Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Unintended journeys
We have all heard stories about people falling asleep on the train or bus and ending up in the wrong place, or even getting on the wrong vehicle and finding oneself travelling in the wrong direction. However, I am not so sure I have ever come across somebody inadvertently finding themselves on the way to the South Pole before.
Today's Telegraph reports that a marine mechanic was reportedly working on an anchor aboard the 52ft Nilaya in Auckland harbour, when the yacht hurriedly cast off as immigration officials tried to serve deportation papers on the skipper, Jarle Andhoy, 34:
Mr Andhoy and three crew members have embarked on an unpermitted voyage to Antarctica's Ross Sea, in defiance of both the Norwegian and New Zealand governments.
A previous trip he made to Antarctica almost a year ago ended in disaster when his yacht Berserk sank in a fierce storm and three men died.
Declaring himself "a Viking", the Norwegian adventurer says he is seeking the wreckage of the Berserk, which was serving as a supply ship for an attempt to reach the South Pole on quad bikes.
New Zealand authorities, who co-ordinated an extensive search and rescue operation last year in which Mr Andhoy and a companion were airlifted to safety, are furious about his return voyage.
Given that the workman does not have the appropriate clothing and the ship itself does not have a beacon so that rescue services can find it, this appears to be a particularly hazardous trip for the unwilling traveller.
Today's Telegraph reports that a marine mechanic was reportedly working on an anchor aboard the 52ft Nilaya in Auckland harbour, when the yacht hurriedly cast off as immigration officials tried to serve deportation papers on the skipper, Jarle Andhoy, 34:
Mr Andhoy and three crew members have embarked on an unpermitted voyage to Antarctica's Ross Sea, in defiance of both the Norwegian and New Zealand governments.
A previous trip he made to Antarctica almost a year ago ended in disaster when his yacht Berserk sank in a fierce storm and three men died.
Declaring himself "a Viking", the Norwegian adventurer says he is seeking the wreckage of the Berserk, which was serving as a supply ship for an attempt to reach the South Pole on quad bikes.
New Zealand authorities, who co-ordinated an extensive search and rescue operation last year in which Mr Andhoy and a companion were airlifted to safety, are furious about his return voyage.
Given that the workman does not have the appropriate clothing and the ship itself does not have a beacon so that rescue services can find it, this appears to be a particularly hazardous trip for the unwilling traveller.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Pyjamas, morning, noon and night
For those of us lamenting the increasing trend to wear pyjamas outside the home, morning, afternoon or evening, this must be the best story yet.
The BBC report that a social welfare office in Dublin has banned interviewees from wearing pyjamas. A notice has appeared at Damastown social welfare office which warns claimants that "pyjamas are not regarded as appropriate attire when attending Community Welfare Service at these offices". They say that the decision was made after a number of people complained.
This is a step beyond popping to the shops in pyjamas. After all, when you go to a social welfare office you are meant to be seeking work. Who would employ somebody who turned up to an interview in pyjamas?
The BBC reminds us that it is commonplace for parents to be seen on the school run wearing pyjamas, as it is to see nightwear in the local shop or supermarket, but they also point out that the fashion houses of Paris and Milan have gone into servicing in this area. One interviewee reports that he has witnessed people walking around Mayfair in London in their pyjamas.
Where will it end?
The BBC report that a social welfare office in Dublin has banned interviewees from wearing pyjamas. A notice has appeared at Damastown social welfare office which warns claimants that "pyjamas are not regarded as appropriate attire when attending Community Welfare Service at these offices". They say that the decision was made after a number of people complained.
This is a step beyond popping to the shops in pyjamas. After all, when you go to a social welfare office you are meant to be seeking work. Who would employ somebody who turned up to an interview in pyjamas?
The BBC reminds us that it is commonplace for parents to be seen on the school run wearing pyjamas, as it is to see nightwear in the local shop or supermarket, but they also point out that the fashion houses of Paris and Milan have gone into servicing in this area. One interviewee reports that he has witnessed people walking around Mayfair in London in their pyjamas.
Where will it end?
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Cleaning up politics
Sky News reports that a committee of MPs has warned that the Government must take action to clean up party political funding before another "scandal intervenes". The Political and Constitutional Reform committee has called on the Coalition Government to stick to pledges to reform party financing "in order to remove big money from politics".
The problem though, as they identify, is to build a consensus around changes, and that seems as far away as ever. This is evidenced by the outcome of the 15-month inquiry by the Committee on Standards in Public Life, which proposed last year that a £10,000 cap on donations be imposed in a bid to end "cash for influence" scandals and corruption allegations.
Under their plans, this funding would partly be paid for by a £23m-a-year taxpayer subsidy, but the three biggest parties united in opposition, saying that it was not acceptable in the present economic climate, even if the change was delayed until 2015.
We seem to be as far away from reform as ever. Should the Coalition go-ahead and impose it anyway? Could it get non-consensual changes through Parliament? Is there even an appetite for reform? It is about time that all the political parties got together and sorted this out.
The problem though, as they identify, is to build a consensus around changes, and that seems as far away as ever. This is evidenced by the outcome of the 15-month inquiry by the Committee on Standards in Public Life, which proposed last year that a £10,000 cap on donations be imposed in a bid to end "cash for influence" scandals and corruption allegations.
Under their plans, this funding would partly be paid for by a £23m-a-year taxpayer subsidy, but the three biggest parties united in opposition, saying that it was not acceptable in the present economic climate, even if the change was delayed until 2015.
We seem to be as far away from reform as ever. Should the Coalition go-ahead and impose it anyway? Could it get non-consensual changes through Parliament? Is there even an appetite for reform? It is about time that all the political parties got together and sorted this out.
Saturday, January 28, 2012
An alternative view of transparency
This morning's Independent shows that a decade of openness and transparency in government has not won over the hearts and minds of the mandarins whose job it is to keep the show on the road.
They say that the former Cabinet Secretary Lord Gus O'Donnell has revealed that civil servants spend a great deal of time working out ways around the Freedom of Information Act including instituting a system of "oral government" in which important discussions are never written down:
The peer, who left his role as head of the Civil Service in December, said the fear of minutes eventually being published was "driving stuff underground or into non-FOI-able routes".
In an interview with BBC Radio 4's The Westminster Hour, Lord O'Donnell said the process would result in "worse public policy decisions". He repeated his call for the Act to be overhauled.
"You just don't know when you write something down whether that is eventually going to be decided by a tribunal of people who may have never worked in government whether or not that should be released," he said.
"If everybody thinks, well, that's all going to become public and that's going to be used against me, people will naturally say, OK, well perhaps I had just better keep quiet. And then you get to a situation where you have oral government."
Lord O'Donnell said a similar issue in the US led to the use of Post-it notes during discussions.
"They'd stick 'I disagree with this' on them. And then there were Freedom of Information requests for the Post-its," he said.
What this reveals is not that freedom of information has led to bad government but that those whose job it is to govern have never adapted to the greater scrutiny it brings.
I find it quite extraordinary that a mandarin who was meant to be a servant of the people should spend so much of his time excluding them from the process of government.
The Act already contains exemptions that protect the national interest and is nowhere near as open as its American equivalent. If civil servants really cannot cope with that then they need to step aside and let people do their jobs who can.
They say that the former Cabinet Secretary Lord Gus O'Donnell has revealed that civil servants spend a great deal of time working out ways around the Freedom of Information Act including instituting a system of "oral government" in which important discussions are never written down:
The peer, who left his role as head of the Civil Service in December, said the fear of minutes eventually being published was "driving stuff underground or into non-FOI-able routes".
In an interview with BBC Radio 4's The Westminster Hour, Lord O'Donnell said the process would result in "worse public policy decisions". He repeated his call for the Act to be overhauled.
"You just don't know when you write something down whether that is eventually going to be decided by a tribunal of people who may have never worked in government whether or not that should be released," he said.
"If everybody thinks, well, that's all going to become public and that's going to be used against me, people will naturally say, OK, well perhaps I had just better keep quiet. And then you get to a situation where you have oral government."
Lord O'Donnell said a similar issue in the US led to the use of Post-it notes during discussions.
"They'd stick 'I disagree with this' on them. And then there were Freedom of Information requests for the Post-its," he said.
What this reveals is not that freedom of information has led to bad government but that those whose job it is to govern have never adapted to the greater scrutiny it brings.
I find it quite extraordinary that a mandarin who was meant to be a servant of the people should spend so much of his time excluding them from the process of government.
The Act already contains exemptions that protect the national interest and is nowhere near as open as its American equivalent. If civil servants really cannot cope with that then they need to step aside and let people do their jobs who can.
Friday, January 27, 2012
With friends like these...
Having gone through a particularly rough patch as leader of the Labour Party earlier this year, the last thing that Ed Miliband needs now is more criticism, especially when it comes from former allies. However, as today's Telegraph outlines, that is precisely what he has got.
The paper says that Peter Mandelson, the former business secretary and one of the most powerful party figures of the last 15 years, has said Mr Miliband is “struggling” to stamp his identity on the Labour Party and failing to distinguish himself from the last Labour government.
This comes on top of criticism that Mr. Miliband lacks the skills and public appeal to become a credible prime minister amid disquiet inside his own ranks.
The paper says that a series of poor opinion polls recently have seen Labour’s lead evaporate, while senior party figures admit that winning the 2015 election will be difficult.
One survey this week suggested that David Cameron was significantly more popular among the public than Mr Miliband, despite concerns that Britain is slipping back into recession. In fact, even Nick Clegg is perceived to be doing a better job than the Labour leader in some polls.
Given the peer's other remarks it is possible that Labour may be fairly relaxed avout his criticism of the Labour leader:
Lord Mandelson had easy praise, however, for his successors at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS), saying he was “very proud and pleased” with the work that Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, and David Willetts, the Universities Minister, have been doing.
And he disclosed that he no longer believed politicians should be intensely “relaxed” about entrepreneurs becoming “filthy rich”, as he once claimed while Trade and Industry Secretary in 1998.
“That was a rather spontaneous, unthought-of remark,” he said. “I don’t think I would say that now. We have seen that globalisation has not generated the rising incomes for all.”
No wonder Labour never really embraced the former Hartlepool MP as one of their own.
The paper says that Peter Mandelson, the former business secretary and one of the most powerful party figures of the last 15 years, has said Mr Miliband is “struggling” to stamp his identity on the Labour Party and failing to distinguish himself from the last Labour government.
This comes on top of criticism that Mr. Miliband lacks the skills and public appeal to become a credible prime minister amid disquiet inside his own ranks.
The paper says that a series of poor opinion polls recently have seen Labour’s lead evaporate, while senior party figures admit that winning the 2015 election will be difficult.
One survey this week suggested that David Cameron was significantly more popular among the public than Mr Miliband, despite concerns that Britain is slipping back into recession. In fact, even Nick Clegg is perceived to be doing a better job than the Labour leader in some polls.
Given the peer's other remarks it is possible that Labour may be fairly relaxed avout his criticism of the Labour leader:
Lord Mandelson had easy praise, however, for his successors at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS), saying he was “very proud and pleased” with the work that Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, and David Willetts, the Universities Minister, have been doing.
And he disclosed that he no longer believed politicians should be intensely “relaxed” about entrepreneurs becoming “filthy rich”, as he once claimed while Trade and Industry Secretary in 1998.
“That was a rather spontaneous, unthought-of remark,” he said. “I don’t think I would say that now. We have seen that globalisation has not generated the rising incomes for all.”
No wonder Labour never really embraced the former Hartlepool MP as one of their own.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Huhne should accept defeat and move on
Today's Independent carries the reassuring news that the Government has lost its bid in the Court of Appeal to cut subsidies for solar panels on homes.
They say that three appeal judges have unanimously upheld a High Court ruling that Energy Secretary Chris Huhne lacks the power to introduce the controversial "retrospective" scheme.
Despite this Mr Huhne remains defiant and has confirmed that he will seek to appeal to the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land.
Most people accept that the current tariff is too high and even those benefiting from the scheme were planning for it to be cut back in April. However, the Government has jumped in with both feet, preempted their own consultation and slashed the amount they subsidise small scale renewable generation by more than anticipated, before the deadline for comments.
It is commonsense that due process has not been followed and that the Government is in the wrong. That is why the courts keep ruling against them. Surely the right decision now is to accept that verdict and go back to the drawing board.
Chris Huhne needs to move on. I do not believe that he can justify spending yet more public money on lawyers to pursue this issue.
They say that three appeal judges have unanimously upheld a High Court ruling that Energy Secretary Chris Huhne lacks the power to introduce the controversial "retrospective" scheme.
Despite this Mr Huhne remains defiant and has confirmed that he will seek to appeal to the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land.
Most people accept that the current tariff is too high and even those benefiting from the scheme were planning for it to be cut back in April. However, the Government has jumped in with both feet, preempted their own consultation and slashed the amount they subsidise small scale renewable generation by more than anticipated, before the deadline for comments.
It is commonsense that due process has not been followed and that the Government is in the wrong. That is why the courts keep ruling against them. Surely the right decision now is to accept that verdict and go back to the drawing board.
Chris Huhne needs to move on. I do not believe that he can justify spending yet more public money on lawyers to pursue this issue.
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau
The BBC reports that the Welsh national anthem has won out in an academic study which looks to measure "sing-ability" of patriotic songs.
They say that a musicologist has found that people are more willing to join in with a chorus from Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau than the UK's official anthem, God Save the Queen, and USA's Star-Spangled Banner:
The French anthem La Marseillaise topped a list produced by experts at the universities of York and London. It was rated with a "sing-along-ability" score of 50.98% with Wales second on 41.81%.
This compares with Australia (36.03%), Germany (31.71%), Canada (31.53%), USA (30.35%), Great Britain (30.22%) and Scotland (25.84%), although neither the Welsh or Scottish songs are official anthems.
Has anybody told John Redwood?
They say that a musicologist has found that people are more willing to join in with a chorus from Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau than the UK's official anthem, God Save the Queen, and USA's Star-Spangled Banner:
The French anthem La Marseillaise topped a list produced by experts at the universities of York and London. It was rated with a "sing-along-ability" score of 50.98% with Wales second on 41.81%.
This compares with Australia (36.03%), Germany (31.71%), Canada (31.53%), USA (30.35%), Great Britain (30.22%) and Scotland (25.84%), although neither the Welsh or Scottish songs are official anthems.
Has anybody told John Redwood?
How to answer a Parliamentary Question
Those who say that there is no art to answering Parliamentary Questions have clearly not seen this one on the subject of Christmas from Bob Neill:
Communities and Local Government
Christmas
Mr Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much his Department spent on (a) Christmas trees and (b) other Christmas decorations in 2011; and if he will make a statement. [91094]
Robert Neill: In 2011 the (a) Christmas tree and (b) other Christmas decorations were supplied at no cost to the Department.
I also refer the hon. Member to my answer of 20 December 2010, Official Report, column 941W, on Scrooge and politically correct Grinches.
Welsh Ministers have a lot to learn.
Communities and Local Government
Christmas
Mr Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much his Department spent on (a) Christmas trees and (b) other Christmas decorations in 2011; and if he will make a statement. [91094]
Robert Neill: In 2011 the (a) Christmas tree and (b) other Christmas decorations were supplied at no cost to the Department.
I also refer the hon. Member to my answer of 20 December 2010, Official Report, column 941W, on Scrooge and politically correct Grinches.
Welsh Ministers have a lot to learn.
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Post Offices and executive pay
Two announcements this week by Liberal Democrat Ministers have been very welcome and demonstrate once more the benefits that the party are bringing to government.
The first of these by Post Office Minister, Ed Davey is reported in today's Daily Telegraph. They say that Post offices have been given a decade-long lifeline with Royal Mail which should help to stave a fresh round of mass closures:
Royal Mail has agreed a 10-year deal to keep using post offices to sell stamps and handle parcels after the company is broken up at privatisation.
The deal is a relief to campaigners who had feared that Royal Mail would have been free to stop using the post office network once it was spun off as a private company.
That would have jeopardised thousands of post offices which rely on Government subsidy and Royal Mail’s work to stay in business.
The new “inter-business agreement”, which starts on April 1, is twice as long as had been thought, and as been agreed with lawyers for Royal Mail and the Government.
Ed Davey, the Post Office minister, said the agreement meant that the future of the post office had been “secured”.
This is of course in addition to he £2 billion investment promised for the Post Office and is a stark contrast to the attitude of the previous Labour Government who closed 6,500 Post Offices during their term in office.
Meanwhile, Ed Davey's boss, Vince Cable has pledged to replace "rewards for failure" with "rewards for success" by outlining plans to boost the power of shareholders to curb excessive executive pay.
According to the Independent his boardroom reform plans include:
* shareholders' votes on pay packages to be binding rather than advisory as at present;
* clearer remuneration reports on executive pay separating what happened in the past year (on which shareholders' votes would not be retrospective) and future policy;
* companies to publish a single pay figure for each executive;
* clawback clauses in executives' contracts at all large companies, like those introduced by the banks;
* shareholders to vote on pay-offs worth more than one-year's salary;
* companies urged to ensure greater diversity on boards, and codes of practice changed to end the "old boy network" under which a small number of executives sit on the remuneration committees of other big firms.
These measures are a major step forward and will hopefull contribute to improving the accountability of the boardroom. However, I hope that the Government is clear that if change is not achieved then legislation to put that right will be pursued.
The first of these by Post Office Minister, Ed Davey is reported in today's Daily Telegraph. They say that Post offices have been given a decade-long lifeline with Royal Mail which should help to stave a fresh round of mass closures:
Royal Mail has agreed a 10-year deal to keep using post offices to sell stamps and handle parcels after the company is broken up at privatisation.
The deal is a relief to campaigners who had feared that Royal Mail would have been free to stop using the post office network once it was spun off as a private company.
That would have jeopardised thousands of post offices which rely on Government subsidy and Royal Mail’s work to stay in business.
The new “inter-business agreement”, which starts on April 1, is twice as long as had been thought, and as been agreed with lawyers for Royal Mail and the Government.
Ed Davey, the Post Office minister, said the agreement meant that the future of the post office had been “secured”.
This is of course in addition to he £2 billion investment promised for the Post Office and is a stark contrast to the attitude of the previous Labour Government who closed 6,500 Post Offices during their term in office.
Meanwhile, Ed Davey's boss, Vince Cable has pledged to replace "rewards for failure" with "rewards for success" by outlining plans to boost the power of shareholders to curb excessive executive pay.
According to the Independent his boardroom reform plans include:
* shareholders' votes on pay packages to be binding rather than advisory as at present;
* clearer remuneration reports on executive pay separating what happened in the past year (on which shareholders' votes would not be retrospective) and future policy;
* companies to publish a single pay figure for each executive;
* clawback clauses in executives' contracts at all large companies, like those introduced by the banks;
* shareholders to vote on pay-offs worth more than one-year's salary;
* companies urged to ensure greater diversity on boards, and codes of practice changed to end the "old boy network" under which a small number of executives sit on the remuneration committees of other big firms.
These measures are a major step forward and will hopefull contribute to improving the accountability of the boardroom. However, I hope that the Government is clear that if change is not achieved then legislation to put that right will be pursued.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Two referendums and an autobiography
For many of us Peter Hain is the marmite in Welsh politics. You either love him or loathe him, but there has never been any doubt about his competence as a Minister, a politician and a campaigner.
Newport West MP, Paul Flynn described him as one of politics 'shapeshifters' and that is certainly borne out in the extracts I have read so far from his autobiography. Having said that I am not yet convinced that I actually want to read or buy the book. Maybe that will come later.
Today we learn that there was clear hostility from some Labour Cabinet Ministers to giving the Welsh Assembly law-making powers, even the watered down version in the 2006 Government of Wales Act. Mr. Hain also reveals that Tony Blair and his team never gave Wales "proper respect and attention".
The BBC report on Hain's view that a reshuffle reducing the Welsh job to a part-time cabinet role was "a spectacular bodge":
The Neath MP writes in Outside In that the 2003 shake-up appeared to have been "cobbled together at the last minute".
The Wales Office was subsumed into what was the Department for Constitutional Affairs (now the Ministry of Justice).
Even Mr Blair appeared unsure whether the Welsh secretary would still answer Welsh questions in the Commons.
Mr Hain said: "At one point it appeared that the secretary of state's post had been abolished, that Wales was being summarily transferred into a department under an unelected peer, Lord Falconer." Mr Hain said the Wales Office was in turmoil, with staff learning about the change via TV.
"For a government supposedly excellent at communicating, this was another example of abject failure - especially if, as later transpired, it had been considered over a period rather than cobbled together at the last minute.
"It was further evidence of Tony Blair and his team never really giving Wales proper respect and attention, contrary to Scotland where the secretary of state's role was pretty minimal because all primary legislation had gone to the Scottish parliament.
Mr Hain reveals how plans to give the Welsh assembly more powers were almost scuppered by cabinet colleagues, including the then deputy prime minister, John Prescott:
According to Mr Hain, Mr Prescott thought the English regions were being discriminated against and was "resentful" about the idea of Wales acquiring full law-making powers.
Jack Straw, then foreign secretary, told a cabinet meeting that he had been struck by the Welsh government's "truly appalling" performance on hospital waiting times and it would be "ridiculous to start giving them more powers".
According to Mr Hain, the then leader of the Commons, Geoff Hoon, responsible for the government's legislative timetable, suggested deferring or shortening the Government of Wales Bill - a suggestion thwarted only by Tony Blair's intervention.
The Guardian has a story about another referendum. They reveal how Tony Blair and his aides sanctioned a secret group inside Labour, including the-then Europe minister, Peter Hain, to prepare the ground for a euro referendum during his second term in office. They say that the group was secret partly to avoid Gordon Brown's disapproval.
They add that the planning was aborted after Gordon Brown declared the UK economy was not ready to join the euro due to insufficient convergence between the two economies.
Newport West MP, Paul Flynn described him as one of politics 'shapeshifters' and that is certainly borne out in the extracts I have read so far from his autobiography. Having said that I am not yet convinced that I actually want to read or buy the book. Maybe that will come later.
Today we learn that there was clear hostility from some Labour Cabinet Ministers to giving the Welsh Assembly law-making powers, even the watered down version in the 2006 Government of Wales Act. Mr. Hain also reveals that Tony Blair and his team never gave Wales "proper respect and attention".
The BBC report on Hain's view that a reshuffle reducing the Welsh job to a part-time cabinet role was "a spectacular bodge":
The Neath MP writes in Outside In that the 2003 shake-up appeared to have been "cobbled together at the last minute".
The Wales Office was subsumed into what was the Department for Constitutional Affairs (now the Ministry of Justice).
Even Mr Blair appeared unsure whether the Welsh secretary would still answer Welsh questions in the Commons.
Mr Hain said: "At one point it appeared that the secretary of state's post had been abolished, that Wales was being summarily transferred into a department under an unelected peer, Lord Falconer." Mr Hain said the Wales Office was in turmoil, with staff learning about the change via TV.
"For a government supposedly excellent at communicating, this was another example of abject failure - especially if, as later transpired, it had been considered over a period rather than cobbled together at the last minute.
"It was further evidence of Tony Blair and his team never really giving Wales proper respect and attention, contrary to Scotland where the secretary of state's role was pretty minimal because all primary legislation had gone to the Scottish parliament.
Mr Hain reveals how plans to give the Welsh assembly more powers were almost scuppered by cabinet colleagues, including the then deputy prime minister, John Prescott:
According to Mr Hain, Mr Prescott thought the English regions were being discriminated against and was "resentful" about the idea of Wales acquiring full law-making powers.
Jack Straw, then foreign secretary, told a cabinet meeting that he had been struck by the Welsh government's "truly appalling" performance on hospital waiting times and it would be "ridiculous to start giving them more powers".
According to Mr Hain, the then leader of the Commons, Geoff Hoon, responsible for the government's legislative timetable, suggested deferring or shortening the Government of Wales Bill - a suggestion thwarted only by Tony Blair's intervention.
The Guardian has a story about another referendum. They reveal how Tony Blair and his aides sanctioned a secret group inside Labour, including the-then Europe minister, Peter Hain, to prepare the ground for a euro referendum during his second term in office. They say that the group was secret partly to avoid Gordon Brown's disapproval.
They add that the planning was aborted after Gordon Brown declared the UK economy was not ready to join the euro due to insufficient convergence between the two economies.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Welsh MP upsets colleagues with caricatures
Whatever one might think of Newport West Labour MP, Paul Flynn it cannot be denied that he says what he thinks, irrespective of the consequences. It comes as no surprise therefore that this morning's Mail on Sunday carries news of a host of outraged MPs at the portrait he draws in his latest book of life in the House of Commons and some of them in particular.
The paper says that Mr. Flynn's book, 'How To Be An MP', exposes junketing, boozing and ‘serial seducers who have sex in their Commons offices’. It adds that ‘travel glutton Gulliver’ MPs ‘prostitute’ themselves on foreign trips paid for by ‘greedy’ businessmen and tyrants, and claims curbs on sleaze after the expenses scandal have not ended the risk of Westminster being ‘re-infested with corruption’. He advises MPs to get rid of trouble-making constituents by telling them they are mad.
Some of the detail from the article is worth quoting in full: Mr Flynn, MP for Newport West, also refers to an unnamed member branded ‘Gorillagram’ because he ‘could earn a living delivering gorillagrams without the aid of a monkey suit’. Then there was an anonymous Tory known as the ‘Talking Grow Bag’ for his ‘dreary country suits’ and a ‘Fred Nobody MP’ asking endless questions about an African country he had visited. Asked to name them, Mr Flynn refused, saying: ‘It might upset them. There are lots of Fred Nobodies. It could be one of 20.’
Mr Flynn lambasts ‘Gulliver’ MPs – ‘travel gluttons consoled by long hours in the sun at the poolside of a luxury hotel’. He says: ‘Commercial jaunts stuff large quantities of protein and alcohol into MPs: ideal for those who have decided to prostitute their time to the highest bidder.
It continues: He alludes to three unnamed Tories who ‘in 2011 flew to the hell hole of Equatorial Guinea. They flew business-class to the oil-rich African country and the total cost of the visit was almost £25,000. The biggest fact that the inept trio found on this jaunt was their own ineptitude’. They were ‘cosying up to a corrupt dictator with a human-rights record halfway between Adolf Hitler and Attila the Hun’.
Last year, Conservative MPs Nadine Dorries, Caroline Nokes and Steve Baker visited Equatorial Guinea. All three declared the trip in the Commons register, with the total cost coming to £24,170. There is no suggestion that they made any personal gain.
Mr Flynn provocatively suggests Speaker John Bercow’s two (unnamed) deputies stood for election to the post in 2010 for the perks. Asking tartly why they gave up their right to speak in debates, he says: ‘Very significantly, no one mentioned the job carries an additional salary of up to £40,000 and comes with faux prestige, dollops of guilt-free foreign travel and elegant dining.’
Finally, in a guide to sex and booze in Westminster, Mr Flynn says: flings are ‘inevitable’ and talks of ‘furtive encounters in parliamentary offices when resistance levels are falling and testosterone levels are rising . . . serial seducers of both sexes roam the corridors’.
The Commons’ elegant Pugin Room is ‘sinfully comfortable . . . popular for romantic encounters’. By contrast, the MPs’ Smoking Room is a ‘melange of gentleman’s club and geriatric home, a refuge for alcohol addicts’. On expenses, he argues: ‘The manipulation of greed still seeks to corrupt the power of Parliament. The fumigation of the Palace cannot prevent its re-infestation.’
All of this of course makes the upcoming selection battle between Mr. Flynn and Jessica Morden for the new Newport seat, a compelling one. Can we afford to lose such a politician from the House of Commons.
The paper says that Mr. Flynn's book, 'How To Be An MP', exposes junketing, boozing and ‘serial seducers who have sex in their Commons offices’. It adds that ‘travel glutton Gulliver’ MPs ‘prostitute’ themselves on foreign trips paid for by ‘greedy’ businessmen and tyrants, and claims curbs on sleaze after the expenses scandal have not ended the risk of Westminster being ‘re-infested with corruption’. He advises MPs to get rid of trouble-making constituents by telling them they are mad.
Some of the detail from the article is worth quoting in full: Mr Flynn, MP for Newport West, also refers to an unnamed member branded ‘Gorillagram’ because he ‘could earn a living delivering gorillagrams without the aid of a monkey suit’. Then there was an anonymous Tory known as the ‘Talking Grow Bag’ for his ‘dreary country suits’ and a ‘Fred Nobody MP’ asking endless questions about an African country he had visited. Asked to name them, Mr Flynn refused, saying: ‘It might upset them. There are lots of Fred Nobodies. It could be one of 20.’
Mr Flynn lambasts ‘Gulliver’ MPs – ‘travel gluttons consoled by long hours in the sun at the poolside of a luxury hotel’. He says: ‘Commercial jaunts stuff large quantities of protein and alcohol into MPs: ideal for those who have decided to prostitute their time to the highest bidder.
It continues: He alludes to three unnamed Tories who ‘in 2011 flew to the hell hole of Equatorial Guinea. They flew business-class to the oil-rich African country and the total cost of the visit was almost £25,000. The biggest fact that the inept trio found on this jaunt was their own ineptitude’. They were ‘cosying up to a corrupt dictator with a human-rights record halfway between Adolf Hitler and Attila the Hun’.
Last year, Conservative MPs Nadine Dorries, Caroline Nokes and Steve Baker visited Equatorial Guinea. All three declared the trip in the Commons register, with the total cost coming to £24,170. There is no suggestion that they made any personal gain.
Mr Flynn provocatively suggests Speaker John Bercow’s two (unnamed) deputies stood for election to the post in 2010 for the perks. Asking tartly why they gave up their right to speak in debates, he says: ‘Very significantly, no one mentioned the job carries an additional salary of up to £40,000 and comes with faux prestige, dollops of guilt-free foreign travel and elegant dining.’
Finally, in a guide to sex and booze in Westminster, Mr Flynn says: flings are ‘inevitable’ and talks of ‘furtive encounters in parliamentary offices when resistance levels are falling and testosterone levels are rising . . . serial seducers of both sexes roam the corridors’.
The Commons’ elegant Pugin Room is ‘sinfully comfortable . . . popular for romantic encounters’. By contrast, the MPs’ Smoking Room is a ‘melange of gentleman’s club and geriatric home, a refuge for alcohol addicts’. On expenses, he argues: ‘The manipulation of greed still seeks to corrupt the power of Parliament. The fumigation of the Palace cannot prevent its re-infestation.’
All of this of course makes the upcoming selection battle between Mr. Flynn and Jessica Morden for the new Newport seat, a compelling one. Can we afford to lose such a politician from the House of Commons.
