European Parliamentary candidate selection: the expenditure cap for applicants

It dawns on me that it isn't really enough for Returning Officers to understand our internal selection rules, but might be useful to tell other interested parties. If you like, it provides an insight into the process for those who might choose to take part in the future.

Besides, I'm quite proud of this, as it was something that I had been pushing for...

One feature of the new selection rules is the change from dictating the number of pieces of paper etc. that each candidate may produce and send/give out, to having an overall expenditure cap for the selection. English Candidates Committee has produced guidelines for each type of election, but the shortlisting committee may decide that a different amount is appropriate for their own selection. When they are agreeing this, please ensure that they understand that the intention is to create a level playing-field for all candidates, and to make sure that applicants are not ‘priced out’ of the selection.

Each shortlisted candidate is responsible for maintaining their own up-to-date, itemised, record of expenditure during the selection and must keep receipts so that evidence of expenditure can be produced if required. Each candidate must bring their list of expenditure to the count.

If someone (another candidate or anyone who is entitled to ask for an Returning Officer ruling) lodges a complaint with the Returning Officer that a candidate has breached the expenditure cap, they must provide some level of justification for their challenge. The Returning Officer must then ask all candidates to produce their list of expenditure at that point (unless the challenge is made at the count it would be reasonable to allow 24 hours for this). If the Returning Officer then believes that the complaint is worthy of investigation, all candidates then have 48 hours to produce a detailed statement of their expenditure, including evidence – i.e. receipts, invoices, quotes etc. It is quite likely that receipts will not be immediately available for all elements of campaign expenditure, so quotations, unpaid invoices etc. may also be provided.

The candidates do not have to provide the Returning Officer with information about their expenses unless there is a challenge on these grounds.

The reason for asking all candidates to bring their list of expenditure to the count is so that, if the result itself is challenged on expenditure grounds, the Returning Officer can have immediate access to information to enable them to decide whether or not the complaint is likely to be justified. Otherwise the announcement of the result would always have to be delayed, maybe for an appreciable period.

This maintains the principle that we have carried throughout the rules, that the Returning Officer will investigate possible problems but that the onus is on the candidates to abide by the rules and to provide evidence, if challenged, that they have done so.

Now, call me old-fashioned, but this seems to be pretty reasonable, and allows applicants to decide for themselves how they will campaign - more, lower quality leaflets, for example... It's called freedom to demonstrate the abilities that we need from a candidtae, judgement, campaigning skill. Seems obvious too me...

Labour begin to propose some ideas... but not necessarily very good ones...

It has been brought to my attention that, under a little bit of pressure, Labour spokespersons are beginning to talk about ideas, rather than merely exclaiming that a particular cut is the wrong cut, in the wrong place, at the wrong time. And whilst that might be true, it isn't very helpful in terms of addressing the public finances.

However, as usual, Labour do seem to be rather keener on finding ways of cutting Government income, rather than cutting expenditure, Liz Kendall's rather more honest piece in the Guardian honourably excepted. And, having failed to convince many people that cutting the standard rate of VAT back to 17.5% is a good idea, today's proposal form Ed Balls to use the income from selling 4G spectrum to, in part, introduce a stamp duty holiday for first time buyers is another of those seemingly obvious, yet curiously ineffectual, proposals that he appears to be good at.

Guido Fawkes has already covered the HMRC report which indicates that the last stamp duty holiday may have had precious little effect, and I suppose that, if you think about it a little bit, it's obvious why;

• If you're struggling to save up for a deposit, and in much of the country, it's going to be a struggle, taking a few thousand off of the asking price isn't likely to make a huge difference.
• Some of the saving is likely to be eaten up by sellers increasing the price a bit to take advantage.
• It doesn't persuade people to put their houses on the market, especially outside of London and the South East, where prices are no better than stable for the most part. If you've lost money, or are in negative equity, you're not going to want, or be able, to sell.
• If you are worried about losing your job, and there are many out there, particularly in the public sector, who are, you might not want to be committing yourself to a large mortgage.
• Oh yes, and mortgages. They're not exactly easily available and, if you can't get one, you can't buy a house.

If the HMRC report is correct, in that the stamp duty holiday only boosted house sales by 2%, if at all, and that the benefit mostly accrued to people who were going to buy anyway, it's a way of spending quite a lot of money for very little benefit.

So, come on Ed, you can do better than that... I hope...

Creeting St Peter: slowing the traffic

Despite the fact that I found myself speaking against a Conference motion calling for mandatory 20 mph speed limits in residential roads, I am a member of a Parish Council which would really like one in our village.

There is good cause for such a thing, as our village is without footways for most of its length, and the road is quite winding, with at least two blind corners, obstructed either by houses or hedges. Indeed, it is so winding that we can't use speed guns in the village - they need a minimum length of straight road in order to be used.

We have asked for a 20 mph speed limit, only to be told by the County Council that we don't merit one. And it is true that, on the basis of County policy, we don't. We don't have a school, or any of the other things that might qualify. However, we are soon to open our new playground, once the legal issues are concluded, and as we would like the village children to be able to access it safely, reducing traffic speeds would reassure villagers, especially parents.

I did wonder if we could introduce a proper shared space system, whereby cars have to give way to pedestrians, like we have in some of the nearby towns (Felixstowe and Stowmarket, to name but two). After all, as most pedestrians in the village have no option but to walk in the road, we effectively have such a thing, without the protection of slowed traffic. However, it would require expensive engineering and, because nobody has died, or been seriously injured, we are a long, long way down the priority list for action.

So, the recent announcement that 20 mph speed limits are being piloted in Fressingfield and Middleton is good news. We'll be watching out to see what the results are, and if they are positive, we'll be pressing hard to get one here...

David Icke is not dead, and he wants to advertise on your website...

One of the more unexpected joys of life on the Liberal Democrat Voice team is the unsolicited e-mail. Naturally, most of them are from Liberal Democrats wanting to write for the site, or campaigning groups wanting to promote their cause and reach out to us. Indeed, some of our best, most interesting articles come to us this way.

However, there are others. Sometimes, they're from someone who demonstrates a slightly relaxed grasp on reality, sometimes they're from someone who wants to confront us with 'uncomfortable truths', i.e. contentious opinions that aren't actually facts, but mostly, they're from random strangers wanting to place articles on the website as part of a 'commercial arrangement'.

Most of these are clearly from 'article factories', churning out infomercials on behalf of their client, and many of them are from the United States, evidently confused by the "Liberal Democrat' banner - one wonders if, like baseball, they assume that it is a concept for Americans only. Occasionally, I drop them a politely worded response, with only a hint of irony, noting this, and wondering if they really want to work with us. I seldom get a response. However, there's always an exception...

From: Jessica Oiler <oiler.jessica@yahoo.com>

To: voice <voice@libdemvoice.org>

Sent: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 8:31

Subject: Cooperation opportunities enquiry

Hi

I'm working on an advertising campaign for my client and came across your site http://www.libdemvoice.org/. Your site looks great and it would work perfectly with my client's site, which is in the same sector.

Ideally we are looking for relevant sites that can write an original article based around a keyword supplied by us. However, if you would prefer us to supply an article, this won't be a problem. We just ask that 1 permanent link is placed in the body of the content and linked back to our client's site.

Please feel free to contact me if this is of interest to you or you have any questions.

Best wishes,

Jessica

An interesting e-mail, offering no clues as to who, or where, their client might be. Intrigued, I replied...

From: Mark Valladares [mailto:markv233@aol.com]

Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 11:57 PM

To: oiler.jessica@yahoo.com

Subject: Re: Cooperation opportunities enquiry

Dear Jessica,

Thank you for your e-mail earlier today.

It is unclear from your e-mail who your client is, or how they fit neatly with us. Accordingly, we would require a lot more information before we could consider such an approach, and I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

Mark Valladares

I wasn't expecting a reply, and so when this turned up, I felt that I should share it with you...

From: Jessica Oiler <oiler.jessica@yahoo.com>

To: <markv233@aol.com>

Sent: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 7:26

Hi Mark,

Thanks a lot for the reply!

Our client is http://www.davidicke.com/ and we would like you to create a post for him and place it in your blog.

Please, let me know if you agree or in case you have any other suggestions!

Alright, I was a bit surprised. Perhaps there is another David Icke, so I checked the link. Sure enough, it was the website of the former Hereford United goalkeeper, BBC sports presenter and contrarian.

I wonder what sector it is that includes Liberal Democrat Voice and David Icke? I don't recall any of my colleagues accusing anyone, not even Charlotte Henry, of being a giant green lizard in human disguise...

National Minimum Wage rates go up... but not by enough?

Think of this as a public information post...

As of yesterday, National Minimum Wage rates were changed as follows;

• adult rate (for those aged 21 and over) - £6.19 an hour (up 11p, or 1.8%)
• 18-20 year olds - £4.98 an hour (no change)
• 16-17 year olds - £3.68 an hour (no change)
• apprentice rate - £2.65 per hour (up 5p, or 1.9%)

Apprentices aged 19 or over who have completed one year of their apprenticeship are entitled to receive the national minimum wage rate applicable to their age.

I have to say that I was surprised to find that the rates were as low as they are for younger workers, and I find myself wondering how a young person, not living at home with parents, is expected to make ends meet.

Inevitably, such people will be entitled to benefits and thus, the Government is effectively subsiding their employers. Hardly an incentive to poor employers to pay a living wage, and it potentially drives salary scales down for younger employees.

Perhaps this is something that Liberal Democrat ministers should be looking at over the months to come?...

ELDR Congress... if I didn't have enough reading matter already...

As my e-mail inbox gets fuller and fuller, and my ability to deal with it all becomes stretched towards breaking point, I note the arrival of a file from the Party's International Office, enclosing all of the draft resolutions to be debated at next month's ELDR Congress in Dublin.

I also note that I only had six days to review them all and contribute my thoughts, and that three of them are gone already. Clearly, I can't do that or, at least, I can't do that on my own. So, I thought that I might do the next best thing, and pass one of the resolutions on for more expert consideration.

Luckily, there are usually people around who know more on a given topic than I do, so I've sent the first resolution, on LGBT rights, to LGBT+ Liberal Democrats. Hopefully, they'll have some suggestions to improve the document a bit.

I'm going to have to look at the rest of these tomorrow, to see what else I can pass on... I may well have struck upon a good idea here...

Lib Dems Announce PCC Candidate

Norfolk Liberal Democrats have announced that James Joyce will be their candidate for the election of the Norfolk Police and Crime Commissioner on November 15th.

James Joyce is currently a district and county councillor. He represents the Eynesford Ward on Broadland Council and the Reepham Division on Norfolk County Council. Since 2005 he has represented the latter body as a member of the Norfolk Police Authority but he will be stepping down from this position in order to contest the election.

Commenting on his adoption, which follows a ballot of all Liberal Democrat members in Norfolk, Mr Joyce said:

"I am delighted to be chosen by the Party to stand in this election. Most Liberal Democrats have some reservations about the new process of elected commissioners but we are determined to make the system work effectively."

"We are fortunate to live in a "low crime" area. Norfolk is acknowledged as one of the safest counties in England with 50 crimes per 1000 residents against an average of 66 crimes per 1000 across the country. Making sure that this position is maintained is essential."

"Like all public bodies the Police are under financial pressure, they need to do more for less. Driving out inefficiency is and has to remain a key objective. Back room savings must continue to be turned into front line visibility."

"Maintaining appropriate communications with the public will be vital if the new structure is to function properly. In my work as a member of the Police Authority I have always been a passionate supporter of Community Policing. Responding effectively to community needs will be my first priority."

An unexpected moment in the spotlight

I am not a regular speaker at Liberal Democrat conferences, and when I do, I normally stick to issues of bureaucracy. Not always, but as a rule I don't really do policy.

However, the more time I spend as a parish councillor, the more aware I become of the issues that affect small villages and rural communities. And, confronted with a conference motion that called for all residential roads to be made 20 mph zones, my interest was attracted, especially as my fellow colleagues on Creeting St Peter Parish Council are rather keen on the idea.

There was a catch though - this was to be imposed on all residential roads, regardless of the circumstances, and the concept of a residential road wasn't actually defined. In theory, that sounds good, but if you're a resident of Earl Stonham, on the A1120, or one of the villages on the A12 north of Woodbridge, you might not be so keen. Indeed, my own village has greater need for footways (the 'proper' term for pavements), as we have none.

Call me old-fashioned, but I rather like the notion of local communities deciding upon their needs, equipped with a range of options, rather than one blunt implement. And so, I decided to put a card in to speak, for it wasn't likely that many people would oppose the motion.

I didn't expect to get called. After all, there were a lot of cards in, and I'm not an particular expert on the subject (I am the Vice Chair of our local Road Safety Committee, but I've only held the post for a month or so). However, I found a comfortable seat near the back of the hall, and waited. I didn't have to wait long...

Luckily, I didn't have a long speech...

This motion gives the impression of reflecting life in the suburbs and country towns, where main roads are, for the most part, kept apart from residential areas. And, as a child of the suburbs, I understand the motivation of the movers. However, I now live in an area of the country where small villages predominate.

The concept of a residential road in a built-up area can be quite different to that of a residential road in a village. In some linear villages, the main A-road is a residential road, and in Suffolk, for example, the A12 and the A140 run through the middle of a number of villages. It may not be viable to build by-passes, yet a 20 mph limit would cause congestion, increase pollution and affect commerce.

As a Party, we believe in localism, in bottom-up community action. And yet, the motion as it is before us, denies that. It imposes one solution on communities regardless of size, regardless of circumstance, regardless of need.

I therefore support Amendment 1, which at has the effect of empowering communities, allowing them the freedom to develop solutions that reflect their needs and aspirations.

So, Conference, please endorse amendment 1 or, if you cannot, reject this motion as well-meaning, but flawed.

Nothing fancy, but it did the job.

I was surprised when it was picked up by the BBC in their live feed,

1651: 

Delegate Mark Valladares says the motion is "well-meaning, but flawed" because it imposes one solution on communities "regardless of their size... circumstance... [and] needs". He says amendment one will allow communities the freedom to develop their own solutions.

But perhaps even more surprised to return to the office this morning to find that BBC Radio Suffolk had namechecked me. Indeed, they rather generously broadcast a chunk of my speech, and then returned to the debate during the breakfast show.

Perhaps I ought to do this more often...

Feeling the love for Navnit and Ann Dholakia...

Instead of being at the BOTYs, I was accompanying Ros to a surprise event, a dinner to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the election of a Liberal to Brighton Council. That young Liberal candidate was Navnit, now Baron, Dholakia.

Navnit is a very special figure to me, as his experiences are similar to those of my father, and when our paths first crossed fifteen years ago, we hit it off immediately. We would, thereafter run into each other occasionally, but ten years later, he was to play an unexpected role in events that changed my life forever.

I had not been seeing Ros for very long, when she went on a delegation to Taiwan with, amongst others, Navnit. He very kindly gave me a very good character reference, and the rest is history. To this day, Navnit jokes that ours was an arranged marriage, and that he was the one that arranged it.

And last night, the room was full of people whose lives have touched, and been touched by, Navnit and his wife Ann. From his early days in Brighton, through his work on penal reform, policing and equalities to his fifteen years in the House of Lords, there were people who had been there, had experienced that.

There were speeches from Tim Razzell, Chris Rennard and Raj Loomba, highlighting his contributions in a range of fields, but it was Navnit's response, talking of his early experiences after coming to this country from Tanzania, of casual racism, of being part of a mixed-race couple, which exposed a passion and a vehemence that I had not seen in him before. It did, however, encapsulate exactly why I admire him so much.

I should also mention Ann. Ann has been by Navnit's side throughout, and always has a kind word or gesture. She fulfils a role that I recognise in a way that many might not, that of support, helpmeet, and the person who, in quiet moments, is there with advice or information, who understands what you are going through. It was nice that she was recognised.

Afloat on a sea of affection, the evening almost ended too soon. But some of us are getting old, and you have to pace yourself.

I should not close without mentioning Chris Maines and Paul Elgood, whose kindness in arranging the event cannot be overstated. The brochure for the event, with pictures and stories from a range of people, brought back some great memories, so many thanks to them.

Slightly embarrassed of Creeting St Peter writes...

There is, occasionally, a moment when someone says something, and it triggers a memory which would have been much more useful a few hours earlier.

So, when last night someone mentioned who had won the Liberal Democrat Voice 'Blog of the Year' Awards, it did cross my mind that I had intended to be there... tonight. Hmmm... not one of my more glorious moments. Admittedly, I was at one of the most enjoyable events I've ever been to at a Liberal Democrat conference, but nonetheless...

And, to make matters worse, I'd been nominated for an award, that for the best blog by a Liberal Democrat holding public office. Yes, a cute, furry parish councillor, up against a county councillor, an MP and a Minister. At least I didn't win, which is something of a mercy.

The award was won by Alex Folkes, whose reporting of events in Cornwall, around his home town of Launceston and on the Unitary Authority. Alex is a worthy winner, and losing to him comes without any sense of failure on my part.

So, three nominations, and still no award to match Ros's for best use of social media in a campaign. Ah well, maybe next year...

The sun is shining, and I'm on a train heading south(ish). It can only mean one thing...

Welcome to the 10.03 service from Billericay to Liverpool Street, the fourth leg of my seven leg journey from home to Conference hotel.

Yes, engineering works are a feature of today's odyssey, in this case starring a rail replacement bus between Witham and Billericay. However, all has gone well so far which, I hope, augurs well for the week to come.

As part of the Liberal Democrat Voice team, I'll be chipping in with reports and the like, but I'm hoping to keep up with my own impressions here on the blog.

So, don't go away, the next few days could be interesting...

Nick Clegg is sorry... but is this tactics or strategy?

I admit to some surprise at the nature of this week's mea culpa over tuition fees. It seems like an odd time to choose to do so as, whilst it fits a domestic Party schedule, it doesn't necessarily come at an early enough point for public opinion.

That said, many activists of my acquaintance were consistently of the view that it was the breaking of the pledge that was wrong, rather than the pledge itself. The policy was, after all, costed, and had Liberal Democrats formed a government, we might well have been able to honour that pledge.

On reflection, it would appear, however, that when making the pledge, no consideration was made of the fact that we might be the junior partner in a coalition subsequently, and thus unable to have confidence that our pledge was deliverable.

But an apology is a good thing. At least, I think it is...

However, what good is an apology without follow up? As I have noted previously, we campaigned for a new type of politics, one that most Liberal Democrat activists believed in, whereby you treated the public like adults, and hoped that they would respond.

In government, we haven't always been true to that. Not as unfaithful as our opponents would have you believe, but we've 'played the game'. I will admit that I am uncomfortable with that. So, hopefully, this is a fresh start for Liberal Democrats in power, with a more open dialogue. It takes two, or more, to make this work, however. The media fixation on conflict and discord plus the cynicism of politicians, serve to encourage a reversion to spin and bluster.

It will not be an easy road back for the Party, but given that the longest journey starts with a single step, it would be nice if we started rebuilding our credibility with the British public this week.

A postcard from Ypres... lest we forget

I'm an amateur military historian, not so much of guns and bombs, but of political imperative, of the influence of nationalism and domestic politics, indeed why so many supposedly smart people sent so many young men to their death.

The 'In Flanders Fields' museum, in the reconstructed Lakenhalle (Cloth Hall), in the heart of Ypres, itself a focal point for much slaughter on both sides between 1914 and 1918, offers a fascinating insight into the personal tragedies of trench warfare, of citizens fleeing a war zone, and of the industrialisation of warfare. Equally powerfully, it provokes thought in those so minded to dwell on such things.

It is, I suppose, traditional that we remember the sacrifices of those that died to preserve our freedoms. So, once a year, we solemnly respect the minute's silence, even though we have no living relative who served, and only family folk memory of those that did.

And I find myself wondering, from time to time, why we remain, in some quarters, so keen to send our young men to some far away place, to die for, what was it exactly? Don't get me wrong, I'm not a pacifist, and I fully accept that military intervention is necessary, if unwanted.

It is, however, the case that we do spend an awful lot of defence, which very few people complain about, and Conservatives like, and relatively little on International Development, which has rather fewer friends. In fairness, the Coalition has continued our progress towards the 0.7% of GDP target for spending in this area, protecting it from cuts, something that we, as Liberal Democrats, should take some pride from.

Making friends does not come cheaply, whilst making enemies is rather more expensive, so we should be making the case in support of our aid program, as an investment in our future, as a means of promoting trade and goodwill, and we need to be smart about how we spend our available funds.

Bilateral programmes of education, or scientific research, infrastructure projects in developing countries, these are means of helping poorer nations to get on, thus creating markets for our exports and trading opportunities for those countries with their neighbours.

In this way, mutual interests develop, likely to make leaders hesitate before initiating conflict, or sponsoring terror elsewhere.

And best of all, there will be less young men and women dying in foreign fields for a political imperative...

Is this the best way to go about lobbying?

In my various capacities, people occasionally want to talk to me. Mostly, it's about things that are internal to the Party - people wanting advice, or support in terms of candidate stuff - as I don't have what I would describe as significant influence. So, when I received an e-mail asking if I would be available to meet the Vice-Chairman of the National Association of Local Councils, as well as its Senior Policy Officer, for a briefing on what they are doing, I was naturally intrigued.

Some research had clearly been done, as I was noted as being a Parish Councillor and a 'leading Liberal Democrat blogger', and, apparently, NALC was "particularly keen to catch up with you personally at conference to outline their current work in promoting the development of locally democratic and accountable community level councils, and in using the powers granted by the Localism Act and the ideas set out in the Open Public Services White Paper to empower local communities".

So, I replied, saying that I would be delighted to, subject to diary commitments. Yesterday, I received an e-mail acknowledging this, and asking for my mobile phone number and a short biography. The phone number I can deal with, after all, things happen. But a biography? For people who have approached me asking to meet? Why am I supposed to justify myself like that?

I admit that it has somewhat 'put my back up', in that having been approached by a group to meet them, I am expected to go to such trouble. It leads me to suspect that their lobbyists don't really 'get' politicians, which is problematic, given who it is that NALC are trying to influence.

Ah well, we'll see how it goes...

ELDR Council Delegation - is encouraging potential opposition really a good idea?

Very few of you, I hope, noticed a piece on Liberal Democrat Voice last week, encouraging people to stand for places on the Party's delegation to ELDR Council.

I wrote it because I was asked nicely, and because there are people out there who might be good for the role. Unfortunately, it's a role that I want to keep, partly because I enjoy it, partly because it seems that I might be quite good at it. And, by encouraging competitors, it makes it less likely that I'll be re-elected. This would be bad, right?

Yet, I think that it's the right thing to do. We are, as a delegation, a bit short on BAME members (that would be me), and poor at reporting back (present company excepted). I'm not entirely convinced that we are, for the most part, that well connected to the heart of our Party, or truly representative - we're a bit bourgeois and middle class (I admit to being both). So, some fresh blood might be good.

I'm not always sure how I fit into the delegation. Most of my colleagues are political, international, multilingual - I'm an English speaking bureaucrat with a love of travel and an interest in history, although I find ELDR Council extremely congenial. Like my Parish Council, it is easy to comprehend yet difficult to truly understand, and you have to approach it in a way that respects tradition and practice, always aware that it was there before you, and will be after you're gone. The debate is usually measured, and clarity is valued over passion (I'm not always great at the latter).

What I bring is a bureaucrat's eye to an organisation that is administrative, rather than political, collaborative, rather than combative. It is gentle - most of the time - and I value that.

And so, I'll be running for re-election. I'll supply a manifesto, one that will follow on from that of two years ago, and Conference delegates can vote on my record. Hopefully, that will be good enough...

Across the border and back for €7...

I just couldn't get into Liege, candidate city for Expo 2017, so I'm back on the train again. Alright, it isn't a particularly glamorous train, a mere year younger than I am, but it does the job.

But despite its age, and its rather firm second class seats, it's a surprisingly cosmopolitan service, as we're on our way to Maastricht (don't tell any Conservatives, the place has a strange effect on them). Interrailers from Canada, students fretting about the courses availlable to them as part of their International Relations degree (and fretting in English too), a woman from Somalia chatting with a friend on her mobile, all this appears perfectly normal.

I've visited the Netherlands on many occasions, but never actually reached Maastricht, and whilst I don't have a lot of time here, probably two hours, it should be long enough to see if I'd want to come back.

Someone else's train, someone else's countryside

Ah yes, Belgium. Famous for its linguistic divide, its inability to form a government from time to time and for its beer. Ah, beer...

But I am here for none of these things, I am here to work. And, although my meeting doesn't start until 11.00 on Monday morning, I am carrying out some important research work first. Yesterday evening, I explored the area around Place Jourdan (alright, I admit, there may have been a little beer involved), with the Hon. Jamie, and today I am off to Liege, possibly to examine European shopping.

As a member of the ELDR Financial Advisory Committee, it is important that I have a sense of such things. The beer is merely refreshment.

It must be said though, that the countryside between Brussels and Liege is very nice, quite like Suffolk with its gentle, rolling landscape, its patchwork of green and brown. And Liege-Guillemins station is described as looking like a glass and concrete manta ray. You don't see those every day...

Music for a quiet evening in...

I understand, from reading some of the work of my fellow bloggers, that providing some indication that I have a life beyond politics is a good thing. You know, hobbies, favourite movies, that sort of thing.

And indeed, I do have a hinterland, whatever that is. My taste in music is, like my religion, catholic, ranging from Mahler at one end, to Madison Avenue at the other (what do you mean, you don't remember Madison Avenue?). And whilst we're on 'M', what about this from, and I know that it's hard to believe, 1998...

Cabinet Reshuffle 2012: how it affects Suffolk

With only two of the county's MPs surviving the 2010 General Election, and with five newcomers to the House of Commons, it wasn't terribly surprising that we were unrepresented within the serried ranks of Government Ministers at first.

Tim Yeo is, to put it bluntly, past it, with no likelihood of preferment, given that there were rumours before 2010 that he wouldn't be running again. David Ruffley, who might have been preferred had it not been for the Coalition, suffered from well-reported health problems, and the added stress of ministerial office might have exacerbated those.

The newcomers were a mixed bunch, with the three held seats going to outsiders, much to the chagrin of local Conservative activists, none of whom were considered worthy of the sinecure that is a safe Conservative shire county seat. Indeed, very few were considered to be worthy of inclusion in a shortlist to be put before local members. On the other hand, the target seats went to two candidates with excellent local credentials.

So, now that they've bedded in, they fall into the category of 'bright young talent', and therefore, potential new ministers.

Matthew Hancock was always likely to get on, as an acolyte of George Osborne, and his former chief of staff. West Suffolk was not his first choice of seat, having applied for selection in Macclesfield where, apparently, he was pretty awful in front of the members. Clearly, George bringing him to the Treasury is a way of instilling greater loyalty, and his future is very much tied to that of his sponsor.

Daniel Poulter's promotion to become a junior minister at Health is more of a surprise. Not because he lacks talent, as I happen to think that he is one of the more thoughtful, collegiate members of the 2010 Conservative intake, but because the idea of appointing someone who knows what he is talking about seems rather unlikely. If I were a health professional, I would be reassured by the presence of a practising surgeon within the Department of Health - he spends part of his recess at the James Paget Hospital in Gorleston.

Still no job for Peter Aldous, Therese Coffey or Ben Gummer, but as two of them will have tough battles for re-election in 2015, and Therese Coffey is a woman, no great surprise there.

So, Suffolk is closer to the centre of government following the reshuffle. It would be nice if it felt like that to the average voter...

London Metropolitan: that's another fine mess that Tory stupidity over immigration has gotten us into...

The combination of administrative ineptitude by the authorities at London Metropolitan University, and the pressure self-induced by an absurd promise by the Conservatives has created a nightmare for a group of innocent students far from home.

There is no doubt that, if the university authorities have failed to fulfil their obligations to ensure that only genuine students are admitted to the United Kingdom, sanctions are appropriate. But whilst the university may suffer in the medium and long term, the Government has a responsibility to protect legitimate visitors to our company.

So, instead of giving the students sixty days to find a new course, with the stress and risk of financial loss that this entails, why not ban the university from offering places to any new students, announce that their current student body will receive rather more scrutiny than might otherwise be the case, and impose an inspection regime for students to be financed by the university?

Something must be done quickly, because the current situation is fraught with danger for our university sector. If it were to become the case that overseas students could find their courses abolished at a moment's notice, they might decide that the risk is too great, and that going to the US, or Canada, or Australia might be a safer choice. And given the revenue that accrues to British universities from overseas, that loss could dwarf the costs of immigration that so trouble the Conservatives.

But once again, the Conservative insistence on setting an entirely impractical target has proved to have created more problems than it could ever solve. The response of the UK Border Agency is designed to appease the political agenda, rather than solve the problem. I would suggest that any benefit that might have thought to accrue from such a hardline stance will be dwarfed by the criticism that this will attract from those who believe in fair play and natural justice.

The hills are alive with the Sound of Music...

An evening of high culture here in Suffolk, as we've been to Snape for a singalong Sound of Music, accompanied by the charming and erudite Jonathan Fryer.

I know what you're thinking - it isn't obviously a place for a jobbing bureaucrat, but I do enjoy a good sing from time to time. Perhaps that explains why I tend to avoid Glee Club at Party Conferences...

However, having been persuaded, somewhat against my better judgement, that it would be fun, we set off for Snape, taking the opportunity to tell Jonathan a bit about the old demesne - he may have been to nearly two hundred countries, but not to Suffolk, it seems. We detoured to Aldeburgh which, despite the rain, put on a decent enough show. One must, I admit, ask how many wine merchants does a town that size need - three is possibly excessive - but it is wonderfully genteel.

But, time was passing and, if you're going to sing, you should do so well-fortified. The Plough and Sail at Snape Maltings is apparently under new management, and their food was marvellous. Duck liver parfait... mmmmm...

Sometimes, I'm told, Sound of Music singalongs are done with the film, and you join in. This evening, it was rather more of a performance. Accompanied by a three piece band, with Alex Woolf on piano (I know this because he subsequently contacted us via Twitter - @alexwoolf), who looked as though they were enjoying it without any loss of professionalism, we ran through the songs with proper musical direction, although not so much as to make it stilted and overly serious.

And with an audience who were clearly up for a fun night out, some dressed as nuns, others as brown paper packages tied up with string, as well as the odd Maria, singing was done. There was the occasional dress that looked like it was made out of curtains... or it could have been Laura Ashley - I often find it hard to tell the difference.

By the time we'd made it to the interval, we were tolerably good, but the second half was going to be the test. With a proper West End singer, and the Aldeburgh Choir, to do the hard bits, we'd have to be up to the mark. And we were or, at least from my untutored ear, we seemed to be.

Having approached the event with a degree of dread, I found myself enjoying the sheer silliness and enthusiasm of the thing. Surrounded by hordes of people out to enjoy themselves come what may, and steered gently by musicians who had a finely tuned sense of what worked, we gave it our best shot, and Rodgers and Hammerstein would have probably enjoyed the fact that we were doing so.

We started at the very beginning (a very fine place to start, it seems), we yodeled along with the lonely goatherd, and we climbed every mountain (without leaflets). And all too soon, it was time to escape over the mountains to Creeting St Peter, stopping only to generously and enthusiastically applaud the real performers. Luckily, the mountains of East Suffolk aren't too high...

Absolutely committe(e)d to road safety around Stowmarket

In the past, I might have noted the concerns that my fellow parish councillors have traffic speed through our village. So, when the opportunity arose to nominate a member of the Stowmarket and District Road Safety Committee, I had rather expected one of my colleagues to step forward.

Expectation is a funny thing though, so when it became apparent that there wasn't going to be a volunteer, I could see that my future would include the occasional debate about pedestrian crossings or road layouts. And it hasn't been so bad, made easier by the expert chairing of Keith Scarff and the excellent secretariat in the form of my stepdaughter, Sally.

So, when at our AGM there was a silence in the room as it became clear that our serving Vice Chair wasn't present, it was with a degree of caution that I offered my services to replace him - and was duly elected unopposed.

I'm not expecting to add a vast amount to my workload as a result of my elevation, but it acts as another connection between Creeting St Peter and the outside world. And that can only be a good thing, can't it?

Dipping her toe back into the water... Ros blogs again...

It is, I suppose, my fault. It was with my encouragement that she first began to blog in 2008, under the title 'Because Baronesses Are People Too...', as I thought that her commentary would be of interest, both as part of her campaign for the Party Presidency, and as a window on what she does. I had, perhaps, not thought out the consequences...

So, when things became a bit tense, some people thought that her blog offered an opportunity for a public dissection of the events of the day. In truth, that wasn't particularly viable, as Ros is not the sort of person who enjoys that sort of public confessional, and more importantly, as she was in possession of all of the facts, some of them quite personal and sensitive, it was impossible to properly correspond.

Under pressure, she took the sensible decision, to my mind, of calling a halt to proceedings. That wasn't easy, but I understood her dilemma. And since then, she has not blogged, nor have I suggested to her that she might. I have offered her a space here, but she hasn't felt the need to take me up on it.

However, she was recently approached by the Hansard Society to become a contributor to 'Lords of the Blog' and, slightly to my surprise, was sufficiently interested to 'give it a whirl'. And I suspect that this will work for her, as it suits her rather more gentle style. She isn't really comfortable with the partisan 'my party right or wrong' approach, and she likes to talk about ideas. It also gives her an opportunity to post on a more occasional basis, without the pressure to report back frequently.

So, we'll see how it goes, and for those of you interested in what Ros does, or thinks, here's the link to her first posting...

Creeting St Peter: a small problem for my Parish Council

I have, in the past, touched upon my Parish Council's difficulties with social media, in particular the divergence of views between myself and our Chair, and the Parish Clerk.

Our Chair is deeply suspicious of individualism, pleading collective responsibility as grounds to discourage personal commentary on the activities of the Parish Council. Given his background, such a stance is understandable, even as it vaguely bothers me.

Our Parish Clerk is more interested in using our website to communicate, and has initiated a Twitter feed (@creetingstpeter) which occasionally broadcasts news of potential interest - flood warnings, local events and the like. She does like to manage our external communication, which occasionally comes into conflict with the notion of independent councillors, but nonetheless, we are fairly cutting edge by rural parish standards.

But now, Eric Pickles has changed the game somewhat. His announcement that broadcasting of council meetings, live blogging from the public gallery, and even Twitter, are to be encouraged, nay welcomed, rather changes the balance of things.

The Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 will come into force on 10 September 2012. Amongst the changes are new legal rights for citizen reporters. Local authorities are now obliged to provide reasonable facilities for members of the public to report the proceedings as well as accredited newspapers (regulation 4). This will make it easier for new 'social media' reporting of council executive meetings thereby opening proceedings up to internet bloggers, tweeting and hyperlocal news forums.

Which means that I am able to tweet my way through Parish Council meetings from here on in, and blog about them afterwards. Giving that public attendance at our meetings is generally low, and getting lower it seems, it won't create many issues in terms of facility provision, but it does create a window of opportunity for yours truly.

Mwah ha ha ha...

Tales from the Pacific Northwest... in no particular order

We've been away, as the deafening silence on the blog in early August might indicate. But we've been busy enjoying ourselves, far from the madding crowd...

And this is a picture of Tanu, the sea otter, at the Vancouver Aquarium. Tanu was part of Ros's birthday present this year, as I had arranged for a 'sea otter experience' for the pair of us, given Ros's love of sea otters.

The experience starts with a behind the scenes talk about sea otters, where they live, what they eat, what issues they encounter, and you get to find out some interesting things, such as, a sea otter has more individual hairs per square inch than a human has on their entire body, making their fur extremely soft and thick. 

That turned out to be pretty bad news for the sea otter, as fur traders rapidly discovered this, and hunted them pretty close to extinction. Fortunately, before it was too late, they became protected, and whilst they are nowhere near as prevalent as they once were, they are rebounding to a degree. They rely on that fur because, without blubber, they have no other way of keeping the cold out, and the Bering Sea and North Pacific are seldom anything other than cold.

Naturally, sea otters eat seafood, floating on their backs whilst they rip crustaceans and the like to bits, and using rocks to break open the shells of clams and other bivalves. I was surprised to find that, if a sea otter finds a really good stone, it can keep it in a sort of fur pouch in its armpit behind its front paws.

Our next experience was to visit the marine mammal kitchen, where we learned about how you keep sea otters amused with toys, varying them from day to day, and what you feed them. They may be cute, but they're expensive, eating squid, shrimp and scallops. It would be fair to say that Ros was slightly envious of the quality of their diet...

So, we knew a lot more about sea otters. But what we really wanted to do was meet one, and we were shown up to the exhibit and, whilst Tanu was the subject of the 'Sea Otter Talk' at front of house, we were being introduced to Elfin in the back for feeding time.

You aren't allowed to get too close to Elfin, for a whole bunch of really good reasons, but feeding him was tremendous fun, as he floats around looking adorable, and you get to toss him bits of squid, or shrimp. Elfin can strip the casing of a shrimp rather more effectively than I can, and watching him go to work on his food rather gave me an appetite too.

But sadly, that was the end of our 'experience'. I did buy Ros a mug with sea otters on it, a coaster with sea otters on, and a fridge magnet... with sea otters on, as a momento of our trip. 

One day, we'll go and see them in the wild...

Asil Nadir is guilty, but what is the effect on Hampshire?

Those with a long memory will remember that what made the Asil Nadir case most interesting to some was his record of donations to the Conservative Party. He was, to put it mildly, generous, giving £440,000 during the late 1980's, just before the Polly Peck campaign collapsed amidst allegations of theft and fraud.

I note that there have been calls for the Conservatives to return the funds, based on a curiously naïve declaration by Lord (then Sir Norman) Fowler that, were the funds proven to be stolen, they would be returned. Now, far be it from me to criticise, especially given the Liberal Democrats' own issues with Michael Brown, but I might reasonably assume that, given the response from Conservative Central Office, we might hear rather less self-righteous carping on the subject from the likes of the Times.

But my attention is drawn to a fragmentary memory of a news report from early July, that the former East Hampshire MP had been selected to be the Conservative candidate for Police and Crime Commissioner in November's election. That would be Michael Mates, whose rather unfortunate contribution to the Nadir saga was being forced to resign from John Major's government after it was discovered that he had given Nadir a watch inscribed "Don't let the buggers get you down" just before the latter fled prior to his trial in 1993.

I don't doubt that the good voters of Hampshire will be called upon to ask themselves whether or not selecting someone with such poor judgement should be given responsibility for policing matters, especially as, at the time, it was clear that there were irregularities in the financial arrangements at Polly Peck, even if criminality had not been proved. Indeed, I suspect that the Labour campaign manager is scouring the archives right now.

Or will Mates jump before he is pushed?...

Assange and Pussy Riot - am I missing something here?

The way in which some individuals or groups become heroes often seems random to me. Why this activist over that one, why that cause and not another, is a bit of a mystery. And I find myself a bit bemused about both of this week's cause celebres in particular.

Let's start with Julian Assange. I am minded to favour transparency over secrecy, and I don't want my government to break international law, so the notion of a group dedicated to uncovering covert acts is a worthy one. However, the way in which WikiLeaks operated, releasing information in such a way as to make individuals vulnerable to arrest and persecution without seemingly any concern for them, and leaking private communications expressing the true thoughts of diplomats and the like for no useful purpose other than embarrassment did not impress this civil servant. Occasionally, people have to deal with those they would rather not have to, rather unpleasant regimes for example, and diplomacy is often about being courteous to people you just can't like.

I can understand why the Americans would like to get hold of him, whether I believe that they should have a chance to try him or not. However, Assange is accused of serious sexual misconduct, offences which, had anyone else been accused of, we would be insisting be dealt with in a court of law. The Swedish authorities have sought to extradite him, he has sought to have the extradition refused using every legal weapon at his disposal, and at every stage, it has found that he should be sent to Sweden to stand trial.

And yet protests continue against his extradition. I don't see too many people speaking up for the rights of the women who claim that he abused them, or is the great Assange far too noble to ever do such a thing? Well, for someone of noble spirit, jumping bail and leaving your supporters to suffer significant financial hardship is hardly a demonstration of integrity. Clearly, their loss is of no importance compared to his freedom.

I would suggest that Julian Assange has, by his behaviour, indicated that he lacks morals sufficiently to raise legitimate doubts as to his honesty and integrity, thus making him a rather dubious poster child for freedom and transparency.

Pussy Riot are more complicated. Their behaviour in violating the sanctity of a holy place for the purpose of an anti-government protest was extremely stupid, and is worthy of contempt rather than applause. The freedom to practice one's religion without hindrance is a basic one, and the members of Pussy Riot weren't exactly respecting the freedom of those attempting to worship. The fact that they were videoed does not suggest a spontaneous act, either.

They probably deserve a slap on the wrist for stupidity and, perhaps, a public order offence. Two years in a penal colony is a quite deliberate, possibly provocative, response to their act.

Traditionally, the Soviet regime used the charge of hooliganism to take anti-Soviet elements off the streets, dissident poets and the like, discouraging opposition and potential opposition voices. In the current political atmosphere, where opposition voices are repressed by bureaucratic means, and occasionally arrest and police brutality, such a sentence as that handed down to Pussy Riot is a reminder of fears that Vladimir Putin wants to lead Russia back down the path towards a totalitarian state, a future which worries its neighbours and its potential rivals.

That said, Russia does have laws, some of which appear to have been broken. The fact that we don't like them much, and wouldn't have them here is somewhat irrelevant, compared to the question of whether or not they have been applied in a punitive manner in this case, the answer to which I do not know. If Pussy Riot have broken such laws, and their punishment is consistent with the usual range of sentences in such cases, we would be better off attempting to persuade the Russian authorities to change their laws. And if their punishment is disproportionate, then some diplomatic pressure might be appropriate.

But, fundamentally, the members of Pussy Riot have sought to provoke a reaction from the Russian authorities and have now succeeded in doing so. They didn't need to use a cathedral as the setting for their protest, but they did, thus providing the opportunity for the authorities to punish them. I'm not sure that they are that worthy a cause under those circumstances...