Is Vincent Cable fit to be in charge of anything?

‘There are two dead bodies on a motorway. One cat and one banker...

There was very little difference between the corpses... except for ‘skid marks around the cat’ – a suggestion that a driver would have tried to avoid the cat but not the banker.'

The Mail has more on Vince Vable's latest gaffe; how long can David Cameron protect this odious man?

Has Vince Cable really been consistently right on the economy?

If you listen to the BBC you might think that Vince Cable had been right all along and totally consistent in his views on the economy. Of course this is propaganda spread by an organisation desperate to prevent the Conservatives winning the general election. Of course the BBC would prefer a Labour victory but a Labour/Lib Dem alliance is definitely preferable to the 'nasty party' winning. Hence the BBC's boosting of Vince Cable and talk of a hung parliament.

So I was interested today to see that The Sun have turned on Vince Cable:

'LIB DEM deputy leader Vince Cable is today exposed as a hopeless "flip-flopper" who cannot make up his mind on what's best for the economy.

Wobbly Mr Cable - who triumphed with viewers in TV's Ask The Chancellors debate last week - has been caught out making a series of embarrassing U-turns on key policies.

It shatters his image as the wise and cool-headed "recession guru" who voters could trust to put Britain back on course.

Lib Dem Treasury spokesman Mr Cable, 66 - who could still land in the Cabinet if there is a hung Parliament - made these five monster flip-flops:

He slammed the Government in January last year for printing more money in a bid to kick-start the economy. He declared: "This is the Robert Mugabe school of economics."

Nine months later he claimed the plan was RIGHT and said: "There is a Robert Mugabe school but this is not it. If I gave that impression, it clearly was wrong."

Mr Cable said in December 2003, that Britain should not be "panicked" into cutting public spending by the International Monetary Fund.

But last September he claimed: "I argued that there was a problem in relation to asset prices and borrowing...

"I don't think I launched a sustained attack on the IMF."

He said in October 2008: "It is entirely wrong for the Government to stimulate the economy by yet more public spending."

In February last year his message had changed to: "We believe the Government stimulus is right and necessary."

When Mr Cable was asked in 2008 about Gordon Brown's backing for Lloyds TSB's takeover of stricken HBOS, he said: "We have no quarrel with what he did. That seemed the right approach."

Just four months later he said: "It looks increasingly as if Lloyds is being dragged under by the dead weight of HBOS." Mr Cable later admitted: "It's fair to say I did change my position on that issue."

He told the Lib Dem conference in September 2008: "The Government must not compromise the independence of the Bank of England by telling it to slash interest rates."

Only weeks later he said the Chancellor should urge the Governor of the Bank to make "a large cut in interest rates".'

Of course these five flip flops will not affect the BBC's pro-Vince 'narrative' in the slightest, after all there is an election to be affected.

in case Vince Cable gets too saintly tonight at the Chancellors debate

The Telegraph reminds us that despite the 'saintly Vince' act, Vince Cable is no more honest than most politicians:

'Mr Cable earlier this month claimed to have been consulted by the Treasury about his party’s policies and suggested the talks were a prelude to his becoming Chancellor in the event of a hung parliament.

It later emerged that the meeting with Sir Nicholas McPherson, the permanent secretary at the Treasury, had been a “courtesy call” requested by Mr Cable himself.

Mr Cable’s presentation of the event angered Treasury officials, and the Lib Dem has now written to Sir Nicholas to apologise.'

I wonder if the BBC will report this climbdown, after all Vince Cable is the BBC's go to economist.

So it's clear who the Lib Dems would support were they to hold the balance of power in a hung Parliament

The BBC report that

"The Lib Dems would not support a government which tried to make major spending cuts in the next financial year, leader Nick Clegg has said."

So that's clear; as the Lib Dems could not be the largest party after a General Election then a vote for the Lib Dems would be as good as a vote for Labour as the Lib Dems would only support a Labour minority government not a Conservative one.

So vote Labour and get Labour, vote Lib Dem and get Labour. Is it any wonder the BBC were reporting Vince Cable's words so positively this afternoon?

Gordon Brown fool or knave?

In 1997 Gordon Brown outlined his plans for the UK economy . "Stability is necessary for our future economic success" he informed the CBI. "The British economy of the future must be built not on the shifting sands of boom and bust, but on the bedrock of prudent and wise economic management."

Unfortunately the other components of Gordon Brown's 'bedrock' included a trillion-pound debt mountain and a decade of unchecked and unparalleled house price inflation.

In 2003 a then less than well-known Lib-Dem MP, Vince Cable, asked Gordon Brown an embarrassing question:

"Is it not true that...the growth of the British economy is sustained by consumer spending pinned against record levels of personal debt, which is secured, if at all, against house prices that the Bank of England describes as well above equilibrium level?"

A fair question, and in retrospect a farseeing one, however Gordon doesn't like criticism and responded thus:

"The Honourable Gentleman has been writing articles in the newspapers, as reflected in his contribution, that spread alarm, without substance, about the state of the economy..."

"Without substance"? Well done Gordon, so nobody saw what was coming?

A levy on properties worth over £1 million

Some questions and comments spring to mind about this Lib Dem policy:
How will property values be assessed? At the last rating valuation, at the top of the market, at last purchase, at estate agents valuation (if so which agent), at average for the road, at highest value in the area, at lowest value in the area? Not as easy as it sounds is it oh economic genius Vince Cable?

This policy will unduly penalise Londoners over the rest of the Country. Whilst a nice house almost anywhere in the Country can be purchased for less than £1 million, in London it is not quite that clear-cut; but then a bit of class war rhetoric by the Lib Dems may help shore up their vote against a Labour party also trying to shore up its core vote.

Vince Cable appears to be assuming that everyone that owns an expensive house has high income, what about retired people in large old family homes, say around Richmond Green? Will they be forced to sell their houses as they may not be able to afford the 0.5% "levy"?

The levy is set to start at 0.5%, £5,000 on a £1 million house, will there be a set upper limit on the rate of the levy or will it like stamp duty be hiked ever upwards as an extra "wealth" tax?

Lib Dem inconsistencies of policy get no coverage on the BBC

The BBC are endlessly looking for dividing lines within the Conservative Party: on the EU, the NHS, public spending etc.

Meanwhile a newspaper spots a Lib Dem dividing line that the BBC will ignore. Sam Coates reports that:

"Vince Cable on the Today programme: "One has to look at everything, it isn’t sensible as I think the Conservatives are doing, to say that you know, there are certain areas we cant go anywhere near which of course means that the pain everywhere else is much greater. I think we have to look at everything."

Nick Clegg in the TES (in an article headlined "Lib Dems will ringfence education cash, claims Clegg") the party leader responds to a question about education spending: “We won’t cut. Absolutely nothing could be more important. We’ve got this ballooning structural deficit, which means we will not be able to pay for things in the way we did before. That is a fact and we need to learn to abandon some policies and funding pledges we’ve made in the past. That will be painful for us and painful for all the parties. But one of the things I’m absolutely adamant about is that it would be madness to cut support for schools in order to deal with the poisonous legacy of this recession.”

Other parties would be taken apart if they made this kind of mistake..."

Almost right, although I would argue that in reality only (of the three main parties) the Conservative Party would be taken apart for such differences of policy. Indeed if you look at the coverage of Alistair Darling and Gordon Brown's recent attitude to cuts and the way the BBC have reported it you will see coverage based upon nods and winks and genial good humour as Gordon Brown is carefully lead to his new position.

The economics of envy

The news that one hundred public figures have joined a pressure group's campaign for a High Pay Commission to curb "excessive" pay does not surprise me. People like Vince Cable and Jon Cruddas will always take such a stand, it shores up their vote and may save their parties from meltdown in the coming general election. The campaign has been launched by Compass who are calling for measures such as maximum wage ratios and bonus taxation. Odd I thought there was bonus taxation; called income tax. As I have said before there are two very good reasons why banks pay such large bonuses (compared to basic salaries); first it keeps the staff working very long hours rather than sitting back and just taking the money, second bonuses do not count as pensionable income and so their pension liabilities are reduced. It is odd that the BBC and others never think about these points, I suppose they do not fit the "narrative" of "greedy bankers".

I read today that "Chancellor Alistair Darling has said he is ready to curb bonuses if necessary." If necessary for what? To raise taxation to pay for the mess Gordon Brown has made of the UK economy? To shore up the Labour vote? To get a positive headline in The Guardian, The Daily Mirror and on the BBC?

Who's the Shadow Chancellor?

Vince Cable seems to think he is, maybe he listens to the BBC too much.

Unblocking the credit blockage

Take a watch of Thursday's Newsnight and see how you feel it goes. Angela Eagle for the Labour "government" complete with stock phrases and digs at Conservative "cuts", Vince Cable for the Lib Dems and the BBC world view and John Redwood for the Conservatives and common-sense. Oh and I nearly forgot the Labour insider Kirsty Wark on-hand to see "fair play".

John Redwood does his best despite being heavily outnumbered and comes over far better and convincing than George Osborne. Here is John Redwood's take on the interview. Angela Eagle seems, understandably, not to have alerted her constituents to her Newsnight appearance. Vince Cable hasn't mentioned his appearance either, but since he is hardly off the BBC I suppose mentioning every appearance might seem excessive.

Maybe John Redwood could become Shadow Chancellor and George Osborne something more suited to his TV-unfriendly "toff" image in a pre-election Conservative re-shuffle.

Who should run the UK economy

ComRes's poll of business leaders for The Independent contains an interesting finding. When asked who they trusted to run the UK economy, these were the results:
Ken Clarke 65%
David Cameron 62%
Vince Cable 61%
George Osborne 39%
Lord Mandelson 31%
Nick Clegg 27%
Gordon Brown 16%
Alistair Darling 14%


Ken Clarke's record speaks for itself, it is interesting that Vince Cable rates so high and that even Peter Mandelson and Nick Clegg rate higher than Dumb and Dumber.

The next Speaker of the House of Commons

Now that Michael Martin has finally noticed that he is about as popular as his mate Gordon Brown and announced his resignation for just over a month's time, the race is on the be the new Speaker. What could be finer than luxurious Westminster apartments, a large entertainment budget and lots of foreign jaunts.

Already the just about Conservative MP, John Bercow, who seems to have spent much of the last few years buttering up Labour MPs, possibly for just this opportunity, looks like jumping into the fray and the BBC seem like they might look favourably upon him. He would meet the "fairness" doctrine of being a Conservative but so loosely that the Labour/BBC alliance could support him.

Other possible candidates include Sir Alan Haselhurst, one of the deputy Speakers, who the BBC carefully talk down in their "Speaker: Runners and riders". In fact the whole BBC list is a fine example of how the BBC try and set the agenda, so here it is with my comments:

"ALAN BEITH - CONFIRMED CANDIDATE

Veteran Lib Dem MP, with more than 30 years experience. Former party leadership contender. Chairman of the constitutional affairs committee. Respected figure who was in the running for the job in 2000. Has told his local newspaper, the Newcastle Journal, he plans to stand again this time: "This is a crucial time for the House of Commons and if I have enough support across the parties, I am willing to take on the task of leading reform as Speaker. But it is a matter for the House to decide.""
Lib Dem and therefore preferable, in the BBC's mind, to a Tory


SIR GEORGE YOUNG - YET TO CONFIRM

Conservative grandee and widely-respected chairman of the Standards and Privileges Committee. One of the bookmakers' favourites to land the job of Speaker after missing out in 2000. But Eton-educated background may count against him in the eyes of Labour MPs. Ladbrokes make him 8/1.
After all the "class war" accusations made by and on behalf of Michael Martin, the BBC have to try and start another one. I presume if the BBC can get it out there that having gone to Eton disbars one from becoming Speaker then maybe they could do the same for putative Prime Ministers. Is there a Labour equivalent of "Conservative Grandee"? There must be a phrase to describe the sort of long-serving Labour MP who is part of the Labour establishment...


SIR ALAN HASELHURST -YET TO CONFIRM

Conservative MP and deputy speaker. Widely-respected figure who also served as deputy to former Speaker Betty Boothroyd. Another favourite at the bookmakers but being singled out by The Daily Telegraph for claiming £142,119 in second homes allowances since 2001, despite having no mortgage on the property, will not help his chances. Joint favourite at 4/1 with Frank Field, according to Ladbrokes.
"Widely-respected" at the moment but let's see if the BBC can change that with mention of his expenses.


SIR MENZIES CAMPBELL - YET TO CONFIRM

Former Liberal Democrat leader. Respected for his integrity on all sides of the house and was one of the favourites to land the job last time. But chances may be hampered by criticism of his second home allowance claim.
A real BBC favourite and not a Tory... Odd how Alan Hazelhursts second home allowance figure is detailed but Sir Menzies' is just alluded to.


FRANK FIELD -YET TO CONFIRM

Maverick former Labour minister who sometimes seem more respected on Opposition side of the house - which may count against him if he decides to run. Led successful campaign to reverse 10p tax band cut. Has also led calls for wholesale reform of the Commons.
Nice choice of words here; "maverick" I presume because he did "think the unthinkable" and not back down. I also like the fact that the sucessful candidate must be acceptable to Labour which seems to mean be a loyal Labour MP, do the BBC understand the history of the Speaker's role?


JOHN BERCOW - YET TO CONFIRM

Backbench Tory MP. Former right winger, who has moved towards the centre in recent years. Thought to have the backing of several Labour MPs for the Speaker's job but may not be popular enough with his own side to stand a realistic chance. Ladbrokes have him at 8/1.
"Moved towards the centre", surely moved right through the centre and heading left. No mention of Jhn Bercow's expenses, why?


SIR PATRICK CORMACK -YET TO CONFIRM

Veteran Tory backbencher who was in the running for the job last time. Chairman of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee. Expert on constitutional affairs but may be seen as too much of a traditionalist to lead changes demanded by most MPs.
I wouldn't disagree but again a Conservative MP with negative points.


CHRIS MULLIN - YET TO CONFIRM

Former Labour minister and diarist, with an independent-minded streak. Standing down at the next election but has been talked of as a possible interim candidate for Speaker, who might gain the necessary cross-party support.
An interesting choice, again positively spoken of as he is a Labour MP.


TONY WRIGHT - YET TO CONFIRM

Widely-respected chairman of the public administration committee, who has led a number of investigations into the conduct of MPs and civil servants. Has been talked of by some as a possible contender from the Labour benches.
More positive coverage of a Labour candidate.


VINCE CABLE -YET TO CONFIRM

Well-known figure with the public who would also be respected on all sides of the house. May wish to stick with the Lib Dem Treasury brief with which he has made his name.
The BBC's favourite economics expert, often the only opposition MP allowed to voice his opinions on the BBC. The BBC would be loathe to lose him as then they might have to interview a Tory.


SYLVIA HEAL - YET TO CONFIRM

Labour MP and deputy speaker. Sister of Labour MP Ann Keen, who organised Michael Martin's successful campaign for the Speakership in 2000.
No mention of Ann Keen's troughing exploits?


RICHARD SHEPHERD - YET TO CONFIRM

Independent-minded veteran Tory MP, first elected in 1979. Has led criticism of Speaker Martin. Stood unsuccessfully for the Speakership in October 2000. Ladbrokes makes him 14/1.
I think the BBC are unsure about this one as this one is in note form, maybe still waiting for No 10's steer.


ANN WIDDECOMBE - RULED HERSELF OUT

The former shadow home secretary is one of Parliament's best-known and most respected figures. Has said she is definitely standing down at the next general election and appeared to pour cold water on the idea of doing the Speaker's job on an interim basis in a BBC interview, after allies on the Tory benches talked up her chances of landing it.
The BBC don't agree with much of Ann Widecombe's views and would hate to see her as Speaker, hence the talking down of the chances of her standing as an interim candidate. Of course an interim candidate is the Labour/BBC's nightmare scenario as that means that the new Parliament, a Parliament likely to have a large Conservative majority, might elect as Speaker someone who the opposition benches might think unsuitable, rather as the 1997 Labour Party did. This is not how the Speaker should be elected but by deviating from the convention of alternating Speakers (in 1997) the Labour party have likely brought this into happening.

The politics of envy

The BBC are pleased to report that:

"Vince Cable is to call for highly paid executives in the private and public sectors to be named and shamed.

The Lib Dem Deputy leader's speech to the party's spring conference will demand the disclosure of all salaries more than £194,000 - what the PM earns.

Publicly listed firms publish board members' pay but Mr Cable will claim some of the highest earners do not join boards to avoid full disclosure.

Mr Cable is expected to name two of them in his speech."

The socialist BBC and their fellow travellers love to indulge in a bit of the politics of envy, don't they?

Why was Robert Peston so angry when he reported that Barclays Bank had found alternative funding to the UK government?

Robert Peston and indeed much of the BBC sounded furious that Barclays Bank had found an alternative to the Government's money with conditions. John Redwood seems to agree, his article on Bank Nationalisation starts:

"The reaction to Barclays has told us a lot about the agenda of Vince Cable and some Labour figures. They clearly want the taxpayer to end up owning more banks. Their anger that Barclays have paid more to keep their freedom, tells us the UK taxpayer is getting a rotten deal from the proposed share purchses the government wishes to make. The way Vince Cable was allowed so much BBC airtime to front run nationalisation, without any Labour slap downs, tells us it was a policy they favoured. He was a useful front man to avoid accusations that Old Labour had been rehabilitated. Meanwhile, all sensible proposals to avoid state owned banks were studiously kept off the airwaves to avoid complicating the argument."

Do read the rest of the article and wonder why the BBC only ever ask one ex-economist MP onto their programmes, have they not heard of John Redwood?

Vincent Cable may not be asked by the BBC to comment on this policy

Vincent Cable is the BBC's favourite expert economist politician, always on-hand with his BBC approved views. However his piece in today's Independent that includes this thought:

"There are demands for a windfall tax. But this largely misses the point. The headline profits usually relate to global operations, of which only a modest part is in the UK. Even if there were a large UK-based windfall tax, the same logic would apply to wheat farmers, who have also benefited from rising world prices. What is more, all these arguments for a windfall tax ignore the inconvenient truth that North Sea producers already face a windfall tax."

Something tells me that the BBC will not be asking Vincent Cable on to discuss this policy as the BBC have already decided how they feel about a "windfall tax".

Following Vincent Cable at PMQs today

Not sure where I found this earlier today on the web, I will gladly acknowledge the author if they contact me.