David Miliband; The Next Prime Minister?

Was David Miliband's recent newspaper article, and subsequent radio appearance a test of support for a potential leadership challenge to Gordon Brown? I fail to see what else it could possibly have been.

Apparently, the reason for writing was down to the sense of fatalism in the labour party. Following the article he has consistently used words such as can, could, when answering if he backs Gordon Brown, and if he thinks Gordon will lead labour into the next General Election. In addition to this he never really backed Gordon in his radio appearance.

Time will tell what the long term plan is for the current Foreign Secretary, but I can see it being turbulent for Prime Minister.

David Davis; A Principled Stand

David Davis has made a stand for what he believes in. After all the criticism that politicians have come under for not believing in anything, for being selfish, and self-serving this is a breath of fresh air. His is putting his career in jeopardy, and is playing a very noble, but personally risky game by triggering a by-election.

However, it is not being portrayed this way in the media. Whilst we all know that the BBC institutionally leans towards Labour, I would have expected a different response from The Daily Mail and also The Sun. However, it seems they have once again gone back to the Headline Grabbing articles/titles that do not accurately reflect events and views.

Yes this is an unheard of occurrence, yet so is the abolition, or step towards the abolition of habeas corpus. This country has fought for the freedom of the British people for centuries, and this Labour government has bought the votes to sacrifice this for political measures.

"the most salient example of the insidious, surreptitious and relentless erosion of fundamental British freedoms."

David Davis on the 42 day detention limit

David's full resignation speech (which he was not allowed to present in the House of Commons) can be seen below.

Guilty before charge; The 42 day detention limit

And so it has been decided. At least for now that is. With a majority of just 9, Gordon Brown has managed to avoid another humiliating defeat. 315 to 306 voted in favour of the plans to raise the detention without charge limit from 28 days to 42 days.

The surprise in this tale is that the DUP voted for the plans. Their nine votes swung vote in Brown's favour, and there is now talk about how Gordon managed to "persuade" them. He of course denies all claims by the opposition (both Lib Dems and Tories) that they were bribed with cash for Northern Ireland.

I haven't yet talked about the bill itself, and what it does to this country. We have always been a very principled country, and I believe very strongly in 'innocent before proven guilty'. What this bill amounts to is 'guilty until we can decide what crime you have committed'. The 28 day limit is, in my opinion too long, but I will concede that terrorists do pose a new, and very different threat than mere 'normal' criminals, and have such a hard-line attitude themselves that it is necessary to take a rougher stance when dealing with them.

However, if you have enough evidence to detain them in the first place, then why not charge them? If you don't have the evidence then they should not be held.

This bill is a step in the wrong direction, and just another Big Brother infringement on our society and a severe breach of our civil liberties.

Mr Speaker; Mr Spender

John Lyon, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards has dismissed the complaint about taxi journeys claimed on expenses by Commons Speaker Michael Martin. Apparently the £4,139.17 claimed was "reasonable" and within the rules. The cost was not "excessive" and the trips were taken to aid her husband.

"It's shocking that they are able to use taxpayers' money for taxis to do their domestic grocery shopping"

Mark Wallace
TaxPayers Alliance

These taxi journeys included trips to the supermarket where the taxi was kept on a wait and return basis as "they were not easy to hail". There were more trips to smaller stores to purchase further provisions and perishables.

There are several things that rile me about this...
a) No "average" person would ever spend over £1000 per year on taxi fares
b) It was the Speaker's wife using the taxi, and not the speaker himself
c) The taxpayer is paying for these domestic trips
and finally, and perhaps the most bizarrely
d) This is apparently acceptable, and not breaking the rules

There needs to be a serious overhaul of the parliamentary expense system. In my opinion the expense system should be scrapped completely. In its place MPs salaries should be increased. However, from their increased salary they should pay all their expenses, including any staff members they may wish to employ. Be in in their home constituency, or in London. Be it a family member, or total stranger. If they want to spend it on taxi journeys then they can, or they can spend it on renovating their second home.

All these things can be offset against income tax as a business expense in the same way that every other businessman, or self-employed person would do. This way we can be sure that there will be no miss-use of expenses.

I appreciate this wouldn't be easy to implement. There are lots of things that would need to be fine tuned. Such as the amount paid. Cabinet members (and Shadow Cabinet members) would need to be paid more. It would also be most likely that the distance each MPs constituency is from London should have a factor on how much they should receive. The total balance given would need to be thought through very carefully too, as obviously some MPs claim large expenses, and others not much, so a balance would need to be achieved. Some MPs would lose out from this, whilst others would gain.

My point though is this. The taxpayers would gain and transparency would be achieved.

Gordon Brown; Asset or Not?

It is fairly obvious from the video below that Labour in Crewe and Nantwich are desperately seeking to distance themselves from Gordon Brown - despite the temporary fix for the 10p debacle.

As for the compensation-con as George Osborne put it, it is only for this year. That means come April 1st 2009 we will be back in exactly the same position as we have been this year. How is putting it off for one year and one year only helping the poor. It is once again a case of Labour putting forward a short-term fix for a long-term problem. I just hope the electorate see past this conniving government and show their disdain in the bye-election next week..

PMQs; Is Brown Losing it?

I don't know whether I look forward to Prime Minister's Questions on a Wednesday afternoon or not. I can't help but cringe at the dreadful performances that Gordon Brown consistently puts in. He fails to answer questions, he dithers, and he generally seems to have no idea about what is going on.

I have a clip of PMQs from May 7th below. Whilst not the full 'show' it has many moments of Brown fighting not to be ground to a bloody pulp.

"The Prime Minister talks about salesmanship, we all know his brilliant salesmanship, this is the man that sold gold at the bottom of the market. That's the problem with the Prime Minister. He has nothing to sell and he's useless at selling it"

David Cameron, PMQs 7th May 2008

Boris; The new Mayor of London

Congratulations to Boris Johnson for successfully overcoming the incumbent Ken Livingstone by 139,772 votes. Boris polled 53% (1,168,738 votes) to Ken’s 47% (1,028,966) of 1^st and 2^nd preference votes.

Boris has been likened to Marmite. You either love him, or hate him. You either see him as a highly intelligent, capable man; or you see him as a bumbling buffoon who makes more gaffes than Gordon Brown. I personally believe him to be the former, and as such admire him greatly. People have always made grand comments such as “Boris for PM”, and “I would vote for the Conservatives if Boris was leading them”. This is now so much closer to being a reality than ever before.

How has this come about then? Boris has been known for years mainly because of appearance on Have I Got News For You (HIGNFY), as well as for the repercussions of many statements made in his articles. Liverpool and piccaninnies ring a bell? But I believe it is his ambition that has driven him on. He gave up his position as editor of The Spectator to take his place on the Shadow Cabinet. This shows the direction he wanted to take his career.

He set about the task of running for Mayor with a seriousness that took a lot of people by surprise; implementing policy idea after policy idea. Now that he is in office he needs to establish himself and consolidate himself in the minds of Londoners as a serious heavyweight in both Local, National and International politics. I have no doubt that he will do this with the animated enthusiasm that he always shows.