Friday, 19 July 2013




Seen Elsewhere




FRIDAY, JULY 19, 2013

How Lords Help Lobbyists Flout Rules

Cameron’s Lobbying Bill certainly leaves a lot to be desired, not least with its failure to address the clear abuse of parliamentary passes by lobbyists working for Lords. Take the case of Lord Kilclooney. The Ulster Unionist peer sponsors a pass for the confusingly-named Edward Lord, a LibDem City of London Corporation figure. Lord was done over by the Indy back in 2011 for his involvement in a deal to lobby for alleged Rwandan war criminals. Yet he is wandering round Parliament…
These days Lord is the Deputy Chairman of the European Azerbaijan Society, which according to its website specialises in public affairs. In his City of London register of interests he also confirms he lobbies on behalf of four other organisations, indeed Lord declares no less than thirteen links to“bodies whose principal purposes includes the influence of public opinion or policy”. A lobbyist pure and simple, given access to the corridors of power by a peer. This is a scandal the Bill needs to deal with…

THURSDAY, JULY 18, 2013

Rupert Murdoch’s letter to John Whittingdale



Guidogram Going Out Shortly

The Guidogram round-up of the week is going out shortly.
Thousands of Westminster insiders read the Guidogram, everyone from Downing Street insiders to Fleet Street never miss it. All your David “The Jews” Ward latest and more…
Join the conspiracy and become a subscriber to the Guidogram, free, to keep in the loop. You’re either in front of Guido, or behind…

DECC’s Green Deal Flops as Only 36 Sign Up

The Green Deal is a giant white elephant. Figures snuck out at the end of term show, as of the end of last month, of the 306 Green Deal plans for making properties energy efficient, 270 are “new”plans, where someone has simply asked for a quote. There have been only a measly 36 deals where the customer has actually signed a plan and energy efficiency measures are set to be installed. None so far have been completed.
Another stunning success for the reshuffle ripe Department for Energy and Climate Change.

New Lobby Mili-Spinner: Runners and Riders


Paul Waugh has put the cat among the pigeons today with his news that Bob Roberts will be hiring a Deputy Director of Communications at the Labour Party, with a lobby figure in the running:
“As for those in the running, there have been worries among some in the Shadow Cabinet that some journos tipped for the post are a tad too close to Gordon Brown’s former aides for comfort. It hasn’t gone unnoticed that one Lobby journo in particular has been Tweeting stuff of late that suggests just that…”
Who could Waugh be talking about? A cursory glance at Damian McBride’s Twitter feed shows that his most recent interactions have been with Paddy O’Flynn, Matthew d’Ancona and Patrick Hennessy. Given O’Flynn is seeking to become and a UKIP MEP and d’Ancona is Cameroon through-and-through, Guido is confident about ruling those two out. Hennessy on the other hand?
The Sindy’s Jane Merrick also talks to the old Brownite regularly, but Guido reckons her husband Toby Helm would be a better fit for the job. It’s  not as if he’s adverse to doing Labour’s dirty work already and it would be a promotion in terms of influence from the dying Observer. James Kirkup is another McBride fan, though Guido is not sure he’s a Labour man. James Lyons is surely having too much fun winding up Cameron from the Mirror to make it official, while it would be too big a pay cut for Kevin Maguire. He’s hardly a fan of Miliband either…
Vincent Moss from the Sunday Mirror would not be a crazy hire, though to Guido there is only one name that sticks out from the crowd to fix Ed’s media problems. Cometh the hour, cometh the Hodges…

Letter From LibDem Chief Whip to David Ward


David Ward MP House of Commons LONDON SW1A 0AA 
17th July, 2013
Thank you for coming to see Nick, Simon and me this afternoon.
You will recall that we discussed the report of your two meetings with the group convened by Simon, which included Jewish colleagues. As Nick indicated to you, that report was a largely positive one. In particular we were all pleased to note that you appreciated the need to use language in this debate that was proportionate and precise.
It was therefore with immense disappointment that we were presented with your public comment made on 13th July on Twitter in the following terms:
“Am I wrong or are am I right? At long last the #Zionists are losing the battle – how long can the #apartheid State of #Israel last?”
We were in unanimous agreement that questioning the continued existence of the State of Israel fails the test of language that is “proportionate and precise”.
We want to be clear with you that in this process we are not concerned about your views and opinions on the policies of present or previous Israeli governments, nor the situation in the Israeli-occupied territories, nor the strength of feeling with which your views are held. As we have sought to impress upon you repeatedly, we are having to decide on whether language you chose to use in January and February, and now this month, is language which brings the party into disrepute or harms the interests of the Party.
During the meeting, we put it to you that your most recent statement – which specifically questions the continuing existence of the State of Israel – is neither proportionate nor precise. Unfortunately, we considered your explanation to be unconvincing and it did not satisfy us that you understood the importance of conducting the debate on this issue at all times and in all places in terms that are proportionate and precise.
We wish to reiterate that this is not about telling you what your views should be. Indeed, we have all visited the occupied territories and we have all experienced an instinctive and liberal reaction to the humanitarian suffering we have witnessed. You will know that Nick, Simon and I have a consistent track record of being outspoken about illegal settlement activities of Israeli governments and the threat this poses to the two-state solution for which the party has long argued.
It is also immensely frustrating for us to find ourselves constantly responding to questions about disproportionate and imprecise language from you. These interventions cause considerable offence rather than addressing questions of political substance about the plight of the Palestinian people and the right of Israel’s citizens to live a life free of violence. It is extraordinarily difficult to gain traction in that debate at an effective political level if the expression of our concerns is undermined by the way your language misrepresents the view of our party.
Whilst we understand you have your own views about this process, which has been long and complicated, we also hope you recognise that we have given you every opportunity to reconcile the expression of your views with the party’s policy on a two-state solution. Unfortunately, you have not been able to do that.
Therefore, it is with regret that I have to inform you that we have decided to suspend the Liberal Democrat whip from you. This period of suspension will be with immediate effect until 13th September inclusive. I very much regret that it has been necessary to take this action.
Yours ever,
Alistair Carmichael