Council Tax has earned its place as the most

The latest figures for public sector employment show a welcome decline - 22,000 fewer in the last quarter of 2006. There needs to be steady pressure to reduce the numbers of administrative jobs, and to cut out unnecessary functions and initiiatives, to start to get a grip on the deficit and on public spending.

The overall totals are still 750,000 higher than in 1997. The pity is the failure to find jobs for well trained doctors and nurses. We need to reduce the totals in the public sector by a large number, but not by skimping

I went to an interesting lunch this week, to act as one of the Commons hosts for visiting Parliamentarians from around the Commonwealth.

I invited the three developing countries represented at my table to tell me what they thought about overseas aid, how it could be improved, and whether they would like more of it.

One MP criticised it, saying it put off the day her country would make more progress for itself in creating jobs and higher incomes. The other two agreed with her that all too often the incumbent government diverted it into projects that they controlled, to make clear to voters that the home government was delivering the

Gordon Brown has started to show us his vision of Britain under new management.

In place of Blair’s grandiose

This government loves targets. Some

It is good news that the review of party funding may conclude there should be a

The Today programme decided to take half the story from this website on the effects of global warming and misrepresent it to David Cameron in an interview. It is low grade journalism, showing the BBC are desperate to create trouble within the Conservative party but can only do so by taking a few phrases out of context.

No sensible person likes the idea of more or higher taxes. Socialist parties like Labour and the Lib Dems always think more and higher taxes are the answer to everything. All New Labour brought to the party was the idea that you should tell people you were keeping taxes down, whilst find as many ways as possible to put them up in ways you hoped people would not notice or mind. Any party which wants to win a majority and keep it should take on board the simple fact that a majority of people have had enough, and do not want to have to pay more tax.

I was not surprised today to be phoned by the Daily Mirror, working in conjunction with a Labour MP, to call me in for questioning about my blogsite. Free discussion and commonsense are clearly not welcomed in some quarters.

The immediate complaint came about global warming. Apparently suggesting that there could be any favourable consequences from global warming is akin to a crime against humanity - we need to concentrate on the gloom and doom that could descend if it was hotter and sunnier in the summer.

Had I not understood the dreadful consequences for people in Bangladesh or Africa, I was asked. When I pointed out I did favour preventive action to tackle water shortages and vulnerability to sea surges, and had made a speech in Parliament about that, I got the impression that did not count. It was still wrong to say anything good about global warming. For much of the developing world it would be great to have a water supply in running taps today, before the future consequences of global warming

So I pointed out that they run the UK at the moment, and carbon emissions are rising. They run the government, whose carbon emissions are rising. If they are so sure higher carbon can damage the people of the developing world, why are they so incapable of controlling their own emissions? Why is their beloved EU pushing up its emissions at a faster rate than the USA? And why are India and China doing so?

If global warming theory is correct we are in for a lot of global warming. There is no evidence that the EU, the US or BRIC are going to curb their emissions anytime soon. So shouldn’t we start planing to handle the consequences?

The EU’s idiotic celebrations over their “agreement” to cut carbon emissions was greeted with insufficient scepticism by a badly briefed media.

There was no attempt to interview and pillory the Ministers of countries who will fail to meet their Kyoto targets, no tough questions for Becket about the UK’s failure to meet its Tony Blair imposed super Kyoto target,no questions on why they might be any better at hitting these new targets than they were at the old ones.

David Cameron does not wish to raise taxes overall. He has made clear that a lower tax economy is a more successful economy, and that he wishes to preside over a lower tax economy. He is regularly attacked by Brown/Blair in the House for saying he wishes to share the proceeds of growth between public spending and lower taxes. Labour now says Conservatives will spend billions less than them under this doctrine, and they seem to think that’s bad news!

The Conservatives are

It was good to see a group of scientists go over the top and ask some of the questions that should be asked about global warming theory in yesterday’s documentary. Things are not entirely as the “consensus” supposes. A recent news item has told us visits to Mars by space probes detect “global” warming there, but have not yet discovered the 4 x 4 s causing it, leading people to ask if the sun is currently hotting up affecting all of the solar system. We do need to know more about cloud formation, water vapour, sun flares and spots and volcanic activity to be sure what is causing the phase of warming that started in 1975 after 35 years of cooling.

Today the EU will solemnly sign us all up to yet more targets for reducing CO2 emissions with no sense of irony or the humbug involved.

There will be no public apology for the failure of several EU states to hit the last set of targets under Kyoto.

There will be no apology for all the jet flights undertaken to get to and from the meeting, or for the high fuel burn ministerial limos sitting on the tarmac with the engines on to keep the drivers warm.

There will be no apology from Mr Barroso, Commission President, for using a high carbon emitting vehicle himself.

There will be no explanation that the increases in carbon emissions from the US are now at a slower rate than emissions from the EU - instead the implication will be theat the US is the epicentre of the problem.

Doubtless all the heating and lighting systems of the EU high command will continue at full blast after the new targets have been set, just as they were before they were set.

Last night

I received no letters and emails about Lords reform before the debate this week. I wrote about it in my local newspaper column to provoke some reaction, but there was

Just as that nice

A recent correspondent said I should set up a Squandermeter to remind people just how much of our money this government wastes.

I replied that I would from time to time issue bulletins of the government’s bulging wasteline to remind people just how badly their cash is being spent by this administration.

We have seen several days of plunging share prices. We are now hearing several varieties of explanation. What began as fear stalking the Shanghai Exchange, as rumours swirled of a forthcoming clamp down on borrowing and speculation by the Chinese authorities, has transmuted into a more general panic about the US economy.

Mr Bernancke, the current President of the Fed, has said he still expects the US economy to grow this year. Mr Greenspan, his predecessor, warns that there could be a recession. The Martians could land as well, but the Fed probably doesn’t think that very likely either.

So why did Mr Greenspan say it, and why did some people apparently believe him? All the forecasts I see still show some growth in the US during 2007.

Labour’s efforts to tax motorists for using the roads we have already paid for is now going to be implemented locally. The government understands just how unpopular a national scheme currently is, despite all the best efforts to spin away the 1.8 million names on the Downing Street petition, so it’s back to Plan B. Livingstone got away with a Congestion Charge scheme - by introducing it into Conservative controlled Boroughs where he wasn’t expecting many votes and by leaving toll free routes through the area. The government hopes there are other borough Livingstones around the country who can

Gordon Brown ran the UK budget reasonably well for

I am asked how could the state spend less without damaging important services.

My posting on What they should tell Mr Blair at Downing Street has a long

The answer is not to transfer all local spending from Council Tax to some national tax. The answer is for government, local and national, to spend less overall.

Of course we should say “No” to extra bands, and to endless revluations, hitting people who improve their homes.

I hope the 60 people who go today tell the PM some home truths.

We are fed up with

The ever larger Council Tax bills which will soon thud on our doormats are a reminder of just how much money some local authorities waste, and how unfair the grant system is that the government uses to send its contribution to local costs.

It is bizarre that at a time when so many members of the public are wrestling with higher mortgage bills, higher Council Tax bills, higher utilities bills and higher pension savings demands, so many politicians should be sitting round discussing how government can tax these same people even more. All too many politicians today want to discuss road pricing, airline taxes, pollution taxes, rubbish taxes, but all too few say they want to slash other taxes at the same time.

No wonder the high tax parties are now so unpopular. They are completely out of touch with the public mood, cocooned in a world of their own whgere money is easily come by and there for the government’s taking. They have no idea how tight many home budgets now are, and what good work so many families do on precious little to feed, clothe and look after their children and elderly.