We must do all we can to prevent another Soham but are we in danger of creating a society in which we think every adult approaching children means to do them harm?

That is a sensible question following a report carried in The Daily Telegraph today which is nothing short of disturbing.  The Government’s obsession with intruding into our lives knows no bounds.  This intrusion is the new anti-paedophile database, set up in the wake of the Soham murders, with a goal of stopping paedophiles gaining access to children and prevent inappropriate people working with vulnerable adults.

Under the plan parents could face a £5,000 fine for the simple favour of driving their children’s friends to a sports event or Cub Scout /girl guide meeting if they have not been vetted first by the massive new government agency. 11.3million people – one adult in four – are likely to come under the scrutiny of the Independent Safeguarding Authority. Launched next month this will be the biggest vetting and clearing system in the world. Every person who comes into regular contact with children or the elderly, through work or volunteering, must be approved by ISA officials checking for criminal convictions, disciplinary action and even unproven allegations……and they will have to pay for the pleasure of being on this database!

Anyone who is paid for their efforts will be charged a registration fee of £64.  Now consider that 11.3 million are expected to register, that means a stealth tax of: £723, 200, 000.

None of us want another Soham.   But the scale of what this prying government are introducing covers even those who have the briefest of contact with children.  Iain Dale highlights a typical situation for many.  Iain regularly gets invited to give talks at schools to help educate them in politics.  A totally honourable thing to do.  But Iain correctly states a point of view many will share: ’Well I for one won’t be signing up to it. I don’t need to prove my innocence to anyone. Some of you might rejoice in the fact that it may mean I won’t be able to impart my words of wisdom to schoolkids any longer. Fair enough. But what about the local historian, what about the local bank manager or careers adviser who decides that they are not going to subject themselves to this? In the end it is the kids themselves who will lose out’.  He is totally right judging from the outpouring of emotion across the web today.  Many innocent people don’t want this intrusion into their lives.

Let’s look at the consequences further.

Chris Grayling is right when he states:  ‘We are going to drive away volunteers, we’ll see clubs and activities close down and we’ll end up with more bored young people on our streets’.” – Daily Mail

Grayling went further today when he added: ’This scheme cannot be allowed to go ahead in this way. We would review the whole safeguarding process and scale it back so that common sense applies. Of course we have to check out those people who have jobs working with children, but the idea that we would vet 11 million parents is complete nonsense’.  Well said Chris!

Graeme Archer, on ConservativeHome, makes a great argument on CentreRight.

‘This insidious, filthy law – actually, would it be possible to design a worse one? – will not protect children – that much is obvious – but it will lead to:

• fewer adults giving up their time to help in their communities;
• an increase in mutual distrust;
• the fostering of the corrosive anti-child culture which causes most men to shy away from so much as talking to a child in public, even if the child is in visible distress;
• an increase in unchecked antisocial behaviour (who’s going to risk approaching a gang of teenage troublemakers now?);
• a waste of money on pointless bureaucracy’.

The best thing to do with this proposal?  Ditch it.  Scrap it.  As the Information Commisioner’s Office, the data watchdog highlights, a large database could see personal details being wrongly disclosed.  We have seen the Government lose many data disks over the years.  This is one step too far.  An intrusion into our civil liberty……

We must do all be can to prevent another Soham.  But let’s have sensible & workable suggestions.

It seems increasingly likely that Gordon Brown will have to be deposed by Labour in the coming weeks/months, to have any chance in the next election.  David Miliband, Harriet Harman, James Purnell and Alan Johnson are the names floating round as the most obvious successors.  But who would Conservatives most fear?  And why should we target that potential leader to dim their brand.

Let’s look at each potential leader.  First to be discounted is Harriet Harman.  Labour, in even their wildest moments would not elect such an erratic performer as Harriet.  Becoming increasingly derided over her poor performance and her bizarre interpretations of equality, Harman is more akin to a national laughing stock and would be made mincemeat at the hustings.  Even in recent stories where she promotes equality and female shortlists, then is seeking to prioritise her husband Jack as a candidate, just show her hypocritical nature.  Hence, even if Labour made her Leader, we have nothing to fear from Harman. 

David Miliband, once with his own powerbase, now is seen as a politician who lacked that final killer instinct to be a leader.  Well known in the press for organising a leadership challenge to Brown last year, Miliband has sniped behind the scenes but never had the courage to show his true courage.  Even when his best friend James Purnell had the courage to resign, when Miliband had his best chance, he bottled it, and this is not forgotten amongst labour supporters.  His time came and past.  He is no political heavyweight and even holding a major Office of State, has made little impact.  Where is he on the news discussing Afghanistan?  Brown would even prefer the hapless Bob Ainsworth represent the Government…that says a lot for Miliband’s position.  It is also well known that Hilary Clinton thinks he is a little boy in a man’s job.

For James Purnell, a formidable potential leader, it is too early for him to strike.  He needs to build credibility and at the moment, amongst Labour supporters there is a whiff of traitor about him.  This whiff will go, after a Labour election defeat and he can then play the ‘I told you card’ and again build his brand.  He is the best Labour leader by a mile…but it is too early for him now.  Hence must be discounted as a threat pre the election.

So opinion polls show it.  Labour Unions Confirm it.  Private Conservative Opinion polls detail it.  Alan Johnson is the most likely next Leader, if Gordon goes pre the election.  Alan comes across superbly well in the media.  ‘That nice bloke next door’, ‘Mr trustworthy’, that ‘happy chappie’, Alan has a lot going for him.  His smile and natural demeanour would go a long way for Labour….and hence is a genuine opponent to be feared. 

Hence this begs a question.  Why have Conservatives not sought to give Alan Johnson special attention now?  Diminish his brand.  Dent his nice guy image.  The more groundwork we do on Johnson now, the better when it comes to any leadership battle.  If we leave it too late to highlight Johnson’s weaknesses and show him for what he is worth, we Conservatives will be seen as the ‘nasty party’ attacking him only when he stands for Leadership.  ‘Oh that poor Mr Johnson being attacked by the Tories…poor Alan’!!!!  Johnson is a potential sharp thorn in our electoral hopes, should Brown go.  Why not blunt his effect in advance?  We don’t need to do that for any other leader.  Johnson….yes….he is the most popular Labour figure.

What frustrates is that Johnson is a ‘Teflon’ Politician.  Very few things stick to him.  But there is much in his past we can target and stick to him.  He has held the following Offices of State for Labour….Secretary of State for Work & Pensions, Secretary of State for Trade & Industry, Secretary of State for Education & Skills, Secretary of State for Health, right up to today as Home Secretary.  We have plenty of ammunition to stick at him.

So Chris Grayling, you have a vital job to perform as shadow to the Home Secretary…..To put the pressure on Johnson.  Help lose his ‘teflon’ image.  Make him seem completely incompetent in his role as Home Secretary.  The Home Office is the political graveyard of many careers.  There are many issues to get Johnson hooked up into.  Knife crime, rising violent crime figures, overcrowding in prisons, rising immigration figures, ID Card Scheme, terrorists getting access to the UK via Student Visas, the intrusion of the Government into our everyday lives & the ‘Big Brother’ state.  Let’s keep him on the back foot put him under the spotlight.  His opinion poll rating will soon decline.

Over to you Chris….help the Party and diminish the potential effect of a Johnson on our electoral hopes.  With Johnson damaged, the more likely Labour will stick with Brown…and that would be a dream scenario for us……

I must confess that George Osborne is an impressive political operator.  Again, in the House of Commons, with little preparation, (as Chancellor Darling only gave him Statement Details 20 mins before he stood up to make it), Osborne tore through Darling’s empty rhetoric and tired old promises as darling sought to reform the Banking System that Brown had messed up years before.  Obviously George is a close friend with David Cameron, hence this suggestion makes even more sense to beef up George’s portfolio.  Maybe now is the time that DC should initiate a Shadow Cabinet reshuffle ready for the next election…..the summer recess is the perfect time….ready for the new Leaders to master their briefs before the election campaign starts in earnest……

George Osborne is a strong Shadow Chancellor but he himself admits his role and capabilities are far wider.  Therefore, it makes sense to move George into a more wide ranging remit rather than just purely economic affairs.  TBB would suggest to DC making George his Deputy Leader and place him at the helm of the Conservatives as Party Chairman, hence enjoying a pivotal role and free ranging remit in the election campaign.  Osborne would be a great media friendly Deputy Leader and Party Chairman.  It would be great to see him on our screens.

So, who for Chancellor?  TBB would suggest that William Hague moves into the role of Shadow Chancellor.  Again, a born communicator in a vital area for the Conservatives.  He would be welcomed by the City and is a huge credible operator.  Given the enormity of turning the economy round, William would be equal to the task and could take the tough decisions and yet command the respect of the British public.

So what for Eric Pickles?  Eric strikes TBB as great material for a Home Secretary.  No bullshit guy who would take no nonsense and get to grips with the rising crime levels across the UK, get the police focused on solving crime and not filling in paperwork or chasing speeding cars for fines and of course, sorting out the overcrowding in the prisons population.

So Chris Grayling has proved himself well in the Shadow Home Secretary role.  He has credibility.  Class.  Intelligence and commands respect and would make a fine Foreign secretary.

So recap:   David Cameron Leader; George Osborne Deputy Leader & Party Chairman; William Hague Shadow Chancellor; Chris Grayling Shadow Foreign Secretary; Eric Pickles Shadow Home Secretary

This could be a good start to a reshuffle ready to fight the next election….is this a winning team…views?

Sky News, always the first for news have just announced that David Cameron has volunteered to repay back  £947 to Common Fees Office, for expenses he  claimed.  The Press Association stated that £687 is for repairs to his properties but more worrying £218.91 for mortgage overclaim, a big issue with the public and the focus of media attention on George Osborne.  George is also in the headlines again for claiming for 2 DVD’s on a talk her gave on….’The Value of Taxpayers Money’.  That will be a headline waiting to bite our Shadow Chancellor!

TBB is a loyal blog to the Conservative Party and to David Cameron, who has led the Party back from the brink, to the verge of an electoral victory.  But that should not stop analysis and asking probing points.

So what annoys me is not so much the repaying of £947, many MP’s have made mistakes.  But it is the timing.  As our leader, behind closed doors, the Party hierarchy should have analysed every DC receipt and where a receipt would not pass DC’s own public moral sniff test, they immediately repay it, (weeks ago).  What were his officials thinking?  He should have cleared any erroneous claims weeks ago and cleared this issue up.  Now Labour will no doubt be gloating that DC is having to repay money and hands them political capital.

Sky News also claims that Chris Grayling claimed for 3 tv’s and 3 expensive shredders!

This obviously has led to a debate.  Some of the Tory Grandees claim Cameron has been super tough on them and not on his favourites. 

Whatever the expenses reveal, it is a shame that they have emerged now and refocused attention on our Party.  I am not being disloyal.  I am not calling for Cameron to go.  But I am allowed to express regret at the timing and the failure of Cameron’s advisers to sort this issue before public reveal.