David Cameron: A Professional Who Plays Like Anmateur

Who will trip David Cameron up? The most likely answer is “himself”.

The Prime Minister’s scorn for his opponent, and laughter at his own jokes, suggest a man without a care in the world.

The ease with which Mr Cameron dominates Ed Miliband is becoming a bit offensive. It is like watching a one-sided cricket match: any spectator of a sporting disposition is bound to wish for a closer game.

The Labour leader runs in to bowl six of the most awkward deliveries he can devise – this week to do with police commissioners and NHS waiting times – but is met by an impregnable defence.

Mr Miliband’s questions are not bad, but Mr Cameron’s retorts are better. The Prime Minister has a long training in this not very glorious kind of warfare: in September 1988, straight out of Oxford, he joined the Conservative Research Department, where much effort was devoted to digging out quotations which could be used to suggest that the Labour Party was mired in a set of absurd contradictions.

So when Mr Miliband said elected police commissioners are a waste of money, Mr Cameron hit him with a remark by Gordon Brown: “The Home Secretary will bring forward proposals for directly elected representatives to give local people more control over policing.”

Mr Brown said this in the Commons on 14 May 2008, but Mr Cameron cleverly implied that it had been in the Labour manifesto of May 2010, written by Mr Miliband, whom he proceeded to accuse of “a complete U-turn”.

When Mr Miliband switched to the NHS, Mr Cameron was once more ready and waiting with an inconvenient quotation, this time by John Healey, the shadow Health Secretary, who had apparently opined that “what Labour says matters less than what almost anyone else says”.

Mr Cameron’s professional technique is hidden by the swagger with which he plays his shots. The Prime Minister’s scorn for his opponent, and laughter at his own jokes, suggest a man without a care in the world. At one stage he committed the atrocious mistake of referring to “my housing minister”: the man is the Queen’s housing minister.

Confidence can easily degenerate into over-confidence, which is why Mr Cameron could one day get himself out by attempting a ludicrously risky shot. He is not averse to taking risks, as he showed in a reply to one of his backbenchers.

Nadine Dorries (C, Mid-Bedfordshire) complained that “the Liberal Democrats make up 8.7 per cent of this Parliament and yet they seem to be influencing our free school policy, health and many issues including immigration and abortion”, after which she issued a challenge: “Does the Prime Minister think it is about time he told the Deputy Prime who is the boss?”

Mr Cameron began, “I know the honourable lady is extremely frustrated,” whereupon he was interrupted by rude laughter in which he joined, after which he ended: “I’m going to give up on this one.”

The Prime Minister had not answered the question. Since it was an unanswerable question, or unanswerable without insulting Nick Clegg who was sitting next to him, perhaps that was the best way to leave it.

Tory backbenchers complain that Mr Cameron listens more to Mr Clegg than to them. Mark Reckless (C, Rochester and Strood) demanded that the Prime Minister “now listen to Conservative colleagues and take the opportunity to hold a referendum on Europe”.

Mr Cameron refused to do so. Perhaps it is his own side who will one day trip him up.

Read Full Post »

Support Grows For Keeping 50p Tax Rate

Politicians from Labour and the Liberal Democrats joined forces with trade unions to argue for a retention of the 50p top rate of income tax after 20 leading economists called for it to be scrapped “as soon as possible” in a letter to the FT.

Alistair Darling, the chancellor who introduced the rate in 2009, and Tim Farron, the Lib Dem president, said on Wednesday that lowering the top rate of tax would be unfair while the economy was still in difficulty.

Mr Darling said: “This has got to stay in place until we get out of the crisis. It would be grossly unfair to remove it. In the long run you have got to keep your tax rates internationally competitive which means something like the two rates we used to have. To remove it today would be grossly unfair. If they do not pay their taxes then it is poorer people who are going to pay.”

He was supported by Mr Farron, who said scrapping the 50p rate would be “phenomenally immoral and send an appalling message to the overwhelming majority of hard-working people in this country”.

Ed Balls, Labour shadow chancellor, also weighed in: “If we really are all in this together then the right priority to boost the stalled economy now should be temporarily reversing the VAT rise, which is costing families with children around £450 a year. This temporary tax cut would help to kick-start the recovery and give a much needed boost to millions of people regardless of their income.

“If the chancellor really wants to know how effective the top rate of tax is he should immediately ask the Office for Budget Responsibility, not just HMRC, to produce a report genuinely independent of government.”

Their warnings came after the Trades Union Congress also took issue with the suggestion of an immediate tax cut for top earners.

Brendan Barber, general secretary of the Trades Union Congress called the economists’ opinion “monstrously unfair”, adding: “At a time when cuts are biting hard and ordinary people are suffering the biggest squeeze on their living standards in years, the last thing we need is a handout to the wealthiest in our society.”

But DeAnne Julius, the former member of the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee and one of the signatories of the letter, defended her position to the BBC, saying many hedge funds had already moved to Switzerland and that, if marginal rates were raised on a small number of highly mobile people, “You end up not collecting the tax that you’d hoped to.”

“Only by returning to an internationally competitive tax regime will Britain enjoy long-term sustainable economic growth,” the economists say in their letter.

The signatories include many figures not usually associated with conservative causes, such as Bob Rowthorn of Cambridge University, and two former members of the Bank of England’s policy committee, Ms Julius and Sushil Wadhwani.

George Osborne, chancellor of the exchequer, is already facing pressure from the Tory right and CBI employers’ organisation to scrap the “temporary” top tax rate.

The Treasury believed that the 50p rate, introduced by the former Labour government in April 2010 on annual taxable incomes above £150,000, would eventually raise £2.7bn a year. Combined with restrictions on income tax relief for pension contributions and the abolition of the income tax personal allowance for people with annual incomes above £100,000, last year’s tax increases on the rich were designed to raise £7bn per annum.

The economists dispute these estimates, arguing the 50p rate “punishes” wealth and entrepreneurship. “It is often portrayed as a justified tax on the rich, but the economic damage it causes means that it is against the interests even of ordinary workers who don’t pay it,” they write.

Last month Mr Osborne said “there’s not much point in having taxes that are economically inefficient”. He added that the rate was uncompetitive internationally and targeted wealthy people who were already paying taxes on their capital gains.

Government officials, however, have suggested that the top rate is unlikely to be scrapped until 2013 at the earliest, when a pay freeze affecting millions of public sector workers is due to be lifted.

Nick Clegg, Liberal Democrat leader, will insist the 50p top rate can only be scrapped if other measures, such as a property or “mansion” tax, are introduced to ensure the wealthy pay their “fair share” towards cutting the deficit. The Lib Dems will also insist that the 50p rate’s abolition is accompanied by accelerated moves to raise the annual tax threshold to £10,000.

Other leading economists are more sceptical. Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies and not a signatory of the letter, said it was much too early to give up on the 50p rate: “The Treasury has been taking a punt on whether [the 50p rate] will raise money. It is taking a risk, but it is not a stupid punt.”

Read Full Post »

Cameras In Courts Could Lead To ‘Theatricals’ Warns Top Law Officer

Televising the courts could lead to “theatricals” from lawyers and offenders and cause “ethical and practical difficulties”, the country’s most senior law officer has warned.

Dominic Grieve has put himself directly at odds with the justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke.

Dominic Grieve QC, the Attorney General, said there was a “big question mark” over allowing cameras in to courts.

His warning puts him on a potential collision course with Kenneth Clarke, the Justice Secretary, who announced the plans on Tuesday.

The 85-year-old ban in criminal courts will be lifted initially with the filming of judges’ rulings in the Court of Appeal but will spread to a judge’s sentencing remarks in Crown Courts.

There are currently no plans to film defendants, witnesses or victims but Mr Grieve signalled he would have concerns if there was a further expansion.

His comments followed concerns from politicians and victims’ charities that the move risked turning justice into a reality show akin to Judge Judy by providing a platform for offenders or “eccentric” or legal professionals.

Giving evidence to MPs on the Commons Justice Select Committee, Mr Grieve said filming aspects of the trial itself, “in my personal judgment, is impossible and undesirable”.

“Clearly all this needs very careful discussion,” he said.

“The question as to whether sentencing remarks should be filmed is in a sense I think, in terms of the validity of the trial process, completely neutral. I don’t think it interferes.

“The issue that then arises is, is this going to help public understanding or might it contribute to the whole thing being turned in to a piece of theatre, which might also be undesirable.

“Clearly filming people actually being sentenced is likely to be undesirable as it would probably encourage theatricals, and so for those reasons I think there must be a big question mark over it.”

Mr Clarke wants to remove the ban “as soon as parliamentary time allows” and a consultation process involving the Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge is planned to ensure the move “does not hinder the administration of justice and that it protects victims, witnesses, offenders and jurors”, the Ministry of Justice said.

Mr Grieve also echoed the view of Cabinet colleagues that the sentencing by the courts in the wake of the riots was appropriate.

He said tough sentences helped deter others and showed there were serious consequences for anyone involved in the looting and violence.

He said that while some of the offences may have been similar to shoplifting, “participating in a catalogue of offending behaviour that has the capacity to wreck an area’s economy and put local people in fear” was clearly an aggravating factor.

Dealing with the riots has cost the Crown Prosecution Service more than £5 million so far, he added.

Read Full Post »

Scrap ‘Reckless And Needless’ Public Sector Reforms, Says Ed Miliband

Labour leader tells PM that money spent on elected police chiefs and NHS shakeup could be better spent recruiting frontline staff.

http://www.youtube.com/get_player

Ed Miliband and David Cameron clash at PMQs.

The prime minister, David Cameron, admitted that stand-alone elections for police commissioners will cost an additional £25m as he faced a barracking from Labour’s Ed Miliband over “reckless and needless” public sector reforms.

Cameron faced accusations of “wasting money” which could be better used to recruit thousands of extra police officers, as he sought to defend moves to introduce elected police commissioners.

A plan to bring in elected police chiefs is set to go ahead after Liberal Democrat peers, who had been delaying the Tory initiated policy, accepted safeguards introduced into the legislation.

In a move likely to irritate many on the Conservative benches who feel their party is making too many concessions to Lib Dems and too few to their own side, the legislative delay will mean voting for the new posts will take place in November 2012 instead of at the same time as local elections in May.

The Labour leader told Cameron he was “making a bad policy worse by wasting money” after the prime minister said staging separate elections in November would cost £25m – money Cameron stressed would not come out of police budgets.

As MPs prepared to debate amendments to the health and social care bill on Wednesday afternoon, Miliband also criticised the NHS shakeup and urged the prime minister to “scrap both of these disruptive and dangerous plans”.

Miliband told Cameron at the close of a heated exchange: “The truth is, under this government we are seeing two reckless and needless reorganisations of our public services, police numbers down and waiting lists up.

“Under Labour we saw police officers up and waiting lists down. Why don’t you do the right thing for the future of our public services and scrap both of these disruptive and dangerous plans?”

Miliband seized on reforms to health and policing as MPs gathered for the first prime minister’s questions session since July.

Regarding the cost of delaying the elections for police commissioners, Cameron told Miliband: “It is important to get this policy right and to make sure it works.”

Turning the tables on Miliband, Cameron asked him why Labour was “so frightened of elections”.

Cameron said the plan involved scrapping police authorities, which would save money, and accused Labour of making a “U-turn”.

Labour previously had plans for “directly elected representatives to give local people more control over policing”, said Cameron.

Miliband said: “We know what the public up and down this country know: this is the wrong priority for the country. What did we see during the riots? We saw visible, effective policing.”

He went on: “The prime minister tells us we cannot afford the current police budget, we have got to cut the number of police officers by 16,000.

“But he tells the country it can afford £100m and more as a result of his decision to waste money on 42 elected politicians earning over £120,000 a year. That could pay for 2,000 extra police officers.

“Isn’t the truth that this is the wrong priority at the wrong time for the country?”

As Miliband later moved on to the controversial health reforms, Cameron joked: “I’m not surprised you want to change subjects because on policing you were having your collar felt because you have done a complete U-turn on the policy you used to be committed to.”

The Labour leader said the number of people who had to wait more than six months for an operation had gone up by more than 60% since Cameron entered Downing Street.

Cameron insisted the amount of time people were waiting for an outpatient operation had “actually gone down”.

“As you know, we have targets for 90% of people to get their treatment within 18 weeks and those targets are being met,” he said.

And he insisted the health reforms were now backed by a number of leading professional health groups as well as former Labour health minister and surgeon Lord Darzi – to the dismay of Miliband, who accused him of being “on another planet”.

The Labour leader said the British Medical Association, the Royal College of GPs and the Royal College of Midwives “all rejected your bill”.

Read Full Post »

Childcare Costs Mean A Choice Of Debt Or Unemployment For Many Parents

Rather than facilitating work, the huge cost of childcare in the UK is a daunting obstacle – and government cuts worsen the bind.

David Cameron visits a nursery in London. His government’s reduction of tax credits has made childcare even more costly for working parents.

I could understand why my bank manager was looking at me like that. It did sound a bit stupid. “You’re about to start a job, and that means you need to extend your overdraft?” he said, dubiously. After years of scratching around as a student, I was finally about to draw a wage – but first, I needed to get myself just a bit deeper in debt.

I have two children, so before I could set foot in my office, I needed somewhere to put them, and childcare has to be paid for in advance. That’s no minor outlay here in the UK, where we have the highest childcare costs relative to household income of anywhere in the world. A survey by the Daycare Trust and Save the Children explains how much of a barrier and a burden this can be, particularly to families on low incomes. Of the parents questioned, a quarter said that the cost of childcare had caused them to get into debt, but it’s the poorest families (those with a household income of less than £12,000 a year) who experience the most crippling effects.

While the better off may have to compromise on swimming lessons or music tuition to cope with higher-than-inflation rises in nursery fees, the more impoverished are often forced to cut back on essentials such as food or heating to make up the difference. And sometimes, ends simply can’t be met: a quarter of those in severe poverty said that they had given up work because of childcare costs. A third of them had passed on a job offer for the same reason, and a quarter reported that the expense of childcare had prevented them from taking up education or training.

Rather than facilitating work, childcare becomes a daunting obstacle, keeping parents out of the workplace – and the poorer a family is, the more likely it is to remain in poverty for the lack of money to cover nursery fees. Single-parent families without savings or access to credit are effectively shut out of work.

The government likes to talk about getting people off welfare and into the workplace. “Over the last decade, thousands of people were simply abandoned to a lifetime on benefits, and a staggering 1.84 million children are living in homes where no one works,” said employment minister Chris Grayling last week. Rightwing analyses talk about the “lack of work ethic … helping to fuel levels of unemployment”.

But it’s practical, financial limitations more than nebulous psychological causes that are often keeping parents from becoming employees, and the government’s actions so far seem likely to worsen the childcare bind. Working tax credit was sliced in this year’s budget, so that it now covers only 70% rather than 80% of childcare costs – a huge difference in the finances of those who need help the most. As the cuts agenda combines with a sneering rhetoric of disdain for the unemployed, this just seems like one more way of keeping the poorest poor, from cradle to grave.

Read Full Post »

Cameron Rules Out Europe Referendum

David Cameron has insisted Britain must make Europe “work for us” as he again ruled out holding an “in out” referendum.

During Prime Minister’s questions he was urged to listen to the calls of Conservative eurosceptics who want a swift vote on the UK’s relationship with the EU.

However Mr Cameron, who is meeting president of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy on Wednesday, insisted there is “no case” for a vote.

Mr Cameron said: “I want us to be influential in Europe about the things that matter to our national interest – promoting the single market, pushing forward for growth, making sure we get lower energy prices.

“Those are things we will be fighting for but I don’t see the case for an in out referendum on Europe. We are in Europe, we have got to make it work for us.”

It comes as a group made up from around 80 new intake Conservative MPs plans to press the Government for significant changes in Britain’s role in Europe.

Tory MP George Eustice, one of the group’s conveners, insisted the initial aim was for reforms rather than a referendum. He said: “The aim of this new group is to promote debate about creating a new relationship with the EU and reversing the process of EU integration.”

The group will work closely with think-tank Open Europe and could eventually expand to take in Labour eurosceptics and possibly some Liberal Democrats.

UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage said: “The Prime Minster has said today that he didn’t see the case for an in/out referendum on Europe. ‘We are in Europe’, he told us and ‘we have got to make it work for us’.

“Well it is obvious that the EU is not working for us, and hasn’t worked for us. So then what does Mr Cameron propose? By ruling out a referendum he leaves himself naked in the negotiations. Our EU colleagues must be laughing at his naivety.”

Read Full Post »

UK Riots: Acting Met Chief Rejects ‘Feral Underclass’ Analysis

Tim Godwin challenges Kenneth Clarke’s description of people involved in last month’s riots.

Tim Godwin has challenged the justice secretary’s description of those blamed for England’s riots as a ‘feral underclass’.

Britain’s most senior police officer has challenged the justice secretary’s description of those blamed for England’s riots as a “feral underclass”.

Tim Godwin, the acting commissioner for the Metropolitan police, said he would not have used Kenneth Clarke’s term as he outlined his vision for the future of policing in the wake of the violence to the London assembly.

Writing in the Guardian on Monday, Clarke said the civil unrest over the summer had revealed an urgent need for penal reform to stop reoffending among “a feral underclass, cut off from the mainstream in everything but its materialism”.

His comments came as figures revealed that almost 75% of those aged over 18 who were charged with offences committed during the riots had previous convictions.

Godwin – one of four candidates aspiring to be the Met’s next commissioner – queried Clarke’s choice of description when asked by Brian Coleman, a Conservative member of the London assembly, what he wanted politicians to do as a result of the riots.

He said: “The one thing that has struck me about the comments made by the justice secretary recently in the Guardian article was that he used a term – that I particularly would not use myself – about ‘feral underclass’.

“The use of the term ‘feral’ in terms of youth and inner-city was first used, as I recall, in my service here in about 2000 following the death of Damilola Taylor.

“I think the fact that term is still being used in terms of young people in our inner city … is a great challenge to us as a city.”

He added: “It’s a term I would not personally use, but I think we do need to understand the level of fear of crime that actually encourages them to join gangs.”

Godwin said the revelation that the vast majority of people involved in the summer riots had previous convictions had been a “wake-up call” for the criminal justice system.

He added that there has “got to be a big debate in London in terms of how we empower local communities” and called for “a wholesale change” in the way people first entering the criminal justice system are dealt with.

This should include developing a “cohesive plan”, such as increasing local justice, which would see people coming forward from communities to sit as local JPs.

Godwin said: “Robust enforcement is key, but at the same time we need people to volunteer and come forward and work to make those communities better and to reduce the fear of crime – specifically among young people in inner cities.”

He also told the assembly that police had not anticipated the scale of trouble that hit the capital across 22 boroughs last month, but said his force would do everything in its power to avoid a repeat of the disorder.

“In terms of the future, we will make sure that we over-egg the pudding in terms of numbers,” he added.

Godwin told City Hall on Wednesday that morale at the Met was as strong as it ever had been. He also said next year’s operation at the Olympics “will be better as a result of the experience we have had”.

His comments came a day after he gave evidence to the home affairs select committee on the riots.

The panel of MPs heard that the rioting will cost the taxpayer more than £133m in policing and compensation for businesses hit by the violence.

Read Full Post »

Former UVF Man Robert Stewart Admits Being Alcoholic

A key witness in a major paramilitary trial in Belfast has admitted being an alcoholic and drug user who fled NI with money stolen from his parents.

A defendant wears a mask to conceal his identity as he arrives at court in Belfast ahead of the trial on Tuesday.

Robert Stewart, 37, is giving evidence against alleged former Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) commander Mark Haddock and 13 other defendants.

It is the largest ‘supergrass’ trial for 25 years in Northern Ireland.

Fourteen men face 97 charges ranging from murder to hijacking. They deny the charges.

Former UVF man Mr Stewart is testifying for a second day.

He, along with his brother David, has turned state’s evidence in return for a reduced sentence in pleading guilty to aiding and abetting the murder of leading UDA man Tommy English on Halloween night in 2000.

On Wednesday, he was cross-examined by Haddock’s lawyer Frank O’Donoghue QC.

He asked him why he was unable to recall specific details about the day in July 2008 when he and his brother fled the north Belfast estate they lived in.

Mr Stewart blamed his consumption of vodka that day and went on to add: “I have been an alcoholic all my life.”

He then confessed to taking ecstasy tablets, cocaine, cannabis, LSD, glue and prescription valium in the past.

“The last few years I would have cut down a lot, but there were times I took a lot of drugs and alcohol,” he said.

Mr Stewart told the lawyer that he and his brother fled to Scotland, then England before returning to Northern Ireland to spend a week in the seaside resort of Portrush before finally handing themselves in.

He said they had funded the travel with £2,000 his brother stole from his parents’ house, a theft he described as “terrible”.

Mr Stewart has claimed Haddock planned and directed the murder of Mr English.

Mr O’Donoghue asked the witness if had he difficulty with his memory.

“Some parts,” he replied. “Everybody has difficulty at some times. Large events I don’t have any difficulty with.”

Mr O’Donoghue accused Mr Stewart of fabricating his evidence that his client had plotted the shooting in a flat in the hours before the attack.

“I want to suggest to you that you have made that up, that’s a cock and bull story and under no circumstances was Mr Haddock ever there (in the flat),” he said.

“Then I would say Mr Haddock is lying,” Mr Stewart replied.

An artist’s impression of the defendants and prison officers in the dock.

Earlier, he gave evidence about an assault he said a number of the defendants took part in.

He said a former neighbour in the New Mossley estate was beaten by seven of the accused after getting into a row over loud music and criticism of the UVF.

Also in the morning, there was a request from one of the defence teams for Mr Justice Gillen to recuse himself and stand down as judge. He did not do so.

The trial began on Tuesday amid high security inside and outside the court.

Thirteen defendants are in the dock – Haddock has been separated, sitting outside the dock surrounded by prison officers.

The accused

* Mark Haddock (42), Maghaberry Prison
* David Miller (39), Upritchard Court, Bangor
* John Bond (44), Essex Court, Carrickfergus
* Darren Stuart Moore (41), Mount Vernon Park, Belfast
* Alexander Thomas Wood (35), Milewater Way, Newtownabbey
* Jason Loughlin (35), Bryson Court, Newtownabbey
* Ronald Trevor Bowe (34), Ross House, Belfast
* Samuel Jason Higgins (35), The Meadow, Antrim
* Neil Pollock (35), Fortwilliam Gardens, Belfast
* David Samuel McCrum (32), Beechgrove Drive, Newtownabbey
* William Hinds (46), Ballycraigy Gardens, Newtownabbey
* Mark Thompson (36), Ballyvesey Green, Newtownabbey
* David Smart (37), Milewater Close, Newtownabbey
* Phillip Laffin (33), Bridge Street, Antrim

Two of his co-accused, Darren Moore and Ronald Bowe, were previously charged with trying to murder Haddock in 2006, but charges were dropped when he refused to give evidence.

Both the UVF (Ulster Volunteer Force) and UDA (Ulster Defence Association) are loyalist paramilitary groups responsible for the murder of hundreds of people during the troubles.

The 14 defendants are being represented by 24 barristers and eight firms of solicitors and the trial is expected to last for 11 weeks.

Read Full Post »

Shafilea Ahmed’s Parents Charged With Her Murder

The parents of Cheshire schoolgirl Shafilea Ahmed, the suspected victim of a so-called honour killing, have been charged with her murder.

A coroner ruled that Shafilea Ahmed was unlawfully killed.

The 17-year-old was last seen in Warrington in September 2003.

Her decomposed remains were found on the banks of the River Kent in Cumbria in February 2004.

Iftikhar Ahmed, 51, and Farzana Ahmed, 48, of Liverpool Road in Great Sankey, Warrington, have always denied any involvement in their daughter’s death.

The couple appeared at Halton Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday, and were remanded in custody.

They are now due to appear before Manchester Crown Court on Friday.

Mr and Mrs Ahmed were initially arrested on suspicion of kidnapping their daughter in December 2003. In June 2004 they were released without charge when the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) ruled there was insufficient evidence against them.

They were arrested on suspicion of her murder in 2010 and released on police bail.

The CPS authorised Cheshire police to charge the couple on Wednesday.

http://www.youtube.com/get_player

The CPS authorised Cheshire police to charge Shafilea’s parents.

Two post-mortem examinations failed to determine how Ms Ahmed died but a verdict of unlawful killing was recorded at her inquest in 2008.

The inquest heard she was a bright and intelligent young woman who wanted to go to university and become a lawyer.

Pathologists said she was most likely strangled or suffocated and South Cumbria coroner Ian Smith said he believed she was probably murdered.

The teenager went missing on 11 September 2003 and was reported missing by a teacher a week later.

Her body was discovered by workmen and she was identified by her jewellery and dental records.

Read Full Post »

Lib Dem Report Blames Nick Clegg For Debacle Over Lost AV Referendum

Deputy PM’s insistence that the vote be held on the same day as local elections turned into a ‘perfect storm’ for his party

Nick Clegg wanted a May vote to boost the chance of a win for the Yes campaign.

Nick Clegg’s decision to call a referendum on the voting system on the same day as local elections backfired disastrously, the Liberal Democrat inquest into the party’s crushing double defeat has concluded.

A report to the party’s annual conference in Birmingham later this month says the council elections turned into a “perfect storm” because the referendum on the alternative vote (AV) also took place on 5 May.

Although David Cameron wanted to delay the AV vote until this autumn, Mr Clegg insisted it was held in May in the hope that elections to the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and English councils would boost the turnout – and the prospects of a Yes vote. In the event, AV was rejected by 68 to 32 per cent and the Liberal Democrats lost 700 town hall seats. With hindsight, the report concludes, the double poll meant that Liberal Democrat activists were unable to give enough time to the “Yes to AV” effort. It also prevented the seconding of staff to the referendum campaign, took media airtime away from the elections and allowed Labour supporters to “kick the party twice”.

The report says: “Turnout among Conservative and socially-conservative Labour voters was at general election levels, driven out in consequence of the AV referendum. A huge trade union campaign in Labour-leaning areas targeted the party leader [Mr Clegg] personally and viciously.”

A simultaneous AV referendum also meant that Mr Clegg’s party got little or no credit from Tory supporters. “Conservative voters satisfied with the Coalition were reluctant to vote tactically for their coalition partners in Lib Dem/Labour marginals, in no small part because of the vociferous rivalry between the two parties in the national referendum,” the report says.

The review by James Gurling, chairman of the Liberal Democrats’ campaigns and communications committee, will be discussed on 17 September, the first day of the party conference. Some activists claim his inquest has been kept deliberately low-key to spare Mr Clegg’s blushes. Many grassroots members remain angry about the defeat and may criticise the leadership at the conference.

The document admits: “Many dedicated community activists lost their seats through no fault of their own, and in the face of exemplary records of personal service. The challenge now is to ensure that the activist base which supported them is not lost.”

The report concludes that Liberal Democrat achievements in government “had not been successfully communicated… the impact of the debate on tuition fees and NHS reform undoubtedly played a part”.

It appears that some voters told Liberal Democrat campaigners on the doorstep that they would back the party but then failed to do so. The report says the Liberal Democrats may have to change their approach to canvassing now that they share power nationally.

Allies of Mr Clegg believe some criticisms are out of date. Since May he has adopted a more aggressive approach inside the Coalition, distancing his party from the Tories on some issues and trumpeting Liberal Democrat achievements such as changes to the Government’s health reforms.

But as MPs debated the Health and Social Care Bill yesterday, the Social Liberal Forum, a pressure group on the left of the party, called for further changes to the legislation and for a full debate at conference. Evan Harris, a former MP, said the revised Bill would not prevent the “marketisation or fragmentation” of the NHS.

Read Full Post »