A lot has been made of the apparent 'lurch' to the right by David Cameron over the last two weeks. There was the calls to do away with the European Human Rights Act, the suggestion that Conservatives may abolish the Inheritance Tax (see below), statements about law and order, immigration and of course the EU Treaty/Constitution.
I don't think that this is a lurch to the right. I think it is a sound Conservative stance. I am a moderate within the Conservative spectrum. My facebook profile will tell you that I am central libertarian. I don't think that David Cameron can be accused of running to the right. I think he may have fallen for the suggestion that there may be an election in October (not ever going to happen if you ask me, but watch this space in case I am wrong) and has reacted by addressing the high profile issues of the moment.
He has spoken about the NHS and we know where the party stands on that. After the recent string of high profile incidents of gun and knife crime I can understand why David Cameron is speaking about law and order. I want more police on the streets. I don't want any more murders and I want to see the gang culture eradicated (start with the US music industry I think). I don't think it makes me an 'old agenda' conservative to want myself and others to be safe on their own streets but if the left say that I am then so be it. Do they not want me to be safe? If they criticise David Cameron for 'lurching' to the right by saying we should have more police and stop people being shot up and down the country then what are they saying about their own position?
Similarly with immigration. I do not want to end all immigration. I do not believe that the country is drowning under the weight of illegal immigrants. I do think that immigration should be controlled for the benefit of all citizens including the new people who come to this country in search of something better for them and their children. Why is it a far-right position to talk about immigration? It is a huge issue and we should not be criticised for talking about it and saying what we think. Does the Labour Party just want to leave it alone and not do anything, why are they not talking about it? Iain Dale talks more about this here.
The EU Treaty is somewhere between 95-98% the same as the old defeated EU Constitution. Gordon Brown came to the Premiership saying that Labour must deliver on its manifesto promises and it was an issue of trust between him and the voters. Now when the Conservative Party and the TUC are calling for the referendum promised in the Labour manifesto we are apparently lurching to the 'right'. Gordon Brown needs to look at his back benches because apparently a lot of his own ranks are lurching to the right as well.
In the light of recent events across and outside of the country maybe the country is now looking to the right. Maybe it is time for a sensible conservatism offered by David Cameron. Not a far-right agenda, but one that speaks to the issues of the day. That is what the Conservative Party is doing and we will become more united, more effective and more electable because of it.
Thursday, 30 August 2007
Wednesday, 29 August 2007
Friday, 17 August 2007
The Death of the Death Tax?
John Redwood's policy group has come up with the frankly earth-shattering conclusion that the Inheritance tax is 'an unpopular tax'.
I could have told you that.
Anyway, the Conservatives are considering abolishing it. Good.
Labour have said that by 2010 on 6% of the country will be paying inheritance tax because they will raise the threshold to £350,000 from the £300,000 it is currently. All very well, but are they basing that on the house prices of today which apparently will continue to rise? And how is that going to help the families of how ever many people die between now and then who are forced to pay an extortionate tax on their relatives death?
Maybe I was a little harsh on John Redwood's wizard-like insight earlier. Maybe the Conservatives are for abolishing the Inheritance Tax because the party is about to die (so my Labour friends would tell me no doubt).
Whatever the reason for the abolishing of the Inheritance Tax, as long as it doesn't throw the economy in to chaos, abolishing it is a good thing!
I could have told you that.
Anyway, the Conservatives are considering abolishing it. Good.
Labour have said that by 2010 on 6% of the country will be paying inheritance tax because they will raise the threshold to £350,000 from the £300,000 it is currently. All very well, but are they basing that on the house prices of today which apparently will continue to rise? And how is that going to help the families of how ever many people die between now and then who are forced to pay an extortionate tax on their relatives death?
Maybe I was a little harsh on John Redwood's wizard-like insight earlier. Maybe the Conservatives are for abolishing the Inheritance Tax because the party is about to die (so my Labour friends would tell me no doubt).
Whatever the reason for the abolishing of the Inheritance Tax, as long as it doesn't throw the economy in to chaos, abolishing it is a good thing!
Monday, 13 August 2007
Surgeries
I have now set up a surgery on Saturday 8th September from 1pm to 2pm at the King George V Pavillion. There will be a surgery on the first Saturday of the month at the same time. Call 07789408452 to book or just turn up.
Dates are as follows:
Venue: King George V Playing Field Pavillion, Loose (parking available).
Always from 1pm - 2pm unless otherwise stated.
Saturday 8th September
Saturday 6th October
Saturday 3rd November
Saturday 1st December
Saturday 5th January 2008
Dates are as follows:
Venue: King George V Playing Field Pavillion, Loose (parking available).
Always from 1pm - 2pm unless otherwise stated.
Saturday 8th September
Saturday 6th October
Saturday 3rd November
Saturday 1st December
Saturday 5th January 2008
Thursday, 9 August 2007
Gordon Brown and the sound of silence
Gordon Brown has promised to listen to the people. I think that he has dealt with the catalogue of chaos that has dominated his first six weeks in charge very well. The attempted bombings, the flooding and now the foot and mouth outbreak. All handled well. All situations in which a leader is needed. All taking press attention from the EU ‘Treaty’.
Labour will keep feeding the press rumours about a snap election to keep the EU treaty off the front pages. The papers will print these rumours because people read papers at election time.
As we all know the Labour Party came to power with many promises. One of which was a referendum on the EU constitution. Now it seems Gordon, just like Tony, is not going to give us this opportunity to speak. Reports do conflict with each other over how much this ‘new treaty’ is like the old constitution. Is it 95, 96 or 98% the same? Does it matter?
Gordon Brown may well keep his promise to listen to the people. But you don’t have to listen when there is no sound.
Labour will keep feeding the press rumours about a snap election to keep the EU treaty off the front pages. The papers will print these rumours because people read papers at election time.
As we all know the Labour Party came to power with many promises. One of which was a referendum on the EU constitution. Now it seems Gordon, just like Tony, is not going to give us this opportunity to speak. Reports do conflict with each other over how much this ‘new treaty’ is like the old constitution. Is it 95, 96 or 98% the same? Does it matter?
Gordon Brown may well keep his promise to listen to the people. But you don’t have to listen when there is no sound.
Friday, 3 August 2007
Gagged
David Cockerham, Vice Chair of Bearsted and Thurnham Society has a very good letter in this weeks KM.
He makes a very good point and one I agree with. To avoid legal difficulties Cllrs have been advised that any public comment on the KIG proposals will mean they are not allowed to take part in debates or vote on the proposals. Neither will they be allowed to debate or vote on the LDF.
David Cockerham says that this is stopping councillors representing the democratically expressed views of the people who voted them into office. He is right. Unfortunately by exercising democratic process in this way would mean forfeiting another democratic role later on. The debate and the vote.
It is a difficult situation and democracy does seem to suffer. I don't know what the answer is myself, but surely there is a difference between voicing the opinions of constituents and your own personal views.
If I am honest I think that as long as personal views of councillors are not expressed we should be able to pass on the messages that the people who put us where we are to do a job are sending us without being seen to prejudge. A history teacher will explain the rise of Nazi Germany to school kids but that doesn't mean that they subscribe to those same views that the Nazi's held. In the same way councillors should be able to say 'Mr X from Loose said that he doesn't agree with this because...' without being accused of prejudging.
However my understanding is that this would get us into trouble. Silly really, we are only trying to do what we are supposed to.
He makes a very good point and one I agree with. To avoid legal difficulties Cllrs have been advised that any public comment on the KIG proposals will mean they are not allowed to take part in debates or vote on the proposals. Neither will they be allowed to debate or vote on the LDF.
David Cockerham says that this is stopping councillors representing the democratically expressed views of the people who voted them into office. He is right. Unfortunately by exercising democratic process in this way would mean forfeiting another democratic role later on. The debate and the vote.
It is a difficult situation and democracy does seem to suffer. I don't know what the answer is myself, but surely there is a difference between voicing the opinions of constituents and your own personal views.
If I am honest I think that as long as personal views of councillors are not expressed we should be able to pass on the messages that the people who put us where we are to do a job are sending us without being seen to prejudge. A history teacher will explain the rise of Nazi Germany to school kids but that doesn't mean that they subscribe to those same views that the Nazi's held. In the same way councillors should be able to say 'Mr X from Loose said that he doesn't agree with this because...' without being accused of prejudging.
However my understanding is that this would get us into trouble. Silly really, we are only trying to do what we are supposed to.
Wednesday, 1 August 2007
Loose Character Assessment
Last night I went on a character assessment in Loose. The Borough Council have commissioned a Planning Consultancy to run a pilot scheme in the South Ward/Loose area with a view to undertaking a much larger borough-wide character assessment to help inform the local development framework.
Now I had initial jitters that perhaps this means Loose is in line for huge development. However it was just a pilot scheme and doesn’t signal any development intentions for Loose ward in the Local Development Framework. This was a practice essentially, to see how a wider character assessment would help the regeneration strategy for the future.
I am so pleased that I had the opportunity to attend. I think it shows that the Council are really very serious about listening to what people have to say about the good and not so good aspects of their home village, area and town. I sincerely hope that the borough-wide assessment is as useful as I think the pilot was.
Regeneration undoubtedly brings development. Regeneration is a necessity. But so is listening to the current residents of an area. Any development has to be sympathetic to its surroundings, enhance the best aspects and counter the worst aspects of its location. The new houses in Loose next to the Post Office, on the site of the old pub are a fantastic example of this. They fit in with Loose and the look very good because of it.
One issue that arouse was transportation. We know that the access to Maidstone from the Loose Road is one of the worst routes into the Town. Buses are infrequent and sometime hard to access. New developments are planned for the Leonard Gould complex in Loose Ward and at the YMCA site in South Ward. The roads around there (especially Pickering Street) are under strain as it is. The Park and Ride facility serving this route is closing and it is suspected that more housing will be on that site. Any development in this area must bring significant transport improvements with it. That is the most pressing issue facing development to the direct south of Maidstone.
It was fortunate that myself and others had the opportunity to explain this to the Planning Consultants last night. I sincerely hope that the Borough Council listens to what people are saying after having given us the opportunity to say it.
Now I had initial jitters that perhaps this means Loose is in line for huge development. However it was just a pilot scheme and doesn’t signal any development intentions for Loose ward in the Local Development Framework. This was a practice essentially, to see how a wider character assessment would help the regeneration strategy for the future.
I am so pleased that I had the opportunity to attend. I think it shows that the Council are really very serious about listening to what people have to say about the good and not so good aspects of their home village, area and town. I sincerely hope that the borough-wide assessment is as useful as I think the pilot was.
Regeneration undoubtedly brings development. Regeneration is a necessity. But so is listening to the current residents of an area. Any development has to be sympathetic to its surroundings, enhance the best aspects and counter the worst aspects of its location. The new houses in Loose next to the Post Office, on the site of the old pub are a fantastic example of this. They fit in with Loose and the look very good because of it.
One issue that arouse was transportation. We know that the access to Maidstone from the Loose Road is one of the worst routes into the Town. Buses are infrequent and sometime hard to access. New developments are planned for the Leonard Gould complex in Loose Ward and at the YMCA site in South Ward. The roads around there (especially Pickering Street) are under strain as it is. The Park and Ride facility serving this route is closing and it is suspected that more housing will be on that site. Any development in this area must bring significant transport improvements with it. That is the most pressing issue facing development to the direct south of Maidstone.
It was fortunate that myself and others had the opportunity to explain this to the Planning Consultants last night. I sincerely hope that the Borough Council listens to what people are saying after having given us the opportunity to say it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
