I'm at home today because little Emma is unwell.
She woke us up in the middle of last night with a temperature and spent the rest of the night wriggling around in our bed.
With the help of a few doses of Nurofen for Children (Stawberry Flavour) she is enjoying a subdued day on the sofa.
I have now seen enough Disney videos to last me a month!
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Monday, September 25, 2006
Chucking NHS cash down the drain
I gave a brief mention earlier to this morning's Times story about private treatment centres and their effect on our cash-strapped NHS.
For me this issue demonstrates just how dogmatic the Blair/Brown Government can be.
If you think back to the 1997 election campaign you will remember that Labour were elected because there was 'only 24 hours to save the NHS'. This was based on Labour's stark warning that the Tories intended to privatise the NHS.
Nine years later and that same Labour Party is forcing Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) to sign up to contracts with private firms to deliver operations. If any PCT dares disagree the local members will be bullied into either agreeing or will be forced out.
There is, however, a small snag.
Within the NHS PCTs pay a fee for each operation that is done to the NHS hospital that does it. Therefore if the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford performs 100 cataract operations for South Oxfordshire PCT the PCT pays for 100 cataract operations.
However these Private Treatment Centre contracts work on a different basis. The PCT has to pay an agreed fee to the private company regardless of how many operations are actually done.
On average these private centres are running at 59% of their targets. That means that if a private company performs 59 cataract operations for South Oxon PCT the PCT still has to pay the cost of 100 operations.
The result is that money which could have been used to pay for 41 further operations is simply handed over to a private company.
This is what Labour politicians describe as 'modernisation' or 'reform' or whatever buzzwords are in this week.
It is what I call a barmy way to run a public service.
For me this issue demonstrates just how dogmatic the Blair/Brown Government can be.
If you think back to the 1997 election campaign you will remember that Labour were elected because there was 'only 24 hours to save the NHS'. This was based on Labour's stark warning that the Tories intended to privatise the NHS.
Nine years later and that same Labour Party is forcing Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) to sign up to contracts with private firms to deliver operations. If any PCT dares disagree the local members will be bullied into either agreeing or will be forced out.
There is, however, a small snag.
Within the NHS PCTs pay a fee for each operation that is done to the NHS hospital that does it. Therefore if the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford performs 100 cataract operations for South Oxfordshire PCT the PCT pays for 100 cataract operations.
However these Private Treatment Centre contracts work on a different basis. The PCT has to pay an agreed fee to the private company regardless of how many operations are actually done.
On average these private centres are running at 59% of their targets. That means that if a private company performs 59 cataract operations for South Oxon PCT the PCT still has to pay the cost of 100 operations.
The result is that money which could have been used to pay for 41 further operations is simply handed over to a private company.
This is what Labour politicians describe as 'modernisation' or 'reform' or whatever buzzwords are in this week.
It is what I call a barmy way to run a public service.
Gosh there are a lot of you
Last week, following a brief chat with Lib Dem Blogger of the Year, Oxford City Council Finance Champion and PoliticalBetting.com pin up Cllr Stephen Tall, I installed a clever widget from those nice people at StatCounter I am now finding out how many people visit this blog.
Having thought that my blog was only really read by a few Lib Dem mates, a couple of friends from Uni days and some slightly bemused members of my close family I have been very surprised at the number of visitors this blog gets.
The vast majority come through the excellent Lib Dem Blogs site and the rest through a variety of interesting searches (a number of whom must end up very disappointed when they get here!) A fair proportion seem to come back too.
Anyway, thank you for visiting. I hope you find my ramblings at least vaguely interesting. Do feel free to comment - I don't get enough of those - and most of the ones I do get seem to come from various furry animals.
Having thought that my blog was only really read by a few Lib Dem mates, a couple of friends from Uni days and some slightly bemused members of my close family I have been very surprised at the number of visitors this blog gets.
The vast majority come through the excellent Lib Dem Blogs site and the rest through a variety of interesting searches (a number of whom must end up very disappointed when they get here!) A fair proportion seem to come back too.
Anyway, thank you for visiting. I hope you find my ramblings at least vaguely interesting. Do feel free to comment - I don't get enough of those - and most of the ones I do get seem to come from various furry animals.
And they accuse us ...
And these muppets claim our sums don't add up!
Read the article and click on the link top right to see a news report.
And don't forget to hold your local Labour MP to account for it!
Read the article and click on the link top right to see a news report.
And don't forget to hold your local Labour MP to account for it!
OK, so now I KNOW they're not reading them carefully!
On the positive side, I can't complain that they're not swift ...
*From:* "Terry Deere" Terry.Deere@dft.gsi.gov.uk
*To:* <neilfawcett>
Neil Fawcett
The website does cover your case - there is an exemption allowing achild over 3 to use a rear seat adult belt where having two other childseats means there is not room for a third.
ABfor Terry Deere
Dept for Transport
Road User Safety Branch 2
zone 2/11
Great Minster House
76 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DR.
... and my response ...
Dear AB for Terry Deere,
This is getting frustrating.
As I have said, the problem is not that there is not enough room for a third booster seat, it is that if we put two booster seats in there is then not enough room for the third child, with or without a booster seat.
Please can you advise me what to do in these circumstances.
Thank you.
Neil Fawcett.
*From:* "Terry Deere" Terry.Deere@dft.gsi.gov.uk
*To:* <neilfawcett>
Neil Fawcett
The website does cover your case - there is an exemption allowing achild over 3 to use a rear seat adult belt where having two other childseats means there is not room for a third.
ABfor Terry Deere
Dept for Transport
Road User Safety Branch 2
zone 2/11
Great Minster House
76 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DR.
... and my response ...
Dear AB for Terry Deere,
This is getting frustrating.
As I have said, the problem is not that there is not enough room for a third booster seat, it is that if we put two booster seats in there is then not enough room for the third child, with or without a booster seat.
Please can you advise me what to do in these circumstances.
Thank you.
Neil Fawcett.
I suspect they're not reading it very carefully
A further development in the child car safety saga.
An email has arrived from the mysterious 'TJN for Terry Deere':
*From:* "Terry Deere" <Terry.Deere@dft.gsi.gov.uk>
*To:* <neilfawcett>
Neil Fawcett
Thanks for this.
Our FAQs explain that there is an exception thatapplies for a child aged 3 years above travelling in the back who mayuse an adult seat belt (ie no need to use a child seat/booster) when twooccupied child seats/boosters prevent the use of a third.
For when the car is not full, there is nothing to prevent a child up to135 cms in height travelling in the front seat (save one using arear-facing baby seat against an active air-bag) provided it uses thecorrect child seat/booster.
But please consult the car handbook (eachcar will differ) regarding children and air-bags (if fitted). We strongly recommend that you follow that advice - air-bags are powerfuland deserve respect.
TJN for Terry Deere
Dept for Transport
Road User Safety Branch 2
zone 2/11
Great Minster House
76 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DR.
Which, as those of you following the saga will know, fails to answer the original question.
I have replied thus:
Dear TJN for Terry Deere,
Yes. I read that.
The situation I am trying to get across is that if we put two booster seats into the back of the car then there isn't enough room for the third child, or my wife, to fit in the back seat.
I would like your advice about what to do in OUR situation, not the various situations on your website, none of which apply.
Neil Fawcett.
Meanwhile the children remain in imminent danger.
(Well, other than for the fact that I haven't taken them anywhere in the car yet.)
An email has arrived from the mysterious 'TJN for Terry Deere':
*From:* "Terry Deere" <Terry.Deere@dft.gsi.gov.uk>
*To:* <neilfawcett>
Neil Fawcett
Thanks for this.
Our FAQs explain that there is an exception thatapplies for a child aged 3 years above travelling in the back who mayuse an adult seat belt (ie no need to use a child seat/booster) when twooccupied child seats/boosters prevent the use of a third.
For when the car is not full, there is nothing to prevent a child up to135 cms in height travelling in the front seat (save one using arear-facing baby seat against an active air-bag) provided it uses thecorrect child seat/booster.
But please consult the car handbook (eachcar will differ) regarding children and air-bags (if fitted). We strongly recommend that you follow that advice - air-bags are powerfuland deserve respect.
TJN for Terry Deere
Dept for Transport
Road User Safety Branch 2
zone 2/11
Great Minster House
76 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DR.
Which, as those of you following the saga will know, fails to answer the original question.
I have replied thus:
Dear TJN for Terry Deere,
Yes. I read that.
The situation I am trying to get across is that if we put two booster seats into the back of the car then there isn't enough room for the third child, or my wife, to fit in the back seat.
I would like your advice about what to do in OUR situation, not the various situations on your website, none of which apply.
Neil Fawcett.
Meanwhile the children remain in imminent danger.
(Well, other than for the fact that I haven't taken them anywhere in the car yet.)
When is a commercial loan not a commercial loan?
Page 4o of the Labour Party NEC's Annual Report includes this little gem in the Treasurer's Report:
A further commercial loan of £2.0 million was received from Richard Caring in March 2006 on terms similar to those already disclosed, bringing the entire amount of the supporter loans from £11.95 million to £13.95 million (excluding accrued interest). In two cases it has been indicated that the loans are to be repaid when the term comes to an end, and we have made budgetary provision for this repayment. Also, others have already agreed to reschedule their loans to future periods. At all times this position is kept under review to ensure we meet our financial and budgetary targets.
This seems to be a very interesting definition of a 'commercial' loan.
Page 45 sets out that the Labour Party had a deficit of £14,500,000 in 2005, basically funded by the above loans.
The figures also suggest that their ongoing income is barely enough to pay for their ongoing income, let alone have anything left to pay the loans off. If they really are 'commercial' loans then they presumably face an interest bill of around a million too.
It is quite difficult to see how a Party with this level of debts can survive without significantly reducing its running costs.
hat tip: Iain Dale
A further commercial loan of £2.0 million was received from Richard Caring in March 2006 on terms similar to those already disclosed, bringing the entire amount of the supporter loans from £11.95 million to £13.95 million (excluding accrued interest). In two cases it has been indicated that the loans are to be repaid when the term comes to an end, and we have made budgetary provision for this repayment. Also, others have already agreed to reschedule their loans to future periods. At all times this position is kept under review to ensure we meet our financial and budgetary targets.
This seems to be a very interesting definition of a 'commercial' loan.
Page 45 sets out that the Labour Party had a deficit of £14,500,000 in 2005, basically funded by the above loans.
The figures also suggest that their ongoing income is barely enough to pay for their ongoing income, let alone have anything left to pay the loans off. If they really are 'commercial' loans then they presumably face an interest bill of around a million too.
It is quite difficult to see how a Party with this level of debts can survive without significantly reducing its running costs.
hat tip: Iain Dale
Robbing the NHS to pay Paul
More evidence that the Blair/Brown government is throwing money down the drain while other parts of the NHS make massive cuts.
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Whiter than white
Remember the 1997 General Election? One of the key planks of the Labour campaign was their attacks on Tory sleaze.
Well wads of cash in brown envelopes seems small beer now compared to Labour's loans scandal.
Setting aside the possible link to peerages, it is now clear that the Labour Party, or, to be fair, a small group of individuals in senior positions in the Labour Party, had a deliberate strategy of arranging soft loans in order to get round the transparancy imposed by the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (PPEERA) that they themselves had introduced in response to Tory sleaze.
Reading the articles in todays Independent here and here - based on evidence from a senior Labour Party source - it is clear that Labour could not have afforded most of the campaign they ran in 2005.
That means that Labour MPs in marginal seats such as Andrew Smith MP in Oxford East, Emily Thornberry MP in Islington South & Finsbury, Claire Ward MP in Watford and even Charles Clarke MP in Norwich South may well have lost their seats, had it not been for the cash raised from secret loans.
They certainly would not have had the billboards, mailshots and newspaper ads that were used to squeeze the lib Dem vote in the last week of the campaign to back up their local efforts.
I hope that Lib Dem campaigners in these and other marginal seats will be pointing this out over the coming months.
Labour got in by attacking the Tories for being sleazy. But now we know that they are not only a bunch of sleazebags themselves, but a hypocritcal bunch of sleazebags at that.
Well wads of cash in brown envelopes seems small beer now compared to Labour's loans scandal.
Setting aside the possible link to peerages, it is now clear that the Labour Party, or, to be fair, a small group of individuals in senior positions in the Labour Party, had a deliberate strategy of arranging soft loans in order to get round the transparancy imposed by the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (PPEERA) that they themselves had introduced in response to Tory sleaze.
Reading the articles in todays Independent here and here - based on evidence from a senior Labour Party source - it is clear that Labour could not have afforded most of the campaign they ran in 2005.
That means that Labour MPs in marginal seats such as Andrew Smith MP in Oxford East, Emily Thornberry MP in Islington South & Finsbury, Claire Ward MP in Watford and even Charles Clarke MP in Norwich South may well have lost their seats, had it not been for the cash raised from secret loans.
They certainly would not have had the billboards, mailshots and newspaper ads that were used to squeeze the lib Dem vote in the last week of the campaign to back up their local efforts.
I hope that Lib Dem campaigners in these and other marginal seats will be pointing this out over the coming months.
Labour got in by attacking the Tories for being sleazy. But now we know that they are not only a bunch of sleazebags themselves, but a hypocritcal bunch of sleazebags at that.
Tooth Fairy latest
Those of you who had a sleepless night worrying about whether the Tooth Fairy would turn up can rest easy tonight.
I was woken at some ungodly hour this morning by Jimmy proudly clutching a nice shiny one pound coin.
Thank You Tooth Fairy, wherever you are ;-)
I was woken at some ungodly hour this morning by Jimmy proudly clutching a nice shiny one pound coin.
Thank You Tooth Fairy, wherever you are ;-)
Saturday, September 23, 2006
Calling the tooth fairy
My son Jimmy, 8, found a long lost tooth two days ago and, being a fast-thinking young thing, put it straight under his pillow.
Sadly, in an uncharacteristic fit of shabbiness, the Tooth Fairy has not turned up.
Jimmy has therefore asked me to put a post on here so that if the Tooth Fairy reads my blog she will see this and come and replace his tooth with a shiny one pound coin.
So before he went to bed I promised him I would put up a post asking the Tooth fairy to pop round.
Now that he's told me about the tooth I feel sure she will turn up tonight ;-)
Sadly, in an uncharacteristic fit of shabbiness, the Tooth Fairy has not turned up.
Jimmy has therefore asked me to put a post on here so that if the Tooth Fairy reads my blog she will see this and come and replace his tooth with a shiny one pound coin.
So before he went to bed I promised him I would put up a post asking the Tooth fairy to pop round.
Now that he's told me about the tooth I feel sure she will turn up tonight ;-)
Now featuring videos
OK - so I'm not quite at the vidcasting stage just yet.
But I have managed to add a clever bit of code from Martin Tod's site which means that you can watch and listen to people far more interesting than me while reading my blog.
You can find the code here.
You can watch Lib Dem Blogger of the Year and Oxford City Finance Chief Cllr Stephen Tall's latest video here.
They even let him out into the community this time!
But I have managed to add a clever bit of code from Martin Tod's site which means that you can watch and listen to people far more interesting than me while reading my blog.
You can find the code here.
You can watch Lib Dem Blogger of the Year and Oxford City Finance Chief Cllr Stephen Tall's latest video here.
They even let him out into the community this time!
What a load of Balls
So Gordon Brown thinks the solution to to the problems in the NHS might be ... more reorganisation!
According to Brown fanboy Ed Balls this is because:
"The track record so far has been about devolution in important areas of policy - on monetary policy, on financial services policy, on local government and regional policy too," he told the BBC.
Well call me old fashioned but I prefer to judge people on the basis of what they have actually done, rather than what they say they might do in the future.
The Brown/Blair Government could have devolved power in the NHS at any point in the last 9 and a half years. They could have done this within the current structure, or any one of the many structures that have existed during that 9 and a half years.
They could have done this at national level, by letting the existing national bodies get on with the job, or they could have genuinly develoved power to the Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) when they set them up.
Instead what we have seen is Government dictac at every stage and at every level.
In this area we have seen PCTs forced to sign contracts with private companies that have resulted in NHS money being poured down the drain. When some of the few genuinly independent minded local members of PCT boards try and take decisions that they believe are in the best interests of their communiities they are bullied into making the right decision or hounded out.
Does this strike you as being the work of someone with 'track record so far has been about devolution in important areas of policy'? Thought not.
In local government it means that local authorities are encouraged to draw up mission statements, Local Area Plans etc. But if they include things that the Government (or more usually the civil servant inhabiting their regional office) doesn't like they are told to change them.
The sad thing is that I think many Labour Ministers honestly believe that they have devolved power.
What a load of Balls.
According to Brown fanboy Ed Balls this is because:
"The track record so far has been about devolution in important areas of policy - on monetary policy, on financial services policy, on local government and regional policy too," he told the BBC.
Well call me old fashioned but I prefer to judge people on the basis of what they have actually done, rather than what they say they might do in the future.
The Brown/Blair Government could have devolved power in the NHS at any point in the last 9 and a half years. They could have done this within the current structure, or any one of the many structures that have existed during that 9 and a half years.
They could have done this at national level, by letting the existing national bodies get on with the job, or they could have genuinly develoved power to the Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) when they set them up.
Instead what we have seen is Government dictac at every stage and at every level.
In this area we have seen PCTs forced to sign contracts with private companies that have resulted in NHS money being poured down the drain. When some of the few genuinly independent minded local members of PCT boards try and take decisions that they believe are in the best interests of their communiities they are bullied into making the right decision or hounded out.
Does this strike you as being the work of someone with 'track record so far has been about devolution in important areas of policy'? Thought not.
In local government it means that local authorities are encouraged to draw up mission statements, Local Area Plans etc. But if they include things that the Government (or more usually the civil servant inhabiting their regional office) doesn't like they are told to change them.
The sad thing is that I think many Labour Ministers honestly believe that they have devolved power.
What a load of Balls.
V for Very Good Indeed
I didn't get to see V for Vendetta when it was in the cinemas but read a few reviews that made it sound like the kind of film i would like.
Seeing it while shopping for dinner yesterday I picked it up on DVD yesterday and we watched it last night.
It is absolutely excellent.
Based on a brilliant graphic novel by the mighty Alan Moore illustrated by David Lloyd and brought to the screen by the people that did The Matrix, the film combines action thriller with politics set in a 1984 like future UK. As the synopsis says:
Set against the futuristic landscape of totalitarian Britain, V For Vendetta tells the story of a mild-mannered young woman named Evey (NATALIE PORTMAN) who is rescued from a life-and-death situation by a masked man (HUGO WEAVING) known only as “V.” Incomparably charismatic and ferociously skilled in the art of combat and deception, V ignites a revolution when he urges his fellow citizens to rise up against tyranny and oppression. As Evey uncovers the truth about V’s mysterious background, she also discovers the truth about herself – and emerges as his unlikely ally in the culmination of his plan to bring freedom and justice back to a society fraught with cruelty and corruption.
There are several parts of the film that could easily be taken as a warning against Blairism, if in an exagerated form.
The look of the whole thing is amazing. It reminded me of the darkness of the first Batman movie (also based on a graphic novel) with touches of Frank Miller's Sin City thrown in. There are also occasional Matrix like effects.
The plot steadily unravels as the film goes on, leading to a quite spectacular finale when the lead characters have to decide which side they are on.
If you haven't seen it, and you like a bit of politics mixed with a bit of action, watch it today!
Seeing it while shopping for dinner yesterday I picked it up on DVD yesterday and we watched it last night.
It is absolutely excellent.
Based on a brilliant graphic novel by the mighty Alan Moore illustrated by David Lloyd and brought to the screen by the people that did The Matrix, the film combines action thriller with politics set in a 1984 like future UK. As the synopsis says:
Set against the futuristic landscape of totalitarian Britain, V For Vendetta tells the story of a mild-mannered young woman named Evey (NATALIE PORTMAN) who is rescued from a life-and-death situation by a masked man (HUGO WEAVING) known only as “V.” Incomparably charismatic and ferociously skilled in the art of combat and deception, V ignites a revolution when he urges his fellow citizens to rise up against tyranny and oppression. As Evey uncovers the truth about V’s mysterious background, she also discovers the truth about herself – and emerges as his unlikely ally in the culmination of his plan to bring freedom and justice back to a society fraught with cruelty and corruption.
There are several parts of the film that could easily be taken as a warning against Blairism, if in an exagerated form.
The look of the whole thing is amazing. It reminded me of the darkness of the first Batman movie (also based on a graphic novel) with touches of Frank Miller's Sin City thrown in. There are also occasional Matrix like effects.
The plot steadily unravels as the film goes on, leading to a quite spectacular finale when the lead characters have to decide which side they are on.
If you haven't seen it, and you like a bit of politics mixed with a bit of action, watch it today!
The Emporer Has No Clothes
Therer's little I like more than seeing people point out that The Emporer Has No Clothes.
Congratulations then to Harriet Yeo for doing nothing more than pointing out the truth to Mr Blair.
It is difficult to bring up children, particularly teenagers, and wise politicians will bear this in mind before pronouncing on the subject.
Labour Minister John Hutton was also mouthing off recently about single parents.
The gist of his comments were that, on average, children living with two parents are lijkely to do better than those brought up by one. In particular they are a lot less likely to live in relative poverty.
Well durr...
Does we really need a politician to tell us that households with two adults in them are likely to have a higher income, on average, than those with one?
Or that single parents might find it harder to hold down a full time job than two parent households?
Seems pretty obvious to me that that would be the case.
What Hutton then went on to say was that there is not actually that much the Government can do about it.
Which makes me question why there is any value in raising the issue in the first place.
Surely it wasn't because he was chasing headlines in the right wing press like this?
Congratulations then to Harriet Yeo for doing nothing more than pointing out the truth to Mr Blair.
It is difficult to bring up children, particularly teenagers, and wise politicians will bear this in mind before pronouncing on the subject.
Labour Minister John Hutton was also mouthing off recently about single parents.
The gist of his comments were that, on average, children living with two parents are lijkely to do better than those brought up by one. In particular they are a lot less likely to live in relative poverty.
Well durr...
Does we really need a politician to tell us that households with two adults in them are likely to have a higher income, on average, than those with one?
Or that single parents might find it harder to hold down a full time job than two parent households?
Seems pretty obvious to me that that would be the case.
What Hutton then went on to say was that there is not actually that much the Government can do about it.
Which makes me question why there is any value in raising the issue in the first place.
Surely it wasn't because he was chasing headlines in the right wing press like this?
Battles in Time
Son Jimmy, 8, has been suffering with a rather nasty insect bite which got infected.
As a result he has been on anti-biotics all week and I had to take him to the doctors yesterday to have it lanced. (Imagine his disapointment when this didn't involve a man on a horse charging at him!).
I was therefore obliged to buy him a copy of the first edition on the latest Doctor Who merchandise - Battle in Time - for being such a brave little soldier.
This is a series of trading cards which arrive each fortnight with a magazine. (Trading cards are a bit like Top Trumps but there are more of them and they run at a level of sophistication that only 8-12 years olds will ever understand.) The magazine also included an excellent poster with daleks on it and a list of all the cards so that you can tick them off when you get them.
The next two issues come with a Tardis shaped box to keep them in and if you opt for the 4-issues-at-a-time subscripiton offer you get a whole pile of freebies as well.
Doctor Who merchandising was never this exciting when I was 8!
As a result he has been on anti-biotics all week and I had to take him to the doctors yesterday to have it lanced. (Imagine his disapointment when this didn't involve a man on a horse charging at him!).
I was therefore obliged to buy him a copy of the first edition on the latest Doctor Who merchandise - Battle in Time - for being such a brave little soldier.
This is a series of trading cards which arrive each fortnight with a magazine. (Trading cards are a bit like Top Trumps but there are more of them and they run at a level of sophistication that only 8-12 years olds will ever understand.) The magazine also included an excellent poster with daleks on it and a list of all the cards so that you can tick them off when you get them.
The next two issues come with a Tardis shaped box to keep them in and if you opt for the 4-issues-at-a-time subscripiton offer you get a whole pile of freebies as well.
Doctor Who merchandising was never this exciting when I was 8!
Friday, September 22, 2006
Guildford Tories' Smear Campaign
Tim Ireland's other site is dedicated to holding the Tory MP for Guildford, Anne Milton, to account.
He has also been busy documenting a particularly nasty smear campaign orchestrated by two prominent Guildford Tories against a Lib Dem activist in the town.
I won't dignify the smears by going into the detail myself but suffice to say it is pretty horrible stuff.
In brief the two Tories concerned set up some bogus websites, put up some smears against the Lib Dem concerned, and then added comments pretending to be him.
You can read all about the detail - and Tim Ireland's efforts to hold the Tories concerned to account here.
Unfortunately I can't find any trace of either Anne Milton MP or Guildford Conservatives taking any action over this appalling activity. In fact Dennis Paul appears to still be a Conservative Candidate.
He has also been busy documenting a particularly nasty smear campaign orchestrated by two prominent Guildford Tories against a Lib Dem activist in the town.
I won't dignify the smears by going into the detail myself but suffice to say it is pretty horrible stuff.
In brief the two Tories concerned set up some bogus websites, put up some smears against the Lib Dem concerned, and then added comments pretending to be him.
You can read all about the detail - and Tim Ireland's efforts to hold the Tories concerned to account here.
Unfortunately I can't find any trace of either Anne Milton MP or Guildford Conservatives taking any action over this appalling activity. In fact Dennis Paul appears to still be a Conservative Candidate.
Very amusing vid
A link to the new vid from Tim Ireland has just appeared, just over there on the right, below the Lib Dem Blogs box.
Gets the point over nicely I think.
If you would like to see some even harder hitting vids go to Tim's Backing Blair site and click on the links down the right hand column. I find them very amusing but effective at the same time. (Not for the faint hearted.)
Gets the point over nicely I think.
If you would like to see some even harder hitting vids go to Tim's Backing Blair site and click on the links down the right hand column. I find them very amusing but effective at the same time. (Not for the faint hearted.)
Is the Green Tax Switch campaign taking off?
Looking at the Green Tax Switch campaign website there are clear signs that the campaign is starting to take off.
Two weeks ago only a handful of Local Parties had set up their action days.
Now, as word of mouth and conference have spread the word, there is almost a mapful. (Press the green action week button on the riught and it takes you to Martin Tod's very clever flocktogether website).
You can also download a rather nifty campaign pack produced by those nice people in the Campaigns Department and a PDF of good advice on how to run a successful street stall.
If your Local Party hasn't sorted out your local action day yet - then step to it!
Two weeks ago only a handful of Local Parties had set up their action days.
Now, as word of mouth and conference have spread the word, there is almost a mapful. (Press the green action week button on the riught and it takes you to Martin Tod's very clever flocktogether website).
You can also download a rather nifty campaign pack produced by those nice people in the Campaigns Department and a PDF of good advice on how to run a successful street stall.
If your Local Party hasn't sorted out your local action day yet - then step to it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)