tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-46583475911663616482024-03-19T09:36:06.480+00:00LOBBYDOGGossip, opinion and Westminster tales.
The inside track on what your Notts MPs are up to...Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.comBlogger1071125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-3832925181671424492012-03-02T18:13:00.001+00:002012-03-26T19:55:46.968+01:00So long....Dear Readers,<br /><br />Thanks for supporting this blog over the last few years. Writing it has been an absolute pleasure, though the time has come to shut this particular site down.<br /><br />You can still follow me on twitter @Lobbydog, or you can subscribe to me at Facebook, Joe Watts (Lobbydog), and soon read my new blog at the <a href="http://http//www.edp24.co.uk/news/politics">Eastern Daily Press </a>website where I am now Political Editor.<br /><br />If you are looking for Notts content please go to www.thisisnottingham.co.uk<br /><br />It’s been entertaining, see you on the other side.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com248tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-87727717309912525862012-02-08T10:27:00.001+00:002012-02-08T10:29:47.552+00:00Battle of the speeches<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHXdAtYDxerJZiqCMl0UyMMQQy7LW9CB98UJ2uzO190Fbtasn_han8viV5RtJnPkxN_-OyVAMsaYSpCRaZvAYHcrM1GRaI3GylZG5SiRT3KtbMyntCR6t1vpNKnr63LcJ2RqwBgX_Uf5eW/s1600/EdMili12.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 211px; height: 323px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHXdAtYDxerJZiqCMl0UyMMQQy7LW9CB98UJ2uzO190Fbtasn_han8viV5RtJnPkxN_-OyVAMsaYSpCRaZvAYHcrM1GRaI3GylZG5SiRT3KtbMyntCR6t1vpNKnr63LcJ2RqwBgX_Uf5eW/s400/EdMili12.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5706710016975910178" /></a>When the press notice came through this morning that Ed Miliband would be giving a speech on Thursday on “fairness in tough times” there was something about it that smelt a bit fusty.<br /><br />I couldn’t put my finger on it till I glanced over at my diary and realised what it was. The Labour Leader’s speech, timed to begin at 6pm, will take place at exactly the same time as a speech by his one-time-mentor turned nemeses – Maurice Glasman.<br /><br />It was Lord Glasman, once described as a father-figure for Miliband, who soiled the Labour Leader’s January by writing an article claiming he had “no strategy, no narrative and little direction.”<br /><br />I’ll be tweeting from the Glasman speech on Thursday and if he says anything interesting I’d wager it is he, and not Miliband, who gets more column inches on Friday morning.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com327tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-38477015515846735032012-02-06T17:04:00.006+00:002012-02-06T17:20:51.914+00:00David Miliband suggests Coalition unemployment policy may have some merit<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiOX9OO1A73X_-wWcInsaL1e5Y1R5iEezWA7ldZe0B7Xk6sp-nsKIx28_em8g13082yCSmIKFNFpX98gAl4Bfwm8oaorjxjaTbJc8OQp94-NzPPP_ZXXmRjnaM72nnkZw1BlJ9gfj-Xlvj/s1600/Miliband11.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 201px; height: 283px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiOX9OO1A73X_-wWcInsaL1e5Y1R5iEezWA7ldZe0B7Xk6sp-nsKIx28_em8g13082yCSmIKFNFpX98gAl4Bfwm8oaorjxjaTbJc8OQp94-NzPPP_ZXXmRjnaM72nnkZw1BlJ9gfj-Xlvj/s400/Miliband11.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5706070315538051090" /></a>Earlier on we had a briefing with David Miliband who has been touting the proposals for tackling youth unemployment from a commission which he chaired.<br /> <br />In his opening spiel he said: “In terms of reforming the welfare state we’re saying that if you’re unemployed, if you’re on the Work Programme for a year you should automatically get a part time job guarantee – part time so that you can spend the rest of the time looking for work.<br /><br />“We say that if you’re unemployed or on the Work Programme for two years you need to be in a long term subsidised job.”<br /><br />The Work Programme is the Coalition’s flagship back-to-work policy, which sees contractors tasked to find jobs for the unemployed. <br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgINhjTddde4fT2_b1S7WxYT7nY1HOFOvp3E36ynnNEIRjeJ03txWfzsja0KHlkJrNg4EhtbJY6fXOQxUFv5Oqj-vkWSe-_wfsuoDA9zj0DYDsvjzF1ZrBsNMjSkIH2wFTKxsUqnAfxQOd2/s1600/EdMili11.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 140px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgINhjTddde4fT2_b1S7WxYT7nY1HOFOvp3E36ynnNEIRjeJ03txWfzsja0KHlkJrNg4EhtbJY6fXOQxUFv5Oqj-vkWSe-_wfsuoDA9zj0DYDsvjzF1ZrBsNMjSkIH2wFTKxsUqnAfxQOd2/s400/EdMili11.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5706070630817098258" /></a>It’s interesting that David is suggesting ideas that incorporate the Work Programme because the official Labour Party line espoused by Ed has been to slag it off and say the previous government’s Future Jobs Fund (FJF) should be reinstated (see <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jan/10/ed-miliband-urges-extension-bank-bonus-tax">here</a> and <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm111123/debtext/111123-0001.htm#11112385000015">here</a>). <br /><br />So did David Miliband’s comments today mean he supported the Work Programme on some level and stood against the FJF – he did claim that the Work Programme was not extensive enough but went on to say…<br /><br />“The Future Jobs Fund had good aspects including the sense of reality that it was a real job, but it also had some problems, for example in targeting different needs amongst young people – it was an emergency response to the recession.<br /><br />“We say very clearly that we want to learn from the Work Programme, not reopen the debate to go back to it or not have it – we can actually learn from it.” <br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiun4wlNW7ffHh6Poj25zkRtk7zXn4TQPNJvmU-rygK1GsaeRKMSfU0czDUemCST3lJb-wRfznRrgITA_vtR9_jKfPqKCoZ4gEdmJQthb1ch0Gkg7HJwVFYNtrMqJ3lWPm4rn261oU6y4rw/s1600/Milibandmiliband1.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 283px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiun4wlNW7ffHh6Poj25zkRtk7zXn4TQPNJvmU-rygK1GsaeRKMSfU0czDUemCST3lJb-wRfznRrgITA_vtR9_jKfPqKCoZ4gEdmJQthb1ch0Gkg7HJwVFYNtrMqJ3lWPm4rn261oU6y4rw/s400/Milibandmiliband1.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5706071034339951410" /></a>David’s response appears to be a break from Ed’s idea that the FJF should just be reinstated. Meanwhile there is the clear suggestion that the Coalition’s Work Programme has positive aspects.<br /><br />I’m sure David would say this isn’t criticism of Ed's chosen path of course, just a thoughtful contribution to the debate.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com216tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-22955912811129247872012-01-19T17:57:00.004+00:002012-01-19T18:11:51.423+00:00Boom and Bust - the definitive explanation<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjToSzEQ9GMRJX97B0b5Q0GZS7lorJhNBVXtUHLPwOx5-3WHJb0UmodyVgibZqDKs1VdyWxgehMKNyOwCoNV4TD7MNHaNDH_8HjR2U15s5vJdyzve8d96_fzNQ314BdxEd2LQ8n6m0D_2nN/s1600/Balls5.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 208px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjToSzEQ9GMRJX97B0b5Q0GZS7lorJhNBVXtUHLPwOx5-3WHJb0UmodyVgibZqDKs1VdyWxgehMKNyOwCoNV4TD7MNHaNDH_8HjR2U15s5vJdyzve8d96_fzNQ314BdxEd2LQ8n6m0D_2nN/s400/Balls5.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5699404218940144114" /></a>At the Press Gallery Lunch earlier The Guardian’s Michael White and Ed Balls had a conversation about the claim that Labour had abolished Boom and Bust, and it led to the most, shall we say, meticulous explanation of it that I have heard. It follows here…<br /><br />Michael White: <em>Whenever Gordon Brown said, as he so often did, ‘no more boom and bust’, some of us GCSE economists flinched because we knew that couldn’t possibly be true. We thought it couldn’t be right. What did you think?</em><br /><br />Ed Balls: <em>I think, economist or not, the power of retrospection is a great power.</em><br /><br />MW: <em>No. That’s the chairman’s cheap joke, come on, what did you think at the time?</em><br /><br />EB: <em>Since 2008 there have been many people who have written columns that said in retrospect that phrase about ‘boom and bust’ shouldn’t have been used. But I certainly used the boom and bust phrase as did other politicians in the previous 15 years. Go back to the first time it was used, was in the Labour party economic policy submission to Labour party conference of 1993. I wrote the words, and it was basically pointing out how Conservative politicians of the previous ten years, particularly Nigel Lawson, in their attempt to play politics with interest rates and the currency had ended up with self-inflicted boom and bust ups and downs, and the solution to that boom and bust political interference was an independent central bank, which was our argument. It was never an argument which was, ‘we could abolish the economic cycle’. It was an argument that we could through bank independence prevent the self inflicted political mistakes of the political era.<br />Did, as the years go on and Gordon Brown made more and more budget speeches, did he sometimes give the impression that stability might have been cemented into the British economic reality and psyche….perhaps. And perhaps in retrospect that was a rhetorical error.</em><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhr5w69HEj53-sGvpJsaN4FkYvqf1h4i5QeBVeVg4EuuH36zqU7rnYkSes0WArvNyc8uL53oPuaRRdH7ymX5UvdGCS-tWbCjFQ9LHTQ83hYAb_xpIUjXxrnfLWv08yiP41TauSe2cm1HTiz/s1600/Balls8.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 139px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhr5w69HEj53-sGvpJsaN4FkYvqf1h4i5QeBVeVg4EuuH36zqU7rnYkSes0WArvNyc8uL53oPuaRRdH7ymX5UvdGCS-tWbCjFQ9LHTQ83hYAb_xpIUjXxrnfLWv08yiP41TauSe2cm1HTiz/s400/Balls8.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5699404374941900274" /></a>It is only a “rhetorical error” rather than an “error”, Balls explained, because the fact that Labour used the phrase was not a reflection of an irresponsible fiscal policy executed by the party, as claimed by the Tories. The country’s economic situation going into 2008 was sound, said Balls.<br /><br />So summed up, the boom and bust thing was just a phrase that Gordon Brown got a bit carried away with. I’ll say he did.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com124tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-20476067683071969262012-01-19T12:08:00.003+00:002012-01-19T12:14:49.083+00:00Cameron's speech is, er, more about "setting tone"...<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxmWgR5FztBWZ8K7-5kEBO4OEwHOhIgq9dz_IR73107QZYE2t3dyu-SLAFjIYJuEdLnGg8YkEcd6-MLXrhbplRztsOGWHvXc2psi8fP7kIVau20J_mGpcY-_uYwe4P6avIXOzJPzOqzvly/s1600/Cameron14.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 140px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxmWgR5FztBWZ8K7-5kEBO4OEwHOhIgq9dz_IR73107QZYE2t3dyu-SLAFjIYJuEdLnGg8YkEcd6-MLXrhbplRztsOGWHvXc2psi8fP7kIVau20J_mGpcY-_uYwe4P6avIXOzJPzOqzvly/s400/Cameron14.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5699314169063681682" /></a>There was a rather distracting Union Jack poster behind the PM as he gave his speech on capitalism just now – it almost meant I missed the new thing in his speech which was thoroughly tucked away.<br /><br />The talk was the latest move in a bid to wrestle the lucrative “responsible capitalism” territory away from Ed Miliband. It’s been riling the Tories that the Labour Leader has been going round saying he started the debate on the issue in his conference speech last September.<br /><br />And so to show that actually the Tories were talking about it first, Cameron claimed his party set the ground for this debate years ago, and just to make sure Eddie couldn’t trump him again he went as far back as Disraeli and Pitt, before Labour even existed.<br /><br />Most of the rest of the speech was doing that thing that the Tories do quite often, where they choose a theme and then try and show how all their existing policies already link into it.<br /><br />So here renewal of the right-to-buy scheme, academies and free schools all tied into moral capitalism.<br /><br />Then 2,600 words into a 2,800 word speech the PM announced that there were 12million co-operative members in the UK and that their groups are governed by 17 pieces of legislation.<br /><br />“Today I can announce they will all be brought together and simplified in a new Co-Operatives Bill that will be put before Parliament.”<br /><br />I know he’s unable to step on the toes of Vince Cable, announcing measures on executive pay in the near future, but it’s hardly a measure to get the blood racing is it.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com90tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-63082800625914571432011-12-13T10:47:00.001+00:002011-12-13T10:49:48.736+00:00Footage of Commons debate on EU veto...If you didn't catch it yesterday...<br /><br /><iframe width="400" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/RWaoZa0t1yk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><br /><br />Uploaded on to Youtube by TAofMoriduraLobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com127tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-17617448562157003092011-12-12T18:55:00.006+00:002011-12-12T23:23:08.476+00:00Preview of tomorrow's column...<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgs1k2-PkmmaHlZSFCoES9HlWrGiSIYG4kBPfEJw0bXRWaJfa-0ty2wFx-iQXrS-3DhbtWG0KJUQT6IAfeDmuiP_Chi1jb8dONkUWup-C5IeIiRSA9qW6twopy5nNkna10ekSZz_OOgFRlE/s1600/EdMili10.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 215px; height: 312px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgs1k2-PkmmaHlZSFCoES9HlWrGiSIYG4kBPfEJw0bXRWaJfa-0ty2wFx-iQXrS-3DhbtWG0KJUQT6IAfeDmuiP_Chi1jb8dONkUWup-C5IeIiRSA9qW6twopy5nNkna10ekSZz_OOgFRlE/s400/EdMili10.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5685318174780169826" /></a>Here is a section of tomorrow's column in the Stoke Sentinel, buy the paper in the morning to get the full thwack...<br /><br /><em>Eddie suspected this all made the PM look a little like a loony right-winger, or at least like a PM kowtowing to a bunch of loony right-wingers on his backbenches.<br /><br />But instead of stating it outright he asked what moderate pro-EU Tory peer Lord Heseltine had said on the issue.<br /><br />The comment induced a hail of laughter from the rather mean righties on the Tory benches who see grandee Heseltine, nicknamed Tarzan in-part because of his wild hair, as a figure of fun.<br /><br />“Oh, Oh, Oh,” said Ed managing to bend his mouth into such a perfect circle that it could have been used to mint a one pound coin.<br /><br />“Oh Mr Speaker, oh how significant,” he continued. “That’s what they think of Lord Heseltine now in the Tory party,” added Miliband finally getting his own back for the Blair botch.<br /><br />He then went on to quote Heseltine’s moderate view on the EU adding: “But it’s no longer the Conservative party of Lord Heseltine, it’s the Conservative party of the Right Honourable Member for Stone.”<br /><br />That member is of course Stone MP Bill Cash – arch eurosceptic, arch agitator for his cause, arch thorn in the side of successive Tory leaders.</em><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2iRjYWa88z2GX6Pv2rvURfRNfBtj3_AVYl_bnzFTRfcTh-0Bo0R_oXorNn-ABNHD9lHqIJcIch4lC2K4Pl0JwqqYKhCOcDOVjSTvq01MP-JJrIcpRDOOkNnFK5JIfZDxawoAhncOcxeHZ/s1600/Cash+Bill+2.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 206px; height: 293px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2iRjYWa88z2GX6Pv2rvURfRNfBtj3_AVYl_bnzFTRfcTh-0Bo0R_oXorNn-ABNHD9lHqIJcIch4lC2K4Pl0JwqqYKhCOcDOVjSTvq01MP-JJrIcpRDOOkNnFK5JIfZDxawoAhncOcxeHZ/s400/Cash+Bill+2.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5685318647002552434" /></a><em>And for one golden moment you could see the thought fancifully dancing about behind his eyes – ‘the Conservative Party of Bill Cash’. What a glorious day it would be when that party came to power.<br /><br />An immediate embargo slapped on Croissants, mange tout renamed ‘flat beans’, peppered German salami vetoed – every Englishman waking up every morning drinking English tea with his full-English breakfast – hurrah!</em><br /><br />I'll post a link to the full column tomorrow night.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com41tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-67761112126350942002011-12-12T18:02:00.002+00:002011-12-12T18:05:58.082+00:00Clegg answers questions on his absence at EU debate<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipqNUNlfuulZ9BXO8AmBS8UsObSgNrXs0B_5sUW256CHB50fz_g-AdRY8-bidmHLRXXe8ToklazWYgigKwjLg1XUvDcoHSHiHR5q31NkqZRaCKgyJrAGSY7dPZwa5KocuZLRwHm_tt8bHf/s1600/Clegg8.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 208px; height: 155px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipqNUNlfuulZ9BXO8AmBS8UsObSgNrXs0B_5sUW256CHB50fz_g-AdRY8-bidmHLRXXe8ToklazWYgigKwjLg1XUvDcoHSHiHR5q31NkqZRaCKgyJrAGSY7dPZwa5KocuZLRwHm_tt8bHf/s400/Clegg8.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5685304589670652466" /></a>For those of you that missed here are the DPM's words after he missed the debate on the EU statement: <br /><br /><em>DPM: The coalition government is here to stay. On Europe, what I’m going to do is this – build bridges, re-engage, and make sure that the British voice is heard at the top table in Europe. Why? Not for the sake of the EU as a whole, because I think that is the right thing for jobs in this country, for growth in this country and for the livelihoods of millions of families in this country because that’s what I care about most.</em><br /><br />Asked whether his not being there was a greater distraction:<br /><br /><em>DPM: The PM and I clearly do not agree on the outcome of the summit last week. I made it very clear that I think isolation in Europe when we are one against 26 is potentially a bad thing for jobs, a bad thing for growth and a bad thing for the livelihoods of millions of people in this country. I’m not here to defend the EU in and of itself; I am here to defend the jobs and livelihoods of millions of people in this country. That’s what I care about and that’s why I think what we need to do know is build bridges, re-engage and make sure that the British voice is heard loud and clear in the heart of Europe.</em><br /><br />Asked if he had changed his position since Friday:<br /> <br /><em>DPM: On Friday, I said that I regretted the outcome, and I’ve stuck to that line and I said that I thought that anti-Europeans should be careful what they wish for so I was quite clear on Friday that I was not welcoming the outcome of the...[interrupted]</em><br /><br />Asked about the fact that the negotiating position was agreed in advance:<br /><br /><em>DPM: I haven’t changed my mind on that at all. The specific list of safeguards which were sought, which was a list of negotiating asks, were perfectly reasonable and perfectly measured in their scope. I haven’t changed my mind one bit from the moment the summit was closed.</em><br /><br />Asked if he was running scared from his own MPs:<br /><br /><em>DPM: When I was told the outcome of the summit, after it finished, I immediately told the Prime Minister that I could not welcome it, that I thought it was bad for Britain. I have stayed with that view since, and I have simply amplified on my reasons for that since the summit.</em><br /><br />Asked how damaging this is to the coalition:<br /><br /><em>DPM: The Coalition Government is here to stay. That’s absolutely clear. On this issue – and by the way, there are many issues, of course, in the Coalition where the parties differ – we differ, and it so happens to be that this is a particularly significant issue. Why is it significant? It’s worth remembering. Not because all things in the European Union are perfect, far from it, but because I think that being isolated - as one - is potentially bad for jobs, bad for growth, bad for the livelihoods of millions of people in this country. But the Coalition Government is here to stay.</em>Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com40tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-19473853905851914662011-12-09T15:43:00.003+00:002011-12-09T15:49:42.813+00:00Odds on collapse of Euro<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinfRE8vBU4-O6EKO3bvLTXW_2lTKBDwINLlGr-ldxED9R4EWI5FZkMP9oIQTE5D464iPOkt0HlWZi5ccJi7apMPy_6wJcwNNzHZfrARd-PJAXkKynXjDChYPeuL6ZBHe6t6R-5oXfOlO43/s1600/Euroflags.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 200px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinfRE8vBU4-O6EKO3bvLTXW_2lTKBDwINLlGr-ldxED9R4EWI5FZkMP9oIQTE5D464iPOkt0HlWZi5ccJi7apMPy_6wJcwNNzHZfrARd-PJAXkKynXjDChYPeuL6ZBHe6t6R-5oXfOlO43/s400/Euroflags.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5684155984324646642" /></a>William Hill is now offering odds of 3/1 that the Euro will cease to exist as a currency by the end of 2012, and 2/9 that it will survive.<br /><br />The book-keeper have also slashed odds for the UK pulling out of the European Union before the next General Election from 33/1 to 20/1. <br /><br />But it has also seen money for a 2012 General Election as punters speculate that the Coalition could split over Europe. Hills have cut odds on a 2012 election from 5/1 to 4/1.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com84tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-53306796381875534702011-12-09T12:52:00.002+00:002011-12-09T12:57:35.082+00:00How will Cam be treated back in the UK?<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHCYTX2Z8AhgCRjxdCSx1LB6k0I8TufEuf-h0Kjpe1QWZIR2raQEdmU5BeE5Y_z5kCrYn2JgW4BeqZF2ql_tCr1JD-DKslwXu0KS4gerM_ZkYPh3tqoWiFpIcbIb3NNLN0u5nQRi-Ybi5Q/s1600/Cameron24.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 204px; height: 133px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHCYTX2Z8AhgCRjxdCSx1LB6k0I8TufEuf-h0Kjpe1QWZIR2raQEdmU5BeE5Y_z5kCrYn2JgW4BeqZF2ql_tCr1JD-DKslwXu0KS4gerM_ZkYPh3tqoWiFpIcbIb3NNLN0u5nQRi-Ybi5Q/s400/Cameron24.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5684111103411269362" /></a>A couple of days ago the main story of the EU summit was how the nations would save the Euro, but this morning it has changed to Britain’s veto and the future of the EU.<br /><br />That is even more so since our erstwhile allies in rejecting a deal, Hungary, the Czech Rep, and Sweden are all now looking to sign the “inter-governmental accord” leaving us in our very own group of one.<br /><br />That has suited France and Germany who have removed the UK as a potential barrier from blocking their goals. One Labour MP also suggested to me this morning that Cameron had been deliberately hostile to a deal in order to paint himself as a blueblooded eurosceptic before a potential election.<br /><br />Either way both Labour and Tory MPs that I’ve chatted with, both anti and pro EU, appear off-the-record to be agreeing on one thing – whatever deal the other 26 nations come up with, it won’t be enough to save the Euro.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhftERjBQo3Twr3KVFRQFAzZb33nFozXiZJ7ql0NWKDaM8a6Dnj9EA3Ox6Hbw4Uri2vWpHJzkiektb-mK5IKQCutyw_dqfN-XTZMx6HAD8-kuW4TRQ1Ma-xyWJwcGarTw-izVISguMNBjXV/s1600/Cameron20.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 312px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhftERjBQo3Twr3KVFRQFAzZb33nFozXiZJ7ql0NWKDaM8a6Dnj9EA3Ox6Hbw4Uri2vWpHJzkiektb-mK5IKQCutyw_dqfN-XTZMx6HAD8-kuW4TRQ1Ma-xyWJwcGarTw-izVISguMNBjXV/s400/Cameron20.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5684111923324257330" /></a>Many also agree that even if there had been a treaty – which would have needed to be ratified through nation states’ parliaments and referenda – the Euro may well have gone down anyway, because any treaty would not have been enough to calm the markets.<br /><br />That’s all speculation of course, but also a view of events “that might have been” which could shape the way Cameron is treated on his arrival back in the UK – one that moves away from seeing him as an isolated wrecker and towards a defender of the national interest in the face if an inevitable catastrophe.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com49tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-24806048287640552112011-12-08T14:33:00.005+00:002011-12-08T14:39:34.952+00:00Clegg on the eurozone<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgJntx_UXOHQ9AdaQjoRP69LC5UX1C8MqRZouG1AUeMg7OeVy1Iq60m_3EUVhLhuYolJG2-pS9xGhNWxCsPZPNZfsTkeZZaDFdcDW68z6vr_jCxvLe_NFmG-LJRIa2vqPdXQ62sUXjo_ZYO/s1600/Clegg9.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 194px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgJntx_UXOHQ9AdaQjoRP69LC5UX1C8MqRZouG1AUeMg7OeVy1Iq60m_3EUVhLhuYolJG2-pS9xGhNWxCsPZPNZfsTkeZZaDFdcDW68z6vr_jCxvLe_NFmG-LJRIa2vqPdXQ62sUXjo_ZYO/s400/Clegg9.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5683767087465309650" /></a>These are the latest quotes from Clegg on the eurozone crisis. Despite him saying he is "hand in glove" with David Cameron - which sounds a bit creepy by the way - on the issue of financial regulation, it doesn't quite feel that way. He points out that he is not asking for "exceptional" treatment for the City.<br /><br /><em>Deputy Prime Minister, what do you hope will come out of tomorrow’s meeting on the Eurozone?</em><br /><br />Well, what I want to see, and what this whole Coalition Government wants to see, on all sides of the Coalition, is that we do the right thing for the country as a whole, in the national interest. What does that mean? It means firstly that we of course must play our bit in making sure that the Eurozone sorts itself out, because that’s good for our economy, it’s good for jobs and growth in Britain. And secondly, we must do everything we can to avoid a great big split in the European Union. Because if you split, you fragment the single market, which, after all, is the world’s largest borderless single market. That’s bad for jobs and growth in this country. Three million people are dependent for their jobs on our access to the single market. I have been speaking to a large number of European leaders over the last several days and weeks and, you know, that British perspective is one that is widely heard and widely shared by many other countries in the European Union.<br /><br /><em>What do you expect the Prime Minister to be asking for at that meeting?</em><br /><br />The Prime Minister has been quite clear, and this is something that we all share in this Coalition Government, I mean I work in lockstep, hand in glove, with the Prime Minister on these issues, and as we are supportive to the Eurozone so they can sort their problems out, in return they introduce safeguards to ensure precisely what I said: that the single market is not fragmented and that important industries like the financial services industry are treated fairly. Not exceptional treatment, but are just simply treated fairly, on a level playing field within Europe.<br /><br /><em>You’ve said twice now that you’ve got to ensure there is no fragmentation of the market. Is there a danger that could happen?</em><br /><br />There is always a danger at a moment of crisis, when some countries are part of the Eurozone and others are not, that you get, in the rush to create an instant solution, that you get momentum towards different solutions for different parts of the European Union. I think that might be tempting in the short term, but could be damaging in the long term. We have to remain, as we always have been as a country, absolutely part of our European backyard, our neighbourhood, and we’ve got to be able to continue to sell our goods and services, and create growth and jobs in this country, because of our place in the single market.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com92tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-90479798475348396492011-12-08T09:47:00.003+00:002011-12-08T09:52:46.185+00:00European charades<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5DFzxjFxhxxCjcPcbHuqd_bRv5ZRFMp9KBeRAnLAtQj8jpvcInJso3MMn-U-gsvOfRFRqcKtHJbVu_oiIJUOig58JYz3OPOkZX3xrUq-qIQmiDBU5zhYA7sIfwsxdQi1-wkttmR2c98uU/s1600/eu_flag.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 205px; height: 169px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5DFzxjFxhxxCjcPcbHuqd_bRv5ZRFMp9KBeRAnLAtQj8jpvcInJso3MMn-U-gsvOfRFRqcKtHJbVu_oiIJUOig58JYz3OPOkZX3xrUq-qIQmiDBU5zhYA7sIfwsxdQi1-wkttmR2c98uU/s400/eu_flag.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5683692382850015746" /></a>When I spoke to senior people at the Department for Transport earlier this year there was complete befuddlement over how the French and Germans managed to give almost all their major train-manufacture contracts to firms in their home countries without breaking EU rules to prevent protectionism.<br /><br />As far as the British could see they were following exactly the same procurement process yet they were helpless to stop big deals often going to foreign firms – causing consternation and political problems at home when industries dependent on Government work lost contracts. <a href="http://www.thisisderbyshire.co.uk/Union-rep-tells-shaking-worker-s-tears-anguish/story-13542622-detail/story.html">Remember Thameslink?</a><br /><br />Anyway the Government spent the summer studying how the French and Germans get away with it and <a href="http://www.thisisderbyshire.co.uk/ministers-finally-learned-lessons-fiasco/story-14078232-detail/story.html">this article based on Government documents not seen elsewhere lays out some of the things ministers have learnt</a>.<br /><br />The beauty of the whole thing is that when British officials didn’t understand how to “fix” contracts so they went to home-based firms, they complained the French and Germans weren’t sharing their secrets and even said they were a victim of a “conspiracy of silence”.<br /><br />Now that they appear to be getting it, officials aren’t so willing to discuss the issue anymore, i.e. they have worked their way into the conspiracy.<br /><br />What we are left with is three big European governments all shamelessly pretending they operate in an open market, and yet all giving their contracts to home industries. Satire at its best.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com54tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-50272473868585205152011-11-30T13:37:00.003+00:002011-11-30T13:40:47.681+00:00PMQs - 'Weak, left wing and irresponsible' becomes new catchphrase<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXO_rqmtC9qAQnqtd6woQNdCIqNdX0BD-xpFNRTres8PEB2jxP5vC6zOY0R16RO1T2HNgO-2Br4dchafhGJHRQC-Dg83IM0DhY1FXYyDcE78Wn02OzL0CxZsMFFa30GGfdFQYZ4nYNGmMy/s1600/Balls11.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 203px; height: 245px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXO_rqmtC9qAQnqtd6woQNdCIqNdX0BD-xpFNRTres8PEB2jxP5vC6zOY0R16RO1T2HNgO-2Br4dchafhGJHRQC-Dg83IM0DhY1FXYyDcE78Wn02OzL0CxZsMFFa30GGfdFQYZ4nYNGmMy/s400/Balls11.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5680782842824000770" /></a>It’s not often I see Ed Miliband smile in the House of Commons. I mean a proper smile – open mouthed with teeth showing in absolute delight.<br /><br />But David Cameron’s comment that he came into politics to improve people’s welfare was enough to force one on to his face, and on to that of his dramatics chum’s face Ed Balls.<br /><br />It appears to me that Leader Ed has been taking some lessons of the other Ed on how to act while not speaking at PMQs. Widow twanky would have proud of Balls’ gurn when a question was asked by Jacob Rees-Mogg MP – a man who was written by PG Woodhouse rather than born. Indeed watching the Eds contort their faces as the Prime Minister spoke today was much more entertaining than listening to the PM try and bat away questions.<br /><br />That might also be because PMQs was a bit banal after the hype of the Autumn Statement yesterday. Even the strikes, which formed the first part of the debate between the two leaders, didn’t really ignite – perhaps Cameron wanted it that way given that he branded the action a “damp squib”.<br /><br />Ed knew that if he were not to exacerbate the difficulty of his position on the strikes, he would have to highlight them and align himself with anti-coalition feeling, if not fully back or oppose the action – something Cameron constantly poked him on, provoking the response from Ed that he would not “demonise dinner ladies”.<br /><br />Cameron came back with the usual line about Labour being in the pocket of the unions (better than taking millions from Lord Ashcroft retorted Ed), but twice used the phrase “weak, left wing and irresponsible” – suggesting this might be the new buzz phrase the Tories use when attacking Labour over industrial action in coming months.<br /><br />After that Ed floated on to tax credits and borrowing covering a lot of ground but not quite hitting any one of them meaningfully, a recurring theme in his PMQs attacks for me – until he gets that sorted I’m not sure he should be smiling quite as much as he was.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com23tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-9840224836153060702011-11-18T13:52:00.003+00:002011-11-18T13:56:21.970+00:00Leveson Inquiry witnessesHere is the list of witnesses at the phone-hacking inquiry next week:<br /><br /><strong>Monday 21st November</strong><br />Bob Dowler<br />Sally Dowler<br />Hugh Grant<br />Graham Shear<br />Joan Smith<br /><br /><strong>Tuesday 22nd November</strong><br />Steve Coogan<br />Mary-Ellen Field<br />Garry Flitcroft<br />Margaret Watson<br /><br /><strong>Wednesday 23rd November</strong><br />Sheryl Gascoigne<br />Mark Lewis<br />Gerry McCann<br />Tom Rowland<br /><br /><strong>Thursday 24th November</strong><br />HJK<br />Sienna Miller<br />Max Mosley<br />JK Rowling<br />Mark Thomson<br /><br /><strong>Monday 28th November</strong><br />Charlotte Church<br />Anne Diamond<br />Ian Hurst<br />Chris Jefferies<br />Jane WinterLobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-25003900968206092962011-11-09T16:49:00.006+00:002011-11-09T18:45:18.249+00:00Cameron's letter to Sepp Blatter<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6ji61ScLNrmUKbiJfvwdPt97OhY5rWA2QXz2NHPxzv_P6M93qVh4GzN4szrGjxj9xkYUAtLxZWOTYL3GxjkbkLrPtVeDyAs6yXRiouHhKkKOC7dEO177-orJcSRZfNk1KWUFEiBZcalfa/s1600/Cameron19.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 178px; height: 200px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6ji61ScLNrmUKbiJfvwdPt97OhY5rWA2QXz2NHPxzv_P6M93qVh4GzN4szrGjxj9xkYUAtLxZWOTYL3GxjkbkLrPtVeDyAs6yXRiouHhKkKOC7dEO177-orJcSRZfNk1KWUFEiBZcalfa/s400/Cameron19.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5673039389061119170" /></a>This just in - David Cameron's letter to FIFA chief (verbatim) over the poppy ban...<br /><br />Dear Sepp <br /><br />I know that you are aware of the importance of Remembrance Sunday in the United Kingdom, when we pay tribute those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in times of war.<br /><br />We fully understand, and respect, FIFA’s rules on its member nations not adorning their shirts with ‘commercial’, ‘political’, or ‘religious’ symbols or messages. However, wearing a poppy is an almost universal symbol throughout the United Kingdom - people from all backgrounds and walks of life across the country join together in doing this as an act of national remembrance, to commemorate those who gave their lives in the service of their country. I can assure you that there are no political connotations whatsoever to wearing a poppy. <br /><br />You will have seen the letter to you on this issue from Hugh Robertson, the Minister of Sport and Olympics, yesterday. The mood of the House of Commons on this issue today was clear - and I believe this reflects a similarly unambiguous sentiment across the country. <br /><br />I do hope that we will be able to find a sensible way through which allows British participants in this weekend's matches to commemorate those who have fallen in conflict.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-51279606281403834892011-11-08T17:18:00.002+00:002011-11-08T17:22:01.375+00:00Government justice plans in spotlight<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiT03D4Bd7NjD1qfIFz1oXkJ8hGVNGXam19YsHyszrYPUiIxB4m5E5gaGPZHwY38BnHDHZpVPESTH456q_x9YKQnRjgaFHordaMBfYjK2zUDLzD-t6xa7o1g9jEXxTF-spl4beOdRfwXuUB/s1600/Prisoner.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 204px; height: 140px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiT03D4Bd7NjD1qfIFz1oXkJ8hGVNGXam19YsHyszrYPUiIxB4m5E5gaGPZHwY38BnHDHZpVPESTH456q_x9YKQnRjgaFHordaMBfYjK2zUDLzD-t6xa7o1g9jEXxTF-spl4beOdRfwXuUB/s400/Prisoner.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5672676333915165106" /></a>Earlier in the House of Commons there were gasps of horror when an MP raised the case of a paedophile let out on day release by a secure mental health unit, who went on to try and rape a ten year old boy.<br /><br />You can <a href="http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/Man-admits-attempting-rape-boy-10-wood/story-13078297-detail/story.html">read the full story here</a>. It concerned one Shaun Tudor who was being held at St Andrew’s Healthcare in Notts.<br /><br />The unit is the UK’s largest not-for-profit mental healthcare charity providing secure services and care for 70 men with learning disabilities and autistic spectrum disorders.<br /><br />The MP asking about it was Sherwood’s Mark Spencer who used the case to question the Government’s plans to encourage more charities and private sector companies to start projects to rehabilitate criminals and then pay them according to the number who cease offending.<br /><br />Crispin Blunt responded: “That case referred to a patient who was detained under the Mental Heath Act – when unescorted leave required both the approval of the secretary of state with a risk assessment and with a recommendation from a responsible clinician.<br /><br />“There are no proposals for companies to be making these kinds of decisions.”<br /><br />None the less the case does raise questions about giving the private sector and charities any sort of supervisory role over criminals – particularly given the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1822528.stm">background of companies like G4S</a>.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com100tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-47394349794442152202011-11-08T15:43:00.002+00:002011-11-08T15:45:30.684+00:00Who says they're a soft touch on sentencing?<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2Gr7FmkIf_ReRPr3M6AoZ4CqIst3b-iz0OTWMHyq6qD84i3bk1vA9bJsEvUn9WuekZOrlJko_hxf_pjmg4krv-N2LR1sR5uQRHsolZd2QSbLYGSdnihgwfs20z7CBSuW9cG_LSzBWI7-d/s1600/ken17.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 133px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2Gr7FmkIf_ReRPr3M6AoZ4CqIst3b-iz0OTWMHyq6qD84i3bk1vA9bJsEvUn9WuekZOrlJko_hxf_pjmg4krv-N2LR1sR5uQRHsolZd2QSbLYGSdnihgwfs20z7CBSuW9cG_LSzBWI7-d/s400/ken17.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5672651574420538434" /></a>There was more than a titter when it emerged in the House of Commons just now that according to the Government’s proposals on abolishing indeterminate sentences for public protection (IPPs) someone will be in line for a mandatory life term if sentenced for using a nuclear weapon – the second time.<br /><br />Presumably after the first offence the culprit will be given a probation officer and told to pick up litter in Victoria Gardens.<br /><br />The issue emerged in a comment from the gnarled Scottish Labour MP Stephen McCabe during Justice Questions with Ken Clarke. McCabe went on: “Allowing for all the Lord Chancellor’s wisdom and guile wouldn’t it be an awful lot smarter to hold someone indefinitely the first time they committed that offence?”<br /><br />IPPs were introduced in 2005 for a whole range of violent and sexual offences, but are now being abolished by the Government in favour of letting judges use their discretion.<br /><br />Ken Clarke responded in as dry a voice as he could: “The Government takes a serious view of the use of nuclear weapons.”<br /><br />On an aside – earlier in the session Labour justice spokesman Sadiq Kahn claimed the Chief Inspector of Prisons had taken a dim view of Government policy and thought “there should be a rocket put up this Justice Secretary’s backside”.<br /><br />Hopefully the aforesaid inspector won’t be encouraged by the fact that if he makes it a nuclear one he might get away with it on the first strike.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-4095118967869777772011-11-07T11:06:00.001+00:002011-11-07T11:08:30.871+00:00Where is Tory support for marriage?<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxocaO3VZPrrfnYEMXs39kzGl2SpjkUKF5BYkb5t1V1ZvNQQA17W_KGtQVQQwIDmw8Q0li8OEl3-r_25rQybZpsISQwyGz_nTnJ_AT7TgP_KPrwxGo31vp1INmnkRCRJ4_exmJxXvp2nLt/s1600/Cameron22.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 137px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxocaO3VZPrrfnYEMXs39kzGl2SpjkUKF5BYkb5t1V1ZvNQQA17W_KGtQVQQwIDmw8Q0li8OEl3-r_25rQybZpsISQwyGz_nTnJ_AT7TgP_KPrwxGo31vp1INmnkRCRJ4_exmJxXvp2nLt/s400/Cameron22.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5672208981731210274" /></a>I was just reading through some recent early day motions when I saw <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2010-12/2375">this one</a> today backing the “Faithfulness Matters” campaign.<br /><br />It’s basically saying that cheating on your husband/wife/partner is bad for society and therefore websites which help to arrange extra marital affairs should be shut down.<br /><br />I’m probably a bit young and naïve in these things, but I was shocked to see just how many of the websites there are and how popular they seem to be. <br /><br />The question is of course at what point does the state stop interfering in a citizen’s personal life? And if these people want to have affairs then it’s not against the law. And if it’s not against the law then it’s a business opportunity and so the market steps in and you have a fledgling industry.<br /><br />Interesting to see that there are no Tories that have signed the EDM though, despite the fact that they are the traditional defenders of the family unit. Isn’t this something the PM, for all his talk of supporting the institution of marriage, would want to take a moral stand on?Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-39400931529210622522011-11-04T11:01:00.002+00:002011-11-04T11:03:53.703+00:00This week's column<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiq5RpB-uOtCIFvQDXVmRqOzu5XRqwdOZbkNw5v6Kjz67_dyyknGeCMi1i6xEupwCCUofWav86iPYSvLjuB51gWu1O-pgDFp9CbNczwh-luxlOleaWo798KjIiQrh3yW7TEFiz2zO4z5Y5z/s1600/Balls11.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 203px; height: 245px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiq5RpB-uOtCIFvQDXVmRqOzu5XRqwdOZbkNw5v6Kjz67_dyyknGeCMi1i6xEupwCCUofWav86iPYSvLjuB51gWu1O-pgDFp9CbNczwh-luxlOleaWo798KjIiQrh3yW7TEFiz2zO4z5Y5z/s400/Balls11.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5671094674178346130" /></a>My Notts column from this week, click to go to full article...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/Joseph-Watts-Balls-Osborne-masters-annoying/story-13753357-detail/story.html"><em>DAVID Cameron once called Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls the most annoying man in British politics. It was a brutal description, but perfectly true.<br /><br />I imagine it is even a badge Balls is quite proud of, in the same way a trouble-making youth has no qualms telling peers about his asbo.<br /><br />Indeed, in the scoff-fest of the Commons floor it helps to be highly annoying, it distracts your opponents and knocks them off guard and Balls is a master.</em></a>Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-65826903643389889622011-10-28T10:41:00.002+01:002011-10-28T10:43:54.621+01:00NEW PPSsIn the wake of the EU rebellion here are the new Parliamentary Private Secretaries (bag carriers) that have been appointed. Good for them - I wonder if they'll let them make the tea.<br /><br />>Conor Burns, MP for Bournemouth West, will act as PPS to the Rt Hon Owen Paterson MP, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland<br /><br />>Gavin Williamson, MP for South Staffordshire, will act as PPS to the Rt Hon Hugo Swire MP, Minister of State for Northern Ireland<br /><br />>Tobias Ellwood, MP for Bournemouth East, will act as PPS to the Rt Hon David Lidington MP, Minister of State for EuropeLobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-60283733114801839482011-10-26T15:07:00.003+01:002011-10-26T15:10:01.874+01:00PMQs vid<object classid='clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000' id='TelegraphPlayer-3690248' width='400' height='259' codebase='http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/current/swflash.cab'><param name='movie' value='http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/template/utils/ooyala/telegraph_player.swf'/><param name='salign' value='LT'/><param name='bgcolor' value='#000000'/><param name='scale' value='noscale'/><param name='wmode' value='window'/><param name='allowScriptAccess' value='always'/><param name='allowFullScreen' value='true'/><param name='FlashVars' value='embedCode=AwNDd4MjrEZ6Ck9Znadh5-ywcC65Qps8&offSite=true&showTD=true'/><embed type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src='http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/template/utils/ooyala/telegraph_player.swf' pluginspage='http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer' menu='false' quality='high' play='false' name='TelegraphPlayer-3690248' height='259' width='400' salign='LT' bgcolor='#000000' scale='noscale' wmode='window' allowScriptAccess='always' allowFullScreen='true' flashvars='embedCode=AwNDd4MjrEZ6Ck9Znadh5-ywcC65Qps8&offSite=true&showTD=true'></embed></object><br /><br />Great vid from the Telegraph site. Miliband should take note of how Blair skewers Major for having difficulties with his backbenchers. Also interesting to see Cameron having a go at Blair for asking questions when he should be answering them - one of his own favourite tactics now he's on the Government benches.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-79497168039145808942011-10-18T17:52:00.002+01:002011-10-18T17:55:43.952+01:00Fox's response<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiewsHQJq-HOTT2oXHvAoCiOFaqScgGUzsR93F8-NuzkuJfO9zoFxeljS8zmVbxhansjJ5JEzFJqVeyvjXRBb5_V1nJQjl9nkRYThi9A7Ru2-xud_xykC6AD1cVoR8GpWg69LqYM0fW0nUG/s1600/Fox.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 194px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiewsHQJq-HOTT2oXHvAoCiOFaqScgGUzsR93F8-NuzkuJfO9zoFxeljS8zmVbxhansjJ5JEzFJqVeyvjXRBb5_V1nJQjl9nkRYThi9A7Ru2-xud_xykC6AD1cVoR8GpWg69LqYM0fW0nUG/s400/Fox.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5664876802928154162" /></a>This is Liam Fox's response to the report. Is it just me or can Fox not even bring himself to say Werritty's name in that second paragraph. Referring instead to "anyone other than Minsters and Officials". <br /><br /><em>“I am pleased that the report makes clear that the two most serious allegations, namely of any financial gain sought, expected or received by myself and any breach of national security, have no basis. As I said in the House of Commons last week, I accept that it was a mistake to allow the distinctions between government and private roles to become blurred, and I must take my share of the responsibility for this. <br /><br />“More care should have been taken to avoid the impression that anyone other than Minsters and Officials were speaking on behalf of the Government, as this was not the case. Although there were no actual conflicts of interest I acknowledge that in order to avoid any possible perception of this, all private interests should have been fully declared to the Permanent Secretary. <br /><br />“I welcome the recommendations in this report which will provide greater clarity for Ministers, officials and private individuals in the future.”</em>Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-27863609448252862892011-10-18T17:34:00.002+01:002011-10-18T17:40:32.926+01:00GoD's plan to avoid another Fox affair<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKVKCfEv4s-wNZ9cY5wIJ7qFxlZlvA_Tvba4yGw4vKt7ZK-f7vmwtFJV6KAcdSNE4XuIPBJUlHXFtCJL327oVQqmdMMt8DBdJUjM_wZQhK7Vxh_EmR3JkZPZkn897EiwLYYMnaZuzFQiBn/s1600/Fox5.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 220px; height: 220px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKVKCfEv4s-wNZ9cY5wIJ7qFxlZlvA_Tvba4yGw4vKt7ZK-f7vmwtFJV6KAcdSNE4XuIPBJUlHXFtCJL327oVQqmdMMt8DBdJUjM_wZQhK7Vxh_EmR3JkZPZkn897EiwLYYMnaZuzFQiBn/s400/Fox5.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5664872897751856066" /></a>At the end of what is a pretty tame report from Cabinet Secretary Gus O'Donnell on Liam Fox's behaviour, thease were his recommendations...<br /><em><br />a. Where discussions take place with external organisations which raise substantive issues relating to departmental decisions or contracts and where an official is not present Ministers should inform their department.<br /><br />b. On Ministerial visits, whether in the UK or abroad, departments should make sure there is no confusion about who is and is not a member of the Ministerial party.<br /><br />c. Officials should accompany Ministers to all official visits and meetings overseas at which it is expected that official matters may be raised, and should seek guidance from the FCO if there is any uncertainty about the status of such meetings or the attendance of non-officials at them.<br /><br />d. Permanent Secretaries should discuss with Ministers at the time of their appointment and regularly thereafter whether any acquaintances or advisers have contractual relationships with the department or are involved in policy development. The Minister and the Permanent Secretary should take action as necessary to ensure there can be no actual or perceived conflict of interest in line with the principles of the Ministerial Code.<br />10<br /><br />e. Permanent Secretaries should take responsibility for ensuring departmental procedures are followed, and for raising any concerns with Ministers, advising the Cabinet Secretary and ultimately the Prime Minister where such concerns are not resolved.</em>Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-85634074115884736342011-10-18T12:53:00.002+01:002011-10-18T12:57:49.215+01:00More civil servants at MoJ<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg17LcY8itmbOcJp3n__x3ZVsQKjjgsOPAhYHZBdxRWoKNeGyYtkA7dCeYEqEAM4Ij5L_2hUMIibYV4SZrPKQ-_JLXE57NCegwo_C713lvnyKnmvxnUUkEu2LdMles5VUuCM-b5yigJ5Ty6/s1600/Ken27.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 133px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg17LcY8itmbOcJp3n__x3ZVsQKjjgsOPAhYHZBdxRWoKNeGyYtkA7dCeYEqEAM4Ij5L_2hUMIibYV4SZrPKQ-_JLXE57NCegwo_C713lvnyKnmvxnUUkEu2LdMles5VUuCM-b5yigJ5Ty6/s400/Ken27.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5664799432803286226" /></a>The budget at the Ministry of Justice is being slashed back at the moment, with legal aid and prison spaces as two of the more high profile victims.<br /><br />So it is interesting to see that the amount of money the MoJ is spending on hiring civil servants to deal with procurement is going up.<br /><br />In 2009/10 the MoJ spent £7.7m, in 2010/11 they spent £8.8m, and in 2011/12 they are estimating that they’ll spend some £10.6m – a £3m odd increase over three years.<br /><br />The figures, which will go down well with Ken Clarke’s insatiable critics, came from a written question <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm111017/text/111017w0004.htm#11101813002779">here</a>.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4658347591166361648.post-1846886008303646812011-10-17T10:01:00.001+01:002011-10-17T10:26:20.630+01:00Pensions motion<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghk2Eh-MNTzx_x7YOgpvBSGG9QVf_vc-0-Wa-EGca1Avlhtv8mg97pYlGI70sgcq6cE1nBvMj0qk9ewNWZ6aJzrURhQpFvvN00NK6QbYTiWwk7LAtbUUQ2b0aszKtljrs9JnULGSvwgpQP/s1600/Commons3.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 189px; height: 240px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghk2Eh-MNTzx_x7YOgpvBSGG9QVf_vc-0-Wa-EGca1Avlhtv8mg97pYlGI70sgcq6cE1nBvMj0qk9ewNWZ6aJzrURhQpFvvN00NK6QbYTiWwk7LAtbUUQ2b0aszKtljrs9JnULGSvwgpQP/s400/Commons3.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5664389875061764770" /></a>After the hoo-ha over MPs’ expenses politicians made a big deal of the fact that the issue of remuneration had been pushed out to an independent body.<br /><br />So it wasn’t without a touch of irony when the Government, out of political expediency, asked Parliament to reject a pay-rise proposed by that independent body earlier this year.<br /><br />Having got a taste for meddling, the Government has tabled <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmagenda/ob111017.htm">a rather contradictory motion on MPs’ pensions</a> today.<br /><br />It starts saying that the Commons, “reasserts its view that the salaries, pensions and expenses scheme for hon. Members ought to be determined independently of this House”.<br /><br />The motion notes that the Independent Public Service Pensions Commission has recommended a rise and then, without shame, says that the Commons should, “[invite] IPSA to increase contribution rates for hon. Members from 1 April 2012 in line with changes in pension contribution rates for other public service schemes”.<br /><br />Should it? If these things are to be done independently surely Commons shouldn’t be taking any view at all, something which the amendment proposed by MPs Christopher Chope and Bill Esterson among others appears to grasp.Lobbydoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17622778941416233125noreply@blogger.com0