Posts Tagged ‘Inverness’

George Osborne has laid out some good starting points for determining and kick starting the road to economic recovery. His full lecture can be read in full at the end of this article and shows how detailed the shadow chancellor and his vision of the future is. As well as being a Parliamentary Candidate I am also a businessman so this makes vital reading for all business people.

Jim Ferguson

George Osborne delivers the annual Mais lecture

Wednesday, February 24 2010

Delivering the annual Mais lecture, Shadow Chancellor George Osborne set out the Conservative vision for a new economic model.

He argued that the debt-fuelled model of growth that the Government pursued over the last decade was fundamentally unsustainable, and that we need to move from an economy built on debt to an economy where we save and invest for the future. We have to deal with our debts to get the economy back on its feet.

He pointed to research which shows that the root cause of the economic crisis was an explosion of private sector debt, and that the biggest risk to the recovery is an explosion of public sector debt. High levels of public sector debt risk undermining growth.

He argued that the existing policy framework failed to prevent the crisis, is unable to deal with the current weakness of the economy, and won’t be able to stop it happening again. He set out a new economic model for growth based on saving and investment, and a new policy framework that can ensure that private and public debt are sustainable in the future, including:

· A new system of financial regulation, with the Bank of England back in charge of controlling the overall level of debt in the economy.

· A new fiscal policy framework, with an independent Office for Budget Responsibility to ensure that public debt is sustainable.

· A supply side revolution that releases the pent up enterprise and wealth creation of our country, encourages a nation of savers, and addresses long term structural weaknesses like poor education and a welfare system that traps people in workless poverty.

He also explained why the Government’s argument that we can afford to wait until 2011 before dealing with the deficit is complacent and puts the recovery at risk, and explained why we need to start dealing with the deficit in 2010:

· Confidence: a lack of confidence in the sustainability of the public finances is already undermining the recovery.

· The realities of markets: those who argue we should ignore financial markets are siren voices. If Britain loses the confidence of international markets the result would be emergency cuts that would indeed be swingeing and savage.

· The realities of Government: real public sector reform takes time so starting early on the deficit creates space for more targeted cuts that protect the poorest and front line services.

For the first time he also set out in detail how the budget process would work following the election in the event of a Conservative victory:

· Phase One: the independent Office for Budget Responsibility will set out an independent audit of the nation’s finances, based on independent growth forecasts. Only then will anyone know the true scale of the fiscal challenge that faces whoever forms the next government.

· Phase Two: an emergency budget within 50 days will set out the overall fiscal path and spending totals that we will stick to over the years ahead, as well as some of the cross-cutting measures on pay, the cost of Whitehall, the review of the pension age, and the largest public sector pensions, that will help to put our public finances on a sustainable footing. It will take targeted steps to reduce some budgets in-year in order to build credibility and make a start on reducing the deficit. Crucially, the first Budget will also contain measures to boost enterprise, encourage new jobs and show that Britain is open for business.

· Phase Three: over the Summer we will work flat out to conduct the detailed departmental Spending Review for the years after 2011 that the current government has simply refused to carry out, and publish that results of that review in the Autumn.

Read George’s Mais lecture in full

Tweet this!

Gordon Brown has denied ordering any briefing against his chancellor, after Alistair Darling said “the forces of hell” had been unleashed against him.

Mr Darling said No 10 and the Tories had given him “a weekend you could have done without” after he had forecast the worst recession for 60 years, in 2008.

But Mr Darling rejected suggestions he had been bullied by the prime minister.

And Mr Brown told GMTV he “would never instruct anybody to do anything other than support my chancellor”.

The PM, who again denied allegations of bullying, said he and Mr Darling and their families had been friends for 20 years and had “huge mutual respect”.

Mr Brown was speaking on Wednesday morning after Mr Darling’s comments in a Sky News interview on Tuesday evening.

A Conservative spokesman said: “The idea that Gordon Brown runs a happy and united team has been blown apart.

“This is amazing public confirmation from the prime minister’s own chancellor that he ordered his henchmen to brief against him.”

‘Still here’

In August 2008, Mr Darling caused a political uproar when he said economic conditions were “arguably the worst they’ve been in 60 years”.

I do not know why the briefers did what they did. One day maybe they will explain Alistair Darling

Following this, there were media reports that 10 Downing Street was unhappy with his analysis and his handling of the economy.

There were also suggestions Mr Darling might be reshuffled to make way for Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary and a close ally of Mr Brown.

Questioned by Sky News about the response to his comments, Mr Darling said that “the forces of hell were unleashed”.

And asked whether that had been orchestrated by 10 Downing Street, he said: “The Tories as well. It was a weekend you could have done without.

“I do not know why the briefers did what they did. One day maybe they will explain.

“What I do know is, unfortunately and it’s not a great source of pleasure, but what I said did turn out to be true.”

In an apparent reference to Mr Brown’s former spin doctor Damian McBride, the chancellor added: “Frankly, my best answer for them is, I’m still here, one of them is not.”

Mr McBride was forced to resign last year after a planned smear campaign against senior Conservatives emerged in leaked e-mails he had written.

‘Robust exchanges’

Asked about Mr Darling’s suggestions of a briefing campaign, the PM said: “I was never part of anything to do with this. Look, this was the most amazing time… and lots of things were happening in this time.

“But I would never instruct anybody to do anything other than support my chancellor, and I think Alistair will confirm that.”

Mr Darling rejected suggestions he had ever been bullied by Mr Brown, but said: “Of course, Gordon and I have some very robust exchanges.

“I can’t imagine any healthy relationship between a prime minister and a chancellor where they don’t have differences from time to time.”

He admitted there had been “some bad days” in his relationship with the prime minister but insisted there was more that united the two men than would “ever divide us”.

Mr Brown was also asked again whether he had bullied anyone: “No. I get angry sometimes, doesn’t everybody? I get impatient. I’m driven to do the things.

“Actually, we work in an open plan office, we’re a sort of family in Downing Street and like every family there’s issues that come from time to time, but we’ve got a great working environment and we get things done.”

Schools Secretary Ed Balls also told the BBC he did not “recognise this atmosphere” of alleged bullying at Number 10.

“Jeremy Heywood, who is the top civil servant, said the opposite was true – it was a friendly, caring, supportive environment. I think he is right,” Mr Balls said.

Mr Darling’s comments follow allegations in political journalist Andrew Rawnsley’s book that Mr McBride and Charlie Whelan, another Brown supporter, had been behind the briefing.

Both Mr McBride and Mr Whelan, a senior official with the Unite union, had their names put to the chancellor in the Sky News interview, but he did not refer to either directly.

I dont think there can be any doubt that Brown piled on the pressure to Darling when he came clean about the state of the economy. It seems that Brown the Bully and his past are indeed catching up with him and as they say the truth will be out.

If Brown was masterminding a campaign to undermine his own chancellor then what chance does the country have with such a divided and war torn Labour party savaging each other in such a bad tempered and aggressive way.

The sooner this discredited Labour Government is booted out of office the better.

Jim Ferguson

Tweet this!

Gordon Brown his said any anger is usually directed at himself

Labour has gone on the offensive over Gordon Brown’s temperament after an anti-bullying charity said it had been contacted by staff from his office.

The prime minister’s Parliamentary aide called for evidence of the calls from the National Bullying Helpline.

Charity boss Christine Pratt has said she spoke out in anger at government denials of staff mistreatment in No 10.

The Observer had reported that civil service head Sir Gus O’Donnell warned the PM about behaviour towards staff.

Labour MP Anne Snelgrove – who is the prime minister’s Parliamentary private secretary – said the charity “needs to demonstrate that these questions really have come from staff at Number 10″.

“Why is she [Ms Pratt] going public with this rather than taking it up privately if these phone calls were genuine?”

In ‘denial’

The charity’s chief executive told the BBC that its helpline had been called three or four times by Downing Street staff in the last three or four years.

Ms Pratt added: “Over recent months we have had several inquiries from staff within Gordon Brown’s office.

“Some have downloaded information; some have actually called our helpline directly and I have spoken to staff in his office.”

She said she would expect any employer in this situation not to “go into denial, but to look into it, to follow due process”.

Outright denial could “compound the stress of those who believe they are being bullied”, she said.

“We are not suggesting that Gordon Brown is a bully, what we are saying is staff in his office working directly with him have issues, and have concerns, and have contacted our helpline.”

What Labour had hoped would be a one-day story is getting wind in its sails BBC deputy political editor James Landale

Downing Street said it had never been contacted by the charity about the allegations, a No 10 spokesman adding that it had “rigorous, well established procedures” for “staff to address any concerns over inappropriate treatment or behaviour”.

“The civil service will continue to have a no tolerance policy on bullying,” the spokesman said.

Warning claim

Reports of Mr Brown’s alleged mistreatment of staff appeared in extracts from a book by the Observer’s chief political commentator Andrew Rawnsley.

The book includes details of incidents where it is alleged Mr Brown grabbed staff by the lapels, shoved them aside and shouted at them.

Downing Street says the reports are “malicious allegations” that are “without foundation”.

I have not seen any of that behaviour in all the time I have been at No 10 or an MP Labour MP Anne Snelgrove

Responding to the allegations, Business Secretary Lord Mandelson said: “I don’t think he so much bullies people as he is very demanding of people.”

Other members of the cabinet rallied to the prime minister’s defence, with Home Secretary Alan Johnson saying that in 17 years he had “never” heard Mr Brown raise his voice.

A Cabinet Office statement said: “It is completely untrue to say that the cabinet secretary ever gave the prime minister a verbal warning about his behaviour”.

Mr Rawnsley told the BBC his source for the story was “24 carat”.

‘Non-political’

BBC deputy political editor James Landale said Ms Pratt’s claims had “put paid” to Labour’s hopes that “allegations about Gordon Brown’s temper would fade once the Sunday papers were forgotten”.

“What Labour had hoped would be a one-day story is now getting wind in its sails and disrupting even further the party’s election plans.”

Mrs Snelgrove questioned why the National Bullying Helpline had “popped up out of the blue when all of this is happening around Gordon”.

NICK ROBINSON’S NEWSLOG The woman who told the BBC her National Bullying Helpline was called by three people who worked with the prime minister is now at the centre of a political storm Read Nick’s latest blog in full

She added: “Life is too short to work for someone who is a bully and I would not be working for Gordon if he was a bully.

“I have not seen any of that behaviour in all the time I have been at No 10 or an MP.”

Tory MP Ann Widdecombe is a patron of the charity, whose website also displays a statement of support from Conservative leader David Cameron.

Lord Mandelson’s Department for Business recommends the helpline to businesses.

The charity says it is non-political, and the BBC has found no evidence of any political involvement by Ms Pratt or the helpline.

Ms Widdecombe said it would be “quite a good idea” for Sir Gus to take “an informal look” at workplace conditions at No 10.

But she criticised Ms Pratt’s decision to go public, saying the helpline was supposed to be confidential.

Labour is starting to disintegrate and the Prime Minister is in denial. His shocking agressive past is now catching up with him and his latest attempts to persuade the public have failed. Being a strong leader is one thing. Being an aggressive bully is quite another and no one in high office can be allowed to treat people in such an appalling way.

Its time for Brown and his cabal of misfits to go once and for all. We dont need him and we dont want him.

Jim Ferguson

Tweet this!

There should be no doubt about the Falklands Islands

Thursday, February 18 2010

Reacting to recent events, Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague has said that “there should never be the slightest doubt where Britain stands on the Falkland Islands”.

He said that good relations with Argentina are “desirable and welcome”, but emphasised that the British Government should make it clear that the islands will remain British territory “for as long as the islanders wish it”.

“Sovereignty over the islands is therefore not up for negotiation”, Hague said, adding that the islanders have “every right” to develop the natural resources of their islands and surrounding waters.

“It should be made very clear that the wholly legitimate search for oil in the Falkland’s waters will not be affected by unwarranted threats or interference from Argentina. Additionally the British government should state clearly that no vessel operating within the territorial waters of the Falkland Islands will require any form of permit from any other country.”

“Increased British naval presence in the area would leave no doubt as to this position”, he added.

There can be little doubt that Argentina are at it again with serious provocation and an outragous attempt to interfere with British shipping around the Falklands Islands. I am certain that a Conservative Government will take no nonesense from Argentina but I am not so certain that Labour have the courage.

I would not expect the Prime Ditherer Brown to be up for much of a fight as he is too busy fighting his nearest and dearest in his own Cabinet let alone a hostile nation.

The islanders can expect full support and backing from us however and William Hague has made it abundantly clear what our position is.

Jim Ferguson

Tweet this!

More and more business people and economic experts are coming on board with the Conservatives to show their support for our economic plans to repair Labours recession. Sir Richard Branson is a welcome addition with his endorsement of our plans to repair the economy and reduce the Labour created debt that is plauging our nation in so many ways.

Jim Ferguson

Sir Richard Branson backs Conservative economic plans

Tweet this!

Its great to see Struan Stevenson MEP campaigning hard on behalf of Scottish interests in Europe in particular his robust defence of our farmers and business who produce such excellent locally grown produce. His comments on labelling are essential for consumers to know exactly what they are buying.

Jim Ferguson

First word …
Welcome to the February edition of my Brussels Briefing.This month, in addition to my involvement in the appointment process of the new European Commission, I have been keeping a close eye on the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy while striving to seek clarity on the issue of food labelling.

In these tough economic times local businesses and farmers need our support. Locally sourced produce is no longer a fashionable phrase, it now relates to the very survival of local shops and businesses.

In addition,  the people of Scotland recognise the quality of home-grown produce and want to buy food that is genuinely Scottish. For too long consumers have been duped by products that have been mislabelled or not labelled at all. It is about time that producers are given clear guidelines for labelling. I will continue to campaign to have existing legislation changed to reflect the choice and clarity that consumers expect.

Join up here to support my campaign and help protect Scotland’s local farmers and businesses.

Best wishes,

Struan Stevenson MEP

Tweet this!

I attended a meeting at the Inverness Town House regarding the debate of the Inverness by-pass. Some excellent comments were made by community councillors with some good discussion regarding the way forward.

Mary Scanlon MSP

Mary Scanlon Conservative MSP spoke particularly well and also made the point that despite LibDem MP Danny Alexander calling the meeting she had on many previous occasions petitioned the LibDem/Labour coalition in Hollyrood when they were in Government, all to no avail. Dave Thompson SNP MSP also highlighted some good points and I felt he contributed in a positive way. The fact that the LibDems have effectively done nothing for Inverness was something that had caused a great deal of frustration on this particular issue.

I also pointed out that these were devolved issues and asked Mr Alexander why as a Westminster MP he was getting directly involved in issues that did not involve him. I also asked him why he was waiting until the eve of a General Election to start to campaign on the Inverness by-pass and why he had not at any other time tried to speak up for the issues at any other point during his term of office.

I suggested that Danny Alexander was in fact using the Inverness by-pass as part of his political campaign to try and win popular support for his own personal election campaign in an attempt to get re-elected.

I asked Mr Alexander to answer these charges but not unexpectedly he refused to do so.

While a by-pass is important to the future development of Inverness it must be well thought out and take into consideration all opinions and feelings of the community that it will affect. The fact that Danny  Alexander has attempted to hijack a sensitive local issue needs to be viewed with a high degree of suspicion.

Danny talks a lot but he has totally failed to deliver on this and many other issues and only now tries to save his political skin by appearing to take an interest. Once the General Election is over, Danny Alexander whether successful or not will no doubt disapear into the void only to appear again when another election approaches.

This region needs real leadership and effective planning and not politicians who simply use issues to further their own attemps to cling on to office. I have no doubt that the majority of people attending were of the same opinion as me.

The time for real action has come and lets hope that it does move forward in a positive way with a cross party consensus on what needs to be done but the political grandstanding needs to be left out.

Jim Ferguson

Tweet this!

I found the following article to be of great interest and one that clearly shows how Labour have failed to achieve the best for the people of this country.

Every person should read this and in particular people who voted Labour the last time around. They need to understand the feckless mismanagement of our economy, health care, policing, military and education by this Labour Government and read the proof for themselves.

The only way forward for Britain is to oust this Labour Government and that can only be done when the majority of people across the UK wake up and realise just how far Britain has fallen and the rate at which it continues to fall.

Jim Ferguson

Labour’s Two Nations

Tweet this!

Gordon Brown’s death tax

Shadow Health Secretary Andrew Lansley says that ministers are secretly planning a “death tax” of up to £20,000 per head to pay for their plans for a National Care Service.

“Gordon Brown needs to come clean with the public and say how he will fund his new National Care Service”, Lansley said.

“Behind closed doors Ministers are secretly planning a death tax of up to £20,000 per head which would be levied on the estates of grieving families.”

Lansley added that even this death tax would not raise enough to pay for this new National Care Service, meaning that Labour are also planning to take away cash disability benefits from the elderly and cut money from the NHS. “It is another top-down, bureaucratic, costly plan from Labour for which every one of us would end up paying the price”, he said.

Philip Hammond, the Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury,  described the problem this death tax would cause: “When you die, a Labour Government would take £20,000 from what you leave to your children and family.  For those with the most modest savings Labour’s plans could leave them with nothing.”

In contrast, he said the Conservatives want to help people in old age so that they can “leave as much of their lifetime’s savings as possible to the next generation”.

“We will offer people the chance to pay a one off premium of £8,000 into a voluntary scheme to cover the cost of residential care in old age. So under our plans no-one would be forced to sell their home to pay for care.”

Tweet this!

Danny Alexander LibDem MP

MP’s and their expenses are under ever greater scrutiny than ever before and rightly so. Some are legitimate expenses and others are bordering on outright fraud.

I found it interesting to note from the article in the Press and Journal the amount of expenses claimed by a number of Scottish MP’s which were well into the top 50 as far as amounts actually claimed.

Danny Alexander is among the highest expense claims of MP’s at Westminster. It led me to wonder if all that money for these MP’s was money well spent. While the likes of Danny Alexander claim a large geographical area as the reason for such huge expenses claimed we cannot forget the fact that its not all fares.

Not so long ago he was approached as were all the local parties to make a contribution to the Blythwood food bank appeal that was trying desperately hard to assist the poor who had no food to eat here in the Highland capital of Inverness and the surrounding area.

I had raised close to £1000 of food aid which had also come from donations from Conservative Party members and I had thought that a cross party effort would have gone a long way to helping those in need.

Danny refused to help and stated that he thought it more important to talk about the situation than to donate anything to it.

Ofcourse at that time few of us knew that every piece of food that Danny put in his mouth was paid for by the taxpayer from expenses he claimed. All legitimate ofcourse. At least as far as the law was concerned.

I am wondering what actual worth some of these MP’s actually bring though. Sure they can appear in the newspapers and opine on this and that on a regular basis.

Danny talks a lot but in my opinion and many others actions speak louder than words.

Are MP’s like Danny Alexander worth the investment ? With a bit of luck we will find out soon enough once people here in the Highlands look at the real worth of those who claim to be working so hard on our behalf.

Jim Ferguson

North and north-east members in top 50

Chairman of Scottish affairs committee was most expensive in 2009-10

Published: 05/02/2010

NINE MPs representing seats in the north and north-east were revealed last night to be among the 50 most expensive at Westminster in the last financial year.

The MP with the highest expenses for 2009-10 was Glasgow East Labour MP and Scottish affairs committee chairman Mohammed Sarwar, who is retiring at the general election – expected in May.

He racked up £192,986 in second homes allowance claims, travel expenses, office costs, computer costs and staff pay.

But his example was closely followed by MPs north of the central belt.

Moray MP Angus Robertson, ranked third most costly, last night defended his £188,164 claim. He said it was partly caused by the extra expense resulting from opening a second constituency office at Keith, and partly high travel costs.

He said: “Given the unpredictability of parliamentary schedules, weekly commuting arrangements often have to be made at short notice, which sadly adds to the travel costs.

“Constituents rightly expect you to attend to issues and events locally as well as with matters at Westminster on a weekly basis.”

He added: “The biggest cost saving from Westminster will come when Scotland is independent and we don’t need to send MPs there at all. I am focused on making that happen as quickly as possible.

At just £539 a year lower, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey Liberal Democrat MP Danny Alexander, also blamed travel costs, driving round one of the biggest constituencies in the UK and commuting back and forth between Inverness and London.

Linlithgow and Falkirk East Labour MP Michael Connarty and Falkirk Labour MP Eric Joyce, at fourth and fifth, were only a few pence less.

Mr Joyce — frequently at or near the top of the expenses league — also cited travel between his home in Falkirk and London as the reason his expenses remain high, pointing out that MPs have to fly on expensive open tickets because they do not know their arrangements very far ahead.

Aberdeen North MP Frank Doran came in at No 12 in the table, claiming £182,139.

Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross Lib Dem MP John Thurso, at No 22, claimed £178,689, Dundee West Labour MP Jim McGovern, 23, £178,597, and Gordon Lib Dem MP Malcolm Bruce, 24, £178,230.

Perth and North Perthshire SNP MP Pete Wishart was 34th with £175,896.

The cheapest was First Minister Alex Salmond, also SNP MP for Banff and Buchan, 533rd, but he rarely appeared in Westminster, claiming £131,316, mainly in staff costs. Western Isles SNP MP Angus MacNeil was 431st, claiming £141,583.

Tweet this!