The Before and after of a parcel bomb

Before After

Well, police have released before and after pictures of the parcel bombs sent to 7 locations so far.

I am very grateful. However I am not sure how useful it is. I suspect most people opening something that goes bang would put it down as a bomb with out having to refer to the after picture!

Quotes of the day

Something Iain Dale normally does, but I am feeling a bit ill, so I thought I'd have a go!

David Milliband on Tony Blair "people will be saying 'wouldn't it be great to have that Blair back because we can't stand that Gordon Brown."

David Cameron on Tony Blair "The Prime Minister is fond of comparing himself to Margaret Thatcher," said the Tory leader. "But there's a difference between a conviction politician and a politician who's about to get a conviction."



Brilliant! Hat tip to Iain Dale, here and Conservative home quoting the Telegraph spy here.


Sorry about the lack of posts. Normal service will resume either later today or tomorrow.

Lib Dems want to rip flowers up!

Well, almost. Here is the background.

Muster Green is a green in Haywards Heath, legend has it King Harold mustered his troops there on his way to the battle of Hastings. It is a triangular green with a war memorial at its point, and has been a conservation area since 1979. Not only that but it even gets a mention on the Royal Horticultural Society website here.

From spring onwards it gets it's flower beds planted with a colourful display of bedding plants. Looks very good. What is more, as the old flowers die, they are replaced.

Well, apparently that is not what the Liberal Democrats on Haywards Heath Town Council want. They don't want flower beds any more, they want a Shrubbery. Well that is fine for the Knights who say Ni, but frankly for the rest of us it would be a bit dull, a bit like the Liberal Democrats.

House of Lords reform

Jack Straw MP, Leader of the House of Commons has come up with some proposals for reform of the House of Lords. He says that if we miss this opportunity to reform the House of Lords then we will miss it for a generation. Good. Lets miss it then.

In this White Paper and speech he has proposed a number of options.

• All 92 hereditaries to sit in the new chamber until they die off
• Current 605 life peers could choose to stay or leave with a generous redundancy package
• A smaller chamber of 540 Peers * 50% to be elected, 30% nominated by Party leaders and 20% by an independent commission
• Peers to be elected in batches of 90 over three elections every 5 years. Term limit of 15 years

(Borrowed from Iain Dale here)

The problem is of course we have been down this road before. No one option is liked by a majority in the House of Commons (or the Lords for that matter) so each alternative gets voted down by a majority and nothing changes.

He has proposed to change the voting system in the Commons for it as well, so that instead of vote for or against each separate proposal MP's have to rank each in order or preference. The least unpopular presumably winning.

Well, as David Clelland Mp for Tyne Bridge, (Labour) does not like the idea of fiddling the voting system to get something. He will be voting against the procedural change and I hope a lot of other MP's do as well. There is a sound reason why there is no agreement thus far. Most MP's think the current system is better than any proposals so far put to them. I agree.

Meanwhile some Labour MP's wishing to do grave damage to our constitution suggest abolishing our house of Lord's and moving to a unicameral system. That is one with only one house. There are clear reasons why that is a bad idea. It would lead to the dictatorship of the mob, or perhaps party machine. The House of commons needs checks and balances. If you want to see what sort of company we would be in if we had a unicameral system, Dizzy has this helpful map. I for one do not want to join that club.

My take on the whole thing is this. If you wanted to create a second chamber today you most certainly would not come up with the House of Lords. However you have to look at what it is for, and what it does. Fundamentally it is there to prevent government doing stupid things, at least with out a fight. It does not stand in the way of manifesto pledges but will seek to amend and alter bills particularly where daft or over authoritarian or both (like the various bits of anti terror legislation).

In an ideal world the commons would hold the executive to account, but frequently it does not because the executive commands a majority in the House of Commons. The Lords does it frequently and well.

Many say we must have elected members of the house of Lords, or that having a combination of hereditary peers and appointed ones is bad. So what? Does it work? Yes. The only thing that you could do is make the Lords more powerful. I am not sure that is a good idea, or less, which I am sure would be a very bad one. Others complain of the name. They think we are a laughing stock in the 21st Century for having a House of Lords. Well what about the monarchy? Are we to lose that too? What of all our old buildings, not very "modern" either.

We were a laughing stock in Europe when we had a parliament in the first place, why should we care what anyone else thinks? We are a separate country with our own traditions and institutions. Other countries have evolved their own. Why do we need to be sheep that follow? Why can't we keep on doing our own thing?

The BBC has this here.

nourishing obscurity has this here.

Labour campaign against NHS reforms

As strange as it may seem, having had many members of Labour's cabinet campaigning against NHS reforms (See here), last nights Channel 4 News pinned down Ivan Lewis, MP for Bury South, and indeed minister in charge of the reforms. He is of course campaigning against the possible closure of his local maternity unit whilst peddling the policy of closing down others to make super units.

How nice. So he wants to close my local one but wants his local one to stay open. Is it any wonder why people are losing trust in this government?

The Channel 4 report is here.

That Friendly Fire incident

By now I suspect that you will have seen the cockpit video of the friendly fire incident which caused the death of Lance Corporal of Horse Matty Hull.

Four things strike me.

Firstly the two pilots concerned were US National Guard. Effectively our equivalent of the Territorial army. May be good, but don't train every day.

Secondly they seemed not to know about the orange marking system at all. Probably because of lack of training, so had no means of telling friend from foe. An "accident waiting to happen".

Thirdly their air controller had no clue that our boys were there. There is a huge danger when two armies on the same side are fighting in the same space if there is not the fullest cooperation up and down all chains of command. That is very tricky. NATO forces are supposed to work that way, but these national guards men seemed not to be in the loop.

It looks to me to be half baked training for NATO type operations and a half baked attitude to communication. Just what you would expect of Donald Rumsfeld. I don't think the pilots were to blame, but then I have not seen their training records.

Fourthly and most bizarrely, having had the world, his wife an their pet dog watch the video on TV or the web, the Americans will allow the inquest to see the video but only if it is a closed court. How strange. Giving grieving relatives the run around does not impress me much either.

The BBC has this, whilst the Sun's video is available here.

Cash for Peerages, Des Smith escapes charges

According to this report from the BBC Des Smith, the Head Teacher who was involved in the City Academies Project is not to be charged.

Undercover reporters from the Times posing as potential sponsors of city academies recorded conversations with him in which he appeared to suggest that people sponsoring academies would get an honour.

It appears that for the CPS this is not enough. Personally I can't see why. That looked liked the nearest thing to bang to rights to me. However, the conversation was over a boozy lunch apparently.

Cash for Peerages, Powell to be interviewed again

Just in case you had not heard according to the Times in this article Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair's chief of staff is to be interviewed again, and under caution.

The article also says that the police have passed files on three people it expects to be charged to the Crown prosecution service.

There is also lots of speculation of whether or not the prime minister would resign of one of his aids were charged.

Friends say he won't because being charged is not the same as being guilty, and in any case that might seem like an admission of guilt. Innocent until proven guilty and all that!

Two things are odd. Firstly how come the papers are now full of a running commentary of this on a hit by hit basis, and secondly Tony Blair standing by innocent until proven guilty when it seems that he thinks it is an outdated concept.

Conservatives to scrap ID card scheme!

David Davis, Conservative Shadow Home Secretary has announced that the next Conservative government will scrap the ID card scheme immediately.

With that in mind David Davis has written to Sir Gus O'Donnell making our position clear, and also asked what provision is being made for the scheme being scrapped early, and pointing out the obligation not to waste public money.

Fantastic. Many will have noticed that I am against the scheme as I have a No2ID banner on my blog!

Also it will be interesting to see how the civil service reacts to being put on such notice.

You can read more on the Conservative party website here.

Hat tip to Iain Dale who has this here and Guido who has this here.

Cash for Peerages, a Terror cover up?

I read this interesting article in the New Criminologist. It appears that West Midlands police and its anti terror unit were not happy about the tabloid press getting advance notice of their terror raids, or the early breaking news before they had rounded up all the suspects.

They are left wondering whether it was leaked to the media to push the cash for peerages scandal off the front pages.

Yet many Labour people criticise about police leaks in the cash for honours scandal.

You just have to wonder!

48 Hours to question a suspect!

Just in case you missed it as it has been hidden in the reports of the terrorism arrests in Birmingham this week, but none of the suspects arrested were questioned at all for 48 hours after arrest.

No doubt John Reid will be asking for more than 28 days to question suspects, and insist we need 90. Well, if when they have 28 they waste 2 I have to say no. In fact, if they still only had 14, I suspect they would have started interrogation well within 24 hours. The longer they have the longer they will take.

Cash for Peerages, Charges to be made!

Well speculation is rife in the Sunday papers this morning over the cash for peerages allegations.

The News of the world has this, which speculates that John McTernan's evidence to police has been most helpful, and led to the arrests of Lord Levy and Ruth Turner as well as the second questioning of Tony Blair. There is some speculation about what will happen to Chris Evans, the bio tech millionaire and Labour Donor. The paper also suggests involvement by Jonathan Powell.

The Sunday Times believes there was a meeting to discuss a cover up, with Lord Levy, Ruth Turner and possibly John McTernan. It's article is here.

The Independent on Sunday has this, largely backing up the others papers take on things whilst the Sunday Telegraph has this on how things are going in the Downing street bunker.

I must say I am constantly amused by those who insist this investigation will, or should come to nothing. It appears they were wrong.

Guido also has this, and Iain Dale has this. (In fact Iain seems to have the whole NOTW article which is handy, becaus they don't seem to have an archive.)

Neil Kinnock, Cure for Insomnia?

I had heard that Neil Kinnock, would be interviewed by Andrew Neil on BBC News 24. I sat down to watch it at 1.30 AM this morning.

I waited with baited breath to see if he would say anything interesting. Alas I was asleep within 5 minutes!

Still, to be fair to Neil, it is entirely possible I was just too tired!

Neil Kinnock, was Labour leader from 1983 to 1992 and is credited with getting rid of the hard line left wing image of Labour. He was also a bit gaff prone, and the press seemed not to take to him.

Cash for Peerages, Pressure grows on Blair

It is quite interesting hearing of the angst of Labour party members over how long Tony Blair will stay on, what with the cash for honours scandal and the local elections coming up in May.

For example the Telegraph today has this. David Cameron is quoted as saying "It seems to me it's got to that point where everyone in Parliament, everyone in government, everyone in the press, everyone in the country is thinking 'Hello? It's over"

I agree. For the good of the Labour party, but much more importantly the country Blair should go, and go now. Obviously this slow motion car crash does help the Conservative party, but it also damages politics, and the government seems rudderless.

The problem is there is no way to force Blair to go. They would need to organise a conference to force him out, and that is after mustering over 70 MP's to call for it.

No matter how obvious it is that Blair must go, this is just not going to happen. Instead Labour will hold on, hoping that Tony Blair will get the hint. he won't. He will hang on as long as he can regardless. It's a shame, but there you go.

Tony Blair on the NHS

I must admit I am not Tony Blair's biggest fan. It was interesting listening to him this morning on BBC Radio 4's the Today program. this morning. (You can listen to the interview here, and Nick Robinson's review here)

He spouted lots about public services, and in particular the NHS. One of the beauties of the blogosphere is that people who know he is talking rot can and will answer back.

Well, unsurprisingly Dr Crippen has on his blog. I suggest you read this article here. Below is a brief extract:

Tony Blair has defended his record on the NHS, and said it was in much better shape than when he came to office.

[Not true. It is worse than it has ever been at any time in my medical career. Some waiting lists are shorter. I cannot think of anything else that is better, but could give you an endless list of things that are worse]

I suggest you read the rest.

I was also talking to a teacher. She has been in education under both Conservative and Labour, and thinks that overall education is worse of under Labour. So there you have it. Want decent public services? Vote Conservative. Or at least don't under any circumstances vote Labour.

Personal Insolvency at all time high

You may have missed the latest story on personal insolvencies, that is bankruptcies and IVA's, as it appeared in the FT here.

Insolvencies are at an all time high, reaching 29,804 in the last quarter of 2006. That is a 7% increase on the previous quarter and a 44% increase on the previous year. That brings the total for the year to an eye watering 107,288.

For some historical perspective, the figure for 1991, the height of the last recession was barely over 25,000. It then peaked at 36,794 for the WHOLE of 1992, declining to a low of 24,441 for the whole of 1997. Since then it has risen every year under Labour, part of Gordon Brown's record I suspect he would rather not shout about.

Some people blame the Enterprise act 2002. I am not convinced. The personal insolvency rules contained in that act did not come into force until April 2004, whereas the numbers have, as I said been increasing every year since 1997. Also, to go insolvent, you have to be insolvent. I do not accept that people are running up debts with the sole aim of using the new law.

Should we be worried? Well it is not news to cheer us up. Rising insolvencies means someones bills are not being paid, and some houses are being sold in "fire sales". Also it can be an indicator of looming trouble ahead.

(Figures for 1992 to 2002 obtained from the Office for National Statistics here)

Update 15:44

The BBC has this article here. It also points out that repossessions are up to 91,200, a rise of 29% over 2005. That is a clear indicator that all is not well with the world.

Update 17:06

I have been doing some digging.

According to both the DCA (Department for Constitutional Affairs, formerly the Lord Chancellor's office) and the Council of Mortgage Lenders, whilst the number of possession orders granted is 91,195. However the number of houses actually repossessed is 17,000. This is a 70% rise on 2005, and is the highest since 2000. House repossessions peaked in 1991 at 71,540.

See the Council of Mortgage lenders statistics here, and the DCA statistics here.

The Attorney General and the Saudi arms deal

Apparently, according to the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, in a House of Lords debate yesterday it was the Director of the Serious Fraud office who decided to drop the corruption investigation in to the Al Yamamah arms deal with Saudi Arabia. Apparently on grounds of national security.

Hold on. What is the Director of the SFO doing making decisions like that? It surely is not within his remit, nor does he have the intelligence information to back up such a decision. This is just plain wrong.

Now, if the cabinet met, and decided to drop the investigation, or the Attorney General decided on his own, fair enough. They are accountable and they will have the information, but the director of the SFO? I am sorry I just don't buy that. he should not be making decisions like that.

If it was in fact an executive decision, then the executive should stand buy it, not try and pass the buck.

The BBC has this report.

The Charity Commission to investigate The Smith Institute

Well it is according to this notice on the Charity Commission's website posted today!

This is the second time the Charity Commission has investigated the Smith Institute as well. No doubt Minitrue will bang on about it being a wing nut plot. We will see.

The Charity Commission's statement says this:

The Charity Commission for England and Wales has opened a formal inquiry into the charity The Smith Institute today.

The decision to open an inquiry was taken in the light of new information we have received which raises concerns about some of the charity’s work.

The scope of the inquiry is to determine whether The Smith Institute is both established and operating as a charity advancing the education of the public in the field of study and research into the economy of the United Kingdom.

The Commission has informed the charity of this decision. The Commission has been and continues to engage with the charity in relation to the issues raised.

Well Guido will be pleased. He has this article on his blog.

hat tip to Carlotta Vance on PoliticalBetting.com.

Cash for Peerages, Blair interviewed again!

Apparently on Friday the 26th of January. The police wanted a news blackout. Very interesting indeed.

The BBC has this.

More news as it comes in!

Shocking stuff. We do not know any further details, for example we do not know if it was under caution.

For more on the Cash for peerages scandal see here.

Update 12:30

It appears that the interview lasted for 45 minutes, and was not under caution. Tony Blair and a civil service note taker were present as well as an unknown number of police.

The police requested the media blackout. That was lifted today. We do not as yet know why they made the request or why they lifted it today.

The Telegraph has this, the Daily Mail has this whilst the Times has this. Guido must be loving it, and he has this here. Iain Dale has this.

Update 13:19

According to Nick Robinson on Radio 4 the police presented a document or documents about meetings discussing peerages and possibly donations in which Lord Levy was present. He also pointed out that Lord Levy is the only person so far arrested for Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. For there to be a conspiracy there must be at least two people involved.

Who, one wonders, are the others?

Murkier and murkier!

Update 14:55

Nick Robinson has an interesting piece on his blog, with more on what was put to Lord Levy when he was arrested. See here.

It was Al Qaeda!

Well, you may well have heard about the latest news on the arrest of some people accused of offences under the various anti terrorism acts. The BBC has this here.

Well the Daily Mail thinks that Al Qaeda was behind it, with this report.

Reports indicate that the plan was to kidnap, torture and behead a British Muslim soldier, all for the benefit of an Internet broadcast.

That would, if true, be horrifying. In fact universally horrifying.

The fact is that what the "Muslim extremists" want to do is to separate the Muslim community from the rest of society. However what Al Qaeda found was that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's tactics revolted the Muslim world, and indeed drove it back to us.

Therefore I somehow doubt Al Qaeda would want to help us unite Muslims against the extremists.

That said, this tactic has happened before with the Indian High Commissioner in Birmingham in 1984.

The plot looks real, I just doubt Al Qaeda was behind it.