More Boris ‘cronyism’ over alleged lover
The Evening Standard reports today:
Boris Johnson came under pressure today to reveal the full details of the appointment of his alleged lover to an official fundraising role.
The Mayor asked art consultant Helen Macintyre to act as an unpaid fundraiser for his Olympic Park sculpture project last spring.
However, her appointment was never made public nor did a Greater London Authority appointments process take place.
Critics called on Mr Johnson to honour his pledge to end cronyism at City Hall and to reveal the circumstances surrounding her appointment.
This would be the second major incident of Boris being accused of cronyism.
The first was when he decided to recommend Veronica Wadley, previous editor of the Evening Standard, as chair of the London Arts Council.
This is despite her admitting, “I am no arts expert”.
Dave Hill wrote this about it:
The most jaw-dropped aspect of the amazing Wadley saga has been the sheer brazenness involved. Imagine: the majority of an interview panel think you fall short of the mark for the job you’ve applied for, yet somehow you get picked for that job anyway thanks a powerful person you’ve helped out in the past.
Most of us would feel embarrassed by such a situation.
Yet Boris wasn’t embarrassed at all. And this time around too, he’ll probably try and brush it off because the media will give him an easy ride.
Are the Tories planning to inflate away our debt?
The coalition government has recently seen its poll ratings drop, its golden boy make a prat of himself and its face repeatedly hit by Balls.
What else to do next but to line up some inflation?
Via Ryan Avent and Buttonwood, I learn that the Government has recently switched from one sort of fund raising device to another. You may find this boring, but this is important.
continue reading… »
Resisting the cuts: building a campaign
I’m old enough to remember the Thatcher years. What I mostly recall is just how ineffective most campaigning we did was.
For sure you could sometimes mobilise many people, but not always to much effect. So how should we approach the challenge we face today in campaigning against the cuts?
There are two types of opposition already getting going.
continue reading… »
Poll shows Coalition’s honeymoon now over
YouGov’s Peter Kellner has just send out an update on the government stating: The honeymoon is over. Apoproval of the government’s policies has dropped sharply over the past few weeks.
Here is the editorial, in the form of key points:
——
1. The contrast with 1997, when Tony Blair came to power, is telling. Immediately after his landslide victory, 76% approved of his government’s performance, while 13% disapproved. That net rating of plus 63 (that is, 76 minus 13) was never likely to be repeated. But four months in, the net rating was still plus 54, and after twelve months, plus 32. Apart from a blip in March 1998, the net rating did not fall into single figures until September 1999, more than two years into Blair’s first term.
2. The figures this time are very different. On May 17/18 – a week after the coalition was formed, 39% approved of the Government’s performance, while 26% disapproved and as many as 35% said ‘don’t know’. Many of the ‘don’t knows’ were plainly waiting to see how this novel way of governing Britain worked out.
3. Five weeks later, after George Osborne’s emergency Budget, the contours of coalition strategy were becoming more familiar. The ‘don’t knows’ were down to 25% – and a larger number of voters were willing to give the coalition the benefit of the doubt. Its net approval rating had climbed to plus 21 (approve 48%, disapprove 27%). Many voters liked the tough talk about Britain’s problems, and they blamed Labour for the country’s plight.
4. But that proved to be the high point. Over the past four weeks, the coalition’s approval rating has slipped slowly but remorselessly. Our latest figures report a net rating of plus four (approve 41%, disapprove 37%). In just over two months, the coalition’s rating has declined to levels that were not reached for almost three years under Tony Blair.
5. Just 44% of voters supported Labour in 1997: 61% voted for one of the coalition parties this May. But whereas millions of people who did NOT vote Labour liked the actions of the incoming Blair government, large numbers of people who DID vote Conservative or Liberal Democrat this year are NOT keen on the coalition’s performance.
6. Many voters are growing queasy about the coming spending cuts. No longer is it possible for most of us to believe that these will be confined to efficiency savings and services that affect other people.
Breakdown by party
7. In mid-June 80% of Tories approved of the government’s rating; this has now risen to 84%. The figures for the Liberal Democrats are more striking. Among those who voted Lib Dem on May 6, opinions are divided: just 40% approve of the coalition’s performance, while 36% disapprove. No wonder Lib Dem support has slumped since the coalition was formed.
Indeed, of those who voted Lib Dem on May 6, just 46% would vote for the party if an election were held now, while 18% would vote Labour, 9% Conservative and 5% for other parties; 22% are ‘don’t knows’ or ‘won’t votes’. To be sure, the Lib Dems have picked up some support from voters who like their involvement the coalition, but there are too few of these to offset the deserters. Overall, Lib Dem support is down by one-third since the election.
8. The other striking change concerns the attitudes of Labour supporters. In mid-June, 14% approved of the coalition’s performance, while 51% disapproved and 35% said ‘don’t know’. In other words, around a half of all Labour voters declined to condemn the Conservative-led government. Now the figures are: Approve 6%, disapprove 79%, don’t know 14%. Partly this reflects a hardening of the attitudes of long-standing Labour supporters; but it also reflects the fact that Labour has gained ground since the election, as it monopolises the growing protest vote. It is about ‘disapprovers’ switching to Labour, not just Labour voters becoming ‘disapprovers’.
9. The early signs from the current parliament are that Labour will be the overwhelming beneficiary if the coalition stumbles.
10. David Cameron and Nick Clegg have not yet exhausted supplies of popular goodwill; their personal ratings, thought not as high as in early June, remain positive. We should also note that Conservative support, unlike that of the Lib Dems, is higher than it was on election day.
Peter Kellner ends by saying:
If the ministers manage to reduce government spending without seriously damaging either front-line services or the wider economy, they can expect the electorate to resume its love affair with the coalition. But, if not, then Clegg in particular will have his work cut out to restore his party’s popularity and to revive his supporters’ faith in his version of partnership politics.
Without damaging front-line services or the economy? Fat chance… that damage is already happening.
Modern day pre-emptive genocide against women
contribution by Adam Grace
The mass sterilization of women in Uzbekistan, as reported this weekend by the Associated Press, is a shrieking reminder that the battle for the global liberation of women is being lost.
It was reported by Mansur Mirovalev that Uzbek health officials are “threatened with salary cuts, demotion or dismissal if they do not persuade at least two women a month to be sterilized.”
continue reading… »
This education bill will allow more unaccountable faith schools
contribution by James Gray
How much time should MPs be given to debate the most fundamental upheaval of state education system in 60 years? According to Michael Gove, a week is plenty.
Today MPs will have their first opportunity to scrutinise the Academies Bill, which will give every school in England the opportunity to become a state-funded but independent school. The Bill also paves the way for ‘free schools’, new schools established by a range of groups including religious organisations.
If all goes to Gove’s plans, the Bill will receive royal assent before recess on July 27.
continue reading… »
Ireland’s example should make the Libdems think twice too
Having just managed to crawl out of a two year recession, the Irish economy was recently branded the sickest of all advanced nations by the IMF.
And despite the Fund making noises that Ireland will not default on its debt, its credit rating has just been downgraded regardless.
continue reading… »
Govt stops Spending & Freedom review sites
The government’s Spending Challenge Your Freedoms website has this nice little video by Nick Clegg.
In the video he says: “And I hope you’ll continue with your suggestions…”
Not anymore!
The same also applies to the Spending Challenge website – which has now completely stopped taking suggestions!
It was only last week that Clifford Singer had exposed us to the joys of what was being published on the site.
You can’t say the Coalition is not listening…
Update: Alix points out in the comments below that the sites are now back up.
Ed Balls – repeatedly punching the Coalition in the face, and loving it
Whatever you might think of Ed Balls’ policies or ideas, you have to hand it to him for forcing the Coalition on the defensive over Michael Gove’s mad education plans.
Let me put it another way. While David Miliband is busy drafting up a credible deficit reduction plan, prompted by his biggest media cheerleader – John Rentoul – Ed Balls is just going out there and repeatedly punching the Coalition government in the face.
I know which one I prefer.
continue reading… »
Thatcher with dementia: not a leftwing fantasy
A forthcoming Hollywood movie will see Meryl Streep portray a dementia-stricken Margaret Thatcher, and the film makers are promising that the Oscar-winning actress will do so with ‘appropriate sensitivity’. That only leaves me to ask just what degree of sensitivity is appropriate.
The former prime minister’s children are reportedly ‘appalled’ at what they have learned about the script, which will paint their mother as a bewildered old biddy who talks to herself, apparently in the belief that her late husband Sir Denis Thatcher is still alive. It represents, they argue, ‘a leftwing fantasy’.
continue reading… »
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or RSS feed. You can also get them by email and through our Facebook group.
» The real agenda behind Telegraph’s abortion investigation
» How Scotland Yard monitors prying bloggers and journalists
» When disabled people want to work – employers can hold the back
» Revealed: the reality behind Workfare and why it doesn’t work
» Job snob? No, I’ve got the T-shirt
» Why country-by-country reporting matters to our wellbeing
» If Unions want to become stronger, they need to modernise
» Why work “reforms” in Spain are a warning for workers across Europe
» Five things you need to know about the NHS bill
» Bigger. Fatter. Gypsier. More Racist.
» Laziness levels in Britain getting lazier, wails government
|
62 Comments 15 Comments 23 Comments 8 Comments 24 Comments 16 Comments 16 Comments 83 Comments 203 Comments 85 Comments |
|
LATEST COMMENTS » Chaise Guevara posted on How Scotland Yard monitors prying bloggers and journalists » pjt posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Chaise Guevara posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » anna-rose phipps posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » the a&e charge nurse posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Jamie Scott posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » Judy Hamilton posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » Cherub posted on Watch: Obama sings the blues at White House » Common Sense posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Jonny Mundey posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » mushroom77 posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » James KM Blake posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » Steve Rooney posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » Andy Hicks posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » Ian posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? |
