Randomly Selected Article or Link

I've just received another electronic communication from one of our South East European candidate hopefuls. It repeats Linda Jack's recent gripe about not being able to say who they are supporting for the leadership.

Apparently this is because such an endorsement by a Euro-hopeful might be interpreted as an implicit endorsement by the relevant leadership candidate for that Euro-hopeful and thereby possibly increase their chances of selection.

If it hadn't been made up by the powers that be it would not have been a conclusion I would have leaped to, I have to say. However, given that I do support a particular leadership candidate I would like the opportunity at least to consider giving extra weight to those Euro candidates who share my opinion of what would be best for my party in the leadership. It might very well not make any difference of course.

So, let's remove the gag. It's a bonkers idea. Sure, we did not know there would be a leadership election when the Euro selection process started, but now that we have one, it could very well be another factor in whether to prioritize one candidate over another.

It's nice to know that I've attracted the attention of some in the corridors of power. After my post the other day about whether it was better to tax emissions or to give out emissions permits and allow companies to trade any surpluses with other corporations that need to buy more for whatever reason, I got an email from Chris Huhne tonight to let me know that he'd put something more about it up on his own website.

I presume he refers to his speech in response to the Stern Report which contains lots of good stuff. Though it doesn't (and nor would I have necessarily expected it to) factor in my personal philosophical bias towards viewing the air/atmosphere as a part of the commons, like land, which ought not to be enclosed if possible and which bias leans me towards taxing emissions rather than trading emissions.

I accept that they sort of emissions taxing I was thinking of is probably not possible at present - that we do not have a "carbon footprint" for every process and that just as it would be technologically difficult in the time frame required for action to introduce personal carbon allowances and trading it would be similarly difficult or impossible to produce a fair tax system without knowing that "carbon footprint" of every process in the economy.

Technorati Tags: climate change, lib dems

The Telegraph reports that the government is to force councils to raise Council Tax by more than inflation so he can divert more central money to the NHS and education. Responding,

Eric Pickles, the Tory local government spokesman, said: "Council tax is starting to become unbearable. Gordon Brown is using smoke and mirrors which is shameful. But, I think people will recognise what is going on. Mr Brown has already fooled them before in this way."

Funny that. Not so bad that it deserved your attention when deciding which tax to cut last week was it, Mr Pickles? Starting to become unbearable? Your own Tory party polling showed that it was the most unbearable tax already. Only one of the mainstream parties wants seriously to address this regressive tax:

Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, said: "Council tax is a particularly regressive and hated tax which has already put a massive squeeze on household incomes."

Now that should be bigger news than the Tory tax cut for about five richest per cent of dead people, don't you think? Even if I do think they want to do it the wrong way.