New Conservative Poster Campaign Has the X Factor

With John and Edward voted out of the X-Factor, tonight the Conservative Party have launched a new poster campaign across London. It is rather unfair on two Irish boys who can’t really sing or dance to be compared to two clowns who have led Britain into its worst economic catastrophe since the war but that’s show business!

The Shape of Conservative Defence Policy Becomes Clearer

As we move closer to the General Election the shape of the likely Conservative Government’s defence policy is becoming clearer. Shadow Defence Secretary Liam Fox has already set out his intention to hold a comprehensive defence review to look at the structure and composition of our armed forces. However, even before that reports, a number of key planks of the Conservative approach are now clear.

At the Manchester Conservative party conference Liam Fox stated his intention to cut the number of MOD Civil Servants. At around 88,000, the total is very high compared to an Army of 100,000 and an Air Force of 40,000. However, the review will need to look at exactly where these cuts should fall. There are many MOD Civil Servants doing essential jobs that used to be done by service men and women, and for much less pay.

The area that could easily stand some cuts is in the Ministry of Defence itself. The armed forces are in my opinion heavily over-staffed at the top. The Army has HQ Land, the Navy has HQ Fleet and the Air Force has Air Command. Each of these directs and runs their respective service with suitably high-ranked officers and senior civilian staffs. Then we also have the Permanent Joint Headquarters at Northwood which oversees current operations in a tri-service environment. On top of these four Headquarters we have the Ministry of Defence itself, in many cases duplicating functions of the individual service commands. One of the Ministry’s functions is to support Ministers with direct advice and public relations but there is often tension between similar staffs in the Ministry and the individual service command headquarters.

I suggest that the MOD itself should be radically slimmed down and many of its functions devolved down to the service headquarters. There is no reason why the individual services cannot provide advice and guidance to Ministers through a much smaller central MOD staff. There may also be a few cases where the individual services should lose some staff and control to the MOD, such as in contracts, accounting and training. We simply cannot afford to have so many people behind desks when we are short of front-line manpower.

The second area where the Conservatives have been clear is in the announcement this week that the 25,000 strong British military presence in Germany would be ended. In the short term this could increase costs to the defence budget as facilities and accommodation have to be found or constructed in the UK, but it could save money in the longer term. Britain would also have to find training areas for the elements of the Army that are currently able to train on the German plains.

Liam Fox has also confirmed that he would wish to replace the aging Trident strategic nuclear missile system (right) and that will require major investment in the next 5-10 years. I think that that is the wrong decision and I fear that there will have to be further cuts in the Royal Navy’s already shrunken surface fleet in order to pay for it. I would prefer to see us nuclear arm some of the cruise missiles that we have on our hunter killer submarines and thereby downgrade our nuclear weapons programme.

The next Government will have to be radical and whilst in the current economic climate there may not be more money for defence, in my view it should avoid cutting the defence budget. One of the most damaging proposals to come out of the Government in recent weeks was the decision to cut the TA’s training budget in order to save a measly £20m. This has now been reversed under pressure from all sides but the salami slicing approach to defence cannot continue.

A defence review must seek to extract more front line bang for every Pound spent. Withdrawing from Germany, cutting the headquarters overhead and possibly restructuring some elements of the armed services will be essential. If we don’t do that we will find ourselves cutting major defence projects after we have invested millions or billions and selling some of the equipment that only last year was deemed essential. That could see us selling one of the planned two new aircraft carriers and having to depend on the French at times for maritime air cover. Such a prospect should send shivers down the spine of any patriotic naval strategist.

There are no easy choices but a Conservative government must ensure that our armed forces are properly funded for the tasks they are being asked to undertake. A strategic defence review must also ensure that the impact of further cuts on our influence in the world, are properly evaluated. A nation’s world influence is often measured by the size of its economy but the size and effectiveness of its armed forces are also a key factor, as well as its willingness to use them. If Britain wishes to avoid losing even more influence and prestige the Government must provide the funds to support armed forces that have worldwide reach and world-class equipment.

Defence is often seen as an easy cut but the consequences are only apparent when British territory or interests are threatened. We should not forget the lessons of the 1930’s, the Falklands conflict or the two Iraq wars. Maintenance of effective armed forces is a sensible insurance policy in an increasingly unstable 21^st Century.

Another Former Labour Councillor Defects to the Conservatives

News this morning that another in a long line of Black and Minority Ethnic Councillors has defected to the Conservative Party, this time on Calderdale Council. His move takes the hung Council to 21 Conservatives, 15 Lib Dem, 8 Labour, 5 Independents, 1 BNP, 1 Eng Dem .

Cllr Zafar Iqbal-Din was accused of money laundering but was investigated and charges were dropped. The allegations revolved around a loan he made to a friend to buy a property. At the time that the charges were made Cllr Iqbal-Din was suspended from the Labour Group and became an independent but he has now decided to join the Conservatives.

I am sure that we will get some statement from Cllr Iqbal-Din about his reasons soon.

Three Labour MPs Face Prosecution

The Telegraph reports this morning that as a result of the expenses scandal three sitting Labour MPs face prosecution. Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Jim Devine all face prosecution when police pass files to the Crown Prosecution Service in January. With them will be files on two Labour Peers, Baroness Uddin and Lord Clarke of Hampstead, as well as Conservative Peer Lord Hanningfield. The CPS will decide whether the cases warrant prosecution and if ultimately found guilty they could face a maximum of ten years in prison.

Morley and Chaytor claimed tens of thousands of pounds for mortgages that no longer existed, while Devine claimed against a fictitious company. The Peers’ claims involve dubious subsistence claims in Hanningfield and Uddin’s cases amounting to over £100,000 each. The police are understood to have dropped investigations into Labour MPs Shahid Malik and Tony McNulty. However HM Revenue and Customs are reported to be investigating a total of 27 MPs.

There will be many MPs shifting uncomfortably on the green benches before they embark on their Christmas and New Year break and the timing could hardly be worse for Gordon Brown. It means that he could face several Labour MPs undergoing prosecution in the run up to the General Election. Polls have shown the public blame Labour more than any other party for the expenses scandal and feel that Brown has handled it less well than David Cameron. Having five out of six potential prosecutions being Labour politicians will only serve to underline that impression.

The Gordon Brown Rap

For those that remember the days of Spitting Image and miss the political satire, the following clip from impressionist John Culshaw will be an amusing and current commentary:

Labour Win Glasgow North East – Lib Dems Come Sixth

Labour cruised to victory last night in the Glasgow North East by-election that was caused by the resignation of former Commons Speaker Michael Martin. The SNP were in second place and the Conservatives third just ahead of the BNP. The turnout was just 33%, very low for a Parliamentary by-election, despite all of the effort that went into postal votes.

This was rock solid Labour heartland territory but made more difficult to read due to the fact that by convention a sitting Speaker is not opposed by the major parties. However, the SNP had stood against Martin and therefore had a record in the constituency. That they failed to make any real progress at all at a time of deep unpopularity for the Government will be a relief to Labour and a wake-up call for Salmonds separatists.

The Conservatives will be happy to have come third in a seat that has such a Labour voting tradition and was always going to be a Labour/SNP race. The BNP scored surprisingly well but the biggest surprise of the night was the disastrous showing of the Lib Dems, who came in sixth place with just 2.3%, behind Tommy Sheridan’s “Solidarity” and only just ahead of the Greens. The fabled Lib Dem by-election machine clearly is a busted flush.

Glasgow North East is hardly a typical constituency and it does not tell us much about the impending General Election but it will give heart to 10 Downing Street that has been rather besieged of late.

The full results are here.

Former UKIP MEP Jailed

I wrote the other day about the problems UKIP was having with some of its MEPs being seduced by the Euro gravy train. Today former East of England MEP Tom Wise was jailed for two years for defrauding the tax payer of over £36,000. He claimed £3,000 per month in secretarial allowances whilst only paying his secretary £500 per month. He pocketed the rest of the money.

UKIP have naturally been very keen to distance themselves from Wise and in the comments section of my previous article it was claimed that he was expelled from the party. However, I am assured that he was not in fact expelled but allowed his membership to lapse once his fraud came to light.

With the European anti-fraud unit “Olaf” reported to have launched an investigation into several of Wise’s former UKIP colleagues, including Nigel Farage, Wise may not be the last UKIP MEP to be feeling the heat of the criminal justice system.

UKIP Damaged by Double Expenses Trouble

The United Kingdom Independence Party has had its fair share of trouble with its elected representatives. However, despite this, it likes to pose as an anti-establishment party untainted by the Parliamentary expenses scandal and similar ails that have afflicted Westminster politicians. It is therefore very damaging for them that former UKIP MEP for the East of England, Tom Wise, has admitted fiddling his expenses and swindling the tax-payers out of £36,000. Wise claimed £3,000 per month in secretarial allowances but pocketed £2,500 of that while paying his secretary just £500 per month. He now faces a jail sentence of up to seven years.

Following the revelations about Wise, the Sunday Times has reported that the EU anti-fraud investigator “Olaf” has launched a wider investigation into UKIP’s use of MEP expenses. Internet speculation has suggested that former UKIP leader Nigel Farage is one of five MEPs that are under investigation by “Olaf”. That could terminally damage his attempt to stand against Commons Speaker John Bercow as an “anti-sleaze” candidate.

Both of the above cases come after the Electoral Commission won a case in the Court of Appeal that may lead to near bankruptcy for UKIP if they have to repay £350,000 in illegal donations. It also occurs at a time when the party has no leader and is about to enter a leadership contest. UKIP surprised many people (including me) with its success in the June Euro elections. It now faces a series of much sterner tests and the timing could hardly be worse for the party.

Remembrance Sunday

Today is Remembrance Sunday and our thoughts turn to those who gave their lives for freedom and democracy in two World Wars. I am occasionally shocked at how little some people know about the two wars, as they gradually recede out of memory and into the pages of the history books.

When I was at school history stopped at 1914 but nowadays most school children study the Second World War. However, too many seem to leave school with no understanding of the causes, events or sacrifices of either World War.

Remembrance Sunday is more than about the two World Wars. It has also become in recent years a chance to remember those who have given their lives in the more recent conflicts such as the Falklands War, as well as Gulf Wars 1 and 2, and now of course Afghanistan. As the death toll mounts, so does the list of grieving families and the injured. It is the latter that are so often forgotten by the media and the politicians. As a rough estimate, for every one death, three are injured. They bear the scars in their bodies and minds for the rest of their lives.

Whilst the memory of the two Worlds Wars may be fading, for many people therefore Remembrance Sunday has a new and very fresh meaning to them. On this Remembrance Sunday let us remember all those who have died in the course of serving this country in armed conflict but also those who have been injured and maimed in the course of their duty.

This country and others owes them a huge debt of gratitude.

The EU – A Conservative Way Forward

The following press release was issued by the Conservative Party today in response to the signing into law of the Lisbon Treaty. I have reproduced it verbatim:

The Lisbon Treaty has now been signed by President Klaus and will shortly become part of EU law, entering force on 1 December.  This is a situation which has been brought about by the Labour Party (aided by the Lib Dems), who could have instigated a referendum at any time prior to the Treaty’s ratification. Given this situation, the Conservatives have today announced a series of measures, which are summarised below and for which we will seek a mandate at a General Election. 

The measures are essentially in three areas.

One: ‘Never Again’ unilateral measures which we can take ourselves

An Irish style ‘referendum lock’ on any treaty handing over further powers from Britain to the EU.  We will amend the 1972 European Communities Act so that any future Treaty which transfers competences (powers) from Britain to the EU would have to be subject to a referendum, as is already effectively the case in Ireland. We will campaign on challenging our opponents to confirm that they will never seek to overturn this.

Similarly, a legal lock ensuring a referendum if any British Government tried to take Britain into the Euro.  We are pledged never to take Britain into the Euro but, to prevent any future British Government from trying to do so without a referendum we will also amend the 1972 Act at the same time to provide a similar safeguard.

A United Kingdom Sovereignty Bill, to ensure the ultimate sovereignty of the UK Parliament.  Unlike many other European countries Britain does not have a written constitution.  Given the increasing amount of EU law with which we have to deal we would amend the law to insert a sovereignty clause, to make it explicit that ultimately Britain’s Parliament is sovereign and cannot be overruled by the EU against its will.  This is similar in principle to the situation in Germany whereby the German constitution (the basic Law) is ultimately supreme. This would not mean striking down individual items of EU legislation but would provide ultimate constitutional safeguards against any attempts by EU judges to erode our sovereignty.

Full Parliamentary control over the self-amending or ‘ratchet’ clauses in the Lisbon Treaty:  The Lisbon Treaty contains a number of ratchet clauses (sometimes called ‘passerelles’) whereby the powers of the EU could be expanded in the future without a new treaty.  These clauses require all EU nations to agree, so we retain a national veto on their use.  We do not believe that any of these ratchet clauses should be used to increase the EU’s powers but, as a safeguard, we would change the law so that using any passerelle would require a British Government to pass an Act of Parliament (rather than a simple motion and a 90 minute debate, as currently proposed under Labour). 

These measures can be brought in unilaterally by an incoming Conservative   Government without the need to seek approval from our European partners.

Two:  ‘British Guarantees’ on the operation of Lisbon and social and employment legislation, which require negotiation with our EU partners

We will use the forthcoming General Election deliberately to seek a mandate to negotiate ‘British guarantees’ on the application of the Lisbon Treaty and on seeking to restore key powers to Britain. These would include:

A full opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR).   Tony Blair told us that he had obtained an opt out from the CFR but he did not.  As Ministers have subsequently admitted he only obtained a ‘clarification’ as to how it would apply.  We want to upgrade this to a full opt out so that the CFR, which for instance would interfere with our trade union legislation, cannot be made to apply in Britain.

Greater protection against EU encroachment into the UK’s criminal justice system.   Lisbon provides us with an ‘opt in’ over criminal justice matters but we want broader protection provided by an additional protocol. This would protect against EU judges extending their control over our criminal justice system and we  also want to ensure that only British authorities can initiate criminal investigations in Britain.   

Restoration of control over social and employment legislation.  Lastly, we want to restore national control over those parts of social and employment legislation which have proved most damaging to the British economy.  For instance we would seek guarantees over the application of the Working Time Directive in our public services such as the fire service and the NHS.

We will establish a European Policy Committee of the Shadow Cabinet, chaired by William Hague, to work on the detail of these proposals.  

We will seek to give these measures legal effect by adding them to a future accession Treaty.  This is the same mechanism that will give effect to the ‘Irish guarantees’ and also the more recent ‘Czech guarantees’ and we would seek to mirror it for the above British guarantees too.   

Three:  The Longer Term

We will aim to implement these measures over the course of the next Parliament, and believe that they can stop Britain’s relationship with the EU from heading in the wrong direction. But if, over the lifetime of this Parliament, we do not succeed in negotiating the return of these powers; or if in fact the EU does move in the wrong direction, in those circumstances, then of course we can return to this subject in a manifesto for the Parliament after that. This is not something we want to happen. Nor is it something we expect to happen. But if those circumstances were to occur, we would not rule out a referendum on a wider package of guarantees to protect our democratic decision-making, while remaining a member of the European Union. However, that would be a judgement for the future, not for this election or for the next Parliament.

In summary:  A Conservative Government will never allow us to become part of a federal Europe and we have devised a series of specific measures which protect Britain from this happening in future.  We will seek a mandate from the British people to implement these measures at the forthcoming General Election.

You can find out more here.

Michal Kaminski – “A Strong Friend of Israel”

I have written before about the truly disgusting campaign against the Polish leader of the Conservative and Reformists Group in the European Parliament. Labour Ministers have been active in the campaign to smear the Conservative Party by association and have claimed that Kaminski is homophobic and anti-semitic. Many people have testified in support of Michal Kaminski but still the smears continue.

One source that has been cited against him is the Chief Rabbi of Poland, Michael Schudrich, who previously said “…it is clear that Mr Kaminski was a member of NOP, a group that is openly far right and neo-nazi. Anyone who would want to align himself with a person who was an active member of NOP and the Committee to Defend the Good Name of Jedwabne (which was established to deny historical facts of the massacre at Jedwabne) needs to understand with what and by whom he is being represented.”

The Rabbi has now clarified his earlier remarks and mounted a strong attack on those who are smearing Kaminski. In his most recent remarks he said “There is no doubt that Kaminski is a strong friend of the State of Israel. He himself has spoken out against anti-Semitism on several occasions during the past decade. It is a grotesque distortion that people are quoting me to prove that Kaminski is an anti-Semite. Portraying Kaminski as a neo Nazi plays into the painful and false stereotype that all Poles are anti-Semitic. I would also like to clarify that the headline of James Macintyre article of July 29, 2009 entitled: “Jewish Leaders Turn on Cameron’s Tories: Poland’s chief rabbi and others call on Cameron to sever ties with Polish MEP” does not represent what I said to the author. I made no political statement and this headline is misleading and untrue.”

It is too much to hope that James Macintyre will offer Kaminski an apology but perhaps it is not too much to hope that the nasty, personal, and inaccurate smears by senior Labour Party figures will now stop. Michal Kaminski is a moderate mainstream politician from a conservative Catholic country. His views will not always accord precisely with the secular liberal values of most of Western Europe but an anti-semite and homophobe he most certainly is not. Labour should look a little more closely at their own record before trying to make personal attacks on others.

Question Time and the BNP

Tonight the BBC will allow British National Party leader Nick Griffin a public platform on one of its flagship political programmes. That in itself is the kind of boost the BNP could only dream about a few months ago. However, Griffin has cleverly also used the controversy over that decision to keep his party of thugs and racists in the news day after day.

Griffin was helped by the timing of the Army Generals decision to condemn the BNPs use of WW2 images and his response was deliberately and skilfully over the top in order to extract additional coverage. Griffin refused to stop using WW2 images and claimed that Winston Churchill if he were alive today would have joined the BNP. It may be true that someone of Churchill’s generation would have held views that today would be seen as un-PC but to suggest that Winston would have joined a party that is a linear descendent of Sir Oswald Moseley’s “black shirts” is risible.

What is also laughable is the stupidity of the BNP in using an image of an RAF Spitfire on their Euro election leaflets which belonged to one of the Polish RAF Squadrons that fought the Nazis in the skies over Europe. That Polish pilot is deemed by the BNP to be unworthy to even join their party and yet they use his image as an icon of Britishness. The same is true for the valiant Gurkha veterans who have just won their right to settle in the UK. Every British person I know would be proud and delighted to have a Gurkha next door to them and yet the BNP would send them packing back to Nepal.

The QT panel tonight will consist of Baroness Warsi for the Conservatives, Jack Straw for Labour, Chris Huhne for the Lib Dems and Bonnie Greer, as well as, of course, Nick Griffin. I fear that the rapid fire questions and answers won’t allow for much scrutiny of Griffin’s arguments and if the panel are not careful he will be allowed to appear the victim of “an establishment” consensus. That will be exactly what he wants. It is important that the politicians don’t try just to score points but maybe take it in turns to demolish Griffin’s underlying racist assumptions.

I am sure that the BBC will get one of the biggest audiences ever for this edition of Question Time and that probably played a part in their decision but they are playing with fire. I don’t agree with those like Peter Hain who argue that Griffin should not have been invited onto QT – refusing to debate with a legal party which has MEPs and Councillors is just not democratic. However, David Dimbleby must allow time for proper debate tonight and possibly limit the number of questions in order to achieve this.

Tonight’s is not a normal edition of Question Time it will be an attempt by an avowedly racist party to gain a platform to recruit and gain electoral support. There will be a heavy burden on the other panellists to ensure that this opportunity is minimised.

Could the First Labour MP be About to Cross the Floor?

It is characteristic of governments in their final days that discipline begins to deteriorate and morale slumps. Who could argue with the statement that both of these features seem to be present in the Labour party at present? It would not therefore be surprising if one or more Labour MPs decided that their patience with Gordon Brown and his front bench team was exhausted.

The Telegraph columnist Richard Eden certainly thinks that one such senior back-bench MP is former Secretary of State for Work and Pensions James Purnell. Purnell is a former advisor to Tony Blair and was elected to the Commons in 2001 for the North Western seat of Stalybridge and Hyde. He was re-elected in 2005 with an 8,348 majority. On 4 June this year he resigned from the Government with a stinging attack on Gordon Brown’s leadership qualities and calling for him to resign as leader.

Cited by some as a possible replacement for Brown he has not been untouched by the Parliamentary expenses scandal, having claimed £247 for some 3,000 fridge magnets! If Purnell were to cross the floor he would be almost certain of a place in a future Conservative Government. He would bring considerable recent experience to what will be a Conservative Parliamentary party that will have the majority of MPs with 5 years or less experience of Parliament and very limited past Ministerial experience.

Watch this space!

Philip Lee Wins Bracknell Selection

Many congratulations to Dr Philip Lee who has been selected to stand as the Conservative candidate for Bracknell. He took part this afternoon in an Open Primary process along with six other candidates, where any Bracknell registered voter could come along and choose their candidate.

There were a series of ballots of those present with candidates being elimated round by round. As a friend of Iain Dale I was rooting for him and I was following Iain’s progress through on his Twitter feed. I was almost as tense as he must have been and sorry to see him elimated in the fifth round.

I am sure that Philip will make an excellent MP and worthy successor to Andrew MacKay, who until his fall from grace was highly regarded by many local people as an excellent constituency MP.

I wish Philip every success.

EXCLUSIVE – Reading Transport to Scrap “Eco-Friendly” Buses

Reading Borough Labour group were very keen to trumpet the purchase by Council-owned Reading Transport Ltd of a number of “eco-friendly” bio-ethanol buses. Reading was seen as a UK pioneer of such technology and bus company directors and Reading Labour Councillors were asked to speak on this development across the country. These buses, purchased from Swedish firm Scania have been running on the Premier No 17 route down Oxford Road and have undoubtedly contributed to a reduction of the amount of pollution in the area.

We were told that the new buses would be economic to run and use only UK sourced bio-ethanol from sugar-beet waste grown in the UK. The Council invested around £200,000 of Council Tax-Payers money to ensure that the bus company would be able to store the new fuel and possibly supply other Council-owned vehicles.

In 2008 Reading Council press released the news of the new buses with statement from the then Environment Lead Councillor Steve Waite as follows “This scheme is using only bi-products of sugar beet from UK sources and is a welcome addition to the range of measures to help us mitigate climate change”.

The news today is that this is completely untrue. Reliable sources have told me that all of Reading Buses bio-ethanol has been imported from Sweden and none of it has been sourced in the UK. Also the economics of running the bio-ethanol buses has turned out to be far less efficient than anticipated. They are about 40% less efficient than a diesel bus and have far more time off the road for maintenance. The decision has therefore been taken to re-engine the entire fleet of bio-ethanol buses and convert them to run on diesel fuel.

Ironically the wood pulp based Swedish fuel was actually more eco-friendly than fuel based on sugar beet waste but that did not account for the costs of importation from abroad.

At the time when these buses were introduced Conservatives challenged Labour Councillors on the economics of the bio-ethanol engines and were assured that this had been carefully investigated and the economics stacked up. Serious questions now will be asked about how such misleading and inaccurate statements were made by leading Labour Councillors and what this does to Reading’s Environmental credentials. I suspect that this won’t exactly help Reading Transport’s chances of winning an innovation award on 12 November for the introduction of the bio-ethanol buses.  

The bus company has been going through a series of problems recently and this is the last thing they needed as Chief Executive James Freeman struggles to tackle numerous deep seated issues within the organisation. However, if the conversion of the buses to diesel helps them become more efficient and economic, that will be a beneficial outcome. However, there are still major hurdles to overcome along the way.