I tweeted yesterday after watching 'Five Days that changed Britain' on BBC 2 - and as I said then, words simply cannot describe how it felt to review events on my TV set. It is all too easy in this job to take for granted the job you have. I don't think I have ever taken my job for granted intentionally, but like all of my colleagues in political based journalism, I was there for one of the most historic political happenings in a generation or more.

----
I note the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions announcement today that he is to reform the benefits system entirely, so no longer will genuine claimants have to have a degree in maths to battle through the system.

There will be a lot of people out there who will be deeply worried about the language used... not because they definitely should be, but because we have a new government reforming a complicated system in the earliest days of office, and for better or for worse, people are being made to feel like they're thieving of the state. Now those who are thieving SHOULD feel like thieves, but never forget the millions of genuine cases in all this please!

----

The Court of Appeal have ruled that the Labour MP's, and Tory Peer who are accused of dishonesty over their expense claims are subject to normal process and will face criminal tiral.

One Lord, Lord Judge said: 'It can confidently be stated that parliamentary privilege or immunity from criminal prosecution has never, ever attached to ordinary criminal activities by Members of Parliament.

Now we do not know if they are guilty, and they are certainly innocent until proven guilty, but I agree with the Court. These men must have an entirely fair trial - but an entirely fair trial on the same terms as anyone else.

---

I'm off house hunting once again today. This is an extremely frustrating process, but I absolutely want to have it bagged by the end of tomorrow.

9Pm on BBC2 - A MUST WATCH

I left talk towers at 5pm this afternoon, not to return until Monday 16th August.

As much as I love my job - and I do - everyone needs a break from time to time, so I am looking forward to leaving my microphone and recorder locked away, and not pointing another mic at anyone for nearly two and a half weeks.

None of this is to say that I am ignoring the world of politics and news... I shall be keeping my ear firmly to the ground, and you may well have the company of my ugly mug looking out at you on Sky News. Don't adjust your TV set - that is just me.

Now, before I get a good hour's sleep, let me urge you to put 'five days that changed Britain' on at 9pm on BBC2. It will explore the five days that passed between Gordon Brown being voted out of Office, and David Cameron accepting an invitation from the Queen to form a Government.

I shall reserve judgement on the programme until I have caught it, but catch it I shall, and catch it you should!

ASBOS get the chop

I have not felt on top of the world today, and so rather than trotting off to Southwark to listen to the Home Sec's speech, I stayed at home and caught it on sky news.

Why is anyone shocked that alcohol is fueling crime? Nearly every violent crime has a link to alcohol - and whatever any government does to combat the problem, one will still exist.

Forget fancy new schemes to ramp up the price of alcohol in the supermarkets, or more patrols to combat anti-social behaviour... the answer is SO simple, and it's to enforce the lisencing laws that exist already. Chief among all offences in the Act is to serve a drunk person. This needs to stop. Police and local authorities would be best advised to direct some atention towards the pubs and bars that serve drunks - since they hold a big chunk of responsibility for their 'customers' then going on to the street and creating chaos.

I was pleased to hear Mrs May talking about tackling antisocial behaviour in ways that mean wrongdoers are punished, but not always criminalised.

Arresting someone is an extremely serious thing because the first time someone is arrested, they're never worried about it again. Nothing terrible happens to people when they are arrested - and for honest people, the biggest fear is the ffear of the unknown. If people are criminalised when they don't need to be, they stand a great chance of graduating to more serious crime. After all, if they already have a criminal record, and if we don't effectively punish criminals through the Court system, why not carry on crimming? The question is, can we totally change the current ASBO system in to a totally new one to better effect? Time will tell.

Tomorrow sees the launch of the first High Street bank in a hundred years in the UK. It's called Metrobank, and the current plan is for me to get along for talkSPORT to see how the business model works, and whether this is good news for the UK. Customers can start an account on the spot, and collect their debit cards 15 minutes later. That's more than you can say for any existing high street bank..... WHAT FINANCIAL WORRIES EH?

999 Update: Your life is at risk due to bad guidelines & bad training!

I received a call from the Hertfordshire Police Communications control room earlier today, and I was told originally that the supervisor had absolutely no problem with the way my 999 call was handled on Saturday.

For more information on this, scroll back to Saturday's posting.

My call was graded as a "priority" rather than an "immediate response" because 999 call handling guidelines say that if the suspects are walking away there and then, it is not considered necessary to send a unit till up to an hour after the emergency call. This notwithstanding a call stating that a registered blind person, and an 83 year-old man were being threatened there and then by a group who were threatening violence, and said they would be coming back.

After a LONG conversation, the supervisor decided that perhaps the call should have been classed as an immediate response rather than "priority" but said that the guidelines cannot be changed as a result of our call.

... And so I am left with the distinctly unsatisfactory impression that people's lives are at risk because of poor training, and poor guidelines.

I shall be telling the story on talkSPORT at 23:05 this evening

Why elected police Commissioners WILL have operational control

I have spent the day looking in to the elected police Commissioner story.

i did a lot of digging, but all I can tell you is that the former Chief Constable of Cambridgeshire, Tom Lloyd thinks the idea is awful, but doesn't rule out running... former Deputy Chief Constable John Stalker of the Greater Manchester Police tells me that the commissioners probably won't work, but it's worth giving them a shot - but in his case, he's too old to run.

Home Office Police Minister, and Justice Minister Nick Herbert tells me they're a great idea - and confirmed that they will be paid out of public funds. He confirmed to me that people can run as independents, or as part of a party backed candidacy, but the police will retain their operational independence from the political electees.

Only one problem (or not, depending on your viewpoint) - the Commissioners, who we are told will not have operational input WILL have the power to hire and fire Chief Officers, and to control their budgets. This means they can take VERY active operational decisions in practice, even if not in theory. If you're a Chief Officer, and you want to keep your job, you will behave and do what you're told. Likewise, if you don't want your budget cut, you WILL behave.

Any which way you cut it, political electees WILL have operational input. The Police have always prided themselves on being independent of political control. I believe they lost this independence many years ago, but in any case, what on earth is the point of an elected police commissioner without any operational input.

A great idea, but 'ave a word with yourselves, and work out what expensive measure you are actually introducing here!

Major Police Reforms tomorrow

Tomorrow (Monday) Home Secretary Theresa May will announce changes to the way Police Forces in England and Wales work.

Once again, Scotland will be uneffected by any changes - but to be fair, that is what devolution is all about.

I think the most significant reform will be the formal announcement of directly elected Police Commissioners for each force area, except for the Met and the City of London Police.

It is not entirely clear how much direct input the new 'Commissioners' will have, but I understand that they will have their hands on the purse strings, and will have the power to hire and fire Chief Officers. If this works out as planned, then it really doesn't matter how much power the coalition wish these Commissioners to have... we will see a battle of wills, and the Chief Officer (not controlling the budgets) will not win.

I am not unhappy about the idea of electing police Commissioners, but to quote Chris Grayling at last year's Conservative Autumn Conference, 'I just home it's not another gimic'

The Home Secretary is also expected to announce the formation of 'The National Crime Agency' which will replace the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA), and for the first time, introduce 'law enforcement agents' on to the streets of the UK.

Here's a suggestion ahead of the announcement Mrs May... can you get the cops to answer urgent assistance 999 calls please?

A flat, or NOT a flat: That is the question

I am really torn in my quest to find a new property, and I'm hoping you can help me.

I have been living in a bungalow for the past eight years, and though it has been absolutely perfect for me, I have decided I need a bigger place.

With this in mind, I had decided that I want a two bedroom house, but I have viewed a lovely flat in a private block.

Now the asking is too high and I'm discussing this with the agents, but my biggest worry is that living so close to others throws up all sorts of possibilities of neighbours not getting on with each other, being noisy, or otherwise being too in your face.

Do you live in a flat? Would you recommend it?

I just CAN'T make my mind up. The mental block is that it's a flat. That's all!

999 Emergency Assistance - NO SHOW

I am posting this firstly because I think it will be interesting and alarming to readers, but also to serve as an instant record of events.

Earlier this evening I called the Hertfordshire Police Coms Centre to advise of anti social behaviour happening outside my house, which was getting more and more threatening.

A group of four or five late teens had gathered out by an alley outside my house, getting progressively more drunk. I was moved eventually to call the police just after taking rubbish to a skip outside. One yob shouted over to me, "Oi mate, you look like a f***ing quere".

I didn't interact, but instead made the call. I was told police would attend to move them on, and to be fair, I did stress there was no break-neck hurry but that this would be appreciated.

15 - 20 minutes later, I called again and informed them that the group had gone and that since Officers had yet to attend, they didn't need to worry about it.

At around 21:30 this evening, I heard odd noises outside, as if someone was picking through my skip, but I wasn't worried about this so thought I'd leave it. A moment or so later, I heard several kicks at my front door. As I went round the back way to investigate, they had gone and were knocking heavily on my 83 year-old neighbour's window.

I asked,

"Gents, can I help you?"

and was told,

"f**k off you twat".

I (surprisingly in the circumstances) politely said,

"Gents, an elderly 83 year-old man lives there, do you really mean to be banging at his window?"

I was threatened that if I didn't want to be "beaten" that I should "f**k off", and so I dialed 999 at 21:33 and called for urgent police assistance, explaining that the group were there threatening violence and threatening to come back and put my windows in. I relayed basic details to the 999 operator and said that they were walking south down Grove Road towards Church Lane - a pretty good description I feel. The 999 operator seemed rather uninterested and said that no officer was near but they'd send someone out as soon as possible.

Some 12 - 14 minutes later, I called the Herts Police coms number to chase the 999 call, pointing out that no one had answered. It appears that if you call on a mobile phone, the call can go to another force area and the details passed on. The two calls had not been linked some 12 minutes later, and as I politely pointed out to the operator, I could have been kicked to death in that time.

Some 40 minutes after the 999 call for "urgent assistance", two PCSO's turned up. They were lovely, and actually they did an excellent PR job for the Hertfordshire police, but the fact remains, I made a 999 call for urgent assistance and the cops didn't show. For shame!

The Brokeback Coalition: Time to laugh it off

Come on people, the David Davis 'Brokeback mountain' thing has gone on way too long.

The vast majority of gay people I know have had a good giggle about it.

David Cameron and Nick Clegg have both joked about being the first civil partnership to run the Country - and I know for a fact that David Davis has NO problem with gay people.

Personally, I really can't get too excited about it. I really can't see that DD's comments can be seen to be homophobic. I'm willing to be told I'm wrong.

My take on Nick Griffin

I interviewed Nick Griffin for talkSPORT Radio yesterday afternoon to get his reaction to the campaign to have his Buckingham Palace invitation withdrawn by the Queen.

Of course we now know that his invitation HAS been withdrawn, and I don’t quite know whether I agree with this.

If you know me, you’ll know I’m not a follower of Nick Griffin’s party, but my view has always been that as a reporter, my view doesn’t matter. I am well aware that this blog is 75% opinion, but in terms of broadcasting for my employer talkSPORT, I think my view is much less interesting than the facts.

I will not blast Nick Griffin for being a racist… not because I don’t think he is, but because it would merely fuel the suggestions that he is being picked on and lied about by the nasty-wasty media.

The BNP did amazingly well at the European election last year, and not so well at the General – and I put it to you that the only reason for their success was because the mainstream parties and media spent their time vilifying him. Even BBC reporters (unwittingly actually I’m quite sure( end up being quite unbalanced in their interviews and comment because, for understandable, though I believe misguided reasons, they are keen to show that they do not have sympathies with the BNP.

For the avoidance of doubt, I actually don’t like the politics of the BNP – BUT – what does that matter?

If you must interview someone, you must do it right, without fear or favour.

The only dangerous view is one that is suppressed!

Time to change policing: Cops tase innocent driver - BY MISTAKE!

Point 1 – this post is entirely unrelated to Roul Moat, and I do not intend for any dots to be linked here.

The Mail are reporting that a man suspected of a traffic offence was accidentally tased by police from the Avon and Summerset force.

Read the story here .

Frankly, I don’t give a rats rectum if the weapon was discharged accidentally or not. The undisputed facts of the case are that police followed a driver whom they suspected to be driving a BMW without insurance. The BMW was in fact insured. Further, it is undisputed that police withdrew a 50,000V taser and pointed it at the driver.

Police say (and I have no reason to disbelieve them) that the driver had become aggressive in his tone.

What I have a problem with is the idea that the first response to raised voices is to withdraw these potentially lethal weapons. How is that going to calm the situation?

Let me be clear, I am absolutely not anti Police, but I don’t like what is happening with the training and recruitment.

Weren’t we told that tasers were only supposed to be used as an alternative to lethal force? Weren’t we led to believe that they may be deployed by cops to incapacitate rather than shooting someone?

How on earth does a traffic stop for a suspected uninsured driver, later shown, and accepted by police to be entirely innocent of this offence warrant the pointing of a taser? Are we to believe that before the rolling out of tasers, the man would have been shot? I really don’t think so.

Is it not also slightly worrying that the taser is said to have been accidentally discharged?

There is a much bigger point here of how the Police Service conducts itself, and whether it is acting in the genuine best interests of the people it is there to serve. For those who don’t know, I do not drive, and never will, and so I have no militant motorist axe to grind.

It is patently obvious that every motorist should hold insurance – otherwise it costs everyone else for their offending. I am about to commit heresy here and suggest that maybe we’ve got the balance wrong when it comes to enforcing traffic regulations.

Last time I checked (which admittedly was a year ago) the devices used to automatically scan number plates (ANPR) were wrong, i.e. giving false results 40% of the time suggesting, as they did in this case that people do not hold insurance, when in fact they do.

The question you have to ask yourself is whether the benefits we get out of hassling road users (often wrongly, and even for proper reasons such as an out of date tax disc) is worth the bad will it creates.

We have long had a system of policing by consent in this country, and having OUR police officers bullying the public in this way is anti this concept.

I’ll say again, and underlie – I am PRO police , and so when someone who IS pro police says what Iam saying, as someone with no convictions, arrests, cautions, warnings or anything of the sort – then frankly, there’s a big problem.

The Police have ALWAYS been pressured by Government to enforce traffic regulations, but they used to ignore it, because the insured driver who was going about his lawful business is highly unlikely to ever trust another police officer, and even less likely to assist another police officer who may need assistance in the future.

“The primary object of an efficient police is the prevention of crime: the next that of detection and punishment of offenders if crime is committed. To these ends all the efforts of police must be directed. The protection of life and property, the preservation of public tranquillity, and the absence of crime, will alone prove whether those efforts have been successful and whether the objects for which the police were appointed have been attained."

This is a quote from Sir Richard Mayne in establishing our police service. It is also a quote, and objective learnt by every new police officer, and most serving officers would be able to quote it to you word for word. In order for the police to be efficient, and pass this test, the police must have the good will of the public, of which they are also members.

Last time I checked (which was LAST NIGHT), the streets of my local town were not absent of crime, nor were they tranquil.

Get the big things sorted before you start becoming tax collectors for the state – and while we’re at it, we obviously need to review whether the police should even have tasers.

Clegwood: Clegg doing PMQ's & Wood in Washington!

Don’t forget that Nick Clegg is in the seat for PMQ’s tomorrow afternoon.

Personally don’t understand why we bother having PMQ’s when the PM isn’t there to answer the Q’s, but there we go… You can rely on me being there for talkSPORT, and you can rely on me being vocal on the spectical.

….

The Lib Dems will be pleased to see David Cameron’s language on the ‘special relationship’, which frankly, particularly for the last 20 years has been about as special as the relationship between Steve Jobbs and Mrs Agnes of 23 Rose Drive Gardens, SE16, who last week bought an iPhone for her favourite nephew, Billy.

…

My talkSPORT colleagues Mike Parry and Mike Graham, today returned to the subject of guide dogs being refused access to premises and public transport. I should like to thank them for pushing such a vitally important subject.

I’m going to tryand shut up about Guide Dogs now because I’ll send everyone to sleep – other than to say that the law is not fit for purpose, and it should be looked at.

…
Lastly, surprised that no one has really picked up on my scoop last week that the Met pulled armed Officers out of the Roul Moat stand-off at 23:30 because of a substantive disagreement on tactics.

60 Minutes, 1 guide dog and 5 guide dog refusals!

I have spent the day deliberately getting kicked out of shops, restaurants, and mini cab offices to demonstrate the scale of the problem faced by guide dog owners up and down the land on a daily basis.

… And I feel sick!

I have been a guide dog owner for 12 years now, and have probably been turned away, or refused service somewhere between 50 and 80 times in this period – but never have I gone out and been turned away for service five times in a row, within the course of 60 minutes.

It’s truly horrible.

I recognise that there are cultural concerns around the acceptance of guide dogs, but it’s as simple as making a criminal offence of turning away a guide dog with a £5,000 fine, and the problem will go away!

The authored report airs on Talksport at 23:15, and I’ll probably bang it on the blog tomorrow too.

Guide Dog ban is backed by law

You may have read reports today in the Daily Mail of a gentleman who was twice challenged about his guide dog by a Muslim bus driver who complained that his dog was dirty.

These horrible incidents took place last year, but I can assure you that you don't have to wait six months between incidents in my experience. During the General Election campaign, I got all round the UK, and I can tell you that the number of places that turned me away because of my guide dog was shocking.

The issue is a cultural one. It should be pointed out that while the Mail focus on the Muslim Community, the problem is not exclusive to followers of Islam. It would however be wrong to say that there isn't a particular problem, and as it turns out, a problem that MAYBE one day could be fixed through educating the Muslim Community.

My friends at the Muslim Council of Britain have issued advice to Muslims that a guide dog should not be turned away, and that they are not themselves, in the view of the MCB, dirty.

We can all recognise that there are cultural reasons why some people don't like guide dogs, but I'm afraid that I take a hard headed approach to this when we're talking refusal to shops, cabs, busses or anywhere else because a blind or partially sighted person has a guide dog.

I guess my biggest issue, as a guide dog owner of 12 years is that the law is totally toothless when it comes to protecting the right of blind and partially sighted people not to be descriminated against. There is a weak bit of legislation called the Disability Descrimination Act, but it doesn't specifically say that guide dogs MUST be allowed access, and there are no criminal consequences under this legislation.

It is a criminal offence for any cab driver to turn away a guide dog, but it happens anyway, and the number of Court cases are ABSOLUTELY pathetically small.

Birmingham Council's Hackney Carriage enforcement office didn't even return my three calls in April after a taxi driver refused to take my guide dog.

I am working on an authored package for talkSPORT radio, which will air on the Ian Collins Show after 10pm tonight.

I'll update you later.

Damien Green Interview on immigration: "The action starts today"

A temporary annual limit to the number of non EU Migrants allowed to enter the UK kick in from midnight tonight.

Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migration Watch UK has praised the Coalition's policy as a real step in the right direction.

Here's my talkSPORT interview with Immigration Minister Damien Green, conducted before he reacted to Philip Hollobone's comments on the burkah, a story you read about FIRST on this blog, following the talkSPORT interview two weeks ago.

Transcript...

SD - The Government have introduced a temporary cap on the number of non-EU Migrants allowed to enter the United Kingdom. I am pleased to say that I am joined by the Immigration Minister, Damien Green. Minister, can you explain this cap, and what it's all about?

DG - What we said before the election is that we are going to introduce a limit on immigration, an annual limit every year on people coming here to work from outside the EU, and what we're going to do now is a consultation so that we'll get the right number for next April when it comes in, but obviously what we don't want is a sudden surge of immigration in anticipation of that, before next April. So from today, we're introducing an incident cap, which sets levels a bit below where they were last year to make sure that we keep things under control while we're working out the right number for the permanent cap.



SD - So to be clear, essentially, the eventual cap could actually be an awful lot higher than this, or even lower, depending on the results of the consultation?

DG - Well, it certainly won't be hugely higher, because the underlying aim of everything we do on immigration is to bring net immigration down to the tens of thousands, as opposed to the hundreds of thousands it was under the previous Government. So we'll be exerting steady downward pressure on immigration through the whole course of this Parliament.

SD - How do we balance up this idea of addressing what is frankly a big concern to many members of the public, whilst at the same time demonstrating that what we're not doing here is picking on race, it's more space?

DG - Well absolutely, there's nothing remotely about race in any of this. It's about numbers really. It's about the scale of change that Britain has always benefited from immigration. We're an outward looking, global society, we've got a history of involvement all round the world, but when the rate of immigration gets too much, then you get the stresses and strains that we saw under the last Government. It's why immigration was such a big issue at the recent election. So what we want to do is to bring immigration under control, so that we as a Country can continue to get the benefits we always have had from attracting some of the brightest and best people from around the world, but not have the strains we saw on public services and so on when immigration was running at too higher level.

SD - Minister, we spoke with members of the public before the weekend on Friday, and the one common theme that was coming through, both from immigrants and British born people, was that the perceived problem is with the former Eastern Block countries rather than the non-EU Migrants How much truth is there in this?

DG - The problem there that people identify comes from a wrong decision that was taken six years ago by the previous Government, when they said we would have no transitional arrangements when Poland and the other Central and Eastern European countries joined the EU. We were the only big country that said there was going to be no restrictions at all. All the other big Western European economies had restrictions on, and so, predictably in those circumstances, they all came here, so we had this very, very sudden unplanned increase. What's happening now is that it's levelled out. A lot of them have gone home since the recession started here, and as of next year, the other big Western European countries will be opening their job markets to the other countries. There was a very serious problem a few years ago, and that's why it's still fresh in people's minds, but it's a problem of yesterday rather than today.

SD - We're chatting with Immigration Minister Damien Green on talkSPORT, Minister, can you tell talkSPORT listeners how they can be sure that what you, and your colleagues in the coalition Government are proposing are real actions, rather than just the wordies.

DG - The action starts today. As of today (Monday) companies will have to apply for Visas to bring workers in under the new limit. That starts today. That will last until next April, and from next April, we will have the permanent system in place, so in our first few months in Government, we have taken this action.

--- ENDS ---

Please feel free to use freely when crediting talkSPORT

Mail on Sunday are a week and a half later than I was

The Mail on Sunday (great paper by the way, and mean that) are reporting tomorrow what I reported on THIS BLOG TWO WEEKS AGO

Here's their story
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1295498/Tory-MP-refuses-meet-Muslim-women-wearing-Burkas.html

I also revealed that a complaint has been made about this to police, and a letter written to the Prime Minister.

Philip Hollobone spoke to talkSPORT TWO weeks ago, and so actually, scroll back two weeks today and you'll read THIS, plus some interesting news, in that he is also a Police Officer!

A cure for sun burn?

As I tweeted earlier, I have spent the day fundraising for Guide Dogs in Welwyn Garden City. I genuinely love giving time to Guide Dogs, since they have done so much for me, and many thousands of others.

I was more than slightly put out by the local train company however, since at no point during the short train ride from home to WGC did they say ANYTHING about planned engineering works, and replacement bus journeys that would make this ten minute train ride take TWO HOURS!

I am also rather sun-burnt from today's events, so if you have any tips on dealing with painful sunburn on the face and arms, please, chuck them this way

The Public: Government have Immigration Cap wrong

I've been working on the hot subject of immigration today, ahead of Monday when the Government's temporary cap for non-EU migrants kicks in. Indeed I am about to interview Sir Andrew Green, who for obvious reasons doesn't think the cap goes far enough.

Earlier today, we hit the streets (as they say), to test the temperature of Joe and Joanna Public.

It was obviously a mixed picture, with some people thinking we're too hard, and other saying we're too soft, but one thing all the contributors had in common was the view that there is absolutely no point in capping non-EU immigration when we have so much immigration from former Eastern Block countries.

I'm just telling you what the public told me.

EXCLUSIVE: MET pulled out of Roul moat stand off due to poor practice by Northumbria Police

News reaches me this evening that the 30 Metropolitan Police Armed Officers attached to the CO19 armed section pulled out of the Roul Moat stand off due to disagreements with the local force.

All 30 Officers were deployed to the North of the Country half way through an eight hour shift, wearing nothing but their Met Police Uniforms, and consequently, an Officer was sent out with a Metropolitan Police credit card to buy the officers clothing.

The Metropolitan Police Superintendant and Inspector had a disagreement on tactics, and according to my source, decided that the Northumbria force were taking a less than professional approach to the situation.

The Met sources I have spoken with have told me,

Honestly, we don't know that a different outcome would be achieved had the Met not withdrawn, but it was clear to senior Officers on the ground that Northumbria were not prepared to listen to the experienced, and frankly more senior force, and so we withdrew at 11:30pm when it became apparent that local clowns had not got a clue about how to deal with the situation.

More news reaches me that a Scottish man, calling himself Andrew, has been contacting Press, claiming that he attends all major police incidents. An unlikely story, believe me. It seems possible that this man, calling himself "Andrew", with apparent police radio interspercing his calls has given one account of events on the night that Roul Moat lost his life, where in fact, quite possibly, "Andrew's" account may be nothing more than a load of old rot.

I am personally satisified that there was a shouting, swearing argument between Met and Northumbria Officers, but the caution I give to all readers is that you can never be 100% sure of anything.

It's your place to decide!

"RIP Roul Moat" page maker is total scum: I'm fureous

I am so angry, so fureous having heard the idiot creater of the "RIP Roul Mout" Facebook page speaking on talkSPORT.

I don't care what the scum bag's name is. I don't tend to use language like "scum bag", but trust me, I mean it, and would stand by it, no matter what!

It spoke with my colleague, the excellent Ian Collins ( @collinslateshow ) and said it believed that Moat was "a hero".

I am spitting in rage!

I have also only just had the opportunity to catch the Sky News interview with PC David Rathband. Now he's a hero, and I don't use that line lightly.

He has no nasty feelings toward the killer, Roul Moat, but he has lost his sight in the line of duty.

How dare that filthy dirt bag creater of "RIP Roul Moat" say that the killer is a hero?

It needs medical help... seriously!

Total scum!

I can't be part of the British way of life according to Philip Hollobone MP

As you will have seen today, the Mail carry a report that "calls for burka ban in Britain" are growing.

Lets get the spelling issue out of the way first... people dispute whether you spell it "burkah", or "burka" - frankly, I don't care, so we'll stick with the spelling the Mail have used TODAY!

Anyway, speaking in defence of his Private Members Bill - which realistically will never see the light of day, the Conservative MP for Kettering has told the Mail,

'Part of the British way of life is walking down the street, smiling at people and saying hello, whether you know them or not. You cannot have this everyday human interaction if you cover your face."

Now as I understand it, very few people in Britain do this nowadays anyway, but Mr Hollobone's comments would suggest that as a blind person, I cannot participate in the British way of life.

What a load of old rot.

I can reveal that Yvonne Ridley, the European President of the Islamic Women's Association has written a letter to the Prime Minister, asking that disciplinary action be taken against the Kettering MP for telling talkSPORT Radio last weekend that as MP for Kettering, he would refuse to deal with a Burka wearing woman in person. He said,

"I would tell her that she needs to write to me, or to get in contact with me in some other way. I just think it's rude to cover your face. If she can see my face, and I can't see her face, then we're not going to get on".

I get entirely why someone might have an issue with the burka - whether they are right in their 'issue' or not, there is a school of thought that says the burka is nothing more than a sign of opression and that Britain should send out a message to say this is culturally wrong. To be honest, I find it hard to get too hyped by the burka, but I think we're on dodgy ground when an elected MP refuses to speak to anyone in person without very good reason. This isn't even a very bad, good reason.

Lastly, you might be interested to know that last Monday 5th July, I made the Prime Minister aware of Mr Hollobone's comments on talkSPORT radio, via his Official Spokesman.

I don't want blood, but in the interests of having an open debate, surely this shouldn't be swept under the carpet?

Where's my copy of Mandy's book?

I note from Twitter that people have been receiving review copies of Peter Mandelson's book today.

I note that I haven't!!

Is it because YESTERDAY, I called him 'Lord Mandelson of Yesterday'?

Need to get on that tomorrow - and assuming I get hold of a copy, I'll let you know my take.

The PM's pay must rise NOW, and we have to stop obsessing about it!

Earlier, I received a press release from the Independent Peer, Lord Stoddart of Swindon, revealing that all 27 EU Commissioners, and 300 European Officials earn more than the Prime Minister.

To be honest, I’m slightly at a loss what to think about this. It is of course ridiculous that we have quite so many highly paid European Officials earning more than the PM, and so I guess I’m probably as outraged as Lord Swindon on this issue.

No! Actually, I’m furious about it, but we’ll put European waste to one side for the moment, and I shan’t rant even one tiny bit about Britain being fined £150m this week for failing to use EU headed letter paper as part of partially EU funded projects – and I shan’t venture in to angrily pointing out that we are a net contributor paying £6.4Bn MORE in to Europe than we get out.

Oh no! We’ll stick to the PM’s pay for now;

but it should be noted that the Prime Minister’s wage Is as low as it is because PM after PM has decided to practice self-mortification and cut their already low wage.

Did you know that the PM’s wage is actually £198,000, but that Gordon Brown decided he’d take £48,000 less than the real wage, and now David Cameron has cut 5% off this already vastly reduced sum, reducing his wage to £142,500?

This kind of political show-boating means that the very Office of Prime Minister is undermined, and worse still, it artificially drives down the pay of other publically employed workers.

I agree that the PM’s pay is pitiful, but serving Prime Ministers have themselves to blame for this. It is time that the nature of the Office was recognised in monetary terms, and it is time that people stopped bleating about those who are lucky enough to earn more than the top dog.

It’s as simple as this… there will always be nearly 600 people in Parliament who could b persuaded to become PM, eve if they had to pay to take the job – and though the rewards for Prime Ministerial Service are rather modest during the PM’s time as head of Government, as Tony Blair would testify (if you made him take the Oath), you do alright when you pass the baton on.

Other public workers however must be paid according to the private sector market value. So long as the jobs are genuinely needed, how can anyone object to a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work.

Thank you to the Police Federation for that phrase by the way. It was used during the Federation’s campaign against the previous Government who refused to increase pay in line with the findings of an independent arbitrator’s ruling. I think I must have the federation on my mind… could be something to do with my lunch appointment with Federation officials tomorrow.

Blind PC to return to the beat in Britain

I was very sorry to learn today that PC David Rathband has lost sight in both of his eyes, and yet delighted to learn that he intends to carry on duties as a Police Officer with the Northumbria force.

… But you couldn’t possibly have a blind policeman – I hear some shout, but you’re wrong. You can, and in this case you should and you must.

Policing isn’t all about wrestling with drunks, and nicking speeding motorists. Actually, as I understand it, machines and speed cameras have taken over the latter duty nearly all together.

There are a multitude of jobs in policing for PC Rathband, provided that the Northumbria force (sorry, service) are prepared to back him, and NOT invalid him out. For instance, it is possible to interview a suspect on tape, in conjunction with the rules set out in the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 without needing to see the interviewee.

It is possible, using adaptive technology such as that used by yours truly, for PC Rathband to work in the police control room dispatching Officers to calls. This job is known as a CAD operator. There are possibly thousands of jobs PC Rathband could continue to do as a fully warranted Officer, and there is absolutely no reason whatever why his newly acquired disability should disqualify him from continuing to serve as a Police Officer.

There will be those who object (believe it or not) on the grounds that as a fully warranted Police Officer , no one would be able to tell PC Rathband not to make arrests, or not to discharge his duties in the same way as any other Officer, but to those ignoramuses, I say go back to the thirties and leave the rest of us alone.

… If Northumbria Police are anything other than totally agreeable to a blind PC Rathband returning to police duties, I say to them that they will have a fight on their hands. PC Rathband would appear to have been blinded in the line of duty, so you owe him!



On a slightly less serious note, I understand that David Rathband has a fine history refereeing football in Northumbria. I don’t see why a little thing like blindness should stop him continuing on. It didn’t seem to bother FIFA during the world cup!

… AND back to be serious for one second – anyone who thinks Roul Moat was anything other than a cowardly scum bag is a couple of letters short of a qwerty keyboard.

A late, late night at the Commons

Today has been very productive for me in many ways.

Aside from all the excellent company I have kept, I would like to thank a very well known blogger (not that one, he's on holiday and not blogging) for encouraging me to keep blogging on this here blog.

The truth be told, one tends to wonder whether anyone is interested in one's rantings and ravings, but I have been convinced that it is worth sharing views and experiences.

As I blogged earlier , I had an excellent verbal ping pong match with Ed Miliband at the Press Gallery lunch earlier in the day, and shortly after my last blogpost, had a chat with Ed's brother David and told him what I thought of his brother's press gallery lunch club performance.

Later in the evening, I had the pleasure of meeting with David Davis, Michael Fallon, and Mark Field, the disaffected right if you like, and was interested to learn how their guests (including one former Chancellor - ;I'll let you guess which one) felt about the coalition. It seems that even the assembled group had nothing other than good words to say about the Chancellor, and his emergency budget.

"The wordies are hard enough for a serving Chancellor to use" said one guest, "now the next biggest step is to act upon those words" h/she said.

Then it was off to the House of Commons Terrace, where alas whatever may or may not have happened , I am disallowed via Commons rules from reporting - but I did have an enjoyable drink with Charlie Whelan and friends.

On that note, and in passing, I was upset to read reports of drunken MP's on the House of Commons Terrace, but perhaps not for the reasons you may be thinking. It may sound controversial to say, but there is absolutely no reason why an MP has to be tea total, or even not drunk to vote with their party. It may sound hard to believe, but voting in 2010 comprises of walking (or staggaring) in to the Lobby, and walking through which ever lobby your whip requires. As long as you can stand, what's the harm in getting a bit razzled?

Now this next comment may appear to stink of complicity with rule-breaking (but really it doesn't stink at all): Journalists have been banned from entering the Terrace without an MP since Michael Martin got the hump as Speaker. Mr Speaker Bercow has partially reversed this (but hardly at all) by allowing journos on the terrace on non-sitting Friday's and recess, but not outside of these times, unless with a serving MP. The solution is to go and grab any MP you might know, but still far from satisfactory in some people's views. Anyway, here goes the comment - I think it's a little bit bad that drunken MP actions were reported... not because MP's who drink themselves silly while preaching against cheap alcohol are getting drunk, and are therefore hipocrits, but rather because when the House is sitting till 3am or later, it is not unreasonable for workers to chill out as they might if they were not working.

Ok, I know I'm going to get flack for saying this... so lets have it!c

Ed Miliband: 'I can tell the truth now I'm not in the Cabinet'

Ed Miliband addressed the Press Gallery lunch club earlier today.

The lunch was fantastic, and the speaker... well good, but could have been better on his question answering skills.

The Labour Leadership wannabe spoke of his desire to sweep the past under the carpet, and move on towards yet a newer politics.

Amusingly, Ed was accidentally introduced as "David" to his audience of journalists, and no doubt, David will be hoping that this is an error Ed's voters may make at conference this year.

Ed M was quite crushin of Labour's "many" mistakes in office, including their wish to bring in ID cards. Civil Liberties, said Ed, are very important... Yes.. Harriet Harman used to say the same once upon a time.

Asked who his second choice for Leader will be, he confirmed that he would be voting for his brother.

On the issue of spinning, Ed told journalists in Westminster, "I was not a briefer", even though he "worked with the forces of hell".

Yours truly asked Mr Miliband (Ed) whether he agrees with "The Third Man", Lord Mandelson of yesterday, that neither GOrdon Brown, or Tony Blair would have ruled without the involvement of "The dark Prince", but unsurprisingly, we didn't get an answer to that one, and so I moved on to asking him about his assertion that he is pleased not to be in the Cabinet anymore because he could say what he actually thinks. I asked whether he was lying before - but again, far from a yes or no answer, Mr EM told us that he is pleased not to have to take the party line because of collective responsibility.

No more National Health Service

The Coalition Government have delivered a White Paper on healthcare today, and the intentions are CLEARLY very good.

Under their proposals, patients would be involved in every step of their healthcare, and offered choice of hospital, choice of Consultant, and choice of Consultant. The principle would be nothing happens WITH me, WITHOUT me, if that makes any sense.

All NHS Trusts would become NHS Foundation Trusts, and GP Consortiums would take over functions from PCT's and GP Consortiums would be paid on their results.

... And 45% will be saved in management costs, and re-invested on the frontline, in conjunction with a small real terms rise in NHS spending each year.

It is not for me to say whether this will work, but I do believe the coalition are honest in their intentions... but just one snag...

NONE OF THIS APPLIES IN SCOTLAND, OR IN WALES, so the quality of healthcare will depend on your postcode.

No longer do we have a National Health Service... but rather a regional health service, one for Scotland, one for Wales etc.

'Mandy': the 'man' of the people

I was quite disgusted, but alas, not at all surprised to catch Peter Mandelson’s awful, awful, awful TV ad for his memoirs.



Is there no limit to the shame certain elements of the Labour Party will go to, to sell their party up the river for personal financial interests?

‘Lord’ Mandelson denies that he has brought publication forward to beat the former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s books on to the book shelves, instead, he believes that the party can learn from his pearls of wisdom ahead of the Leadership elections.

Is this to say that he hasn’t been trying to help them thus far?

Was it only me who felt sickened by the suggestion that neither Mr Blair, or Mr Brown would be able to rule without him, ‘the third man”?

There is no doubt that Gordon Brown’s premiership would have died on June 4th 2009 without the self confessed ‘Dark Princes’ spin tactics, but I sincerely doubt he could have stopped Gordon Brown’s coronation if he actively tried… otherwise, he would have.

He is no fan of Gordon Brown’s, and we all know it.

Pickles to ban councils from splashing out £9k on job ads in the Guardian

In his first major speech since taking office, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government will address the Local Government Association’s conference at 2:30pm today (Tuesday) when he will attack what he calls “a culture of excess” in Local Government.

Eric Pickles will say that Councils need to make savings by taking basic efficiency measures such as sharing Chief Executives and declaring all spending over £500.

In a move to show that the DCLG are asking to do as I do, and not just do as I say, he will tell the LGA conference that all spending over £500 in his department will be published too.

Local Government will also be expected to make economies of scale by teaming up to negotiate the best bulk price going on everything from paperclips up.

Additionally, and controversially, the Secretary of State will ask councils to stop expensive and unnecessary advertising in publications like the Guardian at a cost of up to £9,000 per advert.

… But Richard Kemp, Deputy Chair of the Local Government Association has told me that he is furious at the expected announcements. On the general principles, he said,

“It’s absolutely against his (Eric Pickles) own principles. In the coalition agreement, it says localism, localism, localism. We have the Secretary of State trying to interfere with very small matters, so it’s real hypocrisy. It’s our job as local Councils to deliver the services that people need, in the way they need to be delivered”.

I asked Mr Kemp why banning expensive newspaper advertising, rather than advertising online would be such a bad idea. He told me that the LGA would defy any such edict,

“Online is only one way of doing it, if we want to get the real best people in the job, we use a whole variety of ways. We look at the job, we look at where the readership is, and then we go for the appropriate way of advertising it, which if it’s online, it’s what we’ll do, and if it isn’t, we’ll do something else”.

Who's side are you on?

The right decision: Ofcom throw out 2,800 complaints against Sky News

This is the briefest of posts to congratulate Ofcom for taking the common sense view on 2,800 complaints against Sky News, of which probably 2,600 at least were generated by a small group of trouble makers who got all their "mates" and Facebook "friends" to write in and complain.

There were three complaints that were replicated, sheep style by some very sad people, with very little to do with their time other than try (unsucessfully ha ha ha ha) to get broadcasters sacked.

1. That Adam Boulton was wrong to mention a negative piece in the Telegraph about Nick Clegg, which he directed to the Lib Dem Leader.

2. That Kay Burley was not duly impartal while interviewing a contributor from "38 degrees" on the subject of electoral reform.

3. That Adam Boulton acted wrongly in his TV spat with Alistair Campbell.

Ofcom rightly ruled that it was not unreasonable in the context of a TV debate, where the right of reply was fully available (and taken up) for Adam to mention a topical news story.

Ofcom rightly ruled that Kay Burley, whilst perhaps unusual in her interview style, gave the "38 degrees" spokesperson sufficient space to get his views across.

Ofcom quite rightly ruled that Adam Boulton did not act at all unreasonably in robustly defending himself against suggestions by Alistair Campbell that he was not fair and balanced, but rather wanted David Cameron to win.

I've seen some pretty strange rulings by various regulators over the years, but on this, Ofcom are to be congratulated for their common sense ruling, and Sky News are to be congratulated for standing up to the pathetic "people" who attempted to defame them.

Today is a good day for freedom of expression, and freedom of the press.

PC Philip Hollobone MP would refuse to speak with burkah wearing constituents

---- PLEASE CREDIT TALKSPORT ----

The Kettering Conservative MP Philip Hollobone has been talking to talkSPORT radio about his Private Members Bill to ban the burkah in public.

Asked by host Mike Graham whether he would ask a female constituent to remove her burkah before speaking with her, Hollobone said ,

“I would say to her that she needs to write to me, or get in contact with me in some other way, but I just think it’s rude not to show your face to someone else. If they can see my face, I can’t see their face, we’re not going to get on”.

Justifying his dislike of the Burkah, Hollobone said,

“There is something strange when you can’t see somebody’s face. It makes you feel uneasy, and I just take the view that God gave us all faces so that we could all have different expressions of personality - if you can’t see somebody’s face, it’s very odd”.

Mr Hollobone, who is also a Special Constable with the British Transport Police hit out against restrictions on Officers,

“I’ve asked my fellow Officers what they would do if there was somebody sitting on the tube who was wearing a full face balaclava, and every Officer I’ve spoken to has said that they would speak to that individual, and they would require them to remove it because it would be uneasy for people round-about, and of course, the police have to be alert to potential terrorist threats. Would they do that with somebody wearing a burkah or a Niqab? The answer is probably not because they would be frightened of being accused of being racist. Now that’s not right, and I think the law needs to be changed to address that concern “

Yvonne Ridley, European President of the Islamic Women’s Union reacted immediately to Mr Hollobone’s comments, telling the speech station that she will be complaining to police and will be considering a complaint to the Parliamentary Commissioner for standards. She said,

“I was really shocked by the call from the Tory MP, because you know, he mentioned the British way of life. There’s nothing more British than taking part in the democracy, and of course one of the ways that we take part in democracy is by going to see our elected MP… And he has turned round and said that he would refuse to see any of his constituents who want to exercise their democratic right to see their MP if she wore a burkah, and really, I’m seriously thinking about making an official complaint to the Parliamentary Standards Committee about this”.

She continued,

“He is also a Special Constable with British Transport Police, and should one of his full time colleagues exercise such views, he would be suspended almost immediately, and there would be an investigation. I’m really shocked that somebody like Philip has this view, and also additionally saddened that he has this wonderful opportunity to present a Private Members Bill in Parliament, and he’s wasting it on a Bill that has no chance at all of seeing the light of day.”

--- ENDS ----
PLEASE CREDIT TALKSPORT


For any queries, call Sean Dilley on 07977 411 797