Speeding row government source: 'Huhne is a hypocrite'

Government sources tell me that a real war has broken out. Between Philip Hammond and Chris Huhne over the proposed changes to our speeding laws, and not a row that has been sparked by different and legit political views.

As I explained on the BBC News Channel last night, the Tory section of the coalition are convinced that Chris Huhne's people leaked details of the Tory traffic announcement, ahead of it's planned delivery in Manchester next week, as they see it, to undermine the Tories generally, and Philip Hammond personally.

One angry insider told me, "Huhne's a hypocrite. He didn't give a dam about the environment when he was busy getting caught speeding, but now he sees the chance to play politics, he doesn't hesitate to put his points across".

There are real party political differences on whether the speed limit should be raised, but they are all known, so I don't intent to dwell upon these, but I'm told that trust has broken down between the two Cabinet Ministers.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Ed Miliband, 'Rory Weal is a rising star and would be welcome as a Labour MP'

The following is a verbatim transcript of my interview with Ed Miliband. Please use freely, but it would be damn nice of you to credit the report.

SD - One of the questions that Ed Miliband’s been asked rather a lot in the media is about his expression of good businesses and bad businesses. Now surely if they’re acting within the law, all businesses are good businesses? Do you Ed Miliband think that you need to go back and re-express that one?

EM - No I said in the speech there are good business practices and bad business practices, and I think most businesses would recognise that. And we’ve seen over the last few years in the banks, parts of the energy companies, I’m afraid practices which haven’t helped business, because when a bank doesn’t help small business, that’s not pro business, that’s anti business.

SD - Yes I understand, but what people are confused about as you’ll appreciate, is that they think you’re talking about pro small business, not necessarily big business, and then maybe there’s a cross over point where that small business becomes big. Are they then bad?

EM - No, because I actually praised in my speech Rolls Royce, a very large business which I think does a great job for Britain, but I think in the end, government sets rules, and the question is, does government set rules which encourage good practice, or bad practice. Let me just give you some very practical examples, does government reward research and development for example, companies that do that in the tech system. Does it, when it makes decisions about what it buys, reward those companies that offer apprenticeships, something that’s really important for the long term health of our economy. Does it ensure in banking that there’s proper competition to help small businesses. So I think there are very practical ways in which government can show that actually it encourages the right business practices and discourages the wrong ones, and goodness knows after what we saw in the financial crisis, I think that’s really important.

SD - Ok, well on the economy, we’re in the hall where you delivered your speech the other day, and I think it would be fair to say that your message was that Labour are economically credible. Firstly do you agree with that reading? And also what you did say is that an awful lot of the cuts on the most vulnerable are permanent, and cannot be reversed. Does that mean to say that you cannot, or will not reverse it, or is that something that we’ve misread?

EM - I think what I would say is that we’re not going to make promises we can’t keep, because I think trust in politics is so low that if we do that, then frankly I think people wouldn’t trust us, and rightly so, so what we’re going to do is say what can and can’t we do, and we set out practical policies this week, that can make a difference, for example, showing how we can cut tuition fees from £9,000 to £6,000 by not going ahead with tax cuts for the banks, how we can take on some of the energy companies, and what they’re doing. So I think it’s about practical policies, practical costed policies, and not making promises you can’t afford, and that’s very, very important.

SD - Were you worried about the tuition fees policy, because with the £9,000 cap, which you’re obviously talking about reducing down to £6,000, you know, three and a half to four years potentially before you could be in government, we don’t know the state of the economy at that point, so is this a commitment you’re absolutely able to deliver?

EM - Well what we’ve said is that if we were in government now, we would be doing that, and if there was a general election now, it would be in our manifesto. We’ll see where we are at the time of the next election, but I think it’s given a very practical sense of how we want to move the country forward, how we want to change the country, and I think that’s what people have got from Labour this week, a sense of who we are, who we stand up for, the hard working families of Britain, who want a different bargain in our economy, where their values are better rewarded. That’s what we’re about, that’s what we’re going to be talking about in the coming months.

SD - Let’s finish up by chatting about, and I’m sorry to raise the subject, the very articulate young man, Rory Weal who spoke of being on welfare, and the Daily Mail turned him over, let’s be honest about that, but have you spoken to Rory since, and how do you feel about... is it a bit strong to call it a deception?

EM - Well, I think he gave a fantastic speech. I think there’s a slightly British problem of knocking down people who do great things. Look, he’s a 16 year-old, he came to the very intimidating atmosphere of Labour conference, gave a fantastic speech, I think told the absolute truth about his situation, and you know, I think we should give him credit for having done that. I think he’s a star in the making, and I’ll leave it at that.

SD - So here’s the news line then, there’s a future for him in the Labour Party, possibly on the benches?

EM - Definitely, definitely. He’s a great kid, and he did a fantastic performance.

SD - A future William Hague, who knows. Ed Miliband, thank you very much. *** ENDS ***

Labour Conference at a rear glance #lab11

It may be called autumn conference, but the sun hasn't stopped shining on Ed Miliband's gathering in any sense of the word.

Nearly every Labour party supporter on the ground in Liverpool says they were delighted with Ed's motivational speech on Tuesday, despite being two conferences in to the party's spell in opposition. Most accept that there is confusion on how one company can be seen to be good, and indeed rewarded in the tax system, when another, perhaps the same company that has met with minimal success can be seen as a bad thing to be punished through the same tax system... but the new mantra of "something for something" seems to have struck the right chord with the party faithful, and that's hardly surprising when you consider that the message was clear and upbeat.

For probably the first time since becoming Leader, Ed Miliband seemed entirely relaxed, and dare I say appeared to enjoy his time on stage. But there is a feeling among hacks and political geeks that the Labour Leader may not have impressed with vague talk of "values" without specificity, or the "New Bargain", which invokes images of Arthur Daily, or Del Boy down the market... the standard joke being "buy one, get one free" or BOGOF! It was almost as if senior figures in the party said, we need a new, new deal - but we can't call it the "new deal" because Tony Blair already famously borrowed the expression, but in finality, they could think of nothing better to call it. But hey, what's in a name?

Meanwhile, confirmation reached me yesterday that the fault for Tuesday's six minute cut in the Leader's speech was down to unfortunate use of a kettle. Broadcast bosses were told that there had been "a catastrophic power failure" as opposed to what other kind of "power failure"? A nice one? In any case, after much backing and four thing, and an investigation by the venue itself, it transpires that someone (not working for the ACC directly) fancied a brew, but caused a storm from his tea cup. Friends of David Miliband want to make clear it wasn't him.

In other flippant news (sorry Ed, shouldn't really call your big moment flippant), the BBC's Giles Dilnott @reporterboy had his balls nicked from the exhibition centre. If you don''t watch the Daily Politics, you're very naughty, and you won't know that they run a mood box, asking people to chuck their ball in the box that most represents their view. For instance, one question this week was whether the Leader's speech should be moved to nearer the end of conference. Most people seem to think that conference dies somewhat once the big man's had his say, and as a jour no, I can back this up. We're very early on the fifth day (Thursday) and already, the media broadcast centre has been stripped by many organisations who have gone home early. Now party conferences aren't run for the benefit of the media, but if we're reporting it, the public are hearing it... and there can be absolutely no doubt that if the leader's speech was on the last day, this media centre would be a heck of a lot busier than it is now. Thing is... no one quite seems to know why it's done like it is - but it's different, we should give them that.

Now this isn't intended to be a serious post, but it is intended to give you a bit of an idea of how conference has played down here. It doesn't really matter what anyone in the media, or actually the public thinks right now. For at least the next few years, it's about what the party thinks, and if the public notice, all the better for Labour. Whether Ed Miliband has managed to persuade the public that he's economically viable is actually rather unimportant. He's persuaded his membership that he can persuade the public - and if that's what conference has been about, he's had a fine week indeed.

*** I'll be interviewing Ed Miliband at 8am this morning. The transcript will appear right here, so do pop back ***

Labour Conference 2011: What it's all about #lab11

It's a fair old journey from Euston to Liverpool Lime Street, so forgive me as I occupy it with a note on the real meaning of Labour's 2011 Conference.

Top of the 'among membership and media' agenda has to be one year of Ed Miliband's leadership. The coalition are making very unpopular decisions, and using strong, and some would argue concerning language on issues such as welfare reform, supporting disabled people and social care - and by rights, the Tories should be trailing Labour in the opinion polls by 12 points on a consistent basis, and Ed Miliband should be storming ahead in the personal popularity ratings - but neither has proven to be the case. In Labour's defence, they are a new opposition, taking on a new, and very different government after 13 years of radical rule - and the public will naturally be listening more to the new government, probably until the last 18 months of this Parliament. It's always harder for any Opposition party to get the media coverage - and that's not our fault. Simply speaking, if a government party makes an announcement, the public will feel the actual effects in their pockets and on the street. If the opposition make an announcement, it's hard for people to see why it matters - even though it clearly does. For Ed Miliband, he'll be trying to prove his leadership by not engaging in discussions about him, and focusing instead on Labour's policies.

Last year, Labour were "a blank canvas". This year, the canvas is strewn with notes and scribblings, and so it's over to Ed Miliband and conference to stick up a new canvas and start constructing art from their dorbings so far.

As conference begins,Ed Miliband has ensured that Labour will get it's own flack for tuition fees, just when the other parties have managed to shelve this particular hot potato for a while. This writer states no opinion on tuition fees right now, but it's painfully obvious that the Labour Leader is throwing stones in his glass house on this one. Labour introduced tuition fees under Tony Blair, and actively voted in favour of tuition fee rises last year. I think their best line of attack on this issue, since they've raised it, is to say that they were misled on the number of universities that would be charging the maximum £9,000 per year tuition fees - and I'm sure Simon Hughes would be as helpful to the cause as he can reasonably be.

But debate on tuition fees is frankly nothing more than a side show, but enough of one for the Conservative party to beat not Red with. They are already saying that his pledge to reverse the policy he supported last year indicates weak leadership and raises questions about the party's direction and credibility.

Economic credibility however will be central to Labour's 2011 conference. Every single Shadow Cabinet / Ministerial speech will cause the coalition of cutting "too far and too fast", and Ed Balls will again call for the VAT rise to be reversed and for the banking levy to be repeated. He'll attack George Osborne for economic stupidity, and failing to have a Plan B, but I predict that the biggest unanswered question this week will be what would Labour cut if they were in government, since they have said they don't oppose every cut, and they would have to have made cuts too. This is a hard question to answer, but the only way Labour will put this to bed is to set out very clearly what they would do. I don't think they practically can from where they stand.

Lastly, but far from least will be relations between the Labour Party and the Unions. Bob Crow has already hit out at Labour for taking their money only to slap them in the face. The party is seeking to claw back power from the unions - and Ed Miliband is looking to change Clause 1 to make the party more outward facing. But when all is said and done - deals will be done, and though the coming 18 months may be a little bumpy, Union and party leaderships will shake and make up… but expect damming criticism from the unions over the coming days.

So this week's conference can be boiled down to affirmation of leadership and economic credibility, with a bit of party supremacy stuck in the mix for good measure.

Of course we'll keep you updated along the way. My twitter tag is @seandilley and my producer Sheun is on @whoisthatgirluk

#Lab11 Why I’m excited to be on the Dods / Politics Home Week Ahead Panel on Sunday

The top team over at Dods / Politics Home have invited me to take part in the ‘Week ahead’ panel at the Labour Party Conference in Liverpool this Sunday at 5:45pm. If you don’t know how this works: A mix of politicians and hacks take part in a panel discussion looking at upcoming events at conference, and chew over some of the biggest issues, such as Ed Miliband’s first year in power and Labour’s position in the polls.


This year, Salford MP Hazel Blears will be on the panel (more on this in a moment) alongside Chris Bryant and myself, and we hope to bring you all the flash points in a digestible, straight forward dialogue. No doubt phone hacking will come up, and believe me, I have strong views on how the actions of a tiny group of individuals are being hijacked by a tiny minority of politicians (including party leaders I’m afraid) to vilify journalists, one presumes to mitigate the unacceptable actions of a large minority of MP’s before 2009. I’d elucidate here, but I fear I’d have nothing to talk about on Sunday.

But Hazel Blears and myself have history at the Week Ahead fringe from last year. I would first like to say that I regard Hazel as a friend, and I’m sure this is mutual, but I’m afraid that last year, I caused an unintended headache for the former counter terrorism minister when I reported word for word her assertion that Labour had done some “wicked and malicious” things over the past 13 years.

Out of the blue, and like a bombshell, this story had escalated on twitter, with the Conservative Party retweeting it, the producers at the Daily Politics covering it, and Hazel being asked about it.



I had no choice but to clear my journalistic name after a very public suggestion that I had misreported events. To this day, I feel awful about this because I can only say again, I really like Hazel, and alas for her, the Daily Politics (on which she appeared the next day, but I can’t find the VT) was not the last we heard of her comments in the national media.

(Matthew Norman’s Media Diary, the following Monday)

"* Worrying days for Hazel Blears, whose pants were on fire, not to mention in a frightful twist, after her remark about Labour doing "wicked and malicious things" in power. When asked to specify by TalkSport's talented political editor Sean Dilley, she blethered aimlessly. Then she told the BBC's Daily Politics "wicked and malicious" referred to the Tories. Informed later the BBC had a tape, the Glenn Hoddle of Salford couldn't remember them things what she said. Harold Wilson resigned as PM over the initial signs of early-onset Alzheimer's. Is this why Hazel has denied Ed's shadow cabinet her captivating brand of sunny optimism?"

As you can see, big things can happen at the Dods / Politics Home “week ahead” fringe. I certainly hope you’ll join us!

Clegg: 'I simply won't quit' #libconf

This is my talkSPORT interview with Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, at Lib Dem Conference in Birmingham. Please use freely, but if you do, it would be jolly decent to credit the report.

SD - Business Secretary Vince Cable has called to limit executive pay by giving shareholders the final say in how much the company will pay. Obviously we’re talkSPORT, so let me ask whether you think we should be giving football fans the opportunity to tackle obscene premiership pay.

NC - Well that’s for football fans and clubs to sort out themselves. Different clubs are of course organised and owned differently. You’ve got some clubs in some parts of the world, in Barcelona that are basically owned in a bit of a collective, and of course they have a much greater say about what happens to footballer’s pay... but look, I don’t think that at a time like this, the absolute priority for the government is to start looking at the way that football clubs organise themselves but..

SD -But it is linked to the economy isn’t it?

NC - Well I think what you’re absolutely right to say is that at a time when millions of people are really feeling overstretched, are finding it really tough to pay the weekly shopping bill, the monthly heating bill and so on, I think it’s right that people have got to be sensitive about how people at the top get paid. Crucially, and this is the point that Vince made, and he’s totally right, you shouldn’t be rewarded for failure. We’ve seen this thing over the last few years where people have been given massive bonuses in the banking system to mess things up. Well that can’t be right. We want to see a system where people are rewarded, if necessary generously for success, not for failure.

SD - Alright, well we’re in the run up to the Olympics of course, and we hear all this talk of police cuts. The Police Federation have got this huge poster campaign outside - Liberal Democrat promise of 3,000 extra police. In the coalition, we’re talking about, at least monetary cuts. Is that a matter of regret for you?

NC - Well it’s of course a matter of regret for me that we find ourselves in a situation where we have to make cuts and savings in several different ways. You know, I didn’t come in to politics to make cuts. It’s not something you relish, but look what’s happened to Greece, look what’s happened to Ireland, look what’s happened to countries, which actually have got lower deficits than us when they didn’t get on top of the problem. There’s nothing nice, there’s nothing fair about that... and do you know what, you’re not going to be able to afford police int he future unless you first make sure you balance the books today.

SD - I take the point, but can we safely deliver the Olympics in the United Kingdom, something that’s hugely important to our international reputation?

NC - Sure, absolutely, we are absolutely clear that notwithstanding the changes we are introducing, there is enough resource for the police, and there’ll be enough police officers to make sure the Olympics are entirely safe.

SD - Ok, well lastly then, we’re at the second conference since the Liberal Democrats came in to government, just over a year and a half more or less, and already people are talking about your future, they’re talking about the future of the Liberal Democrats. Firstly, how does that make you feel inside, and secondly I suppose, even though you’re going to tell me it was the right thing to do to enter into coalition, do doubts ever enter your mind, questions on whether it was the right thing to do?

NC - Well firstly, I think as long as I’ve been involved in politics, I’ve seen people predicting on an almost daily basis that the Liberal Democrats are about to expire and...

SD - but enough about Energy Secretary Chris Huhne.

NC - And then usually it’s followed by, oh there’s going to be a leadership crisis. Do you you really detect any of that at this conference? I don’t at all. No, no.

SD - Well my professional judgement is no, but people are still talking about it.

NC - Ah, ah, well just because people talk about it, it doesn’t mean it’s true. That’s one of the things I’ve discovered in politics. People talk about a whole lot of stuff that’s not true. It just is not something that people are talking about in the Liberal Democrats at all. If anything, the real truth is that the party is much, much more resilient, much, much more determined than our critics I think I predicted or hoped for.

SD - Yes, but some of the critics are in the party, and do you never think, I tell you what you ingrates, I’ve really worked worked my backside off, I’m off, I’m going to do something else where I’m appreciated.

NC - No, no, I’m going to see this coalition parliament through. I’m going to be Leader through the next general election and beyond.

==== ENDS ====

#libconf President Tim Farron speaks about the Premiership of Pokitics

Lib Dem President Tim Farron delivered a typically numerous speech to Conference. If I had to liken it to sport, I'd say he's delivered a few affective jabs to the Tories, and sent a message to the party's membership that whatever niceties exist between the Tories and Lib Dems, he's not in it, with them, together.
"................

So, well done - you all got past security clearance!

Incidentally I’m very grateful to the police, they’ve now provided me with all the detailed personal information on party members that I need in order to conduct a Stalinist purge.

Basically anyone who actually passed security clearance without sign of being a subversive will be erased.

Its been a busy six months since Sheffield.

And I’m going to start where I should.

At the bottom.

And Mays elections really were the bottom – at least they flipping well better had be!

Ok, we got 16% of the vote and had some real successes around the country, but let’s not fool ourselves.

In much of the country we got slaughtered.

In Scotland, in many of our great cities, in shire districts Liberal Democrats who have served their communities and worked their backsides off for years, got their backsides kicked.

I want to say this to you now, if you lost your seat, I stand with you; I am angry on your behalf; I take the responsibility and I absolutely will not insult you by claiming that this was collateral damage, or an understandable mid term blip.

Frankly, as your President, I owe you an apology.

Politics is full of clichés.

Perhaps the worst, is that bit where you’re on telly having to pretend everything’s gone swimmingly on a bad election night.

I had that job, and I have to confess that I didn’t stick to the script.

I didn’t pretend it was alright really.

Cos it wasn’t.

I saw the stats piling up, the Lib Dem minus figure getting bigger, you know, I knew these were not statistics, these people are my friends.

People who didn’t deserve to lose.

But who lost.

I’m not going to explain them away, shrug and accept their defeat as an inevitable consequence.

Defeat is never inevitable or acceptable.

But sometimes it happens.

I remember 2001 when we should have won Westmorland and Lonsdale and didn’t.

The campaigns department sent us a pager during the campaign – cutting edge!

They included us in the messages they sent to sitting MPs.

After the election, they carried on sending us messages – assuming that we’d got elected.

I went back to work at Lancaster University on the Monday after I lost, and I kept getting messages telling me about photo calls for new MPs, swearing in and making maiden speeches.

It was a sickener.

I was pleased for those who’d won, but I was gutted, depressed, I took the whole thing personally.

I’d worked my socks off for 3 years, I’d done everything I thought I could to win, but I still lost by 3,000.

And I have to confess that after 2001 there were a few months where I thought, why don’t I just jack it in?

Do a 9-5, dig the garden, get a season ticket at the Rovers, you know, torture myself in a different way.

Then I changed my mind.

There were two things that did it if I recall.

First, England beat Germany 5-1 in Munich; which has no political significance whatsoever, it just massively cheered me up!

A few days later my daughter Gracie was born.

If that doesn’t make you take stock, nothing will.

I thought back to what had first politicised me, and if you’ve heard this one before – well, tough!

I was 14 I saw Cathy come home, it completely broke my heart and my reaction was to do something, to join Shelter and then the Liberals.

Because if homelessness, poverty and inequality are wrong, then not doing something to stop them is equally wrong.

I’d joined this party to make a better a world, and now in the maternity ward in Kendal I had this little ginger thing, someone to make the world better for.

I had no flaming right to walk away.

So I got re-selected and spent 4 years doing everything Hilary Stephenson told me to, and a bit more.

Because you can’t change the world if you come second.

That’s why I am here rather than watching Rovers put 4 past Arsenal, despite only having 3 shots on goal.

Tell me if I’ve got this wrong, but I think that you want me as President to sell the undiluted Liberal Democrat standpoint.

Not to be an apologist for everything the coalition does.

Committed to the Liberal Democrats in coalition, but more importantly, committed to the Liberal Democrats.

There’s wonderful freedom in this role and I’m determined to use it!

Unlike ministerial platform speeches at conference this year, I don’t have to show mine to Oliver Letwin in advance!

I didn’t have to.

But I sent him a copy anyway just to wind him up.

But there are 18 Liberal Democrats who don’t have the luxuries that I do.

They can’t just sound off if they don’t like government policy or trot through the no lobby on occasions – rare occasions – to demonstrate their disagreement.

They are our ministers.

And while I’m parading my conscience around the TV studios saying the right things, they are busy in their departments doing the right things.

On those very, very rare occasions when Michael Gove says or does something stupid or wrong, Sarah Teather doesn’t come out and slag him off. Instead she fixes it.

Free schools for example!

When the Tories showed hesitancy about committing to true and fair banking reforms, Vince Cable laid on the pressure and forced that commitment.

And when George Osborne flew the kite of cutting income tax for the wealthy, Danny Alexander cut the string, and stopped him.

Incidentally, those 20 economists – nearly all of them top rate tax payers by the way – who called for scrapping the 50p tax rate.

They have many supporters in the Conservative party.

But they are utterly wrong.

Are we all in this together?

Well not if we give tax cuts to the rich!

At a time when 90% of the country is struggling to pay the rent or the mortgage,
giving a 10p tax cut to those who need it the least, would not just be economically witless, it would be morally repugnant.

Now of course, all income tax is temporary!

Income tax was introduced as a temporary measure in 1798 during the Napoleonic wars.

So my solemn promise to you is that we will get rid of this temporary measure, as soon as we stopping falling out with the French.

Danny, Vince, Nick and I are absolutely clear – the wealthy will continue to pay the largest share of the cost of our recovery so that we can protect the least well off.

The principle that the rich pay more does not come from a desire to penalise the wealthy, but from a desire to ensure that our recovery must be a fair recovery.

Be absolutely sure of this. Liberal Democrat ministers are the guarantors of fairness in a government that would be an absolute nightmare without them.

And not only this.

Your average Tory minister, bless them, works hard in their department and is rarely seen anywhere near their constituency.

Our ministers are full-on committed constituency MPs as well as being tasked with the small responsibility of running the country.

Their commitment to Liberal Democrat principles and policies is immense and their workrate is phenomenal.

That goes for all our ministers, but goes for Nick in spades.

This summer, Nick hasn’t stopped. His schedule racing around the country meeting members, supporters and one or two former supporters, has been staggering.

Thick skinned, warm hearted, quick witted, occasionally paint-splattered, a Liberal to his fingertips – he leads the Lib Dems, runs the country and runs rings around the Tories.

If you listen to Nadine Dorries, Conservative home and the Daily Mail, then Nick Clegg is leading the government; but when it comes to the NHS, the Bankers and fair taxation, Nick seems to be leading the opposition too!

Ed Miliband, are you still on holiday?

Who is taking the Blairite nonsense out of the NHS bill?

Nick Clegg

Who put the bankers back in their boxes over financial restructuring?

Nick Clegg

Who stood up against reactionary Tory drivel after the riots?

Nick Clegg

We are a radical Liberal Party putting radical liberal politics into action and blocking Tory policies every day.

For how many decades have we dreamed of being able to say that?

I have always been proud to be a Liberal Democrat, I was proud of us when we called it right on Kosovo, when we called it right on Iraq, when we called it right on deregulation of the banks.

But I have never been more proud of my party than I am now.

British public opinion is a bit more mixed.

I mean we’ve endured decades where the public were utterly indifferent to our existence, then for 5 minutes they loved us intensely, followed by a lengthier period where they’ve actively disliked us.

I had a girlfriend like that once.

But no one can say we don’t matter anymore, as Oscar Wilde said there’s only one thing worse than being talked about, and that’s not being talked about!

Look we had three political options after the 2010 elections: we had to choose between the rather unpleasant, the completely impossible or the utterly appalling; but we only had two economic options between the horrible and the catastrophic.

Now my politics were formed in the 1980s amidst mass unemployment in the north of England.

At times more than half of my class at school were on free school meals, most of us - me included – had parents out of work.

That experience scarred me, and it scarred me all the more because those levels of unemployment in the 80s were avoidable - that government deliberately used unemployment as an economic tool to control spending and the unions.

And we are tackling the deficit today, making horrible decisions to avoid the catastrophic alternative of market meltdown and mass unemployment or, as Ed Balls calls it ‘plan B’.

If the Tories created mass unemployment in the 80s out of wickedness, Labour would create mass unemployment today out of witlessness.

This summer, the silly season got serious didn’t it?

No one saw the riots coming.

With the possible exception of the Kaiser Chiefs.

And I reckon that was just a lucky guess!

The riots were an outrage against peaceful communities, a tragedy for civil society, an affront to our identity and an absolute gift for every knee-jerk reactionary in the country.

Some who shall remain nameless, but for illustrative purposes lets call them David Starkey, saw the fires of discontent and thought it wise to pour petrol on them by invoking racial stereotypes.

Now David Starkey is one of Kendal’s favourite sons, and I know that he is absolutely not a fascist, but I also know that he is absolutely an intelligent person and intelligent enough to know that it is culpably reckless to play into the hands of those who are fascists.

And there’s been a hypocrisy in so much of the media – including from the apparently shameless Murdoch press – focusing their ire on what they call a feral underclass with a contempt for society.

Just an observation here:

The super rich don’t need to go down Ealing high street nicking tellies in order to demonstrate their contempt for society. They demonstrate their contempt by not paying taxes.

And lets be honest, we are sharing power with a bunch of people who think that this is OK!

If you care about communities, then you are an opponent of all those who undermine them.

That includes the looters. That includes those who benefit from our society but who do not pay the taxes that they should, and that includes politicians and newspaper editors who provide them with cover.

Before the summer recess, I spent June and July away from Parliament too after my wife had an operation.

She’s fine by the way, she spent 2 months effectively confined to home, not able to walk or drive so I was granted compassionate leave by the whips – who, lets be honest, didn’t owe me any favours!

So I got to look after the kids out of school hours and be a constituency MP the rest of the time.

Rosie meanwhile read lots of crime thrillers, got hooked on online shopping, but absolutely refused to get sucked into daytime TV.

She claims.

Interestingly enough some tickets arrived through the post the other day for a gentle discussion programme called the Jeremy Kyle show.

I assume its a bit like question time.

The title is ‘my husband forces me to deliver leaflets even when I’m on crutches’.

Which is intriguing.

I learnt a lot during that time away from Parliament: first, being a Mum is hard work; second being my wife is really hard work; and third, politics looks a heck of a lot different when you are not in the Westminster bubble.

You see I spent almost 2 months getting my news the same way everyone else does.

No briefings or nuanced explanations from ministers.

The Lib Dems achievements on the NHS bill, on reigning in the bankers on keeping profiteers out of our state schools - they either don’t get reported, or the Lib Demness of those successes is exquisitely camouflaged.

Think about it, we are the first government party in history that doesn’t have a single newspaper telling our side of the story.

But the fact that our excellent message wasn’t landing in the minds of the public
highlighted an obvious danger for all of us who hold elected office.

And this is the moment when I could offend just about all of you, but isn’t it so often the same old story, you’re a brilliant campaigner, you get elected, you get sucked into the council, you go to meetings, you spend lots of time with your very lovely and very bright officers, and you start listening to them intently even though they don’t actually care two hoots if you’re re-elected.

And your diary gets a bit too full to go out knocking on doors, so not only are you now listening to officials but you have stopped listening to normal people and so you forget what they sound like, what angers them, what impresses them, what they elected you to do in the first place so you make daft decisions and you get slaughtered in the local press and then you lose.

That can happen in Whitehall as well as the town hall!

It can be a slippery slope.

So what’s the answer?

I’ll tell you what:

A full blooded return to the principles and the practice of community politics.

And it needs to start now.

In many of the mets, with elections in thirds, the same seats that we lost this year, are up again next year.

There may be a sense of inevitability that if we lost this year, we’re bound to lose next year too.

Well I am absolutely not having that!

This conference must mark a renewal of the theory and practice of community politics – and a belligerent determination to make our own luck.

I don’t underestimate the task ahead, but we have been through far worse and come out smiling on the other side.

The Thorpe scandal, the merger debacle; you know, if our poll rating is currently 13%, I can tell you that that’s about 14 times better than it was in 1989.

You know, I reckon if either of the other parties saw their poll ratings dip into single figures, they would implode and cease to be.

They couldn’t hack it mentally or emotionally, and the vested interests that they serve would abandon them.

Not with us. We’ve got nerves of steel. Survival is what we do.

A bit like cockroaches after a nuclear war, just a bit less smelly, we are made of sterner stuff.

And we are not the vehicle of any vested interest.

We are the vehicle for a radical, green, tolerant, internationalist, progressive form of politics and if we did not exist then there’s hundreds of people here today who’d rush out and invent us!

Going into coalition was absolutely the right thing for the country, but costly for the party.

I’m in no doubt that being in coalition with the Tories has tainted us, our identity is blurred, many who support us are confused. They say: “We thought you were against the Tories, why are you shacked up with them now?”

The picture of the coalition being a marriage is a depressing one isn’t it?

It’s enough to put you off your tea!

If it’s a marriage, well its a good natured one, but I’m afraid its temporary.

We’re staying together for the sake of the kids, or the Special Advisors as we call them.

So look, I don’t want to upset you and its not going to happen for 3 or 4 years but I’m afraid divorce is inevitable.

So, as your president I took the liberty of seeking some legal advice about how we stand in the event of a divorce.

There’s good news and bad news. Good news: we might get half of Ashcroft’s money.

Bad news: we have to have Pickles at the weekends!

Well over the last few months, there’s been a new spikiness and effectiveness about the Liberal Democrats.

We fought against the bankers, we stood up against the witless kneejerk populism of the Tories after the riots, we’ve fought against tax cuts for the rich and we came out fighting on the NHS, and I’ll tell you what, we will continue the fight for our NHS.

And since then, we’ve started winning by-elections, including gaining a seat off Labour for the first time since the general election, our membership has risen, donations have increased and our poll ratings have shot up from absolutely diabolical to just slightly depressing.

Now there’s one thing I haven’t mentioned.

I was sort of thinking of leaving it out but that would be cowardly.

The AV referendum.

That went well didn’t it?

Electoral reform was within our grasp for the first time in our lifetimes, but was it for the last time?

Don’t even think it.

Two things I have got doggedly used to in the 25 years since I joined this party: one is losing, the other is never, ever flaming giving up!

We have a corrupt electoral system, it needs modernising and transforming.

We will democratise the House of Lords and we will bring in proportional representation for the upper house.

PR for parliament.

Unlike the NHS bill, it is in the coalition agreement, I don’t care how many Tories or Lib Dems don’t like it, it is not an optional part of the programme. It’s a red line.

It’s not a sexy doorstep issue, its not going in my focus leaflets, but it is vital if we are to ensure that our democracy emerges from the 19 century.

When we go to the polls in 2015, we must be electing a part of the upper house for the first time ever, by proper PR.

Not a miserable little compromise!

The AV referendum is salutary.

It reminds us what we are up against in general.

A Tory party owned and directed by the impossibly rich, a Labour party which may be led by a progressive but which is owned by the forces of conservatism and a media owned by a handful of powerful individuals with antidemocratic axes that they grind very effectively.

How do we compete against that? Isn't it impossible?

David Penhaligon said “I only got elected because I was too naive to realise it was impossible”.

We must fight every day to ensure that we never become part of the establishment, but we should fight hard to prove that we are worthy of power.

David Penhaligon, Roy Jenkins, Jo Grimond and all the legions of others who brought us from the depths for such a time as this.

They’d have killed to see the day we were in government, and they’d have killed us for complaining about it.

There’s a true story about President Kennedy visiting a NASA warehouse used for storing fuel cylinders for the Apollo programme.

He met the janitor and asked him ‘what do you do?’ the janitor replied, ‘I’m putting a man on the Moon’. That is the spirit.

As Liberal Democrats, we are all in this together whether you are the Deputy Prime Minister or a Focus deliverer, or indeed both.

No one will sell our story if we don’t, no one will believe our message if we don’t, no one will fight our battles if we don’t.

We’ve spent years trying to qualify for the premier league of politics, now we are here – lets waste no time looking into the stands for reactions, let’s look at each other, look to each other, focus on the goal, tackle our opponents and stuff them.

Get on with it!

ENDS


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Transcript: Danny Alexander's speech to #libconf

I’d like to tell you about a man who’s been a great source of inspiration and guidance to me behind the scenes over the last year.
Gordon.
Although outwardly dour, his finely tuned political antennae and no nonsense style make him the perfect sounding board.
He’s not flash – he’s just Gordon. Gordon Birtwistle, the Liberal Democrat MP for Burnley. One of the most talented and tenacious of our 2010 intake. I’m privileged he agreed to be my PPS.
Alistair Darling wasn’t quite so keen on his Gordon.
His Gordon racked up a record deficit fuelled by irresponsible and unsustainable spending.
His Gordon denied any responsibility for the economic woes caused by his own policies.
His Gordon “unleashed the forces of hell” simply for sharing his views on the severity of the economic crisis.
Who was feeding Gordon Brown such advice? Was it Mandy? Or McBride? I think it’s pretty obvious - it was all Balls.
Unlike Labour, our party has never shied away from telling difficult truths on the economy:
Vince Cable led the way in warning of the dangers that were building.
And we made a historic decision last Spring. When we signed up to coalition government, we knew our country’s economic stability depended on it.
Returning our country to lasting prosperity is the founding purpose of this Government - the overwhelming national interest that motivated two very different political parties to take responsibility together for a full 5 years.
We resolved to act in the national interest and put our country first. That is what we're doing.
“In government, on your side” doesn’t mean telling people there's an easy answer to the horrendous problems Labour left.
It means telling it straight.
To get things right for the long term, we must stick to our guns now.
And we shouldn't forget the impact of our unity and our resolve.
Concern about both sovereign debt and economic growth is at the heart of the current market turbulence.
Turbulence fuelled by uncertainty about the ability of political leaders across the globe to take the decisive action their countries need.
Since we came into office, our coalition Government has taken the difficult, and sometimes unpopular decisions necessary to fix our economy.
This decisive action has made an immediate impact.
Interest rates have stayed low, keeping workers in their jobs and families in their homes.
Fellow Liberal Democrats, we played a decisive role in securing our country’s financial credibility. This should make us proud.
We have built a strong shelter, but the storm is still raging.
Elsewhere in Europe, the struggle to establish credible deficit reduction plans goes on. In the US, political deadlock brought a historic downgrade of the country’s credit rating.
Yet despite all the evidence, the party that put us in this hole just want to keep digging.
Labour say our motivation is dogmatic. They're wrong. It's practical.
Financial discipline is necessary for effective government. It would be completely wrong to leave the bills for past mistakes to be paid for by our children. The economic case is indisputable – that’s what so many of you have done in local government, and that’s what we must continue to do in central government. We must stick to our plans and we will.
We'll be straight with people: about how long this will take; how hard it will be, and what we will do to get it right.
A huge deficit, an unbalanced economy, our trading partners in real difficultly.
These are very big problems. Solving them will take years, and every one of us has a role to play. To support growth, to help families under pressure.
As Liberal Democrats, our judgements about what needs to be done should be driven by the liberal economy we want to build.
A liberal economy shaped by free and open competition,
A liberal economy built on long-term investment, not debt and waste.
A liberal economy where growth is shared across the country
A liberal economy where taxation delivers fairness.
Sustainable, balanced, competitive, fair. To get the kind of growth we want, we must break down the vested interests – the enemies of growth that stand in the way of future prosperity.
We are prepared to take them on. We will name and shame those standing in the way of that central national purpose.
TRADE
Free trade has been a liberal rallying call for centuries. Offering gains to countries around the world and especially for Britain, with our quality exports and trading history.
Today our trade policy is being brilliantly led by Ed Davey.
The inception of the European single market a quarter of a century ago helped create hundreds of thousands of new jobs.
Astonishingly, the single market is not yet complete. Huge areas of the European economy are still not fully open to British firms – especially in the services and energy sectors
Completing this work will support growth, jobs and competitiveness not just in Britain but across the whole of Europe.
There's an opportunity for Britain to lead this agenda right now – as we did so successfully in the 1980s.
As the Eurozone seeks to deepen its integration – and we need it to do so more quickly – they will need our support. And they will get it.
Sadly, eurosceptics on left and right still fail to understand Winston Churchill’s insight that sharing sovereignty strengthens our influence and isolation weakens us. Scottish Nationalists make the same mistake.
We'll never let the anti-European isolationists or nationalists frustrate our national interest.
They are enemies of growth.
Fortunately, coalition ministers are united in pursuing a policy of practical, pragmatic engagement in the EU.
Nick Clegg and I are working with David Cameron and George Osborne to make deepening, strengthening, and deregulating the single market a central aim of Britain’s European policy – because it will bring jobs and growth.
INFRASTRUCTURE
Too many businesses are being held back by congested roads, slow railways, inadequate broadband.
At the spending review last year, we looked at infrastructure spending in the round, picking only the most economically valuable projects from across government for funding.
And as a result, we're investing more in the transport network over these 4 years than Labour managed in the last 4. The redevelopment of New Street Station here in Birmingham, the Mersey gateway bridge, Crossrail in London, and a national high speed rail network.
And we have prioritised the money to invest to make sure that high speed broadband gets to every part of the country.
Now more than ever, we need to get on with this work.
But there's a major vested interest in the way. Bureaucracy, rules and red tape that mean it takes years to get things done. A planning system that can take more than a decade to allow even modest developments to go forward.
It has to change. And under the coalition it will.
I know there are concerns about our planning reforms. So it's important to understand what we're really doing. The presumption of sustainable development is right because it establishes the right balance.
Local communities in the driving seat, local protections in place and yes more local homes and local jobs.
So while it is politically contentious - we will reform planning.
As Chief Secretary, I set the rules that control public spending. Mostly, that's about making sure we stick within our budget, which I’m sure you can imagine doesn’t always make me very popular.
On infrastructure, I'm pressing departments to make sure they deliver their plans on schedule.
And we need to do more. More to help support jobs and growth in our communities.
Because growth can’t be imposed from the centre – it must be driven by businesses, communities and local authorities.
They are critical to delivering the jobs and homes that our communities need.
So I’d like to tell you about the next steps in our Plan for Growth.
To support local growth, I can today announce my decision to reduce the interest rate offered to local authorities by the Public Works Loan Board to finance the £13bn of debt needed to leave the Housing Revenue Account subsidy system.
I've listened to local authority concerns that this is a one-off transaction within the public sector and should be financed as such.
Let me put it simply – an extra £100m every year that councils can then reinvest in housing.
And I want to take a further step to support local growth.
Across the country, projects are being held back by tough market conditions, difficult cash flow and a lack of confidence. Projects where people could be working but aren’t.
That is why I'm announcing today the creation of a new Growing Places Fund.
Half a billion pounds that will kick start developments that are currently stalled.
Half a billion pounds that will deliver key infrastructure and create jobs.
Putting local areas in the driving seat, to boost the local economy and get people into work.
Providing flexibility to local areas to recycle funding for other projects once development is completed.
In South Gloucestershire, £300 million of private investment, 3,000 jobs and 2,200 homes is being unlocked with £6 million of public money to build a link road. Just think what we will be able to do with £500 million.
Unlocking local growth by freeing businesses to grow, creating jobs, and freeing councils to build housing. Liberal Democrats in government, on your side.
BANKS
We're on your side when it comes to the banks too.
Delivering on our promise to protect the taxpayer from the cost of future bailouts. Never again should bankers go to the casino with their stakes guaranteed by the rest of us.
That's why we commissioned the Vickers report
It's why we welcomed his recommendations on ring-fencing.
It's why we welcomed his call to extend competition in the banking sector.
And it’s why we will legislate to protect future taxpayers in this Parliament.
TAX
Of course, our main tool to help low and middle income families with the pressures they are facing is the tax system.
Thanks to Liberal Democrats there is genuine progress.
And I’m not just talking about fuel duty cuts for our remotest communities, though I expect we will have that in place next year.
This year, the average worker is paying £200 less income tax than last year. Next year, the bill will come down by another £120. By the end of this Parliament, most working people will be paying £700 less income tax a year.
Conference, an income tax threshold of £10,000 was the first priority in our manifesto. Now it's the first tax priority of the government. We should be proud that in government our ideas are making a real difference to every working family in Britain.
But we shouldn't rest on our laurels. In the next Parliament, I want us to go further; our aspiration should be that someone working full time on the minimum wage should pay no income tax at all.
An income tax threshold of £12,500 - think what that would do to work incentives, think what it would mean for basic fairness.
Let’s put that on the front page of our next manifesto.
Some people have argued that we should change our tax priorities and focus our limited resources on cutting taxes for the wealthiest instead.
At a time of austerity, this argument simply beggars belief. If we are all in this together, those with the broadest shoulders must bear the greatest burden.
Fair taxation of the wealthiest is key to our deficit reduction plan. Of course, if a better way can be found to raise the money from this group, I will be willing to consider it.
But right now we must focus relentlessly on those who are struggling.
And we need to make sure tax owed is tax paid.
Last year, I announced a package of investment to strengthen our fight against tax evasion, as well as tax avoidance.
Let me tell you how we’re getting on.
This year, an additional 2,250 HMRC staff will move into new anti-evasion and avoidance jobs.
This month, over 1,000 of these jobs are being advertised.
And already this package is bearing fruit.
I promised you we’d collect an extra £7bn a year by the end of the Parliament;
And I can tell you we're already on track to raise £2bn this year.
It took 12 years for the previous Government to take action against the wealthiest 5,000 people some of who weren’t paying their fair share of tax.
We can do better than that.
In less than a month’s time, a new ‘affluent team’ will be place. This team will look specifically at the next 350,000 wealthiest taxpayers.
These are the people who pay or should pay the 50p rate of tax. And my message to the small minority who don’t pay what they owe is simple, I agree with the Chancellor. “We will find you and your money” and you will pay your fair share.
CONCLUSION
Economic credibility comes from doing the right thing – that’s why Labour lost it.
At the next election, we can make sure there will be only one party that people trust to both handle the economy and deliver fairness – the Liberal Democrats.
We’ll win that trust by sticking to our guns, especially when times are tough.
We'll do that by levelling with people about the scale of the challenge we face, not offering false promises as Labour did.
By delivering our aspiration to rebuild a more sustainable and balanced economy.
By showing that we understand the fears and the pressures on the people of this country, and share their ambition for a better Britain.
Most of all, we will do that by building a shared sense of national economic purpose so that we are working alongside every person in this country to restore our prosperity.
Do you remember how Gordon Brown liked to conclude his speeches?
Long lists - did you find them annoying? I know I used to.
But not now, with so many Lib Dem achievements already in place, I can’t resist:
A clear plan to deal with the deficit, removing barriers to business growth, investing in infrastructure, promoting free trade and competition, sorting out the banks,
tackling tax avoidance, and cutting taxes for those who need it most.
That is the economic policy of the Liberal Democrats in government and it is a record to be proud of.
Thank you
ENDS



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Lib Dems, so far and beyond #libconf

The Liberal Democrats are keen that conference is seen as a forum to show that, as last year, the party is "in government, on your side" as large posters and slogans shout out at the ICC in Birmingham.

Already, the key battle lines have been drawn up with 50p tax, and fairness taxation dominating. Nick Clegg has urged party members to spend the next days arguing out their disagreements, but then to unite at the end of conference when all is said and done - but unlike Tory and Labour conferences, party members have been happy to shout at, and criticise party colleagues. The party's uncertain positioning within government means that unity is almost impossible - but there's something quite refreshing about watching hecklers yell their guts out, yet be allowed to remain on the conference hall.

Whatever else you'll see this conference season, you won't see quite the same passion from attendees as you'll see within the Liberal Democrats.

Keep tuned because it's certain to get gritty.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

What the Fixed Term Parliament Bill REALLY means

The Coalition is patting itself on the back after the Fixed Term Parliament Bill Passed all of it’s Stages in Parliament - but what does this actually mean?

Until now, the timing of British General Elections has been in the gift of the Prime Minister - and while Parliament’s could not last more than five years, accept under some kind of national emergency, General Elections would usually take place every 4 years (the main exception of recent times being in 1974, when we had an election in February, and another in October when coalition talks proved less successful than in 2010).

General Elections of late then have been held around every four years, when the government of the day has peaked in popularity, or in the case of the Conservatives in 1997, at the absolute 11th hour when everybody but everybody knew they were on their way out.

One of the many agreements and pledges in the Coalition Agreement Document of 2010 was a commitment to Fixed Term Parliaments. In fact, we were told on May 11th, the very night that David Cameron walked in to Number 10, that the next General Election would be on May 7th 2015 - but frankly at the time, the notion seemed less plausible than it does now.

So now the Fixed Term Parliament Bill (soon to be Act) has gone through, Parliamentary Terms are set to run for five year terms, unless under two very achievable circumstances. The first is obvious, and has always been the case... Parliament will be dissolved if the Government are unable to secure the confidence of the House, within 14 days of a ‘No Confidence Vote’ on the floor, or b) if 2/3 of the House of Commons votes for dissolution. Under the current system, a little under 440 MP’s would need to vote for an early dissolution - so it’s impossible for the Prime Minister to influence the timing right? WRONG!

If there’s one thing I’ve learnt in politics, it’s to never say never again, but you can bet your bottom dollar that any opposition party would support an election at any time, for any reason. And so if the Prime Minister were to decide to call an election next week, his MP’s could be whipped in to voting for that election, and Labour MP’s would vote for it faster than you can say hip-hip-horah... and so even in the highly unlikely event that the Lib Dems were not to support a dissolution, it would nevertheless go ahead.

So yes the Fixed Term Parliament Bill (Act to be) is an encouraging statement of intent that Parliamentary Terms should be predictable and consistent, the Prime Minister could at any time he so chooses, force an election, just as he could before the Fixed Term Parliament Bill (ACT), only he’d have to do it in a slightly different way... but the result would be exactly the same.

This blogpost isn’t designed to knock the Coalition. They’ve done what they said they would do, and if doing this thing is what we needed, then they’ve done it as well as it could be done - but it’s taken a lot of Parliamentary time for very little tangible change to the way elections are called. On the bright side, it would be politically tricky for the PM to force an early election having pushed this Bill through Parliament, but let’s be honest about what’s happened here, and it’s not a block of politically motivated games with the electorate.

My 9-11: how it unfolded

I was a young. Producer and in fact, an assistant producer working mainly on talkSPORT's overnight output, but I was working 7 days a week for at least 14 hours a day, and myself and one of the station's tech ops had moved in to a shared House in Woolwich, South East London on September 11, 2001. So as you can imagine, when we got in at 7.30am, I was very tired and went straight to bed. Some time after, I received a call from my dad telling me to turn on the news, and so I reached over to the TV to find coverage of the first crash in New York. I was busily telling my dad how silly he was to suggest it wasn't an accident when the second craft hit.

This was huge. The first thing I. Could think to do was to call the station's Programme Manager Peter Black to offer an extra pair of hands... But I was told to monitor events from home and come in at 8pm to make sure we were covered through till the breakfast show. But it was no good, and at 6pm, I arrived in to the Talksport office where I found a male producer in tears. He'd been reviewing tape of people jumping to their certain deaths from hundreds of feet up to avoid being in the burning building. Already. We had sick email jokes coming in, but our job as news gatherers was clear, and we set about calling as many people as we could in New York to trouble them at their darkest moment in order to do what we believed to be our duty to report and inform.

Many phone lines across the East Coast and beyond were down because many phone lines were routed through the World Trade Tower, but by hook and by crook, we connected with business owners, witnesses, reporters, and Brits in New York who simply couldn't believe their eyes. As a station, we went in to what w call Obit procedure - where all adverts and music beds / opening sequences are dropped. In fact, from midnight through till 6am, my colleague Ian Collins expertly handled the large volume of information coming in to us, and informed the Nation of what we were being told, what we had verified, what we couldn't variety, and what witnesses wee recounting... All of this split only with news updates coming in to us from the Sky News Centre.

9/11 was my first big rolling news situation, and clearly it has yet to be. Topped. I hope it never will be.

Many people have thoughts on 9/11; why it happened, what happened, and whether we reacted correctly to it, but on this day, ten years on, I say we leave these questions for another day, and remember all the who bloat their lives, and those who they have. Left behind.

It seems longer than ten years ago in some ways, but I remember it like it was yesterday. May we never forget.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Location:Fulton Close,Stevenage,United Kingdom