Paul Flynn - Read My Day

Boris' Bike flop?

Total of British soldiers killed in Afghanistan = 236

That's exactly twice the total killed in the Charge of the Light Brigade

Mayor Boris has added to London pollution with his failure to strengthen the successful congestion charge scheme. He sold his soul to the petrol heads to get elected. He has been writhing since denying the obvious need to extend the congestion charge and to jack up the level of charges. The  welcome reduction in traffic that followed the original introduction has since disappeared.
   Congestion has returned to its original level.

This conclusion is based on subjective research over the years from my flat to the Commons four miles distant. By bus or car, journey times are back to their previous worst. Creditably Boris is introducing a borrow a bike scheme. Transport for London (TfL) began applying for planning permission for the 400 docking stations, where people will be able to pick up and drop off bikes around central London.

The docking stations will be built around 300m apart so that potential cyclists are never too far from being able to borrow and lock-up hired bikes. I have seen similar schemes in Barcelona and Paris. Neither seem to be working well. I took this picture in Paris this morning in Rue des Capucines, Not a single bike was in use.

Bon chance, Boris.

Faith in miracles

It's tricky decision. To be in London to ask Gordon Brown a question on his woeful Afghan Statement or be in Paris to cross -question the head of NATO. I have opted to speak at the Western European Union's meeting to many MPs from France, Germany, Italy and Spain. Parliament has heard my views many times.  

Talking to MPs from other countries in likely to be more beneficial. They are less inclined to believe in miracles.

Bad language

PASC has come up with a new idea to pressurised officials into using simple English.

It emerged that Tessa Jowell, the minister for the Cabinet office, kept a "little book of b*****ks" in which she noted down government jargon and 'gobbledegook'. It's probably the first time that bit of bad language has been used in a Select Committee report.

PASC suggested people should be able to complain about cases of confusing or misleading language as they would for other types of poor administration, and if government and public sector bodies do not respond, the complaints should be taken to an ombudsman.

BBC Wales kindly gave me the chance to give a few examples tonight. Pat McFadden once told our committee, 'Government planned a one-stop shop for anyone who had experienced a ‘citizen’s episode.’ These are births, marriages and deaths.

Minister James Purnell refers to someone having suffered ‘An employment cessation event.’ However you wrap it up it’s still the sack. In 2001 the Government introduced legislation designed  “to enable provision to be made for the purpose of reforming legislation which has the effect of imposing burdens affecting persons in the carrying on of any activity and to enable codes of practice to be made with respect to the enforcement of restrictions, requirements or conditions.”

The problem with the legislation that it was so infested with the jargon of regulation that it was virtually incomprehensible to anyone but the parliamentary draughtsmen who wrote it, (perhaps not even to them) and in 2006 the Act was repealed by the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act.

Liam Byrne has invented his own language, including urging everyone to 'raise their horizons'. If someone is travelling at high speed, horizons can advance or recede. If the horizon is rising, it means there's a tsunami on the way. It's time to make for the hills. But I don't think that is what Liam means.

Sleaze antidote

Tony Wright's interview on Hard Talk  last night was a blast against the now accepted image of sleazy MPs. Cardiff LibDem MP Jenny Willott  complained about the abuse and bullying that   MPs' spouses have endured as a result of the expenses storm. All MPs have heard similar stories.

Chairman of the Public Administration Committee (PASC), Tony Wright is a model of parliamentary rectitude. Without his intervention, and that of PASC, MPs would not have come within the orbit of the Freedom of Information legislation. In the original proposal, MPs were not covered by FOI.

Tony explained why, as a talented Blairite in opposition, he was never made a minister. He was put on the first rung of the promotion ladder as PPS to Derry Irvine. He kept stum on legal matters covered by Irvine, but he continued to speak out on other issue. A message came from Peter   Mandelson / Alistair Campbell axis that, in Tony's words, 'questioned his mental health'. Mandelson complained that Tony 'thought too much.' Not much room for that among New Labour ministers.

Very sadly, Tony is standing down from parliament. He explained that his ' kidneys are packing in' and he needs a transplant. It would be difficult to restore his health while doing the work of an MP. Tony is now leading the call for parliamentary reforms. He has led by example, the work of PASC under his leadership is legendary. It has won the acclaim of the academic world and the popular press.

Public confidence in politics would be restored if the public saw more of Tony Wright and less of duck houses and bath plugs.

Climate myths

The agreement of Commonwealth leaders to help developing nations to deal with climate change and cut greenhouse gases is great news.

Nick Griffin's planned attendance at Copenhagen is not. There is rush from the right to rubbish global warming. Several Tory MPs have jumped on the bandwagon. Even David Davis of the vanity by-election fame is agnostic. The Daily Mail is stoking it up following their long record on being wrong on everything.

The Commonwealth is a good starting place. Many Commonwealth members are island states threatened by rising sea levels. Leaders also called for the strongest possible outcome at next month's climate change summit in Copenhagen.

Copenhagen is not the answer but it will be a leap forward.

New MPs sleaze scandal ?

Brace yourself for a new MPs' scandal. But it will not be. It's a heap of baloney.

MPs usually sign for purchases in the Commons. These include meals, hospitality for visitors and parliamentary gifts for raffles etc.. It's  a convenient arrangement and the great majority of MPs have their bills paid by direct debit every month.

A freedom of information request has been made for all MPs' bills for last September. They will be published in a couple of weeks time. No doubt the story will be written up as some new shock and horror scandal. It will be nothing of the sort, It will be entirely meaningless if my experience is typical.

Even though I get a monthly account saying that sums will be deducted from my bank account each month, nothing has been deducted for nine months. The reason is a change of debit card last winter. Even though I have several times begged and pleaded with the refreshment department since last June to deduct the sums due, not a penny was taken until last week the 24th of November. By an amazing coincidence that was the day when all MPs were told about the FOI request.

I have asked for an explanation to be attached to the publication of the figures that the Refreshment Department has not been doing their job. In nine months I, and most MPs, have had a great many visitors that I have been delighted to entertain.

No doubt there will be more 'oohs and aahs' when the figure are published. This time it's not MPs who are at fault. Not that the truth will influence the news reporting very much. 

It's all meaningless

Mission impossible

Gordon Brown is looking for Karzai to establish a 'corruption-free police force'.

To be generous, I should welcome the first acknowledgement from Government that Karzai's police are corrupt. Up until today the  fantasy was that our soldiers were risking their lives to gain territory that will be handed over to the Karzai police to run. In past blogs I have reported that many Afghans fear the depraved, lawless thieves of the police more than they fear the Taliban. I have raised this umpteen times in parliament and twice in direct oral questions to Gordon Brown. Recognition that a problem exists is a start to finding a solution.

Will there  be a dawning of truth that Karzai, his family, most of his government and his warlords allies are all endemically corrupt? That would be helpful too.

Even better would be realisation that we are recruiting Karzai soldiers and police through the use of bribes.  Or that supplies from Kabul to Kandahar and Helmand get through by paying protection money - mostly to the Taliban? That's our ethical corruption.

If the Government face up to the deep hopelessness of the situation, they might conclude that the chances of ending corruption in six months are not good. But this strategy will be enough to buy time until politicians dream up an exit strategy that can be spun as a victory. 

I'm afraid that we are due for something similar from Obama on Tuesday. The aims will be impossibilist. When they fail, the excuse is there for an exit. It's hard to confess that eight years sacrifice of blood and treasure has been in vain.

But this is real progress. Brown and Obama are no longer talking about a war that will continue for five or forty years. Both are looking for an exit.

Ty Hafan

Cheers to Aneurin Bevan Residential Home in Duffryn in my constituency.

 

They have a target of £1,000 to raise today for the best of causes. Ty Hafan is the specialist hospice for children. 

 

A huge effort has been made in preparing the toys, cakes and goods for sale. Ty Hafan needs about £2 million a year in contributions. After the first hour today, £600 had been collected. I look forward to hearing that they made the target.

Well done.

Lang the problem, not the solution

The new supremo of the body to control the revolving door from Ministerial office to retirement riches is Lord Lang. He is a former cabinet minister with three lucrative directorships.  He is not the independent new broom required; he is part of the parliamentary tribe that thinks it’s reasonable to have a clutch of jobs when ministerial life ends.

The Public Administration Committee (PASC) reached the wrong decision in the ‘retrospective pre-appointment hearing’ yesterday. This is far more important than duckhouses and bathplugs in the scandal of parliamentary greed.

PASC rarely divides on anything. For the sake of unity there are usually compromises. There are great advantages in having unanimous reports. On the question of the appointment of the new chair of ACoBA. I had to dig my heels in. Lord Lang will not halt the revolving door, he might lubricate it. I pressed for time to make a minority report. This is not allowed. I voted against.

As a director of Marsh and McLennan since 1997 Lord Lang was sued in 2004 'accused of orchestrating a massive fraud against customers.' Bloomberg reported on 13th of this month that the company 'will pay $400 million to settle a lawsuit by investors who said they had lost money because the company failed to disclose illegal practices'.
 
Ian Lang insisted that the company were blameless. I asked him whether 'they had paid the $400 million out of the goodness of their hearts?' Others will ask the same question. While there may be no sleaze, the perception of wrongdoing is present. That is not a sufficient reason to reject him. Failing to reform a ramshackle ACoBA is.  Lord Lang heard our objections and confirmed that he recognised the danger that ministers, top civil servants and military leaders may have their decisions in office distorted by their expectations of retirement incomes from Mega-greed PLC. The past procedures of ACoBA have been permissive, heavily influenced by the need to allow former office holders full scope to seek top-up job incomes to boost their MPs pay or their handsome pensions. 

 

Lord Lang is not a solution. He is probably part of the problem. There was no sign that he was going to be more rigorous than his predecessor. He has profited by retirement jobs, and believes that others should not be denied the same advantages. These are not the ideal attributes PASC was hoping for in a reformed ACoBA. 

 

There is a wide choice of independent candidates outside of the parliamentary tribe. Former trade union leaders, charity workers, ombudsmen,  even an 'ordinary person'. The last person likely to end the scandal of the revolving door is someone who have been propelled through it.

 

Pre-appointment hearings are new to the UK. PASC looked at the system in America. We commended its limited use here. Most of the hearings held so far in the UK have been formalities. The candidates were eminently suitable for their posts. I believe this is the first where hostile cross examination has taken place. The majority of committee members were unhappy in the public session.

 

The final decision by a majority of the committee was wrong. Rejection was judged to be a nuclear option. If holding pre-appointment hearings is justified, rejections must be seriously considered. One  unique feature in this case is that the appointment had already been made and retrospective rejection would have created a messy situation. That's no excuse for taking the wrong decision.

 

I believe for the first time in the UK the approval of a candidate is qualified. The committee's view that no former cabinet member should be appointed to the chair of ACoBA in future is a signal of serious unhappiness  at Lord Lang's appointment. I could not bring myself to vote even for the compromise. This is not a good appointment and PASC should have rejected it. It is possible that Lord Lang may re-consider his own position. I hope he does. Recent events cry out for fundamental reforms. 

I gave evidence on these lines to the Kelly Committee. They were interested in other reforms. Many of those are less important than the need to obstruct the revolving door.

I stressed that an MP’s job is a full time one.  This principle should underpin all measures to reform the system of remuneration.  It is known that some MPs earn up to £250,000 a year from “moonlighting”. Those who take additional paid employment, which could be considered a second job, should declare the hours spent on these commitments, and the income received, so that voters can consider if they are able to carry out the core job of an MP.  Parliamentary salaries should be adjusted to reflect the additional income derived from second jobs.  There are former ministers who are still Members of Parliament who are paid for giving advice to industries for which they were formerly responsible.  Former Ministers and former senior civil servants should be barred from taking jobs in those areas in which they served.’

Kelly kindly quoted part of my submission to them but they have not adopted my main recommendations. There are no waitresses, bus drivers or people independent of the new Great and the Good on ACoBA. They are all people who think it's normal for an MP being paid £65,000 for a full time job to take on five other jobs that pay him £157,500. That's Adam Ingram's reward for his wisdom as a defence minister in approving the charge of our forces into the valley of Helmand. One more death and twice as many British soldiers will have died in Afghanistan than the total killed in the Charge of the Light Brigade. The wages of those who retire from ministerial office are handsome.

They cannot see any wrong with Lord Warner who rubbished a critical report on the pharmaceutical industry in 2005 but is now working as a former minister for a pharmaceutical company. Nor former health ministers Alan Milburn and Patricia Hewitt coining £115,000 and £165,000 from healthcare firms while still pocketing their parliamentary salaries. Now former Education Minister Charles Clarke is working for an educational services provider contributing to his £90,000 supplement to his parliamentary salary.

PASC has expressed unhappiness with the revolving door.  The only reform of ours that has been accepted in those ACoBA members is now paid. The chair gets an honorarium of £8,000 and members £5,000. Just a token gesture, of course. But more than the annual basic pension. Such is gulf between the governed and those who govern.

Public perceptions of certain kinds of lobbying activity have contributed to public cynicism in the political process: there is a perception that commercial corporations and organisations have an advantage over not-for-profit bodies, an advantage which is related to the amount of money they are able to bring to bear on the political process rather than the cogency of their case; there is concern about the freedom with which people are able to move to and fro between roles in industry on the one hand and ministerial and civil service posts in which they can benefit those industries on the other: a process that has become known as the 'revolving door'; and there is concern about the use of 'lobbyists for hire' (who have no legal obligation to make public who their clients are) to keep secret from the public the identity of those involved in lobbying decision-makers.

PASC found the rules on lobbying loosely and variously interpreted such that former Ministers in particular appeared to be able to use the contacts they built up in office to further a private interest. In other words, the present arrangements allow the influence of MPs (and peers) to be bought, which is potentially corrupting – or worse. This is unacceptable, particularly where the former ministers continue to be paid as sitting Members of Parliament.

The Press release issued by PASC says;_

“We are satisfied that Lord Lang has the professional competence and personal independence required for the post of Chair of the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments as it is currently constituted. However, we have serious concerns about the appointment of a former Cabinet Minister with business appointments of his own to a role that needs the perception of independence if it is to attract public confidence. We ask the Commissioner for Public Appointments to take account of our concerns when reviewing the appointment process.”

Paragraph 17 read.
Amendment proposed, leave out from the beginning to “we” in line 3 and insert “We are unable to endorse
Lord Lang’s appointment to this role because”. —(Paul Flynn)
Question, That the Amendment be made, put and negative

Retrospective Pre-appointment hearing shock

The title is right. Pre-appointment hearings are so new, someone forget to tell the Public Administration Committee (PASC) that one was necessary for the job of Chair of the Advisory Committee on Public Appointments (ACoBA).

 

This morning PASC questioned Ian Lang on whether  we will recommend him for a job he already has. Ian used to be an amiable, good natured MP and Secretary of State for Scotland. Now he is Rt Hon Long Lang of Monkton DL.  

 

ACoBA is the dozy bunch of the Great and Good who have been pushing the

revolving door that launches former ministers, civil servants, generals and admirals into lucrative retirement jobs. Sometimes they have imposed conditions that former ministers should not lobby their former colleagues for a year or two. Sometimes not.

The view of some members of PASC this morning in our public session is that we want  fundamental reform. I am not allowed to tell you the decision we took in the private session on the committee until the embargo ends tomorrow.

 

Wholly justifiable public fury among the public about the excesses of the some members of the parliamentary tribe should be answered with a new reformed ACoBA. It has not happened. Ian Lang is pretty pleased with the committee's past record. He does admit some 'tweaking' may be necessary. There are no waitresses, bus drivers or people independent of the new Great and the Good on ACoBA. They are all people who think it's normal for an MP being paid  £65,000 for a full time job to take on five other jobs that pay him £157,500. That's Adam Ingram's reward for his wisdom as a defence minister in approving the charge of our forces into the valley of Helmand. One more death and twice as many British soldiers will have died in Afghanistan than the total killed in the Charge of the Light Brigade. The wages of ministerial office are handsome.

 

They cannot see any wrong with Lord Warner who rubbished a critical report on the pharmaceutical industry in 2005 now working as a former minister for pharmaceutical companies. Nor former health ministers Alan Milburn and Patricia Hewitt  coining £115,000 and £165,000 from healthcare firms while still pocketing their parliamentary salaries. Now former Education Minister Charles Clarke is working for an educational services provider contributing to his £90,000 supplement to  his parliamentary salary.

PASC has expressed unhappiness with the revolving door ad nauseam. The only reform of ours that has been accepted in that ACoBA members are now paid. The chair gets an honorarium of £8,000 and members £5,000. Just a token gesture, of course. But more than the annual basic pension. Such is gulf between the governed and those who govern.

 

Another ticklish issue that caused us to question the suitability of Ian Lang is the perception of sleaze. Perception is everything now. While there is no suggestion that Ian is anything but a saintly man of business he has been the victim of some unkind news stories.

 

As a director of Marsh and McLennan since 1997 he was sued in 2004 'accused of orchestrating a massive fraud against customers.' Bloomberg reported on 13th of this month that the company 'will pay $400 million to settle a lawsuit by investors who said they had lost money because the company failed to disclose illegal practices'.

 

Ian Lang insisted that the company were blameless. I asked him whether 'they had paid the $400 million out of the goodness of their hearts?' Of course they did. Perception of sleaze? Certainly not. How could I have such a suspicious mind? The Report of the decision of PASC is being released under embargo at 4pm today to the candidate and Cabinet Office only. There will be a 24 hour embargo period until it is published at 4pm tomorrow. I shall be blogging further at 4.05 pm tomorrow. 

Nuclear Fog

Just received this account of a nuclear roadshow.

" Have just visited the RWE npower-EDF (sorry, Horizon now) roadshow in Bangor .

'Why are there no waste storage facilities shown on the map?' Because we don't know yet where to put them.

'Are the reactors  on the map shown in the right position?' Not necessarily, we don't know yet where they will be.

'When can new spent fuel be moved off site?' (correct answer 160 years): 1st guy: I don't know, 20 years? 2nd guy: I think it's 100 years

Have you ever built one of these reactors? No. Oh and anyway it's not us who actually build them.

'So who will be building them?' We don't know yet.

'Will they be able to complete on time?' Hmm, well we do agree it's an ambitious target.

'What about subsidies?' Not needed. Gave them Gerry's booklet.

and so it went on. They knew nothing or wouldn't tell, what a waste of time."

Early Day Motion

EDM 218

  

INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING COMMISSION AND NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY

24.11.2009

Flynn, Paul

That this House notes that new draft National Policy Statement for Nuclear Power Generation, as published on 9 November 2009, concludes its section on radioactive waste management with the remarkable assertion, at paragraph 3.8.20, that `Having considered this issue, the Government is satisfied that effective arrangements will exist to manage and dispose of the waste that will be produced from new nuclear power stations. As a result the IPC (the Infrastructure Planning Commission) need not consider this question'; considers the implication that the most contentious aspect of new nuclear power is not even going to be examined by the new IPC is democratically unacceptable and will lead to bad public policy; further notes that on the same date an explanatory leaflet distributed by the IPC to Ministers states: `The new IPC process will provide clearer and better opportunities for the public and local communities to get involved from an early stage in decisions that will affect them'; and requests that Ministers allow the IPC to scrutinise plans for radioactive waste management, storage and disposal.

Cameron in the gutter

David Cameron led his party into trouble today. It was the nasty incompetent party.

Was it panic after losing a few points in the poll? Probably. There has been an understanding between the main parties that they should not use the 'race card.' It's a very dangerous game that could create racial disharmony.

 

Hizb ut-Tahir has been investigated in the past. By coincidence today I was having lunch today with a former House of Commons researcher who wrote an account of their activities. She concluded that the group did not merit a ban. Cameron has a fanciful idea that banning them will destroy them. It would not. It would drive them underground. The Government also considered action but concluded that it would do more harm than good. Their alleged control over two schools claimed by Cameron is is a wild exaggeration.  

But Cameron knows that the truth is less important than fear. Frightening the voters against the 'enemy within' is an old trick. If he has any genuine concerns, he could communicate the details to the security and police services. That would have been responsible. Raising his wild allegation at PM Questions today was a deliberate act to bump up his profile by playing on fear. No doubt the redtops will join in tomorrow.

 

It was a great relief that Parmjit Dhanda was called and put Cameron is his place. He had not got his fact rights on this most dangerous issue. Tory grandee Patrick MacCormac asked Gordon Brown ' When did he discover that he was omnipotent?' No one laughed. The question was off-targat, neither funny nor true.

 Race relations are a potentially explosive issue here and across the world. Cameron made the situation more dangerous today. For what?

War crime

The bombshells are exploding early in the Iraq War inquiry

.

The intelligence did not support the case for war. Saddam's WMD had been dismantled. There were no links between Saddam and El Quaeda.

 

Today's evidence proves  that Tony Blair misled parliament before the most serious vote of this generation. 169 Labour MPs defied a three line whip and voted against war. We had heard that Blair had agreed with Bush to invade. The facts had to be arranged to fit that promise. The war could not be stopped. But we should not have been involved. It cost us 179 lives. For what?

The Why's beat the When's

There are two groups of politicians, the 'Why?'s and the 'When?'s.

The former are the curious, industrious and creative and seeking to find out why. The latter are waiting for the day when they get promotions or favours. That the theory of the Public Administration Select (PASC)  chairman Tony Wright today.

He was awarded the top prize of Parliamentarian of the Year  by the Political Studies Association. It was for his great work chairing PASC. He unselfishly wrote to members of the committee saying the award was for all of us. The citation said that:

 ' Under his watch the committee had worked hard to hold government to account and through its inquiries and reports, such as though on lobbying and good government, demonstrated the analytic parliamentary function at its finest,'

That's high praise from this prestigious group who appreciate the finer points of the political theatre. It was pleasure to see some of PASC's backroom staff were invited to today's presentation.

 

Especially gratifying to Welsh guests today was the Lifetime Achievement in Politics Award given to Rhodri Morgan. It was accepted by his wife Julie because Tuesdays are his busiest days. He has not stood down yet. The award is for:

 

'His major contribution to political life in the UK and especially to the recent development of Welsh politics and the Welsh Assembly.'

 

Julie read a pointed and witty comment from Rhodri. He said his best decisions in life was moving from studying languages to studying politics and then moving to be a political practitioner. He said he became First Minister in the Welsh Assembly because of his political studies and the opposition to him from Tony Blair. 'Tony helped to make me the people's choice.'  Absolutely true. I believe someone wrote a book of how the dragons overcame the Blair's poodles. We now have Dragons led by dragons.

 

Another winner told me today that she was surprised I was still talking to her. She had not been straight with me. I met Heather Brooks as an interviewer for the Dispatches programme. I took her at face value as a reporter not a campaigner.  I was open and truthful with her.

I did not know that she was a campaigner against MPs expenses problems. It would not have made a difference to what I had to say. I had no hesitation in talking to her. I agree with her citation which said:

 

'She had influenced the political agenda in her tireless and inspiring campaign to bring details of MPs expenses to light.'

 

She is not entirely happy with her great success. She is miffed that people ask if she works for the Daily Telegraph. They got the glory by buying stolen information and publishing it with a strong anti-Labour bias. She courageously did the spadework that forced publication. She really did 'provide a role model for investigative journalists.'

Carry on deceiving

Don't disturb our settled views even though they may be hopelessly wrong. That was the theme of the day in parliament. The subject was Afghanistan.

I intervened on several speakers. I also made a speech but you know all about that. Few satisfactory answers were received. The Foreign Secretary was  looking forward to Karzai's mission to eliminate corruption. I ask David whether Karzai had offered to prove the sincerity of his will to eliminate corruption by promising to arrest his drug dealing brother, Wali Karzai. The answer had no connection with the question. I can safely concluded that Karzai did not promise that.

I intervened on Hague  who was saying that we should not follow the example of Canadians and the Dutch in naming an exit date from Afghanistan. I put it to him that an exit date would change our mindset from believing in the fantasies of success and victory and concentrate on the inevitable eventual solution which will be a deal with all parties involved. Hague gave a tired old answer that naming a date will encourage the enemy. The Dutch and Canadians have already paid their full price in blood and treasure.

Tory Patrick Mercer made a good speech. He does not believe the joint party lie that our fighting in Afghanistan is reducing the threat of terrorism here. He even differentiated between Afghanistan and Pakistan. I asked him if he wanted to send British soldiers to Pakistan. He said he was in favour  in the right circumstances.

I asked the LibDem spokesman whether he was embarrassed by his leader's  use of the latest scare propaganda story that a nuclear war would follow our exit from Afghanistan. He said he was not. Not easily shamed.

Finally Bob Ainsworth gave way to me while he was being lyrical about our planned future successes. If President Obama decided to retreat from countryside to the cities, will the UK follow suit. He said we would.

That's is really interesting because that is precisely the way that the Viet War collapsed. The American's retreated to the cities, then ran out in panic. But those were the days when we had our own British foreign policy. We stayed out of the Vietnam disaster, Pity we are wasting our British lives in a vain war that is already lost.

How soon will politicians find an exit strategy that can be spun as a victory? Until then it's carry on dying.

Ethical corruption?

A novel remedy in the debate from LibDems Ed Davey.

He urged the wider use of bribes to persuade Afghans to desert the $10 a day Taliban to join Karzai's Army and Police. Of course we and the American have been throwing vast amounts already in bribes to Afghans. That's the Afghan way. But we are also urging Karzai to end corruption. He says he will. Incredibly some speakers yesterday said they believe him.

Meanwhile we are fighting corruption with...err corruption. Ours, of course, is an ethical, house-trained British corruption unlike the nasty foreign stuff.

Somehow, I don't think it will work

Selfish reforms

After the year from hell, we in the Labour Party will take comfort from any source.

It's a telling lesson that today's poll showing Labour six points ahead is a great boost. It means my seat in Newport West is relatively safe. It has been won twice before with similar figures. Nationally it could be a hung parliament. 

The Tories needs five points more than Labour to secure more MPs than Labour. This is an unfairness in the electoral system. It was no surprise when John Major gave evidence to PASC, the top reform on his wish list was to re-arrange constituency boundaries. David Cameron's plans to reduce the number of Welsh seats  will also benefit the Tories.

We would take their demands for democratic reforms more seriously if they did not have the stamp of self-interest gerrymandering about them.

It may be a fluke poll today. But it's nice while it lasts.

Transformed

It was one of the ugliest building in London. It stood at the exit of the Waterloo Eurostar station near St Thomas's hospital. It was a dreadful example of the concrete brutalism architecture of the sixties. It had stood empty and derelict for a decade. I suggested once that it was one of the few buildings in the country, the appearance of which was improved by flyposting.

It has now gone and been replaced by this sparkling example of current building fashion. It's certainly a great improvement. I pass it on my way to parliament from Vauxhall every morning. It raises my spirits.

Another fine sight is the glittering Big Ben. We take this wonder for granted. It's a fantastic piece of Victorian extravagant decoration.

A curiosity on my route is a building with a ship emerging from it. Was it once a decoration for a merchant navy head quarters? There is no sign of any link now with the sea.

Pontoons?

There was an answer in the war to fallen bridges.

the army were quickly on the scene to erect temporary pontoon bridges in their places. Do they still exist?

MPs for sale

Evidence from the USA that the Kelly report disregarded  would have improved his findings. He did not take a great deal of notice  of the evidence I sent him on the same point - the corrupting nature of second jobs for MPs.

A career gracing the benches of the Commons leaves Tory MPs almost twice as wealthy as their unfortunate colleagues who ran unsuccessfully for Parliament.

The study is thought to be the first to put a figure on the financial benefits of serving as an MP. It found that while the average Conservative member died with an estate worth £483,448, those who failed to win seats died with a total of £250,699, a difference of £232,749. By contrast, Labour members benefited by a mere £10,200. Two academics examined the personal fortunes of 427 recently deceased MPs who entered Parliament between 1950 and 1970 and served into the 1990s.

Their paper, MPs For Sale?  concludes that Conservative MPs profit from their time in office largely through lucrative second jobs gained as a result of their political connections.  Being an MP trebled  their chances of being offered a job as a company director. 

Many enjoyed profitable retirements as firms bought them up. However, Labour politicians, who were more likely to take up posts with unions, enjoyed far less lucrative positions. There is an uncomfortable number of former Labour ministers who have hawked their contacts and influence to the highest bidders.

The Public Administration Committee grilled several of them who  have grabbed outside jobs before they have retired from the House. This scandal dwarfs the bath plugs and moats.

Paddy praise

It's not every day that this blog get a comment from a former party leader. I was online this morning when Paddy Ashdown complained about a comment I wrongly attributed to him. What he and John Simpson said on the 'One' show on Wednesday merged together in my mind. Their comments were very similar.

No excuse really because the 'One' show kindly sent me a disc of the show. I corrected my error immediately and re-allocated the blame to John Simpson.  It's right also  to re-instate the favourable comments on Paddy. He did a splendid job persisting with his constant raising of the issue of Bosnia in Parliament. It stretched the patience of other MPs - including his own LibDems. But it was the right thing to do. He did a fine job in Bosnia dealing with the micro-surgery of stitching together Balkan ethnic and religious groups.

One of the few faint hopes for progress in Afghanistan was the plan to give Paddy the job of Supremo. It was blocked by Karzai. Another reason not to have faith in him. Government and Opposition are rattled by the collapse of public support for the war. I will have a busy time next week refuting some of the new  false arguments. David Milliband tried a new scare tactic today, threatening that Karzai would go 'in weeks' if British troops leave. Goodbye to the election rigging thief and his drug dealing brother just to end the procession of coffins through Wotton Bassett?

Seems reasonable.

Thanks Sun

It was the Sun that did it. Tomorrow's Observer will make Cameron choke over his cornflakes.

They have a poll showing Tories on 37, Labour  31 and LibDems  17. That's hung parliament territory and the best poll for Labour for a very long time.

The Observer thinks it's the improving confidence in the economy. I believe it's revulsion at the cruel contrived attack on Gordon by the Sun. Only the Sun could make the bereaved mother of a soldier appear unsympathetic. A partially sighted man was abused and mocked for a kind act. That's too much - even for sun readers