Todays announcement that the economic growth for the last quarter is higher than originally forecast is welcome news. In fact at 1.2% it is the best quarterly growth for 9 years.

But Labour are of course claiming all of the credit. Now while Labour undoubtedly should receive some credit, so should the opposition for pushing home the necessary policies that are improving commercial confidence and establishing a better business environment.

Sadly Labour refuse to give any credit to the Coalition Government at all. Stange then is it not, that they also refuse to take any blame for the past 13 years and especially failure to adequately tackle the banking collapse.

Labour remains rooted in the tribal negative class politics of confrontation while the world has changed. They may not want the Coalition to succeed but they are going to have to accept that to “have their cake and eat it” is nigh on impossible in politics.

The fact of the matter is things are gradually getting better, albeit helped by austerity measures that nobody wants to introduce - FACT. Labour had contributed immensely to the mess the country’s finances were in - FACT.

We now have a Government for the first time in a generation is prepared to take the tough decisions necessary - FACT.

People aren’t fools.Times are hard, difficult decisions have had to be taken in the short term in order that in the long term we shall all benefit.    

I wholeheartedly welcome the Government’s announcement today that they have asked councils to review street signs in a bid to improve safety and appearance of local streets.

For too many years the amount of signage on our streets has grown and grown and seemingly as new guidelines are issues new signs are added. Signs never seem to be removed.

They are unsightly and clearly spoil the appearance of our high streets, but worse than that in places the sheer number of signs in close proximity must undermine safety. After all as a motorist there is only so much you can take in whilst trying to concentrate on the road ahead as well. A factor that I would suggest particularly affects drivers new to an area to such an extent that it must affect driving performance and in turn safety.

I think part of the problem has to lie with endless streams and reviews of Government guidelines pouring forth from previous governments, but the trouble is too many local councils have taken the guidelines as policy rather than guidelines to be considered as appropriate to local circumstances.

So hopefully we will soon see a much needed review of street signs throughout Bury and with any luck we may seem some common sense being applied and some signs being removed to declutter some of our streets.

Do you know of a street over cluttered with distracting street signs? Please drop me a line.

Prestwich Festival and many other important community projects may be at risk after an annoucement that Bury Council is to cut all Local Area Partnership Grants in the current financial year.
 
The Conservative-led Council has announced that there will be no Area Partnership grants for Prestwich - or any other parts of  Bury this year. This is a grant scheme which has been run by the local areas for the last ten years. In Prestwich the grants have funded projects throughout the community, with the support for Prestwich Festival being the most visible in recent years.

Local Liberal Democrat Councillor Vic D’Albert said “This is another decision to cut services taken by the Conservatives without any consultation whatsoever. It’s damaging and not what people want. Once again we think the Bury Conservatives have got it wrong. We all know that cuts are needed to pay off Labour’s debt, but yet again the Tories at the town hall are cutting without asking people what matters to them.
 
“The Prestwich Festival is something we’re really proud of. We will fight to keep it going, and the Council need to realise how much this means to local people. They have made their decision without asking anyone, and are making the people of Prestwich pay disproportionately for Labour’s debt mess.

A new planning application has been received which is within Holyrood Ward of Prestwich as detailed below:-

Application number: 53049         Type of application: Consultation From Neighbouring Authority         

Applicant: Rochdale Council
Location: Former Car Supermarket site, Heywood Old Road/Manchester Old Road, Middleton
Proposal: Residential development for 87 dwellings

Plans will be available to view on the Council’s website within 2 working days from the date of this email. Should you require further details please contact the case officer: Mark Kilby on: 0161 253 7639. 

If you would like to discuss this application or how you can comment, please don’t hesitate to contact either myself or Cllr Tim Pickstone.

I went along to the Prestwich Farmers market on sunday and it was good to see the weather hold out for this popular local attraction. Once again hundreds of local people went along as well and were treated to a great selection of stall selling quality produce.

Despite it being such a great success, it was sadly spoiled for many by ill-timed roadworks nearby.

The Council often schedule road works for sundays as they tend to be quiter BUT why did they pick the same day as a busy farmers market?

Since the Farmer’s Market was a Council-run event, I’d have thought the Council would have used some common sense and not decided to close and dig up the road - once again there would seem to have been a failure to communicate between council departments. Or perhaps they just didn’t care about the consequences.

For the record it has to be stated that once again local councillors, residents and the Farmers market organisers were not consulted about the proposals to dig up the road. 

Yet another example of poor management of the Council by Bury Conservatives.

So it has been confirmed after some speculation that the Coalition Government is reviewing the benefits paid to the ”middle classes” as some of the media put it.

The apparent focus of attention is on winter fuel allowance and child benefits. Currently these are not means tested so you receive them irrespective of your income.

Labour have already referred to this as a “Shocking betrayal” - not half as shocking the mess we find the nations finances in however. However, although this review may have been brought about by the empty coffers in the treasury, I for one would certainly argue that a review and for that matter a national, grown up debate on this issue is long overdue. It looks like Labour won’t manage that but it has to happen and now is the time.

Who should be receiving state benefits anyway? Should the rich heiress receive child benefit, and for that matter the same amount as the single mum? I don’t think there is a case for certainly those who could be called rich to receive any universal benefits - its effectively a waste of vital tax payers money that needs to go where it is most needed. Why not increase the amount of child benefit but limit it to those who need it most.

The same goes for the winter fuel allowance - let’s improve allowances to the most needy in society but limit them at the same time.

After all is it the duty of state to provide handouts to all and sundry almost as gifts at various times of your life, or is it the duty of the state to ensure the weak, vulnerable and poor are supported when times are tough. I think the latter.

Who knows how this review will pan out, but it is long overdue and I hope it results in a simpler benefit system that provides meaningful financial support when and where needed to those that are in most need. After all what are benefits all about ?   

The trouble with Tony Blair’s on the face of it massively generous donation of proceeds from his memoirs is all down to his reputation.

What would normally have been acclaimed as a fantastic act of generosity has become embroiled in a debate over whether it is “blood money” or the act of a man riddled with guilt. Of course one of the key reasons for that is that the proceeds will go towards a sports and fitness centre for ex servicemen. 

Perhaps as “education, education, education” was once his rallying cry it’s perhaps a surprise that he hasn’t sought to take advantage of the Governments Free Schools proposals and fund a new high school - perhaps a faith school as he is supposed to be deeply religious.

But the real trouble with Bliar is that it is hard to no if he is being honest and truthful about anything he does. He is so self assured and certain of his own motives and reasoning to the point of arrogance that he doesn’t seem to realise when he is distorting the truth beyond recognition. He is so certain that he is correct on Iraq that he refuses to accept any other arguments.

A good politician speaks his own mind, a great one listens to others first.

The recent announcement that former minister and Labour MP, Alan Milburn, will be examining issues of social mobility on behalf of the Coalition Government have drawn some scathing comments from John Prescott and others accusing him of “collaborating” as if he was somehow engaging in an act of treachery.

Yet not so many months ago Brown’s Labour Government had appointed Lib Dems, Shirley Williams and Matthew Taylor (amongst others) as advisors on various issues. So why has it different now.

Well of course the easy, perhaps cheap shot, is that Labour are now in opposition but I think it is more fundamental than that.

What it highlights is that Labour’s colours are still nailed to the mast of tribal politics - and certainly class politics - the old politics. Whereas the reality is that the edges are getting blurred.

The Coalition Government by definition has broken down barriers that previously existed - in fact far more so than if we had a Lib Dem/Labour coalition. As two established political ”enemies” if the Lib Dems and the Tories can work together then possibly anyone can.

And, Labour now faces the prospect that the ground has moved beneath them - the old established foes will never quite be the same again. Their political compass is in pieces.

Labour are now divided as to how to deal with the coalition as the official opposition. One side of Labour will remain resolutely opposed to every breathing word of the opposition, while the more progressive side of Labour are making noises about working together on issues that genuinely warrant closer cooperation in Parliament.

Undoubtedly the winner of the Labour leadership will determine which side wins out. However to my mind what is patently clear is that a more progressive, constructive, less tribal Labour party will help ensure better Government whether they are in opposition or not.

Lib Dems in opposition and Government have showed that they can work with anyone for the greater good, for the country. And there can surely be nothing wrong with utilising your experience as an MP/Lord etc to bring change/new ideas even if you are not in Government, so long as you maintain your identity and remain true to your beliefs.

The changing shape of British Politics may be about to see another big change - or not.

The Coalition Government has reached (survived?) 100 days and not even our fiercest critics could argue that we haven’t got stuck in to the business of government.

I think it’s also worth recalling that during the election campaign those opposed to coalition government were claiming that nothing would get done, it would take weeks to agree anything!

Interestingly if anything rather than failing to get anything done some people are now asking us to slow down and are accusing us of being too radical.

The fact of the matter is that a coalition born of necessity from a score draw election result has shown that parties can work together for the good of the country both domestically and internationally.

In addition no one dare say we are not prepared to take the tough decisions.

From my perspective as a Liberal Democrat my concern is that we redouble our efforts to promote the party, our policy (manifesto) achievements and also, critically keep developing party policy. It is also vitally important that we find ways to highlight and where necessary campaign on policy areas where we differ from the Conservative Party.

We are and will remain a fiercely independant political party, our mission remains to spread liberalism throughout the land, and so we must not shy away from highlighting our differences from our coalition partners, just as they shouldn’t. A failure to do so, to fail to highlight a Lib Dem perspective would not only lower the profile of the party further, but crucially would critically undermine future electoral prospects.

FAIRNESS AND TRANSPARENCY 

With the spending review on its way in September things are undoubtedly going to get tougher before they get better, but so long as we keep fairness and transparency at the heart of the Coalitions deliberations then I believe we will be tackling the tough decisions in the right way.

In the meantime here’s to the next 100 days and more - there is so much to do to rebuild the economy after the global credit crisis, recession and 13 years of failed Labour government.

The Government are currently undergoing a review of defence spending, as part of the overall spending review across all departments.

The review is much needed not just because of the terrible spending deficit we face but also to ensure the armed forces are modernised to meet the challenges of the next generation with the best possible equipment for our servicemen and women and the most appropriate organisation and logistical support.

It cannot be right for instance that an army of 100,000 soldiers is served by a beaurocracy of 85,000 civil servants!

But whilst that is not right , surely it cannot also be right to exclude the Trident missile system from the review. The system will need replacing over the next 20 years but it’s target “enemy” the Soviet union and Warsaw bloc have long disappeared as a threat. And at a cost of £20bn to renew Trident it just doesn’t add up and smacks of ideology before common sense to insist that Trident is renewed at all costs.

The conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq over the past few years have exposed severe logistical and resourcing issues not to mention the quality of protection afforded those on the front line. In defining our priorities we must not neglect fundamental necessities.

At a time of spending restrictions and cut backs it is surely a matter of financial necessity alone that Tridents renewal costs are examined. Facing new challenges in a seemingly fast changing 21st century it may be possible to change the Trident system, provide a more effective deterrent with greater flexibility and at the same time freeing up vital resources to ensure our service men and women have the best equipment and protection possible.

Isn’t that worth looking at further?