Category: Blog

Let me praise the pilots union. They are challenging the requirement that pilots have to have ID cards in Manchester to go airside. They argue that it will not strengthen security. It is in effect on a new tax on them to do their job, making them buy a card.

As the government steps up its expensive and unpopular bid to put these cards into effect, so the opposition is intensifying. ID cards and the big computer that goes with them is now the Number One example of wasteful and needless expenditure used generally in debate against the government, it surveillance society and its over the top spending plans.This site was an early user of this excellent example of what is wrong with this government.

How much longer can the government hold out? Even David Blunkett thinks they are “mis selling” ID cards. If you “mis sell” in the private sector the Regulator stops you to fine you.

The tourist industry of Australia has shown how you can buy loads of prime time advertising on the BBC for very little outlay.(“The world’s best job” stunt) . Well done to them – the Great Barrier reef looks wonderful.

I suppose the good news is that it makes a welcome complement to all those self serving ads the BBC puts out about its own programmes and achievements.

If the BBC are now so keen on adverts, why don’t they start charging the Australian tourist industry and anyone else who wants some airtime?

Nasty and weak PMs leak or brief in advance that certain Ministers are for the chop. We learn today from some source or other that Hazel Blears and Jacqui Smith are pencilled in to lose their jobs in a reshuffle, for incompetence and disloyalty.If this is not the Prime Minister’s wish, he should slap down such antics. Short of him doing that, we have to assume this comes from the sources close.

If those criteria are to be applied, there will not be many left of the present Cabinet. My own favourites for removal would be:

Ed Balls – a twin nomination. Incompetence as Education Secretary over Sats, handling the teachers Unions and school results. Incompetence over working with Mr Mc Bride and the bungled and crude attacks on the Tories. Disloyalty in the form of allowing people to push his own candidature to take over in due course from his Leader.

Yvette Balls (Cooper) – for incompetence. She will go down in history as the worst Chief Secretary, the one who comprehensively lost control of public spending. She has failed to get value for money and failed to offer any framework of financial discipline to the vast and sprawling public sector

Who would you like to see sacked – other than the whole lot in an election?

There are rumours that the great football being played by Premier league teams at the top of that division may become a thing of the past. People fear that the new higher rate of tax – Brown’s spite tax – may start to deter foreign stars from coming to Britian to earn their mega bucks and display their skills.

As Labour passes from the era of Stealth taxes to the era of Spite taxes, we need to ask why?

Is the idea of the spite tax to create a scorched earth policy? Do Mr Brown and Mr Balls dream of being able to say in opposition that Premier League football is not what is was in their day under a future Conservative government?

Or is this at last the implementation of the PM’s policy of British jobs for British workers?

The decision of the government to offer a taxpayer loan for just four weeks to LDV, with no extension, is a carefully chosen time period for the lending.

Four weeks from today takes us beyond the local and European elections, avoiding embarrassing headlines about the collapse of a vehicle maker when votes have to be garnered. The unwary in the media may even do the government’s bidding, and offer us “rescue” headlines, to show the government feels the motor industry’s pain, and is on board to help them.

We should instead be asking

1. Why don’t the nationalised banks lend money to LDV? Do they think it a bad prospect?
2. Why will the deal be done in another four weeks?
3. What happens if the deal is not done in four weeks?
4. What security have taxpayers got for their £5 million?

The good news is it’s only £5 million. If it had been a bank, then it would have been a different story – huge sums for unlimited time periods. What a pity none of this bank money has produced bank finance for a company the government thinks should and can be saved!

The Ombudsman decision to revisit the Equitable Life issue is a brave one. What else can she do, when her findings of maladministration by Labour’s Regulators have been ignored by the government, refusing to offer compensation as recommended?

The Conservatives have pushed the government to offer some compensation, given the obvious regulatory failings, and have said they will introduce a scheme.

What is the point of this government’s expensive regulators, if they drop the ball so badly? And what is the point of an expensive Ombudsman, if her critical report is ignored? Labour tell us we need to live ina world of Regulators and auditors, of Ombudsmen and investigators, all paid for by taxpayers,yet when the government is found wanting nothing happens.

Both the Brown and the Obama administrations seem united in one thing – the pursuit of lower living standards for all.

The Brown regime will seek to improve on the falling economy by imposing higher taxes which will deter enterprise and send people packing. He will follow that up with extra regulations, as with the proposed new licencing scheme for landlords. I don’t doubt there are some bad landlords out there. After regulation there will be fewer good ones as well.

Obama is seeking to close tax loopholes for companies, another good way of driving them offshore, whilst looking at catching up with European green taxes as another way of taking money off people. Both are very enthusiaistic about bailing out and maintaining zombie banks, and now want a flutter with overextended car factories.

Neither seem to see the irony of wanting to tax people off the road or out of their cars with one set of policies, then offering subsidy to the car makers with another.

Contrary to common belief, Ken Clarke does not set, influence or seek to change Conservative policy towards the EU. He does, however, have an important position when it comes to Conservative policy on the Post Office. He is leading the Shadow Cabinet’s response on that. The government looks as if it is lost in the post. What should the Opposition do?

Current policy backs Peter Mandelson’s proposal to sell a minority stake to a private sector company. This policy happens to be very unpopular with Labour MPs, with the Postal employees and Unions, and with a section of the public. What are Mr Clarke’s options?

A- Back the Unions and oppose the botched partial privatisation.

Some Labour MPs probably think it is the Opposition’s duty to oppose. They privately would like him to find a reason why the Conservatives can no longer back Mr Mandelson. They see the attractive politics of siding with the Postal workers and the ever popular local postman. This would greatly increase their bargaining power, and would probably scupper the whole proposal.

B- Demand proper privatisation, and oppose the bodge

Some enthusiasts for privatisation think this will be bodged Labour style partial privatisation, which will prevent a future outright sale to the highest bidder. It could both damage the Post office and the taxpayer, leaving a future government with no option other than selling the balance of the shares to the partner at a knock down price or soldiering on with an unhappy partnership where the taxpayer has limited influence despite owning the majority of the shares. They would like the Conservatives to vote against the Labour idea for very different reasons to the Labour rebels.

C- Demand a seat to negotiate a better outcome

There is a third way. Mr Clarke could demand a place at the negotiating table, now it is obvious the Labour rebels are giving the government a hard time. He could say that Conservatives are still minded to vote for the government, but seek improvements and reassurances about the scheme. He could, for example, demand shares for the employees at the time of the partial privatisation. This could improve workforce motivation and would add a “people’s privatisation” element to the scheme. He could seek to rule out certain overseas monopoly state owned or influenced buyers for competition reasons. He could demand assurances that a future government will still have a majority stake of value which in defined circumstances it could sell to someone other than the minority buyer in this proposal.

What is he likely to do? I suspect he will think he has given his word on supporting the government’s scheme, and stick with it. It is, however, a very interesting situation where for once the Opposition has some power to influence.

It is always bad news when a car company thinks the answer to its problems is state aid.

As a long standing customer of Jaguar, I have never known the company offer such poor responses as it does today.

I have answered several of their surveys, but never once had a proper reply to the points I have made or to the complaints I have registered. Enquiries to switch vehicles are not followed up. The press comments to launch the XF concentrated on insulting people who had bought S types in the past, never a good sales strategy. Clearly they have failed to find all the new buyers they thought would replace the people who used to buy the S type.

Any government faced with a cash request from them should tell them to go and woo back their customers. Its sales they need, not subsidy.

Where are the Competition Authorities when you need them?

I predict both the expensive EU and the useless UK Competition Authorities will wave through these mega mergers.

It will be bad for jobs, bad for factories, bad for customer choice.

It might even end up as bad for Fiat shareholders as well, but that’s their problem, not mine.

If it works for Fiat it must mean the end of brands, makes, marques, factories and jobs on a big scale.