Much is being made of the Conservatives current polling figures.  Is this a trend?  Is Labour closing the gap?  Has Cameron failed to ‘seal the deal’ with the electorate?  Is Ashcroft right that polls don’t matter because it’s the key swing in a handful of marginal’s that will win this election, (hence the pouring of time & resource into key marginal’s)? 

Of course, who is right we will see…..

In the blog article below, advice given was that the Tories should really start speaking on a handful of key ‘safe’ Tory issues including:  tax cuts, law & order, immigration, Europe.

BUT….What is critical is that the Conservatives need to focus on painting a picture, full of colour & warmth, of the world they want to take us to…..when we are past all the pain…….

Now that may strange and an overly fluffy statement.  But it’s critical for the Conservative strategists to grasp this nettle. 

The focus on ‘Austerity’ and the fact that Britain is broken, the economy a shambles, a debt that is crippling is now well understood by the British public.  George Osborne has been courageous in his ‘sound’ statements on public finances and how he will slash the public debt within four years and that the situation is that dire, he will implement an emergency budget within 50 days of taking office.

Now, October Conference time this message resonated with the mass electorate….and it still does resonate…..but now more so with the financial markets and top economists.  But economists don’t win elections.  It’s the people on the doorstop that matter and push come to shove they may be fearing the prospect of spending cuts, (many of which they don’t know), and potential taxes going up.  This is going to be a fertile area for Labour to exploit…and yes…play on people’s fears in the coming campaign.  Already literature has been circulated saying the Tories will double business rates in certain areas, or close hospital wards as part of its cuts program.  All lies….but Labour will certainly press home any fear for gain of an advantage.

This Government is adopting the stance of an alcoholic.  They have an addiction, (spending tax payers cash…and future cash like there’s no tomorrow).  But like any alcoholic they can’t admit to the problem.  Worse still they don’t want any help in solving their addiction.  The idea of cold turkey is something that is tough to sell to an alcoholic.  Hence the same with tough economic measures.  People fear the medicine.  But people also deny the problem affects them.  ‘How does national debt affect me in my council house…bar…it’s other peoples problems not mine mate’!

The British people love the underdog.  They love to believe in the unbelievable.  They support situations in which winning seems the remotest possibility….but sometimes the impossible happens!  They dream the dream and often dreams are better than reality.  Hence why we always believe that we can win every World Cup we enter, despite often not possessing the talent to progress far.  That belief in hope ably demonstrates that the British people hold dear aspiration as key dream.

It is true that the British people have had to listen to months, maybe years now, of gloomy headlines.  Banks collapsing.  Financial markets in turmoil.  Unemployment rising.  Soldiers dying.  Coupled with a freezing cold winter and heaps of snow, the people must now be at the end of their tether.  They need something to look forward to…..not more doom & gloom.

In many ways Labour strategists are seizing on this theme.  ‘Conservatives talk down Britain’!  ‘Labour does not share Conservative Pessimism’.  ‘Conservatives aim to slash spending and kill the recovery off’.  ‘Inheritance tax cuts for the rich’.  All very familiar slogans coming from the Labour Leadership.

Now, what the Conservatives have to remember is that the current British psyche is a debt culture, (thanks to 13 years of Socialism).  Spend today, pay off tomorrow……but tomorrow never comes.  Debt increases.  Hence why the British have one of the highest personal debt ratios in the G20.  Our people spend what they cannot afford but in the knowledge they can get more credit cards, consolidate etc and put off dealing with their debt.  Hence, in their own minds they ask, ‘Why pay off the debt today, why not leave until tomorrow’. 

What is ‘right’ and what is popular are two different things, especially when it comes to macroeconomic management.

As we head into Spring.  The weather gets warmer.  Sunny weather, sunny outlook!  Nights grow less dark.  People need to again feel optimistic.  To believe in something.  Believe in better times.  The World Cup approaches.  Optimism abounds.

Hence, why the Conservatives campaign must now focus on Aspiration not Austerity.

When people aspire to something better, they work harder….they have a motivation, an inspiration….an aspiration.

That is the ‘promised land’.  The dream of a better tomorrow.

This is the vivid, bright picture that Cameron must now paint in the hearts and minds of the British electorate.

The people are ready to be inspired.  They are listening. 

What will Cameron’s Britain look like in 5 years.  In ten?  What’s the journey?  How will people’s lives be better?

As Conservatives we all know these answers.  But does the mainstream electorate?  Have we articulated our vision enough?  I would say we have a lot more to do.  Turning our campaign into a beacon of hope for all.

Thatcher articulated a dream.  She enthused people with policies of wider home ownership, reduction of the state, privatisation, reduced taxation, Union power in check, strong law & order and of course a sound defence and leading voice on the international stage. 

The current Conservative election campaign is focused on : ‘Year for Change’?  Yes we need change.  But is that enough aspiration for people?  Change…to what is asked by the media and the electorate if polls are to be believed.

Perhaps Conservatives need a new slogan?  How about capturing the present and looking to the future.  ‘Rebuilding Britain for a better tomorrow’.

Labour won in 1997 with the slogan:  ‘Britain deserves better’.  Same principle.  Obama’s was ‘Change we can believe in’. 

Come on DC.  Aspiration not austerity.  It’s the natural next stage to your campaign for the keys to Number 10. 

Much debate in the media about whether the Conservative campaign is faltering.  Why have opinion poll leads halved over recent weeks newspaper headlines scream, especially given the unpopularity of Brown, (even his own aides can’t stand him) and the disastrous effects of this Government’s policies.  Whilst opinion polls go up and down, and there is no need to panic, there is no harm in some friendly advice on how the campaign can sharpen up.  Interesting that extremely few Conservative bloggers are offering advice, in fear no doubt of being seen as disloyal or rocking the boat.  Loyalty is helping the Party not remaining mute!  We all want Cameron in Number 10 in a matter of weeks!  He has to be for the sake of the British people and the future health of our nation: economically, socially, politically.  Another 5 years of Labour would tear us apart.  The consequences are unimaginable.

What is clear is that a resonating theme is that voters don’t quite understand what Conservatives stand for.  They like ‘that nice man David Cameron’.  They maybe don’t get what we stand for in a succinct and simple way.  And yes, we need to articulate our purpose and message.  Labour have defined their campaign under ‘a future fair for all’.  Conservatives have yet to encapsulate those inspirational catch all messages.  Yes, we are not Labour, but can the electorate understand the key differences about what Conservatives bring to the table?  Of course, much will come out in the wash of an election campaign and no doubt there is an element of holding back and building momentum up to the point of a crescendo but what is clear is that the campaign needs .  The question is, will a campaign based on ‘we are NOT Labour’ enough?  There comes the killer question.  Governments lose elections, not Oppositions win them.  Hence how much does an Opposition have to say……?

Question is……..is the best strategy to play safe, appeal to the centre & centre left or is it worth taking some risks, being bold on policy, ensuring there is clear blue water for Conservatives to be fully understood?  Based on a sample of doorstop canvassing, it is clear that turnout could be incredibly low.  People feel disenfranchised with politics and the expenses scandal has shattered trust in our political system.  Whichever Party can mobilise their support in a low turnout election will win.  Sounds simple, but things go deeper than that.

Much is made of the strategy to portray Cameron as an ‘Heir to Blair’.  In many ways this is the battle to seize the centre ground, where the largest pool of voters allegedly resides.  Or does it?  The theory goes that the ‘Blair voters’ that helped Blair win consecutive elections are alive and well and up for attracting to modern Conservatism.  But in many ways, lets also remember that those electors who helped win Margaret Thatcher her election victories are alive and well and it was many of them that transitioned to helping Blair win his elections as they grew disenfranchised with Major’s Conservatives.

In 2010, what must be recognised the ‘Blair’ brand is damaged goods.  Blair may be a great orator and can still charm with his undeniable charisma but the ‘Blair brand’ is now tarnished goods.  A hollow man than smiles nicely is still a hollow man.

Just as Labour had to redefine itself after crushing Tory victories and gloss its socialism as the super sexy ’New Labour’, the Tories have moved to the Left to seize back the Blair Labour vote.

But is this the right strategy?

What is clear on the doorstep is there are a number of key areas that are causing people concern.  Those of the economy, (obviously), but also issues like immigration, defence, law & order and Europe.  Issues that have always been traditionally strong Conservative issues.  But in seeking to seize the centre ground and to pacify all, have we now diminished the key issues and closed the clear blue water in the eyes of the electorate?

Let’s look at each of these issues.  But let’s deal with them simply, exactly as the person on the street sees them.

Immigration

The person on the street feels that immigration is out of control.  That immigrants are coming from all areas of the world, especially Europe, (eg Poland).  There is a fear that population growth will harm the economy.  Too many people in the population overcrowds the health service, larger class sizes, means more competition for jobs in a recession and hence greater unemployment, more benefits being paid, more crowding on public transport, more building of houses on the green belt, greater pollution etc.  All economic issues, some with social ramifications.  Not racial issues as the BNP would state, but economic issues. 

Other issues amplify immigration worries.  Reports that terrorists from Afghanistan and Pakistan are gaining access to the UK under bogus education visas, only adds to the fear and loathing felt by some of the electorate on this issue.  Hence the BNP play and amplify this issue and wrongly present themselves as the saviour.  Interestingly, it is in the Labour heartlands and some of the poorest constituencies that BNP do best.

Conservatives have traditionally been the Party to take a strong line on immigration.  Little is mentioned today, maybe in fear of alienating voters.  But this policy area is key to the electorate and it’s how it is positioned.  In a tough recession, with people losing jobs, the British people understand if there has to be a tighter immigration policy, a strengthening of points entry.  A tightening of education visas.  Immigration is not an extremist issue, just a logical extension of what the country can afford to sustain and help empower.  Let’s hope that this tougher message is part of Cameron’s election battle strategy. 

Law & Order

The voter on the doorstop is frustrated about the inability of police to stem violence in society.  Not the fault of the police, the fault of the tide of bureaucracy the police are drowning under as they spend more time filing reports and seeking to increase budgets via speeding fines.  People sit scared in their houses as young hoodies roam the streets.  Knife crime escalates.  Judges seem perceptibly weaker in their sentencing and incarceration of violent thugs, that the rule of law starts to mean less to all.  Life sentences no longer meaning life sentences.  Prison life seemingly easy as inmates play on videogames and text their mates on the outside with smuggled in mobiles.  Headlines scream out that those defending their property from a violent intruder, get tougher consequences for standing up to a thug…..than the thug!

These are all things that led people to traditionally trust Conservatives on Law & Order.  Conservatives were traditionally seen as tougher on crime…and to coin a phrase, tougher on the causes of crime.  Do people feel Conservatives own this policy area as  naturally today?  Is law & order high enough on the current political agenda?  Do people instantly recognise Chris Grayling?  Not as much as they should do.  Hence, again, a suggestion to talk tougher on law & order as people resonate with this issue.

Europe

Ah Europe.  The policy area touted as always splitting the Party down the middle  The issue to avoid talking about at all costs.  UKIP has been quietly making inroads into some constituencies exploiting Euro fears.  Traditionally the Conservatives have been seen as a Party that relishes the free trade aspects of Europe but none of the political & monetary Union shenanigans that is on the agenda today.  The voter on the doorstep understands that Europe can bring benefits. Cooperation over foreign & defence policy for example.  Free trade.  But they see more and more the bureaucracy and meaningless interventions in everyday life by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels or a clueless European Parliament made up of zealous federalists, at home feasting on the gravy train. 

There’s the point.  Europe has become associated in the hearts and minds of the British people as a major threat to freedom and enterprise.  Intervening in everyday life which has nothing to do with them.  We can see that the federalist dream of a single currency is killing some nations, eg Greece…. and now, to prevent the single currency crashing, Greece is having to be bailed out…followed by Ireland, followed by….etc.  If this recession has taught us one thing is that had we been in the single currency, many more jobs would have been lost, interest rates would have been higher and the economy now would be even more of a train wreck than it was.  Europe is a mess.  The people see that.  Conservatives need to associate ourselves with that public mood.

So, the people want their say on Europe.  They want to be self governed. A tougher line from Conservatives would actually be beneficial as it opens up clear blue water with Labour and Lib Dems. Let’s be bold not fearful of the big European debate.

The Economy

Pure and simple, people understand that you can’t spend what you don’t have.  Spending cuts have to be deep and swift to stabilise the economy and protect our ‘AAA’ credit rating.  So let’s name cuts.  Those many hundreds of Quangos have to go.  The Public Sector has to be cut.  Yes, cuts in health service BUT people understand cutting managers and not nurses or doctors.  Let’s be bold.  A clear and credible plan to reduce national debt over 5 years.

And yes…..as argued before on this blog, get back to cutting income tax & corporation tax at the next budget.  Revenues do rise when tax is cut.  Empirically proven in the mid 80’s recession in the Government’s own red books.  The incentive and entrepreneurship that we need will start to flourish and trickle down.  Inward investment will be attracted.  Those millionaires hiding in tax havens will start to return.  The UK will be seen as a country to invest in again.

Again, tax cuts benefit all.  Yes of course those on higher incomes benefit most.  But who are the ones that have the money to invest, create new companies, create jobs and hence pump more money into the economy.  In the UK we have become too preoccupied for how we protect the poor and generate benefits and support networks for them, then we have in stimulating enterprise…the very things that benefit more people in society.  A boisterous private sector brings benefits that far outweighs a bloated public sector.  And besides where is the public sector funded from…..private sector cash, including those bankers that we so readily bash, but happily visit hospitals their wealth has paid for. 

And yes, let’s reinforce our privatisation beliefs.  There are still parts of the state that can be best served in the private sector, (and shock horror, this includes parts of the NHS & education).  With the money earned from the sale of state assets, public sector debt can be repaid quickly and of course, cutting tax can go hand in hand.

Yes, this requires a mindset change.  The British public started down that route in the Thatcher years but the journey was curtailed as Labour stole the emperors clothes and socialism, more state control, higher taxes, penalising success, union militancy, all crept back in, helped by European legislation and diktats!

Clear Blue Water

So, that brings us back to Conservatives positioning in the middle ground and utilising ‘Heir to Blair’ metaphors.  Is it enough?  Will people vote with their hearts and minds for Conservatives?  Will they stick with the devil they know in Gordon Brown?

One thing is that values, principles and ideologies help the British people understand where a Party is coming from.  Do people understand what the current Conservatives stand for?  Let’s help steer them more clearly & articulately.

Maybe, just maybe, to strengthen the poll gap, to widen clear blue water, the trump cards should be seen as positives, vote winners and a tougher line on immigration, law & order, Europe and the economy will bring home those Blairite voters, (former Thatcher voters many millions of them).

So back to those core simple understandable issues, what do Conservatives represent…..we are

 -              The Party of Enterprise & tax cuts to stimulate wealth for all

-              Committed to reducing the size of the state and leaving individuals to make their own decisions

-              Passionate believers in Privatisation and transferring more state assets to the private sector

-              The Party that is tough on crime and the causes of crime.  Tough sentences.  Tough prisons.  Making the criminal think twice & fearful at the punish they would incur.

-              The Party that is tough on immigration and tightening border control

-              The Party that is for European free trade & enterprise BUT the Party that believes decisions should be taken by Westminster not Brussels.  Powers to be reclaimed back from Europe.

Sounds like a recipe for electoral success!!!!         

Today, of all days, David Cameron has the chance to massacre Gordon Brown at PMQ’s. 

Its is clear there is a division at the heart of Government.

Alastair Darling, Chancellor claims that inside Number 10 ‘the forces of hell’were unleashed on him when he predicted a deep and severe recession and that Damien McBride & Charlie Whelan actively briefed the media against him.

Gordon Brown, of course, denies this,  ”I was never part of anything to do with this.  I would never instruct anybody to do anything other than support my Chancellor.”

So the question is, either Gordon Brown was in control and authorising his inner circle to brief and smear his Chancellor, (in itself the very worst of playground bullying), or, if Brown is right, he would never instruct his advisers to do anything but support his Chancellor, then the accusation must be that he had lost control of the heart of Downing Street and ‘advisers’ were going off doing their own thing.  What else were advisers doing?  Again a very damning position. 

This feels like the court room scene in ‘A Few Good Men’, when Jack Nicholson, (Playing Nathan Jessop), was goaded by Tom Cruise to admit that he had ordered a Code Red.  Nicholson denied ordering his Commanders to enact a Code Red attack on a Private marine, (like Gordon Brown today!).  Nicholson’s Commanders protected him and denied everything.  But Nicholson had to be seen as in total control.  When this assertion was undermined, ie he lacked control or knowledge of what was going on, he cracked.  Lack of control was weakness.  Gordon Brown likes to revel in power, he loves to be seen in control, he is itching to say he ordered a Code Red on Alastair Darling, he just needs David Cameron to rattle his cage hard enough and fire him up to crack. 

So which is it Gordon?

I look forward to DC having some mileage on this in PMQ’s.  DC has his moment as Tom Cruise in that famous scene.  I hope his opening gambit goes something a little like this:  ‘Would the Prime Minister confirm whether he authorised the ‘forces of hell’ on his Chancellor, whether his Chancellor is lying, or whether he was unaware of the briefings taking place by his senior advisers to the media, in which case has he lost complete and utter control of the Downing Street Machine’?

I would also love to see DC draw the comparison with bullying.  ‘Would the Prime Minister agree that one definition of bullying is using advisers to brief against your Chancellor behind their back’?

Should be a fun PMQ’s. 

George….it’s time to embrace cutting income tax and slashing spending.  That’s a vote winner and it will bring us out of recession a damn sight quicker!

Cutting taxation.

A natural Conservative heartfelt belief.

It’s at our core.

And I hope we start saying it in the election campaign…..but I feel we wont because the Party will fear the attacks from Labour.

The mentality of Brown’s Government is that to raise more revenue it is essential to raise taxation: both in corporation tax and personal tax.  Hence why we saw the rise in personal taxation to 50p on earners above £150,000, (political ‘class war’ issues also played a hand to appease Labour’s traditional hard core vote).

What’s the result of the 50p tax……?  …….higher taxes are yielding LESS revenue as individuals are either using clever accountancy to avoid taxes, they are spending less or some even relocating from the UK, (the infamous Brain Drain).  The rich have less incentive to earn more, and more incentive to dodge tax.

As the Governor of the Bank of England has recognised.  Britain, with the low value of the pound, should be an extremely attractive place to set up business and be a haven for entrepreneurs.  It is also a great time to start, if you have money, to buy and invest in housing and shares as they have hit pretty much rock bottom — pending any seismic future shocks.

So to attract more business and investment to the UK, help turn the tide and bring the economy out of this damaging recession, now is the time that the Government should change tact and CUT TAX IMMEDIATELY. 

Firstly, to cut corporation tax.  Let’s stimulate our business to re-invest and take risks.  Let’s attract more business from abroad, who will of course invest, create much needed jobs, generate more revenue for the exchequer and importantly add to a growing sense of confidence in the business community.  This is surely better to stimulate the ‘engine’ of the economy than build up huge debts and pump money to prop up the economy and create thousands of jobs in the public sector.

Yes, confidence is the key word.  Imagine, a cut in personal taxation today.  It sends a bold message out, injects more money into people’s pockets, which as the slight uplift in retail sales shows, will be followed through into retail spending.  People need confidence and the tax system can be used to stimulate—prod—spur on confidence.  People need that fire lit under them.

This bold move is one that has been achieved in the past.  JFK boldly showed this theory is sound in 1960 and the Irish have clearly demonstrated this with lower corporation tax:  less tax means greater yields.  

And of course we can point to the Thatcher era when low taxes led to increased investment, greater confidence and rising exchequer revenue.  When Chancellor Nigel Lawson cut the top rate of income tax to 40% he unleashed unparalleled wealth creation and the government benefited from taking a smaller piece of a far larger pie. 

But Socialists and Lib Dems disagree vehemently with this and need proof.  Hence hopefully they will learn a lot from the table below taken from official HM Treasury statistics.

Just consider that the richest 1% currently pay 23% of all tax revenues collected.  The richest 5% pay 42% of the tax collected.  Only 11.5% comes from the bottom 50%.  Where should the Government concentrate it’s efforts to stimulate the economy and gain more tax revenue?  It does not take a huge brain to work that out!

“Share of total income liability” is available for selected years.  Expressed as a percentage

Note: from 1999, people taxed as individuals not families

The time has come for the British psyche to realise that the phrase ‘cutting taxes’ does not mean falling exchequer revenues….it means, when done properly, INCREASED exchequer revenues.   Increased revenues means less government debt, it means more employment for all….and guess what….a rise in the general living standards of all.

Let’s hear George Osbourne grab this mantle and if elected, demonstrate these principles in his first budget.

Chancellor Lawson:  He got it…and demonstrated it.  Lower tax = more revenue

The Sunday Times YouGov Poll today puts the Conservatives Opinion Poll lead at 6%  That is heading towards hung Parliament territory.  Some Tories have even started to privately start to wonder if the impossible is possible and Labour sneak back in. 

Now is not the time for faint hearts and weak minds.

Now is not the time to talk of hung Parliaments and cozying up to the Lib Dems.

Now IS the time for quiet optimism and strong focus and for the waverers to cut their friendly fire sniping.

Yes, poll leads go up and down.  That is the inevitability of a fickle electorate, affected by the daily news agenda.  Some commentators attribute the Piers Morgan and Gordon Brown love-in interview as helping show the human side of Gordon.  Something the public has allegedly responded to.  But current polls need not create concern or panic.

A message to some of the wavering Tory grassroots.  We are not into the central election campaign yet.  We are in a period of noisy chitter chatter that scores points but does not influence the hearts and minds of the electorate.

Once we get the true election date, then is the time for the sprint to the finish.  Then is the time for Conservatives to reveal more policy flesh and details, (not now when Labour can take the best ideas and use them for themselves…as we know they would do).  Only then, is the time for the really punishing messages of Labour incompetence and how they have truly decimated this great nation of ours.  How they have indebted every family in this country.  That’s their idea of fairness and equality….we all owe effectively £26,000 per household in national debt.  The heavy hitting messages are ready….now is not the time to land heavy blows.  It is all about momentum.  Pickles & Cameron have that in mind.  When you run a marathon you pace yourselves, so you can sprint to the finish.  Conservatives are on track.  The energy for a srpint is well and truly there.

It really feels like, on many fronts, the Conservatives are holding back.  Pulling their punches.  In some ways just toying with Gordon.  Goding him.  Of course the key balance has been that the last thing we would have wanted was for Gordon Brown to have gone, pre the election.  We would not have wanted to fight Labour led by Miliband or Johnson.  In some ways, in those days when Brown was most vulnerable, at PMQ’s, Cameron held off battering him.  In some ways, cameron deserves credit for not killing off gordon and keeping him alive for this election campaign….anyone ever thought that?

Once the campaign starts the truly stark picture can be painted.  Yes Gordon the voters should have a ’second look’ at Labour’s record.  I am sure Cameron will encourage people to have a third, fourth and fifth look at their shambolic record in Government.  And no-one can come to any conclusion but after 13 years they have been a morally & financially bankrupt government. 

I relish the opportunity to see Gordon Brown and David Cameron in the huge TV election debates.  The electorate will see in Cameron a man with a vision for this country and conversely, Gordon Brown, a dour man, with a furious temper, with an empty basket of policies. 

So wavering Tories.  Don’t lose heart.  Keep the faith.  When the election cry is sounded.  Then is the time that Conservatives will again see their poll ratings grow.  Leading to the most important of polls….general Election day.

 The best is yet to come……

How many people do you meet nowdays that call themselves Thatcherite?

A PPC said to me the other day whilst he is a Thatcherite by ideology he would never say it publicly as it may not go down well in the Party!  He though David would not approve!

Seems like Thatcherism is an ideology that is out of fashion.

But what does being Thatcherite mean?

It means you believe in limited Government, sound economics, spending only what you can earn & not getting into debt, rolling back the frontiers of the State, espousing liberty, enpowering the individual, cutting tax, incentivising the private sector and entrepreneurs, a strong Britain on the World Stage, a strong defence policy backed by a well equipped Army, Navy & Air Force, limiting the power & scope of Europe to a free trade area not a political superstate with a single currency………

Hhhhhmmmmmm sounds good.  Aren’t we all Thatcherites? 

Much is made of the power of a blogger.

Some feel bloggers have undue influence on the political scene…others discount bloggers with contempt as a niche group of over opinionated zealous Party hacks with grandiose personal ambitions!

It is interesting to look at both sides of the story.  Some bloggers do yield  ‘power & influence’.  No-one can doubt the ’power’ that Guido and Order-Order.com yields, with, at times, the ability to shape the news agenda.  Effectively removing one of the PM’s most trusted and closest aides in Damien McBride was a real success for the bloggersphere.  The story dominated ‘Fleet street’ for weeks to come.  Guido certainly ups the paranoia factor in Westminster.  When he says a news story is about to break….MP’s look over their shoulder and quake.

Iain Dale is another great example.  Iain, in many ways does not shape the news agenda as much as a Guido exclusive does, but his grasp of PR and perceptive commentary on an issue for the media is nonetheless mightily impressive.  Iain is a trusted authority, whether on NewsNight or Sky News and is a talisman for the blogging community on how to master gaining media coverage, (sometimes he does not get the credit he deserves for his achievements in moving blogging forward).  Others now are starting to follow in his media shes, Shane Greer is a classic example and of course the up & coming Tory Bear himself.

However, not every blogger is a Guido or an Iain Dale. 

Getting to the crux of the question, will bloggers win the next election?  Nope is the clear answer if you are looking at their readership.  Let’s be honest, blogs are generally read by ‘politico’s’, those in the Westminster village, eager party supporters.  A blog reader will either be a supporter ie Conservative reading a Conservative blog, or a mischief maker, eg Labour supporters commenting on a Tory blog to torpedo any argument / have a little fun.  However, this does not sway or change votes.  Blog readers I would guess have 99% made up their mind on their voting intention, hence blogs generally don’t reach new readers and sway mass opinion.  Hence blogs wont sway an election…..not by their current readership…..how can they make an effect then and can they impact an election campaign?

Key here is that a blog story can quickly be picked up in the media and escalate into a national news story, hence then reaching the ears of the wider electorate. Therefore the job of bloggers is to help find and highlight those issues which deserve national news coverage.  Hence when Gordon Brown makes any claim in the forthcoming campaign, it will be the Tory bloggers, more so than the media, who will research the facts, check for previous policy quotes/soundbites and then publish that.  From there, an Iain Dale, Guido, CCHQ escalates up.  That is what will impact upon an election campaign…..what will be interesting in this forthcoming campaign is which bloggers, Left or Right, will generate stories that will reach national media coverage….and impact on the election campaign….maybe influence the result!

There can be no doubting the brilliance of William Hague.  A gifted orator, (take a look at this posting HERE), a man with principles, a quick thinker on his feet, and most importantly, in an age when we most need it….a politician with charisma.

But where is he?  Why is he not in the spotlight fighting Gordon Brown?  We need one of our strongest assets on the frontline in the media.

We can only hope that Cameron is holding him back ready for the General Election campaign to unleash against the Labour spin machine…..

So there is much chatter that Gordon Brown will announce this weekend the date of the General Election….and he wants it sooner rather than later. Iain Dale is getting quite excited by it.

Are we really witnessing the final days of Gordon Brown’s Government…….we can but hope…….

Hello all.

I have been away….for some time.  Thank you to so many of you who have been emailing me and also keeping your views posted on Facebook.

I really needed a break from blogging.  But now I feel refreshed and with new perspectives to share and debate with you all.  I realise by taking a break that I will need to again start rebuilding my readership but word will get out….added with a bit of interesting PR.

So in the words of Take That….I am Back for Good.

Enjoy the ride………

Conference seems a long time ago.  I remember travelling home on the train sitting next to David Willets and Cheryl Gillian, full of optimism.  A great Conference.  Never underestimating the task ahead, key was that everything was pointing in the right direction.  George Osborne had just enjoyed the Conference of his life and delivered a speech which tackled the big issues and underlined the economic competence of the Conservatives.  David Cameron had delivered a barn storming speech which left all with hope, (yes that great word that Obama anchors campaigns around), that we were en route to a better future.  This was off the back of a dreadful Labour Conference that saw a less than half empty hall wearily trudge through a week of depression, until Lord Mandelson rallied their spirits, (and his future career prospects), with throws of inspiring rhetoric for the Labour faithful to finally have a sliver of hope themselves.

Things are bleak for this Government.  Indeed, for the country.

And yet…..opinion polls are throwing up mixed results.  Trending is that Conservatives are not dominating as much as we should be.  Local council by election results, are ‘disappointing’,(in the words of ConservativeHome’s Jonathan Isaby.  Iain Dale also asks the question why by-election results are not going our way).  Yes, there are always localised reasons at play at by-election results, and their impact can never be dismissed.  But we are not dominating.  Opinion polls are patchy and not as inspiring as the recent 17% lead polls.  Tim Montgomerie on ConservativeHome has alluded to a drop in Conservatives support post Lisbon Treaty ‘U-Turn’.  Many seem to agree with that sentiment on that blog site.  But there is more to it than Europe.

What is fundamentally true is that the Conservatives have so much ammunition at their disposal, the question why polls are not moving stronger in our favour is a valid one to ask!

Consider what’s happening around us…..

  -           The economy.  First into recession, last out.  And the deepest recession in Europe.  We hurtle catastrophically towards a £1 trillion debt that our children will still be paying off in years to come. Brown has got away with the biggest lie in Political history.  That lie?  That debt has been built up because Brown states he was saving the UK from recession, (actually he would say saving the world from recession but scrub that).  That’s like Tiger Woods saying he had 10 birdies in a round and his wife believing he was talking about Golf!   Brown was building debt way before this recession even started.  In the good times he was spending like a manic gambler at the roulette table, hoping the ball will end on black.  In the words of the IMF:  ‘Imbalances and balance sheet strains had emerged even before the recent global shocks triggered a sharp decline in economic activity’.  ie we were heading into recession and spending too heavily BEFORE the Global shocks took place. 

 -           Unemployment heads towards 3 million, (that’s by official figures), unofficially claims of 6 million seem more accurate.  That’s people’s lives wrecked, on hold, dignity stripped.  Benefits and dependency culture set in.

 -           Class War.  Entrepreneurs discouraged.  Bankers bashed.  Top talent packing their bags to work abroad as UK thumps those very people who can bring us out of slump, create jobs for others and generate tax revenues, pummelled to the ground, with more ferocity than an uppercut from Mike Tyson in his prime, by punitive tax rates.  50% for top earners.  40% threshold frozen.  More on NI.  VAT back up 2.5%.  Penalties on companies that reward bankers who make money, (the very people we need to save and keep in this country, not incentivise to work and benefit New York’s Stock Exchange). 

 -           The Unions start to flex their muscles.  Just as the nation was free from the strangulation and choking hold of the Unions, like in ‘The Shining’ ‘They’re back’!  Strikes on the increase, Union militancy.  Bob Crow back on the telly chanting his monotone messages like a failed XFactor auditionee.  The Post Office, on the brink of collapse, wont modernise, cancerously pumping money into its bottomless pension pit, faced by striking members, and growing competition.  The RMT, getting the Tube drivers out on strike, more often than we enjoy a boiling hot summers day that we can take off our shirts and bathe!  And that comes before the pending winter of discontent as Unions rally against Darling’s 1% pay rise limit for public sector workers.  Who will be out striking first?  Rush down Ladbroke’s and place your bet tonight. 

 -           Our population continues on its inextricable path towards 70 million.  Immigration remains unchecked.  Asylum seekers lost amongst the population.  Our open borders burden the UK putting huge strain on over stretched public services, with the NHS groaning under the weight, school classes getting bigger, new houses being built on green belt, predicted power shortages for the years ahead as we don’t have the power stations to support our surging nation, public transport wheezing and roads at a standstill. 

 -           We are in the midst of a deeply unpopular war.  Over 200 brave soldiers have been returned home in a coffin.  Debates over strategy have been rife.  More concerning than that, real questions over the equipment troops are issued with and the lack of protection eg helicopters, have undermined this Government.  There could not be a more inept and ‘uncaring’ Defence Minister in Bob Ainsworth.

 -           The Iraq enquiry is rapidly tarnishing the reputation of ‘Labour’s greatest Leader’, Tony Blair.  We hear daily about the lack of credible evidence of weapons of mass destruction and the inability of Saddam Hussein’s regime to produce workable ones.  Coded language comes from the Iraq Enquiry that George W Bush wanted a hard line and pushed Blair into it.  Bliar indeed.

 -           A House of Commons with politicians so morally corrupt that make even Ronnie Biggs look respectable.  Yes, you will retort that Conservative politicians have been just as bad.  BUT the Government have been poor in taking any lead in cleaning up this sh*tstorm of a mess.  Cameron, has pushed Brown all the way.  Even this week we hear of Prime Minister Brown repaying £500 for painting a shed!

 -           Europe.  The continued enslavery of the British people continues to the faceless unelected bureaucrats of Europe.  Now we have the dreaded Lisbon Treaty with the instantly forgettable, but powerful. President of the European Union, (Herman Van Rompuy), and Foreign Minister, Cathy Ashton, (a Brit who was as vocal in British politics as Sooty was to Children’s TV!).  Blair and Brown promised a referendum for the British people but it never ever emerged.  Yes, Cameron took some hammering on his so called U-turn but a referendum on a Treaty in force is daft.  Another referendum on whether we have given too much power away, hell yes.  The blame for our European ills lay firmly at Brown’s door.

-           Education, Education, Education.  Blair’s famous pledge that education was his first, second and third priority.  A memorable catch phrase that was almost Turette’s by nature, proved to be as reliable as Amy Whinehouse sticking to drinking coke in a bar all night !   Education failures rack up.  50,000 A-level students miss out on a place at university.  This year 52,000 more people applied to University but only 13,000 extra places were made available.  The number of young people not in employment, education or training (Neet) has leapt by more than 100,000 in the past year.  Government statistics show there are now almost 960,000 16- to 24-year-old Neets in England, more than 230,000 of whom are aged between 16 and 18.  Oh and the flagship policy, SAT’s…teachers aim to boycott them next year!

-           A big brother state that worms its way into every aspect of our lives.  Want to help out at your local school?  Drive friends Children to their Cubs or Girl Guides?  Got to be checked on the anti paedophile register first.

Quite literally I could go on all night listing failure after failure after failure.

Fertile ground to be in Opposition.  Too much to choose from.  Should be Christmas all year round.

Opinion polls should be absolutely hammering Labour for their incompetence.  Criminal incompetence.  But they aren’t.

Some recent polls have put the difference between Conservatives to 10% difference.  Labour commanding a mid – late 20’s position.

Who the hell is being polled?  Who is supporting this shower?

As we head towards an election, the most important in many a lifetime, Conservatives need to open up the gap and generate clear blue water.  This is the ‘Schumacher’ moment when we need to be so far ahead of the field, we need to be lapping not only the back markers but coming up to lap the entire field.  Schumacher never slowed up.  He pummelled his fellow drivers into the ground.  As we must do now.

So what is wrong?

Why are we not opening up more of a gap?

Many commentators say that Conservatives Agenda is not yet bought by the British people.  Voters don’t quite trust us as yet.  They don’t understand what we stand for.  They like nice Mr Cameron but don’t have a feel for what he would do.

Much of this can be brought out in the wash in an election campaign say Conservative campaign team leaders.  Maybe…in them we have to trust!  We are not privy to the campaign they intend to use to convince the people.

But one suggestion I would impart onto David, Eric, George & William is that the key word around the campaigns table must be emotion.  Emotion is what politics lacks.  Emotion means getting personal.  It means relating to the ordinary person in the street.  Emotion creates and bonds loyalty and trust.

Politics today is too focused on debating statistics or policies.  As we all fight the election in the middle ground, choices get confused, differences misunderstood by the public, whose political antenna is not as attuned as Westminster politicians think.  I say we all fight in the middle, the key word is that all parties want to be perceived as in the middle, to attract the largest number of voters.  Matters not that policies may be more left or right wing, the centre is where we all will fight, (rightly or wrongly in your opinion).

Margaret Thatcher and Norman Tebbit had their finger on the pulse of the people.  They spoke in terms that people understood.  They personalised and humanised issues that people could relate to.  Politicians are forgetting that, just as any film director tries to do, it is about getting someone to believe in what they see.  Emotion is created by personalising issues.  Remember when Margaret Thatcher turned complex economic issues into the language that people understood.  On spending she equated the state to the family.  We cannot spend what we cannot afford.  When we are at home, if we cannot afford it, we save and then we can afford it, we buy it.  Simple language but the people loved it.  The housewife spoke!  Powerful and it resonated.  More so that today’s debate which quotes pure stats and percentages that Joe public does not understand…or will try to understand as they worry whether Joe, Stacey or Olly will win the XFactor!

Unemployment is not about a statistic of 3 million people it is about Mr Jones, who worked all his life, bought his own council house, can’t find work, wife fallen ill, daughter can’t afford University, a man depressed, lost his dignity but wants better for his family…and is fighting to earn money.  In him we respect and want to see him do well.

The health service is not about dirty corridors, increases in disease, rising cancer death rates, it is about Mrs Hughes, a mother who has a family of 3 beautiful daughters, husband died at war, who is diagnosed with cancer and facing life’s hardest choices.  How do we help her and her daughters.

Afghanistan is so more more than a statistic 200 dead, it is about John, a brave soldier on the front line who died by roadside ambush, a wife pregnant with his unborn daughter, a family torn apart.  How we help that family of a man who gave the ultimate sacrifice for all of us.

Public debt is not about a figure of trillion pounds.  It is about Mary, who is struggling to pay her mortgage, close to repossession, working for a company that is struggling to get credit, that is laying off workers, (her friends).

Violent crime is not about a percentage.  It is about 8 year old Sarah, whose father went to pick up a takeaway for the family, but never came home as youths taunted him, attacked him and used a knife in a savage unprovoked attack.

David Cameron is a thoroughly decent man.  Post the tragic death of Ivan the public saw a different side to the Politician.  They related to him.  A family man.  A bereaving dad.  A loving husband.  And they could associate with that.  We see less of the personal side of David of late.  That loving family man, the dad, the husband, has been less visible.   The emotion of the man not emanating out.

Some may shout this down.

But just sit and watch ‘Britain’s Got Talent’ or ‘The X Factor’.  Watch how contestant’s are introduced.  How emotion is used to get that tear welling up in your eye.  Get that lump in your throat.  Make you leap our your chair and vote for them because, for that moment in time, ‘they’ matter to you more than anything else.  You support them.  You don’t care paying a phone vote because you feel better in yourself for supporting them.  You feel you are making a difference.  We can all point to stories used on shows like this.  The daughter who was told by her dad to audition for Britain’s Got Talent by a dad, who died suddenly and she is now doing this for him.  Who did not feel emotional.

So, David Cameron, more than anyone, realises the election is not in the bag.  By a long way.  It’s not over until he faces the cameras on election night after Gordon Brown has conceded defeat.

So dangerous waters lie ahead.  Gordon Brown has been getting more confident of late.  The last two PMQ’s have been his strongest for a long time.  Iain Dale even concluded that Brown beat Cameron in one of them.  Unheard of!  The economy will start to turn round in the new year.  Brown must sit by the fire at No.10 with Sarah over a mug of hot chocolate and array of biscuits, (as he can’t decide his favourite), and really laugh.  ‘Sarah, look at how bad a mess everything is and yet look at those polls.  We are only 10% behind!  Even with the state of the UK as it is the Conservatives can’t kill us off.  We could still win this Sarah!’…..as she forlornly and adoringly looks into the eye of her ‘hero’! 

And things can change in politics.  The nightmare scenario still exists.  What if Gordon Brown steps down early next year?  A new Labour Leader emerges, be it Johnson, Miliband, Purnell or Mandelson, and starts to distance themselves from Brown’s policies, as the economy picks up and as they benefit from a honeymoon period in the polls, that any new leader always does.

Could Labour win the next election.  Yes.  The public may do a 1992 and shock and keep an ‘unpopular’ Government in.  Better the devil you know.  ‘Oh well things are getting better let’s stick with Labour’.

Worst case, as Ken Clarke would say, a hung Parliament.  The best of no worlds.

Election loss.  Conservatives would tear themselves apart.  Many keeping their lips sealed now for Party Unity would feel empowered to state their case.  Something none of us ever wants to see ever again.

So let’s see more spark to our Opposition.  Let’s see our front bench hammering the Government ever harder.  Let’s see emotion, personalisation and humanisation used to bring issues closer to the public, so they understand what really is going on.

We cannot afford, as a Great Nation, to see Labour in again.

………………….Lord Pearson.

Clearly the best of the candidates standing for the post as UKIP leader.  But arguably none as charismatic as the outgoing Nigel Farage.  Many of us remember Lord Pearson as a former Conservative and strong Party Donor.  UKIP is home to many disgruntled Tories it seems!

Whatever your view of Farage, he has been the backbone of UKIP and his driving personality reaped rewards for the small fringe Party.  It will be interesting to see what happens under the unelected Lord and whether UKIP will now decline.  Pearson is a strong man.  He speaks his mind and is not afraid of controversy.  Maybe Farage will be back again one day….?

Farage is now free.  In the short term he has his fight against Speaker Bercow in Buckingham.  That will be one of the media spotlights in the coming campaign.  Will be interesting to see whether Iain Dale covers this in the next edition of Total Politics with his interview with the new Speaker.  I am sure knowing Iain he will.  Would love to know how Bercow feels about Farage.

What I cant get out of the back of my mind is that there would be no need for a UKIP, if the Conservatives were more sceptical in their attitude towards Europe…..but that’s another subject.

Is there a case to be made for the legalisation of prostitution in a modern free society? 

Would it shock you that official best guesses are that there are over 80,000 prostitutes working in the UK today!  Wikipedia details that, in 2003, it was estimated that, in London one woman in 300 was working as a prostitute (compared to one in 35 in Amsterdam).

Prostitution is known as the oldest profession but one that still can generate the feeling of utter revulsion.  For many older readers of this blog, the word itself ‘prostitution’ conjures up seedy images of dirty old men in tweed coats, sneaking off into side alleys with ‘skanky’ looking women and performing unimaginable acts of depravity.  For others, the freedom of the individual is to the fore, whereby, two consenting adults should be left to do what they want. 

Where do you stand?

A controversial subject….for many taboo.  One in which very few blogs will pass comment.  So why this one?  What got me thinking about this subject?  Two things.  Firstly, the media publicity surrounding ‘Belle de Jour’ breaking her anonymity and ‘going public’ this past week and secondly a recent comment left by a reader, ‘Jenny’, on this blog site about how she was struggling to make ends meet in this recession and how she turned to prostitution to support her family.

‘Belle de Jour’

For those of you unaware of this story, ‘Belle’, was for many years a high-class London call girl / prostitute — who wrote an anonymous blog about her experiences, detailing her many sexual and emotional encounters, (some would say taking the Adrian Mole diary concept to the next step for liberated women!).   This blog was then turned into two best-selling books, ‘The Intimate Adventures of a London Call Girl’ and ‘The Further Adventures of a London Call Girl’. Belle’s books were re-energised two years ago, when they were turned into a highly rated TV series starring Billie Piper.  For those interested to look at Belle’s blog site, you can find it HERE and her Twitter feed HERE  

For those thinking this was some dirty, seedy diary, Belle’s behind the scenes insight into her life and views on men is not a blow-by-blow sex guide, but more akin to a camp & fun Sex & the City style adventure!  It must noted that reviewers of these books critically state that the style of writing is what engages readers and that Belle comes across in a ‘sassy, finger-snapping, girl’s best-friend style’.

What is fascinating in this story is who the real Belle turned out to be!  Now for some, the expectation was for a horrible, ‘ugly’, desperate woman that could be pilloried and held up as an example to batter the oldest profession.  Brooke Magnanti crashed through the barriers of anonymity and revealed herself to be the real ‘Belle’.  But Brooke is in fact, DOCTOR Brooke Magnanti, a research scientist at Bristol University.  Now why did Brooke, an intelligent woman with bright prospects turn to prostitution?  Her reply…..she became a £300 an hour high class escort to help fund her studies for a doctorate!  See her here on Sky News….

Now that is an eye opener.  A clever woman with a bright future freely took the decision to fund her way through college via selling her body for ‘protected sex’.  And today, no one harmed, she is proud to be a successful Doctor, (and writer!). 

Does Belle glamorise prostitution as some are saying today?  Opponents of prostitution, quite rightly, point out that Brooke or ‘Belle’ was a fortunate high class hooker and that ‘in real life’ there are many prostitutes who work in horrific conditions, ‘owned’ by a pimp and who earn little money and live a desolate life.  Which is true.  But supporters of legalising prostitution counter that the very seeds of arguing against the legalisation of prostitution are contained in the opponents arguments for banning it.  Yes it is a dangerous profession, yes Pimps need to be banned, yes disease is prevalent.   But are these in fact arguments that support and regulation solve and that making it illegal, drives it underground and hence into dangerous hands.

But Belle is not the only case.  Let’s take Jenny, who left comment on a blog about the depth of the recession.

 ‘Jenny’

Turning to Jenny and the blog comment she left.  Jenny challenged blog readers to come up for a better solution for her problems.  Seems like Jenny had a boyfriend who left her and their kids and she was left with a mortgage to pay and aforesaid kids to provide for.  She claims that there are too few jobs and that state benefits are pathetic. 

Let’s try and flesh this situation out some more and perhaps stretch this story to its limits as I don’t have all the details but it serves as a useful illustration.  Let’s take for granted that Jenny has a high mortgage, (perhaps negative equity), stays at home to bring up the children, whilst her partner works and brings home the money to support their lifestyle.  But that partner then ups and leaves.  Gone overnight.  The CSA start their work in tracking the father but that can be a slow process.  So this woman, faced with a mortgage, a lifestyle to support and more importantly children, for whatever reason turned to prostitution.  Rightly or wrongly, according to your position.  She claims that she could ‘work’ as a prostitute and sell her body for ‘mindless sex’ for £500.  (Higher than Belle!)

Now most people’s reaction will be first condemnation.  But then, when you think of it, when faced in a desperate position, did Jenny do so wrong in protecting, as she would see it, her family & lifestyle and indeed, maybe enhance it, (if you see money as an enhancer!).  Yes, there are moral decisions being made but perhaps those that an individual should take not society?

So are we at the point we should liberate our minds and re-consider prostitution?  Why would prostitution be legalised?

The case for legalisation?

So why legalise prostitution?  There are several key arguments propounded.

— Freedom of liberty.   Supporters say that it should not be in the remit of the state if two consenting individuals want to exchange money for sex.  As long as both sides are consenting, nothing is done against anyone’s free will.  Why should the State intervene?  The woman or the man providing sex is proving a ‘service’ that should be seen in the same way as a foot massage or facial.  The State they argue never knows best.

— Safety for both the prostitutes and customers could be assured.   Prostitutes can end up missing, murdered, or severely beaten. If prostitution is legalized and regulated, the number of tragedies involving prostitutes can be lessened. Those in favour of legalizing prostitution feel that “violence, exploitation, and health effects suffered by women in prostitution” are not deep-seated in the trade but are the outcome of the behaviour of “bad pimps or buyers”; many feel that if “prostitution were regulated by the state these harms would diminish”

— Less disease.  Prostitutes would be checked for disease.   With proper and mandatory health care provided to prostitutes, the risk of disease can be lessened significantly. Prostitutes could be required to have mandatory disease testing done every six months.  In the age of AIDS and other sexual diseases, greater control and monitoring is propounded as a step forward. This way, if the prostitutes are clean then they cannot transmit diseases to their customers.

— Pimps would be eliminated.   The power of pimps could be lessened, and perhaps even banned, to ensure the safety and well-being of prostitutes. Pimps often beat, or even kill, their prostitutes, and Prostitutes could be required to be licensed and made to carry some sort of government issued identification card. The state of Nevada gave the right to each county to determine whether or not to legalize prostitution. Churchill county voted two to one in favour of licensed brothels, which were not to be placed on main streets or close to churches or schools. Prostitutes working in these brothels are required to carry identification cards and are usually fingerprinted (“Prostitution”). This is for the safety of the prostitute.

— Better stability of relationships.  Given divorce break up’s, affairs and cheating is endemic in society, would ‘mindless, uncommitted’ sex act as an outlet and ensure more couples stay together for their families?

— A multimillion dollar business would be taxed.  Just consider the amount of tax revenue missed out…… do the maths

                        Miss X charges £250 per hour

                        She sees 1 client in the afternoon and 2 in the evening

                        That’s £750 per day ‘earnt’

                        Miss X works Monday – Fri ie 5 days and pulls in £4,500 per week

                        She works, let’s say 48 weeks of the year, (takes 4 off like the rest of us).

                        That’s an annual salary of £180,000  untaxed……

                        So from a taxation point of view….who is being screwed?

— Prostitution would be removed from residential neighbourhoods.   The famous, ‘Not in my back yard’ argument.  Set, controlled, regulated, safe environments.

My conclusion

Do I have answer to whether prostitution should be legal in a free society?  I find this a tough subject.  My conscience wrestles between a strict moral code where it is abhorrent to the values I hold.  I can see the depths that some dive to and feel so low and desperate that they will do anything to support their families/earn a living.  I revile in reading about the dreadful conditions that these prostitutes have to reportedly work in, many bullied, (physically & emotionally), by pimps to make money for others that they never see.  So where do I stand?  Would I ever entertain the idea of using a prostitute?  No.  Never under any circumstances.  I have my own strict moral guide.  BUT….and this is a big BUT.  I love and revel in freedom.  I want more personal freedom….tough in a society throttling the very liberties we once enjoyed).  Everyone has a right to be different in society.  The State holds no legitimacy or right  to regulate others in personal matters.  My passion for the freedom of the individual knows no bounds.  I cherish individual freedom above issues of morality like this.  Why should I say that people should not be free to do what they want?  Consenting, (and that is a critical word), adults, engaging in a ’service’, harms no one else’s life, indeed the arguments above for legalising prostitution in fact help society….less violence, less crime, less sexual disease, more money for the state.  Therefore, my desire for liberty supports the legalisation of the oldest profession.

Don’t expect to see the legalisation of prostitution in the next Conservative Manifesto.  It is not a vote winner.  But true followers of a free society know that the fight for more freedom for the individual never ends as we ‘continue down the road to serfdom’.   What do you think?  Would you visit a prostitute if it were legal?…but more importantly would you frown on your friends if they did?………………………

Those that condemn….did you enjoy watching Pretty Woman at the cinema/DVD?  Watch Billie Piper on ITV as Belle?……………………..

Yes.  I am raising the one topic that Politicians don’t want to discuss….apart from the BNP!

And no….Immigration is not about race/colour/nationality……it is….a purely economic issue.  Yes.  ECONOMIC! 

Immigration is the great taboo subject.  The moment it is mentioned, the race card is immediately played.  Speak about restricting immigration into our nation and the ‘left’ immediately invoke the term ‘racist’ and reference someone as being a card carrying member of the BNP.  Hence, real debate is immediately stifled! We deserve better than this.

And yes, immigration is hard to discuss for Conservatives without having the spectre of Enoch Powell’s ’Rivers of Blood speech’, being submitted as a battering ram against any sensible discussion or argument. 

So this blog article is looking at immigration and how sustainable UK entry levels are in a recession, with a strangling, cancerous level of public debt, spiraling unemployment and massively overstretched public services….. and presenting facts for your thoughtful reflection.

Immigration is a HUGE concern to the British people.  It is, without fail, in the top issues that people worry about.  Go down the pub and it’s always a subject of healthy debate.  Hence this allows the BNP the freedom to play on these concerns….and the BNP use all the emotional tricks going to whip a feeding frenzy of publicity.  BNP associate rising unemployment with immigration….hence they publisicse that immigrants are taking British people’s jobs, immigrants taking ‘our’ benefits, immigrants causing crime and making our streets unsafe, immigrants stretching ‘our’ healthcare etc…those are the headlines that the BNP want to see and seek to generate….and some in the media happily pedal this base level argument, verging on vile filth.

The BNP should be nowhere in the polls….but the inability of our politicians…allow the BNP access to public debate….to the oxygen of publicity.  Brown pressed the emotional button with ‘British jobs for British workers’ and boy did this get the public fired up.  Then Brown realized that this was protectionist language and backtracked because Cameron reminded him that huge amounts of British workers were employed abroad, especially across Europe and if we promoted ‘British jobs for British workers’ then, if our European partners did the same, British workers abroad could lose their jobs. 

So David Cameron.  Let’s seize the argument over immigration and squeeze out the BNP.  Kill the issue and you kill the lunatics of the BNP.  How?….use facts in your argument and this will seize populist belief.

Let’s not sleepwalk to 70 million people in the UK, if we cant afford it…..and our public services certainly struggle to cope with 56 million!

Huge levels of immigration put pressure on existing issues we face and are not solving:

- Housing   (limited housing stock and depressed housing market, lack of money to build new houses)

- Jobs   (rising levels of unemployment, not enough jobs to go round)

- State benefit system  (already overstretched with unemployment benefit rising and depleted exchequer revenues)

- Health service  (stretched to the bone, not enough beds, increasing waiting times)

- Education  (already cuts in University funds are seeing students turned away, pressure on schools and classroom sizes)

- Travel infrastructure  (Decrepit roads at a standstill with overwhelming traffic, trains creaking–need for money and public not incentivised to travel on any form of public transport as poor service and very expensive)

- Environment  (building more houses in the countryside, growing pollution, more cars on the road, more wasteful emissions and wastage occurring)

- Depleting energy resources  (more people using more and more resources, speeding their depletion)

- Social Fabric  (how differing cultures seamlessly blend in stressful recessionary times and live harmoniously)

So let’s get to the facts….Immigration is not an emotional debate, it is an economic and social debate, over what the UK can afford and how society should grow, (as shown above).

So what is happening, what is the problem?…in facts we can understand not ‘emotive BNP propaganda’:

-     Net immigration has quadrupled since 1997 to 237,000 a year.  Yes New Labour have failed to get a grip on this

-     This means a migrant now arrives nearly every minute….yes every minute

-      Immigration will add 7 million to the population of England in the next 20 years – that is 7 times the population of Birmingham.

-      By 2008, almost one in nine British residents (6.5m) was born abroad.

-      Some estimates show that we must build a new home every six minutes for new migrants.

-      Much of the increase of immigrants has come from residents of the “A8″ countries that joined the EU in May 2004 – the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia.

-     Of these, two thirds were Polish, making Poland the third most common country of birth for immigrants living in Britain, after India and the Republic of Ireland.

-     The latest government household projections show that immigration will account for 39% of all new households in the next 20 years.

-      England is already the most crowded country in Europe (except Malta)

-      To keep the population of the UK below 70 million, immigration must be reduced by 75%.

-      Asylum immigration, (much loved by the tabloids), only runs at 10% of net immigration, (30,000 per year)

-      There are more than 300 primary schools in which over 70% have English as a second language; this is nearly a half million children.

-     In London, which has long been home to immigrants from all over the world, one in three residents was born abroad by 2007. In the boroughs of Westminster and Brent, there are more foreign-born people than Britons.

-   Growing level of illegal immigrants, (classed as those who enter illegally on the back of a truck, visitors and students who overstay their visas, and rejected asylum seekers who the authorities fail to remove.  In March 2009 a study by the London School of Economics suggested a central estimate of 725,000 of which 518,000 were thought to be in London.

So, alarming figures.  With the UK in the midst of a severe recession, with a public debt that is cancerously spiraling the UK to bankruptcy, it is clear action needs to be taken.   Now, key to this, is not a discussion on the colour of skin, a particular race or culture, but a discussion on the burden that is being placed on public services, housing, environment, society and quality of life.

Defendants of immigration point to the economic benefits of immigrants.   So, what are the economic benefits of immigration?  Searching the Internet and Government papers shows only one major study into this area.  This was enacted by the Economic Affairs Committee of the House of Lords in 1997/98. In April 1998 they stated that “We have found no evidence for the argument, made by the government, business and many others, that net immigration – immigration minus emigration – generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population.” As regards the contribution of migrants to the Exchequer, they concluded that “The overall fiscal impact of immigration is likely to be small, though this masks significant variations across different immigrant groups.”

So who is to blame for the tidal wave of immigration?  New Labour have a lot of blame at their door as they have accelerated the numbers of immigrants, including 

-  Trebling the number of work permits issued from 43,000 in 1997 to 129,000 in 2007. (Dependants are additional—yes additional!)

-   Changing the rules in June 1997 to permit marriage to be used as a means of immigration. The numbers have since risen by 50% to about 42,000 a year.

-  Not removing those immigrants that are rejected each year so the pool of illegal immigrants continues to grow. Applications are currently running at about 30,000 a year.

 So what can be done by David Cameron & his Conservatives pre election?

-      Seize the moment and seize the issue. Cameron should address immigration with a clear policy.  This will be popular amongst voters but also make a difference to the economy.  A vote winner.

-     He should propose we stabilise the current population level to what it is,  (stabilise by balancing immigration & emigration).  Not approach levels of 70 million.

-     Propose we set an agreed target range for immigration and keep to it, (much as other countries do) eg say 20,000

-     Propose stronger border controls and increased investment to prevent illegal immigrants

-     Propose the UK cap the level of work permits.  And increase the number of points needed to settle here, (hence aid economic recovery)

-     Propose the UK cap the number of students immigrating in to study in the UK

-     Whilst asylum is low in proportion, propose measures to deport those who cannot demonstrate the need for true asylum

-     Propose measures to remove illegal immigrants.  Easy to say but hard to empower.  Start by massive punitive fines to employers of illegal immigrants.

All these proposals are potential election manifesto winners on this emotive subject.  I hope this blog demonstrates that the issue of immigration, when tackled sensitively in an economic and social basis, is a huge vote winner.  David…over to you……

In a recent comment to Scott Newton’s guest blog, “Why Cutting Income Tax, Cutting Red Tape and Deregulating Business is essential for the UK’s Future.” I promised to write more on UK Tax Policy.

I must add that these are my personal observations and are not intended to upset anyone…

…Including Scott who’s piece is right on the mark. (Well done Scott!)

For the past 4 years my company (www.ditg.org.uk) has been funded by the worlds largest ICT brands to establish a replacement for the Government’s Home Computing Initiative (HCI).

HCI was budget measure implemented by Gordon Brown as a Tax Incentive for employees. Under Section 320 of the Finance Act, employees could acquire up to £2500 worth computer equipment from their employer Income Tax exempt. In turn, employers enjoyed an exemption on Class 1A National Insurance on the amounts salary sacrificed by the employee.

This created an industry worth £450 Million to the UK and about 2500 related employment opportunities.

Unfortunately, the exemption was removed in Budget 2006. (It was proving too successful?)

This resulted in one of the longest cross-examinations during the reading for a finance bill in recent times. (Well worth a read on Hanson – see the below link).

The Government cited “abuse” as the reason for removing the benefit and pledged to “refocus efforts on those most in need”. Check out the written evidence taken at the time:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmtreasy/994/994we14.htm

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmtreasy/994/994we08.htm

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmtreasy/994/994we06.htm

YOU MUST READ THIS NEXT ONE, IT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY HCI, BUT IS A GREAT READ.

IT ALSO SHOW THAT INSPITE OF WHAT YOU MAY THINK, WE DO RETAIN A AN OPEN AN UNBVIASED RECORD OF PUBLIC COMMENT AS PART OF UK POLITICS.

IT IS ALSO HILARIOUS:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmtreasy/994/994we07.htm

Just in case you don’t want to click off the blog – here is a taster:

“The rhetoric of “transformation”, “reform”, “investment”, “transparency”, “devolution”, “prudent”, “cautious”, “audited” and “world class” is so indulgent and self-congratulatory that one wonders if some drafters inside the Treasury are parodying ministers.”

Professor David Heald, Comments on Budget 2006

Ouch!

At the time the Conservative Party and Liberal Democrats both lobbied against the decision and the recorded debate on Hansard is a fantastic read. It is also a good introduction to political punditry and how Politician’s really debate:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/vo060502/debtext/60502-22.htm

(The unanswered question for me was always how you can abuse a taxation system that assesses individual taxation in arrears…but then I am bias and this blog isn’t about HCI!)

So with this background you would think that it would be easy to gain Parliamentary support for a refocused replacement scheme developed over 4 years at a cost to the IT Industry (not the tax payer!) of over £2.6 Million.

Not so…

In practice the differentiation between the Parties on the issue of supporting a tax incentives is in practice not all that large. (Sorry Scott)

ALL Ministers (despite what the expenses scandal suggests) are concerned as to how to pay for any incentive, will it fit with policy…

So why post this blog at all?

Well my personal concern is not about the detail of Tax Policies, nor believe it or not HCI.

My concern is the Conservative approach. Will it win us the election?

Have a look at the following comparison of Labor and Tax summary statements.

John questions whether there is enough clear blue water between Labour & Conservatives on Tax policy……you decide!

Treat yourself and see if you can spot the difference!

Conservatives:

“We will freeze council tax for two years by reducing wasteful spending on advertising and consultancy in central government.”

Labour:

“We are reducing the amount of central prescription so that local authorities and their partners are better able to respond to local needs and demands.”

Conservatives:

“We will introduce a £50bn National Loan Guarantee Scheme to underwrite
bank lending to businesses and get credit flowing again.”

Labour (DirectGov):

“The government is announcing that it will offer capital and asset protection on those assets most affected by the current economic conditions. This will reduce banks’ uncertainty about the value of past investments, so providing them with greater confidence to lend in the future to creditworthy businesses, homeowners and consumers.”

Labour (Policy):

“Working with banks, Labour is providing loan guarantees to businesses to help them get the credit they need.”

Conservatives:

“We will provide tax cuts for new jobs with a £2.6bn package of tax breaks to get people into work, funded by money that would otherwise go on unemployment benefit.”

Labour:

“Extra cash to encourage employers to recruit people without jobs.”

“Stepping up the training and support people need to get back to work.”

Conservatives:

“We will cut the main rate of corporation tax to 25p and the small companies’ rate to 20p, paid for by scrapping complex reliefs and allowances”

Labour:

“Allowing businesses facing difficulties to spread their tax payments on a timetable they can afford.”

Conservatives:

“We will give small and medium-sized businesses a six-month VAT holiday, funded by a 7.5% interest rate on delayed payments.”

Labour:

“We have reduce VAT to 15%”

Conservatives:

“We will cut National Insurance by 1% for six months for firms with fewer than five employees, paid for from the above changes to the company tax regime.”  

Labour:

“When it is affordable, we will re-link the basic state pension to earnings.  We aim to do this by 2012 or by the end of the next parliament at the latest.”

Conservatives:

“We will abolish Stamp Duty for nine out of ten first-time buyers and raise the Inheritance Tax threshold to £1 million. Both of these changes will be funded by a flat-rate charge on non-domiciles.”

Labour:

“Extending the Stamp Duty holiday for properties under £175,000”

“Extra mortgage protection to help families stay in their homes”

“Helping savers by increasing the threshold of Individual Savings Accounts to over £10,000”

Now hopefully some clever contributors will now explain to me the differences in the comments…WAIT, some I can see! (And before you comment, I know that the Conservatives have shown how they will pay for it !!)

But you know it all does kind of sound the same to me…and taxation detail is part of my day job…

…So what hope does the deciding electorate have?

I do sincerely hope the Tory manifesto has some really clear taxation differentiators in it.

Otherwise I might get confused and vote for the wrong Party.

Here is a thought…committing to bring back s320 income tax benefits for computers would be a start.

Hey look, it is my daily bread…      

John Laity…..