CentreRight

At a time when the economy is in freefall and all of us face ever increasing bills and higher taxes, it seems wrong that the BBC are planning to increase the licence fee.

Last year, the BBC spent £15 million on taxi bills and £14 million on plane flights.  Many of its presenters are overpaid - look at the millions of pounds that Jonathan Ross gets for example.  Some BBC senior Executives get more than the Prime Minister in salaries.

When MPs salaries and expenses are rightly being scrutinised, why is it that BBC journalists and employees can seemingly spend taxpayer's money - also on expenses and allowances - without any kind of public examination?  Astonishingly, the Freedom of Information Act does not apply to the whole of the BBC.

I have argued before on CentreRight that we need to democratise the licence fee, so that every licence-fee payer has the right to vote on the level of the increase on the fee, how they think the BBC has
performed and on the hefty salaries that are paid to high profile presenters.

I happen to enjoy and admire much of the BBC output - and am willing to pay for it.  Like many voters, I just want a choice on how my money is spent and not to have to fund unnecessary increases, when it is possible for the BBC to cut costs from its bureaucracy.

The call by Shadow Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt yesterday for a freeze in the Licence Fee, was a necessary first step in putting the public back in control.  It is a great shame that Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs chose to be so frivolous with Licence-Fee Payers' money and vote for an increase.

How is that the Speaker of the House of Commons has allowed a group of Parliamentarians, Clare Short amongst them, to host a live video link tomorrow, with a known terrorist, someone who advocates suicide bombings in Iraq and has been refused entry into the UK?

After all the recent goings on with the thwarted terrorist attacks – and arrest of a number of individuals in the North of England, what can possibly be the rationale for giving succour to such people?

Tomorrow evening, in Portcullis House, Khaled Maashal, a senior Leader of Hamas, who was denied a Visa, is instead speaking to an invited audience, through video.  If this were to happen outside Parliament, that would be bad enough, but to host a known and self confessed murderer in the Commons is beyond the pale.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, most people will be appalled that Mr Maashal is being given such a platform.  This is a man who is on the record, actively promoting ‘martyrdom cells’ in Iraq.  He has also argued that ‘Allah made a laughing stock of America’, urging for the world to submit to the ‘Arab Islamic will’.  This is not forgetting his role in supporting and planning a range of suicide attacks in Israel.  He is also regarded as instrumental in the Hamas coup in Gaza, which saw, Palestinian Authority members thrown off the rooftops, and 400 Palestinian Fatah members killed by Hamas fighters.

To the credit of Shadow Foreign Minister, David Lidington, he has contacted the Speaker, urging that the event be called off stating:

If this event goes ahead, a strong signal will be given to Islamist extremists in Britain and elsewhere, that Parliament is soft on terrorism.  It will give a propaganda boost to extremists over Palestinian moderates.  Above all, it will demonstrate that all ‘means’ – particularly suicide bombing – justifies the ‘ends’.  And those ‘ends’ usually mean an Islamic caliphate and the destruction of the State of Israel.

One of the most brutal aspects of the extreme Islamism of the Taliban, was the way in which women were subjugated and treated as second class citizens. The West's invasion of Afghanistan was designed not just to deal with Osama Bin Laden, but also to help rid the country of Islamist Totalitarianism and restore a sense of civility to the country.

Now we find that despite a semblance of the mechanics of democracy, the Taliban spirit lives on, even under those who are seen as so called 'moderates'. Today's Guardian and Daily Telegraph, explain how President Karzai - in an effort to win votes from Shias, in advance of the forthcoming elections - has signed into law, legislation which, in effect, allows husbands to rape their wives. If this barbarism were not bad enough, the new law also refuses wives the right to work, to see a Doctor, or leave the house without their husband's permission. The United Nations has condemned the new laws, demanding to see the full legislation - which thus far they have been denied.

Whilst I was a full supporter of the war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda (and remain so) - who couldn't be after 9-11 - I can't help feeling that something, somewhere has gone deeply wrong. What is also going on in Afghanistan today, is also an important reminder, that freedom does not just mean holding democratic Elections. It has has to be about upholding the rule of law guaranteeing property rights, and above all treating all human beings equally and with dignity. President Karzai has failed this simple test of genuine liberty.

What is the biggest vote currently facing the nation? Is it the local elections? The European elections. Fat chance.  Does the answer lies in crisp packets?

In the old days, when a company wanted to develop a new product they might have a few boffins create the idea, followed by focus groups and some marketing here and there. After, the new product would appear on the supermarket shelves. It would succeed by its advertising and by a bit of luck. 

Walkers Crisps have turned this approach on its head. Instead of centrally announcing a new flavour of crisps to a munching public, the company invited people to send in recipes which were then voted on - by the public via the text or internet. The winning flavours were reduced to just six.

The company then released these six flavours onto the market and, as crisp lovers will know, are available at most outlets.  But Walkers didn't stop there at this exercise in crisp democracy.  Every packet bought carries a coloured rosette and allows you to vote (again by text or internet) as to which of the six flavours is preferred. The intention is that after the voting ends, Walkers will introduce the extra flavour based on the voting public's final say so.

I expect many political die-hards will watch Walker's Crisp Democracy with cynicism at another marketing exercise. Yet the truth is that more people will know about this Crisp vote than who their MEP is or local MP for that matter.

Last Saturday I read an article by the Chief Rabbi, which talked about the need for a new moral basis to the market economy - to return to a time when if someone said "my word is my bond", they meant it. The Chief Rabbi's argument was that bankers had got away with making huge errors, not just because of failure by Government or the market, but through the weakening of social capital - of values that differentiated between right and wrong.

I thought about this as I attended a dinner yesterday evening. A famous Peer and tough self-made businessman (who started one of our most famous retail chains), began to talk about the concept of 'duty of care'.   His argument was that the main reason for the financial failures by the bankers was not because of greed (this vice had always existed and would continue to exist in the future) but because of a failure of 'duty of care'.  In contrast to nurses, doctors and teachers, bankers and City folk were not bound by a duty of care - and this had led to the disastrous decisions that had helped ruin our economy (alongside Gordon Brown).  Rather than regulating, establishing a duty of care, would solve the problem of bankers mis-managing assets and savers deposits etc. 

Duty of care is defined by Wikipedia as:

I think this businessman had a fascinating thesis - the question is how one would establish a duty of care for bankers et al, that would be supported and respected by the profession and recognised by the appropriate authorities?  Incidentally, this businessman also said that he had once offered to fund with substantial sums of money, a Chair of Economic Ethics for a famous University in London. His proposal was turned down by the Dean on the grounds that economics was a science and did not have an ethical dimension.

I thought it was only socialists who indulge in the politics of envy.

We should be thankful that the party can attract the best.

As Tim Montgomerie blogs, the role he has played in stopping the left caricature us as the 'nasty party' has been crucial to our recovery. 

Hilton's recent creation, the baby poster ad about Gordon Brown's debt is hitting home with voters. How better to have creative brains devising strategy  - in contrast to Labour.

Hilton's worth is shown by our poll ratings, which are not too bad at present! 

Love bombing is not, as Tim Montgomerie wrote, about ‘appearing to agree with the electorate who vote Liberal Democrat’. It is a much more substantive strategy - and less cynical - than that.

‘Love bombing’ means distinguishing between the extremism of Liberal-Democrat party activists and the moderate views of those members of the public, who are not members -  but often vote for them.  The difficulties Conservatives have always had to contend with, is responding to the often hard-faced and extreme tactics of the Liberal-Democrat activists, particularly fighting in local and parliamentary By-elections.

In the past, Liberal Democrat shenanigans on the ground has provoked Conservatives into tarring all Liberal Democrat voters with the same brush and attempting to fight fire with fire.  As I understand Mr Pickles, ‘Love bombing’ means that, whatever the provocation, we should ignore machinations of the Liberal Democrat activists and go over their heads to woo moderate voters.  These voters will appreciate our stance on issues like Heathrow and Civil Liberties. Far from being a cynical approach, it is one which reaches out to mainly floating voters, and shows the Tory party to be speaking for them rather than responding to the petty politics that emanate from the Cowley St political machine, which, incidentally, is not nearly as good as it once was.

I have written before about how Labour’s attempts to tarnish Mr Cameron have fallen flat.  The most recent jibe, ‘the do nothing party’ far from hurting the Conservatives, could actually be helping – especially if recent polls are too believed. 

One of the biggest fears that voters in recent years had about the Conservative Party was that they would cut spending in vital public services, and raise interest rates (a la the 1990s, following the ERM disaster).  By repeating again and again, that the Tories are ‘the do nothing party’, Gordon Brown is unwittingly telling the electorate that they have nothing to worry about if the Conservatives come to power.  After all, if the Conservatives are the ‘do nothing party’, that means there will be no threats to public services or to the economy, if David Cameron wins the election. 

Mr Brown’s ‘do nothing jibe’, whilst sounding clever, is in reality, telling everyone, don’t worry ‘A Conservative Government won’t frighten the horses’.  The soundbite also hinders Ministers from their favourite line of attack, that the Tories have a secret agenda of hard right wingery, ready to be implemented the moment they win power.  How can a Party be described as having extreme right wing policies, if it is also the party that plans to do nothing? In one fell swoop, Mr Brown has rid the Tories of being ‘the nasty party’.  Moreover it is noticeable that even the media are growing cynical about the do nothing jibe, as they question contortionist Ministers about Conservative policies that prove entirely the opposite!

No wonder, Lord Mandelson’s friend and adviser, Mr Wegg Prossor, has urged Gordon Brown to use this jibe no longer.

Today was a wonderful day. 35,000 people, Jews, Christians, Hindus, all nationalities came to Trafalgar Square to stand up for freedom and against Islamist Terror. Despite attempts by Islamists to disrupt the demonstration through a counter demo and viral emails the day before, we were not to be deterred. The Rally was emotional but supportive of peace. Speaker after speaker urged the terrorists to give up their arms, recognise Israel and make peace. The rally showed that so many in Britain are determined not to appease Islamist terror and to defend Israel's right to protect her citizens from Hamas.  For once the Islamists did not have it their way.

Up to 300 hundred dead.   BBC Television pictures showing Israeli bombardments of Gaza.  The Islamist lobby out in full force.  President Ahmanidejad (Hamas’s financier), hosted by Channel 4.  It’s not really too difficult to get worked up about Israel’s actions. So easy to point the blame.  Much harder to separate truth from fiction – especially when the truth is often under reported  - if reported at all.

Let’s go back to 2005, when Israel withdrew – unilaterally – from Gaza. This action was designed to herald future withdrawals by Israel from much of the rest of the administered territories around the West Bank.

At the time, Israel was praised by many governments in the West for a bold and decisive action.  To jump start the economy in Gaza, millions of dollars were spent on agriculture and the building of green-houses by the World Bank – all of which were smashed up by Palestinian Terrorists - as Israel departed.  Other financial aid – again in the millions of dollars - designed for schools and children, were used by the extremists to promote hate education, and virulently anti-Semitic literature.

Instead of building a peaceful and viable Gaza, Hamas mounted an armed coup d’état against President Abbas’s Fatah movement (which included throwing leading ‘Fatah’ Palestinians off the rooftops).  Aided and abetted by Iran, Hamas gradually began the ‘Talibanisation’ of Gaza (in marked contrast to the more secular West Bank, still run by Mahmoud Abbas).  Not for nothing has Gaza become known as ‘Hamastan’.

Remember the Lebanon war in 2006? Whilst most people know that its catalyst was the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah (from the Israeli side of the border), what is less well known is that Hamas also kidnapped an Israeli corporal Gilad Shalit around the same time.

Although Hezbollah subsequently murdered the two soldiers (their dead bodies were given back to Israel in return for the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners), Gilad Shalit - remains a hostage of Hamas.

In over 900 days of captivity, Corporal Shalit has not been allowed any visitation rights, or even access to any humanitarian organisations. Despite repeated demands from the International Committee of the Red Cross Hamas has refused Corporal Shalit the most basic of human rights.

Hamas has flagrantly violated every aspect of international law including humane treatment of their prisoner, the right of the family to know about his well being and the refusal to permit any kind of humanitarian access.

In order to assist Corporal Shalit and to put pressure on Hamas to grant the Red Cross to access, Parliamentarians across Europe (co-ordinated by European Friends of Israel), are leading campaigns to highlight the case of Corporal Shalit and urge the Red Cross to step up its campaign. In London, senior Parliamentarian and Conservative Deputy Chairman, Alistair Burt MP has led a delegation of MPs from all parties (including James Arbuthnot, Alan Beith and Andrew Gwynne) to lobby the Red Cross to ensure that humanitarian access for Gilad Shalit remains high on their agenda.

So said former Labour Home Office Minister Fiona Mactaggart at a Labour Progress Conference.  This was reported to me by an Immigration Officer and I was so astounded that I did a Google search and found it on BBC online.  According to Ms MacTaggart:

"One of the reasons immigration officers are shits is actually because some people cheat and they decide everyone is like that".

If this were a stand-alone comment, this would be bad enough. Yet Ms Mactaggart was backed up by Labour MEP Claude Moraes, who also rounded on the immigration officers, complaining about their 'professional standards'.

It seems astonishing that senior Labour figures can trash immigration officers, when it is the Government who caused the immigration shambles in the first place.  Immigration officers - under-resourced and working long hours - do a remarkable job, against the odds. No wonder so many of the profession are up in arms at the former Minister's comments.

If anything, this is a fascinating example of how Labour tries to turn its own failings in government into an attack on the professions. Who can forget Tony Blair's playing to the gallery at Labour conference about the 'forces of conservatism' allegedly preventing reform - when in fact the biggest roadblock of reform of welfare and the public services was Gordon Brown himself?  It also shows how Labour, piece by piece are losing touch with the huge coalition of voters who supported the party in 1997. It indicates an arrogance of a decade in power and a 'we are the masters now' mentality.  To label an essential profession - in part responsible for the safety and security of the country as sh*ts - without a moment's hesitation - shows just how far lost in their ivory towers, senior Labour figures have become.

For all Gordon Brown’s ‘tough talk’ on terrorism, in reality, the Government is actively permitting Islamist terrorists entering the UK.  Only recently, the British Embassy in Beirut, granted a six month visa to Hezbollah Journalist, Ibrahim Mousawi.  Mr Mousawi is the editor of Hizbullah’s newspaper al Intiqad and former head of Hizbullah’s TV station Al Manar.

Al Manar TV is a Hezbollah propaganda TV station, whose main output is to stir up hatred of the West and a pernicious form of anti-Semitism.  One of the classic outpourings of this station was to broadcast a thirty part series based on the notorious forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which claimed that a secret Jewish conspiracy plotted to take over the world. Mousawi was invited to speak at a “Stop the War” conference on 1st December and Jacqui Smith failed to deny him entry to the UK at that time. In marked contrast, he was to speak at a similar one in Ireland in October but was refused entry by the Irish authorities.  He has also been banned from France.

If we are to keep the Licence Fee, then it is time to emancipate those who are to forced to pay.  At present, whether the BBC is good or bad, no Licence-Fee payer has any genuine say-so about programming, no genuine right of consultation about BBC operations and no right to question the level of the Licence Fee.   Of course there are always the sham consultations (in which most things are decided in advance), votes in Parliament about the Licence Fee and an ability to complain by telephone, email etc etc etc.

But none of this amounts to very much in reality.  If the BBC chooses to over pay its presenters, do we have any real say?  If the BBC is biased, do we have any real right of address?  If we feel that the BBC need not own travel guides or even local radio stations, do we have any real chance of stopping it?  If we feel the Licence Fee is too high, can we get it reduced?  Of course not.  The BBC has a monopoly not just over broadcasting, but has put a straitjacket over every Licence Fee payer in the land. Just a little wriggle room, but no real movement.

Remember John Kennedy FDR?  Well we Tories should do well to remind ourselves of  the old adage; “we have nothing to fear but fear of Peter Mandelson”.  The way the media and other cognoscenti have been talking in recent days (witness Question Time last Thursday evening), you would think that Baron Mandelson was responsible for every plague, fire and pestilence that ever stalked the land. Just because J K Rowling funds the Labour Party, it does not mean that Lord Voldemort now runs riot (except perhaps on Radio 4 Today programme).

Yes Lord Mandelson is well versed in the arts of spin and was a formidable architect of New Labour.  But if he was so deadly, he wouldn’t have got into a position in which he had to resign from the Cabinet twice, be mired in yet another controversy and be loathed by so many of his colleagues on his own side.   All right thinking people should seek to change the narrative – and present Baron Mandelson for what he is – a lightening conductor for Gordon Brown and a shield against a leadership challenge.

If Peter Mandelson is Lord Voldemort, I am Harry Potter.

“I am sure this is the only way, and this is the way we love”.

So said Um Anaz, an 18 year old extremist Islamist in Gaza, when she was justifying becoming a suicide-bomber to a BBC Radio 4 Reporter on the Today Programme this morning. In what was a chilling interview, Ms Anaz observed that suicide-bombing should not distinguish between soldiers and civilians, was an inspiration from God and that she was waiting for martyrdom.   What was even more disturbing was that this interview was conducted as the background to reports that Hamas and Islamic Jihad are using the current ceasefire with Israel to not only re-arm (in the same way that Hezbollah have done in Lebanon), but also to train a new wave of suicide-bombers, with the intention of causing carnage in Israel if the opportunity allows.  The tragedy therefore is two-fold - not just that young Palestinian women are now being used and brainwashed to become suicide-bombers, but that Israeli towns near Gaza (like Sderot, which has suffered an almost daily missile bombardment since the Israeli pullout), are likely to once again live in daily fear from both the threat of missiles and terrorism.

As Hamas and Islamic Jihad have extinguished moderate Palestinians in Gaza, it is now clear that Gaza is now becoming a mini-Islamist statelet with a suicide bombing factory attached.  So when those siren voices call for Israel to do more for peace (despite unilaterally withdrawing from Gaza and asking for nothing in return), it is worth remembering that Israel is dealing not with moderate Palestinians, but Islamists, who believe that suicide bombing is a way of life and a necessary tool to achieve the destruction of Israel.  For peace to occur, whatever painful concession will have to be made, negotiations have to be conducted with rational individuals who have some regard for the sanctity of human life.  As Radio 4 showed all to clearly today, the tragedy for Israel and the Palestinians, is that the Palestinian cause has been hijacked by Islamist Terrorists who have neither regard for humanity nor care for a real peace.

After days of misogynist and elitist attacks by her opponents, Sarah Palin delivered a speech that was substantial and given with poise, humour and rhetorical flourish. Hurricane Palin swept through the Republican Convention in a way that few imagined.

She successfully turned the tables on her critics by standing up for small town America and stuck the boot into the Obama Campaign for inverted snobbery. This was a speech that reached out to Reagan Democrats. Hard working, small 'c' Conservative, aspirational voters, concerned about the Washington elite.

Mrs Palin showed that she was not afraid to take on her enemies and that she is no patsy. She also illustrated a deep attachment to Conservative values but showed that she would challenge the Republican establishment when wrong.  The Vice Presidential Candidate also demonstrated a deep understanding of the threats of a resurgent Russia by her comments about the Russian activities in Georgia and elswehere.  Even a former Clinton operative, Howard Wilson, interviewed after the speech, stated that her performance was 'priceless'.

This was not just a speech to reignite John McCain's campaign - which it clearly did, this was a speech of a future Presidential Candidate.  President Palin in 2012.

(Some final reflections on Rwanda).

Tom (pictured here) was my Assistant teacher and helped me greatly in the  daily English lessons, I gave to Rwandan teachers.  A good and wise man, Tom's story epitomised the old and new Rwanda.

In 1994 Tom was just 12 years old. When the genocide began, he and his family fled from the North to a kind of refugee camp in Kigali, thinking it would be safer.  One day as the Interahamwe (extremist Hutu Militia) closed in on the camp, Tom ran, and ran, and ran.

He ran so far that he eventually reached the Rwandan border, crossing over to the Congo, where he stayed until the genocide was stopped in July 1994. To get to the Congo from Kigali, is at least 4-5 hours by car, so Tom's marathon run was truly heroic. No doubt hiding from the Interahamwe on the way, and passing through scenes of the utmost tragedy, Tom fed himself on the odd piece of fruit or from food given by a passer by.

Incredibly, after the genocide, Tom was re-united with his mother and a brother who also had managed to survive. He never saw his father again and to this day has not found out what had happened to him.

Today I took the worst photo of my life.  So much so, that I have not been able to look at it on my mobile phone. I do not know if I will ever view it again - or whether I will delete it.

The picture is of rows and rows of human skeletons, heads and bodies.  Hundreds of these skeletons are on display at the Murambi Memorial Centre in the South of Rwanda.

Led by Andrew Mitchell MP, I and a bus load of other volunteers from 'Project Umabano' made the three hour drive to see this Memorial Centre earlier today. To get there, you drive Southwards, through the major town of Butari and pass through green vallley hills of quite unimaginable beauty.  The Memorial itself - a former school - is surrounded by these hills and it is almost like the hills represent heaven as opposed the 'hell' we visited.

Murambi Memorial is a former school  in which the most hideous tragedy occurred at the height of the Rwandan genocide.  On 21st April and 22 April 1994, around 50,000 Tutsis were massacred by the Rwandan army, having been baited and attacked by the Interahamwe (militia) in the days before. 

Thousands of Tutsis had gathered in the grounds of the school in the hope of avoiding being slaughtered by the Interahamwe. For days, they lived in terrifying conditions as the water and electricity had been turned off.  Many were left drinking the blood of animals in order to try and survive.  On the 21st April, the order was given for an organised and systematic massacre and the army were given licence to kill all the 50,000 Tutsis, in just over 48 hours.

As I mentioned in my previous post, our education project involved a number of volunteers in Kigali and around Rwanda, teaching English to hundreds of Rwandan English teachers.

As I and seven other volunteers arrived at the Fawe boarding school on Monday, including Andrew Mitchell and Francis Maude, we were all filled with a sense of trepidation.  Only one of the volunteers had taught before, and we were all worried about our lack of experience and our ability to teach for six solid hours a day. 

Most of us were revising lesson plans the night before, well after midnight.

Day one began with being introduced to our classes. Despite severe nerves, we all passed the day relatively successfully. Our teachers were enthusiastic and hungry to learn.  Each day starts at 8am. There is a short break at 10 and then teaching until lunch. Some of us have an assistant teacher, a trainee, who is there to learn from our techniques (or lack of them) and to help us in the classroom.

We all leave, exhausted at 4pm, chatting in the bus on the way home about what we have taught and how well it went down with opr students.  There have been some memorable images of Francis Maude busy missing his lunch to mark exercise books.

Day two was a remarkable affair.  The school laid on a special ceremony for the teachers and to welcome us.  The Rwandan Education Minister turned up to thank all the Conservative volunteers. His speech was preceded by some inspirational tribal dancing and singing, which transformed the atmosphere considerably.
So far we have survived almost a week of teaching. It is tough, tiring and exhausting. But it is exhilarating too.  The adrenalin flows after each day and we look forward to opening a bottle of beer (Rwandan Primus) as soon as we get home.

From Rwanda.

Imagine a country where one day each month, every inhabitant, from the Government downwards is involved in some kind of social action, whether it be cleaning litter from the streets, or doing some other kind of community action. Inconceivable? Unimaginable? Not in Rwanda. Umuganda (social action) is mandatory for every citizen.

As part of the Umubano (fellowship) programme, I and 35 volunteers, were given the chance to particpate in Umuganda,   Our task was to clear bushes and long grass from a forest, as it was a haven for 'unsavoury elements' (such as drug users), who were using the unwieldy undergrowth as cover from the police.

What was really fascinating was that it was not just the local community involved in the Umuganda, but the Mayor and Deputy Mayor. After the Umuganda was over, the whole community met in the woods for an open air 'town hall' type meeting, in which local politicians talked about the importance of family planning and hygiene.  It was a remarkable experience. The whole purpose of Umuganda was not just social action, but also to bring people together - to unify.

In 1963, Hannah Arendt, watching the trial of leading Nazi, Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem, described Eichmann’s actions as ‘the banality of evil’. Underlying her phrase was her belief that it was quite simple for normal people (and not just psychopaths) to commit evil acts as they convinced themselves that they were doing the legitimate bidding of the state.

I thought of this phrase as I read in my local newspaper ‘The Harlow Star’, that the former leader of the Labour Council in Harlow, Cllr Tony Durcan, compared the Conservative Leader of the Council Andrew Johnson, to Robert Mugabe, over a disagreement about the allocation of the six Labour Councillors on Committees. The Labour Councillor stated “It feels a bit like Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe."

Since David Cameron became Conservative Leader, Labour have tried a range of critiques, none of which have really worked with the electorate. From 'hard right secret Thatcherite' to 'Insubstantial' to 'Eton toff', the attacks have failed to detonate.  So the latest tactic has been to call Mr Cameron 'a Shallow Salesman' or a 'Slick Salesman' or a 'Used Car Salesman'.  But this could come to be a huge tactical mistake by the Labour Party.

Far from wounding Mr Cameron, Mr Brown instead insults hundreds of thousands of people across the country – if not millions - who earn their living by being precisely that –  Salesmen.  By implication, he also criticises not just the Salesmen but also their families and close friends.  After all, if being a Salesman is 'dishonest', then being associated with a 'Salesman' is dishonest also. So the many many people who sell cars, windows, heating systems, health products etc. etc. are according to the Prime Minister, either 'shallow', 'slick', 'used' or 'dishonest'.   This was brought home to me when I visited a car garage recently in Harlow to get my car fixed.  The car salesmen there have always done their best to help me and are highly honest and hard working.  They told me that they didn't take kindly to be described as 'a used car salesman' and had become quite anti-Labour.

The truth is that most salesmen work very long hours, often work on low basic or commission only and have to travel far distances in order to make a living. Many years ago I worked in telesales, and I was struck how many people were doing it as a second job in the evenings in order to provide extra support for their families or had suffered some kind of financial hardship.  Far from being used as a political insult in which Mr Brown can attack the Prime Minister, salesmen should instead be celebrated for their hard work, entrepreneurial spirit and for providing services that many people could not do without.   Mr Cameron should wear the salesmen badge with pride.

Gordon Brown was keen to trump in the Commons today, just how much he had allegedly done for those on lower incomes. This is of course after adding £2.7 billion to the Government debt mountain.

Today I received an email from a constituent, Ann Richards, in Harlow who shows that not quite everyone has benefited from Mr Brown's 'largesse'. I reproduce it below for Centre Right readers:

"Pensioners age 60 to 64 are still being taxed an extra £103 a year after the personal allowance was increased by £600  for the year.

My personal allowance went up by £600  giving me  £120 extra.  The 20p tax band means that I am still £103 worse off.

With the withdrawal of 10p tax band I was paying an extra £233 a year tax

Now only paying an extra £103. That equates to £2  a week out of my pension

Single women pensioners betweeen the ages of 60 and 64 are the worst off section of the population.under the latest tax changes."

She adds:

"Alistair Darling is hitting people who have no prospect of a pay rise as they are not at work.  Please will you inform David Cameron of my protest and get him to redress this gross injustice and say that he will do that before the next General Election. so the conservatives can be assured of a good majority."

I could not have put it better myself!