I highlighted how the MPC got it wrong last time. Will they learn their lesson ?

I'm going to show off a bit here, but I wrote, at length, three years ago about how the Monetary Policy Committee were totally wrong to keep raising interest rates before we went in to recession, in a fruitless and bizarre attempt to bring down inflation. As I wrote in June 2008

"Inflation has today risen to 3.3% from 3% last month. This is 1.3% above the government's target and is 1.2% up on last year. However, in the Monetary Policy Committee's own report they state that 1.1% of the 1.2% inflation rise in the last 12 months is down to rises in electricity, gas, petrol, oil and food. In effect, the MPC admits that the rise is because of a rise in the prices of the basic necessities of life and not because of extravagant spending.

So why are the MPC talking up the prospects of having to raise interest rates again ?

It is an absurd situation that an economy which looks to be heading for a recession might be tipped over the precipice because the MPC might raise interest rates in order to stop people spending money on luxuries when the MPC's own figures show that only 0.1% of the rise in inflation is down to spending on non essentials."

And before that in April 2008 I highlighted the total folly of raising interest rates when I explained

My circumstances are that our three year fixed rate mortgage comes up in the Autumn and it will mean an increase of around £100 per month to out mortgage repayments. Yet if you look at my pay rise for the last three years added together I am now earning just about exactly £100 a month more after tax than I was three years ago. Meaning I will have effectively had three years worth of pay rises wiped out.

Now multiply this across the country, with millions of people's fixed rate deals all coming to an end and more and more people having to pay more for their mortgages, and what's more, tying themselves down to a set rate for three or five years. In effect, this means that we are not only going to see a recession in this country because of the effect of people paying more for mortgages (to pay for houses that will be dropping in value), but the system ties people in to paying recession prices mortgages for some years to come, thus stopping the cycle of money that might kick start a growth out of recession.

So where are we now ? Inflation has risen to 3.7%, because of "rising fuel, energy and food prices". Its June 2008 all over again. Will raising interest rates and removing money from people's pockets stop people buying food, fuel and energy ?  Of course not, they are basic essentials and not excessive consumer spending.

Will the MPC have learnt a lesson from 2008 ? You'd hope so, but some of the same clowns from 2008 still sit on the committee, so I wouldn't put it past them to make the same mistakes again.

Will Ed act or will he posture (again)

Ed Miliband has criticised unions for threatening to strike on the day of the Royal Wedding.

My question for Ed, since he's trying to woo Lib Dems (and if there is any leader who is as ill suited to wooing as Ed Miliband, I've yet to see them), perhaps he could tell us when he will break Labour Party links with those Unions, should they go ahead. Will he ask his MPs to leave the ASLEF group of MPs, should ASLEF go ahead with their strike, and will he fore go any money these unions would wish to throw the way of the Labour Party ?

After all, we would all like to know that Ed Miliband actually backs up his words with action.

The sad death of Margaret Davie

I was saddened to learn of the death of Margaret Davie, a former Broadland Councillor, school teacher, and fine Lib Dem councillor for Spixworth from 1993 to 2002.

Margaret taught at Hellesdeon High School for many years, and was a school governor of many local schools. She was elected in 1993 in a by-election in August 1993, an election which saw me take charge for the first time of designing leaflets for a campaign. Margaret won by about 160 votes, and was then re-elected the following year by over 400 votes (she asked me to be her agent, and it was certainly a proud moment for me to steer a campaign that won by such a big margin, but also a very easy campaign, because in less than 12 months Margaret had built up a massive following and showed just how good a councillor can be.

In 1998 Margaret was re-elected, but she stood down in 2002 to pursue other interests, with a particular fondness for raising money for animal charities at the top of her list of good deeds.

Margaret's funeral will be in four weeks time (yes, that's a shockingly long time to wait, but there is a shortage of trained pathologists in Norfolk !) She will be missed by many people.

Keeping regressive taxes, scrapping progressive ones

David Cameron announced today that the regressive rise in VAT, which hits the poorest hardest will be kept, but the progressive 50% tax rate for high earners (something that was for many years a Lib Dem policy) will be scrapped as soon as possible.

What does it say about this government's priorities that taxes that hit the poorest worst will be kept but the rich will be given more money back ?

Proud to be a Lib Dem ?

Not a day to feel proud of this government.

Today the government announced plans to privatise and sell off vast tracts of the country by selling off Forestry Commission land. In addition to that, the Public Accounts Committee announced that the "culling" of the QUANGOs had no value for money criteria in the decision making meaning that closing many of these QUANGOs will cost us more, and in some cases duties and money previously in the hand of QUANGOs that were at least accountable to parliament, are now in the hands of private organisations that are unaccountable to the electorate.

Not a day to be proud of being a Lib Dem.

No, I'm not going to Oldham.

Saying one thing on Flu when in opposition, doing another when in government

The Tories (and let's not forget the Lib Dems) are the government of the day, but have learnt nothing from the swine flu pandemic of last year and have allowed flu to become a problem again this year when it could so easily have been dealt with.

I blogged last year that I thought the Tories were showing some good common sense on flu, asking important questions. The problem is, now they are in power, they have shown that this was all flannel, intended to garner coverage in the press, and that they meant none of it.

The level of infect amongst under fives is 184 per 10,000. It is classed as an epidemic if the figure reaches 200, so we are only just short of epidemic levels within this age group. yet can you get your under five vaccinated against flu ? The answer is no you can't.

This government, like the last one, has a ridiculous policy of refusing parents the option of getting their under fives vaccinated unless they are in an at risk group. What this ignores is that under fives are an at risk group !


The government only believe you are at risk as an under five if you are suffering from an underlying medical condition. But this list of underlying conditions is very selective, as we found out last year when out asthmatic two year old was told by the doctors that he had "the wrong type of asthma", so was not entitled to a swine flu jab. So on 23rd December 2009, my son came down with swine flue, and what followed was a pretty awful week of timetabled pouring of Calpol and Calprofen, in rotation ever three hours, in an attempt to reduce his sky high temperature whilst keeping him properly hydrated.

So what happened this year ? He was refused a flu jab, because at the age of three, he is not "at risk".

Why doesn't the government offer jabs to any child under 18 whose parents want them to have it ? Because it wants to save money.

Why didn't the government advertise the flu jab campaign this year ? Because it wanted to save money.

Why are people dying needlessly this year from flu ? Because the government want to save money.

This government know the price of everything, but the value of nothing.

Let's end the discrimination against the English

As a party, the Lib Dems are supposed to want to make Britain a fairer place. Perhaps 2011 is the year the party could start this by addressing the discriminatory way in which the English are taxed and charged in comparison to those living in parts of the countries with devolved governments.

If you live in Wales, you children won't pay for University tuition fees like English students will, similarly you won't pay for prescriptions and I, as an English license fee payer will see certain services that I enjoy on the BBC cut in order to fund your Welsh language channel (which most Welsh people watch).

If you live in Scotland, you too won't see your kids paying the tuition fees my children will pay, whilst your government provides more doctors and access to services which we in England don't get.

Northern Irish people apparently pay no water bills, I was shocked to hear this week, whilst again, your devolved government ensure that Northern Irish people received benefits we in England do not get.

Now there will be those who will jump in and immediately see what I am writing as an attack on the Northern Irish, the Scots and Welsh. It is not. What I am doing is pointing out that it is the English who are more highly taxed but receive the least back. We are the discriminated against majority.

Let's see the Lib Dems in government tackle this in the same was as the party has become obsessed with stopping control orders on potential terrorist suspects.

Perhaps the obvious answer to this is that we need and English parliament.