Tuesday 30 March 2010

Thinking of voting Labservative?

Ask the Chancellors

There's almost universal agreement that Vince walked away with the gold medal in the Channel Four Ask the Chancellors debate last night: see the Guardian, the Telegraph, the New Statesman, Channel Four, the Financial Times, the Spectator and the Independent.

That's some achievement, when Cable - given his reputation - had the most to lose from the programme. By contrast, expectations of the Conservatives' George Osborne were generally so low that any performance in which he didn't actually trip over his own shoelaces and burst into tears would be seen as a triumph - and he still managed to end up in third place in the Channel Four poll (later revised to a draw with Labour's Alistair Darling).

Clips of Vince's contributions to the debate are available here.

Monday 29 March 2010

Lark Rise to mail interception

One of the small pleasures of a Sunday evening is an hour in front of the television watching Lark Rise to Candleford. Yes, of course it's a totally unrealistic and saccharine representation of a period that for the rural working classes was often grim and harsh, but nonetheless it's an hour of weekend escapism - and, as Dorcas Lane would say, "it's my one weakness".

Last night's episode featured the Declaration that everyone who worked in the postal service of the time was required to sign before a magistrate, starting:
"I do solemnly promise and declare that I will not open or delay or cause or suffer to be delayed any letter or anything sent by the post."
With that episode fresh in my mind, I was therefore more than a little perturbed to read this article by Henry Porter and Afua Hirsch, about Labour's plans to allow tax inspectors to open people's mail without the recipient being present, or even informed their mail has been intercepted.

Laws like this are often introduced by governments claiming that they are intended to be used in rare and extreme circumstances to deal with serious and present dangers. However, we then see them being quietly extended - often with a flourish of a ministerial pen rather than public consultation or debate - or simply abused. In just one example, powers given to local authorities to deal with terrorist threats were used by Poole Borough Council to spy on parents applying for school places to check whether they were living in the catchment area.

The last twenty years have witnessed a series of attacks on our civil liberties - from proposals for ID cards and lengthy periods of detention without charge, to the large numbers of innocent people whose DNA is held on databases. If Labour is re-elected we won't even be able to be sure that our letters haven't been steamed open by the Revenue.

Sunday 28 March 2010

A clean, positive campaign

New Saatchi poster aims to 'tear lumps out of Brown' reports the Daily Mail this morning.

So we're going to have a clean, positive election campaign over the next six weeks, then? Great.

Saturday 27 March 2010

Out in Wisbech

I and other local Liberal Democrats were back out in Wisbech today, knocking on doors and meeting voters in the forthcoming by-election for the county, district and town councils. Met some lovely residents, including one who has been suffering for years with a host of local problems, about which nothing at all seems to have been done. Had a brief chat with a police officer further up the street carrying out house-to-house calls, and reported one of the constituent's concerns straight away.

Fire at old Belfast building in Wisbech

Wisbech campaigner Dave Patrick rang early this morning with news of the major fire at the old Belfast building in the centre of Wisbech. Fortunately reports suggest there have been no injuries.
(Picture by Dave Patrick)

Hustings in Wisbech

The first, and so far only, hustings meeting of the General Election campaign took place in Wisbech last night, organised by Churches Together in Wisbech at St Augustine's Church Hall.

Steve Barclay (Conservative) wasn't there - his office said he'd been double booked, and apparently didn't offer an alternative representative. The organisers had tried to contact UKIP, but the telephone number offered 'doesn't accept incoming calls' according to their answerphone message. And Peter Roberts (Labour) arrived half an hour late for what was therefore a two-way meeting.

Some interesting questions, including education for employment in the light of the recent Evan Davis TV programme; mental health and the criminal justice system; restoring public confidence in politics and politicians after the expenses scandals; and whether political debate in the current era was now just about 'better ways of managing capitalism'.

Thank you to Churches Together for facilitating an event enabling local residents to discuss important issues face to face with their candidates - it's the stuff of politics, and a shame not all the candidates were there to take part.

Wednesday 24 March 2010

Budget: Nick Clegg's response

Nick Clegg's full budget speech can be read here.

The tiger in the kitchen

Much of the comment on David Cameron's car crash of an interview with Gay Times on Channel Four last night has focused on his confusion over gay equality.

The Conservative record on gay rights in the 80s and 90s was indeed truly abysmal. I don't doubt David Cameron's genuineness in trying to move his party into at least the twentieth century on this issue, and in repudiating his party's actions over Section 28, but equally I'm sure it's an uphill struggle in many cases.

But what stood out from the interview for me was his confusion, not over gay issues, but over something that remains far more of a problem for the Conservatives - Europe. It's not so much an 'elephant in the room' for the Tories, as a tiger in their kitchen, temporarily if flimsily confined but lurking ready to pounce if they try so much as the equivalent of making a cup of tea.

Cameron made two assertions about Europe which really don't seem to me to stand up to scrutiny. The first assertion was his abnegation as party leader of any responsibility over the actions of his party's MEPs: "I don't routinely look at their voting behaviour", he told interviewer Martin Popplewell.

This, for a party that routinely rails at the European Union - rightly or wrongly - for the actions of its politicians and its officialdom, seems to me to be an extraordinary admission. What is the point of the Conservative Party sending MEPs to Brussels if the leader of their party takes no interest in what they do when they are there? And what is the point of him washing his hands of his MEP colleagues' actions, and then complaining loud and long about the decisions taken by the body on which they sit?

The second assertion was in response to the interviewer's probing of the Conservatives' choice of partner in Europe. Cameron's decision last year to pull the Conservative Party out of the centre-right European People's Party, and ally it with extreme right wing MEPs in the European Parliament, was a controversial one - not least among his MEPs themselves, who recognised the damage it would do, not only to the Conservatives' reputation but also to their influence in Europe. It prompted the decision of the former leader of the Conservative MEPs, Edward McMillan-Scott, to leave the Conservative group in the European Parliament, and then, earlier this month, to join the Liberal Democrats.

Cameron told Gay Times yesterday that "we would never ally with parties [in the European Parliament] whose views stepped beyond the pale". This can only mean that he regards the policies of his new European partners in the right-wing European Conservatives and Reformists group as acceptable.

The leader of that new group, Polish MEP Michał Kamiński, has been accused of antisemitism and homophobia, which he denies. The Latvian party 'For Fatherland and Freedom', also in Cameron's new group in Europe, has been criticised for commemorating Latvian Waffen SS soldiers.

If we are to believe Cameron, these views are not 'beyond the pale'. This can only end badly.

Tuesday 23 March 2010

Conference diary

At the recent Liberal Democrat conference in Birmingham, I made a video diary of the weekend. Here it is.

Monday 22 March 2010

Time to negotiate

I agree absolutely with Norman Baker MP about the need for people to get round the table and sort out the current and forthcoming air and rail disputes by negotiation rather than megaphone diplomacy.

Ideally our elected politicians would be a credible force in promoting a negotiated settlement. Whether a Labour government can fulfil this role when it is so dependent on, and influenced by, the Unite trade union is another matter - and demonstrates the pernicious effects of 'big backer' money on political life.

Cab for hire

So Stephen Byers MP sees himself as "a bit like a sort of cab for hire". I've just been watching open-mouthed the footage filmed of him describing how he interceded on behalf of National Express, to enable it to walk away without penalty from a contract to run the East Coast main line service, while holding on to profit-making public contracts elsewhere. This deal cost us, the taxpayers, millions of pounds.

It appears that everyone is now walking away from Byers' description of events, including Byers himself.

Gordon Brown is quite wrong to rule out an inquiry, and astonishingly complacent if he genuinely feels "'satisfied' that there ha[s] been no impropriety". There must be a swift and prompt investigation, and appropriate action as soon as its findings are available.

Breast cancer research pledge

I've just signed the Breast Cancer research pledge. 46,000 people are diagnosed with breast cancer each year in the UK. You can find out more about this campaign here.

Saturday 20 March 2010

Team Liberal Democrat


Here I am (in the red top) at our recent Spring Conference in Birmingham with some of the other Liberal Democrat prospective MPs for the East of England, and MEP Andrew Duff.

Friday 19 March 2010

Questions from Wisbech Grammar students (4): rights and responsibilities

It was actually a member of staff who asked about the balance between rights and responsibilities when I visited Wisbech Grammar School earlier this week - and in particular, about people who appear to 'know their rights' but don't wish to be held to any responsibilities.

I've been thinking about this question quite a bit since Monday, and I came across this speech by Chris Huhne MP which makes the useful distinction between human rights and citizens' rights.

The approach of the Labour government has typically been to use the anti-social or dangerous behaviour of the irresponsible few to interfere with the lives of the law-abiding many. This was most recently seen in the fiasco of the proposals for compulsory dog insurance, and even a sort of 'dog driving test', which were rapidly withdrawn after they got the pasting they deserved ('My dog has never attacked anyone. In fact, he has been rewarded with 5 years No Claims Bonios' as wag Beau Bo d'Or wrote on Twitter).

One of the most prevalent feelings I encounter on the doorstep is a sense of weariness at the determination of the Labour government and its myriad quangos to nanny us through the most minute of our daily activities - even the thickness of our chips is not so trivial as to be beneath scrutiny.

Perhaps a government that trusted individuals to take more responsibility for their own lives might find itself rewarded in kind?

Thursday 18 March 2010

Questions from Wisbech Grammar students (3): tax and the low paid

Isn't it unfair that under your proposals, people on incomes below £10,000 a year wouldn't have to pay income tax?, I was asked at Wisbech Grammar School earlier this week.

Of course, there's already a threshhold at the moment by which the first few thousand pounds of earned income is tax-free. Liberal Democrat proposals would raise that threshhold significantly, to £10,000. In North East Cambridgeshire, that would mean that 6,000 earners would pay no income tax at all - and frankly, on wages at that level, that seems perfectly reasonable to me. After all, people on low incomes already pay tax in all sorts of other ways, not least through VAT, and taxes on goods such as alcohol and tobacco.

And of course the £10,000 threshhold would mean a £700 a year tax cut for millions of other earners, on lower and middle incomes above £10,000 a year.

With the Conservatives only apparently interested in tax cuts for millionaires, it's good to see the Liberal Democrats prioritising tax cuts for millions of working people instead.

Wednesday 17 March 2010

Questions from Wisbech Grammar students (2): the pupil premium

I believe passionately that every child, whatever its background, deserves the best possible start in life. I grew up in a cramped council flat, with parents on a low wage, but I was fortunate to have a mother and father who were determined to encourage me through my state education, teachers who went the extra mile to support me through school and into university - and an anonymous benefactor who every Christmas Eve would leave a bag of new books on the family's doorstep for myself and my sisters and brother, without waiting to be thanked.

Recent figures obtained by the Liberal Democrats show that the poorest children are only half as likely as their better-off classmates to get five good GCSEs including English and maths. What an indictment of thirteen years of a Labour government!

I'm therefore particularly pleased that two of the Liberal Democrats' key policies are the introduction of the pupil premium, and the scrapping of university tuition fees. Due to the comprehensive duffing-up of the British economy by the combined efforts of bankers and politicians, the second policy will now need six years to implement in full, but that doesn't mean we're any less committed to it.

As for the pupil premium, this is a proposal for an additional £2,500 to be spent on the education of each of the one million most deprived children in the country. It would be paid for by reducing tax credit payments to families on above-average incomes, and by scrapping Labour's ridiculous Child Trust Fund.

In our household, we're in the fortunate position of having an above-average income, and I always found it extraordinary that when my children were small I received every year a thick Tax Credit booklet from the Government encouraging me to check I was getting public money that other families needed far more.

And as for Child Trust Funds, my friend Susan told a very revealing story at our recent party conference. When her daughter was born, the Government gave her £250 Child Trust Fund money. This was duly invested in stocks and shares, and every year Susan would get a statement telling her how her daughter's Child Trust Fund was getting on. This year, thanks to the state of the economy, the £250 the Government gave her is now worth £200. What a waste of public money!

It's time to target cash at those children to whom it will make the most difference, and to that ladder by which they have the greatest potential to improve their prospects and make the best of their abilities - a good education.

Tuesday 16 March 2010

Questions from Wisbech Grammar students (1): hung parliaments

As the opinion polls have narrowed in the run-up to the General Election, there's been much speculation about what would happen in the event that no one party wins an overall majority of seats in the House of Commons. In particular, although illogically, the speculation centres on what the Liberal Democrats - and only the Liberal Democrats - would do in that event.

Whether or not there's a hung parliament is, of course, not in the control of any of us; it's an outcome of the collective votes of the great British public under the present electoral system, rather than an aim which any political party can manoeuvre into being. And if that is the result the British electorate gives us all on 6 May, then it's up to all political parties, not just the Liberal Democrats, to rise to the challenge.

It's likely that in that situation, if it occurs, one party will have a stronger mandate to govern than the others, and it's then up to that party to try to form a government. If it's to secure Liberal Democrat support in doing so, then it will have to address four key priorities:
  • reform of the tax system to lift four million people on £10,000 a year or less out of income tax altogether, financed by higher taxes for the rich

  • a 'pupil premium' to target extra education spending at the most disadvantaged children

  • a greener economy less reliant on the financial sector

  • voting reform for Westminster elections.
Before moving to North East Cambridgeshire, I spent several years in a leadership role in a no-overall-control council. It's a situation that forces politicians to work exceptionally hard, to negotiate, to compromise, and to actually take account of public opinion. It also focuses attention four-square on the parties' core beliefs and values. I'm very pleased that Nick Clegg has been so clear in articulating these on behalf of the Liberal Democrats.

In a recent ICM poll, nearly half of those questioned preferred a hung parliament, rather than an outright majority for Labour or the Conservatives. Perhaps after the misery of the Thatcher-Major years, and the failure of Blair and Brown, the public is developing an appetite for a more mature form of politics and a constraining hand on the unbridled ambitions of any one political party.

Monday 15 March 2010

A visit to Wisbech Grammar

A visit to speak to the Upper Sixth current affairs students at Wisbech Grammar School - an enjoyable session with some interesting questions, including:
  • what would the Liberal Democrats do in the event of a hung parliament?

  • how would you pay for your promise of a 'pupil premium'?

  • isn't it unfair to give people the first £10,000 of their income tax-free?

  • what about people who claim their rights in society but don't live up to their responsibilities?

Sunday 14 March 2010

Liberal Democrat spring conference highlights

Here's a link to some of the highlights of the Liberal Democrats spring conference in Birmingham.

Tuesday 9 March 2010

Whittlesey Community Fair


A brief visit to Whittlesey Community Fair this afternoon, and a chance to meet several local groups and organisations, both statutory and voluntary.

The police are on hand, giving out everything from bells to clip on to handbags as a deterrent to thieves, to leaflets about securing sheds and outbuildings.

Crossroads Care Cambridgeshire are here, with a display about their work, from regular carer support and training, to the ICER emergency cover project.

I have the opportunity to hear from Laura Bradley from the University of Derby about her work with local residents on street-level environmental issues - two of the most frequently-raised being dogs and garden bonfires.

Street Pride has a stand to demonstrate the work done by volunteers in Whittlesey, March, Wisbech, Chatteris, Manea and Parson Drove. Some of the volunteers tell me about the enormous quantities of rubbish cleared up, as well as the hedge clearing and planting.

Sadly I'm not able to meet everyone today, or to stay for the police forum - despite the invitation from independent elected chairman Roy Gerstner - but I already know I'm looking forward to visiting many of the organisations represented.

Friday 5 March 2010

So close ...

Only 37 votes separated Liberal Democrat Chris Howes from the winning Conservative candidate in the by-election for Chatteris Mills ward yesterday. Chris fought a stunning campaign, and I hope he returns to the fray next May to provide some much-needed opposition on Fenland District Council.

However, Liberal Democrat Diane Baldry was returned - in both senses, as she's been elected before - to Chatteris Town Council, where I'm sure she'll make an excellent representative for local people.

The Labour showing - trailing fourth behind UKIP with only 33 votes out of over 650 - was pretty poor for a party apparently serious about challenging the Conservatives for the parliamentary seat of North East Cambridgeshire.

Followers