Get well Felipe

Yesterday I happened to be watching a rowing regata in Cambridgeshire and so I missed the Formula 1 qualifying live. It was only when I got home that my other half alerted me to Felipe Massa's injury at the Hungary GP. I then turned the PVR on to watch what happened.

The spring from the back of Barrichello's car hit Felipe's crash helmet when he encountered it four seconds after it fell off. In a freak accident which mirrored to some extent the Formula 2 tragedy of Henry Surtees the week before at Brands Hatch, who was hit by an errant wheel from a previous accident, it is to be expected to hear calls for more safety.

It's strange how these accidents seem to happen close to each other. Back in 1994 Ayrton Senna died two days after Roland Ratzenberger and Barrichello and had a big accident in between. Before then, there had been twelve years before the previous fatality in F1.

The key to Massa's survival was the introduction of carbon fibre helmets four years ago. Had they been around in 94 maybe Senna would also have been saved. As it is, those accidents 15 years ago encouraged greater safety for cars now meaning that Massa did not have leg injuries also.

It sounds like Felipe Massa is going to make a full recovery and is in good care. I really hope so. He has developed into a great driver, and was unbelievably magnanimous in losing the F1 championship last year. I hope that he can make it back into the car before the end of the year.

I think, however, that Alonso will be in the Ferrari for the next race in a month's time - especially now that Renault have been banned from Valencia. He may stay there for next year, but who will he replace - probably Raikonnen who seems to be more interested in rallying now.

Anyway, my thoughts go out to Felipe Massa, his family, and to Rob Smedley - his race engineer with whom he has formed a great bond.

Squiffy.

BoE bad, FSA good? Me thinks not.

He was stating that the tripartite system is better and quoted that Barings and BCCI went under using the old regulations enforced by the Bank of England.

Well, excuse me, but those very small banks went under without threatening the integrity of the entire system. They didn't cause a recession. How is it that the FSA's lack of keeping an eye on Northern Rock, HBOS, RBS & Bradford & Bingley leading to massive bailouts is better than the failure of BCCI and Barings overseen by the BoE?

Delusional. Again.

Squiffy.

Yesterday's PMQs

Having just watched PMQs I couldn't help but agree with David Cameron that "the PMs display is feeble".

Dire. Risible. Shameful. Unwatchable.

Gordon Brown looks beaten. The Labour benches were very quiet. He's on a hiding to nothing, repeating the same old lines day after day with nobody believing him.

The line about a "0% increase" says it all really. He may have misspoke, but you can tell that he's in total denial. The line about the Tory policy being unemployment was absolute rubbish. The party of full employment (Labour) has always left office with unemployment higher than when it arrived. It may believe in full employment, but by it's usual terrible handling of the economy it always hurts most those that it claims to represent.

If I was in the Labour Government, which I'm glad I'm not as I wouldn't be able to get enough Prozac, I would be plotting again.

Squiffy.

Nadine Dorries should be quiet

Having heard Nadine Dorries MP on the radio this morning blasting the new speaker, John Bercow, I just wanted to shout be quiet.

Until recently I had the utmost respect for Nadine Dorries, but her outburst on the Today programme during the expenses scandal, showing that she didn't really get the public's anger, a woeful performance on Question Time and now this morning's diatribe against John Bercow has really dented my confidence in her.

It's true that many Tories do not support John Bercow, but now that he has been elected as Speaker he should be given some respect and some time to prove that he is up to the job. If he is shown to be as inept as Michael Martin then by all means have a go, but this is just looking like peevishness at a lost election. If there's anything that the public don't like it's a sore loser. So Button it.

Squiffy.

Formula 1 in turmoil

As a break from normal politics, I'll take a look at the other great love of mine - Formula 1. Which just happens to be mired in politics at the moment!

Formula 1 is caught between two bodies which think they have the best interests of the sport going forward. In the red corner sits the FIA, the governing body of international motorsport, intent on producing a reduced cost formula of £40 million per team. In the blue corner resides FOTA, the association of formula 1 teams, intent on reducing the cost of teams to enter formula 1.

The positions of the two bodies seem to be nearly identical, so why the fuss?

I believe that it is based on history.

Max Mosley has been president of the FIA for a long long time. In that time he has improved safety massively, especially since the death of Ayrton Senna. But he has also been very adamant in pushing through changes to the sport. One has to think of these changes; re-fuelling, banning active suspension, banning traction control, narrow-track cars, grooved tyres, un-banning traction control, standard engine control units, banning mass dampers, banning traction control again, slick tyres again, new aero-dynamics and KERS. The next changes include banning re-fuelling again. When he has not been able to get his changes through, because technical changes need unanimous support, he has pushed changes through as safety improvements which do not.

Also in that time, many independent teams have become backed by manufacturers, some independents have gone and new manufacturers have come in. They did so because it has been tremendously successful at advertising manufacturer's technical prowess, but they did bring large amounts of money.

With the benefit of hindsight, an autocratic leader who changes regulations regularly causing more to be spent in development whilst the changes themselves make the cars less technological, it looks obvious that we were going to get to this point.

In the current climate, with some teams turning their backs on F1 due to the cost and threatening the strength of the grid it does look like costs need to be reduced. Both organizations want reductions, the manufacturers in a step by step approach, the FIA in a dramatic single step. I can understand why Ferrari, for example, do not want to jump from £200M to £40M in one step, there will be many redundancies.

So, swords have been drawn. In the wrangling, Max Mosley has continued a trend from Gordon Brown. He creates dividing lines, and uses the divide and conquer technique to try to split the FOTA teams. This causes more animosity. Normally it works, but I don't think so this time.

FOTA have become intransigent, and wants to be listened to rather than brushed aside. After all, they are the ones spending money on this exercise. They are sick of being pushed around and being ignored. As an example, FOTA ran a survey of F1 fans and asked them what they thought of various aspects - I know because I took part. One conclusion that came out of it was that there should be a greater points difference between 1st and 2nd place. At the beginning of the season, the FIA tried to push through another system of medals. The World Champion is the one who won most races. The FIA ignored the fan's survey as well as the teams. At present, this crazy system is on the regulations for next year even though Jenson Button would win this year's championship earlier than he will at present. It set the tone for the year.

Multiple suggestions have been ignored, although on the basis of the cost cap there has been some compromise. Even then though there has not been agreement. Press briefing accuses the other side, highlighting the differences.

So, where do we go from here?

This is not about the cost cap any more. It is about Max Mosley. FOTA want him out and he is refusing to go. This is a billion pound game of chicken. Both sides are now so polarised that I don't believe compromise can now be achieved. The likelihood of a breakaway series is now 70% (in my mind), followed by Max Mosley being ousted as FIA president. Maybe there will then be a meeting of minds.

Otherwise we could have an F1 championship, run to £40M with small independent teams and a GP1 championship with the manufacturers including Ferrari, McLaren etc. with the existing drivers. I know which one I would watch. Actually, I love it so much I'd probably watch both.

I'll be in Silverstone this weekend to hopefully watch Jenson Button take a famous victory. The deadline for FOTA backing down is Friday, but don't hold your breath.

Squiffy.

Surprise surprise, the inquiry reports in July 2010

As predicted, Gordon Brown has just announced an inquiry into the Iraq war. It sounds like it maybe a wide inquiry, which is to be welcomed. But as I suggested earlier, the report will be published just after the latest date possible for a General Election.

He must think that we are idiots! We can see through it though, but we are getting used to the lies and the cynicism.

Squiffy.

He can't stop creating dividing lines

On Monday the Prime Minister said to the PLP that he would change his style. But it is so difficult for him, and two days later he's proved that he cannot.

His Democratic Reform Council, packed full of Labour members, has met once and for 90 minutes. In that time they've decided that Electoral Reform should be back on the agenda, funny how Labour is interested now it is in danger of being the third party in the UK.

They also decided that Government papers should be released after 20 years rather than 30 years, which funnily enough would enable all the papers for the Thatcher Government to be released in one go. They obviously want lots of embarrassing details to be in the open just in time for the GE.

So there's some more dividing lines, he just can't stop himself.

I'm also expecting there to be a full review of the Iraq war to be announced in the next few days, and I guess the results will be announced next June, so that the remit is set by this Government but they don't have to face the consequences. Maybe I'm just a cynic.

Squiffy.

Bob Crow makes me mad

As someone who lives in London and needs to use the tube to get to work, I get mad with the annual tube strikes. It's the last union that needs the Thatcher treatment.

For far too long they have held London to ransom with spurious strikes. I remember the strike because the station at the end of line did not have a wash basin, the strike when someone was fired because he was found to be playing squash when he was signed off sick, the strikes because of fears over safety which achieve nothing and the myriad of strikes over pay.

This strike is over a 5% pay claim. Are they in the real world? We're living in a world of deflation and pay freezes. I'd love to see an army of part timers trained up to provide a reduced service when the RMT goes on strike. I'd volunteer myself, I think it would satisfy my boyhood dreams of being a train driver. I'd also pay the volunteer force more money for the days when they have to taken over. Just watch the RMT go on strike then!

Also, why is it that strikes always seem to be held when England are playing?

Squiffy.

Lily livered nancies

That's the Labour party for you. They deserve the largest defeat possible for leaving us with this dysfunctional, half crazed, delusional, lying, economy wrecking idiot.

Squiffy,

Maybe I was just getting excited...

The feeling of gloom has descended on me. I now think that Gordon Brown will not resign and will trudge on for the next few months. Damaged, going slightly mad and angry. It's going to be horrible.

Squiffy.

Could we be approaching the endgame?

Sky News is reporting that cabinet ministers are meeting this afternoon at Number 10. Sounds reasonable to work out a strategy for tonight's PLP meeting.

But my spideysense tells me that it's not going to be like that, Sky say that Alan Johnson and Alistair Darling have been entering via the back entrance.

I think the meeting could be similar to the one-to-ones that Mrs T had when she realised it was over. I'm going to stick my neck out and say that Gordon Brown will announce his resignation to the PLP tonight, they will agree some basic timetable for a leadership election and will then hit the airwaves. Everyone will then say that they regret what happened but Gordon Brown has done the honourable thing, and now they can unite.

I may have got this so wrong, but sometimes who have to go with a hunch.

Squiffy.

Hazel Blears has been strangely silent

The little chipmunk is usually everywhere on our TV screens, but she has gone to ground since her resignation last week. It is traditional that a ministerial resignation leads to a statement in the House.

Could it be that La Blears is planning a Geoffrey Howe type statement? If nothing happens this week, after the PLP meeting and minister level resignations, I think she will. Hazel Blears is not one to pull her punches and she could try to go for the kill. It would be much more effective than Caroline Flint spouting off after giving GB support one day then knifing him the next.

Squiffy.

Now Tony, it's up to you.

It's time for Tony Blair to finish off Gordon Brown. He needs to phone Peter Mandelson to tell him to pull the plug on the PM.

Tony Blair should, for the sake of his own legacy, tell Peter Mandelson to start strategising on how to get the person he wants as PM before the next election. Revenge is a dish best served by the cold calculator of British Politics, the Prince of Darkness.

Squiffy.

Wow. Lord Falconer has asked for GB to go.

The Blairite plot is obviously still running. Tony Blair's ex-flatmate has come out and asked GB to go, now it is obvious that TB also thinks this way.

Nearly game over.

Squiffy.

Why is Suralan being made a Lord?

On the Andrew Marr show and Sky, Sir Alan Sugar has stated that he's not going to be a working peer, and that he doesn't know whether he will be voting with the Government. He clearly doesn't have a clue of what is being expected of him.

It was basically spin, and I thought Sir Alan would have been more astute. He keeps saying that people who know him would know that he wouldn't be used by anyone. That's exactly what's happened.

Out of his depth.

Squiffy.

Delusional.

Glenys Kinnock, that's progress. What next, Keir Hardy?

Squiffy.

Gordon Brown, oi shut it

I'm listening to the cracked record that is our PM. He says he's going to be candid, but then is candid about other peoples failures - such as expenses. Come on Labour MPs. Sharpen those knives, we need him gone.

Oh, Caroline Flint has just resigned. Please, can we have some more?

Squiffy.

Call this a re-shuffle?

The most pathetic "game changing" re-shuffle I've ever seen. If this was supposed to re-launch Brown it has failed before it has even been completed. There's hardly any changes at the top. The only changes made have been to fill in the gaps made by the four secretaries who've resigned.

The cabinet looks very similar to the old cabinet. The PM now has no power at all, he cannot move his ministers and is boxed in. He's a busted flush. Go now.

Squiffy.

The slow motion car-crash

Just in the middle of watching today's Daily Politics. Andrew Neil questioned whether we were watching a slow motion car crash. Completely correct. All of Mr Brown's plans are falling around his ears.

James Purnell's resignation makes it more difficult because as fast as he's re-arranging the deckchairs people are jumping overboard. It all depends on Alistair Darling. He wants to stay where he is and if GB tries to lever him out, Alistair will kill him using a Geoffrey Howe type speech/comment. If he allows him to stay he will show what a weak position he finds himself, all week he has been trying to smooth the path for Ed Balls, but now it looks impossible.

Tonight, it is looking desperate for team GB. I've never witnessed anything like it. I remember gathering in the TV room at college when someone alerted me that (the blessed) Margaret Thatcher had resigned. Such a depressing day. I remember visiting London on a lovely sunny day, when I'd finished my exams at University to find that John Major had resigned the leadership of the Tory party and put himself up for
re-election. I was in St Ives when the coup was enacted to rid us of Tony Blair.

Each time it was a surprise, but it happened incredibly quickly. This time it feels like it's happening slowly, but GB is not getting the message and so another little message is given to him. That's why it's feeling drawn out. The pace is fast, the reaction is slow.

It's an amazing time in politics. I've just been to the IMAX to watch the latest Star Trek, and it was a very exciting film - particularly on a big screen - but my mind kept wondering back to the unfolding events. I don't know what was most exciting, watching the new Kirk's handsome quivering face questioning Spock's possible romance with Uhura during a Romulan attack, over James Purnell's handsome sideburns attacking Gordon Brown whilst a quivering Hazel Blears watches with from the sidelines.

The next two/three days are going to be the most exciting time in politics.

Squiffy.

Could today mark the end of Labour as a political force?

Today it is likely that Labour will have a major drubbing in the local and European elections. They are likely to be third place in the local elections and third or even fourth in the European elections. It sounds bad, but don't Governments find themselves in these positions after a long while in power? Well, yes, they do - but is today likely to be different?

Possibly. I'm not sure what Labour stands for any more. What is their purpose? Even in the dark days of the Tories, when their message was pretty confused, it was still possible to discern that they stood for sound money, responsibility and free enterprise. What made it really difficult for the Tories was that Labour also appeared to stand for these values, they had moved onto the Tory position.

Now, it appears that the "New" Labour values died with Tony Blair, and were a sham anyway. Although they talked about sound money or "prudence", they acted like money was no object. The old adage that all Labour Governments run out of money in the end has been shown to be as true today as it was in the 70s.

When they mentioned responsibility they meant state responsibility. The state is now responsible for huge amounts of the employment whilst the welfare state is responsible for thousands living off taxpayers money without any inclination to earn a living.

Their commitment to the free market and enterprise died when they manufactured a situation in which Railtrack could be forced to go bust, followed by vast nationalisation of the banks.

So now the wallpaper has been stripped from the New Labour project, what's left? The Blairites seem to be floundering around. The old Labour party still exists as a rump within the existing Government, jumping around with glee that RBS is now 70% owned by the taxpayer.

The Labour coalition is threatening to break up under the strain, it is conceivable that the Blairites could split and forge an alliance with the Lib Dems and the Labour party reverts to its old values and becomes a party of Government no more.

It will take someone of great stature to hold Labour together after the meltdown, and someone will need to imprint some new values on the party for it to survive. I cannot see anyone in the current crop able to do that.

For today, vote any party except Labour, the Lib Dems and BNP. All those parties which promised a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and then reneged on their manifesto promise should be punished. And obviously the BNP is beyond the pale.

Squiffy.

It's started

The push for Mr Brown to resign has started, Hazel Blears has gone, citing how she was singled out for criticism by Gordon Brown. GB is now meeting colleagues, maybe he is trying to cobble together his re-shuffle. Or just maybe, the Cabinet his telling him to go. It could be a momentous day.

Squiffy.

Bad headlines

The headlines for tomorrow are really bad for Gordon Brown.

Ho Hum.

Squiffy.

The knifing begins

What a day. As we were waiting for the weekend for the night of the long knives, it appears to have started earlier with ministers doing a contortionists job of plunging the knives into their backs. If there was ever a sign of a Government in terminal decline, today was a significant portent.

In one day, we've had one cabinet minister, two other minsters, one ex-cabinet minister and a disgraced MP stand down from their jobs. It looks like two will attempt to fight for their seats, although in Jacqui Smith's case it's a facile attempt. She will be gone.

This is looking worse than the Major Government. I've never known anything like it, the Government is looking at death by a million cuts, Labour MPs are lemmings on the edge.

It's also looking like there will be a vote in the Commons next week on dissolution, which of course the Government will win. But can anybody remember a party with a 66 seat majority having to face such a vote? It shows how febrile the mood is.

Be gone with you.

Squiffy.

The reshuffle is on

Harriet Harman inadvertently let the cat out of the bag. She said on Newsnight that she would not "speculate on the reshuffle", indicating that there will indeed be a reshuffle.

So hold on to your hats this weekend, for a second night of the long knives, or re-arranging deckchairs on the Titanic.

Squiffy.

How can Gordon get through this?

This morning The Times is speculating that there should be a push to oust the Prime Minister in the aftermath of the June 4th elections. Guido is reporting that Alan Johnson and David Miliband have campaign teams in place and Mike Smithson is reporting on 12 days remaining for the Premier.

This may all be speculation, but I tend to think that there's no smoke without fire and it looks like there have been some movements amongst the cabinet. If so, this is beginning to look terminal for Gordy.

What can he do? I'm sceptical that he'll be able to stop anything if the momentum starts, but I'm guessing that to stop the momentum before it starts he'll need big sackings after 4th June but before the European results come out on the 7th. Even then, it may not be enough and the likelihood is that there will be a cabinet rebellion.

If anything does happen, then I think there will be a Labour leadership campaign, and all candidates will have to promise an immediate general election - otherwise there would be a huge stink. Expect things to move very quickly and an election in September or October.

We're in for exciting times.

Squiffy.

PR is not the solution

This morning's Times has an article by Alan Johnson on the need for Proportional Representation. Some are seeing this as an attempt by Johnson to line himself up for the leadership after the wipeout on 4th June, which it possibly is. As fascinating as that prospect is, the PR question is bigger in the long term.

The argument for 'fair votes' is a rallying cry for every small party in politics, and it's quite obvious why. The smaller parties would get a greater number of seats in parliament, for instance the Lib Dems would be looking at something like an extra 50 seats, parties like the Green Party and UKIP would probably get representation in parliament for the first time (I'm going to ignore Bob Spink - as most of us should). But this would also let the BNP get some MPs, not a prospect we should be welcoming!

There is an even bigger reason why the Lib Dems yearn for PR, which is why they make it a condition for an electoral pact, and that it because it would make them the permanent power brokers in this land. The Earl of Warwick in the Wars of the Roses was the most powerful of the political class in the 15th century, commanding a large army. Whomever he supported would be made King, hence it switched from King Henry VI to Edward IV, to Henry VI and finally back to Edward IV. The Lib Dems want that power now.

If you look at all the general elections of recent times, if elected by purely proportional means, no party would have formed a majority as no party would have over 50% of the votes. This would have meant that the Lib Dems would have been in Government for all that time, switching at their whim whichever larger party would be in Government. Probably, for most of the time, the Lib Dems would follow the prevailing wind and do what the people wanted, but there again maybe not. What if Nick Clegg had a close personal friendship with Gordon Brown, maybe he would not be able to breakaway from the coalition and we would be stuck with him for years.

It is such a scenario which means that I support First Past The Post (FPTP). Take those general election results again, I think that we got the decided verdict of the electorate in each case. In 1997, the Labour party thoroughly deserved their landslide, in a PR world they would have had to form a coalition! It would have been perverse.

Another reason against PR, is that the manifestos put forward at election time mean nothing once the the PR-based election bargaining starts when parties try to form coalitions. Policies are thrown out, watered down and neutered. Not what the public wanted at all. If there was real principle at all, they would form their pact first, thrash out a manifesto and put that to the public - and that could work in a FPTP world.

Of course, pure PR is not being considered by Alan Johnson, other forms such as the Single Transferable Vote and Alternative vote plus would maybe increase the number of possible majority Governments, but in many cases we won't. Although we're living with a ditherer now, we would have permanent dithering built into the electoral system.

Finally, now is not the time. Some people say it's the perfect time, but making major decisions on our democracy on the back of a crisis is wrong. We need time to consider, rushed legislation like the dangerous dogs act leads to bad legislation. And this Government has come up with some of worst legislation (not in intent, but unexpected consequences) of all time. So let's save this debate for a quieter time.

Squiffy.

The contrast between DC and GB

There are so many differences between David Cameron and Gordon Brown, but the left leaning journalist Jackie Ashley has written a fantastic piece about DC's handling of the expenses row, highlighting some more differences.

What made me think, was not that DC is fleet footed and is able to react quickly while GB has feet of clay and has a turning circle of a supertanker. I started thinking that Gordon Brown's famous dividing lines show that his primary motive for most of his decisions is to try to put the Tories on the wrong side of the argument. It's a negative trait.

Contrast that with the David Cameron's efforts, and you can see that he is trying to push the Tories forward by removing the dead wood, known as bed blockers. It's the continuing theme of his need to modernise the Tory party. It's a positive trait.

Whatever you think of David Cameron, he is playing a blinder. He is using the expenses row to modernise his party, and its been more beneficial to him than his own previous efforts. The contrast between the two "star chambers" is also telling, the Tories are submitting every MP to scrutiny, Labour are only doing it for those that are so obviously in the wrong. That's four so far. GB won't clear up the differences between Hazel Blears and Geoff Hoon's cases, but there again Geoff Hoon has not said "Youtube if you want to".

David Cameron looks more like a Prime Minister every day, where Gordon Brown looks like a politician from the last century.

Squiffy.

Bad tax

As an excuse for getting away from the expenses scandal I thought I'd report on a different Freedom of Information outcome.

The Professional Contractors Group made an FOI request on IR35 legislation. For those of you not in the know, IR35 was introduced in 2000, in order to retrieve more money off small companies - mainly single person companies - working is as contractors and consultants to other larger companies.

Operating as a consultant within your own company can have some tax benefits, as employees of the consulting company would take a reduced salary but larger dividends. The IR35 legislation was intended to change this tax status, so that the consultants would be deemed to be acting as employees of the larger company. In this case, the tax man would take an extra amount.

In many of the cases I've heard about, the actual tax paid by the small consulting company in corporation tax, income tax, national insurance and VAT was practically the same as permanent employees in the same industry.

Still the tax man has an army of investigators checking whether the consultants acted as employees so that they can take more money. The consultants have to employ accountants and lawyers to check through contracts, to make sure that they are worded correctly, and provide insurance against any tax claims. A whole industry has developed around the IR35 legislation, and thousands of people are used.

So after all this rigmarole, how much has the tax man taken in increased money? £9.2 million between 2002 and 2008 or roughly one million pounds a year. The Government had hoped to take £220 million in national insurance contributions alone. Out of 1468 investigations which the PGC were involved with, only 6 included extra money being paid to the Government.

What a waste of time and money, I would hazard a guess that the extra effort to pursue all these investigations has cost more than £1 million a year, so the whole exercise is counter-productive.

IR35 legislation, which has always open to obfuscation and confusion, should be withdrawn and I hope the Tories will do so when they get elected.

I can see the same effects happening if the 50% tax rate is applied. Tax laws need to be simpler and less open to avoidance. The tax take will actually go up, live long good tax, die a death bad tax.

Squiffy.

Miss Speaker?

The news that Ann Widdecombe may be standing as the speaker is very interesting. She would command respect, and really knock heads together - which I think is what it needs. Unfortunately, she's already announced that she won't be standing in the next election, so it would be a temporary position, if only she won and then they found her another seat, maybe a safe Labour seat such as Glasgow North East. She'd be able to grab it, as the convention is that the seat becomes uncontested!

Unfortunately, it looks like she won't get it anyway. The contest is already becoming partisan but in a strange way. It looks like Labour are going to be voting for John Bercow, whom many Tories don't like, and the Tories will vote for Frank Field, whom the Labour party don't trust. Isn't that weird? It's like Gordon Brown's Christmas's have all come at once with dividing lines all over the place.

I think Frank Field would be a great speaker, but personally I want him to continue to have his say, as he's one of the only Labour politicians who gets so many issues. I also want him to cross the floor and take Kate Hoey with him.

Squiffy.

Speaker Martin to step down today

So the rumour goes.

Squiffy.

Abysmal. Speaker - stand down now.

That was the only word which could describe the performance of the speaker, Michael Martin today. Facing up to the biggest challenge of his political life, he failed completely.

After misreading the public mood, standing up for vested interests and being late to the apologizing party he has shown himself to be out of touch not only with the public but also with the members of the House.

Some say that this class warfare, it is not. Betty Boothroyd did not come from a privileged background and was highly respected. Others say that he did not write the expense forms with the MPs, but he did preside of the Fees office that paid out the money. It is about his competance, which has found to be severely lacking. The fact that he had to ask the clerk about what makes a substantive motion and how one gets placed, shows that he does not know his own brief.

He's out of his depth. He should resign.

Squiffy.

Wow. A politician who really gets it.

David Cameron has just announced his response to the expenses scandal. And I'm astounded, because he has gone further than I expected him to. It shows that he does get the anger we all feel. It's obvious that he feels it too.

Whilst the Labour front bench have uttered weasle words, DC has shown real leadership. Harriet Harman tried to get in on the act just before DC's announcement, but it was another half hearted attempt to be seen doing something.

I think David Cameron has played a blinder given how bad it was looking this morning. I tip my hat to him.

Squiffy.

Will David Cameron grab the bull by the horns?

After apologizing on Sunday, and reading the dreadful headlines in the Telegraph this morning, it looks like David Cameron is on the war path. And quite rightly.

It looks like there is a meeting of the Parliamentary Conservative Party at 2pm today, at which he will read the riot act. All MPs should pay back the excessive money they claimed, and if they cannot they should have the whip withdrawn. Dc should state that it is up to the constituency parties to decide whether to de-select their MPs.

If DC can show purpose this afternoon, I think it will reflect very well on him, against Gordon Brown's inaction. Again GB will be on the back foot, playing catch-up. Maybe a re-shuffle will come sooner than we think.

Squiffy.

What should David Cameron do about Tory expenses?

If the rumours are correct the spotlight will turn on the Tories tonight. So how should David Cameron handle it?

If I were him, I would be really tough with any discrepancies. For anyone who makes a small amount of money out of the system (such as Gordon Brown's cleaner cost) should be forced to pay the money back over the next few years. For any of the larger expenses claimed which cannot be justified, he should withdraw the whip.

From the Tory team, I don't want to hear "I adhered to the system". This line is making us all mad. I want the Tories to show that they understand the anger - even if it hurts them in the short term. This gets really difficult if DC himself has been found to have played the system.

I think that, after the purge, David Cameron should then take the role of Oliver Cromwell and demand the dissolution of this corrupt, self-serving parliament. He will have the vast majority of the public behind him on this. It will be a great line in next week's PMQs.

There will be some chewed fingernails in the Tory ranks tonight!

Squiffy.

Margaret Moran: What a disgrace. Resign now!

I've just, this minute, watched Margaret Moran try to defend her usage of £22,500 to cure dry rot for her holiday home in Southampton, in neither her constituency or Westminster.

Her defence was that her partner lives there, and that she should have a family life. Yes, she should have a family life, but at our expense? If she is unable to have a family life in Luton then she is disrespecting her constituency. Why can't her partner, who works in the City, not live with her in Luton or London? He obviously doesn't want to be her that much. Thameslink has a quick direct link from Luton directly to the City. And, if he works in the City and she's an MP then surely they have enough income between them to pay for the dry rot treatment themselves.

An absolute disgrace. It's shoddy. She should hang her head. If she doesn't have the moral authority to resign now, then the members of Labour party in Luton South should de-select her now and she should be thrown out of the party.

Squiffy.

Will election defeat mean another re-alignment of the left?

If the Tories win the next election, what will happen to the Labour party? After the last defeat in 1979, the Labour party marched leftwards and the right wing split off to form the SDP. Only when the Labour party ditched the left-wing ideology did it become electable again.

The Tories also had a similar problem in 1997, but the issue which split the party was Europe, not a whole left-right divide. This, they have largely patched up internally with the right winning out.

The newspapers are now beginning to outline a battle for Labour's soul, with an old
left-right divide emerging. The left in the form of Harriet Harman and Jon Cruddas and returning to old ways and seeing class war and equality as the way to fight. The right in form of Frank Field and Alan Milburn are looking at individual freedoms.

We'll only know which one will win after the next election. But will the other wing be content to be carried along? I don't think so. The left have been waiting for a resurgence for so long, and to go further to the right would not sit well. I don't think the right would go along with a left-wing bias either as they would know that it is electoral suicide.

Personally, I think that the party will head left with many members on the right heading towards the LibDems and some even crossing the floor directly to the Tories. In a short time, the LibDems could supplant Labour as the main opposition, and the country would head back to the Tory/Liberal battle lines drawn at the beginning of the last century. Maybe the 20th Century will be seen as an aberration from the norm.

Could be true?

Squiffy.

Is Blair to blame for the country's plight? And does he regret it?

It's very easy to blame Gordon Brown for the state the country in, and I do, nearly every day. But why is Gordon Brown Prime Minister in the first place? Tony Blair.

That may sound weird, given that they have been at loggerheads over the leadership of the Labour Party and country for the past 15 years. But look at it this way, after John Smith's death in 1994 the Labour Party needed a new leader. Gordon Brown presumed it should be him, but Tony Blair realized that he could get it and should go for it. After polls were taken of party members, it showed that Tony Blair would be extremely popular and would win. Gordon

Brown was way down, nearing the levels of Margaret Beckett.

It was at this time that the famous Granita dinner was held, and for Gordon Brown agreeing not run, he would be assured the Chancellorship with wide ranging powers, and (he thought) a deal was in place to step up to the premiership some time in the second term.

That dinner, in Islington, is the root of many things which have gone wrong. If GB had not been promised so much, TB would have had immense power. Freedom to deal with Gordon as and when he wanted to, without being gotten over a barrel. Many of the reforms he fought for would not have been watered down by GB. There would not have been a rival power base next door, as GB (without the promise of the premiership) would not have drawn as many people to his cause. GB could have been replaced as Chancellor with more ease. TB could have found other, more amenable, ministers to replace him at the appropriate time.

Unfortunately, the promises put GB in pole position and kept him there, running a rival operation which TB found hard to contend with. And now we find ourselves here, a bust economy and a PM who is a laughing stock, despised and misunderstood.

So why did Tony Blair promise Gordon Brown so much 15 years ago, we don't know. But probably because he was the younger, less experienced man who had also thought that GB would be the natural successor. Unfortunately, his lack of experience made him make a rash promise which I think will be his biggest ever regret. It could have all been so much different.

Squiffy.

"I was sticking to the rules" is no defense

After the publication of MPs expenses in the Telegraph, I have heard members of the cabinet pop up in the media saying that they were sticking to the rules as they are now.

Do they really understand how this line of defense is angering the public? I don't think so.

If any of them had an inkling of the contempt in which they are held, they would hold their hands up and say:

"Sorry, it was wrong. Unfortunately, that was the culture endemic in the House of Commons, I should have been stronger to resist falling into trough, but I promise to work to pay back the public purse and will actively pursue better regulation of the system of expenses."

I don't believe in Harriet Harman's attack on Sir Fred Goodwin, when she said that he would be held to account in the court of public opinion, but if she does then she and her friends are in the dock and have been found guilty.

One of the more galling aspects of the controversy has been the notion of nominating which is the main residence and which is the second (publicly-funded) residence. And even worse, that this can be 'flipped' at any point during the year. This means that you furnish your second home in Fife, 'flip' your second home to be the one in London then furnish that with public money. When the TV blows up in Fife, 'flip' it again and buy a new TV on the public purse.

It's scandalous, and anyone should know that it's wrong. The PM, Chancellor and Geoff Hoon have been shown to pull this trick.

What is going on in the heads of these people? They have no shame.

Let's see what else crops up for the Tories and LibDems, but I'm expecting no better.

Squiffy.

30 years ago today the people delivered us Mrs T

As we look upon an economic disaster, a Government close to collapse and an untried opposition leader it is easy to draw parallels between 1979 and 2009, and in many ways there are some obvious similarities. Of course, as always, the Labour Government has run out of money and it will fall to the Tories to bring order to the public finances.

30 years ago the country went to the polls, it wasn't absolutely clear the Tories would win but the indications were that Mrs T would make it through. For one, I am grateful to the electorate for delivering that Tory Government.

I was six years old in 1979 and so my memory of the time is not as clear as it could have been but I can see from my own experiences that living standards rose quite substantially. Being born to two parents employed in the public sector and the conventional wisdom that the Tories didn't believe in public services, you may expect that for me things would have got worse during the 80's. Far from it, out went the old 3rd hand car, in came the new one; out went the holidays in the caravan, in came the occasional holiday in Europe; out went the "steam powered TV", in came the Video and home computers. It wasn't all materialistic, but for a little boy things improved massively and I had a fantastic childhood.

When I read old political texts, and watch old documentaries, it's hard to equate the 70's language of an "Income's policy" and "In place of strife" with the current economic realities. Mrs T changed the economic landscape of Britain. No more beer and sandwiches at number 10, but a strategic plan to shift the economy from a command and control, union acquiesced model to an entrepreneurial, go getter system. Ridding us of trade union power and reforming the tax system were key to this.

Standing firm on the Falklands was a symbol that Great Britain would no longer roll over and allow us to be seen as a soft touch. We were put back on the map and allowed to be heard at the top table, as well as provide our obligation to the thousand or so people on those remote islands. Facing down the Soviet Union helped to lead Eastern Europe to freedom. Mrs T was instrumental in bringing about the Single European Act in 1986, the epitome of the original aims the EEC. Mrs T was a colossus on the world stage, no ridicule from a Polish PM for her.

Privatisation would not have passed through the spell checker without the Thatcher Government. British Telecom would be a basket case now, as would British Airways. Our rivers and beaches would still be sewage ridden without the investment provided by private money through Water privatisation. The country became richer, people were set free and failing institutions have stopped needing bail outs and provided vast tax sums to the exchequer. Only recently has nationalisation come back, through necessity, due to the lax regulation provided to the banking industry by the tripartite system.

I could go. She had the right ideas about Grant Maintained schools, and Trust hospitals, which having been abolished have been brought back again by this Government (what an expensive way to go full circle).

She did get many things wrong obviously. The Poll tax was one such failure, her aims were to get some proper democracy and ownership of local Government, but she forgot that many people who couldn't afford to pay were being asked to for the first time. Cabinet colleagues could not convince her that it was a bad idea and she ploughed on. By this stage of her premiership, she believed her own hype and showed the hubris that happens to all people who have been in power too long. Failing to listen to her colleagues was her downfall, any similarities to the present situation?

There were many sections of society left dispossessed by the 80s, and Mrs T did not provide enough focus on curing our social ills. She concentrated on the economy, it needed it, and some people fell by the wayside and so she will always be seen as divisive. It is something that David Cameron needs to consider when he forms the next Government.

For me, though, she did way more good than harm and I will always owe her my gratitude. Enjoy your anniversary Mrs T, we need you again!

Squiffy.

Petition to make him go.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/please-go/

Squiffy.

From disappointment to anger

After the budget I said that I felt disappointed. As time goes by I'm getting more and more angry.

The vindictive tax rises on entrepreneurs and wealth creators continues to unravel. This morning we found that there will be a further raid on their pensions, even though this is out for consultation they have included the figures in their future revenue forecasts. This Government has no shame, they wrecked the great pension provisions we had made by their 1997 raid on pensions, then set-up an inquiry on how to improved pension provision, and are now raiding the again. Absolutely scandalous.

The Chancellor said in his forecast that growth in Q1 2009/10 would be similar to Q4 2008/9. Well it was -1.6% in Q4 and is now -1.9% in Q1, so his growth forecasts are already being missed, only two days after being revealed! That is surely some record, even for this "numerically-challenged" lot.

The latest figures are showing that we may be back in balance by 2032! 23 years away! I'll say that again, it will take 23 years before we can pay back our debt, they have truly mortgaged our future. That's Wangernumb.

An top of all that, the treatment of the Ghurkas is absolutely disgraceful. They should be allowed to stay here after fighting for our country.

The Government should hang their heads. They are a disgrace. We need rid. Please, for God's sake go. Leave. Resign. If you had any decency left, you'd have gone by now. Your moral decency has passed, ceased to be, and gone to moral heaven. You have no bills and no ideas. You are destroying the UK, so call a General Election Now!

Nuff said.

Squiffy.

The dance mix

Check out this dance mix of dear leader.

Squiffy.

The verdict: disappointment

The hope of an honest and decent budget has gone. I feel disappointed. There were some piecemeal initiatives, which will get some headlines but will achieve very little. The 50% rise in the top rate of tax will raise very little a year, and is just an extension of the dividing line established in the pre-budget report. The Tories should say nothing, but repeal it at the first possible opportunity.

There were no significant ways mentioned on how to bring the budget back to balance. The Chancellor is hoping that by returning to growth in 2011 (at an unbelievable rate of 3.5%) he will start to pay off the debt. Well, it's not good enough, that sort of strategy got us into this mess in the first place. He's bearing his head in the sand whilst crossing every appendage he's got. Over-optimism is this Chancellor's Achilles heel, and he's stumbling around on it again.

This was a major disappointed, debt is going to get even further out of control. All Labour chancellors run out of money, and this one has just been added to the list.

Squiffy.

Will this budget be better received than the last few?

The last four occasions that the Chancellor has presented a budgetary report (two budgets and two pre-budget reports) the details have quickly unravelled. Each budget has been deemed as a springboard to Labour's comeback but each one has plunged the party into the abyss. Think back to the damage that the 10p tax fiasco caused.

Will this budget be any different? If the papers are to be believed, then maybe. From what we read, the Chancellor will finally give us some truths about the state of Britain Plc's finances and will not try to be too rosy. It sounds like he is not going to be pushed around by the Prime Minister any more, creating dividing lines with the Tories, rather he will try to get a grip on the amazing levels of debt we are now reaching.

If he does this, then it maybe seen as a successful budget - if not a cheerful one. Here's waiting with baited breath.

Squiffy.

Spot on

Dizzy gets dear leader exactly right.

What ever happened to purdah?

No not the noisy cat, the practice of keeping details of the Budget under wraps until Budget day. In days gone by, there were even prosecutions for Budget leaks, but I can't see Mr Plod doing a Damien Green-esq House of Commons type raid as the leakers are all on the Government benches.

The last two days have seen headlines stating that the Budget will help the construction industry, the stamp duty cut will be extended and that £15 billion will be cut from efficiency savings. On top of that the last month we've heard of car "scrappage", and eco-bonuses for electric cars which don't exist. These should not be announced until budget day, but the Government is desperate to change the subject of conversation away from smeargate to something more wholesome, like the terrible state of the country's finances!

Tomorrow is going to be bleak, and it needs to be. From what we hear Alistair Darling is going to fess up, he's going to tell us that we are deep in the poo, he's been unbelievable optimistic in the past few years and now he's going to give it to us straight. He probably won't go so far as to say that we wouldn't be so far up to our necks in it, if his boss had been more prudent with the finances because that would be too honest!

It's interesting to hear the figures of £15 billion efficiency savings, when the Tories have proposed such savings in the past the Government have screamed "cuts to nurses and teachers". I guess that's another tactic that has been blown away.

So, go out tonight and enjoy yourself. Tomorrow we will all be dealing with a massive hangover.

Squiffy.

Frank Field should cross the floor

Every time Frank Field speaks or writes an article, I'm impressed and bemused. Impressed that he seems to have grasped ideas which his fellow backbenchers haven't and bemused because everything he says points to Tory policies.

For instance read this article, and it strikes you that it could have been written by George Osborne or Kenneth Clarke.

So why on earth does he continue to sit on the Government benches? One of the big mysteries of our times!

Squiffy.

And on the sixth day...

Anyone who has watched the absolutely marvellous West Wing will know about how controlling the news cycle is a major part of Government's agenda. Watching CJ Cregg try to get to the serious news of the day whilst being dragged down by the media storm of the President's MS gave some idea of how difficult it can be.

Our Government finds itself in a similar situation. Guido Fawkes timed his smeargate attacks to perfection, in a quiet period known as Easter he did his worst. For the last five days the news has invariably led with the response to the smear e-mails. Today is different, but no better for the Government. Instead of a Government looking squalid by getting dirty in the ether, we have a Government looking incompetent over the arrest of Damian Green MP. From the frying pan into the fire!

It's not looking good, a Government amid sleeze and incompetence reminds me of a not too distant past. And if the Tom Watson libel suit were to go the way of the 'sword of truth and trusty shield of fair play' (not that it should) the parallels would be ever greater.

I doubt whether it will get better either, rumours exist that there are further e-mails to be released as part of smeargate affair, which will bring it to prominence again. Oh, if only GB had a CJ!

Squiffy

The world is poorer today without Sir Clement

It is a morning of great sadness, hearing of the death of Sir Clement Freud. A man of many talents, including MP for Ely and North Cambridgeshire, chef, horse racing fanatic, writer, television and radio performer.

As part of the Liberal contingent in parliament, I will always be grateful that he chose to vote against the discredited Callaghan government.

In my mind, though, his appearances on Radio 4's Just a minute will forever be in my memory. His dry tones were just the foil for a witty anecdote, sometimes we wouldn't know where he was heading but at the end it was always a delight. Some of his put downs to Nicholas Parsons were priceless, even if you could detect that occasionally he really did meant it!

That brings an end to the original line-up of Sir Clement Freud, Peter Jones, Derek Nimmo and Kenneth Williams and the passing of an era. Thankfully with talents like Ross Noble, Graham Norton and the wonderfully surreal Paul Merton "Just a Minute" will continue, but just like the loss of Humph in "I'm sorry I haven't a clue" it won't quite feel the same.

We'll miss you.

Squiffy.

Never shall he say it's about ishoos

One of Gordon Brown's frequent ripostes in PMQs is that the Tories don't want to talk about policies, but personalities. Now that the operation within Number 10 to reveal unfounded stories on political opponents on a new 'Red Rag' website has been exposed, he will not be able to repeat the jibe with effect.

That doesn't mean that he won't try, the PM has shown that he's not fleet footed within the Chamber and I will be extremely surprised if he stops himself saying something similar. If he does, David Cameron will bring up the McBride emails and the house will be in uproar.

One of Gordon Brown's stock answers has been taken away from him, as well as one of his key aides. The possibility of a Labour recovery has now further narrowed. And quite rightly.

Squiffy.

They have to go

I've said this before, but this Government has to go. The Damian McBride emails have shown that there is something rotten in the heart of Number 10. He may have gone, but the person who appointed him and set the parameters for his behaviour is still around - and that is dear leader.

Gordon Brown cannot wash his hands completely of what has been done in his name. He may not have typed the emails himself, but the tone is set by him - and the spinning and back stabbing throughout the years in power by his coterie of advisers has now gone too far.

Will no-one rid us of this troublesome Government?

Squiffy.

The dead cat that did not bounce

Last week's G20 meeting seemed to be relatively successful for the Prime Minister, whether it is successful in bringing the worldwide recession to an end we'll have to wait and see. But for Gordon Brown, the threatened walk outs and violent demonstrations did not happen and he could pose in his favourite position as Chancellor to the world spouting large figures such as the $5 trillion fiscal stimulus. Never mind that the figures need to be taken with a pinch of salt (the $5 trillion being the total amount spent through the recession by all countries, including the natural automatic stabilizers such as unemployment benefit rather than specific fiscal stimuli packages).

For GB, it looked good and I would have been predicting a 5% increase in the Labour party poll figures which would quickly disappear as reality stepped in. The first poll (for YouGov) had the party increasing by 4%, but the second poll (for Populus) taken after the meeting showed no increase in the Labour party position and the Tories advancing by 1 point. It's too early to say whether the G20 lustre has so quickly faded, but it may be that the dead cat did not bounce this time. In fact it looks like the dead cat has been to a taxidermist and has that very strange stare that only stuffed animals and expense challenged MPs get.

Squiffy.

He's not the messiah, just a very naughty boy

Which must be how Lewis Hamilton feels today. Whatever the details of whether he chose to lie or was told to by the team manager, it should have been clear that the car to pits radio would expose any discrepancies. In such circumstances it seems like a very foolish thing to have done and his reputation has suffered, in a similar way to Schumacher parking his car after Rascasse in Monaco 2006.

This year he needed to repair his relationship with the stewards after the controversies of the last two years. Unfortunately, it's all gone wrong from the first race of the season. The world championship is already looking like a tough ask this year, and it just got tougher.

Squiffy

Capitalism = Freedom

I was listening to an anti-capitalism protester today, when he said "Capitalism equals oppression, we need to rid the world of it."

How utterly, absolutely, undoubtedly wrong.

The guy doesn't seem to realise that capitalism gives people freedom. Not the democracy kind of freedom, but pretty close to it. He has the choice of what to spend his money on, that's capitalism. He has more of his money in his own hand before the tax man takes it, so that he can spend it on paint to splash over RBS windows if he so chose.

You need to ask yourself, what has capitalism done to China? Although the people of China do not have the freedom to choose their politicians, they have a choice of what they spend their money on. For those not living in the countryside, their standard of living has increased immesurably since the East embraced capitalism. They can choose when to borrow money to invest, how many people to employ, the rates that they employ people on and what to charge their customers. Everyone benefits and world spins on its axis.

There is not an enonomic/political system to rival communism for lack of freedom, but these demonstrators see some pseudo-communist state/system as the panacea for the world's ails. It's so wrong-headed, capitalism goes with the grain of the human condition, not against it.

Squiffy.

Ooo, er missus

Poor Jackie Smith. As I've said before, I quite like her (don't know why), but the expenses/porn (cash for porn, porngate?) row has shown that she cannot really run her own household properly (what was she doing signing off expenses for Raw Meat 3? unless it was really that good!) - so what can we expect from the Home Office?

It all goes to show that the MPs should have taken my advice last year and changed their expenses rules. Up their pay with a non-London weighting (something like £80K) and provide resources for constituency office staff from a House of Commons pool. Finally, banish allowances, expenses, second homes, the lot.

Simple, quite like some of our MPs.

Squiffy.

Wasn't it wonderful

Now that there's been time for it to sink in, wasn't it wonderful to see Jenson Button on the top step of the podium on Sunday? It's been a hard slog for him and he deserves it, this time the win was with a car that deserved it rather than luckily when everyone else fell off the track.

It's great that Brawn GP have produced a great car too, and Ross Brawn was close to tears afterwards. Honda management must be having kamikaze thoughts right now. I really enjoyed seeing Williams right up there again, they should be near the front.

Overall, the race was good and I think the cars seemed to be able to genuinely stay closer to each other. There were definately more slipstreaming overtaking moves in this race, so it's thumbs up so far on the new rules.

Looks like a great 2009 in F1 lies ahead of us. If the Barcelona GP is anything other than a bore-fest, we'll know for sure.

Squiffy.

The gall of the man

I've just heard Gordon Brown say what a mistake it was for RBS to take over ABN Amro, saying that it cost £80 billion, and now RBS is worth £10 billion. He says that obviously due diligence wasn't done properly.

For RBS read LLoyds, for ABN Amro read HBOS and the situation is the same. Who was it who pushed through this merger? Gordon Brown, and the complaints have been about a lack of due diligence. The man has no shame.

Squiffy.

Formula 1 Shakedown 2

As promised, a preview of the remaining 5 teams follows.

Toro Rosso

This team was the surprise of the 2008 season, managing to pull out the surprise win at Monza. It showed that small teams can still make it in F1, although this is disguising the fact that the car was largely the same as the Red Bull. The RB5 (on which the STR4 is based) is looking better than its predecessor (more on that later). The team will be using the Ferrari engine again this year, which gave it the edge of the senior team last year, let's see if the Renault engine falls behind again this year.

Again it's a time of Seb's. Out goes the wunderkind Sebastien Vettel, in comes the rookie Sebastien Buemi. It will be tough for Buemi as he has big shoes to fill, and as the only rookie the pressure will really be on. For his French counterpart, Sebastian Bourdais it will also be a difficult year. This year he has to put the difficulties behind him,take over as the number 1 and show what he's made of. Soon, the IndyCar championships will be a memory if he can't deliver this year.

Red Bull

Overshadowed by its junior team last year, this year the team has to deliver. So far the Adrian Newey effect has not paid off, but this year could be different. He has been usually very good at interpretating new rules and creating a fantastic car, such as the McLaren MP/4-13 in 1998. It's only when the rules are stable that he can push the envelope too far and go down a wrong route. The car this year does look quite different to the others and may be about to make a splash. Can Newey reclaim his mantle as designer extraordinaire? Not sure, the testing times look like it could get to the top of the midfield.

This year, Sebastien Vettel can build upon his reputation from last year. If he can regularly get the car on the podium I think he will cement his status as future world champion. It all depends on the man on the other side of the garage. If Mark Webber blows Vettel away as he has to all other team mates, then Webber will show that he should have been in a top team and Vettel's status will be diminished. If the opposite happens it could be the end of Webber's dreams of a top team and foreshorten his career. 2009 is make or break for Mark Webber.

Williams

It's been a tough few years for my favourite team. Times are still tough as their primary backers have suffered through the credit crunch. If there is a year for this team to find it's feet again it's 2009, they focused on the FW31 halfway through the 2008 season. They also may have made the right choice to use a flywheel version of KERS, it's too early to say yet. The testing pace has been great at times, showing that maybe it is time for a Williams resurgence.

For Nico Rosberg this may be his last year in Williams. If the Williams team can provide him with a good motor then we may be able to get a measure of the man, otherwise it will be another wasted year. There is no way that Rosberg can afford to stay if the car is bad, and he will probably jump to McLaren.

Kazuki Nakajima has shown a turn of speed and is regularly able to get the car home. He is regularly a couple of tenths behind his team-mate and he must get closer this year if he is to progress.

Force India

This team has shown some promise in testing, it now has the use of McLaren engines and gearbox, which will aid costs and reliability. If this team can occasionally find itself ahead of other teams then it will have done a great job.

It's amazing that Giancarlo Fisichella is still on the grid. He shows well when at the back of the grid, but falls asleep in races when he's in a top team. He's had his chance and been found wanting. This should surely be his last year.

Adrian Sutil was unlucky last year to lose out on points at Monaco, and at times as shown that he is the real deal. But at other times he's been ordinary, this year he really needs to pull out the stops.

Brawn GP

This could be the surprise of the season. After coming close to a complete no show, the team managed to get several testing sessions under their belt before arriving in Melbourne. And wow! From nowhere, the cars seemed to be the fastest. Whether this will show up in a Grand Prix, we'll have to find out in a few days time. Jenson Button thinks it's the fastest car he's driven in quite a few years, and it appears that Ross Brawn's technical and organisation genius has been brought to bear just at the right time. This could cause the biggest upset in quite a few years!

The cars look a bit bare, as they don't have the necessary sponsorship, but if the car proves to be fast expect all the real estate to be painted shortly.

For Jenson Button, it may be that he has made a very shrewd move by placing his career on the line with this team. If the car is fast, this may be his best chance to clink a world championship or at least to show that he's still a force to be reckoned with. The new cars rip the rear tyres up a bit, but Jenson's smooth driving style should be an advantage on the long runs.

It's understandable that Ross Brawn went with Rubens Barichello rather than a young gun for this year, he needs to lay some solid foundations for the future and he knows Rubens well. Hopefully both drivers will enjoy 2009 after two lousy years. Good luck to them.

Squiffy.

Formula 1 Shakedown Part 1

Similarly to last year, I thought I'd give my thoughts on the forthcoming season with a summary of what the teams look like going into this weekend's Melbourne Grand Prix.

Ferrari

The Ferrari team is looking good going into the season. The car is, again, looking like one of the fastest on the grid, although there are some worries about the reliability of the F60, especially with Ferrari's KERS device.

It looks like Felipe Massa will have a fight on his hands this year as the new car seems to be more to Kimi Raikkonen's handling. This will be partly due to the re-introduction of slick tyres, which will enable Kimi to use his oversteer style more readily. It will be great to see if Kimi can get back to his best, and take the fight to Felipe Massa. Massa should still be on top form although he also didn't cope well with the initial changes last year, but came back after two races to launch his challenge.

McLaren

When the new McLaren MP/4-24 was launched, it looked like the best looking car of the lot. It takes time to get used to the high rear wings and snow plough front wings, but McLaren looked to have produced an elegant solution. In testing however, McLaren stayed with the 2008 rear wing for too long and were struck by an absence of downforce when the 2009 rear wing was attached.

Either McLaren are sandbagging, or they really have a problem. If they do have a problem, don't expect to see them on the podium in the first few races, but if any team can pull it around it's name is McLaren.

Lewis Hamilton looks relaxed going into the season, and with the monkey off his back maybe he will eliminate some of the errors that blighted his season last year. It's going to be a testing time for him and will show whether he is a great driver outside of the car - by that I mean whether he has the technological feedback to help fix a recalcitrant car.

Heikki Kovalainen has one more year at McLaren to show that he has what it takes. If he can take the fight to Hamilton then he should be safe, but otherwise this could be a make or break year for him.

BMW Sauber

The BMW Sauber team look very good going into the season. They've been working on the KERS device for probably longer than anyone else and it is shown in their reliable testing. The times have been fast showing that they are well prepared for 2009.

Robert Kubica is also looking in good form, he was the most consistent driver of 2008 and possibly could have been champion has BMW continued to pile their efforts into the 2008 car rather than the F1.09. One thing that counts against Kubica is his size and if they run the KERS device the car will have limited scope for ballast, making corrections to help balance the car more difficult. If BMW can get around these problems then it is conceivable to see the Pole win his first world championship.

Nick Heidfeld had a terrible 2008 and was unable to match his team-mate. This year he has to show more speed, otherwise it could be his last in F1. Fortunately, his size, will aid him in his battle with Kubica, as BMW may fit the KERS device to Heidfeld's car but not to Kubica's.

Renault

When the Renault was launched it looked awful. The nose is too square and flat, and they say that ugly cars don't win (although that's not really true). From first tests, the car looked to be about two seconds off the pace but in true Renault style, they appear to have made some great leaps during the off season. The team is great at discovering lost pace, just like they did last year. So maybe Renault will surprise us.

Fernando Alonso is probably the best overall driver in the world and shows that he still has the spark to win. The car this year must win if it is to keep him on board, otherwise he could be heading to Ferrari or BMW at the end of the year if circumstances allow.

Nelson Piquet Jr had a torrid time in 2008, making more rookie mistakes than anyone else. I half expected him to be dropped for 2009, but luckily for him he's managed to keep his drive. This year he must deliver and be closer to his illustrious team mate to keep him in F1 for 2010.

Toyota

The Toyota team have been a bit of a puzzle. They have some of the best resources available to them and huge expenditure but have rarely delivered. In many cases the cars they have produced have looked a couple of years behind the game. Not so this year, the car is looking much better and has followed many of the current concepts. It will not be racing with KERS for a while, but we don't know yet whether that is a benefit or hindrance. If the team does not deliver their first win this year, I expect Toyota will go the way of Honda and pull the plug.

Jarno Trulli is also a bit of a puzzle. He is supremely quick in qualifying and naturally talented but sometimes falls asleep during a race. This may be his last chance to win a second race in F1 and he has to grab it with both hands, otherwise it could be curtains for him.

Timo Glock was a bit of a revelation in 2008. His previous spell in F1 with Jordan was not a major success and Toyota managed to gamble on him this time last year. After a shaky start, though, he seemed to settle in to Toyota and started delivering some great results. Unfortunately he will be dogged by the last corner of Interlagos 2008, and the stupid suggestion that he gave the world championship to Lewis Hamilton. He was on dry tyres on a wet race track, still kept the car on the island, and managed to gain a place by staying out on dries. He drove well. This could be the year he excels in Toyota.

A review of the next five teams will follow shortly.

Squiffy.

Are the inflation figures worrying?

Today's inflation figures are extremely worrying. The predicted fall by somewhere between 0.6% and 0.8% was exaggerated and the real fall was a mere 0.1%. With all the reductions in interest rates and home loans, that is not a great reduction. The CPI has actually gone up from 3.0% to 3.2%.

The recession should be having a large downward pressure on inflation, but it is not happening. The Governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, has cited the 28% devaluation of Sterling as a factor in the reduced effect of the recession on inflation. So are we in for a period of stagflation? Inflation with stagnation.

Stagflation would be the worst situation to find ourselves in. Unfortunately, our burgeoning debt & printing money policies will probably have a further depreciation on Sterling leading to continued high inflation. Stagnation seems to be the next stage in this economic cycle.

Squiffy.

The FIA has lost the plot

Yesterday's decisions by the World Motor Sport's Council were quite weird. Firstly, the decision to keep the points system but award the world championship to the driver with most wins is completely inconsistent.

I understand why they have decided to do it, they hope that drivers in with a shot of the world championship and winning races will go all out for the win. But how can it be sensible that driver A wins 5 races and crashes out of all other races through stupid mistakes beats driver B who wins 4 races and finishes 2nd in all 13 or 14 others? I know that example is a bit far fetched, but there will be uproar and the person who wins the world championship will not be deemed worthy.

In 2008 both Felipe Massa and Lewis Hamilton could have won the world championship, and Hamilton won under the points system and Massa would have won under the most wins system. But the point was that they both drove well at times, and made some silly mistakes at others. They both deserved the championship.

I think having a simple system of points along the lines of the FOTA suggestions with a greater differential for coming first would have been sufficient. Now we seriously can have two world champions a year! How bone headed.

The second decision is even more serious. To allow a voluntary cap of £30 million for the permission to have no technical restrictions is just plain barmy. The cap is very low, and most teams would have to make large redundancies. Not great in the current climate. And the drivers' salaries have to come from that £30 million too!

But what about the implications of no technical restrictions? We don't know all the details yet, but what can this mean? Can ground effects come back, can turbo engines? What has Max Mosley's driving force in the FIA been about? Safety. How can this ever square up with the lack of technical restrictions? It can't. For as long as I remember, the FIA and it's predecessor the FISA have been imposing restrictions to slow down cars for safety reasons, the teams naturally have gone to limits to recoup the speed. If those restrictions were lifted, all the old technology can come back and the cars could go 10 seconds a lap faster, containing drivers who drive without a salary (probably those traditionally at the back). Absolutely ridiculous. As Lynne Faulds-Wood used to say, it would be a grid of absolute death traps.

Of course, this is likely to be Max Mosley's usual tactic of going for something completely ridiculous in order to split the teams and then go for a compromise which is further than the teams ever wanted. I hope he doesn't succeed and the teams threaten to break-away from this annual madness.

Squiffy.

Could Mr Brown's temper be the last straw?

Yesterday the Prime Minister was interviewed on Radio 4's You and Yours programme. He came close to losing his temper with the interviewer and the phone-in callers.

We've heard of leaks from Downing Street of mobile phones being thrown across the room, sulks and shouting matches, though none of this can be substantiated. So how will this play out in a general election campaign?

Given that there are usually some difficult times for Premiers during the campaign, think of the Belgrano phone-in question to Mrs Thatcher in 1983 or the NHS clash with a mother of a bone marrow disease girl in the 2001 election campaign for Tony Blair. Never mind John Prescott's fisticuffs in the same campaign!

How will Mr Brown cope in similar circumstances? By then the recession may still be gripping the land, there will be high unemployment, maybe more bank bail-outs and the national debt will be astronomic. There may still be a push for the PMs acknowledgement that he got some things wrong.

Could it be that under the pressure of even more lack of sleep, travelling the land day and night, a stressful campaign, maybe a pseudo leadership campaign all under dire economic news, that Mr Brown verbally lashes out at a voter?

It cannot be discounted, for we have not seen the PM at the forefront of any election campaign, spearheading the BBC Question Time leader questions (I can't remember him ever being on QT) or confronted by Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight. We don't know how he'd react. If he does lose it, it will be game over.

Squiffy.

Sorry is such a small word

Gordon Brown came the closest he has ever done to accepting some responsibility for the economic crisis we find ourselves in, and apologising for it. But he still can't get over that final hurdle. He's still saying that this all started in America (although he won't say that to Congress!), and accepts no responsibility for allowing a mountain of debts to pervade our banking system. He even says that he's not sure that tougher regulation will have stopped the collapse, I think that a reasonable debt to capital ratio might have helped!

He won't accept responsibility for inflicting the Government with a mountain of debt before the crisis started and leaving it with few options. So which responsibility is he owning up to? Also he recognises that 'humility is needed'. Go on then, show some. Don't blather on about what is needed, just do it. Go on. Until you do, this is the narrative of the Government.

Squiffy.

Government out of control

It appears that the Government of the UK is increasingly out of control. At the weekend Harriet Harman proposed that Sir Fred Goodwin's pension be judged in the court of public opinion. What does that mean? Mob rule? And this was from a qualified lawyer! Completely bonkers.

If she were to extrapolate this new court of public opinion she'd probably find that the legality of the Iraq war would be called into question! It's obvious that she is angling for the job of leader of the Opposition after the next election.

It also appears that Lord Myners knew about the pension pot and that the deal to remove Sir Fred from RBS actually doubled the amount in exchange for a year's notice pay. In fact this actually costs more. So the anger, which seems a bit synthetic, should actually be focused like a mirror back onto the Government for handling the 'nationalisation' of RBS incompetently without doing due diligence. If they had done due diligence then it would have only needed one bank bail-out!

On top of all this and of much greater importance is the state of the general economy. As the stock markets plunge again, we find that the Government's loan guarantee scheme is still delayed (this is the most crucial measure in getting money to small businesses). Also the mortgage help, which was rushed out without much agreement from the banks, is still delayed. Other measures are also still 'in the pipeline'. It seems that this Government needs a can of Mr Muscle to remove these blockages. At the moment, the Government which 'will do everything it can to help real people in need' needs to pull its bloody finger out.

Squiffy.

The heart goes out to the Camerons

It's a sad morning in Westminster with the news that Samantha & David Cameron's son Ivan passed away in the night.

It must have been difficult for them on learning that their son had cerebral palsy, but it was obvious that they doted on their son and took pride in him.

Our thoughts are with Samantha and David through this difficult time.

Squiffy.

For anyone following the Derek Draper/blogosphere spat

This is brilliant.



Squiffy.

What is Frank Field doing on the Labour benches?

Every article that Frank Field pens shows that he's sitting on the wrong benches in the House Of Commons. Take this one from today's Independent. It could have been written by David Cameron or George Osborne and backs up what they are saying. Go on Frank, dare you.


Squiffy.

Why does it always rain?

Apologies for not blogging recently, but on returning from a weekend in Manchester I found my flat had been burgled. Apart from the general rubbish feelings that this brings, it also creates a lot of hassle in your life.

For me, I can cope with the loss of personal property as I was expecting to be burgled at some point - such is life, especially in these harder times. My partner is more distraught at the thought of someone trawling through the underwear drawer and making such a mess. No, my problem is the hassle it creates as you have to face up to a time dealing with officialdom, with strange procedure which make no sense and the constant phone calls.

So far, though, dealing with the Police has been ok, apparently our case was closed within 48 hours as there was no evidence other than a footprint on the toilet cistern. Rather disheartening, I know, to have only 2 days as an active crime! Being called at work by victim support was a surprise, and as I ran into a meeting I didn't have time but to ponder the fact that I'm now a victim with my own social group.

Sending details of the stolen items to the home insurance company was slightly annoying as after faxing the details through, there was no acknowledgment of receipt. A quick phone call eased my mind, but why couldn't I have been informed before having to pick up the phone? We'll see what happens when the claim is processed.

The aforementioned rain is from the Travis song, Why does it always rain on me? A sense of self-pity, brought on by the 'it never rains, but pours' sentiment. Apart from the burglary, my bank card has stopped working and I lost my Oyster card. It's all happened in the last few days, so while waiting for a new bank card I've had to use other ways to finance my luxurious life!

Sorting out a new Oyster card was fun, after reporing it lost I got a new one. Great, I thought, I can transfer my old tickets over to the new card. But had I filled in the form? Had I given it a password? No, the man in the tube office hadn't offered one up when I'd explained my situation. No matter that I'd had to go to the next tube station along, as the one I usually used was closed all weekend for engineering works. I popped into another station for the form, to find a man in the kiosk sat behind a sign saying 'Information Only. For tickets use the machine'. I think he may have been able to have read out the headlines to the News Of The World, as reading that seemed to be his job, but for handing out a form from the drawer next to his right hand - that's just too much.

Anyway, I've got my Oyster card now. And a new laptop, although that didn't have my name on the packaging - checking with work's post room made sure that I got it, means that I should be able to resume my blogging.

Hopefully the rain will move away now.


Squiffy.

What will Gordon Brown's legacy be?

It may seem premature to be asking such a question, but let's look forward to July 2010 when, according to the opinion polls, we'll be governed by David Cameron's Tories.

It all depends on what happens to the economy over the next year. If Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling are right in their predictions then we'll have had one year of a recovery and they will be classed as brilliant minds who managed to pull Britain out of a deep recession or maybe even a depression. Gordon Brown will be a Chancellor par excellence. Also, if they are right then they will probably deserve to win the next election and we will be thinking that history has been cruel to them.

My own opinion differs somewhat from the above! Already, the economy seems to be much worse than the pre-budget report set out. If we do start growing in the third quarter of this year, I'll go out and buy a lovely hat, bake it and have it with some HP sauce. I think the economy will get worse during this year and maybe, just maybe, at the bottom of the cycle by year's end. This means that a recovery may be under way come the election, but the price will have been many billions of pounds seemingly squandered which made not one iota of difference to the recession. The public will be angry looking at the increased taxes which will be heading their way like a heat seeking missile.

Given my view, as it is, I think Gordon Brown will be seen in a similar light to Herbert Hoover. He took over in a boom and left in a recession. The previous years were all ruled by Republicans who did not spot the inflating bubble. Gordon Brown's tenure as Chancellor will be shaped by this view too. He mentioned the housing bubble in 2005 and did nothing to deflate it. People who still say that he was a good Chancellor will have differing views come 2015.

What of his other achievements as PM? It's pretty hard to think of them. He promised change, and we got change - a recession - but I'm not sure that was the intention. He was going to get rid of spin and sleeze, well I don't think that's been achieved. The announcment of reductions in British troops during the Tory Party Conference in 2007 put paid to spin, and now the big spinners are back in GB's tent. Sleeze is back with a vengeance now that four Labour peers have been accused of taking cash for changes to legislation.

What else? A big new housebuilding scheme - very unlikely given the economic circumstances. Eco-towns, struck down by Nimbyism. Great Britain day - disappeared. NHS constitution, ok I'll give him that - but until it makes a difference to the care people receive we'll have to wait and see.

I think that history will see him as a bad Chancellor and a desperately bad PM, characterised by high taxes, shocking waste, dithering, a complete lack of empathy, arrogance and bad temper.

Squiffy.

No More Inflationary Tory Boom and Bust

The Prime Minister was on the today programme this morning being interview by Evan Davies. At one point Evan asked him about the now legendary phrase of 'no return to boom and bust', and the PM couldn't - just couldn't - bring himself to say that it had been a mistake to utter those words.

When he said the words some voters may have been convinced, and went out on a spending borrowing splurge leading now to a greater boom and greater bust. So apart from being a factual mistake now that we're in 'bust' - he may have actually influenced behaviour to make it more likely.

It's funny that when we all realised we were heading for a recession Gordon Brown then started inserting the word Tory into the phrase - 'no more Tory boom and bust'. As if that means anything to the people who are now having their pay cut and are losing their jobs. Incidentally, it would be impossible for Gordon Brown to bring about a tory boom and bust as he was a Labour Chancellor. So that was some weird kind of thinking.

This morning he's changed the phrase again to 'no more inflationary boom and bust'. Oh well, that's ok then. It's so much better to be in a credit crunch, possibly deflationary boom and bust than an inflationary boom and bust. I don't think so. At least with an inflationary boom and bust we know which levers to pull. Gordon Brown is like the signal man in the 'The Great St Trinians Train Robbery', randomly pulling the levers without knowing which way the next train is going, when it's coming back and which way it's facing. He's mistaking activity with effectiveness.

One last point, yesterday Adair Turner - the new chair of the FSA - stated that new rules for banks would ensure that they increased capital in the good years to cope with less income in the bad years. Maybe he should apply that to Governments too and tell the PM, then maybe we wouldn't be looking at £1 trillion debt over the next few years.

Over and out.

Squiffy.

Ron Dennis to head the FIA?

Ron Dennis has announced that he is stepping down from the team principal role within McLaren. Last year while Max Mosley was embroiled in his 'strapped for cash' he said that he would not seek re-election as FIA president but I think he will do a U-turn and stand again. He likes the power.

I've just had a cheeky thought. Maybe Ron Dennis should stand for FIA president, probably against Max. The two men loathe each other, and after 2007's McLaren punishment it would be sweet justice for Ron to oust Max.

Sometimes dreams do come true.

Squiffy.

The Euro is a matter of foreign policy

I've just caught up with today's Daily Politics. Denis MacShane seemed to be affronted that it was William Hague who made a statement about the Tory party position on joining the Euro rather than George Osborne.

I don't see the problem. Membership of the Euro is a matter of economics and foreign policy, they are intertwined. Proponents of joining the Euro don't seem to think that ceding part of your economic policy affects sovereignty. I think it does.

Let's see how the Pigs do (Portugal, Ireland, Greece & Spain) coping with the recession within the constraints of the Euro.

Now back to Most Haunted Live.

Squiffy

KC/DC?

Most of the speculation around Westminster and the right of centre blogs revolves about the forthcoming Shadow Cabinet reshuffle. So I thought I'd add my own thoughts.

It's unusual for a Shadow Cabinet reshuffle to be so anticipated, usually they pass with only a small amount of comment. Of course this time the speculation has been mounting on the Ken Clarke Question? Should David Cameron bring Ken Clarke back?

The Tory right are fuming at the prospect of bringing this Europhile back into a front bench position, but should they be wary of Ken Clarke? In the Euro wars which inflicted so much damage on the Tory party, the right won. The Tories now oppose nearly every integrationist treaty and Euro membership. If Maastrict had happened now, the Tories would oppose. The Europhile wing of the party is vastly reduced in number and has virtually no sway on the party.

So should the right fear setting the cats amongst the apple cart by bringing back Ken Clarke? I don't think so. Unlike the Major Government when Europhiles and Europhobes were pretty much in equal number and tearing the party apart on a daily basis, the issue is resolved. It would be up to Ken to tow the party line, and any attempts to tie DC's hands over a Euro issue would be resolved with KC's exit. Ken Clarke would know this from the outset.

So what benefits could be gained? He was a fine Chancellor who did leave the present Government a golden legacy, he speaks with authority and he's a man of the people and not a part of the Notting Hill set. It has been a tragedy that this man has not been on the front line, and he is partly to blame for not wanting to put the hours in tackling the Government on a daily basis. But his presence, in the Business brief would soup up the Tory attack now, and they need it...

In one way, Gordon Brown bringing back Peter Mandelson was a sign that the Labour party could be reconciled after the TB-GBs. Bringing back Ken Clarke would be a sign that the Tories are back as a fully fighting force after the Euro wars.

So bring it on.

On a similar note, who else should be brought back and who should be let go. It's a shame David Davis did his foolish (but honourable) resignation last year, because he should be the next Home Secretary but I can't see DC giving him another chance this side of an election. I'd bring back Patrick Mercer too as he speaks with authority on defence. I think it's time for Caroline Spelman to go back to the back benches for a while, and so too Peter Ainsworth, he's just been too invisible. I wouldn't get rid of Alan Duncan, he's also got the common touch when explaining the Government's mess.

Anyway, my tuppence.

Squiffy.

Politicians in disguise

The world has gone mad. Gordon Brown has said that he thinks Optimus Prime from the transformers would solve most of our problems. The Tories have countered saying that Brown's got more in common with Decepticon. Is this the level of our political discourse? Maybe it's time for a new cartoon, Optimus Prime Mentalist vs DeceptiCam.

Squiffy.

Let's learn to save

Yesterday's announcement by David Cameron that the Tories are to propose abolishing basic rate tax on the interest earned on savings has got to be welcomed. Many people throughout the land have saved their money so that they can enjoy a good retirement living off the interest. And while the young 'uns, like myself, welcome lower Interest rates so that our mortgages are cheaper, it can decimate a pensioner's income. Reducing the tax on interest won't solve the problem, but it can certainly help.

There is also the moral case that someone shouldn't be taxed on earnings and then taxed again if they choose to save it rather than spend it. It will inevitably get taxed when it gets spent anyway, though VAT. This Government inherited a household savings ratio of nearly 10% of income in 1997, which is now down to just below 2%, showing just how much our savings culture has all but vanished. With figures also showing that household debt has ballooned is it any wonder why we're in a credit crunch built recession?

We need to learn to save again and rid ourselves of debt, saving to spend rather than borrowing to spend needs to be the new mantra. Let's each do our bit, I'm now going to put the money saved from the reduced mortgage interest payments into paying the mortgage off sooner. The Government needs to do likewise and reduce spending on extraneous projects (not NHS and Schools, but ID cards and expensive IT projects) and reduce its borrowing.

Only then will we have learnt the lessons of this credit crunch induced recession.

Squiffy.

No time to join the Euro

In yesterday's and today's papers there are two articles about whether we should join the Euro. In yesterday's Times Oliver Kamm states that we should join now. In today's Mail Peter Oborne says that the Euro will not see another 10 years and that we should not join.

Oliver Kamm believes that the first ten years of the Euro have been a success and it is now challenging the Dollar as the world's reserve currency.

Peter Oborne believes that the stresses of the recession will lead to break-up of the Euro Zone and the death of the Euro.

I think it is useful to separate the Euro as a currency from EMU (Economic and Monetary Union) to align these two views.

I think that after a shaky start the Euro has indeed proved to be a successful currency. That's as it should be, representing 16 nations, now that Slovakia has joined, and 300 million people it should be successful. Many people who wish us to join the Euro believe that it should be easier to travel without changing from one currency to another, and that without the cost of changing money from one currency to another the costs to business can be reduced. For this reason the Euro looks attractive.

EMU is the overarching principle for which the Euro was created. One single market, one currency and one central bank to align the economies of Europe. Thus far, though, EMU has only had to contend with relatively benign economic conditions.

The next few years will determine whether EMU and the Euro have a long term future. There are four main levers that Governments use to affect their economy; Interest Rates, Exchanges Rates, Tax Rates and spending. EMU has removed control over Interest Rates and influence on exchange rates and so Euro Land Governments only have control over their spending and tax levels. If the Euro Zone countries cannot effectively manage their tax and spending in these difficult times strains will be placed on EMU and the central bank. The central bank has to cope with the demands from 16 different countries and may not be able to help as much as necessary. Stresses may become amplified in such circumstances (such as those that affected Britain's exit from the ERM).

Countries which were closely aligned when EMU was launched should cope well, those that fudged their budgets and entry criteria to become members of the club may find themselves diverging from the economies of the Euro Zone and finding it ever more difficult.

If EMU survives with all 16 members still operating the Euro at the end of the recession, then it will have passed the test and may become the world's reserve currency (although I think the Chinese Yuan is more likely to supplant the Dollar) . Otherwise Peter Oborne will be proved right.

Until the recession is over and we're well into recovery it is too early to say which is right. For now, I prefer to have all four economic levers at our disposal even if our Government are not using them correctly!

Squiffy.

10 predictions for 2009

Here's some predictions for 2009, let see if I can do better than 4 points for 2008!

1. There will be no general election in 2009. Although Gordon Brown will have been lining up a May/June election for seven months, the polls won't look good enough to risk it, and so GB will go until the last moment in 2010.
2. The recession will last throughout 2009.
3. Several other high street names will experience problems. I'm guessing at HMV, W.H.Smiths, and Robert Dyas. I just hope I'm wrong.
4. Interest rates will reduce to 0.5%, the CPI will also go down to 0.5%, and the RPI will briefly go negative.
5. Robert Kubica will win the F1 World Championship.
6. A bad set of economic figures in the beginning of the year will signal a reversal to Labour's recovery, the polls will go back to a good Tory position of Con 45%, Lab 26%, LD 17% by year's end.
7. Ken Clarke will come back as shadow Business secretary.
8. David Blunkett will come back as Home Secretary.
9. The Tories will win the Local/Euro elections on a percentage share of 43%. Labour will get 22% with the LibDems at 26%.
10. Peter Mandelson will be forced to resign over some business dealings as EU Comissioner.

Squiffy.