Birmingham Post - News Blog

Government agency cuts 122 regeneration schemes - but won't say which ones

Fri, 03 Jul 2009 15:30:39 +0000

Funding for 122 regeneration projects around the West Midlands is to be axed, a government agency has announced - but it refuses to say which ones are affected.

Advantage West Midlands, a quango funded by the taxpayer, has been forced to cut spending on regeneration schemes for three reasons:

The Government has cut its budget by £48 million.

The money it raises itself, through land and property receipts, is down by £21 million.

Business Secretary Lord Mandelson has ordered it to focus the money it does have on measures that directly support industry, rather than regeneration.

Perhaps, then, it has no choice but to withdraw funding from some regeneration schemes which had previously been told they could expect it.

But the refusal to name the projects concerned is a pretty blatant attempt to limit the public relations damage by making it hard for us to report what has actually happened.

The people running the projects involved know who they are, as they were told in letters from AWM chief executive Mike Laverty earlier this week.

I can't see any reason why a Freedom of Information request couldn't be used to get the details, but hopefully AWM will see sense and just publish them before that happens.

Edit: AWM have sent me this statement:

"A list of projects to which funding is no longer allocated will be released on request by Advantage West Midlands shortly. The release of this information to the media is being delayed slightly in order to ensure that affected applicants have received notification and had time to assess the impact of the funding decision.

"Some applicants may already be in discussion with alternative funding providers. We do not want to compromise those discussions by announcing that those projects have definitely been cut, when in fact they might proceed through alternative mechanisms."

MG Rover Inquiry is Complete, But We May Need To Wait For The Results

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:30:10 +0000

The inquiry into the collapse of MG Rover has completed its work - but we may still have to wait to discover what it says.

My colleagues on the business desk are working on a story reporting that the inquiry into the collapse of MG Rover has been completed, at a cost of almost £16 million, four years after it began.

The collapse of the Birmingham carmaker in 2005 directly cost around 5,200 jobs according to the National Audit Office, which measured the number of former MG Rover staff who signed on for Jobseekers Allowance. Their 2006 report (a 1.38mb PDF download) is here.

The Government has revealed that a new report setting out the findings of an official inquiry into MG Rover is now in the hands of Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, in a Parliamentary written answer to Richard Burden (Lab), the Northfield MP who has been increasingly vocal in demanding its publication.

Business Minister Ian Lucas said in the written answer: "The inspectors delivered their report on 11 June 2009. It will be for my noble Friend the Secretary of State to consider its findings and next steps."

The steps Lord Mandelson will take obviously depend on what the report says.

I say there could be a delay before it is published because the report's findings will determine whether any further action is needed. If it is needed, then the publication of the report could be considered prejudicial to that action.

Commons Fees Office Censored Expenses Even When MPs Objected

Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:13:44 +0000

Coverage of MPs' expenses has understandably focused on the way that key details were blanked out.

Some of the worst excesses were only spotted because a newspaper obtained unofficial copies of MPs' receipts, with all the details intact.

As I have said in the Birmingham Post in the past, I was one of those people who had doubts about whether the Daily Telegraph was right to publish advance, leaked details of expenses claims - but was soon forced to agree that they were.

We always knew that the receipts would be censored before the official release. You can see how the process works in the video I made a few weeks back.

But I think some of the reports in today's papers, which suggest MPs simply got to choose what to delete, give the wrong impression.

I've written today, in a story which should go up on this website before long, about two MPs - Andrew Mitchell (Con Sutton Coldfield) and Liam Byrne (Lab Hodge Hill) - who actually asked for information to be public, and were told by the Commons fees office that it would be censored whether they liked it or not.

MPs' Expenses Will Finally Be Published on Thursday

Tue, 16 Jun 2009 23:23:56 +0000

You've seen what journalists make of MPs' expenses claims. And you may have seen some of the claims themselves, when individual MPs chose to place them on their websites.

But on Thursday, June 18, the great British public will at last be allowed to examined every claim, in detail, when the House of Commons finally gets around to making them officially available.

The whole lot is going up on the website for people to examine.

Well, kind of. Because what you're going to get is the censored version (officially called the "redacted" version"), missing out details such as the addresses of homes MPs are claiming subsidies on.

So you won't know, for example, if MPs are claiming cash for properties in their constituency, or in London, or somewhere else entirely.

Neither will it be possible to tell if they have "flipped" properties - buying furniture for one home and then designating another one as their second residence, allowing them to get a second sofa.

Perhaps it doesn't matter - as the newspapers have already uncovered all the dirt.

But I'm betting people won't see it that way. This is a chance for the nation's bloggers to prove Gordon Brown is right about the power of the interweb and spot the stories the traditional media have missed.

At least, assuming they're not already sick to the back teeth of expenses.

Liam Byrne's first task - defend the funding bias against English regions

Mon, 08 Jun 2009 15:25:32 +0000

Birmingham MP Liam Byrne has been handed a poisoned chalice in one of his first tasks as Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

The MP for Hodge Hill will appear before a House of Lords Committee to discuss the Barnett formula, which helps determine how public spending is allocated to the nations of the United Kingdom.

Unless the Government is about to announce a major change of policy, it means he will have to defend a system which means regions such as the West Midlands make do with less money for public services than Scotland - even though average wealth in Scotland is higher.

The system has been in place since 1978, so it's not new. But it's become increasingly controversial since Scottish devolution.

Cabinet Reshuffle List in Full

Fri, 05 Jun 2009 16:51:16 +0000

Downing Street has released the official list of Cabinet members following the reshuffle:

HER MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT: THE CABINET

The Queen is pleased to approve the following Ministerial appointments.

The Queen has also been pleased to approve that Lord Adonis and Ben Bradshaw MP be sworn of Her Majesty's most honourable Privy Council.

Cabinet

Prime Minister, First Lord of the Treasury and Minister for the Civil Service

The Rt Hon Gordon Brown MP

Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal; Minister for Women and Equality (and deputising for the Prime Minister at PMQs)

The Rt Hon Harriet Harman QC MP

First Secretary of State, Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and Lord President of the Council

The Rt Hon Lord Mandelson

Chancellor of the Exchequer

The Rt Hon Alistair Darling MP

Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

The Rt Hon David Miliband MP

Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor

The Rt Hon Jack Straw MP

Secretary of State for the Home Department

The Rt Hon Alan Johnson MP

Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

The Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP

Secretary of State for International Development

The Rt Hon Douglas Alexander MP

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

The Rt Hon John Denham MP

Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families

The Rt Hon Ed Balls MP

Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change

The Rt Hon Ed Miliband MP

Secretary of State for Health

The Rt Hon Andy Burnham MP

Secretary of State for Northern Ireland

The Rt Hon Shaun Woodward MP * and #

Leader of the House of Lords and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster

The Rt Hon Baroness Royall of Blaisdon

Minister for the Cabinet Office, and for the Olympics and Paymaster General

The Rt Hon Tessa Jowell MP

Secretary of State for Scotland

The Rt Hon Jim Murphy MP

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

The Rt Hon Yvette Cooper MP

Chief Secretary to the Treasury

The Rt Hon Liam Byrne MP

Secretary of State for Wales

The Rt Hon Peter Hain MP

Secretary of State for Defence

The Rt Hon Bob Ainsworth MP

Secretary of State for Transport

Lord Adonis

Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

Ben Bradshaw MP

Other Cabinet attendees

Chief Whip (Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury)

The Rt Hon Nick Brown MP

Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office

The Rt Hon Lord Malloch-Brown

Minister of State (Housing), Department for Communities and Local Government

The Rt Hon John Healey MP

Minister of State (Business), Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

The Rt Hon Pat McFadden MP

Minister of State (Science and Innovation), Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

The Rt Hon Lord Drayson*

Attend Cabinet when their Ministerial responsibilities are on the agenda
Attorney General

The Rt Hon Baroness Scotland of Asthal QC

Minister of State (Children), Department for Children, Schools and Families

The Rt Hon Dawn Primarolo MP

Minister of State (Employment), Department for Work and Pensions

The Rt Hon Jim Knight MP

Minister of State (Regional Economic Development and Co-ordination) Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

The Rt Hon Rosie Winterton MP

The Queen has accepted the following resignations:

Cabinet resignations

The Rt Hon Hazel Blears MP
The Rt Hon Geoff Hoon MP
The Rt Hon John Hutton MP
The Rt Hon Paul Murphy MP
The Rt Hon James Purnell MP
The Rt Hon Jacqui Smith MP

Other resignations

The Rt Hon Tony McNulty MP**
The Rt Hon Margaret Beckett MP**
The Rt Hon Beverley Hughes MP**

* unpaid
** attended Cabinet
# Provides Ministerial support to the Prime Minister in the Cabinet Office on the coordination of Government Policy and Strategy

Gordon Brown Can't Hide Behind Labour's Rulebook

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 19:35:44 +0000

Gordon Brown's allies have been busy reminding journalists and Labour MPs that, under party rules, they can't get rid of him even by gathering the 75 or 80 signatures they supposedly have lined up.

It remains to be seen whether reports that Labour plotters really do have a long list of MPs ready to stick the knife into Mr Brown after the elections.

They are apparently drafting a letter calling on him to go, for colleagues to sign, but this may be an exaggeration or wishful thinking on their part.

If they can get the numbers, however, Labour rules won't help the Prime Minister.
Tony Blair's friends made the same point about the Labour rulebook when he was clinging on to office.

It didn't save Mr Blair, because the rules aren't the point. If a significant part of your Parliamentary Party wants you gone, then you have to go.

Is it time to stop naming and shaming MPs?

Fri, 29 May 2009 12:38:29 +0000

The House of Commons has been in recess this week - on holiday, in plain English - and I was hoping for a bit of a rest.

It didn't happen, as the expenses row continued to drag on, leading up to the resignation of West Midlands MP Julie Kirkbride (Con Bromsgrove) on Thursday. Another local MP, Bill Cash (Con Stone) is in the news today, Friday.

To be brutally honest, I've had enough of studying people's receipts and examining their living arrangements. As the Archbishop of Canterbury said, it's not good for democracy - and while many of the practices that have been exposed are scandalous, some of the shock-horror stories that grab headlines aren't really that shocking.

Certainly the issues of how to change the expenses system, and what should happen to MPs who abused their expenses, still need to be in the spotlight.

But is it time to stop the daily focus on individual MPs and their wrongdoings?

Video: Birmingham MPs talk about their expenses

Thu, 21 May 2009 01:12:33 +0000

This is a video blog post showing some of the work I have been doing as Political Editor of the Birmingham Mail and Birmingham Post over the past week, and how MPs have responded to the expenses controversy.

"This was all set up to give people a little bit of extra cash and hide it from the taxpayer, and that was very wrong." John Hemming MP.

You may also be interested in my Post column.

MP Steve McCabe paid back £2,000 in mortgage expenses

Mon, 18 May 2009 22:49:35 +0000

This is a story I have just sent over which may appear on the news section of the website soon:

Birmingham MP Steve McCabe over-claimed £2,000 for a mortgage from Commons expenses four years ago, he has admitted.

The MP said he had made a mistake in his expenses claim, and agreed to pay the money back as soon as the error was spotted.

Mr McCabe (Lab Hall Green), a Government whip, is highlighted in the latest round-up of expenses claims published by a national newspaper.

The Daily Telegraph said he had overclaimed on his mortgage by £4,059, but Mr McCabe said this figure was wrong.

He had in fact made a claim which was out by £2,000 after wrongly calculating the annual interest on his mortgage, when interest rates changed.

The claim was for a one-bedroom flat in London. Under Commons rules, MPs are allowed to claim for second homes used to allow them to carry out their Parliamentary roles.

Mr McCabe claims no subsidy on the home in Hall Green he shares with his partner.

He said: "If you look at the total figures for that year, I was actually the MP with the lowest total expenses claim.

"That's not what happens when someone is on the make. I made a simple mistake, which was corrected."

Tories take expenses transparency to a new level

Fri, 15 May 2009 16:00:29 +0000

The Conservative Shadow Cabinet are now going to publish every expenses claim they make online, as soon as they are made.

You can see the results here:

So, for example, you can see that North Shropshire MP Owen Paterson, the shadow Northern Ireland Secretary, claimed £108 for newspapers on Wednesday, May 13.

Caroline Spelman (Merdien) and Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield) will also be publishing their expenses online, as members of the Shadow Cabinet.

Cameron devotes his TV election broadcast tonight to the subject of expenses - including an admission that MPs had been claiming what they could "get away with" rather than what they need.

Here's a sneak preview:

Zombies line up to take a bite out of Gordon Brown

Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:26:23 +0000

It's the night of the living dead at Westminster, as former Cabinet ministers who served under Tony Blair line up to criticise the government.

Former Transport Secretary Stephen Byers criticised the pips-squeezing 50p tax rate, calling it an exercise in "political positioning and tactical manoeuvring than a principled, strategic approach to taxation and the raising of revenue".

Then David Blunkett, the former Home Secretary, came out against ID cards - one of the most controversial issues facing Jacqui Smith, his successor at the Home Office.

Blunkers is calling instead for the introduction of biometric passports, which are effectively the same thing. But that won't stop opponents throwing his comments in the Government's face the next time Ministers try to justify spending £6 billion on ID cards.

And finally, Charles Clarke, another former Foreign Secretary, chimes in with his own criticisms of the Budget, claiming: "I don't think there's a coherent sense of strategy".

It's been said that the Budget has finally killed off New Labour. But the Blairites refuse to go away.

Labour backbenchers reject Brown's expenses reforms

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:16:31 +0000

We report that Labour MPs in the West Midlands have rejected Gordon Brown's proposals to reform House of Commons allowances.

One Labour backbencher in Birmingham supported the proposals, with three expressing doubts. A number of Labour MPs in other parts of the West Midlands are also opposed to Mr Brown's plans.

The Prime Minister should be able to count on the support of MPs who are also ministers or whips, who face a choice of voting with the government or resigning. However, this would not be enough for him to win a vote on the issue without support from the Conservatives or Lib Dems.

Here are some of the views voiced by MPs in more detail:

Richard Burden (Lab Northfield) said: "I am uncomfortable with what is being proposed. Sir Christopher Kelly is taking a look at this issue.

"I think the public wants to see an outside view, rather than politicians doing it themselves."

Roger Godsiff (Lab Sparkbrook and Small Heath) said: "I think it is best that these issues are dealt with by an independent committee rather than elected Members."

Birmingham MP Lynne Jones (Lab Selly Oak) rejected proposals for an attendance fee and has set out her own proposals in a House of Commons motion.

Wolverhampton MP Rob Marris (Lab Wolverhampton South West) said: "The difficulty with the proposals now on the table is that they lack clarity. Secondly, Sir Chris Kelly, who is looking at this on behalf of Parliament, thinks that these proposals are premature."

Black Country MP David Winnick (Lab Walsall North) also expressed concern in the House of Commons last week, as he asked Harriet Harman, the leader of the House: "If the new proposal is put forward, does she accept that people are bound to think that Members are being paid extra money just for turning up to do our job?"

Tony Wright, Labour MP for Cannock, also signed an open letter to the Prime Minister last week warning that the Government's plans had "serious practical difficulties which need to be thought through".

As chair of the Public Administration Committee, Dr Wright is considered to be an influential backbencher, particularly on issues of constitutional reform and the operation of Parliament.

Khalid Mahmood (Lab Perry Barr) is one of few Labour backbenchers vocally supporting plans for an attendance allowance.

Tories want to give Baron Digby Jones a promotion

Fri, 24 Apr 2009 14:17:13 +0000

He's already the Baron of Birmingham, but former CBI Chief Digby Jones is doing such a good job sticking the knife into the Government that the Tories think he deserves even more.

Lord Jones was given a House of Lords post by Gordon Brown when he briefly became a trade minister in the Labour administration.

But he's now a favourite with the Conservatives, as Hansard shows:

Mr. John Gummer (Suffolk, Coastal Con): "Is my hon. Friend aware that the former Labour Minister, Lord Digby Jones, said today that the Budget gave him no hope whatever about the future of British exporters and the British economy, and that it was a Budget without any kind of vision?

"Is that not an interesting comment from somebody who was sitting on the Labour Benches only a few weeks ago?"

[Shadow Chancellor] George Osborne: "It is a telling comment from a person who was appointed just days after the Prime Minister became Prime Minister.

"No doubt the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change [Ed Miliband] and his cronies, such as the Chief Secretary [Yvetter Cooper], plotted the appointment of Digby Jones for months.

"They thought it would be a brilliant appointment. I have to say that some Members, including me, were sceptical about whether he should really be Lord Digby Jones of Birmingham, but given how helpful he is being at the moment I think that he should indeed represent an entire city in the House of Lords."

Miss Julie Kirkbride (Bromsgrove) (Con): "And Bromsgrove."

Mr Osborne: "Indeed. He can have a dukedom as far as I am concerned."

Taxing the rich could cost Labour votes with the fairly well off

Thu, 23 Apr 2009 15:37:53 +0000

Class war has never been popular in this country. Despite the current antipathy towards rich and greedy bankers, I don't see that changing.

So Labour shouldn't feel too pleased with itself over the tax changes announced yesterday.

I write in today's Post that Labour hoped to place the Conservatives in a difficult position with the introduction of a 50p top tax rate for people earning more than £150,000.

George Osborne, the Shadow Chancellor, will inevitably be asked whether he plans to reverse the increase if the Tories gain power.

If he does, then he could be accused of helping the rich while the rest of us are struggling. But if he doesn't, he could face protests from Conservative MPs who oppose punitive tax rates for high earners - or, at least, this is what Labour hopes.

Most of today's papers have taken a similar line, seeing the new tax on high-earners as an attempt to draw up battle lines for the General Election, probably due next year.

It's possible that we've all got it wrong, and political calculations never entered the Chancellor's mind as he looked for ways to raise revenue the Treasury urgently needs.

The top tax rate will bring in £2.4 billion a year, according to Treasury estimates. Another £1.5 billion will come from withdrawing the personal allowance on earnings over £100,000, and £3.1 billion will come from restriction pension tax relief for high earners.

In total, people earning above £100,000 will pay an extra £7 billion a year into the Exchequer, if we accept the Treasury's estimates. It's not small change.

But I'm not convinced the public will be jumping for joy over this either. Hostility towards Fred the Shred hasn't translated into hostility against everyone who owns a Jaguar or a big house.

The trouble with taxing the rich is that it unsettles people who don't earn huge sums - and probably never will - but still fear they might be next.

After all, the median salary in this country (the best guide to what an "average" person earns) is about £19,600. But plenty of people earn significantly more - and are vaguely aware that they are better off than most.

Labour can't win by appealing only to its core vote. It needs the support of the middle classes and "Middle England" - many of whom really do live in the middle of England, making our region such an important electoral battleground.

The danger for Gordon Brown is that someone on 40 grand doesn't despise the people on higher salaries, but identifies with them instead.