HS2 Bosses To Be Scandalously Paid More Than The PM

I think that overall this government has done a very good job when it comes to infrastructure. More money is being invested into the roads and railways than under the last Government and this is all done despite a cut to the Department of Transport's budget. Network Rail has certainly done a good job of Nottingham train station.

The one big blemish to this good record has been HS2. Spending £42.6 billion plus contingency* on a railway with no business case is very stupid, and we're the ones paying for it. I've made my views on HS2 beforehand consistently clear, I don't think it should happen.

But now that the legislation has been passed and it is 99% likely to take place, what tax payers want is for HS2 to have the lowest costs possible. This has been somewhat shattered today with the plan to pay 30 bosses on the HS2 project more than the Prime Minister.

No one should get paid more than Dave when working for the Government.

Who thought that was a good idea? The PM has the toughest job in the nation and so rightly the Government has a policy of dissuading departments and QANGOs from paying any more than Dave earns, which is £140,000 per year. In a time of austerity I thought this would also be crucial let alone the necessity for high scrutiny of HS2's costings.

Patrick McCloughin after a hard days work at the Department of Transport.

What baffles me most is that the Transport Secretary has come out and said the salaries, which will cost several millions of pounds, "fell within the budget we've set." Yes this is true, but paying people vast amounts is a making it a virtual certainty that HS2 will run over budget. Who will then get the blame for that Mr McCoughlin? Thank the Lord the Treasury has to give approval to these monster salaries. Hopefully George Osborne, Nicky Morgan and co. have the sense to say no to this major pay out.

The sensible squad.

*Bare in mind independent organisations and the Treasury think it will cost around £80 billion.

The EU Referendum Bill Returns

Today the EU Referendum Bill returns. The Private Members Bill sponsored by Bob Neill MP, Bromley and Chislehurst, and backed by the whole Conservative Party will for the second time receive its first reading again.

Dave and the Rest of the Conservative Party are backing the EU Referendum Bill. Are you?

The EU Referendum Bill was first introduced by James Wharton MP, Stockton South, in 2013 to show the Conservatives commitment to holding an In/Out referendum on European Union membership. The Bill will state that a referendum must held before 2017 and, although no parliament can bind its successor, a future Parliament would have to overturn this Bill not to be bound by it.

James Wharton with John Redwood supporting an EU Referendum for Britain.

The EU Referendum Bill has already had a tough ride. The Liberal Democrats and Labour Party refused to support the Bill in the House of Commons chamber but tried to talk out the Bill during its committee stage. This point was passed however after many long nights of Lib Dem and Labour MPs adding pointless amendments which had to be all voted upon and taking for hours about trivial historical information on the 31st of December. Sadly though the Bill did not pass in the House of Lords where the Lib Dems and Labour Party did indeed vote this Bill down. The Wharton Bill was no more.

But now it is back. The House of Lords, under the Parliament Acts, can no longer stop this proposed Bill. The Prime Minster and the Commons can choose to override the House of Lords if it again votes down the EU Referendum Bill. The only place this Bill can now be killed off is in the House of Commons. Is Ed Miliband strong enough to get his MPs to vote against an EU referendum? Unlikely.

Bob Neill jubilant over his major part in the #LetBritainDecide campaign.

Bob Neill has an article in the Daily Express today saying 'This isn’t a Bill that will mean Britain leaves the EU or stays in it. It’s a Bill to end the cancer that has eaten at our democratic life for more than a generation: that of the political elite refusing to let the people decide – after renegotiation – Britain’s future relationship with Europe. We believe it’s such a fundamental decision that the choice should rest with the whole electorate.'

It is only the Conservatives who will #LetBritainDecide by giving you a referendum on Europe and by the end of this Parliamentary session this commitment is likely to be enshrined in statute. You can help the Conservatives and Bob Neill by co-sponsoring the EU Referendum Bill here.

Thoughts On Juncker

The whole Juncker saga over the last week or so has really made an impact on our future in the EU, and its not wholly because arch-federalist Jean Claude Juncker is the new President. Not only has Andre Walker got a new person to ask the British public "do you know who this man is", but we know that not much can change in the EU because of the leaders of Europe.

Only two countries out of twenty eight in the EU voted against Jean Claude Juncker being appointed as EU President. This shows that either the vast majority of European leaders are committed to greater political integration to form a federal Europe or that many of the leaders of 'Eurosceptic countries' are too cowardly to try stop the EU. Personally, I think it is a bit of both. Even if the Swedes, Germans and Dutch did vote against Juncker the majority of EU countries still back greater powers going to the EU.

Who wears the trousers in Europe now?

Of course the Germans may have been able to make a difference in selecting a different President but they weren't going to even though it is believed Angela Merkel actually didn't want Jean Claude Juncker. I agree, for once, with Jermey Hunt. European leaders were 'cowardly'. How can we hope to get any substantial change in Europe with these weak leaders? There is no support to change from the path of moving as quickly as possible to the ultimate goal of the Treaty of Rome of political integration.

No one except David Cameron will stand up to 'ever closer union' in Europe.

No one in the EU with any major power apart from the United Kingdom wants to make changes to Europe from fear of the geriatric Brussels bureaucracy or a real desire to bring about much closer integration. Angela Merkel said after the Juncker vote that "There can be different speeds for member countries to adopt come to ever closer union ... It was made clear, yet again, that the idea of an ever closer union as it is stated in the treaties does not mean that there is equal speed among member countries." But people of the UK do not want a slower descent into the pit of political union, we want a reversal and for it to stay like that.

I admire David Cameron in standing up what was right here. Juncker will only make the effect of the EU on Britain much worse and it was thus right for the PM to do all he could to stop him. Dave knew that he was unlikely to win but he did what was right for the nation. But if anything this shows that you cannot beat Brussels at their own game. We're not going to get anything that we want from negotiation with Brussels and thus we should leave the EU. Dave will try to renegotiate and a large proportion of people still want him to have the chance to do so. But all it can is prove for once and for all we're better off out. Thank god the Conservatives will allow us to do that with a referendum and hopefully the Prime Minister will ask the country to back an EU withdrawal.

Boris: Nick Clegg is Dave's Condom

Boris today has come out and said that Nick Clegg is Dave's condom. No seriously he has, only Boris could say that though. I bet Dave is rather embarrassed with Boris discussing his sex life.

Boris said of Nick Clegg“he’s there to serve a very important ceremonial function as David Cameron’s lapdog-cum-prophylactic protection device for all the difficult things that David Cameron has to do that cheese off the rest.” Boris continued by saying “He’s a kind of shield. He’s a lapdog who’s been skinned and turned into a shield to protect.” I don't know what Cleggers will take issue with most, the lap dog or condom description. 

Of course Boris has a history of taunting Nick Clegg, previously describing him as "wobbling jelly of indecision and vacillation." To be fair to Boris I don't think Nick can challenge that.

Boris is a great expert in politics and sex.

Twas the Night Before Christmas

Dave gets down on the Christmas scene and starts a new career in reading children's stories. I'm looking forward to him reading other epics and poems. Sadly someone was there before him.

Happy Birthday to Dave

It's Dave's birthday today. Happy Birthday Dave. I would send you a cake but if the Prime Minister's office is anything like the President's of America it would be destroyed in case it contained poison.

Photo Bombing Dave

Dave was caught photo bombing his sister in law today by chillaxing behind her when she took a photo for her Instagram.

Older, Slower, Wiser Dave

Dave has got a very bad back, has started wearing glasses and is going grey. Over the Summer a lot has happened to Dave. Let's hope he has become a lot wiser too. At least he isn't going bald.

Weekly Poll Lowdown

If you could advise Dave on whose seat from the Cabinet table should be broken and thrown out it seems your choice would be Michael Gove, the Education Secretary. Although Gove is clearly the loser in the poll, the vote was quite close amongst all other Cabinet Ministers, most picked up 10% or 3% of the vote. The only person without a single vote is Philip Hammond, I'm sure he is very pleased.

Which Major Conservative should Dave sack from his Cabinet?

William Hague	7%
George Osborne	10%
Theresa May	10%
Philip Hammond	0%
Ian Duncan Smith	10%
Chris Grayling	7%
Michael Gove	23%
Eric Pickles	3%
Jeremy Hunt	13%
Ken Clarke	10%
Sir George Young	3%
Dominic Grieve	3%

Total votes: 30

The decision to sack Michael Gove from the Cabinet is poor and beyond belief (his 1st position is probably the result of sneaky left wingers). In my opinion, closely followed by Eric Pickles, Michael Gove is the best minister around the cabinet table. His education reforms are the best thing that has happened under the government. His drive to make sure education is improved drastically across the country in our global race, which we must compete in for people to have jobs and prosperity, is going very well. The quality of education is up under this government. The ideas of free schools and academies are really working because they offer choice to students and parents. Wisbech people can see how well Gove is doing locally with Thomas Clarkson secondary school, which used to be the worst school in the County. Now after 1 year of officially being an academy it is right at the top being one of the best schools in the County. 

 Michael Gove is doing really well as Education Secretary.

Michael Gove probably came top in this poll because he is reviled by the Left. Gove's idea of choice and making every school a good school insults every fibre of left wing dogma. Under the last Labour government it was simply get 5 Cs at GCSE level and that's it. To add insult to this idea GCSEs were inflated so it looked like there were improvements, which is shown clear to be not the case when looking at how much Britain fell in the international rankings. The Left believes students education should be kept at an easy level where the Government looks good but the students do poorly. The results are that for most pupils their education is poor and they become low skilled workers or on benefits and thus vote Labour. What a good system if you want to win elections, not a good system if you want to aspire and have a better life.

 Labour lied when they said their focus was on improving Education.

 

So who should go? To me there are many contenders in my mind. Jeremy Hunt hasn't be a great health secretary and represents style over substance as he is much of a blank page. I would have preferred Andrew Lansley to stay as Health Secretary. Arguably Andrew is very bad at presentation but he was made a scapegoat by the Government and Lib Dems for the health reforms which was a very good policy. It is however hard to sack Jeremy Hunt for not doing much when the Government needs health to not create anymore big issues.

A triumph of style over substance.

George Osborne hasn't done amazingly because he has stuck to a Brownite consensus in economics. Yes, he is tied by the Liberal Democrats but he hasn't pushed for cuts to taxes where it is plainly obvious growth and greater government income would be achieved. We really need a more liberal economic chancellor to bring real and sustainable growth. However, Getting rid of Osborne would seem like a reversal of government deficit reduction policy, which should not happen under any circumstances as it is bad for market confidence (that's 'markets' as in all businesses and people across the country and not a few stockbrokers in the city left wingers). 

Alistair Darling and George Osborne follow similar policies. Osborne is so much better than Ed Balls though.

William Hague has a strong case against him for being partially behind the disastrous foreign policy of the last two months. Why on Earth did he think that invading Syria was factually a good idea when we can only create more problems and solve none? William Hague is starting to look much like a statesmen during the easy times but when the pressure is really on bad decisions are made. This is not a good quality for a Foreign Secretary considering the international bust ups that need defusing.

Not going well for William Hague at the moment.

But the person who I would sack is Ken Clarke. Ken is someone with great gravitas and someone I actually like a lot. But his policy ideas are terrible. His handling of the justice department was woeful. Ken didn't reform the ECHR when he had a great chance and changed the emphasis of the courts and jails from deterrence, justice and punishment. Both of these were awful moves. At this moment Ken is advising Osborne on the economy. I certainly wouldn't take advice from the man who still wants to join the Euro and become more closely integrated in a protectionist racket. 

I love Ken's cigars but not his policies.

So Dave if you're reading, Sack Ken.

Please Vote in the next poll on the Sidebar.

300,000 Porn Views in Parliament

We all know that Parliament can be a dirty place. Sleaze, bribes and scandal are all known to have taken place in the Palace of Westminster. So it's not that much a surprise to know that the 'naughty' MPs, Lords and civil servants have been viewing porn like crazy.

Parliament is well known for its sleaze.

300,000 views of porn have been made in the last Parliamentary year according to data received off the Parliamentary servers. That's an average of 800 views a day; quite a lot considering around 5,000 people work in Parliament. The peak months were November, with 114,844 viewings, and April, with 55,552 viewings, some of the busiest months for both Houses. In February however, when most MPs are away, only 15 views of porn were made. Interesting.

Of course for legal reasons we cannot be sure that each view of porn is a conscious decision to go online for a pleasurable time. It could be a pop up for instance. However the sheer gap between 15 and 114,844 makes this seem unlikely in the vast majority of cases.  

"No More Porn" Says Dave.

These porn statistics come after Dave announced he wants to make sure there is a system where everyone opts in for porn. Dave said Porn gives a 'distorting' view of Sex and Relationships and is not good for people. There is however so many holes in Dave's argument factually and practically that this idea is very silly. I wonder how many times the PM has been hypocritical of his own policy?

However, there is a serious reason for pointing out the Parliament porn views and it's that they should be working. Think of all the man hours lost by MPs indulging themselves in gentlemen's special interest literature. Matthew Sinclair of TPA fame said "these figures highlight the fact that many people working in Parliament are spending far too much time on websites that have nothing to do with their job. The internet can be a useful tool for MPs and their staff when it comes to scrutinising Government legislation; however taxpayers expect their MP and those working in their offices to get on with their important jobs rather than spending time surfing questionable websites."

So MPs stop looking at porn and start reading more constituents letters. You have plenty of  time for recreation after work.

The Noes Have It- What Next?

So Dave lost the vote in the House of Commons. What does this mean for the future of the 'Speacial Relationship', Red Ed, Parliament, David Cameron and of course Syria?

Is the 'Special Relationship' over, as Menzies (what an odd spelling) Campbell essentially said to the news. Well Menzies is quite mad and he can keep dreaming on. On foreign policy we have had several major gulfs with the Americans and yet we're still allies. At Suez the Americans sided with Russia over our invasion of the Sinai. In Vietnam we refused to help America, also the French helped the Americans. During the Falklands America didn't want to give any support because Argentina was an ally against Communists in South America. We have differed a number of times and yet we have always been pretty close. What will happen is a lot of shouting behind closed doors at most and nothing else.

Menzies Campbell speaking out of his arse for not the first time.

If our Special Relationship is coming under strain it's because of President Obama. This is the man who waged war against British Petroleum (not the name of BP). Hates the UK because his links to Kenya and the oppression we used there, of course forgetting that the side he takes in the Mao Mao Rebellion was far worse in killing people. This is also the President who has worst foreign policy ideas of any American President since time in memoriam, this whole debacle on Syria shows that up clearly. Even he is having problems in America about this, 50% of the US public oppose action in Syria. Congress is screaming to have a debate on this issue, but unfortunately for them the President has more executive powers. Obama is weary however and now looks like he is stalling on Syria. It's not just the British, he shouldn't have set the red line of chemical weapons.

 President Obama has messed this Syria issue up so much, i'd resign if I was him.

And speaking of the Executive, this was the day when the UK PM lost the ability to go to war without the consent of Parliament unless it is in defence of the realm or needed action at very short notice. This is a good thing, the fact that Parliament (which is elected by the people) can decide when to go to war is a sign of a healthy democracy. David Cameron wants this too saying in 2006 'the Crown Prerogative — that constitutional quirk that gives whoever is in No 10 the powers of a medieval monarch — needs to be changed.' His respect for Parliament last night showed that the Prime Minister was prepared to do what the demos thinks and not what he believed to be right. The people, or more strictly their representatives, are right. Those MPs who were pushing for a recall deserve a good deal of praise because this is about the only historical thing that has come from this vote.

 Parliament is Sovereign.

There were many good speeches in Parliament but remember one well. George Galloway lied when he said that he did not say Israel supplied the chemicals for the Syrian sarin attack (see  http://thingselliottsays.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/george-galloway-blames-israel-for-syria.html). I hope this disgraceful man is kicked by the electorate at the General Election, his views are disgusting.

What of the leader of Labour, Red Ed? Was he and Labour being party political? Yes. The calls to resign from the PM and Jim Murphy, the Shadow Defence Secretary saying, how much this was a defeat for David Cameron because Tory MPs rebelled against him show this. But Red Ed didn't have much of a choice actually because of his own party pulling at him. If he had supported the Government motion last night it may have gone through, but this wouldn't have been the case next week. The majority of Labour MPs would not support going to war over Syria and combined with the 80+ Conservatives who do not agree with arming the rebels there would have been no majority for war. Red Ed after a summer of disconnect would have not wanted to look weak or ask MPs to back something they vehemently opposed, especially after threats of his leadership. 

 Ed during the debate.

Does this do anything for him? Well his celebrations last night were very over the top because if he tries to make David Cameron look weak by rubbing his face in this defeat he's going to find himself on the most dodgy of grounds because he is making fun over an act of war and the deaths of Syrian civilians. It will be very bad for him if does that. Red Ed has however shown he can advert political disaster which does show some political skills. But overall Ed must stay quiet and not make any gains after this Government defeat. 

David Cameron may have suffered government defeat but in factual senses this shouldn't affect his Government or leadership. This was a vote to go to war, not on government internal policy. Conservative MPs voted with their conscious against the Government because they don't agree with war, they will still support government bills. He also respected Parliament's decision greatly. 'I get that' David Cameron said just moments after the results of the vote was read out. 

But in reality Dave will face damage because nobody wanted this war in the public and he did. His sense of what is actually the right thing to do is clearly a little bit off. His short term rush and lack of political shrewdness is shown, at least he bears this collectively with the government. He must not however go around blaming the opposition for his defeat or saying 'they're a succour to Assad'. The best action is to keep calm and carry on. Hopefully he thinks things through better next time because this was  a bad decision for Syrians to go to war (see http://thingselliottsays.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/war-with-syria-was-bad-idea-thats-why.html).

For the people of Syria there is no relief however because, although a little bit less now Parliament has not backed war, the US could start an attack over the weekend. The striking of missiles is not the greatest worry in itself for the Syrian people. The after results of retaliation by Assad, from an increasing involvement in Iran and more Islamists flocking to the area is going to make their lives shorter and worse. Because of the chaotic state of the opposition diplomacy and aid are the best ways to stop the killing and obtain a better Syria.

I thus urge you to donate to the Syrian Crisis Appeal. I've made a donation to the British Red Cross to make sure they save more lives in the area. I've also collected a lot of charity links so you get wider choice in who you give your money to. If anything good comes out of this debate it is the exposure to the UK again of how terrible it is for the people of Syria. 2 million people are refugees (1 million are children), 100,000 have died and the majority of people are unable to even feed themselves. It's all very upsetting and sad. War would not help Syria but it doesn't stop us giving help to this war torn country. 

Please Donate.

British Red Cross http://www.redcross.org.uk/Donate-Now/Make-a-single-donation/Syria-Crisis-Appeal

Disasters Emergency Committee http://www.dec.org.uk/node/3181

Save The Children http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/about-us/emergencies/syria-appeal

Oxfam http://www.oxfam.org.uk/what-we-do/emergency-response/syria-crisis

Action Aid http://www.actionaid.org.uk/donate/syria-crisis-appeal

UNICEF UK http://www.unicef.org.uk/landing-pages/donate-syria/

UNHCR http://donate.unhcr.org/syria

Islamic Relief http://www.islamic-relief.org.uk/current-appeals/syria-appeal/