Planet Westminster

lab: tom harris: Seeing red

2009-01-07T10:33:45Z

STILL catching up on news stories over the Christmas period, and this one made me fume.

Now, I know I’ve been accused in the past of pandering to the whole Daily Mail/”it’s political correctness gone mad” thing, but there’s a very good reason why this kind of half-witted nonsense should be opposed.

In the 1980s, the right-wing press had a field day with the antics of left-wing councils allegedly banning the words blackboards, black coffee and ”man” in manhole covers, etc. In fact, a lot of it was made up, but the damage was done and Labour paid a heavy electoral price, particularly when our cadidates were drawn from the alleged “loony left” section of the party.

Yet today, it’s almost as if Labour (and other) councils are looking at their archived press cuttings from the ’80s and saying: “Hmm, that’s a good idea - why didn’t we think of that before?”

Take this latest nonsense about red ink: where is the empirical evidence that using a red pen on a pupil’s work will have any detrimental effect whatever on his development? Where is the research? Where are the numbers? Where are the “victims” of red ink, and do they blame their own failures in life on the colour of the pen their teachers used?

Well, if they do, they’re morons. And so are the half-wits who came up with this latest idea.

Here’s a suggestion about why some kids do better than others at school - they’re cleverer! Yes, maybe it’s nothing to do with red ink, or because their school was called a “school” and not a “place of learning”… Maybe kids who are brighter, or whose parents spend time reading to them and teaching them the value of learning and books and respect for their teachers and for authority will do better than their fellow pupils (am I allowed to say “fellow”? Is that sexist? Do I care?).

All of this obsession with “non-threatening, non-offensive” language is simply a distraction. It gives succour to the right wing and their allies in the media. But worse than that, it doesn’t matter. Teachers and (I hate this word - ) educationalists should be concentrating on teaching kids to read and write, to learn stuff instead of worrying about whether the wee souls are going to burst into tears because there’s a red instead of a green cross on their jotter.

Rant over.

con: douglas carswell: Crime mapping: information without power

2009-01-07T09:43:00Z

Over on ConHome, I've a blog about the Home Office's new crime mapping initiative.

It means that you're allowed to know how much crime there is where you live (good). But you're not allowed to do anything about it (bad).

Crime mapping is effective in the US because local people in over there also have a mechanism to hold police bosses to account. Yet our government has recently dropped the idea of directly elected police chiefs from the Policing and Criminal Justice Bill, having buckled to lobbying by powerful vested interests.

You might now be able to know how much crime there is where you live. But the same "experts" who've presided over its increase are still going to be left in charge.

con: david jones: From the front line

2009-01-07T09:07:10Z

Marks and Spencer has today issued its Christmas trading statement, showing that, in the 13 weeks to 27 December, its UK like-for-like sales fell by 7.1%. The company has announced the closure of two of its department stores and 25 Simply Food outlets. Over 1,200 employees will be made redundant. Its pension scheme will also become less generous.

Marks’s executive chairman, Sir Stuart Rose, who appeared on the Today programme this morning, said that he expected the current “challenging” economic conditions to continue for at least the next twelve months and that the cuts were necessary to maintain the strength of the business.

The chief executive of Next, Simon Wolfson, who also appeared on Today, said that the 2½ per cent cut in VAT had been a “missed opportunity”; in worrying economic times, people would feel happier if the money was put directly into their pockets. The cut was irrelevant at a time when retailers were already offering substantial discounts.

Wolfson went on to say that the big problem in the sector was the unavailability of bank credit; the banks were being asked to repay the Government at high interest rates, but were at the same time being told to lend at low rates; this was unsustainable.

Neither Rose nor Wolfson thought that the retail sector was “facing Armageddon”, but both agreed 2009 would be a tough year.

The interview was an excellent reflection of how retailers are feeling in the current economic climate; I do hope that people were listening at the Treasury and DBERR.

Posted in economy Tagged: Politics

con: john redwood: Mr Darling and the MPC need to think again

2009-01-07T07:30:03Z

When the MPC meets this week it should remember just how dependent we are on imports, and just how far sterling has dropped in the last couple of months. If we take the fifth or so of our National Output represented by imported goods, and reckon that the prices of those goods will over the next few months rise by around one quarter as the full impact of lower sterling comes through, we can see there is an inflationary factor the MPC must take into account. The MPC will douibless take into account Mr Darling’s apparent second thoughts on how long the recession will last. When the Chancellor produced his revised forecasts in the Pre Budget Statement, many of us queried his optimism that the recession would be relatively shallow and short lived, with an upturn commencing in July 2009. I read now that he thinks this may after all have been a tad optimstic. Unfortunately we are well past the point where a further cut in interest rates can miraculously turn the economy round this summer. I have set out in the FT why I advise the Monetary Policy Committee to keep interest rates where they are this week. In summary, the problem is no longer the price of credit the Bank of England is recommending, but the availability of credit. Business groups and others lining up to urge a new cut, should ask themselves is it the base rate that still causes them anguish, or the scarcity of credit, or the failure of the banks to charge them a similar rate to base rate? On reflection many business people might see it is the latter two issues that cause them most current concern. If, as many of us fear, this is not a normal cycle, the action needed relates to the health of the banks rather than the level of base rate. I set out in the article how even lower interest rates could make restoring the banks even more difficult a task. If the MPC does cut rates more, this does not mean that suddenly all lending rates will fall by the same amount as the MPC cut. It will mean the banks have to create a different structure of lending and deposit rates so they can still do some business and make some money. Far from establishing the MPC’s wisdom and authority, a further cut would be evidence that it has lost the plot. It would mean a world where base rate was less important than the market rates banks have to set. It would be a further bad blow to savers, at a time when we need more savings to correct private sector balance sheets. This crisis began when governments called time on too much private sector borrowing. It will not end through governments becoming the borrower of last resort themselves, but when banks, companies and private individuals have stronger balance sheets that can sustain new activity.

con: john redwood: Mr Obama finds a small voice

2009-01-07T07:15:04Z

I have been criticised by some of you for daring to mention Mr Obama’s silence on the Midddle East. Let me hasten to remind you that this site was one of the first to identify Mr Obama as a very talented politician who was going places in the race for the White House. I admire his way with words, respect his intelligence and academic ability, and think he is a consumate spin politician. The point I am making is that if someone stands on a ticket for change he needs to be sure he can make changes when he gets into power. I would like him to prove that he not only talk the talk but he can walk the walk. That is what the next few months will reveal. In the UK today David Cameron is offering real change - change from spending and borrowing too much to spending more wisely and borrowing less, change to lower taxes on earning and saving, change in the way we tackle our broken society, change to the way we try to mend the banks, change in the way we approach the EU. I am still at a loss to know what changes to expect from Mr Obama. He looks very like Mr Bush with better spin. He said enough yesterday to let us infer he supports Mr Bush’s approach to the crisis in Gaza. We know he wishes to prosecute Bush’s war in Afghanistan more intensively, and will remove troops from Iraq much as Mr Bush is doing. We know he wants to spend and borrow more, as if Mr Bush was not already spending and borrowing collosal sums, and we know he supports Mr Bush’s approach to mending the banks. The two men do not disagree fundamentally about their response to the economic crisis. Maybe the only difference is going to be that Mr Obama wants more taxes on energy use to be greener. I just wonder how far he will in practise go when the polls tell him just how unpopular such taxes are likely to prove. He may discover that Mr Bush’s idea of increasing rewards to finding and exploiting energy at home had its point after all.

lab: kerry mccarthy: There's probably no God....

2009-01-07T00:48:00Z

I'm a lifelong (or for-as-long-as-I-can-remember) atheist but I really cringe at the idea of these adverts on buses. Not only are they incredibly smug, but surely there are better ways to spend £140,000? I can see the point of them in America though. It needs saying there. By which I mean I think it's no doubt regarded as rather controversial, and unacceptable, and you could never have an atheist President, whereas here I think most people just get on with whatever they think and let other people get on with what they think too. (Most people, I said. Before you start).Kerry McCarthy www.Kerry-McCarthy.blogspot.com www.KerryMcCarthyMP.org

con: nadine dorries: O2

2009-01-07T00:09:27Z

Yesterday, I attended the funeral of a great Bedfordshire man, David Woodward.David dedicated his life to the service of his local community and the Conservative party. A local Farmer and Market Gardner, he held just about every local o...

lab: kerry mccarthy: A techy question

2009-01-06T22:31:00Z

My 'From Under the Floorboards' section only seems to update once or twice a day. Does that happen to everyone else too, or do you get more regular feeds? Logging out and in again doesn't seem to make a difference, nor refreshing the page.Kerry McCarthy www.Kerry-McCarthy.blogspot.com www.KerryMcCarthyMP.org

lab: kerry mccarthy: Twittering

2009-01-06T22:11:00Z

Guardian belatedly has an article on Twitter today, which echoes much of the celeb trivia in the Mail on Sunday's version, but throws in a bit about the Israeli government using it as a PR tool to give it a bit of intellectual credibility. Those who get beyond the bits about Britney, John Cleese, Jonathan Ross and Stephen Fry in the Mail's version, will see that "Astonishingly one Labour politician even posted a message from inside the House of Commons Chamber. At 11.47am on December 15, Bristol East MP Kerry McCarthy sent a Twitter via her mobile saying: ‘In Chamber thinking I’m not going to get called and won’t have long enough to say anything meaningful if I am.’" Most 'astonishing' perhaps is that December 15 was a Monday, and the House doesn't sit till 2.30pm. But I've just checked and the message was actually sent at 7.47pm, after I'd been sitting there for more than five hours. Which shows admirable restraint on my part, I think. Still not sure I quite see the point of twittering, but will persevere.Kerry McCarthy www.Kerry-McCarthy.blogspot.com www.KerryMcCarthyMP.org

lab: tom harris: ‘We’re going to need a smaller nameplate’

2009-01-06T16:18:44Z

REMEMBER when the Tories supported the Union? Yeah, me too…

No longer, it seems. What was once The Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party is now simply The Scottish Conservative Party, according to Alan Cochrane of the Telegraph.

Perhaps they have (wrongly) calculated that the word “unionist” is a turn-off to the near-70 per cent of Scottish voters who supported unionist parties in the last Holyrood elections.

Labour is now the only truly unionist party in Scotland, which will be a blow to those decent Tory voters and members who have effectively been told that support for the Union is now the policy that dare not speak its name.

lab: tom watson: Michael Crick finds the Tory secret “watch list” of parliamentary candidates

2009-01-06T16:08:48Z

Michael Crick has received a leaked document from the Tory high command which reveals a secret Conservative candidates “watch list”. Here’s what he says in full: The Conservative Party high command is so worried about some of David Cameron’s Parliamentary candidates that they’ve started holding meetings every two weeks to monitor what they call a “watch-list” of those “have the potential to embarrass the Party”. This is revealed in the minutes - leaked to Newsnight (download them here (pdf)) - of a meeting of senior national officials - the party’s deputy chairmen and vice chairmen - held on 28 October last year. The minutes say: “Care needs to be taken over the candidates that have the potential to embarrass the Party - there will now be a fortnightly meeting to assess the watch-list of candidates, and the reasons they are on the list needs to be taken into consideration.” And the document shows that a Conservative Central Office official has even been appointed to keep a close eye on what these potential trouble-makers get up to: “The public output e.g. blogs, websites, press releases of candidates will [sic] now to be monitored by a new member of the CRD team,” the minutes read. “Let JM or Stephen Gilbert know if there are any problems with candidates - de-selection should be the last option.” [JM is probably John Maples MP, the Deputy Chairman in charge of candidates.] The minutes make it clear, however, that Central Office thinks that local associations are often a bigger problem than individual candidates. “But there is nothing to deal with the awkward associations - senior volunteers to help?” And the party is taking measures to keep their potential candidates on message, even before they have been elected, according to the leaked report - by arranging for candidates to meet the Chief Whip at Westminster, Patrick McLoughlin: “The Chief [Whip] is keen to meet with the candidates so they can get used to being line-managed by the Whips’ Office.” Line managed? An interesting phrase. The minutes show that despite David Cameron’s slogan of ‘Power to the People’ - reiterated in spirit in his economy speech this week - when it comes to his own party organisation he is more centralist than ever, and that Central Office doesn’t fully trust its candidates or local associations. In monitoring candidates and their output so closely, the Conservatives have clearly adopted many of the techniques honed by Peter Mandelson and Tony Blair for New Labour in the 1990s. These were designed to ensure that the new Labour MPs elected in 1997 were less troublesome than many of their predecessors. What will also concern many candidates and grassroots activists is the suggestion in the minutes that extra resources may have to be pumped into constituencies which have candidates who are female or come from ethnic minorities. This seems designed to save the party from the potential that such seats might be lost in disproportionate numbers. “Of 250 candidates, 70 are women and 10 are of an ethnic minorities [sic] - something extra needs to be done to ensure that these ones are not lost.” In response to a questions from Newsnight, a Conservative Party spokesman refused to identify the candidates with “the potential to embarrass the party”. But he said: “It is quite standard for political parties to monitor their candidates - it would be extraordinary if they did not.”

lab: tom harris: For KC, read DD

2009-01-06T15:54:08Z

INTRIGUING rumours at Westminster - despite the House not returning until next week.

I’m reliably informed that the recent vocal campaign to have Ken Clarke reinstated to the Shadow Cabinet is but a feint, a ruse to disguise the true intent of KC’s apparent supporters: to bring back David Davis.

The former Shadow Home Secretary is considered one of the so-called “Tory Big Beasts” whose presence is sorely missed on Cameron’s front bench. With end-of-year polls showing a severe narrowing of the Tory lead, there is much complaining in the tearoom (or will be when it reopens for business next Monday) that, given the economic circumstances, Do-Nothing should be much further ahead than he is. Hence the increasingly voluble demands for DD’s return.

I suspect DD’s supporters, though, are being unrealistically optimistic: I can’t see Do-Nothing caving into this pressure in the same way he caved in over the Shadow Cabinet’s day jobs. He can’t afford another high profile defeat at the hands of his own party.

con: douglas carswell: BBC tries to ignore Freedom of Information requests

2009-01-06T14:54:00Z

Following Robert Peston's biased reporting, I've put a number of FOI requests to Craig Oliver, Peston's boss and the man responsible for the 10 O'Clock news. Oliver's initial response this morning is a high-handed brush off. He suggests I go through the BBC complaints unit, and completely ignores the specific FOI requests. BBC attempts not to answer FOI requests are a little hypocritical given the number they submit themselves. No, Mr Oliver. The BBC has a legal duty to conform to FOI requests. Just answer the questions I put to you in my letter. It'll be easier for you in the end .... I'll keep you posted. UPDATE: Within two hours of posting this blog, Mr Oliver contacts me with an apology for overlooking the FOI requests. They will be answered. Another example of how the web acts as a great equaliser, allowing individuals to take on vast concentrations of corporate power at the BBC and elsewhere. I hope ...

lab: michael meacher: After the banks, who else should get a bail-out?

2009-01-06T14:08:16Z

After the banks have had a stupefying £500bn put at their disposal, a sum equal to a third of Britain's entire GDP, it is not surprising that many other (and often more deserving) candidates have lined up for a Government bail-out, most notably Jaguar Land Rover. Should they get it?

Clearly all needy industrial victims of the recession cannot be given ring-fenced Government protection. The criteria for determining which industrial sectors, and which firms within those sectors, might be eligible should include the basic soundness of the business (i.e. not lame ducks) and the quality of the jobs that might otherwise be lost. MFI, which finally closed just before Xmas but was sold for £1two years ago, did not mostly have jobs that were highly skilled. Arguably, Woolworths, despite its near-100 year run and its nostalgic reputation, fell into the same category.

Jaguar is more complex. Its owner, Tata, is India's biggest privately owned company, and it is not obvious why it should be subsidised, especially when it made profits of £440m in the last financial year. Also, Ford, Jaguar's previous owner, invested £10bn into the company in its 19-year ownership without ever making it profitable. On the other hand, Jaguar's product development programme amounts to half of the UK car industry's annual research, which indicates that other car firms don't do high-value work, or at least not in the UK. There is therefore a good case for Government assistance (not a bail-out, but offering loans or underwriting credit) to Jaguar in order to preserve high-value jobs in Britain.

But that has further implications. It requires Government after three decades of laissez faire to come forward with a new industrial policy which spells out what are the strategic objectives for Britain. Equally, Government aid should not be given without requiring an appropriate quid pro quo for any taxpayers' money received. It is reasonable for Government to demand a stake in the enterprise, a guarantee of R&D on more environmentally sustainable transport, and a commitment that manufacturing will be based in the UK.

con: douglas carswell: A Clash of Civilisations: was Samuel Huntington right?

2009-01-06T14:03:00Z

Samuel Huntington, who died just before Christmas, challenged some of our intelligentsia's key, post-1960s assumptions. He seemed to suggest that cultural identity is massively important - and that Western-style economic and political liberty are not universal. Not entirely a cultural relativist, much that Huntington says undermines the intellectual rationale of "multi-culturalism". As a one time follower of Francis Fukuyama's "end of history" thesis, what Huntington had to say changed my mind.

Mark Steyn writes a thought-provocative piece about it, that you should read.

We like to think cozy thoughts. But perhaps the truth is rarely quite so soft and mushy and comforting ...

lab: tom harris: Osborne: the savers’ friend

2009-01-06T11:34:51Z

GEORGE Osborne clearly doesn’t share some of his party members’ concerns about the detrimental effects low interest rates have on savers.

In October he told The Daily Telegraph:

It is a statement of fact that, with interest rates still at 4.5 per cent, there is plenty of scope to stimulate demand with lower rates.

Hat-tip to Rapunzel for alerting me to this.

lab: shaun woodward: Tribute to Mike Doyle

2009-01-06T10:40:36Z

Rainhill Councillor Mike Doyle died suddenly on Tuesday 30 December 2008. Mike has been an active Rainhill Councillor for nearly 30 years and was well known to many residents through the work he did...

lab: tom watson: Iain Dale leads the charge to bring back David Davis

2009-01-06T09:50:22Z

Iain doing his usual to Labour (labour spin etc) but pitching in heavily for David Davis AND Ken Clarke in David Cameron’s juddering reshuffle. I wonder what Dominic Grieve thinks of that? There is no doubt in my mind that ConservativeHome reflects Conservative Party grass roots. And they want David Davis back. Let us see whether Iain’s campaign is a success.

lib: adrian sanders: Budget Priorities For Torbay

2009-01-06T09:32:00Z

I received a letter from the Council inviting me to make representations as part of the annual budget making process. I thought good on you for asking, and this is what I have submitted. ...

lib: lynne featherstone: Sharon Shoesmith

2009-01-06T09:19:00Z

A flurry of calls from the media following the not entirely unexpected news that Sharon Shoesmith is appealing against her dismissal and apparently seeking compensation - Evening Standard jounalist said up to £170,000.I hope her appeal fails because she signally failed in her child protection responsibilities - that was the damning conclusion of the Ed Balls ordered investigation. This concurs with my own experiences of trying to get her to deal with cases where there was a complaint against something in her department. The answer I often got was 'children's services are working fine'. She seems to be more interested in defending her department than dealing with the issues I brought to her.If she were now to get paid for failure it would send out a message to those in these incredible responsible and vital positions that they can fail with impunity - and get paid for their trouble.UPDATE: Daily Express has more, including the reaction from my colleague Robert Gorrie:Robert Gorrie, leader of Haringey’s Liberal Democrat opposition, said: “We have said from the outset that those responsible for this tragedy should be held to account and that there should be no rewards for failure. “Sharon Shoesmith was responsible for the council service that failed Baby P. I hope the original council decision to terminate employment without payment of notice is upheld.”

lab: tom harris: Spam filter problems

2009-01-06T09:10:58Z

I’VE BEEN having some issues with my spam filter on this site recently.

I had expected a rush of people leaving comments welcoming the recent drops in the Bank of England base rate. After all, many of those who read this blog and who leave comments are Tories who like to complain about how indebted we are as a nation. We are, they constantly claim, a nation of borrowers rather than savers.

So obviously the drop in interest rates, and the consequent cuts in most people’s monthly mortgage payments, is something they would undoubtedly welcome, especially at a time of economic downturn. I mean, can you imagine their howls of anguish if interest rates had gone up to anywhere near half the levels they were under the Conservatives?

So, knowing how fair and objective my commenters are, I simply have to assume that all the comments saying how much they welcome the cut in base rate to two per cent have been accidentally spammed by WordPress. Tut, tut.

So apologies if your comment welcoming the recent cuts as a vindication of Gordon Brown’s decision to grant independence to the Bank of England in the face of Conservative opposition have not yet been published. Please resubmit.

con: david jones: Rewarding prudence

2009-01-06T08:44:23Z

David Cameron’s announcement yesterday that the next Conservative Government will abolish income tax on basic-rate taxpayers’ savings and increase pensioners’ personal allowance by £2,000 has met with predictable hostility from Labour. Yvette Cooper, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, appeared on BBC News last night to denounce the policy as one that would not help most pensioners and would take money out of the economy when more spending was needed.

I don’t know how many pensioners Miss Cooper speaks to, but I can say from my own experience that she is entirely wrong. At one of the many church carol services I attended before Christmas, several older people approached me, unprompted, to say how worried they were about getting through the winter, as they watched the return from their savings plummeting. They will undoubtedly be pleased by what David Cameron had to say. Gordon Lishman, director general of Age Concern, has also welcomed the announcement.

As Chancellor, Gordon Brown caused untold damage to the interests of a whole generation of pensioners when he abolished advance corporation tax relief for pension funds. At least £5 billion a year, which should have been applied for the benefit of pensioners, has been diverted by Labour to other, often wasteful, items of public expenditure.

Now pensioners see the value of their taxed savings eroded to the extent that, before long, they will receive virtually no income from them and will have to resort to capital. These people feel betrayed, and with good reason, because they have been.

Cameron is therefore entirely right to promise to help an important section of the community, who take the view, quite rightly, that for all his rhetoric about prudence, Gordon Brown has rewarded theirs with a kick in the teeth.

Posted in David Cameron, economy, Gordon Brown, pensions Tagged: Politics

lab: tom watson: End of Jeremy Paxman interview with George Osborne

2009-01-06T08:02:08Z

JP: Why won’t David Cameron let you make these announcements publicly? GO: Well I…was there today, I’ve been involved in all these things… JP: Yeah, you were listening, he was speaking? GO: Well he is the leader of my party. JP: OK. There’s a problem isn’t there? Something has happened since you had your unfortunate difficulties on a yacht and since then you have made one public speech about the economy, which is the role of the shadow chancellor, and he’s made nine? GO: Well first of all I just completely reject, I don’t know where you’ve got that from. JP: By totting up the number of speeches that have been made. GO: Jeremy everyday, indeed today if you open the London Evening Standard there is an article by me which actually came out before David Cameron gave his speech, I was on the World At One, I have just done before doing this a whole stream of interviews on not only the BBC but believe it or not some other news organisations… JP: You’re like the man who walks behind the horse with the bucket? GO: Well… JP: All these media interviews afterwards, the actual announcement of policy is made by the party leader. Why not by the shadow chancellor? GO: Well I have to say this is the most meaningless line of questioning I have ever heard from you. The shadow chancellor and the party leader in this party, the Conservative Party, unlike what we saw with the Labour opposition ten years ago work incredibly closely together. JP: George Osborne thank you.

lab: tom watson: Pig crash lands to earth

2009-01-06T07:54:34Z

Polly Toynbee, November 2006: If Cameron can climb on my caravan, anything is possible Polly Toynbee, January 2009: It might sound appealing, but this is populist poison

con: john redwood: In praise of Josiah Wedgwood

2009-01-06T07:53:16Z

The newspapers are right this morning to mourn the passing of the Wedgwood company. It is another sad casualty of this vicious Credit Crunch. Josiah Wedgwood has long been a hero of mine. As an industrialist I often looked to him for inspiration. He seemed to have it all. He was an innovator, developing new glazes, better furnace controls and better factory organisation. He was a great marketer, realising the value of celebrity endorsement and the need to engage the thought and taste leaders of the day with his products. He was a pioneer of better transport and logistics for access and exit from his factory at Etruria, favouring the then modern canal. He provided employee housing, recognising the need for a settled and motivated workforce, capable of high quality workmanship. He knew how to raise efficiencies through smarter working. Above all he understood the power of beautiful design and decoration, turning to classical designs. In his later years he was determined to produce a copy of the Portland Vase. He was famous for the royal patronage of Queen Charlotte, which led to Queen’s ware, and to the interest of the Empress Catherine of Russia in his work. His blue Jasperware is still being sold to this day, from his use of barium sulphate in the firing. His black basalt range was another classic which has survived 250 years. This year we will remember him as well for the work of Charles Darwin, whose money came in part from his links to the Wedgwood family, which made possible his researches. The modern Wedgwood company still has title to the fabulous designs and glazes that Josiah pioneered. I do not believe they are all without value. Something should be rescued from the collapse. I realise the last Wedgwood product I bought was sometime ago, when they produced a reproduction Clarice Cliff vase. I thought the originals were too expensive for me. I wanted to keep flowers in mine, so a fresh modern version of the original style was just what I needed. They then ceased to make any more reproductions from the amazing Clarice Cliff range, where they hold the title to the designs. Perhaps someone else can if and when they buy that part of the business. it seemed like a missed opportunity. A modern Wedgwood should move with the times, responding to the different needs of people. Some in the press imply it was bound to die because it makes old fashioned dinner and tea services people no longer need. We live in a country with a rising population, who all need to eat food off plates and drink out of mugs or cups. The new owners of Wedgwood need to blend the best of the old and new as Josiah himself did. Josiah sold 2000 year old styles in sets that matched contemporary needs. Today we need a Wedgwood owner that loves the best of the inherited designs, glazes and shapes, and adds to them the magic of modern marketing that can capture the market that is there for good ceramics, and the best of modern design. Meanwhile, this is another casualty of the recession. The business model clearly needed improvement, but the Credit Crunch has claimed yet another iconic victim. It shows just how deep and dangerous this crunch has become.

con: john redwood: The continuing silence of Mr Obama

2009-01-06T07:18:06Z

All those primarily concerned about the loss of life in the Gaza strip as a result of the Israeli mililtary action will be dismayed by Mr Obama’s silence. All those who see the Hamas rockets as the main issue will be disappointed that Mr Obama has not recently condemned those either, leaving that task to Mr Bush. I do not offer a better way forward with this problem as I have insufficient knowledge of all the complications. I have never visited Gaza. I just mention the silence of Mr Obama, as his views and approach generally is so important to us all. It is difficult to sustain his claim to usher in an age of change, when on this collosal issue where the USA is the most important power apart from the protagonists in the conflict, he remains silent. In effect he is backing the Bush strategy, but lacks the courage or the conviction to say so. He is certainly not offering a different one.

con: jeremy hunt: West country wonders

2009-01-06T00:00:00Z

Just been to Bristol and feel overwhelmed by Bristolian enthusiasm as well as Bristolian madness (the latter by the city council).

After a briefing to business people on our plans to deal with the recession, I went to a remarkable organisation called the Broad Plain Boys Club. This boys club, which has been going for more than half a century, teaches boxing to boys and young men who one way or the other have come off the rails. Some of them have been excluded from school, others are at young offender institutions, others have just come out of prison. They don’t just learn boxing – they are given coaching to get their whole lives back on track. But boxing and sport generally are an important part of the formula.

As so often, the organisation is really carried along by the enthusiasm of the person running it, Dennis Stinchcombe. His pride in what he achieves for these young men bursts from every syllable he utters. His son Liam also works there (as well as being a part time professional boxer) and has the same pride, as do all his staff.

The crazy thing is they have been told they will lose their funding from Bristol City Council if they don’t drop the word “boys” from the name of the club as it is "discriminatory". What stupid nonsense. Girls actually use the club on Tuesday and Thursday nights anyway, but it is young adolescent men who most need what the club has to offer. That surely is what counts - not whether it has a politically correct name.

lab: andy reed: January 6th Blog from Andy Reed

2009-01-06T00:00:00Z

Andy Reed's update on 9th January.

lab: andy reed: Putting the Tories Under the Spotlight - Reed Backs Cooper

2009-01-06T00:00:00Z

Yvette Cooper MP, Labour's Chief Secretary to the Treasury, responding to David Cameron's speech today, said: "David Cameron's proposal for spending cuts in a recession is economic madness. "This means cuts in support for the unemployed to get back into work, cuts in training and apprenticeships, business, housing, transport and regeneration. And it also means cuts in things like the police, Sure Start, funding for local councils and important investment in our future. "At a time when President-elect Obama, and governments across the world are increasing public spending to support jobs and the economy, the Conservatives are completely isolated in calling for spending cuts. "Nor will their tax proposals help most people or businesses get through the recession. "Almost 60% of pensioners won't benefit from this as they already pay no tax. And the Conservatives are opposing our £60 boost for every pensioner this month. "The vast majority of ordinary people also won't benefit as they can already put all their annual savings into tax free savings schemes such as ISAs which allow £3,600 cash savings a year. Even for those who don't, savers on less than £30,000 a year are only likely to benefit by £5 a year - far less than the average household will benefit from the VAT cut." Andy Reed said he agreed. "The Tories sat back and let the last two economic recessions rip the heart out of many people and their communities. That is why Labour is different. Whilst the shock is unavoidable labour is getting stuck in and trying to avoid the mistakes of the past. The Tories just want to repeat them and let people sink or swim on their own at the mercy of global finances. That is why all this marketing themselves as different party has been exposed because underneath the gloss they are still the same old nasty Tory party we all hate."

lab: derek wyatt: Palestinian Delegation Press Release on Gaza

2009-01-06T00:00:00Z

Palestinian Authority to pursue those responsible for Israel’s crimes through the international tribunal courts The Palestinian Delegate to the United...

lab: derek wyatt: MP's Update on Gaza

2009-01-06T00:00:00Z

Gaza Update A number of you have emailed me about what is happening in Gaza. Let me try and respond.......

lab: derek wyatt: London 2012 UK Schools' Programme

2009-01-06T00:00:00Z

London 2012 UK Schools Programme Introducing ‘Get Set’ What is...

lab: tom harris: Congratulations, Tony

2009-01-05T23:36:05Z

WHAT a pity I won’t be able to see for myself the violent expulsion of soggy muesli from the mouths of thousands of Guardian readers as they open their papers in the morning to see that Tony Blair is to be given America’s highest civilian award.

Well done, Tony - well deserved. The sensible parts of the country will be proud of you.

con: douglas carswell: Tax cutters must win the argument - and fast

2009-01-05T22:01:00Z

Barack Obama unveils plans for some of the largest ever tax cuts in the recent history of the United States. That's right. "The Senator with the most leftwing voting record" - so we were told - is planning to cut taxes before he's even in the Oval Office.

It's time for British politicians to recognise that we, too, need to cut taxes. Rather than a pathetic gimmick on VAT, how about getting rid of some of the morally wrong and economically indefensible taxes on savings?

lab: michael meacher: Is public ownership of the banks still a taboo?

2009-01-05T21:58:52Z

What is to be done if the survival of the real economy - the jobs, homes and incomes of millions of people and the viability of countless businesses - depends on getting the flow of lending going again, yet the banks resolutely refuse to lend on anywhere near the scale required, and have just announced that they are now proposiing to cut credit still further in the first quarter of this new year? For a year or more now the US and UK Governments have been fighting the financial meltdown by trying to get the banks to perform their proper function of lending credit to businesses and households and thus boosting demand across the economy. In the October bail-out of the banks a staggering £500bn (more than one-third of UK GDP) was made available to the banks to kick-start lending. A special liquidity scheme provided £200bn to allow the banks to swap illiquid mortgage bonds for more attractive government paper, subject to a fee (or haircut). A credit guarantee scheme provided guarantees for £250bn of debt issued by banks so that the banks could afford more funding to pass on to customers. In addition, £50bn was made available to recapitalise bank balance sheets, of which £37bn has so far been utilised. However, none of these measures succeeded in getting bank lending going again. Further measures are now therefore being considered. The special liquidity scheme could be expanded to include bonds which package up other loans such as credit cards. The Crosby report from the former HBOS chief executive proposes that a £100bn guarantee should be provided over two years to try to get bank lending operating again between banks. Or the national loans guarantee plan put forward by the Tories could be adapted to underwrite loans for small businesses, which would ease pressure on banks which are unwilling to lend because of a regulatory demand that they hold more capital. The problem with all these measures remains enforceability. The three banks which accepted taxpayer funds – RBS and Lloyds TSB plus HBOS – were told by the Government as a quid pro quo to maintain lending to businesses and homeowners at 2007 levels. That has certainly not happened. But the Treasury cannot even, in the midst of a devastating credit crunch, get access from the banks to what the credit flows actually are. The Government is therefore considering guaranteeing a range of new loans on condition that the banks are set strict targets for lending this year as the recession deepens. But how again will this be enforced? Quantitative easing is yet another measure under consideration. Under this proposal the central bank would buy up long-dated Treasury bonds and gilts in order to drive down long-term interest rates, since these have not come down anywhere near as fast as official short-term rates. The risk with this however is that if the authorities calculate the deflation-inflation pressures wrongly, the bubble created in the bond market replacing the bubble in the housing market could burst, leading to a sharp fall in bond prices and thus a highly damaging rise in long-term interest rates. So what should be done? The real joker in the pack is that every conceivable incentive is being offered to the banks to them to expand lending, at stupefying cost to the taxpayer, yet the banks still won’t oblige, and have even today announced that they expect to reduce lending in the first quarter of 2009. The reason simply is that the banks are determined to hoover up all this Treasury largesse, grace of the taxpayer, and use it to prop up their balance sheets and not incur any further bad debts after their disastrous experience of being caught with billions of toxic nmortgage-backed securities in 2007-8. The banks, despite the crash they have now visited on the real economy and despite the eye-watering mountains of taxpayers’ aid they have absorbed without recompense, are still determined to save themselves, not the businesses and individuals they exist to serve. In these circumstances the only certain way to ensure that lending is resumed on the scale now desperately required is to take public control of the banks, temporarily at least, to avert the worst crash since the Great Depression. Now that neo-liberalism is wholly discredited, is that still a taboo too far? I think not. First published in the Guardian in Commentisfree on 5 January 2009.

con: david jones: Tony’s tab

2009-01-05T20:14:52Z

The Daily Mail today carries a typically incandescent piece about former Prime Minister Tony Blair, now international Middle East peace envoy, who failed to show up in Israel until last Saturday, long after the disaster of Gaza had begun.

According to the Mail, Blair’s late arrival was due to the fact that he was holidaying with his family; his spokesman, however, hotly denies any lack of urgency on his boss’s part and says that he has been “working tirelessly” behind the scenes “since day one”.

Whatever the truth, I was rather perturbed to read that Blair’s office space in Jerusalem, which apparently comprises the entire fourth floor of the “exclusive” American Colony hotel, is costing the British taxpayer “half a million pounds a year, and more when Mr Blair and his entourage are in town”.

Blair is the appointee of the Middle East peace “Quartet”, comprising the UN, EU, Russia and the USA. One might have thought, in the circumstance, that his considerable expenses would be met by those four entities equally; why should the British taxpayer pick up the tab?

Posted in Tony Blair Tagged: Politics

lab: tom harris: When is a cut not a cut?

2009-01-05T18:29:25Z

DO-NOTHING insists we’re in too much debt, as a nation and individually. That’s why he’s said a future Conservative government will spend less than a Labour one.

So how would he pay for today’s announcement scrapping tax on savings for standard rate tax-payers?

I hasten to add that I’m not dismissing the proposal out of hand; it deserves consideration. But it will cost, and where would the money come from? Presumably not by borrowing, so… cuts?

According to the Conservative Central HQ guidance on the 2.5 per cent VAT cut, it isn’t a “cut” because it ”will need to be paid for by other means (such as general taxation) so it’s effectively a loan anyway.”

So if the VAT cut isn’t a cut, what would Do-Nothing’s latest plan be? It’s surely not good enough to suggest (as many Tory commenters are surely about to on this very site) that if it’s carried out by a Labour government, it’s not a cut, but if it’s carried out by a Tory government, then it is.

UPDATE @ 8.27 pm: On reflection, I think this post is a tad ambiguous. I’m talking about two separate things: tax cuts and cuts in expenditure. So is Do-Nothing’s proposed tax cut an actual tax cut, or is it (as the Tories would have it) in the same league as the VAT cut and not a tax cut? Have I just confused things even further?

lib: lynne featherstone: Why the number of female MPs matters

2009-01-05T16:54:00Z

The Christmas edition of the Electoral Reform Society's magazine, The Voter carries this short article from me:Sadly, I am one of only 126 female MPs in a Parliament of 646. Parliament remains an old boys club, with its adversarial style of politics where bully-boy tactics are the norm; any of you who’ve watched PMQs will be fully aware of this.And this feeds a political system that is so busy being adversarial that it forgets to be effective. This lack of representation is repeated throughout our political system. In local government, women make up just over a quarter of local councillors, whilst with MEPs it is a similar story: just one quarter female.The quality of our government suffers from these imbalances – an impact which therefore affects us all, men and women. Women need to be there, with men, making these decisions, to ensure that public services and policy are relevant to all people and are capable of having a real effect on the lives, not just of women, but of everyone in society.Nowhere is this clearer than in the allocation of resources, where the macho boys culture so often summons up the massive project and neglects the important details. When I was chair of transport at London Assembly it was starkly clear. Why is it that an obsession with boys-toys – the macho game of who’s got the biggest airport or the longest train – delivers multi-billion pound budgets for massive transport infrastructure projects yet not even a fraction of those budgets were spent on so called ‘soft measures’, such as making sure you can fit a double buggy through the door of a bus and making sure that local shopping centres and services are easily accessible – really easily accessible - through using public transport?But it should not be a question of either or – it should be a matter of both. Some of our Nordic counterparts are light years ahead in terms of female representation, and we can see the practical effect on policy and resource priorities. Take Finland – with its childcare allowance for women who stay home and look after children under the age of 3 and its municipal care for children who are below the school age of 7.We have come a long way in 90 years. It’s not enough, but we are constantly pushing, and constantly forcing change. I hope that within the next decade we will able to celebrate the achievement of equal and proper representation of women in politics, as another 90 is far too long to wait for this change!It isn’t enough that women have the vote, and it isn’t enough that Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan all rank above us internationally when it comes to women’s representation. Equal representation and involvement in politics is our right, and it is the women today who will bring about change tomorrow, by demanding the equal representation they deserve and by working together to achieve it.

con: douglas carswell: Meet the quango that uses your money to stop you having any say ...

2009-01-05T14:10:00Z

That's right. The Association of Police Authorities use your money to lobby government to try to stop you having a direct say over how your community is policed. Even the government's own officials recognise that the public is losing faith in the criminal justice system. With local police officers forced to answer to remote target-setters, the public's own priorities are too often ignored. The answer is to give local people a greater say over how their communities are policed. Yet the quangocrats who benefit from the current undemocratic system don't want real accountability. It's no surprise - turkeys don't vote for Christmas. But it is outrageous that they should be able to use public money to pay lobbyists to short circuit our democracy like this. All three political parties are now committed to making police more democratically accountable. Yet here we have a quango, founded in 1997 and in receipt of large sums of public money, lobbying to stop you deciding police priorities where you live. Here's my email to the APA asking for details. I'll keep you posted: From: CARSWELL, Douglas Sent: 05 January 2009 13:49 To: 'fionnuala.gill@lga.gov.uk' Cc: 'ian.barnes@lga.gov.uk'; 'bob.jones@lga.gov.uk'; 'm.bryant@connectpa.co.uk' Subject: Lobbying against localism Dear Ms Gill, I am writing to you with a request for some information. I should be most grateful if you would provide me with the answers. Please could you let me know how much public money the Association of Police Authorities, and any of your member Authorities, is paying to lobby with regard to the Policing and Criminal Justice Bill specifically, and with regard to reform of Police Authority structures more generally. In a phone conversation this morning with a lobbyist at Connect Public Affairs, it was confirmed to me that the Association of Police Authorities is paying money to retain the services of Connect. Can you please let me know how much public money you are giving Connect in relation to this lobbying? Please can you also provide me with a copy of the brief, and other related paperwork, submitted to Connect Public Affairs in relation to this contract? I would also be grateful if you would let me know how much money the APA receives from various sources each year? Finally, I note that the APA uses the slogan "Giving People a Say in Policing" on your website. Can you please explain how that is compatible with using public money to lobby against the democratisation of Police Authority structures? I look forward to your reply. Warm regards, Douglas Carswell MP

lab: kerry mccarthy: And yet more on Gaza

2009-01-05T14:10:00Z

Just been reading Iain Dale's latest posting on Gaza, "Hamas's Useful Idiots". Always a bit of a cheap shot that, interpreting opposition to one side's actions as wholehearted endorsement of what the other side stands for (as in, all opponents of the war in Iraq = apologists for Saddam Hussein).Today's report on injuries to children in Gaza reminded me of a conversation I had with an aid worker in a refugee camp in the West Bank, a couple of years ago, about the almost total lack of counselling services or awareness of the psychological impact on children of the ongoing conflict. The casualty figures in Gaza are horrific - the Guardian guide states 512 dead, 2,300 injured on the Palestinian side, 5 dead, 62 injured on the Israeli side - but these relate to physical injuries. The toll on the mental health of people living in Gaza - and, I accept, those living in fear of Hamas rocket attacks in Israel - will be much higher. Have received an invite to meet with Bill Rammell, the FCO Minister, tomorrow for an update, so will be going along to the FCO for that. Will try to put to him all the questions people have raised with me in emails.Kerry McCarthy www.Kerry-McCarthy.blogspot.com www.KerryMcCarthyMP.org

lab: tom harris: Unsolicited support

2009-01-05T11:45:33Z

Hmm… This gives me an idea.

lab: tom watson: Labour Party Propaganda Alert

2009-01-05T11:30:30Z

Spoof shadow cabinet web chat. Tickled me.

con: douglas carswell: BBC Revolt: Bravo Michael!

2009-01-05T10:18:00Z

My esteemed colleague, Michael Fabricant MP, writes of how he has lost faith in the BBC World Service to "present news in an unbiased manner". Michael has written a formal complaint about their coverage of events in Gaza/Israel to the BBC Trust board. Bravo, Michael!

However, I fear Michael is expecting too much from the smug, self-regarding BBC quangocrats. The BBC Trust couldn't care less what MPs think.

MPs are not even able to table Parliamentary questions about the BBC and the license fee - and the BBC knows it.

The World Service - which Michael objects to most - is even less accountable, being funded separately from the license fee and run at the behest of the Foreign Office. It's only natural that the World Service reflects the world-view of those urbane Guardianista’s at the Foreign Office.

No. Much more likely to be effective is the Charles Moore solution - non-payment of the license fee. I'm not advocating non-payment, which would be illegal. I'm merely noting that a sustained, mass campaign on non-payment is more likely to be effective than the occasional cross letter.

NB. For the record, it would be wrong to refuse to pay the BBC license fee or to break the law. Charles Moore's campaign not to pay the BBC license fee is just as wrong as John Hampden's refusal to pay Ship Money, or Benjamin Franklin's position on tea tax, or Mahatma Gandhi's objections to salt tax. And where did that get us, eh?

lab: tom harris: Your chance to shine

2009-01-05T10:03:29Z

I’VE DECIDED to introduce another award - this time for the most irrelevant and ridiculously partisan political response to a non-political post.

A brilliant example - and the first winner - is this response to my post on Saturday welcoming the casting of Matt Smith in the lead role in Doctor Who:

And,of course, he’s a Labour supporter too. Bound to be a great success, don’t you think?

Fantastic! Now, that’s what blogging’s about.

I can’t wait to see other entertaining examples this year of commenters having a pop at the BBC/public sector workers/Europe/Gordon Brown/me on the back of posts about Doctor Who or The X-Factor.

But please, no hoaxes: the competition is open only to genuinely confused and bewildered readers.

lab: tom watson: Bring back Kenneth Clarke. Don’t bring back Kenneth Clarke.

2009-01-05T09:48:03Z

Guardian, 30th December 2008: Bring back Kenneth Clarke, party members tell Cameron as Tory reshuffle speculation grows Telegraph, 5th January 2009: David Cameron faces revolt over moves to bring back Ken Clarke

con: john redwood: Can you solve a borrowing crisis by borrowing more?

2009-01-05T08:40:03Z

The government has a strange idea that you solve a problem brought about by borrowing too much, by borrowing more. The Prime Minister yesterday went out of his way to stress he wanted the private sector to borrow more from the banks. He has made it well known that he wants to take the public debt to unheard of peaks. The main reason his strategy will not work well is that it is fundamentally flawed, muddled over what the origins of the crisis were and even more muddled over what the solution might be. The government and monetary authorities made two mistakes, not one. Their first mistake is well known and understood now, late in the day. They kept interest rates too low for too long, and set regulatory rules which allowed or encouraged banks to balloon their balance sheets, taking on too much risk by lending to people who would find it difficult to pay back, and playing financial games with each other through the derivatives and futures markets. When this had gone to extreme levels the authorities decided to call time on it. They then made their second mistake, too little understood or acknowledged. They raised interest rates too high, and changed the capital and other regulatory requirements on banks too abruptly, causing the opposite problem. They brought on a sharp deceleration of credit, as they were forcing a sharp contraction in bank balance sheets. I see this as an even worse mistake than the credit expansion. Yes they needed to deflate the bubble. No they did not need to do it so sharply and to such an extreme extent. Now they are in panic mode. They are worried about a self feeding slump/credit crunch. Banks unable to lend more have to withdraw money from companies that need it to stay afloat. Low asset valuations in asset markets starved of money means as companies go into liquidation banks will not get back all they lent to them as the assets are sold off. Banks then lose more money, and in turn have to lend even less as the losses erode their capital. Meanwhile the authorities slashing interest rates too far mean the banks again struggle to make any money on lending, so delaying the day when they will have more capital which they can use to lend more. The government is now trying to be the main borrower and lender, owning banks, borrowing colossal sums of money, seeking to reflate the general economy and to prop asset markets. It is trying to do too much with too much. So what should it do? It should go back to ask itself why the authorities thought they had to deflate the bubble in the first place. They did so because the three UK deficits were getting out of control, and were beginning to create inflationary pressures. The UK was simultaneously running a very large private sector deficit, as banks and companies borrowed too much, a large public deficit as the government borrowed too much, and a large balance of payments deficit as the public and private sectors imported goods and services which the UK economy was too stretched to provide, paid for with the borrowed money. The government is tackling these three deficits in very different ways. The private sector deficit is being brought down by tough measures forcing individuals and companies to rein in their spending and to save more, because there is no longer the credit available. Many individuals face job loss or wage cuts. Many companies face falling turnover, plunging profits or a trip to the Receiver. The balance of payments deficit is being tackled partly by the squeeze on demand, slashing demand for imports, and partly by a huge fall in the currency. A cheap pound will make it easier to sell our goods and services abroad, and will prevent us buying so much from overseas, as the prices of imported goods and foreign holidays rise by around one quarter. Meanwhile the government debt is being doubled, as the government tries to limit the damage done to private sector incomes and prospects from the first two adjustments. All this is very unhealthy. I am glad to hear the Conservatives say they want to do it differently. They see the need for the public sector to make a contribution to the country getting back to living within its means. If the public sector is cushioned from any of the downwards adjustment, it just means bigger job losses and a bigger income squeeze in the private sector. In order to share the pain, the public sector has to rein in its wilder and more wasteful spending, to concentrate on the basics of good health, education and defence. The public sector needs to control its borrowing, which means being much more careful about the money it tips into banks. It could agree a more gentle timetable to get the banks balance sheets into a more prudent position, avoiding the need for extra state capital. It can ensure they carry on trading by the Bank of England acting as lender of last resort against proper security. What makes no sense is for the PM to say banks must lend more, at the same time as carrying on with his regulatory policy of making them run more prudent balance sheets. The two policies pull in opposite directions, and in this climate the regulatory imperative will win and the banks will stay cautious. We do need to correct the balance of payments deficit, the overstretch of bank balance sheets and now the over borrowing of the state. We need to do so at a measured and sensible pace, not in this hectic extreme way. The mood of the times is to save a bit more and borrow a bit less, to lend moderately to people and companies who can afford to repay it, and to consume less to live closer to your means. The government needs to understand this has to apply to it as well.

lab: kerry mccarthy: Do you speak 2009?

2009-01-05T01:12:00Z

OK, this is lazy blogging I know, just referencing other reports, but work doesn't officially begin till tomorrow (by which I mean later today, it being nearly 2am, and before you start, I've actually just been doing emails). The Indy on Sunday had a report on 'new buzzwords' for 2009. Some of my favourites:"Junior moment: Flip-side of a senior moment. Can be committed by adults, with a sudden lapse into immaturity; or by youth, displaying the lack of thoughtfulness, sense or self-preservation we oldies associate with them.""Edible estates: Phrase coined by US campaigner Fritz Haeg for digging up your lawn and growing in its place something you can eat. After all, we did it in the war, when the Dig For Victory campaign increased the land used for food production by 80 per cent. For examples, see any traditional cottage garden, or back yards in Switzerland, Italy, France, Germany – where grass is for sport or ruminants, not something to be made a fetish of." "Eco-embedded: The idea that business and government adopts eco-friendly practices that leave the consumer no choice. A ban on plastic shopping bags, for instance, or other plastic-free zones (such as a shopping centre in Balgowlah, New South Wales), carbon emission laws, or 'green' credit cards where consumers pay a little extra to offset the carbon cost of their purchase.""Enoughism: The creed that holds that we over-consume, amass far too much "stuff" that only ever provides a fleeting pleasure, and ought to cry "Enough!". Experts like John Naish and Oliver James argue this incessant acquisitiveness leads to dissatisfaction that can develop into mental illness. Been around for a while, but fast gaining currency." "Unplugging: Technological wing of the above, where someone realises that the time they spend online, on the mobile, curating the Facebook page, etc, is no substitute for living. So they put themselves on a digital diet, and possibly even cultivate an interest in things without keypads. Like other people. What we all need, probably, are more islands of tranquillity, or thinking time, as it used to be known." Kerry McCarthy www.Kerry-McCarthy.blogspot.com www.KerryMcCarthyMP.org

lab: kerry mccarthy: Counterfeit drugs

2009-01-05T01:01:00Z

On a different issue, this report caught my attention, about counterfeit prescription drugs entering the UK market. I have one of the UK's biggest pharmaceutical distributors (AAH) in my constituency and have had conversations with them in the past about this and related issues, but this report raises it to a new level. It's something I'll be following up on in the new session.Kerry McCarthy www.Kerry-McCarthy.blogspot.com www.KerryMcCarthyMP.org

lab: kerry mccarthy: More on Gaza

2009-01-05T00:45:00Z

Tomorrow's Times has an interesting article from Rabbi Michael Lerner as well as this report on the alleged use of white phosporous shells, and Gordon Brown breaking ranks with the US in calling for an immediate ceasefire. One recurring theme during this conflict is just how much both sides are convinced the media is entirely biased against them and is presenting a distorted pro-Israeli/ pro-Palestinian line. For example, I - and presumably all other MPs - have been getting regular, almost daily emails from an organisation called The Israel Project, whose purported mission is to provide accurate information to the media. See for example its Fiction-v-Fact in Gaza. (Not, I should hasten to add, an endorsement... it doesn't reflect what the FCO and DFID believe to be the situation on the ground, nor what I have been told in updates from organisations like Save the Children.)Kerry McCarthy www.Kerry-McCarthy.blogspot.com www.KerryMcCarthyMP.org

lab: andy reed: New Year 2009

2009-01-05T00:00:00Z

Andy Reed MP Blog update for January 5th 2009. Covering Gaza, the economy and his new website...

lab: derek wyatt: Swale Given "Poor" Rating in Housing

2009-01-05T00:00:00Z

Swale Borough Council Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) This is an authority that demonstrated Fair overall performance in 2004. More details. Latest reports for...

lab: derek wyatt: MP's poll supports Free Swimming

2009-01-05T00:00:00Z

Free Swimming A poll on MP Derek Wyatt’s web site shows 81% to be in favour of free swimming for those...

lab: derek wyatt: MP and Thamesteel

2009-01-05T00:00:00Z

Thamesteel Update MP Derek Wyatt met management in December and again today to try and help them through this difficult time.He has also been in touch with Community, the trade union.

lab: tom watson: Web 2.0 Jags

2009-01-04T19:59:49Z

Prezza on a you tube mash-up. I love it.

con: douglas carswell: The new scramble for Africa?

2009-01-04T18:34:00Z

An interesting article here in the Independent. Western Europe once exported people in large numbers. It seems China has started to export her people in large numbers to settle parts of Africa. Do you suppose that the Western intelligentsia, once vicious in their condemnation of wicked Western colonialism in Africa, yet fulsome in their praise for the likes of Robert “Bob” Mugabe or Jomo Kenyatta, will be critical of these new settlers?

lab: tom harris: Dave’s clueless start to 2009

2009-01-04T18:04:18Z

SOMEWHAT after the event (Carolyn and I have just returned from a two-day break sans weans), but I can’t avoid commenting on Dave’s interview with Jeremy Vine, which we listened to on the way to our country retreat on Friday.

First of all, Dave made much of the Civitas study into the welfare system (pause while red mist descends in front of the eyes of most of my readers) which revealed that couples on welfare are less well off than they would be if they separated. Dave feigned surprise and outrage at this. This has been a part of the system for many years, under Labour and Tory governments - was he seriously unaware of it?

I assume this arrangement is in place because of the recognition that couples can live together more cheaply than can two single people living apart. That’s why the state pension for a couple is - and always has been - less than double the rate for a single pensioner. Dave presumably doesn’t believe that’s an injustice worth getting all hot under the collar about, but what’s double standards when there’s a headline to be won?

Secondly, he described the 2.5 per cent cut in VAT as “a scandalous waste of money”. Just consider that statement for a minute.

Let’s assume he’s right to claim that the cut itself had no discernible effect on pre-Christmas sales (not a judgment anyone can accurately make without knowing what they would have been in the absence of the VAT cut). Even then, that £12 billion (as Dave claimed the figure was) tax cut went directly into the pockets of British shoppers. And the Tory party reckons that that’s a “scandalous waste of money”?

I thought the Tory Party were, in principle, if not in policy terms, in favour of giving tax-payers their money back? It’s not the government’s money, they constantly tell us, but the public’s. And yet, giving us back £12 billion of our hard-earned is “a scandalous waste of money”.

There comes a point when putting headlines before principle becomes such a way of life, so second nature, that no-one even notices any more. So Dave is all style and no substance - so what? So he wants to “send a signal” rather than create policy - who cares?

Meanwhile, GB is criticised by the right for saying he want to create up to 100,000 new jobs. Yes, the actual number of jobs created will be hard to assess, and yes, the actual economic policy behind the plans should be scrutinised and, where appropriate, criticised.

But contrast the two approaches - Dave contradicts his own party’s principles and seeks to “send a signal” while at the same time refusing to say whether he’ll actually change policy, and if so, to what; while the Prime Minister seeks to use whatever power government has to make things better.

Dave’s certainly not “the man with a plan”, unless “becoming PM” is considered “a plan” these days.