Nick Clegg attacked as a hypocrite

Making a difference to social mobility

I can't understand why people should get so agitated about the government's desire to improve social mobility. Maybe it's because they think only they should do it. Labour in particular think the apparatus of the state belongs to them. Their client vote is mainly the bulk of Unison. I saw Jack Dromey on Labour's front bench the other day. Now here's a guy who got a leg up in society with the help of his posh wife. Posh Harriet Harperson, niece of of an earl and a daughter of a posh doctor. When Dromey was picketing in the seventies he must have realised he needed a bit more than a bovver boy's hairdo to succeed in life.

Nick Clegg has been called names just because he had a so-called privileged background. He may have had, but his mother endured a Japanese concentration camp. Do these critics have any clue? And isn't it better helping people than sitting on the sidelines doing nothing? The Good Samaritan was able to help out because he had money and the ability to help. No good asking another helpless soul for help.

I'd say Nick Clegg was in the very best situation to help the less advantaged. Those saying that they never would have voted Liberal Democrat had they known that Clegg & Co would be in government must think voting is completely devoid from the stuff of elections. It's a bit like Little Britain with people saying "I'm the only Liberal Democrat in the village". Did they think voting Liberal Democrat meant hoping they would lose?

Those carping now would, I believe carp if any party had got in. They just carp for the sake of it. Chief amongst them is Ed Balls. He must see details of the deficit and think he's looking at a list of lottery winners from the way he talks.

Nick Clegg has gone from campaign cheerleader to Downing Street deputy. Maybe there's a whiff of jealousy in the attacks?

Wolverhampton mayor arrested after cannabis raid

The Pick of the Cop!

There was a time when the police would accept the word of someone like the mayor of a town. But we live in very changed times. A gentleman may not seem all that he appears. A policeman may not appear all that he seems. We've lived through MPs having their parliamentary offices raided, MPs in court and subsequently sent to prison. We've had CEOs of large companies telling porkies. We've witnessed football managers outdoing each other on the expletives. Is it any wonder the police are not prepared to accept the word of a gentleman?

The mayor of Wolverhampton, a Liberal Democrat, has been arrested after cannabis plants were found by police at an industrial unit. He says it's nothing to do with him. Malcolm Gwinnett was detained by Staffordshire Police on Saturday on suspicion of growing cannabis after the raid in Wombourne. He said he had been "temporarily" arrested and strongly denied any wrongdoing. He has been bailed by police. Mr. Gwinnett said the plants were found in an annexe near a unit he rents out.

So he told the police that the plants were not in his unit, they are nothing to do with him and that he does not smoke. He also says the police found it funny. Found what funny? It seems arrests are made in some cases not because the police necessarily have correct evidence, but because they just don't believe the answers given. Could it be that they thought all LibDems smoke pot so why not just arrest him anyway? Or are they now so suspicious of politicians that a firm NO is mistaken for a maybe or a might be?

I do hope that the arrest procedure is not now just a simple technique in trying to prove prejudices correct.

LibDem MP's wife in kittyknapping court case

The Daily Mirror has the headline "Lib Dem MP Christine Hemming accused of stealing a kitten from mother of husband's daughter" except, of course, she is not the MP, it is her husband John Hemming, up the road from me in Yardley. Christine Hemming is the sort of wronged wife of which TV movies are made. When magistrates asked her if she wanted to be called Mrs or Miss, she said: "I'm not quite sure at the moment." Mr Hemming still lives with his wife in Moseley, Birmingham, but yesterday described his domestic status as "unclear". He went on to say, "I'd just like the cat back. I've spent time looking for the kitten. Her brother, Twinkle, is pining for her." When Christine found out about the relationship bewtween her husband and the kitten's owner in 2005, she stood by her millionaire husband and said that the six-year affair was "about number 26". Christine, you sound like a media man's dream. Roll on the crown court case. High on drama, high on legal costs. That's the LibDem contribution to credit crisis management.

Labour goes into a bitter sulk!

The Liberal Democrats are better off without Labour. I once went to a Labour conference. It was like walking into some time zone. Admittedly it was in the comrades days and everyone looked like they'd forgotten their cloth caps (a sort of dress down Friday) and were trying desperately to be ever so fraternal. A lot of smoking, too, I remember. Now, the Mandy and Campbell duo might have changed Labour into some new kind of spivs lottery business, but the same old mean, grudging, sometimes spiteful opinions of others remains.

After the second world war ended and Labour was propelled into office, my grandmother was confronted by her housemaid with a brutal "Now it's our turn!". Talk of opinion worms on electronic polls. This worm turned with a vengeance rather like the Icelandic volcano. Not entirely unexpected but a shock nevertheless when it happens. When Labour got into office, Nye Bevan led the charge. He called Tories vermin. They don't change much if they stay Labour. Shirley Williams seemed to blossom in the SDP. As Labour, she always appeared world-weary, and she was a heck of a lot younger in those days.

Bringing it up to date we have Dr.Kim Howells speaking as a true Labourite. He says of the failed Progressive Coalition - "I tell you why it's been rejected by most Labour MPs - because they know that they're a bunch of opportunistic toerags, who'll say anything to anyone in order to get power. And they've done it this time, they've got power." No love lost there. The LibDems can wave such commentary aside. It just shows Howells up to be the bitter man he often is. And if he hasn't ever been an opportunist politician, well I'm a ........................

Clegg under pressure - sort of!

Nick Clegg is obviously being got at by those in the press who are not LibDem fans. The Daily Telegraph is reporting that he is "under pressure" over expense funding. That pressure is happening because the Telegraph has just adjusted the thermostat. I do love the terminology that the media uses. Yesterday the BBC said Clegg "attacked" Gordon Brown. When I saw it the scene looked like a toothless terrier that was just barking serenely. I'll tell you what a verbal attack is. George Osborne rounding on Alistair Darling. Now that was rather personal.

If we are going to have politicians attacking people, let it be like John Prescott trying to lay a punch on the public or Quintin Hogg lashing out with an umbrella. That's attacking stuff.

The media misuse words in much the same way as they allege misuse of public funds by MPs. This morning, Nick Robinson the political editor of the BBC (who seems to end his carefully scripted reports in rather the same manner as an episode of The Archers) reported that a voter who had thought of voting BNP had now switched to the LibDems on the strength of Clegg's performance last week.

Nick Clegg has got as far as he has on suggesting a plague on both your houses. The BNP suggests a plague on all three. If the Daily Telegraph pumps this up too much all that will happen is that those that are wavering will flow towards those with a strong and vulgar message. That former BNP voter could become a bit firmer by returning. Also, the Tories are not clean on the expenses issue, highlighted of course in the Telegraph exposure (on a relentless basis). The scandal still excites as witnessed by STV's Scottish leaders' debate when a couple of audience members amplified their disgust.

What is that saying? Oh yes, "Be careful what you wish for!".

Democracy in England - LibDems £2.4M Donation!

Here's a quango at work in the political arena. The Electoral Commission in fact. In a toss of coins they come down in favour of the Liberal Democrats retaining a dodgy loan of £2.4 million and get quite exercised over a UKIP donation of £363,697. The LibDems keep their cash because they could not be held to have realised that the money came from a convicted fraudster. UKIP on the other hand failed to realise that their donor was not on the electoral register at the time of the donation. Even though a district judge ruled that UKIP should only repay £14,481 after ruling the breach had been accidental, the Commission appealed to the High Court and won.

If they had dug a bit deeper with the LibDems one wonders what they might have found out. In any event it hardly seems evenhanded.

Nick Clegg plays Robin Hood today

Some say the party conference season is just like a series of pantomimes. Well, if that is so, the Liberal Democrats are putting on Robin Hood with Nick Clegg in the starring role as Robin of Locksley himself. Vince Cable, as Friar Tuck, is the Treasury spokesman of the LibDems. He is all for a 0.5% annual levy on the most expensive homes in Britain, raising £1 billion in extra tax. This would apply to the extra value over the £1 million mark. Are there that many million-pound mansions in the country? The Lib Dems say about 250,000 property-owners would pay about £4,000 a year each on average mostly in the South-East of England. The tax would be based on Land Registry valuations. That includes quite a few properties worth considerably more that £1 million.

Nick Clegg says, "I think people, even at the top end, now accept we need to try and rebalance things a bit so that everyone moves together - the whole of society moves together. This is a small correction which I think will make a big difference for people who are really struggling to make ends meet." I am all for helping people out but "rebalancing a bit" is surely not going to help matters much in the struggle to pay back our National Debt.

He says the reason for the new tax was "fairness" and rebalancing "one of the most unfair tax systems around". Granted, but we need a powerful hedgecutter to trim things back, not a puny pair of secateurs!

VAT will have to go up. Bank bonuses will have to be curtailed. Corporation tax will have to go up. Public spending will have to be seriously reduced. It will hurt, but this is the time to take off the rose-tinted specs and get a pair of glasses that gives us 20/20 vision!

New Labour's political soufflé collapses in the middle

New Labour was always a fictitious philosophy. It pandered to short-term thinking and quick fix politics. As I've been musing, what is New Labour for, exactly? It isn't for socialism, it isn't for the "class struggle", it isn't for radical change. There are still republicans, socialists and secularists in parts of the party, but it is mainly made up of silver-tongued managerial types keen to spread money around (even in a recession) without too many questions being asked or answers being sought.

New Labour was Tony Blair's concept in the main, along with Mandelson and a few others, who saw great merit in a frothy electoral programme aimed mainly at seducing the British public. It was almost devoid of principle and utterly lacking in sound policy, but what the hell, in 1997 the country was craving change and this grinning, smooth talking politician was just in the right place at the right time.

It comes as no surprise that several Labour MPs are thinking of defecting to the Liberal Democrats. This party is being ably led by Nick Clegg and has some very good front bench spokesmen. Vince Cable is an excellent opponent of the government's lacklustre financial management. I am not a natural supporter of the LibDems, but I think they show a far better respect for social policies and are generally far more "robust" on the financial front.

Gordon Brown must have some problem with them. He has never referred to them as the Liberal Democrats, preferring to say "THE LUBBER-RULL PARTY", as if being dismissive. Now they are appearing to be an effective party and it is no surprise to hear that many Labour MPs are thinking they may well be better off under the leadership of someone who does put principle before party.

My own preferred political solution would be for the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats to be the two main parties. Perhaps it may be happening. The LibDems are made up of a sizeable chunk of former Labour Party people as it is (Shirley Williams, etc), so it may take one or two more mass defections for this to come about.

It is certain that nobody is rushing to order the Gordon Brown soufflé, as it has gone horribly soggy in the middle.

Coalition or National Government Mr.Brown?

In the Daily Mail today, Peter Oborne suggests that Gordon Brown might be considering some sort of deal regarding future governance. Perhaps a coalition with the Libdems? Get rid of the Speaker (Oborne doesn't rate him) first, then install Sir Ming Campbell, then cosy up to senior LibDems by offering plum jobs. Does it sound plausible? I don't think so.

It may be that Gordon Brown is pally with Ming, but that doesn't imply all LibDems are pally with Brown. Oborne rightly suggests that the younger brood on the LibDem benches would be appalled at a coalition with New Labour. And I can understand why. Gordon Brown may have certain qualities, but he is also prone to grumpiness and vendetta-like attitudes. His meddling in the traditional parliamentaty processes is deplorable. No wonder the Tories are furious with him.

I feel that Brown may consider that his best bet in remaining Prime Minister is to contemplate a coalition or a national government before the next election. If he thinks he will go down as a big loser, why not blame the credit crunch ("It started in America") and say that a unity government is the answer? Trouble is that the public won't buy it.

We know that New Labour is a busted flush. All spin and no substance. If it is true that Vince Cable is "on good terms" with Brown, that he is after a job, he won't last long in the scheme of LibDem politics. The only possible coalition after the next election (not before) is that of the Conservatives with the LibDems (and that is a long shot!), because both have been in opposition and the public would accept this over keeping a failed government in power.

One thing Peter Oborne says is curious. He writes, "before 1979 it was common for two minority parties to enter into alliances in order to form a government. Indeed, analysis shows that for at least a third of the past century, the country was governed by parties which had failed to win an election in their own right but had created temporary mergers with another party in order to form a ruling coalition." I'm not sure what this means. Certainly there was no coalition after 1945. Ted Heath tried in vain to bring the Liberals into government in 1974, but this was vetoed by the Liberal hierachy. The odd Irish MP has helped in tight votes, but that is not a coalition. And I don't consider wartime national governments are to be considered in the same vein as peacetime coalitions. So that leaves the period when the Liberals were going down and the Labour Party coming up in electoral terms.

The truth is that we live in a democracy that was originally created around two political philosophies. Conservatism and Liberalism. Then these splintered over the years and the result is we now have a multi-party process in a two-party system. Hence New Labour gets to govern on the votes of only 20% of the total electorate. 80% of us either voted for some other party or didn't bother to vote.

Coalitions are only good if they are supported by the system. In the UK system, our adversarial instincts are now centuries old. A coalition will not last long, even if agreement is reached. It is far better to look at changing the system first rather than to plot an outcome based on present formularies.

Watchdog warns over Lib Dems' phone poll plan

Nick Clegg is said to be facing embarrassment after the Information Commissioner expressed "concern" over plans to bombard 250,000 voters with automated phone calls featuring a recording of the Liberal Democrat leader. According to the watchdog, "The Privacy and Electronic Communication Regulations forbid the use of automated unsolicited direct marketing calls to any individual who has not previously given their consent to receive such calls."

Has anybody told those guys from the US offering holidays in Florida or some such? I get them quite frequently and I've not said yes! I bet someone tipped off the Commissioner. I wonder who it was?

LibDems no longer so passionate over Euro!

In a surprising turn of events, or turn of policy, the Lib Dems have made a significant break with their commitment to the European single currency. They no longer see it as a priority. Well, I'm blowed!

In an interview with the The Independent on Sunday, Chris Huhne said, "The truth is, within the British debate, it's completely off the radar and there is simply no point in regarding it as a runner worth investing political time in." Mr Huhne also told the IoS that Nick Clegg would not become a household name until after the next election, saying the leader needed to "go through an election to become a real figure in the front rooms of the country". But I bet he'll be talked about in the front rooms of Tory and UKIP activists!

I wonder if this is a way of getting on board soft eurosceptics? Maybe. It goes to show that the next election will be a very odd affair indeed.

Tories get legalistic in Henley

Is it a case of David Cameron huffing and puffing and trying to blow down the LibDems' house in Henley? In most by-elections where the Conservatives are defending a seat, the LibDems come up with all kinds of poetic licence. Falsehoods are par for the course. This time they have suggested two things. First that Boris Johnson, now succumbed in the penthouse suite of the Greater London Assembly as Mayor of the Metropolis, has a penchant for the LibDem policies and is keen on their candidate! Far-fetched, I'd say.

Second, they claim the Conservative candidate is less than supportive about community hospitals. The Tories are angry about claims in a Lib Dem leaflet that the Tory candidate John Howell watched the campaign to save Townlands community hospital in Henley "from the sidelines," when they say he was involved in it. That's one thing. They should have said he supported it and left it there. However threatening to sue the LibDems makes the whole issue far bigger than it ought to be.

Electorate's do not like sour grapes or bad losers. The Conservatives should have just countered the claim as is usual in a by-election. This has made the LibDems out to be the campaigners rather than the Tories.

Own goal with golden boots on, I'm afraid! They'd be far better off talking up the Real Opposition, the two young women from Beauties for Britain Party. Now Boris could have meant them!

Belated birthday wishes!

I missed this one. Probably too wrapped up with the idea of going into hospital, but the Liberal Democrats celebrated their 20th birthday last month. Next year will be tantalising for them. Could it be that a general election is called and they get the key of the door?

The Liberal Democrats are a new party. They are not the old Liberal Party (Gordon Brown keeps calling them that - the "Lubberull Party!") nor are they Social Democrats in entirety. They are, at least to me, a new breed of politician. Liberal in some sense, corporatist in a way, muddled on occasions, and socially aware at times. They have, though, done what the old Liberal Party couldn't do. Appeal to a wider audience within the electorate.

So they had a marriage made in Portsmouth, as the BBC Parliament programme showed. Still happily married, although, somewhat like Ken Livingstone, they have preferred not to talk about their tiffs and rows and their two children ,who they have kept at arms length. The continuing SDP and the continuing Liberal Party are still plying their policies and living the life of a minor party.

The Liberal Democrats gave us three-party politics. We will have to wait to see if they can cosy up to another party in the event of a hung parliament.