lord of the blog

« February 2006 | Main | April 2006 »

Friday, March 31, 2006

Responses

Paul. I haven't heard of any country that practices the 'basic income' idea but there was an organisation here that campaigned for it. As I understand the proposal it is rather as you describe - everyone gets a minimum and anything over that is taxed. All benefits are abolished.

I am not an expert on this type of policy but my gut instinct is that it would not be as simple as it sounds. Years ago I was given a pamphlet on it but I haven't heard anymore since then.

In Latvia they have a single, flat rate tax which is catching a lot of attention and is alleged to be a major factor in explaining the very fast rate of growth in the Latvian economy.

Arts policy. Museum charges were abolished by this Government some time ago. I think we do have to continue supporting the arts even if the play writers give us a hard time occasionally! They are an important part of our social and cultural life.

I don't know why the BBC Parliament channel has blank periods. You could check the link below and ask them if necessary.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/bbc_parliament/2320201.stm

Party funding. I have made a number of public comments on this. We all have a serious amount of egg on our faces and not surprisingly. I do support more state funding because I think it is almost impossible to run a modern democracy without political parties and yet people are rightly concerned about the way we raise money at the moment.

Allowing people to tick a donation box for the party of their choice on their tax form gives individual control but tends to favour parties that attract the better off voter. Capping party expenditure makes it easier but if you set it too low it will limit the quality and quantity of party activities and make it harder to engage the public interest at election time - not an easy task right now!

Regional government

I intervened in this Parliamentary question because I find it extraordinary that Conservative members think national government should get involved in the frequency of rubbish collection.

Local government is for local people and local councillors. Regional government, which I support, should have additional powers too.

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199697/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds06/text/60330-02.htm#60330-02_star0

Monday, March 27, 2006

Editing policy

Finally the repetitive and boorish commentators have won! I do have to take the advice that has been given to me quite often and edit posts.

When the comments are insulting to other people I will normally edit them out and leave the rest of the comment unless it is generally offensive and abusive. Critical comments whether of me or others will normally be left in but they should be written in a mature and constructive way.

I will see if I can add a note indicating that a comment has been edited.

Pity really but it takes a long time for some people to grow up.

Sunday, March 26, 2006

Sky News

At 6am to 9am on Monday 27th March, Sky TV Sunrise programme is doing an item on blogging. I am putting this entry on while they are filming. So maybe we will see how many watch the programme!

Friday, March 24, 2006

Red squirrels

Try this for a bit of light relief on Squirrel Nutkin. It is informative as well as entertaining.

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199697/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds06/text/60323-04.htm#60323-04_head1

Sunday, March 19, 2006

Responses

Education

Sam. The point you raise about comprehensives goes to the heart of the argument about selection. I think you are right that if you select out your brightest pupils and teach them together in a single school then you will give them a better education. But they will lose out on social skills (that is, mixing with a more diverse community) and you also risk recreating the class structure we have largely put behind us.

I think it is better to have the advantage of variety over the advantage of excellence. Clearly we have to aim to get excellence for as many as possible but it is the balance that is difficult.

Editorial policy

I have deleted some of the more offensive comments about individuals or national groups. I have been asked by a number of people why I don't delete all the offensive ones. The answer is that most people who visit this site are interested in specific issues and seem to disregard the abusive bits. I may have to review this policy but I do want to keep it as open as possible.

Over 1000 people visit this site every week. I'm not aware that they are put off by the two or three abusive commentators and they go to the posts that interest them. They may however be put off commenting themselves and that is a pity if it is the case.

It is perfectly possible to express anger and outrage without abuse. Those who don't learn that lesson usually lose the argument - even when they are right!

Friday, March 17, 2006

Labour Party funding

The party funding row has done us immense damage and will also make people even more cynical about politics. So we have to resolve this - and fast.

As people don't like us taking large sums from Trade Unions or from business it is hard to find an alternative to state funding but people don't like that either. To add to the problem state funding hasn't stopped some abuse in those countries that use it.

The main expenditure goes into advertising and media presentations. We have already put a cap on party expenditure in one of our earlier Acts but we may need to focus on the high cost of election advertising. If we stop doing it then people are less aware of the election. The media don't like it if we don't have media presentations and I think they are necessary to allow covergae on policy issues.

A limited extension of state funding with tougher limits on advertising and spending generally might help.

We should have stayed within the spirit of the Acts we passed  and not just the letter of the law.

Finally reform of the Lords has to continue and is now firmly back on the agenda but I hope the Commons and Lords lead on this. They haven't done so far and in my view it is undesirable to have governments reforming Parliaments. Parliaments should take the lead on reform.

The following question came up on thursday before the full extent of the loans was known.

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199697/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds06/text/60316-02.htm#60316-02_star0

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

Lords questions. Child care and Royal Commissions

There was a useful exchange yesterday on children in care

http://pubs1.tso.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds06/text/60314-01.htm#60314-01_star0

There was also a rather humorous response from the Lord Chancellor on Royal Commissions.

http://pubs1.tso.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds06/text/60314-02.htm

Friday, March 10, 2006

Civil Aviation Bill

I am attaching my contribution to this debate. http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199697/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds06/text/60308-15.htm

For a quaintly dotty contribution by Liberal peer Lord Bradshaw see: http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199697/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds06/text/60308-12.htm  He then proceeded to force a vote in an effort to prevent civil aircraft flying over National Parks. My imagination went into overdrive! Imagine an airliner coming into Gatwick over the South Downs park. It would have to climb to over 6000 feet before doing a steep diving curve (which would glue the passengers to the roof!) before hitting the runway minutes ahead of the pursuing park warden who, no doubt, would be trying to put a ticket on its windscreen!.

I hope it couldn't happen!      

Sunday, March 05, 2006

Tessa Jowell

I note that 44% of people think Tessa Jowell should stay in her job. 29% think not. That is roughly where the Tory party is today.

You can see why the Tory Party is still the "nasty party"! Along with one or two fellow travelers Dan!

Responses

Education

Lord Pilkington said he wanted technical schools separate from academic ones. Apparently they have this in Holland and he thinks we should have a similar system.

My underlying point in the question was that the 11 plus did separate on the basis of failure in one exam and also tended to keep youngsters from more problematic backgrounds separate from others. So there was more 'problem' behaviour at my old school for 11 plus failures then for the local Grammar school.

We need our schools to select from a wide range of abilities and social backgrounds and to deliver good quality education as well as having high behavioural expectations. The old system didn't do that as well as I would have like.

While I am on this subject I am delighted that we are getting higher food standards. I suspect this is a bigger cause of some behavioural problems then we realised a few years ago.

Ken Livingstone.

There is a need for a standards body. The gross error here was to exclude the Mayor and the fact that it could happen suggests it needs reviewing. It is not well known but MP's are occasionally excluded from Parliament and lose their pay but it can be challenged and reversed by the House.

Directly elected mayors create a different problem and I would have to give it rather more thought then I have before saying the GLA should have the power to reverse that decision.

Tessa Jowell

It always surprises me how quick people are to condemn others for the sins of their partners. You didn't need too much insight to see that Tessa was deeply upset in her interviews and her frustration wasn't directed at the media.  Sadly I was not surprised to hear about their separation.

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

Linda Smith

I was very sad to hear about the death from cancer of that great comedian Linda Smith. She was only 48 and was just brilliant.

Her humour was infectious, immensely creative and imaginative but above all it displayed our human frailty in a generous and gentle way.

What a loss.

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/news/obituary/0,,1720696,00.html#article_continue

Education questions

Those with an interest in schools policy may find this short exchange interesting.

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199697/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds06/text/60228-04.htm