Iain Dale's Diary

The Daley Dozen: Friday

2009-11-20T21:00:00.000Z

1. Mark Pack explains why Conservative candidates are the happiest!
2. PJC Journal on the politician who is unelected, illegitimate and unwanted.
3. TP Party Lines blog on the Top 100 Political Journalists.
4. Letters From a Tory feels sorry for Harriet Harman. Really.
5. John Redwood explains how to cut the deficit.
6. Liberal England explains why Irfan Ahmed has closed down his blog.
7. Quaequam Blog explains why the LibDems "got lucky" over Michael Brown.
8. Matt Atkinson on the old author v publisher battle.
9. Paul Waugh on Brown, Cameron and the unveiling of Lady T's portrait.
10. Michael Heaver says Turkish EU membership is dead in the water.
11. Conservative History Journal publishes a hitherto unplublished interview with the late Professor John Ramsden.
12. Gaby Hinsliff reckons she has too much information.

The Total Politics Top Political Journalists

2009-11-20T12:00:00.005Z

For the second year running, Total Politics has conducted it's Top 100 Journalists poll, asking its readers, MPs and journalists themselves to vote.

1. (+3) Nick Robinson
2. (-1) Evan Davis
3. (-1) Jeremy Paxman
4. (+9) Adam Boulton
5. (+18) Eddie Mair
6. (+1) Andrew Marr
7. (+22) Jon Snow
8. (+3) Quentin Letts
9. (+22) James Naughtie
10. (-4) Martha Kearney
11. (-1) Peter Riddell
12. (-9) Matthew Parris
13. (+1) Simon Hoggart
14. (-9) John Humphrys
15. (-7) Andrew Rawnsley
16. (+16) Carolyn Quinn
17. (+1) Simon Walters
18. (+36) Edward Stourton
19. (+18) John Pienaar
20. (+7) Ann Treneman

You can see the full list of 100 HERE. In the magazine, we carry separate lists as voted by MPs from different parties. Perhaps the most interesting result was that Tory MPs voted the BBC's Laura Kuennsberg as their number one. The journalists also voted on their own and their results are HERE. There are some quite revelaing variations from the main list.

I also asked my blog readers to vote separately. So here are the Iain Dale's Diary Readers Top 50 Political Journalists...

1. Matthew Parris (The Times)
2. Fraser Nelson (Spectator)/(News of The World)
3. Andrew Neil (BBC)
4. Paul Waugh (Evening Standard)
5. Quentin Letts (Mail)
6. Jeremy Paxman (BBC)
7. Adam Boulton (Sky News)
8. Benedict Brogan (Daily Telegraph)
9. Simon Walters (Daily Mail)
10. Jeff Randall (Daily Telegraph)
11. Boris Johnson (Daily Telegraph)
12. John Humphrys (Radio 4)
13. Eddie Mair (Radio 4)
14. Trevor Kavanagh (The Sun)
15. Daniel Hannan (Daily Telegraph)
16. Nick Robinson (BBC)
17. Daniel Finkelstein (The Times
18. Evan Davis (Radio 4)
19. John Redwood
20. Peter Oborne (Daily Mail)
21. Andrew Gimson (Telegraph)
22. Matthew D'Ancona (Sunday Telegraph)
23. Simon Hoggart (Guardian)
24. Charles Moore (Daily Telegraph)
25. Edward Stourton (Radio 4)
26. John Pienaar (BBC) TV & (FiveLive)
27. Ann Treneman (Times)
28. Jon Snow (Channel 4 News)
29. Gavin Esler (BBC)
30. Tom Bradby (ITV News)
31. Andrew Rawnsley (The Observer)
32. Andrew Pierce (Daily Telegraph)
33. James Landale (BBC)
34. Peter Riddell (The Times)
35. Joe Murphy (Evening Standard)
36. George Pascoe-Watson (The Sun)
37. Christopher Booker (Sunday Telegraph)
38. Peter Allen (FiveLive)
39. Simon Jenkins (Guardian/Sunday Times)
40. Simon Mayo (FiveLive)
41. Rachel Sylvester (The Times)
42. Martha Kearney (Radio 4)
43. Robin Lustig (Radio 4)
44. Michael Crick (BBC)
45. Krishnan Guru-Murthy (Channel 4 News)
46. Jeremy Clarkson (Sunday Times
47. Andrew Marr (BBC)
48. James Naughtie (Radio 4)
49. Jonathan Dimbleby (Radio 4)
50. Laura Kuenssberg (BBC)

LibDems In the Clear Over £2.4 Million Donation

2009-11-20T11:32:00.003Z

I may be in Tunbridge Wells today but I am sure I can hear the sound of champagne corks popping in Cowley Street, Westminster. The Electoral Commission has just announced that the £2.4 million donation by convicted fraudster Michael Brown's Fifth Avenue Partners was permissible and that no action will be taken against the LibDems. This despite the fact that the company was clearly not trading in any meaningful form when the donation was made.

Am I surprised? Not really. But the Electoral Commission has brought itself into disrepute over this case. When you think thaty UKIP has been forced to pay back £360,000 because a donor was inadvertantly missed off the electoral roll but the LibDems have been spared any punishment at all, it does make you wonder what kind of priorities the Electoral Commission has.

If Fifth Avenue Partners can be considered permissible donors, it brings the whole system of donation regulation into disrepute.

Triumph of the Mediocre

2009-11-20T10:06:00.003Z

No offence to Baroness Ashton and Mr Rumpy Pumpy, but seriously, is that the best they can do?

And I mean that in a caring way...

Could Harriett Have to Resign?

2009-11-20T09:55:00.003Z

Let's be clear, Harriet Harman has maintained she is innocent of the charges made against her yesterday by the CPS. She is accused of using a mobile phone while driving and driving without due care and attention.

But let's say she is found guilty. What happens then? Is being convicted of an offence of this nature serious enough to warrant a resignation? I'm trying to think of precedents here, where ministers have been convicted of an offence, but am having difficulty. She may well try to pass it off as a minor transgression, but I wonder if she would get away with it.

What do readers think?

UPDATE: Just seen this tweet from BevaniteEllie

@iaindale no @harrietharman will not resign over a driving incident,she has work 2 do 2 achieve equality in this country.Sorry 2 disappoint

LMAO

Chairman of Standards Committee Forced to Stand Down

2009-11-19T22:01:00.004Z

When will it end? The Telegraph has the story tonight of Conservative MP David Curry, the new chairman of the Parliamentary Standards Committee (no, really), has been accused of claiming £30,000 of taxpayers' money to pay for a house he hasn't set foot in for four years, after being banned by his ex wife. The Telegraph says...

The Conservative MP is accused of having an affair with a headmistress in his Yorkshire constituency and using a taxpayer-funded cottage to meet his lover.
A Telegraph investigation has learned that four years ago, after discovering the affair, Mr Curry’s French wife Anne demanded that he does not stay at the Yorkshire property as a condition of the couple’s reconciliation.

However, the former Conservative minister has continued claiming thousands of pounds a year for the house – which he could expect to sell for a substantial profit after leaving Parliament.

After the Telegraph approached Mr Curry with the allegations, he announced that he was referring himself to the Parliamentary Commissioner. He said he would stand down from the Standards committee during the investigation, which is expected to take several months.

The Committee has been criticised recently for taking a sympathetic position towards MPs accused of misconduct. It has been questioned for failing to adequately punish MPs including Jacqui Smith and Tony McNulty who were criticised for expense claims running into tens of thousands of pounds.

Mr Curry’s questionable claims followed the temporary break-up of his marriage in 2004. He had been using the Yorkshire cottage as the base for seeing his lover, a local headmistress called Cherry Edwards.

However, the Telegraph has established that following a reconciliation with his wife the following year, Mr Curry was ordered by her to leave the cottage largely unused because of its association with the affair.

Later that year – after moving back into the family home in Essex – he designated the Yorkshire property as his second home to the parliamentary authorities, since when he has claimed a total of £28,078.

Quite astonishing behaviour. It's even more astonishing that Mr Curry took on the role of chairman of the Standards Committee in the first place. Did no alarm bell ring, even at the back of his head?

It is just as well he has already announced he will be standing down from Parliament at the next election. I could say a lot more, but I think I'll leave it there. For the moment.

The Daley Dozen: Thursday

2009-11-19T21:00:00.000Z

1. Paul Goodman has further evidence that Labour MPs have given up.
2. Luke Akehurst is a tad put out by ranting Bob Piper.
3. Prodicus struggles with Prospect Magazine.
4. David Smith gives you Adam Smith in ten minutes.
5. Working Class Tory fisks a Labour email about their PPB.
6. Cranmer on the virtues of Rumpoy Pumpoy.
7. FT Blog on 10 Things You Never Knew about Baroness Cathy Ashton.
8. Paul Waugh on Oliver Kamm and Nightjack.
9. Guido exposes the loser Labour candidates.
10. LibDem Voice predicts a hung parliament.
11. James Macintyre has (another) bad day...
12. The Blue Blog has details of the community right to buy.

The Truth Behind Labour's DIY PPB

2009-11-19T12:21:00.002Z

Tory Bear and his friend Emily No Mates rip the p*** out of Labour's PPB, created by a Labour blogger in her bedroom. Good on her, but the only reason Labour showed it was because their finances are so shot to pieces that they will broadcast any old crap as long as it's free.

Tory Bear really is the bastard offspring of Boris and Guido, isn't he?

Have Labour MPs Given Up?

2009-11-19T12:01:00.003Z

Have Labour MPs given up? I only ask because I have never seen the government benches so empty during a Queen's Speech debate. Normally they are packed to the rafters. Conservative MPs did a head count yesterday and while Gordon Brown was speaking there were only 127 Labour MPs there, with massive gaps appearing on the green leather benches. This has never happened before. It is symptomatic of a parliamentary party that has lost all confidence in its leader and all confidence in its ability to win an election. Many of them probably just couldn't face turning up and performing like nodding dogs. It's not that they were in the building - they weren't. They didn't even bother to turn up for one of the parliamentary set pieces of the year.

They really do appear to have given up.

Government Borrowing Is Way Out of Control

2009-11-19T10:51:00.005Z

As if we needed a reminder that Treasury forecasts aren't worth the paper they're written on, we learn today that government borrowing is higher last month than it has ever been. In October it reached a massive £11 billion. October is normally a good month for tax receipts, particualrly corporation tax. Borrowing in this financial year is scheduled to be £175 billion. I repeat, in case your gob is too smacked to take that in - £175 billion.

The worrying thing is not just the headline figure of £11 billion - it is the trend. So far this financial year borrowing has amounted to £87 billion. Last year at this point it was £34 billion. Experts are now predicting that if the trend continues, borrowing this financial year could reach £200 billion or more. One financial pundit on 5 Live just now was saying it could reach £220 billion. Truly horrifying.

If the financial markets take fright at these figures, as well they might, the consequences could be truly horrendous. Our triple AAA credit rating will come under further strain, and if that goes, well, we're in unknown territory.

It looks to me as though we will not be heading for a period of massive spending cuts, but also tax rises. Which to a low tax Tory like me are about the bitterest pill to swallow.

UPDATE: LibDem blogger Mark Reckons thinks the Fiscal Responsibility Bill is a Brown built landmine, set to go off as a Tory government prepares for its re-election campaign.

What If There's No Growth, Emily?

2009-11-18T22:36:00.003Z

Earlier this evening I spent an hour on LBC alongside LibDem MP Susan Kramer and Labour MP Emily Thornberry discussing the Queen's Speech. Never was so much hot air expounded over so little.

Thornberry is an ultra loyalist and I expected her to defend the government's programme, but I was somewhat surprised when she was unable to explain how the government's Fiscal Responsibility Bill will work.

She tried to say that it would all be funded by growth. But what if there isn't any growth, I asked? But there will be, she said. But what if there isn't enough growth, I rejoindered. But there will be, she insisted. But just supposing on the off chance there isn't, I countered. Surely there would have to be public spending cuts. Otherwise the government would be breaking its own law. No, no, it'll be alright, she said. There would be growth. I left it to the listeners to judge what she said.

As Vince Cable has just pointed out on Newsnight, there are no sanctions against the Chancellor or the government if they don't meet the target of halving the deficit. So what exactly is the point of this Bill? It seems to me it is a Bill designed to encourage the Chancellor to do his job. Pathetic.

Footnote: If you close your eyes, and just listen, Emily Thornberry sounds rather like Margaret Thatcher. I kid you not.

The Daley Dozen: Wednesday

2009-11-18T21:00:00.001Z

1. Mark D'Arcy looks at some historical parallels from the Queen's Speech.
2. Paul Waugh on the real Queen's Speech.
3. Cicero's Songs says Parliament must exert more control over government.
4. Ellee Seymour asks if you want to be Tory candidate in Cambridge.
5. John Redwood on the strangulation of written PQs.
6. PoliticalBetting.com asks who suffers if there is a Green Party surge.
7. SNP Tactical Voting wonders whether blogging has had its day.
8. Duncan's Economic Blog has a fascinating 'what if' there were two elections.
9. Michael Meacher says there was something missing from the Queen's Speech.
10. Luke Akehurst calls Compass a bunch of disloyal c****. Nearly.
11. Danny Finkelstein bemoans Archie Norman's move to ITV.
12. UKIP blogger Michael Heaver wonders if UKIP should stand against Euro-sceptic candidates.

The Next Election Campaign Starts Here

2009-11-18T10:04:00.003Z

We will hear a lot of political posturing today from both the Government and the opposition parties. Labour politicians will try to present the Queen's Speech as a sign of a government full of vitality and ideas, while opposition politicians will dismiss it as a programme full of electoral bribes and as a an 'election manifesto' Queen's Speech. The whole thing is a ritual and everyone will no doubt play their part.

I would simply say that you cannot govern by aspiration, and that's what this Queen's Speech is trying to do. Very few of the Bills will ever see it to the Statute Book. There are only 70 days left before an election is called and I would be surprised to see more than a couple of these Bills making it into law - and they are likely to be the uncontroversial ones.

Does anyone really believe the Social Care Bill providing free personal care for the elderly has been thought through? Where on earth is the money going to come from? At least the Conservatives have announced how they would fund such a system. Legislating to provide "good education" for every pupil is pie in the sky. It's akin to legislating to abolish child poverty by 2020 - a worthy aspiration but not what legislation either can do or is there to do.

I think the electorate will be asking why there are no measures to tackle political and parliamentary reform - surely something that has been at the top of the political agenda for the last six months. A short bill introducing simple, easy to understand measures, which have cross party support would surely have been a worthwhile thing to propose.

But one thing is for sure. The next election campaign starts here.

The Daley Dozen: Tuesday

2009-11-17T21:00:00.000Z

1. Sara Bedford gives theLabour Against All Odds video a fisking.
2. Danny Finkelstein on what Liz Truss tells us about candidate selection.
3. The Blue Blog celebrates 80 years of the Conservative Research Department.
4. Guido feels deflated.
5. Dizzy celebrates 40 years of The Sun.
6. Tom Harris writes in defence of Adulterers.
7. Paul Waugh on a Franco Irish diplomatic dispute. Sort of.
8. LibDem Voice Readers prefer Gordon Brown to David Cameron.
9. Hopi Sen feels old.
10. John Redwood is a fan of Hammersmith & Fulham Council.
11. Devil's Kitchen has a primer for political apologies.
12. Quaequam blog thinks bloggers should be on the PCC Board!

What is Ed Balls Up To?

2009-11-17T12:52:00.003Z

Oh dear. Alistair Darling and Ed Balls seem to be at loggerheads, after Ed Balls pushed for a £2.6 billion increase in his department's funding. Joe Murphy has the story HERE. Balls really does seem to be all over the place on spending. It wasn't that long ago he reckoned he'd be cutting his department's spending by £2 billion, rather than increasing it. You don't think he could now be playing political games, do you? Perish the thought...

In June, Balls said he could see spending rises for schools and hospitals…

In an interview on Radio 5 Live, Ed Balls came close to committing Labour to increasing spending on health and education from April 2011: ‘If we can get the economy right - as I believe we are doing - I think we can see spending rising on health and schools in real terms after 2011’ (BBC 5 Live, 15 June 2009).

Before backing down from his comments.

But after a dressing down from the Treasury, Balls changed his line: ‘We want to see schools and NHS spending rising [after 2011] but we can’t make those commitments now’ (WATO, 15 June 2009).

In September, he confirmed there would be £2 billion of cuts for schools…

Then, Ed Balls confirmed there would be cuts: ‘in an interview with The Sunday Times, Balls detailed more than £2 billion of cost savings worth 5 per cent of the total schools budget’ (The Sunday Times, 20 September 2009). He then even began to outline where the axe will fall. In a BBC interview, Ed Balls said that, ‘under the head there’s deputies, there’s assistant head teachers and what we can do is we can pool leadership together and that can free up resource as well’, while Mr Balls’s aides said that up to 3,000 posts could be eliminated (The Daily Telegraph, 21 September 2009) equating to 1 in 12 deputy and assistant heads (DCSF, School Workforce in England, January 2009, May 2009).

Just days before Brown promised to raise spending on schools.

In his speech to the Labour Party Conference, Brown said ‘in the next five years we cannot and will not cut support to our schools. We will not invest less, but more.’ (Gordon Brown, Speech to the Labour Party Conference, 29 September 2009).

And now, in November, Balls is asking the Treasury for an increase in cash for his Department.

In the Financial Times today, Balls is reported to have requested a 1.3 per cent annual increase in the budget for the Department for Children, Schools and Families. However, according to the Evening Standard, this has been rebuffed by the Treasury (Evening Standard, 17 November 2009).

And they have the cheek to talk about 'joined up government'! Balls to that...

Everything Government Does Should be Reviewed

2009-11-17T10:45:00.002Z

Eamonn Butler thinks five years ahead of the rest of us. He has got that sort of brain. Today he writes on the ASI blog...

I have a new job for Philip Hammond MP. Currently he if the Conservatives' spending spokesman, and what he doesn't know about public spending isn't worth knowing. But he needs to become instead the spokesman on public service renewal – and minister for that if the Conservatives win the election.
You will never streamline the public sector by Treasury ministers bullying departments over money. Instead, you need a complete review of what government does, what it has to do, what it can do better, and what can be done better by other people and by the public. All departments need to buy into that, and it needs a reform, not a finance minister in charge if everyone is going to trust the process and be a part of it. After all, the process may find that spending in some areas should be increased, even if other departments are found to be doing a lot of pointless stuff.

The good news is that this reforming approach worked for Canada, which reduced annual borrowing from 9.1% of GDP in 1993 to zero just five years later – and has been running surpluses for most years since. Our black hole this year, at 12.4% of GDP, is deeper, but I reckon Philip Hammond is up to that job. He should resign his Treasury brief and instead demand to become Shadow Secretary for Public Service Renewal.

I dojn't go along with the last bit - but I so agree with Eamonn's exhortation for the government to review everything it does. I hope this will form a key part of Conservative strategy over the first six months. Each and every programme in each an every department needs to justify its existence. And if any of them are found wanting, they should be axed.

The Daley Dozen: Monday

2009-11-16T21:00:00.003Z

1. ConservativeHome says beware of Tom Baldwin.
2. Tory Bear on a flawed Labour Party political broadcast.
3. Mark Pack on The Wardman Wire on the benefits on turnout of weekend voting.
4. Mike Rouse on exporting kids to Australia.
5. Ellee Seymour takes on Norfolk vicars over Liz Truss.
6. Conservative History Journal asks if Frank Johnson was really a Conservative.
7. SNP Tactical Voting on the chances of a minor party winning a seat at the election.
8. Ed Vaizey discovers a government policy that isn't working.
9. Alastair Campbell says Fiona Millar whipped Toby Young's ass on Sky.
10. Paul Waugh on the Labour candidate who is lower than vermin.
11. Nick Robinson on plotters, fighters and quitters.
12. Donal Blaney on how to boost charitable giving in Britain.

Liz Truss Wins Through

2009-11-16T21:00:00.002Z

I'll be brief as I am at a dinner honouring John Blundell of the IEA.

Liz Truss has survived her deselection by 132 votes to 37. You couldn't do much better than that. Congratulations to the sensible people of South West Norfolk and for showing those with questionable motives exactly how out of touch with reality they are. I hope the whole Association will now unite behind Liz and that this will be an end to the matter.

She now needs to prove that she will be the excellent MP they though she would be when they selected her.

PCC Chairwoman Wants to Regulate Blogs!

2009-11-16T15:48:00.003Z

Ian Burrell, who edits The Independent's Media Pages, has a very disturbing blogpost about the ambition of the Press Complaints Commission to regulate blogs. The new chairman of the PCC, Baroness Buscombe, seems to have gone native already and wants her empire to grow ever larger.

She wants to examine the possibility that the PCC's role should be extended to cover the blogosphere, which is becoming an increasing source of breaking news and boasts some of the media's highest-profile commentators, such as the political bloggers Iain Dale and Guido Fawkes. Do readers of such sites, and people mentioned on them, deserve the same rights of redress that the PCC offers in respect of newspapers and their sites?

"Some of the bloggers are now creating their own ecosystems which are quite sophisticated," Baroness Buscombe told me. "Is the reader of those blogs assuming that it's news, and is [the blogosphere] the new newspapers? It's a very interesting area and quite challenging."

She said that after a review of the governance structures of the PCC, she would want the organisation to "consider" whether it should seek to extend its remit to the blogosphere, a process that would involve discussion with the press industry, the public and bloggers (who would presumably have to volunteer to come beneath the PCC's umbrella).

The PCC regulates the press online as well as in print, and its remit also extends to the Sun's radio operation, SunTalk.

Blogging, with its tradition of being free and unregulated, sees itself as very different. But is it really?

Er, yes it is. We might write the same bollocks as newspaper journalists, but we don't get paid for it, for a start. Many of us do not see ourselves as primarily news outlets, either. I'd estimate that ninety per cent of my content could loosely be described as comment.

I see absolutely no need for independently operated blogs to be regulated by the PCC or indeed anyone else. If they want to propose a voluntary system of regulation, fine. But the day they try to mandate it is the day I will give up blogging.

Or have I just given them an incentive to do just that?!

TPA Launch New Cinema Advert

2009-11-16T14:02:00.002Z

This is a new cinema advert created by the Taxpayers' Alliance. It illustrates the cost of EU membership to the UK taxpayer. I think it ought to have a caption at the end saying: "Brought to you by the people who gave you 18 Doughty Street attack ads"!

What If We Left the EU?

2009-11-16T13:07:00.003Z

Tonight at 8.30pm Radio 4 will broadcast a programme which looks at the consequences of Britain leaving the European Union. From the write-up on the BBC website it looks like it will be a fascinating listen.

Europhiles understandably try to paint British withdrawal as potentially apocalyptic. Take this...

Simon Hix, professor at the London School of Economics, suggests that cheap flights to EU countries could be threatened if new costs were imposed on British airlines. He sees a potential threat too to what's available in British shops such as French wine and Italian cheeses. This "cuisine culture" has happened "because of the European single market," he says. "Do we really want to give that up?"

Ridiculous. As if European businesses wouldn't want to sell us their goods if we were outside the EU! And on the other side of the argument, UKIP Peer Lord Pearson goes overboard in stating his case. He says...

They'd be delighted to get rid of us

I doubt it very much, seeing as we are the second highest net contributor to the EU coffers.

Analysis: Divorcing Europe will be broadcast on BBC Radio 4 on Monday 16 November 2009 at 2030 GMT and repeated on Sunday 22 November at 2130 GMT.

Should Gordon Brown Copy Kevin Rudd?

2009-11-16T12:51:00.003Z

I must admit to having known very little about the forced shipment of thousands of British children to Australia, but from news reports today, it does seem shameful that our government could do this over a number of decades without anyone really questioning it. It is even worse to find out that children were told in many cases that their parents had died and they were orphans. When they got to Australia they were often used as child labour and sometimes suffered both physical and sexual abuse. Over the years, more than 120,000 children were sent to Australia under this scheme, which was axed in the 1960s.

Today, Australian PM Kevin Rudd has said sorry for the way the children were treated. It is expected that Gordon Brown will issue a similar apology sometime soon for the part the British government played in shipping the children to Australia.

I am usually very sceptical about the value of historical apologies. How can a current day British Prime Minister take responsibility for something that happened decades ago? Except... Many of the children are still alive. This is not the same as when Tony Blair apologised for the slave trade. I can quite see the argument that some sort of apology from both the British and Australian governments may give some sort of closure to those who were taken from their home country and shipped Down Under, so purely from that viewpoint, perhaps it is something which should be given.

Of course one corollary of this is that those affected may decide to take legal action and sue both governments for damages, now that culpability has been admitted. And you have to say, who could blame them?

Good Luck to Liz Truss

2009-11-16T10:52:00.002Z

Today is the day Liz Truss will find out whether she is to fight the next election in South West Norfolk or not. My views haven't changed since I first wrote about this several weeks ago. I hope she pulls through and then goes on to prove her critics wrong. And there's little more to say.

Over the past 24 hours I have turned down countless interviews with the BBC and Sky on this subject - several involving the tantalising prospect of a repeat bout with the dreadful Anne Atkins. I have resisted temptation. Why? Because it's going over the same old ground, time after time. The arguments now are the same as they were three weeks ago. And Anne Atkins and Sir Jeremy Bagge are doing such a good job in making Liz Truss's case for her, I thought I would leave them to it.

Online Businesses Swing to the Tories

2009-11-16T10:25:00.002Z

EBay has just published the findings of its latest Online Business Index, which reveals that online firms overwhelmingly believe that the Tories have the best policies for small businesses.

The Index looked at the views of 507 small to medium sized businesses trading on the internet (all of which are VAT registered). According to the findings, 67% of online firms think the Tories have the best policies for small businesses, compared to only 18% for Labour and 4% for the LibDems.

These findings come despite evidence that online businesses have escaped the worst of the recession – 68% are confident about the future, 69% expect rising sales over the coming months, and 77% expect to grow or maintain profit margins.

The Index reveals anger at the Government over its plans to raise VAT in January, with three-quarters opposed to the change.

The 7 Days Podcast

2009-11-15T23:16:00.002Z

The latest edition of The Seven Days Show hosted by Jonathan Sheppard and myself is now online. You can listen to the 20 minute podcast by clicking HERE. Alternatively for those of you who use iTunes, just search for Tory Radio in the Podcast section and download it there.

In this week's show we spoke about Gordon Brown and THAT letter; the fall of the Berlin Wall; the Glasgow NE by-election; Nuclear power; Miliband and the European job and much much more.

More importantly, if you listen, you will be able to find out just what top name in politics “goosed” me at a party conference!