2014 ends, 2015 begins

As is customary at this time I mark last year's predictions and create some new ones for the coming year.

Firstly, last years:

1. The economy will grow by 2.5% to 3% this year. 1 point
2. The opinion polls will end the year at 36% Tory, 35% Labour, 12% LibDem, 10% UKIP. 1/2 point (Tories and Labour are level pegging)
3. The European elections will give Labour the lead, UKIP 2nd (just behind), Tories 3rd and LibDems 4th. 0 points, UKIP led and the LibDems did worse
4. Lewis Hamilton will win the F1 World Championship. 1 point
5. The Ferrari power plant will be bad, leading to Alonso ditching them and joining McLaren for 2015. 1 point
6. Tony Blair will speak out against Ed Miliband's leadership. 1/2 point (he sort of did yesterday and backtracked today)
7. Vince Cable will resign or be sacked (hopefully). 0 points, still hanging in there 
8. Peter Mandelson will do Strictly. 0 points
9. Scotland will vote against independence. 1 point
10. Gordon Brown will announce he's leaving parliament in 2015. 1 point

Overall 6 out of 10. Not bad this year, certainly better than last year!

Now for 2015 predictions.

1. The economy will continue to recover, and will grow by 2.5% this year. Wages growth will really begin to outstrip inflation/
2. The General Election will be close, final tally Tories 36%, Labour 31%, Lib Dems 10%, UKIP 12%.
3. Tories and Lib Dems will form a second coalition.
4. Lewis Hamilton will win the F1 World Championship again.
5. Sebastien Vettel will not perform as well as Alonso at Ferrari, and Ferrari will end the year in greater turmoil with Raikkonen being sacked.
6. Labour will have a leadership election with Chukka Umuna winning.
7. Vince Cable will lose his seat in the election (hopefully)
8. UKIP will gain 2 seats at the General Election, but Rochester & Strood will not be one of them. Douglas Carswell will be re-elected.
9. Hilary Clinton, Jeb Bush and Rand Paul will all run for the US Presidential primaries.
10. Nick Clegg will resign the leadership of the Lib Dems.

Ok, let's see what happens. The General Election is going to be the most unpredictable in generations, so most of the above could  be wrong.

Squiffy.

Well done Lewis

Fantastic result. Well deserved.

Now to 2015.

Squiffy

Four hours to the title showdown: Hamilton vs Rosberg

You may be reading this after the race and know the result, or just before and in anticipation of the culmination of a fascinating season.

Yesterday, as so many times this season, Nico Rosberg grabbed pole after Lewis Hamilton was strangely off-colour on a Saturday. Usually, however, Hamilton has come back stronger and faster on Sunday, and I expect no different today. Hamilton is quick around Abu Dhabi, and without any other issues I'd expect him to prevail.

There's 17 points difference and Hamilton only needs to come second, but I don't expect him to tighten and win just by settling, like he did in 2008. Let's really hope that there are no mechanical issues, and I think the mechanics on both sides of the Mercedes garage will be desperate to avoid any issues.

Nico Rosberg has shown prodigious speed this year, and has surprised many, including me. He's also shown ruthlessness with the deliberate actions in Monaco and Spa, he definitely isn't the Mr Nice Guy we all presumed. There is an arrogance there which most F1 champs have. For another take, read Will Buxton's blog.

Lewis Hamilton has shown a lot more maturity this year, he's made more mistakes than I would expect, but he always bounces back, which he wouldn't have done a few years ago. I think he's more tense than he appears, but that is understandable. He has shown brilliant race-craft, which is such a stark contrast to his wayward 2011 season, where he would quite often collide with Felipe Massa! If his Saturday's have been more troubled than usual, his Sundays have been spectacular. I think by 10 wins to 5 and by coming back from a points deficit twice, he deserves this championship. For another take, check Will Buxton's Blog again.

Just a few hours to go.


Now to another issue. The demise of Marussia, possible death of Caterham and struggles for Force India, Sauber and Lotus has highlighted the terrible financial state of Formula 1. It's absolutely crazy that Ferrari and Red Bull get over £100m per year, and Marussia were getting £7m! I don't mind having a premium for success but that is just ridiculous. I would say increments of £3m for each place in the constructor's championship. Meaning that the gap between the top and bottom teams should be £30m at most. If I can see this, why can't F1?

Bernie Ecclestone has been name calling the three teams of Force India, Sauber, and Sauber and his behaviour is becoming increasingly bizarre. He recently said that F1 doesn't need young fans who can't buy Rolex watches! Hello? Where do older fans comes from, younger fans you idiot! I'm still watching and can afford a Rolex, but I started at the age of 14, when I couldn't. It's time for Bernie to toodle off.

Finally, how to tackle F1 in the absence of a change in money. Three car teams and customer cars have been raised. Christian Horner, as Ecclestone's mouthpiece, has complained about the new engines and wants to go back to the old V8s. That would be a disaster for the whole grid. The new formula is interesting and gives F1 a new purpose in developing hybrid car technology for the future of the human race.

But the new engines are expensive at £25m and the old engines were only £5m. I would suggest we did something similar to the late 80's where there was a choice of turbo or normally aspirated engines. We could allow slightly de-tuned or RPM limited old V8s to be fitted to cars. The cars would be unlikely to win but could make it to the midfield. In 2006 Toro Rosso was allowed to run de-tuned V10s, so it's not so bizarre an option!

Anyway, rant over.

Enjoy the race!

Squiffy

Rochester and Strood

Today has been the Rochester and Strood by-election following the defection of the Tory MP Mark Reckless to UKIP.

This is supposed to be a key by-election for the Tories, UKIP and Labour. Maybe a verdict on Ed Miliband, maybe whether the Prime Minister can keep his troops in line until the General Election, and maybe the end of the UKIP rise.

Exciting then? As a resident of Rochester I looked forward to discussing issues with the candidates as they came canvassing. Unfortunately none came, which disappointed me. We got plenty of leaflets, however, two from UKIP, around six from the Tories, two from Labour and one from the LibDems. But no people. The high street was busy with the shops converted into makeshift political offices.

Make of it what you will that UKIP took over a spiritualist ex-wiccan shop, the Tories an old games shop and Labour the old butchers (I still miss their fantastic sausage rolls).

I did go to one of the hustings in the corn exchange. The Labour candidate was the most impressive but was poorly supported. One of the other candidates was in the audience and asked whether the main candidates wanted disabled people and pensioners to have a sex life! A strange question, which was not answered!

This morning I voted early (at 7 am), there were four others in front of me - which is quite brisk in my view. I don't know what this means, which candidate out of the two possible victors it favours.

I'll be watching as much coverage as possible tonight, hoping for an early result as I have work to go to tomorrow morning and busy weekend of F1 championship deciders to watch.

Still exciting.

Squiffy.

Do the Tories want to lose?

I ask the question because last night's debacle over the European Arrest Warrant vote makes the party management look very amateur.

They had the vote in the bag and David Cameron had promised a vote before the Rochester by-election so why did they bottle the vote on some kind of technicality? It looks evasive and breaks a promise. What is the point? I despair sometime.

Was this David Cameron's mistake or maybe Michael Gove or even Theresa May. Whoever it was needs to have a serious talking to. It was a real gift to UKIP and right wing backbenchers.

I sometimes think that the whole world is wanting us to vote bloody UKIP.


On a second point, I attended the hustings for the Rochester by-election and the most impressive candidate was the Labour Party candidate, Naushabah Khan. I'm afraid that the Tory candidate was disappointing and very defensive and Mark Reckless was evasive.

Really, I'm not sure any of them deserve to win!


Squiffy.

Where is the Ferrari announcement?

It's been an interesting and also sobering time in F1.

The injury to Jules Bianchi overshadows everything. I read that he hit his head with a force of 92G, it is a wonder that he's still alive. I hope that he manages to make a recovery and can make it back into a car, as he has shown such promise.

The season has been fascinating. For a while it looked like the bad luck would completely destroy Hamilton's campaign, but since Rosberg's error in Spa the momentum has all been with the Brit. In fact the latter half of the season has shown Rosberg is prone to errors under pressure and so far he has yet to better Hamilton in a straight fight.

We're entering the end of the season and mileages on the engines are going to get critical. Is it a possibility that for the last double point race Mercedes decides to have penalties and replace the both engines? Maybe, just in case there is a danger than one of the cars might not finish.

The big news on driver moves is that Sebastien Vettel is leaving Red Bull. He's been out of sorts all year, and when he learnt that Alonso had exercised his get out of Ferrari clause, he leapt upon it. So Vettel to Ferrari. Or is it? The likelihood is yes, but it's weird that Ferrari haven't announced it. Why wouldn't they?

An off the wall thought. It looks like Alonso is heading to McLaren, but they're just trying to tie down the contract. Maybe McLaren have signed Vettel too! It would explain why Ferrari haven't announced Vettel.

Probably not, but you never know! Maybe Ferrari are looking at a way of getting rid of Raikkonen who has been a disappointment this year. Maybe Alonso will take a sabbatical with the aim of getting his backside into a Mercedes in 2016 (in which case I think he may be disappointed).

Looking forward to the last three races, but I don't want double points or reliability problems to settle this championship. If Rosberg wins at the last race with Hamilton out, the win tally could be 11-5 to Hamilton. It would be a travesty.

#ForzaJules

Squiffy

Could Douglas Carswell's election as UKIP MP be bad for them?

I quite like Douglas Carswell. He believes in democracy and better structures to support democracy. He is very independently minded. In fact, he could put the Independence into UKIP.

He's now a big fish in a small pond, rather than a small fish in a big pond. He will be on our TV screens a lot more as a spokesman for UKIP.

I think though that we'll be seeing some obvious differences of opinion with the leadership of Nigel Farage. He's already been highlighting a different opinion on immigration to the leadership, as he pointedly mentioned it in his victory speech in Clacton.

For now, though, he is the only UKIP MP and although not the leader he is now the most senior elected representative of the party. A full on general election campaign, this time round, will be looking for major differences of opinion between the leader and its first MP. Expect there to be more controversies.

I think it's likely Carswell will win re-election in 2015, but what happens if La Farage does not become MP? The differences could get more extreme.  I foresee fireworks! In fact I can imagine a leadership challenge which Carswell might win. Afterwards, though, if Farage is not leader he would be very grumbly and UKIP could lose it's best electoral asset, as Carswell doesn't have the common touch of the current leader.

We might just be in the phase of peak UKIP, it might be downhill from here. It's possible we've just witnessed a new Kilroy-Silk moment.

Squiffy.

Nick Clegg's Speech: Verdict

A bit dull as he was only talking to his own base.

He did the usual 'plague on both your houses' section which is now getting so old it needs a pension. Lambasting Labour for breaking the economy and Tories for being mean. Only the Lib Dems can save us! In which case Lord help us.

The big offer was some improvements on mental health. Whilst worthy, it doesn't exactly set the pulse racing.

He was trying to gee up his own base for the election next year rather than talking to the electorate. As I say, rather dull.

The Lib Dems, although in Government, increasingly seem like an irrelevance.

Squiffy.

UKIP want Labour to win

Most commentators think that UKIP would prefer there to be a Tory Prime Minister and a European referendum campaign rather than a Labour PM. Not true.

The nightmare scenario for UKIP is that the Tories win, David Cameron wins some marginal powers back and manages to sell it to the country in the referendum.

In much the same way that the Scottish referendum was David Cameron's gamble in that would take independence off the table for a generation, UKIP think the same is possibly true about the EU.

Any way in which Labour win and deny us another referendum will further the calls for us to be out.


It's possible, though, that they could get us out of the EU sooner rather than later. Though, it would be a pretty big gamble on their part. In this scenario, they'd need David Cameron to win and hold the referendum. After a period of stability, we may be about to see a bigger Euro problem than we had two years ago.

EU interest rates are at rock bottom and it looks like there may be a period of deflation. At the moment inflation is 0.3% and looking to go lower. Growth is anaemic. Germany is faltering. France and Italy are sick. The ECB would have no options, it would be up to EU Governments to save their economies - difficult given their levels of debt!

Given this back drop we may actually see more convulsions than we did in sovereign debt crisis. If Britain can keep growing while the EU, including Germany, starts to really have difficulties then maybe the whole Euro and even the EU could be on the table. Maybe then we'd want to be out.

As I say, a lot of things have to happen for this scenario to occur. But you never know.

Squiffy.

Cameron Speech: Verdict

What a difference a week makes! Last week we had Ed Miliband's forget-athon, a real lesson in why he should not be Prime Minister. This week David Cameron made the best conference speech of his premiership.

When the PM's back is against the wall he really can turn it on, and he did. He's shown that he can do the no notes speaking before - in fact it was he who started the trend - but he has eschewed this tactic to be more prime ministerial. And it works.

The speech was serious when it needed to be. He mentioned Patrick Churchill, a D-day veteran. In this year of remembrance it was a fitting tribute. He did not go on about all the people he met whilst walking around the leafy suburbs of Hampstead Heath who managed to speak Ed Miliband-ese.

The PM did not revert to the Tory comfort zone either. He was visibly moved to tears when mentioned the anger he feels when being accused of not caring about the NHS. He also said he would banish exclusive zero hour contracts and modern day slavery.

The PM obviously got into his stride when talking about raising the personal allowances at the 20% and 40% bands. I would have wished he'd raised the level at which National Insurance starts being paid, rather than the personal allowance. This would really help the lower paid being taken out of income taxes altogether. Its about time NI was rolled into income tax completely by the way!

He was good on Europe, but I want him to kill off a line of attack by saying that he would be prepared to recommend leaving if he cannot get what he wants. Maybe he can't make himself a hostage to fortune as then he'd need to outline his exact dividing lines.

He laid into the hypocracy of Labour's education policies, though it hasn't changed them in 40 years - it's not about to start doing so now. I wish he'd really go for them on the brass neck they have about English Votes for English Laws.

It was a great speech, whether it translates into a change in the polls is difficult to say. But it should. Anyone with an iota of common sense can see that there can only be one realistic candidate for PM after the next election. Ed Miliband is a walking disaster, and he'd turn this country into one.

Squiffy.

Ed Miliband Conference Speech: Verdict

What a long, turgid, affair. Oh dear me. By far his worst conference speech.

It was long on anecdotes with Gareth, Elizabeth and all, but it didn't add up to much. For policies, we had some extra money for the NHS, voting for 16 and 17 year olds, a mansion tax and extra taxes on tobacco companies.

You can tell when Labour are operating the core vote strategy, they focus on the NHS. I remember a tweet from Dan Hodges, commentator, and son of Glenda Jackson MP, who said when they start banging on about NHS you know that they know they'll lose. I'm not so sure but I'm not plugged into the party like Dan was. They'll reverse the NHS changes made by the coalition. Does that ring a bell? Yes, when Labour came into power in 1997 they reversed the previous Tory hospital organisation and then 5 years later started to bring it back. Will they ever learn?

The mansion 4 bedroom semi tax has been spent twice now, to bring the deficit down and fund the NHS. A new tax. There's also a new tax on tobacco companies, as if they don't pay a lot anyway with duties. There will no doubt be more bank taxes too.

Whatever the problem, the answer is always the same. A new or increased tax to provide increased Government spending. If not, use borrowing for increased spending.

What was striking was that there was no mention of the deficit. We now know that he meant to mention it, but forgot. It's so easy to forget the most pressing issue affecting the country today. Immigrations was forgotten too. Another doorstep high priority.

Talking of a current issue which Labour has no answer to, the impact of devolution and English votes for English laws, Mr Miliband said David Cameron was trying to divide the nation.

Since the referendum I have felt more and more incensed by repeated claims that we shouldn't rush the answer, and have some constitutional convention. Who rushed into lots of devolution as soon as they were elected last time? Labour. They created this monster of an issue and did not bother to seek out answers to the unbalanced state they created in 13 years of power. It's because it suited them to brush it under the carpet. It's extremely rich for them now to accuse the Tories of trying to solve this problem to their advantage!

Anyway, back to the speech. Oh must I? If this man is Prime Minister next May I may have to go on Prozac. He's the least impressive leader since Iain Duncan-Smith.

Squiffy.


By the way, funny that Rachel Reeves, shadow pension secretary didn't know what the standard state pension was - she thought it was just below £100. I fact it's £113. You'd think she'd know. Yesterday she seemed to not quite know the difference between capital and current spending. This lady is supposed to be in the next group to be leader. Give me strength.

Indyref: The time is nearly upon us

We don't have many referendums in the UK but usually they are for big questions. The referendum today is the biggest I've experienced.

I'm still convinced that it will be a No vote, but maybe closer than my prediction of 60/40, maybe even 55/45. We shall soon see.

The mammoth TV coverage will soon start, and I'm a sucker for it!

Bring it on Mr Dimbleby Edwards.

Squiffy.

Scottish Independence: One week to go.

We're into the last few days of the Scottish Independence referendum and I thought I'd write some of my thoughts down.

Firstly, about the question. I heard some people asking why 'Devo-Max' is not on the ballot paper. Imagine a not too unlikely scenario where Independence gets 45%, 'Devo-Max' gets 40% and no change gets 15%. What should happen then? It would be wrong to go to Independence as it would not have a majority (on something so crucial). 'Devo-Max' would have come second so it would be weird for it to be enacted, and so the most likely thing to happen would be no change, when it came third! That's why it had to be a straightforward yes/no question.

I personally don't want Scotland to leave the Union, I have many Scottish friends who would then be foreigners. It's difficult to imagine the end of Britain as we know it. I do believe that we are better together.

Looking at the arguments, it appears that the Yes camp have been a bit disingenuous with some of the figures regarding oil revenues, NHS spending etc. and tax figures. The No camp has been more negative, which I suppose was always likely given the nature of the question and risks involved. The better arguments for Yes are through self-determination which appeals to the heart.

The No camp has focused on the question of the currency, which is important - especially as the Yes campaign has stated they intend to use the Pound in a currency union with residual UK (rUK). The UK party leaders have said they won't allow it, but the SNP keep pushing that it will happen anyway. This is especially disingenuous as the rUK would not enter a currency union with a foreign nation, as we have shied away from joining the Euro area. The SNP should have had the nerve to go with a new currency as a backup option.

The implications on the military are immense and not thought through well enough.

Alec Salmond has also repeatedly talked about policies implemented by London by the Tories such as the 'Bedroom Tax' as reasons for independence but that is very short term. Some people think that Scotland would be a socialist haven if independence occurred, but I can see that Scottish politics would eventually move rightwards, as socialist policies increasingly failed and taxing and spending went out of fashion. For the rest of the UK, we may have more Tory Governments initially but the present equilibrium would eventually reassert itself.

Do I think there will be a Yes vote? No, I think the fear of the unknown is a major driver, also I believe that there are quite a lot of people who say they'll vote Yes but will actually vote No - due to the perceived disloyalty of voting 'against Scotland'.

That does not mean that the status quo will remain. If we do get 'Devo-Max' as promised by the UK party leaders there will have to be wider constitutional change for England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Wales will certainly demand more powers, and how can England continue to be Governed by Scots and Welsh MPs in such circumstances? There's no way it could continue without the so-called West Lothian question being answered. There would have to be an English Parliament over English only issues.

The days of the existing Union is over, we need to fully think out the future of a more federal UK and this must be put to the people. It cannot be knocked up by the party leaders in a hasty fashion to scare off the Yes voters!

RIP GB 1707-2014.

Squiffy.

Rosberg vs Hamilton: It's war

It's been brewing for a while, but the race at Spa was the end of the cold war. We're now at Defcon 4 in the Formula 1 season.

The incidents that have brought us here are: Hamilton defending aggressively at Bahrain and using the extra-special powerful setting, Rosberg using the extra-special powerful setting in Spain, Rosberg having his 'off' at Monaco ruining Hamilton's lap and finally Hamilton refusing team-orders at Hungary.

You could say it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. Indeed, my own interpretation was that it was all pretty fair and evened up - although the Monaco incident did look suspect but I gave Rosberg the benefit of the doubt.

The race at Spa looked like it was going to be a great ding-dong battle until Rosberg clipped Hamilton's rear left tyre on lap two going into Les Combes. It was a clumsy attempt at a pass by Rosberg but looked like a cack-handed misjudgement.

That was until Lewis Hamilton appeared after the debrief in front of the press, reportedly nearly tearful, and said that Rosberg had done it on 'purpose' to 'make a point'. Maybe fanciful, and Toto Wolff denied that it had been on purpose, but agreed that Rosberg had said he'd wanted to 'make a point'. To me this infers that Rosberg had not deliberately decided to crash into Hamilton at the beginning of the race, but would - if the moment arose - not back out of possible contact in wheel to wheel combat.

Looking at the video footage Rosberg decides he's not going to be able to pass Hamilton and turn's left to avoid contact - and then changes his mind and turns right again leaving Hamilton to drive into him while following the racing line. Given that Hamilton was well ahead and could not have seen exactly where Rosberg was at that time, he had no option and Rosberg cannot complain about not being given enough room.

Rosberg chose to collide with Hamilton in that split moment. He had the lead in the championship, so if both went out so be it. He made his point. Hamilton said that he did not know how to race Rosberg any more, now that Rosberg has shown an unpredictability, nearly worthy of Pastor Maldonado!

Where to go from here? Niki Lauda squarely blamed Rosberg and Toto Wolff was incandescent with rage. They said there would be consequences but it's difficult to see what. We don't know the mind of Paddy Lowe, but obviously he's been with Lewis Hamilton ever since McLaren so knows him well.

If they make some changes to team orders, it will probably favour Rosberg even if that is not the intention. In which case Rosberggets what he wants. They could fire Rosberg but that's inconceivable. They can't dock points from him, as that is up to the FIA.

I think the only way to punish Rosberg, lay down the law, and make sure this does not happen in the future is to bench Rosberg. Bring in Antony Davidson or Heikki Kovalainen for one race, someone who will still get points for Mercedes but leave Rosberg on the sidelines as he watches his 29 point lead get reduced.

It would obviously enrage Rosberg but would be payback and let him know that the team calls the shots.

Do I think they'll do it. No. I expect there will be some changes to team orders and I think F1 will be the poorer. Unfortunately.

Squiffy.

No return to tax and spend for Labour: Pull the other one

Today there was a Labour conference in Milton Keynes for their policy forum. Ed Miliband has announced that the next Labour Government would not return to 'Tax and Spend'.

I have a feeling of deja vu about this. Wasn't this the same mantra from New Labour in 1997? I remember National Insurance tax rises, fuel duty and alcohol escalators and and this was before the crash in 2008. In that time spending went from £352Bn to £527Bn - yes more tax and spend. And where taxes didn't go up, borowing took over. In 2007 after 10 years of growth, Labour were borrowing £30Bn (it has since been revised up by the treasury to £70Bn structural deficit).

So, it's pretty hard to believe Ed Miliband. It might be that it really is his intention, especially in straightened times - but after a while - when some policies fail to live up to expectations the inbuilt Labour DNA takes over and the spending tap is turned on again.

It's why the welfare system got so out of kilter. Initially Tony Blair asked Frand Field to think the unthinkable, and when Mr Field came back with radical proposals to tackle real welfare dependency he was sacked. The Government then spent lots of money on benefits, vastly widening the base for people taking the state's shilling. The Government reverted to type. As always.

Mr Miliband again re-iterated that they would run a surplus on current spending - with the caveat that they would continue to borrow to 'invest'. Hello, we've been here before. Again, the last Government. Gordon Brown just kept redefining what was investment, and changing the definition of the economic cycles to fulfil his own golden rules. Basically, there is so much wriggle room that the promise is not worth the airtime devoted to it.

Take the largest pinch of salt when considering these promises, or at least cross your fingers when putting your tick in their box.

Squiffy.

Reshuffle: Clarke/Gove

The reshuffle happened yesterday. It was quite big, bigger than recent reshuffles. Here's some thoughts.

Ken Clarke leaving is a conflict for me. He's knocking on a bit, at odds with me on Europe, but is a big beast, affable and is able to get on with most voters. I like him, he was a great Chancellor and really talks human. If he'd been Eurosceptic, he'd have been leader in 1997, or 2001 . It's possible he would have been Prime Minister in 2005, but his undying love for the EU is his undoing. But at least he stuck to his guns and will go down fighting. I admire him for that. And I saw him on the tube twice, very unassuming!

Michael Gove moving on is a great shame. I honestly don't care whether the teachers don't like him. His reforms have been the most significant aspect of this Government. The education of this country has needed the shake up that Michael Gove has brought. Since the abolition of the grammar schools, this country's education system has been an excuse for mediocrity in which you really have to shine to get on. I've seen my schoolmates, who had no encouragement, languish. There's no aspiration. Gove's mission was to change the whole direction of schooling, and he's done more than anyone else that than anyone else. In years to come, we will realise that he was the most inspiration Education Secretary since the war. I'd keep him in post for 10 years!

William Hague leaving is not much of a surprise, he as no ambition to lead the party or the country. He's been there done that. Unlike Iain Duncan-Smith who's also led the party, he doesn't have any great mission and so was there to provide a common touch and gravitas to the Government. He's done a reasonable job as Foreign Secretary, but it's the kind of job which will never let his natural talents shine. He would have been a great Home Secretary, not that Theresa May hasn't!

On other points, I don't mind Philip Hammond being Foreign Secretary - he's Eurosceptic and will not drop the ball - so that's fine. I'd liked to have seen Liz Truss as Education Secretary, Nicky Morgan as Defra Secretary, Anna Soubry as Defence Secretary as improvements on their new jobs. I'm glad the other guys are still in place, but Teresa Villiers could have done with the boot. I'd have liked to see Liam Fox taking her place.

And the new Welsh Secretary is a bit dishy - where did he come from?!

Anyway, not bad but could have been slightly better.

Squiffy.

Passport received

This is just a post as a testament (or otherwise) to the reported delays to the passport renewal process. My last post on 14 June said that I had sent my renewal passport application two days before and had received a text saying it was being processed that day.

Two days ago I received a text to say the new passport was being printed and would be sent shortly. Today it arrived. If we look at the number of days, it is 18 days in total, or 20 including the days between sending the application and receiving the initial text.

So, slightly less than 21 days or three weeks. In my mind that is great response from a Government bureaucracy, and from one supposedly in deep chaos - a marvel!

 Crisis? What crisis?

Squiffy.

Passport to chaos

There have been conflicting stories about the passport office. In the media this week we had many reported problems about delays. The Government has stated that they are taking action due to an unusually high demand.

I added to the demand this week. I sent the renewal application to the passport office on Monday, received a text to say they had received it on Wednesday and that it should take three weeks to process. Hopefully, as I have a foreign holiday booked in September!

Let's watch this space to see whether the media or Government are correct in their statements.

Squiffy.

David Cameron is wrong about the AfD

The Prime Minister has been trying to get the Conservatives group within the European Parliament to not admit the new German party, Alternative für Deutschland. Unfortunately, it's hypocritical to do this.

David Cameron on being elected as leader took the Conservatives out of its traditional centre-right home of the European People's Party, because the EPP was overwhelmingly federalist. When he did this, he angered Angela Merkel, but he was correct to set-up a new group of centre-right anti-federalists, the European Conservatives and Reformists.

He now cannot try to put pressure on the members of the ECR group to not admit the AfD because it would anger Angela Merkel and support a rival to the traditional sister party of CDU/CSU! Although the AfD is not completely centre-right, on the European issues they line up most closely with the Tories - so it makes sense to have them in the group.

Also, it looks like the Prime Minister has mishandled the proposal of Jean-Claude Juncker for head of the European Commission. By being so vocal he's managed to box Angela Merkel in support of Juncker. I'm afraid we're now going to get the arch-federalist and not learnt the lessons of the European elections. Mr Cameron was right to try, but he should have done so in private.

Squiffy.

Ed Miliband: Meet me in Venezuela

Today's announcement that a future Labour Government would introduce rent controls for private landlords by limiting rent increases is another reminder that Ed Miliband would be a dangerous man to be elected as Prime Minister. They say you could put 10 economists in room and get 15 opinions. 95% of economists think rent controls are a disaster, leading to worse housing stock and fewer rental properties.

On top of energy price freezes and bans on zero hour contracts we are beginning to see the patterns of a very interventionist Government putting its fingers into all sorts of pies. It all sounds a bit tame at the moment, but where does it end? Into how many further businesses and areas would the command economy mechanisms intrude? The 'Cost of living crisis', created by the Labour recession, is a great cover for old fashioned socialism.

It must be stopped. This is where we were in the 70's. It's where Venezuela is now, starting with control of oil it now has controlled shops with rationed buying and shortages of toilet paper.

We learnt via Mrs Thatcher that the 70's command economy could not be successful. Let us not fall into it again.

Squiffy.