One Small Step for Sinn Féin: Why Iain Dale is Wrong

I read this morning that Iain Dale is feeling cold about a Sinn Féin member of the UK Youth Parliament preparing to speak in the chamber of the House of Commons. I disagree I feel a little warm buzz on hearing the news.

Connor Morgan is apparently is about to make history in being the first Sinn Féin speaker in the chamber. That is one small step towards a normalisation of politics. If his senior representatives can find a way to similarly to take a full role in their elected representatives of the people by voting and speaking in the chamber we would be a step closer here in Northern Ireland.

Iain objects to the young man on a number of grounds.

First, that he will address the house in Gaelic or rather Gaeilge. Iain should wake up, this is allowed in all three of the devolved chambers across the country. The addressing of the house in native tongues at Stormont, Holywood and the Senedd is as far as I'm aware allowed, but then must also be spoken in the majoritive language English*. If this is what Mr Speaker Bercow is allowing in the chamber today it is not unusual. The citation of Ray Michie taking the oath in Scots Gaelic is one that has been repeated in the devolved Assemblies and Parliament and is an exception as an approved version in the native tongues is already available. Personally I hope that Connor is as fluent as the Gael speakers in Kelly's Cellars rather than the stuttering version we hear from Gerry Adams at Stormont.

Second there is the objection that turns his heart cold. He cites the killings of Lord Mountbatten, Airey Neave, Ian Gow, yes all the victims of republican violence. But the people of Northern Ireland have less prominent people, their mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, friends etc who they remember who are lost, who have lost life, or home or livelihood as a result of the 'troubles'. In 1998 the people of Northern Ireland voted in a referendum to move on. To look for a shared future together, putting aside the things of the past to look for a new tomorrow. If the people of Northern Ireland are looking to do that since the Belfast Agreement then Iain you should allow us all to do that. That includes letting Sinn Féin, if and when they choose to do so, to speak in the chamber of the House of Commons. You may not agree with them, but Connor Morgan, just like Gerry Adams has been elected to a UK Parliament and if he wishes to speak he should be heard.

Finally Iain falls into the mainstream journalists trap of condemning youth by their Facebook pages. Iain before hurling that stone should look at the pages of some of the Conservative Future members of the same Youth Parliament. Yeah we are growing up with a generation of future politicians who have all their youthful high jinks captured on a mobile phone and uploaded before they have a chance to sober up. We've all done things that we regret, just in our youth if there wasn't a camera loaded with film present it wasn't recorded for posterity and picked over by someone who thinks they know better.

Therefore overall the fact that Sinn Féin are allowing Connor to not only take his seat today but to speak, is a good thing. The fact that the speaker is allowing Gaeilge to be spoken is also a step towards the normalisation that happens elsewhere, I expect the same conventions will apply, the exuberance of youth may have led Dale to believing that the whole speech will be unintelligible to an English speaker.

There is a little ray of hope and an anticipation of history on a young man's shoulders later today. I hope he strikes the right balance between the two, for his own and all of Northern Ireland's shared futures' sakes. Connor Morgan I wish you well, go n-éirí an t-ádh leat.

UPDATE: As I suspected Connor only gave a greeting in Gaelic before carrying on to speak assuredly against the raise of the cap in tuition fees. Some of what he said is here and below:

"It is a great honour to stand here before you and to have the opportunity to address you in Irish.

"Is it just that the current Members of Parliament, many of whom had a university education paid for by the state now expect us, the innocent and disenfranchised in this economic mess, to pay for the mistakes that they have made?

"Is is right that considering we, as young people, are constantly being told that we are the future, our future appears to us to be a burden of debt and uncertain job prospects?"

UPDATE 2: Paul Burgin has added this on his Mars Hill blog.

* I'm not sure if this applies in Wales which is legally bi-lingual, maybe one of my Welsh readers will clarify.

Time to Be Making Your Mind Up

It looks like those nice people at Total Politics have been raiding Mr Dale's record collection, at least I hope it was his and now mine. They've even picked up a Diamond and some Bucks Fizz.

But I see some of my favourite people in there. Some of the highlights, Harry Cole losing his skirt, Iain Dale failing his audition, plus Mark Thompson, Helen Duffet and others putting on their dancing shoes allegedly.

As nominations closed this evening the ballot papers will be getting made up shortly it really is time to make you mind up.

Why the People are Kingmakers not the Lib Dems

I'm sorry Iain and Tom it's not as easy as Iain makes out. Indeed Tom's argument "let the little people have their vote*, then ignore what they say and start bartering away the very policies they voted for behind closed doors and without reference to them." seems to apply to some of the policies that over 60% who expressed a preference against in 2005 saw happen under first past the post.

What Nick has laid out are four principles that will shine through no matter what decisions Liberal Democrats have to make after an election (even if that is in choosing a minority partner to see them through). So Iain or Tom either of your parties can make it clear right here right now.

• Is your party committed to a fairer tax system lifting the poorest out and make the wealthiest pay their fair share by shutting some of the loopholes you've both created.
• Is your party committed to investing in education and provision of skills to lift us out of the recession and get some of those out of work back in productive employment.
• Are you committed to a green, sustainable economy to lift us out of this recession.
• Is your committed to real political change to sort out the political mess we now find ourselves in.

Neither of you seem keen on the first, are non-committal on the second, need work on the third and are refusing to take tough choices on the fourth.

One of your parties talks change yet seems to not know the meaning of the work. The other promises future fairness while ignoring that means a failure to deliver over the past 13 years. All of the above are examples of change and fairness on the way forward. Things that the people are saying they want, you know away from the Westminster bubble, on the streets, on the buses, in the shops.

The Liberal Democrats principles are clear, the people will know just what we stand for. Whereas both you parties seem to be confused on just what you stand for.

Tom what we are waiting for is for those people to have their say first, see what mandate they give, they are the kingmakers not us. Sorry Tom unlike Labour we do not take anybody's vote for granted, that has been the problem with both Labour and the Conservatives for too long. That gentlemen is the difference, why it isn't straight forward to give an answer you want us to say. Although even you own party leaders are now being asked that question I notice, and guess what? They aren't giving as straight an answer as Mr Dale.

* How derogatory of an MP to call the electorate 'little' people.

Question For Iain Dale "Why Aren't the Tories Doing More?"

I see that Iain Dale is talking about the Conservatives doing stuff about ethnicity balance since the year nought AD (After David). He says that the Conservatives have selected five Black and Ethnic Minority (BME) Candidates in safe seats, and that they will have at least 11 BME Tory MPs or as many as 16.

He asks what are the Lib Dems doing about it? Well in month 1 AD I posted this about our Reflecting Britain Campaign. So whoops on point one we've been working at it since the years BC (Before Cameron and Clegg).

He also is using raw numbers. Always a bad thing to do with a statistician on the loose. And ignoring as LibCync points out that Operation Black Vote have said that there are 1-3 BME Lib Dems in potentially winnable seats, indeed under the title "The future's bright for Lib Dems".

I trust that Iain Dale is still expecting the Tories to hold the majority to lets take a look 11 BME Tories out of half the House of Commons comes in at 3.41% of the total (16 is 4.95%). Three Lib Dems of our current number 63 is 4.76%. So in real terms we are looking at doing pretty well, indeed either ahead or equal with the Tories on projections.

But that is looking at the figures without checking one other thing the possibility to get candidates into winnable seats. I can imagine the bulk of Lib Dem MPs laughing at the thought of their seat being a safe seat for starters.

However, lets consider the longevity of the current crop. 12 Lib Dems seat (19%) are currently being contested as held for the first time and a further 8 (12.7%) only for the second that is 31% of the current MPs. Indeed 43* of the seats we currently hold (68%) we have only be held since 1997. So many of these seats are not looking for new candidates. The Tories of course are looking for 125 gains and have a substantially higher number of retirements this time around than the Lib Dems (I believe, and will no doubt be corrected that we only have three MPs stepping down).

So actually Iain should really be asking " Why Aren't the Tories Selecting More BME Candidates in Winnable Seats?" theirs is by far a greater opportunity for change if the opinion polls are to be believed.

Read also: Mark Reckons points out to changes in the electoral system. While Sunder Katwala says that the Lib Dems need to start selection non-white candidates in areas where there is isn't a natural ethnic vote. While that would probably be the Labour and indeed Conservative way of parachuting candidates in, the Lib Dems are more likely to grow local candidates to contest local seats; it is after all our local parties that have full and democratic say on the candidate selection.

* It may be more I'm just taking the raw figures without going through the gains and losses in detail.

Brown Loses Whip who is a 'Titan' of Politics

In what is almost a daily announcement of the latest Future Retirement for Me from the Labour benches today it is the turn of Labour's longest standing whip, Tommy McAvoy the MP for Rutherglen and Hamilton. He has been a whip for the last 13 years of his 23 in the House of Commons. Gordon Brown himself has described McAvoy as a 'Titan' of politics.

At 66 it is the time that many people look forward to retirement, but in the run up to 2005 those who were retiring from Labour's benches for that reason left a longer built up for their replacement to be found and bedded in. The fact that so many this time are leaving it so late shows that in certain seats Labour are taking it for granted that you can put a red rosette on anyone and the seat will remain Labour's.

While some of the seats that are selecting last minute replacements will be selecting people who have campaigned locally others will be parachuting in people who the Labour party want in their team after the election. But the people are not going to have much change to get to know who some of these people are. Many of them have yet to be named and selected, I just hope none of them do turn out to end up sticking a rosette on a chimpanzee so that we prove that particular theory.

UPDATE: Iain Dale has written a post why he wonders if McAvoy leaving is because he is allegedly the whip that will be mentioned by Jim Devine in his defence in court over his expenses.

If true, and the coincidence of a long standing Scottish whip giving such advice to a new Scot seems highly probable. It gives added nuance to Jim Murphy's validictory to McAvoy:

"His job has been to steer laws through parliament to change people's lives. It is because of his work that Labour has been able to introduce so many changes which help so many people in different ways."

Could the last bit include MPs, their families and their constiruency parties?

Bursting Dale's Bubble

Yesterday modesty almost forbid Mr Dale posting some glowing comments about himself from the Daily Mail including this (readers of a delicate anti-Dale deposition should look away now):

"There are many reasons to celebrate Iain Dale. The author, journalist and aspirant politician for the Conservative Party is not only a much-valued contributor to GQ, he’s also the publisher of Total Politics magazine and has become something of an online deity because of his celebrated blog, Iain Dale’s Diary."

Well of course Total Politics is holding its own Election Question Times* at a selection of City Inns.

• 4 February, Birmingham - Andrew Mitchell MP, Jacqui Smith MP, John Hemming MP, Marc Reeves (ex-editor Birmingham Post)
• 11 February, Manchester - Hazel Blears MP (tbc), Graham Bradley MP, Mark Hunter MP, David Ottewell (Manchester Evening News)
• 18 February, Leeds - David Davis MP, Hilary Benn MP (tbc), Greg Mulholland MP
• 25 February, London - Tony McNulty MP, Eric Pickles MP (tbc), Lynne Featherstone MP, Steve Richards (The Independent)

You notice something about that list?

Not a single venue is Scotland....and....not a single SNP panellist on any of them. But do I hear Alex Salmond up in arms? Was my February copy of Total Politics confiscated at the border in its clear sleeve? Are Nats taking Total Politics down from the shelves of WH Smiths across Scotland and burning this promoter of only the Unionist parties and their politics in the streets outside?

So I guess Iain Dale is just a minor deity. One that fails to register on the great ego that is Alex Salmond's radar. In the words of Terry Pratchett but a small god.

*Panel line-up may change without notice.

Is Iain Dale Hinting At Cameron's "Fairness"?

Of course you probably wouldn't be a Lib Dem blogger, or a regular reader of Lib Dem blogs and escaped the news of David Cameron's love bomb New Year Message.

We there is an interesting possible proviso of what may lie ahead in Iain Dale's blog. In his ten predictions for 2010 he predicts that:

"VAT will go up to 20% at some point this year"

Now that is an interesting statement for someone who has recently looked at becoming a Conservative candidate. There are only three possible occasions that VAT could be raised next year, after it goes up on January 1st that is.

The first would be in the budget. The second would be if an incoming Conservative Chancellor wants to radically change things just after a splash and dash budget into General Election failure by Labour. The third would be in the Autumn Pre-Budget Report as Darling did last month.

So does this mean that the Tories are planning to lift the level of the regressive* VAT to 20%. Cameron is talking about fairness. The Lib Dems are promising to lift the income tax threshold closer to the level of the national minimum wage than any of the other main parties is prepared to go. The Lib Dems also recognise that VAT hurts most those on the lowest incomes. The raise in VAT would be vintage conservatism. Its very nature of being the same on all goods means that their wealthy donors don't feel that they are being hard done by.

But historically look at who has made the increases in VAT.

In Geoffrey Howe's first budget for Margaret Thatcher in 1979 the Tories almost doubled the standard rate from 8% to 15%, even the higher rate before then was only 12.5%. The only other Chancellor to take VAT to new heights was John Major in his 1991 budget taking it the 17.5% level. The Major increase was to help fund for a cut in that other regressive tax the Poll Tax, robbing Peter to pay Paul. Darling's cut in 2008 was only a temporary measure one which he felt would act as a stimulus.

Cameron as I said yesterday likes to think that we are more in common, but I don't think there is anything in common about how to raise the Government's finances in a fair way, which is kind of a major issue.

Embarrassing Update: No sooner do I post about the difference's between Lib Dems and Conservative than Sara Bedford points out one of our MP is following in an Anatidae nature.



* Yeah that was even my initial reaction as I live blogged the pre-budget report.

Anti-Sports Personality Thierry Henry and more on Anti-Sectarianism

Tomorrow is the annual BBC Sports Personality of the Year awards, I'll be writing up my views on who I think deserves it most later. However, what I did see in the Grauniad today was an anti-sports personality of the year poll.

In reverse order the result was

Andre Agassi 1.7% for fessing up to using recreational drugs and admitting to hating tennis

Martin Johnson 2.2% for failing to admit England play dull rugby (as an Irishman I say keep it up, we'll take another Grand Slam or at least an English scalp)

Tiger Woods 2.3% for well those 'transgressions' which are tarnishing his image.

Sulaiman Al-Fahim 2.8% whose financial boasting was on a greater scale than Livingston's own Massone during his short ownership of Portsmouth FC.

Mike Ashley 7.2% for his disastrous running of Newcastle resulting in their relegation from the Premiership which even Alan 'God' Shearer couldn't divert in the last 8 games of last season.

Emmanuel Adebayor 7.7% for his incendiary goal celebration at Manchester City in front of his former clubs fans.

Dean Richards 9.7% for his part in Harlequins Rugby bloodgate scandal, and it wasn't to try and get in on the Twilight trend.

Flavio Briatore 12.3% for that race-fixing incident in Singapore I trust rather than all the leggy models.

Sepp Blater 25.7% for introducing seedings into World Cup play-offs which was deemed to be unfair.

Thierry Henry 28.4% for that handball.

The ultimate winner brings me to an interesting point. Recently Iain Dale posted an image on his blog, which I'm not going to link to, of Thierry Henry with a ball under his arm and an Orange sash over his shoulder.


Now I know that Iain is a football fan. I'm pretty sure he wholeheartedly backs the Show Racism the Red Card initiative to stop racist chants from the stand. I'm sure he is also behind the 2005 FA summit to aim to stamp out homophobic behaviour in football as well. So why then does he believe a sectarian football image is OK to publish on his blog?

Growing up in Northern Ireland, as indeed applies in Scotland the one question that kids ask each other is which team do you support. The answer in most cases can determine your religion pretty easily. My answers of Bangor, Liverpool and Livingston don't give the game away too much. But once the question is answered or not answered depending on who is asking the trouble can start. Supporting the wrong team can lead to bullying, physical violence or worse. It is not based in those areas merely on your support of the team but from that teams identification with one side of the religious divide.

As for the claims that all Northern Irish protestant football fans were glad that Henry's handball put the republic out that is also not true. Judging from my friends' online reaction to the news ALL my Irish friends of all sides, in both parts were up in arms about the blatant cheating that he got away with. Having supported the Irish team in USA '94 in the Irish pub across the road from work I can assure you it is one of those things that would have united all Irish football fans again. Indeed we came very close to getting both teams to South Africa next year which would have been something.

I was call 'sanctimonious so-and-so' in the comments on Iain's blog for raising my concerns about this issue and being bold enough to stand up against it. I'm not going to apologise. It is a real issue of concern.

It really is time to kick out bigotry in football.

Openly Homophobic Paper Fails Again

Shame on you Ephraim Hardcastle in the Daily Fail for this:

"Overtly gay Tory blogger Iain Dale has reached the final stage of parliamentary selection for Bracknell, telling PinkNews: 'I hope any PinkNews readers who live in Bracknell will come to the open primary on October 17 to select their new candidate.

"You don't even have to be a Conservative to attend.'

"Isn't it charming how homosexuals rally like-minded chaps to their cause?"

For starters what has the man's sexuality got to do with anything, especially his ability to apply for or do a job. In fact isn't discrimination on the grounds of human sexuality against the law of the land Daily Fail?

Secondly Pink News tends to interview high profile gay men and women with a story to tell. It gives their readers hope against the over accusing homophobic or just not recognised reality of the MSM like the Fail itself. So obviously when a high profile political event does feature a gay candidate he'll be asked for comment. Iain's full quote to the paper is:

"I'm delighted to be on the Bracknell shortlist. It's the only seat I have applied for and I hope any PinkNews.co.uk readers who live in Bracknell will come to the open primary on October 17th to select their new candidate. You don't even have to be a Conservative to attend."

We all know that Iain is a great fan of open primaries, even if I'm not so sure, he sees it as a way of letting the people have their say. He hasn't said vote for me, but has said turn up if you live in the seat and select your candidate. Hardly a case of rally like minded people to his cause, but asking people who are sometime ostracised by society and indeed have been by the Tory party to get involved in the electoral process.

Update: Iain himself has written about the story, starting with the line 'Just by writing this blogpost, I will probably damage my chances in Bracknell'. It is reported in Pink News and by others including Mark and Andrew. Even Lib Dem Voice got in on the act with a special story of the day round up called Homophobia is Gay when it's against Tories, too. Mark Pack also noticed the mystery of the missing comments on the piece on the papers site.

At the end of the day though Iain has recieved an apology from Peter MacKay of the Daily Mail, which Iain has accepted. But he also writes:

"I think there are two lessons here. Don't take this sort of thing lying down. Fight back and you can get a result. It wouldn't have been possible without the internet, though, would it?

"It is all very well for me to do this. I am in a position to. But what about if it had happened to someone else without the facilities to do what I did today? Think on that."

Update 2 00:40 Looks like we may have been taken for a ride. Iain Dale has just tweeted:

"Yup, judging from the content of the Ephraim Hardcastle today, the apology wasn't in fact from the real Peter McKay at all. PCC here I come."

Ten Political Blogs That have Rocked Your Year

Yes folks it is that time of year again and once again the Blogfather Iain Dale is organising that great big love in of the web the 2009 Total Politics Guide to Political Blogging sponsored/promoted by LabourList and LibDemVoice.

The rules are largely the same as last year's mass participation event.

1. You must vote for your ten favourite blogs and ranks them from 1 (your favourite) to 10 (your tenth favourite).
2. Your votes must be ranked from 1 to 10. Any votes which do not have rankings will not be counted.
3. You MUST include ten blogs. If you include fewer than ten your vote will not count.
4. Email your vote to toptenblogs@totalpolitics.com
6. Only blogs based in the UK, run by UK residents are eligible or based on UK politics are eligible.
7. Anonymous votes left in the comments will not count. You must give a name
8. All votes must be received by midnight on 31 July 2009. Any votes received after that date will not count.

Iain is asking us not to list a 10 on our blogs to encourage others to vote for them, so if you want to see my list you're going to have to wait until August the 1st, which is just as well as I have other things to do in the meantime. Of course if you like what I've done over the last 12 months all votes will be willingly accepted and appreciated, after all I have high standards to keep up and improve on from last year.

However, what I would suggest is no matter what your political hue you vote outside you political frame of refernece. This is about good blogging and that isn't about partisan politics. Looking at the way a lot of my good blopgging friends voted last year that was certainly the way the votes went. The Scottish Bloggers especially seem to realise that.

So I'm off to give my 10 a good hard think. No matter what 10 I chose somebody is going to be disappointed so I'm going to think long and hard to get the best 10 that I have read in the last 12 months, considering I've read over 40 very good blogs this week already.

Iain Dale's Hoisting by His Own Petard

Iain Dale has got rather shirty about the Lib Dems selecting April Pond who was the the PPC for Broadlands as the PPC for the by election in Norwich North.

Now there is one thing about by elections that differs from General Elections. Any party that doesn't scour for the best candidate available is stupid. And if there is a good local candidate selected for a more winnable seat already selected they may well be the best person to take the extra pressure of national attention that most General Election candidates do not encounter.

But the irony is that the Tories themselves are the experts in flying in candidates. At least April is from the same county.

For the last Westminster by election in Glenrothes Maurice Golden was parachuted in. He's now the PPC of the more winnable Central Ayrshire seat. Having failed to get selected for Dunfermline and West Fife by election, but was on theMid Scotland and Fife list* he has now abandoned Fife so soon after been proud of saying he was '28 years old and [had] lived in Fife all his life' on his by election literature.

Of course that Dunfermline and West Fife selection caused some controversy as local party members boycotted the selection when Tory Group leader on Fife council Cllr Stuart Randall was not shortlisted. The candidate Carrie Ruxton had stood in 1999 for Dunfermline East for Holyrood but by 2001 had cropped up as Westminster candidate in Northavon where the 34.7% of the vote she gained just wasn't enough to unseat Lib Dem Steve Webb after being parachuted in as a token female in a target. In actual fact the swing was from Conservative to Lib Dem.

As for Glasgow East whoops Iain. Davena Rankin had been selected for Glasgow South before then being selected for East. But guess what Iain she lost and in your own word went 'crawling back to' Glasgow South Conservatives to 'beg for them to have her back'. Oh and they did. Does Iain wonder 'what on earth will' Glasgow South 'voters make of her whoring herself across' Glasgow? No I don't think so either.

There is something about people in glass houses. I'm reckoning the glass house at chez Dale must be very draughty this evening.

UPDATE: There is now a classic comment posted on Iain's blog at 9:31pm that points out that his use of the word 'whoring' once selected as a PPC for somewhere to then stand somewhere else in a by election means he has just called Winston Churhill and Margaret Thatcher whores. Double oops.

*Number 9.

Yesterday I noticed that both Iain Dale and Kezia Dugdale were jumping up and down with glee because Norman Baker was reported in the Brighton Argus had been claiming rent on office space in the property he bought as his home. However, it appears he has not done so since 2004 from the article both quoted extensively from.

I embarked on a little research last night to see what the Green Book said and also to look into the background history of this story before making comment. I was still to write my conclusions on this research when I saw this morning I notice that to his credit Iain has published the following full statement from Norman.

1. I have long campaigned for transparency in MPs’ expenses and for the system to be drastically reformed to end unacceptable practices. I intend to continue to do so.

2. I therefore have no objection at all to public examination of my expenses, which for some time have been published on my own website.

3. I have pursued the actions above, not merely because they are right, but because I am confident that my own expenses claims have both met the rules and more importantly are morally justifiable.

4. I would point out that I have, along with only a minority of MPs, never used taxpayers’ money to obtain a mortgage and through that a capital gain, let alone indulged in “house flipping”. I have not used the second home allowance for the acquisition of expensive consumer durables or for property repairs, and maintenance, the costs of which have fallen on my landlord.5

. In respect of today’s article in the Brighton Argus, the facts are as follows:
(a) When I was elected in 1997, I secured a shop for rent in a mixed hereditament in Lewes High Street, with my landlady occupying the rest of the building
(b) When in 2000 she decided to sell the building, I asked the Fees Office for advice on whether or not it was in order to buy the building for our own domestic purposes, and keep the office on site. I did so because

(i) We were in any case very keen to move houses and this house met our
needs
(ii) The nature of the property is such that it would have presented
operational problems had a new landlord or landlady been hostile
politically
(iii) I did not want the upheaval, and indeed cost to the taxpayer, of
moving offices shortly before an expected General Election

(c) I did not commit to purchase until I had received clearance, in writing, from the Fees Office
(d) As part of the proper protection for the taxpayer, the independent and external District Valuer was called in to decide the appropriate rent to be paid. His decision was of course accepted.
(e) The rent he decided was, in fact, marginally less than I had been paying to my landlady, so an immediate saving to the taxpayer was realised (along with the savings made by not moving)
(f) Not so long after I had moved to the house, the Fees Office indicated that they had changed their minds and that they had now decided that rent could not be paid to my wife and me, despite the written assurances in clear terms I had been given.
(g) A period of, from memory, about two years followed where no rent was paid and my wife and I provided an office in our house for Parliamentary use at no charge. Given that at that time it was not difficult to rent out shops in the High Street, my wife and I therefore lost well over ten thousand pounds of income as a consequence, while the taxpayer secured an office free of charge, saving the public purse a similar amount. The taxpayer has therefore lost no money as a result of the arrangements, indeed quite the reverse. I was thousands of pounds worse off, as I could have rented the space out for an income and the public purse would have paid for me to have an office elsewhere.
(h) In March 2006, I moved my constituency office to its present address, recommencing claiming for rent.

6. This whole story was subject to a story in the Sunday Times several years ago, followed by a correction the following week...

7. Having said that, I am totally in favour of full disclosure when it comes to matters involving public money, and am happy to provide the facts.

8. If the allegation is that this is somehow an expenses fiddle it must be the only case where the MP accused is thousands of pounds out of pocket, and the taxpayer is better off, as a consequence .

Now I doubt the Brighton Argus can afford to have 25 staff working on these stories like the Telegraph but they are only working locally. However one thing this latest escalation in press witch hunting would do well to do is learn from the Washingston Post over the Watergate scandal. Yes you may have some apparently juicy peices of information thrust into your hands.

But.

Do background checks.

Do journalism.

Make the shit stick to the fan that deserves to hit it and leave what isn't well alone. Throwing everything at something willy nilly will throw up flaws that will detract for the important message if you look at it hard enough and carefully enough.

A Leaky Chanter: SNP Attempt to Tartanise Smeargate Failure

Well The Times is running a story today about A Leaky Chanter being the Red Rag of Scotland. it even quotes a week old post by Iain Dale which calls them attack blogs.



But the Times is showing a bit off sloppy journalism when it says, "The respected Labour blogger Tom Harris MP has a link to A Leaky Chanter on his site" as if that was damning evidence that it was Labour run. But hang on a second thinks I the Scottish blogosphere is very incestuous when it comes to links so I checked out some of last years top Scottish Blogs in the Iain Dale love in. Well Jeff as top ranked SNP blog links there is his blogroll as do I. The Scottish Roundup will refer to it including this snigger at the Scottish Tories. So hang on if Leaky Chanter is meant only to be an attack blog against the Nats what is that story doing there. Admittedly most of the posts are anti-SNP but they are in Government.



But hang on Angus MacNeil, the SNP’s Scotland Office spokesman, said:

"With a senior blogger linking Leaky Chanter to Scottish Labour, and Welsh Labour finding themselves red-faced over the Aneurin Glyndwr blog, Labour must reveal who is running Leaky Chanter and what its relationship is to Labour’s blogging operations.

"There is a place for humour but we have Labour-linked blogs in Scotland branding neutral civil servants as SNP staff, making inaccurate allegations claiming ‘phantom houses’ and running fake sites as the First Minister — this is a dangerous path for any organisation to take."

Pardon? How does having a link to another blog link that to your own party. Tom Harris also links to Iain Dale, Guido and ConservativeHome does that make them Labour. Personally I agree with Tom's tweet that this is a pathetic attempt by the Nats to tartanise Smeargate.





There are a number of addition reasons that this rant from MacNeil is ill judged, first it comes so late in the day it cries out of attempting to steal some of the thunder. Although if he'd seen some of the polls at the weekend he may have seen that staying clear of the issue was the best course of action. Also Leaky Chanter does not fit into the modus operandi of a Labour backed attack blog, it is on blogspot not a purchased domain. It could be any manner of types that run it.

• A disillusioned floating voter not necessarily pro-independence that voted SNP in 2007 and is sick of seeing broken promise after broken promise


• It may be a disillusioned former Nat (there are a few of these one even sits in Holyrood)


• Of course it may be a Labour sympathiser doing it off their own bat. Particular seeing the number of Nat propagating blogs out there.

So as well as being ill informed MacNeil's comments are also terribly blinkered as a Labour spokesperson correctly points out at least 12 anonymous pro-Nationalist and anti-Labour websites operating (some of them will also be found on my blogroll). "Angus MacNeil and the SNP need to take a long hard look at the actions of people associated with their own party . . . before making baseless allegations against others."

One thing that MacNeil's misunderstanding of the blogoshere does do in linking him to smeargate is that like Draper and McBride he doesn't get the concept, thinks he can just jump in and make statements without full understanding, grasp of the facts or checking his own house first.

Government Start to Come Clean on Rendition

Almost three years ago Tony Blair's normally calm persona at PMQs took a serious knock when he fumbled out an answer that there was nothing new on rendition flights. Even Iain Dale was impressed with how Ming had got the then Prime Minister on the ropes.



Then the Prime Minister said there was nothing new to from the Council of Europe's report that Britain had colluded with the USA on extraordinary rendition flights.



To be fair to Tony Blair it now appears that collusion is indeed the wrong way to describe it. The Labour government appear to have actively handed over suspects to them to catch these flights. Far more than even Sir Menzies Campbell hinted at on that particular Wednesday when it was only assumed that our airspace or airfields were being used.

We're a Party Dumbass: A Response to Iain Dale

Yesterday Iain Dale asked the question "Are the Lib Dems a Political Party or a Pressure Group?" I thought I'd leave my response overnight in the hope that I would calm down. As the title suggests I didn't really.



He basically started a piece about rumours of cooperation between a Tory Government and the Lib Dems with a rant about how he'd personally like to see the Lib Dem's 'obliterated' and then this tirade in his final paragraph.

It is sensible at this stage to see what levels of cooperation are both desirable and achievable. If nothing else, it will force the LibDems* to decide whether they are a political party or a pressure group. Pressure groups have the luxury of spouting forth on every issue of the day with no ability to ever gain power and change things. Political parties exist because they are hungry for power and want to effect change. The LibDems have just over a year to decide which they are.

Now Iain as well as being a member of a political party I am or have been a member of some pressure groups, No2ID, Amnesty and CND to name 3 high profile ones. So I do know the difference. Pressure Groups focus on one area, one issue they do not spout out about every issue of the day. Another pressure group may well do so but a pressure group doesn't have to make tough decisions to make the whole work together. That is the key a political party has to get a balance between those ares of concern that face its members and the country as a whole.



If the Lib Dems were hungry for power as you put it they very easily may well still have a hand in power here in Scotland. You're forgetting Iain that while it has been almost 12 years since the Tories had power in any Parliament in the UK it has only been less than 2 years for the Lib Dems (not counting the current all in set up in Wales). Now we still get barbs for some of the tough calls we had to make over 8 years to form a partnership with Labour to get some of our ideas unto the statute book we had to led some of those we didn't necessarily agree with from Labour go through to. That is hardly the act of a pressure group but of a political party playing the hand they are dealt by the voters.



But just why ask the question Iain? Is it because rather than just spouting off the Lib Dems are making sense. They are issuing costings on some of the keynote policies. We are striving to get our message across and to be sensible about it.

Unlike the Tories and Labour we don't have the luxury of a continuous forum, recently there was two consecutive weeks without Lib Dem representation on the Question Time panel if this had happened to Labour or the Tories there would have been uproar. We have to take what media is given to us because sadly, as Iain's comments show, many don't like thinking outwith the two party box. Things were so much easier with only teens of Lib Dems, the sprinkling of Nats plus the Northern Irish members. But when the third party becomes more sizable the potential of failure to attain an outright majority tends to increase. Is that what Iain is scared of while his own party look at how to cope with such an eventuality?

Iain if the Lib Dems were not a political party while I would probably have been associated with them for these past 20 plus years I wouldn't have stood for Parliament for them. The reason being is that pressure groups have their place and campaigning on issues is important, but standing on a platform of one issue often hides true intent on a range of issues which will come up once you get elected.

Therefore Iain you own argument about spouting off on a range of issues answers you own question. If we were a pressure group we'd only be focusing on say civil liberties, or the environment, or crime we'd probably not have a lot to say the economy and anything we did say wouldn't be noted by those in the know. So fear not Iain our obliteration is not something you will see come election night, whenever that may be, we're a political party that forms policy that people believe in, they may not be your kind of people but they still have a vote.

*No idea why Iain persists in his style of running this into one word with double capitalisation it stems from two words Liberal Democrats after all.

Wow has Draper Passed the Baton to Dale

This could be a case of deflective therapy over the attacks of Derek Draper. Or it may be the pressure of the Red Devils heading to Upton Park the afternoon*. But Iain Dale Tory Version 1.0 seems to have a bee in bonnet about the Lib Dem Blogosphere this morning.

First he took exception that LDV hadn't published Nick Clegg's 25 Random Things About Me, then when LDV posted a teaser which has since been updated in full following permission being granted, he took it on himself to publish the list in full in an update. Now Iain you can't accuse Draper of unreasonable bloggishness then go ahead an do the same yourself, despite Tweets and correspondence telling you this is what was going on.

Then he decides to also post about Lembit Opik's views on the Presidential election. His headline would make you imagine that "nasty LibDem bloggers" had a part in Lembit failure to become president. Now if Iain honestly saying that the Lib Dem Blogosphere which did have a debate on the issue of the candidates had that big an impact in the 70%+ success of Ros Scott he must be greatly overdilussional about the power of the Internet on internal party elections. Either that or we really do need to get our hive mentality fully in check and with the Lib Dem Blogosphere as leading the charge log on and prepare for Government.

You know it Iain, you too will be assimilated.

Resistance is futile.

*This Liverpool fan will be forever blowing bubbles if that result goes the right way.

If Will Shakespeare were a Blogger

Extract from 'As You Blog It' a Vlog reply to Derek Draper by WillyShakespeare1564

All the blogosphere's a stage,
And all the Twits and Bloggers merely players:
They have their rants and their excentricities;
And one Blog in its time plays many parts,
Its acts being seven ages. At first the infant,
Uncertain and reeling in the writers's mind.
And then the whining school-boy, with his satchel
And shining cheeky face, creeping with malice
Unwillingly to the game. And then the lover,
Commenting with earnest, with a mutual blogroll
Made of his friendships built. Then a soldier,
Full of strange thoughts and bearded like the pard,
Defended with honour, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking a mutual respect of ideas
Even cross the political divide. And then the justice,
In fair round readers list and passing trolls,
With eyes mischeivious and Blog of history long,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the fat and northern former buffoon,
Who not long ago didn't get the t'internet,
His youthful rebirth, well recevieved, a world web wide
For his elderstatesman grin; and his manly blog voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans readers, sans friends, sans reputation, sans everything.

Possible how recent event would have been covered on WillsShakeySpear.blogspot.com

Blogiquette 101: FAO Derek Draper

A couple of days ago I was irritated at Derek Draper's misuse of Web 2.0 in all it's various forms, particularly in the way he was treating Iain Dale. So much so that I tweeted this:

Over the years, and yes Mr Draper many of us Mr Dale and myself included have been at this for years have come up with a way to co-exist. We follow some simple rules that newbie Draper in his rush for the top spot seems adamant to barge straight over. This is a lesson in some of the ways of the Blogosphere to help him with his blogiquette.

Now I don't brown nose Mr Dale as our recent spat over his use of language shows but I'd like to think there is a certain respect that goes on there despite of ideological differences. In fact even during that little spat I was conversing in private with Mr Dale and was having a good laugh, but it was our ideological clash that was in the public domain and created a little bit of a debate.

Yes it started as comment on his blog. I then felt the need to blog about it. That is fine that is debate that is what the blogosphere is good at. You can respond almost instantaneously to the posting of another. You use your blog, your social networking, your YouTube or whatever means you want in the plethora of Web 2.0 options to get your reply across. You engage in debate.

That is something that Draper has singularly failed to do over the past three weeks. He thinks he can walk into the room and not so much engage in the debate but set it.

Lesson point 1: you cannot control the debate the Interwebby is too big a vehicle for that.

Now there are two arguments that were going on regarding Carol Thatcher's remarks one was the use of language, the other was the whole issue of privacy and indeed double standards from the BBC. The privacy issue was one thing that Will Young did some up on Question Time last night, but yes it was also a grey area. The green room of a television studio is technically still in a workplace, and it also the equivalent of a staff rest room (with the added issue that alcohol may be present).

So therefore that in this complex issue the fact that Draper published private correspondence received as well as merely what was sent as Dale did. Now every blogger will from time to time publicise their outgoing correspondence. That's natural it is the Web 2.0 version of the open letter to the press. But that does not give you the right to publicise the whole correspondence from both sides to score cheap political points. Heaven forbid if all my correspondence in confidence to other bloggers over the years ever became public. It is often the behind the scenes stuff that does the firefighting, especially if others are getting overly worked up about something which starts to distract from the main point.

Lesson point 2: What comes in private stays in private. What you write back you can publicise.

Mr Draper it may surprise you to learn that by in large the political blogosphere is a pretty amiable group. I mean every day we sit at our keyboards putting out our opinions for the world to see, and those of us who accept by in large all comments know that we are going to be slated, but we raise to the challenge of debate.

Now I don't feature that often on the Lib Dem Voice weekly Golden Dozen possibly for a number of reasons firstly I'm not one of the Westminster/London centric based blogs but also more importantly I think because the majority of my referrals come from the opposition blogs rather than the Lib Dem Blogs aggregator (which accounts for the top seven positions).

Lesson point 3: Engagement in debate with others will get others to read you far better that a soliloquy stage left.

Now it depends very much what Derek Draper's raison d'etre is for LabourList. If it is to stir up the Labour activist core into action then he is going the right way about it, because I read very few of the rest of the party's bloggers (or for that matter some of the moderate Labour ones) that pay much lip service to LabourList. If it is to get his message and point across to the other streams of ideology and those of now he has to be more than an attack blog.

I still love the quote that Nich Starling lifted off my blog for the Total Politics Guide to Political Blogging 2008-9.

Maybe Mr Draper concentrate a bit on the balance of that statement. He's clearly found something in what Iain Dale's stance could be perceived to be attack worth, whereas Iain was attacking a different angle from the one Draper has been running with.

Now as Caron says time to grow up boys.

Update 8 February: Derek Draper has actually been here and left a comment below. It refers to a posting on his website however you cannot post without registering. But of course to register there as well as asking for my email details it asks for my name, postcode and whether I am a Labour party member. The only reason that these three details could be required to allow me (or anyone else) to pass comment on Mr Draper's baby would be for the purposes of electioneering, therefore I refuse to comply. On that issue I posted the following response.

The fact that LabourList requires postcode details before allowing them to post shows the overzealous nature of control of people's personal data. So while I am fully aware that the Local Labour party know full well where I live (indeed both the MP and MSP are aware that I live close to their office) I will not be submitting it to your site to have the priviledge of commenting there.

Doing so is another lack of understanding of the inclusiveness of the blogopshere.

Lesson point 4: Either you are a party site and campaign tool or a blog. Don't expect bloggers as individual units to divulge personal data for your dark purposes to have the priviledge to comment. They will do it elsewhere without this hassle which does make it harder for you to actually keep track on what they think.

He's Blogging Around

First we had Prezza, then the return of Kezia and now in tribute to the latest heavyweight Labour blogger I give you this musical interlude.*



I'm sorry Alastair but every time I've hit the dance floor to this song I have some bizarre image of you and the Lord Voldemort of Hartlepool and Foy as Kylie's backing dancers.

One thing I thing we may find is that Mister Campbell will be a better, more well rounded and more humorous read than Mister Draper, even if he does hit out at other political persuasions.

*As promised on Iain Dale's comments on Facebook

Labour's Bitch

I've been sort of watching Derek Draper's Twit Bitch at Iain Dale this morning starting here. It doesn't surprise me too much as Draper seem woefully unable to remain civil in the blogosphere and his blogiquette is atrocious.

It started with the statement:

LabourList has suspended Iain Dale from our blogroll until he clears up
remarks he has made about "Golliwog" being an acceptable term.

Actually if you Iain's original post you find that he was actually pointing out inconsistencies in the BBC's policy over racist comments. He cited Chris Moyles as an example who got away with it not once but twice. While the daughter of the former Prime Minister, Carol Thatcher upset Brummie man of the people Adrian Chiles, Moyles upset Oscar royalty in the form of Halle Berry. Iain was under the assumption until earlier this morning that the hair in question belonged to Andrew Murray, as white as the snow that is cover so much of the UK south of Dunblane.

Now in past with Mr. Dale and other bloggers that I read I will point out an error, asking them to correct it, if after giving adequate time for a correction to be made nothing is forthcoming I may consider other action. Not so with Mr Draper ignorer of Blogiquette extraordinaire. His hissy fit a suspending of Iain's blog came after Dale had struck through his comments thus

And the tennis player concerned is allegedly the hideously white Andy
Murray.

See Derek Iain know that if a blogger is found to be in error transparency of that error is what counts. It's what the audience expects. You see another example last night where Iain posted John Prescott's video response to his own error of assumption.

Sadly LabourList like so many of the Labour blogs seems to think that political blogging can exist without referring to the rest of the rainbow of Political opinion. One thing Iain Dale despite his own right wing leanings can never be accused of. Labour need to lighten up in the Blogosphere and engage with others constructively, sadly as the approach of Mr Draper seems to so they seem to think they can control it. Tough that got out of the bag too long ago.