Time To Change The Tune

There now follows (an extremely funny) party political p!sstake broadcast from the Green Party!

PRE CHRISTMAS CRACKERS

My apologies for the short delay in normal service, (lack of blogs) but a family bereavement and high work load temporarily threw me off course.

So to play catch up and give regular readers an insight into all things politically malignant I thought I would treat you to some short inputs and comments.

THE COMMISSIONING COMMISSIONER

Adam Simmonds as Northamptonshire's newly elected Police and Crime Commissioner has certainly not wasted any time in making himself and the Tory Party even less relevant and popular by announcing his appointment of up to 16 staff to help him in his newly elected role!

These include Assistant Commissioners dealing with a whole host of specialist areas, including advisers on Youth, Neighbourhoods and even faith.

But what is extraordinary about his employment rest is that most of the applicants are not applicants at all! They are just self appointed Tory party members. All it seems very eager to join the new Conservative Party managed gravy train. His election agent and the Tories current Political assistant at County Hall are just two among many new "crime" experts who will now be paid from the public purse.

He has though now, after much pressure, announced that some of these 16 posts will only be filled after a proper interview process has taken place. Late but laudable you may think?, until that is you see that he has already announced who will fill the posts before the interviews have even taken place!

Of course whilst making it clear he is quite prepared to spend way beyond the previous £800,000 revenue expenditure for the decommissioned Police Authority to make sure he gets the right staff, he is at the same time telling Police Officers and Staff that he cannot protect their jobs in the forthcoming budget round.

This man is doing more single handily to undermine and destroy the Conservative Party's future local and general election chances than all of the opposition parties in Northamptonshire could muster as a collective effort. (although Binners is a good second option at the moment)

Long may he continue in post!

LABOUR PAINS

Whenever I mention the ongoing troubles within the local Labour Party I get the same tired old complaints from over zealous members accusing me of not moving on or blaming the regional Labour Party for all of the Party's ills.

So let me make it very clear, I care little for what happens in the Labour Party's regional office or about who is currently responsible for their steady supply of political own goals, but I do find it astonishing to hear that the Local Party is once again to be suspended.

This means that since my expulsion way back in May 2007 that the local party has been suspended for longer than even my own personal expulsion lasted! I work out that of the 5 years and 7 months since that date, that the party has been under suspension for a total of 5 years and  2 months? But I stand to be corrected.

The latest suspension I am told is because there were so many complaints and counter complaints flying around related to individual Cllrs on the Labour Group of the Borough Council that the region thought it best to just once again pull the plug. In fact from just the small snippets I hear I doubt if there is a member of the Labour group left who currently is not complaining against a fellow comrade or who hasn't had a complaint lodged against them! So much for Fraternity!

Funny though really how the region always ensure that the party is suspended and never up and running when selections for election candidates are on the horizon, so once more their County Council candidates will need to be "appointed" by region rather than selected by local members. Now given that the last two panels of candidates for the County and Borough elections have been hand picked by region who should they blame for the infighting currently ensuing?

Meanwhile some even more disturbing news reaches me about serious criminal investigations in respect of one of their other elected members in Northampton, But in order to allow justice to be done I will of course refrain from revealing all or any of the details, but those inside the party may feel a little aggrieved that they didn't heed the warnings some including myself were giving them at least a year back!

PAYBACK TIME

Whilst focusing on the local  Labour Party's current (constant?) woes I must share with you the misgivings many party members are now expressing over the Party's choice for candidate at the next general election in Northampton North.

Now of course myself and Sally Keeble never really got on when we were both in the house , we were chalk and cheese, and I could never get away from the feeling that she felt my election in Northampton South was a distraction to her, she certainly seemed happier after I had gone and seemed to prefer having a Tory next door to shout at rather than a nuisance neighbour.

Another area where we were both miles apart was in respect of Sir Thomas Legg's enquiry into the MP's expenses scandal. I was pleased to receive early on in the enquiry a letter from Sir Thomas  saying

 "having examined the records in the light of my interpretation of the rules and standards in force at the time, I have not identified any payments made to you under the ACA during the review period which I consider call for any repayment or further supporting evidence to be provided by you. Accordingly, my conclusion is that no further action is required from you in this matter"

Not surprising really, as my office staff at the time will confirm that I wouldn't even claim insanity despite having more than enough evidence to boot!

Sally on the other hand you may recall got her self into a spot of difficulty by claiming for a whole host of "improvements" to her second home in Northampton including  according to the Daily Telegraphs expose:

"£5,000.00 worth of repairs to the kitchen of her constituency home in 2005, along with £2,403.00 on new appliances and work surfaces. She later claimed £950.00 for the “essential” replacement of her shower, toilet and washbasin, £3,072.00 for a new boiler and £7,669.00 for new windows., not to mention all those tree works in the garden!"

So concerned was she at the time that her largess may influence the way people voted that she along with many other "embarrassed" MP's made voluntary payments back to Parliament to prevent further criticism of the claims. The payments were made at the height of the furore over MPs’ expenses, as the public vented its anger about the widespread abuse of the system.

However, it has emerged that since then, nearly two dozen current and former MPs had quietly asked for the "repaid" money to be returned to them , after receiving lower than expected demands from the House of Commons authorities to repay any over claimed expenses.

And so it was that our Sally in 2010 after no longer being an MP and perhaps feeling less guilty about all those items she felt she had wrongly claimed for and therefore wanted to pay back,  joined 26 other MP's and former MP's in asking for a refund of their refund!

The Commons authorities therefore quietly and secretly sent her a cheque back for £3,737.74

But now she is standing for election again! So can she tell us, was she in her own eyes right in claiming the money for all of the above on her expenses in the first place? If so, then was she then wrong when she said after the scandal broke that she felt she had duty to pay some of the money back to Parliament?
And if she was right in paying "some" but not all of her claimed expenses back to Parliament in 2009 then why has she then secretly claimed it back since when she is no longer an MP?

THE SPEECH ED SHOULD HAVE GIVE TO THE TUC

When a Labour Leader in opposition is booed at a TUC rally (Saturday 20th Oct 2012) for addressing an anti cuts audience with a weak and limp "we will cut less, and we will cut slower" message then you know that the body politic, that is now Labour PLC has completely lost it's way.

You also know that the divide between the people and the party has been widened and deepened, and far more disturbing you start to realise that our democracy has been weakened to the point that those who are governed feel that not only those who are governing them but also those who seek to replace them are both not listening.

You then realise that the British public are starting to wake up to the sobering fact that no one in the mainstream of our political system is offering them an alternative, not just to the cuts, but to how Britain is to be governed and to who will come forward with the courage to take on the vested interests of the entrenched establishment and speak up for the people.

So I thought I would write my own speech for Ed, the one he should have given to the TUC, it is formed around new and old ideas, each formed around the discussions taking place in and around the country mostly outside of Labour Party meetings and including a public meeting held recently in Northampton at the inaugural Ron Todd Lecture,  which I had the privilege to chair.

It was not totally a Labour free zone,  Jon Cruddas MP who stood as a candidate for the Labour Party deputy leadership joined me at the top table, and as the author of the party's policy review, I hope that he picked up one or two ideas. His local Labour Party members didn't get the opportunity to guide him however as only one of them turned up to listen! I guess the rest were probably banned from attending the meeting on the grounds that they may sit next to someone radical!

But for what it is worth these are the sort of things we were discussing and this is what I think Ed should have said to those at Saturdays TUC rally, albeit very truncated;

"Colleagues, Brothers and Sister's

I bring fraternal greetings to all gathered from the Parliamentary Labour Party and the wider workers movement at large.

I join you in expressing a collective opinion as one voice to the current Coalition Government in the strongest and clearest terms that they have cut and slashed our public services far too deeply, far too quickly and in doing so have bought Local Government and Britain to its knees, they have deflated the UK economy, increased public borrowing and put Britain's economic recovery in deep perilous jeopardy.

I say to those listening at home in the country that the Tory Party in government have cynically  used the current economic crisis as an excuse and as a smokescreen to achieve it's long term political ambitions of destroying the Welfare State and shrinking Local Government and the state to the point that the rich can continue to get richer at the direct expense of those who have least and those whose need is most.

I say to the Prime Minister, that he has personally presided over the most blatant and cruel attack on the weakest in our society and in doing so divided Britain for the first time in 40 years on class lines rich against poor, haves against have nots, North against South, and I say to his mini me, deputy Nick Clegg that no prize, not even that of deputy Prime Minister is worth the price paid by him and his party for their collusion and complicity in this brutal assault on the poor in our country.

I today call on them both in the name of common decency to leave office, to put an end to this corrosive coalition government, and to put to the country the choice as to how they want Britain governed in the future and how they want their taxes spent and their money used.

And I announce from this platform that after a vote of the PLP and NEC executive endorsed by a majority of CLP chairs across the country that the first thing a Labour government will do back in office is to table a government emergency bill to immediately scrap the Trident nuclear weapon programme releasing over time over £100 bn back into the UK economy to assist in our economic recovery and in the delivery of our vital services.

For Britain to spend such vast sums on a nuclear weapon system eight times as destructive as the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 shows a lack of sanity, and a lack of common sense in a post cold war era.

Such a weapon would be illegal to use and no country on earth, not even the nation responsible for its launch could be able to escape the total devastation that would follow the use of such a destructive device and such a wicked strike.

I therefore also pledge here today that the the scrapping of Tridents replacement at an unnecessary cost of a further £25bn in 2028 is now official Labour Party Policy. I pledge that the 7000 jobs lost by scrapping trident will be replaced with 52,000 new jobs within the construction industry using the annual £4bn set aside for Trident capital spending to build new homes for Britain's young.

I say to this audience that if we are really all in this together then why does the British government stand by and watch blue chip companies like Starbucks, and Ebay, and Amazon and Boots and Barclay's Bank and Vodaphone and KPMG make billions of pounds of profit off of the backs of British workers and from the pockets of British earners without paying their fair share of British taxes?.

So let me be clear, a Labour government will also legislate as a priority to ensure profits earned in Britain are taxed in Britain. If they want our trade, then the tax man gets paid!

I also announce here today an immediate investigation into the introduction by a Labour Government of a new Land Tax to further help fund the Britain's economic revival. Only 5% of Britain's 60 million acres are used up by our population for domestic dwellings, 90% of our population crammed into just 3 million acres of land, another 5% of our land is used by British businesses, and 20%, is unusable for either purpose, as rivers or mountains. Leaving a massive 70% of our land which has then been left in the ownership of just 0.28% of our population.

So why is then the home-owners and business owners are paying £33bn and £20bn respectively in Land tax each year to the exchequer whilst the 0.28% who occupy the majority of our land are paying nothing and receiving an annual rebate of £3.5-5bn a year for simply not working the land they own, or in agricultural policy paybacks! This aid for aristocrats must stop, and Britain's richest landowners should PAY land tax, not be the recipients of government hand outs!

You poor take courage, you rich take care, this earth was made a common treasury for everyone to share!

I offer you this vision, these policies to the British public as a fairer way of reducing Britain's deficit, as a more equitable way of ensuring that wealth in our country is equitably distributed, and a sure way to ensure that tax revenue is put to the use of the many not the few.

NO MORE CUTS - NO MORE WASTE ON USELESS WEAPON SYSTEMS - NO MORE TAX EVASION FOR MULTI NATIONAL COMPANIES and NO MORE TAX REBATES FOR THE RICHEST IN OUR SOCIETY.

That's my vision for a fairer Britain. that's our answer to those who say there is no alternative. let us offer to the people of Britain a real choice, let us show them how Britain can be fairer and more just, let us work for the future of our young people rather than against their interests.

At present we are not all in this together, but together we can build an alternative way forward"

For those interested in Jason Cowleys excellent piece in Septembers New Statesman, you can find it here: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/politics/2012/09/aid-aristocrats For those wanting the facts without the narrative I copy them below:

IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID (part three) AROUND THE WORLD

In this 3rd and final part of our plain English guide to state we are all in we look beyond the UK's shores and identify that he banking crisis of 2008 hit not only the UK, Europe and the US, its aftershocks were felt across the globe, China and India's economies for example may still be growing faster than anyone Else's at present but if their continued growth is to be maintained then they need a market for their goods they are producing abroad and if the rest of the world is in recession and no one is buying those goods then that will have its own negative impact. This "world view" of the economic troubles facing citizens around the globe is also accompanied by a series of infographics which I hope assist with the explanations to enlarge on any diagram just click it

But before we can make total sense of what the current crisis is doing to the economies of different countries and how it affects us here in the UK we have to understand where we as a country sit at the table as a player, and also where we are expected to be in future years based on current and historical growth. In the UK this is critical because as you will see from the infographic below the UK economy is due to contract sharply irrespective of any current downturn.  So irrespective of the recession we are already facing an expected drop in our wealth and position as China and India and others take their place at the top of the manufacturing league.

But Britain's real fragility is only really exposed in its totality when you compare the contraction in our own growth and income with a much broader set of countries including those outside of the top ten above. This next chart therefore shows just how close Cameron and Clegg's cuts without growth programme has put us in comparison with those economies like Greece, Ireland and Italy which are presently close to collapse.

 

 Are you worried yet? well you should be as thanks to Cameron's go it alone stance in Europe we are isolated even further and unlike those in the Euro Zone we have no one to bail us out if the market takes a run on the pound.


The next nettle for us to grasp is how big is the UK's debt when measured against other countries in the world, and what do the credit reference organisations (see below) think about our ability to being able to pay the money back? Just like individuals having a credit reference record, so do countries and the biggest credit reference company to rate countries is a company called Standard and Poor's, ironic really when you consider that our banks seem to have no standards and their actions are making us all poor! Anyhow a reduction in your rating, (ratings go from AAA+ to C-)  just as with any individual makes it more difficult for the country to borrow more money which then pushes up the interest rate that they will have to pay to borrow, which in turn increases the GDP to debt ratio which ends up with Standard and Poor reducing the rating even further, in other words the banks make the debt ridden countries pay more for their borrowing because they say the risk is higher which in turn effects their rating which pushes the interest rate up even further and they go round and round in circles until they can/t afford to borrow from the banks at all, at which time they are in need of a hand out from the IMF (International Monetary Fund) or the European Central Bank. This next graphic is very revealing in not only showing you the ratings but also in understanding who is close the edge and who could be next for the vultures in the City to circle around

As you can see the UK's debt as a % of it GDP (what we earn) is very high at 83% and rising but it is nowhere near some of our other competitors. Ireland and Italy and of course Greece all with 100% + GDP/Debt ratios have all seen runs on their economy recently and have all faced and still may face financial meltdown. All have lost their (A) ratings and have been downgraded to B's and yet Japan which owes a massive 229% of its GDP still hangs on to an A rating (albeit AA-) so why is this?

Well Standards and Poor's take into account a Countries growth projections, and Japan is still seen as a good bet in terms of its manufacturing base, It is also worth noting that the above figures are also based on earlier 2011 forecasts predicting the UK growth figure way above the actual achieved. In reality because the current government are now planning to borrow even more than the last Labour Government planned to borrow if elected, due to increases in welfare payments and a period of flat growth, we now risk the UK's rating also being downgraded.

Standard and Poor's have in fact hinted at a rating downgrading of all countries within the Eurozone, which seems crazy given that there is a vast gulf between the performance of say the Greek and Italian economies when compared with say the German economy, but their excuse is that Germany and others may have to pay more towards any bailout of Greece or Italy and therefore their rating as well as the ratings of more indebted countries also has to be altered.

In other words a butterfly flaps it's wings in Athens and the aftershock is felt all the way over in in Berlin. It is in this context that David Cameron's disastrous walk out at the recent Euro summit last week. simply adds more fuel to the pessimistic forecasters who will now say that without all 27 countries committed to a Euro rescue plan the markets will not be satisfied. the markets then of course say they are not satisfied as they make money out of each and every crisis and the whole merry go round continues. One question of course for David Cameron and the UK is that if we are not going to be there to help back up the Euro in its hour of need then who will come to our aid if there is a run on the pound? also as most of our import and export markets are within the Eurozone then what happens to the British Economy if the Euro goes belly up?

My old comrade Dennis Skinner was right to call Cameron a plonker in the Commons last Wednesday but you have to wonder how foolish the PM must have felt having issued such a ridiculous ultimatum to the other 26 countries. I imagine a David Cameron stood at the door of the meeting room saying "Give me what I want or I will walk" "Au Revoir" and "Aud Weidershen" came the reply "and shut the door as you leave" This followed by "Call me Dave" walking very slowly down the corridor shouting "I mean it, I won't be back" to sounds of cheers coming from behind the now closed door. I imagine he was even asking the airline staff in the departure lounge whether or not anyone had phoned to call him back.

Whatever the truth about those fateful non negotiations, we have now as a country have put the Euro even more at risk, and as a consequence potentially damaged not just the latest Euro rescue plan but also massively weakened our position with our biggest trading partners.

And that's enough bad news for one day and where I will leave it for now, but I do hope this short series has informed and assisted people to get their heads around the core issues surrounding the world recession and also where the UK sits.

I also hope the graphs and infographics have helped, they are all up to date and where possible I have provided the source in order that you can check for yourself the data, but the most frequent comment I hear from people is that they just can't get their heads around the figures and the size of say a billion pounds or how one debt compares with another, so I have saved you my final infographic to give you a comparative view.

The billion pound o gram was produced back in 2009 by the guardian after the banking crisis had first hit in the year before. The deficit between what we earned and spent was £175bn, but how does that compare with say how much we spend a year on trident or the cost of Local Government across the UK well below you have the answer in scale. So now you know that political manipulation by the current government in reducing Local Government spending by a few % here and there is but a drop in the ocean when compared with the cost of bailing out the banks which caused the crisis in the first place. More on the billion pound o gram can be found here http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/nov/27/billion-pound-gram-inormation-beautiful#_

 

ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID (part two) THE MICAWBER PRINCIPLE

When I arrived at Kings Bench Prison Mr. Micawber was waiting for me within the gate, and we went up to his room (top story but one), and he cried very much. He solemnly conjured me, I remember, to take warning by his fate; and to observe the other piece of advice he had given, "Copperfield" said Mr. Micawber,

"You will remember, annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds nought and six, result misery. The blossom is blighted, the leaf is withered, the god of day goes down upon the dreary scene, and — and in short you are for ever floored. As I am!" 

After which he borrowed a shilling of me for porter, gave me a written order on Mrs. Micawber for the amount, and put away his pocket-handkerchief, and cheered up.

Mr Micawber's good advice to David Copperfield is as sound a financial principle as you will ever find, you see economics is not difficult at all, it has always been about ensuring you never spend more than you earn, or if you do them only borrow what you can afford to pay back from within your earnings. And so it was that the last Labour government on a pretty good record of previous prudence found itself logging on to the equivalent of a multi national wonga.com to ensure it could pay its way after spending a fortune bailing out the banks in 2008. Below we take the Micawber principle a step further and align it to the UK economy, the graphs alone make interesting viewing and if you want to look in more detail just click them and they will enlarge, just like the countrys debt!

Like any household, UK PLC has an annual income and an annual expenditure budget, it is only the figures that get bigger, so what does (or did!) the country earn in a year? What does it spend? And where does the money come from and go to? If we look at the years running from 2002 up to the 2008 Banking crisis and we will see that the total income and expenditure of the UK government was pretty much in balance Our income from 2002 (roughly £430bn) to 2007 (£544bn) was rising steadily this of course is mostly made up of tax income together with money from any sales of government property or stock. Our planned expenditure each year was planned on the expected income the same as you and me would set up our direct debits and plans based on our expected monthly pay checks. Sometimes expenditure was slightly ahead of income and sometimes the other way around but it was manageable. The chart left shows income and expenditure per capita (which means per person) in the UK as you can see the amount they earned from each of us was rising year on year and in 2007 we were paying out about £8300 each to the government and recieving about £8,800 back in service, but then in 2008 it all went Pete Tong


In fact the data is remarkable: from 2002 to 2008 the difference between income and expenditure over the whole period was just £6bn – or 0.2% of total income for the six year period. In three years prior to 2002 we even had a surplus and was able to pay back on our debt bill. During that period the total we owed in long term borrowing (the equivalent of the household mortgage or outstanding loans and credit) hardly moved and stayed around the £500bn mark this was the equivalent of just one years income, in other words its like the average couple both working and jointly earning £40,000 a year only owing £40,000 on their mortgage and credit cards, it was manageable.

As a result here was little or no borrowing problem. Nor despite the politicians claims was there excessive spending – it was funded on a "living within your means" Micawber principle. Until 2008 that is when it is not spending that is excessive, but the fact that income falls off a cliff and we spend a fortune on bailing out the banks, and that is where our problems started. Government Income though should not be confused with GDP (Gross Domestic Profit) GDP refers to the total market value of all goods and services produced by a country each year, and is usually about 3 times what the government actually earns. I prefer to stick to the real income but GDP is important in economics as borrowing is always measured by the banks as a % of a country's GDP to see if they can afford to borrow any more, just after the second world war when Britain borrowed to rebuild our borrowing as a % of our GDP was a massive 240% of our GDP (2 and a half times what we all earned) in fact in the early to mid1800's it was even higher (more wars to fund) but from the 1970's onward it was at almost record lows before the crash in 2008 the % was around the 40% mark but now it is rising ever closer to the 100% levels last seen in the early 1960's.


So lets look at the nations debt and borrowing year on year from 2008. In 2008 we owed £525bn in 2009 we borrowed a further £91bn and now owed £612bn in total, in 2010 when the coalition came to power we borrowed a further £143bn and owed £759bn and this year 2011 we are looking to borrow a further £150bn to bring the total to £909bn in fact because the new government has stifled growth and the benefit bill has increased to pay to keep people on the dole the treasury estimate that the debt will rise to £1046bn in 2012 £1164bn in 2013, £1251bn in 2014 and reach a whopping £1314bn in 2015. The Tory/Lib Dem coalition have now accepted that they will have to borrow more than even the last Labour Government had planned to borrow (an extra £40bn) during the same period.

To explode another myth over which government (the last or this one) is spending more in government spending in 2009 was £621bn in 2010 it was £660bn this year 2011 it is planned to be £683bn and next year 2012 we are planning to spend £760bn

IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE WE CANNOT GO ON SPENDING AND BORROWING UNLESS WE ARE EARNING ! AND WITH RECORD NUMBERS ON THE DOLE AND INCOME TAX FALLING THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT ARE MAKING MATTERS WORSE NOT BETTER

Lets look at what we have been spending and plan to spend on the welfare state in order to keep public sector workers on the dole. In 2009 the welfare budget was £94.47bn in election year 2010 it was £106.69bn this year it is £109.48bn and next year 2012 £110bn. That's £16bn a year more than the last government was spending on those who are inactive. In addition every worker we put on the dole reduces the income tax income and shrinks the high street spend. The total income tax received by the treasury has shrunk from £152bn in 2009 to just £140bn now, another £12bn deficit to be paid for, meaning that so far the bill for Cameron and Clegg's cuts programme just on increased Welfare and lost income tax revenue is £28bn a year. Pension payments which are also affected by the lack of donations to the NI budget are up a further £20bn a year pushing the deficit ever higher and growth is non existent and we are paying out more in benefits and borrowing more and more each year to fill the gap left by reduced income tax receipts and higher debt charges.

So going by the rules of the Micawber principle that we are earning less than we are spending of course there is a need to cut expenditure, but should we be reducing our income at the same time by working less? The only way to close the gap is to increase not decrease our income and encourage growth. Why are we sacking public workers who earn little and provide vital services when it pays us to keep them working and spending? Why pay out to a household £30,000 a year in unemployment and housing benefit when you can put the same household to work doing something useful for the same money and increase the income tax income of the country and encourage spending in the economy? as the chart above shows we are as a country spend ever more on keeping people inactive and as a result can not afford the extra cost of education and healthcare without more income tax coming in and less welfare payments having to be paid out.

As well as these short briefings being delivered in plain English I also believe the truth is always better served in small bite size chunks, and thats enough figures for one day so here ends part two of our short series. In part 3 we look at how other countries are faring during the world economic crisis, but as you can see from this chart on the left it's not a pretty picture, for anyone and we will also look what the euro has to do with us and whether or not Britain thanks to David Cameron's weak negotiation skills can really stand alone during what is a deepening worldwide recession.

"IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID"

Why are we never really told in language that we can all understand what is really happening with the worlds economy?

Is it simply a case of treating us like mushrooms, constantly left in the dark and fed on manure in the hope that we will not ask too many awkward questions?

Recently I have been asked by a number of people (usually over a drink) to explain to them what is really happening to us all, and so I decided to commit it to print for others to take in and question, I would appreciate it your views.

THE STATE OF THE UK ECONOMY IN PLAIN ENGLISH (PART 1)

Background:

First of all to understand the mess we are all in now, and how bad things really are, we need to understand how we got into the mess, and also who was responsible for us getting us in the mess in the first place. Basically during the 1990's, and into the early 2000's Banks across the Western world particularly in the USA but also in part in Britain started to relax the rules on lending money to house buyers who were encouraged to take out bigger and bigger loans. In more responsible times people looking to buy homes were usually advised to borrow no more than three and a half times their total single/joint annual income, but all of a sudden banks were giving mortgages out like confetti, in the USA few checks were taken on whether or not people were able to afford to pay back the loans and even benefit (Welfare) claimants were being given mortgages despite their income being far lower than the repayments!

The Banks then sold that debt (they would package 100's of mortgage loans into one bigger debt) onto bigger financial institutions to try to reduce the risk to their own bank. And then the bubble burst as the financial institutions who now were left holding the risk suddenly found out that the people living in the homes couldn't afford to pay back the mortgages and as a result repossessions rocketed. As a consequence some of the Banks and the super banks went bust and no one had any money to lend out to anyone. This of course had a massive impact on other businesses who now couldn't borrow from the banks to either expand or even cover short term cash flow problems, so the economy started to slow down, people were laid off, who then couldn't pay the mortgage and the whole cycle went around and around. Meanwhile the value of peoples properties were also falling meaning people owed far more than they could ever sell their homes for, but even if they could afford to sell them potential purchasers also couldn't anymore get a loan from the banks. During the boom banks would lend couples 100% of the cost of the house and even more on top in some cases, but now the banks wanted deposits and restricted total loans down to 70% to 90%. First time buyers couldn't even afford the deposits and the housing market stalled.

The crazy thing here though thing is that the big financial institutions were so tied into the world economy, that they knew that they could take such risks with other peoples money and homes in the faith that the governments will come to the rescue with billions and billions of pounds in order to avoid financial meltdown within the stock markets. These people are still flying around in their private jets  and driving Bentley's whilst many who now live on the edge through in some cases bad decisions but others through  necessity whilst the banks continue their casino style gambling on the worlds banking roulette table. Traders even glout on the TV as to how wonderful the reccesion is and how every new collapse brings them more opportunities to make money.

The Labour Government:

Despite both the Tory and Lib Dem parties repeating over and over again like a mantra since the election in 2010 that it is all the Labour Party's fault, The Labour Government at the time  were not responsible for the meltdown, the reasons for that are outlined above however they cannot in any way be seen as just innocent bystanders in this mess.

They failed to implement any guidance to or legislation on banks restricting the amount of lending to avoid bad debts. They also let the finance institutions act exactly how they wanted without any meaningful intervention. The former Chancellor, Gordon Brown and to be Prime Minister at the time took his eye off of the ball and stood aside as the sub prime mortgage debts were being resold as good business.

Having given the Bank of England almost total independence he had no room to manoeuvre even if he wanted to, that coupled with a desire to keep his new job meant the country just drifted into more borrowing and less action.

The government also had left social housing projects solely within the private sector which would never fill the demand of such housing. A boost in public sector house building at the time in my mind might just have saved the day, but the lack of supply fuelled house price inflation to ridiculous levels.

Joe Public:

The other player in this sorry affair was the public at large who had become obsessive about house ownership, home improvement, buying things we didn't need and whacking everything on the plastic, as a result personal debt spiralled.

The feel good factor from the pre 1998 prosperity made a lot of people completely forget the self restraint of managing their debts sensibly. A must have, will have it now society, not even embarrassed by taking on extra debt they cannot afford. Now we are all paying the price. Housing costs had also rocketed and now took up more and more of the monthly salary as a % of income. We were all trapped in the credit card debt zone and unprotected against the ill wind that was blowing.

In part two (to follow very soon) we take a look at the Country's income and expenditure over recent years and try to make sense of the economy from a  Mr Micawber (Charles Dickens) point of view

 "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."

in order to get our head around just what the country is earning, what we are spending and how we close the gap.

THIS IS NOT LIKE IRAQ! IT'S FAR MORE DEVIOUS

Did I dream the whole economic deficit episode? Were we not so broke last week that our County Council were sacking lollipop wardens and turning all the lights off at midnight? Did I imagine the government making newly trained pilots redundant and scrapping orders for new jets to sit on now plane less aircraft carriers?

I must have done because now all three main political party's are falling over themselves to sound out the War Clarion as Britain engages in yet another costly campaign in the desert and pretends to us all again that it has nothing to do with OIL

How stupid do they really think we are? and having armed and sucked up to Gaddafi for so long are we now expected to just forget the huge part we played, right up to the release of the Lockerbie Bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi in protecting his reign?

And is a civilian life taken in Yemen or Bahrain by their government forces worth less than the life of a Libyan citizen?

These are all questions we must all ask ourselves and answer before we accept any moral justification for Britain involving itself in yet another Middle East meltdown. Why o why a nation like ours supposedly bankrupt wants to jump in both feet first is any ones guess.

Gaddafi is not liked in the West and few from any side would mourn his passing but Libya is a country divided The North and West in favour of Gaddifis reign continuing under him and his son Saif and the East equally determined to overthrow the state. Therefore the UN resolution to enforce a no fly zone and to prevent attacks on civilians was just in its formation and supported by the Arab League with its votes because it made sense.

But is there anyone out there still willing to believe the British or French military when they say they are simply endorsing the UN resolution? Shots of a Libyan jet being brought down on Saturday morning were used as an example of Libyan government aggression against the rebels. Then just a few hours later when it was no longer possible to deny that the fighter jet actually belonged to the rebels and was being used against government forces the BBC changed its tune but not composer by describing its bringing down as still an act of Libyan Government aggression but this time by ground to air troops against a rebel plane!

It seems now as if the civilian rebels have tanks and planes! This has all the hallmarks of a bloody civil war with little signs of an early victor.

This conflict for the West is about Regime change. pure and simple, Gaddafi has had his day and they now need to dispose of him and interfere in the election of tommorrow puppet to the West, and the realisation today (Monday 21st March 2011) that voices in the Arab League are questioning the intent and actions of those carrying out the UN resolution paint a dark picture for the west's involvement from here on in. Already the end game is uncertain, the planning? non existent and the questions as to compliance with the UN resoltion already being questioned by the Arab League, India and others. Call me old fashioned but shouldn't we set the plan for all to see and have clear objectives laid out and decided upon before we start shooting people? Shouldn't we ensure that those plans accord with international law before we go messing around in the internal conflict of another sovereign state

I am not a pacifist. I don't like war, who does? I voted against the Iraq war in the Commons because the case was not proven and I equally supported the action on Serbia/Croatia because it was and it was obvious to anyone that only force alone would stop an humanitarian crisis from continuing, but who are our current political leaders kidding when they try and tell us that civilians dying at the hands of British supplied arms in Yemen and Bahrain are less deserving than civilians dying at the end of a British supplied gun in Libya.

But the real nasty taste left in my mouth from all the weekend news was the race by Clegg and Milliband to jump aboard any passing war horse. we are fully behind the Prime Minister and his actions they said. Well did they ask their respective memberships? of course not and it sums up all that is wrong with British Politics today. Around the Country Labour and Lib Dem candidates will be knocking on doors before the local election polls trying to defend the stances of their respective parties which they themselves had no say in formulating. as we speak a vote in the Commons will be conducted with a Free Vote (if you believe that then you really are gullible) to decide on whether or not we undertake Military action which has already begun!

Over in Palestine there will be continued confusion as to why only some UN resolutions are acted on by the West whilst others are ignored for years and years and years. And in Yemen and Bahrain families will be burying their loved ones with no hope of international support or intervention simply because their OIL flows are either not significant or they flow in a different direction!

Forced regime change in Libya? NOT IN MY NAME. Selective action to cover up the self interest of the West? NOT IN MY NAME. A Party leader telling me how to think and who to support? NOT HERE

Freedoms inner kingdom remains untouched by exterior attacks

Followers of the "FREE THE CASTLE WARD 2" story http://tonyclarkeindependent.blogspot.com/2009/07/labour-tough-on-crime-tough-on-causes.html will be delighted to hear that the continued free liberty of Alderman Dickie and Cllr Clarke has now been confirmed by the powers that be.

News reaches me from Northamptonshire Police that after careful Consideration by the Crown Prosecution Service in York that the CPS has decided that it is not in the public interest to prosecute us for forgetting to put our usual imprint on one leaflet during this years County Council Elections

As such they will be taking "no further action" in this matter, and my fingerprints are to be destroyed (bit pointless really as they hold my DNA with my blessing from the 4 years I served as a Special Constable)

As I have said previously I bear no grudge to the Police on this matter they were simply doing their job, but I still feel very aggrieved at the waste of the Police service and CPS 's time and money having to process a complaint which was never going anywhere and was instigated by the Labour Party as what can only be seen as an act of spitefulness and childish revenge against us for having the audacity to be elected by a sizeable majority.

But from what seems to be happening within Northampton South Constituency Labour Party at the moment it seems the inquisition has now moved onwards or more so inwards.

So with our Liberty assured will myself and John be now seeking revenge?

Not a hope.

Sacha Guity once infamously said of revenge:

"When a man steals your wife, there is no better revenge than to let him keep her

And the way myself and John feel about what is being done to the Party that we gave between us over 65 years of loyal service to is that we can find no happiness in revenge or by seeking to get back at those responsible, but to them we would simply say:

"When cowards and traitors steal your Party, there is no better revenge than to let them keep it"

Meanwhile we will now celebrate our assured freedom over a glass or two of something suitable and we would like to thank each and every one of you for you messages of support and offers to bail us out or spring us from the pokey.

Cheers - and God Bless You All

Shooting yourself in both feet

Extraordinary news reaches me that Northampton South Constituency Labour Party has been suspended, Lock Stock and Smoking Barrel.

In addition four of their most loyal members Geoff Howes, Anjona Roy, Kathy Smith and Alan Scott are under further investigation.

So what have they done? Called for a return of Clause 4? or for total Renationalisation of the Public Utilities and Coal Mines?

Maybe they have upset the next door neighbour Sally Porter? or embezzled party funds to spend on a Vodka Frenzy?

But it seems it is none of the above, There crime is that they simply tried to win an election.

When Geoff Howes stood in the Borough Council By Election in Duston earlier this year he phoned me and asked me if I would give him an endorsement for his leaflet. He also asked fellow Independent "Fitzy" from Northampton's Market and the late John Gardner BEM for similar endorsements.

I was happy to oblige. Despite my expulsion from the Party and the way they have treated me, individuals within the Party remain my friends. Geoff was a very good Councillor, he is a very able man, and would run rings around a large number of the current incumbents at the Guildhall.

The endorsement simply said that the Council could well do with people of Geoffs calibre, and who could argue with that at present. Fitzy and John Gardner god rest his soul also gave endorsements. All three were published in an election leaflet at the time. I sought nothing from the endorsement other than helping a decent man get elected despite the way I was personally treated by the Labour Party. Geoff, his agent Anjona and Kathy Smith who printed the document sought nothing other than getting their candidate elected. What possible Machiavellian intent was detected by the Labour Party higher offices reveals more about their own insecurity than it does the intentions of those accused. If I wanted to put a leaflet together in Duston I could do so, without using it to support a Labour Party candidate!

Anyhow it seems the national party were not happy, what were local members thinking about, getting endorsements from people who were not party members? Heavens above, its never been done before has it? Alan Scott I hear is up on a different charge of swearing at a party meeting. Well there for the grace of god go half of the f*cking cabinet!.

But yes in fact getting external endorsements has been done before, all the time, and when I was in the party, I was told an endorsement from outside is worth a hundred from a Party member.

But they couldn't possibly have a quote from Tony Clarke on their leaflet could they, so the very slow wheels of Labour Party injustice churned ever onwards towards the inevitable suspension of the whole party, and since the suspension of individual members.

Very helpful with a general election around the corner I here you say. Their Parliamentary Candidate Clyde Loakes (remember him, still twittering away telling us of his leafleting in Northampton at the same time he was at meetings in London, and they say men can't multi task!) seems to be fully supportive of the NEC's actions and happy that at a time that the membership should be preparing for battle that they are spending all their time and energy fighting each other. The national party will now pretend there are "other reasons" for their actions and try to make themselves look conscientious by inventing non existant reasons for their concerns, but it wont wash with anyone in Northampton who knows what is going on.

And of course the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats will be beside themselves with glee

I though am very saddened, I hold no torch now for the modern day Labour Party, and as I have said on numerous occasions the top down, London controlled administration of all three of the main party's make it impossible for local democracy to remain meaningful, but the thought of good people being trodden down by cowards and traitors for simply trying their best to get local representatives elected makes me very angry.

If the Labour Party are unable to challenge the Tories and Liberal Democrats next May at a general election then I am more than prepared to fill that void and in doing so stand up for decent independently minded centre left voters across Northampton, but I can't help but think that any chance of the open wounds within Northampton Labour Party ever being healed will now have to wait until Clyde Loakes and Sally Keeble are back home in London as defeated candidates, both victims of their own stupidity and inability to see and respect loyalty when it is staring them straight in the face.

Scrutiny, It does what it says on the tin.

I woke up this morning with a sharp stabbing pain in my side. No doubt somewhere deep in Northampton Lib Dem HQ a loyal yellow belly peon was busy sticking pins in their Tony Clarke effigy as punishment for my involvement last night in co-authoring a call-in of the Local Lib Dems plans to "Market Test" (privatise) all of the main public services in Northampton, and in doing so deliver them in partnership with Daventry District Council.

I was very grateful to Labours Joy Capstick in sponsoring our joint request for a call in and I felt she performed extreemly well last night and she will have gained herself a lot of deserved credit both in the eyes of council and also those she serves in her ward and those still loyal to Labours traditional values and roots.

Our shared concerns (which were upheld) were that the administration had been less than truthful over their intentions and contrary to all their warm words about "only investigating the options" and "the need to test best value" and our preparations for the call in exposed further their plans for what they really are.

Backbench Councillors (including many Lib Dems) were annoyed and angered to be told by the press and by myself at full council on June 29th of the plans, as up to that point their had been no discussion or now inkling of what the executive had planned for the Council. The item didn't appear on the Councils Forward Plan until June 30th and then only appeared as a 'Non Key' Decision.

The cabinet decision on the 8th July was accompanied by soothing assurances that nothing was set in stone and that the "in house team" would also have the time and the right to bid. So imagine the surprise on some faces last night when I was able to tell them that the whole process started way back in April 2009, and that the tender document had already been written, printed and advertised in the EOJU (European Journal) on the 9th of July. And that a project manager was already in post, and that the contract for all services was proposed for a period of 14 years ( 7 + 7 by agreed renewal) and that despite not being told of their involvement that Northamptonshire County Council were also part of the partnership.

Imagine the thoughts running through the head of the Lib Dem Portfolio Holder for the services to be tended when I reminded the Committee that she had told Council only last Monday that no advert had been placed and that no meetings with other councils on the tender had taken place, and yet I produced a copy of the advert placed on the 9th July and minutes from the meeting with other councils agreeing the partnership and announcing the appointment of the project manager?

And why they even want to go down this road god alone knows, a cursory glance at refuse collection costs (as but one example) shows that Northampton Borough Council has the second lowest per household cost for refuse collection in the East Midlands at £46, against a national average of £56 when Daventry District Council (our chosen partner) has the highest cost in the East Midlands at £84 !

The success of the call in (on the grounds that the leader says it was wrongly designated as a Key Decision and should have been a non key decision!) now means that this report must be revisited at the next Cabinet meeting in August andthat will give us another opportunity to further expose the folly of these plans and the underhanded deceit that has dogged this project to date.

The administration will say we were simply opposing for opposition sakes and risking the financial Security of the Council.

I say that we were simply doing our duty, I don't want all our services contracted out, and then delivered in tandem with a rural council until 2023 without this Council or those which follow in 2011, 2015 and 2021 being able to reverse the decision.

I don't want Councillors of any party including the administration left in the dark as to the Councils true intention, and I don't want Northampton Borough Council reduced to the status of the largest Parish Council in England on the back of partnership arrangements with surrounding Councils pushing us nearer and nearer to a Unitary County Council run by the Northamptonshire Squirocracy.

And do you know what? I think a large number of the Lib Dem group agree with me, and I also believe that in 6 months time even the Cabinet members will see that this call in saved them from their own folly rather than simply exposing them to cold truth as to what has gone on in their name and without their full knowledge and consent.

So we live to fight again. We have more revelations to come, more call ins to write, and more opportunity for Councillors of all party's to do what they were elected to do, take decisions based on all the information being available to them in order to guide that decision, not sold a line and then forced to go along with the decision out of blind party loyalty.

The other positive outcome from last nights meeting was that the opposition party's acted as one in defence of the common good, long may it continue.

We all want what is best for the Council, and the people we were elected to serve, but we do not expect the decisions to be taken for us, or on our behalf by officers working behind the scenes and committing expenditure and enacting decisions before the authority has been given to them through the votes and decisions of 'all' the elected members.

All Councillors of all Party's should be able to agree to that.

Labour, Tough on Crime, Soft in the Head.

OK its a fair cop, we will both come quietly, we have no choice, they have us bang to rights and as we speak black arrows are being sewn on two over sized grey prison suits and Mrs Clarke and Mrs Dickie are busy baking cakes shaped like files (or files shaped like cakes?)

So heinous is the crime that we have committed that both of us are at this very moment considering our respective positions.

John, is concerned as to whether or not he will ever be able to show his face again in St Peter's Church where as the only atheist church warden in Britain he ably assists in the organising of small arts programmes for the masses.

I, likewise feel it only fair to inform my fellow members of the Woody Guthrie appreciation Society that I may have to relinquish my membership to save them any future embarrassment.

My foes will no doubt take great delight in hearing that last week I was asked to present myself at Campbell Square Police Station, where in the hands of two of the constabulary's finest Senior Fraud Detective Officers I was questioned for an hour and 15 minutes and then duly processed, photographed and fingerprinted ready for Justice to have its wicked way with me.

Thankfully, I was then released, a free man once again, to now await the decision of the Crown Prosecution Service in York who will no doubt ponder over the severity of my offence and whether or not the public will be best served by a trial and a possible financial punishment or our incarceration.

So what was our crime? what evil acts did myself and JD inflict on the good people of Castle Ward.

"WE FORGOT TO PUT AN IMPRINT ON A LETTER SENT OUT IN THE COUNTY COUNCIL ELECTIONS"

There, I have said it, admitted my guilt. For those who think I have gone mad, or that the police have equally lost their marbles, I will explain all. I was cautioned under section 110 of the Representation of the People Act, which makes it an offence to send out unsolicited mail during an election which may seek to hide the identity of the sender and/or defame another candidate.

All of our leaflets (bar this one) carried the imprint:

'Printed by NIV Press 30 Ethel Street, Northampton and Published/Promoted by John Dickie, 2 Western View, Northampton'

The offending leaflet (which was in fact a letter) was sent to 1200 postal voters within the ward asking them for their support, it carried my name, home address, phone number, email, website, and a photo and my personal signature (we were hardly trying to hide my identity) and it did not mention the other candidates. Our other five items of election material were all properly imprinted, and on this occasion there was simply an error of omission on our part, with clearly no ulterior motive or intent.

So surely the Returning Officer, the Police and the Crown Prosecution Service are all wasting time and your money chasing myself and John around the town and preparing us for our possible time in pokey?

Not so. You see they had no choice, once a complaint had been made and an offence reported they were duty bound to follow it up.

Last Year in the 2008 elections across the UK 26 such offences were processed. 25 resulted in no further action and the one that proceeded to court was part of a much broader breach of the act where offence had been caused to other candidates.

So step forward those brave souls and vigilantes responsible for bringing us to book, or if you prefer step forward those responsible for wasting Police and CPS time and money on frivolous complaints. We give praise to ..........

THE LABOUR PARTY

We know not whether the brave soldiers who grassed us up were from the Regional or Local Party, neither can we guess what their motive was? or what they hoped to gain from their endevour? but we are sure that you are feeling a lot safer in your beds in the knowledge that the peoples party is still willing to be tough on the criminal classes and ready and willing to pounce on the guilty.

In the meantime if I disappear from the blog scene for a while or you hear that I have gone on an unexpected enforced holiday can someone please set up a campaign to:

"FREE THE CASTLE WARD TWO"

As keeping myself and John in Pokey for a month or two will cost the taxpayer a fortune.

Localism is the key to cleaning up politics

Whenever I was asked as an MP if I would "do as I promised" or "Why should we trust you" I used to honestly answer by saying "I won't be an MP for ever you know, and when I am not I will still have to live in the same street, drink in the same pubs, eat in the same restaurants, Northampton is my home and if I don't keep my integrity and good name then I will have lost a damn sight more than a seat in Parliament"

When I was first elected to the Commons in 1997 it was of course as part of a massive Labour landslide and hidden amongst the celebration and false hope was a little written about added extra, that in winning well and going way beyond the '100 Key Seats' needed for a majority in the Commons, the party had returned to Parliament a number of additional MP's who in their plans, were really not meant to have been there.

Joining me in Parliament were people like Phil Sawford in Kettering, Andy King in Rugby, Ivan Henderson in Harwich all local constituency based candidates who had done their apprenticeships working hard in their local communities and on their respective local councils.

The 100 Key seats on the other hand were stacked full of careerist and opportunists who would have traveled anywhere, and said anything to land a prize of a seat in Parliament. People who lived in one place represented another and saw their constituencies as places to visit rather than places to live and bring up their children.

So if you have a few moments to spare dig up a copy of Labours 100 from 97 including all the Blair's babes and match it against the morally bankrupt individuals who have disgraced parliament over recent weeks with indefensible claims for adaptations, building works, furniture, gardening and luxury goods for their second homes.

Surprise Surprise, the two lists are well matched.

It's not just the Labour Party though, the Tories and the Lib Dem's all have favoured lists of placed candidates parachuted into constituencies at their Party's behest. And in return they get pliant, obedient, voting fodder to do their bidding and sell their policy wares in the House and to the wider electorate.

Local candidates on the other hand are less likely to simply go along with the Party flow, more likely to stand up for what is right for their localities and their constituents, and are bad news for the whips. Mp's should represent their constituencies views in Parliament, not represent the views of their Parties within their constituencies.

So in essence we have the Parliament we deserve, stacked to the brim with individuals with little loyalty to the town's and cities they represent and whose priority in life is the advancement of themselves first and foremost and the needs of their constituencies are way down their list.

So when all the Parties are through with their Star Courts and Chambers, and they have culled their ranks of the greedy and corrupt, then they would do well to thinking about some form of proven local connection when choosing replacement candidates. We have had all women shortlists and secured positions on shortlists for black and minority ethnic candidates, so perhaps it's now time for system that concentrates the mind and the vote on people who truly represent their seats because they know the people who live there and want to improve their own own areas not just see it as the place where their fees office paid for property portfolio is based.

Add in a dash of Single Transferable Vote and a generous sprinkling of transparency and we might just have a recipe for real change.

In the meantime though I will steer clear of the lot of them, and the only way I see a lot of constituencies getting proper representation is through them electing Independent candidates into office as Local Government and at a National level.