Who are the progressives?

Osborne claims the Tories are. He claims that Labour does not want to reform public services. Are these the same public services that were in disarray in the mid 1990s? Where every winter people died on trolleys in our hospitals because the NHS didn't have the capacity to treat them? This doesn't happen any more. In 1997 the dominant association with the NHS was of waiting lists. These have all but been eradicated.

Labour has reformed public services by making them more effective. Re-building hospitals, slashing waiting lists and rebuilding every school in the country is an impressive record of Labour reform.

Twibbons

Brand Republic reports that Labour now has a Twibbon - a Labour logo to appear in the corner of one's Twitter profile photo. I'll be waiting with baited breath for the weekend's opionion polls, this really could be the catalyst for a startling recovery...I'll still be adding one to my own Twitter profile.

No second jobs

I have always felt that MPs should have only one job - the one they were elected to do. I'm pleased that second jobs won't be permitted by Labour and that the Tories are following suit. It might mean that Parliament actually begins to sit at reasonable hours, making it less necessary for some MPs to have second homes.

Howard Stoate may be a good local MP, but if the same rules apply to lawyers and bankers, they should apply across the board and it is only right that he should focus on one job.

Is the government responsible for unemployment?

Last night I debated this on Richard Bacon's Five Live show with Tory blogger Shane Greer. Yesterday saw a record increase in the number of unemployed in the UK. The reasons for the increase in unemployment are manifold, not least that Britain is suffering together with the rest of the world. Also that not many people spotted this coming.

There is a clear differential between Labour offering business and individuals support, including the holiday on business rates for small businesses; and the Tories offering no alternative. There is also a huge difference between today's recession and those of the 1980s. Before mass privatisation the government was directly responsible for employing huge swathes of the population - and then making them unemployed - when this is no longer the case.

The government here is also ensuring that wide scale public sector construction projects, like Building Schools for the Future and Crossrail continue.

Globalisation also means that we're under ever increasing pressure from the rest of the world to be economically competitive. At the same time, this also offers our best escape route, giving UK business the chance to trade overseas. Protectionism isn't an option.

Listen again, I'm on in the first hour.

Time for defections

After reports that a deselected Labour councillor in Waltham Forest has defected to the Lib Dems, I bring some heartening news from the North West. At a time when many are washing their hands of Labour, when the party really needs them, at least two former Lib Dems have seen fit to join Labour.

Denton Parliamentary Candidate Paul Moss and former Lib Dem leader on Tameside Council Karen Wright have switched to Labour according to the Manchester Evening News. Wright said: "Lib Dems in Tameside have become disorganised and are now showing little sign of understanding what local people need."

Barking and Dagenham Labour Party de-selects 13 councillors

It looks like Barking and Dagenham Labour Party have wielded the axe over a number of sitting councillors in advance of next year's London local elections. Tribune has also touched on this recently.

I'm not close to the local party there, but the time of selections does pose questions for all party members about the type of representatives we seek to offer voters. I'd suggest that the Labour Party needs its representatives to look like the people they represent, should be both ethnically and gender balanced and should offer the voters the chance to elect people who will use their positions of responsiblity to work hard and stand up for them. It is always disappointing whenever some feel that the party no longer represents them. As Labour heads towards a general election, I hope all members can feel enthused to fight the threat of a Tory government and not their own comrades.

Phone tapping and smearing

David Cameron has backed Andy Coulson after the News of the World was alleged to have illegally phone tapped private citizens to subsequently smear their reputations. This could be dangerous, especially if Labour's planned attack is able to stick mud to Cameron's reputation.

However, I doubt whether Labour have the team to really mount a successful sleaze campaign, the moral high ground to do so or a receptive media to take on the campaign. Comparisons could be drawn with the Damien McBride and Derek Draper "Red Rag" affair a few months ago, where there Brown's aide was forced to quit. However, Coulson has not been accused of doing anything wrong whilst working for the Tories.

The phone tapping allegations are not all that surprising, distasteful though they are. It isn't that far removed from journalists rooting through rubbish bins to find information. It is potentially damaging to Cameron. While taking the political initiative over Brown in the expenses scandal, he hasn't come out of it with his nose clean. Cameron himself claimed some of the highest expenses possible. Coulson's role or otherwise in phone tapping just makes it that little bit harder for Cameron to claim he is the anti-sleaze champion, especially when he backs Coulson publicly.

Egypt

This blog has been on holiday in Egypt. I'm back, more soon. Every time I go on holiday it seems that Labour relaunch and that the British political scene changes, except it looks much the same as when I left. nobody has agreed how Parliament will be cleaned up, Labour still talks of reforming the House of Lords and neither Labour or the Tories will admit what public spending they would cut if they won the next election.

Expenses scandal: the casualties

Iain Dale wrote yesterday that the media has decided it wants and needs a scalp (or several) from the expenses scandal. Today we have Labour's Margaret Moran - which I thought was inevitable - and the Tories' Julie Kirkbride, who has had her name sullied largely by her husband. Dale also points out that the lady leading the Bromsgrove protests against her is a member of hard left Respect.

Any media led campaign like this almost always needs its victims. I suspect there will be a few more. From a public relations point of view, both Labour and the Tories need this to stop. It would be better if the internal disciplinary procedures were quick and decisive instead of relying on individual MPs' ability to withstand or crack under media pressure.

It is symptomatic of the whole expenses affair - one that broke through a media leak - that action and regret has only taken place when nudged by the media. The political moral compass still seems to be lost.

I meet popular music act The Saturdays

On Tuesday I was a privledged guest of Veet to see a secret show by The Saturdays. They are embarking on a UK tour next week.

John Smith

Recently linked to Labour blog Red Threads tagged me in a post about John Smith to mark the fifteenth anniversary of his death. The idea is to get as many Labour people talking about our late (great) leader.

Where were you when you heard John Smith had died?
I had just got home from secondary school, I was 14. My mum was standing by the radio in our kitchen and told me the second I walked in the door. When she told me I felt like the world I had hoped for had just been snatched away from me. I felt a slightly desperate. I can remember staying up late with my dad in 1992 to watch the election results come in and getting deeply upset. John Smith was Labour's last hope and he was no longer.

How did you view John Smith when he was leader and how do you view him now?
In the run up to the 1992 election it had seemed that the media and much of the public was deeply suspicious of Neil Kinnock. John Smith was painted as the sensible alternative who would have led Labour to victory - despite his disastrous shadow budget and the subsequent Tory Labour's tax bombshell adverts.

At the time I viewed him as the only man left who could lead Labour back into government. Now I view him as a man who probably would have led Labour to victory in 1997, but who would have led a different party to that which Tony Blair took into government. Reform of the party would have been less aggressive than under Blair, Smith's victory was OMOV, I'm not sure he'd have wanted to take on more. As a result it could be argued that Labour might not have been able to hold onto power for as long as it has. Or it could be argued that he might have kept Labour old and that the party would have remained stronger. I'm not necessarily convinced of the latter. Key strands of his policy as Shadow Chancellor in 1992 were a national minimum wage - something enacted by Blair's government.

Do you think he would have made a good Prime Minister?
Smith would have made a good PM. I don't know if he'd have been able to decimate the Tories in parliament and in elections as the centrist Blair managed. They were so tired by 1997 though, so who knows?

What do you think is his lasting legacy?
Smith carried on necessary reform of the Labour Party and his commitment to social justice was undoubted. It is important that we continue to remember him in the Labour movement. It is so easy to forget that Blair's dominance of British politics and Labour Party came about by accident.

London's Euro election candidates

If anyone actually cares while Parliament continues to implode over the expenses crisis, UK Polling Report has a useful breakdown of all the candidates, by party, for June 4's Euro elections.

Former England footballer Stuart Pearce's brother, Dennis, is standing for the BNP. I've always had a lot of respect for Stuart and was shocked when I heard the news. At least the People have documented "Psycho's" "fury" at the news.

I have been campaigning recently in Islington with Labour's Claude Moraes. He has been zig-zagging his way across London meeting as many voters as he can. Like me, he is worried that the cynicism in politics and politicians brought about by the MP expense scandal should lead to gains for a party of the far right.

Not all politicians need to come way tained by the current crisis, not least Islington's MPs Emily Thornberry and Jeremy Corbyn who have never claimed for second homes.

An MP should be an MP and nothing else

I've always felt that an MP should be and MP first and last. Representing your constituents is paid as a full time job and should be treated as such. MPs, mostly Tories, have often had outside paid employment, which is wrong. Kenneth Clarke and William Hague are two key examples.

Working for a tobacco firm as Clarke does, or earning around £1m in additional income as Hague does, opens up MPs to several weaknesses. The first is that they are not devoting their time to representing their constituents fully, or to their (shadow) ministerial duties. Further, it opens them up to accusations of being influenced by outside interests. Much of the additional income from these outside consultancies will come from firms seeking influence. Why else would they pay politicians? Therefore, if a company pays an MP or minister, they are seeking to influence them.

A benefit of the MPs' expense scandal is that we might finally get to the stage where by seeking probity, politicians divest themselves of these outside interests. Voters are entitled to ask their MPs what they are doing to represent them if they are being paid to do something else when they are also being paid by the taxpayer to represent their constituents.

Hague has finally hinted that he may give up his outside interests. It is absolutely right that he should do so and others should follow. For the public to have any confidence in our politicians we need MPs who are MPs and purely that. State funding of political parties will mean accusations of cash for influence will die too. The sooner this happens the better.

MPs' expenses: payback

The row over MPs' expenses has caused carnage in Westminster, directly implicating all three main party leaders and a host of others. Politicians are queuing up to apologise for making extravagant claims and to state how "strongly" they feel that the system is wrong. How few have actually acted to show that they understand the public anger is incredibly disappointing. Care Minister Phil Hope showed he gets this, while Ann Widdecomb showed a lack of understanding in criticising David Cameron's crackdown.

Widdecomb's is right to point out that we don't want to end with a parliamentary system that only allows the rich to become MPs. Criticising any clampdown while the public backlash against the current expense system is misguided and will win few plaudits.

It is right that there should be an independent investigation into the MP expense system. Public money should be treated with respect and the simplest way to resolve this row is to simply pay MPs more and expect them to cover their expenses from their salaries, just like the rest of us. MPs' pay should also be assessed independently. The days of MPs voting on their own pay rises has gone. MPs have shown that they can't manage their own expenses so we can't expect them to manage their pay either.

MPs' expenses

There has clearly been fault from all parties with MPs making the most of a generous expense allowance. I'm pleased that The Daily Telegraph has turned the tables on the Tories, campaigning for Labour at the weekend wasn't easy when at that point, all the public knew about were Labour claims.

A common mitigation from MPs in the spotlight has been that they kept within the rules, but that these rules need changing. Again, there is agreement from almost all involved that the rules need changing. It has taken a national newspaper to leak the details of expenses to trigger the desire for change. Proposals to change the expense system recently have either been rejected by Parliament or have failed to be agreed by the main party leaders.

If Cameron is to discipline his MPs that have claimed for swimming pools or homes they already owned outright; or Brown to (unlikely) discipline MPs for avoiding tax, someone has to decide where the line between acceptable claims and unacceptable should be drawn.

Most MPs will get away with it. They made claims, if not in "good faith", then within the rules. Some claims might have been making the most of the system but claiming for furnishings and decorations of new homes will most likely have to be left alone. Those who have switched homes to create an additional allowance, especially properties that have nothing to do with parliamentary duties (like Luton MP Margaret Moran's Southampton home) should face censure. Those who have claimed for swimming pools, tennis courts and chandeliers should face censure. These claims are unreasonable under any system.

The Daily Telegraph's campaign has done much to breed cynicism in politics and politicians in general. Clearly the blame lies with the politicians for making unreasonable claims, though the effect has been wholeheartedly negative.

The only means to redress this is to set out a new system that pays MPs fairly for having to live in two places. This should also limit the outside interests of MPs. Being an MP should be their only job. At the same time state funding for political parties should be introduced to rid the British political system of all opportunities for abuse of power and and accusationis affair should lead to root and branch reform of the whole UK poli

Where is Brown's team?

I am continually astonished about the lack of cabinet names appearing in the media to talk up the government. I mentioned it on Five Live last week, about a year after I'd first mentioned it there. Jonathan Freedland makes this point today, that Brown has no praetorian guard to defend his every move. This is either because Brown won't let them or because they are unwilling.

Every leader needs a strong team for support and to take some of the flak when things don't go well. Brown needs to do that urgently. He needed to do it some time ago, it isn't too late to avoid meltdown. Using the cabinet more might actually allow Brown himself to start presenting ideas to the country about his plans for the next five years, were he to win the election. Without doing so his plans will be lost and the election with it.

Is there anything Brown can do to save himself now?

David Blunkett's assertion today that Labour "has lost its political antennae" marks a significant juncture in the life of Gordon Brown's government. Even Peter Mandelson commented that "it never rains but it pours." Blunkett suggested that at present Labour is heading for the worst case scenario, a comprehensive defeat. I hope, like Blunkett, that we can plan for the best case and fight all the way to the election.

This has been a woeful week for Brown's government. In losing in the Commons over the right to let Gurkhas live in the UK and having to retreat over MP expenses, the government has shown that it is has lost the strength to stand by its convictions and also has lost touch with public opinion.

It is vital to the success of any leader that they pick their fights and battles wisely. Pick fights they can win and fights that are crucial. This week it would have been sensible to back public opinion over the Gurkhas and to seek a consensus over MP expenses.

I spoke on Victoria Derbyshire's Five Live discussion this morning with Michael White, Bob Roberts and Lance Price about this. I said that Brown needs to use his team more effectively. He takes too much on himself. It is rare to see other cabinet ministers given high profile media coverage (outside of their strict policy remits). Whatever good Brown might do, he has a poor reputation. He has handled the economic crisis well but his poll ratings remain the same.

I'd like to see others given a higher profile. Alan Johnson, James Purnell and Jack Straw have all been very quiet.

Brown has much to offer, shown by his handling of the banking crisis and the G20. Yet any good work by the government is never associated with him and has no effect on opinion polls. The handling of MP expensive is symptomatic of a government machine that is unable to communicate a good idea effectively. Much has been made of the unreasonable claims made by MPs and of Brown appearing on YouTube to announce his plans for reforming the system. This has meant there has been no mention of the fact that it was Labour's policy to open up MP expenses to public scrutiny in the first place.

I'm a strong supporter of Labour in government. The country and public services are in better shape than they would have been if the Tories had been in power - I firmly believe that we'd be in an even bigger financial mess had they been. I had to agree with White though that I don't see any way back for Brown and Labour at the next election. I agreed with Price, that the next 12 months shouldn't be abandoned. We have a year to show that we have a positive agenda and that if Labour does lose, for it not to be catastrophic.

Many of us have been waiting a long time for Brown to take the initiative. I'm preparing for the worst case scenario and hoping for the best.

Dispatches on Boris

Tonight's Channel 4 Dispatches study of BJ's first year in charge of London passed a judgement of a mayor without a plan. I'm still unsure exactly what Boris Johnson is trying to achieve for London. I have not yet been able to establish what he wants to do, much like Simon Jenkins, quoted in tonight's programme.

BJ claims that he wants to make London greener, cleaner and safer.

How is he making London greener? Encouraging public transport use is one obvious means of doing so. Bendy buses were meant to have killed cyclists. This has been shown to be false, something the mayor has had to admit. Most people wanted to keep the bendy buses according to the public consultation. However, the mayor is getting rid of them anyway. Journeys will take longer and taxpayers money will be wasted on needlessly replacing them. As I blogged before the election, the replacement Routemasters will not hit the roads for several years in any case. Further, the much vaunted bicycle hire scheme was actually started by the previous mayor.

How is BJ making London cleaner? Scrapping the extension of the low emission zone and the extra congestion charges for gas guzzlers won't make London cleaner.

BJ promised to give Londoners more bang for their buck. While the (small) mayoral portion of council tax has not increased, keeping my bill down, my transport fares have increased by far more than he could ever save me on council tax. That doesn't feel like value for money.

Is the mayor making London safer? Causing Sir Ian Blair to quit as Metropolitan Police Commissioner, then being referred to the Standards Board over allegedly compromising confidential information about Damien Green's arrest was unfortunate. Creating turmoil in the Met should be avoided, not unnecessarily created.

BJ's London is not getting greener or cleaner. He is giving "pocket money" to improve local parks and is cancelling the improvements to Parliament Square and Highbury Corner. Further evidence that the rhetoric fails to match the reality. Evidence of muddled thinking.

Much criticism was levelled at the former mayor for running a programme of vanity projects. If BJ's ludicrous "idea" to build an airport in the Thames estuary is the very embodiment of a vanity project. To commit the billions it would cost to build would be total lunacy in the current climate. The environmental cost would be huge.

I'm continually drawn to a mayor with no coherent plan. Tonight's Dispatches presented the argument from one side. This evidence was compelling, that the mayor's programme doesn't match the rhetoric, is often contradictory and is failing London.

Are the Tories ready for government?

They would certainly say so. The polls suggests that they are likely to win the next election whether they are ready or not. The volume of seats Labour has to defend with minimal majorities suggests that they might. Andrew Rawnsley and Max Hastings both implied that the Tories are not ready, but are likely to be in power regardless. Will the Tories win? Are they ready?

The Tories are now in position to win. The Tories lead in the polls has remained, despite Labour action and Tory inaction on the economy. An election is little over a year away. The economy is likely to get worse rather than better in that time. As incumbents this will disadvantage Labour. To run an effective election machine costs money. Labour's finances are in a parlous state, the Tories are awash with Ashcrofts cash and paid staff in key seats. The election is the Tories to win.

Are they ready? The Tories might win the election but will find government very tough. Inexperience won't make it tough itself, Labour managed ably enough in 1997 without government experience. Government will be tough for the Tories because they haven't prepared for it. What do the Tories plan for the NHS? What do they plan to actually do to better the environment when in London Boris Johnson is cutting back on schemes to cut pollution?

The Tory plan for government isn't clear. If it exists it must be well hidden. Over the next 15 months the country has to make a serious choice. It isn't a fair choice when the choice is made without full knowledge of the consequences.

I fear the electorate won't be interested and that the Tories will be elected anyway. With parlous results for the country. Labour has to show why the Tories don't deserve to win. Labour has to pull the gaping holes in Tory policy open to the country. Labour needs to attack the Tories and ensure the election is the challenge the country deserves it to be when so much is at stake.

The Tories might win. They are not ready. Labour has to make sure this becomes an issue.

In the Loop trailer

Emire magazine have linked to the trailer for Armando Ianucci's upcoming political classic: In the Loop. I can't fucking wait.