Lib Dems cleared by Electoral Commission over Michael Brown donation

Here is the full statement from the Electoral Commission;

The Electoral Commission, the independent elections and party finance watchdog, today announced the outcome of its investigation into donations made by the company 5th Avenue Partners Ltd to the Liberal Democrats. Donations totalling over £2.4m were made in 2005.

The investigation considered whether there had been breaches of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (PPERA). In particular, it looked at whether the company, reported as the donor, was a permissible donor. It also considered whether the company was in fact the true donor. If a party accepts impermissible donations, the Electoral Commission can apply to a court to seek forfeiture of an amount equivalent to the sum accepted.

To be a permissible donor, a company must be registered under the Companies Act 1985, incorporated within the UK or another EU member state, and be carrying on business in the UK. The Commission has concluded that 5th Avenue Partners Limited met these requirements at the time the donations were made, and therefore was a permissible donor.

The Commission also considered whether there was a basis for concluding that either Michael Brown, as an individual, or 5th Avenue Partners GmbH (the parent company of 5th Avenue Partners Limited) was in fact the true donor. Neither of them would have qualified as permissible donors under PPERA.

The Commission has concluded that there is no reasonable basis to conclude that the true donor was someone other than 5th Avenue Partners Limited.

Commenting on the outcome of the investigation, Electoral Commission Chair Jenny Watson said:

“The law sets out who can make donations to political parties and makes sure that information about where parties get their money from is in the public domain, so voters can see for themselves how politics is funded. Our job is to make sure those rules are followed.

“Parliament considered carefully the rules on company donations in 2000, and set out specific requirements, including that a company must be carrying on business in the UK in order for it to be a permissible donor.

“We have conducted a thorough investigation into these particular donations to the Liberal Democrats, and considered a substantial body of evidence: evidence from the criminal proceedings against Michael Brown; documents obtained from the City of London Police, including analysis by forensic accountants; and evidence provided by the party.

“Having considered all the evidence in this case, we have concluded that 5th Avenue Partners Limited met the requirements to be a permissible donor. The Electoral Commission will be taking no further action in this case.“

The Liberal Democrats then issued this statement;

"We welcome the Electoral Commission's ruling on this matter. At all times the party acted in good faith in relation to the receipt and the expenditure of these donations in the 2005 General Election campaign. All our donations and loans were properly declared to the Electoral Commission."

Racism alive and well in David Cameron's Conservative Party

Yet more proof that the Conservatives may have tried to change their clothing but underneath they are still the same party of sleaze and racism.

Over at Duncan Borrowman's blog, he has an extraordinary post from emails sent to him.

Conservative Councillor Peter Hobbins complains of the campaigning inexperience of the candidates, and when referring to candidates Dilon Gurmal and Cameron Cutie Zerha Zaidi among others says;

"Not one of them has a 'normal' English name....

"For hells sake. Why are Candidates Department so keen on these foreign names?!!!! ...

"Maybe I should change my name to something foreign - how does Petrado Indiano Hobbinso sound to you?"

Do go and read the full posting from Duncan here, especially if you have been tempted by David Cameron to vote Conservative for the first time or if you happen to be one of those rare things in life, a decent Conservative.

Again shame on the Conservatives.

Mariah Carey's diva demands just to turn Christmas lights on

I really couldn't believe my eyes this morning when in the Daily Telegraph they were reporting that to turn the Christmas lights on at the Westfield shopping centre in West London Mariah Carey was being a diva, darling.

According to the Daily Telegraph, Mariah Carey's demands included;

• Driven in a pink rolls royce, down a pink carpet to a pink podium, where she was to wave a want to turn them on!
• 80 security guards, plus an entourage of 15
• Confetti shaped like her favourite insect, the butterfly

Now, those were the ones that the organisers apparently complied with......

Those that were turned down included;

• 20 white kittens
• 100 white doves

Honestly, I really hope this is one of those nonsense made up celebrity stories that there are in the media now and again although as reported in the story a source told the Daily Mail "We have worked extremely hard to make sure that Mariah's event is fantastic. Even the model of car had to be changed six times to one that her people liked."

What a load of nonsense, yes she can sing but let us get a grip here and get back to real life.

Conservative MP David Curry resigns in latest expenses scandal

Conservative MP, David Curry has now resigned as the chairman of the Parliamentary Standards and Privileges Committee and now faces a formal inquiry into his £30,000 expenses claims for the second home.

Back in 2004, David Curry was apparently having an affair using his constituency home to meet his mistress, once his wife discovered the affair she banned him from that home despite this he continued to claim for this property.

When the Daily Telegraph approached him with the claim that he continued to claim for this second home from Parliamentary Allowances he immediately referred himself to the Parliamentary Commissioner.

In such a position of authority, supposedly policing the expenses scandal it shows that the Tories cannot be trusted.

Read the full piece in the Daily Telegraph.

Yet again more proof if it was needed that David Cameron's Conservative Party is no different from the old days of Tory sleaze.

John Lamont is the most expensive MSP and the Conservatives stick their fingers up to Kelly Report

The latest batch of MSP expenses are out and there are two names that stand out John Lamont MSP and Jim Hume MSP, both of which have spent in excess of £20,000 in the last twelve months on postage and office costs.

Firstly, let us tackle the issue of dual mandate, something the Conservative leader in Scotland has long banged her drum about, however it appears that her MSPs aren't following the spirit of her campaign.

John Lamont MSP and Alex Johnstone MSP, both Conservatives, are sticking two fingers up at Annabel Goldie and David Cameron. In fact David Cameron only this morning said all parties must embrace the Kelly report, obviously he means everyone apart from John Lamont and Alex Johnstone - whats that "Dave"? Don't do as I do, do as I say. Caron talks about the Conservative Leader's words not matching Scottish Conservative actions.

And it isn't the first time that John "Bubbles" Lamonts has ignored David Cameron, read it here.

Who said the Conservatives have changed?

Anyway back to the most expensive MSP, John Lamont, who last year spent £26,952 on postage and office supplies.

The Conservatives had an answer for all of this public money being spent, obviously, saying that it was a large rural constituency which required "a lot of work" but then pointed at Liberal Democrats Jim Hume MSP, who claimed £20,234.22 and the Conservatives said Jim had a similar constituency!

Erm, what crap the Scottish Conservatives talk.

John Lamont represents Roxburgh & Berwickshire's 47,862 constituents in Holyrood.

Jim Hume represents (wait for it, you may want to get a drink) Ayr, Carrick, Cumnock & Doon Valley, Clydesdale, Cunninghame South, Dumfries, East Lothian, Galloway & Upper Nithsdale, Roxburgh & Berwickshire and Tweedale, Ettrick & Lauderdale and their 514,105 constituents in Holyrood.

You see Jim Hume is the Regional MSP for the whole of the South of Scotland and the half a million constituents spread over nine constituencies whereas John Lamont has one constituency but is clearly not happy with being in Holyrood as he also now throwing his hat in the ring to stand for Westminster.

John Lamont MSP is clearly ignoring the Kelly Report and it's recommendations to clean up politics despite it receiving support from both David Cameron and Annabel Goldie.

Here is what one of John Lamont's constituents said on one of my earlier blog postings.

"I agree - what does he want London and Westminster or Edinburgh and Holyrood - he can't have his cake and eat it and as I voted for him as our MSP I would really like him to honour that commitment. This is just where Politicians fall down every time - they want the power and there is no greater political "bells on" than Westminster. The problem come the next election is that Scotland doesn't think the same way and John Lamont should remember that if successful in his Westminster bid he will have far less influence in Scotland as there may only be two or three Conservative MPS. Hardly a mandate for Cameron. He should stick to Holyrood and stand down as the Westminster candidate before he too is pushed."

One of the things Liberal Democrats Jim Hume MSP did was to write to many of his constituents across the whole Region and ask their opinions about the SNPs plans to sell off 25% of Scotland's forests to private developers. Jim Hume then released these findings and told his constituents the results.

Whereas John Lamont MSP surveyed, wrote, wrote again and did yet more surveys about the Borders railway - but - where are the results Mr Lamont? Are the surveys just chucked in a box in your office because you didn't get the answer you thought you were going to get?

It is time to clean up politics in the UK, and the Kelly Report goes down the right road and starts that process - it is a great pity that the Scottish Conservative MSP John Lamont is just sticking two fingers up to the whole process and obviously doesn't want to clean up politics!

Shame on them.

NHS turn down Liver Cancer drug on cost

I know that the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has to think of all the patients and the costs of all drugs for the NHS.

However, surely if there is a drug available that helps liver cancer patients live longer then that has to be a price worth paying.

Not everything in life should be about cost, and perhaps NICE and the Government, who claim they are taking cancer seriously should then approach the drug companies and say right then, we have this many people in the UK diagnosed with this cancer, we will commit to purchasing enough of the product for all these people for three years and can you therefore reduce the overall cost?

NICE says the drug sorafenib costs too much to make treatment worthwhile - what utter crap, I would like to see the head of NICE, Andrew Dillon go and explain that to the person suffering from liver cancer and their immediate family instead of hiding behind a desk.

It is easy for him and his team to write it on a piece of paper and shove that on a website but it is the dedicated nurses and doctors on the frontline who then have to explain it to the patients and family face to face.

The decision by NICE will leave nearly 3,000 patients a year with only palliative, end-of-life care instead of offering hope.

The drug costs around £2,200 a month for one patient, but NICE says in draft recommendations to the NHS that the cost is too great. Surely it is for the NHS to decide not NICE, shouldn't NICE just make recommendations?

Chief executive Andrew Dillon said to Sky News: "The price...is simply too high to justify using NHS money which could be spent on better value cancer treatments."

If Gordon Brown had the balls he would stand up to NICE and the drugs companies and say NO, we want this drug, we want to improve the lives of these people suffering from this awful disease and then set his Secretary of State for Health the job of negotiating the price, perhaps if we looked at some joined up thinking with Scotland and perhaps even other European countries to reduce the cost?

Come on people, let us think outside the box for a solution to pay for it, not just accept the original price from the drug company and the recommendation from NICE and then give up.