Archive for November, 2010

Wednesday News Review

03/11/2010, 07:55:27 AM

Clegg under the cosh

Nick Clegg will today battle to head off a revolt within the Liberal Democrats as the government announces that a cap on university tuition fees in England will be set at a maximum of £9,000 a year. Jenny Willott, MP for Cardiff Central, and parliamentary private secretary to the climate change secretary Chris Huhne, told the Guardian she would stick to her pre-election pledge to vote against any rise in tuition fees. – The Guardian

Nick Clegg faces a mass rebellion as 27 of his 57 MPs threaten to oppose university tuition fee increases. Whips believe the revolt could lead to the return of Lib Dem ex-Treasury Minister David Laws, who quit in May over an expenses scandal. – The Mirror

Buy one get one free

Ed Miliband is planning a “two for one” trip to the registry office to have his name put on the birth certificate of his newborn child – as well as for his existing son Daniel. Mr Miliband’s partner Justine Thornton, is expecting the couple’s second child – also a boy – imminently and the Labour leader intends to take the full two weeks’ paternity leave. Topping his list of priorities for the time off is to register not only the new birth but also that of 17-month-old Daniel – which he failed to get round to doing the last time. – The Independent (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

CSR analysis: cuts and confusion are the reality behind the Tories’ tough talk on defence

02/11/2010, 03:18:56 PM

by Andy Bagnall

The strategic defence and security review was cleverly timed. By publishing it the day before the comprehensive spending review, one day of bad headlines about defence cuts was quickly eclipsed by reports of the wider savagery being unleashed against our public services.

Casual observers might remember little more than the Tory-Lib Dem government’s perverse plans to build new aircraft carriers but retire the Harrier planes that fly from them, ten years before buying replacements. More interested analysts might even have been musing on the last time a Tory government decided to dispense with carrier strike capability, in 1981. (A year later, Argentina invaded the Falklands and the policy evaporated). But then we were deluged with the news of welfare cuts, arts cuts, housing cuts, any-kind-of-cut-you-can-think-of cuts. And the plane-less carriers disappeared from the horizon. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Can it be right to have a transparent public sector while private companies grow rich off people’s personal information?

02/11/2010, 12:30:17 PM

by Ian Lucas

ONE of the focuses of civil liberties campaigners in recent years has been on the growth of information held about individuals by the state.

Yet while these concerns have grown, it is remarkable how little attention has been paid to the amounts of data held on individuals by private companies. The area is slowly coming under scrutiny – and is creating a difficult area for the government to regulate.

The pitfalls and problems were laid out in a recent debate in Westminster Hall – notable for several reasons, not least the number of Tory MPs, in a government pledged to cutting red tape, calling for fresh regulation.

In some ways, the shock at recent stories – such as Google’s capturing of personal data from the roadside as its cars compiled pictures for its street view application – is not surprising. One of the side effects of civil liberties campaigns focussing on the role of the state has been, as I said during the debate, that we have paid too little attention to the increase in the collection of information by private organisations.

Some of this information is given by a direct choice – the Facebook status update, the tweet about plans for the evening – even when those using such sites may not have considered all the implications of their actions.

But what happens where information is being gathered in other ways – such as the use of cookies to monitor people’s activities online and target products at them? The passing of internet activity logs by ISPs? Or even those events, such as the street view row, where personal information is taken without consent? These are diverse issues relating to personal; privacy and the real question here for any government is – how do you enforce any system you set up?

Much was made during the debate of a system of self-regulation. I have some concerns about this. Looking at the recent data security issues involving mobile phones and the News of the World, and the response of the press complaints commission, it is clear that some self-regulatory bodies can be less than robust in dealing with complaints. While we should recognise the strengths of self-regulation, such as the possibilities it poses for international agreement, we should also be aware of the dangers a weak system poses.

And I believe there is a wider problem than simply internet regulation which also needs consideration – which is the entire manner in which information about individuals is collected and used by third party organisations.

But how do we tackle this? First, by raising the profile of the issue with the general public. A greater amount of information would help people make an informed decision about their actions. People need to know much more about the scale of the information companies keep, and why it is being kept.

Second, we – in Parliament and in the country at large – need to have a very wide discussion about our next steps. I would be interested to hear people’s views on how we proceed. But I think we must recognise that private organisations should be scrutinised in exactly the same way and to the same extent as governmental organisations.

Can it be right to have a transparent public sector while private companies grow rich off people’s personal information?

Ian Lucas is Labour MP for Wrexham and a shadow business minister.

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Ed Miliband is not Sarah Palin

02/11/2010, 09:00:21 AM

by Dan Hodges

The tea party. Not a party as such, but a movement. A reaction. Forged in response to a seismic defeat.

They look mainly inward. Purists. Believers. Compromise is dangerous. It led to electoral catastrophe. Their politics is confident. Aggressive. Its practitioners alert to betrayal.

They eschew centralisation. They are well organised, yes. But their structures are pluralistic. They believe in grassroots ownership. Distributed leadership.

This creates problems. Indiscipline. Extremists have infiltrated the organisation. Mainstream politicians who do not fully embrace their ideology have been challenged. Members of the same party have, for reasons of personal expediency, turned on their own. The old political hierarchies are unwilling, or unable, to intervene.

They do not have opponents, but enemies, who must be destroyed. Their enemy is not just pursuing a different political agenda. He is laying waste to the country they love. They must rally others to its defence. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Tuesday News Review

02/11/2010, 08:22:28 AM

Ed blasts Cam

David Cameron today joined the long line of British prime ministers who go to European summits and return, like Roman generals, to declare a historic triumph. It’s just that there is always a suspicious absence of gold, bejewelled elephants, or slaves to crucify along the roadside. In fact we’ve only got his word for it. Mr Cameron adopted a more aggressive tone than his predecessors. The demand for a 6% rise in EU spending was “frankly outrageous” he said, before claiming that thanks to his negotiating skills and crafty alliances, he had made sure the increase was limited to 2.9% or even stalled for a year. This was, Ed Miliband said in one of his rare references to his Jewish roots, “chutzpah” – of a kind his grandmother would have admired. The Labour leader, after some flabby performances, was on sparkly form. The prime minister, he said, was stuck between his old friends and his new friends on the frontbenches. “I want to say to him, very sincerely, we are here to help.” He said this rather in the manner of Michael Howard’s old TV catchphrase: “I’m not going to hurt you.” It sends a shudder down the backbone, like trick or treating children when you’ve just given away the last funsize Snickers. – The Guardian

Ed Miliband tore into David Cameron yesterday over the Prime Minister’s humiliating U-turn on the EU budget. The PM had promised to fight for a freeze but ended up agreeing a 2.9% rise that will cost £430million. Mr Miliband said: “You wished you could say no, no, no, but it’s a bit more like no, oh go on, have your 2.9%.”Mr Cameron claimed he had succeeded in getting a dozen countries to oppose a 6% rise, but ducked a call to guarantee that the bigger increase would not happen. The Tory leader was even heckled by members of his own party. Father of the House Sir Peter Tapsell said: “Is it possible for you to give your country the referendum which was promised?” – The Mirror

Labour poll lead

Labour has moved ahead of the Conservatives after the public spending cuts announced last month, according to a ComRes poll for The Independent. It is the first time that ComRes has shown Labour in the lead since September 2007, when Gordon Brown was on the brink of calling a general election months after succeeding Tony Blair as Prime Minister. The new survey puts Labour on 37 per cent, up three points since a ComRes survey for The Independent on Sunday two weeks ago, just before the Chancellor, George Osborne, unveiled his spending review. The Tories have dropped five points to 35 per cent, while the Liberal Democrats are on 16 per cent (up two points) and other parties on 12 per cent (no change). The figures suggest that the deep spending cuts confirmed by the Chancellor are harming the Tories directly. Until now, the prospect of cuts appears to have hurt their Lib Dem partners, whose poll ratings have slumped from the 23 per cent share of the vote they won at the May election. In contrast, the Tories retained their lead over Labour – until now. – The Independent (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

The swaggering arrogance that is storing up pain for the Tories

01/11/2010, 05:30:00 PM

As George Osborne sat down to the sound of rapturous applause and shaking order papers, he had achieved what few had thought possible. He had fronted up to the biggest political challenge facing a chancellor in years and ended not just still standing, but firmly on the front foot.

After a hoarse hour spelling out the detail on the investment and the reasoning behind the savings, Osborne climaxed his comprehensive spending review with the sort of political sleight of hand that must have had the absent Gordon Brown nodding in grudging approval. After all the cuts, all the efficiencies, the elimination of Labour waste, the fledgling government, thanks to turning around the economy, had actually cut less than Darling had planned. Your move Mr Johnson.

"We're all in this together"

Except, of course, that he hadn’t. Osborne’s move was calculated to win a short term tactical battle. The treasury team would never have attempted such a move against a Brown or a Darling. They took the gamble to instantly put Labour’s new shadow chancellor under pressure. The braying 30 and 40 somethings in the cheap seats loved it. Of course they did. The backbenchers were raucous but whilst this was a tactical triumph it was a strategic disaster. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Former prime ministers don’t usually say much in the Commons

01/11/2010, 02:48:19 PM

Those getting in a lather about Gordon Brown’s speaking record are ignoring tradition. The lore of the land. The former PM is behaving quite normally.

Winston Churchill spoke twice after stepping down as PM. The first time was four and a half years after leaving Downing Street, on 25th Nov 1959. Both interventions were to acknowledge birthday wishes.

Both Harold Macmillan and Mrs Thatcher spoke just four times after resigning as PM. Mrs Thatcher first spoke three months after her resignation.

After stepping down as leader of the Conservative party, John Major didn’t speak again for eight months.

Yet none of the above faced the barrage of venom which is being rained down on Gordon. Go figure. And tell your friends.

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

The loony libertarians in the government are not confined to the Lib Dems

01/11/2010, 11:33:35 AM

By Michael Dugher

Today David Cameron will chair a meeting of the government’s emergency planning committee, Cobra, as calls grow for a full review of airport security, after a bomb was found this weekend on a US-bound cargo plane at East Midlands airport.  All of a sudden, what Harold Macmillan called “events, dear boy, events”, have rather inconveniently intruded upon the government’s review of counter-terrorism laws, and the ultra-libertarian muddle that lay behind it.

The cargo bomb story has understandably dominated the news since last Friday, but its impact is likely to be more enduring.  Norman Smith, the BBC Radio 4’s respected chief political correspondent, concludes that two things are now clear. First, that there will be no relaxation in existing passenger security measures – despite last week’s call from the chairman of British Airways, Martin Broughton, to scrap some “completely redundant” security checks and the attack on so-called ‘securocrats’ this morning from the CEO of Ryan Air, Michael Leary.  Second, the possibility of any easing in the government’s anti-terror legislation looks increasingly remote, “regardless of the pressure from Liberal Democrats”. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Cameron’s European spin too far

01/11/2010, 09:00:15 AM

by Denis MacShane

Having lived through years of European councils, I am not surprised that David Cameron, like his predecessors, is obsessed with the need of all EU leaders to spin their way to “victory” headlines for domestic consumption. Instead of a common news conference where EU leaders would have to declare in front of each other what they had done or decided, each national press corps meets with its national leader to be fed the line.

David Cameron is no different. He went into his own news conference after the EU council with clear objectives.

First, to underline that the European Parliament’s overblown ambition for a six per cent increase in the EU budget was trimmed back.

Second, to throw up as big a smoke-screen as possible about the need for an EU treaty change which, under Cameron’s previous pledges and rhetoric, would require a referendum. Every EU treaty alters the balance of power between national control and an enhanced role for the EU. If that were not the case, there would be no point writing new treaty language. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Monday News Review

01/11/2010, 07:14:29 AM

Tory Lib Dem clash over civil liberties

The home secretary, Theresa May, today rebuked the man she appointed as the external supervisor of the review of counter-terrorism laws amid reports that David Cameron fears it is heading for a “car crash”. May made it clear that the role of Lord Macdonald, a former director of public prosecutions and now a Liberal Democrat peer, in overseeing the internal Home Office review was restricted to ensuring that it was being done properly, saying decisions on the outcome were for ministers alone. Macdonald is believed to have written to the home secretary, warning that he would publicly denounce any decision to retain control orders for terror suspects when the review is finally published. “Ken [Lord Macdonald] will go ballistic if the government decides to keep control orders,” one source said. Macdonald’s intervention is acutely embarrassing for coalition ministers. As DPP, he was a leading critic of the campaign by police and security services to raise the period of pre-charge detention for terror suspects to 90 days. – The Guardian

Cabinet Minister’s conduct to be investigated

A cabinet minister faces a parliamentary inquiry into his links with a cocoa magnate who donated £40,000 to his political office. Andrew Mitchell, the International Development Secretary, denied any wrongdoing by intervening on behalf of Anthony Ward, a wealthy businessman nicknamed “Chocfinger” who was seeking to get a trade ban lifted. Sources close to the minister insisted that proper procedures were followed. But a Labour MP last night referred the case to the Commons standards watchdog, claiming the contacts between the two men raised serious questions about the minister’s conduct. – The Independent

Boris & Dave

Sources close to David Cameron were profoundly irritated by the Mayor’s words, which they saw as intended to cause trouble for the Prime Minister on a sensitive issue. The same sources said that any further “unhelpful interventions from Boris” over housing would spark a “rethink” over plans to put him in sole charge of the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) in London, which distributes billions of pounds every year in its role as the funding body for affordable homes. Mr Johnson asked for – and is set to be granted under a deal with the government – sole command of the HCA in the capital as part of the Coalition’s “localism” drive – which aims devolve more powers down to communities. The law is set to be changed under the Localism Bill shortly to be introduced to parliament. Currently the Mayor jointly runs the HCA in London with the organisation’s chief executive. A Coalition source said: “Any more unhelpful interventions from Boris on this issue and we will certainly look again at this agreement, at the very least.”We can’t have him going around shooting his mouth off in this way.” – The Telegraph (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon