Well, anything America can do, Bury can do better (apart from, perhaps, sky scrapers, nuclear weapons manufacture and space exploration), as we will prove this Sunday when hosting the World Blackpudding Throwing Championships.

The event, said (by nobody but me) to be bigger than the Olympic Games and the FIFA World Cup combined, is organised by Stubbins Community Trust, and will take place this Sunday on Bridge Street Ramsbottom outside The Royal Oak Pub. Rumour has it that the Maracana in Rio was closed for cleaning.

The “Lob off” commences at 11 am and will finish at 4 pm.

“Pudstock” (the wonderfully-named bandfest in the car park at the rear of the Royal Oak) kicks off at 1 pm with Sugar Bullets followed by Pie then Roots Cafe, Mooly bloom, Big Lix, UkePunk, The Rolling Stones*, Point Blank, Well Said and all held together by the brilliant DJ Mart. Pudstock will finish at 10pm.

A great family day out, including stalls and childrens rides with all proceeds going towards local charities.

For more information please contact Bury Tourist Information Centre on 0161 253 5111

* = not really.

Rick

I think he has a point. Yesterday I wrote about how the government’s Criminal Records Bureau is releasing health records to would-be employers. Last week, the Foreign Secretary William Hague was forced to publicly deny rumours about his sexuality. And today, the Prime Minister’s Head of Communications is again facing questions about whether he knew about phone-tapping journalists working for him when he was editing the News of the World.

People with more time on their hands than I have, and with significantly more erudite ways of putting things are having their say on this today, and if it’s analysis you want I suggest you read them. But I do a fine line in personal angst, and can tell you that the whole thing makes me feel uneasy and angry in equal measure.

How did we come to a place where it is acceptable to behave as journalists have done, tapping phones and making lurid allegations seemingly on the flimsiest of foundations? What is the end game for these journalists? Are they just the grown-up equivalents of sneering playground bullies, motivated by easy money? Or is it something else?

There seems nowhere for anyone in public life to go now which they can consider truly private, even if they have done nothing wrong. And, more worrying still, as this routine invasion of the privacy of public figures becomes accepted, its effects on the lives of ordinary citizens is felt as well. Prying, snooping cameras, and organisations playing fast and loose with personal data for money are commonplace and need tackling now.

I think it’s something that the coalition agree on, and I suspect the public do too. Let’s make some progress on it and make clear where the boundaries are between what is and is not acceptable. At the moment they are too blurred, and there is too little responsibility borne by those who clearly cross them

Rick

CRBs have also prompted dozens and dozens of people from all over the country to write to me with their own stories, some of them truly heartbreaking. Teachers, social workers, nurses, all effectively barred from gaining employment or waiting in fear for an employer to ask to see a CRB disclosure they know will make public some false allegation or half-truth from years ago.

Of course we need a system which stops people convicted of certain crimes from having access to vulnerable people. But CRBs in their present form are not that system. They disclose far too much, going way beyond what is relevant and recent. 

Legislation has given the police the task of revealing to the CRB all information that they hold which they consider relevant, and for the CRB to reveal that to potential employers. That police judgement of “relevance” goes way beyond what most people would consider fair, and it can have far-reaching consequences.

In these risk averse times, I don’t blame the police for including everything. I doubt they have the time to make an objective judgement on the millions of people who now need CRBs. The way the law stands means that far too many people need vetting, and it gives them no option but to reveal far too much. The number of CRB checks almost trebled to 3.8m per year in the six years 2003-9. With that many taking place, it’s no wonder the police include everything but the kitchen sink.

And of course, once information about convictions, allegations, cautions or rumours is in the hands of a potential employer, human nature will make an ex-offender or even someone victim to a smear campaign that much less likely to get a job. Research from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development found that over a third of employers would automatically exclude all ex-offenders from their recruitment process. Not very fair if you stole some sweets in 1964 and have been clean living ever since.

Tonight though I have heard from someone exposing a new type of information being disclosed on CRBs which is perhaps even more unfair and inappropriate, and my sympathy for the police is significantly reduced.

I have seen evidence that some CRB disclosures now contain health information, particularly prior mental health problems, or in the case of young people prior contact with social services even where this contact was because the young person was suspected of being a victim not a perpetrator.

This cannot be right. A person’s health history is a matter for potential employers of course, but it is absolutely not a matter for the CRB. If I had three months off sick last year, my future employer has a right to know. If I was under the care of a psychatrist for some reason many years ago, he absolutely does not, and especially not on a form supposedly about criminal convictions. The linking of criminality to mental ill health is abhorrent, and whoever is disclosing historic mental illness on CRB forms is guilty of the type of discrimination against the mentally unwell that has no place in society. People with mental health prolems already face discrimination and stigma, and this is a public body which makes the situation worse.

I don’t know how commonplace this type of disclosure is, but it is yet another sign that the legislation around CRB disclosures is unfair and not working. I thought that some Lib Dems in government would improve things, and perhaps they will given time, but so far my attempts to let them know about this issue have fallen on deaf ears. Our Home Office Minister Lynne Featherstone has failed to respond to both of my letters about this issue, instead passing them on to the CRB itself claiming that it’s an operational issue.

Lynne, it really isn’t - It’s a policy issue which you have the power to change through legislation and official government guidance. I don’t want to be a mad stalker (it’ll probably end up on my CRB…) so I won’t be writing to you again, but in the unlikely event of you reading this, I urge you to use your influence to order a review of CRB disclosures, because if fairness is hardwired through this government I can think of few better things to maker fairer.

Rick

A new campaign has been launched by Nacro, the crime reduction charity, called Change the Record: Giving reformed offenders the chance to work.   

It focuses on two areas - Reform of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, 1974 and the practice of criminal records checks.

The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (ROA) was a good piece of legislation which has helped thousands of people back to work by giving a date by which sentences have been spent, and therefore don’t have to be declared to employers. The trouble is that sentence inflation means that people are getting longer sentences nowadays so offences stay on record for longer. And as many employers are reluctant to take on people who have a record, people are finding it harder to find work when their sentences end. Criminal Records Bureau checks allow employers to do find out the criminal records of applicants whether the offences are spent or not.

While it’s clearly important to carry out checks for people working with children and vulnerable adults, there’s a growing concern that these checks are being carried out indiscriminately with the result that anyone with a record will find it difficult to find work once their record is disclosed. This is particularly worrying given that many CRB disclosures contain information not only on convictions, but also on unproven or untried allegations, acquittals, or even rumours. The disclosures are virtually beyond challenge in many cases. 

Anyone with an interest in this area may wish to become a supporter of the campaign. For more information about the campaign, feel free to visit www.changetherecord.org

Rick

Commenting Liberal Democrat Health Minister, Paul Burstow said:

“NHS 111 will build on NHS Direct but will go further providing a much more integrated service for the public.

“Unlike NHS Direct NHS 111 will be free to call.  Where NHS Direct can only signpost other services NHS 111 will be able to book a GP appointment and go straight through to local out of hours services.  If you do need an ambulance the 111 service will cut out the need to go through the 999 service assessment.

“NHS 111 will ensure people are put in touch with the right health professional first time.  By doing that the new service will reduce the pressure on 999 services and A&E departments.

“This is a simple, cost effective idea: from 2013 people can ring 111 for non life threatening health concerns and 999 when it is a matter of life or death.”

Spousal decapitation would have been a sad end to the day, although on the plus side, my mortgage would have been paid off. She escaped with merely a grazed neck, and my disappointment in having to do some emergency DIY was only compounded when I opened my post to discover the new issue of “Intelligent Life,” the lifestyle magazine I get with my subscription to the Economist.

It tells stories of lives so wealthy and sophisticated that they are light-years out of my reach. In my tattered suit returning grubby from a day at work and then the Town Hall, all these Rolex-sporting outdoorsy-types on their sail boats appearing in stories about baking your own bread and holidaying in Martha’s Vineyard seem a world away.

I don’t know whether I am truly envious, or whether I’d actually get bored of being a wealthy member of the east coast elite in about a fortnight, and long to return to Prestwich. What I do know is that that type of free and easy lifestyle is infinitely preferable to attending Council scrutiny meetings, which is where I was last night as my loft was imploding.

In an ideal world (well, a world in I remain in Prestwich as opposed to Cape Cod, but one in which scrutiny functions correctly) scrutiny would play a crucial role in the workings of the Council. We back bench members would have our say in the decisions of the Council, and feel equipped to give voice to local people and support or oppose what those in charge are doing.

Sadly, under the new “strong leader” model of local government, which was imposed in the last months of the Labour government and under which Bury Council now operates despite it being wanted by nobody, there isn’t much room for scrutiny. The leader and his cabinet can do more or less what they wish, unimpeded by such trivial irritants as other Councillors. It doesn’t only make scrutiny fairly pointless, but it makes me wonder why any Councillors are elected (and paid £8k a year each) at all.

Thankfully we had a good discussion about this at Scrutiny last night and have a plan to work to improve the situation. The new scrutiny arrangements are still bedding in, and I think there is a consensus that we want them to work. It’s just a shame that, right now, they aren’t. Still, at least I know what to do with anyone actively stopping them from improving. I just need to stand them underneath the door to my loft, and wait.

Rick

There’s a new system of scrutiny in Bury this year, and I don’t think it’s working very well at the moment. The way it should work is that the Cabinet make decisions which affect Bury, and we get to take a look at them after, or preferably before, they’ve been taken to ensure that everything is being done properly and in the interests if Bury. Obviously we might disagree with the end decision, and it’s not necessarily about changing it, but it is certainly about giving Councillors of all political views a say.

Until last year there were about 5 scrutiny panels. They looked at lots of interesting, but often irrelevant, things. Now there’s just one, which is supposed to look at fewer things, all of them important.

Sadly, the change in arrangements has coincided with the new “Strong Leader” model for the Council, which has changed the way that the Cabinet makes decisions. As a result, in the three months which we are to scrutinise tonight, only a handful of decisions have apparently been made, very few of them important.

Hopefully tonight we will discuss ways to improve the situation, as it’s evidently not right that the Cabinet have made so few decisions when, in reality, the Council is doing lots which affects the borough, like making big financial decisions about cuts.

I am looking forward to our discussion tonight and to ways of improving the situation. If you’ve really nothing better to do and don’t want to watch the last ever episode of The Bill, you can watch the drama unfold, as the meeting is open to the public and free to attend! At the Town Hall, tonight at 7!

Rick

Because Focus is delivered entirely by hand by volunteers (as well as being paid for, written, edited, published, printed and folded by the same hardy bunch) it might be some weeks before your copy floats serenely down from your letterbox to your door mat. I suspect most people will be able to wait though.

In the meantime, if you do see us out and about delivering, in between the showers which are making August so cheerful this year, do stop and say hello. You never know, if you’ve a problem we can sort out, it might make the next issue of Focus!

Rick

Commenting on the 10-fold rise in the number of obesity-related surgeries carried out on the NHS in less than a decade, Liberal Democrat health minister Paul Burstow said:

“Over the last 13 years we’ve become the country with the highest rate of obesity in the whole of Europe.”

I like to imagine that he said that in between bites of a Big Mac Meal whilst funnelling pints of ale down his gullet and ordering a Chinese takeaway. But I doubt it.

Regardless of his culinary status at the time, he continued: “Obesity related surgeries are procedures that can transform lives, save lives and save money for the taxpayer.

“The 10-fold increase in less than a decade shows the last Government failed to get a grip on public health issues.

“We are committed to a real drive to consistently deliver public health messages about changes in lifestyles that people can make, both in diet and exercise, that can significantly reduce the need for these procedures.”

I was slightly confused by that press release, since on the one hand it says how great obesity related surgery is, but on the other criticises the increase in obesity related surgery… But I get the point that obesity itself is bad, and that more survery for obese people means more obese people in general.

Which is fine, but I think the approach in the press release is not exactly fair on the previous Labour government, nor does it really reflect the type of small-government liberalism that the coalition professes to be about.

Nobody doubts that obesity is a growing problem (pardon my pun). But there’s only so much that our solution of ”consistently delivering public health messages” can do. Labour could, and perhaps should, have done more to tackle this problem. But I don’t think the coalition has started well in terms of righting any Labour wrongs. We could be doing lots more. 

How about reversing the cuts in free swimming, or having some targeted investment in local leisure centres so that they can be realistic, cheaper alternatives than private gyms? How about better lighting and security in parks, or exercise equipment in parks? Or better enforcement of traffic laws that would make it safer for cyclists? All of those would make exercise easier. We might not be able to afford them right now, but we could at least mention them.

On the food side, how about working with retailers, not necessarily to tax bad foods, but to make good foods more appealing. Ready meals are often discounted or made buy one get one free. Why not more bags of fruit and veg? Double Clubcard points for every carrot? I dunno, but it’s a start. We need people in the Department of Health to come up with innovative ideas. People like Paul Burstow.

Granted, Labour did none of the things I suggest above, and maybe deserve some criticism for it. But we now have much better food labelling and a greater understanding of nutrition than we did in 1997, and things like the need for 5-a-day have entered the public consciousness far more than they were before. I’m not sure we’ve done anything in government yet.

Increasing obesity is a worry, and we need to sort it out. I think Labour were unfortunate to be in government when games consoles, the internet, multi-channel TV, 24 supermarkets and lots of other things developed to make exercise less appealing and slobbing out more attractive. To blame them entirely is silly “old” politics, and I don’t like it. People do stupid things like get fat. Government can only do so much, and should only do so much. We shouldn’t blame the government for people being stupid.

For goodness sake, there’s enough to have a genuine go at Labour at without making stuff up like this. 

I don’t think the solution to the obesity problem is to blame Labour and say we’ll tell people a bit louder to be good. It’s not sensible, nor is it liberal.

We accused Labour of being excessively nannying, and yet now we accuse them of not being nannying enough when it comes to public health messages? We should make our minds up, at the same time as coming up with an actual plan to tackle this problem.

Rick

It’s not surprising that a budget cutting government services hits hardest those who use those services most. The NHS’s budget is protected, so the next biggest spending government department is the Department of Work and Pensions. Cuts there mean fewer benefits, and the poorest suffering most.

These are Conservative measures, and ones which under normal circumstances I wouldn’t support. But of course we did support them, and whilst it makes me sad there are reasons why which I think are valid and which need considering.

The Conservatives took more votes and seats at the election than anyone else. This annoyed me because I’d worked hard for the Lib Dems to win. But we didn’t. We’d said throughout that, if a coalition was required, we’d look to form one with the party with most support. I guess I’m more left-leaning than not, so it was a shame that it had to be the Tories. It would also have been a shame though if it had have been Labour, since I disagreed with many of their policies then, and do now.

So we did form a coalition with the Tories. I was upset to be in league with people whose philosophy, especially at a grass roots level, I really don’t like. But that’s what was needed. The alternatives were an unworkable centre-left coalition which would have meant a broken promise and wouldn’t have stacked up in terms of numbers, or a minority Tory government unable to govern at a time when that really wasn’t a wise move.

The budget itself was, of course, massively Tory. Lib Dems are one sixth of the coalition, and probably have about one sixth of the policies in the budget. These include a rise in corporation tax and in the income tax threshold, both of which help the poorest. Of course, the two parties always did have things in common too. We have also enthusiastically supported some common policies like reforms to banking, for example.

There was lots in the budget that wasn’t Lib Dem. The bulk of it, in fact. Our own budget would’ve been massively different, but we aren’t the only governing party. The Tories have the huge majority of government votes because they won the election. This wasn’t a Lib Dem / Tory budget of two equal parties, as Labour will try to claim. It was, as the electorate determined, a Tory budget tempered a little by the Lib Dems.

We had to vote for it because we are in this coalition. It’s how coalitions work. Lots of Lib Dems are, I’m sure, privately upset about it. Lots of Tories are too, because they didn’t want to put Corporation Tax up or put the income tax threshold up. But what are the alternatives?

Labour are, of course, making the most of the regressiveness. I would if I were them. But their argument must rest on a viable alternative, and so far they haven’t provided one. Yes, it’s a shame that the budget is regressive, but where is the progressive alternative they say they have which will also deal with the debt and deficit? At election time, hey too promised bigger-than-Thatcher cuts. Would they have been progressive? Don’t think that they automatically would have been. I don’t see how.

Perhaps they’d have taxed the rich more, or cut different things in different ways. We don’t know, because they haven’t said. What we do know is that the Conservatives got more votes and seats than them, and so have a bigger mandate to govern on their own terms.

Let’s remember that in thirteen years under Labour, good years when cuts weren’t on the cards, the gap between rich and poor got bigger, and social mobility reduced. That looks like thirteen regressive years to me, compounded by things like doubling the income tax rate for the lowest earners as Gordon Brown did.

This is a difficult time. A sad time. I don’t like seeing those with the least getting even less, whilst those at the top don’t pay their share. It’s why I’m not a Conservative. But solutions are far more difficult than pointing out problems (as I am finding very clearly having moved from supporting the opposition to supporting the government) especially when the solutions are mainly from a party you don’t like.

It’s disappointing that the government have rejected the IFS’s conclusion. This conclusion wasn’t clear before, but I think it is now.

A better tactic, in my view, would be to honestly say that these are the measures which the government believe will work in the long term, relieving the whole country of a debt and deficit which will leave everyone more free to prosper in the future. That, to me, has the potential to be truly progressive.

By rejecting these findings the government looks churlish, plays into the hands of Labour, and by not yet coming out with any sort of differentiating line between the two governing parties, the Lib Dems in the government once more seem to be worryingly keen on standing by it.

I floated this meteorological proposition to some colleagues today, as we looked out at the storm lashing Ashton-under-Lyne. The response was that the lovely April weather I was referring to was what has always been known as “spring,” and that all that’s happened is that summer has disappeared.

Whatever’s going on, at least it’s cleared up now and I am free to resume the summer-evening surveying that local Lib Dems have been doing across Prestwich and Whitefield. It’s been great meeting lots of people, almost none of whom are spewing the type of anti-coalition bile I am terrified of when reading the letters page of the Bury Times (written almost exclusively, I have learned over the years, by politically active people from the various parties rather than genuine members of the public).

It’s all remarkably pleasant, in fact, and it’s good to be able to hear people’s problems and respond positively like good councillors should.

So I’ll be doing that in a bit.

All this rain is slightly ironic because tonight is also the night when my family expands by precisely one bag full of tiny little fish, all of whom would feel quite at home in the puddles outside. I thought that my recent wedding should be the prelude to some familial expansion, and so we’ve decided to add to the cat by purchasing some fish, and storing them in a (hopefully) cat proof tank. It’s all a prelude to the hens which we’re hoping to get for our soon-to-be zoo-like abode in the autumn.

I used to keep goldfish when I was a kid. I remember the drill was to either win one at the fair, or nip down to the pet shop and return with one in a polythene bag. Things have moved on somewhat now, as my trip to Pets @ Home tonight will be my third attempt to persuade them to let me have a goldfish.

The first time I went in to buy the tank they said that it would be wise to let the water settle first. I returned two days later with the sample of water they asked me to provide (!) so that they could test it. It passed the test, but they said that I had to wait 72 hours to let the filter bed in, and they still wouldn’t give me my fish. So I am hoping that tonight I will be able to make it third time lucky.

I feel slightly guilty that I am clearly unfit to look after even a goldfish, apparently, although slightly baffled because the last one I owned (when I was a child) lived for about 8 years.

Anyway, enough about my rollercoaster life. It’s time to go out surveying.

Rick

It was another great success, but sadly it was spoiled for many by ill-timed roadworks nearby. It makes me wonder why the Council scheduled noisy roadworks which caused traffic problems right next to the market on what was a very busy day?

On a normal Sunday the area would have been quiet, but obviously not on a Farmers’ Market day. Since the Farmer’s Market was a Council-run event, I’d have thought the Council would have used some brains and not decided to close and dig up the road. Could they not have waited a week?

Sadly they didn’t seem to be aware of the likely problems, and certainly didn’t ask ward Councillors, residents or the Local Area Manager before digging up the road. Another example of poor management of the Council by the Conservatives running it.

Rick

Until now only 0.01% of electricity in England is generated by local authority-owned renewables, despite the scope that exists to install projects on their land and buildings.  In Germany the equivalent figure is 100 times higher.

At present local authorities are able to put any renewable electricity they generate to local use, and to benefit from the associated feed-in tariff for projects smaller than 5MW.  But they are restricted from selling any excess renewable electricity into the grid. 

The steps that are now being taken could mean up to £200m a year in income for local authorities across England and Wales.

This is good news. Sensible, green, and putting power in the hands of locally electable and accountable councillors. I’d like to see more like this. It’s a shame that at the moment the Tories’ big idea of the “Big Society” seems to bypass Councils altogether, but hopefully the Lib Dem influence on the coalition can be positive and change things for the better as its doing here.

Rick

That’s not to say that I have been idle. Aside from a return to work today (to 283 emails) there has been casework. This week I have had a housing issue to deal with, after some troublesome council tenants began causing misery for their neighbours. I have also learned about how to get unadopted roads adopted so as to help a resident enquiring about that (it turns out you need public access and pavements). And I have continued to try and find a solution for a local football team trying to stop young people setting fire to its pitch every weekend evening. Thankfully the rain will probably scupper them tonight, which is more than can be said for the Police, despite their efforts so far.

Friday means Prestwich Advertiser day, and I am very disappointed to find that they didn’t print my letter of reply about Lib Dem voting records again, despite finding time and space last week to print a letter accusing me of not answering the original query (which I did, hence the repeated answer this week). The paper, owned by Trinity Mirror, the people behind the Labour-backing Daily Mirror, aren’t doing themselves any favours in the fairness stakes on this one. Maybe next time eh?

This weekend will see me finally do the last of the post-Honeymoon sorting out. People keep asking me if married life is different and the answer is “yes, there’s lots more laundry.” The pair of us going away for three weeks each has meant double time for the washing machine. I will also get through the other bits of casework yet to be responded to since I’ve come back (sorry if this is your query, but I am working through the backlog as quickly as possible) and get out and do some leafleting for the first time as a married man.

For once the women of Prestwich will have a reason not to pounce on me. Prior to now they just haven’t.

Rick

Sadly the government haven’t listened to my lamppost / vegetable idea, and have simply banned clampers. The press release actually says that they have banned “cowboy clampers”, which makes me think of Marlboro Men affixing things to the wheels of my Peugeot 207 in between herding thousands of cattle across Arizona. But apparently that’s not what it meant.

Anyway, so the coalition, in the guise of Liberal Democrat ministers Lynne Featherstone and Norman Baker have announced that car clamping on private land is to be banned.

This long-standing Liberal Democrat policy and manifesto commitment will be introduced as part of the Freedom Bill this Autumn.

Home Office minister Lynne Featherstone said:

“The Government is committed to ending the menace of rogue private sector wheel clampers once and for all.

“For too long motorists have fallen victim to unscrupulous tactics by many clamping firms. Reports of motorists being marched to cash points or left stranded after their car has been towed are simply unacceptable.

“A ban on clamping and towing on private land will end this abuse and companies who decide to flout new laws will face severe penalties.”

Transport minister Norman Baker, who campaigned to ban private wheel clamping as Shadow Transport Secretary before the election, added:

“The rules governing parking on private land should be proportionate and should not result in motorists being intimidated or forced to pay excessive fines.

“Cowboy clampers have had ample opportunity to mend their ways but the cases of bullying and extortion persist.

“That is why we are putting an end to these outrageous practices once and for all to ensure that drivers no longer have to fear intimidation from rogue traders, allowing the parking industry to begin to restore its reputation with the motoring public.”

Hurrah for that.

Rick

I have my radio tuned in there to catch the football, which is what’s on in the evenings when I tend to be in the car. I forget that during the day the station opens its phone lines to people who seem to actively enjoy shouting unfiltered bile to the entire nation, as if there’s a switch in their brain which simultaneously compels them to screech rubbish and dial national radio stations.

Today’s question was about Tony Blair’s donation of the entire proceeds from his memoirs (at least £4.6m) to the Royal British Legion to help them build a rehabilitation sports centre for injured service personnel.

That’s right. A man who could potentially earn an 8-figure sum writing his life story has decided to donate the entire amount to charity. A generous gesture, no? Well, no, not if you were one of the many boiled-blooded scream-mongerers who rang in this morning. I simply couldn’t believe the self-righteous harping and the frankly stupid remarks from what seemed like the majority of people ringing in. It made me, genuinely, ashamed to share a country with some of them.

Now, having worked for a time answering the phones at a radio station, I understand that a lot of people who ring in to daytime radio shows are at the polar ends of the normality spectrum. But I just don’t understand the pure hatred directed at a man who led the country for a decade, did so with a thumping democratic mandate which he won three times over, and then donated several millions of pounds of money which he rightfully earned to an exceedingly good cause.

Of course people are angry about the decision to go to war in Iraq. I disagree with that decision myself. But that decision was taken honourably, and the man who took it led his party to a general election victory two years later. The reaction to this donation made it seem as if Bernard Matthews had left his estate to the Cute Little Turkey Wurkeys Stroking Society. Shouts of “hypocrite” and “blood money” abounded, from people who clearly had never heard Mr Blair speak with such compassion about troops, and who probably don’t go about handing out millions to charity.

More seriously, it re-awakens the Iraq debate, and displays two worrying trends.

Firstly, it once again shows the lack of understanding that a lot of people (or at least those ringing radio shows) seem to have about how democracy works and what the relationship between electorate and elected is all about. We don’t elect governments (or councillors) to do everything we want, whenever we want it. We elect them to listen, take soundings, and then make their own decision based on what they think is best. That’s what representative democracy is all about. Sometimes, unfortunately, it means doing things that will annoy a lot of people. But if they annoy too many people then the next time there’s an election the electorate can undo them.

Unfortunately this concept seems to have been lost to some people, and it’s especially clear on issues like Iraq. We elected Labour in 2001 to make decisions. They made a decision over Iraq even though many people thought that the decision was wrong. It was their decision to make though, and the way our democracy works is to put that decision making power in the hands of the people we elect. Contributors to the phone in today seem unwilling to accept that the decision was valid just because it went against what they thought. This is worrying, especially given the tough decisions coming up over spending cuts, and shows a potential gap between the reality of our democracy and what people understand democracy to be.

The second worry is the incredible personal vitriol handed out to Mr Blair. Even the newspapers are hinting that this multi-million pound donation, the biggest single donation in the history of the Royal British Legion, is blood money. I am staggered that Mr Blair isn’t being universally praised for a gesture of unrivalled generosity. This is a huge sum of money, and yet so many people today were suggesting that Mr Blair was some kind of robber from the public purse simply for being able to earn that money in the first place. And all this hot on the heels of the Brown baiting which made me feel a bit queasy during the general election campaign. Why the hell would any sane person want to be PM if the best they can hope for as a legacy is either obscurity or hatred?

Mr Blair was Prime Minister for 10 years. I didn’t agree with a lot of what he stood for, but he’s definitely the top PM in my lifetime so far for the good he did. I don’t care how much he rakes in or what he chooses to do with it now that he’s a private citizen. That he has given up every penny from a highly lucrative book deal to support a worthy cause is something I doubt almost anyone else would do. I probably wouldn’t! The criticism, from people who clearly have enough time during the working day to ring in radio shows rather than run countries, is maddening in its wrong-headed intensity, and upsetting in its jaw-dropping personal hysteria. Criticise the guy by all means, but for God’s sake do it with some grace.

Some people were even suggesting that the Legion turn the money down! There’s so many people cutting off their own noses to spite their own faces that I must be the only 5 Live listener in the UK to have a nose at all!

Anyway, rant over. I’m listening to Radio 2 tomorrow.

Rick

I wasn’t happy though, when I read the Prestwich Advertiser of 5th August.

In it, a local Labour activist queried why I hadn’t replied to a previous letter of his asking a simple question about how the Lib Dems had voted in Council this year. His original letter had hinted that there was a deal between the Lib Dems and Tories locally which could be seen when analysing how we’d all voted. It was a reasonable question, and one which, since someone had taken the trouble to ask, should have been answered.

I was annoyed though, because I had replied to the letter originally, only for the paper not to print the reply! Not only had the paper not printed my reply, but they’d now printed a letter criticising me for not replying!

I am very conscious of the need to answer questions from anyone, even dyed-in-the-wool Labour activists out to make my party and me look bad. I haven’t ever shied away from doing that, either in the press or on here. It really gets me angry when it’s suggested otherwise, particularly in the press when it’s simply not true.

The Prestwich Advertiser should know better. I hope their approach in this instance isn’t a symptom of their recent takeover by the people who own the Daily Mirror, the most voraciously pro-Labour / anti-Lib Dem national paper of the lot. I don’t think it is, because their news coverage has been very fair of late. But the letters page is a key local opinion-former, and it’s important that they don’t make mistakes like this.

To be clear, I have sent a letter to them this week explaining their mistake (together with a copy of the original reply I sent) and again answering the original question. Just so that an answer to the original query is in the public domain, I will put on here what is in the letter, namely that there have been two Council meetings since the local elections. Overall there have been five final motions put to the vote. The votes cast were as follows:
 
1) Motion on Six Town Housing - Conservatives and Lib Dems voted the same way.
2) Motion on cuts - All three parties voted the same way.
3) Motion on appointing the Leader - Labour and Lib Dems voted the same way.
4) Motion on appointments to committees - Conservatives and Labour voted the same way.
5) Motion on remunerations - All three parties voted the same way.
 
So, despite the original letter (and its follow up) hinting that there is some kind of deal between the Tories and the Lib Dems, the facts are otherwise.

Hopefully that will be printed in this week’s paper to set the record straight!

Rick

All three of those things were planned. This wasn’t a trip to Vegas gone drunkenly wrong. It was in fact a trip to Aldershot gone romantically right, followed by a honeymoon in the Isles of Scilly.

The wedding was, for me at least, a marvellous day. I can’t speak for my new wife, whose smiles surely masked the horror at having had to legally bind herself to me for life. But as far as I was concerned, it could scarcely have gone any better. The rain held off, I managed to tie my cravat, and my speech took place without any Labour Councillors shouting “shame” as I rose from my seat, which was a novelty.

This is a family blog, so I won’t go into the detail of the wedding night, other than to express mild disappointment at two things I feel I should warn fellow grooms-to-be about. First, I was bitterly sad to find that the bridal suite I was staying in was comfortably the nicest hotel room I will probably ever legally get into, but that because the wedding didn’t finish until 2am and because breakfast meant being out of there by 8.30, I had no time whatsoever to utilise the facilities. There was a bath the size of David Beckham’s swimming pool, and a space age trouser press that looked like it had been designed by Arthur C Clarke. But I couldn’t use either.

Second, the bride’s dress was not as easy to remove as the movies would have us believe. I was expecting a sleek, slithery manoeuvring something akin to the boozy end of an evening enjoyed by James Bond. In fact the contraption was held in place by a compendium of buttons, hooks and loops so complicated that it made the control console of a Saturn V mission look like an Etch-A-Sketch. For someone as cack-handed as me (I couldn’t tie a double knot in my shoelaces until I was 16), getting her out of that was like drinking two quarts of vodka, donning a blindfold and then trying to build a full scale Meccano replica of the Cutty Sark. I am going to go on Dragon’s Den as soon as humanly possible with the world’s first velcro wedding dress. It will be a sure-fire hit.

Still, she escaped it eventually, which sadly brought us a few minutes closer to the end of what was the single most lovely 24 hours of my entire life. It was quite emotional to think that such an ensemble of my nearest and dearest is unlikely to come together again unless I either get insanely rich and can pay for them all to get somewhere, or I die. I don’t begrudge our photographer his outrageous fee any more, because his photos are all we have left.

Apart from the Debenhams gift list, obviously. Oh, and each other.

So after that we went on our honeymoon, to Scilly, a place so jaw-droppingly beautiful that it renders foreign travel utterly needless. Forget environmental arguments or the fact that you can’t stand the French. The best reason I have ever seen never to leave the UK is called the island of St Agnes, and it’s 25 miles off Land’s End.

We didn’t stay on it, although we could see it from St Mary’s, which was a couple of miles away and was where we were staying, in a 17th century former windmill which had been turned into a cottage for romantics too tight fisted to stay in a hotel (like me). It contained four round rooms, one on top of the other. The bedroom was at the very top, and the bathroom was at the very bottom, accessible only by an outside staircase, which sounded cute in the brochure but which is irritating when my bladder goes to sleep an hour after the rest of me, and wakes up three hours before.

For the yachtless, Scilly is accessible only by a ferry, a helicopter, and a tiny aeroplane. On the way out we took the helicopter, which was a new experience and one which I found much preferably to flying. If it didn’t cost a thousand times as much as any other mode of transport (except perhaps the Metrolink), I might helicopter more often. My fear that the rotor and the blades would become detached mid-flight, sending us hurtling into the sea, proved unfounded, although I was slightly perturbed on arrival at the heliport to be informed by the check-in man / mechanic that there would be a delay due to “maintenance issues.” These issues were overcome enough to prevent airborne tragedy, and we arrived.

On the way back we came by plane, a 15 seat affair driven by propellers and called an “Otter.” I am no expert in aeronautical nomenclature, but if I was I don’t think I’d name a tiny plane carrying people from islands across seas after an animal that specialises in diving headfirst into water.

Whilst on the islands there was plenty of walking, eating and relaxing. I was forced at divorce-point to go horse-riding, which was a terrifying affair I don’t wish to repeat in a hurry. My horse was bigger than anything I’ve seen close up since Jurassic Park was on at the IMAX. Getting on it was like trying to mount Ayres Rock. My terror was made all the worse by the 12 year old girl escorting me, who leapt aboard her own horse and proceeded to thoroughly show me up by leading the way as I bumbled along behind hanging on for dear life.

I was told that the day previously, the actor Jude Law had ridden the very same horse. Obviously there’s a rude joke in there about that being the only time in my life I’ll ride something Jude Law’s ridden. But I am above making it.

We met said Mr Law a couple of days later, in a posh hotel we’d sheltered in to escape the cold. He’s the type of man so depressingly handsome that it confirm’s to me that God is the divine equivalent of Jeremy Beadle - chortling away whilst playing nasty tricks on ugly people like me. His staggering beauty almost put an end to the marriage there and then. Thankfully my wife is a stickler for the types of local Lib Dem fundraisers that Hollywood A-list types simply can’t provide.

It’s been a great couple of weeks. I have another two days off work too, to catch up on casework and answer my emails. The bad news is that I have to contemplate the fact that having used up all my leave in one go, I now have no more holidays until Christmas. The good news though is that when they do come round I have a wife to share them with.

Rick

I use inverted commas in “consultation” because, as ever, it’s not a proper consultation. The Conservatives running the Council have decided their policy and voted it through already. Now they are just concerned with the detail of the charges, not the principle of them which everyone I’ve spoken to disagrees with them about.

The time to tell them what you think about that approach to running Bury is at the ballot box in May. Right now it’s the time to let them know what you think about these charges. The address to write to is:

Transportation Services, PO Box 545, 3 Knowles Place, Duke St, Bury BL8 9HA

Lib Dems is Bury have been opposed to these charges since day 1. We voted against them when they were first proposed and have done ever since. We will continue the fight against them because they’re bad for local business and not fair on people needing to get to the local NHS facilities.

Let the Council know what you think of these proposals in this last week of the consultation.

Rick

My own wedding (coincidentally taking place at precisely the same time as my fiancee’s) is next Saturday, but tomorrow is a dummy run in the form of another wedding to which we’ve been invited. I did consider dressing in next weekend’s clothes to get a practice session in, but feel that may somewhat spoil the day for tomorrow’s real bride and groom.

In amongst preparing for the nuptials and doing my day job there has been casework and the like to occupy me as well. As your local councillor it’s my job to help if you’ve got any issues with council services. This week there’s been a mixed bag, with everything from problems with licensed premises, to vandalism and anti-social behaviour, to the perennial favourite - the missed bin. The missed bin concerned was in fact my own, and it wasn’t missed so much as wrecked by the bin wagon, which took not only its contents but also its lid when the thing was emptied on Monday! A spectacular success for the neighbourhood foxes, who were given free reign until it was replaced, but sadly no good for me. Thankfully it was speedily dealt with.

The same couldn’t be said for the residents of Belvedere Court, a couple of whom contacted me earlier in the week to say that their paper recycling bags hadn’t been collected and now presented a fire hazard. A touch over-dramatic in my view, since in order to be a fire hazard someone would need to set them alight, and if someone was setting things alight in the flats then they’d succeed whether there were bags of paper there or not. But still, a query is a query, so I made sure that the Council got onto it.

I was also amused by a couple of national things this week. Ed Miliband’s ridiculous claim to have been against the Iraq War in 2003 but to have forgotten to mention it at the time was disappointingly opportunistic, although this naked opportunism was sadly and wildly outdone by the Labour Party as a whole which has decided to campaign against AV in the referendum on changing the voting system which will happen (all being well) next May. Labour were actually the only party to campaign FOR it in the election, but now that the coalition (including the evil Lib Dems, now more evil than the Tories apparently) are proposing it, they are against. After 13 years away from opposition they appear to have forgotten that they aren’t meant to oppose everything, just the bits they don’t agree with.

But even electoral reform can’t distract me from weddings, and that’s what will keep me occupied for the time being. When I left work today my colleagues had tied balloons to the car with such uplifting slogans as “under the thumb” and “good lucj - you’ll need it” scrawled on them. With such sentiments in my mind do I leave for the weekend to return on Sunday night only five short days away from getting married. And, if those five days reflect anything that I have learned with dismay recently, they really will fly by.

Rick

The ride will be following National Cycle Route 6 along the Outwood trail and the Bury Bolton canal to Bury. Heading through Pilsworth, Unsworth, and Heaton

Covering approximately 20 miles the route is both off and on road, some of the off road sections are on rough surfaced tracks and the ride includes some short steep slopes but no big hills! There will be stopping points along the route including a lunch stop, so please bring pack lunch and plenty of liquids. Start time is10:30am this Sunday 1st August, and the approximate finishing time 3:00pm  

Please ensure your bike is in working order. Helmets are recommended.

For more information and to let us know your coming phone Ranger Ian Rogers on 0161 253 5522.

Rick 

This is a real Liberal Democrat achievement. It was the centrepiece of our education policy during the election campaign, and it is now being implemented in Government. I remember campaigning on it myself in Bury North and being proud to do so. It’s happening now and will benefit children in Bury and right across the country.

While the Conservatives had a similar policy, it was the Liberal Democrats who pushed for it to be funded from outside the schools budget, and for it to feature specifically in the coalition agreement. And it’s no secret that it was one of the sticking points of the negotiations with Labour – they simply refused to agree to it.

It’s odd that Labour couldn’t support a policy designed to support the most vulnerable in our society and give them the chances that other children have.  

Liberal Democrats are committed to the Pupil Premium because we understand that education can be a key driver of social mobility. But it is shameful that we still have an education system which too often perpetuates inequality rather than tackles it. The poorest children are only half as likely to leave school with 5 good GCSEs than their better-off classmates. The Pupil Premium will help in tackling the decades-old failure to break the link between social background and performance at school, opening up opportunities for children regardless of where they are born. 

The Coalition Government is now consulting on the way in which the premium should be implemented. The consultation includes options for how deprivation should be calculated

– in relation to children on Free School Meals

– in relation to tax credits

– by using marketing classifications like MOSAIC or ACORN 

And it includes questions about other groups who might benefit, such as children in care or children of those serving in the armed forces, and raises the issue of how it could be extended to cover children in the early years. We are determined that it has the best possible impact and I urge you to get involved in the consultation and to give the Department for Education your views.

This week the Coalition Government’s Academies Bill will also become law. It won’t be a perfect law. It does things I don’t wholly agree with, and it’s coming into law quicker than I’d have liked. But it’s a welcome change from the overly centralised school system in place until now, and it gives a strategic role for Local Authorities that I welcome. It gives more flexibility for headteachers to run their schools as they and their communities think best.

By working within the Coalition, Liberal Democrat members of the House of Lords have been able to secure important protections for the most vulnerable, such as children with Special Educational Needs, that we could not have done from the Opposition benches. This is what coalition means - the Academies Bill is a flagship Conservative policy and the pupil premium is a flagship Liberal Democrat policy – and they are both part of the programme for Government.

Rick

My own weekend, well away from the screeching hens, was very enjoyable. I went to the Farnborough air show and hopped on board an airbus A380 for the first time. Say what you like about a species which is slowly destroying its only home planet, but anyone capable of designing a machine the size of a town hall which can take flight gets a round of applause from me.

Surprisingly, the world of politics hasn’t stopped just because my wedding is looming. Today there’s chatterings about elected police commissioners, plans for which are about to be announced by the government. This is something that was in the Lib Dem manifesto, and Tom Brake, one of our MPs who is the Co-Chair of the Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Committee for Home Affairs and Justice, said:

“These proposals should lead to both more accountable and more effective policing.
 
“But elected police commissioners will need to be subject to tough checks and balances. 
“These proposals should not be seen as a green light for the election of Judge Dredd characters more interested in populism than effective co-operative policing.”

The worries that Mr Brake mentions mirror my own. I was never a huge fan of this particular bit of our manifesto. It’s a shame that in this protracted season of abandoning our pledges in the name of the coalition, we have doggedly stood by this one.

I think elected police chiefs are an unnecessary idea, and won’t actually improve accountability at all. Of course the police should be locally accountable to communities, but this already happens through Police Authorities which are made up of elected Councillors, magistrates and independent members. The Police Authorities set policing priorities and budgets, and make sure that complaints are properly responded to.

I share the view that there isn’t enough accountability yet, but I think the solution isn’t to have another elected person at the top, but to beef up the existing Police Authorities and make sure that the Police Service actually listen to what’s being said on the ground.

Here in Prestwich for instance, our attempts to align the wishes of the community (as articulated via their elected Councillors) to the priorities of the Police is very difficult. They have their’s and we have our’s. An elected police commissioner wouldn’t solve this problem. In fact, it would most likely make it worse, changing priorities for political reasons, failing to take into account the non-policing ramifications of policing decisions, and making Councillors less influential at the same time.

An elected commissioner would mean less direct influence for local people, not more. At present we have a clear line through local councils to the Police. Replacing that, or muddying the waters with a single elected police chief, is not the best solution. How can one person sat in an office at Greater Manchester Police HQ respond to Bury’s problems better than a Bury Councillor? We should work to strengthen the clear links between Councils and the Police instead.

Having said that, the thought of Judge Dredd presiding over GMP is quite amusing. Stick a yellow rosette on him and I’d probably think about voting for him…

Rick

Thankfully I am not involved, although the whole sorry spectacle does mean me having to leave town and take shelter in one of the many empty premises vacated for the weekend by the hens temporarily living at my house.

There are rumours that I have to endure a “stag” do at some point in the near future. The prospect of drinking myself into oblivion and waking up tied to a lamppost is not appealing. I hope that if I am indeed to be the victim of some kind of pre-wedding exercise in extraordinary rendition, it is less riotous than it might be.

I am spending this weekend in London, attending the Farnborough Air Show tomorrow. For an unapologetic geek like me, the idea of spending a day in the company of both an A380 and a Dreamliner is hugely exciting, not to mention all the military jets we’ll no doubt cut the funding for quite soon.

The wedding is now just two short weeks away. Everything is done. All that remains is to answer the millions of people asking me if everything is done. The answer is that yes, everything is done. Everything, that is, apart from me negotiating a substantial discount on the price now that I’ve found that the venue was recently used by Eamonn Holmes.

All this town-fleeing means that I won’t be around to deliver focuses or answer phone calls or emails from residents this weekend. Handing over the keys to my house to two dozen drunken girls also means that I may have to fling myself at the merciful feet of the Council’s Homelessness team come Monday.

I hope everyone has a nice weekend. I am travelling to London on one of those tilting trains that make me feel seasick. I will emerge into the Euston twilight feeling like I’ve just got off the car ferry.

Rick

This isn’t good news, especially for those of us closer to the polling booth firing line than others. It’s fine to say that this is the third month of a five year project, and that we won’t have to go to the country until George Osborne starts shaving, but there are Council elections in May and this poor sap is one of many due to be on the ballot. 

Of course, local elections are fought on local issues, and the Lib Dems in Prestwich have a long and successful track record which I am confident will continue and which has so far led to people putting their trust in us. But of course come election day we’ll be in the middle of the Nuclear Cuts Impact Winter and other things might dominate people’s minds. Perhaps polling stations will be cut entirely and I’ll be saved.

Again, for me, our problem comes back to our presentation, which I think remains woeful and needs some radical bucking up. Policy-wise we should be holding steady and gaining. As I demonstrated the other day  we are coming good on more manifesto pledges than you might expect. We’re doing good. There should be a wave of positivitiy. But there isn’t.

It’s the message about what coalitioning is all about which we’re struggling with, and I think thats what’s causing the confusion and the upset. We haven’t done anywhere near enough to explain why we’re supporting the Conservatives and what it means for the country. We’re not doing it because “Nick Clegg is a Tory”, we’re doing it because they came first in the election and because it’s the only way for Lib Dem voters to see Lib Dem policies negating Tory ones.

Why aren’t we putting this message across loud and clear? The “Nick Clegg is a Tory” one is as ubiquitous as a World Cup vuvuzela (and equally annoying). How have the voices shouting about betrayal taken hold of people’s senses when the truth is nothing of the sort?

If the public aren’t grown up enough to understand that coalition means compromise, then I want to give up and go home. But I’m pretty sure that they are more than grown up enough. So for God’s sake let’s be honest about it and better at explaining it. We have to support Tory things we don’t like, but that’s the trade off. If we didn’t make that trade then the Tories would be doing it untempered, and that would be worse. Remember that Labour lot you booted out the other week? That’s the alternative.

If we did it right we could be the natural home not just for people like me who are genuinely enthused by the Lib Dem policy agenda (as was), but also for lots of people not on the rabid end of the Tory party, and any Labour sympathiser who remembers the shower who ran the country until May.

At the moment though it seems as if we’re the natural home for nobody.

We need to sell our message more right now. I understand that the party has changed the way it’s financed since it’s now in government and doesn’t get the money it did as an opposition party. And I know that, regardless of the truth or not of tales of members leaving and joining us and Labour since the election (I have no idea what the truth is there. The conflicting statistics flying around are like an episode of The X-Files) we are still the third largest party by a mile. But can somebody please employ somebody to put out the message that we are a separate entity to the Conservatives, and that whilst the government is one entity, the two parts of it are not?

When I get married in two weeks (at the same venue as Eamonn Holmes, I disappointingly discovered recently) I won’t entirely cease to exist as an individual human being. Yes a new partnership will have been created, but we remain two people. The same thing has happened in the government, but for some reason we aren’t spreading the message to people to help them understand that. We don’t have a separate identity from “the government”, and since the government’s face is almost entirely Conservative, we don’t have a separate identity to them. It’s like me being subsumed by the in-laws, which is something I am keen to avoid in a couple of weeks.

We don’t help ourselves sometimes. The “latest news” section of our own website is depressingly out of date at times, and updated nowhere near frequently enough. Surely we must be doing more positive in the government than we’re making public on a day to day basis? It’s fine releasing a list of our achievements every few months (as happened this week), but where’s the dripping tap of good news and Lib Dem policy being enacted that will keep our identity separate and keep people interested? People might start thinking that there isn’t such a stream of good news, and then will start asking what the point is…Tomorrow the two parties are meeting for a full session at Chequers (they can’t use mine, unfortunately, because it’s the Hen weekend). Apparently on the list of topics for discussion is how to raise the Lib Dem profile. I hope they make some progress, or else we’re in more trouble than even our poll ratings suggest.

Rick

Rick

Going into the election the Liberal Democrats made clear that they had four key priorities: fairer taxes; a fair start for children with extra funding for disadvantaged pupils; a comprehensive clean up of our politics, including a fairer voting system; and a green, sustainable economy.

Thanks to Lib Dem involvement, the Government will deliver on each of these.

There are also a large number of other Lib Dem policies and pledges that will now begin to make a real, positive difference to people’s lives because of our role in the Coalition Government.

These include everything from rolling back the surveillance state and giving people back their civil liberties, to prison and NHS reforms, fairer pensions, the ending of child detention and the scrapping of the third runway at Heathrow.

Delivering on our promisesFairer taxes
The Liberal Democrats promised to make the tax system fairer by ensuring no one pays tax on the first £10,000 they earn and closing loopholes that allow the wealthy to pay a smaller proportion of their income in tax than people on low and middle incomes.

The Coalition Government has already taken a step towards achieving this by raising the income tax threshold by £1,000 in last month’s Budget, saving low and middle earners £200 a year, and reforming Capital Gains Tax. The income tax threshold will continue to be increased every year during this Parliament until hopefully the £10,000 limit is reached as promised.

The Liberal Democrats also promised to restore the earnings link to pensions, which the Government will now do.
We also promised wide scale banking reform, including a banking levy to make sure that banks pay for the financial support they received from the taxpayer. The levy, which will raise £2.5bn, was announced in the Budget.

A fair start for children
The Liberal Democrats promised to introduce a Pupil Premium to target extra money at disadvantaged children. The Coalition Agreement makes clear that this will now happen.

We also promised greater freedoms for teachers over the curriculum, which will also be brought in as a key part of the Coalition’s education reforms.

Fair politics
The Liberal Democrats promised a comprehensive clean up of the rotten political system. This is now a key part of the Coalition’s agenda for which Nick Clegg has responsibility.

The plans include:
- A referendum on the Alternative Vote to take place in May 2011
- The right to sack MPs guilty of serious misconduct
- Fixed term parliaments of five years
- Reform of party funding
- Moving towards an elected House of Lords, elected by proportional representation
- A statutory register of lobbyists
- A radical devolution of power and greater financial autonomy to local government and community groups

A green, sustainable economy
The Liberal Democrats promised a raft of policies to help the economy recover and make sure that we build a new green and sustainable economy fit for the 21st century.

A huge number of these policies will now become a reality, including:
- Tough action to tackle the deficit
- The creation of a green investment bank
- Reform of the banking system to make sure that banks lend to viable British businesses
- An independent commission on separating investment and retail banking
- Measures to improve energy efficiency in homes and businesses
- Support for low carbon energy production and an increase the target for energy from renewable sources
- Enabling the creation of a national high speed rail network
- The creation of a smart electricity grid and the roll-out of smart meters
- The establishment of an emissions performance standard that will prevent coal-fired power stations being built unless they are equipped with Carbon Capture and Storage Technology
- Replacing Air Passenger Duty with a per-plane duty
- The provision of a floor price for carbon, as well as working to persuade the EU to move towards full auctioning of ETS permits

Other Lib Dem policies that will now become a reality
The Liberal Democrats have long campaigned for the restoration of freedoms and civil liberties eroded under Labour and the rolling back of the surveillance state. A huge number of Lib Dem policies will now happen, including:
- The abolition of Identity Cards, the National Identity register, the next generation of biometric passports and the ContactPoint Database
- The repeal of unnecessary laws
- Further regulation of CCTV
- The outlawing of finger-printing of children at school without permission
- Extending the Freedom of Information Act
- Ending child detention for immigration purposes
- Removal of innocent people from the DNA database

There are also a host of other Lib Dem policies that will now happen under the Coalition Government. These include:
- Fair compensation for Equitable Life victims
- Flexible working and promotion of equal pay
- Reform of the NHS to strengthen the voices of patients and the role of doctors
- A commission on long-term reform of social care
- Cutting Quangos and government bureaucracy
- Implementing the recommendations of the Calman Commission on Scottish devolution
- A referendum on further powers for the Welsh Assembly

All in all, a heck of a lot more Lib Dem than we’d otherwise have got, and a lot less true blue Tory too.

Rick

Sadly, he didn’t distinguish himself when it came to answering the set-piece big questions from the Leader of the Opposition’s stand-in. Jack Straw was standing in for Harriet Harman, and asked about the loan to Forgemasters. Sadly Nick Clegg started talking about Iraq which, whilst interesting in context, is completely irrelevant. I don’t know the back story or the rationale for the Forgemasters decision, but I can hazard a guess that Jack Straw’s voting record on Iraq didn’t come into it. So why did Nick Clegg start talking about it? Sadly typical of everyone from every party I’ve ever seen answering questions there.

On a slightly more positive note, there is an interesting article in today’s Guardian about CRBs. Its author Mark Johnson, a charity-founder and former prisoner, highlights the injustices of the current CRB system and calls for a re-think on the concept of criminal records and calls for large employers to do more to employ rehabilitated ex-offenders. The comments under the article are also interesting, particularly the ones giving real life stories about the difficulties people have with CRB disclosures and the information given to would-be employers which is sometimes questionable at best.

I have been banging on about this issue for ages and have been in discussions recently with both the CRB and Lynne Featherstone MP, the Lib Dem Home Office Minister. Hopefully the law will soon change to make it fairer for those who suffer unduly under the current system.

Rick

Today’s Guardia

Sadly, that’s pretty unlikely. What isn’t unlikely though is that the steady stream of casework flowing like a leaking BP oil-well into my inbox will cease at any point soon. This week there have been issues about St Mary’s Flower Park, hooligans getting drunk and vandalising local facilities, and of course the ongoing drama of the Fairfax Road car parking charges, which we oppose along with 100% of the people I’ve spoken to about them.

I am quite light on meetings this week, so have used the opportunity to do some party things instead. We always have lots of Focuses to deliver, and since I prefer the company of leaflets to humans after a hard day at work, I quite like delivering them. And we will also be out doing residents surveys soon, so look out for that when if you see us round your way.

Rick

The vote was taken after the controversial plans were outlined at the meeting. Angry residents in the audience grilled Council parking chiefs for half an hour after it was confirmed that the Council plan to charge motorists £1 to park for up to an hour, and £2 afterwards.

It was clear that everyone in the room was against these proposals. It’s all about making money for Bury Council by punishing the people of Prestwich. These charges mean that people going to the doctors or the walk-in centre will have to pay. That’s just not fair, and that’s why I voted against the parking charges at the LAP like I did at the Council meeting when they were first proposed.

Sedgley Councillor Steve Wright said “Local people are angry and we need to make it clear to the Conservatives at the Town Hall that Prestwich opposes these proposals. They are bad for business, bad for traffic congestion and bad for the town. I appeal to everyone in Prestwich to try and beat these plans by letting the Council know how much we oppose these charges.”

Rick

The statement explained that my contributions in the tax year recently ended were “£0.00″. This was a surprise because I had paid £200 a month to something called “Student Loan” and expected that that was what it was paying off. Evidently not. I rang the number on the top of the bill, to find it defunct. I have no idea why the SLC print a broken telephone number on their statements. I can only assume that the mistake was made from someone without the benefit of a university education.

When I rang the alternative number provided by a chirpy recorded voice, and navigated a labyrinth of options, I alighted at the sound of a bored Scottish call centre worker who told me that they’d send a more accurate statement when they’d got to the bottom of my missing contributions. That was a relief, but it was clear from the saga that whatever my student loan repayments are going on, they certainly aren’t going on making the Student Loans Company in any way useful.

Vince Cable didn’t mention the problems with the SLC phone system in his speech, oddly. His idea for university funding is to do away with the up-front tuition fees I had to pay, and instead levy a graduate tax which would vary dependent on income. 

Sounds fine in theory, but as Vince said himself, the way the current system works is not wholly dissimilar to that. Yes, the words used now are “fees” and “loans”, but in reality the fees can be paid by student loans, and those loans aren’t paid back until the student is earning enough to afford the repayments.

The proposed change seems only to simplify that process, rather than change it. It cuts out the middle man (the Student Loans Company and their wrong bills and broken phone lines) and just has the government paying the university the equivalent of the fees, and then claiming the money back from the students in tax.

It might make students from poorer families look on university with a bit more favour, because they won’t have to take out loans to pay fees. This is great. But it’s not a fundamental change in itself.

It does have some fringe benefits, like stopping the practice of wealthier students taking out low interest student loans, banking them in high interest accounts, pocketing the difference and then paying the loan back in full when they graduate. But it doesn’t do much more than that. Nor does it do anything to extract due debts from students who leave the country. In fact, it doesn’t address the big issues either, like the relative costs of degrees and the relative educational standing of universities, or the debts incurred by lots of students who have to take out loans to pay rent and buy food.

I’m not sure, in fact, that it does much at all. Even the variable element suggested by Cable happens now.  What I pay back depends on my income. Someone earning £15,000 a year (the level at which repayments kick in) pays back less than someone earning more, because the repayments are a fixed proportion of income. If I lost my job, I’d stop paying back the loan.

Now though what happens is that eventually, after paying back the loan plus interest, the repayments stop. If I understand Cable correctly, his plan is for repayments to go on forever. If this isn’t what he’s suggesting then I apologise for the mistake, but if I’ve made a mistake then he’s actually not changed anything at all.

Such a proposal strikes me as very unfair. It means the better off paying back student loans ad infinitum, on top of the already higher rates of tax they would pay on their income. 

It’s fine that the richer should pay more in income tax. But this system makes the burden on them greater, and pays no attention at all to the cost of the degree or the amount paid back in total. I’d like to see a lot more detail from Cable on this. Why should a hard working English graduate who becomes a millionaire pay back more over a lifetime for his degree than an engineer whose degree cost ten times as much but who, through bad luck or bad choices, earns a lot less? The millionaire should (and does) pay more in tax generally, but should he pay more for his degree? I don’t think so. That’s what seems to be being proposed.

The idea of making university less worrying for students from poorer backgrounds is obviously worthy. Removing the Student Loans Company and moving to completely post-study repayments would go a long way to achieving that, so long as it’s clear how much students owe and at what levels they can pay the sum back until it’s gone. But that clarity is necessary for fairness.

In the meantime I expect more from Lib Dems on student funding. The obvious consequence of widening access is increasing bills for higher education. Labour’s fees solution hasn’t worked, but there’s still little debate on realistic alternatives to university which allow for career development without incurring as much cost and debt. There’s been little so far on part time work-based study, or employer contributions to fees in return for jobs post-graduation.

The solution to this problem won’t be found by tinkering with payment methods alone. It will come from looking at student numbers, methods of study, employer engagement and a debate about education in general. Until we get that, ideas like Vince Cable’s are just tinkering round the edge. Yes, the removal of loans and fees as a concept is good. But the rest is unclear at best and unfair at worst. Hopefully Lord Browne’s report on the future of student finance, due in the autumn, will be broader in its scope and fairer in its conclusions.

Rick

In a speech in London, the deputy prime minister said a “truly reforming” Parliament could change politics and the economy for the better by 2015. His Conservative coalition partners shared his “reforming zeal”, he argued.

Mr Clegg has heralded decisions taken by the government to scrap ID cards, review counter-terrorism laws, take millions of low-paid people out of the tax system and hold a referendum of the voting system as signs of “liberalism in action”.

“Now that the Liberal Democrats are in government, liberal ideas are being deployed directly,” he said. “And I can tell you that as deputy prime minister, my liberal instincts are stronger than ever.”

By the time of the next election - scheduled to be held on 7 May 2015 - Mr Clegg said he believed the UK would be a “more liberal nation”. “It is striking that our reforming zeal is matched by our Conservative coalition partners,” he added. “We are independent parties but working together on a shared agenda - a hugely positive development for British politics - in and of itself.”

Mr Clegg said he was “under no illusion” about the extent of the challenges facing the country but he was confident of progress in all areas. “By 2015, power will have been radically redistributed towards people. Our civil liberties will have been restored. Our broken political system will be repaired. Our economy will be balanced, green and growing. “If the coalition government succeeds, by 2015 Britain will be a…nation of stronger citizens living in a fairer society.”

Here’s hoping that’s true.

Rick

Whatever its status in your brain, the facts are that the Local Area Partnership meets tonight at 6.30 at the Macabbi Sports Centre off Bury Old Road (near the Woodthorpe pub). Come down for the open forum at 7.30 to ask any question about local public services you like. Or, if you can stomach it, come for the whole thing and hear various presentations and reports that bring the entire audience that little bit closer to the warm embrace of eternal rest.

Rick

Sadly, once again the predictable headlines about scrapping a nice-sounding target made him too scared to enter into a serious debate about what works and is actually best for patients. And, once again, I just want to scream at him to answer the question! What would the public prefer - an appointment in two weeks or a longer wait but more funding on other things which might work better? Now we’ll never know.

Harriet Harman then changed tack and began to talk about the reorganisation of the NHS. The government this week proposed a massive change in the way the NHS is run, taking power to commission services away from Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) and giving it to GPs. There’s a debate about the rights and wrongs of this approach which has been waged in places more learned than this blog, but what both parties are seemingly united on is a wish to get rid of bureaucracy and promote money for patient care. It was a Lib Dem idea to scrap the regional Strategic Health Authorities, and I think it’s good news that this is happening. That’s a whole tier of bureaucracy we can do without.

I do worry though that the rhetoric about bureaucracy and management goes way over the top sometimes. David Cameron today accused Labour of “defending the bureaucrats, all of whom are paid vast salaries and huge pensions.” I don’t think this is any way to be talking about people who work in public service, and I also think it’s completely wrong.

I am doing no more than defending people like me here - I am an NHS manager by day - but David Cameron betrays a complete lack of knowledge about the NHS if he sticks by comments like that, and he is utterly wrong if he thinks that the NHS can function well without managers. Apart from anything else, patients want well managed services. He is also wrong about Labour, who have been joining their Trade Union backers in having an almighty go at highly paid public servants.

I have the utmost respect for the doctors and nurses and therapists and others providing the day to day care of patients in the NHS. But patients don’t just want services. They want services which are safe and reliable, at a time which suits them and in buildings which aren’t falling down. They want services to be staffed safely but efficiently, and for services to grow to meet their demands. They want services to be planned strategically so that decisions aren’t made today and then reversed tomorrow. They want information on services so that they can choose which ones are best for them. And they want to be able to give their views back to people who care. They want their doctors and nurses supported in their jobs. They want the NHS to be financially sustainable so that their tax money is spent in a way which means services don’t stop next year.

Who does all of these things for patients? NHS managers. Many of which are, incidentally, nurses and doctors by trade. In my experience the overwhelming majority of managers are dedicated and highly skilled. Of course there are the bad ones, but there are bad ones in all organisations. And of course things can and should be changed (although it will take some managers to make this change. It won’t just happen). But to wage some kind of general war on managers in the public sector is silly. It will drive down performance and motivation, and make good people think about leaving. It doesn’t help people to understand how public services actually work.

It is also completely wrong to say that all managers are highly paid and on inflated pensions. Completely, utterly false. Yes there is the Chief Executive on £150k+, and the Directors on six figure salaries, but these people manage hundreds of millions of pounds of our money, run organisations employing thousands of staff, and in my view deserve their salaries. It’s not just my view either, it’s the view of independent remuneration panels who still set top salaries far lower than private sector equivalents. Of course the bad ones should be removed and treated fairly. But the examples of massive pay-offs are down to bad local policies and silly decisions made by a few people. they are not evidence of all public service managers being on the take.

The majority of managers in public bodies earn far, far less than the top salaries though. And their pensions, whilst final salary-based, are based on that low final salary. A salary which has always been low on the understanding of a final salary pension, and made lower still by contributions to that pension.

It’s not fashionable to defend public sector managers, high pay amongst the top ones, and their pensions. It’s not perfect and if ever there was a time for sensible reform it’s now. Paying out seven years salary in redundancy to civil servants (as reported last week) is evidently wrong and unfair. But turning the government’s fire on public servants is also wrong, as is Labour’s populist haranguing of top earners at Councils and elsewhere. We need good people to make the savings needed in public services, and this doesn’t help.

Rick

There are several new licensed premises opening in Bury this week when The Rock development opens at last. It’s on my route from work to the Town Hall, so driving to meetings over the past couple of years I have seen it rise, phoenix-like, from the ashes of that tatty old Halford’s and now dominate that side of town. Beyond the perimeter of the soon-to-be-removed metal fencing lurks a brand new cinema, a bowling alley (thankfully nothing to do with crown green bowls - see yesterday’s entry) and lots of shops and restaurants. There’s a Primark, where you can buy an entire wardrobe’s worth of clothes and still get change from a fiver, a brand new M&S, a bigger Next and lots of predictable restaurants like Frankie and Bennie’s.

I’m excited to see it when it’s done. It puts Bury at the top of the league when it comes to Manchester’s district shopping centres, and will bring shed loads of people into the town. It knocks the pants of Ashton under Lyne, where I spend my working days, that’s for sure. It opens on Friday and I’ll head down to take a look as soon as I can. Perhaps I’ll see you there… Not that I’ll know, obviously, unless you introduce yourself.

I remember when the Millgate Shopping Centre was created, in what essentially involved putting a roof on existing shopping streets. There’s no such cheating involved in this one though. It’s all completely new and shiny, and I for one can’t wait for it and what it could do for the town. Here’s hoping the Council don’t rest on their laurels after this success, and get on with regenerating Prestwich too!

Rick

We have opposed these plans since the beginning and voted against them when they were proposed because we think they will deter shoppers and cause congestion on nearby roads. They will also impact on people needing to get to the NHS facilities nearby. There are many alternatives to the planned proposals, and the short-term charges will be particularly damaging.

Now there is a consultation period, so you can let the Council know what you think by writing to them at Transportation Services, PO Box 545, 3 Knowles Place, Duke St, Bury,

Rick

It began with the Bradley Cup Bowling Competition on Friday, as mentioned in that day’s post. This is the annual Councillors v Officers competition that has been played every year for about one hundred years, and which I thought I may as well have a go at seeing as how I’m up for election next time round and may never have the chance again.

I’d never bowled before, so I’m glad I didn’t spend any time clearing a space on the mantelpiece for the cup, which unsurprisingly didn’t return home with me. Like the Italian football team, I exited the competition at the group stage, although bizarrely I did win one of my two matches, by a single point against Labour’s Besses ward Councillor Alan Matthews. Unfortunately my other game, somewhat unfairly pitting me against the vastly experienced President of the Bury Bowls Club, ended in what can only be described as an ignominious defeat.

I was flummoxed by almost every aspect of a sport which I suspect is actually one of the world’s simplest. Despite my best intentions, even a feather-light flick of my wrist meant the bowl hurling uncontrolled into a far off ditch. When I wanted it to curl to the left it went obstinately to the right. When I wished it to go right it veered off left-wards. And when I needed it to stay straight, it just didn’t. My opponents’ bowls glided serenely towards the jack, floating to a halt as required. Mine bobbled unceremoniously in the vague direction of the target, before juddering past and off on a speeding tangent like some kind of dangerously out-of-control firework.

So my dream of quitting the rat race and making my fortune on the world’s bowling greens is crushed. It’s also another sport removed from the ever-dwindling list of sports-I’ve-never-tried-and-so-could-actually-be-world-class-at. Next up, clay pigeon shooting.

Other than my bowls escapades though, the weekend was largely uneventful. On both Saturday and Sunday I was leafleting in Prestwich and Whitefield, hand-delivering the Focus leaflet we use to keep residents informed of what we’re up to, whether they want to know about it or not. These leaflets are printed, produced and delivered entirely through donations to the party from members, and don’t cost the taxpayer a penny, unlike the ridiculous “Our Voice” magazine which the Council produces at huge cost to the taxpayer and which lines the bins of properties borough-wide.

I also chased up several bits of outstanding casework, including helping a family with a disabled child, asking the Council about petitions, and talking to several people about our opposition to the Fairfax Road car park plans.

This week is a busy one. As well as the Local Area Partnership meeting on Thursday, I have some Licensing training tonight, and a meeting about the Local Community Plan on Wednesday evening. It’s a good job the World Cup’s over and I don’t have to miss any games!

Rick

What;
Working in the clough stream to improve stream flow involving moving stones and re-channelling. (Please note, it will be quite physical at times)

When;
Sunday 18th July 9.30am.

Where;
Prestwich Clough, Prestwich. Meet at Clough entrance on St Anns rd, opposite Lowther Rd at 9.30 or come and find us in the Clough.

Bury Ranger service will provide gloves and tools but would recommended wearing clothing that can be messed up and safety boots and wellington boots.

Any questions please do not hesitate to contact Ian Rogers (see below). 

Bury Ranger Service, Phoenix Centre, St Mary’s Park, Prestwich
0161 253 5522

All of which has made it much easier for me to pretend that I would’ve been doing a massive pre-wedding fitness regime were it not for my injuries. It’s just the pain that stops me from going for a run, honest.

Sadly my feet aren’t broken enough to have given me the chance to turn down an invitation to compete in the annual Bradley Bowling Competition, which takes place this teatime.

It is a handicap competition, which is handy because my handicap is never having bowled before in my life. So I expect to be duly humiliated in front of the Mayor of Bury during my many defeats against fellow Councillors and officers, most of whom are regular competitors. Of course, as a complete novice there is always the chance that I will discover a hidden talent and actually be a world class bowler smashing all-comers to smithereens. I’ll let you know about that.

The last Council-related sports event I took part in was the ill-fated five-a-s-die football tournament, during which my team lost every match. That was on the same day as my ankle injury. So my form is not good. But in the sedate world of crown green bowls, what could possibly go wrong.

I will report back, hopefully not from my hospital bed, when it’s done.

Rick

Residents are invited to come along and air their views when the LAP meets on Thursday July 15 at Maccabi Sports & Social Club in Bury Old Road, starting at 6.30pm.

Ian Crook from Bury Council’s environmental and development services department will be outlining policies to help manage parking in Prestwich.

Six Town Housing will be outlining proposals arising from a review of garage colonies and seeking the views of the partnership and local residents.

There will be details of a small scale music event in Heaton Park, an update on the Local Community Plan and reports from the LAP manager and police.

There will also be the usual 30-minute open forum when the public can raise any issues.

Councillor Vic D’Albert, LAP chair, said: “Parking is an important issue for residents, businesses and visitors to Prestwich so the opportunity to examine this issue in more detail is very welcome. I am pleased that the garage colonies review findings will be debated at the partnership. The condition of some sites has long been a concern and residents are invited to give their views. Our meetings are open and friendly and I would encourage the public to attend.”

For more information call Rose De, Local Area Partnership manager, on 0161 253 7245/ 07733 125 441 or email r.h.de@bury.gov.uk

Rick

I think we did the right thing in creating the coalition. If the country needed one thing it was strong government and a clear programme for that government. Over 60% of the voters voted for us or the Tories, and much as it would have pleased my softer sensibilities to have coalished (a great word of my own invention) with Labour because I think most of them are in it for better reasons, they clearly lost the election and I was/am opposed to probably as many of their policies as those of the Tories.

The coalition agreement seemed pretty good too. We got loads in there, way more than our one-sixth representation warranted. Civil Liberties, a commitment to ask the people about electoral reform, lots more local devolution, concessions on inheritance tax and the promise to deliver our income tax threshold reforms. All straight out of the manifesto.

The budget was obviously going to be overwhelmingly Tory and eye-wateringly tough. The Tories got far more votes and seats than anyone at the election, and everyone agreed that toughness was needed before the election, so it’s fine that they had the vast majority of it. Labour’s reaction to it, and especially to us, has been mis-targeted and unconstructive in my view. Whilst they are right to oppose some specific cuts and perhaps their timing and scope, their refusal to accept any blame or offer any alternatives is as silly as the more rabid government members’ desire to pin all the blame on Labour and say that there were no alternatives at all.

But what gets me worried is the lack of a constructive Lib Dem alternative voice. Coming in to the election we had a set of policies which I believe would have worked and which millions supported. I campaigned on them and I still believe them. Yes, things have changed since in Greece and Spain, in the world markets and in the currency exchanges. And yes, we’re in coalition now and will vote for a programme that is rightly 5/6ths Tory and 1/6th Lib Dem. But where have our policies gone? How can our leading lights, who so strongly and rightly campaigned for them and against George Osborne 8 weeks ago, now say nothing, not one thing, as a constructive alternative? Nick Clegg, Danny Alexander, Vince Cable etc cannot all have had a complete volte face in two months. I know I haven’t.

If coalition government is the mature way of doing things, then how can that exclude mature and reasoned public debate between the two coalition partners? The coalition agreement is in place and signed, after all. It can’t be right that on the one hand this is an agreement between two different parties, and on the other hand that there is not a hair’s breadth between them now on issues that were bitterly dividing them two months ago. It makes us look silly and gives Labour an open goal which they are consistently hitting.

I’m not saying we should actively call for our policies at the expense of the Conservatives’. There is no democratic mandate for us to do so - we came third in the election and they came first. But there must be a way of voicing an alternative view without rocking us all out of the coalition boat. There must be a way of Lib Dems differentiating themselves from the Tories on things other than the AV referendum.

We should be able to say that we disagree when the Tories propose things which we strongly oppose and have alternatives to. It might be that a particular policy is how 5/6ths of the coalition want to behave. We will vote for it because the country needs strong government which we have made ourselves part of for sensible reasons. But the coalition is made up of one large party and one smaller party, not just one very large party. We as a small party have alternatives which we think are better. They can’t come to pass because not enough people voted for us last time. But next time this is what people will get if they do vote for us.

Surely, if we don’t find a way of saying that, we irsk being seen as the same as the Conservatives, and they the same as us? That’s not the case, and I’m glad that on the AV referendum we will be campaigning on different sides. I think we need to find a way of doing that on other things as well, or else I fear we risk being swallowed up in a horrible Tory mess.

I’m sure such discussions go on in private. I’ve seen them go on at a local level, trying to get just a few Councillors with differing views and big egos to tow a common line. Trying it with hundreds across two parties and with even bigger egos must be incredibly difficult. But I think Nick Clegg is doing too good a job. There has been virtually no dissent at all, which I worry is making us look like poodles. That’s obviously what Labour want people to think.

I know what the worry is about dissent - that it would potentially de-stabalise the coalition and could mark the beginning of its crumbling. But I don’t believe that that has to be true. There is scope for mature debate, there has to be. And there has to be room for dividing lines between parties even in a coalition. Not allowing public dissent risks two things. First, it risks a bottling up of frustrations which will one day burst with damaging consequences. And second, it risks keeping the public under the impression that we are Tories.

We are not Tories, we are Lib Dems, and we need to find a way of saying that.

Rick

 Today though I was driving from one meeting to another during PMQs, so tuned in to discover that, sadly, the coalition government’s Prime Minister is no better at giving straight answers than any predecessor I’ve ever heard. The “new politics” was nowhere to be seen.

Harriet Harman, the temporary Labour leader, asked a very straightforward question: Could the PM guarantee that police numbers would be maintained during the course of the Parliament? He didn’t answer it, instead saying that there would be “difficult decisions” about expenditure.

The answer to the question is obviously “no.” Of course he can’t guarantee it. So why couldn’t he say that, and give the reasons why?

He could’ve said “No, I can’t guarantee it. I would like to, but there’s not enough money to do everything so as a coalition we’ll look at prioritising what’s important and trying to work with the Police so that even if numbers do come down, crime won’t go up. The reason there’s no money is because of the deficit, which is bigger than Argentina’s. And let’s not forget that Labour couldn’t make that guarantee either when they were asked before the last election.”

I’d have given him support for an answer like that. It says that bad things might happen, but says why too. Surely I’m not the only person in the country to want honesty as opposed to sugar-coated lies?

His dancing around the subject, refusing to give a straight answer is infuriating. But sadly it’s entirely understandable. Saying “no” to the question would give Labour ammunition for ever more to say that police numbers would be cut by this government. The government would be “soft on crime” and a breaker of promises. That would create awful headlines for the government, despite the fact that those headlines or the Labour newspapers printing them don’t present any alternative ways to cut the deficit.

Such an admission would also make us Lib Dems look bad, because we’d prioritised increased police numbers and now might be presiding over them coming down. Of course it would be perfectly acceptable and true to say that were we in majority government we’d be having the 3,000 extra police we promised, but since we make up one sixth of a coalition, we can’t have everything we promised. Anything above one sixth of it is a bonus. And anything less than five-sixths of the government’s policy being true-blue Tory is a bonus too, since that’s the way the electorate voted under the electoral system we want to change and Labour now want to keep.

That would make us sound grown up, honest and straightforward. But I won’t hold my breath for anyone to say it. I’ve heard Nick Clegg, and his dancing skills would make Fred Astaire run for cover. For some reason, not answering questions, treating us all like idiots, and making it seem like nobody’s telling the full truth, still wins the day.

Rick

On May 5th 2011, there will be a referendum on whether to adopt the Alternative Vote system. That’s also the day that I am up for re-election to Bury Council, so make sure you come and vote!

AV is a step in the right direction towards a fairer voting system. The First Past The Post system (the system we’ve got now) hands power to the lucky few voters who live in marginal constituencies and sucks it away from the vast majority of us who do not. If you live in a safe seat, safe for whatever party, then the influence you have is seriously curtailed.

Alternative Vote isn’t a perfect system. It’s not proportional representation, which is what Lib Dems have always wanted and still want. But sadly we didn’t win the election, and make up only a sixth of the government, so we can’t get everything we want. This referendum though, agreed to as part of the coalition agreement, is a move away from a system which really doesn’t work, to one which will work better.

It will make MPs work harder for people’s support, and will give people whose vote never counted before much more of a say.

So over the next ten months the Liberal Democrats will be fighting hard, with others, for a ‘yes’ vote in the referendum. It will not be easy. There will be many MPs who want to keep the status quo because it protects them from the need to win majority support.

Of course there are other more important and more pressing issues that we’ll be fighting for as well, like making sure that the cuts made necessary by the debt and deficit inherited by the government are dealt with as fairly as possible for everyone, and that we stick up for Prestwich and Bury like we were elected to do. But this referendum is a big chance to make a big change to our political system. That’s the change people wanted after expenses and during the last lingering days of the last government. Now we can make it happen.

You can get the referendum campaign off to a flying start. Please sign up to our Fairer Votes campaign newsletter here: www.fairervotes.org.uk

Rick

The Council confirmed a range of cuts to be made immediately, including a reduction in funding for children’s services, playgrounds and roads. The decisions were made with immediate effect and without the involvement of Councillors or local people.

We all know that cuts need to be made because of the huge debts left by the last Labour government. But this is the wrong way to go about making those cuts. In just a few days the Conservatives have decided to slash vital services without asking anyone else what they think is important.

Why didn’t the Conservatives at the Town Hall ask other Councillors to talk to local people and get a sense about where they would like to see the cuts made? If they’d have asked local people they’d have found out just how bad some of their plans are. For instance, all year people have been telling me how much the roads need better maintenance, and yet this is the first budget to be cut. That’s madness and it isn’t fair. Local people have also said that they want more facilities for young people, but this budget too has been cut straight away. Where’s the sense in that?

I call on the Conservatives to start a big consultation with local people right now about the full options for these necessary cuts, and I call on local people to let me know what their priorities are so that local Lib Dems can work with local people in making the right cuts to clear up Labour’s mess.

I want to hear local people’s views on what services should be prioritised so that the cuts happen in the fairest way possible. Please let me know your views using the contact details on this page or leaving a comment.

Rick

Lib Dems in Prestwich have opposed the Fairfax Road car parking charges from day one. We voted against them, and have campaigned strongly against them since. 
 
We’re worried that the £1 charge for short-term parking will be particularly damaging to local shops, whilst at the same time doing nothing to achieve what the Conservatives at Bury Town Hall say they want, namely to reduce all-day parking.

We’re worried that on street parking will increase on the nearby residential roads traffic congestion will increase on surrounding roads, and local people who need to use the NHS walk-in centre and GPs, particularly the old and disabled, will be disadvantaged.

In the interests of Prestwich, its time for a re-think on the Fairfax Road parking charges. 

Rick

Stopping vast numbers of people being locked up for non-violent crimes on short sentences was a key Liberal Democrat manifesto commitment, and now the government are announcing that that’s what it intends to do.

It is simply silly to keep sending people to prison, if all that happens to them there is that they bide their time before being released to re-offend and head straight back! If people are detained, we should educate, rehabilitate, and make very sure that when they leave they are as unlikely as possible to re-offend again.

Sending people to prison for short spells is expensive, counter-productive, and not at all useful. Prison doesn’t work.

“Tough on crime. Tough on the causes of crime” is a great idea. But it didn’t happen, unfortunately. Lots more laws and stiffer sentences didn’t translate to lower re-offending. In fact, re-offending has gone up, especially amongst the young where it is now at really staggering levels.

Liberal Democrats believe that criminals should be caught and punished, but they should also be set back on the straight and narrow.  Prison places should be for violent criminals not first time petty offenders.

Of course, no offender should be let off or treated “softly.” Too often the alternatives to prison are just that. We need community sentences that really work. That instil a work ethic and a sense of responsibility and pride in offenders to stop them offending again. That’s why I’m such a fan of restorative justice and of schemes like community payback that we saw here in Prestwich. That scheme had small-time offenders renovating churchyards and removing graffiti in the community, as an alternative to prison. It focused their minds, gave them skills and something to be proud of, and it helped the community. It was cheaper than prison, and that type of scheme has been shown to cut re-offending by huge amounts.

The new policy is sensible, and it’s Lib Dem! I hope to see it work.

Rick

This is mainly because on occasion the Leader can get his words muddled and come up with all sorts of mangled gems (calling our lady former mayor “Mrs Mayor” being my favourite ever example), but is also due to the fact that we do sometimes get important bits of information.

Last night was no exception, as I asked about the involvement of Councillors in the programme of cuts that the Council needs to introduce as a result of the government’s budget.

Some of these cuts need to happen this year, which means that the budget we voted on in February no longer works and has to be revised. The Cabinet of the Council (the leading Conservatives who run the Council) have decided on what these in-year cuts should be, citing emergency powers and the need to get cuts agreed quickly.

I think that other members should be involved, so that we can discuss how these cuts happen fairly and make sure that they don’t impact unduly on the priorities for Bury and its constituent towns. For instance, I was disturbed to see that the roads maintenance budget would be cut. I don’t know if there’s an alternative to cutting this service which a lot of people have said really is a top priority, and I’d have liked more members to have been consulted or been involved in discussions. We all know that cuts have to happen, but Councils have a say on how they happen, and we need to make those decisions giving as many people as possible a say.

It’s a shame that the Leader and Cabinet have not involved other members in these cuts in any way. We might have ended up with a fairer, better solution if they had.

Rick

Sitting there stewing in that muggy Council chamber listening to my colleagues was akin to being slow-roasted by a particularly verbose team of chefs.

There were two main debates. The first was about the recent decision to sack the entire board of Six Town Housing, which is the “arms length management company” charged with managing the Council’s housing stock. The board was made up of Councillors, tenants and others, but it was dismissed en masse and temporarily replaced with appointees after the Chief Exec of STH was suspended. The lead-up to that suspension, and how and why the board were then sacked, is murkier than the Gulf of Mexico, and allegations were flying left, right and centre. Labour members were annoyed at the actions of the Council who suspended the board, and other board members seemed annoyed at the action of the STH Chair (a Labour Councillor) whose actions connected to the suspension of the Chief Exec were also questioned.

It’s all a bit of a dodgy business, and raises important questions about the powers and conduct of Councillors and officers. What the debate shouldn’t have become was a slanging match with serious allegations about individuals lobbed about like confetti. Unfortunately that’s what it descended into before it was brought to a close by the Mayor. The Lib Dems submitted an amendment calling for an enquiry, which was passed despite Labour opposition. So we’ll get to the bottom of it and hopefully top this type of thing happening again. It’s not right that, for whatever reason, STH doesn’t have Councillors and tenants on its Board. Whoever’s to blame for that needs to be held to account.

The second debate was about the government’s programme of cuts. Unfortunately, some have to be made this year, which means less money than we thought even for the current financial year. The Lib Dems put forward a motion calling for full consultation with all parties and the public on how to make these cuts fair. Cllr Vic D’Albert proposed it, and I seconded it. I didn’t make the speech I’d prepared because it was already about fifteen hours after the meeting had started, but it’s below if anyone wants to read it. I did say a few words on a silly amendment Labour put forward which sought to pin the blame for everything on what they hilariously term the “Con/Dem Coalition.”

Whoever coined that piece of linguistic genius is clearly cut out for bigger and better things. Not only is it a HILARIOUS juxtaposition of the abbreviations for Conservative and Liberal Democrats, but it also sounds like the word “condemn.” Honestly, it’s beyond clever. Ho ho ho ho ho.

Anyway it was a pointless amendment which added nothing and which was defeated.

And then it was the end of the meeting and we all staggered from the council chamber-cum-convection oven out into the cool summer air, and went home.

Rick

I did say a few words on Labour’s amendment, but had I had the time I’d have said what I was going to say about the government’s cuts and what we should do about them, which is the following… 

“Thank you Mr Mayor.

A couple of months ago I was at a general election candidates debate in Ramsbottom, and someone asked whether the cuts we needed to make were going to be worse than Mrs Thatcher had to make.

The Conservative candidate, who’s now the Conservative MP, said yes.

I said yes too. And so did the Labour candidate.

We were applauded for our honesty.

But now these cuts are being made.

And a lot fewer people are applauding.

The governor of the Bank of England said that the government having to make these cuts would be out of government for the next thirty years.

As a Liberal I’d been out of government for 80 years until the other week, so I like those odds.

But I don’t like having to make the cuts.   I didn’t get into all this to support shrinking back what we can do to help people.

I believe that progress is measured by the things a government does to help people prosper.

It isn’t good that for a while at least it can help people less.

People will suffer.

How I wish it wasn’t so.

But they were always going to, and everyone knew it was necessary to curb the debt, to curb the deficit.

That’s why they applauded when all sides were honest and told them so.

I only hope that my party in government has made people suffer less than would otherwise have been the case with a government of Tories alone.

Now it’s the easiest thing in the world for the people not making the cuts to talk about betrayals when the cuts are made.

It’s so easy to criticise. I know, I’ve been there.

But they are the same people who knew that the cuts needed to be made.

They said themselves that £50bn of cuts were to be made. They just didn’t say where.

Now they need to do more than just criticise.

Because no matter what anyone says. No matter what the hand-wringing and the finger pointing and the accusations sound like. We have to take action to try and make the cuts felt less keenly here in Bury.

There’s a lot we can debate about the cuts.

For every economist who says we should cut this, there’s another who says we should cut that.

For every expert who says cutting now is vital, there’s another who says cutting now is lethal.

100 people, 100 opinions.

It’s like a meeting of the Bury Lib Dems.Only with 93 more people.

But we had an election, and this is the result.

There’s a coalition, whether we like it, or we don’t.

This is the way the cuts are happening.

Not exactly the way my party wanted it, I’m sure. But then remember, the proportion of Lib Dems in the government is the same as the proportion of Lib Dems in this chamber, round about one sixth.

Our influence there is probably as limited as here.And just as frustrating.

We have a mountain of debt.

Every minute that goes by the government spends a £80,000 on interest, that’s over £800 million a week.

That’s not party political, it’s fact.

Without action on the deficit, this debt will get bigger still.

We will carry on spending more money on debt interest than we do on schools. And there won’t be money to create jobs and growth and opportunities.

There’s little to be happy about in the cuts. But there’s nothing to be happy about in doing nothing to get rid of the debt. Some say there are too many cuts and too few tax rises.

Some say we’ve taken too much from this or that, not enough from something or other.

Asked too much from some, too little from others.

Maybe they’re right. Maybe they’re not.

Nobody knows.

Nobody. Not me, not any other Councillor, no MP and no government minister.

What is being done is being done in good faith. I have to believe that.

And it’s fine to say we shouldn’t cut Child Benefit or raise VAT. It’s fine. I agree. But only if you tell me what else we should cut, what else we should raise.

Until you do, it means nothing.The true test of our character is not who we seek to blame, but how we steer the ship through unchartered, troubled waters.

We need to make sure that the solutions are fair. The solutions the government propose mean that for the next few years the richest pay most, and the poorest least.

The cuts are unpleasant. Deeply unpleasant. But they are not unfair.  And Mr Mayor, whatever our squabbles, they are nothing compared to the impact that these cuts will have on the people they directly affect.

These cuts mean a huge hardship for the people of Bury.

The people who will have to work longer and harder for the same money as before.

The people who will have less support than they once had, from people less supported themselves and with less resources to help.

These cuts will be an immense hardship for the staff of this Council who have to make them.

For people who dedicate their working lives to public service, asking them to do more with less has given way to us asking them to actually do less, with even less, but still keep Bury working and its people happy and looked after.

We should give them every help we can.If last year was the year the staff of this Council were so badly let down by some Members over Equal Pay and Job Evaluation, let this year be the year we do all we can to support them and make their task easier, and their jobs safer.

We need to come together and work as the link between this Council and the people it serves.We need to find the most important services, protect them, protect the livelihoods of the people who provide them and the lives of the people who need them.

We must do our utmost, our absolute best, to make sure that Bury doesn’t suffer unduly or pay more than its fair share.

And we must do it together, not as three parties but as one Council, to make sure that the budget put forward from this Town Hall next spring is as fair, open and transparent as it can be.

Whether we like it or not, we are all in this together.

Not because George Osborne says so but because I live in the same borough as all the rest of you.

Except the leader.

Anyone not in this with us, anyone shouting from the sidelines, might well be dodging political bullets, but is dodging their responsibilities as well.

Even if some of us lose our seats next May, we’re still in it, and we still need to find a way out.

And we must work with our partners locally, regionally and nationally to get what we can for Bury.

We need to focus on recovery.

What can we do to create jobs in this borough?

What can we do to generate wealth?

What can we do to protect the most needy?

How can we support those less in need to make their own way?

How can we take advantage of the incentives for new business in this region?

How can we bring that new business to Bury?

How can we do things differently as a Council, and how can we keep people spending their time and their money in this great borough of ours?

If taxes go up, what can we do to create value in our services?

If services get cut, how can we change what we do so that nobody suffers?

I don’t know, but I want to find out, and I want to work with you all to do it.

We need to find answers to these questions right now.

Right now. Together.

That’s what we owe the people who look to us for leadership.

I know we can do it, and this motion is a start.

Mr Mayor, I appeal to all members to support it, and I am glad to second it.”

Last night it was the Annual General Meeting of the Rainsough Tenants and Residents Association. A new committee was elected, and there was input from lots of the local partner agencies like the Police, Six Town Housing and Groundwork.

An interesting stat falling out of the meeting was that there hasn’t been a single burglary in Rainsough in the last three months. This is pretty remarkable, and typical of a substantial fall in local crime which I think is at least partly due to the TRA working well as a place for local people to bring their problems. I was pleased to attend last night along with Cllr Mary D’Albert and share the TRA’s success. The clean-up day last month (which I sadly missed because I was on holiday) was another great success, and there are more events for the whole community of Rainsough coming up.

Tonight I have another meeting, this time of the entire council, who meet once every couple of months to quiz the leadership and debate issues. Tonight’s depressingly lengthy agenda includes debates on budget cuts and Six Town Housing, and questions to the leader from me about scrutiny and from other Lib Dems about various other things.

It’s a public meeting, and since there’s no World Cup games on, there’s simply no excuse not to come down and gawp. 7pm at the Town Hall.

It’s preceded by a ceremony which will grant the Freedom of the Borough to former Cllr Albert Little, who led the Council in the 70s and 80s, was Mayor for a year and was an elected representative of various bodies for more years than I’ve been alive. I doubt I’ll make the ceremony because I’ll still be at work, but it is a fitting tribute to a man who dedicated a massive number of years to trying to make Bury a better place.

Rick

I don’t mind playing tennis, even though listening to it is pretty bad. Sadly the same can’t be said of my wife-to-be. She finds the speed of the whole thing terrifying, and reminds me whenever the subject is brought up of an incident in her childhood when the speed of the game conspired with her own unsteady hand-eye coordination to implant a tennis ball in her eye. She chuckles about this now (I am consumed with laughter) but it hurt at the time.

We tried squash once too, but smaller, even faster balls meant that that was even worse. Luckily there is an alternative, available right here in Prestwich, courtesy of Bury Council. And Saviour, thy name is Badminton.

Badminton, when played by professionals, is a lightning quick game of daring and skill. Thankfully, there is an amateur variant played by the likes of me which involves prancing around a court watching a shuttlecock float gracefully towards the earth with all the force of a feather caught in the breeze. It is like regular badminton but in slow motion. Less like a sprint around a court, and more like amateur hour at the ballet studio. 

It is though both good exercise and a racket sport unlikely to blind my girlfriend.

From tonight, the Council are putting on cut price badminton sessions at Parrenthorn High School’s sports hall. For £2.50 a pop you too can pretend to be a bit like Andy Murray, without risking your eyesight. And, a particular bonus for me, you can play with girls.

The sessions are called “no strings badminton,” and I am told by the advert that they are fun, social ways to start playing and improving my skills. My skills currently reside around the “zero” level, so the only way is up.

Assuming there isn’t some other comical excuse to close the motorway tonight, and I get home in time, I may well go down and play. And if not tonight, then it’s on every Tuesday from now on.

If you’re interested and need more information than the time (18:00) and the venue (Parrenthorn High School) the number to call is 0161 253 5893.

Rick

The Chancellor announced a 25 per cent cut in spending for unprotected departments over four years. Now, as part of the Spending Review, the Government is launching a ‘Spending Challenge’ aimed at engaging the whole country in rethinking public services in order to deliver more for less.

The first phase of the Challenge aims to harness the experience and insight of those at the front line, including NHS workers, police officers and civil servants, who will be asked to look at three areas:

• Government-funded activities that they believe are non-essential and should not continue.
• How the Government can better target activities or provide them more effectively.
• Activities that can be provided completely differently to save money, including by providers other than Government

A website has been set up at where the country’s six million public sector workers can submit their answers to the question, “How do we rethink services to deliver more for less?”

Take part: Here

In their letter, The Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister say: “We want you to help us find those savings, so we can cut public spending in a way that is fair and responsible. You work on the frontline of public services. You know where things are working well, where the waste is, and where we can re-think things so that we get better services for less money.”

Rick

Sadly, she cites things like “nature” and “tranquility” as reasons to forego running water and post-Victorian toilet facilities and de-camp modernity. Don’t get me wrong, I am all for nature and tranquility, but I like them followed by a hot bath.

Now that we’ve joined a government with the Tories though it seems fashionable to regress, and so in the spirit of pre-marital compromise I have dipped a toe into the world of camping. Yesterday we erected a tent in the garden, which is where I spent last night. I appreciate that this is behaviour not unlike that of many 8 year olds up and down the land, but in my case it’s a start. And, I have to say, a faintly pleasant one at that.

My house was already built when I moved into it, whereas I had to actually build the tent myself yesterday. But there is a certain satisfaction in turning a clump of sheets into a habitable dwelling, even if it was a bit limp at one end because I’d started in the wrong place and run out of grass to pin it all to. We could comfortably fit inside it, and that was the main thing.

We did make certain concessions to comfort, namely an air-mattress and, of course, the fact that I was only six feet from my back door. But I was forbidden the fridge, toilet, television, internet-ready PC access and portable air conditioning unit that I had requested. I really was roughing it quite badly. All manner of disasters could have befallen us, from a tornado dislodging our flimsy canvas shelter to a run-in with our resident hedgehog, who I know likes to shuffle around the garden in the early hours and who I was certain would have shuffled into my face given half a chance. There were also tent pegs strewn around the garden, tethering the tent to the ground but also just waiting to trip me up. It had half the makings of an assault course, and half the makings of a silent comedy film with me tumbling about all over the place.  Thankfully, I lived to tell the tale. 

Were I to do it again (and I suspect I will be bullied into it gain fairly soon, now that I have survived), I would make several changes. For one thing, I wouldn’t pitch the tent quite so close to Hilton Lane, which is near where I live and which is, let me tell you, very noisy even at 3am. There’s no place for a nomadic woodsman like myself so close to juddering lorries. I would also perhaps invest in an eye-mask of some kind. It never really gets dark at this time of the year, which meant that even in the middle of the night the sky was still pretty blue. Charming at first, but rapidly annoying. Perhaps like this blog post.

But I am alive, and not even that tired. Ready and raring to go for this afternoon’s match. Come on England! If you show the fortitude that I did , the World Cup is surely in the bag!

Rick

I am similarly disappointed. When I pulled Italy out of the World Cup sweepstake at work, I thought I was a shoo-in for at least a semi final spot and a small prize. Sadly, I have been badly let down by my Italian friends, who today crashed out in the group stage, having lost to Slovakia and drawn to New Zealand. Given that Slovakia didn’t exist as a nation until a few years ago, and given that the national sport of New Zealand is something to do with churning really nice butter, that’s quite a tepid performance.

I take solace in being able to expunge such horrors with a good dose of casework, which is what I did today when I boarded a metaphorical short-haul European airline and departed Italy for Zurich (the insurance firm. Gosh that’s a bad joke…).

A resident has got in touch about his house, which he bought and which adjoins a Six Town Housing property. Six Town are the Council’s “Arms Length Management Organisation” which, in layman’s terms means the organisation which runs their council housing. Six Town sorted out the roofing on their properties a while back, but sadly nobody told the roofers where Six Town houses ended and private ones began. Hence my resident returning home to find a new roof on top of his house which was neither wanted nor better than the one that was there before.

Zurich are the insurers he wants to claim back from. Sadly, they are being a bit casual in replying to any of the letters, emails or demands for compensation, so I have got involved to try and oil their wheels. Hopefully we can get a resolution  soon.

I have tried to placate my resident by saying that no matter how slack Zurich are being, it’s nothing compared to how slack the Italians were with my £5 sweep stake. But it doesn’t seem to be making things any better. Ah well, back to putting my faith in England.

Rick

These charges were vigorously opposed at the time of their suggestion by Lib Dems, and have been opposed by us ever since. The amount of revenue that they’ll generate is estimated at only £30,000 but the symbolism of losing a free car park and replacing it with a pay car park is huge for Prestwich. Local retail centres are already struggling, and this is one less reason for people to shop in Prestwich.

The Council could make up the revenue shortfall in any number of ways - £30,000 is the cost of not filling a single junior vacancy at the Town Hall, for instance, or of cutting back on advertising or conference fees. We aren’t talking a massive amount of money. When we opposed them at the Budget Council back in February, we showed how the money could be made simply by allocating money in a slightly different way, but sadly the Conservatives were hell bent on these charges.

The charge are not only bad for business, but imposing them on short-stay shoppers does nothing to address the stated aim of the charges, which is to deter long term parking and make it easier for short stay shoppers. Plans for a new Metrolink car park nearby will help to address that.

The charges as a whole are wrong. They will mean people parking on already congested side roads like Heys Road and Poppythorn Lane, and with schools nearby that’s not safe. If the Tories won’t budge on imposing charges, they should at least re-visit the specifics. It’s crazy to charge people £1 to park for the local shop. It will do Prestwich no good at all, and all for a few thousand pounds.

Rick 

I wanted a Lib Dem budget. Sadly, not enough people voted for us for that. Far more people voted Conservative than for any other party in the country at the election, so it is right that the budget is predominantly as they would have liked it. But thanks to the coalition agreement the budget is only largely Tory rather than entirely so. We have toned down their excesses and got an awful lot of what we believe in and campaigned for:

Those with the broadest shoulders bear the heaviest burden

As we promised in both our manifesto and our coalition agreement we are ensuring that the wealthier pay their fair share. We are increasing the rate of Capital Gains Tax to 28% for higher rate taxpayers while keeping it at 18% for basic rate taxpayers. In line with the Coalition Agreement we are also increasing Entrepreneurs Relief from £2m to £5m. There will be no indexation and no taper relief- these only complicate the tax system. This will raise an extra £1bn and end the disgraceful situation of bankers paying a lower rate of tax than their cleaners.   

Securing a fair deal for Pensioners

As we promised in our manifesto we are introducing a ‘triple lock’ to protect pensioners. In future pensions will rise with the higher of earnings, 2.5% or inflation. This year because RPI will be higher than CPI it will rise with RPI, in future the inflation measure will be CPI. The standard minimum income guarantee in Pension Credit will be increased in line with RPI this year so that the poorest pensioners receive the full benefit of the rise in the Basic State Pension. We believe that it is only fair that pensioners are guaranteed a decent pension from the state on which to live.  

Tackling Child Poverty This budget keeps a commitment to tackling child poverty in meaningful way. Despite this Budget representing an unprecedented fiscal consolidation the Coalition Government has taken action to ensure that there is no measurable impact on child poverty. This has been achieved by committing a further £2bn in to the Child Element of tax credits. The coalition also remains committed to introducing the Pupil Premium – which will give more money to the pupils and schools that need it the most.  

The Environment The Government will publish proposals in the autumn to reform the climate change levy in order to provide more certainty and support to the carbon price;

o      creating a Green Investment Bank. Detailed proposals of which will be provided after the Spending Review; and

o      establishing the Green Deal for households, to help individuals invest in home energy efficiency improvements that can pay for themselves from the savings in energy bills.

Rebalancing the economy

The Coalition Budget introduces a bank levy (based on balance sheet size), which will raise £2.5bn a year. It is only fair that that the banks pay their fair share back to the taxpayers who helped bail them out.  This will contribute to tax cuts for all other types of business. Corporation tax will be cut from 28% to 24%, over 4 years, with 1% cut each year. The small companies rate will not rise to 22% in April 2009 as proposed by Labour, instead it will be cut to 20%.

Of course the budget will be difficult. Of course there’s stuff in it that I wish there wasn’t. Freezing Child Benefit, putting up VAT. It’s not nice. But for every nice thing we did, we’d have had to do another nasty thing. Such is the mess we’re in.

Hopefully the list above is a sign that, for a party that makes up a sixth of the government, this budget has a lot of Lib Dem in it.

Rick

What she didn’t have though was any alternative suggestions. It’s fine to criticise the budget, and incredibly easy when pretty much everyone in the country is going to be less well off as a result. Maybe Labour think that by stirring up enough anger they’ll get some more votes. But I think they need to do more. They need to come up with a credible set of proposals which would have dealt with today differently. Not a re-hash of their general election manifesto, which is now outdated and was never anywhere near costed even when it was new. I mean a full set of budget alternatives. Until they do, their criticisms are hollow even if they ring true in parts. If they’d have won the election, it would have been them making the decisions. It’s far easier to criticise than to actually do.

One particular thing that grates with me is the accusation of ”unfairness.” The budget shows clearly that the poorest 10% of households will feel the effects of the cuts the least, and that the wealthiest 10% will pay the most. That makes it, on the whole, fair. And yet there are accusations of unfairness because certain benefits are cut and certain taxes raised.

It is my view that Labour are confusing unfairness with unpleasantness. The budget is fair in the most obvious sense, but it is deeply unpleasant for lots of people. This unpleasantness doesn’t make it unfair. The reality is that whatever the government chose to do it would mean unhappiness for lots of people. I don’t agree necessarily that this means unfairness. Reducing the perceived unfairness of a benefit cut by reversing it would have meant another cut elsewhere, or another tax hike. We’d all like to reverse some of the less palatable cuts, but there’s no money left to do it.

Am I happy that benefits are cut to people who need them? No.

Do I think that alternatives would have been worse? Yes.

Is the compromise about right, and fair to everyone? Probably, yes.

So fairness and benefit cutting aren’t mutually exclusive. Don’t be confused between unfairness and unpleasantness as Labour seem to be.

Rick

These are not decisions that any government wants to take but we have no choice except to clear up the financial mess that we’re in. If Labour were in government, they’d have had to make similarly tough choices. Maybe they’d have made the very same choices. Today’s Budget takes these difficult decisions in an honest and fair way and with the clear stamp of Liberal Democrat values running through it.

Obviously it’s more of a Conservative budget than a Lib Dem budget. We have less than 10% of the MPs in the House of Commons, and 1/6th of the ones in the government. But I’d say the budget is more than 1/6th Liberal Democrat. And it’s certainly less Conservative than it would have been if we’d let them form a government without our restraint.

In the past, efforts to tackle a big deficit have always hit the poorest the most. The coalition has ensured that – for the first time – this will not happen. The richest will pay the most.

Look through the Budget and you will see key policies we campaigned for being put into effect.

These measures will ensure that the burden of deficit reduction is shared fairly across society.

This Government is being honest with people about the road ahead. Of course there are things in the budget we didn’t want. There are things in there that Lib Dems campaigned against, like the VAT rise. But that’s because this is a budget of compromise which sees the party most people voted for mix policies with the Lib Dems. It’s how coalitions work. The alternatives are worse. A weak Tory government and a wholly Tory budget, or a Lib/Lab coalition which Labour didn’t want and which wouldn’t have delivered on reforming the tax system or tackling the culture of overspending in government.

Today isn’t a happy day. I’m not happy at cuts and extra taxes. I don’t think many people are. There are things in the budget I’d have tried to do differently, like the VAT increase. But every penny less received in VAT means another penny off services or on to the debt. It’s unsustainable.

I hope that the coalition keep on listening, keep on trying to be fair, and keep on trying to do the right thing. It’s hard to be happy tonight but at least we now all know where we stand and have a credible and serious plan to get Britain’s economy back on track.

Rick

I hope my limp will have cleared up by the time I have to walk up and down aisles in front of my family and friends. Presently it is still causing me difficulties. Luckily, I spent the weekend being fairly sedate, trying to do an essay as part of a Masters degree I’m doing. The topic was public leadership, a characteristic sadly lacking from the Leader of Bury Council, in my opinion.

The Leader, the Conservatives’ Cllr Bob Bibby, would be a headline writer’s dream were he to exist in somewhere any more glamorous than Bury. Sadly, he doesn’t, and thus his often-crazy outpourings to the press never get much more attention than the pages of the Bury Times.

This week, it’s the Prestwich Advertiser which contains his latest gem, as Cllr Bibby enquires publicly “what planet Ivan Lewis MP lives on.” The reason for the query was Mr Lewis’s comments to the paper about the impact of the forthcoming budget on local services, and on his current campaign for more independence for local townships from Bury Town Hall.

Cllr Bibby is wrong to dismiss Ivan Lewis’ concerns about these things. As ever with Cllr Bibby, his response is unhelpful. I think Mr Lewis is right to be concerned, and it’s not very professional for Cllr Bibby to pretend otherwise.

However, Mr Lewis is also not entirely right. He calls for greater independence for Prestwich, Whitefield and Radcliffe. I applaud his late conversion to a policy the Lib Dems and I have supported and pressed for for years. He has made no progress in achieving it in his 13 years as our MP, nor did his party, who ran the Council from 1985-2007 and the country from 1997 until the other week, and did nothing on this then. Why not, Mr Lewis?

Mr Lewis then criticises government cuts, which is the easy thing to do. Here again he is not telling the whole truth. He fails to acknowledge what his colleague Liam Byrne did – that there is “no money left.” It saddens me to say it, but we need to make cuts. Everyone agrees, except Mr Lewis it seems (and the Trades Unions who back him, as we found last week). Mr Lewis offers no alternatives to the necessary cuts in what he says to the paper. He can be critical of them, as I’m sure others will be, possibly including me when they’re actually confirmed. But with no alternative his criticisms are meaningless. So I appeal to Mr Lewis - if the coalition’s cuts are so bad, please tell us what exactly you would do instead to bring down the debt your government’s spending created. What would you cut?

We’ll find out what the budget says tomorrow. I’m not looking forward to having the painful truth spelled out. But the truth, sadly, is what it is. I only hope that Lib Dem influence in government has steered the Tories towards a fairer solution to the problem left the country by Labour.

Rick

This slightly ominously-named body (which conjures up images of rubber-glove wearing nurses and painful probes designed to “internally scrutinise”) is the result of reforms to the Council’s overview and scrutiny processes, and is now the only place where decisions of the Council’s Executive can be debated, challenged and potentially changed by backbench members like me.

It’s a brave new world for scrutineers. Gone are the days when we received earnest and interesting, but usually fairly useless, reports on all and sundry. Instead now we have to be focused only on the key decisions which have a material impact on the Council, the money it spends and the people it serves.

In previous years, the work programme would be set up for the year in advance, and we’d know in June what we’d be looking at the following March. We can’t do that any more. The Executive doesn’t know what it’s going to be doing in six months time, so we can’t know what we’re going to scrutinise. It’s a new way of doing things, but hopefully a successful one.

Before we got down to deciding to not decide what was on the work programme though, we had to consider one item which was a hang over from last year’s scrutiny – the review of Special Educational Needs provision. Regular readers will remember a few months back when it came to light that the SEN team at the Town Hall was understaffed, over-pressured, and scoring fairly woefully in terms of both official performance indicators and unofficial ones. Last night’s update showed that progress has been made and that the Council is taking seriously the issues raised by members. It looks as though the service is going to make the improvements it needs to serve our young people better. We have asked for a further update to come to the panel in a few months time.

Rick

I’m finding it odd being a Lib Dem at the moment. On the one hand I suspect I wince a lot more than a lot of Conservatives do about cutting public services, but at the same time we’re in partnership government with them and I can appreciate the logic that the Lib Dem leadership are espousing about the need to make pretty wince-inducing cuts all round. I am sympathetic to those who want to avoid cutting, but I’m also more hard-nosed about it than I was before because suddenly it’s us wielding the scissors. Or should that be wielding the chainsaws?

We’re in a difficult place. Many of us are ideologically opposed to the idea of slimming back services, but we’ve stepped up to government and as a result we’re going to get panned for bringing them in. I like Nick Clegg’s idea of mirroring the Canadian approach to making cuts - involving as many people as possible in making the decisions and hopefully taking them with us in the process. But whatever they decide, there are going to be unhappy people, and I’ll probably be one of them because I didn’t get into this to make people unhappy.

Labour and the Tories have it exactly as easy as we Lib Dems used to have it when we chirped from the sidelines. The Tories can cut away thinking that they’re doing the country a service whilst sticking to their principles. Labour can oppose the cuts, because that’s their job in opposition. It fits their principles too.

I wonder what either side would do if their roles were reversed, particularly Labour. But I am even more perplexed by the attitude of the Trades Unions.

Today the General Secretary of Unison (the largest public sector union) has said that they will punish the government until they “don’t know what hit them” if there are cuts to services, pay or pensions. Whilst I can understand the upset about specific services, I don’t understand the apparent complete lack of acknowledgement that there is no more money left to fund the services that will be cut. It’s not that services are being cut for the sake of it, or to annoy the Unions, it’s that they need to be cut to help slim down the debt and the deficit. Some Tories might want to make more cuts than necessary, but Lib Dems bring fairness to the government and will tone them down. A glance at the coalition agreement proves that.

Labour and the Tories argue about whether cuts now are worse than cuts later, but the principle that cuts are necessary remains. No serious commentator or anyone thinking about this has argued that we can get away with no cuts. So why are the Unions advocating exactly that? A far more constructive approach would be to engage with the government, accept that some cuts are necessary, and play a part in making sure that they’re the right ones.

If cuts are going to happen, which is certain, then we need to make sure they’re fair. Fair to workers and, in the case of public sector workers, fair to the people they serve. Unison aren’t serving their members well by divorcing themselves from the process entirely. Rather than setting themselves against what will certainly happen, they should get involved and make sure that it happens fairly.

Rick

Another thing that was limping along until today was the proposed Vetting and Barring database which would have meant that lots more people working with vulnerable people had to submit details to the government. I hope the same fate that has befallen the database doesn’t befall me, because today it was put out of its misery and suspended pending a review which will hopefully see it substantially slimmed down.

The government’s plans for the database were always overly bureaucratic and demanding, in my view. Whilst protection of the vulnerable is obviously vital, this costly and gigantic scheme would have given benefits significantly outweighed by costs, and would have put off many people whose hugely beneficial work with children and vulnerable adults was done voluntarily or unofficially.

The desire to keep people safe is obviously laudable, and it’s one I share. But it’s impossible to keep everyone safe all the time. Awful crimes like the Soham murders can be made somewhat less likely by administrative and bureaucratic interventions like this, but they can never be totally prevented. Sad though it is, there will always be people who harm others. For me, the vast amounts of cash spent on systems like this could be better used in more productive ways, on education, rehabilitation, policing and enhancing community relations. Creating giant databases may make us feel better, but won’t ever achieve their promise of preventing every harmful incident. They also damage so much good will and engender a climate of suspicion and fear which casts adults as aggressive when they are overwhelmingly not.

This suspension and review of the database is a good thing from the coalition, and hopefully the start of a number of suspensions and repeals in this area, including of the CRB system which as I’ve mentioned on here many times can also be grossly unfair.

Rick

It happened when I was out leafleting on Saturday. I decided that a time-saving ploy would be to forego the normal leafleting etiquette of walking to the end of someone’s drive before walking back down the drive next door, and instead to walk to the side of the first drive and jump down onto the next. It couldn’t have been more than a three foot drop, but unfortunately it turns out that my ankles are made of jelly. They gave way, I landed in a crumpled heap and couldn’t get up for the best part of ten minutes.

I eventually hauled myself from the ground, and spent the next hour hobbling painfully home (whilst continuing to leaflet, so dedicated am I!) bleeding from my grazed bits and in quite a lot of pain. The incident was particularly ironic given that I escaped from the five-a-side without a scratch on me on Saturday morning, only to injure myself doing something very mundane on Saturday afternoon.

My ankle pain subsided after a few hours, leaving a nasty pain in my heel. This morning I dramatically over-estimated my own abilities when I attempted to drive to work. Never have my efforts to depress a clutch pedal made me shriek in agony like they did today. It was beyond my meagre strnegths, and so instead of going to work I got a cab to the NHS walk-in centre and had them diagnose me. I am glad that the walk-in centre accepts people incapable of walking in, because they didn’t raise an eyebrow as I limped across the threshold. The nurse tells me I have two sprained ankles and a sprained achilles. Apparently they can take weeks to get better, which is fairly irritating given that it means not only the end of my World Cup dreams but also the end of my ambition to enter the all-Ireland dancing championships . I have been prescribed ibuprofen, a tubi-grip and some exercises involving a Yellow Pages. It’s hardly the cutting edge of modern medicine, but I’m told it’s my only hope.

So, for any opposition councillors searching for my achilles heel, the answer is that it’s my achilles heel.

I have spent the day working from home, thanks to the miracle of emails and Blackberries. I have also sourced a lift from a kind colleague/neighbour who will take me to work tomorrow. Hopefully I’ll be able to make the two Council meetings I have planned for this week, although it’s doubtful whether I can make them under my own steam. Driving’s not within the scope of my abilities at the moment, sadly.

So Mr Capello, I can only apologise and make myself unavailable for selection. Sorry about that.

Rick 

I have one or two talents, but they are sometimes difficult to deduce and they certainly don’t include football. Eyebrows may have been raised when Fabio Capello left me out of the England squad, but not very many. In the unlikely event of Rooney, Gerrard et al needing some advice on modes of local governance I could be of some use. If however they need a box to box midfielder, I’m not the right man. It is a sad day when a boy realises he’s not going to make it as a professional footballer, but I got over that particular upset some decades ago and am comfortable now.

The team was a multi-party affair. I was the Lib Dem representative, and was joined by Cllr Iain “Messi” Gartside (Con), Cllr Rishi “Pele” Shori (Lab) and Cllr Tamoor “Maradona” Tariq (also Lab), as well as the son of Labour’s Cllr Tony Isherwood. I was less Maradona and more Madonna, but the five of us made quite the impression as Brazil, losing our opening four games 0-4, 2-4, 0-5 and 0-4. They would have been crying in the streets of Sao Paolo had they known. Or cared.

Our two goals though were both scored by me, as I discovered that my strengths really lay in goal hanging. The second goal was no mean finish, but the first will live long in the memory, ballooning off my knee as it did and rebounding in a joyous looping arc into the goal.

Our “performances” somehow didn’t qualify us for the final, but we did make it into the losers’ play-off, which is something. And that game, against France, was the undoubted highlight. For one thing we didn’t get massacred, as the final score was 1-1. We actually held our own against a team clearly as awful as we were (possibly because of frequent industrial action, 35 hour working weeks, and the strings of onions that the players inexplicably wore around their necks), and it came down to a penalty shootout. Since the prize was the wooden spoon, I suppose in a way we won the shootout. However, football purists would probably dispute that, for though we did indeed claim the wooden spoon, this was as a result of converting fewer penalties than our opponents. I missed my one of course.

Losing on penalties on the day England start their World Cup is a portent of doom so obvious I barely need comment on it. I always hoped Fate would use more imagination than that, but when England lose on penalties themselves as they undoubtedly will in the quarter finals, I will look back on this day and blame myself.

Rick 

A friend of mine moved to New Zealand some time ago, possibly to escape me. Whatever his reason, he sends me postcards every now and againd from far flung bits of the far flung nation he now lives in. Don’t be fooled by his international jet-setting though, for he is incapable of many simple tasks. One of which is writing an address. His latest postcard contains:

- A “humorous” fake name

- The incorrect town

- No postcode

- No HOUSE NUMBER

And yet despite this, it has arrived on my doorstep. This is the domestic equivalent of writing “Santa, Lapland” on a postcard, and it still arriving.

God bless the Royal Mail. And here’s hoping that whatever its future is, this type of exemplary service is continued.

In the meantime, the fact that I care about France v Uruguay can only mean one thing - it’s the FIFA/Coca Cola/Canon/Playstation/Rainbow Nation/Carlsberg World Cup. Time to watch some of it.

Rick

As I got to the top of the stairs and looked over towards the function room, I heard an oddly familiar, slightly wavy voice. Its owner, pacing the stage delivering a well-received speech about the value of volunteering, was someone far more well-known that most of the people normally associated with hospital broadcasting. In amongst the faded 80s wedding disco crowd and the teenage Wogan wannabes stood none other than the former MP, former Shadow Home Secretary and now novelist. A strange, but nonetheless welcome, sight. As she remarked in the Q&A afterwards when asked about the coalition, she and the Lib Dems are friends now, all of a sudden…

I had forgotten that Ms Widdecombe was now a friend not only of the Lib Dems but of the radio station. She’d been interviewed by one of our presenters some time ago, and been impressed enough not just to give up her time then but a couple of times since as well. Her appearance at the party on Sunday was quite a coup for our little radio station. She deserves our thanks for trooping up from the South for a luke warm buffet and a bit of a book-signing.

The party itself marked a highlight of what will be a tepid week for me. Tonight I am off to Coventry for another three day stint as a student, the final residential module of the Masters in Public Management which I am taking at the University of Warwick. Last time, due to a hotel booking catastrophe, I spent three solitary days in a rank and noisy hotel barely speaking to another human soul. Despite the prospect of another 72 hours in the Midlands not filling me with joy, at least the only way is up from last time.

All of which means not very much in the way of bloggings. The hotel I have upgraded to this time is still less “Savoy Hotel” and more “Savoy Cabbage” and if it has broadband it’s not telling me about it on the website. I may discover that it does have, in which case I can write away. If not, I can’t, and I apologise in advance.

Back on Friday.

Rick

It won’t all be in vein though, as I’ll meet up with familiar faces once again, and we’ll discuss our plans for the year ahead. It will also be the first meeting of a Bury Liberal Party with us playing a part in government since decades before any of us were born though, so it’ll be historic if nothing else. I doubt we’ll get a discount on the room though, even though we now play our part in running the show.

My weekend was spent soaking up the sunshine and getting soaked by the rain. I took my bike out for a ride on Saturday night, discovering that it is possible to ride all the way to Radcliffe via Drinkwater Park, 13 Arches, and various other bits of woodland, without encountering another living soul. Unfortunately, it was when I reached Radcliffe that the heavens opened and reminded me that whilst it’s liberating to ride so far in peace, it’s also annoying to have ride so far home whilst wet.

Rick

The fiancee had been doing a Masters degree in Education. She was clearly not content with being surrounded by thirty screaming 5 year olds all day as part of her job, and actively sought academic excuses to further her torment. Several years and several thousand pounds later we arrive at today. She did very well, and graduated with distinction. And she kept her smiley face on despite having to wear a thick gown on the hottest day of the year.

The Open University is a marvellous institution, which I always admired but know a lot more about now. It’s now over 40 years old, and in that time has handed out hundreds of thousands of degrees at all levels to students who have studied in their own time and at their own expense. More often that not these students are, like the one I went supporting today, doing a degree on top of their full time jobs, juggling studies, families, jobs and everything else. They have my full admiration.

I am doing a Masters myself at the moment (not at the Open University, but still, it’s something…). But I’m wonderfully supported by my employer, who’s giving me time off and a paying hefty proportion of the fees. I don’t have to cope with the pressures that most of today’s graduates did. So well done to them all. They are an inspiration to us all, and proof that it’s never too late to learn, nor are there any reasons why trying circumstances can’t be overcome.

The rest of the day was spent sorting out my wedding suit, which involved being man-handled by an attractive Moss Bros employee who informed me that I was less fat than I thought. Once that was done I returned home to contemplate the weekend ahead, some of which will be spent leafleting the latest Focus. So if we come down your street, pop out and say hello.

Have good weekends all,

Rick

The reason for my venture away was to sort out things for my wedding, which is fast approaching and which is taking place far away in a place where my fiancee’s parents live but I don’t. The venue is gorgeous, but 5 hours drive away, which is annoying enough for me but exceedingly annoying for my poor guests who have to sacrifice their entire weekends to watch me wander up and down an aisle. Political opponents rejoice in the fact that several local Lib Dems will be inconvenienced in this way.

Our couple of days away were organised with military precision. We squeezed in meetings with our photographer (an uncomfortably good looking gentleman who will easily outshine me on the day and who I hope will come dressed in rags to even the score), our videographer, the officiant, the hotel’s own wedding coordinator, and a couple who will be our DJs when we send guests scattering for cover and undertake our first dance. They suggested playing something called “Urban R&B” at points during the evening. I put a swift and severe stop to that.

Weddings, I am finding, aren’t easy to organise. No longer do I labour under the misapprehension that it’s all about picking a wife from a line-up, haggling with her father over the price, and settling down to a lifetime of bliss. I am told by my ever-more-tetchy fiancee that there are things like “wedding favours” to consider. I thought she was on about us all doing everyone a favour and finishing in time to catch Match of the Day, but apparently not. We have to wrap sweets in netting.

I do think though that we may have been conned into pursuing certain expensive wedding avenues which are not strictly necessary for the success of the day. I can (grudgingly) accept the need to record the day for posterity and thus hire the services of a photographer. But is it really necessary to schlep to IKEA and buy twenty identical vases around which to scatter something called “table crystals”? Apparently it is.

Today I am going to get my suit measured. My groomsmen are currently all living abroad, and so I have had to gather their measurements to take to Moss Bros myself. It worries me that they will be responsible for the smooth running of my big day when they are singularly incapable of measuring their own limbs and waists. Apparently one of them was a 44 inch waist, and the other has a 31 inch arm. I have met them both, and I can confidently say that neither of them are so fantastically proportioned. One will be spending my wedding day rolling up his sleeves, and the other will be wearing clown trousers.

Everything’s not lost though. My present for my bride-to-be arrived today. Underneath my cynical exterior beats the heart of a romantic. It really is amazing what you can pick up in Lidl these days.

Rick

Prestwich Festival rumbles on, like one of those freight trains from America. This weekend is a Bank Holiday, so hopefully you’ll have even more time to enjoy the events going on all over Prestwich over the weekend and into next week. Such as… 

30 MAY BANDS IN THE PARK 14.00 - 16.00
St Mary’s Flower Park
Tottington brass band. Free entrance.
Phone: 0161 253 7983

31 MAY PROCESSION OF HORSES 11.00 start Simister
Simister and Prestwich Bridleways Association procession of Horses will leave the Same Yet Pub, Simister at 11:00am, processing down Simister Lane to Heywood Road, along Polefield Road and onto St. Margaret’s Road, back onto Heywood Road and onto Simister lane back into Simister.
Contact: Margaret on stewardson1@sky.com

1 JUNE PRESTWICH CONCERT SERIES 2010 MARTIN SNELL (BASS) SONG RECITAL 19.30
St. Mary’s Church, Church Lane, Prestwich
Hailing from New Zealand, Martin Snell has sung opera from Wellington and Taiwan to Basle and the illustrious Wagner Festival in Bayreuth, Germany. This evening,
accompanied at the piano by Philip White (chorus master at the Royal Opera, Copenhagen) presents a recital of Duparc, Wolf and Finzi. Entry £5 (under 18s free)
0798 009 2311 0161 773 6320 white548@btinternet.com orwww.stmarysprestwich.zoomshare.com

2 JUNE SAPHIRE BLUE LIGHT JAZZ BAND 20.00
Church Inn, Church Lane
For more information Phone: 0161 798 6727.

3 JUNE A MaD EVENING in association with FC United of Manchester 19.30 start
The Longfield Suite
Moston Active Drama present films from ‘Angels with Manky Faces’, followed by a preview of their forthcoming play, ‘Thai Brides and Teacakes’. Plus author Andrew Davies, discusses his best-selling book, ‘The Gangs of Manchester’.
Entry £2. Phone: 0161 253 7227 for information.

5 JUNE PRESTWICH CRICKET TENNIS AND BOWLING CLUB OPEN DAY 12.00 - 18.00
Prestwich Cricket Club
Local Derby day when the Cricket First X1 play rival neighbours Cheetham Hill. New club facilities include a re-modelled clubhouse, new changing rooms and 3 new floodlit tennis courts. Free entrance, inc. BBQ and a chance to try out the Bowling Green and Tennis Courts. Children particularly welcome.
find us at www.pctbc.com

5 JUNE FAMILY FUN-PACKED EXTRAVAGANZA 12 noon – 17.00
Creative Living Centre (Behind TGI Friday’s), Bury New Road
Come and enjoy our fund-raising extravaganza, with plenty of fun for all the family – face painting, pampering treatments, tombola, children’s art competition, Beat the Goalie, Roll a Penny, Name the Teddy, refreshments and much more. All money raised goes to the Centre.
Tel: 0161 772 3524 for further details.

5 JUNE COME DANCING WITH GIBBONS DANCE 19.30 – 23.30
The Longfield Suite
Gibbons Dance presents Come Dancing with a demo by the Dance with Passion Latin Formation Team. Plus enjoy a night of Ballroom & Sequence dancing including Charity Raffle. Cost £6.
Phone: 0161 798 9327, 07963 488446 info@gibbonsdance.com 

It’s been great to see so many events in the first two weeks of the festival, and there’s loads more between now and the Prestwich Carnival which ends the Festival in a few weeks time. So get involved!

Rick 

I will always publish comments, so if you have something to say in response to what I write, please let me know.

Rick

Whether England win or lose though doesn’t matter a jot to the organisers of World Cup sweepstakes, and it was our one today at work. For a fiver competitors get to pick a competing nation at random. If that nation gets to the semi finals, its owner wins a prize. Coming third, second or first results in bigger prizes. So I chucked in my fiver expecting to pull out an absolute no-hoper like Honduras, New Zealand or England. Bizarrely, I yanked out Italy, defending champions and with more than a sniff of victory this time round too. If they win I get £70. A good deal, I think.

Sadly, talk of good deals evaporated this afternoon when I visited a local used car showroom to talk through an issue they’re having with a boundary fence. I always find places like that a bit intimidating, because they are the realm of oil-stained men in overalls who know manly things about machines which I should know about but don’t. My masculinity shrinks into itself as they give me disappointed glances whilst discussing cam-shafts. My knowledge of local governance and the workings of the public sector count for nothing on the cold, lonely asphalt of the car lot. I am bereft.

It gets worse if I’m ever actually buying a car. My wheeler-dealing skills are legendary for their awfulness. Thankfully car buying is only a once-every-few-years activity, but then so is root canal surgery, and both are equally painful for me. I once agreed to a car salesman’s offer so swiftlly that he actually told me to relax and then offered me a discount himself.

Such gargantuan failings in the art of negotiation have obviously not come to the attention of the Bury Labour Party, who have once again accused us Bury Lib Dems of dealing with the local Conservatives over who runs the Town Hall. In today’s Bury Times, Bury Labour Leader Cllr Mike Connolly accuses the Lib Dems of doing a deal with the Conservatives to create what he originally and hilariously terms a “Con Dem Coalition.” Let me set him and everyone else straight - there is no coalition.

We have made it clear that the Lib Dems in Bury are in opposition to the ruling Conservatives, just as Labour are. This was the case and remains so. Labour are telling lies in suggesting otherwise.

If anyone doubts us over whether there’s a coaltion, consider what the Tories got from any “deal.” The answer is nothing. Any concessions to the Lib Dems would have been in return for Lib Dem support to let the Conservatives run the Council. But we didn’t support them, we abstained. And so did Labour. Labour and the Lib Dems both voted the same way! So for Labour to now turn around and accuse us of being in cahoots with the Tories locally is as silly as saying that they’re in coalition with the Tories themselves.

A coalition would see Lib Dems on the Executive running the Council. But there aren’t any. There is no coalition.

The Conservatives received no undue favour from us, so either they’ve negotiated the worst deal in the history of deals (and I include my car purchase in that) or there is no deal.

There is no coalition in Bury. We are, like Labour, in opposition. And we’ll continue to fight for Bury as a constructive opposition to the Conservatives.

Rick

The Liberal Democrats have campaigned against the introduction of ID cards since they were first announced by the previous Labour Government.

Commenting on today’s announcement, Liberal Democrat Leader and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said:

“The wasteful, bureaucratic and intrusive ID card scheme represents everything that has been wrong with government in recent years.

“By taking swift action to scrap it, we are making it clear that this government won’t sacrifice people’s liberty for the sake of Ministers’ pet projects.

“Cancelling the scheme and abolishing the National Identity Register is a major step in dismantling the surveillance state - but ID cards are just the tip of the iceberg. Today marks the start of a series of radical reforms to restore hard-won British freedoms.”

I was worried that any Lib Dem voter who leaned even remotely rightwards would desert us and vote Tory, and that any Lib Dem voter who leaned a bit leftwards would desert us and vote Labour. As I said at the time, I was doing the ironing when Mr Cameron went to Buckingham Palace. I was mournfully straightening my underpants and battling to get the creases out of various complicated female clothing items as the sweep of history swooshed over the land. As David Cameron was kissing hands with The Queen, I felt like kissing goodbye to any votes in the future.

The fear has not gone away entirely. I am still worried that come the next elections here, Bury Labour (never knowingly under-angered) will dance themselves dizzy in disgust that they’re no longer in Downing Street, and blame us for it. Since my name’s on the ballot paper next time round, it is particularly concerning.

Labour are wrong of course. The public chucked them out of office for lots of reasons, and we did the only logical thing which was to talk to the largest party and get as many of our policies into a government plan as we could.

I am relieved that early elections since that fateful decision seem to lay waste to my fears and point to a brighter future.

For instance, the Liberal Democrats last night won all three seats in Camden Council’s delayed Haverstock West election, beating Labour and improving their share of the vote by six percent. Hurrah for that, I say. If ever Labour had the chance to mop up the dis-affected, this was it. Sadly for them and happily for me, it looks like there weren’t any.

Commenting on the result, Liberal Democrat Party President, Ros Scott said:

“This is a fantastic result and is testament to the hard work and dedication of our Liberal Democrat councillors in Haverstock.

“Labour was crowing that it would mop up votes from Lib Dem supporters who are supposedly upset about the Coalition Government. This result, in the Milibands’ old backyard in the heart of Labour territory, shows that was just arrogant nonsense.”

Hopefully this is just the start, and we’ll be rewarded for stepping up to firm up government when the country needed it, and toning down the Tories with dozens and dozens of policies which make Britain a fairer and more liberal place.

Rick

The coalition’s priorities include many Lib Dem ideas which we would not have been able to see happen without this coalition agreement. These ideas also represent Conservative concessions which also wouldn’t have been made if we’d let them form a minority administration.

Labour don’t seem to like it, but they had the chance to work to form a coalition with either of the other two parties, and they failed.

The speech today included plans to make the tax and benefits system fairer and simpler, including a significant increase in the personal allowance and an ambition to increase it to £10,000. As well as this, there were 22 other Lib Dem policies which went more or less straight our of our manifesto and, coalition longevity permitting, onto the statute book. Highlights include:
• Restoring the earnings link to pensions
• Greater freedoms for teachers over the curriculum
• Measures to improve energy efficiency in homes and businesses
• Support for low carbon energy production
• Financial services regulation to learn the lessons of the financial crisis
• Fixed-term parliaments of five years
• A referendum on electoral reform
• The right to sack MPs guilty of serious misconduct
• Reform of party funding
• Moving towards a wholly or partly elected House of Lords, elected by proportional representation
• A bill to restore freedoms and civil liberties, through the abolition of identity cards and repeal of unnecessary laws
• Giving greater powers to councils and giving neighbourhoods and communities more control over planning and housing decisions
• Ending child detention
• Fair compensation for Equitable Life victims
• Enabling the creation of a national high-speed rail network
• Flexible working and promotion of equal pay
• Strengthening the voices of patients and the role of doctors in the NHS
• A commission on long-term reform of social care
• Cutting quangos and government bureaucracy

A good day for us, and hopefully the start of many more.

Rick

Unfortunately, Labour’s shadow Chancellor Alistair Darling (the man who was the actual Chancellor when the economy disappeared down the tube) has not grasped this important concept yet. His response to the cuts was to say that “these cuts will seriously affect support for business, and mean less jobs for young people.” He’s not only wrong, but also completely wrong-headed. Firstly, the CBI completely disagree with him, saying that the cuts are an “encouraging” sign of what the government intends to do. Others coming out in favour are the British Retail Consortium and the National Housing Federation who welcome additional support for social housing. There is also more money being set aside for job training, which is a specific Lib Dem proposal agreed to by the Tories.

More importantly than who supports the cuts and who doesn’t though, is the principle which Mr Darling evidently fails to grasp. His Labour government got us into this mess, running up a record deficit. He knows that cuts are needed, and admitted that they’d have to be painful during an election campaign where all the party leaders said the same. Now that the pain has started to come, he criticises without offering alternative suggestions. That’s not really on.

The problems with the Euro and the advice from the Bank of England have told us that some reduction of the deficit is needed right now. We wanted to wait, but the situation has changed. It’s a shame that Labour can’t join in trying to find where cuts need to come. Their carping from the sidelines might be good at getting funds from the Union backers, but isn’t good for the country.

Rick

It’s also good news because the Prestwich Festival continues this weekend, with a Farmers’ Market on Sunday in the Longfield Centre. There’ll be lots of unusual foodstuffs to purchase, at prices laughably absurd in this new age of austerity we’re entering. But for some reason when it’s badged as “local farm produce” it doesn’t seem so wrong to spend £4 on a victoria sponge.

Also present amidst the farmers will be a face painter, and the disconcertingly-named “Squeaky the Clown.” So whilst mummy and daddy argue over whether to buy the ostrich burgers or the goat curry, the kids are alright. Unless they’re scared of clowns.

The Farmer’s Market isn’t the only event taking place over the weekend. On Saturday there’s a barn dance at St George’s Church in Simister from 17.30. There’s also a hot pot supper included in the price, so I hope it’s cooled down a bit by then. 

On Sunday there’s a car boot sale in St Mary’s Park, for anyone searching for a car boot. There’s also a free performance from the Besses o’ th’ Barn Brass Band in the flower park from 14.00.

Full details of the weekend programme, plus everything else about Prestwich festival, can be found here.

It’s also the Bury Lib Dem post-election thank-you extravaganza-rama-palooza this weekend, when we say thanks to the very many people who helped out in the recent elections. Loads of people chipped in, from delivering leaflets throughout the campaign, to cooking breakfast for us all on polling day. Your help was invaluable, so Sunday afternoon will be a fun way of saying thanks.

I hope everyone has a lovely weekend.

Rick

There are some exciting proposals in there, and you can download the whole document to take a read for yourself here. I have had a brief look through it (I am at work so haven’t had a proper chance yet!) and although there are things in there I’m not tremendously keen on, there is a huge amount that is in common with the Lib Dem manifesto. Given that 60% or so of people voted for either the Lib Dems or Conservatives in the General Election a fortnight ago, I think the majority of people in the country will be pleased with this programme for government.

For me one of the most interesting things in the document is the promise that Councils which want to return to the Committee System of governance can do so. This is hardly the sexiest thing in there, but for geeks like me it’s important. It would be a radical redistribution of power away from leading cliques within Councils and back to the entire democratically elected Council as a whole. It would be really excellent for Councils if this were to happen, and in stark contrast to the centralising, power-concentrating approach of Labour which was condemned by all sides in the Council chamber in Bury just the other day.

I will take a good look at the whole document after work, and welcome any comments from anyone about what they think.

Rick

- Abolishing Labour’s ID Card Scheme

- Abolishing Labour’s Contactpoint database

- Restrictions on DNA retention

- Removal of limits on peaceful protest

Mr Clegg also outlined plans to make good manifesto promises about recalling MPs found guilty of serious misdemeanours, ad about repealing unpopular laws which Labour introduced since 1997 and which restricted freedom without making a positive difference.

This is all part of the “new politics” espoused by the government, and although there’s not going to be much to smile about once the inevitable cuts start (because remember, as Labour’s Liam Byrne shouted back at us on the way out, “there’s no money left!”), there’s certainly a lot to smile about here.

One thing sadly missing though, from this and previous statements like it from the new government, is anything about Criminal Records Bureau checks. The glaring injustice of “soft” evidence, unproven allegations and acquittals being disclosed in perpetuity at the whim of the police is something which needs addressing quickly. I hope that the new government continues its liberal run of form and sorts this out.

Rick

Tim said “The Liberal Democrats have decided not to enter into a coalition with either party, and we remain a strong opposition on Bury Council”.

“The people of Bury have chosen the Conservatives to be the largest party on the Council. They will be forming a minority administration. We will decide on issues on an individual basis in the best interests of the people we represent and serve.” 

“Labour made it clear that they had no interest in running the Town Hall, just like they showed no interest in running the country. Maybe they want to avoid taking responsibility for tough decisions.”

“The Liberal Democrat group will continue to put the needs of Bury before politics, and will continue to be an effective opposition to the Conservatives, and make every single Liberal Democrat vote in Bury count.”

Rick
 

Bury’s Mayor this year is Cllr John Byrne. I wish him well for his year in office. He has a tough act to follow, as the outgoing Mayor Cllr Sheila Magnall was a hard-working, popular and dignified holder of the office. She also marshalled Council meetings like a communist border guard, which is what is needed to keep the egos at bay and the debates flowing. Hopefully Mayor Byrne will follow suit. Cllr Magnall left the stage as Mayor, returning a few minutes later as Deputy Mayor, as is the custom in Bury. So her merry go round of events across the borough will continue this year.

Prior to the jollity of Mayoral hokey-cokey there was the serious business of electing a Leader of the Council. This was always going to be an interesting decision, since the Council is now “hung” after the Conservatives lost their overall majority in the elections on May 6th. The Tories are still the largest party, and so it was that they proposed their Leader Cllr Bob Bibby as the Leader of the Council. We abstained as did Labour, and so Cllr Bibby is the Leader. The Lib Dems in Bury will remain in opposition to the Conservatives, despite Labour cat-calls about “deals” which are clearly false. Labour did themselves no credit whatsoever by failing to talk about alternatives to Conservative rule in Bury. They enjoy name-calling, but when it comes to stepping up and potentially replacing the Tories in control of the Council, they don’t want to know.

Cllr Bibby was the Leader last year, but now he has far more powers than before thanks to a new bit of legislation creating “Strong Leaders” for Councils. Essentially this vests huge powers in Council Leaders at the expense of other Councillors, and I am of the view that this is a huge backward step for local democracy. I’m not the only one either - there were angry voices on all sides of the chamber about the outgoing Labour government forcing this change on us and other Councils. Nobody seems to know why they’re doing it, but the quicker the Lib Dems in government get round to changing it, the better.

The Council meeting also confirmed appointments to the various committees of the Council. I am fortunate to have been appointed Chair of the new Scrutiny Commission, which will hold the Executive to account. Hopefully I can make that work, and I know there are other dedicated and capable Councillors on there with me to help make that happen.

So, it all starts again. Another Municipal Year begins, and I know that it ends with me trying to get re-elected as your Councillor. I hope that in the next twelve months I can make sure I’m worthy of your votes.

Rick

In it, Mr Laws sets out his approach to cutting the deficit. There will be £6bn of cuts this year. Although we campaigned against cuts this year in the election campaign, the situation has now changed for one crucial reason. That is that the Bank of England have said that the cuts are no longer likely to harm the recovery if they’re made this year. Given that our objection was based on the likelihood of this harm, and that this harm is now less likely, it seems prudent to start making the necessary cuts now.

In addition, whereas the Tories wanted to use all £6bn to reduce the deficit, Lib Dems wanted to use some to fund training to get people back into work and to create jobs. As part of the coalition deal, the Tories have agreed to this.

The cuts will be unpopular, of course. But remember why we need to make them. Nobody wants to make cuts, but we have to because of the awful state of our finances.

Here is the text of the letter from Mr Laws:

“My Labour predecessor, Liam Byrne, left me a note saying ‘Dear Chief Secretary, There’s no money left.’ He may claim this is joke, but sadly it is all too true.

Labour have left the nation’s finances in an utterly ruinous state and we face a colossal task ahead of us. That is why today the Chancellor and I announced the creation of the Office of Budget Responsibility as well as the date for the emergency budget in six weeks time on 22nd June.

It is also why over the next week I will be working to identify £6bn of wasteful government spending that we can save in order to start to pay down the disastrous deficit left to us by Labour.

In addition to this, every new spending commitment and pilot project signed off by Labour ministers since the turn of the year will be individually reviewed in a bid to find additional savings. This is simply due diligence by the new coalition government in relation to some of the irresponsible decisions we have inherited.

I would like to give you my personal guarantee that whilst the decisions ahead will be tough I will always put social justice as their heart. I have, and I will continue to reject any proposals which would damage key services or put at risk those on lower incomes.

This is not merely a coalition of competent accountants. The challenge we face is how to address the deficit while protecting the quality of key services, making this a fairer country and ensuring that those on the lowest incomes are protected as far as possible from the actions that are necessary.

This will not be easy. But there is more chance of it being achieved with Lib Dem presence in HM Treasury than without it.

Best wishes,

David Laws MP
Chief Secretary to the Treasury”

As someone who has worked in public services all my career, and who values them immensely, I hope that the promise of cuts with social justice comes true.

Rick

After last year’s brilliantly successful inaugural Festival, we promised another, and here it is. Between now and mid-June there’ll be a range of great community events, special offers at local businesses, and things for eveyone to enjoy. Here’s what’s coming up in the first week… 

16 MAY PRESTWICH CLOUGH DAY
12.00 - 17.00 : St. Mary’s Flower Park, Bury New Road
A fun filled afternoon for all the family from 1 yr - 90 yrs young there is something for everyone, with over 50 activities / exhibitors. Including 2 Brass bands, New Orleans Jazz Band, Morris Men, Falconry flying display, Punch & Judy, face painter and activities for children. This years Clough Day promises to be bigger than ever. More information at www.prestwichclough.co.uk

16 MAY - 20 JUNE TIME FOR TEA FESTIVAL OFFER
Time for Tea, Bury New Road Open: Tuesday - Saturday 9.30-5pm & Sunday 12-4pm
£1 for any drink on menu, upon production of this booklet.
Phone: 0161 773 3612 www.timefortearoom.co.uk

16 MAY - 20 JUNE FESTIVE SPECIAL @ BLUE BAY INDIAN RESTAURANT
Blue Bay Restaurant, 56-58 Bury Old Road, Prestwich
3 course meal from our traditional menu excluding sea food and duck served Mon-Thurs 5-7pm. Price £9.95 per person. Sunday Family Buffet served from 2-6pm only £9.95 per person / children £5.95. Bury Curry Club ‘Gold Award winner 2010’.
Phone: 0161 773 4743 or 0161 773 3657.

16 MAY - 20 JUNE PRESTWICH HOSPITAL EXHIBITION
The Heritage Museum, Prestwich Library (1st floor)
A poignant exhibition taking a look at the social history of Prestwich Hospital. A moving collection of photographs, aretefacts and personal stories taking an inside look of what was once Europe’s largest mental institution.
Phone: 0161 253 7214 for opening hours.

16 MAY TASTING EVENTS + every Fri & Sat
The Cheese Place, 35 Longfield Shopping Centre
A series of tasting events with SPECIAL OFFERS FOR YOU on cheese, bread, chutneys, jams, biscuits, cider or many other foods.
Phone: 0161 425 7975 www.thecheeseplace.co.uk

16 MAY Longfield Suite Bridal Fayre - Free Entry
The Longfield Suite, Prestwich
Over 20 stalls filled with everything you need for your big day. Goody bags and a glass of bubbly on arrival. Catwalk show at 1.30pm courtesy of Proposal bridalwear. Dance exhibition, bridalwear, Wedding cakes and much more.
Phone: Rebecca Gallacher 0161 253 7227 r.gallacher@bury.gov.uk

18 MAY OVER 50’S KEEP FIT + every Tues 10.00 – 12.00
Longfield Suite, Prestwich
Join Janet for a morning of keep fit and socalising. £2.50 with the brochure (50p off ).
Phone: 0161 253 7227 www.bury.gov.uk

18 MAY LEARN BELLY DANCE + every Tues 17.00 – 20.15
Longfield Suite, Prestwich
Special Offer: 5 classes for the price of 4. Have fun and get fit! Normally £25 for 5 classes – only £20 for the festival (that’s £4 per class), £20 (for all 5 classes).
Phone: 07780 708544 learnbellydance@yahoo.com

18 MAY THE PRESTWICH CONCERT SERIES 2010 ROYAL NORTHER COLLEGE GOSPEL CHOIR 19.30
St. Mary’s Parish Church, Church Lane £5 (under 18 free).
07980 092 311 white548@btinternet.com or www.stmarysprestwich.zoomshare.com

19 MAY TEA DANCE + every Weds 13.00 - 16.00
Longfield Suite, Prestwich
Dance plus cup of tea £2.50 on production of programme.

20 MAY LINE DANCE + every Thurs 10.00 - 12.00
Longfield Suite, Prestwich
Only £2.50 on production of programme.

20 MAY MOCK TRIAL Free Entry 19.00 - 21.30
Parkside Pub, Bury Old Road, Prestwich
If you’ve ever wondered what its like at court…without having to go to court, this is your opportunity! A mock trail and has been organised by Sedgley Councillor Alan Quinn, “I’ve asked my colleagues from Magistrates in the Community to come along and show how a trial is carried out in a Magistrates’ Court. It will last about 2-3 hrs and will be held in the Parkside pub on Bury Old Rd in Prestwich on Thursday 20th May from 7-00pm and should be a good night out. Magistrates in the Community are local Justices of the Peace who give up their time to show the public the workings of local courts.
Phone CLLR ALAN QUINN on 798-8209 for information or email: nochinquinn@aol.com

21 MAY AEROBIC STREET DANCE WITH JO + every Fri 19.15 - 20.15
Longfield Suite, Prestwich
If you’re aged 13 and upwards try Aerobic street dance.
Phone Jo on 07968 762 205 for information.

21 MAY KARAOKE OR DISCO NIGHT + every Fri 20.00 - midnight
The Farmers Arms, Simister Lane
It’s Festival time at the Farmers Arms, Friday nights either karaoke or disco, and Saturday night live music
Check at the Farmers Arms or phone 0161 773 4623.

22 MAY ST GEORGES CHURCH SIMISTER BARN DANCE 17.30 - 23.30
Lady Wilton Hall, Simister
Barn dance and hotpot supper (admission by ticket only ) Entrance fee £8, concessionary £5.
Contact: 07927 301 554 (after 6-00pm only) www.stmargaretschurch.net

22 MAY LIVE MUSIC FROM A RANGE OF TALENTED ARTISTS + every Sat 21.00 - midnight
The Farmers Arms, Simister Lane
It’s Festival time at the Farmers Arms, Friday nights either karaoke or disco, and Saturday night live music
C heck at the Farmers Arms or Phone: Michael on 0161 773 4623.

But the more I think about it, the happier I get. For one thing, if we weren’t in the coalition at all, there’d be none of our policies in there, and no influence either. And of course we’d have shirked our responsibilities to the country, as Labour did by refusing to compromise on a deal. But really, the coalition agreement  has loads of things in it that as a Lib Dem I am really pleased about. Obviously it’s not perfect because the Tories want to do some things I don’t like, but it’s a heck of a lot better than nothing, for people who voted for us at the election and would have got nothing had we stayed out.

The policy agreement for the new Government is full of Liberal Democrat policies. It is a real chance to put into action the ideas that we have campaigned for.

For instance…

A Fair Start for Children

·        Introduce a Pupil Premium to give all children a fair start. This was the key plank of our education policy, and will make a massive difference to the lives of children from poorer families.

Fairer taxes and Economic Reform

• A substantial increase in the personal allowance from April 2011 with a longer term policy objective of further increasing the personal allowance to £10,000, making further real terms steps each year towards this objective. The £10,000 rate was the key plank of our tax plan, and although it’s been watered down, we’ll be making big strides towards it.
• Reform of the banking system, ensuring a flow of lending to businesses and a Banking Levy. An independent commission on separating retail and investment banking.
• Capital Gains Tax reform to increase the amount of tax the more well-off people pay on their capital gains.

Fair Politics

• Fixed-term parliaments and a referendum on electoral reform for the House of Commons. Fair enough it’s not PR, but this was scuppered by every party but our own! We’ve made real progress getting a referendum on ending the discredited and unfair FPTP system.
• A power of recall, allowing voters to force a by-election where an MP was found to have engaged in serious wrongdoing.
• A wholly or mainly elected House of Lords on the basis of proportional representation.
• Giving Parliament control of its own agenda so that all bills are properly debated.
• Enacting the Calman Commission proposals and a referendum on further Welsh devolution.
• A statutory register of lobbyists.
• A limit on political donations and reform of party funding in order to remove big money from politics.
• Radical devolution of power and greater financial autonomy to local government and community groups. This could mean massive change and real power for Councils, something I personally have been campaigning for for ages.

A fair and sustainable future

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

Pensions

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

Civil Liberties

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

These are huge steps towards a more Lib Dem Britain, and ones we just wouldn’t have been able to take without making the incredibly difficult call on a coalition. At the same time, we can play a part in government in tackling the deficit, rather than helping to create it and then shirking responsibility for dealing with it, as Labour have done.

A lot of people will look at this list and will be glad they voted Lib Dem, because in very many policy areas indeed, that’s exactly what they’ve now got in government.

Rick

So I guess the best thing to do is read all about it!

Here is the full text of the agreement between the Lib Dems and Tories to form their coalition, or for a summary you can click here.

Obviously there are things in there I really like, and there are things I’m a bit less keen on. Anyone from any party who says anything different about any set of policies, including their own party manifesto, is probably telling lies. I know that there were bits of the Lib Dem manifesto I wasn’t too keen on, but I was willing to put that to one side so that we could move forward in a more positive direction overall. Hopefully we can do the same with this.

I’d love to hear any comments you might have.

Rick

This will include:

Sadly for me there’s no mention of the Criminal Records Bureau. Only last night, as Gordon Brown was leaving Downing Street, a man rang me to say how his life is ruined by a false allegation appearing time and again on his CRB form, preventing him from getting a job.

What this list of pledges does do though is indicate the new government’s commitment to civil liberties, and our freedoms as citizens of this country. I hope it’s the first of many positive moves that the government can make to improve our nation.

Rick

I was ironing a t-shirt yesterday whilst David Cameron was kissing hands with The Queen. I paused as I felt the hand of history passing over the nation. I won’t ever be able to wear that ruined t-shirt again. There’s a bloody big burn mark on it now.

When I stood last week to be a Liberal Democrat MP, that’s what I wanted to be. I wanted a Lib Dem government to bring our manifesto to life because I thought that it would be best for the country. Labour, Conservative and all the other candidates wanted the same for their own manifestos, I’m sure.

The public voted none of us into absolute power. They said clearly that no manifesto was quite right, and that no party was fit to govern alone. Regardless of the electoral system, regardless of the outcome of negotiations, the country wanted a coalition, and that’s what we’ve got.

The Conservatives came first, Labour second and the Lib Dems third. Since Labour and the Conservatives will never put their tribal differences to one side for the good of the country, it was up to us to negotiate to try and find enough common ground with one side or the other to form the stable government we need. As promised, we started with the party with the biggest mandate first. No matter how that made us feel, it was the right thing to do.

Negotiations were never going to make us feel great. There were only going to be two outcomes. Either a failure, which would have led to a weak government, another election, and the end to the hopes of so many that collaboration could trump party self-interest. Or a coalition of compromise, having to stomach policies we oppose so that we can have a go at implementing ones we support. Regardless of who we ended up in coalition with, it was never going to be comfortable. But sometimes doing the right thing for the country isn’t the easy thing for the party or the people in it.

I have never voted Conservative, and I joined the Lib Dems from Labour. I believe in the same things I did last week when I ran for Parliament as a Lib Dem. I hope and believe that my colleagues throughout the party do as well. But we have a shared agenda with the Conservatives to make the country better, and in taking that on and trying to give the country stable government we have taken the massive political risks that Labour would not. I am absolutely sure that  Labour will try to kill us for entering this coalition. But they have no divine right to govern, nobody does. The Conservatives came top in the election. Because of this it was our duty to form a government with them if their policies and ours could align in a workable way.

There’ll be some things we really like, and some things we really don’t. I don’t know how it’s going to pan out, but we need a strong government, and I hope we have one. I am pleased that my party has a chance to make the country a better place. It will certainly be a more liberal one.

Rick

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fair taxes.

A fair start in life for every child.

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

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

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

The Council as a whole will look different from now on. The Conservatives did have a small overall majority, but Labour made some significant gains and the situation is now a hung Council. The Conservatives have 23 seats, Labour 20 and the Lib Dems 8. The next week or so will see some interesting discussions about what will happen at the Town Hall.

My thanks to everyone who supported us in the local election campaign. Although we lost a seat, it was an incredibly challenging campaign, and I’m proud of what we achieved.

My thoughts now turn to the next local elections in May 2011, because my four year turn is up then and I will need your votes again if I am to carry on being a local Councillor.

But I am taking the weekend off first, because it’s been a hard few weeks! 

David Nuttall (Con) 18,070

Maryam Khan (Lab) 15,827

Richard Baum (Lib Dem) 7,645

My congratulations to David, and commiserations to Maryam. I have tremendously enjoyed the campaign, and am privileged to have met so many lovely people across Bury over the last few weeks. Whilst I’m obviously disappointed to come third, we’ve picked up over a thousand votes since last time, and seen our share of the vote increase by 3%. On what is a mixed night for the party across the country, that’s not a bad result at all.

Thanks to everyone who supported me.

Rick

My immense thanks to everyone I’ve met and spoken to over the last few weeks. It’s been a blast. I love this town, have been lucky to grow up in it, and come back to live in it. It has everything going for it, and no matter who is elected our new MP, there will be a bright future for Bury which I hope to share.  

Who knows what the result will be tomorrow, but you’ll hear it here first (unless you have access to TV, radio or newspapers). In the meantime, all I can say is thanks, and get out and vote. This really matters, so use your voice and make the right choice.

Now let’s do it!

Rick 

Bury Council really is on a knife-edge, with the Conservatives having the tiniest overall majority. So your vote can really make a difference.

Since coming to power in Bury, the Conservatives have put up Council Tax above inflation EVERY year (despite explicitly promising not to). They have restricted your right to ask questions at meetings, and have imposed parking charges in Prestwich. They have reduced the power of Local Area Partnerships, failed to kickstart regeneration of Prestwich or Radcliffe, and refused to sign up to the 10:10 climate change pledge.

Labour meanwhile, enthusiastically backed congestion charging, and tried to close Prestwich Arts

I am a Bury councillor in St Mary’s ward in Prestwich. Our candidate is Donal O’Hanlon, who is seeking re-election after 4 years serving the area. In that time he has overseen the creation of a masterplan for regeneration, supported residents for better road safety, proposed lower Council Tax, improved community facilities and stood up for the area at the Town Hall. I will be casting my vote for Donal on Thursday, and I am asking you to do the same, or for the Lib Dem candidate in your ward.

Remember, the local elections are different to the General Election. Even if you don’t want to vote Lib Dem nationally, the Council is on a knife-edge and we can make Bury a better place.

Rick

I have heard about this before, when someone close to the person I defeated to become a Councillor told me that it was the only reason I won.

Aardvark theorists propose that the candidate with the first name alphabetically has an advantage because his/her name appears at the top of the ballot paper. Thus people who are unsure of who to vote for will be naturally drawn to them, and stick a cross in their box.

I have not studied biology beyond the rudimentary (I got my fallopian tubes and my umbilical cord mixed up in the GCSE exam), nor have I studied anthropology at all. But if it were true that elections were swayed in any way by the alphabet, I would give up this whole sorry charade and hide under my duvet until I died.

I can accept that there are people who won’t vote. I can also accept that there are people who simply can’t stomach not voting, and will cast a vote come what may because that’s how to function in a democracy. But proponents of the Aardvark theory actually believe that there are people in this country who exist between those two plains – civic minded enough to march to the polling station, but so devoid of thought that they would actually freeze when in the booth and find no solution other than to stick a cross in the first name they came to.

I’ll take every vote I can get, but that’s just ridiculous. Surely there are no such people.

This theory would though, give the first real reason why America elected George W. Bush President twice. Gore and Kerry were close, but where was that famous Democrat Aaron Aaronson when we needed him?

Rick

Thankfully, there’s Charlie Brooker and David Mitchell in The Guardian to calm me down and remind me that amidst their misanthropic, world-weary responses to the unfathomable whirrings of the crazy campaign is probably more actual truth than in the myriad of worthy proper-news columnists I also feel I should read.

I am taking some time off campaigning today because as well as all this I have a full time job. I have taken the next few days as annual leave, but not today, which means the pile of leaflets which I woke up to this morning will not have shrunk by tonight (unless I get burgled…). Nothing beats the feeling of knocking off at 5 o’clock after a hard day’s graft knowing that you’re waited for at home by a massive pile of leaflets.

My Bury North opponents make a bit of a play of dedicating their lives to the constituency. One in particular has said on every public occasion we’ve spoken together that her commitment to Bury North is exemplified by her having given up work to fight the good fight. Believe me when I tell you, nothing would have pleased me more than to have spent the last two months convincing people constituency-wide that I am the man for the job. I would have loved to go to every community meeting, focus group, coffee morning and village fete around. But sadly I have a mortgage to pay like most other people, so I have to come to work.

Anyhow, today’s the last day I’m off the campaign trail. I’ll be back on it at teatime as we enter the final stages, and I won’t hop off it until the declaration on Friday morning. And who knows where I’ll hop to then?

Bed, I suspect.

Rick

The analysis reveals that:

• The Inheritance Tax pledge would cost £6bn over the course of the next Parliament
• It is aimed at the wealthiest 0.8% of estates in the UK
• Every year, 3,000 of the wealthiest estates in the country would each benefit by almost £250,000

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Shadow Chancellor Vince Cable said:

“At a time when the gap between the richest and poorest is so great, it beggars belief that David Cameron wants to give the wealthiest estates a £6bn give away.

“The Tories are showing where their priorities really lie.

“This tax pledge is grossly unfair, only helps the wealthiest households and costs £6bn at a time when the public finances are in a perilous state.

“A vote for David Cameron is not one for fairness and change. It’s a vote for more of the same.

“Only the Liberal Democrats are fully committed to creating a fair tax system.  We are the only party that stands for fairness and not division.”

Beyond the obvious down-side to this activity (the fact that it dominates my long weekend the way fun and frolics do for normal people) is that it’s playing merry hell with my hands. Don’t get me wrong, I am not one of these Metrosexual blokes who dabbles in skin balm and moisturiser. In fact, there was a time when I laboured under the misapprehension that a Metrosexual was someone who fancied trams. But after days and days of skin-on-ink contact, my hands feel like they’ve got a Teflon coating. I wonder if, by election day, I’ll be able to fry an egg on them with minimal fuss. It’ll be some consolation if the result mirrors history and I come third.

It would be though, one of several good things to come from constant leafleting. Fitness is one, as my pavement pounding does wonders for my waistline. Another is that I get to meet all sorts of cats. Today I saw an elderly feline with a wispy grey beard, who seemed very curious about my Focuses. I also saw a four-legged twin to my own three-legged cat Mac. It’s a shame he lives miles away, I’m sure the two of them would get along like a house on fire. The cats are a welcome antidote to the dogs, several of which rip the Focuses from my hands as my vulnerable digits penetrate letter boxes briefly, imperiling themselves at the mercy of canine teeth. I am lucky to have remained unbitten so far this year, but it is surely only a matter of time.

Tomorrow I am back in work, perhaps for a bit of a rest, although certainly for the last time prior to polling day. Then it’s back out with my leaflets. If you see the odd sight of a man wearing gloves on s warm spring evening, you’ll know it’s due to skincare, not cold.

Rick 

After David Chaytor’s alleged expenses crimes, and after a lacklustre campaign from Labour, it was always going to be a tall order for the party to win with an inexperienced out-of-towner as its candidate. Now though, after Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg’s performance in the three debates, after the Lib Dems picked up the backing of two major national newspapers, and after a series of local debates, we have emerged as the only serious way to stop the Conservatives. And now the odds reflect that.

So on Thursday Bury North has a choice - a Conservative MP who will slash public services in favour of tax cuts for millionaires, or the Liberal Democrats who promise fair taxes, a fair start for children, and real political refore. And we’ve got it costed for everyone to see, right there in our manifesto. I am the Lib Dem candidate, already a serving Bury Councillor and a Bury person my whole life. I am not a serial election candidate like the Tory candidate (fighting his fourth general election in his third constituency), and my party will deliver the change that the Tories promise but won’t.

It’s a two horse race now. If you want real change and real fairness, vote Liberal Democrat in Bury North on Thursday.

Rick 

Bizarrely, the defeat which the serial-bottlers were pre-destined to sleepwalk into didn’t happen, and the team actually won, led from the middle by 57 year old Patrick Vieira, a man who prior to today appeared to have only joined City to collect his weekly wage and lumber about the centre circle like a man made of concrete wearing a pair of iron shoes.  

The win sets up a crunch showdown against Spurs on Wednesday night which will more or less determine which of the two teams reaches the Champions League, and which doesn’t. That game comes the night before the election, when my other team are also within touching distance of triumphs undreamed of until just recently.

All this success is odd, and it’s affected my political party as well as my football team. 18 months ago I was watching a football team owned by a dodgy Thai politician exiled from his homeland with none of his cash, and was campaigning for a political party met on the doostep with a mixture of unfamiliarity and sympathy. Now, City are the richest football club in the world, owned by the rulers of a country where money flows from the taps, and the Lib Dems have seen their poll ratings almost double to make them serious contenders.

City are football’s perennial under-achievers, and the Lib Dems hold the same unwanted title in politics. The 27 hours between kick-off on Wednesday and the polls closing on Thursday will determine whether either or both can shake off the shackles. For City, Champions League football will allow the team to make the most of their owners’ billions and buy the cream of the world’s players. Failure will mean another season as also-rans. For the Lib Dems, a strong performance could mean the end forever of two-party politics in this country. For both, a status as major players that just a short time ago seemed implausible.

Both are a few days away from potential astounding change, but nothing is certain and I am petrified that both will somehow bottle it and end up crushingly defeated. City have Spurs to conquer. The Lib Dems - the Daily Express.

The comparisons are striking though. Both City and the Lib Dems have stars in their ranks who’ve come out of relative obscurity to be leading the line - in the yellow corner is Nick Clegg, emboldened by three debates and now risen to the lofty heights as at least an equal to Cameron and a much more tasty prospect than Brown. In the blue corner is Craig Bellamy, perhaps now realising his potential for the first time having spent most of his career annoying managers and fighting team mates. A year ago, who’d have put Clegg as the nation’s favourite PM wannabe, and who’d have put Bellamy on some people’s shortlist for footballer of the year? Bellamy as PM and Clegg on the left wing for City seemed just as ridiculous.

Both also have mercurial superstars, seemingly blessed with gifts beyond the mortal. Carlos Tevez, the diminutive Argentinian poached from Manchester United, dances with the football like it’s an extension of his leg. Vince Cable was the only man who predicted the economic meltdown. Nothing would scare an opposition team more than bringing on Tevez. Nothing would put the frighteners up George Osborne more than having to go ten rounds on fiscal policy with Vince.

Lib Dems have Paddy Ashdown, Man City have Patrick Vieira, both elder statesmen lending class to their respective teams’ efforts. Lib Dems have Coldplay, City have Oasis. And City have Wayne Bridge whilst the Lib Dems have Lembit Opik. Both have had interesting love lives over the years.

Both face crucial weeks, and as a regular City-watcher and a Lib Dem parliamentary candidate I have already told my heart not to expect an easy ride of things between now and the count on Thursday night. Come that hour, both could have reached the promised land. Or both could end up fifth! Either way, it’s going to be interesting.

Rick

In the very same venue last night, our three would-be Prime Ministers faced a similar, if not entirely identical, set of circumstances, as they met to debate for the last time. Would any of them take a tumble down the steps?

No, because the BBC had put up a flat stage. But that’s not the point.

I was probably more nervous last night though than I was in 2002. The debates were great, and have energised the nation, but for someone with a vested interest, the whole thing was like watching England in golden goal extra time. It was wall-climbingly, fingernail-destroyingly, nightmarishly terrifying. There was an inescapable sense of dread that something calamitous and fatal was about to occur, but just the sniff that something wonderful could happen. The political equivalent of the Gary Neville own goal didn’t happen to Nick Clegg, thankfully, but then neither did the 119^th minute Wayne Rooney 30 yard screamer. It was no wonder Lord Mandelson looked like he hadn’t slept in five years in the media room afterwards.

Even the dispassionate could get wrapped up in things. If you don’t believe me, read Charlie Brooker’s take on events. He puts it far better than I can.

Now it’s all over though, thankfully, and we can finish the campaign the way we started it (and continued with it, pausing briefly to gawp at the debates), by delivering leaflets til lour arms ache and our fingers are torn to shreds on the various letterbox configurations that exist. There are 20,000 to deliver apparently, a figure which is nauseatingly large and looms even larger than normal given that I have to take time out to go and watch City 0-2 Villa (Fulop OG, Vieira OG) on Saturday. I’m sure we’ll get it done though, especially with the help of the debate-watchers who’ve been impressed enough with Mr Clegg to come out and give us a hand (of whom there are lots).

So, in the words of sports commentators everywhere, and yoga teachers too I suppose, “we’re into the final stretch now.” A week to go to change  Britain. Nick Clegg’s started it, now we have to finish it. Game on.

Rick

Unfortunately, despite Bury North having 7 people wanting to be its MP, only two could be bothered to turn up - me and the gentleman from the Pirate Party. Labour at least sent a replacement, in the shape of one of their Bolton candidates. The Conservatives demonstrated their warmth for local people by sending nobody. Their soap box stood forlorn and empty.

It wasn’t the best attended event I’ve been to, and not just from the candidates. I suppose talking at politicians on a wet Thursday afternoon isn’t a massive draw for most people, and so it was proved when the significant majority of passers-by continued to pass by and weren’t lured to the debate by the sight of the three of us shivering atop our boxes in the drizzle.

There were a few dozen hardy souls though, who deserve thanks for turning out (unlike most of their candidates!) and even more for staying. The questions were varied, from youth centres in Ramsbottom to Trident. Thankfully nobody suggested removing the former by using the latter, but we had a nice chat all the same.  There were also more questions on issues that have come to dominate the campaign, from public spending to yesterday’s “Bigot-gate” incident.

My view about the “bigot” thing is that Mr Brown was wrong to be duplicitous, and wrong to duck the issue. The reaction of the press though has been utterly ludicrous. If we all had microphones stuck to our lapels all day, we’d all be in trouble. Who in the world hasn’t been a bit two faced at times? I certainly have. The press want the PM to be a normal person, but as soon as the veneer comes off and Gordon Brown does something normal, it’s as if he’s punched The Queen. I’m sorry for the lady he insulted, because she didn’t deserve it and she didn’t seem bigoted to me, but he shouldn’t be slaughtered over it. 

Once we’d done the bigot thing, we got on to the clearly-less-important matter of the economy. It’s clear that some candidates still aren’t being open about cuts. The Labour representative said that a Labour government wouldn’t make cuts to health, education or the police. Well if that’s true it means every other budget in the government will be slashed back to the stone age. Good job it’s not true then, although candidates shouldn’t be lying to voters or ignorant of the facts. Not sure which this one was.

Bury North is clearly attracting significant attention. As well as Indy journalists, there were reps from El Pais  and Le Figaro there amongst others. It’s a shame that the two most likely future MPs couldn’t join us. Hopefully I get points for showing up, if not the 15,000 votes I need to win the seat!

Thanks to the Independent for organising, and to all the people who came down, especially the ones I got to meet in person.

Rick

Speaking today at Oxford Brookes University, Nick Clegg said:

“One thing I will not do, and Labour and the Conservatives are doing, is try to fool you into thinking that you can fill in one of the biggest black holes in our public finances in generations through phantom, fantasy ‘efficiency savings’.

“It’s an insult to your intelligence that David Cameron and Gordon Brown pretend that you can fill a structural deficit the size of which we haven’t seen since the Second World War through savings on paperclips in Whitehall.

“It’s a nonsense, it’s a joke, they’re treating you like fools.

“So when you next hear David Cameron and Gordon Brown talking about billions and billions of so-called efficiency savings, don’t believe a word of it.

“That’s why Vince Cable, myself and the rest of the Liberal Democrats took the decision to spell out in our manifesto item by item, saving by saving, how we would find £15bn of cuts.

“£5bn will go towards our priorities. The rest, £10bn, is a serious down payment to deal with this structural deficit.”

A few years ago I graduated with a debt of about £12,000. This was made up of three years worth of tuition fees at £1,000 per year, and three years of loans which paid for food and accommodation and which totalled about £9,000. I supplemented this with a part time job to make ends meet whilst I studied.

The loans were provided by the Student Loans Company, which charges fairly low interest rates and which extracts the money from my pay every month, at rates dependent on how much I earn. Presently they take about £200 per month.

Eight years after graduating, I have still got half my original debt outstanding.

I don’t have a problem paying it back, because I borrowed it. But I have a problem in having had to borrow it in the first place. I simply don’t think it’s right that higher education access depends on taking out massive loans which have a huge material impact on earnings for decades afterwards. It’s no wonder young people can’t find deposits for their first home, or start pension savings in their 20s and 30s. They can’t afford to because they’re paying off student debts. It’s just not right, and it’s going to get worse.

We predict that students will be saddled with debts as high as £44,000 in the next five years under Labour and Conservative plans to raise tuition fees after the election. Only the Liberal Democrats are committed to scrapping tuition fees and opposing any attempt to raise them. We will phase out tuition fees over six years, starting by immediately scrapping final year fees for students doing their first degree.

Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg said: “Labour and the Conservatives have been trying to keep tuition fees out of this election campaign. It’s because they don’t want to come clean with you about what they’re planning. Despite the huge financial strain fees already place on

“The Liberal Democrats are different. Not only will we oppose any raising of the cap, we will scrap tuition fees for good, including for part-time students. We can’t do it overnight, but we can start straight away with students in their final year - that way means anyone at university this autumn will have their debt cut by at least £3,000. Students can make the difference in countless seats in this election. Use your vote to block those unfair tuition fees and get them scrapped once and for all.” 

We predict that the cap would rise with inflation, totaling £22,567 for a student at university between 2012 and 2015. Maintenance loans are a maximum £4,950 for non-London students and £6,928 in London, with slightly lower rates for final year students. Working from Budget inflation estimates, this is predicted to rise to be a total maximum of £15,556 for a student at university between 2012 and 2015, or 21,654 for a student in

I don’t think it’s right that students could graduate with a lifetime of debts. We are the only party who wants to change this.

Rick

Commenting on David Cameron’s description of Proportional Representation as a ‘great con’, Chris Huhne said:

“David Cameron doesn’t want change at all. He’s just another old-style politician making a grab for absolute power with just one in three of the votes.

“He’s happy for your vote not to count so that he can keep his MPs in safe seats tending to their moats and duck houses instead of the people they are supposed to represent.”

Liberal Democrats would double the number of forces’ family homes refurbished each year and ensure that no service man or woman goes into harm’s way on less basic pay than a new recruit to the police force.

Action would also be taken on ensuring the Armed Forces have enough of the right kit through a Strategic Security and Defence Review, to take place shortly after the election.

Commenting, Nick Clegg said:

“The brave men and women of our Armed Forces have been left under-equipped and under-paid by Labour. The Liberal Democrats will change this.

“Gordon Brown has failed to give our troops all the kit they need to do their job. And he has failed to give them a decent wage for the work they do and a decent home to raise their kids in.

“Someone spending six months fighting half way around the world to keep us safe should not have to worry about leaving their family in a shoddy, run-down home. They should not have to worry about whether they are paid enough to provide for their loved ones.

“The Liberal Democrats will bring forces family homes up to standard in half the time the Government plans, and we will increase the salary of our lowest paid troops by £6,000. We are committed to a fair deal for our Armed Forces.

“These changes are affordable because we have proposed £15bn of cuts and savings elsewhere in government each year, including cutting waste in the Ministry of Defence.”

Forces Pay: Our proposals would bring the basic pay of the lowest paid soldiers in line with new-entrant police constables (£23,259). Pay increases will be tapered up through the lower ranks. A fully-trained Private’s pay will rise by up to £6,000. Our policy is focussed on the lowest paid personnel. In future we will continue to up-rate pay in line with recommendations from the Pay Review Body, particularly on retention measures for those in key “pinch-point” trades. Soldiers will continue to receive the additional bonuses, such as the operational allowance.

Forces’ Family Homes: We will double the number of family homes being refurbished every year until the job is done, ensuring all homes can be refurbished within 10 years.

Cutting Waste: The current structure of the MoD is inefficient and we believe savings can be found from natural wastage, as part of the Strategic Security and Defence Review. We believe that efficiencies can be found in various areas. There are 86,000 civilian staff in the MOD, almost 1 civilian for every 2 men and women in uniform. This is one of the highest civilian ratios of all NATO states.

There are 800 staff in the MOD communications and media section alone. The MOD ‘White Fleet’ of non-military vehicles costs £80m a year for 24,000 vehicles. Over 14,000 staff work in equipment procurement and support. We believe that there is significant scope for reform of these services. We believe that such has been the disastrous record of MOD procurement in recent years that there is much greater scope for closer cooperation with industry. Almost 20,000 civil servants are employed directly by the three services across the country. We believe that rationalisation of these dispersed roles would also bring savings.

The Armed Forces are also top heavy, with too many senior officers. Following the end of the Cold War the numbers of lower rank soldiers fell dramatically. But the axe did not fall so hard on the top brass. There are now more Brigadiers than there were in 1997 - 17 of them for every combat Brigade. The Navy has almost two admirals for every warship. The Armed Forces do not need so many senior officers.

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

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg said:

“This election is not like any other.

“Climate scientists tell us that the next government will be the last that can stop dangerous climate change.

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

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

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

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

“We should seize it.”

Clearly the sun has got to David Cameron, who came out against “unelected Prime Ministers” today, clearly not realising that we’ve never actually elected any of them, ever.

He said that in future any government which changes its leader during a parliamentary term should have to call an election soon afterwards to get that leader a mandate. This would be reasonable were it not for two glaring things. First, it’s incredibly hypocritical given that the last Conservative Prime Minister, John Major, came to power in precisely this way when Margaret Thatcher stepped down. He did call a general election, but not for 18 months.

Secondly though, and far more importantly, general elections aren’t to elect Prime Ministers, they’re to elect MPs. We don’t live in America and we don’t elect Presidents. As primary school children are learning up and down the land, we vote for a local MP, and the party that has more MPs than other parties gets to form the government. That party chooses its Leader, and that person is the PM (potential hung Parliaments and the rubber-stamping role of The Queen make it a tad more complicated I suppose, but that’s basically it). David Cameron either doesn’t know this, in which case he’s less politically informed than an 8 year old, or he does know it but he’s pandering to try and get the votes of people less politically informed than an 8 year old. Either way it’s bad form, I think.

I get that he might actually want to change the current system, but that too is wrong headed. By saying that a change of PM should trigger an election, he is elevating the position of PM to something its not, and relegating Parliament and the rest of the Cabinet to a place they don’t deserve. Elections should come when whole governments fall, not just when the person at the top changes. 

Thankfully my annoyance at David Cameron was abated tonight with a very enjoyable evening at the theatre. We saw “A Comedy of Errors” at the Royal Exchange. If you get the chance, go yourself. This Shakespeare fella has got some game.

Prior to that another comedy of errors was narrowly averted in the form of Manchester City’s display against Arsenal, which I had to watch. I thought I couldn’t be staggered by anything more than Mr Cameron’s earlier remarks, but then it occurred to me that Patrick “My boots are made of lead” Vieira is the third highest earning player in the Premier League. Watching him and then watching our keeper stretchered off and replaced by someone from the Faroe Islands who isn’t even their first choice almost did for me. We ground out a 0-0, but like a lengthy Cameron speech, it’s 90 minutes of my life I’m never getting back.

More leaflets tomorrow, and now my bed is calling.

Rick

Commenting on remarks made by Ken Clarke that alternatives to Trident should be considered, Edward Davey said:

“Ken Clarke’s comments have blown a gaping hole in Tory policy on Trident.

“The Conservatives have claimed that there are no alternatives to the £100bn like-for-like replacement of Trident. They have said explicitly that it should be excluded from the defence review.

“Now Ken Clarke says there is a case for exploring cheaper alternatives. On the eve of the most important defence review for a decade, the Conservatives are in total disarray on the future of the nuclear deterrent.

“David Cameron will need to make clear this evening whether he agrees with his Shadow Defence Secretary or his Shadow Business Secretary.”

Commenting on today’s GDP figures showing 0.2% growth between January and March this year, Vince Cable said:

“These figures show that the promised recovery is barely visible. There is a real danger of the UK going into a double dip recession. As people deal with their own debts and as the banks continue to strangle good British businesses by starving them of credit the recovery will remain fragile.
 
“The British economy has had a massive heart attack – it has just emerged from the intensive care unit into the recovery ward. The worst possible action is the Tory proposal to pull out the drip-feed when the patient is still in a critical condition.
 
“Not only must we tackle the deficit in a considered and rational fashion, we must also ensure that we support jobs and infrastructure as well as making sure businesses get the credit they need to drive growth in the economy.”

Last night was the second of the three televised Leaders’ debates. Leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg, debated with Gordon Brown and David Cameron about international and domestic affairs. Subjects discussed included Europe, immigration and climate change.

You can watch the opening statements from the debate here.

The text is below:

I am so proud of the values that have made our country great. Human rights. Democracy. The rule of law.

But the sad truth is that in recent years our Governments, under the two old parties, have let those values down.

We shouldn’t have sent our troops into harm’s way without the right equipment and decent pay.

We shouldn’t be facing allegations that we were complicit in torture.

We shouldn’t have invaded Iraq.

I want us to lead in the world.

I want us to lead in Europe, not just complain from the sidelines.

I want us to lead in creating a world free of nuclear weapons.

And I want us to lead on the greatest challenge we all face, climate change.

My family knows what British values really mean.

My mother was freed by British troops from a prisoner of war camp.

If we do things differently we can once again be proud of the great role we can play as a force for good in the world.

Last night I had another candidates’ debate, this one organised by Churches Together. It was another interesting evening, with plenty of good argument and hopefully lots of visible difference between the three candidates. Again it was lovely to talk to people afterwards who said I’d convinced them to vote for me and the Lib Dems. That’s at least half a dozen votes I’ve got now. Only another 19,994 and I’m home.

It was interesting to note last night that despite the predominantly Christian audience, a couple of the questions certainly didn’t echo the “Love Thy Neighbour” bit of the Bible, especially around same-sex couples. I said last night, and I’ll say again here that I found it odd that people supposedly upholding the compassionate values of the Church would be so suspicious and hostile towards gay people.

Tonight, whilst the three leaders prepare for their second debate (Nick Clegg and Gordon Brown boning up on policy, David Cameron applying his foundation), I will be out delivering letters and leaflets. That will be all over in time for me to watch said debate, during which I hope Nick will be able to comprehensively rebut some of the pretty outrageous slurs that have come his way today. It’s amazing how rattled we’ve obviously made the Daily Mail.

Don’t forget to watch it if you can - Sky News tonight.

Rick

Commenting on the IMF’s (International Monetary Fund’s) recommendations that banks and financial institutions should pay a bank levy and a further tax on profits and pay, Vince Cable said:
 
“The IMF’s report confirms what the Liberal Democrats have long been arguing – that a banking levy should be introduced.

“Many of the banks are still unwilling to acknowledge the massive debt they owe the taxpayer and that they are still underwritten by our money.

“The Liberal Democrats understand that the old way of banking simply cannot continue and this is a view shared by the IMF.

“If we are to create a stable banking system, we must ensure that taxpayers are not expected to underwrite the risks of reckless casino banking, and that pay and bonuses within banks do not reward irresponsible behaviour.”

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

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

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

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg said:

“In 1997, when New Labour was first elected, no one would have believed it would end like this.

“Labour’s bright promise of a fair society has faded away.

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

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

“With the deficit as it is, everyone knows money is tight, but this is a question of priorities.

“We have identified in our manifesto £15bn of savings, of which we will redirect just £5bn to alternate spending. It is a measure of my personal commitment and passion for education that half of that money will go into our schools.

“Our plans will raise the money spent on the million children from the poorest backgrounds to private school levels.

“Headteachers will be able to use that money on a whole range of measures to help all pupils and all schools.

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

To give every child a fair start, we will spend an extra £2.5bn a year on schools. The money will be targeted at schools taking on children who need more help, but will benefit every child in every school. The cash can be used to cut class sizes, provide one-to-one tuition, catch-up classes or in anyway the school wishes, ensuring every child gets the individual attention they need. An average primary school could cut class sizes to 20. An average secondary school could see classes of just 16.

Performance at school is closely linked to children’s background. The poorest children are only half as likely to get 5 good GCSEs as other children. Too often, the poorest children start school already struggling and fall further behind as they grow older.

Schools taking disadvantaged children aren’t getting the money they need to cut class sizes and provide them with extra support. The existing methods for distributing deprivation related funding are confusing and inconsistent. Nearly one in three secondary school pupils eligible for free school meals attends a relatively affluent secondary school.

Area based targeting therefore misses a large proportion of the poorest pupils – including in many rural areas. There is a huge gap between poor children in different parts of the country: in Kensington and Chelsea, 59% of poor children get 5 good GCSEs, while in Rutland, it’s 14%.

The Pupil Premium would be available to the school which each disadvantaged pupil attended. It would be attached to the million children with the highest levels of disadvantage. The Pupil Premium would be set nationally and it would top up a national per pupil base funding figure. It will raise the poorest children’s school funding to private school levels, with the average school receiving around £2500 extra for every child entitled to free school meals on their roll. Head teachers would be free to spend the money as they see fit, to raise standards in their school.

This policy costs £2.5bn a year, and will be introduced in the second year of the Parliament after our jobs stimulus package, paid for from savings in government such as our proposed reforms to tax credits (which will save up to £1.5bn) and administrative savings in the Department for Education and quangos (which saves up to an additional £1bn).

It’s my sister’s old school, which means that memories of it mainly revolve around teenage awkwardness and the odd site of strange mythical creatures called “girls” which she would occasionally bring into my house in time for my return from my own boys school.

Thankfully I am now familiar with females on a social level, although I’m not entirely over the awkwardness which still makes me shrink into corners at parties.

I do need to get over it today though, as I’m expecting great things from an audience big on issues and small on the type of tact you learn as an adult. I have no idea what they’ll ask us, but I think it will stray beyond the comfort zone of tuition fees and SATs. In my experience, younger people interested in politics are more passionate and committed than virtually any other group, so I’m expecting some fireworks today.

The whole school will be there, including some of the older girls who I suspect will be able to vote in the coming election. Even the younger ones have a mock election to think about, and I have been speaking to Rosie the Lib Dem candidate via email this week. She may have a better chance of winning than I do…

I’ll let you know how it goes.

Rick

The plans include:

• Breaking up the banks and a Banking Levy
• Getting the banks lending
• Local Enterprise Funds
• Regional Stock Exchanges
• Supporting mutuals

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg said:

“At the heart of our plans for economic change is a simple insight: we need to devolve and disperse economic power, particularly in the banking sector.

“Most people, except perhaps Gordon Brown, now recognise that too much centralisation in politics has led to wasteful bureaucratic public services and a command-and-control state that leeches power away from people.

“I believe the same analysis can be made of our economy.

“Power has been too concentrated in a few super-banks.

“The building societies and regional banks that used to be the bedrock of families’ and small businesses’ access to credit have been swallowed up.

“And accessing equity investment, so you don’t have to rely on loans to grow your business, can be almost impossible unless you’re already big enough to cope with the burdens of listing on a stock exchange in London.

“Trying to grow businesses without money is like trying to grow plants without soil.

“We will create a totally different financial system; a completely different ecology of banking. More mutuals; a Post Office Bank; credit unions; Regional Stock Exchanges; Local Enterprise Funds to attract venture capital into small businesses.

“And for the banks: fundamental change. We will break them up and break them down.

“To re-root our banks in the communities they serve by making them, quite simply, smaller.

“And to protect people’s everyday savings from being used to fuel the casino culture of the global financial industry by separating retail and investment banking for good.

“Under the Liberal Democrats, the financial infrastructure of Britain will be different.

“Diverse, devolved and open, where more money is available, on reasonable terms to families and local businesses, not from distant super-banks but locally.”

We will split up the banks, to separate low risk deposit taking banking and utility banking from high risk investment banking. We appreciate that separating these banking functions is complex, and will take time. We will consult about the best way to split up these banks. However until such a time, the taxpayer will have to continue underwriting the banks. To recognise this we are proposing a new levy on bank profits at a rate of 10%.

This levy would be supplementary to corporation tax. However, unlike corporation tax, it would be payable on all profits made within the tax year, without the deduction of previous years’ losses.  Unlike windfall taxes, a banking levy of the kind we are proposing is not arbitrary as it is a direct recognition that banks have received beneficial and explicit taxpayer support without having to pay for it.

A Liberal Democrat Government will immediately set new net lending targets for both Lloyds and RBS for 2010-11, to ensure that amount of money available to British businesses increases in the next 12 months. We will make it clear that these targets are non-negotiable. If at the end of the year the Chancellor of the Exchequer judges that these lending targets have not been met, the Board of Directors of these two banking groups will be held personally responsible and will be dismissed.

This policy is part of the Liberal Democrats’ view that the priority of the nationalised banks must not be to repair their balance sheets in preparation for a swift reprivatisation but they should be solely focussed on supporting the recovery through lending to good British businesses.

We will connect local entrepreneurs with local wealth through the creation of Local Enterprise Funds (LEFs). LEFs are tax efficient investment vehicles which will invest in start-up/early stage businesses looking for equity investments of £75,000 to £150,000.  This will provide entrepreneurs with the access to the capital they need to develop and ultimately commercialise their ideas.

Entrepreneurs who successfully attract seed capital often require further development capital to continue climbing the Ladder of Enterprise.   Many such rapidly expanding SMEs will be unable to support additional bank debt and are still too small to attract private equity interest or access existing stock markets.  We will introduce a network of Regional Stock Exchanges (RSEs) to act as regional platforms, matching local investors with growing SMEs to provide cost-effective access to equity.  RSEs will make a significant long-term contribution to economic growth throughout the UK.

We believe there is a particularly important role for mutuals, social enterprises and co-operatives to play in the creation of a more balanced and mixed economy. We will:

• Give financial regulators a clear objective of maintaining a diversity of providers in the financial services industry.
• Seek to turn Northern Rock into a mutual, and investigate whether mutualisation could be applied to parts of other financial institutions owned by the government.
• Divide ownership of the Royal Mail between an employee trust and the government, with the remaining 49% being sold to create funds for investment. To give both Royal Mail and post offices a long term future, we would separate Post Office limited and retain it in full public ownership.
• Pass a new Mutuals Bill to bring the law up to date and give responsibility for mutuals to a specific minister.

It was very frustrating, and had me screaming at the TV like non-geeks must do at the X-Factor.

Now it’s all changed though, after the performance of Nick Clegg on Thursday night, which I thought was quite impressive at the time but which has since snowballed so spectacularly that I half expect him to be recommended for canonisation at any moment.

All of a sudden we’re seriously in the game. Our poll ratings are almost double what they were a week ago. The Sun/ComRes put us in the lead this morning, which is utterly remarkable and unlike anything I could ever have dreamed of. In the lead! In a poll! In a year after 1916! Man alive…

I’ve not been around that long, but having fought for a seemingly lost cause for years and feeling as excited as I do, I can only imagine what activists with decades of thankless envelope-stuffing under their belts must be thinking. This is like raising a baby and waiting for it to take its first steps, only to turn round and watch it overtake Usain Bolt. Saint Jude obviously wears a yellow rosette.

Obviously it won’t last. The polls will calm down, and even if they don’t our silly voting system means that we’re coming third in terms of seats even if we win the popular vote. It’s amused me to think that Nick Clegg talked about the possibility of a coalition with whoever has the mandate to govern. If the election was today, it might well be us!

I love how the others have reacted. David Cameron has lurched to the right, almost visibly yanked there. He’s hit us on immigration, despite Boris Johnson backing our plan for an amnesty and despite the alternative seeming to be to spend untold billions rounding up people pretty good at hiding. He’s hit us on Trident, despite top military officials agreeing with us and despite the fact that spending £100,000,000,000 on something that probably won’t stop a suicide bomber might not be the best idea. And today he’s hit us with the message that the only way to get change is to vote for the Tories. That’s not true, because we’re the real alternative, and the polls tell a different story anyway.

There’s another debate on Thursday, and I expect a rebound. David Cameron’s performance last week was OK, but you’d have thought from reading the papers since that he’d wandered on stage drunk, pulled down his pants and set fire to the podium. So long as he doesn’t actually do that this week, he’ll have met his expectations. Nick Clegg meanwhile, would have to summon down the Icelandic dust cloud into a magician’s hat to exceed his own. It’ll be a struggle to keep the momentum going, I fear.

But right now, this is spring-in-your-step exciting. My inbox has had more emails from would-be volunteers in the last five days than it’s had in the last five years. People are moving from tolerant towards visibly happy when we knock on their doors. Nobody doesn’t know who Nick Clegg is any more (we should wheel Vince Cable out in case people forget he’s one of our’s too!). And more importantly, we’re in the game now, front and centre. I don’t find myself screaming at the TV any more to get us into the story. We are the story, and the others are catching up. Long may it continue.

Rick

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

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

Difficult though it was to stay dispassionate last night, I thought Nick did fine. The whole thing was a bit stilted and I wish they’d gone a bit deeper. I wish he’d spent longer talking about policies and less about who he’d met and when he’d met them, for instance. But I think everyone fell into that trap.

Over lunch someone told me that the first polls had come up, and that the unweighted one had put the Lib Dems up 14 points at 35%! This put us only 1% below the Tories and over 10% above Labour. And yet when the seats were analysed, we’d still be the third largest party be a country mile. If ever anything demonstrated the unfairness of the voting system we have in this country, it was that.

Clearly that poll though was taken by phoning 3,000 members of the National Liberal Club, because when the weighted figures came through we went down to 24% (70-odd seats, about 12% of Parliament…). But still, that’s an almighty bump for a single day. Here’s hoping that the second debate goes as well, with a bit more substance perhaps.

I had my own version of the Leaders’ Debate this lunchtime, on BBC Radio Manchester with Andy Crane presenting a couple of hours of Maryam Khan, David Nuttall and me. It was fun, although it’s disappointing to be interrupted in the midst of de-bunking a load of Tory waffle so that they can segueway into “Careless Whisper.”

The weekend will see me take some time off tomorrow to go to the Manchester derby and see City doubtless bottle it. If that doesn’t ruin my day, the thought of approximately a billion election leaflets to deliver will accomplish that I’m sure!

I hope the weather holds and that everyone has a good weekend.

Rick

Rick

A recent review of the service which was brought to the Council’s Resource and Performance Scrutiny Commission (of which I am a member) indicated that there were staff shortages in the service. The service manager there re-iterated those concerns, and said that the service wasn’t functioning as it should.

I did some digging, and found out that this is affecting lots of children and potentially wasting upwards of a million pounds of our money.

The SEN service looks after children who have a statement of special educational need. These statements are reviewed annually. The schools carry out the SEN annual reviews. If they decide that action is needed as a result of the review (e.g. a revision to the statement such as more 1:1 supervision etc, or a revocation of the statement) then the Council takes that action.
 
Unfortunately though, this isn’t happening.

In the last three years the numbers of statements requiring action were 163 (2008), 192 (2009), 266 (2010). 611 in total. This is about 20% of the total number of statements that there are.
 
The numbers actually actioned were 36 (2008), 12 (2009), 55 (2010). 103 in total e.g. less than 17% of the total needing action.
 
The Council spends £6m per year on SEN provision. If 20% of the statements need changing, that’s over £1m each year being spent incorrectly. Some of that £1m may not need to be spent at all. And yet the Council is only actually looking at one fifth of the statements that it needs to!

But that’s not the important thing. The important thing is that over 500 kids (an entire big primary school’s worth) are potentially on the wrong statement and receiving the wrong care because the SEN team don’t have enough staff.

We should be making that investment in the staff now. For the sake of a couple of extra £30k a year staff, 500 kids get the proper care and we save £1m.

I have tried to get a comment from the Council on this. Maybe there’s a reason for it that I don’t know about. It’s been three and a half weeks since the original meeting, and there is another meeting of the same committee tonight. I requested the attendance of the Executive member and Lead Officer for this area, but both have declined to attend. That in itself is disrespectful and doesn’t treat this matter with the seriousness it deserves.

If it turns out that there is no good reason for this service failure, then it is a damning indictment of the Conservative Council’s neglect of our most vulnerable children.

Rick

Unfortunately, I won’t be watching it, because I have a Council Meeting to go to about Civic Halls. I am gutted about that.

As important as this meeting is, its scheduling could scarcely have been more irritating. Although, like David Cameron complaining this morning about a debate format he himself agreed to, I shouldn’t complain because I said “yes” to the date.

I’ll be watching rounds 2 and 3 next week and the week after. I just hope that by then one or other PM-to-be hasn’t landed or received a knock out blow. I also hope that they haven’t bored the nation to death. Quite why 76 rules of engagement are necessary when the three Bury North candidates managed a successful debate with zero rules last week is beyond me. I hope everything’s not stifled. If it is, and nobody watches the next two except people elike me who’ve already been convinced, then it’ll be a huge disappointment and a massive opportunity missed.

This will make or break us, so it’s particularly nerve-wracking. If you’ll permit me to use the type of sporting metaphor that I hope to God they all steer clear of tonight, it’s like a three way FA Cup Final between Arsenal, Chelsea and Leyton Orient. We’re the plucky underdog who may well get taught a lesson, but who could jump into the big leagues with a good performance. In Bury North, the Lib Dems are so down in terms of money and people that the only thing that could turn it is a killer performance in the debate. Nick Clegg isn’t just gunning for Number 10, he’s doing a job interview on behalf of 600 Lib Dem PPCs as well.

I wish I was watching it. I’m not quite geeky enough to be having a debate party like some people I know, but this is history and I’ll be in the Peel Room at Bury Town Hall talking about Radcliffe Civic Suite (which some might argue is also history…).

I’m hoping to catch the end of it when the meeting’s done. I’ll certainly catch the reaction. Some say 20m will watch. It’s like an England World Cup game or a Morecambe and Wise Christmas show. However it pans out, I hope people get to learn more about what we stand for. If they’re anything like me, they’ll be swayed our way.

Rick

I am 29 years old now, which is a fact so startlingly unpleasant that I could scarcely summon the will to get out of bed this morning. My mum asked what I wanted for my birthday and I told her I’d like my youth back. I was 18 about two weeks ago for God’s sake… Stop this train, I want to get off and go home again.

Anyway, enough moping. For some reason the entire nation and its election campaign doesn’t stop just because I’m depressed about time’s unstoppable power, so let’s talk politics, and in particular the manifesto we unveiled today.

We are the only party which will hard-wire fairness back into society. We will put £700 into the pockets of ordinary people by reforming the tax system. We’ll clean up politics and introduce a voting system where every vote counts. We’ll turn round the economy by making investment where it’s needed and being open about cuts. And we’ll help children by investing billions in education. Somewhere near the back we talk about giving people their carefree twenties back as well.

So often I hear two things on the doorstep (aside from the menacing growl of dogs wanting to rip my hand from my arm). The first is that the Lib Dems won’t ever get anywhere near power so there’s no point voting for them. The second is that even if they did, their policies don’t chime with what people want.

I think that now, after expenses and recession and years of spin, both of those things have changed. We’re closer to power than ever, and our policies for fairness and reform really do reflect the needs and wants of lots of people.

The Lib Dems are more popular now than ever before at a corresponding time in an election campaign. At the very least there may be a hung parliament with the Lib Dems very much involved in the next government. At the same time, for a lot of people the choice between Gordon Brown and David Cameron is about as appealing as the choice between a headache and an upset stomach. In 1997 people wanted Tony Blair as much as they were sick of the Tories. I don’t get the same feeling about the public’s appetite for David Cameron. But Vince Cable saw the economic problems coming, and has been putting forward the sensible way out of it ever since.

After expenses, what party other than ours is giving people the option of real and fundamental change? And is there another party out there giving people the big changes to tax that are needed to restore fairness. I don’t think there is. It’s up to you though, so take a look at the manifesto.

Tonight my own election campaign will continue. In between work, birthday cake-eating, and depressive introspection, I am going to an event in Bury tonight arranged by the mental health charity Rethink. Mental health is an issue I am very interested in, and I’m looking forward tonight’s event, which the other candidates will be at as well.

With all the talk about the NHS, it’s interesting to note that schizophrenia costs the NHS more than cancer and heart disease, and that the majority of people in prison have a mental illness and aren’t receiving treatment for it. Mental health often gets forgotten, so I’m glad it’s not being forgotten by the Bury North candidates.

Rick

Nick Clegg said:

“Every manifesto needs to have an idea at its heart. The basic idea that animates this manifesto is something I have always believed. I believe every single person is extraordinary.

“The tragedy is that we have a society where too many people never get to fulfil that extraordinary potential.

“My view – the liberal view – is that government’s job is to help them to do it. Not to tell people how to live their lives. But to make their choices possible, to release their potential, no matter who they are.

“The way to do that is to take power away from those who hoard it. To challenge vested interests. To break down privilege. To clear out the bottlenecks in our society that block opportunity and block progress. And so give everyone a chance to live the life they want.

“There’s a simple word for those ideas, and it’s a word this manifesto is built on: fairness.”

The five point plan will ensure the bonus system can never again encourage banks to behave in the way that led to the banking crisis.

Under the Liberal Democrats, excessive cash bonuses will come to an end, there will be no bonuses for board members and there will be no rewards for failure.

Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg said:

“I want to see fundamental reform to Britain’s banks. Only by transforming the banking industry from top to toe can we start to build a new economy.

“I make no apologies for the fact this will mean big changes in the City of London. I want to see a change as fundamental as the Big Bang of the 1980s, for the better, not the worse.

“I want to focus, today, on one particular issue: bankers’ bonuses. They have become symbolic of the culture of greed and excess that dominated the City in the build-up to this crisis. We have a five point plan to finally bring the bonus culture in banking under control.

“Liberal Democrats will ensure the bonus system can never again encourage banks to behave recklessly. Bankers must understand that after the billions pumped into the banking sector there can be no financial or moral justifications for the obscene bonuses which are still being paid out.”

The Liberal Democrats will ensure that the bonus system can never again encourage banks to behave in the way that led to the banking crisis. Ultimately our plans to break up the banks and make a more competitive banking industry will bring an end to the excess profits of the investment banking system and with it the massive bonus payouts.  However, the Liberal Democrats also have a five point plan to tackle bankers’ bonuses quickly. This is:

1. No cash bonuses – We will require all bonuses in excess of £2,500 to be paid in shares. These shares will only be redeemable after five years; it will be written into the right of entitlement of these shares that they will revert to the company if they are pledged or used as security prior to the date of their redemption.

2. No bonuses at board level – We will ensure there are no bonuses at the board level of banks. This is not to say that board directors should not be well paid, but that they should have the long term interests of a company at heart - bonus payments do not encourage this.

3. No rewards for failure – We will extend the Financial Services Act to ensure that no regulated institution which has made a loss can pay discretionary bonuses.

4. Total transparency – We will require the publication of the names of all bank staff that have salaries and bonuses that are greater than the Prime Minster’s salary (which is just under £200,000).  In addition we will require the FSA to publish its assessment of all regulated firms remuneration policy.

5. Holding directors to account – We will extend the powers of the FSA to ensure that the directors of banks are personally fined if their institution breaks the current code of practice for remuneration.