forthcoming election, and the 'bars' are not portrayed in proportion properly."
Nothing new there, you might think - the LibDems have a long history of only being elected on the back of tactical votes rather than what they really stand for (if you can work out what they really stand for) and doing so on the back of the dodgy use of bar charts and statistics. They are the staple of a LibDem leaflet - in Tory areas then "Labour can't win here" and in Labour ones then "only the LibDems can beat Labour", normally irrespective of what the results are. Where they can't "prove" this using the last election results, they could use the council results, or the number of council seats, or the change in seats, or a parish council by-election held years ago or maybe the European result for whole region?
The most worrying thing is that the resident believe her neighbours may react to this misleading information not by voting LibDem but: "I am concerned people will be misled by this into not bothering to vote."
I think this is something the LibDem candidate will no doubt be questioned on this during the campaign.
Nothing new there, you might think - the LibDems have a long history of only being elected on the back of tactical votes rather than what they really stand for (if you can work out what they really stand for) and doing so on the back of the dodgy use of bar charts and statistics. They are the staple of a LibDem leaflet - in Tory areas then "Labour can't win here" and in Labour ones then "only the LibDems can beat Labour", normally irrespective of what the results are. Where they can't "prove" this using the last election results, they could use the council results, or the number of council seats, or the change in seats, or a parish council by-election held years ago or maybe the European result for whole region?
The most worrying thing is that the resident believe her neighbours may react to this misleading information not by voting LibDem but: "I am concerned people will be misled by this into not bothering to vote."
I think this is something the LibDem candidate will no doubt be questioned on this during the campaign.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Councillor Norfolk Blogger
Despite the various clashes, and very different views on the political situation locally, I wanted to congratulate Nich Starling on his victory in the Taverham North by-election yesterday. It was a solid win and on a decent size swing too - he should be proud of that achievement. The ward, which currently is in Chloe Smith's Norwich North seat, is traditionally a very safe Conservative area and I predict it will return to form very soon ;-)
Well done Nich, enjoy being a Councillor and I hope this position of responsibility doesn't lead to you losing your edge when it comes to blogging.
Well done Nich, enjoy being a Councillor and I hope this position of responsibility doesn't lead to you losing your edge when it comes to blogging.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Business As Usual
I am incredibly grateful to all the messages of support we've had since the news of death threats on our Campaign HQ came out.
All of us on the Conservative campaign are deeply shocked at this and will continue to help the police fully with their investigation. We are very grateful to the team at Ferndale Business Centre who worked quickly to remove this vile statement.
In politics you get used to the rough and tumble of debate but this takes it to new levels. Our campaign offices are in the use a lot of the time, including at night for meetings with local residents. This is either a sick joke or a very real threat to local democracy because it is intended to make people not feel safe.
Many many people give up their time and effort to support my campaign to be our next MP. If this is an attempt to stop them, I have one message - it won't work. We are used to some unsavory elements locally but their opinions are best expressed through the ballot box, rather than death threats. This incident has made us more determined to get out there and sell the Conservative message to the people of Norwich. It's business as usual as far as we are concerned because democracy doesn't halt in the face of an unpleasant minority.
I would also like to thank my fellow candidates for their messages of support, including ones from MPs Charles Clarke and Chloe Smith.
All of us on the Conservative campaign are deeply shocked at this and will continue to help the police fully with their investigation. We are very grateful to the team at Ferndale Business Centre who worked quickly to remove this vile statement.
In politics you get used to the rough and tumble of debate but this takes it to new levels. Our campaign offices are in the use a lot of the time, including at night for meetings with local residents. This is either a sick joke or a very real threat to local democracy because it is intended to make people not feel safe.
Many many people give up their time and effort to support my campaign to be our next MP. If this is an attempt to stop them, I have one message - it won't work. We are used to some unsavory elements locally but their opinions are best expressed through the ballot box, rather than death threats. This incident has made us more determined to get out there and sell the Conservative message to the people of Norwich. It's business as usual as far as we are concerned because democracy doesn't halt in the face of an unpleasant minority.
I would also like to thank my fellow candidates for their messages of support, including ones from MPs Charles Clarke and Chloe Smith.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Crushing embarrassment for Labour as C4's Factchecker says their Sure Start claims are "wrong"
As anybody who has been paying attention to the Labour gumpf in Norwich, the "Tory cuts" to Sure Start have headlined. This claim has caused real concern amomgst local people, particularly Mum's in areas like one I represent, who are worried that their support will be taken from them. This claim is taken from a Conservative idea to move funding to support outreach and Health Visitor work. I have for some time believed that the party ought to be more vigerous in defending the position - which is that there are no planned cuts - because Labour had repeated the fib so many times it was taking on an air of truth. Even the Labour Councillors at City Hall have bet their political reputation on this.
Oh dear. Now the C4 Factchecker has done the research (click here for more) and come up with ... Labour claims, coming from cuts to Sure Start, but from the health budget. So the inflammatory headline on Labour’s scare story is, strictly, wrong.
Will I get an apology from those Labour Councillors, including their Leader Steve Morphew and Childrens Spokesman Sue Sands, who were vigerous in their attack on this issue? I not holding my breath, but Mums and Dads across the City ought to take note of these independent findings.
Labour claims not true ...
Oh dear. Now the C4 Factchecker has done the research (click here for more) and come up with ... Labour claims, coming from cuts to Sure Start, but from the health budget. So the inflammatory headline on Labour’s scare story is, strictly, wrong.
Will I get an apology from those Labour Councillors, including their Leader Steve Morphew and Childrens Spokesman Sue Sands, who were vigerous in their attack on this issue? I not holding my breath, but Mums and Dads across the City ought to take note of these independent findings.
Labour claims not true ...
Sunday, March 14, 2010
When Sir Trevor met Dave ...
Tonight's efforts on ITV was a good use of an hour and provided a great overview of the man who wants to be our next Prime Minister. As a political observer I preferred the fact that Cameron went for Sir Trevor McDonald, in direct contrast to Brown's choice of his Labour-chum and disgraced former Mirror editor Piers Morgan. McDonald was polite, decent, insightful and yet probing (for example, asking about "that poster" and if Cameron could ever sack Osbourne).
Samantha Cameron came out very well indeed and the programme really enforced the loving and solid nature of their relationship plus her influence on his politics; and the interview with his Mum really illustrated how his childhood has shaped his life. The section on Ivan was touching but not over-the-top.
I didn't feel the behind the scenes footage was very revealing, but what both David and Samantha Cameron had to say was. They came across as very passionate about changing the country, very relaxed, almost normal and clearly enjoying themselves.
I think this programme will have really solidified the Tory base and, hopefully, made others think again about the Tory Leader (he really took the "posh" stuff on and made good on it). Those who have already made up their minds about "the old Etonian" David Cameron won't have budged.
But, as always, I speak as the Cameron faithful and will wait to see what the staffroom has to say tomorrow!
UPDATE: In the comments James has mentioned the lack of policies in this programme - but this effort, like Brown/Morgan, wasn't about policies and it certainly wasn't an hour long PPB. The programme told you lots about the man-who-would-be-PM and the values which drive him. I have always argued we need to policies more up front but this wasn't the vehicle for this.
Samantha Cameron came out very well indeed and the programme really enforced the loving and solid nature of their relationship plus her influence on his politics; and the interview with his Mum really illustrated how his childhood has shaped his life. The section on Ivan was touching but not over-the-top.
I didn't feel the behind the scenes footage was very revealing, but what both David and Samantha Cameron had to say was. They came across as very passionate about changing the country, very relaxed, almost normal and clearly enjoying themselves.
I think this programme will have really solidified the Tory base and, hopefully, made others think again about the Tory Leader (he really took the "posh" stuff on and made good on it). Those who have already made up their minds about "the old Etonian" David Cameron won't have budged.
But, as always, I speak as the Cameron faithful and will wait to see what the staffroom has to say tomorrow!
UPDATE: In the comments James has mentioned the lack of policies in this programme - but this effort, like Brown/Morgan, wasn't about policies and it certainly wasn't an hour long PPB. The programme told you lots about the man-who-would-be-PM and the values which drive him. I have always argued we need to policies more up front but this wasn't the vehicle for this.
Friday, March 12, 2010
That LibDem Election Slogan In Full
The problem with the LibDems election slogan - "Change that works for you. Building a fairer Britain", isn't that it is a Tory-Labour hybrid, but that is it too long and tries to convey too many messages in one go. The LibDems are about change, on your side and building a fairer Britain - none of them bad things may I add - but it was once said that any good slogan or policy should fit on a bumper sticker, but this one would require a very wide car indeed!
In many ways, it tries to be all things to all people, and thus typical of the way the LibDems have been for many years.
In many ways, it tries to be all things to all people, and thus typical of the way the LibDems have been for many years.
Guardian / Independent Sales Down Again
The latest figures show that the sales of The Guardian have slipped again to their lowest in 16 years - see here for more. The Independent has crashed again too. I have two friends, one of whom was a very loyal Guardian reader and the other an occassional Independent reader, both of whom have stopped reading in the last few weeks. They haven't switched papers but have stopped reading and turned to online news and blogs. Both have done it when the rags switched to default election mode of Tory-bashing instead.
I think that backing Labour at this election might not be commerically viable.
I think that backing Labour at this election might not be commerically viable.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Unitary Riddle II
Apparently we shouldn't judge Norwich City Council in its current form (because it isn't very good) on its suitability to be a unitary authority because the unitary would be a new council.
Except that we should judge Norfolk County Council in its current form and its current policies as a reason for unitary (i.e. the current administration at County Hall is doing things City Hall doesn't like) rather than examining the relationship between two tiers of government.
Unitary riddle or Labour hypocrisy?
Except that we should judge Norfolk County Council in its current form and its current policies as a reason for unitary (i.e. the current administration at County Hall is doing things City Hall doesn't like) rather than examining the relationship between two tiers of government.
Unitary riddle or Labour hypocrisy?
Unitary Riddle
One of the big arguments in favour of Unitary is that it is wrong for representatives from areas miles away to vote on issues which impact on your area. So, for example, a Councillor from far-a-way Sprowston shouldn't vote on the closure (or not) of Westlegate.
Yet last night, in the House of Commons, Labour MPs were bussed in on a three-line whip to defeat a Tory motion about the shambles of the Norwich Unitary proposals and so MPs from areas miles away were voting on issues which impact on us here in Norwich. So, for example, Labour MPs from Glasgow, Liverpool and London were voting on Norwich Unitary.
Spot the contradiction?
Shouldn't Labour have left this vote only to MPs whose areas are affected - those in Suffolk, Devon & Norfolk? Oh, no ... that would have meant they would have lost the vote wouldn't it? After all, MPs from Norwich North, South Norfolk, North Norfolk, South West Norfolk, North West Norfolk & Mid Norfolk all opposed the Unitary with only 2 MPs (Norwich South and Yarmouth) voting in favour.
Unitary riddle or Labour hypocrisy?
Yet last night, in the House of Commons, Labour MPs were bussed in on a three-line whip to defeat a Tory motion about the shambles of the Norwich Unitary proposals and so MPs from areas miles away were voting on issues which impact on us here in Norwich. So, for example, Labour MPs from Glasgow, Liverpool and London were voting on Norwich Unitary.
Spot the contradiction?
Shouldn't Labour have left this vote only to MPs whose areas are affected - those in Suffolk, Devon & Norfolk? Oh, no ... that would have meant they would have lost the vote wouldn't it? After all, MPs from Norwich North, South Norfolk, North Norfolk, South West Norfolk, North West Norfolk & Mid Norfolk all opposed the Unitary with only 2 MPs (Norwich South and Yarmouth) voting in favour.
Unitary riddle or Labour hypocrisy?
Saturday, March 06, 2010
Mr & Mrs
So the Mail on Sunday have published a frontpage story claiming that Samantha Cameron once voted Labour; I suppose we all do silly things sometimes, but on this occassion she didn't - according to CCHQ, Mrs Cameron not only voted Conservative in 1997 but took 5 weeks off work to campaign for her husband in Stafford.
However, even if she did, should we expect political spouses to vote the same way as their partners? After all, I assume that Mr and Mrs Bercow vote different ways (him being the former right wing MP turned Speaker, her being the Labour local government candidate).
However, even if she did, should we expect political spouses to vote the same way as their partners? After all, I assume that Mr and Mrs Bercow vote different ways (him being the former right wing MP turned Speaker, her being the Labour local government candidate).
Tuesday, March 02, 2010
Restoring my faith in human behaviour
Sometimes it feels as if we live in a very sanitised world where interaction between humans is limited by the rules of engagement; a fera of crime, of strangers, of adults even. However something today has shown me a glimmer of hope.
Walking to City Hall, I got "acosted" by a student, dancing in front of me and signing "hiiiiii Sir" in an irritating voice (a working hazard of being a teacher, but a delighful ritual if you like that sort of thing). I smiled at the dear little one, chuckled a little and moved on (thinking - ha ha, you have a science exam tomorrow and I don't!). As I moved away, he yelled "is that your wife" at the complete stranger walking next to me.
"I'm not that lucky," was my reply - and then far from being embarrassed or offended, the lady grabbed my arm and said to me, "go on, let him believe it!". As we walked towards City Hall she and I spoke about the positive attitude that many young people have and why witty banter and joking in public were important traits.
To whomever you are, thank you for making me realise the old adage is still true, "a strange is just a friend you haven't met yet."
Walking to City Hall, I got "acosted" by a student, dancing in front of me and signing "hiiiiii Sir" in an irritating voice (a working hazard of being a teacher, but a delighful ritual if you like that sort of thing). I smiled at the dear little one, chuckled a little and moved on (thinking - ha ha, you have a science exam tomorrow and I don't!). As I moved away, he yelled "is that your wife" at the complete stranger walking next to me.
"I'm not that lucky," was my reply - and then far from being embarrassed or offended, the lady grabbed my arm and said to me, "go on, let him believe it!". As we walked towards City Hall she and I spoke about the positive attitude that many young people have and why witty banter and joking in public were important traits.
To whomever you are, thank you for making me realise the old adage is still true, "a strange is just a friend you haven't met yet."
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Darling & The Bully
Aside from being away when this story broke I haven't really spoken about the Prime Ministerial bullying row because I am not sure if the truth is really ever going to be known and this could decend into allegation, discrediting blows and coutner-allegations. The PM says he didn't do it, Darling says someone else did it, Mandelson blames the Tories and an aide says he did do it afterall. It's probably too late for my two-pennies about this but I would say two things about what has come out of it.
Firstly I don't believe this is what is moving the polls, if indeed they are being moved. We've spent day-after-day on the doorstep afetr this came out and nobody has mentioned it to me at all; the expenses row still comes up more than the bullying one. My experience on the doorsteps - and yesterday I spent the whole day talking to hundreds of people in Earlham - is that Labour are still seriously in trouble. I haven't felt the poll movement shift here in Norwich at all.
And the second is a theme which has been picked up by today's PB thread - the future of Darling himself. Darling has proved to be unsackable, both last year when Balls wanted his job and now when he has slagged off his boss in public. His words will chime with both the Labour Party and the public. If, after Gordon has gone, the Labour party may well seek an experienced head rather than youth and dynamism. If they do, the conventional wisdom is that Straw is the man, but I think darling may well have staked his claim this week.
Firstly I don't believe this is what is moving the polls, if indeed they are being moved. We've spent day-after-day on the doorstep afetr this came out and nobody has mentioned it to me at all; the expenses row still comes up more than the bullying one. My experience on the doorsteps - and yesterday I spent the whole day talking to hundreds of people in Earlham - is that Labour are still seriously in trouble. I haven't felt the poll movement shift here in Norwich at all.
And the second is a theme which has been picked up by today's PB thread - the future of Darling himself. Darling has proved to be unsackable, both last year when Balls wanted his job and now when he has slagged off his boss in public. His words will chime with both the Labour Party and the public. If, after Gordon has gone, the Labour party may well seek an experienced head rather than youth and dynamism. If they do, the conventional wisdom is that Straw is the man, but I think darling may well have staked his claim this week.
Only One Line
And so my dramatic performance in the production of "The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe" is over ... and all I can say it - "it looks so familiar!".
It was really good to see the behind the scenes stuff and a congratulations to the whole cast, production team and backroom boys and girls who put on such a show. Absolutely brilliant!
It was really good to see the behind the scenes stuff and a congratulations to the whole cast, production team and backroom boys and girls who put on such a show. Absolutely brilliant!
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Back The Evening News "End The Indignity" Campaign
Today the Evening News has launched its "End the Indignity" campaign. The cases of our some of our most vulnerable people being given medical treatment in what amounts to little better than a cupboard has shocked a large number of people. The management of the N&N need to suspend this practice immediately and have a full review determining how this came about. They dignity of these patients is worth more than the bureuacracy of the NHS.
The Evening News is showing why we need a strong, vibrant, independent press who can rally local people behind important cases such as this. They deserve all our support.
You can read more about the campaign here.
The Evening News is showing why we need a strong, vibrant, independent press who can rally local people behind important cases such as this. They deserve all our support.
You can read more about the campaign here.
Adam Roche MYP
Big congrats to Adam Roche for beating off the hot political competition and becoming the new Member of the Youth Parliament for Norwich South; a great achievement. He will get to do some amazing things - not least speak and debate in the House of Commons - and it will no doubt be a fantastic experience. Well Done, Adam.
Blogger set for council bid?
Rumours are that Nich Starling - he of NorfolkBlogger fame - is set to contest the Taverham North by-election set to be held on 18th March. Nich is a former Councillor from North Norfolk and seemed to enjoy being free of council responsibilities and now, if true, he is set for a rollercoaster of elections with this election leading into the next General Election. Strangely I haven't heard about a Conservative candidate yet, but it seems the Greens are putting up - nothing from Labour.
The result last time (taking top results) was Conservatives 497, Lib Dems 344 & Independent 295.
The result last time (taking top results) was Conservatives 497, Lib Dems 344 & Independent 295.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Discussing community cohesion in Norfolk
Tonight I was pleased to be on a panel discussion the issues of race, community cohesion, immigration and minority rights at a public meeting in Norwich. Also on the panel was a Labour MP, LibDem MP, a Community Activist and a Green Councillor.
What amazed me is the amount of agreement there was on the key issues of diversity in Norfolk and especially the role of the police. We also discussed educational attainment and how to get minority groups involved in politics. There was a great appreciation of the work that David Cameron has done in broadening the appeal of the Conservatives too.
There were some dividing lines - over the issue of targets for ethnic minority recruitment (I was the dissenting voice arguing that targets create tokenism) and also about the wearing of burkhas and hijab in which Charles Clarke was strongly taken to town for his views that some circumstances - like the court and the classroom - were not suitable places for people to hide their faces. There was a great feeling he has misjudged why people wear these; not to hide at all but as a sign of their beliefs.
It was fun and lively, so thanks to the Runnymede Trust for organising it. The audience was heavily political - 3 LibDem City Councillors, the Leader of Broadland Council, a couple of Tory activists, 2 Green City Councillors, some Tory County Councillors amongst the guests. Why not come along and compare the candidates next time - and make the audience "more diverse" between politicians and the public!
What amazed me is the amount of agreement there was on the key issues of diversity in Norfolk and especially the role of the police. We also discussed educational attainment and how to get minority groups involved in politics. There was a great appreciation of the work that David Cameron has done in broadening the appeal of the Conservatives too.
There were some dividing lines - over the issue of targets for ethnic minority recruitment (I was the dissenting voice arguing that targets create tokenism) and also about the wearing of burkhas and hijab in which Charles Clarke was strongly taken to town for his views that some circumstances - like the court and the classroom - were not suitable places for people to hide their faces. There was a great feeling he has misjudged why people wear these; not to hide at all but as a sign of their beliefs.
It was fun and lively, so thanks to the Runnymede Trust for organising it. The audience was heavily political - 3 LibDem City Councillors, the Leader of Broadland Council, a couple of Tory activists, 2 Green City Councillors, some Tory County Councillors amongst the guests. Why not come along and compare the candidates next time - and make the audience "more diverse" between politicians and the public!
Unitary: How do Labour (and the LibDems) expect to get away with this?
Typical Labour Government - they can't even announce a decision without making a ham fist of it. Let me tell you the story of Unitary.
As regular readers will no doubt remember the story goes something like this.
Norwich Labour decide they want Unitary because they thought that those horrible Tories (you know, the ones who run the excellent four-star County Council) ignored Norwich and their out-of-touch cabinet members who know little about the City (you know, the ones who represent faraway places like Cringleford or live in Eaton) shouldn't be allowed to spread practice (you know, the acclaimed service provision) to Norwich (you know, the council with the zero-star Housing Department). So they applied for unitary status.
Unfortunately the then-Labour Secretary of State said that the plans were unaffordable, so they put in 2 bids (against the rules at the time I think) which contained plans for a small unitary based on existing boundaries and an enlarged unitary based upon taking in surrounding villages. Labour Ministers never killed this off...
Then people in South Norfolk and Broadland went bananas at the thought of this and protested against the plans. Still the then-Labour Secretary of State thought it was a bad idea.
Then the County Council launched their own bid for one large Unitary based upon the whole of Norfolk, which upset an awful lot of people including the district councils.
So given the County bid met the 5 criteria set down by the government but the City bid didn't, the then-Labour Secretary of State sent the decision off to the Independent Boundary Commission for a decision. Still Labour Ministers didn't kill this off...
The Independent Boundary Commission worked very hard and fought off various legal challenges and the whole thing dragged on-and-on whilst taxpayers continued to foot the bills.
Then the Independent Boundary Commission stunned everyone by saying only the Norfolk Unitary met all the criteria and that the Norwich bid was risky, unaffordable, poor value for money and the government should avoid it at all costs.
So the decision goes off to the Labour Secretary of State for a decision. Should he go with the County Unitary, scrap the whole thing (despite telling everyone status quo wasn't an option all along) or do something else?
You got it - do something else.
So a written statement was sent out and the Secretary of State avoided questions in the Commons because his decision was to implement the original City Council bid (you know, the one which the Independent Boundary Commission warned against as did two former Labour Secretaries of State).
And now - thanks to the Guardian for the story - it turns out the Civil Servants are so worried about the decision backfiring that they asked the Secretary of State to "order" them to do this and thus clearing them of responsibility.
And how does the Secretary of State justify this? By changing the goal posts and applying some very muddled thinking to this. So still Labour don't kill it ...
If you think I'm being partisan about this, think again - this decision sees me unable to stand for council and will have to give up my seat and does nothing to help the Tory position (an extended boundary unitary would have, for example). The position I have taken has always been in the best interest of the City (and taxpayers) of Norwich
If you think I'm being flippant, you're right, I am. Only because like a lot of people I want this whole thing sorted one way or another. And given the potential hold ups in the Commons and the Lords, and the Conservative pledge to overturn this in office, could the whole game be for nothing? This has dragged on too long and cost too much - for all councils and all council tax payers.
Unitary has been cursed since the day that Labour, and their LibDem / Green poodle allies, popped corks on the steps of City Hall. So where has this announcement leave us? Not much further forward I'd say; still in the air.
UPDATE: LibDems are pretty much at war over this now - Norman Lamb was uncompromising in his attack on the plans in the EDP today and tonight Brian Watkins, City LibDem Leader, told me he still passionately backed the bid. Words from LibDem circles is that of daggers drawn.
As regular readers will no doubt remember the story goes something like this.
Norwich Labour decide they want Unitary because they thought that those horrible Tories (you know, the ones who run the excellent four-star County Council) ignored Norwich and their out-of-touch cabinet members who know little about the City (you know, the ones who represent faraway places like Cringleford or live in Eaton) shouldn't be allowed to spread practice (you know, the acclaimed service provision) to Norwich (you know, the council with the zero-star Housing Department). So they applied for unitary status.
Unfortunately the then-Labour Secretary of State said that the plans were unaffordable, so they put in 2 bids (against the rules at the time I think) which contained plans for a small unitary based on existing boundaries and an enlarged unitary based upon taking in surrounding villages. Labour Ministers never killed this off...
Then people in South Norfolk and Broadland went bananas at the thought of this and protested against the plans. Still the then-Labour Secretary of State thought it was a bad idea.
Then the County Council launched their own bid for one large Unitary based upon the whole of Norfolk, which upset an awful lot of people including the district councils.
So given the County bid met the 5 criteria set down by the government but the City bid didn't, the then-Labour Secretary of State sent the decision off to the Independent Boundary Commission for a decision. Still Labour Ministers didn't kill this off...
The Independent Boundary Commission worked very hard and fought off various legal challenges and the whole thing dragged on-and-on whilst taxpayers continued to foot the bills.
Then the Independent Boundary Commission stunned everyone by saying only the Norfolk Unitary met all the criteria and that the Norwich bid was risky, unaffordable, poor value for money and the government should avoid it at all costs.
So the decision goes off to the Labour Secretary of State for a decision. Should he go with the County Unitary, scrap the whole thing (despite telling everyone status quo wasn't an option all along) or do something else?
You got it - do something else.
So a written statement was sent out and the Secretary of State avoided questions in the Commons because his decision was to implement the original City Council bid (you know, the one which the Independent Boundary Commission warned against as did two former Labour Secretaries of State).
And now - thanks to the Guardian for the story - it turns out the Civil Servants are so worried about the decision backfiring that they asked the Secretary of State to "order" them to do this and thus clearing them of responsibility.
And how does the Secretary of State justify this? By changing the goal posts and applying some very muddled thinking to this. So still Labour don't kill it ...
If you think I'm being partisan about this, think again - this decision sees me unable to stand for council and will have to give up my seat and does nothing to help the Tory position (an extended boundary unitary would have, for example). The position I have taken has always been in the best interest of the City (and taxpayers) of Norwich
If you think I'm being flippant, you're right, I am. Only because like a lot of people I want this whole thing sorted one way or another. And given the potential hold ups in the Commons and the Lords, and the Conservative pledge to overturn this in office, could the whole game be for nothing? This has dragged on too long and cost too much - for all councils and all council tax payers.
Unitary has been cursed since the day that Labour, and their LibDem / Green poodle allies, popped corks on the steps of City Hall. So where has this announcement leave us? Not much further forward I'd say; still in the air.
UPDATE: LibDems are pretty much at war over this now - Norman Lamb was uncompromising in his attack on the plans in the EDP today and tonight Brian Watkins, City LibDem Leader, told me he still passionately backed the bid. Words from LibDem circles is that of daggers drawn.
Friday, February 05, 2010
A Rebel With A Cause
I wonder what Esther Rantzen is up to these days? The celeb-turned-expenses-buster was due to stand as an MP against Margaret Moran in Luton, but since Ms Moran decided to cheat the electorate of their right to boot her out by standing down, a lot of people wonder what the point of Rantzen's candidature is. Maybe she won't end up standing at all, but one thing she has done is make it more likely that MPs from all parties can be effectively challenged even if they have the support of their local parties and in safe seats.
Take this example. The ultra-safe Labour seat of Liverpool Wavertree has selected the 28 year-old best friend of Euan Blair and girlfriend of junior minister Sion Simon to be their candidate - one Luciana Berger. Miss Berger though, as you may know, isn't from the area and seems to know little about it. In fact she even seems to not wish to learn.
But this being Liverpool Wavertree the local population have a dilema; this is rock-solid Labour territory. No other party can touch the majority built up by Jane Kennedy. So step forward Ricky Tomlinson, the TV star and Socialist Party member. Tomlinson is outraged at the outsider trying to be elected in his home seat. Tomlinson seems genuinely furious, enough to quit acting, take a pay cut and be the local candidate that people want. Tomlinson's fame and media pull could make this into another Tatton-style contest. He may not win but he could very well give Miss Berger a fright.
Is this a good thing? Are celebs and their like any better as politicans, can they enliven the political debate or restore faith in democracy? Who knows, but its gonna be fun finding out!
Take this example. The ultra-safe Labour seat of Liverpool Wavertree has selected the 28 year-old best friend of Euan Blair and girlfriend of junior minister Sion Simon to be their candidate - one Luciana Berger. Miss Berger though, as you may know, isn't from the area and seems to know little about it. In fact she even seems to not wish to learn.
But this being Liverpool Wavertree the local population have a dilema; this is rock-solid Labour territory. No other party can touch the majority built up by Jane Kennedy. So step forward Ricky Tomlinson, the TV star and Socialist Party member. Tomlinson is outraged at the outsider trying to be elected in his home seat. Tomlinson seems genuinely furious, enough to quit acting, take a pay cut and be the local candidate that people want. Tomlinson's fame and media pull could make this into another Tatton-style contest. He may not win but he could very well give Miss Berger a fright.
Is this a good thing? Are celebs and their like any better as politicans, can they enliven the political debate or restore faith in democracy? Who knows, but its gonna be fun finding out!
Brown the Father
Just when you thought you knew somebody. I know a lot of people believe it to be a cynical stunt, and others pointing out that he said he would never put his children in the spotlight, but I thought that Prime Minister Gordon Brown's interview today (click here) was a beautiful tribute to his daughter who died just ten days old.
Mr Brown doesn't do emotion very well in public but his words will chime with every parent in the country. His words about Sarah were fitting and there is no doubt about the way that Brown, clearly a proud Dad, felt about Jennifer and the impact she made on his life.
He spoke about how he dwells about what Jennifer would be doing had she still been here - going to school, learning to read or being a teenager - and which of us would not be doing the same, almost on a day-to-day basis?
Both the Prime Minister and David Cameron know the pain of losing a child; an unusual bond for two men in their positions.
His interview has really made me see Gordon Brown in a new light today; a surprising light - Brown the Father.
Mr Brown doesn't do emotion very well in public but his words will chime with every parent in the country. His words about Sarah were fitting and there is no doubt about the way that Brown, clearly a proud Dad, felt about Jennifer and the impact she made on his life.
He spoke about how he dwells about what Jennifer would be doing had she still been here - going to school, learning to read or being a teenager - and which of us would not be doing the same, almost on a day-to-day basis?
Both the Prime Minister and David Cameron know the pain of losing a child; an unusual bond for two men in their positions.
His interview has really made me see Gordon Brown in a new light today; a surprising light - Brown the Father.
Tuesday, February 02, 2010
Political Betting vs. The Independent
I urge you to read this demolishion of the Independent's headline story today by PB.com, which goes to prove why it is the leading political website. Excellent article and, of course, spot-on. It's just a good job so few people read the Indy. I used to be a daily reader of the paper but things like this remind me why I quit it last year. I did phone up the Indy to tell them why I was ceasing my subscription and they really didn't care one way or the other - amassing losses clearly mean nothing to them.
Monday, February 01, 2010
New Local News Website
I am pleased to link to a new website that covers the news in Norwich South - www.southnorwichnews.co.uk - so please take a look.
You'd expect me to say this, but I particularly liked this extract from their article about the battle for the parliamentary seat:
if the by-election is anything to go by, this could be the year for the 30 year old high school teacher
You'd expect me to say this, but I particularly liked this extract from their article about the battle for the parliamentary seat:
if the by-election is anything to go by, this could be the year for the 30 year old high school teacher
The Only LibDem In Broadland?
I wouldn't want to be savaged for failing to mention the selection of Dan Roper as the new LibDem candidate in the "key seat" of Broadland for the next election, so I thought I'd blog something to make him feel important. As it happens I like Dan, who frequently comments on this blog, and I am sure he will put up a good fight.
However this effort from his website did make me laugh - even for the LibDems this is a bit of spin too far!
"It had been rumoured that the national party would "parachute" a big name into this key seat. However it soon became clear that Mr Roper had such overwhelming support from the local party that he was selected unopposed."
Are they honestly expecting us to believe that hundreds of LibDem hopefuls wanted to be selected for this top target marginal seat and were put off because the entire membership rallied around Dan? Surely there was ONE LibDem, somewhere, who would have made a contest of this?
Ridiculous - they know what we all know which is that the LibDems stand no chance whatsoever here. As good a candidate as I am sure Dan Roper is, the fact is that nobody else wanted to put their time and effort into this one. The lack of LibDem effort speaks volumes about their hopes here.
Come on, Dan, you're a decent guy so lose the spin and fight a positive campaign. This sort of stuff makes us laugh but the public must despair with statement like that; it's almost like you're taking them for fools. Either that, or you are desperate to convince yourself that you stand a chance ... which is it?
However this effort from his website did make me laugh - even for the LibDems this is a bit of spin too far!
"It had been rumoured that the national party would "parachute" a big name into this key seat. However it soon became clear that Mr Roper had such overwhelming support from the local party that he was selected unopposed."
Are they honestly expecting us to believe that hundreds of LibDem hopefuls wanted to be selected for this top target marginal seat and were put off because the entire membership rallied around Dan? Surely there was ONE LibDem, somewhere, who would have made a contest of this?
Ridiculous - they know what we all know which is that the LibDems stand no chance whatsoever here. As good a candidate as I am sure Dan Roper is, the fact is that nobody else wanted to put their time and effort into this one. The lack of LibDem effort speaks volumes about their hopes here.
Come on, Dan, you're a decent guy so lose the spin and fight a positive campaign. This sort of stuff makes us laugh but the public must despair with statement like that; it's almost like you're taking them for fools. Either that, or you are desperate to convince yourself that you stand a chance ... which is it?
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Cracks in St. Andrew's Car Parks
The news that cracks have started to appeal in St. Andrew's Car Park is very worrying indeed, especially as this is a much trumpeted effort which has won awards in the past. I hope that the council are swift in their report on this because the public will naturally be concerned. I have submitted an emergency question to Council on Tuesday but am yet to hear if it has been accepted. In the meantime you can read more here.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Clarke votes for longer holidays
Charles Clarke must now justify why, yesterday, he voted for an extended 12 day holiday for MPs in February instead of the usual 7. Conservative MPs opposed the move which was only supported by Labour MPs.
MPs have ridiculously long holidays and to extend them is a slap in the face for British people who pay their wages. This government has a long list of problems to tackle, mostly of their making, such as reducing the deficit, tackling anti-social behaviour and improving the NHS. Surely this must keep them busy at Westminster?
But no, Charles Clarke and his Labour friends vote for more holiday instead of tackling our problems.
David Cameron has set out that the Conservatives will, in necessary, work through the summer holidays after being elected to get a grip on the problems created by Labour.
Mr Clarke's move is cynical - if Labour doesn't have anything to do, maybe they ought to get round to calling a General Election?
MPs have ridiculously long holidays and to extend them is a slap in the face for British people who pay their wages. This government has a long list of problems to tackle, mostly of their making, such as reducing the deficit, tackling anti-social behaviour and improving the NHS. Surely this must keep them busy at Westminster?
But no, Charles Clarke and his Labour friends vote for more holiday instead of tackling our problems.
David Cameron has set out that the Conservatives will, in necessary, work through the summer holidays after being elected to get a grip on the problems created by Labour.
Mr Clarke's move is cynical - if Labour doesn't have anything to do, maybe they ought to get round to calling a General Election?
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Second LibDem PPC quits
Following hot on the heels of Newcastle LibDem PPC Greg Stone, who quit because of rude remarks he made about female MPs using a false name on a website, now the LibDems have lost their PPC for Stoke, David Jack, after he apparently sent racist emails.
The one thing you can say is that Mr Jack realised his error and quit immediately rather than hanging on and fighting his difficult corner. People's trust in politics is bigger than any candidate's career.
UPDATE: Iain Dale blogs that this is not representative of the whole party but of the actions - which he denies, may I add - of an individual. I totally agree, after other candidates who have quit from other parties, I think we all accept that Stone and Jack say as much about the LibDems as a "bad apple" candidate says about the Tories or Labour. I do wish politicans and bloggers from all sides saw it like that.
The one thing you can say is that Mr Jack realised his error and quit immediately rather than hanging on and fighting his difficult corner. People's trust in politics is bigger than any candidate's career.
UPDATE: Iain Dale blogs that this is not representative of the whole party but of the actions - which he denies, may I add - of an individual. I totally agree, after other candidates who have quit from other parties, I think we all accept that Stone and Jack say as much about the LibDems as a "bad apple" candidate says about the Tories or Labour. I do wish politicans and bloggers from all sides saw it like that.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Cameron's Right On Teachers
There isn't a single parent or pupil reading this that doesn't rate the quality of teaching as one of the single most important factors in the quality of our education system; in fact, most might rate it as the most important factor. An inspirational teacher makes the world of difference.
David Cameron today launched the Conservatives Draft Education Manifesto and the central plank of this excellent document is just that - quality teaching.
The most important part of this is the acceptance that we need to get rid of poor performing staff. The quality of teacher training, but also the support provided in school, is vital here - but at the end of the day, the teaching profession is still a vocation but a tough one at that. Some people will not cope with life in the classroom, like others do not cope with the court room, mechanics garage or press room. So the Conservatives will tackle poor teaching with more speed - good idea, after all those children do not get that time back, their education moves on. Nobody ever says to a kid, "OK, to be honest that teacher wasn't very good, so do you fancy doing year 8 again with a better one?".
Now, if we are going to do more to get rid of bad teachers we have to do more to replace them with good ones; exceptional, "elitist" you might say. I would, however, say that Mr Cameron and Shadow Schools Secretary Michael Gove are only part of the way to explaining how we do this.
We do want only those with high quality qualifications to be teachers; but we need to understand what is stopping them from applying at the moment. This is not meant to be an exhuastive list, nor is it based on anything other than my thoughts, but we need to be ready to tackle:
1. Poor behaviour and the lack of methods to tackle this
2. The culture of targets and inspections
3. False alegations and the impact of them
4. Lack of support from some parents
5. Constant government reform
6. Wages & Conditions
I am sure in time these will, one by one, be addressed fully.
However to be frank this is the best and most important education documents in a very long time and it deserves to be welcomed; it certainly was from people of all politics in my staffroom.
UPDATE: I understand Labour have slammed the proposals and the Unions have gone mad because they say sacking bad teachers may lead to a temporary rise in class sizes whilst the new teachers are trained up. I would urge Labour and the Unions to try that arguement with parents on the doorsteps or in the playground - the parents I know, including myself, would rather have a great teacher with more kids than a bad one with fewer.
UPDATE 2: Speaking to a friend who is "in" teacher training he has said that this could be done with no impact on class sizes at all - good to hear - as long as the incentives to teach are right and the Teach Now programme is implemeted properly. Great to see the party really thinking this stuff through - excellent eye on detail of policy.
David Cameron today launched the Conservatives Draft Education Manifesto and the central plank of this excellent document is just that - quality teaching.
The most important part of this is the acceptance that we need to get rid of poor performing staff. The quality of teacher training, but also the support provided in school, is vital here - but at the end of the day, the teaching profession is still a vocation but a tough one at that. Some people will not cope with life in the classroom, like others do not cope with the court room, mechanics garage or press room. So the Conservatives will tackle poor teaching with more speed - good idea, after all those children do not get that time back, their education moves on. Nobody ever says to a kid, "OK, to be honest that teacher wasn't very good, so do you fancy doing year 8 again with a better one?".
Now, if we are going to do more to get rid of bad teachers we have to do more to replace them with good ones; exceptional, "elitist" you might say. I would, however, say that Mr Cameron and Shadow Schools Secretary Michael Gove are only part of the way to explaining how we do this.
We do want only those with high quality qualifications to be teachers; but we need to understand what is stopping them from applying at the moment. This is not meant to be an exhuastive list, nor is it based on anything other than my thoughts, but we need to be ready to tackle:
1. Poor behaviour and the lack of methods to tackle this
2. The culture of targets and inspections
3. False alegations and the impact of them
4. Lack of support from some parents
5. Constant government reform
6. Wages & Conditions
I am sure in time these will, one by one, be addressed fully.
However to be frank this is the best and most important education documents in a very long time and it deserves to be welcomed; it certainly was from people of all politics in my staffroom.
UPDATE: I understand Labour have slammed the proposals and the Unions have gone mad because they say sacking bad teachers may lead to a temporary rise in class sizes whilst the new teachers are trained up. I would urge Labour and the Unions to try that arguement with parents on the doorsteps or in the playground - the parents I know, including myself, would rather have a great teacher with more kids than a bad one with fewer.
UPDATE 2: Speaking to a friend who is "in" teacher training he has said that this could be done with no impact on class sizes at all - good to hear - as long as the incentives to teach are right and the Teach Now programme is implemeted properly. Great to see the party really thinking this stuff through - excellent eye on detail of policy.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Clegg's Haiti Moment
Nick Clegg is a careerist politican, we shouldn't forget that, but somebody ought to be briefing him on events and how to behave in the outside world. Mr Clegg, whom we should not forget cannot tell you how much the basic state pension is but can remember his exact number of lovers, has done it again - pushing the case for donating to the DEC on behalf of the victims of the terrible Haiti earthquake but then being forced to reveal he hadn't done it himself! (More here). Some are even saying that Clegg is getting better on policy but worse on being in touch with real-life; his decision to quit shopping at Waitrose because of the recession, a classic.
The question for me, though, is do we have a right to know if politicans donate to charities and, if so, which ones? Generally "no", but we do expect our politicans to practice what they preach.
p.s. I have donated; not directly the DEC website but to "bucket shakers" in the street whom must have mobilised very fast and give up their time to back this excellent cause.
The question for me, though, is do we have a right to know if politicans donate to charities and, if so, which ones? Generally "no", but we do expect our politicans to practice what they preach.
p.s. I have donated; not directly the DEC website but to "bucket shakers" in the street whom must have mobilised very fast and give up their time to back this excellent cause.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Greens are petty and shortsighted when they reject jobs for the City
The decision of Green Councillor to work en bloc to reject a planning application for the car park of the disused Romany Pub on Colman Road for a new shop is nothing short of disgraceful and shows the party up for the shortsighted bunch they are.
Forget the jobs created through construction, forget the jobs created when the store opens, forget the virtual lack of local opposition and forget the need to clean up this site.
Don't worry about the fact we're in a recession and ought to be doing all we can to back business.
The Green Party rejected this proposal just in case Tesco are planning to buy the site after planning permission is granted. I am told that Tesco's have no idea about the site, haven't made any approaches and don't have plans for a store in the area.
So why have the Greens done this? Because their shortsighted attitude is going to drag this City down. I am furious with their petty actions; I hope all those in the area who are unfortunate enough to not have employment and may have applied for these jobs note who has denied them this opportunity.
Forget the jobs created through construction, forget the jobs created when the store opens, forget the virtual lack of local opposition and forget the need to clean up this site.
Don't worry about the fact we're in a recession and ought to be doing all we can to back business.
The Green Party rejected this proposal just in case Tesco are planning to buy the site after planning permission is granted. I am told that Tesco's have no idea about the site, haven't made any approaches and don't have plans for a store in the area.
So why have the Greens done this? Because their shortsighted attitude is going to drag this City down. I am furious with their petty actions; I hope all those in the area who are unfortunate enough to not have employment and may have applied for these jobs note who has denied them this opportunity.
At Last - CCTV in the Castle Gardens
A big word of congratulations to my Bowthorpe Conservative colleague, Cllr. Niki George, who has won his long campaign to get CCTV installed into the Castle Gardens to tackle anti-social behaviour (click here for more).
Cllr George has really pushed this inssue, including multiple questions to council; the re-buffs he got from Labour on the issue made him more determined to do this.
This kind of news shows why grassroots democracy is so important; it can pay off if you have the determination. Well Done Niki.
Cllr George has really pushed this inssue, including multiple questions to council; the re-buffs he got from Labour on the issue made him more determined to do this.
This kind of news shows why grassroots democracy is so important; it can pay off if you have the determination. Well Done Niki.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Winning the e-war in Norwich South
This excellent website seems to have taken a lot of time and trouble to review the online presence of all selected candidates in constituencies around Norfolk. He includes some very detailed feedback, including on websites, blogs, social networking and how they all link together. It is very thorough and Chris Bardell really does seem to have made something very up-to-date and useable here.
In an article in which the LibDems are described as just "adequate" and Charles Clarke is "uninspiring", it is good to see the efforts made by the Conservatives in the City coming out on top. We have put a lot of effort into our online campaign and it really does pay off - our doorstepping tells us this too. The Tory effort in Norwich South beats all of the other parties.
There are convincing wins for Brandon Lewis in Yarmouth and also Chloe Smith in Norwich North in their seats.
I am really convinced this is going to be an internet election and we are well ahead of the curve - with more to come still. I take on board what Chris says about the use of the facebook group - although my own page and the campaigners page does make up for some of this - so we clearly have more to do to improve further. Let's go for it!
In an article in which the LibDems are described as just "adequate" and Charles Clarke is "uninspiring", it is good to see the efforts made by the Conservatives in the City coming out on top. We have put a lot of effort into our online campaign and it really does pay off - our doorstepping tells us this too. The Tory effort in Norwich South beats all of the other parties.
There are convincing wins for Brandon Lewis in Yarmouth and also Chloe Smith in Norwich North in their seats.
I am really convinced this is going to be an internet election and we are well ahead of the curve - with more to come still. I take on board what Chris says about the use of the facebook group - although my own page and the campaigners page does make up for some of this - so we clearly have more to do to improve further. Let's go for it!
Monday, January 11, 2010
Brown's Critics Go Wobbly
According to the BBC, the meeting of the PLP went by without note and the rebels stayed silent. I warned they wouldn't have the nouse to go through with the task of removing Mr Brown. Labour MPs have chosen their captain to go down with the ship.
However, what I thought was interesting was the degree to which Brown now relies not just on his cabinet as a whole but a few figures within it.
Note during today's photocall with the Prime Minister launching a stratgey to give out free laptops and internet access to low income families, there lurking in the background was ... Lord Mandelson and Ed Balls. The 2 men currently keeping Brown where he is.
Oh, and during all of this tonight's polls show significant Tory leads. Thank God Labour MPs don't wonder why!
However, what I thought was interesting was the degree to which Brown now relies not just on his cabinet as a whole but a few figures within it.
Note during today's photocall with the Prime Minister launching a stratgey to give out free laptops and internet access to low income families, there lurking in the background was ... Lord Mandelson and Ed Balls. The 2 men currently keeping Brown where he is.
Oh, and during all of this tonight's polls show significant Tory leads. Thank God Labour MPs don't wonder why!
Is our media really this predictable?
This excellent blogpost (click here) by Glasgow Labour MP Tom Harris is well worth a few moments of your time ... I hope our media isn't this obvious, but I think it probably is!
Saturday, January 09, 2010
In defence of the Headteacher
The decision to close schools isn’t an easy one, and Headteachers seem to take the rap no matter what they do. If you close, the commeteriate launch at you on BBC News24, and if you don’t then parents will queue up to attack you if things go wrong for their children. Snow Days are a no-win for any head. But this year, with prolonged bad weather, it seems that much of society is taking it out on schools, and if doing this will make the weather better!
Now Tory blogger Iain Dale has waded in and asked why if some schools can open, others cannot. It’s dangerous to disagree with Iain, but I’m afraid he is totally wrong about this.
In direct answer to his question, some schools open and some close because they are all different depending on size, location of pupils, location of teaching staff, structure of the site and support of grounds staff. But I don’t think Iain understands the ways that schools work and blaming the legal side of things is only half the problem.
Schools are not businesses – you cannot operate on a skeleton staff and everything begins and ends with the bell, not when the boss chooses it.
Some teachers will find it harder to get into school. I work 15 minutes walk away from my school, but my colleagues come in from Diss, Thetford, Lowestoft and – sometimes worse in terms of travel – small Norfolk villages. If you are late, who registers your class? Or teaches period one until you arrive? Let’s double up classes I hear you cry! Great plan – so how many rooms can cope with 60+ kids at a time? In my school we have around 6 rooms that could cope with those numbers. If you cannot make it in at all you have 5 periods of cover to arrange. Every class needs a teacher in front of it and I bet you nobody could find a supply teacher for love nor money in the last week. So the moment 6 staff are away the school is in trouble, even for the biggest High School you only need to be missing double figures are pupils will either be unsupervised or badly supervised.
So let’s assume we have all the staff in school that day. What about the pupils? If you work in a small village school – as my wife does – the majority of pupils are probably walked in by their parents. But larger primaries (like my daughter's) and all High Schools (like mine) take their pupils from a large catchment area. To give Iain some idea, my school has pupils from Yarmouth, Diss, Cromer and Swaffham. You don’t get much more travel than that. So the kids struggle in, the snow falls and come 3.30pm they can’t get home again. Trust me, on Wednesday as the snow started to fall parents were turning up to collect pupils and others were requesting they leave school early. A few years back I can remember standing on the playground at gone 5pm still waiting for parents to collect all because we opened in the snow. No teacher pushes the kids out of the door at 3.30pm and doesn’t care what happens to them then. A 2-3hr bus journey home is unacceptable for 11 year olds.
So now let’s assume we get all the teachers in, plus the kids and that they can get home okay. What kind of learning do you think is going on? A simple rule of teaching is that it is impossible to get anything done when it is snowing outside. On Wednesday my double History lesson 9.05-10.30 was going great guns; the snow started and the kids ground to a halt. Even closing the blinds didn’t work! What should we do with them? Teach or babysit?
So now let’s assume we get all the teachers in, plus the kids and that they can get home okay, and that they are learning ok. What about the times when they go outside? We can’t trap 1400 High School kids inside during break and lunch; the playgrounds are almost un-patrolable. This is your chance, as a pupil, to pelt your least favourite teacher with snow – dangerously and yes, it can hurt – and get away with it because the chance of seeing who threw a snowball at the back of your head is nil. No wonder extra staff don’t want to go outside when some petty adolescents want to get their revenge on you with no chance of being sanctioned. I have know circumstances where teachers have been hurt (snow, ice, stones inside them etc) and yet nothing can be done to redress this.
So now let’s assume we get all the teachers in, plus the kids and that they can get home okay, and that they are learning ok and that teachers are willing to do duty. Now what about the school site? My school is based around several buildings and the pupils have to move between sites. Our site team are excellent and are out from 5.30 and yet you still cannot guarantee that things are safe. Yes, I’ve known pupils falling and the parental complaints that follow. Yes, I’ve known teachers falling and all of the fall out that follows. There have been legal issues, of course, but what about the genuine health & safety issue here?
And finally there is the argument that snow falling is one of the events that kids always remember, and the chance to tabogan or sledge is one of life’s great moments. Let’s give it to them.
Iain, it isn’t as easy to say “open” or “close”; it is a myriad of factors. Every school, every Head and every teacher is aware of the knock-on impact we have. It is the toughest decision anyone can make at 6am to decide to open or close.
This is an issue nobody will ever get right all of the time, but we have to trust the professionalism of our Headteachers rather than carping on when things don’t go the way we want them. Schools are odd because although nearly all of us have been through them, very few really understand how they work. Or to put in another way,
For every parents who complains that a school is shut, there is one who is concerned that their kids are not properly supervised on a site still covered in ice.
Now Tory blogger Iain Dale has waded in and asked why if some schools can open, others cannot. It’s dangerous to disagree with Iain, but I’m afraid he is totally wrong about this.
In direct answer to his question, some schools open and some close because they are all different depending on size, location of pupils, location of teaching staff, structure of the site and support of grounds staff. But I don’t think Iain understands the ways that schools work and blaming the legal side of things is only half the problem.
Schools are not businesses – you cannot operate on a skeleton staff and everything begins and ends with the bell, not when the boss chooses it.
Some teachers will find it harder to get into school. I work 15 minutes walk away from my school, but my colleagues come in from Diss, Thetford, Lowestoft and – sometimes worse in terms of travel – small Norfolk villages. If you are late, who registers your class? Or teaches period one until you arrive? Let’s double up classes I hear you cry! Great plan – so how many rooms can cope with 60+ kids at a time? In my school we have around 6 rooms that could cope with those numbers. If you cannot make it in at all you have 5 periods of cover to arrange. Every class needs a teacher in front of it and I bet you nobody could find a supply teacher for love nor money in the last week. So the moment 6 staff are away the school is in trouble, even for the biggest High School you only need to be missing double figures are pupils will either be unsupervised or badly supervised.
So let’s assume we have all the staff in school that day. What about the pupils? If you work in a small village school – as my wife does – the majority of pupils are probably walked in by their parents. But larger primaries (like my daughter's) and all High Schools (like mine) take their pupils from a large catchment area. To give Iain some idea, my school has pupils from Yarmouth, Diss, Cromer and Swaffham. You don’t get much more travel than that. So the kids struggle in, the snow falls and come 3.30pm they can’t get home again. Trust me, on Wednesday as the snow started to fall parents were turning up to collect pupils and others were requesting they leave school early. A few years back I can remember standing on the playground at gone 5pm still waiting for parents to collect all because we opened in the snow. No teacher pushes the kids out of the door at 3.30pm and doesn’t care what happens to them then. A 2-3hr bus journey home is unacceptable for 11 year olds.
So now let’s assume we get all the teachers in, plus the kids and that they can get home okay. What kind of learning do you think is going on? A simple rule of teaching is that it is impossible to get anything done when it is snowing outside. On Wednesday my double History lesson 9.05-10.30 was going great guns; the snow started and the kids ground to a halt. Even closing the blinds didn’t work! What should we do with them? Teach or babysit?
So now let’s assume we get all the teachers in, plus the kids and that they can get home okay, and that they are learning ok. What about the times when they go outside? We can’t trap 1400 High School kids inside during break and lunch; the playgrounds are almost un-patrolable. This is your chance, as a pupil, to pelt your least favourite teacher with snow – dangerously and yes, it can hurt – and get away with it because the chance of seeing who threw a snowball at the back of your head is nil. No wonder extra staff don’t want to go outside when some petty adolescents want to get their revenge on you with no chance of being sanctioned. I have know circumstances where teachers have been hurt (snow, ice, stones inside them etc) and yet nothing can be done to redress this.
So now let’s assume we get all the teachers in, plus the kids and that they can get home okay, and that they are learning ok and that teachers are willing to do duty. Now what about the school site? My school is based around several buildings and the pupils have to move between sites. Our site team are excellent and are out from 5.30 and yet you still cannot guarantee that things are safe. Yes, I’ve known pupils falling and the parental complaints that follow. Yes, I’ve known teachers falling and all of the fall out that follows. There have been legal issues, of course, but what about the genuine health & safety issue here?
And finally there is the argument that snow falling is one of the events that kids always remember, and the chance to tabogan or sledge is one of life’s great moments. Let’s give it to them.
Iain, it isn’t as easy to say “open” or “close”; it is a myriad of factors. Every school, every Head and every teacher is aware of the knock-on impact we have. It is the toughest decision anyone can make at 6am to decide to open or close.
This is an issue nobody will ever get right all of the time, but we have to trust the professionalism of our Headteachers rather than carping on when things don’t go the way we want them. Schools are odd because although nearly all of us have been through them, very few really understand how they work. Or to put in another way,
For every parents who complains that a school is shut, there is one who is concerned that their kids are not properly supervised on a site still covered in ice.
Friday, January 08, 2010
The BBC vs. Reality
When he's not talking about politics, Norfolk Blogger tends to be spot on. In this post, he highlights the massive difference between online weather forecasts from the Met / BBC. He's totally correct too; not only are there massive differences between different companies but areas only miles apart have totally different weather forecasts.
So today I am conducting my experiemet of comparing the BBC forecast to what is actually happening outside of the window in the City Centre.
The BBC said 9am would be "sunny". My window said it was "snow blizzard".
Not a good start. More later.
UPDATE: BBC says snow by midday; my window says clear with some sunshine.
So today I am conducting my experiemet of comparing the BBC forecast to what is actually happening outside of the window in the City Centre.
The BBC said 9am would be "sunny". My window said it was "snow blizzard".
Not a good start. More later.
UPDATE: BBC says snow by midday; my window says clear with some sunshine.
Thursday, January 07, 2010
All the news thats fit to print
Apparently the third biggest political story in the UK today, and worthy of tweets from C4, is that a Tory advisor, who has no public recognition at all, got an £80 fine for getting abusive over not having a train ticket ... in 2008 (click here).
Aside from the fact that this is ridiculous to even make the headlines, and before LibDems everywhere start leaping up and down, haven't we seen this before (click here) ... only with somebody far more senior and in a far worse position?
Things like this make me despair of the British media.
Aside from the fact that this is ridiculous to even make the headlines, and before LibDems everywhere start leaping up and down, haven't we seen this before (click here) ... only with somebody far more senior and in a far worse position?
Things like this make me despair of the British media.
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Don't get excited
The Hoon-Hewitt plot (backed by Norwich MP Clarke) has set Wesminster alight in the snow today. And yet from the excitement of lunchtime it has all fizzled out. Why? Because Labour MPs are spineless and unable to act in the way that the Tories did in 2003 or the LibDems in 2007. Most of their MPs would rather go down to defeat with Brown and have a post-election bloodbath than do so now in the hope of producing a leader who may just save them a few extra seats. OK, that's fine by me and probably fine by Cameron too.
So let's not get too excited; it'll all come to nothing, as usual from Labour.
So let's not get too excited; it'll all come to nothing, as usual from Labour.
Sunday, January 03, 2010
Does Brown believe this stuff?
So, Gordon Brown tells Andrew Marr: "Everything I have ever won in my life I have had to fight for."
You can understand the political line of attack behind this; portray Gordon Brown as the great battler in life, compared to David Cameron who has had everything presented to him on a silver platter. In the Downing Street bunker that line made total sense I'm sure.
The trouble is: it doesn't work.
It doesn't work because the class warfare stuff is failing badly.
It doesn't work because Cameron is open about his background and his rebuttle about the importance of family and education is good.
And it doesn't work because it isn't true.
Gordon Brown was selected for a safe Scottish Labour seat and even now will not struggle to get re-elected come the next election. He didn't have to fight for the Labour leadership in 2007 either, prefering a cornonation to an election. In fact, in many ways the opposite it true. Brown shows every signs of hating battles, even choosing to put off an election when he may have won it.
I am not saying he hasn't has problems in his life (his eye sight, for example, and the loss of his daughter) but to portary Brown as one of life's great battlers just isn't true.
If he said this line for political advantage he takes the British people for fools; we can see through it.
If he said this line and believed it, well, that's much more serious ...
You can understand the political line of attack behind this; portray Gordon Brown as the great battler in life, compared to David Cameron who has had everything presented to him on a silver platter. In the Downing Street bunker that line made total sense I'm sure.
The trouble is: it doesn't work.
It doesn't work because the class warfare stuff is failing badly.
It doesn't work because Cameron is open about his background and his rebuttle about the importance of family and education is good.
And it doesn't work because it isn't true.
Gordon Brown was selected for a safe Scottish Labour seat and even now will not struggle to get re-elected come the next election. He didn't have to fight for the Labour leadership in 2007 either, prefering a cornonation to an election. In fact, in many ways the opposite it true. Brown shows every signs of hating battles, even choosing to put off an election when he may have won it.
I am not saying he hasn't has problems in his life (his eye sight, for example, and the loss of his daughter) but to portary Brown as one of life's great battlers just isn't true.
If he said this line for political advantage he takes the British people for fools; we can see through it.
If he said this line and believed it, well, that's much more serious ...
Thursday, December 31, 2009
10 for 10: Predictions for the New Year
Happy New Year to everyone and I hope the next year brings about much joy and success. As is the want of bloggers, my 10 predictions for the first year of the new decade:
1. Norwich City will be promoted to the Championship, and it will be through one of the automatic places
2. David Cameron will be Prime Minister with an overall Conservative majority and will do so with a swing and a parliamentary result that defies all predictions and re-ignites the debate over voting reform. His new cabinet will look strikingly like his Shadow Cabinet; Gove, Fox, Lansley, Osbourne, Grayling and Hague will all keep their positions in government. The bigger shake-up will be at the middle and junior ranks. Chloe Smith will become a government minister.
3. Gordon Brown will not be Leader of the Opposition come next New Years Eve; he will quit in the hours that follow the General Election and in the next few weeks he will also stand down as an MP prompting the first by-election of the new parliament. David Milliband, Alan Johnson and Harriet Harman will be the candidates for the new Leader; Cruddas will be out of parliament and Jack Straw will not win enough support. Harman will win.
4. Nick Clegg will, despite a poor overall result (the LibDems will lose seats), cling on as LibDem Leader pointing to some spectacular gains from Labour as his defining moment. Their gains will not include any in Norfolk or Suffolk.
5. The overwhelming majority of newspaper websites will be "pay-to-view" by the end of the year.
6. The Queen will still be monarch with no signs of being otherwise, but Prince Charles will prompt a political controversy with the new government.
7. Local Government Reorganisation in Norfolk will come to nothing, but nobody will take any political responsibility despite the massive cost involved.
8. Diplomas will stay despite the new government's radical education policy.
9. Matt Smith will prove a more popular Doctor Who than David Tennant, to the surprise of pretty much everybody.
10. The new MP for Norwich South will be ...
1. Norwich City will be promoted to the Championship, and it will be through one of the automatic places
2. David Cameron will be Prime Minister with an overall Conservative majority and will do so with a swing and a parliamentary result that defies all predictions and re-ignites the debate over voting reform. His new cabinet will look strikingly like his Shadow Cabinet; Gove, Fox, Lansley, Osbourne, Grayling and Hague will all keep their positions in government. The bigger shake-up will be at the middle and junior ranks. Chloe Smith will become a government minister.
3. Gordon Brown will not be Leader of the Opposition come next New Years Eve; he will quit in the hours that follow the General Election and in the next few weeks he will also stand down as an MP prompting the first by-election of the new parliament. David Milliband, Alan Johnson and Harriet Harman will be the candidates for the new Leader; Cruddas will be out of parliament and Jack Straw will not win enough support. Harman will win.
4. Nick Clegg will, despite a poor overall result (the LibDems will lose seats), cling on as LibDem Leader pointing to some spectacular gains from Labour as his defining moment. Their gains will not include any in Norfolk or Suffolk.
5. The overwhelming majority of newspaper websites will be "pay-to-view" by the end of the year.
6. The Queen will still be monarch with no signs of being otherwise, but Prince Charles will prompt a political controversy with the new government.
7. Local Government Reorganisation in Norfolk will come to nothing, but nobody will take any political responsibility despite the massive cost involved.
8. Diplomas will stay despite the new government's radical education policy.
9. Matt Smith will prove a more popular Doctor Who than David Tennant, to the surprise of pretty much everybody.
10. The new MP for Norwich South will be ...
Monday, December 21, 2009
Last Christmas
As this is likely to be my only spare time for a good few months yet, I am spending it excusively with my family and so blogging / twittering / Facebook will be non-existent; except if there is a political crisis or amusing story involving a celebrity and a farm animal.
So I'd like to wish everyone a very Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year. 2010, eh? Scary!
p.s. As one Christmas card said today, "this could be our last under Labour" - I don't think so, it'll just be our last under Labour for a very, very, very long time ...
Ho ho ho
So I'd like to wish everyone a very Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year. 2010, eh? Scary!
p.s. As one Christmas card said today, "this could be our last under Labour" - I don't think so, it'll just be our last under Labour for a very, very, very long time ...
Ho ho ho
Sunday, December 20, 2009
MORI humiliate pretty much everyone
Overnight political hacks have been having much fun (best summarised here) about a new MORI poll which was claimed to have a narrow Tory lead of 3%, which would fall within the margin of error and could have meant that Brown was level pegging with Cameron, but ended up being a whopping 17% Conservative lead.
The joke was, of course, on everyone - Tories who were scared that the rumours were true were buzzily doing some "expectation managing" and critiquing the work of MORI (regular readers will testify that I hold MORI in no regard at all when it coming to polling; I don't care for the 17 point lead in the same way I didn't care for the 6 point one) and Labour were spinning this was the fightback and that Gordon could still win.
Then the real result was announced and some Tories were left to delcare that MORI was, in fact, spot on and Labour were attacking the MORI methodology.
This has led, rightly, to some saying that the political commentararti ought to wait for results before speculating and looking fools.
In the last few weeks things have gone well for Labour in the narrtive if not the events; Brown has done well-ish at PMQs, the polls were narrowing and the Tories seemed to be underpressure on a number of fronts. Locally here in Norwich the activists were getting bullish, their MPs had a spring in their steps. Good news gave them hope; optimism.
And now? Things have pretty much fallen apart again - the polls are pretty much back to where they were, Cameron is back on the policy frontfoot and the government continues to stumble from disaster to disaster. And Labour MPs? Once again the storm clouds gather over their heads.
The joke was, of course, on everyone - Tories who were scared that the rumours were true were buzzily doing some "expectation managing" and critiquing the work of MORI (regular readers will testify that I hold MORI in no regard at all when it coming to polling; I don't care for the 17 point lead in the same way I didn't care for the 6 point one) and Labour were spinning this was the fightback and that Gordon could still win.
Then the real result was announced and some Tories were left to delcare that MORI was, in fact, spot on and Labour were attacking the MORI methodology.
This has led, rightly, to some saying that the political commentararti ought to wait for results before speculating and looking fools.
In the last few weeks things have gone well for Labour in the narrtive if not the events; Brown has done well-ish at PMQs, the polls were narrowing and the Tories seemed to be underpressure on a number of fronts. Locally here in Norwich the activists were getting bullish, their MPs had a spring in their steps. Good news gave them hope; optimism.
And now? Things have pretty much fallen apart again - the polls are pretty much back to where they were, Cameron is back on the policy frontfoot and the government continues to stumble from disaster to disaster. And Labour MPs? Once again the storm clouds gather over their heads.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Labour in Bowthorpe
The Bowthorpe page on the Labour Website says everything about their ideas for - and chances in - the community.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Hewett Fingerprint Scheme Is Good For Security
The decision by the Hewett Nursery to install fingerprint technology to aid security is very welcome indeed, and parents have backed the move in this story in the EEN. As one of my kids attends the nursery I knew about this a while ago and think it to be a thoroughly good thing.
One person did comment to me that the best security is human-to-human contact; a key worker who knows the child and their carers and uses their professional sense. I wouldn't disagree but this technology just adds that extra bit of security and should be seen as a complement to security arragements rather than replacing the old ones.
I was also told that these ideas "de-humanise" schools and turnback the open culture of schools and nurseries. I can see the arguement there, but if you are a regular at the school then they will hold your fingerprint and you are only one click away.
Either way I think this is the way that schools and nurseries will go; for the security of my daughter I think its a good thing but I don't know how far security will have to go in the future.
One person did comment to me that the best security is human-to-human contact; a key worker who knows the child and their carers and uses their professional sense. I wouldn't disagree but this technology just adds that extra bit of security and should be seen as a complement to security arragements rather than replacing the old ones.
I was also told that these ideas "de-humanise" schools and turnback the open culture of schools and nurseries. I can see the arguement there, but if you are a regular at the school then they will hold your fingerprint and you are only one click away.
Either way I think this is the way that schools and nurseries will go; for the security of my daughter I think its a good thing but I don't know how far security will have to go in the future.
Evening News Website Layout Leaves Something To Be Desired
I am not taking anything away from the seriousness of this story in the EEN about pornography on school computers but somebody should really have thought about the layout and choice of picture on the website.
Didn't anybody think the choice of splash headline "Norfolk Schools Computer Porn Shock" next to a large picture of LibDem Councillor Mervyn Scutter could lead some people to making the wrong conclusion?
Cllr Scutter is, of course, outraged at the discovery that some porn sites are missed by the Net Nanny - but you'd only find that out by clicking on the story and reading it.
It reminds me of a headline in the Uxbridge Gazette, way back, which was "Strip Club Outrage" alongside pictures of the local MP and Council Leader ...
Didn't anybody think the choice of splash headline "Norfolk Schools Computer Porn Shock" next to a large picture of LibDem Councillor Mervyn Scutter could lead some people to making the wrong conclusion?
Cllr Scutter is, of course, outraged at the discovery that some porn sites are missed by the Net Nanny - but you'd only find that out by clicking on the story and reading it.
It reminds me of a headline in the Uxbridge Gazette, way back, which was "Strip Club Outrage" alongside pictures of the local MP and Council Leader ...
Wednesday, December 09, 2009
The Pre-Election Report
Today's efforts from the Chancellor have left me both baffled and poorer.
Aside from the politics of keeping putting off the "tough choices" until you assume somebody else will be in power to deal with them (I'd assumed that Darling had been doing this for years), I cannot work out what this has done or what it is for.
It wasn't a blueprint for economic recovery nor a plan for jobs and growth. It raised taxes (later) but only uses this money to pay for extra spending rather than paying down our debt.
No vision; no hope. So it's interesting to see who Labour chose to hit. In one of George Osbourne's best speeches, he pointed out that anybody with aspirations, those who wanted to buy their home, those who wish to save for pensions won't find any comfort from Labour.
I have finally agreed with the BBC's Nick Robinson; this is the politics of 20 years ago, of big government (Labour) versus small government (Conservative) and of attacks of middle income, Middle England.
And on the issue of the election date? Will Labour really want another budget before the poll if this is the sort of news they have to deliver? Don't book any holidays for late March...
Aside from the politics of keeping putting off the "tough choices" until you assume somebody else will be in power to deal with them (I'd assumed that Darling had been doing this for years), I cannot work out what this has done or what it is for.
It wasn't a blueprint for economic recovery nor a plan for jobs and growth. It raised taxes (later) but only uses this money to pay for extra spending rather than paying down our debt.
No vision; no hope. So it's interesting to see who Labour chose to hit. In one of George Osbourne's best speeches, he pointed out that anybody with aspirations, those who wanted to buy their home, those who wish to save for pensions won't find any comfort from Labour.
I have finally agreed with the BBC's Nick Robinson; this is the politics of 20 years ago, of big government (Labour) versus small government (Conservative) and of attacks of middle income, Middle England.
And on the issue of the election date? Will Labour really want another budget before the poll if this is the sort of news they have to deliver? Don't book any holidays for late March...
Greens Elect New Leader
After Adrian Ramsay's resignation as City Hall's Green Leader, the party has now elected Cllr. Claire Stephenson as Leader and Cllr. Samir Jeraj as her Deputy. There has been a small re-shuffle of frontbench positions too. I hope Cllr. Stephenson uses this as a chance to return to the days when the Leader of the Opposition is also the Chair of Scutiny. My big wish for the Stephenson Leadership is that she starts to flesh out what a Green-led Council would look like; the Greens have a habit of abstaining a lot and failing to produce their own budgets etc.
Friday, December 04, 2009
CO2; Good Start But More To Do
According to a report by the BBC, Norwich South is ranked 450th out of 646 Westminster constituency for its CO2 emmissions (where the 1st constituency has the most CO2 emmissions), above Norwich North (365th) but below Great Yarmouth (530th).
As the worlds delegates meet in Copenhagen, this report on the BBC reminds us all about the importance of taking action as individuals at grassroots levels. This report shows us that Norwich South is doing better than most areas but has much work to do in terms of reducing our CO2 output.
Local people need to take action to reduce their own carbon footprint, which is why more and more people are taking the 10:10 challenge to reduce CO2 by 10% next year.
There is a temptation for some parties to use a big stick to force people to cut emmissions. I would rather see governments and councils using the carrot; such as Conservative plans to reward residents for recycling and provide funding for better insulation.
As the worlds delegates meet in Copenhagen, this report on the BBC reminds us all about the importance of taking action as individuals at grassroots levels. This report shows us that Norwich South is doing better than most areas but has much work to do in terms of reducing our CO2 output.
Local people need to take action to reduce their own carbon footprint, which is why more and more people are taking the 10:10 challenge to reduce CO2 by 10% next year.
There is a temptation for some parties to use a big stick to force people to cut emmissions. I would rather see governments and councils using the carrot; such as Conservative plans to reward residents for recycling and provide funding for better insulation.
Bullying in Schools; Why are few ever excluded?
Amazing press release of the day - Official Government figures have revealed that just ninety pupils across the country were expelled last year for school bullying, despite a new survey finding half of all 14-year-old children have been bullied.
Across Norfolk less than 5 pupils were expelled last year from state secondary schools. In over two-thirds of local authorities across England, not a single child was expelled for bullying. In Norfolk 40 pupils were suspended from state schools – meaning the disruptive students returned to the school where they caused misery for their classmates.
Since 1997, Labour Government rules have deliberately made it more difficult for schools to expel pupils, undermining the authority of head teachers and meaning bullies end up back at the same school as their victims.
Bullying makes far too many children’s lives a misery. But the Government’s own figures show that in the vast majority of cases bullies are returned to the same school as their victims after a short punishment, rather than being expelled.
The key to tackling bullying is giving Norfolk’s teachers the powers they need to crack down on bad behaviour. But under Labour, the balance of power in the classroom has shifted too far in favour of disruptive pupils.
Conservatives would give Norwich’s schools the power to take a zero tolerance approach towards serious offences such as bullying. We will give our teachers the tools they need to maintain discipline in the classroom before it spirals out of control.
Across Norfolk less than 5 pupils were expelled last year from state secondary schools. In over two-thirds of local authorities across England, not a single child was expelled for bullying. In Norfolk 40 pupils were suspended from state schools – meaning the disruptive students returned to the school where they caused misery for their classmates.
Since 1997, Labour Government rules have deliberately made it more difficult for schools to expel pupils, undermining the authority of head teachers and meaning bullies end up back at the same school as their victims.
Bullying makes far too many children’s lives a misery. But the Government’s own figures show that in the vast majority of cases bullies are returned to the same school as their victims after a short punishment, rather than being expelled.
The key to tackling bullying is giving Norfolk’s teachers the powers they need to crack down on bad behaviour. But under Labour, the balance of power in the classroom has shifted too far in favour of disruptive pupils.
Conservatives would give Norwich’s schools the power to take a zero tolerance approach towards serious offences such as bullying. We will give our teachers the tools they need to maintain discipline in the classroom before it spirals out of control.
Tuesday, December 01, 2009
How about these 2 for good luck?
At a fundraising event we held tonight I met 2 people who claimed to be the luckiest Tories around; everytime they move to a constituency it is won by the Conservatives from Labour.
The pair moved back from abroad into West Norfolk in 2000 - just months before Henry Bellingham re-captured the seat for Hague's Tories from Labour.
They then moved to Norwich North in 2008 - just months before Chloe Smith siezed the seat from Labour in a dramatic by-election gain.
They have then come to Norwich South in 2009 - ...
The pair moved back from abroad into West Norfolk in 2000 - just months before Henry Bellingham re-captured the seat for Hague's Tories from Labour.
They then moved to Norwich North in 2008 - just months before Chloe Smith siezed the seat from Labour in a dramatic by-election gain.
They have then come to Norwich South in 2009 - ...
Monday, November 30, 2009
Who is reading this blog?
Apart from you, right now, obviously.
I have just got to grips with the data provided by my Stat Counter and it is very interesting; although the sort of stuff that I shouldn't look at too much for fear of becoming obsessed.
Wading through everything, it turns out that I am getting visitors from the House of Commons, European Parliament, CCHQ, UEA and - biggest group - Norwich City Council!! Maybe they are keeping an eye on me!
I have just got to grips with the data provided by my Stat Counter and it is very interesting; although the sort of stuff that I shouldn't look at too much for fear of becoming obsessed.
Wading through everything, it turns out that I am getting visitors from the House of Commons, European Parliament, CCHQ, UEA and - biggest group - Norwich City Council!! Maybe they are keeping an eye on me!
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Labour's Ipswich Choice for Norwich Seat
If Labour shot themselves in the foot by ousting Ian Gibson, then smacked themselves over the head with a mallet with their amateruish by-election campaign, they have done some almost medically impossible with the choice of John Cook (click here for more) as their General Election candidate.
Proving that all parties have issues with selections, Cllr Cook is an Ipswich Borough Councillor who lives and works miles away and whose association with Norwich is a decade old. Now rather than being able to take the fight to MP Chloe Smith, I understand Cllr Cook has already run his campaign into a brick wall as questions about his living and political arrangements surface.
Does Cllr Cook plan to move to Norwich, in his own property, and if so ... when?
If he doesn't, this must surely show that he doesn't believe he can win and won't commit to the City.
Does Cllr Cook plan to move his family with him when he does this to make Norwich his full time home?
Again if he doesn't and simple lodges or stays with somebody then how can he really claims to stand up for local people without understanding our City or its services?
Does Cllr Cook intend to stand down from his Ipswich seat now so he can focus on the campaign ahead in Norwich?
If he doesn't then questions may be asked about how he can represent one area miles away from campaigning in another. Will Cllr Cook continue to claim allowances in Ipswich whilst seeking to be elected in Norwich?
I am not saying Cllr Cook is a bad candidate but he certainly isn't a clear clean choice. Labour will have to spend the first few weeks of this campaign sorting out those issue during which time Miss Smith (not only to let the moss grow) will be consolidating her by-election lead.
Proving that all parties have issues with selections, Cllr Cook is an Ipswich Borough Councillor who lives and works miles away and whose association with Norwich is a decade old. Now rather than being able to take the fight to MP Chloe Smith, I understand Cllr Cook has already run his campaign into a brick wall as questions about his living and political arrangements surface.
Does Cllr Cook plan to move to Norwich, in his own property, and if so ... when?
If he doesn't, this must surely show that he doesn't believe he can win and won't commit to the City.
Does Cllr Cook plan to move his family with him when he does this to make Norwich his full time home?
Again if he doesn't and simple lodges or stays with somebody then how can he really claims to stand up for local people without understanding our City or its services?
Does Cllr Cook intend to stand down from his Ipswich seat now so he can focus on the campaign ahead in Norwich?
If he doesn't then questions may be asked about how he can represent one area miles away from campaigning in another. Will Cllr Cook continue to claim allowances in Ipswich whilst seeking to be elected in Norwich?
I am not saying Cllr Cook is a bad candidate but he certainly isn't a clear clean choice. Labour will have to spend the first few weeks of this campaign sorting out those issue during which time Miss Smith (not only to let the moss grow) will be consolidating her by-election lead.
What do we think young voters care about ... and what do they really care about?
I don't usually reproduce other posts in full but this one from the Speccie about a BBC Politics Show poll is well worth reading:
The Politics Show conducted a fascinating poll into the concerns of voters aged under 20. The Recession Generation are primarily concerned with, well, the recession. Economic recovery, public spending and tax came top of their list of priorities, closely followed by health and education. It’s clear that younger voters have exactly the same concerns as the wider population, and encouragingly for the Tories, those polled prefer David Cameron to Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg by a clear margin of 8 percentage points. The Liberal Democrats attracted only 18% of voters, indicating quite how damaging their tuition fee u-turn has been.
Popular myth dictates that younger voters are consumed by tackling climate change. Intriguingly, climate change came towards the bottom of the list of pressing concerns. Has emerging scientific contention engendered a more general scepticism? Have economic realities created a sense of realism? Or has the relentless noise of Green campaigners initiated ‘green fatigue’? As the great Copenhagen shindig draws near, and ever more ludicrous soothsayings about the world ending next Tuesday are made, the political consensus seems out of touch.
When I did a meeting at the UEA last week I said that in my discussions with students, fees actually came a long way down their agenda behind the economy, jobs, crime and transport. Too often politicans, and the media, decided what they think young people ought to be ineterested in - often its the environment, drugs and international aid. This poll appears, and I realise its only one survey, to reject that suggestion and say that young people focus on the same things that other groups do. I must admit to being very surprised that climate change came so low amongst young people but it shows that the people set the agenda rather than politicans.
As for the voting intentions that didn't surprise me at all; most students I have met both in formal meetings and in the Square/Hive tell me they are as fed up with Labour as everyone else and will be voting Conservative to make sure we are rid of Brown and Clarke.
The Politics Show conducted a fascinating poll into the concerns of voters aged under 20. The Recession Generation are primarily concerned with, well, the recession. Economic recovery, public spending and tax came top of their list of priorities, closely followed by health and education. It’s clear that younger voters have exactly the same concerns as the wider population, and encouragingly for the Tories, those polled prefer David Cameron to Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg by a clear margin of 8 percentage points. The Liberal Democrats attracted only 18% of voters, indicating quite how damaging their tuition fee u-turn has been.
Popular myth dictates that younger voters are consumed by tackling climate change. Intriguingly, climate change came towards the bottom of the list of pressing concerns. Has emerging scientific contention engendered a more general scepticism? Have economic realities created a sense of realism? Or has the relentless noise of Green campaigners initiated ‘green fatigue’? As the great Copenhagen shindig draws near, and ever more ludicrous soothsayings about the world ending next Tuesday are made, the political consensus seems out of touch.
When I did a meeting at the UEA last week I said that in my discussions with students, fees actually came a long way down their agenda behind the economy, jobs, crime and transport. Too often politicans, and the media, decided what they think young people ought to be ineterested in - often its the environment, drugs and international aid. This poll appears, and I realise its only one survey, to reject that suggestion and say that young people focus on the same things that other groups do. I must admit to being very surprised that climate change came so low amongst young people but it shows that the people set the agenda rather than politicans.
As for the voting intentions that didn't surprise me at all; most students I have met both in formal meetings and in the Square/Hive tell me they are as fed up with Labour as everyone else and will be voting Conservative to make sure we are rid of Brown and Clarke.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Rumbling on ...
The debate over "real life experience" rumbles on. Today after work I had a very productive hour with the Sabbs at UEA discussing student issues - from housing to student finance and back to parking at the UEA. Aftewards leaving campus I met a gentleman who not only recognised me (!) but had also read the posts below. I believe more-or-less word for word here is what he had to say about it:
"I want an MP who has recently worried about bringing up kids and how to pay their mortgage. No political party is perfect, I don't agree totally with any of you, but at least we can pick the candidate who know what life is about."
To balance up the arguement, an email I ahve recieved:
"Your attack (I, by the way, deny this is an "attack") on other candidates who don't have jobs is a nonsense. The question is, will our next MP have the right instincts when it comes to voting on going to war, tackling climate change and child poverty. Political instinct is worth more than any job you might hold for the moment."
Interesting stuff. Keep it coming.
"I want an MP who has recently worried about bringing up kids and how to pay their mortgage. No political party is perfect, I don't agree totally with any of you, but at least we can pick the candidate who know what life is about."
To balance up the arguement, an email I ahve recieved:
"Your attack (I, by the way, deny this is an "attack") on other candidates who don't have jobs is a nonsense. The question is, will our next MP have the right instincts when it comes to voting on going to war, tackling climate change and child poverty. Political instinct is worth more than any job you might hold for the moment."
Interesting stuff. Keep it coming.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
PB's Super Six on Norwich South
There are very few people left who really believe that "only the LibDems can beat Labour here" (including very senior LibDems who say to me privately that they don't expect to win). I was speaking to Costessey residents in the last week who desperately wanted Labour out - surely a good target then for the Libs? No, they wanted a proper change and were voting Conservative. You can only be sure to get rid of Brown by voting Tory, they added.
And now PoliticalBetting.Com's Super Six Predictors have had their say; these are the best political tipsters on the site.
2 say it will be a Conservative gain; 1 for Labour, 1 Green and 1 LibDem.
Hardly scienfific and hardly authorative but nobody can say this is anything but a wide open race. People who say otherwise are deliberately misleading the voters.
And now PoliticalBetting.Com's Super Six Predictors have had their say; these are the best political tipsters on the site.
2 say it will be a Conservative gain; 1 for Labour, 1 Green and 1 LibDem.
Hardly scienfific and hardly authorative but nobody can say this is anything but a wide open race. People who say otherwise are deliberately misleading the voters.
What experience do Green Councillors have?
There is a very funny and mischevious letetr in today's EEN (sadly not online) which encourages Rupert Read to stand to be the new Green Leader on the basis it is only right that a philosophy lecturer can top the experience of a politics graduate who has never held a proper job (!)
That got me thinking if a party leader should have what we now fondly call "real life experience" to do the job properly. I'd like to hear what you have to say on that issue.
But a glance at the publicly available register of interests for 2009 show the following as the professions or jobs for the 13 Green Party Councillors;
Cllr Janet Bearman - no job
Cllr Tom Dylan - Employed by the Green Party
Cllr Bob Gledhill - Full Time Green Party Councillor
Cllr Adrian Holmes - Software Developer
Cllr Howard Jago - no job
Cllr Samir Jeraj - Admin support for another Green Councillor & UEA Student
Cllr Tom Llewellyn - Development Manager at Norwich Buddhist Centre
Cllr Stephen Little - Full Time Green Party Councillor (also on Norfolk County Council)
Cllr Ruth Makoff - UEA Student
That got me thinking if a party leader should have what we now fondly call "real life experience" to do the job properly. I'd like to hear what you have to say on that issue.
But a glance at the publicly available register of interests for 2009 show the following as the professions or jobs for the 13 Green Party Councillors;
Cllr Janet Bearman - no job
Cllr Tom Dylan - Employed by the Green Party
Cllr Bob Gledhill - Full Time Green Party Councillor
Cllr Adrian Holmes - Software Developer
Cllr Howard Jago - no job
Cllr Samir Jeraj - Admin support for another Green Councillor & UEA Student
Cllr Tom Llewellyn - Development Manager at Norwich Buddhist Centre
Cllr Stephen Little - Full Time Green Party Councillor (also on Norfolk County Council)
Cllr Ruth Makoff - UEA Student
Cllr Peter Offord - Tutor
Cllr Adrian Ramsay - Deputy Leader of the Green Party
Cllr Rupert Read - Lecturer at UEA
Cllr Claire Stephenson - Teacher
I wonder which of these people think has the experience to be the next leader?
Cllr Adrian Ramsay - Deputy Leader of the Green Party
Cllr Rupert Read - Lecturer at UEA
Cllr Claire Stephenson - Teacher
I wonder which of these people think has the experience to be the next leader?
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Ramsay Resigns as Green Leader
I would have thought that the resignation of Adrian Ramsay as Leader of the Greens at City Hall would have made more of a splash in the media; he has, after all, led them now for many years and has taken the Greens from a rump party to the official opposition.
Adrian has made the Greens into a very acceptable organisation; his successor would well be the type of person who undoes years of work in under a day. I understand, from somebody who knows the inside of the Greens, that the party remains very much split between 2 factions - those who wish to keep the public face of the party and those who believe the ideology is what matters. We note that Cllr Rupert Read has ruled himself out of the race - Ramsay believes the next Green Leader will also be the next Leader of Norwich City Council (I'm not convinced by this) so this could matter a great deal and could, so I'm told, lead to a swift reversal of his position. If his party pleads, will Read answer that call?
Adrian has made the Greens into a very acceptable organisation; his successor would well be the type of person who undoes years of work in under a day. I understand, from somebody who knows the inside of the Greens, that the party remains very much split between 2 factions - those who wish to keep the public face of the party and those who believe the ideology is what matters. We note that Cllr Rupert Read has ruled himself out of the race - Ramsay believes the next Green Leader will also be the next Leader of Norwich City Council (I'm not convinced by this) so this could matter a great deal and could, so I'm told, lead to a swift reversal of his position. If his party pleads, will Read answer that call?
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
My Defection to the Labour Party (by Libby, aged 2)
Do you believe in "signs" ...
Imagine being a Tory Councillor and the local PPC, when you walk into your dining room to find out that your darling, sweet, gorgeous 2 years old had gotten hold of your "lucky" Conservative rosette (the one you wore winning each of the last 5 local elections) and had coloured it in using a felt-tip pen.
Then imagine - as you react calmly and lovingly to this incident - discovering she had coloured it with a red felt-tip pen.
Top to bottom red scrawled over the blue, the logo, the lot ... it is as bad as you think.
So either a sign of my impending defection to Gordon's tribe - or I have a very naughty toddler - and I know which it is!!
Imagine being a Tory Councillor and the local PPC, when you walk into your dining room to find out that your darling, sweet, gorgeous 2 years old had gotten hold of your "lucky" Conservative rosette (the one you wore winning each of the last 5 local elections) and had coloured it in using a felt-tip pen.
Then imagine - as you react calmly and lovingly to this incident - discovering she had coloured it with a red felt-tip pen.
Top to bottom red scrawled over the blue, the logo, the lot ... it is as bad as you think.
So either a sign of my impending defection to Gordon's tribe - or I have a very naughty toddler - and I know which it is!!
"Mechanical Failure" sinks blog
Thank you to the (two) people who emailed to ask if I was still alive as I had stopped blogging. I am alive and well, which is more than could be said for my laptop which apparently had "mechnical failure" (sounds nasty). However it is now fixed and service can be resumed.
Monday, November 09, 2009
Exclusive (biscuit) poll says Gordon set for landslide
Forget the real polling, tonight I have the results of a new and exclusive poll which shows Gordon Brown set to have a landslide fourth term and the LibDems almost wiped out of the Commons.
At tonight's ND Sixth Form open evening I asked visitors to eat the biscuit which represents their favourite and which thus represents the party leader they are most aligned with.
Whilst Dave's biscuit choice has a steady trickle, Clegg's biscuits remained almost entirely in place and Gordon's flew off the plate.
If Gordon is as in touch with the country on other issue as he clearly is with biscuits, I can strongly predict a fourth Labour term and maybe even a Labour Gain in South Norfolk? Who knows...
At tonight's ND Sixth Form open evening I asked visitors to eat the biscuit which represents their favourite and which thus represents the party leader they are most aligned with.
Whilst Dave's biscuit choice has a steady trickle, Clegg's biscuits remained almost entirely in place and Gordon's flew off the plate.
If Gordon is as in touch with the country on other issue as he clearly is with biscuits, I can strongly predict a fourth Labour term and maybe even a Labour Gain in South Norfolk? Who knows...
Monday, November 02, 2009
Clarke claiming more but doing less?
The expenses row has turned the spotlight onto our MPs, how much they earn, how much they claim and what work they do. So it is only right that we look closely at what our local MPs are up to. Is Charles Clarke providing value-for-money?
According to the research done by theyworkforyou.com, Mr Clarke is yet to speak in the House of Commons during 2009 and his only parliamentary contribution was in a Westminster Hall debate about the local government (unitary) review in Norfolk. In addition, Mr Clarke has not tabled a single written question and served on just one select committee - Labour's controversial East of England Committee. Mr Clarke's voting behaviour doesn't hold out to much scrutiny either, voting just 66% of times which is below average according to "publicwhip".
And all this is at a time when Mr Clarke has held company directorships, been paid to give speeches, write articles for newspapers and go on overseas fact finding trips.
During this time Mr Clarke has claimed over £160,000 - making him one of the highest claiming MPs in the House.
I have made honesty a major part of this election. I have said I will hold no other paid job than being an MP and that I will be a value-for-money MP claiming less in expenses than Mr Clarke. What's more, I will ensure I am speaking up for the people of Norwich South in the chamber and asking key questions of Ministers.
It will seem to a lot of people that this is Mr Clarke claiming more but doing less. Maybe Mr Clarke knows his time in parliament is up, but he ought to be doing what people elected him to do and stand up for the City.
I think the answer for all this is for the Prime Minister to call a General Election and give the people of Norwich South the chance to vote for a Conservative MP who will work hard them, not a stay-away Labour MP.
Statistics detailed here: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/charles_clarke/norwich_south
According to the research done by theyworkforyou.com, Mr Clarke is yet to speak in the House of Commons during 2009 and his only parliamentary contribution was in a Westminster Hall debate about the local government (unitary) review in Norfolk. In addition, Mr Clarke has not tabled a single written question and served on just one select committee - Labour's controversial East of England Committee. Mr Clarke's voting behaviour doesn't hold out to much scrutiny either, voting just 66% of times which is below average according to "publicwhip".
And all this is at a time when Mr Clarke has held company directorships, been paid to give speeches, write articles for newspapers and go on overseas fact finding trips.
During this time Mr Clarke has claimed over £160,000 - making him one of the highest claiming MPs in the House.
I have made honesty a major part of this election. I have said I will hold no other paid job than being an MP and that I will be a value-for-money MP claiming less in expenses than Mr Clarke. What's more, I will ensure I am speaking up for the people of Norwich South in the chamber and asking key questions of Ministers.
It will seem to a lot of people that this is Mr Clarke claiming more but doing less. Maybe Mr Clarke knows his time in parliament is up, but he ought to be doing what people elected him to do and stand up for the City.
I think the answer for all this is for the Prime Minister to call a General Election and give the people of Norwich South the chance to vote for a Conservative MP who will work hard them, not a stay-away Labour MP.
Statistics detailed here: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/charles_clarke/norwich_south
Friday, October 30, 2009
Show Us The Money!
Press Release; and a typical Clarke hypocrisy:-
Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for Norwich South, Cllr. Antony Little, has asked Gordon Brown to stop dragging his feet over a new law which requires the Government to tell us how much taxpayers’ money is spent in Norwich and in every other part of the country. In Parliament on 28 October, Labour MPs actually voted against a motion calling for more openness on public spending across Norwich.
The new law, called the Sustainable Communities Act 2007, was introduced by a Conservative MP and passed by Parliament with wide cross-community support from local and national organisations. It could help fix Britain’s broken politics – by giving local people the power to decide how their cash is spent in their area, and requiring a regular breakdown of spending by central government departments and quangos in new ‘Local Spending Reports’.
More and more taxpayers’ money is being spent by unelected quangos. A new report published on 26 October by the Taxpayers’ Alliance has revealed that quangos now spend an astonishing £90 billion a year – equivalent to £3,640 a year for every household across Norwich.
But Labour Ministers have been trying to water down the new law. They initially only wanted to publish spending by councils and NHS Primary Care Trusts – facts already in the public domain. Further information will only be “developed over time”.
Norwich South Labour MP Charles Clarke was one of those who voted against this important transparency issue.
Conservatives are calling for greater openness and accountability, and are pledging to:
• Use the Sustainable Communities Act to publish detailed Local Spending Reports including central government and quangos, and devolve more power to local communities.
• Require Norwich City Council to publish online figures for all expenditure on goods and services over £500, as is already being piloted by Windsor and Maidenhead Council.
Councillor Antony Little said: “It’s time for the Government to show us the money – and tell Norwich residents how much of their money is actually spent in our area. Gordon Brown wants to stop local people finding out that they get a raw deal from his Government, and conceal that his unelected quangocrats spend almost £4,000 a year per household in Norwich wth little or no say for local people.
“Local communities deserve a far greater say on how their money is spent. It’s time for change, and only Conservatives will open up the books and give power back to local people.”
Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for Norwich South, Cllr. Antony Little, has asked Gordon Brown to stop dragging his feet over a new law which requires the Government to tell us how much taxpayers’ money is spent in Norwich and in every other part of the country. In Parliament on 28 October, Labour MPs actually voted against a motion calling for more openness on public spending across Norwich.
The new law, called the Sustainable Communities Act 2007, was introduced by a Conservative MP and passed by Parliament with wide cross-community support from local and national organisations. It could help fix Britain’s broken politics – by giving local people the power to decide how their cash is spent in their area, and requiring a regular breakdown of spending by central government departments and quangos in new ‘Local Spending Reports’.
More and more taxpayers’ money is being spent by unelected quangos. A new report published on 26 October by the Taxpayers’ Alliance has revealed that quangos now spend an astonishing £90 billion a year – equivalent to £3,640 a year for every household across Norwich.
But Labour Ministers have been trying to water down the new law. They initially only wanted to publish spending by councils and NHS Primary Care Trusts – facts already in the public domain. Further information will only be “developed over time”.
Norwich South Labour MP Charles Clarke was one of those who voted against this important transparency issue.
Conservatives are calling for greater openness and accountability, and are pledging to:
• Use the Sustainable Communities Act to publish detailed Local Spending Reports including central government and quangos, and devolve more power to local communities.
• Require Norwich City Council to publish online figures for all expenditure on goods and services over £500, as is already being piloted by Windsor and Maidenhead Council.
Councillor Antony Little said: “It’s time for the Government to show us the money – and tell Norwich residents how much of their money is actually spent in our area. Gordon Brown wants to stop local people finding out that they get a raw deal from his Government, and conceal that his unelected quangocrats spend almost £4,000 a year per household in Norwich wth little or no say for local people.
“Local communities deserve a far greater say on how their money is spent. It’s time for change, and only Conservatives will open up the books and give power back to local people.”
Mystery Solved!
Remember this story (click here) about me recieving what was pretty much a letter of abuse about a Tory leaflet which featured the NHS? Well, mystery solved because the original writter has responded with evidence of the leaflet enclosed - trouble is, the offending leaflet wasn't (as I suspected) a rouge Tory effort but the latest LibDem leaflet.
Glad we got that cleared up!
Glad we got that cleared up!
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Why aren't we talking about allowances?
The City Tory Group have been moving for months to get a debate on Councillors allowances and - in our view - cut them overall whilst rewarding those members who do take on extra workload. Anything which reduces the burden on taxpayers during this time of recession and cuts is vital for helping to restore public trust. I say - we are not in this for the money nor the glory (what glory?!?) so let's show this to the public.
So in the same way that I feel that Labour, the LibDems and Greens have blocked this debate at City Hall, now the Tories are doing the same at County Hall (click here for more) over the issue of allowances for Twin-hatters; those people who serve, and claim allowances, on 2 different councils. In Norwich this includes Labour's Bert Bremner and the Green Stephen Little. There are various Conservatives in the same position in the County too.
I understand the point about recieving the allowances for the work you do - double the work meaning double the allowances. In fact a LibDem Councillor wrote recently to the EDP to make this very point. However I also understand the anger that being a Councillor is the equivalent to a part-time job and that some people are building up massive allowance claims to live on because being a Councillor is their sole income. I understand some people believe that to be wrong and that Councillors need outside experience and aren't rounded people if politics is all they have. I also understand that people know that they are voting for a twin-hatter and do it with that knowledge. I also understand that having synergy between councils through twin-hatters can be a good thing. I understand that some people don't want taxpayers money to be used as an income for aspiring young politicans who just want the time to devote to a political career. It is - as you can tell - very complicated.
But the answer to these questions won't come from closing down debate. Let's talk about them, not as party animals, but as elected representatives looking to do the best for people. Shutting down debate looks shifty and as if we are happy with the status quo because some people do well out of it. And this isn't a party issue - don't believe those who tell you otherwise - because Councillors in all parties on at leats one council has voted not to talk about allowances.
The only way to address this perception and restore public trust is to have the debate; fully, honestly and in the open.
No matter which party you are in, refusing to talk about the issue won't make it go away. It just makes all politicans look that little bit more aloof than we did before.
So in the same way that I feel that Labour, the LibDems and Greens have blocked this debate at City Hall, now the Tories are doing the same at County Hall (click here for more) over the issue of allowances for Twin-hatters; those people who serve, and claim allowances, on 2 different councils. In Norwich this includes Labour's Bert Bremner and the Green Stephen Little. There are various Conservatives in the same position in the County too.
I understand the point about recieving the allowances for the work you do - double the work meaning double the allowances. In fact a LibDem Councillor wrote recently to the EDP to make this very point. However I also understand the anger that being a Councillor is the equivalent to a part-time job and that some people are building up massive allowance claims to live on because being a Councillor is their sole income. I understand some people believe that to be wrong and that Councillors need outside experience and aren't rounded people if politics is all they have. I also understand that people know that they are voting for a twin-hatter and do it with that knowledge. I also understand that having synergy between councils through twin-hatters can be a good thing. I understand that some people don't want taxpayers money to be used as an income for aspiring young politicans who just want the time to devote to a political career. It is - as you can tell - very complicated.
But the answer to these questions won't come from closing down debate. Let's talk about them, not as party animals, but as elected representatives looking to do the best for people. Shutting down debate looks shifty and as if we are happy with the status quo because some people do well out of it. And this isn't a party issue - don't believe those who tell you otherwise - because Councillors in all parties on at leats one council has voted not to talk about allowances.
The only way to address this perception and restore public trust is to have the debate; fully, honestly and in the open.
No matter which party you are in, refusing to talk about the issue won't make it go away. It just makes all politicans look that little bit more aloof than we did before.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Liz Truss & Trust?
There are 2 things I know about Liz Truss.
One is that she is the newly selected PPC for South West Norfolk, a safe Tory seat, and thus almost certainly the next MP for the constituency.
The second is that a few years back she had an affair with a then-High Flying Tory MP called Mark Field.
I know this because (a) I remember reading about it in the newspaper and (b) I googled all of the finalists for the seat when they were announced and I read about it (again).
If I knew about it ... why did the selectors and members of the South West Norfolk Conservatives not know about it? Does this really constitute a breach of trust? Was she, a highly bright and articulate young woman, really going into the selection to talk about her rather poor taste in men? Does this change the way they think she could do the job of PPC and MP?
I have the highest regard, and I really mean that, for the South West Norfolk Tories. I hope they manage to answer these questions.
One is that she is the newly selected PPC for South West Norfolk, a safe Tory seat, and thus almost certainly the next MP for the constituency.
The second is that a few years back she had an affair with a then-High Flying Tory MP called Mark Field.
I know this because (a) I remember reading about it in the newspaper and (b) I googled all of the finalists for the seat when they were announced and I read about it (again).
If I knew about it ... why did the selectors and members of the South West Norfolk Conservatives not know about it? Does this really constitute a breach of trust? Was she, a highly bright and articulate young woman, really going into the selection to talk about her rather poor taste in men? Does this change the way they think she could do the job of PPC and MP?
I have the highest regard, and I really mean that, for the South West Norfolk Tories. I hope they manage to answer these questions.
Why I oppose the challenge to the Essex & Silver Rooms
City Conservatives have today joined the growing chorus of opposition to the government's shift to personal budgets which could see valuable local services, such as the Essex and Silver Rooms, closing. I thought I would say, in more detail, why this is.
The decision to close the Essex and Silver Rooms comes as an unfortunate move for Norfolk County Council, forced in part by the Westminster government telling our local government to move to a “personal budget” model which represents a dramatic change from the former block-contracts system. Though the “personal budget” for social care offers people greater freedom, it doesn’t readily allow for day centres because they cannot guarantee the income they previously received, effectively forcing their closure.
No centre can move ahead without knowing it will be funded properly. Under “personal budgets” the centres may survive but if a number of people move their funding away from them, then they will have to shut. If these services close, where will people who depend upon that specific centre then go for care? It seems to me that this shows one of the potential weaknesses of the new system. I am strongly urging Norfolk County Council to recognise the needs for these important centres to stay open, especially given the shortage of day centre places and the waiting list to attend many of them.
So ... what now?
I will be working with my colleagues on Norwich City Council – from all parties – to see what we can do to help the campaign. I know some people believe all is lost, but I feel positive we can change this decision if we all work together. If we can prove that this is a genuine cross-party campaign with the strong backing of local people then we have a chance.
Norfolk County Council have options - for a start opposing what is being forced upon us by the national government. I hope they are in a listening mood.
The decision to close the Essex and Silver Rooms comes as an unfortunate move for Norfolk County Council, forced in part by the Westminster government telling our local government to move to a “personal budget” model which represents a dramatic change from the former block-contracts system. Though the “personal budget” for social care offers people greater freedom, it doesn’t readily allow for day centres because they cannot guarantee the income they previously received, effectively forcing their closure.
No centre can move ahead without knowing it will be funded properly. Under “personal budgets” the centres may survive but if a number of people move their funding away from them, then they will have to shut. If these services close, where will people who depend upon that specific centre then go for care? It seems to me that this shows one of the potential weaknesses of the new system. I am strongly urging Norfolk County Council to recognise the needs for these important centres to stay open, especially given the shortage of day centre places and the waiting list to attend many of them.
So ... what now?
I will be working with my colleagues on Norwich City Council – from all parties – to see what we can do to help the campaign. I know some people believe all is lost, but I feel positive we can change this decision if we all work together. If we can prove that this is a genuine cross-party campaign with the strong backing of local people then we have a chance.
Norfolk County Council have options - for a start opposing what is being forced upon us by the national government. I hope they are in a listening mood.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
BNP & QT
I could add to the mass written on the blogs about the appearance of the BNP Leader on Question Time tonight, but I don't know what I could add that hasn't been said.
So I will simply direct you to Norfolk Blogger's take on it - which puts it better than I ever could.
So I will simply direct you to Norfolk Blogger's take on it - which puts it better than I ever could.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Anyone delivering Tory leaflets without telling me?
I recieved a letter today from a constituent saying that she had read our leaflet and wanted to disagree with our policy on the NHS.
Trouble is, we haven't put out a leaflet about the NHS ... which is a bit odd.
Trouble is, we haven't put out a leaflet about the NHS ... which is a bit odd.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
The Next General Election in 30 Minutes
After a discussion about getting more people interested in the work of the council, we then had a debate which one member of the public who did turn up to watch the council meeting described as a "disgrace". It was interesting and I cannot deny I love the cut and thrust of what we do, especially when the council is being political-with-a-capital-P, but this person said the debate was "messy, generally thoughtless and the kind of thing that puts us [ the voter, I assume ] off." I think that was a bit far - after all the debate gave us a very clear insight into the next election.
The motion was one that highlighted positive statements about Sure Start from national politicans (even the Green Party) and suggested that we ought to back the service and refrain from unfair political attacks - such as those parties who might suggest another party wishes to scrap Sure Start because this worries people unncessarily. I don't think anyone expected what came next ...
Cllr Andrew Wiltshire moved a very good speech about the work that Sure Start did. I have to say that I was left bewildered by the response of Labour's Cllr Sue Sands who reeled off a list of clubs that her Sure Start ran citing this as the reason it ought to continue. Great idea; let's share good practice from around the City. Unfortunately Cllr Sands doesn't seem to appreciate the work of Health Visitors quite so much and doesn't see the next to expand their work or to have a multi-agency approach to what Sure Start does. Cllr Ramsay, Green Leader, gave a good speech in favour of the motion - then LibDem Cllr Lubbock (and quite why she was chosen to respond was beyond me) descided to take the motion apart line by line. She didn't appreciate me correcting her every error - including when she criticised the stated aim of Sure Start (as taken from their website). A bizarre moment of my life that one. Lesson 101 of the Council; Whenever you want to oppose a motion but can't work out a decent reason you always say it is "badly written". I'd say her speech was badly written alright. Council Leader Cllr Steve Morphew wanted to know what the Conservatives would change about Sure Start and it was laid out some specifics about changing the role of the Health Visitors, the link to early years education and the role/direction of local services. Not good enough for Cllr Morphew who demands to know more. He is given more. He doesn't like the response so screams that he wasn't given an answer. He was given an answer, he just didn't like it or agree with it. So Cllr Morphew has the words of David Cameron stricken from the motion; quite why is beyond me but never mind. The motion is still passed - yes, the Conservatives still voted for it - and I assume Labour will continue to frighten some very young and very vulnerable voters with this come election time.
I remember letters written by Steve Morphew to the people of Bowthorpe saying that if they didn't vote Labour they wouldn't get new windows in their council homes. They didn't vote Labour but they still got new windows. Maybe we can't believe everything our Council Leader says?
So why do I say that this is a marker for the next General Election? Labour say everything is fine, keep spending chaps and smile for the cameras; the Conservatives want to change and reform our services so they better serve out communities; the LibDems look bewildered; and the Greens had very little indeed to say about the issue.
So could I convince the member of the public of this? No, but they thought none of us came out well. They were annoyed that what should have been a fairly bland political moment was hijacked by Labour. Get used to it, there's plenty of months before the election and I suspect all issues will be subject to this kind of game playing.
Let the political debate begin (we just might want to warn the public first!)
The motion was one that highlighted positive statements about Sure Start from national politicans (even the Green Party) and suggested that we ought to back the service and refrain from unfair political attacks - such as those parties who might suggest another party wishes to scrap Sure Start because this worries people unncessarily. I don't think anyone expected what came next ...
Cllr Andrew Wiltshire moved a very good speech about the work that Sure Start did. I have to say that I was left bewildered by the response of Labour's Cllr Sue Sands who reeled off a list of clubs that her Sure Start ran citing this as the reason it ought to continue. Great idea; let's share good practice from around the City. Unfortunately Cllr Sands doesn't seem to appreciate the work of Health Visitors quite so much and doesn't see the next to expand their work or to have a multi-agency approach to what Sure Start does. Cllr Ramsay, Green Leader, gave a good speech in favour of the motion - then LibDem Cllr Lubbock (and quite why she was chosen to respond was beyond me) descided to take the motion apart line by line. She didn't appreciate me correcting her every error - including when she criticised the stated aim of Sure Start (as taken from their website). A bizarre moment of my life that one. Lesson 101 of the Council; Whenever you want to oppose a motion but can't work out a decent reason you always say it is "badly written". I'd say her speech was badly written alright. Council Leader Cllr Steve Morphew wanted to know what the Conservatives would change about Sure Start and it was laid out some specifics about changing the role of the Health Visitors, the link to early years education and the role/direction of local services. Not good enough for Cllr Morphew who demands to know more. He is given more. He doesn't like the response so screams that he wasn't given an answer. He was given an answer, he just didn't like it or agree with it. So Cllr Morphew has the words of David Cameron stricken from the motion; quite why is beyond me but never mind. The motion is still passed - yes, the Conservatives still voted for it - and I assume Labour will continue to frighten some very young and very vulnerable voters with this come election time.
I remember letters written by Steve Morphew to the people of Bowthorpe saying that if they didn't vote Labour they wouldn't get new windows in their council homes. They didn't vote Labour but they still got new windows. Maybe we can't believe everything our Council Leader says?
So why do I say that this is a marker for the next General Election? Labour say everything is fine, keep spending chaps and smile for the cameras; the Conservatives want to change and reform our services so they better serve out communities; the LibDems look bewildered; and the Greens had very little indeed to say about the issue.
So could I convince the member of the public of this? No, but they thought none of us came out well. They were annoyed that what should have been a fairly bland political moment was hijacked by Labour. Get used to it, there's plenty of months before the election and I suspect all issues will be subject to this kind of game playing.
Let the political debate begin (we just might want to warn the public first!)
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Peers shouldn't face questions in the Commons
I have been following the debate over the recent moves to have more Peers as Cabinet Ministers and how the elected House of Commons hold them accountable. Lord Adonis, the Transport Secretary, has suggested that they ought to face MPs in the chamber of the Commons (click here for more.) I would disagree.
Firstly this wouldn't be an issue if the Prime Minister hasn't taken so many Peers to be members of his cabinet. The system works best if the government of the day is drawn from the elected members (except, of course, those positions which have to sit within the Lords, such as its own Leader) because it keeps the lines of accountability and scrutiny very clear.
Constitutionalists and historians will keenly know what this country has been through to protect the integrity of the elected chamber. The privilidge of being an MP earns you certain rights and sitting in the Commons is one of those. The Monarch isn't allowed in the chamber - echoes of 1642 and all that - and has to address the joint session of both Houses from the House of Lords. And now, in disrespect to the history and traditions of the fight for parliamentary democracy in this country we are now to allow unelected Lords to address the chamber.
So, let's review - we don't allow Monarchs to do it, we don't allow foreign Heads of State to do it and we don't allow great statesmen to do it. But now we are allowing Mandelson and Adonis to do it. Doesn't seem right so far, does it?
Isn't the solution an arrangement with Westminster Hall or some other similar venue? Accountability is very important but we ought not to throw the baby out with the bath water here.
Firstly this wouldn't be an issue if the Prime Minister hasn't taken so many Peers to be members of his cabinet. The system works best if the government of the day is drawn from the elected members (except, of course, those positions which have to sit within the Lords, such as its own Leader) because it keeps the lines of accountability and scrutiny very clear.
Constitutionalists and historians will keenly know what this country has been through to protect the integrity of the elected chamber. The privilidge of being an MP earns you certain rights and sitting in the Commons is one of those. The Monarch isn't allowed in the chamber - echoes of 1642 and all that - and has to address the joint session of both Houses from the House of Lords. And now, in disrespect to the history and traditions of the fight for parliamentary democracy in this country we are now to allow unelected Lords to address the chamber.
So, let's review - we don't allow Monarchs to do it, we don't allow foreign Heads of State to do it and we don't allow great statesmen to do it. But now we are allowing Mandelson and Adonis to do it. Doesn't seem right so far, does it?
Isn't the solution an arrangement with Westminster Hall or some other similar venue? Accountability is very important but we ought not to throw the baby out with the bath water here.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Cameron's new intake
The Conservative intake of 2010 will look very different to all those that went before it, according to an article in tomorrow's Sunday Times (click here). I am profiled - as a Tory candidate who is also a state school teacher and a Union Representative - along with other PPCs who don't fit the Tory mould. The Sunday Times is the latest newspaper or political site to regard Norwich South as a winnable seat for the Conservatives. It's well worth a read.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Great day for the City
Chloe Smith is now - officially - the MP for Norwich North. ConHome has some great shots of the swearing in here. As the weeks have rolled on, some have forgotten what a great victory Norwich North was for the party generally and Chloe personally. A great day for the City!
Influential poll puts Tories ahead in Norwich South
The EDP and Evening News cover the story here, including the factually incorrect and rather grumpy protestations from my opponents. I am not taking any vote for granted at this election and we must prove that we are ready for, and responsible in the use of, power. There is still a lot of work to do, but this backs up what we are being told on the doorsteps that we are performing very strongly in the race to be our next MP.
Thursday, October 08, 2009
Oh, yes...
A LibDem friend of mine, a former activist for their party, made a point to me about Cameron's speech.
Mr Cameron didn't mention the LibDems once during the speech.
And in setting the debate at the next election between "big government" and "small government", Cameron has essentially defined it as between Labour and Conservative. No alternative.
"Oh, yes..." I replied.
Mr Cameron didn't mention the LibDems once during the speech.
And in setting the debate at the next election between "big government" and "small government", Cameron has essentially defined it as between Labour and Conservative. No alternative.
"Oh, yes..." I replied.
Ready to Lead
Cameron's speech was probably the best he has given as Party Leader; even beating his noteless triumph of 2007. It was sensible, measured, detailed and gave the best narrative of what our party stands for that I have heard. Cameron's attack on poverty; and the standing ovation it won; says a lot about the party and where we are going. The section about Sam and Ivan was heartfelt and decent - such a passage could have been tricky for a political leader, but Cameron's genuine and personal statement certainly hit home - especially for new fathers such as me. His sections on education, health and crime were pitch-perfect.
Cameron looked like a Prime Minister in waiting - this wasn't the tubthumping speech of past leaders and it wasn't designed to fire up activists. But in a funny way it did just that - by adopting a softer more serious delivery, Mr Cameron has shown us what he wants every Tory candidate, MP and canvassers to do on the doorstep.
This speech hasn't won the next election - I don't think we have done that yet - but it certainly sets out a clear path for us to follow and a great message for the doorstep.
Cameron looked like a Prime Minister in waiting - this wasn't the tubthumping speech of past leaders and it wasn't designed to fire up activists. But in a funny way it did just that - by adopting a softer more serious delivery, Mr Cameron has shown us what he wants every Tory candidate, MP and canvassers to do on the doorstep.
This speech hasn't won the next election - I don't think we have done that yet - but it certainly sets out a clear path for us to follow and a great message for the doorstep.
Wednesday, October 07, 2009
Gaffes come and Gaffes go
I have been amused by the media going bananas over the gaffe in which Tory Home Affairs Spokesman Chris Grayling got the wrong end of the stick over Gen Dannatt. It was on the same day that a certain leading BBC journo called David Cameron the "Prime Minister" and a SKY equivalent said George Osbourne was the "chancellor". These things happen, and everyone gets over them - even Political reporters!
Sunday, October 04, 2009
Cameron's Bank Balance = Brown's Health?
I have just finished watching Andrew Marr grill Tory boss David Cameron as the party conference opens in Manchester. Marr was, at times, rude and deliberately provocative. Good, I say, that's just the way it should be and people at the sharp end of politics deserve that sort of scrutiny. However, once again, Marr went off political issues - Cameron had been quizzed about Europe, tax, spending & welfare reform to this point - and out of the blue asked Cameron what his personal wealth was.
When Cameron went to give an overly detailed answer, Marr got impatient and asked for a total figure. The question is - why should people know this? Now, being a teacher and a Councillor I am used to the fact that pretty much the whole of my financial dealings are available to anybody who can use google to search for my pay scales. My financial disclosure at City Hall will confirm anything else that is left. I am personally happy for people to know about all of this - but I don't think the private financial details of politicians are necessarily fair game for the public. Why should David and Samantha Cameron's bank balance be a matter for public scrutiny?
Personally I wonder if this was Marr's attempt to balance out his asking last week if the Prime Minister was on medication? His question prompted a tidal wave of anger and the more general point of what is or is not acceptable to ask politicans (including the Prime Minister).
On the Brown issue I back Marr; if the Prime Minister is doing anything which may affect his ability to do the job then he should be open about it. Do we really think that Cameron's bank balance impacts on his ability to do the job? I am not so sure.
If this was Marr's attempt to balance the books between the parties then it was rather bizarre to say the least.
When Cameron went to give an overly detailed answer, Marr got impatient and asked for a total figure. The question is - why should people know this? Now, being a teacher and a Councillor I am used to the fact that pretty much the whole of my financial dealings are available to anybody who can use google to search for my pay scales. My financial disclosure at City Hall will confirm anything else that is left. I am personally happy for people to know about all of this - but I don't think the private financial details of politicians are necessarily fair game for the public. Why should David and Samantha Cameron's bank balance be a matter for public scrutiny?
Personally I wonder if this was Marr's attempt to balance out his asking last week if the Prime Minister was on medication? His question prompted a tidal wave of anger and the more general point of what is or is not acceptable to ask politicans (including the Prime Minister).
On the Brown issue I back Marr; if the Prime Minister is doing anything which may affect his ability to do the job then he should be open about it. Do we really think that Cameron's bank balance impacts on his ability to do the job? I am not so sure.
If this was Marr's attempt to balance the books between the parties then it was rather bizarre to say the least.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)