US economy pulls out of recession?
Data out today is expected to show that the US economy is no longer in recession, with significant growth between July and September.
Maybe that's the worst of it over?
Perhaps, instead, it's what happens when you throw a US$ 787 Billion stimulus package at the economy. Economic growth caused by intervention to increase aggregate demand is not really sustainable. But what happens when the money runs out?
How do you fix a debt-created recession by borrowing more?
My guess is that you don't. Could we see a double-dip downturn?
Posted on 29 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Turkey deserves better
Turkey should be one of our natural allies. She was a democracy for most of the last century, indeed for more years than many of the countries now inside the EU. She was a staunch member of NATO during the Cold War.
Today, Turkey is secular and relatively successful. While no nation is ever perfect, Turkey's embrace of modernity is a template that others could do well to follow.
Yet I fear Turkey has been treated very badly on the question of EU membership.
For years, Turkey has had EU membership dangled in front of her. "If only you do X, Y, Z", EU diplomats told her, "we'll let you join". Thus did Turkey's Western-leaning, liberal elite drive through reforms, jumping all manner of hoops, in order to qualify.
I suspect that they are likely to be bitterly disappointed. Failure could well undermine Turkey's liberal elite, turning many against the West - and strengthening the hand of those who would like a very different future for Turkey.
Indeed, there are already reports of growing tensions.
Whatever your view about Turkey joining the EU, surely that is no way to treat a friend?
UPDATE: For the avoidance of shadow-boxing, this blog does not propose Turkish membership of the EU. Nor does it oppose it. This blog is about the consistency with which we treat a friend.
Posted on 28 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Free markets and the French
French expats living in the UK will, apparently, soon be able to vote for their very own member of the French assembly.
The result will, I'm certain, reveal that there are indeed thousands of young French people committed to free market capitalism. What a pity for France that they all seem to live in Kensington.
Posted on 28 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
The plan to deal with the quangos
For decades, opposition politicians have talked about a "bonfire of the quangos". Thus far, it ain't happened.
As the Taxpayers' Alliance points out in a brilliant new report, there have never been more of these independent (ie unaccountable) executive bodies. Quangos have never been more powerful, more in command of public policy and better funded at our expense.
What to do about it?
The first thing is to recognise that Ministers rarely ever go into Cabinet meetings to argue that their empires should be slashed. Far more usual for Ministers to defend "their" departments and try to convince themselves, and others, that the quangocrats they appoint will somehow be different. Hummm.....
We cannot leave it entirely to the executive to rein in the executive. It's not how power works - no matter what promises are made.
From that, we should grasp that quango culling is a job for the legislature, too. The only way we'll get a massive reduction in the number of non-departmental agencies is if the House of Commons starts to do its job properly.
The quangocracy needs to be democratised, with full on Commons confirmation hearing for all quango chief (unlike the pre-appointment hearing for the Children's Commissar, a thumbs down must mean no contract).
More important, each non-departmental public body should be required to have it's budget for the following year annually approved by each relevant Commons select committee. No approval, no budget approval in the estimates votes. (Details on how to amend the Standing Orders of the Commons to make this happen are set out in The Plan).
"But there are so many quangos", I hear you say. "How could the Commons select committees approve them all?" MPs would indeed need to work very hard to oversee them all - but that's supposed to be their job. And as they did so, they might also begin to realise we could all do without so much government.
Posted on 27 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
What's happening to our newspaper industry?
Printing news on sheets of paper and selling them - newspapers - is just one method of distributing information. For a century or two, it looked like a pretty robust business model; revenue from sales and ads could more than cover the cost of gathering and producing the content.
The newspaper industry has been through rough times before, for example when industrial action or the price of paper squeezed margins. But the current crisis in for the newspaper industry is something more serious.
Looking at some latest stats from the US (hat tip Stephan Shakespeare), it seems that the problem is the demand. Folk just don't seem to be buying newspapers like they used to. The 10% year-on-year decline in these US stats is not a decline. It's a crash.
Should we be concerned? Up to a point, Lord Copper.
I'd hate to see fewer newspapers - especially local newspapers which reinforce our sense of civic identity.
Actually, long term I'm more optimistic than I am pressimistic. I think those who take an interest in the news, or who earn a living from it, will - eventually - gain from what is happening.
Newspapers are simply one method for distributing news - and there are better ways of doing the job now - which could mean a boon for the news industry in time.
Until now, stories rarely got covered in national papers unless they were of large enough generic interest to merit it. Even then, the coverage was often insufficient to cater to those with a specialist interest in or knowledge of a particular subject. In order to be a mass product, for a mass market, national newspapers almost necessarily had to make sacrifices to quality and specialist knowledge.
As with so many things from music to publishing, the internet makes it possible to cater to previously unreachable niches in the news market. This is going to drive up quality.
It's not clear how revenue can be generated from on-line newspapers and sales. I suspect that at some point some form of micro payment system will catch on. All the more reason to watch what happens to Spotify and their revenue model.
An all-in-one local newspaper, on-line radio station and blog, anyone?
Posted on 27 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
How to save our financial sector from EU directives
Business seems to be waking up to the implications of the EU Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive.
Recognising what it'll mean for wealth-creators, jobs, competitive advantage and our tax-base, business is starting to lobby against it.
I'd have more sympathy for all the City's Wesley Mooch's if they were willing to follow their argument through to its logical conclusion.
There's one simple way to stop the EU meddling in our affairs. Not quite so unthinkable anymore, is it?
Posted on 26 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
New series of The Thick of It
I watched the new series of "The Thick of It" last night. Not as funny as "Yes, Minister", yet it, too, rather brilliantly illustrates some truths about the way we're governed.
Tin pot MPs scurry about, playing the part of being a minister. Devoid of self respect, they see success in terms of headlines and survival. Strangers to public policy and principle, their departments run them, rather than they their departments.
When things go wrong, they don't seemed to fear having to answer the Commons. Accountability is always upward to more senior ministers and inward to press managers.
After years of devoted sycophancy, the minister discovers they're utterly expendable. Long, smarmy hours sucking up to a Prime Minister who can barely tell the nodding clones apart - and couldn't care less which one held office.
The running punch line is that the elected officials are puppets of the permanent ones. Unelected PR people call the shots for the sake of expediency.
Over the past four years in Westminster, I've met dozens of crest-fallen ex-ministers, each looking like they've been spat out by a Malcolm Tucker. It's then, their vanity broken, a few of the more honest and perceptive ones admit that perhaps our politics is broken, too.
Perhaps it's not really such a joke.
Posted on 25 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Quote for today
"... the BBC, which is utterly in thrall to the left-wing agenda of the majority of its staff, has contributed hugely to the rise of the BNP through its systematic censorship over the years of any coverage or debate on the biggest wave of mass immigration in British history."
Daily Mail editorial. Oct 24th 2009
Discuss.
Posted on 24 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
It's not just Gordo's credibility that's sunk
Britain has had 18 months of declining economic output - our GDP now lower than Italy's. Gordon Brown, once lauded as the "Iron Chancellor", looks a bit of a chump.
We all know that. But what about those mugs in the media who spent years telling us he was some kind of economic genius?
An "independent" Bank of England, free to set interest rates was a master-stroke, they kept saying. Oh yes? And what of the ruinously low rates they then set, causing first a massive over-supply of credit, then a debt bubble and now a chronic credit shortage?
Brown's new City regulatory regime was frightfully modern, BBC-types told us. It did succeed in causing a boom in compliance. Indeed, entire departments were created within banks to cope with Gordo's new Financial Services Authority. All the boxes were ticked, yet it failed to do the most basic checks that mattered.
During the boom years, the media class praised Brown, as he fleeced the goose that laid all that gold. Economically illiterate, they simply failed to see that a revenue bonanza derived from a property and financial services boom was not a permanent addition to the tax base. Now we have a 14% gap between what government takes in revenue and what it spends.
And all the while, Brown squandered the supply-side dynamism our economy once had with regulatory overkill.
Brown and Labour cannot be trusted on the economy. Many state-subsidised reporters and the dead tree pundits cannot be trusted to provide an accurate economic analysis either.
Posted on 24 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Everyone is blogging about ....
... Question Time and the BNP. I'm not going to.
Much wiser to focus on how we clean up Westminster, tackle uncontrolled immigration and restore meaning to politics. Do that, and I think fewer folk would vote BNP in the first place.
Posted on 23 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Why is Parliament so useless?
Posted on 22 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Why spend £27 million on a helicopter ....
.... you could buy for £8 millilon?
The Aussies have decided to purchase their military helicopters - with a naval capability - "off the shelf".
Odd that. You'd think they'd rather spend three times the amount on something that that won't be ready for years - so long as it's made in Oz. It'd give them sovereignty over supply, you see. It's how we won the war - apart from all that lend lease and stuff.
Posted on 22 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Recall and Primaries Bill
Ever thought that the rules in Westminster were made to favour politicians?
Here's a way to re-write them so that they favour the people.
Posted on 22 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Legg Heads Arms Body
After Tom Legg has sorted out MPs expenses, I hope he's put in charge of reviewing defence procurement.
He'd not only have his work cut out making sure all was above board, but we could have a great headline.
Posted on 22 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Immigration: government doesn't have a clue
One of the biggest immigration scams involves "student" visas. Apply to study in the UK, get a visa to do so, and once in, just stay.
It has been running for years. Everyone in Whitehall knows it. And absolutely nothing has been done to put it right.
S
uch a system is ultimately bad news for those genuine students we might want to attract. For our universities to remain world class, they do need to be able to draw in the brightest minds
.
Not for the first time, I find myself wondering if our liberal society - the engine of our success as a country - is being undermined by the grotesque incompetence of the British state.
So the other day I asked the Minister in charge of who speaks about immigration a simple question: How many people who entered the UK on a student visa does he estimate have remained in the UK in recent years?
He says he doesn't know. He may well prefer to plea ignorance, given the likely scale of the abuse that has happened on his watch.
Yet he has done nothing to create a system that is capable of distinguishing between a bright maths or medical graduate our universities could really benefit from - and someone simply looking to move to the UK.
How did we create such a useless system? Is it not shocking that the broken levers of government - presided over by self-serving Whitehall mandarins - should have done nothing about it?
Rather than rage against the BBC for allowing the BNP to take part in Question Time, if we are serious about taking on the BNP we need to act over immigration. And top of the list must be to sort out the bogus "student" visa scam.
Posted on 22 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
All women short-lists?
Fact: open primary selections run by the Conservative party have a 100% track record of selecting women candidates.
It is not that open primaries have proved insufficient. We've just not used them enough.
In fact, we've only used open primaries the one time - in Totnes. And a first class woman GP candidate was selected.
As I never tire of pointing out - and for good reason it would now seem - every other selection contest run in every other constituency has either been an open or a closed caucus. Primaries involve everyone. Caucuses are a self-selecting meeting. It's the outcome, not merely the process, that is different.
Go figure.
UPDATE: Wasn't Bracknell a primary, ask some readers? No. It was a caucus. An open caucus, perhaps. But most certainly a caucus and not a primary. Read here for more on the difference.
Posted on 21 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
"The smug musings of a self-satisfied tribe in SW1"
My verdict on what passes for "debate" in our morally bankrupt House of Commons. Read my short intervention here.
We urgently need change. Not just a change of government. Nor merely changing some of the MPs. We need to change the way that we do politics.
If you want change, why not get your MP to support this Commons motion? It'd allow us to fire MPs guilty of serious wrong-doing - and ensure everyone has a say over who gets to be their next MP.
Posted on 21 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
How to make Parliament representative?
Read Daniel Hannan's blog for a clue.
Open source politics means trusting local people to determine the right answer.
Posted on 20 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Want to recall your MP?
If we had a proper accountable democracy, an MP guilty of serious wrong-doing would be out on their ear.
Instead, even if a committee of fellow MPs were to uphold a complaint of wrong-doing, they just carry on in their post. In fact, the only time local people get a say is when another MP (Gordon) calls an election.
Ever get the feeling that the rules are written to favour the politicians?
I think the rules should be re-written to favour the people.
That's why I'm campaigning for a right to recall MPs guilty of serious wrong-doing (and open primaries so local people, not party hierarchies, decide who gets to be the candidate). Let all elected public officials answer to to those they are supposed to serve.
Please have a look at my EDM - and get your own local MP to sign it.
Posted on 20 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Open source politics means hands off
Established political parties face three massive challenges. Individually, any one of them would force our political system to change. Coming together, I believe that they herald something revolutionary.
First, the tide of anti-politics.
It's much more than their expenses. MPs are scorned for a more fundamental reason. Those you vote for have been conceding ground to unelected officials - locally, nationally and supranationally - to the point they now have remarkably little say over public policy. They are left to either defend it or attack it. But their words are often blah blah, since they can rarely change it.
The public has clocked this impotence - and increasingly despises all politicians for it.
Second, the internet.
Just as the web has removed the barriers to entry in business and commerce, it has opened up enormous potential for new entrants in politics. Communication and comment have been democratised. Campaigning is going to dramatically change as the concept of a tightly controlled message or "line to take" yields to something more authentic.
Cheap, democratic communication removes many of the barriers that traditionally made it so difficult for independent candidates to do well. It is unclear what the consequences could be.
Third, the rise of consumerism.
Spotify gives people choices as to which music they listen to that were impossible and unimaginable a generation ago. If people have that degree of choice over music, they will not long tolerate a lack of choice over some of the more important things in life.
Or as one constituent put it to me "if I can book my holidays on a Saturday afternoon, how come I can't see my doctor for two weeks?". Indeed. Consumerist citizens are not going to be prepared to leave it entirely up to politicians to decide the shape of their public services.
If established political parties don’t adapt to these new circumstances, they will (continue) to lose market share to new entrants.
Open source politics
So how should political parties respond? Giving local people more direct control over public services is going to be key - either via localism or via a more consumerist model of control.
But politics itself needs to change.
Parties need to become more "open source". That is to say they must stop being quite such "top down" hierarchical structures, with a tightly controlled message from London. Instead, they must be broader, inclusive movements.
The Conservatives - the party of the "little platoons" - has pioneered open source politics. MyConservatives.com allows campaign messages needs to be written organically. Trusting people is becoming more than a campaign slogan, with proposals on the centre right for popular initiative - and even wiki-Bills to refine the process of law making.
Perhaps our most successful experiment has been with open primaries and caucuses. These allow local people a direct say to which candidates should stand for office. Most important of all, they show very visibly that we are a people's party, not a politicians' club.
Not only must we truly embrace open source politics. We must do far more to be seen to have embraced it.
Posted on 20 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Time to democratise the judiciary?
Days after the Supreme Court officially opened, is the case for some sort of democratic oversight over the judiciary growing stronger?
Posted on 19 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Democracy gives way to quangocracy
If you allow unelected quangos to pass judgement over those you elect, this is what you get;
-
This morning, your elected MPs' decision not to approve the appointment of Children's Commissar was simply ignored by Ed Balls.
-
This afternoon, Nick Herbert is reported to the Standards Commissioner - because of his party policy on hunting. Seriously.
Where did the democracy go?
What's the point in having a Parliament if those you elect must answer to unelected officials. Didn't we work this out in 1640-something?
Posted on 19 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Commons stays in the sewer with Gordon Brown in charge
One of the reasons why the House of Commons is so despised is the fact that its members are in fact pretty useless at doing their job. MPs might cost the taxpayer ever more, yet they don't hold government properly to account.
Indeed, they can't since those with executive power are able to carry on - and all many politicians seem able to do is talk.
On first becoming Prime Minister, Gordon Brown promised to change this. He said our elected representatives would be better able to scrutinise ministers. Specifically, MPs could confirm appointments to quangos.
Turns out to be nonsense. Crown Prerogative continues to be abused.
The select committee on which I sit decided not to approve the appointment of Maggie Atkinson as the new Childrens' Commissioner.
Guess what? The minister, Ed Balls goes ahead and does it anyway.
Today is the final proof - if it was needed - that the current executive is incapable of making the kind of changes needed to lift SW1 out of the sewer.
UPDATE: Ed Ball's arrogance - I don't like your reasons for saying "no", so it's going to be "yes".
Read here for yourself the level of contempt this clown of a minister shows for Parliament.
Posted on 19 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Why do we have a national policy for starting school?
Ed Balls, the minister, says four. Educational "experts" last week said six.
So when should our children start school? How about when "we", i.e. each family, thinks best?
If Mr and Mrs Balls think four is the ideal age, good on them. They should then be free to send their children to school at that age. But I really do not see why every other mum and dad in the country should have to follow suit.
Why not have some schools start at four, and others at five and some at six? Why not allow professional teachers to use formal, informal and every other shade of teaching method in between?
And then let mums and dads decide what's best for their own children.
Would we tolerate politicians prescribing a national iTunes list? So if we have the kind of freedom Spotify gives us for the trivial things in life, why don't we have freedom over the really important?
I simply do not think it is any longer acceptable for politicians and officials to decide what's best for other people's families.
Posted on 19 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Bashing the bankers?
"We're watching you" Tracy Corrigan warns bankers in her Sunday Telegraph column.
Who does she mean by "we". Journalists, like her, perhaps?
The one slight flaw with that is that (Jeff Randall aside) I can't think of many hacks who were able to spot how banks ran up insane asset to liability ratios. As watchers, they proved every bit as myopic as official regulators.
It was the free market - not journalists nor regulators - that called time on unsustainable folly in the financial markets.
For over a decade, commentators and regulators all agreed about the wisdom of an asinine regulatory regime. As boxes were ticked and entire departments created within banks to ensure compliance, few seemed to ask "can we afford to pay back what we owe?"
For years, hacks and officials all knew that low interest rates were A Good Thing. Yet officials controlling the price of credit first created a glut of cheap money. Then a chronic shortage, or credit crunch.
The "we" that needs to keep an eye on banks are not officials nor politicians nor commentators. It is the wisdom of the crowd that keeps bankers (and indeed politicians and journalists) on the straight and narrow.
Reading Tracy Corrigan, I thought, not for the first time of Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged. If she echoes Bertram Scudder, perhaps the real problem is that too many of our bankers are now James Taggarts. With the £billion bail outs, any Hank Rearden wealth creators have been turned into looters.
Posted on 18 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
How to rebuild our democracy - my proposals reviewed in today's Telegraph
Charles Moore kindly reviews my proposal to make all MPs properly accountable to local people, with a right to recall wrong-doers, and select Parliamentary candidates by open primary.
The idea is to ensure that every single MP owes their place in the Commons to competitive election - not the sinecure of a "safe seat".
Moore says I'm seen by some in SW1 as a "maverick". To be regarded as unconventional in Westminster in the current climate is the greatest of compliments.
Posted on 17 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Tom Watson's interesting blog
Interesting blog by Tom Watson. He writes ...
"This story “Conservatives plan to give ministers more power over the civil service” is fascinating. For all the bluster about NuLab centralisation of power, it shows the the British Conservative Party has no intention of letting go of the reins."
Not exactly, Tom.
Ensuring that Sir Humphrey Appleby is made properly answerable to elected politicians is not a repudiation of localism. On the contrary, and as The Plan makes clear, shifting power back from the civil service and the quango state means putting it in the hands of local people - and where necessary, those we elect - be it in town halls or Parliament.
Localism and direct democracy demand making the civil service accountable once again.
Posted on 16 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Is it Obama or America that they are attacking?
I feel disquiet at the way some British commentators nowadays pass fiercely partisan judgements on US Presidents.
Guardianistas sympathetic to lefty Democrats raged against Bush the younger in a way that never seemed to happen against Bush the elder. Were they such different Presidents, or have we on this side of the Atlantic lost sight of something?
Following the election of President Obama, certain right wing compatriots routinely make comments about him that few raw Republicans over there would make.
Now we see the extraordinary sight of lefty Brits starting to attack Obama for not being sufficiently Guardianista. Did they really think that President Obama was going to stop acting in America's national interest?
Often what is said about a US President in Britain tell us more about the prejudices of who is saying it than it does about the occupant of the Oval Office.
This morning, I read Mehdi Hasan's essay in the New Statesman, which suggests Obama is little different from Bush. As I did, the thought struck me that perhaps some on the left who criticise US Presidents do so because ultimately they don't much like Americans?
Perhaps those Brits on the right who lay into Obama, however unwittingly, undermine strong Atlantic ties?
Whoever is in the Whitehouse is not merely America's political leader, but their Head of State. Laying into him is not, in the eyes of middle America, quite the same as criticising a Prime Minister is by middle Britain.
By all means criticise whoever is in the Whitehouse. But I hope we don't forget that it was millions of ordinary Americans, who I greatly admire, who put him there.
Posted on 16 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Euro extremists want compulsory lessons
Remember how the Tory group of MEPs in Brussels quit the European People's Party (EPP)?
Remember the shrill hysteria of David Miliband and the Foreign Office at the idea that Conservatives would form a new, centre right group dedicated to returning powers back to nation states?
Now ponder the fact that, according to the Telegraph, the EPP that we left is now demanding children have compulsory lessons on the benefits of the EU. Seriously.
Leaving the EPP looks more and more like a smart move with each day that passes.
According to one Euro extremist, Mario David, British children should have a Euro curriculum in order to "know and understand, from a young age, ... the successful history of the European Union" so that "the generations of tomorrow will be immune to any distortion of the perception of the role of the EU".
He says that compulsory lessons on the benefits of the EU will ensure that we "embrace the advantages of this unique project of voluntary sharing of sovereignty."
For anyone under the age of 52, there's not been much "voluntary" about it.
Posted on 16 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Goodbye Defence Industrial Strategy?
According to the Gray Report, the way the Ministry of Defence buys equipment is unaffordable.
Indeed. That's because too much defence procurement is about buying what suits the contractor to supply at a price they like. As a direct consequence our forces have often not got the kit they need.
Too many supposed "experts" over-complicate it. Paid commentators give an analysis so focused on the minutiae, they miss the obvious; off the shelf procurement would mean we could have more for less. Scrap the DIS. Simple.
Posted on 15 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Our analogue Parliament in a digital age
After
several million watched Daniel Hannan
on YouTube roasting the Prime Minister, lots of people asked me why they never see Westminster MPs doing likewise.
First, I doubt too many MPs are articulate enough to pack such a verbal punch. Second, Commons rules are generally rigged so as to prevent real meaningful scrutiny of whoever is behind the despatch box pretending to be a minister. Speeches and debate have all the spontaneity of a Latin Mass.
But the most glaring reason why you'd never get to see such a sight is that MPs are not allowed to post clips on to YouTube the way Daniel Hannan was able to.
Since John Wilkes and co kicked up such a fuss, newspapers can report Commons proceedings. It would be unthinkable to regulate who and how Hansard can be quoted.
Yet the Commons Administration Committee's ridiculously flat-footed approach to that internet thingy imposes rules that stop folk YouTubing clips quickly or with edits.
In other words, the great gift of the internet - democratising distribution and broadcast content - is not allowed to apply to what is said in the Commons.
The restrictions are great news for ministers and government - no one posting what they say and ensuring people are made aware. They suit most politicians, since the voters are unable to edit and distribute what they say.
But it is terrible news for those outside SW1 who want to be able to hold to account those in Westminster for what they say.
Speaker Bercow said he would modernise the Commons. When will he allow people to post YouTube clips of Commons proceedings right away?
Posted on 15 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Hands off home education!
This morning, the education select committee took evidence from people with a background in home education. Given that a number of local mums and dads in Clacton have decided they'd prefer to home educate, rather than take what is on offer from officials, I've a keen interest in this subject.
The Badman Review on home education (quango alert) called for a system of registration and inspection (entirely predictable).
The reason? Child protection, some say. I thought that the whole point about recent failures to protect children was that the children were on registers.
Perhaps government is worried about standards? It's concern about poor standards that drives many mums and dads to become home educators in the first place.
Surely, if government has failed to provide kids with the schooling they deserve, it's a bit of cheek for those same officials to then knock on people's front doors and start to demand inspection and audit?
Why should people like Ed Balls decide what is best for other people's kids?
It is not local mums and dads who should answer to education officials. But officials who should be made to answer to local parents. My own Essex county council has, rather brilliantly, started to give out home education grants - reflecting the fact that it's local parents money.
It is extraordinary that the state no longer seems to trust most mums and dads with their own children. The relentless drive to infantilse us continues.
Posted on 14 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Michael Gove - Reformer of the Year
My favourite think-tank, Reform, is running a Reformer of the Year competition.
While shortlisted, I'm cheering for Michael Gove. After his superb week in Manchester, he is without doubt my choice.
Michael's proposals on education could really help improve things for local children - and mums and dads - in Clacton.
Vote for Michael Gove here.
Posted on 14 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Recall and Primaries Bill
Here is the text of the debate from yesterday's Bill to allow recall ballots and open primaries.
I'm not sure, reading the comments about it on ConHome, that those posting have necessarily familarised themselves with the idea. Not for the first time in politics one finds people arguing against you on the basis of something you've not in fact proposed. (There ought to be a word for it?)
Also, our modern, happening washed up House of Commons takes four days to prepare footage for YouTube - so you'll not actually be able to see the debate yet.
Posted on 14 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Jack Straw backs the Bill
Apparently, Jack Straw has indicated on BBC World at One that my proposal on a right of recall is to be included in the Labour manifesto.
Have a look at the precise text of the Bill here.
Posted on 13 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Gordon Brown could act to clean up politics today
Gordon Brown spoke about allowing recall votes in Brighton the other week.
Will he do anything about it today? This is the letter I sent him.
From:
CARSWELL, Douglas
Sent: 30 September 2009 14:59
To: BROWN, Gordon
Subject: Cleaning up Westminster: an opportunity to make recall of MPs a reality
Dear Gordon,
I listened to your conference speech yesterday, and was really impressed to hear you say that you favoured a right of recall to allow constituents to sack wayward MPs. Well done.
As luck would have it, I have a Ten Minute Rule Bill on Tuesday October 13th on this very subject. Part of what I am proposing would give local voters the right to trigger by-elections to oust MPs who have served themselves, rather than their constituents.
I am allowed to have several fellow MPs sponsor my Bill. Would you be willing to act as one of them?
I appreciate it might be a little unconventional having the Prime Minister sponsoring a Ten Minute Rule Bill. However, public anger with what some MPs have been up to is such that we need action. And some of what passes for Westminster convention might even need to change.
In the interest of bringing about real change, I am keen to build a cross party consensus on this issue. It would be wonderful if you would take the opportunity to back my Bill and help make recall a reality.
Thanks so much.
Warm regards,
Douglas
Douglas Carswell MP
Posted on 13 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Recall and Primaries: a Bill to make the Commons properly accountable
Tomorrow I’m introducing a Bill to allow local voters to sack wayward MPs – and have a direct say over who gets to be their MP in the first place.
One of the reasons why Westminster doesn’t work – and why folk have become quite so anti politics and anti politician – is the perception we're governed by a remote and unaccountable political class. Too many MPs seem insulated from meaningful public accountability
.
In fact, with 7 out of 10 Parliamentary seats unlikely to change hands during a General Election, many MPs are more vulnerable to pressures inside SW1 than those outside.
Only real accountability will revive our political system. What can we do to make sure that every MP in every constituency faces a real democratic contest in order to be in the House of Commons at all?
If we had a right of recall to sack serious wrong-doers, MPs would be held properly accountable for how effectively they did their job. If we had Open Primaries, there would be a real choice to deicide who should be the next MP – not just choice in marginal seats.
After the success of the Totnes Open Primary this summer, the advantages of open source politics are obvious. Not least, it’ll create more independent-minded citizen lawmakers, and mean fewer professional politicians.
However, the big problem is the cost. My Bill overcomes this problem by allowing the local returning officer to “piggy back” a primary ballot, on behalf of a local party, on to a pre-existing election. The marginal cost increase of the additional ballot paper would be a few £hundred, rather £thousands.
Even Gordon Brown in Brighton talked about recall. Will he now back the Bill?
Posted on 12 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
BBC and climate change: are we about to see more balanced reporting?
The lunatic "consensus" on man-made climate change is starting to break down.
As Damian Thompson has spotted, the BBC has posted a comment about climate change which questions if human emissions of CO2 really do influence the climate.
For years, the BBC has reported opinion about the impact of human CO2 emissions on the climate as if they were fact. From fawning coverage of the Stern report to their foreign correspondents' constant assertions that droughts and natural disasters are a result of man-made global warming, the BBC has totally failed to present any of the counter arguments. Until today.
Is this evidence that the BBC realises its license fee funded prejudices are no longer defensible? Or does it suggest that the memes in Ian Plimer's book, which questions man-made climate change, are starting to spread?
Posted on 12 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Article in PR Week
Something I really enjoy writing is this regular little column I have in PR Week.
We live in an age of anti-politics, and I'm convinced that the impact of the internet is going to have already having a profound impact on public policy making and public affairs.
Frustrated at listening to endless cliche-merchants regurgitating drivel, I really like being able to spell out what changes I think are coming.
Posted on 11 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Miliband's energy policy is a disaster in the making
Thanks to Ed Miliband, the energy minister, the cost of your electricity bill looks set to increase by 60% over the next few years.
As you begin to feel the pinch, don't fall for any of the faux excuses that imply it's all inevitable. Your bill won't be rising because of shortages in available supply. Nor will it be down to rising demand in India or China. Rather, it's current government policy that's the problem.
The government already adds surcharges to your electricity bill to pay for wind farms. Why? Because wind farms generally cost more to build than they would otherwise recoup. So in order to make sure they get built at all, government has add a charge to your household bills as a tax to subsidise them.
Even then, the subsidy is not going to be enough. It is now estimated by OFGEM at £200 Billion of investment - on top of the existing subsidy system - is needed to stop the lights going out. So householders can expect those surcharges on their electriticy bills to rocket. And if you're a wealth creator whose business needs electricity, life will be made even harder for you.
Perhaps on cold, still evenings, amidst the candle light we can debate why no one thought to invest the money in nuclear power instead?
Perhaps by then policy makers will have read Ian Plimer's Heaven and Earth, and realised that we've been tilting at windmills?
Posted on 10 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Obama and the Nobel Prize
President Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize seems to have upset some commentators. Apparently he's talked about resolving international problems, not actually solved them. Perhaps.
I'm no expert about the Nobel prize - and frankly, I couldn't care less. Nor, if I was a US citizen, would I vote Democrat.
But what I do know is that I like the US. When US prestige stands tall, my world is a better, safer, more prosperous place. On that basis, it's great to see a US President winning international plaudits.
I like America. I like it when other people like America - even the sort of people who dish out Nobel prizes. The rest is just detail.
Posted on 9 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
What would Maggie say?
It's interesting to compare David Cameron's speech yesterday with what Margaret Thatcher told the 1978 Conservative conference in the run up to the 1979 General Election.
Her speech, too, talked about the problems caused by Big Government:
"government takes too much in tax .... government tries to level everyone down ....
instead of the voice of compassion, the croak of the Quango is heard in the land"
Interestingly, anyone today demanding Cameron unveil a detailed blueprint, might ponder the great lady's own words back then:
"We Conservatives don't have a blue-print for instant success. There isn't one."
Don't take my word for it. Read it here yourself.
Thatcherite Conservatism was about decentralising control over the economy. Post-Thatcher Conservatism is about decentralising control over politics and public services.
Posted on 9 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Why the hostility to Dannatt?
News that General Sir Richard Dannatt could serve in a future Conservative government has drawn predictable howls of protest from people opposed to the idea of a future Conservative government.
But it has also upset some other vested interests.
For years, senior figures in the military have sat and watched as big contractors lobbied to ensure the defence budget gets spent in the interests of their profit margins. Money meant to buy kit has been spent on giant job creation schemes. Top defence chiefs have had a put up with MoD officials making monumentally stupid decisions on procurement.
Could it be that in Dannatt, we might at last get someone close to power able to ensure that the defence budget is spent in the interests of the armed forces?
See all the bunkum about the constitutional propriety blah blah for what it is. Since when did we ban generals from having a say in defence matters? Not least in times of war?
Dannatt having a say would make it more likely that the defence budget got spent in the interests of the military. Not the interests of politicians, defence lobbyists and contractors.
Posted on 9 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Twittering away @douglascarswell
I found lots of new followers on Twitter when in Manchester. Dozens signed up following the Channel 4 Twinge - and then after the Sky Unplugged thing I did.
Someone has written in to complain that "you don't understand Twitter .... since you only have followers and don't follow anyone".
Not strictly true. I now follow 5 people. And if I choose to use Twitter largely as a form of personalised RSS feed, it's precisely because I do understand it, and choose to use it that way.
That's the beauty of this internet thingy, you see. Each person can use it their way.
Posted on 8 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Beware the lobbyist
I saw more lobbyists and PR types in Manchester than party members. And it wasn't through lack of trying - I spoke at half a dozen fringe events for the membership.
The success of the next government depends on reining in the quangocrats and their hired advocates. Not reconciling ourselves to them.
Their flattery and implied delight in Tory success should be treated with extreme scepticism. Were they saying much the same in Brighton last week?
The quango state appears to believe the Conservatives will form the next government. A vast sucking-up operation is underway. It must be resisted.
Sir Humphrey Appleby is part of the problem - not the solution. Our radical edge mustn't be blunted.
Posted on 8 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Ignoring European Human Rights rules helps fight crime
After French and Belgian police turned down their request to bug a suspected drug dealer because of the European Convention on Human Rights, Jersey police "did it anyway" - reports today's Telegraph.
If they'd followed the ECHR Criminal Rights Charter, I doubt they'd have secured a conviction.
There's a wider lesson for us there - quit the ECHR if you want to fight crime.
Fiercely supportive of individual liberty, I simply do not believe that Human Rights rules - and all the judicial activism that goes with it - is the way to keep us free. Nor does it help our police officers tackle crime.
Posted on 8 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Spotted in Manchester: Gordon Brown's Porky Pies
Posted on 8 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
No lobbying. Just a plan
An alarmed lobbyist tries to speak to me. Seems he got to the bit in The Plan where we say we need to axe the defence industrial strategy.
Tight budgets. Off the shelf. More bang for our buck.
Sense which way the wind is blowing?
Posted on 7 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Hannan - the restaurant
First it was 3 million watching him take on Gordon Brown on YouTube. Then they ranked him amongst the top ten most influential Tories in Britain.
Now, after he's been in Manchester for 48 hours, it seems they name restaurants after him.
When will the madness end?
Posted on 7 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Why are we paying for this poster?
We heard yesterday from George Osborne about some of the tough measures we're all going to have to adopt to sort out the nation's finances. I think most folk recognise that a new realism and honesty is needed.
But what enrages me is that £squillions continue to be spent by government on the pointless.
Take a look at this poster, which I snapped on the London underground the other day. It's a poster basically telling us that some stuff we eat has salt in it. No kidding! They have salt in food now?! And too much of it is, like, bad for you? Really?!
Not only it is deeply patronising, but you, me and every taxpayer in the country is paying for the privilege of having a quango - in this case the Food Standards Agency - lecture us on the obvious.
Worse, this quango today boasts that it's escalating its public awareness campaign. We're not only going to be paying for the posters, but for ad slots on TV, radio, print and online advertising. (No mention of the private businesses now unable to advertise their products in such a way because the FSA has now helped price them out).
Tell me. Is it right that folk coming up for retirement are being asked to work an extra year, while at the same time £millions are squandered in this way?
And it's not just the Food Standards Agency. There's such an alphabet soup of these quangos - FSA, QCA, DSA, CSA, NICE etc - that they've run out of letters of the alphabet to name them all. The letters FSA having to double up for both the foodie quango, and for the Financial Services Authority (the guys who failed to regulate the banks).
It is simply not credible to call for a "bonfire" of quangos. All politicians do, and we have discovered that the executive rarely reins in the executive. Ministers seldom go to Cabinet with demands that their empires and vanity be scaled back.
What we need, rather, is a revolution in Parliamentary oversight; Make the head honcho of the FSA appear annually before the Commons to plead for his budget, line item by item. I don't think expensive PR campaigns would long continue.
And it might just give our politicians something worthwhile to do, too.
Posted on 7 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Channel 4 event at Conservative conference
I wonder if one day many TV interviews with politicians will be done like this. The interviewee asking the questions - but ones put forward by viewers.
Posted on 6 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Why so little blogging: conspiracy or cock up?
Wild conspiracy theories at a function last night about the lack of MPs blogging and tweeting in Manchester.
Was it a directive handed down from CCHQ to avoid any banana skins in conference week, someone asked me? Part of a pre-election clamp down to prevent folk going "off message", speculated another?
No. Alas, the lack of internet comment was due to something more mundane. Dodgy wifi connections.
If anything, the Tory party seems to get internet politics - and the need not to try to dictate a bogus, manufactured message ....
Posted on 6 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Most influential right wingers?
Iain Dale and the Daily Telegraph have compiled their annual list of "the 100 most influential Right Wingers" in Britain.
They rank me as a new entry at number 59. Ummm ...
Should one be flattered or mildly embarassed? Still they got me down as being a right winger, which is something (outside planet BBC).
Also, if one was really influential, one won't be blogging about it, surely?
Interesting, they rank Daniel Hannan at number 10 (in the listings, not Downing Street).
Posted on 6 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
The Plan is the blueprint
According to the Times, The Plan is the "blueprint for Tory modernisers".
Aye.
Posted on 6 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Conference update
Having a fantastic conference in Manchester! Alas, I couldn't hook up on the wifi system today, so blogging has been light.
Full service resumes tomorrow! (And I'll be able to moderate your comments - sorry for the delay).
Posted on 5 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Conference Diary
Busy week in Manchester. Lots of opportunities to promote the new Tory agenda about how to push power away from remote elites down to people and communities. Lots to say on the direct democracy theme.
Mind you. I suspect we'll be hearing one or two nods in that direction from inside the main conference hall, too, this year.
Monday:
8:30. Why does the Left hate Israel? Bridgewater Hall. (ticket only)
19:30. The Twinge, Channel 4. The internet and new politics. Lancaster Suite, Midland Hotel
Tuesday:
9:30. Police accountability. Dickens & Thackeray Room, Radisson Edwardian Hotel
17:30. Localism and public services. Colony Restaurant, Midland Hotel
Wednesday:
12:30. Democracy Dragon's Den - why we need open primaries. Manchester Central, Exchange Room 2.
Posted on 4 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Why do we have a National Curriculum?
Everybody has an opinion about what we need to include in the National Curriculum.
I've just read a letter in the Telegraph saying we have to include geography. ConHome readers want more of our island history. On Radio 4's Farming Today recently someone was saying "our children's" education must include farm visits.
I've nothing against geography, history or farms. In fact, I love all three. It's just this "our children" bit I'm unsure of.
If people feel so strongly about a certain topic, why don't they make sure their own children are taught it? Why is it considered acceptable for people to seek to impose "what's important" on to other people's families?
One argument is that a common curriculum gives us common cultural reference points. Making sure we're all taught the same things binds us together. Alas, it's nonsense.
For years we had no National Curriculum, yet children throughout England were taught much the same. Cultural reference points worth having in common arise organically - not at the behest of quangocrats.
However counter-intuitive it may seem, leaving people and institutions free to choose what they want, far from ending in chaos and fragmentation, usually results in similar outcomes (See the "hits" in long tail distribution - a self-defining "core Curriculum?).
Then there's the argument that a state-run Curriculum raises standards. Imposes the same blandness on everyone, more like.
It's not the existence of a National Menu that maintains standards in my local restaurant. It's the fact that an unhappy punter won't come back.
The moment one accepts the need for a National Curriculum, you cannot escape the debate over what to include. And who gets to decide.
Every time someone demands the inclusion of their pet subject, what they're really saying is that they know best for you and your children.
Some fear the freedom not having a National Curriculum would bring. That in itself tells you how diminished and infantilised Big Government makes us.
Posted on 4 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Manchester conference
Once upon a time, Conservative party conferences simply took place in a large conference hall at the seaside. That’s basically where it all happened.
Gradually, with the main conference being so formal and rigid, people began to organise “fringe meetings” outside. The conference fringe was born.
Today, with the fringe itself now growing more formal (and corporate) – and with human nature being as it is – a “fringe fringe” is now starting to evolve. In fact it is outside the formal conference zone entirely.
Welcome to the Freedom Association’s Freedom Zone – easily the most interesting part of the conference. Why not drop in?
During the conference week, I’ll be speaking at various fringe events on foreign / defence policy, Channel 4 News / Fishburn Hedges’ Twinge event, why we need open primaries, scraping the Human Rights Act, localism, blah blah and much else besides.
Although hopefully not all at the same meeting - nor all at the Freedom Zone ….
Fringe or Freedom Zone, I hope to see you there.
Posted on 4 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Gordo makes a dog's breakfast out of election debate
Apparently there will be a General Election TV debate afterall. Brown has indicated that he will take part.
Yet the Prime Minister's dithering about this says far more about his character than his performance in any TV debate ever could.
It was inevitable that the proposal was coming. Yet, when faced with it, what did he do? He briefed that he would - sort of. Then he delayed. He put it in to his Brighton speech. Then took it out.
Now he writes a wooden, politician's letter to Sky News, waffling on about "What's important for the country is ...." Blah. Blah.
It is utterly bizarre.
Whatever advantage he might have had in taking the initiative over this has gone. Any chance of appearing refreshingly direct, in an age of anti-politics, has been lost.
Extraordinary.
Posted on 3 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Tony Blair: President of Europe?
Germany's Christian Democrats and Nicolas Sarkozy's lot apparently want Tony Blair to become the President of Europe.
Another illustration of why we were right to pull out of the European People's Party.
But if Blair becomes Euro-President it will serve to further undermine the legitimacy of the whole Euro-project in Britain. The undecided middle will see the EU for what it really is - a construct of the technocratic elite - rather than the free market Heath promised it'd be.
Heaven forbid that that should ever happen, eh.
Posted on 3 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
The last gasp of summer
It's been an extraordinary Indian summer in our part of Essex. Golden sunshine, and not much rain for weeks!
There's been one last flourish of colour in the garden. I photographed this very late sunflower, and these dahliahs, this morning.
It's curious that like the tomatoes and pumkins in the veggie patch, they're all exotic American imports. How different our Essex gardens must have looked before Columbus set sail.
Posted on 3 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
MyConservatives.com - will it work?
The Twitteratti are swooning over the new Conservative site, MyConservatives.com.
And it is indeed impressive. Or rather the architecture is all there.
But the key, as with TV, is going to be the content.
If the site gives in to cut-and-paste obsequiousness, it'll just be an impressive looking site full of blah.
If, on the other hand, the centre lets go, and sections of the site become a platform for a wider, diffuse movement, then it is going to be spectacular.
Giving the little platoons control would give the site an authenticity that many party sites still lack.
The digital platform is in place. But the content mustn't be analogue.
Posted on 2 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
After 230 tweets ...
... and 755 followers (but only 3 people followees, so to speak), I've discovered how to post a reply.
Progress, eh! Almost a Twitter Tsar.
http://twitter.com/douglascarswell
Posted on 2 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
What not to do in government ....
Peter Riddell has ten points of advice for David Cameron, should he win the next election.
Phew! What a relief to know that Mr R - a Senior Fellow at the Institute for Government, no less - is on hand to tell us how it should be done.
Riddell's top tips include "acclimatising to what government involves" and "trusting the civil service". And above all "don't rush".
Sounds like Riddell would like an incoming government to surrender to the machine - which is not surprising when you look at the Sir Humphrey Appleby-types at the Institute for Government.
But Riddell is wrong. Britain is in a mess not merely because of inept Labour ministers. And it's not just the ministers that we need to change.
Public policy is failing because those responsible for it are no longer accountable to the rest of us. Whitehall grandees and quangocrats decide policy - while ministers decide little more than the wine list.
Ministers must become more than departmental mouthpieces - and that requires some radical change. As suggested in The Plan, far more accountability is needed, with greater oversight of the machine.
Far from "acclimatising to government", government is going to have to change. And that involves much more than switching ministers.
Posted on 2 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Why does the Left hate Israel?
I'm giving a talk in Manchester next week at the Conservative conference about why the British Left seems to hate Israel.
I've several key points that I intend to make, but would be interested in ideas and contributions from readers.
Over to you. The comment thread is yours....
Posted on 1 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Is Carswell's blog more popular than Labour List?
Could it be that this blog is now more popular than the top Labour blog, LabourList.org?
According to fellow insurgent, Guido, LabourList clocked up 25,000 visitors in September.
This blog attracted 25,083 individual visitors (far from my best month, alas.)
And I'm still dwafed by Guido's vast zillions of individual visitors. But, if Guido is right, then it's still 83 more than the top Labour one.
So if you did read me last month, thanks for being one of the 83!
Posted on 1 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell
Supreme Court judges sworn in
By whom? And from what does our new Guardian Council derive its legitimacy?
Expect trouble. It is only a matter of time before the unelected, human rights mullahs on the Supreme Court strike down the actions of an elected government.
Given how much power these 11 judges have, when do we get to democratise their process for appointment?
Posted on 1 October 2009 by Douglas Carswell