Deep divisions in coalition being exposed

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/coalition-heads-for-storms-as-parties-diverge-before-election-8439307.html

Doublespeak : Fare increases not all that bad according to the government

http://www.independent.co.uk/hei-fi/news/train-passengers-angry-over-ticket-price-rises-while-rail-minister-says-fares-are-not-nearly-as-expensive-as-is-being-presented-8435117.html

Liberal democrats are pro Europe

I've tended to link liberty with being liberal, but now I see this is not so.  So I have no idea what being liberal means now.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9766846/Nick-Clegg-warns-David-Cameron-not-to-back-out-of-Europe.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/26/clegg-warning-cameron-britain-europe

Good, the tide is not going the government's way over benefits

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/less-than-half-the-public-back-george-osborne-on-decision-to-raise-most-state-benefits-by-less-than-inflation-8426259.html

George Osborne has failed to win the support of the majority of the public for his decision to squeeze most state benefits, according to a survey for The Independent.

When the Chancellor announced this month that most benefits and tax credits would increase by one per cent – which is less than inflation – for the next three years, the Conservatives were confident that the move would be highly popular, supported by a clear majority of the electorate.
But according to ComRes, the public is split down the middle. While 49 per cent agree that the Government is right, a surprisingly high 43 per cent disagree and eight per cent say they don't know. The benefit uprating Bill will be published today and Labour will vote against it in the Commons in the new year.
The squeeze on benefits is less popular among women than men. While men support Mr Osborne's decision by 52 to 43 per cent, women back it by a smaller margin – 47 to 44 per cent.
Although 69 per cent of Tory supporters agree with the decision, it is opposed by most Labour voters (54 per cent) and Liberal Democrat supporters (65 per cent). The basic state pension is not affected by the squeeze and will go up by 2.5 per cent in April. Despite that, those aged 65 and over oppose the below-inflation increase for most other benefits by a margin of 46 to 41 per cent. Opposition to the benefits squeeze is pronounced among those aged 18 to 24, with more than half disagreeing with the move, but it is supported by a majority of people in other age groups.
Mr Osborne, who has positioned the Tories as on the side of "strivers", told his party's annual conference in October: "Where is the fairness, we ask, for the shiftworker, leaving home in the dark hours of the early morning, who looks up at the closed blinds of their next-door neighbour sleeping off a life on benefits?"
Some Labour MPs have expressed fears that their party would be walking into a trap set by Mr Osborne by voting against the benefits squeeze. However, their fears may be allayed by the poll's findings.
Senior Labour figures believe opinion is changing as voters realise that 60 per cent of the people affected by the clampdown are in work and receiving tax credits rather than unemployed. Liam Byrne, the shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, said last night: "People are starting to see through George Osborne's attempts to play politics with social security. This Government has failed on jobs, put up the dole bill and is now taxing strivers to pay for their failure."
Labour will mount a new-year campaign contrasting the below-inflation rises with Mr Osborne's cut in the 50p top rate of tax on earnings above £150,000, which takes effect at the same time next April.
Yesterday, David Cameron defended the one per cent rise in benefits at Prime Minister's Questions, admitting it was a "difficult decision" but pointing out that tax credits and public sector pay would increase by the same amount.
Ed Miliband claimed the Chancellor's "tax on strivers" would hit working families. He told the Prime Minister: "The reality is, in the third year of your government more children are going hungry and more families are relying on food banks." He attacked Mr Cameron as "very out of touch" with ordinary families.
Mr Cameron replied: "What is out of touch is denying the fact we had a deficit, left by your government, that we have had to deal with. We have been able to do it at the same time as cutting taxes for the poorest in our country, increasing child tax credits and freezing the council tax to help those families." He insisted the richest people would pay more in tax under every year of the Coalition than during any year of the previous Labour government.
Pressure groups seized on Treasury figures suggesting that working families would be the biggest losers. Imran Hussain, head of policy for the Child Poverty Action Group, said of today's legislation: "This is a poverty-producing Bill. It will hit all low-income families hard in the pocket and can only drive up child poverty.
"With so many struggling with rising living costs the Government should be helping, not hurting, all families. In the long run, we cannot cut the deficit by shredding the life chances of our poorest children."

Laughing all the way to the bank

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2249858/The-Queen-wears-Tory-blue-historic-visit-sit-Cabinet-meeting-ministers-whip-round-buy-placemats.html

 

How now unelected, former Prime minister, Tony Blair wants to influence the Labour Party

What real interest has Tony in the future of Britain?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2250099/Dont-blame-migrants-Britains-troubles-Tony-Blair-delivers-series-thinly-veiled-warnings-Ed-Miliband.html

If Plebgate was a fraud, this is very serious for the police

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2249845/Plebgate-Sacked-Chief-Whip-goes-war-Met-PC-falsely-claimed-witnessed-f----plebs-rant.html

A bitter row broke out last night between Downing Street and the police over an alleged plot to bring down the former Chief Whip.
A constable is now known to have falsely claimed he witnessed Andrew Mitchell’s encounter with two other officers in Downing Street when he is alleged to have called them ‘f***ing plebs’.
And CCTV footage screened by Channel 4 News last night cast doubt on the widely-publicised police version of the incident on the evening of September 19.
Mr Mitchell, who lost his job as a result, called for an inquiry and said he was the victim of a ‘stitch-up’. David Cameron was said to be furious about the allegations.
In a strongly-worded statement, Number 10 said: ‘Any allegations that a serving police officer posed as a member of the public and fabricated evidence against a Cabinet minister are exceptionally serious.
‘It is therefore essential the police get to the bottom of this as a matter of urgency. We welcome Bernard Hogan-Howe’s commitment to achieve that aim.’
However, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner said he stood by the original account of the two officers involved in the confrontation.
Mr Mitchell was forced to resign in October following allegations that he swore at police officers in Downing Street when they stopped him riding his bicycle through the main gates. In a police report leaked to the Sun newspaper in September, the officer involved said Mr Mitchell told him: ‘Best you learn your f***ing place. You don’t run this f***ing government. You’re f***ing plebs.’In a threatening afterthought, the minister allegedly added: ‘You haven’t heard the last of this.’
Mr Mitchell has always denied calling police officers ‘plebs’ but admits swearing at them, saying he had said: ‘I thought you guys were supposed to f***ing help us.’

CCTV footage of Andrew Mitchell with two police officers on the evening of the so-called ‘pleb rant’ raised fresh questions about the incident last night.
The film from a Downing Street security camera shows the former Chief Whip cycling up to the main gates before appearing to talk to the officers for just a few seconds.
It is widely agreed that the officers refused Mr Mitchell’s demands to open the gate. The footage shows that after the conversation he wheels his bicycle to the pedestrian exit and leaves.
A police log leaked days later claims he launched into his alleged tirade as he approached this gate.
There is no audio on the CCTV so it is impossible to know what he said, but the footage does not show any visible signs of an argument. It also appears to dispel another key claim. According to the police log, officers claimed ‘members of the public looked visibly shocked … by the language used’.
But the film shows only three people walking past the gate, two of whom look too far away to hear anything, and one who appears to express no more than a passing interest in what is going on.

The toxic allegation was seized on at the time by both the Police Federation and Labour to damage the Conservative Party.
But last night it was reported that a constable in the elite Diplomatic Protection Group, posing as a member of the public, had falsely claimed to have witnessed the incident in order to fuel the row.
The officer, who was arrested on Saturday night on suspicion of misconduct in public office, sent an email to his local MP, Tory deputy chief whip John Randall, the day after the encounter, giving an account of events in Downing Street that was strikingly similar to the version published in the Sun newspaper a day later.

 

Mr Randall passed his account to Number 10 and went on to play a key role in the removal of his boss.
Channel 4 News said the officer had admitted not being present when the confrontation took place and had hinted that others were involved in an apparent conspiracy.
The CCTV footage is thought to have been obtained by Mr Mitchell himself using data protection laws and passed to Channel 4.
The footage is silent, but the millionaire former minister can clearly be seen being stopped by police as he attempted to ride his bicycle out of the main gates of Downing Street.
After a brief conversation he wheels his bicycle to the pedestrian exit and leaves.
The film is largely inconclusive as it is impossible to tell what words are used by Mr Mitchell.
However, there is little sign of the rant alleged by the police. The police account of the event suggested there were ‘several members of the public present opposite the pedestrian gate’.
Members of public were said to have been ‘visibly shocked’ by the language Mr Mitchell used. No one is obvious at the gate in the CCTV footage.

But Mr Hogan-Howe said: ‘I don’t think, in terms of what I’ve heard up to now, that it’s really affected the original account of the officers at the scene. Because of course this officer we’ve arrested wasn’t any of those people involved originally.
‘This is another officer who wasn’t there at the time.’

 

The Sun also said it stood by its story. The astonishing revelations last night prompted speculation at Westminster there may have been a wider conspiracy among some police officers to smear a senior member of the Government at a time when ministers are pushing through controversial reforms of the service.
Mr Mitchell said: ‘Three phrases were hung around my neck for 28 days and used to destroy my political career and toxify the Conservative Party.
'They are completely untrue – I never said them. I have never called someone a f***ing pleb and never would.
‘It has shaken my lifelong support and confidence in the police. We need a full inquiry to get to the bottom of what happened and make sure it cannot happen again.’
Tory MP Dominic Raab last night described the developments as ‘deeply disturbing’.
He added: ‘The assumption has been that the police had behaved like angels, and Andrew Mitchell a villain.
'It now appears that at least one officer has deliberately told falsehoods, explicitly designed to drag Andrew Mitchell’s name through the mud.
‘We need a swift and rigorous investigation to see whether he acted alone, was put up to it, or indeed acted in collusion with other officers.’
Government sources said the Prime Minister accepted Mr Randall had acted in good faith.

Tensions over drugs policy between Clegg and Cameron

...but is it all just a charade?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9745358/David-Cameron-slaps-down-Nick-Clegg-drugs-will-not-be-legalised.html

Liberal Democracts want to decriminalise drugs

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/14/nick-clegg-reform-drugs-laws

How the ruling elite want to be above the law

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/9743909/Maria-Miller-expenses-Telegraphs-side-of-the-story.html

How the government wants to manipulate the press

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/9738505/The-minister-and-a-warning-to-the-Telegraph-before-expenses-story.html

Big Brother Doublespeak : "Prime Minister accepted that equal marriage rights were ‘not a priority by any stretch of the imagination’

Big Brother's double speak is increasing in size quite rapidly.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2246184/Ministers-expect-big-win-gay-marriage-vote-despite-increasingly-bad-tempered-protests-Tory-traditionalists.html

Big brother ignores 500,000 people against gay marriage

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9735738/Ministers-accused-of-sham-consultation-over-gay-marriage.html

Ministers accused of 'sham' consultation over gay marriage

The Coalition has been accused of running a “sham” consultation on same-sex marriage by discounting the views of more than half a million opponents.

MPs will be told that the biggest official “listening exercise” ever undertaken on a government proposal found that a narrow majority support the highly contentious move.

This result is based on the responses of around 228,000 people who took part in the consultation earlier this year, the vast majority of whom submitted anonymous online forms to the Government.

Yet petitions organised by campaigners, in which more than 500,000 people opposed plans to redefine marriage to include gay couples and around 64,000 supported them, have been ignored by ministers.

In addition, participation was not limited to UK residents despite claims that lobbying groups in the US had been attempting to recruit people to submit responses.

Opponents of the plan have cried foul, arguing that the consultation’s finding of majority support amounted to dishonesty.

David Burrowes, the Conservative MP, said: “If they want to rely on those figures it is wholly disingenuous. It makes the consultation a sham in terms of justifying this on the back of numerical support, given that 500,000 people were ignored and they have accepted all-comers from around the globe.”
He said that support was now so disputed that there was a strong case for a referendum on the subject.
“The Government doesn’t have a mandate to proceed and the consultation raises more doubts and questions about the public support for going forward,” he said. “Different polls have been misappropriated and now the Government is mis-applying its own consultation responses. They don’t have the authority to do this.”
Colin Hart, campaign director for the Coalition for Marriage (C4M), which opposes gay marriage, said: “The decision to ignore a petition of half a million people is disgraceful and undemocratic and goes against assurances from civil servants that all submissions would be treated equally and fairly.
“All those who have signed the petition which the Government has now chosen to ignore deserve to be told why their name on a petition, which includes their address and signature, has been airbrushed out, while completely anonymous internet questionnaires have been counted.”
Details of the Government’s plans will be outlined in the Commons today by Maria Miller, the Culture Secretary.
The Daily Telegraph understands that MPs will be told that between 52 and 53 per cent of responses to the government consultation came out in favour.
However, the results of mass petitions from both C4M, which is led by Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Coalition For Equal Marriage (C4EM), which supports the change, were discounted from the total.
It is understood that around 137,000 people filled in consultation forms on the Home Office website, while tens of thousands of others submitted responses by email, including through the C4M website.
By the time the consultation had ended in June, more than 500,000 people had already signed the C4M petition, a figure which has since grown by another 100,000. The C4EM has amassed almost 64,000 signatures in favour. The statement had to be brought forward after David Cameron disclosed details at the weekend of a government about-turn on allowing same-sex weddings to take place in churches, synagogues and mosques.
Critics of the move have argued that the change could invalidate the consultation, which was conducted on the basis that there would be a blanket ban on same-sex marriage in religious premises to prevent those who refuse to host such ceremonies facing legal challenges.
Speaking to MPs on Monday, Mrs Miller underlined the Government’s determination to press ahead with the change, insisting that the Government strongly supports the institution of marriage.
She said: “The Government should not stop people from getting married unless there is very good reason — being gay, I don’t believe, is one of them.”
Edward Leigh, the former Conservative minister, called for a new consultation because of the U-turn.
Mr Leigh, whose urgent question about whether there would be a new consultation forced Mrs Miller to make a statement to the House, said the original consultation had “specifically excluded” churches from the proposals.

Government considering introducing anti strike laws for teachers

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2245459/Gove-war-footing-teaching-unions-expected-launch-industrial-action.html

Hipocrausterity

Cameron spends a fortune on hiring a plane for his work

Glad we're all in this together.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2245303/Prime-Minister-hires-plane-700-000-trade-mission-jaunt-London-New-York-Brazil-again.html

A new commandment from Cameron "Everyone must contribute"

Well let's see if the individual MPs will be contributing to the deficit.

Let's see if bankers will be

Let's see if millionaire footballers will be

Let's see if owners of wealthy companies will be.

And notice how he doesn't say how everyone must contribute based on how much they are able to contribute. So if the richest person in Britain contributes £1, the poorest gives up all their benefits and the rest give up £5, then everyone has contributed.

As I have learnt over the past few weeks : when Cameron means "Everyone", he actually means : those we can target and which we think the population don't mind us targetting.

In the article it says "He is expected to raise most money from the wealthiest and the welfare budget." Notice how it can not bring itself to say the poorest, so its says "the welfare budget".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/9723355/Autumn-Statement-Everyone-must-make-contribution-towards-deficit-says-Cameron.html

Another expenses scandal

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/9691993/MPs-expenses-top-Tory-in-secret-deal.html

MPs barring release of expenses details

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2235517/MPs-expenses-cover-Bercow-bars-release-landlords-details-security-grounds.html

Cameron's speech at CBI conference

Monday, 19 November 2012 10:00 AM

Read the full text of David Cameron's speech to business leaders at the 2012 CBI conference here:

I look around this room and see people I've been on trade missions with all around the world to Africa, China, India, Russia, Mexico, Brazil.

It's great to see Aggreko here – we were in Africa together and I'm glad you've sealed that deal in Cote d'Ivoire and are selling in one hundred countries today.

Diageo are here – we drank some whiskey in India and they liked it so much they bought the company

and now with that huge United Spirits deal they're the biggest premium drinks company in the world.

We've got Ian King here – just a couple of weeks ago I was in the Gulf with him and BAE Systems and we're stepping up our efforts with the Emiratis, the Omanis and the Saudis…

to keep on proving that the best fighter jets are made right here in the UK.

And of course, Roger – I am delighted that we were able to help Centrica get those deals done with Qatar and Norway.

Britain is selling to the world again

that is a vital part of my job – and what this economy needs.

I am also determined we make the most of the Olympics and Paralympics too.

In Sochi, in Russia, we've won 60 contracts ahead of their winter Games

designing the stadium, building the roof for the ice-skating rink, providing legal services and a lot more.

In Rio, in Brazil, we've already got over £70 million in deals done ahead of 2016.

Next year we're planning more trips to India and China – and I hope we'll have a lot of you there too.

Because frankly, we need this buccaneering, deal-making, hungry spirit now more than ever.

Britain is in a global race to succeed today

and you don't need me to tell you that.

Every day the people in this room are fighting to win contracts in Indonesia, India, Nigeria.

Every week you step off aeroplanes in the South and East and feel the pace of change there.

You know what the global race means because you're living it.

And I'm here today to tell you this Government gets it.

We get that the world is breathing down our neck.

And we get what British business needs.

You need us to deal with our deficit.

To cut business taxes so we can compete.

To have a proper industrial strategy to get behind the growth engines of the future.

To reform education so we turn out the brightest graduates and school leavers.

To reform welfare so it pays to work.

These are the key steps to Britain thriving in this global race.

But it's not just about policies – it's about attitude.

You need us to be tough. To be radical. To be fast.

I'm going to tell you what that means.

First, you need a Government that is tough; that can take the big, difficult decisions where they really matter

and nowhere does that matter more than on sorting out the deficit.

Never forget – we inherited a deficit bigger than Spain's. Bigger even than Greece.

This has meant taking decisions no other government had dreamed of taking before.

Capping welfare. Freezing child benefit. Raising the state retirement age.

Like I said – incredibly tough decisions.

But here's the thing.

Being tough on the deficit doesn't mean being simplistic – salami slicing budgets and taking an axe to everything.

It's got to mean prioritising the right things

backing enterprise, growth and business – even in the teeth of fierce opposition.

That's what we've done.

Yes, we've made significant cuts to some budgets, like the business department

but at the same time we've protected the science budget and funded record numbers of Apprenticeships.

Yes, we've had to put up some taxes

but we've cut taxes on business and entrepreneurs.

Corporation tax – coming down to the lowest rate in the G7

and yes, the top rate of tax has been cut too

because you cannot on the one hand say “Britain's open for business” and on the other have the highest top rate of tax in the G20.

So this is what being tough means.

Doing what's right for our future; taking on all the noisy lobby groups that want to pour money into today and forget about tomorrow.

And this approach is working.

The deficit – cut by 25 per cent.

Interest rates – at record lows.

A million new private sector jobs created in two years.

Exports up dramatically.

That's what tough government has helped deliver.

You needed government to be radical too – to shake up the status quo

especially in education.

As the CBI says in its report today, this is critical to thriving in the global race.

We took the view that massive structural change was needed.

Why? Because there were three big problems

failing schools; coasting schools; and that long-running failure in Britain on technical and vocational education.

Our changes are dealing with all three.

Instead of a monolithic state system with no real competition we've introduced free schools and created more than 2000 Academies – free to innovate and teach how they want.

This is having a massive effect already.

Inner-city Academies backed by sponsors – including business – in some of the poorest areas are getting extraordinary results – better than they're getting in the leafy, well-off suburbs.

We've been utterly intolerant of failure too

raising the bar on what we expect, and when a school falls below that bar – getting an Academy sponsor to take over as a matter of urgency.

We said we'd turn the 200 worst primary schools into Academies by the end of this year, we're on track to achieve it – and next year we're going to double that to 400.

As for technical education – new University Technical Colleges are opening

and we are clearing up the baffling array of qualifications and insisting on rigour.

Like I said – big structural changes.

By the end of this Parliament we're going to have thousands of new Academies, scores of new free schools

a system that is diverse, that welcomes competition and encourages innovation.

And we're having an all-out war on dumbing down too.

When we came to office primary school pupils went into their maths exam with a calculator – we're ending that.

We had GCSEs based largely on course-work and modules – no we're moving to more final exams.

And we inherited a system where just 15 per cent of pupils got good GCCEs in English, Maths, Science, a language and a humanity.

This is crazy. Employers like you are crying out for these skills.

There's not a job in the world where you don't need a good grasp of English and maths

so with the new English Baccalaureate we're putting them right back at the heart of education.

And all this isn't about looking back to the 1950s, it's about looking forward to help our children compete in this world

and we'll do whatever it takes to help them do that and help you get the bright, skilled workers you need.

So this government has been tough and we've been radical.

But there's something else you desperately need from us – and that's speed

because in this global race you are quick or you're dead.

Let me be clear: we have made some massive steps towards leaner, faster government.

Today the civil service is smaller than at any time since the Second World War.

Some departments have had central overheads cut by 30 per cent.

We've cut the number of quangos by nearly 200.

Last year, we cut wasteful spend by more than £5 billion

this year we're on track to save more than £8 billion.

And this goes all the way to the top.

The Cabinet I chair is now a Growth Cabinet

I go around that table and hold people to account for progress on everything from superfast broadband to house-building, in a way that has never happened before.

But we need to do more – because government can still be far too slow at getting stuff done.

You know the story.

The Minister stands on a platform like this and announces a plan

then that plan goes through a three month consultation period

there are impact assessments along the way

and probably some judicial reviews to clog things up further.

By the time the machinery of government has finally wheezed into action, the moment's probably passed.

Government has been like someone endlessly writing a ‘pros and cons' list as an excuse not to do anything at all.

Consultations, impact assessments, audits, reviews, stakeholder management, securing professional buy-in, complying with EU procurement rules, assessing sector feedback

this is not how we became one of the most powerful, prosperous nations on earth.

It's not how you get things done.

As someone once said, if Christopher Columbus had an advisory committee he would probably still be stuck in the dock.

So I am determined to change this.

Here's how:

Cutting back on judicial reviews.

Reducing government consultations.

Streamlining European legislation.

Stopping the gold-plating of legislation at home.

And quite simply: getting our roads and railways built more quickly.

Let me say a quick word on each.

First, judicial reviews.

This is a massive growth industry in Britain today.

Back in 1998 there were four and a half thousand applications for review

and that number almost tripled in a decade.

Of course some are well-founded – as we saw with the West Coast mainline decision.

But let's face it: so many are completely pointless.

Last year, an application was around 5 times more likely to be refused than granted.

We urgently needed to get a grip on this.

So here's what we're going to do.

Reduce the time limit when people can bring cases.

Charge more for reviews – so people think twice about time-wasting.

And instead of giving hopeless cases up to four bites of the cherry to appeal a decision, we will halve that to two.

Next, government consultations.

When we came to power there had to be a three month consultation on everything

and I mean everything, no matter how big or small.

So we are saying to Ministers: here's a revolutionary idea – you decide how long a consultation period this actually needs.

If you can get it done properly in a fortnight – great

indeed the Department for Education has already had a consultation done and dusted in two weeks.

And we are going further, saying: if there is no need for a consultation, then don't have one.

The next hurdle is excessive European legislation.

It holds us back. It clogs things up.

So we are fighting back hard.

We're having EU accounting rules reduced and micro-enterprises exempted.

Last month I worked with Angela Merkel to stop a new torrent of rules and regulations reaching the in-tray.

So now - for the very first time in Brussels – we have a commitment to look at existing regulations as well as new ones coming in.

This is about finally getting that ratchet of European legislation to start going in the opposite direction

and every summit I go to, every meeting I have with other leaders I am making that happen.

But the problem isn't always the legislation itself, it's how we interpret it.

You get laws gold-plated with reams of pointless reports.

Take the Equality Act.

It's not a bad piece of legislation.

But in government we have taken the letter of this law and gone way beyond it, with Equality Impact Assessments for every decision we make.

Let me be very clear.

I care about making sure that government policy never marginalises or discriminates.

I care about making sure we treat people equally.

But let's have the courage to say it

caring about these things does not have to mean churning out reams of bureaucratic nonsense.

We have smart people in Whitehall who consider equalities issues while they're making the policy.

We don't need all this extra tick-box stuff.

So I can tell you today we are calling time on Equality Impact Assessments.

You no longer have to do them if these issues have been properly considered.

That way policy-makers are free to use their judgement and do the right thing to meet the equalities duty rather than wasting their own time and taxpayers' money.

Last on my list – and it overlaps with some of the above – is getting our roads and railways built more quickly.

In the 50s it took us 8 years to design and build the first 50 miles of the M1.

Today it can take that long just to widen one section of a motorway.

So we are speeding things up.

Since we came to office we haven't just announced a load of road and railways schemes

yes – we have actually got diggers on the ground

on the A23, the M62, the M4, M5 and M6.

What's more it's our ambition to cut the time it takes to upgrade our roads in half.

So we are determined to dismantle some of the procedures that have been slowing us down – and slowing you down.

But none of this will mean much unless we have a change of culture in Whitehall too.

Now let me be clear: over the past two and a half years I've worked with exceptional civil servants who are as creative and enterprising as any entrepreneur..

and they are as frustrated with a lot of this bureaucratic rubbish as I am.

But the truth is, Whitehall has become too risk-averse

too willing to say ‘no' instead of ‘yes'.

There are understandable reasons for that.

When you have lobby groups lined up to criticise every action you take

and Parliamentary Select Committees ready to jump on every bump in the road

then the rational choice is to be cautious – even over-cautious.

But for the sake of our country's progress we have got to cut through this.

I want every Department in Whitehall to be a growth department.

I've insisted that every Permanent Secretary has growth as a key objective.

And I want every Minister and every official to understand that the dangers are not just in what you do but what you don't do

that the costs of delay are felt in businesses going bust, jobs being lost, livelihoods being destroyed.

When this country was at war in the 40s, Whitehall underwent a revolution.

Normal rules were circumvented. Convention was thrown out.

As one historian put it, everything was thrown at “the overriding purpose” of beating Hitler.

Well, this country is in the economic equivalent of war today – and we need the same spirit.

We need to forget about crossing every ‘t' and dotting every ‘i'

and we need to throw everything we've got at winning in this global race.

And I'll tell you why.

Not for our country to climb the ranks on some global leader-board for the sake of it

but for the sake of our people and their aspirations.

When we talk about re-industrialising Britain, about hi-tech industry and high-value manufacturing

this is about getting decent well-paying jobs for our people; opportunities to be had, a sense that everyone can get on if they try.

This is what it's all about.

Getting Britain on the rise.

Helping our people thrive.

Building an economy that's not just worth something but worthwhile.

And we'll build it together.

 

 

 

 

One rule for plebs and another for ruling elites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9684441/Minister-in-cash-row-keeps-27000-profit-from-sale-of-second-home.html

Minister in cash row keeps £27,000 profit from sale of second home

A Treasury minister who said it was “morally wrong” to pay tradesmen cash-in-hand is keeping thousands of pounds from the sale of his taxpayer-funded second home.