on the Lib Dems, now the second party of Britain

In the latest ICM poll for tomorrow's Sunday Telegraph, the Lib Dems have moved into second place pushing Labour into third with the Tories ahead on 40%

Only 22% of respondents said they would vote Labour in a general election, with the Liberal Democrats receiving 25% in the same poll.

Surely this spells the end of Gordon Brown just days before the country goes to the polls in European Parliament elections? With Parliament back from recess tomorrow, the daggers are tonight being sharpened.

According to the Telegraph the last time Labour was in third place in any poll was in 1987.

In the same poll respondents were asked who they planned to vote for in the European Parliament elections this Thursday: 29% Conservative, 20% Lib Dem, 17% Labour and UKIP 10% dispelling somewhat the myth that UKIP were going to be the main benefactor on Thursday.

While it would be easy to dismiss Labour as a 20th Century project that has come to an end, I think I will wait to see what happens on Thursday, when the electorate decides, but these results are good news for Nick Clegg who has been working hard to get his message of reform out. Visit TakeBackPower.org

Click here to view related posts from the blogosphere with Sphere.com

on the 'modernisation' of the Conservative Party

In my last post, I suggested that David Cameron and The Telegraph were in cahoots over the entire expenses debacle.

I didn't realise until today how deep it possibly runs. Has Cameron used the whole expenses issue to complete one of his long running aims for when he becomes Prime Minister, the modernisation or some might argue, neutering of the Conservative Party.

Consider this, what is a party if it has no candidates who have a history of following that party's ideology? New Labour, a semi-vacuous grouping of people who serve at the pleasure of the person who got them there.

But that is obviously what Cameron wants, unquestioned power, almost Presidential? Well President's aren't usually that powerful, unless you throw in control of the legislature, which is what Cameron will have.

This is something quite popular in France, where a Presidential candidate may sometimes create a party for National Assembly elections to create a mandate for the President in the Assembly. This is illustrated by the "Union for the Presidential Majority" created to give Chirac a majority. Even the French were not so brazen and the party's title was quickly changed to Union for a Popular Movement, thus maintaining the same acronym.

Now while I am in no way suggesting David Cameron is Jacques Chirac (nor could he ever be as charismatic) he certainly seems to be quite keen to use this expenses issue to get rid of his old guard. Note how the main Tory MP's to be in the spotlight are all backbenchers, yet Jonathan Djanogly, Chris Grayling, Oliver Letwin, Michael Gove and Francis Maude et al. all still have their jobs and are all standing at the next election.

There is an interesting post over at Mark Reckons on the correlation of safe seats to being implicated in the 'scandal'. I'd be interested to see how many safe seats are Conservative over Labour, and how many of these safe Conservative seats will be  given the boot by David Cameron.

Maybe it's just my cynical nature, but be prepared for a mass exodus of the Thatcher old guard over the next few months as Conservative HQ 'instructs' local activists who to choose.

Also while we are on the subject of expenses, and I know I ranted in my last post about the whole thing being politicised, but hey-ho call me a hypocrite.

If Parliament is to avoid being turned from the mother of all parliaments into the eunuch of all parliaments, we need a proper overhaul of Westminster. That means a change in how we do business – family-friendly hours, a review of MPs' expenses, and reform to our over- generous pensions, for starters.

- Nick Clegg, November 2007

Click here to view related posts from the blogosphere with Sphere.com

on David Cameron - leading on expenses

So David Cameron has finally found a policy position to lead on. Unfortunately it is only on expenses, something important to the public only in an outraged sense rather than a "oh my this caused the credit crunch" sense.

Is this what we should expect from the next Conservative government? An elbow jerk Daily Mail-esque reaction? An outragegasm whenever something goes wrong?

Why wont the Conservatives back the Independent Commission on MP's expenses? Theresa May refused to state that they would seeming to suggest they would take the results on a case by case basis.

Me thinks they have something to hide, the whole thing is so contrived, maybe the Telegraph briefed Cameron on the leaks, he got everyone to pay some money back, he took 'action' and then the following day the Torygraph runs a story on 'a courageous David Cameron' showing how to lead.

He can show us how to lead by stop playing politics with what is essentially a non-political issue.

Stephen Fry said it best.

Click here to view related posts from the blogosphere with Sphere.com

on reform of MP's expenses

I'm sure the whole house will join with me, in endorsing the changes to the members allowances and expenses policy outlined below.

The Houses of Parliament will buy sufficient housing for all MP's outside greater London, in the central London area.

At the start of each Parliament following a general election, all MP's who wish to do so may apply for a Houses of Parliament property.

Properties will then be assigned on a need by need basis and will continue to be owned by the Houses of Parliament.

No rent will be paid by the MP.

Any maintenance and upkeep costs will be paid for by the Houses of Parliament and any contracts entered into by the MP with other companies will be paid for by the MP (telephone, internet, gas, electricity etc.)

At the end of a Parliament or if the occupant of a property is no longer an MP that person will have one month to vacate the property.

Expenses may only be claimed for out of pocket costs incurred by an MP. These include subsistence, travel and hotel costs where the MP is undertaking business related to his or her position and in the case of hotels, where no ordinary means of travel is available to return to either a constituency or London home.

No expenses will be payable for any costs incurred to a constituency home.

Changes to the expenses policy of the House can only be made following the endorsement of such changes by the electorate by way of a party manifesto

Click here to view related posts from the blogosphere with Sphere.com