09-Feb-10
Mr. Biggs-Davison asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department the estimated number of tubercular and other hard core refugees to be admitted to the United Kingdom during the World Refugee Year; and the arrangements for their reception and settlement.
Mr. R. A. Butler Two hundred refugees, including eighteen suffering from tuberculosis, as well as others with a past history of this disease, have so far been accepted for admission during World Refugee Year. Details of the arrangements for their reception and settlement were given in my reply to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member of Lewisham. North (Mr. Chataway) on 30th October, 1959.
A bit of local interest pertinent to my new neck of the woods:
Mr. D. Smith asked the Postmaster-General the number of people in Brent-ford and Chiswick on his Department's waiting list for telephones and the number who share telephone lines.
Mr. Bevins One hundred and nine are on the waiting list, and 240 applications are under inquiry or in course of being met. The number of people sharing their telephone lines is 1,736. During the past twelve months, 818 telephones were installed in Brentford and Chiswick.
Shared lines, eh? Try explaining those to the youth of today.... Shared mobiles might force them to cut down on the texting, yelling and so forth.
Road safety:
Mr. Prentice asked the Minister at Transport whether the ideas incorporated in the Cornell-Liberty safety car in the United States of America have been examined by his Department in the interests of road safety; and to what extent, and by what methods, he will encourage the application of those ideas in this country.
Mr. Marples Details of this imaginative research project were carefully examined by my technical advisers. Some of its special design features are of a practical character and are already incorporated in car models now being produced; some appear to be unsuitable or not readily adaptable for use on normal types of cars.
Extensive studies and research into safe vehicle design have been undertaken in this and other countries, and discussions by international bodies, with a view to reducing the risk of serious injury in the event of accident, are continuing.
And this is what it looked like, courtesy of this site:
Presumably the major feature was its extreme ugliness, which prevented folk from wanting to drive it and other drivers to want to be anywhere near it. Attempted wit to one side, "The project discovered that an extraordinary percentage of injuries could be prevented by improved door locks, energy-absorbing steering wheels, padded dashboards, and seat belts". Source.
"In June 2009, Uganda conservationists had reason to smile: They witnessed the birth of the first ever baby rhino in Uganda, 27 years after the last rhino was seen. The rhino was named Obama, a tribute to its shared birth heritage with the current leader of the Free World. Like US President Obama, the baby rhino has an American mother and a Kenyan father".
Can't say I buy into Obamamania, but my skin is crawling.
The story of the judge who said he wanted to allow Sikhs to walk around with kirpans has prompted some debate across blogs that I quickly want to weigh in on.
My position, as I've said previously when writing on knife crime, is that schools should have the right to make up their own policy. In some cases a kirpan may not be of consequence, in other cases a school may be worried that knife crime is out of control. There may even be cases where Sikhs are running around stabbing people – in which case a school may like to step in and put in a complete ban. I'm in favour of local decisions based on local conditions, simply because there is a danger of some Sikhs abusing the rules that govern usage of the dagger.
Jako from Frank Owen's Paintbrush says:
Insisting that Sikhs should have the right to walk around with their ceremonial daggers - even in schools - certainly suggests the man is possessed by a religious arrogance of such massive proportions that there isn't room for any other considerations.
Pity the BBC Asian Network didn't bother finding an opposing point of view. I'm sure there's a sensible Sikh out there willing to say that some of the more eccentric teachings of their faith should not be given privilege over the law of the land (and of course basic common sense).
The chances of finding a Sikh saying that the kirpan is "eccentric" are as low as the chances of a Sikh saying that the Gurus were idiots. Not. Going. To. Happen. I'm not particularly religious (I don't follow Sikhism but I do say I have a Sikh heritage) but I wouldn't go that far.
But there is a point about religion in the public space, and I think Dave Semple is spot on:
This principle is not at stake in this case. Quite the opposite. Thinking secularists would surely defend the right of anyone to do anything, provided that it was unlikely to result in harm or the coercion of any individual.
When Jako claims that 'the more eccentic teachings of their faith should not be given privilege over the law of the land" I am at a loss to explain such anti-religious nonsense, a parody, almost, of real secularism. Just because something is a law does not justify it.
If we take the incident of the Sikh girl and her kara from a few years back, where no health and safety issues were at stake, the courts quite rightly ruled that to exclude her for wearing something so connected to her beliefs was discriminatory. So the law is not so uncomplicated as Jako thinks anyway.
Dave's whole article is very worth reading. But I want to make a wider point here: there is a strain on the left that is militantly anti-religion, and not just pro-secularist. I've pointed out in the past that the National Secular Society also makes this mistake of conflating secularism with atheism and represents the latter view that a nuanced former view.
Politically, this means is that many lefties ends up pissing off people, especially Christians, who want to retain their religious identity in public. I don't think religious people should get special treatment or be absolved of discrimination – but this misunderstanding of secularism really is a political liability.
If the left becomes anti-religion then we'll never be able to build coalitions on many issues like fighting poverty, sustaining welfare programmes and get near any sort of power.
"a charismatic guy with a Teleprompter"
- how Sarah Palin described Barack Obama during her speech at the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville last weekend. Unfortunately for Palin, though, it seems that Obama is not the only one who needs a little help remembering his lines as Palin was photographed with crib notes written on the palm of her hand during the very same speech. A close examination of the former vice-presidential candidate revealed she had the words "Energy", "Tax," and "Lift Americans Spirits" scrawled in ink on the inside of her left hand. "Budget cuts" was written and then crossed out. She surreptitiously glanced at the words during a question and answer session afterwards when she was asked what should be the top three things a Republican majority in Congress would focus on.
This morning, the Courier covered my comments about the problem of wheelie bins sitting permanently on pavements in certain streets in the West End and action the City Council is taking to address the issue.Today's Evening Telegraph covers the issue of begging in Perth Road and Nethergate and my discussions with Tayside Police about the issue. As the article points out, tonight's police community surgery at Blackness Library (5.30pm to 7pm) will be an opportunity for residents to air their views. Tonight's West End Community Council also takes place immediately afterwards (7pm) at the nearby Logie and St John's (Cross) Church Hall.
Good news on unadopted footways! Following residents' requests to add Hillside Place to the list, I have been advised by the City Engineer as follows :
"Hillside Place has now been assessed and scored in accordance with the Unadopted Footways Scheme Criteria and has attracted 18 points, ie the same as Hillside Terrace. The list is currently under review so I am unable at this time to advise of these footways final position. I can confirm that the footways of Hillside Tce and Hillside Place would be done at the same time."
He has also confirmed to me that the review of the list to enable priorities for upgrading for 2010/11 to be determined will be complete by the end of February.
Leader of the Commons announces that the government will set aside a day for debates and votes on the controversial changes
Harriet Harman today moved to allay MPs' fears they could be deprived of a vote on proposed Commons reforms designed to increase the influence of backbenchers.
The leader of the Commons announced that the government was setting aside a day, provisionally 4 March, for debates and votes on the controversial changes.
The move comes after the Tories accused Gordon Brown of delaying the reforms and the prime minister appeared to suggest last week there might not be time before the general election.
The reforms were put forward by the select committee on the reform of the House of Commons, chaired by Labour MP Tony Wright.
They include electing members and chairmen of select committees via a ballot of all MPs and setting up a backbench business committee to schedule non-government business.
But Harman said the backbench business committee needed further consideration to clarify its scope and procedures and that the government motion would back it "in principle".
She also indicated the government would not at this stage support the establishment of a house business committee to consider all Commons scheduling.
The reforms are to be debated in the Commons on 22 February, but there were concerns there was no time set aside for further debate or votes on the more controversial aspects.
The Tory leader, David Cameron, has called for the half-term recess later this week to be postponed by a day to create time for consideration of the Wright reforms.
Harman said today that the 22 February debate would provide an opportunity to make "immediate progress" on measures which commanded universal support in the Commons.
She went on: "For any motions which are opposed, we will make time for a further debate and, if necessary, votes.
"We are considering providing a day to do this no later than the week following the debate, provisionally at the sitting on Thursday 4 March."
Her announcement, in a written statement to the Commons, comes as Harman is due to appear before the Wright committee tomorrow morning.
Also due to give evidence are the shadow Commons leader, George Young, and the Liberal Democrat spokesman, David Heath.
Defence secretary says the Taliban will only negotiate if the military campaign by the international coalition and the Afghan army continues to make progress
The Taliban leadership has no desire to seek peace with the Afghan government of Hamid Karzai, the defence secretary, Bob Ainsworth, warned today.
Giving evidence to the Commons defence committee, he said the Taliban would only be brought to the negotiating table if the military campaign by the international coalition and the Afghan army continued to make progress.
Ainsworth defended the controversial "reintegration and reconciliation" programme launched by the President Karzai at last month's London conference on Afghanistan.
He said the aim was to "peel off" elements of the insurgency who were motivated by local grievances rather than the "international jihadist agenda" of al-Qaida.
He acknowledged that there was no immediate prospect of any reconciliation with the senior Taliban leadership.
"Reconciliation with the top end of the Taliban command is still some way away," he said.
"I don't think that there is a desire by the overwhelming majority of the leadership of the Taliban to reconcile. I think that may come, it will come in time, it will come if we are seen to make progress."
He said that if talks came, the Afghan government needed to be able to negotiate from a position of strength, which was why it was necessary to continue to build up the Afghan army and police.
"We do not expect them to negotiate with an enemy from a position of weakness. We expect them to peel off parts of the insurgency as part of the process of winning the confidence of the Afghan people," he said.
"We should try to split off those elements of the insurgency who are wedded to al-Qaida and the international jihadist agenda from those who have more local reasons for joining the insurgency."
He denied that the reintegration and reconciliation programme amounted to "blatant bribery" and said it was designed to work by offering alternative economic opportunities in the form of jobs and addressing local issues.
"We are not proposing in some kind of simplistic way to bribe people to put down their guns so that they can pick up their guns tomorrow. That would achieve absolutely nothing," he said.
Ainsworth said Operation Moshtarak, about to be launched in central Helmand province involving 30,000 international troops, had been announced in advance in part to help avoid civilian casualties.
He said it was important to give people a chance to flee the area before the fighting began if they were to succeed in winning the hearts and minds of the local population.
"The last thing we want to do is to go into an area and inflict unnecessary civilian casualties. One is too many," he said.
"Giving the civilian population the opportunity to move away from the fighting is an important part of the preparations."
Gordon Brown said Operation Moshtarak would mark an important step in the process of handing over control to local security forces.
With further British causalities expected, Brown paid tribute to the armed forces, "their professionalism, their dedication, their expertise, their service and their sacrifice".
"Marjah and a small number of other centres are the last remaining bases for Taliban-led insurgency in the main population areas of Helmand," he said as he launched the UK's Civilian Stabilisation Unit - which will work alongside the military after the offensive.
"The aim of Operation Moshtarak - which means in the Dari language 'together' - is that the Afghans and the coalition work together for peace, to drive out those lingering points of resistance from the Taliban, to dismantle the bomb-making factories where IEDs are assembled to attack our troops and then, by dealing with the insurgents, to make the Afghan population secure."
The PM said he had discussed the role of the offensive in the "Afghanisation" process with Karzai by telephone at the weekend.
"Over the next few weeks we will take new steps to make this strategy a reality, with Afghan forces clearing, holding and building in the main population centres of their own country.
"Our aim is always to minimise casualties and to separate a hardline Taliban from those who have been caught up in the insurgency.
"The people of Marjah have been alerted in advance, the insurgents given time to leave and the population have all been informed that we will make them more secure.
"And once we have worked together, Afghans and the coalition, to clear the areas, the Afghans will take the lead in holding these areas as Afghanistan takes more responsibility for its own security."
Asked if 2010 would be a less bloody year in Afghanistan for British forces than the previous 12 months, the David Miliband, the foreign secretary, told a Westminster lunch: "I think the answer to that significantly depends on how this forthcoming campaign goes."
He added: "2009 was a very, very bloody year and I think that a lot of lessons have been learned."
o Burnham denies planning £20,000 inheritance levy to fund social care
o Claims Labour cancer pledge would save 10,000 lives
o Launches anti-Tory internet campaign
8.58am: The Labour party is holding another campaign press conference this morning.
Douglas Alexander, the general election co-ordinator, and Andy Burnham, the health secretary, have invited journalists to their HQ at Victoria Street to hear them "outline Labour's campaign for the NHS and the threat posed by David Cameron and the Conservative party policy on the NHS".
I'm not sure how good it's going to be; Gordon Brown delivered a big speech on the NHS just yesterday. But if they don't have much new to say about the NHS, there are plenty of other topics to ask about. The press conference starts at 10am.
9.59am: I'm at Victoria Street now in the holding room, waiting for the press conference to begin. Coffee and biscuits are available.
Reading Gordon Brown's speech, I see that Labour's health policy has got more guarantees than a branch of Currys. There's a cancer guarantee, a waiting time guarantee, a GP access guarantee, a health check guarantee and a care guarantee.
10.07am: They've just handed out a news release. Burnham is launching a voteNHS.com website to support a key element of Labour's health manifesto. The release says:
The "target cancer" campaign aims to save up to 10,000 lives by backing a pledge to create a new NHS guarantee of cancer diagnosis within one week of GP referral, allowing patients to be tested and told their results in just seven days.
10.09am: Alexander and Burnham are here.
Burnham says he does not believe in over-claiming for the NHS. He's not complacent. There are many places where it could improve. But there have been real improvements over the last few years.
At the 2005 election Labour promised to bring down waiting times to a 18 week maximum and to half MRSA rates. People said it could not be done. But it was achieved, he says.
Today Labour is promising to ensure cancer patients get their results back within one week by 2015. Experts say this could save 10,000 lives.
Catching cancer early also saves on treatment cost further down the line, he says.
This will place cancer services in the UK "on a par with the best in the world".
Burnham says:
As we have seen in the past, the NHS can move mountains when it is given a very clear job to do.
Labour's national guarantees will be the "battleground" for the election.
The Tories would scrap the guarantees on day one of a David Cameron government, Burnham says.
Labour today puts its cards on the table.
10.14am: Alexander says voteNHS will build on the support of internet campaigns like Ed's Pledge and Back the Ban.
Labour is also launching a CameraON/CameraOFF campaign to highlight the difference between Tory rhetoric and Tory reality.
10.15am: We're onto questions.
Burnham says today's pledge is about creating new "testing capacity" within the NHS.
Q: How will the government achieve its plan to save £2.7bn by moving more care from hospital to home?
Burnham says the figures have been "carefully worked out" in the department of health. He can provide a full breakdown. (Cathy Newman from Channel 4 asked the question. On her FactCheck blog yesterday, she suggested yesterday that these figures are bogus.)
10.18am: Q: Haven't we heard about this seven-day target before? And aren't the Tories right about cancer outcomes being very poor in the UK?
Burnham says:
And I was sitting here thinking you did not have memories that long.
He admits Gordon Brown announced that one-week pledge before Labour's conference.
On survival rates, Burnham says the NHS has reduced cancer mortality rates among the under-75s by 19%.
10.21am: Q: When does the target get rolled out? And how much does it cost?
Burnham says he is "confident" it can be introduced by 2015.
Hospital trusts would strike deals with GP practices to deliver this.
It would cost £180m a year for the first three years. That's the cost of new equipment.
10.24am: Q: Is Labour planning a death tax on estates to pay for the national care service?
Burnham says there is a consensus that long-term care services need "fundamental reform".
The government published a green paper last year. It is consulting on options.
The story on this in the Guardian today is "inaccurate in a number of ways".
There is a "scurrilous campaign" being run by the Conservatives on this.
Q: Where is the Guardian story inaccurate?
Burnham says:
The Guardian story suggests a £20,000 flat levy. I'm not currently considering that as a lead option for reform.
He goes on:
The Conservatives have set their face against reform ... I believe the biggest mistake this country could be would be to step back from reform.
If the government abandoned reform, it would leave an "inadequate" and "unfair" system in place.
People are paying from their own pockets "in large amounts" to fund the cost of care.
10.29am: Q: What cancers will this target?
Burnham says it is particularly important to target lung cancer, bowel cancer and ovarian cancer.
Q: Where did the 10,000 lives saved figure come from? And won't faster diagnoses produce a bottleneck?
Burnham says GPs tell him they could do more tests more quickly if they have access to the right equipment.
Because patients aren't picked up quickly enough, they have to go into hospital for more invasive treatment.
By making this decisive shift towards a more preventative service, we can make better use of resources.
10.32am: Q: Where does the money come from? And will Labour have a pledge card?
Burnham says Alistair Darling has promised to protect frontline services for the next three years.
Alexander says health will be a central feature of the campaign.
We want there to be a very clear choice in relation to policy.
That's why he wants to ensure "adequate scrutiny" of the Conservative party.
Q: So will there be a pledge card?
Alexander says we will have to see whether there are five pledges, 10 pledges or more.
10.36am: Asked again about social care, Burnham says he set out three models in the green paper: a partnership model, a voluntary model and a compulsory model.
He says there is "no decision within government" as to which of those three models the government will promote.
The Tory proposal for people to pay an £8,000 insurance fee is "backward looking". It provides an incentive to put more older people in care.
10.38am: That's it. Here are the main points.
o Burnham denied being in favour a £20,000 levy on estates to pay for a national care programme. He said that the government was still considering its options. And he attacked the Conservative alternative as "backward-looking".
o He reaffirmed Labour's commitment to giving suspect cancer patients the right to diagnosis within a week. He claimed this would save 10,000 lives and he said it would cost over £500m.
o Alexander announced a new online campaign attacking Tory health policy.
Cross-posted from the Power 2010 blog:
If all it took to sort out our political system was to produce a list of proposals we'd have the best political system, ever.
Over the last few years, there has been no shortage of wish lists, most of which have promptly disappeared never to be thought of again.
So I'll readily admit to being a little sceptical of Power 2010 when it was launched intending to, yes, put together a list of proposals.
To its credit, though, Power 2010 has put together an imaginative approach: trawling widely for ideas, then getting a cross-section of the public together to discuss face-to-face their merits in order to create a list of ideas which is then opened up to the public's vote for winnowing down to a final list.
The selection of proposals up for vote are an intriguing cross-section of the different hobby horses ridden by different groups : English votes on English laws is right there next to proportional representation, directly elected Mayors listed alongside holding a referendum on the Euro.
That gives the process a real strength – and gives an extra incentive to vote, as most people will find not only ideas they like but also at least one idea that they don't.
The way to ensure it doesn't get through? Why to take part and vote for other proposals that you do like of course.
In my case, the proposal I don't like is the allowing a "None of the above" option on the ballot paper.
This can come in two flavours: one where "none of the above" can actually win an election, with no-one getting elected, and one where it can't.
If it can win, it means we'll end up with some people living in seats without elected representatives.
That not only gives power to the unelected instead (governing won't stop; it'll just be done more by unelected people), it means people who voted otherwise get their representation stripped away from them.
One person shouldn't be able to vote to deny another person having an elected representative.
So perhaps then "None of the above" works best where the votes for it are tallied, but someone gets elected anyway?
But that turns it into a superficial process: let people express their view and then ignore it.
Having officially declared "None of the above" totals may make people pause and think for a moment or two about the importance of raising turnout, but it's not as if anyone is short of information on that score already.
So "None of the above" is not for me. If you don't agree – then go and vote for it, and if you do agree - go and vote for other options.
So I have a proposal, couldn't we just replace him with this and save the taxpayer some money?
Just a thought.#!/bin/bash
EDM=/home/parliament/edms
NEW=`find $EDM -mtime -1`
for i in $NEW
do
`grep "Peter Bottomley" $i`
if [ $? != 0 ]
then
echo "Peter Bottomley" >> $i
fi
done
Note: Script is released under the GPL v3.
The bit of fuckwittery from the Downing Street bunker is that the bloated land whale of a PM, old one eye McGordon is eating lots of banana's.Then the old lie is pumped out that the waddling snot eating PM has "also taken up jogging to boost his fitness."
Really well that has been Questioned before, as questions are being asked over the picture that showed McCyclops jogging. Ever since Gordon Brown was photographed jogging in a London park earlier this month - his track suit bottoms tucked neatly into his socks, naturally - the paparazzi have been lying in wait, hoping, no doubt, for the first picture of the Prime Minister running out of puff.
So far, alas, their quarry has eluded them. Just as he had never been seen jogging before the photograph had been taken, he has not been seen since. Some members of the paparazzi are now muttering that the original picture must have been a stunt.
What is more, one tells Mandrake that it is a mystery who took it, as the photo was uncredited.
Matrix, the agency which furnished newspapers with the picture, will tell me only that it was not taken by one of their photographers. "It was supplied to us by someone who wished to preserve their anonymnity," says Tom Smedley, of the company.
Certainly the Nike trainers that the PM was wearing with the Air Max logo showed little sign of wear.Now our fat waddling PM has claimed that he go's a running on a regular basis, something one look at his lardy saggy figure makes you question.
Porkie No.1:
Telling critics that their "hopes" that he would stand down were in vain, the Prime Minister insisted that he was fully fit to govern and went running regularly to maintain his health.Porkie No.2:
"I am healthy and I am very fit. I run a lot to keep fit and I will continue to keep fit. "I keep going. I have got a job to do. I have got work to do."And yet just one photo from a mystery source to show McSnotty waddling his way through the streets in jogging gear? Hmmmm, next they will claim that David Blunkett is a rally driver an his guide dog Sadie barks directions to him.
The fat fucker even had the nerve to bleat an complain about the press pointing out he was in fact a fat fucker who they mocked as such in cartoons.
He considers himself to be a political heavyweight, but it appears that Gordon Brown doesn't like being drawn as one. It has emerged this weekend that he has complained to newspaper cartoonists that they draw him on the rather large side - "fat" was the word the PM used.
Mr Brown is known to have brought the subject up with at least two national newspaper artists, including The Independent's Dave Brown, pulling them up on their portrayal of him and insisting: "I'm not that fat." A touch vain? Perhaps.
But, in complaining, he joins a host of image-conscious politicians who fret over the way in which they are parodied in the media.Still fingers crossed that the lying fat wankstain does go jogging an has a massive fatal heart attack.Hat Tip tractor stats for the pic
Journalists and media workers are coming together later this month to launch ‘Expose The BNP', a campaign aimed at revealing the undemocratic and racist nature of the British National Party.
Backing the campaign, James Macintyre, political correspondent for the New Statesman, said:
The political and media consensus appears to be that the way to tackle the BNP is to meet it half way, by talking up tough anti-immigration measures and airing this racist party's lies. This conventional wisdom must urgently be challenged.
The new campaign aims to investigate and challenge the BNP's attempts to construct a respectable public image, and to support media workers who refuse to work on programmes or material that break the reporting guidelines laid down by media trade unions.
Peter Hain MP, who will also be speaking at the event, said:
It is vital that journalists take a robust approach to the BNP. It was an outrage that the BBC gave the fascist, racist BNP the credibility they craved by inviting Nick Griffin onto Question Time. In the event, it became a shameful circus that boosted the far right party, and short-term BBC ratings.
In the run up to the general election and beyond, EXPOSE will provide well-researched information and background briefings for reporters, news editors and others in our industry in order to challenge the BNP's statements and spokespersons, and the racism and criminality at the heart of their organisation.
Launch Public Meeting
Tuesday February 23: 7pm
Amnesty International Human Rights Centre, EC2A 3EA
Speakers include:
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, columnist and broadcaster
Mehdi Hasan, senior editor (politics), New Statesman
Sunny Hundal, editor, Liberal Conspiracy
Peter Hain, secretary of state for Wales
Michelle Stanistreet, deputy general secretary, National Union of Journalists
Pat Styles, national official, Bectu, the media and entertainment union
Weyman Bennett, joint secretary, Unite Against Fascism
Recently, Labour Party members in Liverpool Wavertree chose Luciana Berger, a 28 year old Londoner who works as Director of Labour Friends of Israel, as their candidate for the next general election. This has led to criticisms that the Labour Party "parachutes" loyalists from London into safe seats.
Or as Neil put it, "the selection will only increase the sense that Labour regards the role of MP as some glorified graduate trainee programme, and sees constituencies as regional call centres, expected to dilligently enact the faxed dictats from central office...Perhaps the defeat of Ms Berger would send a symbolic - but important - message from Liverpool to London that the days of carpetbagging must end if Labour is to re-establish itself with what was once its heartlands."
Now the specific example is poorly chosen – Liverpool Wavertree is a marginal constituency, the number one target of the Lib Dems in the area. But the wider point deserves a fact check – is it actually true that Labour's traditional heartlands are suffering from the "rise of the carpetbaggers"?
To find out, I looked at the excellent UK Polling Report website of all the Labour seats where the current MP is standing down, they've selected a candidate, and the majority is more than 20% (i.e. which Labour are still very likely to win even if the Tories win the election overall). Guess how many were London-based New Labour loyalists with no connection to the area?
Of these twenty four seats, ten picked someone who was a current or former local councillor in the area, i.e. not a carpetbagger by definition.
Of the other thirteen, six grew up and went to school in the constituency where they are standing (not carpetbaggers); one was born in Hexham and is standing in Newcastle (not a carpetbagger); one works as a trade union official in Sunderland (not a carpetbagger). And one is a councillor in Warrington whose husband works for the outgoing MP (not a carpetbagger).
So that leaves five people who did not have local connections to their seat before they were selected. Stephen Twigg has revitalised the Liverpool West Derby Labour Party since the local party deselected Bob Wareing; Rachel Reeves is always mentioned as one of Labour's rising stars; Lisa Nandy is an expert in issues which affect refugee and migrant children; Yasmin Qureshi is an anti-war leftie who will be the UK's first female Muslim MP. None of them got selected as a result of a stitch-up by the party centrally.
And possibly the star of an extremely talented group is Kate Green, the former Director of the Child Poverty Action Group and now parliamentary candidate for Stretford and Urmston. Kate has spent her life campaigning for social justice, and Britain would be a better place if the government had listened more to her over the past few years and less to businessmen like Lord Freud, who is now the Tory "expert" on welfare.
When you actually look at who is getting selected in Labour's safe seats, it becomes clear that it is just silly to argue that "Labour regards the role of MP as some glorified graduate trainee programme, and sees constituencies as regional call centres, expected to dilligently enact the faxed dictats from central office".
I'm sure that the evidence won't kill off this myth, just as people go on about "sheep-like" MPs when in fact they are the most rebellious ever. But the fact is that the overwhelming majority of people who the Labour Party selects in its safe seats were either born and grew up there, and/or had already served in the area as local councillors. Those that weren't are as likely to be leftie critics of key government policies as loyalists, and all achieved success on their own merits, rather than as a result of London stitch-ups.
Apropos of THIS, let's have a little song about Alternative Voting:
The Electorate: Really? You think so? Seems to me that nearly all elections these days are completely rigged trash.
David Cameron: Yes, quite right. But never before in history have we had such a wide selection of rigged electoral methods!
When the PM lauds a policy he used to disavow,
When he says 'we must reform the voting system and here's how',
When he knows that everybody wants to vote him out RIGHT NOW,
Then the plain situation,
The simple declaration
Labour's trying to rig elections with AV!
Now as Brown cries on the TV and beats up his office staff,
We know Mandy's in the background making plans on his behalf,
So the thought that AV's fairer should be one to make you laugh,
They can try to deny it,
But there should be a riot,
Labour's trying to rig elections with AV!
And five more years of Brown will make us all feel ill,
As all our taxes rise to pay his spending bill,
*Then there's Balls and Harman*
Now we know that Gordon Brown's the worst PM there's ever been,
AV's use of second choices could still keep him on the scene,
We've had twelve years of New Labour and can't cope with seventeen,
Oh there ain't nothin' to it,
They're gonna try and do it,
Labour's trying to rig elections with AV!
The Electorate: You know, I think I'm getting the idea, David!
David Cameron: Uh? You see?
The Electorate: Absolutely! Hey, how about this:
Labour want to keep their seats by any means they can contrive,
With their MPs and their ministers all desp'rate to survive,
So they've tried to get the Lib Dems help to keep their hopes alive,
No we won't over-sell ya,
We merely wanna tell ya,
Labour's trying to rig elections with AV!
Now to say that AV's fairer is a lie and a disgrace,
They just want to rig the system to help Labour win the race,
Brown is only recommending it to keep himself in place,
Oh you ought to deplore it,
You really can't ignore it,
Labour's trying to rig elections with AV!
Now if you want to see this nation on the mend,
We need to bring New Labour's regime to an end,
So to sum up the philosophy on which we're all agreed,
All the garbage in the Cabinet is just what we don't need,
And that AV's just another way for Labour to mislead,
When you pull back the curtain,
It's absolutely certain,
Labour's trying to rig elections with AV!

There is precious little detail of what and where the story relates to but I do know there has been such phone calls made in the Edinburgh area so could well be close to home. Or, alternatively, could be Dundee going by this story around the time of the European elections.
UPDATE:
The story is now up on the BBC and relates to recorded messages from Vera Duckworth in 2007. Labour was told to stop making such calls but persevered in 2009 and have now been hit with an 'enforcement notice'.
The 'robo-calling' is reminiscent of the calls Alex Ferguson made on behalf of Labour in the Glasgow North East by-election but, to be fair, the same has been done in the past by the SNP with Sean Connery providing the recorded message.
That said, if there is a rule that political parties shouldn't do this, all subsequently do it anyway,they collectively get told not to it and then Labour is found to be continuing the practice illegally, surely at some point some sort of action has to be taken?

Meet Andrew Lacis, a physicist at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) and colleague of James Hansen.
Education:
- B.A., Physics, 1963, University of Iowa
- M.S., Astronomy, 1964, University of Iowa
- Ph.D., Physics, 1970, University of Iowa
Publications
Lacis's bibliography is pretty huge, so I haven't represented it here; suffice to say that Andrew Lacis is not only prolific and well-respected but also "mainstream"--he is not "a denier".
Bearing all of this in mind, I would like to call your attention to his comment on Chapter 9 of the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4). Now, Chapter 9 is extremely important, as Bishop Hill explains...
Chapter 9 is possibly the most important one in the whole IPCC report - it's the one where they decide that global warming is manmade. This is the one where the headlines are made.
So, bearing all of these facts in mind, here is Andrew Lacis's comment on the Executive Summary of Chapter 9 of the IPCC's AR4. [Emphasis mine.]
There is no scientific merit to be found in the Executive Summary. The presentation sounds like something put together by Greenpeace activists and their legal department. The points being made are made arbitrarily with legal sounding caveats without having established any foundation or basis in fact. The Executive Summary seems to be a political statement that is only designed to annoy greenhouse skeptics. Wasn't the IPCC Assessment Report intended to be a scientific document that would merit solid backing from the climate science community--instead of forcing many climate scientists into having to agree with greenhouse skeptic criticisms that this is indeed a report with a clear and obvious political agenda. Attribution can not happen until understanding has been clearly demonstrated. Once the facts of climate change have been established and understood, attribution will become self-evident to all. The Executive Summary as it stands is beyond redemption and should simply be deleted.
This is pretty damning stuff and would, surely, have given even the most enthusiastic Warmist some pause for thought. So why did no one pick up on it?
Because, of course, Andrew Lacis's comment did not appear in the report. Like many other even mildly sceptical comments, it was rejected and left out of the report. And the reason why the editors rejected the comment?
Rejected. [Executive Summary] summarizes Ch 9, which is based on the peer reviewed literature.
Frankly, I am staggered. That is the complete explanation for the rejection.
Further, as we are now beginning to find out, vast swathes of the IPCC AR4 are based on non-peer-reviewed reports from Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund; even where those organisations have used scientific reports in their pieces of propaganda, they have cherry-picked and twisted data to suit their own agendas, e.g. Amazongate.
This is how the "consensus" has been constructed--by posting sceptical comments down the memory-hole; by disappearing all but the most alarmist of opinions.
Is there anyone who now thinks that the IPCC are to be trusted as a truly scientific organisation?
If there are any such people left, then I have a bridge that I'd like to sell them...
The European Commission has authorised, under EU state aid rules, plans notified by Sweden to provide a guarantee that would enable Saab Automobile AB to access a loan from the European Investment Bank (EIB). The Commission found that 82.8% of the guarantee to be provided by Sweden was in line with its Temporary Framework for state aid measures, which gives Member States additional scope to facilitate access to financing in the present economic and financial crisis (see IP/08/1993 ).
European research ministers have made a commitment in San Sebastián to increase investment in R&D and to promote a culture of trust in scientists, without forgetting that research must be accountable to the public.
Catherine Ashton, High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and Vice President of the Commission, made today the following statement:
The European Commission has authorised, under EU state aid rules, a Danish scheme providing export loans to Danish exporters and /or their clients who experience difficulties in accessing funding in the current financial crisis.
50% of European teenagers give out personal information on the web - according to an EU study - which can remain online forever and can be seen by anybody. Today, Safer Internet Day, the European Commission is passing a message to teenagers: "Think before you post!"
The European Parliament approved on Tuesday a set of key principles to be implemented in the cooperation agreement governing relations between the EP and the Commission. Commission President Barroso endorsed MEPs' demands, reflecting the new position of Parliament under the Lisbon Treaty.
1. The electric vehicle is the focus of the informal meeting of ministers of industry.What is the line of action of the Spanish Presidency in this matter?
President,
Honourable Members,
This is a time for boldness. This is a time to show our citizens that we care, and that the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty will make a real difference in our ability to serve their interests.
If a cure is not to be found then it must be the fate of a few men (and women, it seems) to live with a psychiatric pathology, knowing that your brain triggers impulses that the vast majority of the rest of humanity finds repellent. You are at the mercy of lynchings at worst and misplaced sympathy at best.
All I can think of currently is that there must be a better way of trying to find a cure. Because the very presence of paedophilia in our midst seems to bring out a desire in many just to "kill off" these predatory people.
From the Italian TV Station RAI
What is paedophilia?
The World Health Organisation includes paedophilia in the list of sexual disturbances. It is a psychiatric pathology which is part of the so-called sexual deviations, meaning disorders which involve an attraction for something unusual, like inanimate objects, or in this case, children.
Treatments: an open discussion
Two treatments have been examined for curing paedophiles: the first is aimed at correcting the hormonal profile, commonly called "chemical castration", the second involves treating the psychiatric disorder.
The idea behind correcting the hormonal profile is to reduce testosterone (male hormone) or at least its effects with some drugs (primarily cyproterone). But to have a lasting effect the individual must be forced to take this substance for a long time and this may lead to irreversible physical injuries.
From a psychiatric viewpoint, paedophilia is manifested as an obsession and emotional disorder. The paedophile is an obsessive because he has the repeated idea of finding a child and using this child emotionally and sexually, an idea which he is unable to control. There are drugs which are capable of relieving this repetitive thought mechanism, but this type of treatment is not seen as a permanent solution. To treat the emotional disorder, often caused by childhood traumas, psychotherapy is used.
The debate over drug treatment to correct the hormonal profile and on psychiatric treatments continues and is very heated. To date it has not led to short term solutions.
Prevention and control: advice from associations
The best way to fight paedophilia continues to be prevention.
Doing the Shake and Vac and Putting the Freshness Back into the GMC
He recently hilariously exclaimed
"The current situation is profoundly unsatisfactory," said Niall Dickson, chief executive of the GMC."We are not able to give the level of assurance we want because of the present legal framework.
"Our position is clear. In order to ensure patient safety, when doctors first register with us, we need to be able to test their English language proficiency and we need to be able to test their clinical knowledge and skills."
You mean over the last 100 years since the GMC's existence, they have been hiring unsafe doctors and if so is the GMC responsible for the potential high death rate?
Overall, Niall's first month at the General Medical Council has been filled with disaster. As he is currently bald, the stress levels can only be measured by the level of shine on his head not the RHDR [ Rapid Hair Drop Out Rate]. Well, what can we expect of an ex journalist. This is what the GMC says about the bald man at the helm. Isn't it lovely to have a Ex BBC Health Journalist as top dog.
Niall Dickson joined the General Medical Council as Chief Executive and Registrar in January 2010.
He began his career in teaching before taking up posts in national voluntary organisations involved with older people. He was Editor of Therapy Weekly for the allied health professions and then of Nursing Times.
He moved to the BBC in 1988 as Health Correspondent, became Chief Social Affairs Correspondent and then, in 1995, Social Affairs Editor, focussing mainly on Radio 4's Today programme and the Ten O'clock News on BBC 1.
Niall is a member of the Cabinet Office Honours Committee (Health) and the Department of Health's End of Life Care Implementation Advisory Board. In 2008, he chaired a cross-party commission on accountability in health for the Local Government Association (LGA).
He is a trustee of the Leeds Castle Foundation. His honorary awards include being a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and as Fellow of the Royal College of General Practitioners.
NB Finally, I would like to thank the General Medical Council for their Royal Presence on the blog for the past few days. Please will the designated visitor learn to spell before reading this blog :)




