Not hideous, but diverse
"I feel as if I am home now. As if I have freedom now with all that brings with it. I can go anywhere in the whole world. I can walk tall. This is a country where you can sleep with both eyes closed. Where the chances are that you won't get robbed. Where you can build a house without tall walls. Where you can have any kind of car and no one will challenge you with a gun. Where the police are not lawless. I feel proud. Like I was born again today."
Yousif Khaledi, 26, a shop assistant who arrived five years ago from Iraq, was entranced by the talk of British values, diversity and democracy. Enough to sing the national anthem when others were only mumbling. He may not sing it again, but that's OK. On any reasonable criteria, once is more than enough.
Welcome to Britain, Albert Ekemode and Yousif Khaledi.However, this other article makes me wonder if we deserve you.
Labels: immigration
Cuts, cuts and more cuts
The Stirrer reports that changes in the council's parks service could leave it unable to comply with legal obligations or government reporting requirements as certain key posts are being scrapped.
Another department which deals with building conservation issues is also facing the axe, as the officer in charge is retiring in March and not being replaced and the staff are expecting further job cuts to come.
Embarrassingly, this came to light at a recent meeting in Yardley, where residents in Acocks Green were stunned to discover that plans for a conservation area in the ward had been delayed, despite a promise from the ineffectual Tory in charge of Regeneration, Cllr Neville Summerfield. Although the Liberal Democrat councillors in the ward had promised a start to the scheme within six months, it was revealed that it wasn't in the departmental work plan at all and that this covers the next eighteen months. With the job losses, even this looks unachievable.
It appears that the plans have now been restored to the work plan, but a start date is still some way away. With the job cuts looming - how realistic is that?
Labels: building conservation, Neville Summerfield, regeneration, Yardley
The job of propping up Gordon Brown is not a job I want. We need to make Parliament do its job properly... Under a minority Government, things would have to be discussed and argued about, and what is wrong with that? Ministers would have to get their legislation through by convincing people it is the right thing to do.
Very democratic and laudable.
But odd that this comes from the man who was desperate to prop up the Conservatives in a coalition. Councillors aren't allowed to freely discuss and argue matters - disagreements are hammered into shape behind the closed doors of the Liberal Democrat and Conservative group offices. Cabinet members don't need to to convince councillors, because both groups will do exactly what they are told.
Odd that when the then Cllr Hemming had the influence to achieve this democratic dream, he declined it and signed up to the concordat in 2004. Now he has no influence of which to speak, even within the Liberal Democrat party at Westminster,
he's reversed course.
Labels: coalition, Conservatives, John Hemming, Liberal Democrats
Opportunity Knocked
Imagine this.
You are a maverick, backbench MP from a minor party, starved of media oxygen since your last leadership bid.
PMQs comes around, as it does every Wednesday.
The green leather benches are packed, the galleries are full. Gordon is there. So's Dave. And Whatsisname, Nick something-or-other. The TV cameras are there, this is live on the radio. This is what Parliament should be.
Mr Speaker's gaze has alighted upon you and he has called your name, summoning you to the centre of the bearpit of the Mother of Parliaments.
This is your moment. This is your chance to skewer the Prime Minister, challenging his policies over the economy, the military, Iraq, Afghanistan, the chance to demand an immediate election.
You could make your name with this question.
Silence falls across the chamber.
Not just because half of them are trying to work out who you are.
You are on your feet, ready to dazzle with sparkling repartee.
You have it - a leftfield question that the big man won't be expecting.
Then you wonder why the whole House laughs at you.
Genius.
And before John Hemming burbles something about the Labour Party not caring, he's wrong. we've been campaigning on this as well. In short, Travel West Midlands have re-routed the number 41 bus, taking it away from the centre of Acocks Green. As part of their re-routing, there is no now bus serving the Fox Hollies Leisure Centre directly, which has to be a stroke of genius on their part. Furthermore, the 41 now carries passengers to Shirley, close to the site of a new Asda superstore, rather than to the local shopping centre of Acocks Green. TWM have got it massively wrong, but this is not something that can be laid at the door of the Labour Government. I seem to recall John's new best mates, the Conservatives,
deregulating the buses back in 1985.
Incidentally, Cllr Gareth Compton - a Conservative star in the making - reviewed the bravura Hemming performance on The Stirrer:
You made an absolute tit of yourself at PMQs, provoking howls of derision from all sides... You had an opportunity to ask the Prime Minister a serious question. Instead, you chose a stunt for a press release and another 'Focus'. It made you sound frightfully trivial I'm afraid.
I think Gordon was joking when he said that he was going to call an emergency Cabinet meeting, but he did promise to write to John about the matter.
Labels: John Hemming, PMQs
Tower Block of Commons
An interesting idea, taking these Westminster fish out of their Thames water and putting them somewhere where they are small fry in a much bigger pool.
So far, I've been distinctly unimpressed by our own Austin Mitchell - or more precisely, his wife, who are finding out about how the other half really live, but aren't getting into the spirit of the life swap as much as the others and seem to confuse empathy with condescension. I have a sneaking suspicion that I could have started to warm to Iain Duncan Smith and I'm feeling rather sorry for Mark Oaten, despite the embarrassment of his history as a Liberal Democrat, who appears to have a thin skin for a politician. I couldn't help grinning when his first response to the poor housing conditions of his tower-block hostess was to start a petition.
Tim Loughton, who is apparently the Conservative shadow spokesman on children (no, me neither) looked crestfallen when sent to Birmingham, as apparently, there are no Conservative MPs in Birmingham. Mr Loughton, can I introduce you to the shadow secretary of state for international development,
Andrew Mitchell, who is the MP for Sutton Coldfield? Last time I checked, that was within the boundaries of the fine City of Birmingham, no matter how much the residents wish it otherwise.
Like all reality programming, this is staged and carefully edited to meet a particular agenda, but is this just a social safari? These MPs may want to live like common people and do whatever common people do, but at the end of the programme, they will return to their own realities, to their comfortable, safe houses with their swimming pools and wring their hands over the dinner table about how some people live. Austin Mitchell was at least honest enough to admit that he didn't know about how readily available drugs are, but I hope that this proves an eyeopener for four MPs who are clearly out of touch with some of the realities of life at this forgotten end of society. Perhaps it may even allow them to reconnect with their original reasons for going into politics.
Labels: Politics
Money, money, money...
A very interesting meeting,
last night's Yardley Constituency Committee. So interesting that
Cllr Paul Tilsley spent most of his time working through the emails on his Blackberry, although I'm sure that he was keeping an ear on the discussions. Perhaps he was booking a few anaesthetic-free
dental appointments with underperforming council officers.
First up was the financial situation across the constituency. The councillors sat there, impassive and silent, while an officer ran through the report, which was a pile of bad news. This bad news actually dates from last September, as the data has - apparently - not been available until now. Quite how anyone is supposed to manage the constituency without current financial data is entirely beyond me and I simply don't believe that these figures weren't available earlier. The quarter 2 data apparently indicates a forecast overspend at year end (that's the end of March 2010) of £564,000, but this seriously understates the position, because the budget reconciliation is based upon 'efficiencies' of £364,000 being delivered by the end of the year. Given that at the end of September, a grand total of £0 had been delivered and that the councillors failed to deliver £118,000 in 2008/09, the signs aren't good. This means that the true end of year forecast position is likely to be somewhere north of £920,000 - an overspend against locally managed services of some 20%.
I did ask - just as I did at the last financial reporting session - for some details about how these savings are to be achieved, but no answer was forthcoming, either from the officer or his elected masters, who left him to struggle bravely, supporting him by remaining silent and impassive. Some of this overspend has been gifted to Yardley from the centre, as no allowance was made for the costs of retrospective appeals against the outcome of the Pay and Grading exercise. Cllr Whorwood tried to shift the blame for these costs by saying that it would have been cheaper if done earlier, but this ignores the simple facts that the process was flawed and some additional costs should have been factored in from the start. Basic business practice would dictate that, but such was the confidence in the process from the very top that it was thought unnecessary. In any case, only a small part of the overspend relates to Pay and Grading.
The only information available is that £177,000 has apparently been earmarked for recovery against 'general efficiencies.' However, only £52,000 has actually been saved and that is 'not fully in place.' The remaining £125,000 is classified as 'one off savings in place for 2009/10', but it is actually coming from the 'Constituency Investment Fund.' That sounds like a good idea - we need some investment in our constituency, but I suspect that this grand name is actually a cover for the use of central council reserves to try to cover up the failures of the Regressive Partnership. A similar funding solution has been employed in
Hall Green, where the Liberal Democrats in charge face swingeing cuts to try and cover a deficit of £1.8 million - comprised of a history of years of overspending and failure to meet savings targets. The short version is that this £125k isn't an efficiency saving, but seems to be an additional chunk of funding from the centre that has been dressed up to look like efficiency.
There are also problems incurred through the 'Customer First' scheme, which is running late and has therefore failed to deliver the forecast savings within this year, so these will have to be found from somewhere else. It isn't clear who is to blame for this delay or whether any of those costs can be contractually recovered, but Yardley will pay the price in the immediate term.
And there is more. The officer presenting the budget tonight let slip that the, as yet unpublished, figures for the third quarter actually show a further deterioration in performance. I wonder if we'll get those before the end of the financial year? Given that the district auditor
has been very critical of the council and has refused to sign off the 2008/09 accounts in time for the deadline last September, I doubt that we'll see quarter three before the end of the financial year.
Perhaps Tilsley should start his 'bad cop' meetings rather closer to home.
Plans to sell off surplus offices and raise £49.7 million towards the project have been put on hold following the slump in the commercial property market.But city council analysts expect the bulk of sales to go through by 2012/3 and have included the full amount in their forecasts for the future Business Transformation savings. In the meantime, the shortfall in income is being plugged by high-cost borrowing.According to the latest figures, the council was expected to raise £38 million this year and £7.2 million next. But it will now only reach £2.5 million this year before seeing a rise to £8.8 million next and £36.6 million the year after. Council deputy leader Paul Tilsley, the man heading up the Business Transformation scheme, admitted the authority was assuming the market would return to its pre-recession levels
That may happen, but it is unrealistically optimistic to provide a medium term budget on such a basis.
Labels: Birmingham Council, Finance, Yardley
Stop whinging Nigel
Yet again, I'm forced to ask the question - what planet is Nigel Dawkins on?
He's spent the past few weeks wandering around Bournville collecting letters and signatures demanding that the government act to keep Cadburys British and now
he's delivered them to Downing Street. Now, while I'd like to see some guarantee of continuing employment and investment in Birmingham and the rest of the UK, I'm flummoxed as to what the government can do to ensure that Cadburys is owned in Britain, short of nationalising the damn thing. And I don't think that the Conservatives really want to limit shareholder rights, do they?
You may recall that
Nigel accused the local MPs who signed an Early Day Motion about the proposed takeover of 'gesture politics.'
Not that he'd ever engage in anything as pointless as that.
Labels: Nigel Dawkins
Scraping out of recession
Only just, but we are through the worst.
We've been badly hurt because of our central position as a key focal point for the world's financial trading and banking operations, so we've taken longer to pull out. The danger now is that this fragile recovery might be derailed. This month's loss of productivity due to snow won't help in the immediate term and nor would the Tory plan to slash and burn government spending. Dumping people back onto the dole queue isn't a solution. The government has to sustain the economy in the short term until the private sector is able to pick up the strain again. We've managed to scrape through with unemployment at 8% - behind the 10% in the US and the EU - and Liam Byrne reports that the growth, although slight, has a reasonably broad base across manufacturing and services.
No matter how much George Osborne postures, looking petulant in TV studios isn't a substitute for real policies.
Cameron and Osborne have got it wrong on the economy before. Rough as this has been over the past year, the Conservatives would have made it deeper and harsher with their failure to respond to the initial problems. Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who chairs the IMF commented that
if you exit too early (from the stimulus steps), then you’ll have the risk of going back into recession
So all the talk of cutting now is downright dangerous.
Labels: George Osborne, recession
Unreasonable force
Chris Grayling was on the Politics Show this week, trying to argue in favour of a change in the law to allow homeowners to use all force that is not 'grossly disproportionate' in defence of themselves, their families and - one presumes - their property.
Naturally, the appeal case last week came up for comment, but I'm not quite sure of the relevance in this case, as the injuries to the burglar came after he had left the victim's premises and been pursued down the street by the victim and his family. Surely Grayling can't be proposing that we will be allowed to wreak vengeance upon criminals. I suppose that it would save money on the courts system, but I'm not sure that it is in the interests of justice.
Grayling said that nobody knows how they would react if they came across
a burglar holding a knife to your children's throats
which is, fortunately, true. However, I doubt that many parents would consider the law in their response, but the situation is likely to provide sufficient justification for extreme force.
And indeed, the
advice from the Crown Prosecution Service and the Association of Chief Police Officers is quite clearAnyone can use reasonable force to protect themselves or others, or to carry out an arrest or to prevent crime. You are not expected to make fine judgements over the level of force you use in the heat of the moment. So long as you only do what you honestly and instinctively believe is necessary in the heat of the moment, that would be the strongest evidence of you acting lawfully and in self-defence. This is still the case if you use something to hand as a weapon. As a general rule, the more extreme the circumstances and the fear felt, the more force you can lawfully use in self-defence.
The law itself is quite straightforward and relies upon the
Criminal Law Act 1967,
A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large
further codified with more detail in the
2008 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act. Case law (
Palmer v The Queen) has established that as long as a victim acting in self defence
had only done what he honestly and instinctively thought was necessary that would be most potent evidence that only reasonable defensive action had been taken
R v Owino established the concept that
a person may use such force as is [objectively] reasonable in the circumstances as he [subjectively] believes them to be.
The law covers everyone from me at home to an armed police officer patrolling the streets of Birmingham and that versatility is a tribute to the elegance of the solution.
Why we need a new law specifically to allow householders to use additional force just short of grossly disproportionate, but not a law to provide additional protection to people on the street, isn't quite clear. Despite the fear spread by the Conservatives, ai
ded and abetted by a stunt committed by Myleene Klass' PR merchant, there are very few prosecutions brought for the use of excessive force and most of them deserve to be put before a jury for their consideration.
The law change simply isn't required, other than to provide soundbites for Grayling and Cameron.
Labels: Chris Grayling, David Cameron, reasonable force
Bungalow Bill shows his sensitive side
Despite his Etonian background (yet another Cameronian contemporary), Conservative MP
Bill Wiggin seems remarkably dumb. Or just plain insensitive.
Smack bang in the middle of his Leominster constituency is the
Marlbrook milk plant, operated by Cadburys. Obviously, the employees there were concerned about their future, now that Kraft have taken over the company, but
Bill thinks (allegedly) that these plebs are just moaning Minnies -
"No-one wants to hire a whinging workforce when you could have a positive upbeat one"
These are the workers who
will face job losses over the coming months as Kraft try to turn a profit on the purchase of Cadbury. Bill even refused to sign an Early Day Motion in support of an independent Cadburys - I do hope that
Nigel Dawkins will be as critical of him as he was of the Labour MPs who didn't sign.
An early victim of the Kraft axe will be Roger Carr. Roger Carr is the chairman of Cadburys who started the week attacking Kraft, but swiftly reversed course in the face of the new offer and welcomed the new overlords. He says he'll miss being chairman of Cadbury,
but the £4.5 million his shares will make should cushion the loss somewhat. So, there is little surprise that some of the workers further down the food chain are rather more worried - as they can't expect that sort of payout when their jobs are declared surplus to requirements.
But I digress. Back to the lovely, sensitive and supportive Mr Wiggin. Even the
£11,000 that Bungling Bungalow Bill claimed in mortgage interest for a property that he already owned would help a family get over the tough times ahead, but perhaps I'm just whinging. After all, he was exonerated by his Etonian chum Dave. Even when challenged by his party members to stand down, Bill stood firm
re-selection would "send a signal" that he had done something wrong when he had, in fact, made an error
So that's all right then. He's not done anything wrong. He's made a mistake - something completely different. Anyone can make a mistake...
...repeated 23 times on expenses claims meant to cover the mortgage on his London home but mistakenly attributed to his Herefordshire home
23 times.
But he doesn't whinge about it.
Labels: David Cameron, MPs expenses Bill Wiggin
Dave and TED's Excellent (Secret) Adventure
Cameron is off to speak at an event run by
TED, an American foundation
devoted to the dissemination of ideas, at an event entitled 'What the World Needs Now.' Continuing the elitist theme of this week, a select group of 250 movers and shakers have been invited to witness the outpouring of Cameron's genius (limited to 18 minutes, as all sessions are), but only the first 150 applicants will actually get to see the great man perform and then share in the experience with their fellow luminaries.
Peculiarly, they have
been sworn to secrecy in advance over Cameron's presence.
Don't worry, plebs - TED puts these presentations on line, so we'll get to see what Cameron is blathering about eventually.
Labels: David Cameron
Ashamedly elitist
I am not the only person to have noted that in
Cameron's drive to attract graduates from the best universities with the best degrees into the teaching profession would bar his own maths tsar, Carol Vorderman,
who only got a third. I sought advice from an expert with more than 40 years' experience at the sharp end of education - practical, classroom teaching. She's recently retired as a maths teacher, but is in great demand by her former employer for cover work, although she doesn't have a degree, so wouldn't qualify for training funding under the Cameron approach.
If I'm being generous, this is another Cameron policy idea that is based upon a simple solution - education results can be improved by getting the top graduates involved in teaching. There is a damn sight more to being a teacher than the quality of your degree. I know of one Cambridge graduate with a first-class degree in maths that lasted twelve months in front of a class because he lacked the necessary abilities and skills possessed by many lesser-qualified teachers. I've known well-qualified teachers without the ability to control classes, but the top graduates will get the golden welcome, while lesser mortals - still required to make up the numbers - will have to fund themselves.
I'm not alone in this view.
Similarly, the idea that married couples should get a tax break is well-meaning, but it is based upon a fundamental misunderstanding of cause and effect. Children certainly benefit from stable parental partnerships, but marriage is not the cause of the stability, but a symptom. Stable couples are more likely to get married, but the message that Cameron is sending out is that unmarried parents are second-class parents. Perhaps this is appealing to some of the Daily Mail-reading classes who consider all single-parents to be young, feckless scroungers - although the reality is that over half of single parents are single in their 30s and 40s as the result of the end of the marriage through widowhood or divorce and a very small proportion of single mothers are in their teens. For some reason, these aren't deserving of a tax break, but the love-rat partner who abandons them and takes a new wife then collects the tax bonus. And then there's the reality check - would a few pounds a week in tax benefits really make anyone dash out to find a spouse? I'm not sure that encouraging relationships on the basis of tax efficiency is a guarantee of love or stability. Isn't it rather odd that a party that has been critical of the level of state intervention into people's lives is happy to intervene in their lives in this way.
If I'm being less than generous, then this is just a series of attempts to grab headlines without the intention to follow through with any real, substantive policy.
But that isn't likely, is it?
Labels: David Cameron, education, families
Niggling Nigel
Nigel Hastilow popped up on The Politics Show
as a blogger who has opposed Birmingham's bid to be
UK City of Culture in 2013 - he thinks that it is a waste of money to spend a few thousand pounds on a bid that could provide a positive image of our City across the country, bring hundreds of thousands of visitors and their money into our City and would further energise an already successful local cultural scene.
Nigel, seasoned observers will recall,
hit the headlines a couple of years back when his views on Enoch Powell were regarded by many as rather radical and out of step with reality, his party and the modern world. As Nigel put it - in scenes now deleted from his shiny new blog - but remembered by others,
Enoch, once MP for Wolverhampton South-West, was sacked from the Conservative front bench and marginalised politically for his 1968 'rivers of blood' speech, warning that uncontrolled immigration would change our country irrevocably. He was right.
After that, Mr Hastilow had to step down as a Tory candidate in Halesowen and Rowley Regis. Prior to that, at the time of the 2001 election, he had inadvertently praised the state of the Labour-run economy while he was the Tory candidate for Edgbaston and this was thrown back at William Hague by the Prime Minister during questions in the House.
Yesterday, Mr. Hastilow said: For many voters and most of the media, the Conservative Party is a lost cause. On the economy, Mr. Hastilow--should we call him Nigel?--provided the answer to the right hon. Member for Richmond, Yorks (Mr. Hague) when he said that we've never had it so good . . . people are prospering, unemployment is falling, interest rates are low. There's nothing much to worry about. Mr. Hastilow provides a rather more accurate summary of the
economy than does the Leader of the Opposition
So, Nigel is a bit of a loose cannon.
However,
his observations have again proved interesting.
He's still on the hunt for a winnable Conservative seat, but the party hierarchy have decided that in a tight campaign, they don't want this particular piece of weaponry rolling around the gundeck during close-quarter battles, so Eric Pickles and John Maples both rolled up to meet South Staffordshire's Conservative committee this week - the seat falls vacant as Patrick Cormack will retire at the next election - to ensure that Nigel wasn't put through for the selection meeting. Nigel doesn't think this is fair and gives us a blow-by-blow account of the meeting. Eric Pickles summarises Nigel's career to date
You don’t want him. He has embarrassed the party twice, once in 2001 and then again in 2007. You can’t have him.
Nigel isn't happy.
If David Cameron’s “localism” policy does not apply to his own constituency parties, how can we have any faith in its wider application under a Conservative Government? ...If the party’s own members can’t trust its leaders to behave honourably and honestly, why should the voters?
Good questions, Nigel.
Anyone got any answers?
Labels: City of Culture, Nigel Hastilow
The party's over
All UKIP candidates signed a declaration that they would agree to join the Group, and pool our resources in order to continue our fight against the European Union. Nikki Sinclaire has dishonoured that pledge. In a separate breach of party discipline, Ms. Sinclaire also failed to declare other relevant issues to the interview panel when she was selected as a UKIP candidate. As a consequence of these actions, the National Executive Committee took the decision on 11 January 2010 that Ms. Sinclaire will not be permitted to stand as a UKIP candidate at future elections
Thus came
the decision from the appropriately named chairman of UKIP, Paul Nuttall, although Nikki claims that she has had no chance to answer the accusations and has been convicted and sentenced by a kangaroo court.
Curiously, bankruptcy petitions are
a matter of public record and this one was filed on the day before the 2005 General Election, when Nikki was on the verge of being defeated by Sylvia Heal in Halesowen and Rowley Regis. Rumour has it that the petition was presented to Nikki on the occasion of the election count. In short, I find it very hard to believe that UKIP weren't aware that Ms Sinclaire had been bankrupted - a bankruptcy that was later discharged and would not affect her candidacy as an MEP. Indeed, it seems clear that senior members within UKIP were well aware of her past troubles.
Responding to Nigel Farrago's assault earlier in the week, Nikki has
declared that she is determined to stand for UKIP in the General Election in Meriden, although as her nomination and right to use the party description and logo has to be signed off by a party official, it seems unlikely that this will come to pass. Indeed, she has already been instructed that she is now prohibited from using the UKIP logo and name in any published material.
Looks like my forecast of her being gone by the summer is distinctly optimistic. Will she last the weekend as a UKIP MEP?
Labels: Nikki Sinclaire
Every party has their bad apples.
A man who admitted making nail bombs at his West Yorkshire home has been jailed for 11 years.... [the] arsenal of weapons and explosives included home-made shotguns, pen guns and pistols... [he] also pleaded guilty to six counts of having or collecting documents useful in terrorism... Mr Justice Calvert-Smith said his case was "unique" because of his long and persistent manufacture of guns and explosives.... pleaded guilty to 22 charges at Woolwich Crown Court in November.... Police discovered 12 firearms and 54 improvised explosive devices, which included nail bombs and a booby-trapped cigarette packet, at the home Gavan shared with his mother.
As I heard this story, I was just waiting for the inevitable denouement. And lo, it came to pass...
the court heard [he] was a former member of the BNP
Sadly, his defence wasn't up to much.
He told detectives he had "a fascination with things that go bang", the Old Bailey heard
The judge wasn't a lot better, describing it as
almost an obsession with guns and explosives
ALMOST? I don't think there's
any almost about this. This was the largest stock of home-made explosives and weapons ever discovered in that area.
Police uncovered... nail bombs, pipe bombs and a booby-trapped cigarette packet, and 12 firearms - three of them loaded - plus devices in whisky bottles and aerosols. There were also materials for making more devices, including fireworks, weedkiller, hydrogen peroxide and gunpowder. Gavan was also apparently in the process of building a rocket launcher. It took police and Army bomb disposal officers six days to search the room and explode some of the devices to make them safe, during which time shocked neighbours in Colbeck Terrace had to be evacuated.
I think we can safely call this an obsession. Yup, I'll sign off that this is an obsession.
And the BNP membership? That's just a given. The BNP will doubtless
Labels: BNP, Crime
Dissent at the top
Nikki Sinclaire is clearly
having difficulty with the leadership of UKIP, as she has left the Europe of Freedom and Democracy grouping to which UKIP belongs, although she continues her membership of UKIP (for the time being, at least). Refusal to follow the party course is usually something likely to result in disciplinary action, and withdrawal of the whip
but in this case, apparently not
I have discussed my position at length with the Leader of UKIP, Lord Pearson, who understands my viewpoint and has assured me of his support both now and in the future in my continued work for UKIP. My move to the non-attached group therefore will not affect in any way my position as a UKIP MEP for the West Midlands.
Her problem with the grouping is that she found some of the other member parties
have a variety of extremist views which includes anti-Semitism, violence and the espousal of a single European policy on immigration. One of these parties, Liga Nord which was expelled from the previous Ind Dem Group, currently holds the Group Presidency jointly with UKIP.In addition, a particular difficulty has arisen for me with the prospect of EFD joining a PAN-European Party whose aim is Party enhancement within the EU rather than extraction from it, to which I am implacably opposed.
But that is not her only issue. It appears that the former leader, Nigel Farage doesn't like her much.
My working relationship and trust with EFD Co-President, Nigel Farage has broken down since his personal admittance to me recently that he wished I had not been elected. The comment “I wish I had only 12 not 13 MEP`s” was made to many people in the aftermath of the European Elections. I have found this personal animosity difficult to work with.I would also like to point out that on a pre arranged interview on the BBC West Midlands Politics Show, Mike Nattrass and I had to spent two thirds of the time defending our membership of the EFD Group and Nigel’s public remarks made about leadership candidates ‘not being credible’.
Despite Nikki promising to support Nigel Farage in his campaign to eject John Bercow from Buckingham, but the swivel-eyed one wasted no time in putting the boot in himself,
using a Daily Politics interview to threaten action against her and disclosing the fact that Ms Sinclaire was made bankrupt in 2005, something that he claims she did not disclose back when they selected her. You would think that they would have learnt something from the Ashley Mote case, where he apparently forgot to tell the party that he was about to face trial for fraud. Apparently not.
So, will Nikki still be a UKIP MEP by the summer or will she join the procession of former UKIP MEPs who have left the parliament under a range of clouds.
Still, despite the abuse heaped upon us by Nikki and her West Midlands colleague, Mike Nattrass, at the count - calling Labour and the Tories 'fascists', the Labour MEP Michael Cashman
extends a comforting handMy sympathies go to Nikki Sinclaire. No one should have to suffer such Neanderthal discrimination in the 21st century. However it's proof that if you scrape away the gloss from these extremists, they remain the same terrible bigots. They have never voted for equality or stood up for the rights of minorities.
Farage's dream of detoxifying the party has a LONG way to go yet.
When I took it over, and for a few years before that, UKIP had been riven with in-fighting. We had a brand that was seen by many to be somewhat toxic. I think that has gone.... When I took it over, and for a few years before that, UKIP had been riven with in-fighting. We had a brand that was seen by many to be somewhat toxic. I think that has gone....
You carry on believing that Nigel.
Labels: Nigel Farage, Nikki Sinclaire, UKIP
Plots thickening.
If you recall, way back in the summer of 2009,
John Hemming distributed a leaflet which was considered by some to allege that a property developer had purchased plots of land at the Swan Centre to hinder the new Tesco development. M'learned friends became involved and a legal threat winged towards the MP, at which John decided that discretion was the better part of valour and
issued an apology on his blog.
Since August, this email has clearly rankled with John, so
an emergency debate has been called for tomorrow and the
full text of the email has now been published.
On the one hand, there would seem to be a case to answer for Withers, in that they have tried to get an undertaking from an MP not to repeat an allegedly libellous statement even from behind the protection of Parliamentary privilege.
an undertaking not to repeat the allegations or any similar allegations, particularly in Parliament.
On the other hand, John has obviously accepted that the developer concerned is not engaging in spoiling tactics to delay the Swan redevelopment, but has genuine concerns and is seeking to voice them despite the compulsory purchase order process, so it would seem unreasonable of him to then abuse privilege to repeat a statement that he publicly accepts to be false.
So, is John Hemming on a crusade to protect the primacy of parliamentary free speech? Is he using this to gain some publicity for himself? Or is there something else going on in the background?
I initially thought that this was publicity-seeking, but now, I suspect that there is something else going on.
All most peculiar.
Labels: John Hemming, libel