Did Tory MP breach the Data Protection Act in courting Muslim voters?

Concerns have been raised that Conservative MP for Stockton South James Wharton may have breached the Data Protection Act by sending a letter about the current conflict in Gaza, but only to Muslim voters .

I have been passed the letter sent on 22 July by a number of Muslim residents who are concerned that they have been singled out to receive the letter on the sole basis of having an 'Islamic-sounding' name. Their concerns are borne out to a degree by the fact a number of friends and constituents with non-Islamic names who frequently receive such unsolicited correspondence from Mr Wharton have not received this particular letter.

The case bears remarkable similarities to that of Labour MP Karen Buck who a fortnight ago admitted her staff trawled the electoral register singling out people with 'Islamic' names in order to send cards celebrating Eid - a practice Miss Buck was warned by the Information Commissioner's Office back in 2010, following a previous complaint, was probably in breach of the Data Protection. Correspondence should not be sent to selected voters 'merely on the basis of an assumption about their names' chided the ICO.

The strong pro-Palestinian sentiments expressed in Mr Wharton's letter, criticising Israeli military action as being "out of all proportion" and the consequences "horrifying", will doubtless anger many of his Conservative supporters. Indeed, there can be no doubts as to where Mr Wharton's sympathies lie, with his helpful inclusion of a photograph from 2011 of him shaking hands with the Palestinian Authority's Prime Minister Salam Fayyad.

Mr Wharton himself recognises his position will be widely unpopular, stating: "I know this is a matter which divides opinion and that my stance will not please everyone." His actions are somewhat less principled than he seeks to portray, however, when he attempts to court the votes of those he presumes will agree with him (i.e. those with 'Islamic' names) whilst hiding his position from everybody else.

It is such opportunistic cynicism that has become Mr Wharton's hallmark since 2010, and does so much to erode voters' confidence in their elected representatives.

In criticising Miss Buck, Tory MP Philip Davies said: 'The idea that you can win elections by this kind of vacuous, politically correct, cynical tactic is wrong." Mr Wharton would be well served to heed his colleague's words.

In the next day or two I expect we will hear an ardent denial of wrongdoing by Mr Wharton; maybe even some letters ostensibly received by local party members residents will be helpfully presented. Should such a situation remarkably transpire, I trust Mr Wharton will be helpful enough to clarify to whom the letters were sent and, more importantly, on what basis those individuals were singled out. For some reason, I very much doubt he will...

Response to the Autumn Statement

The chancellor's statement (see the key points here) this afternoon once again reiterated how little he understands just how much ordinary families, particularly in the north east, are struggling. Whilst hard working families need help with their bills now, the best the chancellor could offer was a pledge to kick them slightly less whilst they are down.

It would be churlish to admit there wasn't some welcome news.

The increase in personal income tax allowance to £10,000 from April 2014 will help most in work retain more of their wages. It is nevertheless disappointing however that he won't commit to increasing this further and work towards removing all earning the minimum wage from paying income tax altogether.

The increase of £2.95/week in the basic state pension is also welcome. However, this is hardly news - following the changes announced in 2012 the increase was already guaranteed; the announcement was akin to being cheered to the rafters for declaring tomorrow to be Friday.

We also, finally, had confirmation of the married couples and civil partners tax break to be introduced from 2014. Granted, this only qualifies as good news if you are married or in a civil partnership - if you are single, cohabiting, or widowed this announcement might well be considered a waste of £700million (which, don't forget, we don't have so needs to be borrowed).

Oh, erm, this is rather embarrassing. That seems to be all the good news I can find.

What we also found out is that, despite the much publicised government announcement of a £50 saving, the average energy bill will still rise by £70 this winter. Already exorbitant rail fails will, on average, rise by inflation (ie by more than your wages are rising). Fuel duty will once again be frozen, but that is hardly a help if you already cannot afford to fill and run your car.

Of particularly concerning news for the north east is the announced increase in state retirement age, to 68 in the mid-2030s and to 69 in the late-2040s. Given the Healthy Life Expectancy for the North East is 59.7 years for men and 60.2 years for women - the lowest of any region of the UK - and the disproportionately high number of employees engaged in heavy manual labour in the region, increasing numbers of us will be forced to, literally, work until we drop.

Although it has been patently obvious for some time now, this government of millionaires really does not comprehend how increasingly difficult the average family is finding it to get by. For 40 out of the 41 months of this government, inflation has outpaced the rise in incomes.

Put another way, for 40 out of 41 months of this government we have been getting poorer. Much poorer.

Indeed, figures publicised by Labour today show that the average household is £1,600/year worse off than when this government came into power. (NB I use this figure with a caveat: as is Labour's way, this figure is incredibly simplistic as it only compares inflation directly with wages and fails to take into account changes to tax allowances, benefits, etc.).

What is clearer than ever is that this country, and particularly the North East, needs support and a change of government priorities. What is clearer than ever is that the Conservatives and Lib Dems have no intention of delivering that change.

What is also clear is that Labour can never, ever be trusted with our economy again. Although the ConDem coalition have proved to be poor stewards, it would be sheer lunacy to throw Labour the keys to the economy they crashed so spectacularly.

Only one party pledges to cut your fuel bills, not just marginally slow the rate of their increase; only one party pledges to cut taxes and business rates across the board for every small and medium sized business in the country; only one party pledges to put the poor of our own region ahead of those in foreign countries.

And that party is UKIP.

Labour scaremongering over schools' closure

Stockton Labour’s cynical scaremongering plumbed new depths this week with Labour MP, Alex Cunningham, attempting to goad Michael Gove with the suggestion that a decision to proceed with the Ingleby Manor Free School would result in surplus secondary school places across the borough and the closure of some schools (read the Northern Echo's report here).

Alex Cunningham MP scaremongering in the Commons

The suggestion that a new secondary school within the borough, a school which will ultimately, but not for a number of years, accommodate 900 pupils will result in school closures is demonstrably absurd.

Perhaps Alex Cunningham and Labour are oblivious to the fact that the Labour-dominated planning committee has already granted approvals to a number of planning applications that will see thousands of new homes (some presumably housing children) built across the borough?

Perhaps they are oblivious to a number of current and anticipated planning applications which, following the usual rubber-stamping process by Stockton's Labour council, could see hundreds, if not thousands, more homes gifted planning approval?

Or perhaps, in Alex’s craven desire to secure cheap headlines, he has overlooked the fact that the borough’s primary schools are bursting at the seams already and Stockton’s Labour council is rapidly running out of ideas and options as to how we can accommodate an ever increasing number of primary school age children?

A Labour MP’s ignorance of facts, either unintentionally or deliberately, is not news. Indeed, it is par for the course.

However, to deliberately try to frighten residents, not just in Yarm and Eaglescliffe but across the entire borough, with unfounded talk of school closures is nothing short of outrageous. That he is referred to in Parliament as the ‘honourable member’ is the most laughable misnomer I have come across in a very long time.

If there is one crumb of consolation to come from this sorry episode it is the fact that outstanding schools such as Conyers will continue to go from strength to strength for decades after opportunists like Alex Cunningham MP have been long forgotten.

Stockton Conservatives to boycott council AGM

As a result of Stockton Council's refusal to hold a minute's silence in memory of Lady Thatcher at its AGM to be held next Wednesday - the same day as Lady Thatcher's funeral - Conservatives on Stockton Council are set to boycott the meeting.

Lady Thatcher, the UK's first woman Prime Minster

Following such a disrespectful decision from Stockton Council, it was out of the question that I would attend the AGM.  Largely a ceremonial event nowadays for the nodding dogs to welcome the new mayor for the forthcoming year, to refuse to hold a minute's silence for the country's first and only woman Prime Minister demonstrates what a callous and childish bunch make up, for the most part, Stockton's councillors.

Earlier this week I was proud that my request at Yarm Town Council to stand for a minute's silence was agreed unanimously and observed impeccably by all councillors and members of the public present.

Not all those in attendance were Conservative, or even small 'c' conservative, by any stretch of the imagination. Many at the meeting disagreed with some of her policies fiercely and remain bitter about them to this day.

It is a measure of those that attended the meeting that they were decent enough to mark the passing of such an historic figure, the like of whom we are unlikely to see again.

The outgoing Mayor of Stockton, councillor Lynne Apedaile, has been exemplary in the way she has conducted herself during her mayoral year. I would hope all councillors, irrespective of political persuasion, would agree that she has been an example for all future mayors to emulate and she should look back on her year in office with great pride.

However, the response to be issued by Stockton Council in the event of any media enquiries is pretty shameful. It reads,

"I believe there are more appropriate forums and enough other opportunities for local politicians to express their own respects and thoughts to the news of Baroness Thatcher’s death."

Quite how or why it is felt 'inappropriate' for the council to acknowledge the passing of Lady Thatcher at its first meeting since her death is not explained.

It is a sorry state of affairs, and just the latest sad indictment of some of the characters we have on Stockton Council, that they can't even bring themselves to stand for a minute's silence. This is party political bitterness from the Labour benches to a degree that I have never before experienced, and would hope I never have to witness again.

I regret that I will not now be attending the AGM, but I am proud my fellow Conservative councillors do not wish to have anything to do with the meeting either.

Stockton Council approves council tax hike

Stockton Council last night approved its budget for 2013/14 agreeing in the process to a referendum dodging 1.9% increase in council tax.

An alternative budget proposal from the Conservative group of councillors which would have seen council tax levels for 2013/14 frozen was regrettably, but nevertheless predictably, defeated. Interestingly, even though the Lib Dem and Ingleby Barwick Independent (IBIS) councillors voted with Labour to increase residents' council tax bills not one councillor from IBIS contributed to the debate nor even attempted to justify their voting for the hike.

Put in a national context, even amongst those other councils who have also opted to increase their council tax rates, the average rise was just 0.8%. In a local context, neighbouring Hambleton and Durham councils are yet again freezing their rates.

In the Stockton Council's press release early this morning, the Leader of the Council, Bob Cook, said, "we simply cannot afford the additional £2million cost that the [council tax] freeze would have over the next three years."

What councillor Cook neglected to include in his press release was the fact that the Labour / IBIS coalition cabinet did manage to find an additional £4.7million to throw at the council's Stockton High Street vanity project. You will, of course, draw your own conclusions as to what this says about Labour's priorities.

As a result of Stockton Council's program of efficiency, improvement and transformation (EIT) reviews - launched under the then leadership of Conservative councillor Ken Lupton - the council has been able to absorb some £31 million in savings already, with scant impact on services. The council is now a much leaner, more efficient body following the EIT initiative.

However, the difficult questions the council now faces are not simply ones of further reductions in funding, but rather questions of political courage.

When it comes to making further efficiencies, the low hanging fruits have already been plucked. The potential areas from where further savings can be found are not as immediately apparent as they once were. Much more creative thinking and, yes, tough decisions, are needed.

Last night the council found itself at a crossroads (or more accurately, a T-junction).

One path was undoubtedly more challenging to tread, with obstacles to be tackled head on and overcome, this being the path to a council living within its means and not passing an ever-growing buck to the taxpayer.

The second path was a much less daunting prospect, smoothed as it was by the ever-diminishing content of taxpayers' wallets. There is no need to live within your means whilst on this path; you simply increase your means to match how you live.

Faced with choosing the path of financial prudence, of doing right by the taxpayer, councillors from Labour, Liberal Democrats and IBIS instead joined forces to choose the path of cowardice and easy decisions.

An unnamed councillor who voted for last night's budget

But then again, what's new?

We shouldn’t be freezing councillors’ allowances; we should be cutting them

It was reported over the weekend that Councillor Bob Cook, the leader of Stockton Council, is to recommend freezing councillors’ allowances for 2013/14.

Big deal.

Given the current economic climate, and particularly in light of changes to council employees’ pay and conditions in recent years, the very idea of increasing councillors’ allowances in unconscionable. So suggesting a freeze is hardly groundbreaking stuff, but welcome news nevertheless, right?

A little background first. Stockton Council currently spends around £800,000 each year on councillors’ allowances.  The lion’s share of this is accounted for by the basic allowance of £9,300 paid to each of the borough’s 56 councillors.

Although this basic allowance has been frozen since 2010/11, it had risen substantially in preceding years, from the £6,150 payable in 2007/08 – a rise of 50% in just three years.  Furthermore, the current basic allowance is, according to the borough’s Independent Remuneration Panel, nearly £1,000 more than the average annual allowance paid by comparative councils.

To put the basic allowance into a regional context, the figure of £9,300 is calculated on the basis of councillors ‘working’ an average of 15 hours each week.  This amounts to a full-time equivalent annual income of nearly £23,000.  In comparison,  the average income of residents throughout the North East is just £20,800 p.a., with 52% of residents earn less than £15,000 p.a..

In his press release lauding his own proposal to freeze allowances, Councillor Cook played down the resultant ‘savings’ from councillors not giving themselves a pay rise as “not a lot of money”.  (Interestingly, he then went on to say, “we have to do all we can” despite failing to even float the idea of actually reducing allowances, let alone recommending such a move!)

In any event, if the ‘savings’ from his idea are “not a lot”, then let’s find a way to increase them.

Instead of a freeze, I would like to see allowances paid to councillors CUT. A 5% reduction in allowances across the board would see savings of around £40,000 overnight (and I mean genuine savings, not the ‘savings’ Cllr Cook refers to despite the fact his proposal wouldn’t actually see the council pay out any less money).  A further saving of  £33,500 could also be found, again overnight, by abolishing the Special Responsibility Allowance paid to the vice chairs of the council’s select committees.

Over the next couple of years, councils the length and breadth of the country face continued challenges to make further efficiencies and savings.  Within Stockton, this has already led to senior council officers talking about further redundancies to come, many of them compulsory.

I grant you, not even the savings from my suggestions amount to a king’s ransom, but they could be implemented immediately and the savings used to protect a handful of jobs.  Whilst 3 or 4 jobs may not be significant to the council in the grand scheme things, they are to those people currently being paid to undertake them.

Of course, much more substantial sums could be saved by conducting a wholesale review of the council’s governance arrangements, particularly the number of elected councillors. I’m only guessing, but I suspect the vast majority of people would happily see a reduction in the number of councillors throughout the borough and would find it difficult to notice any subsequent negative consequence.

Unfortunately despite repeated calls from Conservative councillors to undertake such a review, our pleas have fallen on deaf ears.

But, then, that’s hardly a surprise.

When Labour councillors issue press releases boasting of how they are protecting their own incomes by freezing allowances, yet they refuse an offer of government assistance to freeze the council tax bills of hard pressed residents, that tells you all you need to know about Stockton Labour's priorities.