It makes me angry though that whilst you are right, so much of your party is actively campaigning against service changes which will improve care and save lives and backing the trade union, masquerading as a professional body, the BMA, in campaigning against ‘closures’ and ‘downgrading’ when really they hate change and competition.

Reply: Nonsense - Conservatives spend other people’s money more wisely, as the record in local government shows. I have no wish to cut back on services or take money away form the low paid - unlike Labour with its 10p tax hike which I voted against

Reply: Exactly! You need to kn ow the legitimate critisims of you and what you are doing, but you should avoid spending time studying the nuances of the press in a self obsessed way. If you get the policy and administration right the public will appreciate it, and the press will then have to follow.

But, I was under the impression that the “Treasury Green Book” was invented to do exactly this type of assessment. Does this not happen? Does there exist a spreadsheet somewhere in government, that tells the results of financial impact of primary and secondary legislation? That is, the cost of operating it and the cost of complying with it; is it doing the job that was intended?

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/economic_data_and_tools/greenbook/data_greenbook_index.cfm

Redwood fans may be interested in this system that appears to be working in Canada.

http://www.regulatoryreform.gov.bc.ca/progress.htm

Reply: yes, there are Impact Assessments at the moment, but they are often inadequate.More importantly they are not used to manage the amount of regulaiton. Our proposals would make Ministers reduce the total cost of regulation based on the Assessments.

In my experience business people seem to have more gripes against tax and employment law than any other area of regulation.

Tax is under national control but much of employment law, such as minimum harmonisation on health and safety at work, comes from the EU.

I also believe that if deregulation was to focus on the tax system that this should not only look at businesses but also at simplification of the complicated tax and benefits system in terms of individuals.

Reply: See the detail in the deregulation chaper of the Economic Policy Review (available under downloads on this site)

Why didn’t the Labour Party do so when they had the chance? My suggestion is that they just do not understand how government can be made to work. They think it is ‘magic’, just mutter a few impressive sounding ’spells’ and ‘poof’, it happens. Except it doesn’t, of course.

For a long time Blairini, and his unglamourous assistant Gordon, were able to entertain the punters using exagerated gestures to distract and misdirect. Even when the ‘tricks’ didn’t work and the Weapons of Mass Destruction failed to appear, everyone was having such a jolly time that the act carried on.

Now that unglamourous Gordon has taken over his lack of skill in judging the audience has meant that they have now realised that all they have to show for some very expensive tickets is some sparkly confetti and some faded paper flowers.

By the way, I like the pictures - you are lucky to have such a good photographer in your constituency! And, of course, well done for using your own people.

reply: Thanks

The prime directive of a socialist administration is to control everything from the centre. It always wants to be both the purchaser and the provider of everything. The family is the enemy of the state, because the selfishness inherent in family structures detracts from its allegiance to the state machine. The capitalists – all private sector employers - are all crooks by definition, exploiting the working class. I think the last ten years have proven this in spades.

The fact that the economy has done reasonably well over the last decade was despite Brown’s chancellorship, not because of it. He was surfing the wave of globalisation and deregulation that was started in the Reagan / Thatcher era. We are all now aware that Brown only looked good because he was maxing out the public sector credit card and, got very poor value for money. Pouring money into an unreformed, heavily trade unionised, public sector was fatal, a natural consequence of the state being both purchaser and provider.

The only government I will be voting for next will be the one that shows me, how it will roll back the state in pound note terms. Shows me it has a way to reduce spending from 44% to 33% of GDP. Shows me how it will put local (government) spending closer to local taxation; and, national spending specific to national taxation.

Shows me how it will democratise our Quango state, putting most of it back into a unitary local government system that the citizens can understand and feel they belong too. Lets me spend a whole day without being monitored, breaking numerous rules and regulations, that I never knew existed.

http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com