Watching the much-anticipated televised debate between the Chancellor, Alistair Darling and his two political opposite numbers, George Osborne and Vince Cable was very much an anti-climax.
Neither participant wanted to step on the others' toes and it was a very sedate affair. Politeness was the name of the game.
It was very difficult to choose a clear winner. All three men gave confident answers to the questions put to them by the studio audience. Any voter still undecided about who to support in the general election expected in just a few weeks time would have been no more certain after the hour-long debate.
We will wait to see if the debate between the three main party leaders is any more exciting.
Thursday, 11 March 2010
Is Cameron Losing the Plot?
Watching this week's PMQs, David Cameron's performance was about the worst I've ever seen from him. He normally shouts across the Despatch Box, but his voice was far more high-pitched than usual. He struck a distinctly petulant tone, one that nobody should expect from someone who is hoping to be the next Prime Minister and leader of our country.
I detected a dramatic loss of control from the Leader of the Opposition. Is this a sign that he realises that he has nothing to offer by way of new policies and only sees PMQs as a means of scoring cheap political points?
Brown, on the other hand was calm and measured in his responses. He has greatly improved in PMQs and I believe, will continue to out-shine Cameron in the weeks ahead. As we get closer to the General Election, the voters will have a clear choice; one between Statesman Brown and Schoolboy Cameron.
I detected a dramatic loss of control from the Leader of the Opposition. Is this a sign that he realises that he has nothing to offer by way of new policies and only sees PMQs as a means of scoring cheap political points?
Brown, on the other hand was calm and measured in his responses. He has greatly improved in PMQs and I believe, will continue to out-shine Cameron in the weeks ahead. As we get closer to the General Election, the voters will have a clear choice; one between Statesman Brown and Schoolboy Cameron.
Darling Has Labour's Priorities Right.
The Chancellor, Alastair Darling today set out Labour's priorities for this month's Budget, the last before the General Election.
He has said that it will not be a give-away Budget, designed to win last-minute support from voters before they head for the polls. At the same time, by promising to spend what is necessary to protect jobs, Mr Darling has shown that he will continue to make the right decisions to get us through the recession.
He is absolutely right to keep hammering home the point that, if the Conservatives do win power in the next few weeks, their promise to cut public spending immediately will ultimately tip Britain back into recession. We must not allow that to happen.
Mr Darling is making very sensible decisions on the British Economy and it is also very reassuring to hear from Liam Byrne, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, that tax increases will not be necessary this year to achieve the halving of the decifit. This is thanks to the prudence exercised by the Chancellor in last year's pre-Budge report.
He has said that it will not be a give-away Budget, designed to win last-minute support from voters before they head for the polls. At the same time, by promising to spend what is necessary to protect jobs, Mr Darling has shown that he will continue to make the right decisions to get us through the recession.
He is absolutely right to keep hammering home the point that, if the Conservatives do win power in the next few weeks, their promise to cut public spending immediately will ultimately tip Britain back into recession. We must not allow that to happen.
Mr Darling is making very sensible decisions on the British Economy and it is also very reassuring to hear from Liam Byrne, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, that tax increases will not be necessary this year to achieve the halving of the decifit. This is thanks to the prudence exercised by the Chancellor in last year's pre-Budge report.
Wednesday, 10 March 2010
Brown Ever-Strong on the Economy
Gordon Brown was at his brilliant best today, delivering a highly-inspirational message on the economy.
Whilst he admitted that there would still be 'choppy waters' ahead, he pledged to the British people that 'I will not let you down'. More important, he sought to diminish the superficial gloss of David Cameron, by saying, 'I believe character is not about telling people what they want to hear, but telling them what they need to know'.
This was just what we needed from him.
All we have heard from Cameron and the Tories is that if they get into power, spending cuts will happen straight away, undoing all the investment of the last 13 years and ultimately damaging the already-fragile economy even more. Mr Cameron has gone out of his way to attack Brown as weak and indecisive, but we have heard almost nothing in terms of concrete policy alternatives from the Conservatives.
Time is running out for the Tories.
I believe it is the Labour who will prove the stronger during the forthcoming televised debates and election campaign. They have been straight with the British people about the difficulties that lie ahead. Gordon Brown has showed his experience and maturity by not sinking to Cameron's level and attacking personalities. When the election is eventually called and the campaign-proper begins, it will be very clear that it is Gordon Brown who has the more coherent road-map to guide us through the economic recovery and beyond.
Whilst he admitted that there would still be 'choppy waters' ahead, he pledged to the British people that 'I will not let you down'. More important, he sought to diminish the superficial gloss of David Cameron, by saying, 'I believe character is not about telling people what they want to hear, but telling them what they need to know'.
This was just what we needed from him.
All we have heard from Cameron and the Tories is that if they get into power, spending cuts will happen straight away, undoing all the investment of the last 13 years and ultimately damaging the already-fragile economy even more. Mr Cameron has gone out of his way to attack Brown as weak and indecisive, but we have heard almost nothing in terms of concrete policy alternatives from the Conservatives.
Time is running out for the Tories.
I believe it is the Labour who will prove the stronger during the forthcoming televised debates and election campaign. They have been straight with the British people about the difficulties that lie ahead. Gordon Brown has showed his experience and maturity by not sinking to Cameron's level and attacking personalities. When the election is eventually called and the campaign-proper begins, it will be very clear that it is Gordon Brown who has the more coherent road-map to guide us through the economic recovery and beyond.
Tuesday, 9 March 2010
Has Cameron Mis-judged Again?
It's not been a easy time for the Tories recently. A year ago they were so far ahead in the polls that a resounding victory at this year's General Election looked certain. But with the polls only weeks away, a combination of a resurgent Gordon Brown and a series of embarassing headlines - most notably the 'non-dom' status of Lord Ashcroft - have left David Cameron and his party on the backfoot.
Today's historic agreement reached in Northern Ireland on the devolution of policing and justice powers from Westminster to the Assembly is long-overdue. It was hailed by Gordon Brown, who said that the politics of progress had now replaced the politics of division.
David Cameron also offered his support for the agreement. And yet the only party not to back the vote were the Ulster Unionists - a political party that the Conservatives have formed an alliance with.
Hasn't this put David Cameron in a rather awkward position? So close to the British people going to the polls, the man who aspires to be the next Prime Minister has sided with a party that has opposed a solution to a problem that has dogged Northern Ireland for far too long. Isn't it time for Mr Cameron to think again?
Today's historic agreement reached in Northern Ireland on the devolution of policing and justice powers from Westminster to the Assembly is long-overdue. It was hailed by Gordon Brown, who said that the politics of progress had now replaced the politics of division.
David Cameron also offered his support for the agreement. And yet the only party not to back the vote were the Ulster Unionists - a political party that the Conservatives have formed an alliance with.
Hasn't this put David Cameron in a rather awkward position? So close to the British people going to the polls, the man who aspires to be the next Prime Minister has sided with a party that has opposed a solution to a problem that has dogged Northern Ireland for far too long. Isn't it time for Mr Cameron to think again?
Monday, 8 March 2010
Venables: Common Sense Has Prevailed
Jack Straw's statement to the House of Commons today on the recall to prison of Jon Venables struck absolutely the right note. By refusing to bow to the intense media pressure to reveal the reasons behind Venables' arrest, Mr Straw has insured that his lawyers will not be able to declare a mis-trial on the grounds of unfair coverage should Venables face charges. Nobody should be denied a fair trial, no matter how awful the offence is that they are accused of. I also wish to echo the sentiments of Baroness Butler-Sloss, who imposed the life-long anonymity order on Venables and Robert Thompson in 2001. I agree that the former should not be identified under any circumstances, given the strength of feeling that still exists about the Bulger case, even 17 years on. He is bound to be the target for vigilantes.
I also can't help wondering about the adequacy of the supervision Venables has received over the last eight years. Denise Fergus, James Bulger's mother, has called for those in charge of Venables to be sacked and I am inclined to agree. At the very least, an enquiry into Venables' supervision should be launched. This is not the first time someone under the supervision of the Probation Service has re-offended in a serious way. I wholeheartedly accept that it is ultimately the individual's responsibility to not break the law. However the question of just how rehabilitated Venables was on his release from custody in 2001 does need to be answered. Given the amount of tax-payer's money and resources invested in giving Venables and Thompson a future with new identities, was it really too much to expect for one of them not to re-offend? Or do the authorities have to share some of the blame?
I also can't help wondering about the adequacy of the supervision Venables has received over the last eight years. Denise Fergus, James Bulger's mother, has called for those in charge of Venables to be sacked and I am inclined to agree. At the very least, an enquiry into Venables' supervision should be launched. This is not the first time someone under the supervision of the Probation Service has re-offended in a serious way. I wholeheartedly accept that it is ultimately the individual's responsibility to not break the law. However the question of just how rehabilitated Venables was on his release from custody in 2001 does need to be answered. Given the amount of tax-payer's money and resources invested in giving Venables and Thompson a future with new identities, was it really too much to expect for one of them not to re-offend? Or do the authorities have to share some of the blame?
Miliband on the 'Feeble' UN
Very interested to hear the Foreign Secretary's evidence at the Iraq Inquiry today. David Miliband has described the UN as 'feeble' in not enforcing earlier resolutions against Saddam Hussein and his Iraqi regime.
I, like a lot of people in this country, whilst on the one hand, not sorry that the US and Britain took the decision to invade Iraq, would have much preferred there to have been a second UN resolution backing the use of force against Saddam Hussein.
The Foreign Secretary's comments are very significant. He has questioned why the UN did not more effectively ensure that earlier resolutions on Iraq were enforced. Had the UN done its job properly and seen that Saddam complied with these, the US and Britain might not have seen fit to go over their heads and invade the country without the backing of much of the international community.
The invasion of Iraq in 2003 certainly brought the relevance of the UN in solving international conflicts into very sharp focus.
I, like a lot of people in this country, whilst on the one hand, not sorry that the US and Britain took the decision to invade Iraq, would have much preferred there to have been a second UN resolution backing the use of force against Saddam Hussein.
The Foreign Secretary's comments are very significant. He has questioned why the UN did not more effectively ensure that earlier resolutions on Iraq were enforced. Had the UN done its job properly and seen that Saddam complied with these, the US and Britain might not have seen fit to go over their heads and invade the country without the backing of much of the international community.
The invasion of Iraq in 2003 certainly brought the relevance of the UN in solving international conflicts into very sharp focus.
Straw considering releasing details on Venables
Given the notoriety of this case, I am not surprised at the increasing public demands to know what Jon Venables did to warrant being recalled to prison. The pressure group, Mothers Against Murderers, has now joined the calls for Venables' offence to be revealed, saying that he was given a second chance to make something of his life and has now 'blown it'. Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, is now considering whether he should reveal why Venables is now back in custody.
In my mind, the fact that he has been recalled having obviously done something extremely serious, should put people's minds at rest; the public are no longer at risk. Venables will appear before a Parole hearing within 28 days who will decide what to do with him. Perhaps we should wait for the outcome of this and whether he is going to be charged with anything, before any details are made public.
My concern is, once again, the popular media being allowed to dictate the political agenda and the course of justice. Handing out punishment should be left to the courts.
In my mind, the fact that he has been recalled having obviously done something extremely serious, should put people's minds at rest; the public are no longer at risk. Venables will appear before a Parole hearing within 28 days who will decide what to do with him. Perhaps we should wait for the outcome of this and whether he is going to be charged with anything, before any details are made public.
My concern is, once again, the popular media being allowed to dictate the political agenda and the course of justice. Handing out punishment should be left to the courts.
Sunday, 7 March 2010
Samantha Cameron and Labour
I suppose it was too good to be true - the wife of the Tory leader supporting Labour at one time. I must admit to being quite amused at fellow Tory MP Ed Vaisey being the source of the story. He clearly has a great deal of egg on his face now, following flat denials from Tory HQ of it being the case. With a general election so close, the rumour mill is in full motion. What will we hear next?
Ed Balls on Jon Venables
I am further encouraged to read Ed Balls' comments on skynews.com. I totally agree with the Secretary of State here. By continuing to report information that could eventually lead to Venable's identity being revealed, the media are actually impeding the likelihood of a successful prosecution taking place. They could, albeit inadvertently, make sure Venables actually gets away with what he's done.
Jon Venables
I have watched with interest the recall back to custody of Jon Venables over the last few days. The reaction of James Bulger's mother, Denise Fergus, is of course, totally understandable. Nobody can blame her for feeling let down by the judicial system. One can see her argument that Venables, and his accomplice, Robert Thompson, should have spent time in an adult prison before being released.
These two young men were released in 2001 under life licence and that to me, does not in any way, constitute, real freedom. The terms of their licences mean that they have to be supervised by the probation service for the rest of their lives. They cannot leave the UK without permission, have to notify their probation officer if they change address or enter a new relationship and cannot return to their home town without the written consent of the authorities. They will never be completely free. And no matter how much rehabilitation and therapy Thompson and Venables underwent during their eight years in custody, what they did as ten year olds that fateful day in 1993 will stay with them until the day they die. They will have to live with committing that abhorrent and evil act forever. That in itself is a life sentence.
To say that Venables and Thompson should never have been released at 18 and spared adult prison at that time, I believe, is wrong. To keep them in prison for many years beyond their teens, exposing them to hardened recidivist adult criminals would have been very detrimental; only serving to completely undo any good that was done whilst they were in secure accomodation.
Whatever Venables has done now to warrant being recalled to prison, is of course the subject of wild speculation. The tabloid press, always ravenous for a story, is exploiting the anguish of James' family to the hilt. Until we know exactly how serious Venables' breach of his licence is, the Bulger family should be left alone and not be encouraged to speak to those sections of the media whose sole aim is to distort and sensationalise.
No doubt a great effort will be made to blow Venables' cover and reveal his whereabouts. Even though there is a worldwide injunction in force prohibiting the publication of any details either Venables or Thompson, it is highly probable the former will be recognised by a fellow prisoner.
I believe Venables' recall to prison proves that the judicial system is working well. Clearly this was not the first infringement of his licence and he was obviously given several warnings before being sent back to jail. But the fact that Venables is now behind bars again shows that he was considered to be a danger to the public by the people charged with supervising his behaviour.
If Venables has committed a very serious offence then the proper judicial process should be allowed to run its course.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)