Triple whammy Wednesday

Capturing the enormity of yesterday has been a test for Fleet Street's headline-writers.  Most have passed the test with flying colours:

• Alluding to John Prescott's affair The Times chose FLIRTING WITH DISASTER.  The Sun and The Daily Star both chose "TWO SHAGS" - dispensing with the need for any kind of allusion.  "There's hope for fat old gits everywhere," continued The Star.
• "JUST WOEFUL" says The Daily Mail below a "foreign murderers roam Britain" sub-headline.
• The Telegraph chose BEWITCHED (over a photo of the Deputy PM)... BOTHERED (Patricia Hewitt)... and BEWILDERED (above Charles Clarke).
• Next to a photo of a dying rose The Scotsman opted for NEW LABOUR WILTS AS CRISIS DEEPENS.
• The Independent called yesterday A SORRY MESS.
• And my favourite - from The Guardian - TRIPLE WHAMMY WEDNESDAY.

Inspect all of the frontpages yourself at Sky News.

I'm sat in the atrium of Portcullis House, with my laptop, writing this post.  For those who don't know the atrium (with its 'Despatch Box' coffee bar and cafe-style canteens) it's one big meeting place for MPs, research staff and journalists.

I'm constantly interrupted by folk and yesterday's Black Wednesday is on everyone's lips.  John Prescott's affair is the thing most people want to discuss but it will be the prisoner release cock-up that is the story that will do most long-term damage to Labour and it's not going to go away.  Over the next few days, weeks and months the newspapers will be hunting for stories of released rapists and murderers reoffending.  Charles Clarke won't survive too much longer and the damage to Labour will be considerable.

This is a great opportunity for the Conservatives to reinforce our law and order credentials.  This is not a time for roadtesting carbon efficient cars.  This is an opportunity for the Conservatives to show that only the Conservatives - not let-prisoners-vote LibDems - will really be tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime.

Comments

[Jonathan Sheppard]

I agree. The Governments record on Home Affairs has been pretty shocking - and its nothing to do with punch and judy politics to point this out.

[Chris Palmer]

Would this also be the, 'lets send underage drivers go-karting' Lib Dems? The Conservative party have always been the party of law and order. The Conservatives need to make this know again in the face of such monsterous failings by Labour.

[Phil Taylor]

It is funny that tonight's Chameleon broadcast from Labour leads on Black Wednesday 1992, the day after Labour's own.

They are trying to have a go at the Tory record of 14 years ago in order to divert attention from incompetence across the board in the here and now.

Gordon Brown is not immune, leaving aside high taxes, tax credits and all the rest, look at Gordon's gold sale. Black Wednesday probably cost about £3.3 billion. Gordon's early sale of the gold reserves probably cost about £2.3 billion. Pot? Kettle?

[ToryTotty]

This is a great opportunity for the Consrvatives to reinforce our law and order credentials
Is it?
We've hardly been consistent.
Isn't it a shame, that we capitulated on the ID Cards bill?
That bill could not have survived after yesterday's news.

Charles Clarke, Hazel Blears and the ever repugnant Tony Mcnulty have spent all their time being arrogant and rude to the opposition as the Home Office collapsed around them.
Why for instance did McNulty not resign after it was shown that immigration officials were giving visas in exchange for sex?

These people do not care about the public or the country. They only care about staying in power and making the Tories look bad.

How can the same people who wanted to keep people in detention for 90 days without evidence not be able to co-ordinate the deportation of FOREIGN CRIMINALS who have already been convicted ?

They allow the ex-convicts who are not allowed to live or work here to roam free, while those who are merely suspects have to stay in jail without evidence.
It's ludicrous.

David Davis should be able to get rid of the awful trio at the Home Office.

[Suggestion]

Editor, remember David Cameron's interview with the News of the World a week or so ago on prisoners?

No early release, he said. End the probation fiasco. Let them serve full sentences.

This was said before the current crisis came to light, and cannot be painted as reactionary.

Cameron's Tories know very well that protecting victims from violent crime is a matter of social justice.

I wish you would give him proper credit for the line his leadership is already taking.

[Suggestion]

Another example. Anybody who's paid the slightest bit of attention to DC, or who was at the Manchester Conference, knows his admiration for the Balsall Heath Forum. In that instance, following disgraceful police inaction on prostitutes and kerbcrawlers, the residents took matters into their own hands and drove the crime away, making Balsall Heath a desirable area again.

DC has been lauding them since before he won the leadership.

He has also demanded reform of a police system which too many of us on the ground see as politicized and ineffective, making them accountable to local communities.

Cameron's Conservatives are all about social justice and the effects on communities. Ending Labour's love of the "rights" of criminals and predators is, and always has been, part of that commitment to the community. It's his focus on victims first that led to his NOTW interview.

[Suggestion]

"Cameron: All prisoners should serve sentence in full - April 10, 2006
Source: The Independent

David Cameron pledged yesterday to scrap early release of prisoners and ensure they serve their full terms behind bars.

Promising that a Tory government would be "tough on crime", the Conservative leader said: "Prison will not be a deterrent until people serve the sentence they are given by the courts. It's ridiculous the way people are let out before their sentences are complete," he said in an interview with the News of the World.

"The first step would be to scrap Tony Blair's parole reforms, which now allow 30,000 criminals a year to be freed on licence before they have even completed half their sentence."

Mr Cameron said he would give the courts powers to send people back to prison and he would put more police on the streets.But he also said that not enough was being done to rehabilitate prisoners. More effort should be made to cut reoffending rates, he said."

http://www.lccsa.org.uk/index2.asp?ItemID=2674&rcid=10&pcid=9&cid=10&mid=71&mid2=12&incid=39

[Ranting Guttersnipe]

Stephen Pound has just been on Jeremy Vine claiming nothing is wrong and Charles Clarke is right to stay on.

He must be having fun on Planet Hewitt

[Andrew Woodman]

'Stephen Pound has just been on Jeremy Vine claiming nothing is wrong and Charles Clarke is right to stay on.'

He was on Newsnight as well. Methinks he might have been chosen as defender of the faith. Maybe on the promise of being the future Lord Pound.

[Ted]

No I think Stephen probably likes Clarke and the spinmeisters are using this and his percieved objectivity within Labour.

Unless that so atractive Chief Whip has something in her little black compaq PDA...

[Ed]

"Defender of the faith" is the perfect expression for that particular unenviable government role. Well coined, Mr. Woodman.

[Martin Smith]

It's shame he wasn't the one in the dock likes Charles Clarke, otherwise Labour could have had a Save The Pound campaign.

[TimC]

Did Prescott win her over with his good looks, or his way with words?

[Deputy Editor]

Suggestion, we did mention the police & prison reforms in the previous article to this.

[wasp]

Was there an element of taking out the trash with these stories all happening on the same day, incidently straw also made a speech on foreign affairs that normally would have had the anti-iraq media baying for blood.

[johnC]

Straw and Blunkett are as culpable over the Home Office fiasco as Clarke is. It was in 1999 that the system stopped working properly.

[Matthew Oxley]

Let's not forget Kinnock was also banned from Driving yesterday.

[Alain Portmann]

Deportation Island: New Reality TV Show in the United Kingdom.

Prime Minister Tony Blair announced today his cabinet would be launching a new reality television show. The reality TV show entitled “Deportation Island” will mark the Prime Minister’s directorial debut and represents a direct public relations offensive to combat sliding approval ratings. A poll conducted by The Telegraph places the Prime Minister’s personal approval rating at just 36%.

Executive producers of “Deportation Island” include Home Secretary Charles Clarke and Lord Levy. Clarke was asked to become executive director following his extensive experience handling deportation issues. Only yesterday Clarke admitted that 1,023 foreign prisoners had been freed without being considered for deportation.

“Deportation Island” will be an unscripted quest series that will feature teams of foreign and British convicted criminals who will be provided with a series tasks, aimed at getting them deported from the United Kingdom. More on Deportation Island on www.darkmatterpolitics.com

[Suggestion]

Sam, I know, but your editorial line in this thread reads, to me anyway, as though Cameron hadn't ALREADY shown his concern for crime victims.

[Editor]

Suggestion: As Sam (Deputy Coates) has already pointed out we have mentioned DC's commitment to imprisonment AND reoffending - not just in an earlier post today but prominently at the time.

The day before the welcome News of the World interview, however, in his speech to the Manchester Spring Forum Mr Cameron didn't even mention crime. A terrible error. The way to put issues on the agenda is to talk about these issues in the most high profile ways and repeatedly. That is what I would encourage DC to do.

The 'grid' for the last week of the election campaign should be ripped up and replaced with a focus on crime.

[Suggestion]

Don't agree Editor, not at all. That would have been utterly the wrong time to talk about crime, an 'old Tory' issue we are already trusted on. The message there was Change, remember? The conference's emphasis on social justice and social entrepreneurship hammered that home. A focus on old issues would have destroyed the ...and message.

Later, and separately, giving it due prominence and not getting it lost in a mess of other issues, Cameron drove home the message on early release.

[Suggestion]

Also, I feel your instincts are off. The issue of crime is already on the grid in the highest possible way.

[John Hustings]

"an 'old Tory' issue we are already trusted on."

Ha. You are very naive if you think that.

[James Hellyer]

Don't agree Editor, not at all. That would have been utterly the wrong time to talk about crime, an 'old Tory' issue we are already trusted on.

That's not true. The polling evidence shows Labour has a lead on law and order. We did have a slight lead on that issue in the run up to the last election, but it was lost after Michael Howard never on capitalised on his specialist area, and our position on civil liberties was seen as endangering national security (see the furore in the press over opposition to control orders, for example).

[RobC]

Just like Black Wednesday in 1992, when the Tories lost the lable of being economically competent, perhaps yesterday was when Labour lost their crime/security competency.

Until yesterday the Blair government was just about riding the punches, avoiding the heavy blows. Yesterday was the fisrt time a really heavy blow (or combination of blows) was landed.

Let's home it shows in next week at the ballot box.

[Andrew Woodman]

Perhaps we need to come up with some Golden rules like Gordon Brown did. How about prisoners to serve their full sentences for the first one!

[frank aylesford]

But why are we flatlining in the polls up til now and why will any benefit of yesterday's events almost certainly go to the Libdems? Isn't it a terrible indictment of Cameron that he has sold out every principle for approximately a 3% rise in support. The views of the liberal commentators can be dismissed. This isn't even thirty pieces of silver for a total betrayal - in the middle of a parliament with a hugely unpopular Labour government - on the basis of current polls we still wouldn't be the largest party. Conservatism is in a dire state. No one is representing true conservatism now and what is worse there doesn't seem to be anyone who could do it.

[RobC]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4949706.stm

Good piece on the BBC website showing the sorry history of Blair's third term

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

Well, what a surprise, the worst day for the Labour Government since 1997, and the usual suspects on here respond by attacking their own side. Bravo.

[John Coles]

Frank Aylesford is spot on - we are flatlining in the polls because no one is representing true conservatism. Instead we have commentators on this Blog referring to social entrepreneurship (what on earth is that?) and the need for "Change" (into to what, pray?) and saying that we should not discuss "old Tory issues" like crime.
The party is now a repository for wet liberals, mewing about social justice and peddling their half-baked ideas. The only real road to success is to offer a right-of-centre platform. Much hope of that under the present management - I eschew the word leadership.

[frank aylesford]

Yes but politics is about principle not just about getting into power. Otherwise it's just a vehicle for personal ambition for whoever is in charge at that moment. And it's also a recipe, if we ever did get in, for another decade of muddled incompetent politics without principle. (Remember the heir to Blair.)

But to give up your principles with only the most marginal increase in support is even worse. And what about the timing? Just as everyone accepts that the answer to the NHS isn't just money and that just maybe it's a flawed concept, we pledge to keep it as it is. Just as everyone begins to see the benefit of low tax regimes, we destress it. And so on......

So we shouldn't take refuge in Labour's problems. "Dave" and his mates need to embrace real conservative values as there is no one else to do it - and we mustn't let them off the hook with their hidden theory of managerial politics. Isn't it so unconservative and ultimately conceited to base one's whole approach on wanting power, not on the fact that one's principles are right, but on the idea that one is better qualified for the job than the other lot? It's time we faced up, unfortunately with the current lesdership, to the elephant that's been in the room since Dave's election.

[Editor]

Suggestion: "The issue of crime is already on the grid in the highest possible way."

It's high up on the nation's grid. It hasn't been on the Tory grid. I don't see how you can say that it is.

We can't just assume "that the worst day for the Labour Government since 1997" will translate into support for the Tories, Iain. The polls suggest that the LibDems are benefiting most. The Tory tactic of talking about LibDem issues appears to be increasing support for the LibDems. We're not also talking about issues like crime where the LibDems are beatable.

[Annabel Herriott]

I see the nurses at the RCN congress came up trumps. Nice little mauling was that!! Must have had a rush order on those yellow cards they all held up. I call that a symbolic rotten egg down her front. Well deserved at that.

[Matthew Oxley]

Well, what a surprise, the worst day for the Labour Government since 1997, and the usual suspects on here respond by attacking their own side. Bravo.

Well, what a surprise, Iain Lindley adds a response which entirely fails to add anything constructive to the topic, and just attacks other Conservativehome members instead.

You might also want to remind me what nightmarish day Labour had in 1997, since I recall that being quite a good a year for them.

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

We can't just assume "that the worst day for the Labour Government since 1997" will translate into support for the Tories, Iain.

I quite agree, but carping on here isn't going to help us.

I went along to the local residents' association today, amongst the usual residents is a couple who are (I think) in their mid-eighties. They have always voted, and they have always voted Labour. This time, neither are voting Labour, and at least one expressly said they intended to vote for my colleague.

We are getting support on the Council estates in my ward because they are being leafleted and visited by Conservatives for the first time in a quarter of a century. If we put the legwork in, we will see results in those areas. No party won votes by attacking the leadership, in public, a week before the election. We need to be out, working hard and capitalising on Labour's incompetence.

[Suggestion]

Tim,

And I don't see how you can call giving an exclusive to the News of the World that solely focuses on reform of Labour Get Out of Jail Free policy not putting it on the grid.

That was a firm attack on Labour policy and got national headlines everywhere.

What I would like to see, though, is an attack on the LibDems, our main challengers in the locals. Now would be an excellent time to remind the nation that the Liberal Democrats support giving prisoners the vote!

[James Maskell]

Wait a sec, havent we already discussed the doing full time in prison rather than part of sentence before? I thought there was conflicting voices in the Tories, with the Tory spokesman on prisons in a sense deviating substantially from Camerons tougher line.

Also, if Cameron feels that drug users should be given a softer sentence on the basis of rehabilitation being better than punishment/prison, does this not conflict with the idea of "prison works"?

Oh yes, a round of applause to the RCN...good job! Davis should be able to claim scalp number two soon with Clarke, who cant stay in his position realistically. Precott...urgh, mental scarring...

[kingbongo]

Whatever the plan was for the local elections this is one of those occasions when a general needs to get his troops to respond to events.

Yes we need to change and yes I think DC is broadly doing the right things. However, part of our job is to highlight what a massive set of incompetent twerps are in charge of the levers of power.

DC can continue to stress the message of localism and local issues but I want to see DD and others on the TV relentlessly hammering away at the government.

If Labour lose the public trust on law and order they can kiss goodbye to the ID database and if they lose trust over the NHS they have only the economy to rely on.

As Brown has already borrowed £700 million more than he predicted in the budget and as unemployment creeps closer to a million then even that prop will be taken away.

Over the last two days I have been impressed by the top team, and it has been a team effort - but they shouldn't be afraid of vigorously pursuing each of the ministers in trouble (there are so many it may not be possible to cover them all). The narrative has to be that the government is incompetent. If that sticks the public will be ready to listen to our alternative - so we better have it ready.

[Editor]

Labour support is on the slide Iain and we can all rejoice in that. What, though, are we going to do about the LibDems? Without beating them it's almost impossible for us to become a majority party again. I plan to post more on this topic of LibDem-Conservative rivalry/ collusion tomorrow anyway...

[Suggestion]

"No party won votes by attacking the leadership, in public, a week before the election."

Hear hear Iain!

[Suggestion]

Editor, a suggestion for that piece (well it is my handle).

Could you flag up in bold the LibDems five most awful policies the nation doesn't know about?

The LDs are the Not party - not Labour, not us - but if voters knew what they actually stood for they would be horrified.

How about no. 1 - Liberal Democrats want to give prisoners the vote
no. 2 - Liberal Democrats want a local income tax....

[Editor]

The News of the World interview was big, Suggestion, and welcome but one or even a few big goes on crime in five months is not a serious commitment.

Crime is for me domestic issue number one. Unless we are going on it every week and David Cameron finds time to focus on it in his biggest speech since becoming leader I don't think its really on the grid in any meaningful way.

We shouldn't do crime unthinkingly... focusing on its impact on the poor and emphasising rehabilitation so that we're also seen as compassionate is important... but we must put crime front and centre in our appeal over the next week.

[Richard North]

It would help if the Boy King occasionally looked at the work his own MPs were doing.

Owen Paterson recently published a paper on policing for the Cornerstone group. Amongst other things, he looked at the way other countries handled the problem of recidivism ... See here See page 17.

"The Japanese have addressed this problem in a novel way. They have established a system of Volunteer Probation Officers (VPOs), with a network of approximately 50,000 persons serving as VPOs throughout the country each
year. Their expenses are paid and the VPOs are expected to supervise and assist the probationers and parolees, to inquire into the environment where an inmate of a correctional institution is expected to return upon release and adjust any problems there, to conduct preliminary investigation for a candidate for pardon and to promote crime prevention activities in the community.

The system is currently under strain, with under-recruitment in the VPO establishment and special police surveillance systems are being adopted to make up the shortfall.

However, against lower overall crime rates, Japan reported that the number of re-incarcerated prisoners over a five-year period (1990 to 1994) as a proportion of all prisoners released over that period, was
exactly 42.0 percent. One commentator remarks that:

….over the past four decades, Japan has reduced crime substantially in all
categories except traffic-related offences. Japanese authorities have learned
from experience that offender correction and restoration to the community are essential elements of an approach that has proven to be effective in correcting socially deviant behaviour. What has developed is a spiral of success, with law enforcement officials, community members, criminals, and victims working interdependently to prevent crime and reintegrate offenders back into the community."

[Suggestion]

Tim, did you see this?

"Earlier, Conservative leader David Cameron renewed his attack on Mr Clarke.

He said he was "not the right person" to lead the Home Office, especially after news that there were 1,500 more foreign prisoners in British jails than first thought.

He urged Mr Blair to bring forward his Cabinet reshuffle and create a new homeland security minister so the home secretary could get on with clearing up the "mess" on crime, immigration and prisons."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4951730.stm

[Editor]

That's good to see Suggestion. Let's hope he keeps at it for the next week and every week until polling day. Crime and pensions would be my two top issues for the next nine hundred or so days...

[Suggestion]

On the doorstep I am hearing NHS. But I would put crime/NHS together at the moment.

Immigration and lack of security is another big one. A statistic I heard was that one in eight of our entire prison population is foreign.

Labour loves to mess up the basics (border security, parole, prison) then instead of fixing them, react by attacking our civil liberties (ID cards, national databases). Let them run the sex offenders' register correctly first. Or, you know, stop letting rapists off with cautions.

[John Hustings]

"Now would be an excellent time to remind the nation that the Liberal Democrats support giving prisoners the vote!"

We don't know that Cameron doesn't support this yet. It might be his clause 4!!

[Richard North]

"We don't know that Cameron doesn't support this yet. It might be his clause 4!!"

But there again, since the issue has already been decided by the European Court of Human Rights, the Boy King's opninion is irrelevant. See here.

[Ted]

Richard

- agreed but the "Boy King" can ignore the ECHR by amending Labour's legislation on the Himan Rights act or by simply passing an Act of Parliamnent which states that prisoners lose the right to vote on conviction and that that act over-rides an other act of parliament. The SCHR only has a place in English Law by the acceptance of the Queen in Parliament.

The minority view that the ECHR does not have a legislative funcion is the coreect one in my view and this is a case where I would say ignore them. Cameron is much mmore likely to do this than either Ming or Tony.

[Ted]

sorry Parliament not Parliamnent & more not mmore (shouldn't type after having my first drink in a fortnight...)

[Richard North]

"Boy King can ignore the ECHR by amending Labour's legislation on the Himan Rights act or by simply passing an Act of Parliamnent which states that prisoners lose the right to vote on conviction and that that act over-rides an other act of parliament."

And you think he's likely to do that?

[Suggestion]

I agree Ted.

[Goldie]

Dr Richard North is a truly brilliant writer, one who actually understands the world. Good to see him in these comments.

He certainly perceive the true nature of the "Boy Kings" when fools such as myself were still cheering him on...

Listen to this man!

[Ted]

Richard North

Actually I do - thought a while and asked myself if David Cameron, David Davis, William Hague were faced by Labour bringing in legislation to do this if they'd support it or pledge to overturn it..think the latter.

And after the current farrago would Charles Clarke really push it? would the Lib Dems dare to support it?

A supra-national court might decide to become a pseudo-legislative body but in the end it has no teeth, it depends entirely on the willingness of nations, who remain sovereign, accepting its judgements. Would the other signatories push for sanctions over criminals rights?

I'm with de Gaulle in European matters when asked to compromise the real national interest (compromise for advantage OK). Or perhaps a Thatcher Gaullist Non, Non, Non. Would the UK electorate punish Cameron for making such a stand or reward him?

[Dontmakemelaugh]

Now would be an excellent time to remind the nation that the Liberal Democrats support giving prisoners the vote!"

We don't know that Cameron doesn't support this yet. It might be his clause 4!!

Posted by: John Hustings | April 27, 2006 at 19:31

Cameron's clause 4 will occur when he dumps Maude and co and the EU

[Suggestion]

You should head over to the Guardian and listen to the Jackie Ashlet podcast of Cameron and what he says about the EU.

It includes withdrawal from the EPP and some repatriation of powers.

Cameron wants Euro reform, he is no Europhile, far from it.

[matt wright]

On the doorstep and in canvass surveys the issues that people are concerned about are in order as follows:

Health
Crime
Education
Pensions
Council tax

[John Hustings]

"On the doorstep and in canvass surveys the issues that people are concerned about are in order as follows:

Health
Crime
Education
Pensions
Council tax"

Sounds about right. Unfortunately the Conservative Party doesn't "do" most of those anymore.

[True Blue]

Health
Crime
Education
Pensions
Council tax

Gosh, Europe isn't on that list, and neither is immigration.

[John Hustings]

"Gosh, Europe isn't on that list, and neither is immigration."

And if you asked me, and others on the "right", we don't really want a narrow focus on either of those issues. We want a broad focus on a range of issues that makes us look like a balanced party.

At the last election we came across as unhinged because we only talked about one issue. Now, under Shallow Dave, we're doing the exact same thing, we've just traded we issue we focus on.

Stupid.

[True Blue]

At the last election we came across as unhinged because we only talked about one issue. Now, under Shallow Dave, we're doing the exact same thing, we've just traded we issue we focus on.

I think he has a long-term strategy, but his political inexperience is showing. These are local elections, and he could have concentrated on local issues. He did try to segue from the glacier to the recycling scheme, but I don't think it worked too well.

The waste of Labour councils, their complacency in dealing with education and refuge management, their housing policies and general managerial incompetence needs to be highlighted.

As for the LibDems, they are two-faced at the local level. If anybody could be accused of being a chameleon, it a LibDem activist. Their incoherence should be exposed.

At the moment, DC is making the party more appealing to floating voters. I'm sure he'll attempt to bring the more "eccentric" activists online later. I do hope that he emphasises "the peoples' money in the peoples' pockets" soon. This combined with believable compassion for the improverished will make a good policy platform:

1. Help the middle class by not taking so much of their money, and taking things out of state control that can be handled better by private citizens. Let them choose with their money, and not have the State choose for them.

2. Help the impoverished by ensuring that couples (married or otherwise) are not penalised in benefits, that earning money up to a certain threshold doesn't cut your benefits, by massively increasing the non-taxable threshold and by using means proven to be effective to get people back to work (what he calls social entrepreneurialism). Also - emphasise how crime disproportionately affects the poor (including immigrants) and offer policies to deal with them (I modestly point out my market-led rehabilitation proposal.)

3. Promise a managed migration policy. People have to learn the difference between refugees and immigrants (hardly any of one, loads of the other) - and ensure that housing policy is fair and is seen to be fair. Deal competently with repatriation, and offer a decent points-based scheme which allows for low paid workers.

4. Incapacity Benefit. I'm amazed no one has torn the government to pieces over this. It's primarily a scam to hide unemployment figures, either that or we are the sickest nation in the world. We'll have to tread incredibly carefully over this - it's got to be help them back to work, not steal their benefits. I think the big problem here is that employers don't want to be landed with an employee with a pre-existing back problem, or something equally unpleasant. There must be something we can do here.

5. Health. I really can't think of any popular proposals here - we can only attack the government's imcompetence and mention that there are too many managers, and many overpaid GPs.

6. Pensions. We can reverse Brown's pension theft taxes. Personally, I think a compulsory private scheme is a good idea for the future.

7. Council tax. I'm out of ideas on that subject. A local sales tax appears unworkable to me, a local income tax is foolish, a poll tax is a good idea but impossible to sell.