OMG! Cameron has flipped his lid! He’s sending a copy of the King James Bible to every school

[captionpix imgsrc="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2367/2242353112_ed2b81e99b_o_d.jpg"]
1. Many have got a copy or many copies already.
2. If you are going to send a Bible anywhere, send the New International Version or similar modern translation, so young people do not think that Jesus spoke in 17th century English.

Yes, The King James Bible is a great work, as are the works of Shakespeare and Chaucer and The Origin of the Species.

But, for goodness sake, there are bad enough problems with communicating the faith of Christ without muddying the waters too much with idiotic “thees”, “thous” and “wherearts”.

….and a foreword by Michael Gove?! Is it April 1st?! (Apparently not, the story is in the Times Education Supplement.)

What utter nonsense! What a complete waste of money!

Bibles image credit: Some rights reserved by J. Mark Bertrand

PMQs: Ding-dong over youth unemployment

[captionpix imgsrc="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2660/3729899772_31ca170d63_b.jpg"]
Cross-posted from Liberal Democrat Voice

The focus of the Cameron v Miliband this week exchange was the new figure of one million unemployed young people. It started with a battle between the government’s Work Programme versus Labour’s Future Jobs Fund. Miliband blamed the Work Programme for increasing Youth Unemployment:

…in June, when the Work programme was introduced, 85,000 young people had been unemployed for more than six months; now, there are 133,000—a massive increase since he introduced the Work programme.

But Cameron countered with figures saying that:

The Work programme is helping 50% more people than the future jobs fund: it will help 120,000 young people this year, where the future jobs fund helped only 80,000.

Cameron said that youth unemployment increased by 40% under Labour, starting in 2004.

…A bit of a score draw that.

Why doesn’t he take up the idea of Labour’s bonus tax? – Miliband asked. Cameron had a very effective answer to that:

He has used his bonus tax for higher tax credits; giving child benefit to those on the highest rates of tax; cutting the deficit; spending on public services; more money for the regional growth fund—that is when he is defending it rather than attacking it; turning empty shops into cultural community centres; and higher capital spending. This is the bank tax that likes to say yes. No wonder the shadow Chancellor has stopped saluting and started crying.

Miliband retorted with the accusation that Cameron:

…is the one cutting taxes for the banks year on year in the course of this Parliament. That is the reality. He is creating a lost generation of young people, and he knows it. It is his responsibility; it is happening on his watch.

Cameron said that the government is introducing the bank levy which will raise more every year, allegedly, than Labour’s bonus tax in one year.

Miliband read out an optimistic quote from Cameron from June 2010, saying all his predictions then of higher growth, lower inflation and falling unemployment have not come true. Ah but, we’re doing better than most of Europe, said Cameron.

In the exchange, Miliband probably didn’t do as well as he should have done. He’s got something of an open goal on the economy these days, but Cameron always manages to keep his head above water in these debates.

There was much mention of the forthcoming public sector strike. I noticed that there was no call, this time, for parents to teach in classes when the strike is on. But instead, the PM’s idea is now for parents to take children to work. When is the government going to stop making such inane suggestions?

Mature question of the week

Chris Bryant (Labour) asked a remarkably dignified question as follows:

The personal damage caused by long-term unemployment can be phenomenal. On average, somebody who is unemployed for more than six months is six times more likely to contract a serious mental health problem. Does the Prime Minister not worry that we will have a generation of young people who will suffer many of the problems of lack of self-esteem and of never having a first job? Would it not make more sense to guarantee every under 24-year-old a job after six months’ unemployment, thus paying them to work, not paying them benefits?

LibDem question:

Alan Reid asked about the cuts to the Ministry of Defence Police budget and “possible implications for security at the nuclear bases at Faslane and Coulport” in his constituency of Argyll and Bute.

Tribute to Pudsey Bear

The Prime Minister paid tribute to Pudsey Bear for all the money he has raised for Children in Need. This was in response to a question from Conservative MP Stuart Andrew. I am almost too embarrassed to mention which constituency Mr Andrew represents.

Oh all right then. It’s Pudsey. [Squirms]

“Jobs not cuts” photo credit: Some rights reserved by Labour Youth

The utter and complete cobblers being talked about the “Devonwall” seat proposal

[captionpix imgsrc="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2597/4018976738_276024c813_b.jpg"]
OK, first of all let’s get this out of the way. OK, I have lived in Berkshire most of my life. The last time I lived in Cornwall in any sense of the word, was when I was seventeen. A long time ago.

I am Cornish. I was born in Bude. Yes, actually in Bude, not a hospital in Devon. And I have actually bothered to trace my family tree on my surname’s side back to Henry Walter whose baptism is recorded on the first page of the first volume of the Kilkhampton Parish Register in 1550, the same year as Cardinal Wolsey decreed that parishes should have a register of baptisms, funerals and weddings.

But, OK, I know more about Berkshire than Cornwall and if I was really Cornish I’d live there wouldn’t I? Right?

So, that’s got that out of the way.

So now a rather detached view. I have looked at the “Keep Cornwall Whole” website.

I have to say that there is an aura of ridiculous hysteria about the campaign against the “Devonwall” seat. It is interesting that most of it is coming from the Cornwall end. Remember, half of the seat involves Devon being stuck in Cornwall. There is triumph of Devon/England over Cornwall here – it’s halfy-halfy chaps.

What I am about to say is going to make me very unpopular. So be it. Or “Sod it” as they say.

All that is proposed is that an MP will represent places such as Bude, Tintagel and Launceston as well as place such as Holsworthy, Bradworthy and Bideford.

Cornwall remains as Cornwall. The border will not change. How the hell could they change the border? It’s the Tamar. How the hell can you redivert a river without spending the entire UK national wealth for the next century on the project?

People in Bude have more in common with people in Holsworthy than folks in Padstow or even Camelford.

For two centuries the local newspaper of much of that northern part of Cornwall has been the “Cornish and Devon Post” – does that not give you some clue that there is a natural cross-border community?

And the writer of Trelawny, which is known by some as the “national anthem” of Cornwall, Rev R.S.Hawker (Whisper it: He was born in Devon) was a Devonwall minister – he was the vicar of Morwenstow (Cornwall) and Welcome (Devon) at the same time.

OK, please make your views known to the Boundary Commission about this proposal. You can do so here. Local views may well sway them. Excellent.

But please let us accept two things:

1. If you live in Truro or places round about there, you tend to know absolutely diddly squat about the community patterns of North Cornwall. That’s a given.

2. The border isn’t changing. Land is not being “stolen” from Cornwall. To pretend otherwise is bovine scatology of the most round spherical order.

And one final plea to those who call themselves Cornish: Take that chip off your shoulder, check yourself for inferiority complexes and approach this proposal as informed, mature adults, please.

Thank you so much.

Update 24/11/11:

I have now submitted this comment to the boundary commission:

Re: Bude and Bideford seat.

There is, to an extent, a cross-border community within the proposed seat. For example, people from Bude see Holsworthy as their local market town. Also, the Cornish and Devon post series newspaper has, for two centuries, covered the area on both sides of the border. The A39 is an important link between the communities on both side of the border. Historically, the writer of what is known by some as the “Cornish National Anthem”, Rev R.S.Hawker, was the vicar of Morwenstow parish (Cornwall) and Welcome parish (Devon) at the same time. Indeed, the church tower of Welcome is represented on one of the chimneys at his vicarage at Morwenstow, Cornwall.

So I can see some sense in the proposal, which would be better than, for example, than a Torpoint/Saltash/West Plymouth seat.

However, there is a very strong passionate attachment to the entity of Conrwall from Cornish residents, and this would run counter to that. You should particularly consider that Launceston is of great historic significance as the ancient County Town of Cornwall.

 

One and all image credit: Some rights reserved by Leo Reynolds

Vince Cable sets out employment law consultation to establish ‘culture of dialogue – not confrontation’

[captionpix imgsrc="http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6174/6162845238_0443e1e212_b.jpg"]
Cross-posted from Liberal Democrat Voice

In a speech today to the Engineering Employers’ Federation in London, Business Secretary put forward a wide range of items for consultation aimed at reforming Employment Law. He said that the aim of the exercise is to change to:

A culture that establishes dialogue rather than confrontation as the norm between employers and employees. That trusts people to do the right thing rather than relying on regulation to deal with every single issue that arises. And that ensures businesses have the confidence to hire the talented and committed workforce they need in order to thrive.

There are well over a dozen elements for consultation contained in the speech.

Vince Cable stated that his aim is to encourage the hiring of new staff by removing “peverse incentives” that “dissuade responsible responsible employers from hiring new staff for fear of the costs and the time incurred if it doesn’t work out.”

He emphasised that this is not:

an attempt to give businesses an easy ride at the expense of their staff. This is not about introducing a ‘hire and fire’ culture. We are not making a cynical choice to favour flexibility over fairness. Instead, what we are doing here is hacking through the excessive red tape and regulation that prevents too many businesses from creating new jobs in the first place.

In future, he said, “all claimants will be obliged to submit their complaint to ACAS, in order that parties are given an opportunity to resolve their dispute through conciliation before it can be taken to a tribunal.”

Cable proposes a system of “protected conversations” which allow open dialogue which can’t be used as evidence, with a view to allowing early resolution of disputes.

There is a proposal for simplified compromise arrangements to enable two sides to reach a no fault settlement.

There will be a search for a quicker and cheaper alternative to tribunal in some cases – a Rapid Resolution Scheme.

Cable announced a judicial review of the rules governing employment tribunals to modernise their processes.

There is also the suggestion of a system of fees for tribunals:

Introducing different fees for different kinds of claim will encourage potential claimants to fully consider their cases – leading to more realistic expectations for individuals and greater certainties for employers. But I want to make it very clear that for those with a genuine claim, fees will not be a barrier to justice. We will ensure that there is a remissions system for those who need help.

There are a series of proposals for consultation on dismissal, which Cable stressed have the aim of fairness at their heart:

Our objective is to strike a sensible balance between the need to give poorly performing workers reasonable warning that they should improve their performance; and the need to ensure that employers, especially SMEs, have the flexibility to manage their staff if they are not performing adequately in spite of warnings. And to do so without getting tangled up in red tape and bureaucracy.

Those are just some of the consultation items. You can read Vince Cable’s speech in full here.

Vince Cable photo credit: Some rights reserved by Liberal Democrats

CPS Huhne decision “very close”

[captionpix imgsrc="http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5283/5266892672_dae2bed4a4_b.jpg"]
Andrew Sparrow quotes Keir Starmer, Director of Public Prosecutions, saying on Five Live this morning:

We are very close to a decision. There is one remaining issue which is that we are seeking some material which is held by a national newspaper. That is the only thing we are waiting for now … I understand why people think it is taking a lot of time but the way in which we get material from journalists is an important principle, quite separate from the Chris Huhne case.

Chris Huhne vigorously denies all allegations. I should point out that the CPS have been trying to extract information from a national newspaper for several months, and said national newspaper has been reported as contesting the request. So, I’m not holding my breath on this.

 
Chris Huhne photo credit: Some rights reserved by DECCgovuk

Baroness “Two fingers” Trumpington – the Lloyd George connection

[captionpix imgsrc="http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3532/4566455936_6f0ff234d2_o.jpg"]

…And there’s plenty of other connections in a superb interview write-up by Sam Macrory on PoliticsHome. She’s some lady… Wartime exploits at Bletchley Park…working with Sir Alec Douglas-Home and Margaret Thatcher (“…she had no sense of humour) – she’s had a very rich life and understandably doesn’t want to be known for an off-hand gesture!

In the interview, Trumpers reviews that the legendary libido of Lloyd George was still in evidence in old age:

When her family home in Kent was requisitioned, she was sent to stay with a friend of her mother’s, the daughter of former prime minister, David Lloyd George.

“I was sent to be a land girl, and I lived with the then Miss Stevenson, who married him in the end. I’d have lunch with the old boy when the family were there.” She describes Lloyd George as “gaga in bits, and brilliant in others – but I think he was a bit scared of going to London because he didn’t like the bombs”. However, age did not entirely wither the old man. “I was very young, but he had a certain reputation with the ladies,” says the Baroness.

Even in his 80s? “Especially in old age,” she adds.

 Lloyd George statue photo credit: Some rights reserved by alex drennan

Three hours on Sunday morning – and three examples of LibDems thwarting Tory extremism

Cross-posted from Liberal Democrat Voice

Paul Waugh on PoliticsHome gives three examples where the LibDems “put the brakes on” Conservative policy aspirations in just three hours yesterday morning:

First, Danny Alexander chucked a large bucket of cold water over Tory hopes of abolishing the 50p tax rate, saying:

It’s very very important indeed that we continue to ensure that the wealthiest in society pay a fair contribution. That’s what the 50p rate is doing. We’ll see what the numbers show; I expect it is making money for the Government.

…Well, he’s in a good position to know.

Second, on Sunday AM, Francis Maude raised the spectre of increasing strike ballot thresholds. Within an hour, Danny Alexander, more or less, kiboshed that one, saying that, although the situation was under review, changing the law was “not the main response to these strikes”.

Third, the Beecroft “fire at will” plans. Vince Cable is clearly not in favour and, yesterday morning, received backing from that arch “One Nation” Tory, Lord Heseltine.

“Tarzan” said that no business worth its salt should be making investment decisions based on whether it could fire more people. He added that it is not sensible for the coalition to be seen to be attacking workers in a downturn:

You don’t want to make life rougher and tougher for large numbers of people you want to vote for you.

Paul Waugh concludes:

No wonder many Conservative backbenchers are frustrated.

You can read the full post here.