Latest figures released by the office for National Statistics shows Bury witnessed a big decrease in Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) Claimants from the previous month.

Claims were down 5.8% to 4,095. Bury had the highest decrease of JSA claimants (5.8%) in Greater Manchester with the combined Local Authorities total reaching 3.6%, slightly less than the UK average of 3.9%. Bury District has seen an annual decrease in JSA claimants, 10.9% combined over the past 12 months, with Moorside and Church wards of Bury seeing decreases of 23.4% and 20.7% respectively.

The total number of jobs provided by the Jobcentre Plus increased in June by 13.4% from 967 jobs to 1097. This represents an average of 27 jobs for every 100 JSA claimants. As a whole most wards saw drops in Job Centre (JCP) vacancies with 5 wards posting fewer vacancies than May. Tottington and Redvales witnessed 433% and 52.6% increases in JCP vacancies with Redvales total vacancies accumulating to 566 vacancies.

The male JSA claimant count fell by 6.0% to 2986 and the female claimant count decreased by 5.2% to 1109. Showing that male JSA claimants are staying on JSA for a shorter period and finding it easier to find jobs than female JSA claimants.

The long-term (over 6 months) JSA claimant count stood at 1,625 in Bury for June 2010, a decrease of 3.6% from May. LTU in the Ramsbottom ward dropped considerably (11.1%) implying the job vacancies created in this ward are being filled.

The youth (16 to 24 year olds) JSA claimant count stood at 1,320 in Bury for May 2010, a fall of 7.7% on the previous month. A 7.7% drop is considerably higher than both Greater Manchester and the United Kingdom. They dropped by 5.9% and 5.0% respectively. This is a considerable drop compared to May with a total claimant drop of 90. Bury has a high percentage of total youth JSA claimants against all claimants. (32.2%) Considerably higher than the UK average (27.8%) suggesting younger people are finding it harder to work in Bury than the rest of the UK. 

Vic D’Albert commented, “This is good news for Bury but there is clearly a long way to go and the Government must not become complacent on this crucial issue. In Bury’s case it may well be that the opening of the new Rock shopping centre will have had an impact - especially on youth unemployment. But we should be cautious because there is a real fear that there could be an adverse impact on the Millgate shopping centre and the old Rock area which could lead to a reduction in jobs there, possibly cancelling out some of this improvement.Nevertheless this is an improvement in local fortunes that should be welcomed.”

Nick Clegg is promising that Britain will be more Liberal by 2015, when the next General Election will be held.

And he rightly boasts about a number of achievements already since the Coalition was formed such as the scrapping of ID cards, rolling back the DNA database etc and indeed if the legislative programme promised and agreed by the coalition does get through Parliament then indeed we will be a more Liberal nation.

Of course it will take longer to truly roll back much of the illiberalism of the past 30 or more years, and in fact perhaps the harder part will not be the changing of laws and new acts of parliament, but the changing of hearts and minds throughout our towns and communities.

Running tangent with more oppressive, restrictive legislation and Government of the past we have seen the growth of illiberal attitudes, a reduction of tolerance in society and a growing narrow mindedness to other attitudes or beliefs. A developed response from people increasingly withdrawn from society behind increasingly closed doors and minds to the outside world, their community, society.

I dearly hope the changes now being wrought at the top of the political pile start an avalanche of change in society, that will inevitably roll back the illiberalism of the past 30 years. But more than that a change that fundamentally develops more liberal views across the spectrum of our society and truly leads to the rebirth of liberal Britain. 

Not right, Not left, just liberal - the freedom to be different, the power to be free, the hope to be safe.

Vince Cable’s recent announcement about the reform of university funding highlighted the need to both find ways of developing increased funding for universities whilst at the same time reducing the debt burden faced by students and making the whole system fairer for all concerned.

As a Lib Dem councillor and former parliamentary candidate, our parties pledge to scrap tuition fees has been a long held committment by my party that I was particularly proud of. So it was with some concern, to put it mildly that we joined the coalition and then effectively appeared to shelve that committment.

The proposal for a graduate tax instead of a student loans to pay for fees, however would meet the political ambition of removing fees directly from students and in turn reducing the debt burden.

A FAIRER SYSTEM

In addition the fact that the graduate tax in place of fees would by virtue of the tax system be more progressive thus enabling graduates to pay according to their employment income - which means those high flying career graduates would pay more and those on slower burning or lower paid incomes would pay significantly less, put proportionally their fair share.

Understandably the whole issue of student debt, tuition fees and university funding has been a matter of increasing concern over the past few years , but hopefully this will prove to be a liberal minded breakthrough that will prove a win win solution for all concerned.

It is increasingly hard for the man/woman in the street to believe that we will leave - whenever that will be - with some semblance of a result - whatever that would be!

9 years after 9/11 and the Afghan invasion and you feel that it could easily be another 9 years, or another 19 years.

Now don’t get me wrong, I am not advocating pulling out just yet, but I do think there is a growing crisis of confidence as to whether we can succeed. And the recent murdering of 3 British soldiers by an Afghan soldier just adds to that feeling.

I think we are fast approaching the point where it will not be just the hearts and minds of Afghans that need to be won over , but the countries involved in the International mission as well.

But above all, if the Afghan government want us to succeed, then they have to work harder both to quell corruption and mis-government in their country, but they need to be winning the hearts and minds of their own people. It’s no use US/UK and others handing out sweets to children and building bridges etc- long term success needs an Afghan Government that is supported by its people and recognises its value and importance to long term stability.

Once that happens our boys can come home safe in the knowledge that their fallen comrades won’t have died in vain and that the mission has truly been a success. BUT that’s the problem as well - our success is reliant on the Afghan Governments success. And that make me feel really uncomfortable about the whole thing.

If you believe Peter Mandelson, and probably that is 50/50, then Labour Ministers expected to lose the General Election on May 6th.

But whilst it is perhaps surprising to hear Mandelson say as such, it does all fit together with what we know followed the result.

It’s on the record that Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems always made clear that in the event of a hung parliament then we would try and negotiate with the largest party first, which of course we did. But what has always bugged me is the failure to make any progress with the brief negotiation with Labour.

Putting aside the difficulties faced with building a rainbow coalition including natonalists etc, I was amazed that Labour weren’t more keen to try and achieve concensus. But in light of the Mandelson memoirs we now see a party resigned to defeat, to replacing Gordon Brown AND when you add to the mix the cuts to public services even Labour  publicly admitted were necessary if they won, then it really is no surprise that they didn’t have the stomach for it.

Much easier to regroup, refresh and in the meantime hurl bricks from the sidelines. It is not only cynical but the worst type of self interest politics. Labour knew what was coming but didn’t want to deal with it.  

The Government is set to announce a radical shakeup of the NHS, ostensibly handing much of the NHS budget for commissioning services etc down to local GP’s.

The NHS budget currently stands at £105bn. About 80% of this is given to local health managers working for 152 primary care trusts which in turn commission services for their areas.

A Government White Paper to be published later, is expected to call for much of this to be handed to GPs working together in formal partnerships in what would be a major shake-up of the NHS structure.

Now it’s not hard to see that in wanting to meet it targeted aims, the Government want to cut back on NHS management and focus spending on frontline services, that this is an attractive option. But there are big questions and as a high risk strategy if it does not succeed then it would prove disastrous, both from a cost point of view, but more importantly for patients adversely affected.

A lot seens to hinge on being able to cut back on managers and re-invest in GP led/commissioned care instead. But isn’t there a danger that as local Primary Care Trust managers lose their jobs, local GP’s find they need to employ them instead?

And are GP’s and their surgeries equiped to handle this new regime? I should state here that I am sure my GP would excel at such an opportunity, but do all GP’s have the necessary skills? Would it impinge on the time available to see patients?

Presumably for financial reasons the Government is preferring to roll this out across the NHS, when normally such a radical shakeup would have been piloted first.

As with many great ideas it has potential, and undoubtedly makes sense on paper, but then things often look different in practice. I hope they have done their homework and extensively consulted with the medical profession otherwise there may be problems ahead.

Remember the Poll Tax? 

Nick Clegg yesterday confirmed to Parliament a package of political reforms aimed at cleaning up politics, restoring some confidence and trust in politics and making our Parliament more representative of the great British public. (”gawd bless em”)

From a die hard Liberal perspective there has to be an element of dissapointment that the long awaited reform of the voting system, that will be put to a referendum, will be the Alternative Vote system (AV).

However, when the initial dissapointment wears off I have to accept that it will at least be better than what we currently have. It will mean that all votes count. It will mean that the duly elected MP is more representative of their constituencies wishes and it will lead to a more representative House of Commons.

Having said that AV of course is not truly proportional representation and it does not fully deliver fair votes - and we must not pretend that it does. But it is a start. And so far as I am concerned that is the key.

If this was the final chapter in the long campaign for fair votes then this proposal would be unacceptable. BUT it does signal the start of positive, albeit, stepping stone reform. So far as I am concerned this is the beginning of the end for unfair votes and unrepresentative parliaments in this great land and that can only be good.

As we gradually get use to the new politics and this strange coalition government it is easy to greet most announcements or policy initiatives with dissapointment as the inevitable compromises take their toll. As a liberal I can’t help searching every announcement for clues as to the party political source and identifying the compromised elements, and I am sure Conservatives are doing the same.

And this novel idea of compromising is playing havoc with the media, left/right-blinkered students of politics and even the politicians themselves.

Just look at the supposed furore over the announcement of a referendum on the introduction of AV . “The Prime Minister will vote No” screamed the BBC News website. “The Prime Minister will enforce that the Conservatives will vote for the referendum”, screamed other media. There has been so much written already about onservatives who will vote “NO” because they are against PR and Lib Dems who will vote “YES” because they support PR and Labour MPs who………..well don’t really know , except they accuse Lib Dems of betrayal - a common charge this days.

Yet AV is not proportional representation and everyone knows that. But everyone also knows that once the fair votes cat has been let out of the bag there is only one way it will go. Conservatives and Labour  MP’s opposed to PR know that and that is why they will try and stop this now.

The art of political decision making in the great corridors of power has suddenly slowed down to take account of coalition partners demands/concerns. Whilst that means compromise it also means (hopefully) better decision making. But it does mean that we don’t always get what we want, when we want it - but it will come. And anyway how long have we waited?

Liberals of the world unite ! 

Bury Council has (due to the last Government) been forced to adopt a “Strong leader” model of Government.

Ostensibly in practice what this means is that instead of the council having an “Executive” made up of 8/9 councillors as previously and making decisions collectively, the Leader of the Council makes the decisions or delegates to a cabinet member responsible for a particular portfolio.

Whilst this is great for the leader of the council and may even speed up decision making, I’m not sure it exactly enhances democracy and accountability to local people.

The problem is that the democratically accountable element of the council now boils down to 6 councillors - leaving 45 councillors wondering how they can effectively represent their constituents views in the decision making process.

That situation is further aggravated by last years decision by the Tories locally to limit questions from Councillors at meetings.

Meanwhile at the other end of the spectrum residents still rightly expect Councillors to be standing up for their concernes at every opportunity. So we are left with a massive democracy gap in the middle.

Last weeks Lib Dem motion proposing the Tory administration at Bury deals with future cuts in as inclusive and engaging manner as possible sought to flag up this issue.

Lets face it no one wants to make cuts , or have to administer them on behalf of the Government, but the more local people understand the rationale, the more the decision making process and options are explained, the more likely that people will either understand or even accept that what is proposed is the best way forward.

Failure to engage local people at such times, faced with big cuts to services would amount to rubbing salt into the wounds. And lets face it local people will often readily influence the process.

So what we need now is a leader that is strong enough to enhance and broaden the democratic process and to fully engage with local people. After all in effect is he not there to represent the people of Bury?

A MESSAGE FROM NICK CLEGG 

We’ve already scrapped ID cards. Now I’d like to ask you - which other laws do you want to scrap?

Your Freedom

The Liberal Democrats have always stood up for civil liberties, scrapping unnecessary laws and reducing the burden of regulation on businesses and charities.

In our manifesto, we proposed a Freedom Bill to roll back Labour’s attacks on British civil liberties. In government, we are doing just that.

Yesterday I launched Your Freedom, a national dialogue on how to create a more open, inclusive society. Anyone can make suggestions about which laws we need to scrap and where we can cut red tape. You can also rate and comment on other people’s suggestions. The best ideas will be put into practice – because this is a listening government.

This is the open government we have long campaigned for. So tell us about every time you’ve felt snooped on by the state, or had to fill in the same form three times. Help us put Liberal Democrat values into practice in Government.

I know people are talking about this up and down the country – so please do have your say and pass this message on to anyone who has ideas for Your Freedom.

The second motion to last nights Bury Full Council Meeting was a Liberal Democrat motion following on from the Coalition Government’s Emergency Budget and the resulting impact on Bury Council services.

As a result of the emergency budget local authorities are being asked to cut immediately £1.6 billion from the budgets they approved in March for the current year. In Bury’s case this boiled down to £5.2 million cut from grants expected from the Government.

Local Liberal Democrats feel very strongly that so far as possible proposed cuts to services need to follow extensive consultation with local residents, users, staff and Unions. We need to explain, identify the issues, challenge officers to find less painful options and savings and basically bend over backwards to protect local services and staff.

As a result the Liberal Democrat Group tabled the following motion:

Public Expenditure Motion

“This Council notes:

1.The unsustainable high levels of public debt and budget deficit that the country has been left in by the previous Government.
2.That the Government has announced significant cuts to public spending which include £1.6 Billion cuts to local government finances, and that more reductions are expected to follow.

This Council therefore believes that it is imperative that urgent and immediate action is taken to address the impact on Bury Council and the services it provides, in particular;

1. To identify and highlight how best to protect statutory services
2. To identify and highlight how best to protect other frontline services
3. To ensure that other non-frontline but necessary services or administration can continue to provide an effective and efficient service to the authority
4. To protect as many jobs as possible
5. To work with partners in the city region and across the North West to safeguard the local and regional economy
6. Work with our MPs and neighbouring authorities to ensure a fair deal for the region and sub-region in any grant reductions

This Council therefore resolves that the discussions and decisions relating to these budgetary challenges will take place in an open and transparent manner, including:

1. Welcoming the establishment of the all-Party Overview Working Group on the budget to look into these issues in greater depth
2. Ensuring that proper scrutiny of any decisions takes place, through the Internal Scrutiny Committee or as appropriate.
3. That ways are found to involve and inform the public in the important decisions about services in the Borough
4. That all members of Council are kept informed and briefed throughout the process of current savings and discussions for the 2011-2012 Council Budget.”

Proposer: Cllr Vic D’Albert        Seconder: Cllr Richard Baum

An amendment was tabled by the Labour Group basically referring to the Government as the Con/Dems and trying to delete the first paragraph or two - they were upset that we identified that the last Labour Government had left the country near bankrupt. Sorry facts are facts! The amendment failed. The motion was passed by Bury Council.

You can read my speech in proposing the motion here: speech_30610.pdf

I was glad to hear today that the Government have announced a radical review (shake up) of prisons. Especially with regard to the imprisonment of people for relatively minor offences and at what sought of level custodial sentences should apply.

It worries me that too many young people end up in prison for the first time and find themselves in an institution that caters more for an education in crime and criminal networking rather than rehabilitaion.

If we could stop or at least drastically cut reoffending rates in the young it would save millions and ultimately improve the lives and long term prospects of thousands.

I am a firm believer that punishment should fit the crime and be seen by society to be fair. In addition we do have to accept that the only place for hardened criminal minds, and especially violent ones is imprisonment.

But one size does not fit all and whether this review is financially driven or not if it addresses the need to at least try and rehabilitate those on first time sentences as different from ‘long term remove from society criminals’ then that’s fine by me.

Oh and before you ask, no I don’t support the death sentence, but life should mean life!

I know love him or loathe him as the British people do, John Prescott has today gone all hysterical about the fact that former Labour ministers John Hutton and Frank Field have agreed to review pensions and poverty respectively for the Coalition Government.

He has called them “Collaborators”. He seems to have forgotten very quickly that Lib Dems, Shirley Williams and Mathew Taylor amongst others held similar appointments advising Gordon Browns government. Whilst I can tell you that there were eyebrows raised at those appointments there were certainly no screams of “collaborators”.

Of course John Prescott is very much old Labour (or is he hard Labour?) and is still fighting the class wars. He and others in the Labour hierarchy either miss the point completely about this “new politics” of cooperation, concensus building or they are suspicious or fear the end result for their particular brand of confrontational black/white politics.

I think its mostly the latter, with the consequences that may have for Labour generally. Politics in Britain is changing - goodness knows it needed to change - no one knows how it will end up but it’s clear that there will be no going back as promised in the Tory and Lib Dem manifesto’s, so far as I’m concerned whi;lst it may be a bit of a roller coaster ride, it’s certainly change for the better.

Derek Simpson, joint leader of the UNITE Union has today urged Lib Dem members to rear up their membership cards and join the Labour party rather than be associated with public spending cuts.

Now I realise Labour have long since cast off any pretensions of socialism, and barely adhere to any particular philosphy these days  - in fact its more determined by their leader at the time ie Blairism, Brownism. What next Milibandism?

Besides the void of political philosophy at the heart of Labour at the moment I do have great respect for a number of council colleagues representing Labour who do have sound principles and will fight the historic cause. So the least I expect in return is a similar recognition that members of the Liberal Democrats have principles too - mostly!

I am a member of the Liberal Democrats because I am a liberal - pure and simple. I have liberal values , liberal views, lead a fairly liberal lifestyle and believe hook line and sinker in the political philosophy of liberalism. I would never join any other party. If my party ceased to be liberal then I would leave,  but I would still be a liberal.

I don’t pretend to be comfortable with public spending cuts, but as previously mentioned on this blog the current Government has inherited an appalling financial situation not of our making. If we fail to address the budget deficit we will be unable to protect key front line services, we may be liberal but we are also pragmatic and realistic in supporting those that rely on public services most.

The fact is most of the cuts being announced recently were Labour pre-election spending bribes and “Give-aways” intended to create a feelgood towards a failing administration prior to the election.

My message to Derek Simpson would be , “Derek you don’t belong in the Labour Party any more - labour has failed you, the Union movement and the country. You have  socialist beliefs unlike the Labour party. Thanks for the invite but i’m staying put”.    

With the back drop of global recession and on-going banking crisis, now accompanied by the Euro Zone crisis the Coalition Government is well into public spending cuts mode.

A steady stream of announcements have already been made and of course the daddy of them all is expected in the emergency budget next week (22nd).

And so it would seem that battle lines are now well and truly drawn across the floor of the Commons and they are drawn across the key issue of public spending. With the recent history bringing us to the recent events and to next weeks budget, it’s is now clear that the issue of public spending is set to dominate this Parliament and beyond.

The trouble is now that we have a new Government we have two versions of history. On the one hand Labour ex ministers are running around saying these cuts by the new Coalition are disgraceful and hurting the neediest in society, on the other hand the new Coalition Government Ministers are running around screaming “we don’t have a choice, Labour was spending money we didn’t have”.

The fact at the heart of all this was that during the election all 3 main parties agreed that massive cuts were needed, and all 3 parties refused to say what they would cut. So now Labour are saying we wouldn’t have cut this and that without actually saying what they would cut instead. They probably beleive it’s the perogative of HM opposition, but it’s more opportunism cloaked in deceit posing as opposition.

It’s interesting that during the elction many people were saying that they wanted a hung parliament because they wanted politicians to work together to deal with the massive problems the country faces. Well they got a hung parliament and they got a coalition, a surprising coalition perhaps, but a coalition nevertheless. At such a time - a time of crisis, we also need a responsible opposition - sadly that is lacking.

Labour didn’t have the stomach for coalition, and Labour don’t have the stomach to play a reasonable , constructive role in the new parliament. If that is a shame in itself, the old style brick hurling and 13 years of collective amnesia from the labour benches is disgusting.

Well there you go, I admit it, the truth is out!

I can almost feel the local Labour hierarchy reaching for their laptops/mobiles in a fit of ”we told you so, they’re all tories really”, despatches to whoever is prepared to listen.

So perhaps I should clarify a bit before they start writing the Labour Rose headlines. Just one of my friends is a Conservative party member and lives in Devon. But I must confess to having friends and family friends who are either conservative by nature/tradition or yes, even vote Conservative. And, as a councillor, I have many friendly contacts in the community who are conservative supporters nationally, just as I have a large number of labour supporting contacts. And very nice people they are too!

Now the trouble with the current Labour party is that they find that all difficult to accept, they still insist on fighting the class warfare of the early twentieth century, they still see Labour and Labour alone as standing up for the working man, the Tories as upper class business backers and the Liberals as either misguided pseudo socialists or Tories in disguise!

The world has moved on, and although, frankly, I don’t care if the Labour party nationally or locally continues to behave like that, the people they purport to represent have moved on, and have greater aspiration, expectation and awareness.

Now I understand that in confrontational politics of the 20th century it was always a case of them and us, good versus evil, right and wrong, in the manner that politics was portrayed, but over the past 15-20 years the spectrum has blurred.

But politics is now more issue based than ever, voters pick and choose which candidates they will back, more and more on the issues that they represent almost as much as the party label. Voters party allegiance has weakened in favour of their personal manifesto of issues, policies and how they see the world. We now live in a world of political “pick and mix”.

That’s why there is nothing intrinsically wrong with coalitions, there is nothing wrong with alliances and in general politicians of different parties working together. In fact time and time again on the doorsteps during the General Election voters were telling me just that.

They key (as ever) is in the detail. That’s why it was so critical that the Coalition Government published details of the policy agreement.

That is why Labour are mistaken in posturing to oppose oppose oppose the cuts and spending reviews that the Coalition will be considering. We need positive, constructive opposition that’s prepared to work to solve the problems this country faces, not hurl bricks from the sidelines and run away from tough decisions. 

There have always been liberals in all parties, but personally I decided that I should join THE Liberal party in Britain. As a liberal I am tolerant of other beliefs, faiths, views, races and lifestyles etc etc etc. That’s perhaps why I have friends who support the Conservatives and Labour parties as well as the Lib Dems. 

If the Lib Dems in coalition help break down further the political barriers to cross party cooperation then that in itself will be a major achievement. An achievement that won’t get any headlines or TV coverage but will over the course of time change politics for ever - for the better.

But I doubt that Labour could handle that - they of course would like to keep things simple, straightforward, red and blue, good v.bad, outmoded, unrepresentative, maintaining class division, living in the past, fighting for the past.

David Cameron is today making a speech that will say the cuts the Government are to make will be painful and deep, and may even “change our way of life” - that last bit is a bit scary to say the least.

Meanwhile at the weekend, Nick Clegg for the Lib Dems confirmed they would be deep and painful but they would be handled differently than the vicious slicing of budgets that  Thatchers Tory Government undertook in the 80’s - irrespective of the damage inflicted on precious local services. Of course we’ll have to wait and see - all will become clear at the budget on June 22nd.

What I find particularly galling however is Labour’s current bleating about cuts. There is one big big ginormous fact looming over us all at present and that is the £1.6 billion hole in our budget - that is, put simply, we are spending £1.6 billion more than we are receiving as a country.

Labour knew this, Labour were happy to go through a general election also pledging massive cuts (albeit not immediately), now they are screaming. And they are gearing up to attack the Coalition over cuts - many of which they would have also faced making themselves. It is disgraceful and is certainly not new politics - what ever that actually is. it is certainly old politics.

What is clear to me and was made clear to me during the General Election was that a) the people of this country know we are in a crisis and  b) They would like politicians to work together to get us out of the crisis.

But in the end analysis its a case of return to year 1 for Labour. They want to ignore the fact that after 13 years of New Labour we have an illegal invasion of Iraq and a £1.6 billion public accounts black hole as their legacy to the British people.

In the coming months when Labour try to accuse the Coalition of making harsh cuts to public services, we must remind the British people of how we got where we are today.

We must say how the misery and hardship was the product of an irresponsible Labour Government obsessed with spin and spend. How the Lib Dem /Conservative Coalition are the agents of change that are trying to clean up British politics and put public finances back in order. 

Some commentators worried about Vince Cable. Some worried about how effective he would prove in Government, rather than chastising from the opposition benches. Others worried whether a Tory/Lib Dem  coalition was too stomach churning a prospect for even someone of Vince Cables experience and fortitude to take.

But yesterday in his first major speech as Business Secretary he seemed to dispel the doubters and be relishing the ability to put Lib Dem policy into action.

So if I was on the board of a major British based bank at the moment, and especially one that has ha taxpayers money pumped into it, I’d be calling a special board meeting to review lending policy asap.

That is because yesterday Vince Cable effectively served notice on the banks, not from the opposition benches but now as a member of the Government, that if the banks don’t start lending more freely to business and especially small business, then the Government will take action to ensure they will.

And when you take Vince Cables coments yesterday and add them to the previous comments from the Chancellor and Chief Secretary to the Treasury about cutting the deficit etc,  the clear thing that comes through is that this Coalition Government, if nothing else, has a strength of purpose to deal with the problems Britain faces.

In fact I would go further. Remarkably (for now at least), it seems to be more “joined up” than the previous Government in its coordinated approach. An approach that is refreshingly relatively spin free as well.

As such people like Vince Cable will hopefully flourish in his role, some have remarked that he should still be chancellor, well that may yet happen one day, but undoubtedly he, as a man of substance and experience, will be able to bring his firm but fair approach to anything he tackles.

So a warning shot has been despatched to the banks. I wouldn’t wait for the next volley if I was in their shoes.  

As events unfolded yesterday I found myself thinking back to the Dunblane massacre and Hungerford and first wondering if the subsequent tightening of gun control legislation after each of those events had really made any difference.

Then of course you realise that no legislation can ever be 100% effective, even a complete ban on all guns would not stop people getting hold of them and potentially running amok.

Of course what is crucial is that a through police investigation is carried out and then once all the facts are known lawmakers can decide if the gun control legislation needs to be tightened or restricted further.

Needless to say your Government can legislate all they like to control guns, what can’t be controlled is the state of the human mind - with all its frailties and potential for malfunction in an ever stressful and difficult society.

The horror of yesterdays shootings must be acted upon rationally and with all due diligence. And I trust the Government will see through their promise yesterday to ensure victims families and all affected get the support they need over the coming weeks and months to ensure that they and their community recovers and can come to terms with these tragic events.

My deepest sympathies and condolences to all who have lost a loved one.

The international row and widespread condemnation of the storming of ships bound for Gaza by Israeli Defence Forces if nothing else highlights the complete PR disaster that the whole affair is, not forgetting the tragic loss of 9 lives.

What I find particularly incredible is that Israel felt they had to board the ship at all. Why not let them dock ?And, If not Gaza, then somewhere else. If gun running was suspected - then why not unload and search the vessels once docked? Why did they have to board the ships at all?

And whats all this nonsense about carrying paint ball guns as some kind of deterrent?

I have always advocating the right of Israel, as a sovereign state, using whatever means to defend its borders, but really, 500 “peace” activists hardly posed a threat to security in themselves.

My fear for Israel following this unnecessary and damaging act, is that it will lead to further isolation for Israel, and further problems for the Palestinians in Israel - that do badly need aid supplies.

My great hope is that it will bring the powers to be to their senses, that it will make them beleive that such acts just play into the hands of the enemies of Israel and those opposed to the peace process. 

Since the David Laws expenses story broke and his subsequent resignation I have gone through all sorts of emotions, from anger to sadness.

Now don’t get me wrong I am not normally one to shed a tear at the resignation speech of a Minister - and didn’t do so this time (I must add), but at the risk of sounding partisan, this was different.

Here was an exceptionally talented MP, who within 2 short weeks had made his mark on the treasury and excelled in his one appearance at the Commons despatch box.  And prior to that had been a key member of the Lib Dem coalition negotiating team.

But what is really saddest of all is that the error of judgement that brought him down was because of a determination to keep his sexuality and his private life just that - private, and in particular to protect from the eyes of the media his partner of 8 years. 

As a result he badly miscalculated and has paid a heavy price - don’t get me wrong I don’t think there was any option but for him to resign, but his loss will (no disrespect to Danny Alexander MP) leave the Treasury and the Coalition weaker as a result.

We are told he is currently considering his future and whether even to remain an MP. Now I suspect that he doesn’t often  read my blog posts, but if per chance he randomly lands on this today I would say this. What has happened has happened. It doesn’t change what you are, you still have much to offer your party, your Government, your country. Regroup and bounce back. For what it’s worth,  I for one can’t wait to see you back in the Treasury.

As for the Daily Telegraph I would say this. We have a new Government, we have determination on all sides to put an end to corruption, and clean up politics and make MP’s expenses simpler and more transparent. 

It would really help if you now put your country before your newspaper sales and stopped holding back on any further “revelations” you might have up your sleeve - bring anything else out into the public domain and lets draw a line under the whole sorry episode once and for all.

I was pleased to discover today that Sir Menzies Campbell has pledged to continue opposing tuition fees, even though it may mean voting against Coalition proposals for University funding etc when they come before Parliament.

Personally I am not enamoured by the whip system and would prefer to see all MP’s voting according to their own beliefs and conscience.But that is sort of another issue really. 

But I am particularly keen that the Lib Dems should not abandon their commmittment to scrapping tuition fees and I don’t see why a coalition agreement should stop us doing so.

All parties, and the Lib Dems are no exception, must be free to campaign and for that matter develop policy. Those freedoms must be protected within the framework of the Coalition otherwise the party will cease to “think”. That would be stifling and only serve in itself to undermine the longevity of this Coalition.

So Ming the Merciless to lead the first rebellion against the Coalition - who’d have thought it!  Well done Ming.

As someone who is generally a news and current affairs junkie, it has become increasingly obvious that the media, or at least TV news, are growing more desperate with every day over the Coalition Government.

It’s not that they are not getting any news or announcements to report, it’s because it’s not the news they are looking for.

With every passing day the reporters question whether this issue is/will be causing a split within the Coalition, whether the back benchers will cause a fuss, how will the wider party memberships react? Will there be an almighty row between Government ministers from each party.

Today’s “Split opportunity” would appear to be whether Capital Gains Tax reform (a Lib Dem pledge) will upset hoardes of Tories.

And, as recently as this morning Vince Cable was on BBC Radio 5 Live and was questioned as to why he had resigned as Deputy Leader of the Lib Dems. The suggestion being that it was somehow related to unannounced dissatisfaction with the coalition arrangements.

You could almost feel the dissapointment in the questioner when Vince Cable insisted that the reason was that he could concentrate on being Business Secretary in the new Government.

Of course what’s completely daft about this growing media obsession with splits, possible splits and cracks etc, is that even in past Governments formed from one party there have been splits and division and sometimes virtually open rebellion. 

Undoubtedly there will be divisions and disputes - it’s human nature - but for the sake of the national interest, lets hope the Coalition can continue strong at least until we are out of recession and have at addressed the budget deficit.

That probably won’t satisfy the media hounds desperate for 24 hour news coverage, but I believe it is what is needed - stable government may be boring but its really helpful at times like these.

In this brave new world of Coalition Government we could be forgiven for finding ourselves staring into the glare of this new era like political rabbits caught in the  headlights of radical change. Indeed I have already noticed some Government backbenchers have started wearing sunglasses to avoid the glare!

But, as in all situations, good, bad or indifferent, radical change such as is being promised by the coalition does present an opportunity that should be grasp by others in the wake of the Governments reforms.

And, in my view the best place to start would be with our own Town Halls, our local councils. Partly because some promised reforms will affect Councils in any case and irrespective of the affect of those reforms, the £1.16 billion of announced cuts to local authority grants should prove a spur to reform if ever one was needed.

Much of the way our local councils work hasn’t changed in decades, there has been change, but all too often since the dark days of Thatcher, it has been change forced through in response to annual budget cuts.

It’s about time we had a root and branch examination of what council services we provide and how we provide them. It’s time for a local council re-think, to re-think not just service provision but how we work with local people to provide the services they want.

If we grasp the nettle of reform that the Coalition is sending us then we can harness that reform to enable us to renew local democracy and local government and provide a truly radicall and dare I say revolutionary approach to the way we serve local people.

There has never been a better time like the present.

Listening to Labour’s response to the announcement of Coalition proposals for public sector cuts yesterday you would have thought that they had nothing to do with the previous Government and certainly no responsibility for any of the budget deficit.

Now we can all argue about a) how much Labour are responsible and b) When the cuts should take place, but there is no getting away from the fact, as all parties agree, that we need massive cuts to public services in order to reduce the budget deficit.

Key point No.1 has to be that we don’t overdo the cuts and £6bn, whilst sounding a lot (and is), is only a fraction of the Governments overall budget, and it has been done with the approval of the Governor of the Bank of England and following consultation with leading economists. In addition cuts have to be sensitive to the delicate slight recovery that would seem to be underway, so as not to jeapardise our climb out of recession.

Key point No.2 is that key frontline public services for the old, frail, young and infirm have to be protected. Even if”back-office” functions are cut, we must protect the vulnerable in society.

Key point No.3 is to ensure that we are as even handed as possible - there is no use devastating certain areas of public services if such devastation leads to further catastrophic problems as a result.

Overall, from what I’ve seen, I feel the cuts announced yesterday do meet these three key points and so, while I am not exactly happy the cuts have been made, as a believer in strong public services who can, I feel they are being approached in a proper, considered, manner by the new Government.

Ultimately the fortunes of the Coalition partners may well succeed or flounder on how the cuts and progress out of recession are handled, but its certainly to early to judge, and I for one won’t take any lessons from Labour on how the public finances should be managed.

Yesterday Nick Clegg MP gave his first speech as Deputy Prime Minister – you can read the full speech here on the important subject of political reform.

What Nick has announced is the biggest shake up of British democracy since the Great Reform Act of 1832. It is a fundamental resettlement of the relationship between state and citizen that puts people, not Whitehall, in charge.

Step one – we will repeal all of the intrusive and unnecessary laws that inhibit people’s freedom. This means scrapping ID cards, halting the second generation of biometric passports, radically reforming the DNA database, ending the ContactPoint children’s database and stopping the fingerprinting of children without parent’s permission.

Step two - we will reform our politics so it is open, transparent and decent. We will introduce an elected House of Lords, fixed termed parliaments and strengthening parliament so it can hold the executive to account. Under our plans voters will have the power to recall corrupt MPs, there will be a register of lobbyists and a cap on donations. And most importantly we will give people a chance to vote in a referendum on our outdated and undemocratic electoral system.

Step three - we will radically redistribute power away from the centre, into your communities, your homes and your hands. We will strengthen local democracy and empower local people whilst scrapping layers of unnecessary top-down Whitehall bureaucracy. And we will implement further devolution to the nations of Britain.

Liberal Democrats in government are already delivering our manifesto commitments and opening up our political system and empowering citizens. That is what we have fought for over many years, and that is what we are now able to do.

Yesterday we made a new Mayor, or so it goes, as Bury’s councillors gathered at the Town hall to elect a new Mayor of Bury.

This year after some pre-election shenanigans from the Conservatives we finally got round to electing Cllr John Byrne who represents East Ward for Labour.

It’s a very ceremonial event with much back slapping and kind words gushing forth in support of the new first citizen and indeed the endeavours of the outgoing Mayor - Cllr Sheila Magnall. But it is certainly a respectful and honouring occasion when friends, family and dignitaries are present to share the occasion as the gift, responsibility and honour of being the Mayor of the Town is bestowed by your peers.

Sadly all the ceremony and pleasantries was preceeded by an Annual Council meeting that had to deal with some controversial issues surrounding amendments to the council constitution and “reforms” to the leadership of the Council foisted upon us by the previous Labour Government.

Under Labour’s plans yesterday we had to elect a “strong” leader.  Now anyone with a minimal interest in local affairs will now know that following the local elections the Conservatives no longer have a majority on Bury Council and will have to rely to a certain extent on oppostion party support to get key decisions through.

As a result the election of leader was not a forgone conclusion, but as neither the Lib Dems or Labour could bring themselves to support or oppose the Conservative nomination, Cllr Bibby was duly elected leader of the Council.

This was followed by amendments to the council constitution partially designed to fit with this new leadership model and partially to improve the scrutiny and review of council decisions.

Over the past year the scrutiny process in Bury has been roundly condemned by councillors from all three parties and as such it was no surprise that proposals before us yesterday also drew criticism and concerns. Especially concerns about openness , transparency, the real ability to hold the leadership to account and whether too much power was being vested in one person!

Of course we won’t truly be able to give the response to those concerns until probably well into the municipal year. But I pray the new system is better that what we had because otherwise it will be disastrous for our democracy and ensuring good decisions are made.

Time will tell.

The Coalition Policy Agreement has now been published and I am delighted to discover that it is full of Liberal Democrat policies.

Obviously by virtue of the fact that we (like the Conservatives) have had to compromise, there are policy issues that we are unable to put into practice at this time. Nevertheless it is a real chance to put into action the ideas that we have campaigned for over the last few weeks and in some cases for decades!

If this agreement holds, and I hope it does, then our two leaders will have changed politics for good and found a new way of governing, replacing the yah boo, confrontational politics with a more consensual approach, accentuating the common ground, the positives.It will of course remain a tremendous challenge for the coalition partners and in fact all political parties, it will be very interesting to see how Labour reacts for instance.

Below is a summary of the key headline policies so far as our key manifesto pledges were concerned. You can read the full coalition document here. 

A Fair Start for Children

·         Introduce a Pupil Premium to give all children a fair start.

Fairer taxes and Economic Reform

• A substantial increase in the personal allowance from April 2011 with a longer term policy objective of further increasing the personal allowance to £10,000, making further real terms steps each year towards this objective
• Reform of the banking system, ensuring a flow of lending to businesses and a Banking Levy. An independent commission on separating retail and investment banking.
• Capital Gains Tax reform

Fair Politics

• Fixed-term parliaments and a referendum on electoral reform for the House of Commons.
• A power of recall, allowing voters to force a by-election where an MP was found to have engaged in serious wrongdoing.
• A wholly or mainly elected House of Lords on the basis of proportional representation.
• Giving Parliament control of its own agenda so that all bills are properly debated.
• Enacting the Calman Commission proposals and a referendum on further Welsh devolution.
• A statutory register of lobbyists.
• A limit on political donations and reform of party funding in order to remove big money from politics.
• Radical devolution of power and greater financial autonomy to local government and community groups.

A fair and sustainable future

• Establish a smart electricity grid and the roll-out of smart meters.
• Establish feed-in tariff systems in electricity
• A huge increase in energy from waste through anaerobic digestion.
• The creation of a green investment bank.
• The provision of home energy improvement paid for by the savings from lower energy bills.
• Retention of energy performance certificates when HIPs are scrapped.
• Measures to encourage marine energy.
• The establishment of an emissions performance standard that will prevent coal-fired power stations being built unless they are equipped with sufficient CCS to meet the emissions performance standard.
• Establish a high-speed rail network.
• Cancel the third runway at Heathrow and refuse additional runways at Gatwick and Stansted.
• Replace the Air Passenger Duty with a ‘per plane’ duty.
• The provision of a floor price for carbon, as well as efforts to persuade the EU to move towards full auctioning of ETS permits.
• Make the import or possession of illegal timber a criminal offence.
• Promote green spaces and wildlife corridors in order to halt the loss of habitats and restore biodiversity.
• Reduce central government carbon emissions by 10 per cent within 12 months.
• Increase the target for energy from renewable sources.

Pensions

• Restoration of the earnings link for the basic state pension from April 2011 with a “triple guarantee” that pensions are raised by the higher of earnings, prices or 2.5%.
• Phase out the default retirement age and end the rules requiring compulsory annuitisation at 75.
• Implement the Parliamentary and Health Ombudsman’s recommendation to make fair and transparent payments to Equitable Life policyholders.

Civil Liberties

• Scrap the ID card scheme, the National Identity register, the next generation of biometric passports and the ContactPoint Database.
• Outlaw the finger-printing of children at school without parental permission.
• Extend the scope of the Freedom of Information Act to provide greater transparency.
• Adopt the Scottish approach to stopping retention of innocent people’s DNA on the DNA database.
• Defend trial by jury.
• Restore rights to non-violent protest.
• A review of libel laws to protect freedom of speech.
• Safeguards against the misuse of anti-terrorism legislation.
• Further regulation of CCTV.
• Ending of storage of internet and email records without good reason.
• A new mechanism to prevent the proliferation of unnecessary new criminal offences.
• End the detention of children for immigration purposes.

About 12.45 last night I had to accept that we were now in a coalition with the Conservatives.

The moment had arrived when following the endorsement of the Lib Dem parliamentary party and Federal Executive Committee, Nick Clegg stood in Lib Dem HQ and said that the Lib Dems had joined a full coalition with the Conservatives.

I think up to that point I had been in a sort of trance/state of shock or even denial. After all it isn’t easy dealing with the fact that the party you have fought against and opposed for the past 30 years are now your partners in government!

But that was all but ordained by the electorate when no one party was able to command a majority after last thursday. People want us to work together for the common good, and that’s what we have got to do.

But as the dust settles on a new era with a new politics emerging it has become clear that many Lib Dem manifesto pledges have been accepted, as have some long standing Lib Dem committments. And as I said yesterday it has to be about the issues and how we tackle them. If this is to work we have to look past party labels and develop trust and good working relationships amidst a joint committment to make Britain a better place to live.

Anything less would be damnable, anything less will mean the coalition will fail. If this works though I am confident that this historic parliament will see Britain through some difficult times and change the way we are governed for ever.

Here’s to a sustainable economy, fair votes, fair taxation, improved education and a more liberal Britain.

“Tonight the Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Party and the Federal Executive of the Liberal Democrat party have overwhelmingly accepted my recommendation that we should now enter into a coalition government with the Conservative Party.

“Before I say anything more about that coalition government I would like to express my thanks and admiration for Gordon Brown. He has been a towering figure in British politics for well over a decade. And the manner in which he has acted over the last few days has demonstrated immense dignity, grace and a profound sense of his public duty.

“We are now going to form a new government More importantly than anything else, we are going to form a new kind of government; I hope this is the start of a new kind of politics I have always believed in. Diverse, plural, where politicians with different points of view find a way to work together to provide the good government for the sake of the whole country deserves.

“That was what we were asked to do by the people of Britain in the General Election last Thursday and that is what we will deliver.

“I want to thank David Cameron for the very open, constructive and workmanlike way in which we have come together to make this agreement on how we can come together in this coalition government. We are obviously politicians from different parties. I believe we are now united in seeking to meet the immense challenges that now face the country and to deliver a fairer, better Britain.

“Of course there will be problems along the way; of course there will be glitches. But I will always do my best to prove that new politics isn’t just possible – it is also better.

“I’d like to say something directly to the nearly seven million people who supported the Liberal Democrats in the General Election last week. I am now acutely aware that I carry your hopes and aspirations into this coalition agreement.
I am sure you have many questions, maybe many doubts. But I can assure you I would not have entered into this agreement unless I was genuinely convinced it was a unique opportunity to deliver the changes you and I believe in.

Fair taxes.

A fair start in life for every child.

A new approach to our discredited banking system and the prospect of green and sustainable economic growth.

And new, open politics which you can trust once again.

“So I hope you will now keep faith with us let us prove to you that we can serve this country with humility, with fairness at the heart of everything we do. And with total dedication to the interests and livelihoods of everyone in this country.”

…..but as with everything the devil will be in the detail. Remember the manifesto pledges, remember the issues and the crisis the country faces.

There’s a lot of talk in the media about the various party leaders and who gets on best with who. And then on top of that some people are saying they don’t want Brown/Cameron etc.

We have to remember firstly that we did not have a presidential election last thursday. we didn’t vote for a party leader we voted for local representatives who would then appoint a Prime Minister from amongst them - usually from the party that has the majority of votes.

But crucially all parties had published manifestos, which received wide coverage, analysis and scrutiny. People heard what the parties had to say on the big issues and didn’t overwhelmingly endorse any one party.

So now we are negotiating for a stable Government to take the country forward in difficult times. All three main parties are duty bound to negotiate to get the best deal based not upon personalities but on their manifesto committments and the decisions that need to be taken.

To some this situation seems chaotic, to others, myself included, it’s just part of the process of forming a Government, and so long as it doesn’t drag on too much further, it will not harm the economy and will ensure we have a Government with a programme for the next parliament.

With the polls closing on thursday evening in the past it would have been around 2.30 or 3am when one side would have conceded defeat.

However as the people have ordained that no one party should have overall power in this balanced parliament we are now being subjected to a slow motion result, with teams of negotiators meeting up, reporting back and getting feedback etc.

I do believe from what I have witnessed that the whole process does seem to be being conducted in a spirit of responsibility and for the good of the country as a whole with the current crisis we face.

Even the Labour Party, who could be forgiven (to a degree) for not playing ball, seem to be playing their part in a constructive approach to the transfer of power and the formation of a new Government.

For me it shows that no one need fear balanced parliaments in future, with the so-called “horse trading” the tabloids condemned balanced parliaments for creating.

It’s still too early to see what the result of these negotiations will be . What is clear is that it won’t be easy for any of the protagonists. They are being asked to do the right thing by the country, keep their parties happy and at the same time ensure that those that backed them in the poll in their millions don’t feel betrayed.

Its a tough one. But then the stakes don’t get much higher.  

This event lived up to its billing with well over a hundred people present. The three main candidates delivered a 5 minute speech and then faced audience questions - with a minute each to answer.

I must confess I find it a tall order to answer questions on important issues within a minute, but I did my best.

We faced a set of far ranging questions covering many aspects of party policy, the economic situation, Fair votes, immigration etc, but what was most interesting was that one of the questions generating some of the most interest from the audience and the liveliest responses between candidates was a question not about big national issues but the future of the derelict former Whitefield Town Hall. It just shows at the end of the day all politics is local politics when it comes down to it.

There was some upset at the end when English Democrats supporters protested that minor party candidates had been denied an opportunity to get there message across as they hadn’t been invited to speak. I think perhaps if there had been say 4 candidates it would have been difficult to ignore that candidate, but with seven candidates we wouldn’t have got through nearly as many questions as we did.

My congratulations to Laurie Bullas and the Methodist Circuit for organising what turned out to be the best attended event of the campaign.

If you want to read my speech you can do so here:  methodists_speech.pdf

Nick Clegg: “As you decide how to cast your vote, of course you’ll be told by these two, that real change is dangerous, that it can’t be done.

“Don’t let anyone scare you from following your instincts. Together, next week we can change Britain for good.”

Well done Nick Clegg, another confident perfomance last night confirmed his status as a key challenger. And with Lbour slumping what had become a 3 way fight is fast becoming a 2 way horse race - between the Lib Dems and the Conservatives.

Whatever your views about live debates, they have clearly energised the electorate like never before and allowing people to make up their own minds, sidestepping the spin doctors and the biased national newspapers.

And it’s clear that over the 3 debates Nick Clegg has probably done best, and Brown has struggled. 

For the Lib Dems they have been a remarkable success, projecting Nick Clegg into the spotlight like never before, allowing us to outline our policies and vision for Britain like never before and allowing us to challenge the two old failed parties and their tired policies.

Now it’s over to you, “You’re the boss”. Do we go for real change with the Lib Dems, cosmetic change with the Tories or no change with Labour.

There is everything to play for , it’s time to grasp change like never before.

Your can read Nick Cleggs opening and closing statements from last nights debate here.

Last nights Hustings event was at the (relatively new) Maccabi Community and Sports club on Bury Old Road in Prestwich.

As ever my Labour and Conservative opponents were also there and we were treated to a pretty good turnout. The event was organised by the Faith Network 4 Manchester, a Manchester centred interfaith “alliance” of faith groups and charities.

Naturally therefore many of the questions were directly or indirectly related to faith issues, some on issues of concern to the Jewish community and some of concern to the Christian community.

Questions were also asked about Asylum seekers, Hung parliaments, Mental Health and supporting the low paid. 

The event lasted 2 hours and when I tell you answers were limited to 2 minutes per person you can imagine we got through quite a few questions. A bit like political speed dating!

All in all an excellent event. I must congratulate Jonny Wineberg as Chair, and all involved in the Faith Network 4 Manchester for organising this event and of course Maccabi for hosting it. 

Last night I attended a hustings event organised by the Chamber of Commerce alongside my Labour and Conservative counterparts.

What came across loud and clear was both the pressure small to medium sized enterprises currently find themselves under and the concern that the political parties had the right answers so far as business and the economy were concerned.

On the day when the Institute for Fiscal Studies criticised the 3 main parties for having large holes in their plans to cut the budget deficit etc, I said that political parties need to be honest with the electorate. It is no use any of the main parties trying to pretend in this crisis that we have exclusive solutions to the problem.

That’s why the Lib Dems would like the three main parties to get together after the election in a council for fiscal stability. We need a coherent, sustainable cross party response to this massive problem. Lets bring the Chancellor together with the shadow chancellors and the Governor of the Bank of England and others and iron out a strategy that can take the economy forward.

Incidently  the IFS briefing clearly stated that the Liberal Democrats have gone further than any party in identifying the savings that will be needed to tackle the structural deficit. The Conservatives on the other hand have pledged to make the biggest cuts to spending since the Second World War without coming clean about where the axe will fall. 

The IFS also shows both Labour and the Conservatives are hiding behind vague efficiency savings to avoid coming clean about their proposals.

We welcome the IFS’s overall assessment that the Liberal Democrat plans to raise the personal allowance to £10,000 is progressive, adds up and gives people an incentive to work.

This is in stark contrast to the assessment of Conservative tax plans, which the IFS have shown to be both regressive by rewarding the richest, as well as self contradictory. As the IFS have shown, the Conservatives would have to reverse half of their proposed £6bn National Insurance tax cut to meet their own targets on tax.

The Liberal Democrats have set out radical plans to protect the environment and set the economy on a path to a zero carbon Britain.

The proposals include a £3.1bn green economic stimulus package, plans to slash energy use and improve energy efficiency, and a UK Infrastructure Bank to embed green investment for the long term.  

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg said:

“This election is not like any other. Climate scientists tell us that the next government will be the last that can stop dangerous climate change.

“That is a huge responsibility for the party that wins this election. But it’s an even bigger responsibility for the voters that will choose them on May 6.

“So my message is this: don’t settle for a Labour party that has had thirteen years to deliver on the environment and has failed. Don’t settle for a Conservative party that talks the talk on green issues, only to align themselves with climate change deniers in the European Parliament. And don’t give your vote to a Green Party that cannot make a difference in Westminster.

“Instead, choose the only party that was taking a stand on saving the planet well before it became fashionable. The only party that has led the way on tackling climate change, from championing the 10:10 campaign in our councils, to setting out radical plans in Parliament to cut Britain’s carbon emissions. Choose the only party that in the wake of the economic crisis is setting out a credible vision for a new and sustainable economy.

“Something really exciting is happening in British politics. This is a huge opportunity to set Britain on the road to a prosperous and green future. “We should seize it.”

I’ve just returned from a election campaign meeting at Manchester Mesivta High School in Prestwich.

It was great to visit this school for the first time since it’s been rebuilt, to meet Mr Pink , Head Teacher and Mr Lewis, Principal and colleagues.

The event was effectively part of the schools mock election campaign. Along with candidates from Labour, the Conservatives and the Green Party, I was invited to make a short speech, which was followed by a question and answer session.

I have to say there were some tremendous questions from the pupils and we were all suitably tested.

My congratulations to the organisers and of course the Mesivta LibDem candidate.

You can read my speech here:mesivta-speech.pdf

I’m currently waiting for the headline, “Clegg eats babies for breakfast”.

Todays savage attack on Nick Clegg confirms more than ever that we need a groundshift and radical reform in british politics.

The Tories said our policies should be scrutinised. Fine, that’s right and proper. Today we saw smear not scrutiny, we saw Conservative vested interests bullying the electorate. We saw corporate conservatives saying to the British people, oh no you don’t - you will vote Tory. 

It’s wrong, it is a disgraceful intervention in a general election and it certainly aint policy scrutiny or news journalism.

I was prepared to just put it down to the press and their conservative vested interests but I have yet to see any condemnation from the Conservative Party.

The only comment I have seen was to say that we should expect this as we are doing well. Ok, well we undoubtedly expected to be attacked, but this has gone way over the top. In any case what can be expected doesn’t necessarily mean its right.

It just proves yet again how rotten our democracy really is. Things have to change.  

The Liberal Democrats have set out radical plans to invest extra money in schools to give every child a fair chance.

We will invest an extra £2.5bn in schools through a Pupil Premium that will raise funding for the poorest pupils to private school levels.

The money will be targeted at schools taking on children who need more help, but will benefit every child in every school. The cash can be used to cut class sizes and provide one-to-one tuition or catch-up classes, ensuring every child gets the individual attention they need.

An average primary school could cut class sizes to 20. An average secondary school could see classes of just 16.

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg said:

“In 1997, when New Labour was first elected, no one would have believed it would end like this. Labour’s bright promise of a fair society has faded away.

“Our big task now is giving people back their hope that things can be different, and better, and that the fair society we have hoped for so long can become a reality.

“If you want to build that fair society I believe education is everything. That is why the biggest financial commitment in our manifesto is to our schools.

“With the deficit as it is, everyone knows money is tight, but this is a question of priorities. We have identified in our manifesto £15bn of savings, of which we will redirect just £5bn to alternate spending. It is a measure of my personal commitment and passion for education that half of that money will go into our schools.

“Our plans will raise the money spent on the million children from the poorest backgrounds to private school levels. Headteachers will be able to use that money on a whole range of measures to help all pupils and all schools.

“Cutting class sizes, providing more one-to-one tuition and catch-up classes: whatever suits their school and their pupils’ needs best. With a simple, but profound ambition: to make sure every child gets the fair start in life they deserve.”

Vic D’Albert, Lib Dem Parliamentary candidate for Bury South added, “I am very proud of the Lib Dems committment to education. Recession or no recession our childrens education is fundamental and cannot be put at risk. Smaller class sizes is a simple but very effective way to improve early years education at a stroke.”

Ok with 15 days to go too Polling day it is now patently clear that the Conservatives proposals for Government would appear to centre on two recurring and recurring and recurring themes.

1. They will cut waste to halve the deficit

2. They will cancel an increase in National Insurances scheduled for 2011

So people are expected to return a majority Conservative Government on the basis that they will scrap mythically large amounts of apparent waste that’s everywhere waiting to be cut and they know now that in a years time, not now, not later this year, it won’t be necessary to keep the NI mincrease as it will damage the economy.

They should forget politics and get into fortune telling. 

It was welcoming today to hear that four senior Generals have come out against replacing the trident missile system.

The key for Liberal Democrats is that the world has changed beyond belief since the cold war, when Trident was commissioned.

We no longer need to point a range of missiles permanently at one country. Threats to our country now come from different sources, international terrorism, dirty bombs, rogue states.

Trident is quickly becoming obsolete, which is why its potential replacement is on the agenda now. However first of all we have to be clear. While other senior military figures insist that a decision does not need to be made now, and Tridents life could be lengthened, the harsh reality is that we need to adapt our military capabilities to a different era and new challenges.

When coupled with the difficult economic times we currently face, it makes economic and military sense to address this issue as part of a widespread review of military spending that should ensure that our forces can meet the challenges they are likely to face over the coming decade with the best possible resources and equipment. Trident should be part of that review.

The Lib Dems are not looking to unilaterally disarm, but would wish the UK Government to play its part alongside current innitiatives by President Obama, to reduce the worlds nuclear arsenal and tackle head-on the issue of nuclear weaponry development amongst rogue states and in general.

Labour and Tory opposition to these proposals is yet another example of their failure to adapt to changing times. A combination of still fighting the cold war and protecting the “empire” still prevail at great cost to our military budget and under resourced and protected service men and women.

If you would like to read the General’s letter to the Times you can follow the link here.

I have found it quite shameful over the past few days to watch Labour and especially Tory politicians fall over themselves in their attemps at scaremongering against hung parliaments, and trying to rubbish the Lib Dem influence on these elections.

Essentially I believe it’s an insult to the electorate. What is clear now in this election is that people want change, but not any change - not the pendulum change of the past, but the fundamental, radical change that would lead to a clean up of politics, reform of our institutions and Government a sensible measured approach to cuts, and an injection of fairness into our tax and benefits system and society in general.

But the hitherto unmentioned factor has been the demand for real choice. People are now telling the pollsters and the politicians that they won’t accept the old two party, either/or choice of the past. They want to be able to choose Lib Dem, Green, UKIP etc in the knowledge that a vote for their choice will count. That’s real democracy too.

As such it looks like the Lib Dems are now the beacon carriers for real choice, not just now but in the future. However this election ultimately turns out, surely elections can never be the same again. 

When the polls close on May 6th the people will have decided, the politicians must not just accept that result as the will of the people they have to listen and act responsibly in taking a new Government and parliament forward. Anything less would be a travesty and a deceit.

The Liberal Democrats today launched plans to create jobs that last by stimulating a green, sustainable economy. The plans include investing in wind energy, energy efficiency in public buildings and homes, and bringing empty homes back into use through renovation.

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg said: “This week I will be focusing on the most important issue of all in this election: how we can build a new economy from the rubble of the old. Under Governments from the old parties, economic policy was made entirely subservient to the needs of just one square mile - the city of London.

“This will provide an immediate jobs boost and help create the green infrastructure we need for a low carbon economy. On Tuesday and Wednesday I will unveil further proposals on restructuring our financial system and on boosting social mobility in the new economy.”

Vic D’Albert, Lib Dem Parliamentary candidate for Bury South added, “Time has moved on but the approach and attitude of the two old parties has remained rooted in the past. The recession shouldn’t be the death knell for environmentally friendly policies it should be the spring board. A spring board for massive growth in the green economy, providing a boost to jobs and the economy when it most needs it.”

You can read more about these policies here .

Or your can download this section of our manifesto here: libdem_2010_job.pdf

I must confess to being nervous before hand last night as I settled down with colleagues to watch the live debate between the 3 party leaders.

However, I believe Nick outshone Brown and Cameron, putting our case well, getting our message across and frankly exposing Cameron’s shallow, cosmetic Conservative policy position.

From where I sat Brown did better than many probably expected, whilst Cameron looked the most nervous and lost every spat with Clegg and Brown.

Well before the end it was clear that it was Nick Cleggs night, by the end I had forgoten how many times Cameron and Brown had said “I agree with Nick”. 

Of course it was just one debate, but it did give the Lib Dems the (equal) coverage we deserve and it was interesting to see the three leaders away from the kindergarten atmosphere of the House of Commons and in an environment where they had to deal with public questions and then face challenges from the other two. Excellent format.

Nick responded with clarity and substance, confidence and assurance.  Well done Nick! 

But don’t take my word for it read what the experts have been saying today:  

“Mr Clegg took his chance. He used the biggest opportunity ever given to the third party in British politics to give a virtuoso performance. It was his night.” (Times)

Leaders’ Debate Polls

• YouGov instant reaction: Nick Clegg: 51%, David Cameron: 29%, Gordon Brown: 19%, Don’t Know: 2 %

• ITN poll: Nick: 43%, Cameron: 26%, Brown: 20%

• Populus (Times): Nick: 61%, Cameron: 22%, Brown: 17%

The first Leaders’ debate took place yesterday and Nick won.BBC Political Editor Nick Robinson said the biggest impact of the contest will be the insertion of Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats into the nation’s consciousness but nothing the other leaders said had fundamentally altered the general election debate. The abiding memory of the contest could be “the other leaders saying ‘I agree with Nick,” he added.

Vince Cable: “What matters is not what the commentators and spin-doctors think, it’s what the public think, all the indications we’re getting is that the public really liked Nick Clegg, he seems to have come out well ahead.”

Leader Debate Front Pages

• The Guardian reports that Nick Clegg came out on top of the long-awaited TV leaders’ debate. The paper says he won the argument with his pitch that he represented change from the other two parties’ “combined record of failure”. (Clegg the outsider seizes his moment in the TV spotlight)

• The Telegraph reports that Mr Clegg was able to exploit his equal billing to score points off Gordon Brown and David Cameron, reports the Daily Telegraph. Mr Brown decided to attack Mr Cameron rather than outline his future vision for Britain, the paper says. (Clegg’s star rises in great TV showdown).
• The Independent claims that Nick Clegg eclipsed Gordon Brown and David Cameron in the first leaders’ debate (Clegg comes of age).
• The Times also hails the performance of Nick (Enter the Outsider).
• The Mirror comes out in favour of Mr Clegg, although the paper says Mr Cameron was the clear loser. (It’s a man vs boys).

Clegg: “Don’t let anyone tell you the only choice is old politics, we can do something new, we can do something different this time. That’s what I’m about, that’s what The Liberal Democrats offer.”

Out and about knocking on doors since the start of the campaign what is as clear as day is the anger, distrust and frustration many residents now feel towards politicians in general, political parties and Government - at least as embodied by the House of Commons.

The Expenses scandal is like a poorly healed wound that keeps opening up every time a further incident occurs - most recently of course the claim for legal aid by the 3 charged MP’s has angered many, reopened the wound.

But how do we as politicians and our parties persuade people that it won’t happen again, that if elected we won’t behave as shamefully as the last lot, that we will take the action needed to clean up politics?

Some people have told me that whilst they will still vote in the local elections on May 6th, they plan to boycott the General Election. I tell them that whilst I understand there concerns there is a real danger that we end up with an even worse Government, and something even less representative of the British people than we have had.

That for me is the real danger, the scenario created by a shift to extremism coupled with a low turnout. That would make the last parliament look like a  high school debating society by comparison.

Rightly so, as Nick Clegg has constantly repeated that the decision as to who governs Britain rests with the people, “They’re the boss”. And so we have to urge, plea, beg if necessary, for the great British people to first of all get out there and vote.

Secondly, even if you have precious little faith in British Politics, choose a candidate/party that if nothing else, most closely matches your aspirations and hopes for your country and your community.

And finally, make sure they are offering genuine change, new hope, a revitalised politics, a trusted Parliament and a representative Government.

That of course would come at the end of this long campaign, but would genuinely herald a fresh start and hopefully a Liberal Britain.

THE LIBERAL DEMOCRAT MANIFESTO

This is a manifesto you can trust. We have stripped our priorities back to the essential, fundamental changes that Britain needs to make it fair:

• Fair taxes that put money back in your pocket
• A fair chance for every child
• A fair future, creating jobs by making Britain greener
• And a fair deal by cleaning up politics

These are deliverable, practical plans to make your life better, and they are right there on the front cover of our manifesto.  Instead of rhetoric and razzmatazz, we are saying what we will do and how we will pay for it.

Elections should be a competition of ideas, not marketing budgets. They may have the bigger budgets but we have the bigger ideas.And you can trust us to deliver because unlike the other parties, we have spelt out, line by line in the manifesto how every single policy is paid for, and how we will reduce the deficit.

We have set out £15bn of details spending cuts and just £5bn a year of new spending, meaning £10bn for the deficit every year. We are the first party to put detailed spending plans into a manifesto.

Four key pledges

1. Fair taxes: We will ensure no-one pays income tax on the first £10,000 they earn. Most taxpayers will get a tax cut of £700 a year.  We’ll pay for it by closing loopholes that unfairly benefit the rich, a new tax on mansions worth over £2m, a crack down on tax avoidance and higher aviation duty.
2. A fair start for all our children: We will get every child the individual attention they need by cutting class sizes.  We will spend an extra £2.5bn on schools, targeted at children who need the most help. The average primary school could cut class sizes to 20. An average secondary school could see classes of just 16.
3. A fair future: a rebalanced, green economy: We will break up the banks and rebalance the economy away from unsustainable financial speculation. We will be honest about where savings must be made in government spending to balance the books and protect our children’s future. And we will create new jobs with a £3.1bn green stimulus and job creation plan in our first year in office, fully funded by cut backs elsewhere.
4. A fair deal from politicians: We will introduce a fair voting system. We will ensure corrupt MPs can be sacked by their constituents and stop non-doms from donating to parties or sitting in Parliament. We will take power from Westminster and give it to communities, with local power over police and the NHS, and introduce a freedom bill to protect and restore civil liberties.

We also have the following commitments:

• Protect front line NHS services. We will help the NHS work better with the money it has and protect front line services by re-investing the savings we find back into healthcare
• Recruit 3,000 more police officers to keep our streets safe and scrapping ID cards
• Scrap student tuition fees to reduce the burden of student debt immediately and eliminate fee debt altogether over 6 years
• A pay rise for our brave service men and women together with cut backs of bureaucrats and top brass officers in the Ministry of Defence
• Uprate the basic state pension in line with earnings immediately so that pensioners do not fall further behind when the economy starts to grow again

YOU CAN READ NICK CLEGGS MANIFESTO LAUNCH SPEECH HERE

YOU CAN READ OR DOWNLOAD A COPY OF OUR MANIFESTO HERE: libdem_manifesto_2010.pdf

ALTERNATIVELY YOU CAN VIEW OUR MANIFESTO IN FULL OR SECTIONS ON OUR WEBSITE HERE 

I was pleased to meet with officers of the Jewish Representative Council of Manchester last night.

They are meeting local candidates to highlight issues of concern to the organisation and find out candidates views on issues of concern to the Jewish community.

I think it is fair to say there was a frank exchange of views, I spoke openly about issues and hopefully reassured the JRC about issues such as faith schools, anti-semitism, Foreign policy towards Israel  amongst others.

It was a very pleasant meeting, I would offer my thanks to Mrs Barbara Goldstone and colleagues, Frank and Sydney Baigel for allowing me the opportunity to meet with them.

Analysis of the Conservatives’ proposed tax cuts or reversals shows that they will cost over £13.5bn a year in 2011-12 prices – yet just £100m has been specifically identified to fund them.

This leaves a £13.4bn black hole, equivalent to a 3% rise in the standard rate of VAT. This would mean an extra tax of £389 on the average household.

The Liberal Democrats have fully-costed plans to raise the starting threshold for income tax to £10,000 – this would put £700 back in the pockets of the vast majority of people, and lift around 4m of Britain’s lowest earners out of paying tax altogether.

It would be funded by ensuring the very well-off pay their fair share, through measures including:

• taxing capital gains as income
• a mansion tax on properties worth over £2m
• giving tax relief on pensions only at the basic rate
• tackling tax avoidance

Commenting, Nick Clegg said:

“Liberal Democrats have costed, in full, our proposals for tax cuts. We can tell you, penny for penny, pound for pound, who pays for them.

“We will not have to raise VAT to deliver our promises. The Conservatives will. Let me repeat that: Our plans do not require a rise in VAT. The Tory plans do.

“Their tax promises on marriage and jobs may sound appealing. But they come with a secret VAT bombshell close behind.

“So if you’re on an ordinary income, you have a choice. If you want your taxes to rise: vote Labour or Conservative. If you want your taxes to fall: choose the Liberal Democrats.”

The Tories have finally come clean about how they would cut public spending by £12bn - to help fund their pledge to curb the rise in National Insurance.

Lo and behold it’s a mish mash of “efficiency savings”, cuts and unspecified “projects” as well as cuts to recruitment.

Advisors to The Financial Times, not renowned for its left leaning views, reckon it could mean 40,000 public jobs lost.

Lib Dem Treasury spokesman Vince Cable said it appeared the Conservatives were “looking to immediately slash employment throughout the public sector”.

Vic D’Albert, Bury South Parliamentary candidate added, “What bothers me most here is that the Tories are treating people like fools. They are making wild promises to cut public spending and lower NI and then they insist people won’t lose there jobs and key services like the NHS and Education won’t suffer.

“Every knows it just doesn’t add up and it doesn’t make sense. On top of which anyone who can remember Thatchers Conservative Government will remember they promised the same and they then proceeded to decimate public services.

Many people are telling me how sick they are of the “current lot” and we need a fresh start etc. Yet there is every possibility that a third of the population or more may not even vote this time.

The trouble is the more people don’t, vote the more likely we will end up with a Government that is unrepresentative and no better than the “current lot”.

So make sure you vote in the local elections for Bury Council and the General Election for a new Westminster Parliament on May 6th. Polling stations will be open from 7am to 10pm.

If you are unable to get to the Polling stations on May 6th and would like a postal vote you can either email the elections office at Bury Town Hall at electionservices@bury.gov.uk or go to the link lower down on this website.

Alternatively you can download a Postal vote application form here: postalvoteapplicationform.pdf

If you are not yet registered to vote you can download an application form here: voterregistrationform.pdf

The deadline for the receipt of postal vote applications and voter registration is April 20th. 

For general advice etc about the elections and registration etc please call 0161 253 5113 or 5114 or email electionservices@bury.gov.uk .

DON’T WASTE IT - USE IT!

I woke up this morning to the news that 98% of the jobs created by Browns Government have allegedly been filled by foreign workers.

That headline reminded me of the electrician I met last night. He was angry and bitter at the way Labour had mishandled immigration and failed to protect “British” jobs. He told me he had been unemployed now for 18 months, his job having been filled by less qualified and cheaper Polish electricians. He was inclined not to vote at all so dissilusioned was he.

Previously I met a man still angry and seething at the MP’s expenses scandal. He had now reached the conclusion that all MP’s were corrupt and “just in it for what they can get out out of it”.

Both incidences highlighted to me what happens when Governments fail to recognise public concerns about issues and then fail to take strong decisive action.

We need a Government that listens, that understands and then acts on public concerns. That doesn’t mean knee jerk reactions, or tabloid led decision making. It does mean recognising the concern ordinary people feel about immigration and corruption and considering rational, fair steps that can be taken to address those concerns.

As I said in a previous post, we need a rational grown up debate about immigration that evaluates the seperate and considers what needs to be done to deal with the seperate strands - illegal imigration and trafficking, Asylum immigration and skills shortfall immigration through economic migration (as desired).

Of course too often illegal and Asylum immigration gets blurred. And it doesn’t help that the Government doesn’t seem to have accurate figures.

What is clear is that yet another of Browns promises - “British jobs for British workers” is yet another failure by him and Labour.

You can read about Lib Dem Policy on Asylum and Immigration here:

asylum.pdf            immigration.pdf

Nick Clegg: “It is a very exciting opportunity for everyone in Britain who wants fairness and real change, who wants something different.

“This isn’t the old politics of a two-horse race between Labour and the Conservative Party. The real choice is between the old politics of Labour and Conservatives and something different, something new and that is what we offer.”

“This is a huge, huge election. It is certainly the beginning of the end for Brown, that’s for sure.

Vic D’Albert, Lib Dem Candidate for Bury South added, “As equal citizens in a modern society isn’t it right that we should all expect a fair deal from the state as a fundamental expectation in return for our duties and responsibilities to that state and our communities?

“As I started knocking on doors last night time and again residents told me that they were sick of the way things are, sick of the tired old politics, sick of post code lotteries, sick of the unfairness that now infects all aspects of our society and Government.

“I told them only the Liberal Democrats are putting fairness at the heart of our manifesto committments, fairness that means fundamental change.”

Our manifesto has four key themes:

Fair Taxes for all

A Fair Start for Children

Fair, transparent & local politics

A fair and sustainable economy

The General election will be on May 6th - it’s official (at last)!

After 13 years of Labour, with a fragile, damaged economy, confidence in our Government and Parliament at an all time low, It really is time to reject the pendulum politics that has blighted British Government for generations.

It is time for a new politics that is directly and constantly responsible and answerable to the British people, that is representative of the British people and will truly stand up for the interests and concerns of the British people.

It’s not that Labour have failed or the Conservatives before them. It’s the system, it’s the arrogant assumption of “our turn” from the Labservatives when the tide turns.

This time surely to goodness after the scandal of MP’s expenses and countless more failures to deliver to the British people the tide is turning towards a new dawn in British politics. A fresh start offering new hope, new ideals and new solutions.

If ever there was a time for the Liberal Democrats it is now. 

 A RECENT MESSAGE RECEIVED FROM NICK CLEGG

Last week, we launched a spoof campaign for the “Labservative” party. You can find the details at www.labservative.com.

It’s a funny campaign, but it has a serious point, a point only Liberal Democrats are making in this election.

For 65 years the government of our country has been handed from Labour to the Conservatives and back again like a game of pass the parcel. Red-blue, blue-red politics – and look what it has got us: corrupt politics, recession, inequality , time and again. They just take turns at making the same mistakes. It has to end.

The old politics is not good enough any more. It is time for something different.

Our strategy in this election is to make it clear that if you want real change, you have to vote for a party that is different.

All you will get from the old parties is more of the same. Just think how much they agree on.On the economy: the Labservatives have been in thrall to the City of London for decades, neglecting the rest of Britain and letting the banks get away with doing whatever they want.

And now the Labservatives are both refusing to come clean about the tough decisions needed to sort out the public finances - it’s a conspiracy of silence.

It’s the same story wherever you look: together David Cameron and Gordon Brown have blocked political reform, including our plan to allow people to sack corrupt MPs.

The Labservatives compete to sound tough on crime instead of doing what works to actually catch criminals and stop them committing more crimes. And the Labservatives have made UK foreign policy subservient to the interests of the United States, from the illegal invasion of Iraq to the decision to waste £100bn on replacing, like for like, the cold war era Trident nuclear submarines.

Labservatism is alive and well in Britain today, and only the Liberal Democrats can change that. A vote for Cameron or Brown is a vote for the corrupt, failed status quo.

Only Liberal Democrats offer real change.So wherever you are out campaigning, from Scotland to Cornwall, from Ceredigion to Norfolk, from inner London to rural Cumbria, remember this: We are not campaigning against two parties: we are campaigning against one. We are campaigning against the old, failed way of doing things. We are campaigning for real, permanent change to build a fairer Britain.

It’s a simple choice between old and new.So keep on campaigning, and take on Labservatism in your area. Say No to more of the same and Yes to real change.Thank you for all of your hard work,

Nick Clegg MP
Leader of the Liberal Democrats 

I found it incredible that Gordon Brown should stand at a podium in 2010 and declare that illegal immigrants are not welcome and then spout off (inaccurately) about various statistics that allegedly show asylum seeker numbers and others were reducing. What took him so long.

There has been a deafening silence from Labour for 13 years and now facing their most difficult test at the polls for a generation they decide to break their silence

Immigration is a big election issue for many and if handled badly will just play straight into the hands of extremists.

I do hope that in the election the parties will have a sensible mature rational debate over immigration policy. Electors deserve to know and it’s long overdue.

But I would plea that both electors and politicians look closely at the facts and figures and breakdown the various elements. We can’t treat illegal immigrants the same as legal immigrants ( from say other part of the EU) alongside asylum seekers etc.

There are wholly different circumstances and rights and responsibilities attributable and as the grandson of an immigrant, I have always been proud of my countries liberal approach to immigration and tolerance towards others that are fleeing persecution etc.

And, we must not forget the children caught up in the whole process. As a civilised, liberal, tolerant and caring nation we at the very least have a duty to deal with asylum applications speedily and fairly, keeping families together and not treating people as criminals in the meantime.

It’s a complex issue, not as black and white as the BNP and others would like to make it seem. So lets have a mature debate about immigration but lets not forget that we are dealing with vulnerable human beings as well.

Commenting on Labour’s plans to reform social care, Liberal Democrat Shadow Health Secretary, Norman Lamb said: 

“After 13 years in power spent ducking social care reform we probably shouldn’t be surprised that Labour has once again hit it into the long grass.

“A white paper without any commitment to substantial change in the next Parliament is barely worth the paper it is written on.

“We’re now being offered a series of piecemeal reforms that have not been properly thought through or costed. Seeking consensus is the right approach but that will only work if the cross-party commission is free to consider all ways of funding social care, not just Labour’s preferred policy. The commission should report within a year so changes can be implemented straight away.

”Vic D’Albert, Lib Dem Parliamentary Candidate for Bury South added:

“Gesture politics coupled with desperation has meant that the Government made this announcement now rather than seeking to further develop consensus and properly consider how the scheme would work and be funded.

“The issue of social care for the elderly is too important a subject to be reduced to a sound bites and slogans.

The announcement has been followed by suggestions that the Attendance allowance benefit may be slashed by £100m to pay for it.

“It is important right now that we make it clear to Labour and the Tories that we will not stand by and allow other vulnerable groups and disadvantaged communities to see their budgets slashed to pay for this.

“It’s no use addressing the need of the elderly while punishing the disabled or others to pay for it.”

So Alastair Darling has presented his last budget before the election and possibly his last budget for ever, who knows. It was a nothing budget. It said nothing, offered nothing, achieved nothing. Much ado about nothing.

What we do know is that it was a typical Brown Budget, as upbeat as possible, with some nice little titbits BUT all the detail missing. With Brown and Darling the devil is definitely in the detail. As usual it has already turned out that some of the  nice little sweeteners won’t actually happen until 2012 - if they happen at all. Meanwhile he forgot to mention the cuts. Now we all know we face cuts, we were all expecting if not the nitty gritty, more detail than we got. To give us no detail at this time is unfair and unnecessary and shows that Labour are intent on manipulating the situation to their advantage all the way to polling day if possible.

Whilst Labour won’t give public spending cuts details and neither will the Conservatives (yet), only the Lib Dems have said precisely how they would cut the budget deficit with £15bn of specific measures announced already.  Yet within 24 hours of the budget Alastair Darling was letting us know that the cuts, that he can’t tell us about, would be as bad as under Thatcher. Only for the Tories to insist , well we will cut even more then.

It’s a ridiculous unholy child like squabble of who can cut most between the Tories and Labour. When what the people deserve is to know what will be protected, to what extent, how will the cuts break down and as for taxes, how will they be affected.

We need more openness (especially after the expense/lobbying/foreign trips/ scandals) and on a need to know basis, the British Public need to know. Isn’t that the least they deserve, after all they will be paying the bill!

Just when we thought the MP’s expenses scandal was over, we get the MP’s lobbying scandal followed swiftly by the MP’s foreign trips scandal!

Please insert a word of your choosing in the following sentence: MP’s _______Scandal. It will probably happen.

We started off thinking that the system of managing and authorising expense claims was unregulated, archaic and open to abuse, it’s now beginning to look like every nook and cranny of Parliament is either unregulated or abused at will by all and sundry.

I’d like to think things aren’t really that bad, that it’s partly the fault of an over hyping media, to sell newspapers increase audience etc.

BUT irrespective of the hype and the motivation the facts are undeniable. That is that on the one hand we appear to have a largely unregulated systems in place throughout Parliament that are largely left unregulated or loosely monitored and secondly that we have too many MP’s and Lords that are prepared to abuse the system or lack of one.

Perhaps the time is fast approaching when we need a Royal Commission to undergo a sweeping review of our parliementary processes and interaction with Lobby firms and foreign governments et al.

In the meantime it won’t half make the coming General Election fun - Unless you are a candidate of course! 

According to the local advertiser the Labour MP, Ivan Lewis is calling for virtual independance from Bury for the Boroughs 6 townships.

Whilst the detail of his letter to the press doesn’t quite go that far in reality, he might as well have gone for independance for all the sense his remarks make.

Now as a good old fashioned liberal , I’m all for devolution and bringing power down to the lowest possible unit of government etc, power to the people!

BUT the Lewis Plan is pure fairy tales meets electioneering meets desperation.

He calls for Area Partnerships to be replaced by Area Boards. Whoopee, so we scrap our partnerships with the Police, NHS , Voluntary sector and community organisations do we? 

He then says that “Significant funds” will be devolved to the local boards. What does significant mean, where does this come from. Is Bury Council replaced by an Area Board as well or does Bury just become a glorified central supplies and managements body?

The trouble with this proposal is that it hasn’t been thought through, and that is because it’s a blatant election gimmick. Of course prior to the past 3 years of Tory rule at Bury we had 21 years of Labour control. 21 years without a hint of “significant funds” delegated to local areas. Funny how Labour politicians don’t believe in devolving power from the centre until they lose power.  

Then of course he omits to mention that Area Partnerships and the current system of local Government has all been brought in by this Labour Government, with precious little say or influence allowed by the local councils concerned.

Gimmicks notwithstanding, I do hold certain sympathies with his comments. He may well be reacting to local dissatisfaction over Bury Conservatives handling of regeneration in Radcliffe, and their treatment of local people over the threat to Civic halls etc. We should not forget by the way the shocking manner Labour treated local people over the review of High Schools when they were in control.

What we do need locally is to re-connect local power with local people, that does mean devolving decision making and appropriate funds to the 6 Towns of Bury. But if it is to work properly whilst maintaining the economies of scale and the savings provided by one central administration, then there have to be clear areas of responsibility to be devolved.

A good example that I have often cited is our parks. Clearly it is plain for all to see that certain parks fall under certain areas. It would therefore be easy to pass responsibility for local parks to local area partnerships, giving local people a greater say in how they are run. Meanwhile savings could be maintained by having one central parks staff and management. That way we see value for money and greater community involvement.

That I feel is a more common sense approach that utilise the current Town hall structure to the advantage of local areas whilst passing greater responsibility and influence to local people and their elected representatives. And, if better, unlike the Lewis plan it could be implemented very quickly.

So, no need for gimmicks just common sense and political will. 

Scientists would probably tell me that accurate climate change facts are part of the problem, but if people are to have confidence that climate change is occurring and that they should support national and international efforts then accuracy goes to the heart of the matter.

It was a shame therefore that the Government has been ticked off for an advertising campaign about climate change which has been stopped by the Advertising watchdog because it exaggerated the problem.

Incidents such as that and the recent questions about scientists exaggerating the issue are causing real problems when it then comes to public support for much needed environmental policies required to combat climate change.

I for one find it impossible to deny the scale of the problem and my concerns about our climate and ultimately the future of this planet remain undimmed. But I find myself increasingly frustrated and exasperated by the growing questioning of the severity of the problem, and contradictory and innacurate facts and statements an’t helping the cause! 

It is looking increasingly likely that the General election will be on the same day as the local elections.

Whilst all the media interest has been about Brown, Clegg, Cameron and Westminster, we shouldn’t forget that the local elections will have serious consequences as well.

In Bury we have a Conservative administration that is desperate to hang onto power despite a string of high profile mistakes and u-turns.

In Prestwich where the Lib Dems hold all 9 council seats and will be defending three seats, we are hoping residents will show their support for the hard work we have been doing over the past two years (since the last locals).

In fact the contrast is clear. Whilst in Prestwich the Lib Dems have been campaigning to protect local services, keep the Council Tax down and redirect resources to crucial and underfunded services like highway improvements etc, the Conservatives have taken the opposit view.

They have been hunting for cuts such as their recent threats to community centres and parking charges proposal for Fairfax Road car park. And they have been increasing Council tax by well over inflation rate at a time when people can least afford it.

So when you go to the polls on May 6th, if the General Election is on the same day, don’t think nationally and vote the same way locally. All I would ask is that you look at the local situation and look at what the parties have said and done locally and their candidates/councillors records and vote accordingly. And then make seperate judgements on the General Election.

You never know you may end up with what you want at Bury Town Hall AND Westminster, but in any case having considered all the information to hand for two elections, you will have voted and made your vote count. No one can ask fairer than that.

I was delighted that the Liberal Democrat Spring Conference yesterday backed plans to rebalance the economy and create thousands of new green jobs.

The plans will play a vital part in a fair recovery that locks in investment and ensures a path of low-carbon growth.I am particularly delighted that this green economic stimulus package will be a core part of the Liberal Democrat election manifesto.

It is important that Sutainable energy,Climate change and green policies remain at the heart of policy as the need for a radical green public policy agenda will become more pressing with time and we should see the current difficult times as an opportunity for green jobs and investment in our economy and a sustainable future and not an obstacle.Core policies will include: 

•  Immediate investment to expand our green energy infrastructure
• Bringing hundreds of thousands of empty homes back into use
• Insulating schools and other public buildings
• An ‘eco-cashback’ scheme to reward people who make energy efficiency improvements in their homes
•  A National Infrastructure Bank to promote long-term investment in sustainable public transport and renewable energy 

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Shadow Energy and Climate Change Secretary Simon Hughes said:

“The Liberal Democrats have set out a blueprint for a fair economy that’s fit to last. A green stimulus package will help boost investment in clean energy, reduce fuel bills and create thousands of new jobs.

“Labour and the Tories can’t be trusted to deliver the green growth we need. Only the Liberal Democrats have bold and credible plans to rebalance the economy and put Britain at the forefront of this vital transition.” 

I was delighted to join my colleague Richard Baum (Bury North PPC) for a live Radio interview and phone-in at Bury’s Project Radio on sunday.

As part of their General Election coverage, project Radio are interviewing local parliamentary candidates and we of course were delighted to do our bit.

Anwar (pictured) put a variety of questions to the two of us on subjects ranging from Iraq and Afghanistan to the economy and the expenses scandal.

Project Radio is currently operating on a 28 day pilot licence from Knowsley Street and is hoping ultimately to become Bury’s first community radio station.

I was delighted to have been able to support project radio and hopefully we managed to enlighten a few people with our answers.

I received a nice letter from HM Government/Identity & passport agency yesterday.

The letter and accompanying leaflet was extolling the virtues of the Governments Identity card scheme which is currently being piloted in Manchester and London. 

Of course they do make it clear its voluntary and they do eventually mention that they would like you to part with £30 for the privilege.

Of course they don’t mention the fact that the marketing campaign across Manchester and London is estimated at costing £1.3 million of taxpayers money.

Money that could pay for 50 more Police officers (on basic starter pay) at a time when Greater Manchester Police is facing budgetary constraints.

As someone that doesn’t even have a current passport never mind an ID card, I am surprised I can exist. Certainly when you read the promotional letter you could be forgiven for thinking that your life would be so much easier (albeit £30 poorer) if you only had one of these precious cards. 

At a time when public sector spending is supposed to be being cut back I find it absolutely scandalous to find the Government is spending £1.3m on a pet project that will not stop terrorism, will not improve public services and is not necessary.

Commenting on the report by the Princess Royal Trust for Carers which reveals that only 23% of the money allocated to help carers was used in this way, Liberal Democrat Shadow Health Secretary, Norman Lamb said:

“The Government has completely neglected the vital work that carers do and this report is further evidence of the scale of the problem.

“Labour’s cuts are already biting across the NHS and their failure to cut back on waste means that it is the most vulnerable who are losing out. 

“This report highlights the need for a guarantee to respite care which only the Liberal Democrats are committed to.”

Vic D’Albert, Parliamentary candidate for Bury South added, “It just shows how low on their priorities list this Government places carers. These funds should have been ring fenced if Labour were really serious about providing respite care.

“Once again many of the 9000 plus carers in Bury have lost out under this Government.

“It’s about time the role of carers, the valuable work they do and the daily pressures and stresses they face were properly recognised with real commitment. Once again it would seem that only the Lib Dems can offer the commitment they deserve.

An increasingly desperate Conservative Party are increasingly playing dangerous games with the economy by stoking up fear about hung parliaments.

They are now plying a strategy of fear, stirring up anxieties amongst their friends in the city, damaging the pound, causing share to plummet and hurting British business.

Rather than outlining detailed policies for taking the country forward they are enthusiastically highlighting their views as to what will happen if you don’t vote Tory. Its tantamount to political blackmail. Vote Tory or we will wipe out your savings and plunge the economy back into deep recession.

It’s cynical and irresponsiible, it’s negative and it’s damaging the economy before a vote has been cast.

The fact remains while Labour bury their heads in the sand, and the Tories stoke up fear and anxiety, only the Lib Dems have credible coherent plans for dealing with the budget deficit and taking the economy forward.

The worst thing about this whole affair about Lord Ashcroft and his £millions of donations to the Conservative party are that it reopens the whole sleazy murky business about politics being corrupt, underhand and lacking transparency and for that matter honesty that started with the expenses scandal.

It is particularly damaging to a Conservative leader thats been desperately trying to appear squeeky clean and suggesting his party is the same.

Now I know his tax status as a Lord is perfectly legal for now, and I know other parties have had non-dom donations. But this has been going on for 10 years, and the Conservatives have refused to come clean. And I’m sorry it’s no good Cameron saying he wouldn’t tell us. If they truly didn’t know at the start , well they should have known before they gave him a peerage to thank him for the millions donated to the party.

That aspect in itself is sleazy and I would suggest in the current era of distrust of politicians, would not go down well with joe public. It’s the fact that someone can to all extent and purposes buy a seat in the House of Lords. If that isn’t the case, then that’s how it looks and you would have a hard job explaining differently to the man in the street.

Then there is the undue influence that a single men with such wealth can wield with a political party. Ashcroft has bank rolled the Conservative party for years and has personally targeted his millions towards certain Conservative targets/ certain candidates.

One man is potentially affecting the outcome of dozens of marginal seats up and down the land, trying to buy a general election win for the Conservatives and that is interference in democracy on the grandest scale and and just plain wrong.

Commenting on the Government’s ‘chain schools’ announcement, Vic D’Albert Lib Dem Parliamentary Candidate for Bury South said:

“As if we haven’t had enough proposals and meddling in our childrens’ education over the past 13 years the Government has come up with another gimmick on the eve of a General election.  This latest gimmick is just more top-down meddling from a tired Government desperate to divert attention from its failure to raise standards in our schools.

“New providers could possibly help to turn around long-term failing schools, but do we really want Ed Balls to be handpicking all 500 of them?  

“But then again properly funded Local Education Authorities can also provide answers along with improved training for teaching staff and better school management.

“I would rather see our Government concentrating on getting the basics right, freeing up teachers from beurocracy and rectifying imbalances in education funding that sees Bury Council as one of the worst funded authorities in the country.

“Only the Liberal Democrats are committed to giving all schools the extra money they need to cut class sizes and provide children who are struggling with individual support.          

“We will make sure all schools have the freedom to provide an excellent standard of education, without the constant interference of Whitehall politicians.”

Police officers have missed nearly 80,000 days of work after being assaulted by members of the public in the last five years, according to research by the Liberal Democrats. The key points are:

·         78,276 working days have been missed by police officers due to assaults between 2004/05 and 2008/09.

·         17,055 days were lost last year alone, an 11.2% increase on the previous year.

·         This is the equivalent of reducing the number of police officers in England and Wales by 75.

·         Police staff also lost 5,398 working days to assault in the last five years (including 1,118 days last year).

Commenting, Vic D’Albert, Lib Dem Parliamentary Candidate for Bury South said:“These figures are frankly alarming. We need more bobbies on the beat, not bobbies being beaten.

“These figures paint a very clear picture as to just how difficult it can be being a police officer. “Violence is clearly all too common on our streets when thousands of police working days are being lost as officers recover from assaults. Time lost that undoubtedly stretches and further undermines the effectiveness of our Police force.

“Every effort must be made to try to get injured officers back to work as quickly as possible, even if that means lighter duties or paperwork. 

“The Liberal Democrats are the only party committed to increasing police numbers. We will put 3,000 more bobbies on the beat.”

You can find out more about our plans to make our streets safer here: safer_streets_-_more_and_better_police.pdf

The news that the UK’s public finances deteriorated further in January coupled with the 30% plus drop in retail sales show how fragile the economy still is. 

This is also worrying news for the state of the public finances. Our weak economy, with increased bankrupcies and insolvencies will undoubtedly be having a dramatic impact on tax receipts. 

If nothing else these figures underline the importance of having a credible plan to tackle the deficit and stimulate growth and jobs to strengthen future tax receipts. 

The current fragile situation combined with the announced support of 60 leading economists today add increased weight to the Lib Dem view that simply slashing spending now regardless of the economic circumstances would not only a be a fruitless labour but a damaging one. 

If we cut too soon, the economy will be pushed back into recession, lowering tax revenues even further and negating the effect of the cuts. 

Only the Liberal Democrats have a clear and concise plan for dealing with the deficit and for promoting the long-term growth and security of our economy.” 

Latest Government figures show that we are still well and truly in the mire.

Worryingly the number of people claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance soared by 23,500 last month to reach the highest level since Labour came to power in 1997.The claimant count increased to 1.64 million in January, the worst figure since April 1997.

Meanwhile long-term unemployment, covering those out of work for more than a year, increased by 37,000 in the quarter to December to 663,000, also the highest figure since 1997.

The number of people classed as economically inactive reached a record high of 8.08 million, more than 21% of the working age population. The figure covers students, people looking after a sick relative, or those who have given up looking for work, with records dating back to 1971.

Despite all this unemployment in the latest quarter actually fell slightly by 3,000 to 2.46 million, giving a jobless rate of 7.8%, unchanged from the previous three months.

Unemployment among 18- to 24-year-olds fell by 13,000 in the last three months of 2009 to 725,000, while for 16 to 24-year-olds the total dropped by 13,000 to 923,000.

This Government has failed to respond effectively and expediently to provide adequate support for those worst hit by this recession – and Labour’s ongoing failure to support the young unemployed is storing up numerous problems for the future from that generation.

The Institute of Directors has revealed that during 2009/10 a staggering 60% of businesses were refused finance by their banks and a to make matters worse 20% of business are to some extent financing their business with credit cards.

This really does lift the lid on Bank lending claims. Clearly there is massive gap between what the banks are prepared to tell us and the harsh reality of trying to run a business in recession hit Britain.

The double edged sword here is that businesses are then turning to expensive credit card finance to stay afloat when reasonable bank finance should be more readily available and so the Banks are making even greater profits from their credit cards at the expense of struggling businesses. Now that’s a disgrace.

It’s time the Government renewed pressure on the Banks and especially the nationalised ones to ensure finance is available to help ease Britains businesses through the recession and thus help the country out of recession, with guaranteed finance committments.

Its our banks provided more ready finance for cash strapped industry rather than excessive bonuses for cash happy bankers.

If you ever needed proof that Cameron’s Conservatives remained out of touch with the realities of British Society then their recent pronouncement on teen pregnancies is the perfect example.

In their “Two Nations” document published at the weekend they claimed 54% of girls in the worst deprived areas get pregnant before they are 18.

A startling fact, in fact a startlingly incorrect fact. The real figure is 5.4%, Ok so they got the decimal place wrong, but the fact that they accepted the figure as correct just shows how out of touch with reality they really are.

Clearly they have been watching too much TV. This may come as a shock to Cameron’s Tories but most of our estates are not like an episode of Shameless. Then again this is the party of the garden moat and duck islands. Should we be surprised?  

I think perhaps they should get out more and visit some deprived estates, in fact any estates, and talk to real people about their problems, hopes and fears. Then perhaps they could draw up policies that not only add up but address the problems of real Britain.

Watching the debate on the Constitutional Reform Bill last night (I know, it doesn’t get sadder than that), what became ever more obvious as I listened to the speeches was that electoral reform was caught like an innocent bystander on the streets of Pamplona just after the bulls are released.

By the end of the debate it lay trampled beyond recognition under the hoofs of party politics stampeding towards the next election.

With the Tories determined not to relinquish any clutches on future power, Labour seemingly desperate to shore up their prospects of holding on and the Lib Dems spotting the opportunity of a generation to introduce fairer voting, I felt the whole debate and argument got lost amidst the screams of deals, vote rigging and hunger for power.

Of course it all looked a bit dodgy to start with. When a Government that has been in power for 13 years and is behind in the polls starts proposing an electoral system that arguably makes it easier to hang onto power only weeks from a General Election, it doesn’t provide the best environment for a rational debate on the subject.

As its likely that due to the proximity of the election the bill will fail to make it to the statute books, I think it would be more appropriate if the whole thing could be brought back early in the next Parliament. Now that would be a test to the other parties committment to ER! 

Fair votes for a representative Government - it’s a big prize and a big subject. It needs rational reasoned debate in Parliament and ultimately across the country. It deserves to be treated with respect.

I have to say I find todays rantings by David Cameron regarding the 3 MP’s charged with theft over their expense claims more than a little distasteful.

He is so determined to make political capital out of anything and everything he is in danger of ignoring natural justice.

Perhaps someone should remind him that we still have trial by jury in this country and as I understand it you are also innocent until proved guilty.

However, do I appreciate much of todays furore is over the MP’s claim that they will seek Parliamentary privilege and claim immunity from prosecution. Clearly that would be a nonsense and if they themselves are so convinced that they are innocent of the charges then they should be prepared to submit to the scrutiny of trial rather than searching for a way of avoiding trial which will only serve to further discredit MP’s and reopen the wound that is MP’s expenses.

As for David Cameron when he acknowledges that there is more to this than MP’s behaving badly and that the whole system is discredited and rotten and that we need root and branch reform, then I’ll take his comments on this issue more seriously.

We get the Government we deserve, and much less than half the population voted for this Government using a system that does not fairly represent the consensus within constituencies  and renders the election in many of the constituences pointless.

Reform is the key word and it’s about a lot more than expense claims.

Liberal Democrats in Bury South today set out their General Election plans to put more police on the beat.

The extra officers for Bury will be funded by the savings from scrapping ID cards, and are part of the Liberal Democrats’ Safer Streets – More and Better Police manifesto commitment.

Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Bury South, Vic D’Albert said: “People in Bury South are often telling me how they feel unsafe. “Expensive ID cards aren’t going to change that, but an extra officer walking down Bury New Road or Dumers Lane or more police in Radcliffe on Friday night will.

“The Liberal Democrats are committed to more police, and this is the only way to create safer streets.”  

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg said: “The Liberal Democrats are the only party that wants to cut crime by putting more police on the street. “When only one in a hundred crimes ends up with a conviction in court, it is time for things to change.

“Labour and the Conservatives may talk tough but they are unwilling to make the crucial decisions to cut crime.”

You can download our Policing manifesto committment here: safer_streets_-_more_and_better_police.pdf

SPEECH TO FULL MEETING OF BURY COUNCIL TONIGHT

Mr Mayor,The Liberal Democrat Group put this motion before Council tonight in an attempt to raise an issue in the borough that could ultimately have serious consequences for safety and crime detection in the area and therefore ultimately undermine the Bury Safe partnership. Greater Manchester Police are either heading for or in a crisis depending on your stand point. 

They are currently heading towards a £5m overspend on their current £560m budget and are in the middle of a radical shake up.Just before Christmas Chief Constable Peter Fahy and his deputy Simon Byrne imposed a 90 day action plan to improve performance. This includes:

• Getting more officers on the beat
• Cutting beaurocracy
• Targeting the worst performing divisions

Failure to succeed in improving GMP performance could lead to Home Office intervention.The affects of the budget overspend could lead to 450 jobs going, potentially 300 officers, although this is hoped to be mitigated by investment in new improved IT systems which is hoped will free up 200 officers from paperwork for frontline services.In addition 2 police stations (neither in Bury) are scheduled to be closed. On top of that there is real fear that GMP could even face a grant reduction which if not compensated by s significantly improved precept, and I doubt it would be, could lead to a £30m plus shortfall – the real disaster scenario. 

So what it will mean if these cuts are implemented is that in absolute terms there will be 100 less police officers and about 150 other positions in addition to two stations closing. Part of the problem faced by GMP is that have struggled to control spending on devolved division budgets. In addition they are now operating under a 3 year precept agreement which whilst it does carry significant benefits for financial management and accountability aligned to targets and performance management, significantly the big big downside is the difficulty in absorbing the financial implications of responding to high profile investigations and unforcasted events. 

Now before you think I’m knocking GMP let me be absolutely clear –  I am not. What I am outlining here is a situation identified and being responded to by Peter Fahy and GMP themselves.  

But whilst GMP are addressing these issues as best they can and with a determination to not only bring their spending under control but to use the opportunity to introduce improvements, they are being hampered, I believe unfairly, by the financial funding formula applied by the Home office.  Read the rest of this entry.

Yesterday George Osborne - the man who would be Chancellor of the Exchequer (despite no actual expertise in finance, not to mention Treasury finances), stood up in the British Museum and when he spoke the Tory manifesto pledges on the economy and budget deficit etc started to unravel before our very eyes. 

You may recall that the Conservatives had pledged massive cuts in their first 50 days of Government. For this they were roundly attacked because of the damage such mid-year cut backs would have on the finances of many public sector and voluntary organisations. 

Now they say they are not going to be nearly so brutal after all. But most worrying of all, they have decided that they are not going to tell us anything about the cuts. Yesterday George Osborne was repeatedly asked about the cuts - where, when, how much. Repeatedly he refused to answer.

It is frankly not credible to stand up and make vague and veiled promises about how they would handle the economy and budget deficit and then refuse to go into any detail. He might as well of stood up and said “Just trust me, I’m a Conservative politician”. It would be as detailed as the spinned double-talk of a speech yesterday and would have saved him and the media a lot of time.

The Tories are now in turmoil over the economy. They wanted to act tough with cuts and appear strong in their handling of the economy, prepared to take the tough decisions etc, But for whatever reason they are now recoiling from that position. There policy seems to vary depending on which Tory is speaking!

Only the Liberal Democrats have a coherent economic policy that is both credible from a treasury/economy point of view and importantly is designed to protect key public services.

The Liberal Democrats want to split up the banks so that taxpayers no longer have to underwrite reckless risk taking.

We will create a fairer tax system with an income tax cut which will make work pay for those on low incomes.

Through targeted cuts in spending we will be honest about how to reduce the deficit. And by setting up an infrastructure bank we will ensure that public infrastructure projects get the private funding they need to revolutionise our economy.  Now that is how you usher in an economy that is fit for the challenges ahead.

The Chilcot Enquiry into the Iraq War yesterday was astonishing for an incredible insight into how we were manipulated by Blair and Bush into deciding the war was legal when our own Attorney General felt it wasn’t.

When our Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith was opposed to the Iraq war or at least felt it was illegal, he went or was he pushed over the atlantic to visit Condoleeza Rice et al. Incredibly he then returns to the UK suitably reassured that the war would indeed be legal.

Now forgive me for pointing out the startlingly obvious but as the US were a tad keen on invading Iraq and removing Saddam Hussein, were they likely to say anything other than the war would be legal? I think not. It was hardly a neutral second opinion.

What it amounted to was ”we’ve got a problem with our top legal guy who isn’t so sure the war would be legal, you need to work on him”. They did, he advised that he’d changed his mind, we invaded.Incredible and appalling.

In a separate development the Enquiry has voiced concerns over the Governments reluctance to declassify certain information. We need this information in the public domain, the Chilcott enquiry needs it to be able to properly question witnesses ie Blair tomorrow.

A failure to do so will leave too many questions unanswered, we need transparency and openness if the enquiry is to succeed and satisfy the publics demands.

If there is one single area where Labour has persistently failed many people in this country it would be in its attempts to reduce poverty and the poverty gap in Britain. And within that their pledge to eradicate Child poverty is the most miserable failure of all. 

A report by the National Equality Panel published today has stated that the gap between rich and poor in Britain is now wider than 40 years ago.

The Panel found that “Deep-seated and systemic differences” remain between men and women and minority groups in pay and employment.

This is despite this Labour Government throwing millions of pounds of taxpayers money at the issue and numerous initiatives.

The trouble is they have done just that - thrown millions of pounds at the problem, almost scatter cushion like, without going to the fundamental issues that drive poverty and curse many born into poverty. And coupled with new labours conservative approach to personal taxation, especially in their first Blair Parliament from ‘97, they have undermined their own ambitions to deal with poverty.

It’s probably their biggest failure and worst legacy to many over the course of a generation, who despite promises now bear the brutal scars of poverty and all that flows from it.

Commenting on the launch of the Conservatives’ crime section of their draft manifesto, Liberal Democrat Shadow Home Secretary, Chris Huhne said: 

“The Tories love to tell you they are the party of law and order, when in fact they are the party of crime.“Their disgraceful record in Government speaks for itself – crime nearly doubled, violent crime nearly tripled and robbery quadrupled.  

“A vote for the Tories is a vote for more crime; a vote for more tried and tested policies which don’t work.  

“The Tories cannot be trusted – one of their policies is to reduce one of the few remaining protections from the surveillance state.” 

Vic D’Albert, Lib Dem Parliamentary Candidate for Bury South added.“The Conservatives’ crime policies are masked by a total disregard for the causes of crime and an insatiable determination to undermine Police resources. There policies are tough on paper, but don’t add up in the real world. As with their other “policies” pronouncements they are all spin and no substance.” 

The Conservatives recent announcement of tax breaks for married couples if they win the General Election may sound appealing but it is little more than another Tory tax bribe. 

Even if we put aside the big big question about how they would pay for such an expensive bribe whilst arguing the need for public service cuts everywhere because the country’s “bankrupt” , it just boils down to being blatantly unfair to millions - many of the poorest in society - and just a little patronising. 

Giving tax breaks to married couples where one person can afford to stay at home, but doing nothing for couples who both work is unfair. And penalising a woman whose husband has left her with a tax hike is unfair. 

And even if we look at the social engineering aspect of this - encouraging marriage. Have we forgotten the misery many endured in unhappy marriages in the past when it was the expected social norm. In a 21st century society that now largely respects different types of relationships, Is it not better that people find the kind of relationship that suits them and their family unit rather than encourage marriage irrespective of the consequences. Is not love, mutual respect and support within the unit more important than the type of arrangement? 

This policy ultimately takes money out of the pockets of the poorest families and gives it to rich ones. It would reopen divisions in our society that have taken generations to heal and it would punish single parents. 

The Tories’ first instinct is to help those at the top, Once again they have proven that they can’t be trusted to make this country fairer. 

Lib Dem policy to increase basic tax alowances to £10,000 benefits everyone, but by definition the lowest earners most. But crucially - it’s fair to all.

The Liberal Democrats today set out plans to bring a quarter of a million empty homes back into use, making homes available for people who need them and creating 65,000 jobs.

There are over 760,000 empty properties across England which are no longer used as homes but can be brought back into use with some investment. People who own these homes will get a grant or a cheap loan to renovate them so they can be used: grants if the home is for social housing, loans for private use.

Across Bury there is a staggering 1840 empty properties laying idle which could be used to meet local housing needs.

Vic D’Albert, Lib Dem Parliamentary Candidate for Bury South commented,

“I welcome this pledge. Empty property is an issue that this Labour Government has clearly failed to address in any adequate manner at all. In one street of Holyrood Ward of Prestwich alone I know of 2 properties that have been left empty, to rot for years.

“This situation cannot be allowed to continue and I am positive this election pledge would have a dramatic in dealing with empty properties across the country.” 

The plans form part of the economic stimulus package outlined as a core principle of the Liberal Democrat election manifesto. In the first year of the new Parliament, the party would redirect over £3.6bn of spending to create jobs and build up Britain’s infrastructure. In the following years this money will be redirected to other Lib Dem spending priorities and reducing the structural deficit.

Read the rest of this entry. Read the rest of this entry.

Nick Clegg has today written to Gordon Brown urging him to go before the Iraq enquiry before the General Election. Earlier he had raised the issue during Prime Ministers Question Time in the House of Commons.

It is clear from comments made by Alistair Campbell and from questioning by the enquiry itself that it would be more than useful for Gordon Brown to make himself available to answer questions as to his role in the Iraq affair.

In fact it is clear to me that if we are to draw a line under the Iraq war controversy at the next election it is essential that he deals with his now. A failure to do so would lead to speculation that there is indeed something to hide and that the Iraq Enquiry has been politically influenced by showing alleged favouritism to the PM.

The British people need and deserve answers from our PM now, to enable a proper judgement to be made at the next election. They need to know his views and the part he played before a General Election.

So how about it Gordon, transparency and openness or brush it under the carpet till later?

The text of the letter to Gordon Brown from Nick Clegg is below:

Dear Gordon,

I am writing to urge you to indicate immediately to Sir John Chilcot that it is your strong preference to go before the Iraq Inquiry ahead of the General Election.

Following developments yesterday at Alastair Campbell’s hearing, your personal role in the decisions that led to the war in

As I said to you across the floor of the Commons today, people have a right to know the truth about the part you played in this war before they cast their verdict on your Government’s record. I urge you to confirm publicly that should Sir John Chilcot invite you to give evidence to the Inquiry ahead of the election you will agree to do so.

Nick Clegg

Figures obtained by the Liberal Democrats show that over 5000 pensioners in Bury South (and 10000 across Bury) could be missing out on crucial cold weather payments.

Overall the party has identified that up to 1.7m pensioners could be missing out on the payments that are triggered by 7 days of sub-zero temperatures, according to analysis of Government figures by the Liberal Democrats.Cold Weather Payments of £25 a week are paid to people on low incomes who receive a qualifying benefit, such as Pension Credit, which goes unclaimed by as many as 1.7m pensioners.

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Candidate for Bury South, Vic D’Albert said: 
“It is a scandal that in the 21^st century pensioners on the breadline in this country are missing out on these crucial payments, worth an estimated £42.5m.

“The very possibility that over 5000 vulnerable pensioners across Radcliffe, Prestwich and Whitefield could be missing out is nothing short of a disgrace.
 
“With Fuel prices at all time highs, Cold Weather Payments have never been more important for people already struggling on a poverty pension.

“This is yet another example of how Labour has failed pensioners. By creating a complicated system that makes it difficult for them to get the help they desperately need they have let down some of the most vulnerable in society.

“The Government should be making every effort to identify pensioners who are missing out to ensure that they get them this extra cash to help keep them warm and healthy this winter.”

As I drove to work today, passing a billboard with David Cameron staring down at me trying to look all ernest and serious, the election campaign ahead became even clearer to me.

You listen to Cameron and Brown and all you seem to get is a bidding war as to how much they would cut public services in order to deal with the budget deficit. They both pledge to “protect” the NHS. Although it would seem the Tories now don’t mean all the NHS, just certain bits.

It’s as if they are trying to prove they are tougher than each other and in the mad scramble to chop services they are forgetting that we need radical change to improve many of our public services and crucially the great British Public need to know where those cuts will fall. What services will they be left with after the great cull!

That’s why we need the real change only the Lib Dems can offer not the fake change Tories or No change Labour. There has been much damage to many of our services with countless tinkering, interfering and gimmicks over the past 13 years and blatantly we can’t afford a Conservative Government when Labour have left Britain with wider poverty gaps than ever. The Economy is in a delicate position and we need sustainable economic policies not soundbites for the city.

Real change for Britain has never been more needed, Only the Lib Dems can offer the changes we need at a cost that we can afford. It’s about creating a fairer Britain for all.

Gordon Brown insists yesterdays leadership “coup” attempt was nothing more than a storm in a tea cup. Well he may well say that publicly but surely he cannot be so thick skinned and out of touch to realise that a letter to all Labour MP’s calling for a leadership election because the party is so divided, so close to a general election can only mean further damage.

The fact of the matter is that as confirmed by Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt, the Labour party is very much divided and has lost direction. After nearly 13 years in power it’s time to go.  What is uncertain is the motivation for the letter. The authors are not stupid or naive, they will have realised the damage it would do so close to an election and they would surely have known Gordon Brown well enough to know he wasn’t likely to  accept a leadership election any time soon.

Perhaps these old blairite loyalists were in some way keen to exact some kind of revenge for their loss of position under Brown, perhaps they succumbed to the notion that it would somehow benefit the party to.

All it has achieved is once more publicly confirming that the Labour party is divided, that many Labour members do not support Brown and that crucially they feel they will lose the election with Brown at the helm.

Brown may have survived his “storm in a tea cup”, but he is now irrevocably damaged and holed beneath the waterline - taking on water, drifting like a stricken vessel towards the General election. If he survives now and manages to win the election, it won’t be thanks to his leadership or the Labour party, more the effectiveness and trustworthiness of the main opposition parties.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey has today urged as 70 million population cap on immigration urging that the situation is taken more seriously by politicians.

Whilst I am not sure arbitrary caps are necessary what we do need is stronger control and policing of illegal immigration combined with a greater recognition of the impact that large scale immigration can have on an area and the stresses and anxieties that it can cause the local indigenous community. The days of politicians avoiding the issue of immigration like the plague are long gone and with a a forthcoming general election the main parties have to find rational, coherent manifesto points that acknowledge concerns and offer practical solutions.

My own party already supports a strong border police force and believes migrants should be directed to areas of the country where they are most needed and where the communities would have adequate resources to accomodate their arrival. Sensible though this approach is, it doesn’t go quite far enough for me and I would like to see a tougher policy towards trafficking and illegal immigration and across the board the main parties need to start addressing the perceived negative impacts of large scale immigration into areas and start focusing on how communities can be better supported and how large scale immigration into areas can be limited.

Its a difficult issue, especially for liberal thinkers, but its a crucial issue. Why? Because the people are telling us it is, failure to listen now would be further fuel and amunition to the BNP and would lead to further civic unrest in the future. It’s time to listen and to act.

David Cameron’s Christmas message has called on Lib Dems to back the Conservatives as there is between Lib Dems and Tories  ”now a lot less difference than there used to be on how to create a fairer Britain”.

He then goes on to give the game away by saying that a hung parliament would be bad for Britain - despite his apparent belief that there is not much between us and the Tories.

Mr Cameron, not for the first time, is talking double-speak and rather in bad spirit for the season og goodwill trying to put a rather distortive spin on the Lib Dems and the Tories and for that matter the next election. So let me translate this double-speak into plain english.

When Dave says there is “now a lot less difference than there used to be on how to create a fairer Britain”, what he actually means is the Conservative party can’t win the next election outright unless Lib Dem voters drop their principles and vote Tory.

When Dave says a hung parliament would be “bad for Britain”, what he means is that it would be bad for the Conservative Party.

There are many and varied policy differences between the Tories and the Lib Dems and for that matter Labour. The Tory interpretation of the word “fair” would seem pivotal in this argument.

When we talk of fair taxes, we mean for all not just millionaires, when we talk about fair green policies for a sustainable economy we mean polices that will commit to real changes to maximise our contribution to halting climate change - and it doesn’t involve pr visits to the north pole to pose with polar bears. And the Lib Dems want to see a fairer society that recognises the value that we can all contribute to society not just the privilaged few.

If David Cameron really does want a clean fight at the next elect he would do well to start applying a bit more honesty and a lot less spin.

Desperation amidst the arrival of Obama and other heads of state seemed to galvanise efforts in the final moments of the Copenhagen Climate Summit yesterday but do we have a deal?

Ok agreements were reached which were broadly in line with some hopes, but it is questionable as to whether any of it is legally binding. Targets also are a bit thin on the ground and there would appear to be so much dissagreement outside the US, China and India ie especially South America that you wonder whether this will hold up at all.

We should try and be positive in that reaching a deal of sorts does at least enable the commitment to fund developing countries and enable them to start adapting and making changes and meet their development targets. In addition if China and the US start taking the whole climate  and CO2 emissions thing seriously that will have an impact and will lead to further committments, of that I am sure.

The big question now is that even if countries are bound to these agreements, will they stick to them or will they eventually be watered down? And of course as the deal does not go far enough in any case, is it too little too late?

I am growing increasingly concerned that the semi-stalled climate talks in Copenhagen are going to fail to reach much needed major agreements.

Of course it is always difficult to get meaningful agreements out of these Governmental summits, and when they do they are almost always hard fought compromises that are often ignored or watered down further over time.

But I was hoping this time would be different. As the world fast approaches the point of no return regarding climate change and global warming, I had hoped that the growing climate crisis would start to break through national self interest and political posturing.

I had hoped that the rich developed world would recognise their responsibiities to the poor world and future generations and future life itself.

Failure to reach a milestone agreement will be a frankly damnable result that will consign the Copenhagen summit to the history books as the time that the world stood on the brink, looked around, talked about saving life on earth then stepped off the precipice.

For the sake of the planet lets hope there is a breakthrough.

Commenting on Ed Balls’ announcement that the Government is to water down plans on vetting and barring, Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Candidate for Bury South, Vic D’Albert said:

“At last the Government has injected some common sense into this issue. This u-turn is long overdue. The Governments heavy-handed approach to rules on parental vetting were likely to deny opportunities to young people, damaging extra curricular activities at schools and actually harm parental involvement with their children, rather than significantly improve their safety.

“There is still some concern however that this U-turn doesn’t go far enough.  

“The existing daft regulations on child protection require even police officers to go through an expensive and bureaucratic registration system. It’s not yet clear whether rules of this type are going to be swept away.We can only hope that the Governments will see sense on this aspect as well and make further reforms.”

As is usual with this Government the devil is in the detail. With the pleadges to protect services and the fairly minimal increases in taxation combined to a pledge to half the country’s borrowing, if anything was clear it was that the sums didn’t quite add up.

Now thanks to the Institute of Fiscal Studies we have expert examination that confirms what many feared , that “unprotected” services will face cuts of £36 Billion over the next 3 years. To put this into context the Armed Forces budget is £38 Bn.

Whilst that is a worry to put it mildly, what is also worrying is that we now learn that Gordon Brown overruled Alastair Darling and the Treasury on the proposed strategy. The Treasury wanted to make deeper cuts sooner - which the opposition generally believe is necessary. But Gordon Brown with an eye on the coming election clearly felt the medicine would be too severe and stepped in - but at what cost to the economy and peoples livelihoods?

Interestingly Brown is on record as a great admirer of Margaret Thatcher. Older readers will recall that Thatcher regularly usurped her Chancellors - remember Lamont, Howe and Lawson? Has Brown modelled himself on Thatcher? If so with £36 Billion of cuts coming our way the suffering will be long and hard.

Last night I sat down to watch a couple of my favourite TV programmes. Spooks, A fictional MI5 drama was all about the fact that if the Government couldn’t sieze assets of around £2 bn from an unscrupulous bank, then the country would be bankrupt and unable to pay public sector workers.

This scenario then seemed to morph into the news where I was confronted with Alastair Darling the Chancellor informing the country that we were in a worse mess than he had thought but he had a plan that involved bingo and boilers!

I have to tell you “Spooks” was more believable. Alastair Darling looked like a rejected pilot episode of “Yes Minister”.

I doubt there is anyone left in this country who does not know the nations finances are in a mess, that tough action is needed. Yet we saw a Chancellor trying desperately to offer nuggets of comfort, little tasty morsels to see us through a miserable winter.

He promised to protect Health and Education from cuts and offered increases in some benefits for next year - but what about the following years, after the General Election?

Read the rest of this entry.

I don’t know what planet the RBS Board are on but if they think that they should get their way and pay investment bankers £1.5 Billion in bonuses or resign, frankly they should resign.

This bank is effectively owned by the British Tax payer that has pumped billions into keeping it afloat. There would be no investment bankers at RBS if it wasn’t for taxpayers money, in fact there wouldn’t be a Royal Bank of Scotland.

It’s been a hard year for many. There are many wondering how they will manage this Christmas, whether they can afford presents and all the other goodies - whilst they struggle to afford food and bills. There are many that had decent jobs a year ago and are now unemployed. There are many that owned there own homes that now live with others, rent, or are even homeless or up to their necks in debt.

So perhaps a decent christmas present for the investment staff at RBS would be a nice card from the Chairman and Alastair Darling a thankyou for all their hard work a christmas party and a gentle reminder that they still have a job this year thanks to us all.

There but for the grace of God….

The Social Work Task Force report published yesterday, provides a long overdue and much needed insight into the profession, but why has it taken so long?

These changes should have been made following the tragic death of Victoria Climbie’ nearly 10 years ago.

And, whilst very welcome the big question mark surrounds funds available. Cash strapped local authorities are already struggling to pay the kind of salaries to attract social workers and they will undoubtedly need to know that extra resources will be made available to provide the professional development, training, support and salary packages that need to be provided if the Government is serious about developing the profession and retaining experienced social workers.

So we will have to see how serious the Government takes this issue. Lip Service or crucial service? We will see. Whatever happens the fact remains that social workers do a difficult job in often difficult circumstances under extreme pressure and stress.

They deserve and we should expect that should have their situation and the professions future development taken seriously. We don’t need any more Baby P’s.

As the Fusiliers march through Bury Town Centre, the Government has just announced a further deployment of 500 troops to Afghanistan, presumably as part of a deal with Obama who is expected to announce major troop increases tomorrow.

However after 8 years and thousands of deaths across the spectrum, this surely is the beginning of the end of the Afghanistan war - at least so far as direct western involvement is concerned.

There is much talk of starting to bring troops home by next christmas, so much will hang on the new strategy devised to finish the task. At last we are also seeing greater political pressure being applied to the Pakistani Government and the Afghan Government to take firmer action themselves to ensure that military gains can be sustained by political improvements. A must if the sub-continent isn’t to sink closer to widespread civil war and unrest following troop withdrawals.

So with about 9500 troops and more equipment (at last) we must see through the coming campaign BUT it is important that we learn the lessons of Iraq and start developing the exit strategy now and start planning for the support that the Afghan Government will require after we have gone. Support that enables the Afghans to develop a sustainable economy and maintain security and peaceful coexistence.

We owe it to all who have lost their lives or been seriously injured or disabled to ensure we have that exit strategy and support plan in place. Failure to do so would be a damning indictment of this Government.

The Conservatives are treading dodgy ground indeed with their claims that the Government is effectively funding Islamic schools connected with extremist organisations.

Childrens education and Islam, never mind extremism, are not the areas to be weighing in with irresponsible unconsidered, not to mention unsubstantiated claims. 

However, whilst I do not support the extremist organisation concerned there are clearly questions that have to be asked. Firstly they claim to be a registered political party. If so the organisation although extremist has the same rights to exist as the BNP - regardless as to whether I loathe their views.

If they are not legitimately registered or indeed if they are to be banned then of course there are procedures and protocols to be followed. And indeed if they have supported the killing of British troops then I would be first in the cue to support a ban.

But where is gets really messy and worrying is the Tories allegations with regard to the funding of schools. Last night claims were made which were then unable to be substantiated then they were withdrawn, and today I woke to find that certain allegations have been reiterated.

The Conservatives really do have to be correct with their facts when it comes to throwing allegations around about extremism especially when it concerns schools and the education of our young people. If there is any substance at all then those facts need to be conveyed to the authorities without the need to wave them like some kind of patriotic flag in the House of Commons. Then on receipt of those facts the Government needs to give assurances that they will be thoroughly and rigorously investigated.

I wonder are we seeing an example of what the Conservatives would be like if they formed the next Government?

Would they ban organisations, withdraw funding, exclude people, on the first whiff of an accusation, before receipt of the facts, before asking the necessary questions.

Jumping on the bandwagon of populism carries risks, even more so when they jump to the tune of the red top tabloids as they appear increasingly prone to do.

Remember we are also dealing with young people and their education.

It has been reported that Labour’s ID card scheme is now up and running. The Governments newly appointed Independent Identity Commissioner has reported that as of last week there were 538 people on the register. Apparently all but 1 are UK nationals.

Why anyone would want to shell out £30 of hard earned readies to obtain a bit of plastic that tells people who you are and tells the Government a good deal more, is beyond me.

The scheme is being piloted across Greater Manchester at present at is expected to be rolled out across the UK from 2011. Labour currently insists that it will remain voluntary. However I suspect the temptation to make it compulsory will become too great, especially following any kind of security emergency, when they will decide it’s in the public interest etc.

However, it remains and always has been a distraction from real investment in security and defences including more police and intelligence officers and resources - it is a colossal wate of public money that is being spent on gathering yet more information on the citizens of this country in a massive database that will be abused and breached and will not stop terrorism.

I will reiterate hear and now that I will never carry an ID card - In a liberal society freedom doesn’t come wrapped in a piece of plastic - it’s a birthright. 

Oppose it and boycott it - then after the next general election lets scrap it. 

So Brown’s Labour Government has outlined it’s so called legislative programme for the rest of this Parliament - all 70 parliamentary days of it.

In essence this Queens Speech was the mother of all Party Political Broadcasts on behalf of the failing Labour Party. And as such was either an abuse of the process or a missed opportunity or both.

While Brown has taken the opportunity to try and highlight areas of division at the next General Election he has completely failed to tackle the unfinished business of electoral and political reform that has dominated the past year and has been left hanging in the corridors of power like a bad odour.

He seems to forget the anger from the expenses scandal and the demands for reform from inside Parliament and out, and the derision and low public confidence and esteem politicians are held in, not to mention the damage to the legitimacy of parliament. Sadly Brown seems to think enough has been done and we can now move on. I think the general public think otherwise.

Under the circumstances I think Nick Clegg was right to call for the Queens Speech to be scrapped to enable reforms to be debated and implemented before the General Election.

Lib Dems believe in order that trust can be restored in politicians and Parliament, reform is now essential and have proposed the following refoms:

1. Recall power for MPs suspended for misconduct – so we never again have to wait months and years to get rid of people who have betrayed the people they represent
2. Code of conduct for candidates in the next election, including declaration of financial interests – so everyone elected can command full public confidence
3. House of Lords reform – so only elected representatives have the power to make our laws
4. Party funding reform in time for this election – so big money and the whiff of corruption it brings are removed from politics for good
5. Fixed term Parliaments – so the voters can never again be toyed with by a Prime Minister planning an election timetable to save his own skin
6. Legislation to establish a 100-person Citizens’ Assembly, on the Canadian model, to agree a new voting system for Parliamentary Elections
7. Changes to House of Commons procedure to reduce executive power – so never again can a government use the power of the whips to ride roughshod over the views of Parliament.

It was extremely sad to read in the local paper of the tragic death of Rachel Davies as a result of an air rifle accident. And to read the heartfelt plea from grieving parents Angela and Ricky Davies at the inquest into their daughters death urging people to stop buying these weapons.

Too often we read in national and local news of either tragic accidents or abuse of these weapons by owners. I firmly believe the time has now come for the Government to take a firmer line with these weapons. Whilst there are regulations already it is worrying that air guns and rifles do seem to be readily available and they seem to fall into the wrong hands too easily.

I myself was “shot” at from a bedroom window while visiting an estate in my council area a while ago and whilst I suffered no injuries the incident was alarming, and even now I wonder what damage would have been done if the pellet had hit me in the eye rather than my jacket.

It would seem to me that the regulations are too casual, we need need firm regulations from beginning to end - from importers to shopkeepers to purchasers. Outlets selling these weapons should be strictly licensed and limited.,And there should be strict penalties for improper use of these weapons. Too often people treat them as toys when they are offensive weapons.

How many more tragedies will we have to put up with, how many more parents have to lose their precious daughter? 

The scandal of 180,000. dementia sufferers being prescribed anti-psychotic drugs - leading to behaviour changes in many and even death, is bad enough, but sadly I think the problem is a much wider problem.

We need (as a country - society) to decide how we want to be treated both in old age and when unable to properly look after ourselves such as in this case. We need to once and for all decide how we are going to provide the hidden health service - our carers, with the support and advice they need and deserve.We need to fundamentally address a few issues as a society, we need a national debate on these issues which can ultimately inform Government as to what we should expect.I remember when the elderly were often referred to as Senior Citizens - that phase doesn’t seem to be used often enough these days. But to my mind that’s what they are.

In a week when we have commemorated the passing of a generation that gave so much for our freedom and quality of life, isn’t it time we properly recognised that we owe them a certain quality of life in their final years. And isn’t it time we guaranteed a certain quality of life for severely disabled or those generally in need of constant care?

It’s time this issue was placed firmly on the agenda before it slips beneath the cloud of spending cuts and the un-holy political auction between parties fighting to out-cut each other.

Read the rest of this entry.

Yesterdays announcement by the Government for proposals that will fast-track a new generation of nuclear power stations is nothing short of a “cop out” according to Lib Dem parliamentary candidate for Bury South, Vic D’Albert.

“This Labour Government have gone grey on sustainable energy and renewable power and are now on the verge of a devastating mistake if they plough ahead with plans to build a new generation of nuclear power stations.It’s nothing short of a cop out” 

“There is a massive cost to the taxpayer involved in building Nuclear plants and they are seemingly determined to build these plants without addressing the issue of lethal toxic waste that will be inherited by future generations.

“And, so determined are they to ride roughshod over local public opinion on this issue that they are even prepared to change Planning Law to make it easier to avoid public opposition.That is a disgraceful way to treat people near these sites, people that may well be worried sick about these proposals.

“By putting all our eggs into this toxic radioactive basket the Government is putting at risk any strategy to develop sustainable energy in the UK . The fact remains nuclear energy even with these new sites would only contribute a fraction of the energy demand when it is available - which won’t be for many years.

“The best way for Britain to reduce emissions and secure its energy supply is through the rapid development of renewable power which is clean, safe, effective and would create huge numbers of jobs.

“With one reckless stroke this Labour Government has endangered the development of renewable energy strategies, undermined energy demands, failed to respond to much needed energy consumption cuts and put at risk future generations who will face the legacy of toxic waste.”

Spelling mistakes and grammatical errors seem to be in the news today, locally and nationally.

At a national level, Gordon Brown has been attacked for spelling the name of a soldier killed in Afghanistan wrongly in a hand written note to his grieving mother which contained other grammatical errors.

Meanwhile a local Bury Labour Councillor has been accused of being illiterate by a Conservative Councillor for spelling and grammar mistakes on an email circulated to councillors.

Now personally I think that perhaps the biggest accusation that could be levied at Gordon Brown was that he should have paid closer attention to detail. And as such, for such a busy person, perhaps it was questionable as to whether he should have been allowed to pen such an important note in obvious haste.

But lets get something straight, and clearly I am no Brown fan, but there are far more important questions and criticisms to be hurled in the direction of our Prime Minister and his government than the standard of his spelling. It was a bad mistake to miss spell a soldiers name - but it’s not as bad as the poor equipment many soldiers have to put up with or the absence of crucial potentially life saving equipment and body armour.

Then there was the attack on a fellow Bury Councillor. I won’t pretend to know either Councillor personally - politics often gets in the way of developing friendships! But personally I have always had two principles that to me are crucial qualifications to decide if someone is a suitable candidate to be a local councillor. 

Firstly, they understand and can empathise with the people they seek to represent and serve. And secondly, they are prepared to listen and act on the concerns of those people.

It’s simple really - service and action.

I have met many people in the course of my duties as  a councillor that really have been illiterate and most people I meet and know(including myself) make spelling and grammar mistakes. But it does not affect my view of that person. I would not judge that they were unfit to represent people. This is 2009 not 1809.

Do you care for your community? Do you care for the people in your area? Do you want to make your town a better place? Yes? Do have the time and inclination to commit to playing your part in the community and the Town Hall decision making process?       Then that’s good enough for me.

What we don’t need is arrogance, personal insults, disrespectful behaviour and a dismissive approach to members of a different political persuasion coupled with abuse of the democratic process. 

Undoubtedly I have made some grammatical error in this statement, I am sorry if that offends - I was just doing my best.

Today it has been announced that in order to satisfy competition rules Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds TSB are to be split  - my immediate thought was great bring back Williams & Glyns, and the Trustees Savings Bank!

However, whilst it may not be to difficult to appreciate the need to split these banks up, it will be difficult for Joe Public to swallow the extra £30Billion needed for the exercise.

At a time when most people are feeling the economic squeeze and political parties are falling over each other to promise greater public spending cuts, another handout to these failed institutions will I suspect be nigh on impossible to explain let alone justify.

I am also growing increasingly concerned that the great British public will end up with the dodgy end of the stick with this whole affair. Lets face it it’s Ok to split banks up and sell off branches etc, but any new business created or business hived off will have to be from the more profitable sections of these 2 banking giants to be an attractive proposition. So what will be left, and will that mean a longer term investment and further bail-outs from the UK Government? 

This Labour Government needs to tread very carefully here. They are playing with the future of the British economy with these financial initiatives. But maybe they’re thinking they won’t be there to pick up the pieces after next May.

So now we understand the purpose of Government advisors. Whilst it would have been reasonable to assume that they existed to provide advice on important issues from acknowledged experts in their field, we now know better.

From the fall-out of the sacking of David Nutt the Governments chief drugs advisory on the Drugs Advisory Panel, we can now see that it would seem that the real purpose is to give credibility to Government policy. 

The sacking of David Nutt was an incredible over reaction from a Labour Government clearly now extra sensitive about every tiny aspect of public policy so close to an election.

The decent thing for Brown to do would be to re-instate David Nutt with a formal apology. That however is unlikely to happen. The real damage as a result of the mishandling of this whole affair is that it’s now highly unlikely anyone will take any notice of any other advisors. Why should they? How do we know that it hasn’t all been agreed in advance with the appropriate Government Minister.

Most sensible people would have accepted that there is a place for science and a place for politics. That whilst it is right and proper for scientific advice to be furnished to Ministers and Government, it is also right and proper that a fuller judgement is made by Ministers based upon other factors as well - and yes that may well include public opinion.

BUT, in doing so the Government has to be honest and transparent about how it makes its judgment, it needs to acknowledge the advice given and explain the overall rationale behind decisions , not try and cover up the real reasons and seek false explanations.

The whole shady affair reminds me on a grander scale of the attempt to prove that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

It has damaged the credibility of Government advisors and the Goverment yet further.What a mess.

Commenting on today’s GDP figures, which show the economy shrank by 0.4% between July and September, Liberal Democrat Shadow Chancellor, Vince Cable said:

“For all the hopes of a quick recovery, these figures make it clear we are still in the longest and what could yet become the deepest recession on record.“For all that has been thrown at the economy to try and stimulate a recovery it is clear that massive structural problems remain, particularly in the banking sector.

“This news adds to serious concerns over the realism of Government plans to deal with the burgeoning public debt. It is critical ministers spell out a credible path as to how they will deal with the deficit.

“With the legacy of unemployment likely to remain for years after the end of the recession, we need radical measures to avoid repeating the mistakes of the 1990s which left millions on the scrap heap.”

Parliamentary Candidate for Bury South, Vic D’Albert added: “With thousands of families across Bury struggling to cope with the recession and unemployment, it is crucial that they see leadership and real action to deal with the affects of recession, providing genuine support, new opportunities and jobs.

“This Government is struggling to meet the aspirations of those worst affected and that means they are failing people in their hour of need. When leadership and action is expected they get the response of a head-less chicken and that just isn’t good enough.” 

Well the show went on as they say. No doubt whether it should or shouldn’t have will be long debated.

But it was clear last night that the persistent challenging of the BNP by the other panelists on their much publiscised right wing views did start to get to the heart of the matter. Griffin struggled to explain past quotes and failed to explain their policies.

Policies that until now they had publicly dressed up in a cloak of moderation and nationalism were becoming exposed as rascist, bigoted, homophobic, islamaphobic, divisive, illiberal and intolerant. In fact against everything Britain stands for. The mask definitely started to slip.

In that respect it’s only a shame he was subject to more forensic scrutiny as at times panelists were clearly allowing their hatred of the BNP to (understandably) get the better of them a little.

However at the end of the day, I just wonder how many current or would-be BNP voters actually watched Question Time last night because its not Nick Griffin and his mob we need to go after it’s the potential BNP voter. The problem remains the same. Mainstream parties need to persuade BNP supporters that we are worth voting for and that means we have to take their concerns seriously and find solutions.

When mainstream politics re-engages with that massive swathe of dissilusioned, apathetic voters that feel deserted and let down, then the BNP will be defeated.

Commenting after the defeat of a Liberal Democrat Opposition day motion calling for Government, Parliament, and all public sector bodies to cut their carbon pollution by 10% by the end of 2010, Vic D’Albert, Liberal Democrat Parliamentary candidate for Bury South said: “This is a bad day not just for Parliament, but our country and the planet.

“The Government has failed to understand the level of public support for the 10:10 campaign or to get the message that people want real political action now to tackle dangerous climate change.

The 10:10 campaign calls on people/organisations and Governments to pledge to take decisive action to cut carbon emissions by 10% in 2010.

“Britain needs a Government which sets an example and delivers immediate and ambitious carbon reductions in the UK. Today the Government has failed to show leadership and send a clear message to the rest of the world that Britain will take action on climate change now.

Last year Liberal Democrats successfully added an 80% emission reduction target to the Climate Change Act and continue to press for Green taxes both to drive down emissions and to gradually replace traditional tax mechanisms.

“The Liberal Democrats will continue to show political leadership in dealing with the climate crisis and we will continue to give the strongest backing to the 10:10 campaign.”On Wednesday October 28th, Bury Councillors will be debating a motion to commit Bury Council  to the 10:10 campaign. “I hope for the sake of our town and it’s future citizens that the whole Council will rally behind the 10:10 banner and start to seriously examine ways and means to cutting carbon emissions in Bury.”

If you would like to join with me in taking the pledge to cut carbon emissions by joining the 10:10 campaign go to www.1010uk.org

ELMS COMMUNITY CENTRE, GREEN LANE WHITEFIELD from 6 to 7pm

Come along , say hello and find out more about Vic D’Albert, Lib Dem Parliamentary Candidate for Bury South at the next General election.

What are your priorities for the next Government? What kind of MP do you want? Do you have a burning question you would like to put to Vic?

So as we (hopefully) approach the final chapter in the expense claims scandal, MP’s are receiving letter detailing over claims.

It is being reported in the news that not all MP’s are happy about some of what they are being asked to repay - especially the sums arising from the retrospective setting of spending limits for for instance cleaning.

However, what I would say to any MP’s (yes even Lib Dems) that don’t think they should repay is that they are completely missing the mood of the country if they think they have a case. The public aren’t interested in MP’s whinging about expenses, they would be more interested in how they plan to create more jobs and get Britain out of recession, and rightly so.

Public confidence in MP’s is so low at present the only acceptable thing is to pay up and shut up. Either that or stand down.

If confidence is to be restored the public need to know that their is a tightly regulated expense claim process and strict controls on what is acceptable. Only then can we move forward.

It is a matter of national disgrace that this scandal has dominated the news when the focus should have been on matters affecting the well being and quality of life of the British people. So hopefully this will be an end to the matter.

As Gordon Brown announces a £16 Billion Sale of public assets I can almost here the character from Dads Army shouting “Don’t panic”.

Any remnants of “prudence” has finally been expunged from his character with this one. The timing of this sell-off off public assets, in the midst of a recession has to be questionable proposal and one could almost lead to panic as to the true state of public finances. If indeed it was a simple case of being able to pick the timing in order to maximise interest and income, then this wouldn’t be happening now.

However, It could be that this sell off has nothing whatsoever to do with the state of our public finances and more to do with an impending General Election preceeded by a Budget. It could well be a cynical attempt to try and free up some resources - only time will tell.    

Clearly Cameron’s speech to the Conservative conference yesterday was full of fine , warm, words for those suffering at the front line of the worst depression  for decades. However if you have lost your job , struggling to feed a family, maintain your dignity and confidence in the future and keep a roof over your head , would those words make a difference to you?

The thing is we’re not talking about some wonderful economic theory, or building aircraft carriers, or policies to address endangered species.  We’re talking about peoples lives, here, now, and how they can be helped to recover and thrive.

That is where yesterdays fine words fail to meet the reality of the people he was clearly trying to reach. Because when you scratch the surface it’s the same old Conservative Party. They say they want to help the poor, so they plan to cut benefits. They say they want to help struggling families, so they plan to cut public services.

To paraphrase a famous quote, the author of which I have temporarily forgotten (to my shame). “Why is it that when they want to encourage the rich to work harder they pay them more, and to encourage the poor to work harder they pay them less?”

Cameron and Osbourne are right. If they win the next election there will be a lot of pain to endure, and they will be inflicting it without pain killers. Same old Tories. Squeezing the public services to pay for tax cuts for the fortunate.

So the Conservative Party is gradually coming clean. And it is clear already that as part of their “pain for all” plans phase one is taking a scorched earth policy to public spending.

With a freeze on public sector pay, delayed pensions, restricted pay limits and a 10% cut to public services this is a scorched earth policy designed for more than control of public spending in mind.

The more I here from Cameron, Osborne and co. the more I believe this weeks announcements are part of a concerted attempt to scare the British public into accepting the most demanding and fierce medicine they can throw at us. The big question is this. If the Tories are planning this scale of attack on our public services and spending, what do they intend to do with the savings? Something tells me when the public purse has recovered, we won’t be seeing re-investment in those same public services, and then they may just delay restoring the pension/earnings link or even put back retirement age further. And we shouldn’t forget that they have already pledged cuts to inheritance tax to make life easier for the rich as well.

Phase two should be very interesting - there is no doubt we need to cut public spending and we do need people to face up to some stark choices. However what we should be doing is not taking a chain saw to our public services but discussing which services should be protected and which need improving and which need support. What should our priorities be. I suspect the Conservatives know what they’re priorities are - so how about telling us. Now. Or is it all a case of slash and burn?

David Cameron’s announcement on the eve of the Tory Conference, that  Tory Government would review all those on Incapacity benefit with a view to getting many of them in to work or on £25 per week less in benefits (switching to Job Seekers), is a cheap shot at best in an attempt to woo the right wing of his own party and of course the right wing press.

At a time of deep recession when unemployment isn’t expected to start dropping any time soon, targeting those on incapacity benefit, forcing them onto the end of a growing jobs queue really isn’t going to solve the problem. In many parts of the country it is now common for up to 100 applicants for a job. How helpful will it be to add people who have been on incapacity benefit for possibly years , too that jobs market?

Everyone knows that the benefit system needs reform, it’s been Lib Dem policy for as long as I can remember. All main parties want reform and all main parties are committed to reviewing spending.

But this is really just another case of Tory posturing coupled with spending cuts. But cuts for cuts sake is irresponsible and will harm vulnerable people. We have to reconcile any proposed cuts too what our spending priorities need to be over the coming decade.

We need to protect the vulnerable, to protect vital front line services and to maintain key public services. Sadly the nature of Cameron’s announcement just reaffirms Tory cruel intentions and shows a reverting to type in the quest for media coverage and spending cuts.

On tuesday night, Ocober 6th, I will be hosting my latest “MEET VIC” event. An opportunity to come and say hello, and tell me what you think about our Government and what the issues are that really matter to you.

Feel free to raise any issues or ask me about Lib dem policies, or bring local problems to my attention. I will do my best to help in any way I can.

And the added bonus (if you are so inclined) is you can have a drink as well if you like.

It’s from 6 to 7pm at the Frigate Pub, Thatch Leach Lane, Whitefield. I hope to see you then.

What struck me most about Gordon Brown’s speech to the Labour Party Conference was that with possibly just 7 months left of 13 years in government how little there was left to offer the British public.

Ok, so he rattled off some notable achievements, fair enough,  but after 12 years it would be expected that something will have been achieved, however he completely ignored many of this Governments failings. Labours trampling and abuse of civil liberties, the failure to control public debt, the banks encouraged to gamble with that public debt. Excessive government borrowing to fuel failed initiative after initiative.

The complete failure to get to the heart of the green agenda and take the world forward - a missed opportunity if ever the was one. The illegal war in Iraq, the failure to have an exit plan, the absence of an exit plan in Afghanistan. The ethical foreign policy that vanished into this air. The 3000 extra criminal offences on the statute book - but failure to tackle the fear of crime and rising violent crime. Overcrowded prisons, under funded Councils, and far too much dithering to deliver real help and support when and where needed - for instance to the growing young unemployed.

Read the rest of this entry. Read the rest of this entry.

MEDIA STATEMENT

Bury’s dole queues have lengthened by over three quarters this year to over 4,000.

Now Bury South Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Candidate Vic D’Albert says the Government must act fast to halt the rise in job losses and home repossessions in the borough.

There are now 4,230 people claiming Job Seekers’ Allowance in Bury, an increase of 78.9% compared to this time last year, and an increase of 41.7% in the last three months.

Unemployment in the borough is now at a higher level than before Labour came to power in 1997, after the ravages of 18 years of Tory government.

Commenting, Vic D’Albert said: “Despite some sterling work by local businesses, these figures show that the recession is continuing to hit Bury hard as more jobs and homes are being lost. It is clear to me that the Labour government has failed Bury, and that the Tory Council isn’t doing anything like enough to help.

“It is vital that the Government offers help to the millions who are struggling to keep their heads above water. Income tax should be cut, and the banks must pass on the cuts in interest rates to reduce the cost of borrowing and keep people in their homes, and businesses open.

“The Prime Minister promised to abolish boom and bust, yet for the people of Bury it’s unemployment that’s booming, and their businesses that are going bust.
At the same time, the Tories at the Town Hall are dithering over Lib Dem proposals like our “Park Free After 3″ idea which would be a big boost to jobs.

“The banks have had their bail-out, how much longer must ordinary people wait for theirs?”

(source: Office of National Statistics)

Once again Labour are both slow to react and when they do, they get it wrong. Baroness Scotland should resign over the error in employing an immigrant worker without the proper paperwork, not because of any political malice or opportunist “knifing” on my part, but because of her status and position.

As Attorney General she is the countries chief legal officer and advisor to the Government. She herself brought in the law that she has now broken (accidentally or otherwise). And remember ignorance of the law is no defence - and surely to goodness she cannot claim ignorance from where she stands.

No, the key reason is the fact that she holds one of the highest offices in the land and the top legal position at that. There is a real danger that she will be bringing her office into disrepute and certainly damaging its status and credibility. If she values the  position of attorney general and its reputation she will go.

But of course the amazing thing in all this is that Gordon Brown appears unable to see that or is at least prepared to see the office of Attorney general diminished in the public eye in order that one of his friends can keep their job. That is a bad decision and plain wrong.

Conservative Chairman , Eric Pickles has today said it’s time for Lib Dem voters to come home to the Tory party and told senior Lib Dem, Chris Huhne he is “playing hard to get”.

If we are really so close to the Tories why don’t they join the Lib Dems. In fact if any Conservatives want to drop me a line I’ll happily pop round and sign them up.

Of course Mr Pickles is in wind up mode and is just trying to undermine Lib Dem fortunes. The fact remains we are miles apart on many key issues. For instance while David Cameron proposes sweeping cuts to the salad counter at the House of Commons the Lib Dems are looking at savage cuts to Government expenditure in an attempt to find ways of safeguarding crucial front line services. 

While David Cameron goes on jollys to the North Pole to show us his green credentials the Lib Dems have been putting together real policies to deal with much needed cuts to Co2 etc including scrapping nuclear power and developing alternative sustainable energy.

While Cameron has huffed and puffed about the state of our democracy only the Lib Dems have proposed real reforms that include fair votes for our people.

Then there is civil liberties - more rhetoric about rolling back the state from Cameron, proposed legislation to scrap hundreds of illiberal laws from the Lib Dems.

Pickles, Cameron and co. are no liberals, but they are opportunists that are determined not to let ideology and real policies get in the way of a grab for power next year. And we have all seen what that approach has done to New Labour since ‘97   

It really does not achieve anything for Labour and the Tories to constantly try and twist each others words and statements on public spending in order that they then bleat “I told you so” to the media. With the Tories pledging to increase the costs of a ploughmans lunch in the House of commons and Labour trying to match the rhetoric with strong words but without saying much at all, we desperately need a grown up debate.

They talk of Public services as if they were something that is a luxury that can’t really be afforded in tough times - like eating out less or not replacing your ageing TV.

In all the talk of spending cuts and committments we need to remember that many public services are by definition quite vital and essential - relied on by many of the most vulnerable in our communities and by necessity not always affordable or providable through the private sector.

So in these difficult times whilst it is right to address Government spending, let’s also address Government income and Government waste, and lets have a sensible grown up discussion about services - the services that we can do without - ID cards etc and the services that need protecting - because of the impact of cuts.

The TUC were right to wade into the debate yesterday on the eve of their conference because we must not forget the implications of cuts invariably mean redundancies directly and indirectly.

Cuts will need to be made, but we need to ensure vital services are protected. It’s about services that matter, it’s about people lives as well as livelihoods.

Is the world going mad? Are all men guilty until proved innocent? Is there so much danger exposed to our children when they take part in organised events?

The Government have today announced that parents who regularly drive children for sports or social clubs will have to undergo criminal record checks or face fines of up to £5,000 under new rules.

Along with parents who host foreign exchange students, they will fall under the scope of the Vetting and Barring Scheme, the Home Office has confirmed.

There is a real suggestion here that Government is losing the plot on this issue. At the very least it is a further civil liberties intrusion, at worst it will threaten the existence of small sports and other clubs.

What next ? Why not check out prospective fathers when their partners get pregnant? Why not get schools to carry out checks on parents who want to place their kids in their school?

It’s frankly ridiculous and we are in serious danger now of moving to a society of visible and invisible checkpoints. Perhaps this was one of the aims of the ID card scheme - they could carry our criminal record check details 

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said the government was “in danger of creating a world in which we think every adult who approaches children means to do them harm”.

“Should parents who give other people’s children a lift to sports matches really face a £5,000 fine and criminal record if they fail to register?”

I wonder how long will it be before they extend this to the elderly or the disabled?

The worlds gone crazy.

As if the current recession isn’t bad enough, I came away from last nights Council Climate Change meeting with the realisation that things are going to be very difficult for local authorities and for that matter central government if we are to meet internationally agreed targets for Carbon emissions.

Effectively from 2011 a set of increasing financial pressures/penalties will be applied vice-like by Government in order to force councils to reduce carbon emissions. 

At the centre of the proposals is a scheme of carbon trading which would involve councils with emissions over a certain level having to “buy” carbon allowances and possibly trade them in etc.

What was clear from last nights meeting was that there isn’t really any alternative to these proposals and in Bury’s case perhaps as much as £300,000 in allowances may need to be purchased to start with (from where will the money come from I hear you ask?) and this may well rise if we struggle to reduce emmissions. It could all be a nightmare for councils and in turn council services that will require investment to meet the reduction targets.

The biggest challenge is likely to be with our schools. Currently it has been identified that 72% of Bury’s carbon emissions come from our schools.

I suppose what hit me last night was the fact that a) there is virtually no room for manouvre on this, b) Its another financial problem for public services and c) there is no choice!

After all if we fail on climate change we fail future generations and the clock is already ticking.

David Cameron is fast turning gesture politics into an unenviable art form. Today he has announced his plans to cut the cost of politics.

In plans that he admits won’t actually save that much in the overall scheme of things he says a Tory Government will reduce the number of MP’s, reduce their pay, reduce ministerial cars and other benefits such as subsidised food and drink in the HoC bars and restaurants etc.

Whilst I am all for saving money, he has to be careful that his party don’t push punative measures in a kind of populist retro punishment for the expenses scandal.

However irrespective of his empty gestures towards in acknowledgement of the popular dislike of politicians the plain fact is he is missing the point about the state of British politics.

Firstly many talented people can’t see the point or are not prepared to put up with the hassle of being a councillor or MP - that is leading to a poorer Government whether at local or national level.

Secondly, the state of our democracy. Frankly it’s in a state. We need to make voting more meaningful to people, that means they must feel their vote counts on a number of fronts. Firstly that means fair votes that lead to more representative politicians and secondly (at Council level especially) voters need to feel that casting a vote is worth the effort because of what can be achieved. Too many feel councils have little power these days to achieve much more than empty the bins. That needs to change.

Democratic politics isn’t something that can be afforded or not, it doesn’t come with a budget that can be trimmed. It’s precious and it ain’t cheap - but it also needs to nurtured and protected. So come on David how about dealing with the real problems instead of empty populist gestures against an easy target.

For me the real problem with this whole Libya/lockerbie problem is the way this Government seems to prefer to handle foreign policy and has now got it into a mess with the US Government and previously with EU partners.

I still recall way back in 1997 Robin Cook promising an ethical foreign policy for the UK. Well that would appear to have been truly ditched a long time ago - presumably well befor the Iraq war.

Once again we see the lure of massive trade deals  - a £550 million Oil deal in this case, being the price for sweeping any collection of ethical concerns under the carpet of convenience. From Human rights, arms deals with dictatorships to environmental destruction it would seem that if the price is right this Labour Government will happily turn a blind eye.

To a degree I can appreciate some dilemmas. For instance a deal that provided a major economic boost to UK business and provides or sustains jobs. That would be hard to turn down. But surely to goodness we can inject a bit more moral steel into our negotiations and without totally abandoning our principles.

If this whole Libya/Lockerbie prisoner episode show anything it is the need to reinvigorate our foreign policy with a strong ethical backbone and stop being played for the spineless money grabbing western power we must appear to be to some less than scrupulous foreign powers at times.

Gordon Brown is desperately keen to get G20 Governments signed up to greater control on bank bonuses - why not do the same for an ethical aspect to Foreign policy?

Lib Dems ask all teachers, nurses and street cleaners in Bury South ‘where is the waste?’

Everyone employed in the public sector – including Bury South’s army of hard-working teachers, care assistants, librarians and social workers – is being asked to say where they think taxpayers’ money can be saved. 

The Liberal Democrats are launching a website where people who work with taxpayers’ money can submit suggestions on how to cut waste in the public sector. It will be launched by leader Nick Clegg as part of the ‘Ask the People in the Know’ project and can be accessed at www.nickclegg.com/intheknow .

Vic D’Albert, Liberal Democrat candidate for Bury South, said: “Every day I meet public servants out and about in Bury South whose hard work and dedication is an inspiration to us all. 

“They are the people who know what works and what doesn’t in their chosen field, and frankly they’re the ones I’d trust to say where cuts can be made safely without putting lives in danger. 

“Unlike the Tories, who just want to take an axe to public sector jobs, and Labour, who only care about bailing out bankers, the Liberal Democrats will reduce public debt in a responsible way. “That’s why we’re asking the experts – the people on-the-ground who know how money can be saved without threatening essential services – where is the waste?”

I have just signed up to the 10:10 pledge.10:10 is an ambitious project to unite every sector of British society behind one simple idea: that by working together we can achieve a 10% cut in the UK’s carbon emissions in 2010.

I increasingly believe that if we are to tackle carbon emissions in the UK we need to tackle it as individuals as well as applying pressure to our Government. Green policies are stalling with a Labour Government faced with recession and financial instability, but what about climate instability?

We need to show the Government that as individuals we want action to cut emissions and we are prepared to do our bit.  So go on take the pledge to cut your carbon footprint by 10% in 2010.

To sign up just visit the 10:10 web site at www.1010uk.org

Nick Clegg has today launched a new Liberal Democrat pledge to put service personnel and their welfare at the heart of our defence policy.

Nick said: “Many soldiers fighting on the front line are on salaries lower than those of trainee police and fire fighters. 13,000 members of the armed forces take home less than £17,000 each year. Under Labour, our lions are being paid peanuts.

Our servicemen are being sent to fight in treacherous conditions in Afghanistan while living close to the poverty line. It is time to stop short-changing our troops.

That is why if elected, the Liberal Democrats would ensure that no service personnel receive less basic pay than someone starting out in the Police or fire brigade.

If you believe our troops should receive better pay, then help us spread the word. Please make sure all your friends know about our new policy, especially those with family members serving in the Armed Forces.

To back the campaign and help spread the word, see my website: NickClegg.com/ArmedForcesPay

Nobody can put a price on the sacrifices our troops make on our behalf - but we can start rewarding them properly”

Liberal Democrats have called on Bury South MP Ivan Lewis to explain his role in the freeing of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbset al-Megrahi.

It has been reported that Mr Lewis, Minister with responsibility for Libya, wrote a letter to Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill just two weeks before the decision to free the bomber, saying that he hoped that MacAskill “would consider the Libyan application” to free al-Megrahi. According to reports the Scottish government saw this as an attempt to influence their decision.

Vic D’Albert, Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Candidate for Bury South said “I’m sure everyone in Bury was shocked by the scenes in Libya giving the Lockerbie bomber a hero’s welcome home. Although al-Megrahi has only a few months to live, I was very disturbed to hear that our own MP may have interfered with the decision made by the Scottish Justice Secretary which granted him his freedom.”

The decision to free the only man convicted of Britain’s deadliest peacetime act of terrorism has prompted suspicion and anger across the world.

Vic D’Albert continued “I urge Ivan Lewis to explain his actions at once. He represents the people of Bury South, and we have a right to know what role our MP has played in this controversial decision, and indeed why he was involved at all. This is a Scottish matter and I would be very worried if any Minister, let alone our own MP, was interfering in this way.”

This may seem like my craziest post yet but the fact is that unless politics is revitalised and revamped with new faces, new blood - and I mean ordinary people like YOU!!!  then it will prove disastrous for this country - leading to poorer Government, (even more) out of touch politicians and terrible decisions.

WE  NEED YOU NOW. And I don’t mean the Lib Dems alone. All the mainstream political parties. If you care about the area you live in, your community, your town and the issues that affect you, the do something about it. Talk to the local political parties and either join one of them or get involved helping out to start with.

Only by community minded local residents getting involved and influencing the parties will our politics become more representative, more vibrant and dynamic and more effective. So go on get involved - we don’t bite you know, and you might even enjoy yourself! 

As Green energy and other initiatives take hold and become more embedded in out enterprise culture isn’t it time the Government had a strategy for green energy and a sustainable economy?

We just seem to be drifting from initiative to initiative in a desperate attempt to appear “green” , when what is needed is a costed, properly worked out national policy.

The trouble is the Government wants it all ways - firstly it wants to appear green, secondly it worries about the green sceptics an doubters especially in a time of recession and thirdly this Labour Government isn;t really that green conscious anyway.

So while the climate change/sustainable energy closk keeps ticking our policies are drifting with lots of fine rhetoric and initiatives here and there that never quite add up.

In what can only be described as gross insensitivity, the compassion shown by the Scottish Government in releasing early the Lockerbie bomber due to terminal illness was swept away by an insulting act of hero celebration for his return home to Libya.

Despite pleas from the British and Scottish Government for the reception to be low key the response by the Libyans was appalling and clearly shows how unaware or utterly uncaring they are about the act of terrorism that was the lockerbie bombing.

If anything this heroes welcome for the lockerbie bomber just raises further concerns about our determination to “bring Libya into the international fold”, can they be trusted?

David Cameron is today making a speech on the NHS in another desperate attempt to prove the Conservatives are the party of the NHS , that it’s safe in their hands.

The trouble is even if we believe him, I am not sure I can believe the Conservative Party - especially following very public outbursts from  some of his MEP’s etc.

The problem is their past handling of the NHS and the lack of detail on their current policies. For instance they propose to “introduce more providers”. Now this can only mean privatisation. But there is no substance or detail so we can only wonder and worry about the extent of the privatisation they plan.

Until we see the small print of their health manifesto then no one can be confident that the NHS won’t suffer as it did under Thatcher and Major. The Tories can’t be trusted with our vital public services. That has been proved time and time again.

With many young people receiving GSCE results shortly and many failing to make it to University - due to a shortage of places and dissapointing grades, a major headache is about to hit the unemployment statistics in September and October.

When you add the end of seasonal summer working in many places there could be a major problem brewing.

The Government needs to act now to ensure young people unable to find employment or full times education receive proper support. Its difficult enough finding work when experienced. When you are fresh to the jobs market its pretty daunting. When the job market is as poor as it currently is then that can be soul destroying.

It’s easy for young people to lose heart and even direction with early dissapointments. And this can lead to future problems, self esteem/confidence, health etc. At such time real support is needed. They have every reason to expect proper programmes of support, advice etc in place to help them find suitable employment or training etc and offer the encouragement to persist.

The right wing opponents to Obama’s public health care proposals in the US are now going into hysterical hyperdrive with allegations about the NHS that are totally wrong and a total fiction.

I for one would not be here today if we didn’t have the NHS - OR if I lived in the US - the NHS saved my life and I find it both distateful and upsetting to read the slanderous, insulting comments that are being misrepresented in the US media.

For instance: 

A Republican National Committee ad said that in the U.K. “individuals lose their right to make their own health care choices.”

Another ad launched earlier this month by the anti-tax group Club for Growth claimed that government bureaucrats in Britain had calculated six months of life to be worth $22,750. “Under their socialized system, if your treatment costs more, you’re out of luck,” the ad says, as footage of an elderly man weeping at a woman’s bedside alternate with clips of the Union Jack and Big Ben.

One Republican Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa told a local radio station last week that “countries that have government-run health care” would not have given Sen. Edward Kennedy, who suffers from a brain tumor, the same standard of care as in the U.S. because he is too old. Another Republican, Congressman Paul Broun of Georgia, said that the U.K. and Canada “don’t have the appreciation of life as we do in our society, evidently.”

I am pleased to hear that the Department of Health has now launched a campaign to correct the lies being reported, I believe the Government should also make the strongest representations possible.

What is happening is insulting to all those that have relied on the NHS  and to all those dedicated and highly committed health practitioners that work in the NHS. These right wing comments are nothing short of a disgrace and an insult to the UK.

We love our NHS  - Hands off!

With the announcement that Bury Council is to contest the recent equal pay ruling against the Council would suggest the Tories are playing a dangerous game indeed both with Council services and finances.

I understand all the other Greater Manchester Councils have accepted the decision, yet Bury Council seems to think that they somehow have a special case.

Having already incurred costs of over £600,000 they are now committing to spend a whole lot more on legal expenses to fight a claim that will cost millions if lost. To that end I appreciate the Chief Executives judgement that as protector of the public purse they must do all they can to safeguard public funds and as such the maths says it all, sadly however form on this issue isn’t good.

What is deeply worrying is that having seen what has gone before on this issue leaves me with precious little faith in the Council strategy especially with regard to any involvement from the ruling Conservative administration.

It must be remembered that not so long ago councillors were being told that we had to go through the painful pay and regrading review because if we didn’t we faced hundreds of legal actions against the Council.

So having demoralised half the staff, with many leaving, surpise surprise we end up with legal actions culminating in the recent decision that exposes Bury to claims running into millions.

Of course that was also helpfully followed by Bury’s Chief Executive warning of redundancies with dire consequences for council services.

Now the Council is advised that we once again have a great case. I wish I was that confident and in any case the moral arguments would seem in many cases to outweigh any legal technicalities. Then there is the sleeping partner in all this - the Labour Government that has stood back, washed its hands and refused to offer any crumbs of comfort to beleagured councils around the country- the silence is deafening.

Amid the recent reports that 19000 high street shops are likely to close this year and reposessions likely to rise to 75,000 this year why is this Labour Government appears utterly inept and paralysed.

This Government is seemingly unprepared to tackle the banks over the lack of help for small business and indicisive to the point of neglect in bringing to the table useful, properly funded initiative to provide support and re-training for the unemployed and incentives and further support for struggling businesses.

Personally I am sick of hearing a Government spokesperson standing in front of a camera exclaiming about all the great things they are doing , then seeing another local business go bust.

The problem with such devastation to small business is the knock on effect to other small businesses and the decimation to small towns suburbs. Small businesses usually have precious few reserves of any kind to tap into and find it harder to make cuts and offer the same services.

If Iraq was Blairs legacy, I fear Browns may well be Economic dithering and too little too late.

The Conservative experiment in “open” primary style selection in Totnes whilst interesting isn’t the answer to a wider engagement and broader public involvement in politics unless of course the Government funds the prohibitive cost of approximately £40,000 per candidate! And that suggestion in itself  would pose enormous questions, most of which I suspect the public at present would react negatively to.

We should remember the Conservative experiment is based on the american “primary” system and while there are merits to that system, I think much will get lost in translation to the British electoral system.

The overriding fact remains that our democracy is broken, trust in politicians has collapsed and our electoral system is blatantly unfair and unrepresentative. So essentially we need complete root and branch reform and we shouldn’t just look over the pond at their system - there are (sadly) many other countries across the world with different systems, more democratic, more engaging and more representative than ours.

When it came to representation of the people and democracy, it is matter national disgrace that the mother of parliaments was overtaken years ago. But we still beleived we were the best, we have delude ourselves for generations and now the great British public have said enough is enough.

Somehow the main parties have to now come together and push change through - failure now would be the death knell for the current political system and political parties as we know them and god only knows what we would end up with then!

With Northern Rock’s announcement of £724 million losses for the first half of the year it looks like it’s going to remain owned by the taxpayer for some time yet.

In fact I think for stability it may well be prudent for the Government to make clear their intentions to hold on to this business for the significant future or at least until certain criteria are reached.

It’s quite clear that Northern Rock was all but terminally damaged by the lending/banking crash and that at present any attempt to sell it off would merely appease asset strippers and speculators and prove an expensive write off for British tax payers.

I just hope the Government are proactive in working with the bank to ensure restructuring and revamping of their financial products is in such a way as to be in the best interests of the taxpayer in the long term. After all it is important to sell off these nationalised assets but not at any price.

Following on from the news that 12,000 high street businesses have closed their doors this year, I remain alarmed at how little is actually happening on the ground to help struggling small businesses through the worst recession for decades.

If you strip back the warm rhetoric from the Government we are left with the facts that banks are not lending as they should - they have admitted to building up reserves rather than lending, and the Government just keeps moaning about it in the media. Not good enough.

As if that isn’t bad enough we have a local Council that sees the building of a new shopping centre and cranes towering over Bury as a sign that Bury is booming. Cllr Bibby if you bring your gaze down from the lofty cranes you will see boarded up shops, shops To Let etc all over Bury. The trouble is when the shopping centre is redeveloped will there be any local independent businesses left to be part of it or will it be the usual collection of national chain stores you can find anywhere?

The Government must apply more pressure to get banks lending and at local level we need Councils to stop “living the dream” and get real with the plight of struggling local businesses and do what they can to ensure they get whatever support we can offer them. After all small businesses are the lifeblood of towns like Bury and Bury Conservatives must not forget that. 

There has been much debate in the media today about David Milibands call for talks with the Taliban.

I think it’s important that we accept that if we are to get out of Afghanistan any time in the not to distant future we have to win some friends and tha Afghan Government has to start talking to those moderate Taliban leaders that may be prepared to listen.

We cannot turn Afghanistan into some sort opf westernised and western looking country. We have to face up to the fact that at the end of the day the Afghan people have to choose their own future. They may well choose an islamic fundamentalist future for their state. That shouldn’t automatically mean we cannot work with them. It shouldn’t ultimately mean they are our avowed enemies.

Nearly 200 British servicemen have now died in Afghanistan and for all we know thousands of taliban and certainly thousands of afghanis have died. If the bloodshed is to stop any time soon we have to start a dialogue, find a level of understanding and a path that leads to a peace acceptable to all a peace that saves lives, improves the security of our nation and ensures those that have sacrificed their lives have not done so in vain.

In the wake of the Tory by-election victory in Norwich North their treasury spokesperson Phillip Hammond has called for a massive Tory majority after the next election in order that the Tories are not held up in Parliament from making the necessary public spending cuts.

Hopefully there are still plenty of people out there who remember the early 1980’s. A new Conservative Government had come to power and they set about making deep cuts to public spending. Cuts that decimated local councils, cuts that hit front line services, cuts that hit the vulnerable and the weak.

The Thatcher Government politicised me and (I suspect, many more). I joined the Liberal Party in 1983 as a result - the need to fight such damaging policies, to fight for the vulnerable and the weak, the disadvantaged and the poor.

The last thing this country needs is a massive Conservative majority after the next election. Its generally agreed by all main parties that we need to make spending cuts, but they need to be justified to Parliament and to the people and they have to be managed.

A large majority for any party right at the start of a new Parliament would lead to a Government that could push cuts through without taking notice of opposition or the people. That would mean bad policies, bad cuts and bad news for the weakest in our society.

No Mr Hammond a massive Tory majority is not what’s needed, a caring supportive, unifying Government that can take the tough decisions and make cuts sensitively is what’s needed and the Conservatives aren’t it! 

Unemployment in Bury has risen to 4589.

While the lastest figures represent a slight increase from May to June of 0.7%, they show that unemployment in Bury has doubled over the past year. There are now 78314 unemployed (on job seekers allowance) across Greater Manchester. The rate of unemployment in Bury matches the national average at 4.1%.

1 IN 3 UNDER 25

As if that isn’t alarming enough the amount of young unemployed (16-24’s) now stands at 1595 a staggering 34.8% of the total Bury unemployed. Or to put it another way 1 in 3 Bury unemployed are under 25. Bury now has the highest proportion of young unemployed across Greater Manchester. Overall there are 25115 young unemployed in the region.

LONG TERM UNEMPLOYED UP 113.9% IN A YEAR

Meanwhile those that have been out of work for over 6 months has now reached 1080 in Bury, representing 23.5% of the total unemployed, up 13.7% since last month and a staggering 113.9% in a year.

Sadly the number of vacancies doesn’t lift the gloom with a total of 531 vacancies posted in June- down 11% on last month and down 41% compared to the same time last year.

While incredibly some commentators are suggesting that we are starting to see a the light at the end of the tunnel due to the slowing increase of unemployment, personally I remain sceptical for now. After all now is the time we start to see a lot of seasonal jobs traditionally easing unemployment figures for the summer. If that is actually represented in these figures then things are even worse than we fear.

With businesses still struggling to get funding from banks (despite Mr Browns insistence) and a mass of university leavers hitting the jobs market any time soon, we need positive assertive measures now to stimulate the economy further.

Labour are almost paralysed with dithering and despair and effectively making a bad situation worse, when we desperately need a Government that can take decisive action and initiatives.

The Conservatives have announced their plans for reform of financial regulations and the regulatory system in the wake of the global financial meltdown.

The headline suggestion is that by scrapping the Financial Services authority and passing those powers to he Bank of England would somehow improve the system.

Sadly the Tories once again fail to address the front line problem and that is the power of big financial institutions and the greed mentality that led to over exposure and excess risk taking in an unstainable financial market place.

They do not address the fact that once banks start doing well again they will start acquiring other businesses and growing their financial portfolios once more.

That is why we need to address this empire buildingand limit the expansion of banks developing across all financial sectors, but essentially risking financial stability by moving into high risk areas. And that is why Vince Cable and the Lib Dems are right when they say we should be taking a lead amoving to break up the nationalised banks into appropriate small units that can focus solely on specific banking sectors ie retail (high st) banking seperate from merchant banking, investments etc.

What stopping the Tories from supporting this practical sensible approach? Perhaps they are too close to these institutions, too reliant on them for financial support. Perhaps too many vested interests. 

Listening to Prime Ministers Question Time if one thing stands out its the huge chasm that appears to exist between Labour pronouncements on Afghanistan and the reality on the ground for the ordinary serviceman.

Like many other last night I was profoundly moved by the incredible public reception by residents in Wootton Bassett to return home of the eight servicement recently killed.

At the same time we here persistent reports from soldiers about inadequate equipment, comments from former senior militarymen and advisors about lack of helicopters and other equipment.

The complete incompetence and dithering this Government is showing is now politicising virtually every aspect of Government, even areas such as defence which once carried a convention of Government support. But clearly in the wake of such dithering and incompetence MP’s and opposition can not (and should not) stand by and allow the Government to waffle through the concerns raised while week in week out we bring back more and more of our dead servicemen.

The Government has to get a grip of the situation. We are in NATO, if we haven’t got any more suitable helicopters (to use that example of a pressing need), then lets borrow them off other NATO countries. What’s NATO for, for goodness sake!  If we haven’t got to hand whats need lets get it.

A matter of life and death if ever there was one.

Labour have announced today a review of elderly care funding to end what they rightly call a care lottery.

The trouble is that firstly they have said they want to make things fairer for the elderly requiring care but haven’t exactly said how. Only suggesting a few options that could be considered. Secondly you can’t go round inventing policies that affect one aspect of one sector of the community (albeit a major one).

Yesterday they announced a review of official retirement age, also fine, but shouldn’t it be considered as one of a range of measures that improve the quality of life of Britains people through their passage from working life to retirement life to elerly care and dependency?

Council officers endlessly talk about creating provision and support for those wanting to remain at home, then there are those with disabilities. Travel and leisure requirements and extra pressures on the NHS, not to mention actual pension levels  and other state entitlements.

It’s one thing Labour saying something needs to be done (It’s shameful by the way, that it’s taken 12 years for them to realise that!), but we need joined up thinking, cross agency/service working and genuine consultation with the elderly and the wider public.

Let’s face it we all hope to get there one day.

Last night the Government gave a fierce defence of the abolition of the 10p tax rate claiming it would bring down the budget and lead to tax chaos.

“The fact of the matter is however that Brown’s bloody mindedness and determination not to reverse this damaging cut will only serve to punish further in this recession many of those who have suffered most already. ”

The Government defeated the amendment to restore the 10p basic rate by 43. Lib Dems and Tories were joined by a number of Labour rebels led by Frank Field.

“A good Government must always be prepared to listen, however increasingly, Brown’s bunker mentality is leading to entrenchment and lip service, the result of which is leading to more and more suffering for those in the front line in this recession.

“Last nights “win” for Browns failing Government was a hollow victory confirming once and for all that Labour are no longer prepared to fight for the poor, the disadvantaged and the vulnerable. ”

Cllr Sheila Magnall followed the House of Commons speaker in making a very competent debut at Wednesdays full council meeting at the town hall, maintaining a firm control of proceedings and not afraid to make judgments. Clearly the lady is not to be messed with!

However it is a shame she is operating in an apparently ever diminishing democratic environment at the Town hall.

To recap the Conservatives have made it more difficult for members of the public to ask questions at council, they have limited questions from councillors at Full Council and restricted questions at Executive meetings, they require further notice of questions in writing. On top of that they are in my opinion trying to restrict the scrutiny commissions scrutiny of policy and limiting the scrutiny commissions work programme of items they may wish to scrutinise. And if that wasn’t bad enough if an item is scrutinised, any recommendations to teh Executive tend to be ignored - at least if opposition members have had a significant input.

We desperately need to open up our democracy and re-engage with members of the public. The public we serve!

It’s time our democratic decision making and policy review structures were completely reviewed, if necessary with the aid of independant advisors or members.

I thought the new speaker, John Bercow made a competent start today at his first PMQ’s. It can’t be easy knowing most of your party colleagues voted against you and the Labour party only voted for you cos’ they don’t want to get the blame if and when things go pear shaped again!

But he started to impose himself - cutting short a couple of MP’s that threatened to waffle on, calling for MP’s to be quite while people spoke etc, and in his post PMQ’s statement he has demanded that Ministers make statements to the Commons BEFORE varied radio and TV programmes. How will the spin doctors cope - we’ll see what happens when that dictat is tested.

Pity he can’t force people to answer questions properly, never mind one step at a time.

If you give your people a vote to decide their Government, they expect it to count, If you tell the world you are holding democratic elections, then you have to accept the results. 

The lesson over the past week (and sadly repeated time and time again) is that democracy and fair votes is a serious business. It is to be protected, nurtured, developed. Not undermined, tampered with and discarded at will. It is not a showcase PR event for 24 hour news.

If you ask the question you have to be prepared for an answer you don’t like!

So whether it’s the Irish referendum on the Lisbon treaty, Irans elections or for that matter Gordon Browns reform of our democracy and voting reforms, politicians should remember democracy has the words “Fragile, handle with care” stamped all over it.

So Gordon Brown has finally set out plans for an inquiry into the Iraq war. Something tat the Lib Dems have been calling for years. But there are problems.

Firstly, he says it will be held in private and secondly it will take over a year - ie taking it past the date of the next general election.

So far as holding the inquiry is concerned, I appreciate the need to guard state secrets, operational issues etc BUT there is a need to satisfy public concern and in some quarters , outrage at being led into an illegal war. Therefore there is a need to to have an element in the public domain, because there is a need to put the record straight, to come clean and to remove any doubt or concern over a potential cover up or white wash over events that transpired.

As for conveniently publishing the findings after the General Election, well I suppose its no real surprise. I doubt that there is anyone outside the Cabinet and certainly the Labour party that wouldn’t believe that this is being “managed” to minimise the impact, and I suspect that the publication date of the report is merely the tip of the iceberg when it comes to damage limitation.

So much for open government.

Phillip Hammond, Conservative treasury spokesperson has accused Labour of being juvenile over their attacks on his party for mentioning spending cuts.

Certainly it is the case that Labour leapt with childish enthusiasm down the throat of the Tories over their spokespersons admission that they would be cutting all departments by 10% except for the NHS.

And it certainly is mischievous if not juvenile for Labour to make these attacks when their own spending plans amount to spending cuts of similar levels, even if they are dressed up in typically machiavellian Brown double-speak and spun accordingly.

BUT it is rich for the Tories to get on their high horse about juvenile politics when every week at Prime Ministers Question Time their leader, David Cameron acts like an over excited steroid pumped 12 year old on red bull in a sweet shop.

The one key covered televised session of parliament deserves straight forward questions and answers. Not the mudslinging TV posturing nonsense that Cameron/Brown slug out each wednesday - now that’s juvenile. Remember Cameron pledging an end to punch and judy politics - it didn’t last did it.

The public is crying out for honest politics. Politics where the politicians just tell it as it is - no spin. Answer questions, not side step them and put forward clear policies not ambiguous vague “visions”.

We need politicians with guts, ideology, committment and attitude. The people need clear choices and policies nothing less. And they need to be listened too and properly represented. 

In an attempt to attack the Government this morning, the Conservatives confirmed that if elected they would cut public services by 10%.

Although they insist they wouldn’t cut NHS spending (Would they increase it in line with the massive deficit from 2011 announced today??), they did confirm that all other departments would be expected to make 10% cuts.

Whilst some of this may seem appropriate “careful” talk in times like these, but unless they are prepared to be more precise then they are acting wholly irresponsibly.

Where in Education would 10% be found, What cuts to defence, the Police, Local authorities, Transport?

The Conservatives are trying to respond to claims that they haven’t any policies by announcing little tasters that they hope will put the opposition on the back foot. The trouble is their “policies” don’t go anywhere. They have reduced policy announcements to sound bites! 

The drawn out process that started with abysmal local election results for Labour on thursday and finished with abysmal European election results last night served only to prolong the agony and confirm our fears for the state of british politics.

The mathematics of the European elections meant that the collapse in the Labour vote allied to reduced turnout directly related to the fascist BNP leader getting elected last night.

The results did favour the Conservatives, undoubtedly- again part of the mathematical process under this style of PR but don’t be taken in by Camerons spin on this. Voters were hardly flocking to the Tories - up just 1% to 27% of the total vote.

Once again my party , the Lib Dems, suffered for sticking to its principles in support of the EU and our committment to improving it rather than dismantling it as some would. But we held our seats and only lost 1%.

The real worry is the fragmentation of our political system, the spread of the vote widened further not just to the extreme parties such as BNP, UKIP, and English Democrats but across a plethora of small parties making up a spectrum of the odd, the eccentric, the self-interested and the extreme.

The expenses scandal has clearly damage mainstream politics further and coupled with successive Government failure to address the issues facing many led to growing disilusionment with the established parties. One wonders how long the clock will tick before the timebomb of extremism will go off in our faces? Because then it will be too late.

I know many politicians local, national or international of all parties work their socks off to tackle their constituents issues. So why is it that the parties of Government are apparently paralysed and unable to respond to the screams from our streets and estates?

What is clear is that Government has to start listening soon. This isn’t about Gordons job, its about our democracy, it’s about our way of life.

Today is polling day. Many people are understandably angry with Parliament over the expenses scandal, many are undoubtedly dissillusioned with British politics. And I know many are toying with the idea of voting for one of the extremist parties such as the BNP or UKIP.

Whatever you do today please don’t vote for the extremists, politics may be damaged but backing extremists will damage Britain. Please vote and please try and vote for one of the mainstream parties.

If you want a strong British contingent working in Europe for Britains future then vote Lib Dem.

Europe: Stronger together, poorer apart.