A watch from an Arab Sheik and a trip to Monaco for who knows what

In the short time since July 1 that MPs have had to register their earnings in more detail a few interesting titbits have already popped up.

The register of members’ interests shows John Reid (left) getting a £5,000 trip to Bahrain, paid for by that country’s Government, to meet ministers.

Seems odd considering the former Home Secretary doesn’t have a role here anymore.

Nonetheless, His Excellency Sheik Rashid bin Abdallah al Khalifa of Bahrain still saw fit to give him a watch for good measure.

I always wonder how MPs can hold advisory roles with some organisations without there ever being a conflict of interest.

Labour’s Jim Hood has registered getting £7,500 from Scottish Coal for being a consultant on parliamentary matters.

Meanwhile Tory Tim Yeo (right) had a trip to Monaco paid for by a Romanian company – so far he has declined to record how much it was worth and for what purpose he went there.

Cameron could be descendant of Moses

Some people have been fond of likening Gordon Brown to Moses – albeit one who leads the people into the sea without it having parted.

But a Jewish scholar at the University of Manchester claims Cameron (left), who just had to go one better, could actually be a direct descendent of the biblical figure.

The Times writes that Dr Yaakov Wise traced the Tory leader’s ancestral line back to Elijah Levita who lived from 1469-1549.

The name Levita is the Latin form of Levite, meaning a Jew descended from the tribe of Levi, the son of Jacob, and one of the original 12 tribes of Israel.

Dr Wise said: “It is possible that Cameron is a direct descendant of Moses or, at least, a cousin.”

Tories V Lib Dems - press office wars

With the news-barren summer recess approaching, a war has erupted between the Tory and Lib Dem press offices.

It all started when the Tories noticed that a Lib Dem press release was based on figures that a Conservative MP had asked for.

The figures had been printed in Hansard, the Lib Dems had seen them and managed to get a press release out before the Tories.

Their release was worded carefully, not saying that the Lib Dems had “discovered” figures, but merely saying they were “highlighting” them.

It has now happened more than once.

On one occasion this week the Tory press office, a little riled no doubt, proceeded to copy the Lib Dem release word for word – just changing the quoted politician to a Tory before sending it out quickly.

The sneaky Lib Dems managed to spot another set of Tory figures and get their release out first again today.

Shortly after the Tories got their handbags out and called around local hacks telling them the Lib Dems had stolen their figures.

I suggest there should be a group fight – blues versus yellows – in central lobby at 5pm.

The particular variety of Lib Dem Bull****

Every now and then we get a wonderful snapshot of just how dignified politicians are not.

A leaked e-mail has emerged from a defeated Lib Dem councillor who lost her seat in recent elections, and is also a parliamentary candidate.

Sally Morgan writes in response to being contacted by “apparatchiks” to ask for a bigger donation to the party. Read it all the way, it’s priceless.

Dear Cowley St and Campaigns Dept.
Please do not employ apparatchiks to telephone me at home to tell me how well the Party did in the local elections only days after I and many of my colleagues lost our seats.
I do not appreciate being told how the public decided to teach Gordon brown a lesson nor that a General Election is around the corner and we have never been in a better position.
I no longer subscribe to that particular variety of bull****.
I was particularly taken aback to be asked if I would make a substantial donation and increase my standing order. Is that not the equivalent of frisking a mugging victim for any more pickings?
The party has benefited from several thousand pounds of my money as well as my blood, sweat and tears and yet the Party chooses to spend such money on employing ‘organisers’ whose sole purpose it seems is to forward centrally-generated emails that I have already received.
I would happily save the Party thousands of pounds a year by offering the services of my 11-year-old daughter who would be more than capable of performing such tasks for the price of a tenner and a few bags of Haribo cola bottles.
They obviously do little else as I have not seen sight nor sound of such organisers for many, many months despite being a Parliamentary Candidate.
Perhaps the Party thinks PPCs who are councillors and mothers have not time for such fripperies. The lack of support would lead me to believe so.
For that reason I’ve cancelled my, already generous, standing order and when my membership expires in October the Party can sing for it.
Yours, with b***** all left to lose.
Sally

Hat tip Matt Chorley and the WMN

Coulson will have to go

There will be frenzied planning in David Cameron’s office today after it emerged a newspaper his press secretary Andy Coulson ran tapped the phones of everyone and his wife.

The problem for Cameron is that he can’t stand on the moral high-ground demanding the departure of Damian McBride – you remember Smeargate of course – and now keep Coulson under his wing.

McBride’s case was different – his misdemeanours were committed while he was working for the Prime Minister, while Coulson’s situation occurred in a previous career at the News of The World. Plus the former editor claims he knew nothing of it.

The editors of the papers I’ve worked at had a very good idea of all the big stories being cooked up.

In terms of Coulson’s position it’s irrelevant whether he knew or not, because muck sticks and if Cameron doesn’t jettison his press secretary it’ll stick to him too.

So the planning they’ll be doing now, I suspect, is how to minimise the impact of his departure.

PMQs vid

Hat tip Mindtrackresearch

Harman makes best of a bad hand

I actually thought Harriet Harman did a better job of arguing Labour’s case on cuts Vs investment than Brown has done until now.

If you start from the point that Labour’s case is full of holes, to advocate it you have to stay away from the figures – which is what Harman did.

It even meant she didn’t look totally stupid when challenged with the 0% rise claim. She didn’t defend it at all, she just talked about something else.

If it were Brown he would have pulled out a list of stats that didn’t add up, before making some sort of tenuous claim about them.

His problem is that he can’t avoid the figures when he’s talking because normally that’s the only area he’s comfortable with.

All in all, PMQs was a fairly tedious affair today, the Tories had to keep themselves amused.

Nadine Dorries even gave Andrew Robathan a flirtatious little tickle on her way out, making the whip jump like a girl.

Coaker makes impact

Minister Vernon Coaker had a grounding moment just now when he went to give evidence to the Children, Schools and Family Committee.

Just as everyone was about to get started chair Barry Sheerman MP commented that it was the first time Coaker had been in front of the committee in his new role as Schools Minister.

“Er, we were here three weeks ago chair. Nice to know we’re having an impact,” the minister replied to chuckles in the room.

Healey drives me up the wall

I heard Housing Minister John Healey defending his party’s dog whistle politics on the Today show this morning.

You’d have thought they would have learnt their lesson after the “British Jobs, for British workers” fiasco.

Instead they decided to promise local authorities more power to prioritise “local people” for housing.

No doubt it’s a reaction to, and an attempt to stymie, the BNP’s success – but actually it plays right into their hands.

Healey dodged the issue, using that most irritating style of ignoring what was being asked and answering a different question.

To be fair, many politicians do it. But when it’s employed with such precise obtuseness, it’s enough to drive one to distraction.

Conservative rural re-action

Lobbydog was unimpressed with the Conservative’s Rural Action campaign which the party “launched” today.

Rural Action was touted as an “agenda for rural communities”. In truth it was largely made up of previously announced proposals collected in a document with “rural” written on the front.

It seemed particularly meagre as Gordon Brown was given such an ear-bashing by the Tories for wrapping up old policies in new packaging with the Building Britain’s Future plan last week.

In Rural Action the Tories said they’d help save village schools by abolishing current limits on surplus places. But this was a wider policy David Cameron and Michael Gove proposed as far back as 18 months ago.

Under Rural Action the party would also let communities decide where new developments went through Local Housing Trusts, something Grant Schapps announced in April.

Then there was the document’s promise to help small firms with tax relief – one of Caroline Spelman’s announcements from March.

They would’ve been better off highlighting the benefit of their policies to rural areas when they were first announced – and targeting the relevant rural media outlets to hammer the point home.

Instead they’re trying to convince rural lobby groups that they’re important because they have their very own “agenda” document, full of polices announced months ago for everyone else.

Shadow rural affairs minister Jim Paice admitted the Tories don’t have the rural vote sewn up yet – if they want it they need to do better than this.

Lords scold Government

A Lords Committee has slammed the Government’s attempt to bring in new laws to improve standards of conduct in Westminster.

The Parliamentary Standards Bill was pushed out in the wake of the expenses scandal.

The Bill has already suffered two setbacks after parts – including one which would rob MPs of protection to speak freely in the Commons – were defeated.

Now the Lords Constitution Committee has said what others suspected – it has all been too rushed.

They wrote: “The Bill is the product of a desire to respond to a demand to see something done, as the Government put it, rather than the product of a law making process suitable for a bill with serious constitutional repercussions.

They said the Government’s attempt to fast-track the bill was “wholly unacceptable”.

Osborne's detractor

Here is the chair of Tatton Labour Party giving his reasons for making a complaint against the shadow chancellor on Sky News.

Acid test burns

The Royal Mail stand down will have left Mandy fuming, though only inside of course. He’s far too polished to let his hair get out of place.

There were rumours that an unspoken deal was done over the issue at the Labour meeting, which saved Brown’s premiership, last month.

If Brown had to stay, said angry backbenchers, so too did Royal Mail.

The Government’s struggle to get the institution part-privatised was branded by Ken Clarke as an acid test of the leadership’s strength.

That it failed is not a huge surprise, we all knew the Government was weak. But what may become of Royal Mail now could still be a huge shock.

Royal Mail makes a profit of more than £320m but has a £10bn pension deficit, that makes paying for tech upgrades – and everyone admits they need it to survive – very difficult.

In other words without substantial amounts of new cash from somewhere it’s going down the toilet.

Tessa Jowell's face is a picture

Immediately after PMQs 25 to 30 hacks surrounded Michael Ellam, Brown’s spokesman, and harangued him over what – in the name of jumping jehosifa – a 0% rise is.

The likes of the Spectator’s Fraser Nelson, the FT’s George Parker and the Sun’s George Pasco Watson – who were leading the interrogation – looked astonished as Ellam attempted to explain that a 0% rise was indeed a rise.

The weird claim, along with Brown’s equally bizarre statement that Tory policy was to increase unemployment, made this a particularly desperate performance for the PM.

Hat tip to Crown Blog, speedy as ever.

Second wave of repossession coming

Amid talk of hope and stability came a little dose of reality yesterday.

Official figures showing the number of people in arrears on their mortgage and repossessions are apparently dropping.

But housing experts reminded MPs on the Treasury Select Committee that the figures are still at their highest level since 1991.

Dominic Lindley of Which actually said arrears were rising right now and that official figures were misleading.

Meanwhile Kay Boycott of Shelter warned there was a second wave of repossessions coming in 2010.

The first factor was that interest rates are low and are keeping arrears down – when they inevitably rise they will send mortgage payments beyond people’s means.

Market conditions and rising unemployment count – for every 10% in sustained unemployment, she said, you get 30% in increase in arrears.

Finally – the mortgage rescue schemes that are in place are time limited, they start to run out at the end of next year.

Without the extra support, she said, the people who would have had their houses repossessed or gone into arrears may do anyway – leading to the second wave.

Which begs the question – if we were only prolonging the inevitable was it worth it?

Reprioritising Britian's Future

Regional hacks did a right hatchet job on Building Britain’s Future last night.

In question was the promise to spend £1.5bn building homes, creating 45,000 construction jobs.

Half of the money would come from "underspends" at the Home Office and the health, education and transport departments.

Another £750m would be raised by "reprioritising" existing housing budgets at the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG).

Hold on. If you’re moving money from one budget to another, isn’t one of those budgets being boosted and the other being cut?

Apparently not, officials said – there are no cuts, only reprioritisations.
So which budgets are being reprioritised?

In the end a DCLG spokesman suggested that they didn’t exactly know yet.

We’ve got a briefing with Brown later today – if all funding for proposals are this shambolic it’s going to be ugly.

MP jostles for slither of celebrity limelight

Not much passes in the celebrity world these days without Gordon Brown making a trite statement shortly after.

And after the PM got involved in the Susan Boyle affair it was only to be expected he’d make some statement on Michael Jackson’s death.

Only one other person could possibly match such a level of bandwagonism – and today that person inevitably came through.

Radical reform, well, reform anyway… sort of

Seems as though the Government’s gusto for handing power back to Parliament has already dampened.

They decided to set up a Reform Committee which would get to set out how new powers – including Parliament scheduling its own business – would work.

At the moment the Government gets to decide what things are debated, and when – enabling them to use scheduling to their own advantage.

After a lot of big words the signs were that ministers were ready to let Parliament control its own scheduling, until Harriet Harman published the motion laying out what powers the Reform Committee could discuss.

It talks of the committee discussing the scheduling of “non-governmental” business. See it here, click and scroll down to number 66.

That means Parliament would not get to schedule any of the laws put forward by Government – 85% of what goes through the Commons.

So to a House which is meant to be the main check on Government, ministers are effectively saying, “you can have more power over everything – but the Government”.

Labour's latest attack on Tory cuts

Is it me or does this feel a little amateurish?

Recession hits firm of former Tory Health Secretary

The clothing company that Stephen Dorrell MP, former Health Secretary, is chairman of is in dire straits.

Wensum has announced it won’t be able to publish its annual accounts and shares are no longer being traded.

The firm merged with Dorrell's Crown East business in December 2008 at a point when its shares were trading at about 26p.

Dorrell took over as Chairman of the combined group on June 10, five days before they announced the suspension of trading.

War criminal?

An MP I was chatting to earlier said he’d wanted to call Tony Blair a “war criminal” during the Iraq War Inquiry debate today.

When he ran the idea past the Commons authorities they said he may not make it to the end of his speech if he did.

The English language was "rich enough" to say what he wanted to say, they informed him, without using words which were likely to cause a "sharp intake of breath."

UPDATE 25/06/09: Just in case you hadn't worked it out, the MP was Alan Simpson and he worked out a way to say what he wanted quite well.

Vaz and Hewitt play role in Bercow campaign

Pat Hewitt has informed Lobbydog that she was one of the MPs who sponsored John Bercow in his campaign to win the Speaker's chair.

Every candidate needed 12 to 15 sponsors, at least three of which must be from a different party.

Tory MP Edward Garnier reckoned there was only one Conservative member on Bercow's sponsor list.

I guess it was Julian Lewis MP as he was dutifully holding up little prompt notes for Bercow while he tried to do the "speaking without notes" trick at the election debate on Monday night.

Meanwhile, I've learnt that the notorious Keith Vaz – who pops up in all sorts of newspaper stories – also played a role in Bercow's campaign, though I’m not sure what yet.

The garden path comes back to haunt Beckett

When I spoke to Margaret Beckett last night she sounded angry – if I was her I would be too.

Just over two weeks ago she was sacked from the Government, without really being given a good reason by the PM.

Then, some say by Gordon Brown’s design, she was encouraged to stand for the Speaker’s position – possibly with the promise of support from whips.

No doubt many a Labour MP will have pledged support and there was the prospect of back-up from Tories disgruntled with Bercow.

The whips’ involvement back-fired, the Tory support didn’t come and her backing fell away after the first ballot – despite more votes being available.

She wasn’t willing to speak openly last night, but I suspect she feels as though she has been led up the garden path.

Bitter Dorries

After seeing some Tory MPs’ expressions last night I guess it’s not surprising that there is already talk of an attempt to flush Bercow away after the election.

When he was giving his victory speech Bercow started to say that the first thing he thought of after winning was his “wife”.

But before he could say that last word, a Tory MP – I’m certain it was Nadine Dorries – shouted out “wages”.

She’s just been on the Today show claiming Bercow only got three votes from Tory MPs.

Talk of an overthrow may be sour tittle-tattle that will subside, but it highlights a major obstacle for Bercow in pushing through any reform.

Tories are sickened by Bercow

There were 15 to 20 people on the Tory benches who simply refused to applaud John Bercow when his victory was announced in the Speaker’s election.

The looks on their faces were simply priceless.

When Labour MPs rubbed salt in the wound by making it a standing ovation some gave-in and began clapping, others remained glued to the benches.

Their collective jaws ground as Bercow promised not to launch into a lengthy victory speech – only to then go and do just that.

All over for Beckett?

Technically she goes through to the next round, but the voting figures look ominous for Derby MP Margaret Beckett.

She got less than half the number of front runner, John Bercow, and the votes of the bottom four candidates, who got knocked out in the first round, don’t look likely to be redistributed her way.

Those who voted Parmjit Dhanda will be looking for a reform candidate, which Beckett ain’t.

Meanwhile Tories who voted for Sir Michael Lord, Sir Patrick Cormack and Richard Shepherd will be drawn to Sir George Young.

But Bercow is looking like a very strong favourite to win overall.

On another note – how did Sir Michael Lord only manage nine votes when you need between 13 and 15 to get nominated in the first place?

Full results:

John Bercow, 179, Sir George Young, 112, Margaret Beckett, 74, Sir Alan Haselhurst, 66, Alan Beith, 55, Ann Widdecombe, 44, Parmjit Dhanda 26, Richard Shepherd, 15, Sir Patrick Cormack, 13 and Sir Michael Lord, 9.

Speaker election tit-bits

Just nipped in to blog while they're voting in the first round.

Beckett called herself a "House of Commons Woman".

She was solid but will have confirmed the fears of those who don't think she'll push reform hard enough.

She said she would not instigate change, but would "facilitate" it.

Bercow tried to do the "speaking without notes" trick, but his oddball mate Julian Lewis was sitting next to him holding up prompts.

I think we'll probably need another two rounds of voting after the first.

Beckett emerging as front runner

It’s looking more and more as though Margaret Beckett is going to clinch the Speaker’s position later.

A coalition of Tory MPs who want to keep John Bercow out and Labour MPs who want someone who will be “kind” – that very word was used to me – will seal the deal for the former Foreign Secretary.

Word is that Labour whips have even been employed to garner support for Beckett, the thinking being she would also be “kind” to the Government.

Accordingly her odds have been shortened by the bookies.

There is a big question over whether Beckett would bring the kind of radical change called for.

Actually, there is a question over whether any Speaker has the power to bring about that type of transformation.

Redactions

The amount of information that has been “redacted” (I hate that word) from the MPs’ claim forms and receipts is scandalous.

Having seen un-redacted copies of some MPs’ documents I can say there is a lot of information, written notes and so on, that allows people to get a full picture of what is happening.

As it is many of these documents pose more questions than they answer.

No-one wants to see an MP’s secretary’s bank details, so redact them. But at least the post-code of an MP’s address should be published to check for flipping.

Everything else should have been published.

Sadly Parliament missed the opportunity again to be totally honest about all this, and it is left up to the Daily Telegraph to put the truth out there.

Hewitt snaps up directorship

Patricia Hewitt, who is quitting as an MP at the next election, said she wanted to stand down to spend more time with her family.

I guess when she said “family” she meant it in a very broad sense, because today she was appointed the new senior independent director at BT.

Ms Hewitt, Leicester West, has been on the board at BT since last March.

How Ken Clarke will vote in the Speaker's election

The shadow business secretary told Lobbydog he's planning to vote for Sir George Young.

He says Sir George has the experience and knowledge of parliamentary procedure behind the scenes and in the House.

"It needs to be someone with great personal respect and an air of authority," he said.

"He is a man of impeccable integrity."

Clarke added that Margaret Beckett has enough authority to do the job, but he wants it to be a Tory.

So if it comes down to a choice between her and John Bercow, he'll go for Bercow.

Fingers in throat

Sycophancy is not unusual in the Commons, but tributes now being paid to Michael Martin are enough to make me sick.

This is the House that chose, just a few weeks ago, to drive hundreds of knives into the man's back.

Most MPs that didn’t directly attack him were happy to sit quiet while others did the dirty work.

Now they are standing one by one to lick the proverbial – Martin is apparently “warm”, “kind” and “courteous”. You’ll be surprised to hear it wasn’t either Kate Hoey or Pat Hewitt who said those things.

Nicholas Winterton, who was found to have broken rules by claiming for a flat his family owned, said he was "completely satisfied" with the Speaker’s performance.

An endorsement like that is worse than anything any opponent could have said.

Wobbly hand at PMQs

Brown’s voice started to wobble at the end of the bout between the leaders at PMQs – but it was nothing compared to his hand which shook like a pink blamange.

The PM must’ve been stung from the last time his wobbling hand gave away his anger at PMQs, because this time he tried to hide it under his other arm.

From where I was sitting it was on show, but it was mutual loathing – and I don’t use that word lightly – that you could feel between the two leaders today.

It was an extended tussle that set out the battle lines of the debate that both leaders know is now crucial to their fortunes.

Cameron says Brown will cut spending and is lying if the PM says anything else. Brown says Cameron is going to cut services while Labour will keep the cash flowing.

The Tory Leader normally listens, smiling sarcastically, while Brown speaks – today he shouted repeatedly “answer the question” in frustration.

He even got reprimanded by the Speaker for addressing the Prime Minister as “you” – a big no-no in the Commons.

Making a profit out of expenses isn't wrong

“There seems to be an assumption on the part of many that it is definitely wrong – and I have to say it’s a very difficult, if you like, moral issue with which to wrestle.

“I don’t find it easy to conclude one way or another whether it is morally wrong. Certainly, in the context of what I’ve tried to explain are the origins of this, I think it is difficult to conclude that it is wrong.”

That’s what Alan Duncan said when asked at the expenses inquiry if it was wrong for MPs to make a profit from selling taxpayer funded houses.

Mr Duncan previously explained that the system of allowances had originally been set up as a pay supplement for MPs.

He added that MPs had therefore entered into arrangements as part of an “overall package” which only now did they understand was “totally discredited”.

Duncan obviously doesn’t wrestle with moral issues that often if he finds this one a toughie.

Labour cuts to school capital spending?

A couple of days after Building Schools for the Future (BSF) was slammed by the Public Accounts Committee, Ed Balls has raised the prospect of the project being further delayed.

BSF is the Government’s plan to rebuild every upper school and was meant to be complete by 2020.

That completion date was pushed back to 2023 as a result, the committee said, of “over optimistic” and “poor planning”.

But speaking to Lobbydog today Ed Balls refused to commit the Government to the 2023 deadline.

He said: “We are working very hard to make sure BSF stays on track. Now, obviously the pace at which we can move to that goal depends on the funds that are available to us.”

He added that the “state of the economy” over the next few years and what happened with unemployment and debt interest would “very substantially affect” how much money BSF might get.

Is that Labour speak for a possible spending cut?