MPs' expenses: Vote of 'no confidence' tabled on Speaker Martin

Following my rant yesterday about my disgust with House of Commons Speaker Michael Martin, I am pleased to see support is growing for a 'no confidence' motion against him.

I'm glad some Backbenchers agree with me and have now drafted a Commons motion calling for the Speaker to step down for approving the allowances system that MPs have exploited with questionable claims, damaging parliament's authority.

Douglas Carswell, the Tory MP behind the campaign, said he was confident of securing cross-party support and believed that the 'dishonourable' Mr Martin could be removed before the next election.

Good riddance... the sooner the better!

I have emailed my MP and urged him to back the motion. I would suggest you do the same!

On MP's Expenses

I just heard Tony McNulty pathetically sidestepping some, surprisingly very polite, questioning by Kay Burley on SKY News.

McNulty, who is the employment minister, is today being urged to consider repaying money to the parliamentary authorities as pressure grows for an investigation into the way he claimed £60,000 in allowances on the constituency home where his parents live.

His arrogance in the interview, still insisting that he was entitled to make these claims and that it was within the rules... is just enough to drive me to apoplexy!

He's not alone of course. I watched Douglas Hogg and others... making the same claims. They just don't get it!

The question is not whether their abusive claims were within the rules... the question is and should have been in their minds when they considered making these claims... is it right? The answer... in the vast majority of cases is an emphatic NO! No it was not right for them to make claims for expenses that go far beyond what the MPs expenses system was originally set up to deal with.... a system which in principle, I have no problem with. But I do have a very BIG problem with the way they have abused it.

I've got an even bigger problem with the way they are now going around trying to defend the indefensible... apologising, hypocritically banging on saying they agree the system is wrong and that it should be put right as a matter of urgency.

The fact IS... that in the vast majority of cases that has been exposed by the Daily Telegraph... and bloody good for them... these expenses should NEVER have been claimed for in the first place!!

But... they did make the claims... and now the they are responsible, individually... and whether they pay these back or not... (of course they should)... the electorate will be holding them responsible. That is for sure... and rest assured, this post is NOT a partisan party whip!

Jacqui Smith shoots us all in the foot again... over freedom of speech

Last month I tried to answer a question posed on a google search query (which strangely arrived on my blog), asking Why don't Gibraltarians want to be Spanish?.

In my rather long winded answer (nothing new there and it was an interesting question), I explained that amongst the reasons why I valued my British nationality and heritage was freedom of speech.

"I strongly value the long established British values of freedom, democracy, justice, freedom of speech, human rights and the embracing of mixed cultures, creeds and religions within our society."

All well and good and I hope you'll agree with me, quite as things should be. Except until today, when I was surprised to find out that our Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has decided, in her wisdom... to do away with the great tradition of tolerance and freedom of speech in Great Britain!

Yesterday, Jacqui Smith decided to publish a list of 16 people banned since October to "show the type of behavior Britain will not tolerate"!

This list, which includes people barred from entering the UK for fostering extremism or hatred, has been published for the first time ever in this country. Islamic extremists, white supremacists and a US radio host are among the 16 of 22 excluded in the five months to March to have been named by the Home Office.

According to the BBC, the UK has been able to ban people who promote hatred, terrorist violence or serious criminal activity since 2005.

Explaining her reasons for publishing this list, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said "coming to the UK should be a privilege" and I wouldn't disagree. But banning people, who have not committed any crime, purely because they hold views that most of us, I'm sure, disagree with?? That doesn't sound right to me!

Ms Smith said "the public interest was against naming" the remaining six, for example on the grounds it could reveal the type of information being held about them. So... that's 'innocent until proven guilty' out of the window too!

The Muslim Council of Britain says the government should not act against people, "whatever their views, unless they have broken the law". They've got a point... and I for one have always thought that is how our laws work!

'Against our values'

However, Ms Smith said granting free speech did not provide a licence to preach hatred and that those banned had "clearly overstepped the mark" with the attitudes they had expressed.

Maybe so... but again, that is no reason to break with our much valued tradition of tolerance in this country... or of course, the right to freedom of speech and ban people, who have not committed any crime... as yet. That's just plain wrong and totally contrary to our British values!

In any case, as in the US radio host, Michael Savage's case today, his real name is Michael Alan Weiner by the way... (I say nothing ) ... this idiot's views, who delights in taunting gays, environmentalists, Roman Catholics and Muslims, are now receiving widespread publicity across our media. Ms Smith's barring order, has given this pathetic racist a megaphone and allowed him a platform which he would never have had, had he been dealt with differently.

To his credit, Inayat Bunglawala, of the Muslim Council of Britain, told BBC Radio 5 Live that people should be free to enter the country, regardless of their views.

"If they step over the line and break the law, it's at that moment the law should be enacted, not beforehand.

If people are keeping their odious views to themselves, that's their business. We should not be in the business of policing people's minds.

Quite so Mr Bunglawala... that's exactly what I think too!

I believe the people of the United Kingdom are wise enough to be able to make up our own minds about this sort of claptrap from people like Savage. We would have maybe raised an eyebrow or two, when reading reports of his views, put him down immediately as another racist radical idiot... and promptly ignored him (maybe enjoyed a rant or two on our blogs too). Instead, thanks to the unwise Ms Smith... his views are reaching far and wide... and possibly into corners of this country, where unfortunately, they may be more welcome and fostered! So... well done Ms Smith!

By the way, you might be pleased to hear that Savage has said that the last time he was in Britain was about 20 years ago, and he has "no immediate plans to return"... so good bloody riddance I say!

But... this is yet another example of how this Minister and this Government, continue to erode our country's great traditions... and continues to shoot themselves in the foot with crass decisions and policies... one after another.

In today's Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs) Gordon Brown was actually accused by LibDem's leader Nick Clegg as "stupid", and added that the PM's recent speeches were "vacuous"!

The BBC's political correspondent Ben Wright said:

"Deference to the prime minister has never been a feature of the weekly Commons grilling but today's session was striking for the confidence with which the PM's political opponents were prepared to mock Gordon Brown."

It is clear to me, that Gordon Brown has lost any authority he ever had... aided and abetted by his Ministers... not least Jacqui Smith with her constant trip ups... and the 'mocking' blast by Hazel Blears at the weekend... about the "YouTube if you want to" editorial in the press.

Downing Street Petition

If you too are fed up with all this nonsense, you might like to give your support to this Downing Street petition asking Brown to resign. Here's your chance to ask him (and hopefully this useless Government) to go... NOW!

Oh and you'll be in good company... as over 52,000 people have already signed!

Jacqui Smith at the GrumpyOldTwat

Not that I condone much of what our eccentric and extremely irreverent blogging colleague often has to say (I do find him quite amusing at times though), but in Jacqui Smith's case... I do think the GrumpyOldTwat has got her number! I have to warn you though... this link is not for those of a sensitive disposition!!

Jacqui Smith to be sued

As a footnote... not only is Ms Smith corroding our rights to freedom of speech... and handing Michael Savage a PR coup which he is relishing, as the Guardian said but it's also looking like it's going to cost her dearly!

Savage is now threatening to sue Smith ‑ who he repeatedly taunts as a witch and a lunatic in this radio clip – and says he wants top first amendment attorneys to represent him "in a major international case". He claims to have seven lawyers working on the case.

Again, quoting the Guardian, at the very least, Savage is milking his run-in with Smith for all it's worth. This is publicity that Savage, who was fired by MSNBC for telling a prank caller to "get Aids and die", can only dream of.

As I say, it looks like Smith has scored an own goal, the latest in a series of Labour self-inflicted wounds in recent weeks. Apart from threatening legal action, Savage is also urging his 10 million listeners to boycott the UK and to stop buying British goods.

Thanks a bunch Ms Smith!! D'uh!! I hope Savage takes her to the cleaners... the dumb broad deserves it... oh and this time, unlike with her husband's porn account... she should pick up this damn bill... for legal costs and damages which are sure to come... personally!!

'Moody' encouragement for Brown... to Go Now!

Following my post last night telling Gordon Brown... For God's sake go... I thought I would give him a little 'moody' encouragement...



In just a little over 24 hours, the petition has reached 6,916 (as I write). Come Monday morning... when people start emailing it around offices, this figure will soon spiral into the tens of thousands!

If you haven't yet voted on the Downing Street online petition asking Brown to resign... here's your chance to ask him to go... NOW!

Now you too can tell Brown... For God's sake go!

It has been said before and now you and I can say it... and tell Gordon Brown... for God's sake GO!

He never gave us the chance to elect him... and I know he'll have to go sooner or later. In any case, he does have to 'go to the country' (no I don't mean to hide in Southwold again) and call an election sometime between now and May 5th next year.

Frankly, this Government is in such a state (no pun intended) and the country in such a crisis that I really don't think there's any time to waste. So... it really would be best if Brown resigned sooner rather than later... and NOW would be good to my mind!

Many others agree with my train of thought and now someone has set up a Downing Street online petition asking the Prime Minister to resign... so here's our chance to ask him to go!

Not that he'll pay any attention I know... don't think I am kidding myself for one moment. He and his Government NEVER listen to anyone!

I'm also aware that these petitions never really achieve very much... as Guido also agrees, he never links to Downing Street online petitions "because they never achieve anything". But he added:

"However dozens of people have emailed about this petition. Guido has spoken to Civil Service types who confirm that under the rules of the petition service this petition is valid and permissable (sic) since it is non-partisan."

This petition has already attracted hundreds of petitioners in support, including yours truly (and am waiting for the 'Black Marias' to arrive any moment now). As I write, the petition has already reached 3,102!

Guido asks... Will a Million Voters Tell Gordon to Go? He thinks "this could be big, really big"... and I think so too... and if at the end of the day the petition manages to attract some headlines and make a point... then at least Brown will hear it... and hopefully get the point!

Over two million people watched Dan Hannan on YouTube crush Gordon in a speech when he said he was "pathologically incapable". I wasn't sure then... I am now!

Here's what Hannan said to Gordon at the time... see whether you too agree with him now:



If half of the people that watched Daniel Hannan on YouTube can be bothered to tell Gordon to go, it will be a huge symbolic protest against the unelected Prime Minister.

If you too now want Gordon to go... tell him so via his own website: Click here and vote!

Brown's sleight of hand on Gibraltar OECD listing and 'tax havens'

Over the weekend, my friend Sancho, who as regular readers here may know, blogs over at Tilting at Windmills had a pop at Gibraltar's offshore status... which I must admit took me aback a little.

I say 'my friend' Sancho loosely, as we've never met... indeed we've never even spoken or had a conversation online... not even an exchange of emails... but I hope you and Sancho will pardon me if I describe him as 'my friend' because despite that, this is how I like to think of him, as a fellow blogger and friend. I hope it's mutual... but I have no idea.

The fact is that I enjoy reading Sancho's blog and by and large... enjoy his views and share his traditional British values of what is often termed these days as 'middle England'... something which curiously, is actually not that unusual to find on Spain's Costa del Sol where Sancho lives and blogs from!

Anyhow... the fact is that our communications have alway been 'one way traffic' with me commenting regularly on his blog posts... and sending him the occasional email 'chivving' him (as happened this weekend) when he's a little slow in approving blog post comments (me thinking he's decided not to post them). To his credit... he's always approved my comments (they've never been particularly controversial or conflictive). But... he has never acknowledged any of my emails or replied to either them or my blog comments... and that's fair enough. I have no problem with that... I'm just mentioning this as background... in order to explain this, somewhat curious (perhaps) relationship.

Anyway... getting back to Sancho's pop at Gibraltar over the weekend, I was a little surprised... as he is not one of those who constantly find one or other reason to harangue Gibraltar. My impression is that he just enjoys making observations at a distance and I have to say they are usually quite well informed, balanced and dare I say... even sympathetic.

Which is why I was a little taken aback when Sancho wrote "Gibraltar signed an accord to meet the OECD’s standards in 2002 then sat on its hands for seven years and did nothing."

Sancho's blog post was spurred by a letter sent recently by UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown, to all the British Overseas Territories and UK’s Crown Dependencies who operate offshore finance centres or so called 'tax havens', which are included in the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) list of 'jurisdictions that have committed to internationally agreed tax standards' but that have not yet substantially implemented these agreements. The list includes Gibraltar, along with six other UK overseas territories, Anguilla, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, Montserrat and the Turks and Caicos. This OECD list also includes the UK crown dependencies of Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man who, whilst listed, have been accepted as having already 'substantially implemented the internationally agreed tax standards'... unlike Gibraltar and the other British Overseas Territories.

Gordon Brown's letter, which followed the G20 Summit, 'warned' these jurisdictions to "meet international transparency standards within six months or face sanctions".

In his blog post, Sancho wrote:

"The facts are these: Gibraltar signed an accord to meet the OECD’s standards in 2002 then sat on its hands for seven years and did nothing. Ahead of the G20 meeting it hurriedly signed a tax agreement with the USA but has seen itself demoted down the OECD’s list of “Good Guys”. Under the threat of sanctions the British Government has now given the Rock till November to get its house in order."

Sancho also questioned Gibraltar Chief Minister, Peter Caruana's confidence that he would meet Brown's timetable saying it would be "a miracle – 13 agreements in seven months after seven years of doing nothing", and concluded:

"So it still begs the questions why did Gibraltar sign the agreement in 2002 then do nothing when it could have acted and been the pace-setter amongst off-shore tax havens?

Why has it given the strong critics of tax havens a sitting target – because even if it now complies it will be the threat of sanctions that is held up as the reason – when it could have been"

Hmmm... whilst it wrankles me to hear it... I DO have to admit that Sancho has a point... in as much as I too share a discomfort in the way it seems that Gibraltar keeps giving its detractors the opportunity to have a pop at us... BUT... there ARE mitigating circumstances, as I explained to Sancho and his readers in my comment on his blog post on Sunday:

Good day Sancho...

I have to say I find your insistence on singling out Gibraltar, castigating it in the manner you do, accusing Gibraltar of "sitting on its hands" on the issue of tax transparency and bilateral agreements... a little (if not very) unfair and rather unbalanced.

Excepting the Isle of Mann and the Channel Islands, who do not depend wholly on themselves for funding their economies, Gibraltar, has done as much if not more than many other jurisdictions, in making sure they adhere to international standards as best it can, within the framework of the OECD and in the context of very competitive markets of offshore tax jurisdictions.

Gibraltar does not have a manufacturing base or the ability to earn revenue externally from agriculture or other means of production and exporting. It therefore has to rely for its income largely from two sources, tourism and the offshore financial centre.

Gibraltar is also not able to rely on other funding (nor does it wish to) from any outside sources, such as the UK as the Isle of Mann and the other Channel Islands jurisdictions in Jersey or Guernsey can do.

It is therefore hardly surprising that Gibraltar has not run around signing up to bilateral agreements with others thereby putting itself in a less attractive position... when compared to other jurisdictions, that also have not adhered to the OECD list (of 'jurisdictions that have committed to the internationally agreed tax standards' but that have not yet substantially implemented these agreements)... and not signed up to tax transparency agreements... countries such as Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Singapore and Bermuda. Nevertheless, on tax transparency issues, as I posted the other day, Gibraltar IS committed to the OECD 'tax haven' delisting and tax sharing agreements!

Issues on tax transparency are not the 'be all and end all' on offshore finance centres. In order to offer a more balanced view On Gibraltar's Finance Centre, you should also note other matters that the Gibraltar authorities are in the forefront of, as an offshore finance jurisdiction.

Far from "sitting on its hands", through the Financial Services Commission, Gibraltar has ensured it runs a very effective and well regulated Finance Centre... probably better than most. Have a look for yourself on the issue Gibraltar is most often wrongly criticised for... Gibraltar Financial Services Commission > Anti Money Laundering Provisions. On this page, you will see how the FSC openly addresses questions such as:

• What is Gibraltar’s record in the fight against money laundering?
• Does Gibraltar comply with international standards?
• What areas need updating?
• Does the fact that Gibraltar has a large company and trust management industry make it vulnerable to money launderers?
• Isn’t Gibraltar soft on some money laundering such as tax evasion?
• What are the main risks to Gibraltar from launderers?
• How have Gibraltar’s anti-money laundering provisions been verified?
• How does Gibraltar work with others in the fight against money laundering?
• Summary of the anti-money laundering provisions

You will see from this page and from a lot of other information provided 'transparently' on the Gibraltar Financial Services Commission > Anti Money Laundering Provisions, that Gibraltar, far from 'sitting on its hands' does a great deal to ensure it provides a effective and very well regulated Offshore Finance Centre, recognised as such by the IMF and other international regulatory bodies, including the OECD!

Whilst I believe it is right, in a democratic system of free enterprise, that it is a good thing to keep the regulators under scrutiny and of course Governments, I also think in fairness, these issues need to be put into context and any criticism should be a little more balanced than that normally aimed at Gibraltar.... perhaps unlike you have done on your post here today. Which is why I thought I would take the opportunity to redress this... with my comment... and I thank you for allowing me to do so! :)

A couple of Sancho's readers also commented on his post. I thought they were rather ill-informed so I answered them too!

Mark Tanner said:

"Now Gibraltar has received a warning from Brown it will be used to highlight the Rock's lack of transparency when it could have avoided this deadline by compliance."

In reply I responded that Gordon Brown's letter was directed at ALL British AND UK offshore jurisdictions or so called 'tax havens', NOT JUST Gibraltar. Namely... the seven UK overseas territories of Anguilla, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, Montserrat and the Turks and Caicos. Brown's letter also included the UK territorites as he sought to increase pressure on Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man – UK crown dependencies also on the OECD list.

Source: FT.com / UK / Politics and policy - Brown warns tax havens to comply

Another reader named Anthony said:

"Gibraltar was encouraged to develop its off shore financial centre as compensation for the closure of its naval dockyard. The British Government largely turned a blind eye to the lack of supervision and now that albatros is coming home to roost."

I thought this comment was a particular load of tripe and I said so. In reply to Anthony, I chose to ignore his affirmation that Gibraltar was "encouraged to develop its off shore financial centre as compensation for the closure of its naval dockyard"... couldn't be bothered with that one, it's so crass! But I did address his other point... and I'll share it with you here... as I thought my ending remark was quite amusing (well it amused me!).

With the greatest respect Anthony...that's a load of ill-informed rubbish!! If you bothered to check your facts you would have found that Gibraltar's offshore finance centre is constantly under a great deal of scrutiny in the UK Parliament. All you have to do is visit Parliament.co.uk and search their archives. A casual check for "Gibraltar Offshore" showed up over 300 instances of questions in BOTH Houses of Parliament regarding Gibraltar's finance centre in the recent past.

In the EU... if you bother to check, you will find many many instances, including cases that have gone to the European Courts of First Instance (where Gibraltar has mainly won nearly all cases) and again been very much scrutinised by the EU... under the auspices of Gibraltar's EU membership through the UK's own membership! Now... no one (at least no one well informed) would categorise this hardly as... "turning a blind eye"!

The reality is that Gibraltar (and many of the other British and UK crown dependent jurisdictions) have largely been accepted by a number of successive (I incorrectly wrote 'respective' in my original comment) UK Governments, including the present Administration, to run efficient and well policed jurisdictions. In his recent letter... Brown also stressed the importance of the tax information sharing deal reached between Gibraltar and the US, and acknowledged that Gibraltar was in well-advanced negotiations with other countries, so again, clearly not "turning a blind eye"!

If anything, what Brown is up to is covering his ass (as per usual) in the context of his pretence at leadership for the G20 countries... in the face of the difficulties all countries are facing in the Global economy and in the fight to avoid further global recession!

That.. is more what Brown's letter is about... sleight of hand spin that takes the focus away from his own Government's largely self created difficulties... and much less concern about how Gibraltar's (or other British and UK) offshore jurisdictions handle themselves.

Oh and Anthony... no 'albatross is coming home to roost' in Gibraltar. As a major world centre for bird migration, we are well used to these and other 'crows' just passing through... and moving along quite harmlessly and peaceably... even though, in their passing, they occasionally do sh**t on us from a great height!

Petitions set up in support of Margaret Haywood

There are now a number of petitions set up in support of Margaret Haywood, the 'whistleblowing' nurse who has been struck off so unfairly by the Nursing and Midwifery Council.

Here's a couple I have chosen to support.

The following Petition has been set up by the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) who have been providing legal representation for Margaret Haywood:

Petition in Support of Margaret Haywood > Support for whistleblowing nurse struck off by NMC @ GoPetitions

The petition reads:

"We, the undersigned, wish to show our support for nurse Margaret Haywood who raised issues of concern around poor patient care.

We believe that Margaret was justified in exposing the worrying conditions at her local hospital and that the NMC was wrong to strike her off the nursing register."

This Petition is to the Prime Minister at 10 Downing Street website:

Petition for the Prime Minister to Intervene on behalf of Nurse Margaret Haywood @ Number10 > Prime Minister's Office

I have happily signed both petitions but I have to say I think the Prime Minister's e-Petition is a bit of a waste of time... as I doubt very much that Brown will be at all inclined to intervene in this matter... his Government is more intent on muzzling whistle blowers... not helping people in need!

Latest News on Margaret Haywoood

Ms Haywood from Liverpool, who worked as a nurse for 20 years and is now unemployed and disbarred from carying on employment as a Nurse by the NMC, is now taking advice from her professional body, the RCN, about challenging the ruling at the High Court.

Chris Cox, director of legal services at the Royal College of Nursing, said:

"The RCN has been providing legal representation for Margaret Haywood from the outset and is very surprised at the severity of the punishment dealt out by the NMC panel.

Our legal team are working with Margaret to explore the various legal options available to her in light of the judgment."

I wish them every success... and the sooner the better!

Today, I was also pleased to read that hundreds of nurses have contacted the Nursing and Midwifery Council to protest its decision to to ban Ms Haywood from the profession, amid fears that it will discourage other NHS whistleblowers from coming forward.

Yesterday, the NMC disclosed that it they had received over 400 emails and 200 telephone calls in support of Ms Haywood, with most of the complaints coming from other nurses.

I have visited many websites who have commented on this story over the last few days. It's quite amazing that I have yet to come across a comment in support of the NMC's decision... that is quite telling and just shows how out of step the NMC's ruling is with NHS staff and the public at large.

Here's one comment I came across, in the Nursing Times, which rather encapsulates NHS Staff (and the general public's) strong feelings in this matter:

"The health, safety, well being and care of patients is what is meant to concern us. This principle should over-ride any requirement to ask patients permission to record the lack of or poor quality of the care and treatment they are receiving.

After this foolish ruling nobody will feel inclined to raise concerns about any aspect of treatment and those who suffer will be the patients whose care is our number 1 concern!

Source: NMC defends decision to strike off undercover nurse Margaret Haywood. | News | Nursing Times

If you would like to support Margaret Haywood on Facebook, there are a number of Groups now set up. You can find them posted at this Facebook Group whose aim is to Reinstate Margaret Haywood.

If you want to let the NMC know how you feel you can do so by emailing this article to them - Just click on the 'SHARE' button below to email them - Copy these email addresses as they are (including the comma) and paste it into the email address window of the 'SHARE' email: fitness.to.practise@nmc-uk.org, communications@nmc-uk.org - You might like to add, as I did, that you think their decision is "appalling and shameful"!

Nursing and Midwifery Council insist on their crass decision on Haywood

Following my post last night about the 'striking off' of whistleblowing nurse Margaret Haywood, I see today the Nursing and Midwifery Council have had to put out a statement explaining their decision!

In a statement published on their website this morning, the NMC note 'significant media interest' concerning their decision, by an independent panel of the Nursing & Midwifery Council’s Conduct and Competence Committee to strike off Margaret Haywood from the register.

The NMC say "the view of the independent panel was that Margaret Haywood’s actions in breaching patient confidentiality represented a major breach of ‘The Code: Standards of conduct, performance and ethics for nurses and midwives’ by which all nurses and midwives must abide".

"Based upon the evidence it heard, the independent Panel decided that Margaret Haywood’s fitness to practise was impaired by reason of misconduct.

A patient should be able to trust a nurse with his/her physical condition and psychological wellbeing without that confidential information being disclosed to others. Only in the most exceptional circumstances should the cardinal principle of patient confidentiality be breached. Based upon the evidence it heard, the panel did not believe that this was the case and although the conditions on the ward were serious, it was not necessary to breach confidentiality to seek to improve them by the method chosen. The panel believed that the method was unlikely to benefit the patients that were on the ward at the time of filming and under Margaret Haywood’s care."

What a load of tripe!

At the NMC hearing, Elizabeth Bloor, the producer of BBC's Panorama programme that blew the whistle on the Royal Sussex Hospital's lack of care of the elderly, gave evidence and told the hearing consent had been obtained from all the families of patients involved in the filming!

The BBC producer added that there had been "an over-arching public interest" to produce the Undercover Nurse documentary because Panorama had received up to 5,000 complaints about conditions.

In November the panel found no evidence that Ms Haywood broke the NHS Trust's policy on whistle-blowing by raising concerns about patient care in the documentary, or that she failed to assist colleagues when a patient was having a seizure.

A BBC spokesman said "there was clearly a strong public interest in revealing that some elderly people were not receiving the level of care we expect from our national health service".

"Panorama believes that Margaret Haywood has done the elderly population of this country a great service."

Today, listening to a BBC Radio 5 Live phone-in, it was clear that a very significant number of people across the country agree that Ms Haywood's actions have improved care for the elderly... and not just in Sussex. They also believe the NMC have got it wrong!

People are grateful for the courage and enterprise Ms Haywood showed... in standing up and fighting for these elderly patients... and blowing the whistle on the Royal Sussex Hospital.

The consequences Ms Haywood now faces... in being unemployed and disbarred from being able to continue employment as a nurse is shameful. This woman should be being congratulated for what she did!

If you would like to support Margaret Haywood, there is a Facebook Group whose aim is to Reinstate Margaret Haywood.

Update - Petitions set up

There are now a number of Petitions set up in support of Margaret Haywood and I have listed those I have chosen to support here: Petitions set up in support of Margaret Haywood

If you want to let the NMC know how you feel you can do so by emailing this article to them - Just click on the 'SHARE' button below to email them - Copy these email addresses as they are (including the comma) and paste it into the email address window of the 'SHARE' email: fitness.to.practise@nmc-uk.org, communications@nmc-uk.org - You might like to add, as I did, that you think their decision is "appalling and shameful"!

NHS 'whistleblowing' nurse shamefully struck off by NMC

Margaret Haywood, a whistleblowing nurse who secretly filmed for the BBC to reveal the neglect of elderly patients at a hospital has been struck off for misconduct.

Ms Haywood who is 58, secretly filmed elderly patients at the Royal Sussex Hospital in Brighton for a BBC Panorama programme in July 2005.

Today... in an unbelievably crass act she was struck off by the Nursing and Midwifery Council who said she failed to "follow her obligations as a nurse". In other words... the Nursing and Midwifery Council believe that rules... are more important and come before the care of patients! Unbelievable!!

Ms Haywood, who is originally from Liverpool and has been a nurse for over 20 years, said she thought she had been treated harshly and insisted she had put patients first.

"I am absolutely devastated and upset by it all. I think I have been treated very harshly."

I think most people would agree Margaret!!

Ms Haywood is now calling for a whistle-blower review and I'm glad she is as this is really very unjust. Her intentions were clearly to help these patients. If the Nursing and Midwifery Council felt that strongly that Ms Haywood had indeed failed in her nursing duties, then in the circumstances, I would have thought some sort of reprimand would have been more appropriate.

A spokesman for the Royal College of Nursing said parts of the NHS did not have "systems or working environments" in place that encouraged staff to speak out. He added:

"This can put staff in an extremely difficult position and when staff concerns are discouraged or ignored, it can often lead to poor patient care getting worse.

It is absolutely vital that healthcare staff at all levels feel they can raise concerns about poor patient care with their managers."

But a Department of Health spokesperson said:

"Whistle-blowers already have full protection under the Public Interest Disclosure Act passed by this Government.

We expect that any member of staff who reports concerns about the safety or quality of care to be listened to by their managers and action taken to address their concerns."

Well... the Public Interest Disclosure Act doesn't seem to have helped Ms Haywood very much so far... despite the fact that she did her best to report her concerns to her managers, as she confirms:

"I did voice my concerns through my immediate line manager and I also went to my ward manager but nothing was really taken on board.

Nurses are afraid to speak out about what is happening and the whole process needs to be reviewed so nurses can make it easier to voice their concerns."

Quite! They should also not be struck off for 'whistleblowing' clear examples of appalling treatment of the elderly!

I very much hope the BBC are supporting Ms Haywood's case... and not letting her hang out to dry!

If you would like to support Margaret Haywood, there is a Facebook Group whose aim is to Reinstate Margaret Haywood.

Update - Petitions set up

There are now a number of Petitions set up in support of Margaret Haywood and I have listed those I have chosen to support here: Petitions set up in support of Margaret Haywood

If you want to let the NMC know how you feel you can do so by emailing this article to them - Just click on the 'SHARE' button below to email them - Copy these email addresses as they are (including the comma) and paste it into the email address window of the 'SHARE' email: fitness.to.practise@nmc-uk.org, communications@nmc-uk.org - You might like to add, as I did, that you think their decision is "appalling and shameful"!

Gibraltar committed to OECD 'tax haven' delisting and tax sharing agreements

Yesterday, I commented on a post over at Tilting at Windmills, defending Gibraltar's inclusion in the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) list of 'jurisdictions that have committed to the internationally agreed tax standards' but that have not yet substantially implemented these agreements.

I was therefore very interested to read a story in the Gibraltar Chronicle today quoting a report published in the Financial Times last Friday, which I missed, saying that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has written to the UK’s offshore tax havens, including Gibraltar, "warning them to meet international transparency standards within six months or face sanctions".

These reports say Mr Brown has told these jurisdictions to sign at least 12 bilateral tax information sharing agreements by November.

The Chronicle say that in his letter to Chief Minister Peter Caruana, Mr Brown also welcomed recent steps taken by the Gibraltar Government in this context.

He referred to a statement issued by the Gibraltar Government ahead of the G20 summit in London, in which Mr Caruana reiterated Gibraltar’s commitment to OECD standards. A Chief Minister's Office spokesman at the Convent told the Chronicle:

"The Prime Minister highlighted the fact that that statement was well received."

Mr Brown also stressed the importance of the tax information sharing deal reached between Gibraltar and the US, and acknowledged that Gibraltar was in well-advanced negotiations with other countries.

Last week, even before he had received Mr Brown’s letter, Mr Caruana said he was confident that Gibraltar "would sign at least 12 agreements by November".

In early April, following the G20 Summit, the Gibraltar Government issued a statement welcoming the global raising of standards of financial services regulation, transparency and exchange of information, saying "Gibraltar is already very well positioned and well placed to prosper from" these agreements and added that the Gibraltar Government "is very comfortable with the outcome of G20, as it affects Gibraltar".

In the aftermath of the G20 Summit, the Gibraltar Government said the OECD "appears to have adopted, as a test of 'substantial implementation' of agreed tax information exchange standards, the entry into of around 12 Tax Information Exchange Agreements".

The OECD has published a Progress Report as at 2 April 2009 in this respect.

In their statement after the G20, the Gibraltar Government added:

Since Gibraltar has not yet signed 12 agreements, Gibraltar is categorized among 'Jurisdictions that have committed to the internationally agreed tax standard, but have not yet substantially implemented'. This categorisation is accurate and fair.

The countries listed as committed but not yet substantially implemented, (like Gibraltar), include reputable EU Member States like Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg and others such as Switzerland, Singapore and Bermuda.

Gibraltar is well advanced in the process of signing up tax information exchange agreements and fully expects to be in the category of countries that have fully implemented the internationally agreed standard, by the time that the OECD issues its next progress report in November 2009.

The Gibraltar Government considers that it is right and fair that no 'black list' emerged at G20, especially not one based on a new, sudden criteria of which
committed, active countries had had no prior notice."

Concluding their statement in the aftermath of the G20 Summit, the Gibraltar Government publicly repeated their offer to all OECD countries, which was made through the OECD in November 2008 and subsequently directly to these countries, "to enter into Exchange of Information Agreements, at their request".

The reports of Mr Brown’s letter today in the Chronicle, comes just days ahead of publication of an initial report on the UK’s offshore havens. Michael Foot, a former Bank of England director who was commissioned to write the report, will publish his interim findings on April 22.

I'm sure this report will be read with great interest in Gibraltar.

These reports, in the Chronicle today and in the FT last week, gave me the opportunity to refresh my memory on the Gibraltar Government's statements on their inclusion in this OECD 'tax havens' list... and I'm pleased to say these rather underline my comment yesterday in the post over at Tilting at Windmills, when I said that Gibraltar was not "wishing to act illegally and cock a financial tax snook at the rest of the world"!

The Gibraltar Government's position is clearly one of willing co-operation and are clearly committed to meet Prime Minister Brown's deadline on bilateral tax information sharing agreements by November.

In meeting these internatonal standards and deadlines however, the Gibraltar Government must still ensure they maintain their position in safeguarding Gibraltar's independent economy, as a beneficial tax jurisdiction for high net worth individuals (HNWI's) and offshore corporations.

As I said yesterday, I'm no lawyer or international finance expert, but I imagine this is a tricky balancing act for Gibraltar... and I do hope these agreements do not put at risk, Gibraltar's ability to make it's own way economically... in difficult and changing global financial markets and tax jurisdictions.

One final point on this is that I believe the Government and Gibraltar authorities should be given credit for the commitment and effort they are showing in meeting these international standards... rather than be castigated... as they often are by the uninformed or, especially by mischievous opportunistic politicians from our neighbours to the north! As the Gibraltar Government themselves highlighted in their statement, there are many other countries listed as "committed but not yet substantially implemented", (like Gibraltar), including reputable EU Member States such as Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Singapore and Bermuda!

In conclusion, it is worth reiterating the Government's stated position that "Gibraltar is well advanced in the process of signing up to tax information exchange agreements and fully expects to be in the category of countries that have fully implemented the internationally agreed standard, by the time that the OECD issues its next progress report in November 2009".

Telling it to Brown... telling it like it is

When it comes to integrity in politics today... a rare thing... it's good to see one can still count on people like Frank Field MP.

Writing on his blog today... Frank Field, who has been Labour MP for Birkenhead for the past 30 years, tells it like it is to Gordon Brown.

Yesterday, I wrote about Gordon Brown's 'morally defunct government'... today in a blog post, Frank writes about the "Darkness at the Heart of the Labour Party" and tells Brown "he is in for a very rude awakening"!

Frank Field is a worried man. He writes:

"McBride sat on the Prime Minister's political War Cabinet. If this is the war the Prime Minister thinks the country wants he is in for a very rude awakening. In the meantime, Labour supporters are left bewildered and wondering what happened to the moral crusading side of our mission.

Poor old Labour party."

You may well ask Frank... "what happened to the moral crusading side" of the Labour party? What the rest of us are wondering is... what happened to its morals!

The sad thing is Frank... they never listened to you before... and I doubt very much if they'll listen to you now. In any case, even if Brown does hear you now... it's far too late... the Labour goose is well overcooked... well past it's 'sale by date' too!

What worries me far more is... I cannot see any viable alternatives... we do not have an 'Obama' waiting on the sidelines... ready to offer our country the leadership it so badly needs!

Time to go Gordon!

Those of you who read my blog regularly will know that I rarely comment on UK politics... I don't have any strong political affiliations or axe to grind. My politics have always tended to be liberal with a small 'l'.

Today though, I'm making an exception... as I really have had enough of Gordon Brown's morally defunct government!

In 1887, the historian and moralist, Lord Acton, in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton, expressed his opinion that "power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men".

Well, I don't for one second think Gordon Brown would ever fall into the category of 'great men' in anyone's mind... but I have come to the conclusion that this Labour government led by the un-elected Gordon Brown... is corrupt and morally lost!

This latest episode, involving the e-mails which planned the smearing of senior Tories by Damian McBride, the prime minister's former 'top adviser' and political press officer, which found their way to a Westminster blogger, Paul Staines who writes the Guido Fawkes Blog, is for me... the very last straw! I've had enough of this bunch of clowns... and yes I know... probably long after many of you came to this same conclusion. I do believe this Government has completely lost the confidence of the whole country now... if not maybe for a very small minority who perhaps blinkerdly... still read 'Red Rag'!

This latest blunder, at the very centre of No 10, when added to all the recent sleaze disclosures over Ministers' and MPs' expenses and most importantly of all to my mind, the Government's inability to deal properly with the Banks and the 'credit crunch' crisis... makes me think it really is time for Gordon Brown to call it a day!

The trouble is... if and when he goes... what next?

Saying something does not work is not good enough... unless you can say what WILL work... and I don't really have an answer to that! Once we arrive at the conclusion that Gordon must go, especially at a time when the UK and the world is screaming out for strong sensible Government and leadership, what are our alternatives?

David Cameron and George Osborne are unfit to govern, not because of any old photos, real or imagined, or visits to clinics, (the smearing planned by McBride) but because they don’t know what they want to do with power and are simply hoping Labour hand it over to the Tories... on a plate! After all... look what's happening to London under the buffoon Boris Johnson! How did this guy EVER get elected? Livingstone... though I didn't always necessarily agree with some of his politics... to my mind did a good job for London... didn't he? But that's a slightly different story... perhaps of electorates getting what they deserve!

As for alternatives to Gordon Brown and Labour... this really is a problem for the country.

I still remember vividly... the mess that Conservatives got us into during their last tenures... and I do NOT want to return to that. While I quite like Cameron as a person... and he IS particularly good during PMQ's at the 'despatch box' I don't think he has what the country needs right now... and this, to my mind, is firm and experienced intelligent leadership.

As I scan the political panorama, the only person who shines... and seems to me to be possibly capable of providing what the UK needs right now... is Vince Cable. He's about the only balanced voice that has consistently sounded like knowing what he's talking about on the economy... and the only voice that has provided a sensible approach to dealing with the financial mess that Gordon Brown has been... if not directly responsible for... has been incapable of providing any real leadership over. Brown's certainly not making things better... and Vince Cable just might!

Trouble is, the country will never elect a Liberal government... and I wouldn't want one led by the insubstantial Clegg anyway.

Here's a thought... in times of crisis in the past, the UK has chosen to go for Coalition Governments... and there's no question the country IS in crisis, over the economy... and society generally!

How about Vince Cable, as Leader of a sound, sensible, non-sleaze coalition Government, perhaps with Ken Clarke as his Chancellor of the Exchequer... and William Hague as Foreign Secretary (he has been sympathetic towards Gibraltar in the past)... now I'd vote for that!!

Oh and yes... I know... I did say I didn't want more of the old Conservatives and I've chosen two for my 'fantasy cabinet'! But... the difference is, both Clarke (a wet in Thatcher's day) and Hague are from the more acceptable side of Toryism... plus, with their experience they do still inspire confidence with most people... well, at least with me anyway!

One can dream... but I really worry for what's coming. The one thing I do know for sure is... Gordon Brown and his clowns... must go... and Gawd 'elp us with what comes next. Whatever it is... I can't see it being much worse than the mess Brown (and as a result the UK) is in... can you?

My 'Twat of the Week' award today goes to... Sir Fred Goodwin

As you may be aware... I've not been writing this blog for very long... but I thought it about time that I started an award for people I come across in life, who get right up my nose. I've decided to create my very own 'Twat of the Week' award!

Not that I would ever pretend to aspire to reaching the heady heights of my esteemed blogger colleague GrumpyOldTwat, who has perfected the art... but I do think every self respecting grumpy old blogging git should have a 'Twat of the Week'... so here goes!

Today, my 'Twat of the Week' has to unequivocally be Sir Fred Goodwin!

Sir Fred Goodwin, as I'm sure you all know by now, is the former (and highly discredited) boss of RBS (yes... arguably the king of the banker wankers!). He is in the news today under fire for the generosity of his £650,000-a-year pension, four months after leaving the Royal Bank of Scotland.

Sir Fred, who stepped down after RBS had to be bailed out by the government, revelled in his nickname of 'Fred the Shred' for cutting costs and jobs.

Commonly described as the most charismatic and also the most abrasive of the banking bosses, Sir Fred's position became untenable as the bank was propped up with £20bn of public money - now bolstered by another £13bn cash injection.

Sir Fred was in charge at RBS for nine years and steered it from being a bit-part player to global icon as one of the world's top five banks.

He built up the bank with acquisition after acquisition - NatWest, Coutts, Adam & Co, Direct Line, Ulster Bank, Churchill and Citizens Bank in the US - and then ruthlessly cut costs through staff reductions to generate bigger profits.

But the wheels started to come off with the acquisition of ABN Amro as part of a consortium at the height of the boom in 2007.

Even before his departure, Sir Fred was under fire because of heavy losses and a £12bn rights issue to raise more money for RBS.

It has been disclosed today, that Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, sent a junior Treasury minister to have a word with Sir Fred Goodwin yesterday, after it emerged that the 50-year-old banker was already benefitting from a £16 million pension pot... grotesque, especially in the light of his massive mismanagement of RBS.

RBS has posted a pre-tax loss for last year of £24.1 billion, both from trading losses and write-downs. RBS is also to receive a further capital injection of £25 billion in public money and have also announced that they will inject £325 billion in toxic assets into the Government's insurance programme.

Mr Darling has apparently asked Sir Fred to give up his pension.

The new chairman of RBS Sir Philip Hampton has also spoken to Sir Fred and asked him to voluntarily reduce his pension.

Today, I am awarding Sir Fred my 'Twat of the Week' award... not only for his part in getting us all in this heap of shit... but especially for his reply to Darling and anyone else suggesting he should, quite reasonably, make a voluntary reduction in his grotesque pension. Sir Fred, who is apparently 'furious' with the leak of his pension arrangement (oh dear... we so sympathise... NOT) said earlier today that he would think about it. However, BBC News is just reporting as I write... that apparently this greaseball has now stated categorically... that he will not give back a single penny! What a twat!

Sir Fred, in a letter to the Treasury, has now rejected all requests to give any of his pension back. In his letter, he also suggests ministers agreed to the deal.

Earlier today on Radio 4, Darling said that the Government had thought the deal was legally binding when it was agreed in October, but that they now realise they could have blocked it!

Of course, many of you will undoubtedly argue, that perhaps the award should more rightly be going to Gordon Brown or Alistair Darling... or whoever negotiated the bail out with RBS on behalf of the Government... or indeed the whole of this, daily more ludicrously mismanaging, Labour Government. I would not be able to argue strongly against this!

As for Labour MPs... not many have come out today to criticise or comment. It could be because they are all getting ready to go partying with Banker Wankers tonight!

Dubious, strange and embarrassing bedfellows they keep

It's hardly a surprise that England and Wales Cricket Board chairman Giles Clarke is now coming under severe pressure to resign, following the revelations over the Sir Allen Stanford affair!

Billionaire Stanford has been charged with a $8bn (£5.6bn) investment fraud.

As ECB chairman, Clarke struck a deal with Stanford to play five $20m matches, with plans in place for new 20-20 tournaments in England as well.

Clarke's dubious leadership of the ECB in all this has now led to at least two county cricket clubs publicly asking him to resign.

Today, both Leicestershire and Hampshire cricket clubs are reported as saying that Clarke should go but he has been backed by Glamorgan, Durham and Middlesex.

Clarke was elected chairman of the ECB for a second term just a matter of days ago, having ran unopposed after Lord Marland withdrew in January.

But the chairmen of Leicestershire and Hampshire, who have been vocal critics of the ECB in the past, have firmly pointed the finger of blame at Clarke.

I find it amazing, that the rest of the county cricket clubs, that comprise the ECB, are not also joining in, in calling for his resignation!

I don't know about you, but right from the very start, when I first heard of Sir Allen Stanford, at the time when he first made his proposals to the ECB, I thought to myself... this guy sounds very dubious. Later on, following his antics during the Twenty 20 internationals between England and a West Indies all-star XI, which he funded with a total prize fund of £12.270m (US $20 million), my doubts about this character were heightened even further. I watched with fascination at all the bullshit and razzmatazz that surrounded Stanford, which he was largely responsible for creating.

The word 'charlatan' kept screaming out loud and clear... at least to me! Naturally, being a somewhat naive and trusting soul, I assumed that the ECB had conducted all 'due diligence' in checking this guy out... and thought, well they must know what they are doing. How naive can we be!

It's ok for me to be perhaps naive... but when the Chairman of an organisaton such as the ECB, is shown to have been so badly taken in, even if all decisions were made jointly by the board, then surely it is time for the Chairman to go... maybe the whole board too! What were they thinking about?

Dubious, strange and embarassing bedfellows

Speaking of keeping dubious, strange and embarrassing bedfellows... I just watched a press conference of Gordon Brown... our esteemed Prime Minister, being welcomed to Rome by the very dubious Signor Berlusconi... the Italian Prime Minister.


Am I being an idiot for feeling a touch of discomfort watching these two effusing about each other... and the good they are going to do when discussing the need to help poor countries during the global economic crisis? I mean... come on, this is a guy, the prime minister of a major European country, who has been indicted for paying bribes!

Perhaps this does not embarrass the Italians, but those scenes with Brown and Berlusconi... give me great discomfort!

On Tuesday, David Mills, the estranged husband of the UK's Olympics minister Tessa Jowell, was sentenced to four and a half years' jail by an Italian court after being found guilty of taking a $600,000 (£400,000) bribe as a reward for withholding court testimony to help Berlusconi!

It appears, that Berlusconi, who was indicted alongside Mills, his former legal adviser on offshore dealings, is no longer a defendant. His government passed a law last year giving the prime minister and some other top Italian officials immunity from prosecution. If that's not scandalous in itself, I really don't know what is!

While newspapers report that this is the first time in Italy that someone has been found guilty of taking a bribe without the giver of the money being identified, we all KNOW who it was!!

The fact that Berlusconi himself is still prime minister and not resigned in shame is bare faced cheek to an extreme. For our own prime minister, to be seen effusing jovially with this crook... gives me great discomfort and makes me wonder... what sort of dishonourable world are we living in... but hey, that's just me!

As we say in Llanito... valiente carra dura... the bare faced cheek of it all!