Tuesday, 6 April 2010

And we're off

All that waiting for Gordon Brown to announce the election date is over. He’s called it for May 6th, the most likely date but he’s in a weaker position than he was in early March.
 
I’ve been looking forward to this election for such a long time. Firstly, because I want a new Government desperately. Secondly, because I love election campaigns. I love all the interviews with the leaders, the set piece morning conferences and this time we’ll have the leader debates. I will love to see Paxo have a go at Gordon Brown – he’s not put himself forward for a Paxo grilling since becoming Chancellor. I’d also like to see him face the public – something which he is reluctant to do.
 
I also feel a sense of disappointment, that the present exciting time will be over soon.
 
Squiffy.
 

Thursday, 1 April 2010

Fast and loose with the figures! That's our Gordy

For the second time in a few weeks Gordon Brown (or at least his number 10 office) has had to apologise for the misuse of statistics. First there was his defence spending at the Chilcott inquiry, and now it is the migration figures (best not to get it wrong when talking about such an emotive issue).
 
I’m not surprised, over the years, especially as Chancellor, Mr. Brown frequently double counted, changed the baseline and forgot about ‘real-terms’. Many of us got used to it, which is why the opposition always has to look at the small print.  He even altered the definition of the economic cycle to get around his own golden rule. The annoying thing about it is that the PM so frequently uses statistics to make his argument, bandying around figures at the drop of a hat. The trick is not to be taken in.
 
Squiffy.
 

Wednesday, 31 March 2010

Mr Eugenides has magical Vince spot on

This post from Mr Eugenides sums up my thoughts on Vince Cable. He's a nice gent, but the beatification of the man with muddled thinking is annoying me somewhat.

He doesn't face any difficult questions, like why did he say one month that the Government should not tell the BoE what to do about interest rates, then the following month calling on the Chancellor to tell the BoE to cut rates immediately?

Because he has no chance of becoming Chancellor he gets a free ride, and with a bit of comedy he's everyone favourite. I want someone with joined up thinking thank you.

Squiffy.

Monday, 29 March 2010

Reversing the 1p on NICs

George Osborne has announced that the Tories will reverse the increase in National Insurance Contributions for 7 out of 10 people including Employers contributions. That is to be welcomed as increasing taxes on people and employers will be a bigger drag on recovery than any removal of the existing ‘stimulus’.
 
It’s also quite right that if there are to be efficiency savings of £11Bn can be found for 2011/12 then they should be brought forward to 2010/11. In fact how can any Government seriously think that it is good to continue with something which they know is not performing at its most efficient! I do think though, that it would have been a good idea if Mr. Osborne had announced a mix of savings and spending cuts to finance the tax cut. It would have been a big signal that the Tories are going to ‘get real’.
 
There is too much emphasis on efficiency savings and waste, and no doubt a lot can be found, but we are getting used to the promises but are still awaiting the delivery. The existing review announced a few years ago identified £35Bn of waste and efficiency savings, with only one year to go only £11Bn has been found.
 
Squiffy.
 
 

Friday, 26 March 2010

Tax cuts for a while, tax rises for ever

In the budget on Wednesday, Alistair Darling announced a two year cut in stamp duty for properties up to £250,000. He announced that it would be funded by an increase to 5% of stamp duty on properties over £1M.
 
Remember that tax raises, by this Government are by stealth. So you can bet your bottom dollar that if Labour get re-elected the tax cut will stop as planned in two years, but the tax rise will continue.
 
Also, it wasn’t mentioned on Wednesday but the tax allowances have been frozen for the year. That is an effective tax rise for  every taxpayer in the country. Expect more of the same, Liam Byrne’s statement that there are no reasons for further tax rises looks pretty unbelievable now. It’s noted that he hasn’t re-made that assertion since that day on the Daily Politics!
 
Squiffy.
 

Wednesday, 24 March 2010

Budget 2010: The verdict

Odourless Crap.
 
There was no new information on the budget deficits. All the announcements of ‘savings’ and ‘efficiencies’ were made in December, so nothing new. Some tax increases on the cost of living. A tiny giveaway. That’s about all.
 
He did talk about ‘saved money’ when referring to the deficit being lower – which as I said early is not ‘saved money’, it is ‘not borrowed money’. Creating a quango to make sure that banks lend money to firms which they deem to be too risky is weird. How did we get into the credit crunch? by dodgy lending!
 
Apparently VAT will be added to stamps. Stamp duty taken away somewhere to be added elsewhere!
 
Closing offshore tax havens in Belize was just pettiness. Shows what kind of Government we have, regulations to target one person. Vindictiveness.
 
If the polls stay steady his ‘say nothing’ budget will have worked. I hope not, but then I can’t understand how 30% of the people say they would vote for this corrupt, spiteful, disorganized, incompetent and useless Government.
 
Squiffy.
 
 
 
 
 

Budget 2010: An opportunity to do the right thing

Today’s Budget is the last opportunity for this Government to do the right thing. After 10 years of throwing money at every problem, there is none left. The deficit may come in at under £178Bn and that should be welcomed, but that does not allow for new spending – it is still debt. Any money below the £178Bn figure is not excess, it is money that has not been borrowed, it is money that hasn’t been created from thin air.
 
If Alistair Darling says ‘investment’ today, he means spending that he can’t afford. If he announces any give aways today there should be a march on parliament saying ‘give us our money back’.
 
He should announce ways to pay back the huge debt that his Government has built up. If there is any increase in taxes, even by stealth, it tells us that Liam Byrne was wrong two weeks ago. If the Government can u-turn in two weeks then we know what will happen after an election. New taxes.
 
If he doesn’t pay back much debt, or fails to outline a plan, the currency will plummet when he sits down. It will be the most reliable verdict. After each budget or autumn statement, Labour’s poll ratings have plummeted. If it happens this time it may be game over. It’s a balancing act between the people’s verdict and the market’s.
 
I suspect there will be a few give-aways and no plan to pay back the debt. I expect to feel very disappointed, and poorer, today.
 
Squiffy.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Tuesday, 23 March 2010

The LibDems contradiction

If you take a look at the LibDems policy document you will see two contradictory policy statements, showing confused thinking:
 
Fairer local taxes: Scrap the unfair Council Tax – The Council Tax is an unfair tax which bears no relationship to the ability to pay. Liberal Democrats believe that it should be scrapped and replaced with a fair local tax, based on people’s ability to pay. We will pilot a fair local income tax in areas that choose to try it out.
 
Cutting taxes for people on low and middle incomes - … The change will be paid for by introducing a mansion tax…
 
It’s interesting that they hide the mansion tax away as a small sentence rather than give it the headline section that it demanded when Vince announced it at conference.
 
The Lib Dems state that they want fairness, and that they want to get rid of the council tax because it ‘bears no relationship to the ability to pay whereas they are happy for a property tax even if it ‘bears no relationship to the ability to pay just as long as the property is a big one.
 
Muddled me thinks.
 
Squiffy.
 

Wednesday, 17 March 2010

The funding of Unite

Unite has paid the Labour party £11M in the last few years. Where does Unite get its money from? From its members you may say. True, but did you know that it got £4.5M from the taxpayer, in the form of a Union Modernisation Fund?
 
It’s quite hard to see what modernisation has occurred in the current dispute. Similarly to other beneficiaries such as the RMT, the unions still act like dinosaurs. Why does a union need money from the taxpayer when they have their own member’s contributions?
 
The fund was established by this Labour Government, and isn’t it scandalous that it can give the taxpayers money away only to receive it back into its own party coffers. It’s a form of money laundering that should be stamped out!
 
Squiffy.
 

Bahrain: The Verdict

After the hype of leading up to the first Grand Prix of the year, with 8 possible World Champions and 4 teams in with a shout of winning, it’s probably not surprising that the talk after the race was of a procession and that something needs to be done.
 
I’d say hold your horses. People have short memories, there were plenty of races in the days of refueling when there was no overtaking – in fact there was more overtaking in this race than many others!
 
The disappointment for me was that the tyres were not as marginal as they could have been. At present, Bridgestone bring two compounds of tyres, one hard, one softer to each race. They deem the hard tyre (or the ‘prime’ tyre) to be the one more likely to be useful for the race and the soft (or ‘option’) tyre to be more apt for qualifying – even though they have to use both for the race. They pick which is the hard tyre compound based on previous seasons.
 
My suggestion is that they go one or maybe two compounds softer for both, making them have more grip to aid overtaking but more marginal and so more drop off in performance as they get worn. Forget talk of mandatory two pitstops, it would happen naturally!
 
Squiffy.
 

Friday, 12 March 2010

The Tories go open source

In a welcome announcement yesterday the Tories said that they would support open source and go down a more agile route to Government IT if they get elected.
 
For those that don’t understand anything I’ve just said this means an end to the huge corporates such as IBM, Accenture and EDS locked into nearly every Government IT contract. They usually overspend, come in late and provide a large bloated system which barely does what was intended. You’d think that after each project the Government would say, hey why don’t we try someone else, but in effect they go around in a cycle trying each one in turn until they start at the beginning again. Nothing changes.
 
Until now. The idea of going open source is to stop the huge procurement of expensive systems. They would buy something off the shelf and then use many thousands of developers around the world, who develop for free/fun to customize it to the required use. Open source is the way to go. Anyone who religiously buys Microsoft Office, should instead think about downloading OpenOffice. It’s an equivalent which does just about as much – why does it need to be MS Word if all you’re going to write is a letter?
 
Think of the thousands of pounds which could be saved by not being locked into Microsoft.
 
The idea is to get small systems and components (which are easily testable) to work together, rather than the monolithic huge databases such as the new NHS IT system which is years late and cost many extra billions.
 
The other announcement was that they would employ a small in-house development team, this team would take on small projects but would also be used to advise on new systems and make recommendations. Surely it’s a good idea to get experts to make these kinds of decisions rather than ministers who can’t tell their ASSP from their EPROM (*).
 
While they’re at it, they should make sure every large company they work with uses Agile methodology and that a Government IT project manager sits in the Agile Scrums and planning sessions.(*)
 
At last, maybe a Government with some nous. Hopefully they’ll get rid of IR35 tax legislation – which costs more to regulate than it brings in. But you can’t have everything.
 
Squiffy.
 
*Excuse the geekery
 

Thursday, 11 March 2010

F1 2010 is here

The first race of the 2010 F1 season will be this weekend. I thought I'd give you my thoughts on the states of the teams.

Mercedes

The championship team has a struggle on its hands to retain the title this year. Ross Brawn admitted that the work on this year's car was delayed by last year's battle.

The biggest change is that Michael Schumacher is on board, and we all know that he is an immense talent and I don't expect his 3 years away to have dented his skills. Nico Rosberg must have expected to face Jenson Button as a team mate and might have rated his chances, but the team will quickly focus on Schumacher unless Nico can pull out some stellar performances. Judging by his speed, it may be possible but he has to cut down on the errors which marred 2009.

The ingredients should be there for the car to be one of the best, but testing has shown that it may be a fraction off the pace of McLaren, Ferrari and Red Bull. A diffuser update is scheduled to appear for the first race, maybe it will return the team to the top.

Red Bull

The RB5 was the best car of 2009. Unfortunately, they didn't have the double diffuser at the start of the year and it hurt their title chances. Not so this year, but Adrian Newey's cars have always pushed the envelope to the limit and risk reliability in the pursuit of speed. Testing shows the same trend, an ultra fast car with some reliability concerns. There may also be issues regarding tyre degradation.

The RB5 also set the trend for this year's cars, which have copied the best features from last year (apart from pull-rod suspension). Sebastien Vettel and Mark Webber will battle it out again this year and it's hard to see Vettel not making it to champion in the next few years. It could very well be this year if he eliminates the mistakes and the car holds together. I would expect Mark Webber to win a few more wins, but the amazing qualifying performances have been beaten by Vettel and unless he can reverse this trend he will not make it to champion.

McLaren

Last year started appallingly for McLaren, they were three seconds behind the competition and that is not a position the team is used to. In an amazing turnaround, they won a race by the middle of the year and go into this year with one of the fastest cars. In testing both Lewis Hamilton and new team mate Jenson Button have told how the car is very fast and reliable.

After Hamilton's bad start to last year, he is looking very fast and should be a contender this year. He faces the new World Champion Jenson Button and the rivalry should be gentlemanly but intense. Most expect Hamilton to be faster, and I agree, but maybe Button's smooth driving style will reap dividends when carrying a full fuel load by saving the life of his tyres. It will be fascinating.

Ferrari

The Ferrari has been looking like one of the fastest cars this year in testing. I was skeptical, that ending development of last year’s car so soon would be a good idea, especially as there were so many development opportunities to exploit in the new regulations and so little testing. It looks like they may have produced a corker and if Fernando Alonso is to be believed they have not been showing their true pace, which must be truly astounding!

Now that Kimi Raikkonen has decided to join the gravel trippers, Massa has to face his third World Champion in Fernando Alonso. I don’t suppose that it will faze him, and neither will the injury he faced at last year’s Hungarian Grand Prix. It will be interesting to see how the two men square up, Alonso with a competitive car again will want to add to his tally and Massa has to show that he can beat Alonso in the same way that he did Raikkonen. It will also be fascinating to watch the Alonso vs Hamilton vs Schumacher battle.

Renault

The Renault team are going through some big changes. Both drivers, the management and ownership have changed. The livery is back to being the yellow and black of the early 80's and they may even be adorned with Lada motifs! Last years car was ugly, and slow. Testing times have not shown a major improvement and so this maybe a 'building' year.

On the driver front, Robert Kubica has moved from BMW and looks very comfortable in his new surroundings. Unfortunately it looks like he jumped at the wrong moment because the BMW Sauber is looking good. He will be fast and consistent but it may be very difficult for him to find himself on the podium this season. His team mate, Vitaly Petrov is the first Russian in F1 and has a big challenge on his hands. He has a very fast team mate and needs to show that Rookies can make a difference after the poor showing from Piquet Jr and Grosjean.

BMW Sauber

Although the team is still called BMW, this is largely back to being a privateer run team by Peter Sauber. He runs a tight ship and although the new car does look a bit ugly testing times have shown that this car maybe the dark horse of the season. It is especially kind to its tyres and this may show dividends in the latter laps as they can pick off cars in trouble.

Pedro de la Rosa is back racing full time after the mini season he had in 2006. He is a good steady hand and will bring lots of experience from McLaren. No wins expected but he may make it to the podium on occasion. His team mate is Kamui Kobayashi who shone in the last two races of 2009. It's been a long time coming for a Japanese driver to really stand out, but maybe Kamui can be the real deal. If he continues where he left off I wouldn't be surprised if he got the odd podium.

Williams

I have a real soft spot for Williams, ever since Nigel Mansell drove for the team. It is a team of real racers, and their return to the top flight is long overdue. Last year's car showed consistency which had been lacking in the previous three seasons, but was still a disappointment when the points tally was counted. This year let's hope for better. They are back to using the Cosworth engine which should be fast but hopefully more reliable since they last used them.

Rubens Barrichello is in the last few years of his career but showed last year that he can still make wins when in the right car. If he can show consistent pace then he may put the Williams as best of the rest, after the top four. His team mate is Nico Hulkenberg, who's pace is looking very good. So far I think that Nico will show himself to be the best rookie.

Force India

This team visibly grew last year. With support from McLaren and the Mercedes engine, the late season update package added an extra second to the pace. In Spa they came very close to winning! If the same dynamics are in place then this team could show some surprises.

Unfortunately, last year's best showing was in the hands of Giancarlo Fisichello and after he ran off to Ferrari to never be seen again, the team is reliant on Adrian Sutil and Vitantonio Liuzzi. Both have been able to show speed on occasion but are too inconsistent to trouble the front runners on a regular basis.

Toro Rosso

A big change for this year in that they have to build their own car. It's no surprise that the car is a development of last year's Red Bull. I expect the team to snatch the odd point, but I don't expect them to trouble the middle field too often as this plucky team is now into a better financed Minardi type position.

The drivers are still Sebastien Buemi and Jaime Alguersuari, but apart from the odd show of speed, neither has stood out.

Virgin F1

The first of the new teams with a car based entirely on computation fluid dynamics, will find it a struggle. Both this team and the new Lotus seem to be around 6 seconds off the pace, but I don't think we're in a position where CFD can entirely replace the wind tunnel. I expect the Lotus to attach itself to the back of the midfield leaving Virgin in its wake.

Timo Glock is a good driver who shone at times last year, and I expect him to lead this team to midfield-dom. If he is very lucky, he may even snatch a point in an incident fuelled race. So far it is unclear to see what speed Lucas Di Grassi has due to the lack of true pace shown by the cars.

Lotus Racing

It's welcome to see the Lotus name back in racing, albeit in this different guise. The car is slow right now, but with the experienced Mike Gascoyne as the technical director I expect this team to be the best of the newbies.

The team has a very experienced line-up with Jarno Trulli and Heikki Kovalainen, both with something to prove. Jarno needs to show how he can make a difference to a new team, helping to develop it whereas Heikki needs to show that two years as Hamilton's team mate has not destroyed his basic speed.

Hispania F1

This team is the big unknown, until recently named as Campos it is now named as Hispania or for short HRT F1. Whoever thought that was a good idea? The car has not been shown yet so we have nothing to go on.

The drivers are Bruno Senna, trying to show that he has the skill of his uncle and Karun Chandhok who I know very little about apart from being India's second F1 driver.


That's my preview. I think it will be Alonso or Hamilton as driver's champion with Ferrari as constructors, but we only have a few hours to find out whether the winter testing times were anywhere near accurate. I can't wait.

F1 is go.

Squiffy.

Wednesday, 10 March 2010

Budget on 24th March, Election on 6th May (prob), not much time for debate

Is it just my cynicism that makes me think that the late date for the budget is designed to limit the debate about the measures announced?
 
It will need to be voted on very quickly to enact laws for the next financial year and to allow it to be passed for a May 6th election to be called. Either they don’t want it to be debated in depth (of course) or Alistair and Gordon couldn’t agree (of course too)! Probably both.
 
Squiffy.
 

Monday, 8 March 2010

A counterfictional - What if Gordon Brown had called the election last weekend?

I thought I'd write a story in the form of a counterfactual. In fact, since the story is written as a view from 2022, it's a counterfictional!

The 2010 general election was one of the more exciting elections of the early 21st century. It brought in the three term Cameron Government, the realignment of the left and the splintering of the Labour movement. The election was a close affair, with polls showing a small lead for the Conservatives right until the last week of the election, when Secretary-gate derailed the Labour campaign.

When the election was called at the end of March, the Tories had a 3% lead in the polls. This steadily grew as the impact of the National Insurance tax rises were felt, and the electorate realized that the newly announced increases in VAT (to 19%) and a further penny on NI would further hit them in the pocket. A hammer blow to the Labour campaign came on the 23rd April when the recovering economy slipped back into recession posting a decline of 0.2% GDP.

The big turning point in the race came the following Sunday, when footage was released showing a recording on a mobile phone of the Prime Minister shouting and throwing newspapers in the face of a secretary after she had shown him reports of the second leaders debate. He had done badly when talking about the economy in the debate, when he said that after the current recession there would be no more returns to boom and bust.

Even the Daily Mirror turned against the PM when images of the crying woman were shown on TV pictures over and over again. Labour slumped to 26% and the Tories were returned to power with an 80 seat majority.

David Cameron went on to cut public spending, bringing back strong growth for the 2014 election which he went on to win strongly. The reforms to the public services allowed them to increase productivity against the economic backdrop, the schools reforms led to many new community schools being created by motivated parents moving Britain up the international league tables. The major disappointment has been the failure to tackle 'Broken Britain' as Britain still has too many problems in society.

Meanwhile the Labour party fell apart. After the election Gordon Brown resigned immediately. Harriet Harman, the deputy leader, took over in a caretaker capacity and built enough support to mount a leadership campaign against Ed Balls and David Milliband. In the end she won, after Ed Balls was knocked out and his support transferred to Harman. With that support she beat Milliband by 61% to 39%, and started to put forward a left leaning shadow cabinet.

Harriet Harman appointed Ed Balls as the shadow Chancellor and Yvette Cooper as shadow Foreign Secretary. The husband and wife team making history in the process as they got two of the three top jobs, albeit in a shadow capacity. Things started well, but soon soured when David Milliband resigned as shadow Home Secretary after being under pressure to dismiss half the male police chief super-intendants to promote female counterparts.

Milliband's resignation citing 'Political correctness gone mad' started the downfall of Labour as a ruling power. After the proposed 60% tax rate on earnings above £200,000 was accepted by Harriet Harman, quickly followed by an 80% tax for bankers alone judged by the 'court of opinion', 97 MPs on the right of the party defected to the Liberal Democrats, making them the new official opposition. At subsequent elections, Labour support haemorrhaged further to the low levels of 24 MPs we see today.

It could all be so different. What would have happened if Gordon Brown had called an election on the weekend of the 27th February?

The Tories had been losing ground to Labour since the beginning of the year and the lead had contracted to 6%. Then a poll on the eve of the Tory Spring Conference gave them only a lead of 2%. Gordon Brown talked to his advisers during a trip to his Welsh conference that weekend and decided that he should grasp the nettle. With the lead so narrow he could hope to turn the election result into a hung parliament at the very least.

David Cameron made a good speech at the Tory conference, but this was trumped by the evening when Gordon Brown announced on television that he would be going to the Palace the next day to ask for a dissolution of Parliament. The headlines the next day told the public that the game was on.

After one day of finishing the business of Parliament, the 'duck-island parliament' was consigned to history and the nation rejoiced. Or they would do, if they hadn't to face one of the most bruising election campaigns in history.

Gordon Brown and David Cameron immediately set off on trips to the marginal constituencies, whilst their campaign teams started to get the election literature printed. There had been some questions in the press around who was leading the Tory election campaign effort, with disagreements being cited between Steve Hilton, Andy Coulson and George Osborne. The snap election gave them no time to fully sort out the details and this would come to hurt them later in the campaign.

On the Friday, the day when Gordon Brown should have been facing the Iraq inquiry, which was now suspended, Labour launched their manifesto. Their message was upbeat about Cancer care, halving the deficit and care for the elderly. The Tories were still trying to nail down how to provide their married couples tax incentive and so their mainfesto was delayed.

The first leaders debate came and went the following Thursday with no-one coming out on top. David Cameron did himself no favours when he looked evasive over the couples tax allowance and Gordon Brown had some difficulty explaining why he had called the election now - was it due to the polls? He had mislead the public once before by saying that calling off an election was on no account of the polls.

The polls were still showing a slight Tory lead but the Lib-dems had eaten a couple of points of both main parties. The Tory manifesto was published the following Monday showing an agreed plan for shared allowances for families with children under the age of 5. Some of the right wing press and the influential ConservativeHome website lambasted the tame policy calling it a non-policy.

There were further problems for the Tories when it became clear that confusion in the campaign team was causing scheduling difficulties. One school in Norwich suspended lessons for the morning waiting for the Tory leader to arrive whilst he was shaking hands at a hospital in Ipswitch. The headteacher went onto TV to accuse the Tory leader of not being interested in her school children's education.

Meanwhile, Gordon Brown continued his tour of the marginals. A viral poster campaign showing the Tory leader in riding breeches chasing down a fox caused a political storm but highlighted the Tory leader's position on fox hunting and his upper class background.

Going into the third week of the campaign Labour had pulled ahead slightly in the polls. Mr Brown faced a difficult situation when he was berated by an angry pensioner in Ealing. He made policy on the hoof and announced that there would be a 50% reduction in council tax for over 70's in the next budget. It had worked before in 2005, and he was determined to put the Tories on the back foot. No-one knew whether he had meant it for a year, like in 2005, or longer, but the Tory poster attacking the cynicism backfired when he announced in the final debate that it was policy for the entire length of the next parliament. Financing the policy became a question that the Tories constantly asked, but the Prime Minister refused to state where the money would come from.

The new policy added an extra point to Labour's slim lead in the days following his announcement, but David Cameron forcefully put the message across that he could not go on making spending pledges while promising to half the deficit in the final leaders debate. This brought the parties level on 37% going into election day.

After a fraught day with many recounts, the polls were shown to overstate Labour support but the result was that the Tories were short of a majority by 10 seats. With the Lib Dems demanding electoral reform to provide support, the Conservatives went it alone as a minority administration.

Initially, the Tories seemed to be reasonably popular and the new PM had good approval ratings. David Cameron's Queen's speech showed that he would try to push through equal sizes of consistuency seats and a reduction of MPs to 500. Although this was designed to level the playing field and remove Labour bias, it was not well received by the public, and gerrymandering accusations seemed to stick. Other bills had public support, but everything hinged on whether the emergency budget could be passed.

The reduction of 10% in the education budget proved to be especially unpopular and Labour and the Lib Dems promised to vote against the budget. The Tories believed that showing resolve would win out, even if they had to face a new election. This theory was soon to be tested when they lost the Budget bill amid raucous scenes in the House of Commons.

Gordon Brown again led Labour into the second election, he had stayed on after defeat for just this circumstance. He had gained in popularity against the 'mean' Government, and Labour was now 2% ahead of the Tories in polls which had reduced Labour's weighting. The election was dominated by the deficit again, and Mr Brown's decision to abandon Trident to finance a small increase in the education budget and reduce the deficit proved popular. His late conversion to the AV+ system for Westminster, as espoused by Roy Jenkins, brought added support from Lib Dems and going into election day Labour were 6% ahead.

Again the polls had overestimated Labour support but they emerged as the largest party in a hung parliament, 5 short of an overall majority. After a weekend of deals between the parties, David Cameron resigned and Gordon Brown was reinstated as Prime Minister. Nick Clegg had announced earlier that he could not work with Gordon Brown, but the promised PR referendum swung him.

With a reasonable combined majority, budget votes would not be a problem for the popular new Chancellor, Vince Cable, but he was the victim of vicious briefing, believed to be coming from the new Home Secretary Ed Balls. The tensions within the Government continued to rise and with the PR referendum won in May 2011, Nick Clegg demanded that Gordon Brown sack his long time friend. When Mr Brown refused, Nick Clegg demanded that the PM resign to keep the coalition intact.

Very surprisingly for everyone who knew Mr Brown, he agreed. The last year had been exhausting for the PM and he couldn't carry on fighting for his political life. He was replaced by Ed Milliband, beating his brother by 8% in the Labour electoral college vote. He faced the new Tory leader, Jeremy Hunt, at the dispatch box for the next two years until the coalition fell apart over the proposed 100 days detention without trial legislation.

Nobody would have expected in those days, for PM Hunt to lead a Con-Lib coalition with David Laws as his deputy but as his third term gets under way its interesting to see what might have been.

Squiffy.

Saturday, 6 March 2010

Gordon Brown : Dissembling and disingenuous

That's the verdict on Gordon Brown's performance at the Iraq inquiry. Lords Boyce and Guthrie, both ex-chiefs of the defence staff, have given their opinions on Mr Brown's funding of equipment for Iraq and Afghanistan.

It looks like he used a form of words which is technically correct, but hides the bigger truth that he resisted extra funding for equipment which would have saved lives.

I know which ones I believe, and I think it is a disgrace.

Squiffy.

Wednesday, 3 March 2010

Harriet's performance was woeful

She had a one track mind, ‘I must make my points on Michael Ashcroft’ and forgot why she was there – to answer questions. She couldn’t even tell the difference between a question on Sterling and Gilts. It really reflected bad on her and the House in general (and she’s its leader), woe betide us if she ever makes it to the leadership.
 
Hague 7 points
Hattie 0 points.
 
Squiffy.
 

Rest In Peace, Michael Foot

It’s just been announced that Michael Foot, the ex-leader of the Labour party has died at the age of 96. He has two major distinctions, one for being a towering intellectual on the left of the Labour party during the 60’s, 70’s and early 80’s, and secondly as being in charge when Labour produced ‘the longest suicide note in history’ in the form of its 1983 manifesto.
 
He was a House of Commons man through and through and made some fantastic speeches at the dispatch box. I once nearly knocked him over in The Freemasons Arms in Hampstead and quickly apologized, he was tottering around on two walking sticks with a helper. He loved Hampstead and would often be seen in the area.
 
Rest In Peach, Michael.
 
Squiffy.
 

Monday, 1 March 2010

Michael Ashcroft's tax status

It has become an ever increasing bore to listen to interviewers asking Tory politicians about the tax status of Michael Ashcroft. The Tories have been made to sound evasive because they have not pried into another person’s tax status.
 
Finally though, Mr Ashcroft has clarified his own statement on his website, detailed by Ian Dale. In it he states that he stopped being the UN representative for Belize, re-took residence in the UK and started to declare all his taxable income to HMRC. In effect he became a Non-Dom, much the same as many Labour donors such as Lord Paul.
 
When did he do this? In 2000, so for the last 9 years we’ve had question after question, journos digging into his private affairs and now we know the truth. He didn’t do anything wrong at all.
 
I hope the matter can be put to rest now.
 
Squiffy.
 

Friday, 26 February 2010

Is the election going to be called this weekend?

The rumour mill has started. On the back of the revised 0.3% increase in GDP for 2009 Q4, it is possible that the PM will call an election for 25th March. It avoids the Iraq inquiry appearance, it avoids the budget and he could overshadow David Cameron’s speech to the Tory Spring conference this weekend.
 
If I was Gordon Brown it’s what I’d do, but can the Labour Party afford it? Look at it this way, when has Gordon Brown avoided spending money because he couldn’t afford it? Exactly.
 
Squiffy.
 

Tuesday, 23 February 2010

The bullying - Taiwanese style

Hattip to Dizzy for this spot.





Squiffy.

What's going on with the polls?

There’s only been one poll since the excepts of Andrew Rawnsley’s book were released, showing the Tory lead steady at 6%. The lead may change in the next few days but let’s have a think about the trend since the beginning of 2010.
 
Since the beginning of the year the Tory lead has dropped, mainly due to an increase in the Labour position. Previously their polling was in the high twenties, but now has advanced to the low thirties. It’s possibly due to the end of the recession, maybe that the abortive coup steadied Gordon Brown’s position, or maybe due to the lack of a gaffe by team Brown in 2010.
 
Indeed, gaffes have been coming forth from the Tories. The confused message about how large the cuts would be this year, the unforgivable error about a misplaced decimal point, the crass death tax poster and the airbrushed David Cameron have all contributed to a sense of confusion and drift at CCHQ. It shows that Team Cameron are unsure whether to go positive or negative. My answer is go positive – the public needs some hope in these dire times. The Tories need to get a grip and unify their messages.
 
I think this may explain the figures. What I’m dismayed about, though, is how can 33% of the population think that it’s a good idea to have 5 more years hard Labour? I know that there is around a core of 23-24% of people who will always vote Labour, but what about the floating voters? Have they such short memories? Have they forgotten:
 
- the 10p tax
- the lack of planning for the wars
- the vast amount of increased tax
- the huge deficit
- the devaluation of our school exams
- the increase in violent crime
- the increase in inequality
- the destruction of the pension system
- the reduction of social mobility
- the 42 days detention
- the nanny state intervening everywhere
- the large data loss
- the complete breakdown of the immigration system
- the artificial dividing lines
- the doubling of council tax
- the broken communities
 
I could go on. Two things will determine the next 5 years, the first is the vast reduction of our deficit. How can we trust the man who created a huge structural deficit before going into recession to reduce it, when all he knows is how to spend? The second is the ‘vision thing’ for the succeeding years, what is the Labour party vision? What is Gordon Brown’s vision? He asked us to give him time to tell us – we’re still waiting. At least the Tory party have described a vision whereby people take control of their lives, services and communities.
 
Finally, I should confess that if Gordon Brown is PM in July I would seriously think of emigrating. I don’t think I could stand another 5 years of it!
 
Squiffy.
 

Saturday, 20 February 2010

Disappointed.

Gordon Brown did not call an election. Hopefully he will soon, I want to get rid.

Squiffy.

Friday, 19 February 2010

James Purnell standing down - what does it say?

The news that James Purnell is to stand down as an MP in the forthcoming election is a major surprise. Firstly, he is one of the standard bearers for the New Labour project, secondly he may have been a future leader of the party.
 
The fact that he is no longer interested makes me think that he is giving up on Labour for a generation. Maybe he sees that the project is already lost and that Labour will make a left turn after the next election, which he expects them to lose.
 
It might have been better if he’d taken the opportunity to defect to the Tories, as a Blairite who pushed through so called Wisconsin styled benefit reform he may be able to fit in. He’d also have given Brown a bloody nose. Oh well!
 
Squiffy.
 

Thursday, 18 February 2010

Labour to reveal election themes at the weekend

According to the BBC, here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8522025.stm, Labour are going to reveal their election themes at the weekend. Also, there are going to be a large number of cabinet members present. Given that the cabinet meets on a Thursday morning, could it be that GB has told his team that the election will be announced this weekend?
 
I think the game is going to be on, very soon.
 
Squiffy.
 

Wednesday, 17 February 2010

The Tories should not use negative campaigning

I completely agree with Daniel Finkelstein’s article in the Times today. In it he says that people have made their minds upon about Gordon Brown and now need a reason to vote Tory. The Tories should be sending out positive messages to give the populace enthusiasm.
 
The £20,000 death tax poster campaign was very negative and also speculative since it only attacked a possible tax and not one that has been put in place. It reminds me of the Labour posters of old, describing cuts of £35Bn in nurses and teachers when the Tories had only promised to reduce the increase in spending – thus no cuts. It was despicable of Labour then as the death tax poster is now. I expected better.
 
If you’re going to go negative, mention the many many things which Labour have promised and failed to deliver on. On Tax, mention the ‘no income tax rises’ pledge and then the many increases in NI. Mention the wider gap between rich and poor. Better still, don’t go negative and give positive messages.
 
Talk about bringing down the debt in a measured but effective way. Talk about no ID cards. Talk about remedies for Broken Britain. Talk about incentives for generating your own electricity. Talk about refunds for recycling, not taxes for rubbish. Talk about cuts in Council Tax. Bombard the country with positive policies on each billboard.
 
Squiffy.
 
 
 

Monday, 15 February 2010

What do we think of Brown's interview?

Watching the Piers Morgan interview last night was a strange affair. He came across well when discussing his family, you could not help to be touched by the segment when he talked about his children.

He looked different though when discussing politics, when he talked about being angry about Tony Blair becoming leader, he said "but the anger went away quite quickly". I wouldn't class the seething resentment of 10 years being "quite quickly". There were points when you wanted to shout at the screen, for instance when GB mentioned that he'd made many mistakes - any interviewer worth his salt would ask "what was your biggest mistake?".

It was clear that Piers Morgan is a family friend, and so would not give the PM a hard time. It does raise questions of political bias in the run up to an election. I understand that David Cameron has turned down a similar offer, but I'm sure that ITV has not offered a friendly interviewer to do it. I can't believe that the ex-editor of the Mirror would give as easy ride to the Tory leader as to the PM.

I expect GB's personal ratings to increase by a few points and maybe an extra percentage on the Labour share. I expect a totally different poll response when GB has to face tough questions from the public, Paxo & Humphreys during an election campaign. He has ducked these media contests in the past, so we'll see in a few weeks time. I can't wait.

Squiffy.

Thursday, 11 February 2010

Euro-turn, Greece tests the mettle

Today, there will a conference of EU leaders to discuss what should happen to try to secure the Euro-zone and handle Greece’s budget deficit. It is also the first to be hosted by Herman von Rompuy.
 
Greece is running a very high deficit at 12.7% (similarly to the UK) of GDP but has little means of paying off the debt other than drastic and unpopular cuts. If they had a floating currency they could devalue and then inflate their economy, but the Euro closes that option for them.
 
The stakes are high. If at the end of today, the EU issues a communiqué saying that Greece has a plan of attack and the EU shows confidence in it then it will be clear that they  cannot agree on a plan of action and Greece is toast. If they say that they have a fund which could be used to aide Greece, the markets will test it until the fund has to be used. If they say that they have started aiding Greece, markets will judge the scale of help and decide whether to continue battering Greece or hold back.
 
It all depends on the market’s verdict on the help. Incidentally, the Maastrict treaty which set-up EMU made it illegal for the EU to help out countries which became debt ridden. Only bilateral agreements can be used, which in effect means Germany. I guess that the EU will neatly forget that, and who is going to prosecute?
 
If Greece is allowed to fall and default on its debts, the focus will switch to Spain and Portugal. It all reminds me of 1992 again. If the markets then test Italy, the Euro itself will be looking death in the face.
 
The original rules that set-up EMU, tried to enforce convergence between member states before allowing entry to the Euro-Zone and then had a Stability Pact to make sure the states kept within deficit limits of 3%. In practice, the entry requirements were fudged and the stability pact has not been enforced (why fine a country which is already running a large deficit?).
 
It now points to two directions, either the Euro-Zone collapses, or it pulls through but means that economic union needs to be much tighter to take control of fiscal policy.
 
Either way, we are much better off out of it.
 
Squiffy.
 
 
 
 

Sunday, 7 February 2010

Why do I think the Tories will still win?

According to many commentators we are likely to have a hung Parliament after the election. Others point to a small Tory majority, but I believe the majority will be significant although not a landslide. Why though?

When the election is called, possibly on May 5th although I still think there is good chance that it will be early, there will be a bid test for our pollsters. This will be the first general election in which the Tories have started a good chance since 1992. That time the polls got it spectacularly wrong, but each election since has been a foregone conclusion and so many people have not paid much attention to the correlation between polls and outcome since.

I'm an avid reader of PoliticalBetting.com, a website which studies polls very closely. One significant fact is that in all the polls before the general election result in the last three GEs 29 out of 31 of them have overstated the Labour position, so much so that Mike Smithson who owns PoliticalBetting.com has a golden rule:

"The poll which has Labour in the weakest position is the likeliest to be most accurate".

Other tests of polls such as the European Elections have also shown this to be true. Political Betting does have its own pollster Angus Reid, which has consistently been putting the Tories at 40% and Labour at 24%, if that were true it would be a significant difference to the other polls. We'll only find out at the election!

There is a common wisdom that the Tories are not doing as well as Labour did before 1997, that's probably true. In 1997 people were really wanting to believe in new Labour, and because that promise has been broken we're not inclined to believe the promises so readily now.

There are factors which have given Labour an exaggerated position in the polls. I'll quickly go over these, firstly there is a well known fact that Labour voters are less likely to turn out than Tory voters, add in the fact that Labour is even less popular now and that may be more significant. Secondly, for some reason, people working in the public sector are over represented in the polls than their private sector counterparts, and they are more likely to be Labour voters. Thirdly, in previous elections there was major tactical voting to stop the Tories getting in. The pollsters generally ask questions about how they would like to vote, but there are changes when they are asked to vote 'in their constituency'. There is evidence that the tactical voting factor maybe about to be reversed.

Also, other data points to polls of the marginals (where the change of Government will come from) show a 5% increase in Tory lead over the national position.

From all these factors, the historical data, the overstating of Labour's position and the data from the marginals shows that it is likely again that the polls are going to be out by several percentage points. That's why I think the Tories will still win, and talk of hung parliaments should not come into play until the lead is roughly 4%.

Squiffy.


m th

Wednesday, 3 February 2010

Politics at its cyncial best

Yesterday’s announcement that Gordon Brown has now embraced the AV System for Westminster shows what a cynical politician he is. Just on the cusp of losing an election, he wants to change the electoral system. He says, this is because we need to renew our politics. Yes we do, people think that politicians are in it for themselves, they get too many perks and don’t represent their constituents well.
 
AV is not going to fix any of that, in fact it shows that Brown is doing it for himself (one of the main criticisms). He wants to entice the LibDems into a possible electoral pact after a hung parliament – that is his only motive. It’s as clear as the nose on your face. Cynicism at its height, he has never shown any  interest in voting reform in the past – so why now, three months before an election?
 
Squiffy.
 

Tuesday, 2 February 2010

Let's nail this notion of Gordon Brown's

Time and time again we hear that this is not the moment to start withdrawing support for the British Economy. With a hesitant recovery, they say, we should continue the support until the recovery fully takes hold.

So why are none of the interviewers asking the next follow-up question? It really infuriates me that they miss the obvious.

If this isn’t the time to withdraw the support why has January seen the withdrawal of the cut in VAT (at £12Bn – the largest Government ‘support’ package) and the stopping of the car scrappage scheme (the Government’s most successful ‘support’ package)?

The Government is saying one thing and doing the opposite – it’s hypocrisy – but no-one is pointing it out.

Get’s my goat.

Also, we are now the most indebted nation (according to Guido) as a percentage of GDP:

Sunday, 31 January 2010

Why do we do it? Murray fails to shine

Why do we do it, time and time again? We get up early, we watch as another British hopeful promises so much and then fails to deliver in Tennis.

Although Andy Murray looks like he could do it one day, we should have known the writing was on the wall when all the pundits said he would win. In the end a 3 set to love defeat.

I think I will stick to Formula 1, where Brits do win!

Squiffy.

Thursday, 28 January 2010

The hand of history gives Gordie a slap in the face

Gordon Brown is trying desperately to show some success in leadership on difficult foreign policy and domestic issues. He remembers his success on the G20 summit and wants to replicate it, hence his big presence at Copenhagen, the Northern Ireland policing summit and now the Afghan summit.
 
Unfortunately his luck seems to have run out. There was no deal at Copenhagen, the Yemeni summit was a damp squib and yesterday all he got was a slap in the face and recriminations. It’s a far cry from Tony’s fantastic quote from the Good Friday agreement:
 
This is no time for soundbites , you can leave them at home but I feel the hand of history on my shoulder
 
No, Gordie, the summits will no longer work, and staying in Belfast for a few extra hours just looked like you were ducking PMQs to avoid answering questions on the 0.1% !
 
Squiffy.
 

Tuesday, 26 January 2010

Wow, we have amazing GDP growth of 0.1%

The latest GDP figures show that we have grown by 0.1% putting an end to the recession. It’s very weak though, and lends even more weight to my theory a few days ago that it may go negative again in Q1 2010, and lead to an earlier election.
 
Of course, these figures are an early estimate and may get revised up to show stronger growth. On the other hand, they could be revised down and show we are still in recession!
 
Squiffy.
 

Friday, 22 January 2010

Is it a March Election?

The collective wisdom seems to have settled on a May 6th General Election, but a few things look like they might trigger an earlier election.
 
In the last few days Gordon Brown has offered to appear before the Chilcot inquiry. The letters have been published, and in response Chilcot says:
 
The committee plans to conclude its hearings on Monday 8 FebruaryThat would mean, if you take up the offer, holding the hearings at the end of February or early March..If, of course, in the meantime a General Election is called, we would need to postpone the hearing, as we have always made clear.
 
Although Gordon Brown says he is relaxed about appearing before the inquiry, this may be bravado. Maybe he is worried that it would be a bad start to the Election Campaign. A General Election in March would be a get out clause.
 
Adding to the problems, Alistair Darling seems determined to start bringing the fiscal deficit down in the Budget. To avoid the bad headlines which would inevitably accompany the cuts and destroy one of Brown’s election tactics, or a possible resignation if Brown stops Darling getting his way this time, it makes sense to avoid having a budget.
 
We will also be likely to have briefly come out of recession before the we enter it again. To me it makes sense to go in March, will Brown jump though?
 
Squiffy.
 
 
 

Thursday, 21 January 2010

David Blunkett accuses the Tories of gerrymandering

David Blunkett has accused the Tories of planning to gerrymander future elections due to the plan to reduce the number of seats in Parliament. I know, that doesn’t make sense!
 
What he really means is that the plan to make each seat represent the same number of electors (i.e. having the same size constituency) will take away the current bias in the electoral system which means the Tories need a lead of 8% to get the same seats. The cheek of it!
 
He talks about poor people not being willing to vote – which obviously is going to hurt Labour more than the Tories, but that is a problem of the parties not enthusing poor people to vote and not a problem with the electoral system. Go and take a look at Obama’s campaign if you really want to tackle that!
 
He really wants to entrench the current bias in the system for years to come, i.e. gerrymander to keep Labour in power.
 
Squiffy.
 

Schumacher's mind tricks

It is not known whether Michael Schumacher will have outright No 1 status at Mercedes (one can guess that if there is any new kit – he’ll get it first though).
 
He was though supposed to get the Number 4 on his car, whereas Nico Rosberg was supposed to have 3. Traditionally, the lower number is for the number 1 in the team and I guess that Rosberg came to the team expecting to lead it after Button jumped ship to McLaren and expected to be adorned with “3”.
 
Apparently, Schumacher has a preference for odd numbers, funny that,  and has been granted a swap. He’s used to having Number 1 on his nosecone, maybe they should just try to get that for him.
 
I think the mind games for supremacy at Mercedes have started early!
 
Squiffy.
 

Tuesday, 19 January 2010

The double dip beckons

Today’s inflation figures show that CPI has risen by 1.0% in a month to 2.9%. I would have expected a rise like that to occur after January’s figures are produced (these will include the VAT rise), but not in December where all the retail outlets were targeting Christmas customers with sales.
 
It shows that the inflation we had before the recession (it was relatively high) has not been beaten out of the system by the downturn, and is ready to return with a vengeance. We’re not officially out of the recession yet, but the double dip is on the horizon. The effect of quantitative easing and VAT increases will combine to drive inflation up, meaning that the Bank Of England is likely to raise interest rates sooner than later. Add in the effect of the market’s view on our debt and the outlook looks bleak.
 
If we do to take hold get growth in Q4 2009, expect recession again in Q1 2010.
 
Squiffy.
 
 

Monday, 18 January 2010

Brown's shameless grab for the middle

You’ve got to admire the sheer cheek of it. Gordon Brown is now a middle class warrior, declaring that he will protect the middle classes.
 
Er, come again? Wasn’t it Mr Brown who decimated the middle class pension pot with his cack handed raid on pension dividends. Or did he put NI contributions up time and time again? Or did he try to stop city academies? Or did he introduce IR35 legislation? Or did he introduce a 50% tax rate? Or did he increase stamp duty? Or did his Government force parents to register on the child register to take kids and friends to football matches?
 
All of these things. Tony Blair had a feel for the middle classes, so did Mandelson – they understand aspiration. Brown never has, so it’s a bit rich now for him to ask us to trust him.
 
I never will.
 
Squiffy.
 

Friday, 15 January 2010

Raise a toast to Tom Harris MP

It’s not often that I agree with a Labour MP (apart from Frank Field – who’s in the wrong party), but Tom Harris is one thoughtful MP, who’s blog is well worth reading.
This post about minimum pricing for alcohol is spot on.
The most important point is this:
And thirdly – and by far most importantly – minimum pricing of alcohol won’t work. Do you imagine that the type of person who gets blitzed on a 12-pack of Carlsberg from the local supermarket is going to see the new, increased price label and say to himself: “No, I can no longer afford to indulge my drinking habit. I will therefore save my money and spend it instead on books for my children.”?
Absolutely right. It’s not going to work, but all parties seem to be set on it. It will make no difference. The fact is that this country has relied on alcohol since its birth – it was better for us than the water! We have grown up around it, it oils our social lives and occasionally we have too much. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be much else for large sections of our community to do, and occasionally turns into often, so Fridays and Saturdays become a drunkfest and town centres become no-go areas.
I don’t have a solution, if people had better things to do then maybe it could be reduced. Maybe aspiration is the key, but at the moment an aspiration for many is to get drunk at the weekend.
Squiffy. (Possibly aptly named).

Wednesday, 13 January 2010

David Cameron needs to change tack

Gordon Brown performed well in today’s PMQs, as he did last week. He’s having a good run. He still doesn’t answer questions and manages to bluster well, but that’s GB for you.
 
I think David Cameron now needs to change tack. Recognizing that he’s not going to make headway with Gordon Brown, as GB asks DC the questions, he should turn the tables and start to answer the questions. He could use his honesty (like saying that he misspoke last week) to his benefit and be more open. The sight of David Cameron answering a question, then asking one which gets blustered by Gordon Brown will show that he is more Prime Ministerial and open.
 
It would certainly be a surprise to the house, and would GB be able to cope with this change of tactic.
 
Squiffy.
 

Monday, 11 January 2010

Are we lining up for an almight Brown-Darling bust up?

The outcome of last week’s snow plot is that Alistair Darling seems to have convinced Gordon Brown of the need to talk about cuts. He made this plain by immediately getting out and telling the Times that he would be setting out the worst comprehensive spending review for 20 years.
 
Unfortunately, we’ve been here before. In the middle of last year when Brown was using the Investment vs Tory Cuts there appeared to be a parting of the waves. Until the nearly successful coup forced Brown to start using the C-word. He then  reverted to his previous message, managing never to use the C-word in last week’s interview with Andrew Marr.
 
It seems that the Cabinet drags him to the centre, then as time goes by Ed Balls drags him back to the left until we get a coup attempt. It was in this backdrop that the Pre-Budget Report was made, and typically avoided any mention of cuts. It was then made known that Darling and Mandelson wanted to make clear that cuts would be needed.
 
What if Brown starts to go back to the investment vs cuts arguments in the run up to the election and budget? Could Alistair Darling say enough is enough and walk out. It would be devastating. If he stayed, he would still leak that Brown had stamped all over his budget. It could get very messy.
 
For all Brown’s words of bringing in Darling, Mandelson & Harman, he can’t shake his Balls.
 
Squiffy.
 

Thursday, 7 January 2010

What an absolute shower

They’ve now had three attempts to get rid of this deeply unimpressive Prime Minister. They know they are doomed. But they haven’t got the balls, excuse the pun, to get rid.
 
They can’t speak to each other to prepare a well organized coup, each attempt has ended being a damp squib. If they can’t even organize a leadership election in a political party, how can they run a country? Well, they’re not. Apart from reacting to events, it’s hard to think of anything concrete which has come from the last 5 years of this Government. Lots of words and policy announcements, but very little effect. As someone once said, in office but not in power.
 
On an alternative note, the Tories got themselves into a small difficulty on Monday when David Cameron appeared to downgrade the commitment to recognize marriage in the tax system. After some little twisting, he came back and corrected himself to  turn it back into a commitment. This morning on the Today programme, he fessed up and said that he made a mistake and apologized. How refreshing, a politician telling the truth? It would have been easier to have covered up his mistake. But as Jim Hacker said once, honesty is sometimes the best way of surprising the opposition!
 
Squiffy.
 

Saturday, 2 January 2010

2010 : The Predictions

Happy New Year to all. I hope 2010 is a great year, and one in which this discredit Government is evicted from office.

Here are my predictions for the year ahead.

  1. The Tories will win the election with a majority of around 80. Many people think it will be tighter than that, but I think the polls overstate the Labour position.
  2. The election shares will be Tories 43%, Labour 27%, Lib Dems 24%.
  3. Gordon Brown will be succeeded by Harriet Harman. (They should chose Andy Burnham)
  4. Lewis Hamilton will win the F1 World Championship.
  5. Michael Schumacher will win 3 races this year.
  6. David Davis and Malcolm Rifkind will be in the Cabinet.
  7. The country will have recovered last quarter but will enter it again this quarter. It will re-emerge in the 3rd quarter.
  8. CPI Inflation will hit 3.5% by years end.
  9. Lord Mandelson will renounce his peerage in an attempt to rejoin the commons.
  10. The first Cabinet Minister to resign will be Alan Duncan.
Lets see how it looks at the end of the year.

Squiffy.

Thursday, 31 December 2009

A look at my 2009 predictions

It's the end of the year and so it is time to mark my predictions for the year. Here is what I said:

  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.
    CORRECT.
  2. The recession will last throughout 2009. CORRECT.
  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. OTHERS DID, BUT NOT THE ONES MENTIONED. HALF POINT.
  4. Interest rates will reduce to 0.5%, the CPI will also go down to 0.5%, and the RPI will briefly go negative. CORRECT.
  5. Robert Kubica will win the F1 World Championship. WRONG.
  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. CORRECT.
  7. Ken Clarke will come back as shadow Business secretary. CORRECT.
  8. David Blunkett will come back as Home Secretary. WRONG.
  9. The Tories will win the Local/Euro elections on a percentage share of 43%. Labour will get 22% with the LibDems at 26%. CORRECT, BUT FIGURES WRONG. HALF POINT.
  10. Peter Mandelson will be forced to resign over some business dealings as EU Comissioner. WRONG.


So, that's 6 points out of 10. Not bad. Tomorrow for my 2010 predictions.

Squiffy.

Wednesday, 23 December 2009

Exciting - the leaders debates

The excitement has already started to build. Next year the UK will see its first leaders debate in a general election. All across the globe these events are standard practice, but here in Blighty we’re used to one party calling for a debate and another saying no.
 
Now that the blockade has been broken, they will form a part of every general election campaign here on in. Halleluiah, it’s taken a long time to get here but thankfully we’ve got here. The old refrain that every PM puts himself to questioning once a week at Prime Ministers Questions as an excuse will now be put to sleep.
 
I like the fact that the three debates will be 85 to 90 minutes long, quite a serious amount of time!
 
Who’s got something to lose, and who’s got something to win?
 
On the face of it, Gordon Brown, being an unpopular, PM has nothing to lose. David Cameron has everything to lose by starting  ahead. Nick Clegg has the gift of a lifetime in that he will get equal airtime to the two main party leaders.
 
So far the commentary follows these lines. I think that is too simplistic. For David Cameron, the repeated mantra that he hasn’t sealed the deal may be getting wearing. I don’t think things will change before the campaign, but a good performance may see him get closer.
 
David Cameron comes across well on TV, whereas Gordon Brown is notoriously bad and has a tendency to make mistakes under pressure (remember the investment of 0%). I’ve blogged before that the PM may well lose his temper and blow up under sustained questioning by the public (something he has never faced as PM) and if this happens it could be a real game changer.
 
Finally, I think Nick Clegg will do well whatever happens to the other two, if he gains 4 to 5 % on the back of a good performance I’d expect it to be at the expense of Labour rather than the Tories. It could make this election more like 1983 or 1987 with a seriously divided left leaving the Tories to win handsomely.
 
Only a few months to wait and we shall see.
 
I can’t wait, I wonder if I can get tickets for the audience?
 
Squiffy.
 

Friday, 11 December 2009

Why David Cameron cannot seal the deal.

During the last year or so there have been many articles about current polling trends, many pointing out that the Tories are stuck around the 40% mark and that David Cameron is seemingly unable to 'seal the deal'.
 
My thesis is that this is not a problem with David Cameron and that any Tory leader would have the same problem.
 
Many people remember the Tories from the last time they were in power, it's only 13 years ago, and many of them have a visceral hatred for them from that time. Two things which people remember is the sleaze at the end of the Government and the harshness at beginning, they put them together and get a corrupt and uncaring Government. They tend not to remember the transformed economy, the end of the strike culture, the international head held high etc.
 
When Labour were evicted in 1979, the feeling (I'm guessing as I was 6 years old) was that many people thought that the Government had their hearts in the right place but were incompetent, especially economically. Throughout the 80's and early 90's the population wanted a Government who could mix the caring image with economic competence. When Labour promised that with Tony Blair's election with a pledge to stick broadly to Tory economic principles, the populace embraced them with glee. Hence the national jubilation on May 2nd 1997.
 
For the Tories, now, this is not possible. The abiding memory will not allow it. David Cameron can only do his best, and the best that can be achieved is that floating voters reluctantly vote Tory. It will be for David Cameron to demonstrate, if he gets into office, that he can mix the economic competence with a compassionate conservatism whilst bringing down the deficit. If he can do this then he will seal the deal, and the following election will be easier to win. It's a very tall order, but with the right mix it is possible.
 
P.S. The Labour party are in a worse position now than the Tories were in 1997. As well as sleaze, they now look incompetent and are increasingly looking like they don't care what happens to the country whilst trying anything to stay elected.
 
Squiffy.
 

Thursday, 10 December 2009

Will my prophesy come true, it looks like it has started...

I don't know when the polls will come in but looking at the newspaper headlines, it appears that the media narrative will change once again from a Labour recovery to Labour disaster.
 
Yesterday was another bad day, for everyone. Bad for the Government because they had precious little to give away as an election sweetener, and also bad because they didn't tackle the deficit and showed that everyone earning above £20, 000 is seen as a cash cow to plunder. Bad for the taxpayer, spending is going up next year and the day of reckoning has been put on hold again. It will only get worse. It was another opportunity lost.
 
Thankfully the tax on jobs, i.e. National Insurance rise, may not happen as it is penned to come in 2011 and there will be an election before then. Will the Government risk another awful budget next spring? Maybe not, maybe March 25th is now more likely than not. I hope so. We need rid - now!
 
I'm intrigued by the strategy, if you can call it that, of keeping on with the mantra that you don't cut the deficit and stimulus until the economy grows. The stimulus of the VAT cut will be taken away in 21 days time. What happens if this quarter's growth shows there is none and another contraction? It blows their whole argument out of the water! There's no wonder they reduced the tax on Bingo, they're hoping their numbers come in pretty quickly.
 
Squiffy.
 
 

Why is it always me?

The country is in a mess, and so people like me have to pay a bit more. Fair enough. Beforehand, the country is growing with a booming economy so we need to tax those making money to pay for services. Me again.
 
And so it goes on, under a Labour Government, whatever the occasion people who are not the poorest will pay more and more and more. Until you think is it worth it? I could go on benefits and do some things that I enjoy rather than sit around at work getting bored, putting up with the horrible commuting experience, in winter never seeing daylight and earning money which gets taxed more and more heavily.
 
When do I get a break? Oh yes, I remember, under a Tory Government. A party that believes that doing work is good for you, and letting you choose how to spend your own money gives you responsibility, and with extra responsibility you can maybe set up an entrepreneurial enterprise and employ someone else and that by doing such the whole economy grows, tax receipts go up and there is more to spend on the poorest.
 
I'm just counting down to the days when whenever the Government makes a mess of it, they don't just decide to take a look in my wallet and help themselves.
 
So ends the moan.
 
Squiffy.
 

Thursday, 3 December 2009

Why can't Gordon own up

Again Gordon Brown has told a mistruth, albeit a minor one. Yesterday in PMQs he said that Spain was a member of the G20. They do attend meetings but are not a member of the G20.
 
Harriet Harman has just popped up and said that he was exactly right to say what he did and that Spain is a member of the G20. Well he wasn't so why can't he just fess up. Last week David Cameron made a mistake in the House about the two schools linked to dubious organisations, but he came back and apologised. The PM seems pathologically unable to do the same.
 
If he needs a refresher, these are the members of the G20, taken from the G20 website www.g20.org:
  • Argentina
  • Australia
  • Brazil
  • Canada
  • China
  • France
  • Germany
  • India
  • Indonesia
  • Italy
  • Japan
  • Mexico
  • Russia
  • Saudi Arabia
  • South Africa
  • South Korea
  • Turkey
  • United Kingdom
  • United States of America
Hello, where is Spain? I've looked up and down the list but cannot find it. No, not there. Come on, just be a man.
 
Squiffy.
 
 

Wednesday, 2 December 2009

Gordon wows at last

Gordon Brown's performance today at PMQs was his best - by far. He may not have answered any questions but he was able to get his one liners in effectively and was able to make David Cameron uncomfortable.
 
Will he be able to keep up this level of performance? Only time will tell.
 
Squiffy.
 

My view on the polls

There has been much talk lately of a narrowing of the polls, of hung parliaments and of difficult times ahead for David Cameron. Yes, there been a small narrowing in the polls, mainly due to a softening of the Tory vote and not through a resurgence of the Labour party.
 
I think this has mainly been through the following reasons. Gordon Brown and the Labour party have not managed to slip on a banana skin for the last month, in fact the PM was seen with pity when The Sun made an attack on him. David Cameron had to make the change on policy over the Lisbon referendum, leading to some people talking about moving to UKIP. There was also the incident of Elizabeth Truss and the 'Turnip Taliban'.
 
It all adds up to some small movements in the polls. I don't think this is a defining time though. Never underestimate Gordon Brown's propensity to turn some good news for him into bad news. Next week is the Pre-budget report, and if history is any guide then it will be full of partisan announcements designed to create dividing lines. The public see this for what it is, and want some honesty about what to expect after the election in putting UK Plc's finances back on track. They will not get it, and I think the usual backlash will occur.
 
By mid December, expect to see the Tories back in the low 40's and Labour around 25.
 
Squiffy.
 

Wednesday, 25 November 2009

The Iraq truth is already starting to disseminate

Two items in the Chilcott Iraq war inquiry have already come to light. The first was that the USA and Britain had already discussed deposing Saddam Hussein before September 11th 2001, and the second that the Attorney General had advised that it would not be legal.
 
We expected the first, to be honest, and we're probably not surprised by the second. But just these two facts really do ring big alarm bells over why we went to war. The whole terrorist link which was trumpeted by George Bush and WMD report by the British Government were a means to an already wanted end. And what was it that changed the Attorney General's mind?
 
It's no surprise really, but it confirms our doubts that the public were heavily misled about the war. The words 'in good faith' will be used time and again over the next few months, but if the first few days are anything to go by we should not hold much store in those words.
 
Squiffy.
 

Tuesday, 24 November 2009

Tony Lloyd re-elected as Labour PLP chairman

Last night Tony Lloyd was re-elected unopposed as the chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party. This seemingly small piece of news has bigger implications than what first appears.
 
There are precious few moments when the Labour Party can do the most sensible thing and get rid of a Mr. G Brown of 10 Downing Street. One moment was last night. Barry Sheerman had said that he may stand as chairman of the PLP as a "Get Brown Out" candidate. If he had succeeded it would have shown that the Labour Party did indeed want him to go. Without the vote, that's another chance gone.
 
Maybe the poll over the weekend showing the Tory lead down to 6% had an impact. But as they were voting another poll put the Tories' lead at 17%, and Labour at a low of 22%. It now looks likely that the previous poll was rogue and normal service will be resumed.
 
There are now two more set pieces which could trigger the downfall. The PBR and Budget. So far each PBR and Budget of Mr. Brown's reign has immediately lead to a worsened poll position.
 
It is beginning to look like Labour will stick with Brown and face a severe drubbing. Of which we can all be truly grateful.
 
Squiffy.
 

Thursday, 19 November 2009

The Queen must have been cursing inside her crown.

What a pitiful Queen's speech. Getting the Queen to read out a Labour Party political broadcast is horrible. It was cringeworthy.

We know there are only 33 days in Parliament before a General Election is called and so hardly any bills with any opposition will become law.

The worst law is the promise to reduce the deficit by half in 4 years. Sure the aim is fine, but what happens when it isn't adhered to. Can't imagine the PM being taken down. No, it's just the worst politics. Just bloody do it. I can't believe the Labour party can though, at every turn they just spend more money. It's the only thing they know.

Oh, by the way, what happened to the fiscal prudence rules which were passed into law in 1997/1998. They were supposed to keep out debt down. When it went slightly wrong they redefined the economic cycle. Then when it went further wrong, it was the global downturn. So who's going to prison for breaking this law? No-one. So what's the whole point.

Yesterday we heard Lord Mandelson on the Today programme being interviewed by Evan Davis. It was handbags at dawn, as Davis put it to Mandelson that the law to make sure no families would be in fuel poverty by 2010 was going to be broken. Who would be prosecuted. Mandelson did his usual trick of blaming Evan for not listening to his answer (the fact that there was no answer, didn't seem to matter to Mandelson). He's good, but soon the interviewers will cotton on to his technique!

Please put this Government out of its misery. I don't think I can wait another 5 months.

Squiffy.

Jenson to McLaren. Probably not good.

Now that it has been confirmed that Jenson Button will be joining Lewis Hamilton at McLaren, we take a look at his chances.

Firstly, we know that both are very good drivers and both should win races. But both like different set-ups. Lewis prefers an oversteer based car, but for Jenson it has to be perfectly balanced.

We know that Lewis has been McLaren's favoured son for many years. The likelihood is that the car will be built to Lewis' preferred set-up making it very difficult for Jenson. When Lewis doesn't have his perfect set-up he can grab the car by the scruff of the neck and make a good fist of it. Unfortunately, Jenson can struggle in a non-balanced car.

It does look to me that he may have made the wrong choice and will be beaten by Hamilton. I'm hoping I'm proved wrong and they are more evenly matched, but my suspicion is that Lewis will blow Jenson away.

Squiffy.

Thursday, 12 November 2009

Degrees in Nursing?

I heard with incredulity that everyone who goes into nursing will need a degree in a few years time. What has happened to this country?
 
My mum was a night sister, very respected, well liked, firm but fair. Everyone knew where they stood with her and the patients knew they were getting the best of care.
 
She didn't get a degree, she left school at around 15 to go into training. In fact, she didn't have O-levels and I was extremely proud of her when she decided to get GCSE's later in life to make up for her lack of formal general qualifications from earlier schooling.
 
You can't tell me that hospital care is so different now to what it was two decades ago. Sure things will have moved on, there will be new treatments, drugs and a bit more administration but the care being provided by a nurse will greatly similar.
 
By making nursing a degree only profession, it will close off another job prospect to those kids who find they're not as academically gifted and be another reason why vocational qualifications are not taken seriously in this country.
 
I suppose this is one way to fulfill the Government's aim of getting 50% of people into university. There'll be no jobs for anyone without a degree soon! What does this mean for the policy of raiding other countries for nurses in recent years? Is it going to be that only British nurses need a degree, whilst others can transfer in without the necessary qualifications?
 
How flaming ridiculous.
 
Squiffy.
 
 
 

Friday, 6 November 2009

Reaction to the Tory change of policy on Europe

Now that we know what the new Tory policy on Europe is (or we think we do), I can give my first thoughts.
 
Firstly, disappointment that my recommendations weren't taken on board. I guess David Cameron does not want to go on board the train that could lead us out of the Union.
 
Secondly, though, I believe the policy is largely pragmatic and will have the best possible chance of keeping the Tory party united. I like the sound of the legislation to keep British Sovereignty, make sure future treaties have a referendum, and stop the ratchet clauses. I just hope they are strong enough to hold legal force!
 
Thirdly, when the dust has settled and we're on a path to economic recovery and a debt-reduction plan is in place, he will need to start playing hardball with the EU on his promises to bring back powers. Any lack of determination will be as much as a broken manifesto promise as the Labour party's promise to hold the Lisbon referendum. He must be prepared to withhold money, and must be prepared to play the EU countries at their own game and be very slow at implementing new laws.
 
Finally, in private he must be telling the EU partners that we must being to look at Association and not Union unless we get our powers back. Anything less will not get them thinking.
 
And for  all those people who harp on about the "cast-iron guarantee", they forget to mention the line after that which reads "No treaty should be ratified without consulting the British people in a referendum." i.e. the cast-iron guarantee is only while the treaty is not ratified.
 
Overall, probably the best the Tories could hope for. But as Vic and Bob used to say, 'you wouldn't let it lie' - and the public won't!
 
Squiffy.
 

Sunday, 1 November 2009

David Miliband as EU foreign representative? No

In a column in the Mail on Sunday William Hague talks about David Miliband's recent comments about the Conservative's partners in Europe.

He points out that the EU partner's are not very happy about these comments, and it just so happens that some of them form coalition partners in their Governments or have the position of President. Do you think that they will want David Miliband to represent them at an EU level? I don't think so.

Mr Miliband has been disgraceful and will have to apologise before he gets that job. Even then his behaviour has been less than diplomatic and should rule him out completely!

Squiffy.

Saturday, 31 October 2009

Europe: The proposal

Earlier in this post I gave some options that David Cameron can use for his European policy.

I've now got my proposal.

Firstly David Cameron should be up front and say that he didn't want to be in this position. He had said that Lisbon was a step too far, and it is. He now has to push for Britain's rights to have the relationship we want with Europe. With that in mind he will have one or two referenda.

The first referendum will have a question such as "Britain should have its own rights over Fishing Quotas, Immigration, Taxation and Employment rights. Agree?". The exact list should be set out at the time, but be at a level where we are happy. I can now hear the laughter - how naive, Europe will never agree to such repatriation of powers (even though the original Constitution was supposed to bring some powers back to nation states - look how that turned out!).

That's the reason for the second referendum. In case the EU turns away and chooses not to listen to the UK's point of view, the second referendum is asked. "Britain should have an Economic relationship with the EU, and have associate membership". This is the nuclear option.

Both referenda will be set out at the start. It is blackmail, but the EU does not listen to its people and Governments collude to deny the electorate their say - so needs must.

It will then be a matter of how much the EU wants the UK as a member. If they do want us, then we will continue to contribute to the coffers but we want some powers back. If they don't then fair enough we will go our own way.

I think it is time to play hard ball with the EU political elite.

Squiffy.

Friday, 30 October 2009

The Brown jinx hits again

Whenever the PM wishes someone well before an endeavour or publicly supports someone, you know it's curtains. Last night he publicly back his old friend and foe, Tony Blair, as new President of the Council of Ministers. This morning we hear that EU leaders have cooled on the idea.
 
He's done it again! Maybe that was the plan…
 
Squiffy.
 

Thursday, 29 October 2009

David vs William: Part two

An infrequent series of interviews seem to be occurring on the Today programme where at 8.10 a.m. both David Miliband and William Hague are interviewed together. It's always entertaining.
 
In this morning's exchanges, William had the killer point in the earlier part of the interview and David in the latter.
 
Firstly, William Hague pointed out that the Labour Government claimed that the treaty was not a constitution and was just a tidying up exercise and so the referendum was not needed. But Hague then pointed out how David Miliband is stating that we need a strong new EU President who can stop the traffic to push forward EU views to the rest of the world. Surely that role is quite a constitutional change from the rotating presidency with limited powers now. David Miliband had no real comeback on this hierocracy.
 
Then in a discussion about the polish head of the Conservative grouping in the EU, Michael Kaminsky, David Miliband read out an interview in which Kaminsky said that the death of 300 Jews  was not of a scale as the Holocaust and should not be apologized for. William Hague had no come back for that.
 
1 all, I would say.
 
P.S. When I think about the EU and how the electorate (of the whole EU) are being treated, I get angry. Very angry. In fact I've nearly had enough. I am now close to changing my position on the EU and thinking that we should go for associate membership, like Norway. I'm not there yet, but it's getting closer.
 
Squiffy.