The elected role was created by the coalition government after being a key Conservative election pledge to introduce accountability to policing and elections are due to take place on 15 November.

Until now, only the Iraq war veteran Colonel Tim Collins had announced that he wishes to seek the Conservative candidacy for the position – stating his intention to stand at last year’s Conservative Party Conference.

However, Cllr O’Brien will be a formiddable opponent. He has lived in Kent all his life and took on the council community safety portfolio after Cllr Rehman Chishti was elected to parliament in May 2010.

He is also chairman of the Medway Community Safety Partnership.

Cllr O’Brien told the Messenger “I am considering my application. The opportunity’s there and I think it’s an exciting one.

“I feel my experience stands me in good stead.”

Col Collins expressed concern about the role going to a “sunset councillor” – a charge Cllr O’Brien dismissed.

It is not yet clear how many other potential candidates will put their names forward.

The New Homes Bonus is a multi-billion pound programme that rewards communities when they accept more housebuilding in their area. The Bonus includes an extra reward for building new affordable homes, and for getting long-term empty homes back into use.

It was announced on 1 February by Housing Minister Grant Shapps, who also highlighted how the Government’s action to get Britain building again will play a vital and central role in getting the country’s economy on the road to recovery.

Among the range of measures to get the homes the country needs built, the Minister announced that he has already identified enough Government land to build 80,000 homes, and is now working with organisations including the BBC and Royal Mail to find even more unused sites for housebuilding – meaning Ministers are on course to release enough land for 100,000 homes by 2015.

Mr Shapps also announced details of the NewBuy Guarantee scheme to help those aspiring to buy newly-built properties to do so with just a fraction of the deposit that’s normally required and that he is devolving power from Whitehall to Town Halls, ending a long-standing ‘tax on tenants’ in a £19 billion deal enabling councils to keep the rents they collect and invest the money in their homes.

Following the publication of Medway’s grant allocation Mr Reckless said “building on the flagship Housing Strategy, the Government has this week unveiled a range of measures to help first time buyers onto the housing ladder, provide support for millions who have been left languishing on social housing waiting lists and get construction on the move.

“The announcement that, through the New Homes Bonus, Medway Council has been granted £2,317,239 this year to build much-needed housing in the local area is welcome. The New Homes Bonus, which will start being paid in March, is a multi-billion pound programme which rewards communities when they accept more housebuilding in their area and includes extra rewards for building new affordable homes, and for getting long-term empty homes back into use.

“Medway Council, under the leadership of our excellent group of Conservative Councillors, will have ultimate oversight of any proposed building development, not central government. It will be the job of locally elected, and therefore accountable, representatives to decide on the benefits of building new affordable homes versus the human, environmental and economic impact of continuing with Labour’s failed housing policies.

“Labour led Britain into a housing crisis – the number of affordable homes fell, waiting lists almost doubled and first-time buyer numbers collapsed to their lowest level for a generation.

“As I said on Wednesday in reply to Simon Hughes in the House of Commons debate on Welfare Reform, it is not fair that many of my constituents are forced to get up at 6 in the morning to catch a coach to London because they cannot afford to pay the fare for the train, let alone find the rent for a flat in Bermondsey. It is not fair that the taxes of so many hard-working residents in my constituency of Rochester and Strood are supporting people on benefits who live permanently without a job in some of the most expensive accommodation in the country.

“The government is right to tackle the lack of decent homes as a priority while also addressing the huge imbalance in the welfare system which traps people on benefits. I am delighted to welcome the Government’s £2.3m funding for new homes in Medway, which is far more than generous than the grant allocated to our more leafy neighbours such as Sevenoaks and Tunbridge Wells (£645,997 and £597,603 respectively).

“The Government’s action will help local people onto the housing ladder, provide more affordable housing and create local jobs.”

“Here is the message that Britain has sent to those considering setting up business, or locating more staff, in this country. First, we resent those who earn large salaries. Second, we do not care about contractual obligations. Third, there is a court of public opinion to which everyone is accountable and which acts as a national remuneration committee. It sets salaries by holding public hearings on the Today programme and picking an amount by vox pops on the News at Ten.

“Fourth, you may be picked at random to appear in front of this court, never being quite certain when it will prove to be your turn. Fifth, if this should happen to you, the best thing to do is to surrender quickly. Resistance is useless. You will be pilloried until forced to surrender in the end.

“Finally, do not think that surrender will help you. Once the court of public opinion has finished with you, it will come after everyone else in your company. Oh, and welcome to Britain. We hope that you will enjoy the opportunities this country has to offer.

“Why would anyone site their business, and particularly their financial services business, in Britain under these circumstances?”

Notes

1. Editorial, ‘Jumping the Shark’ The Times (London, 31 January 2012) 2

“So now we know: no repatriation, no renegotiation, business as usual. December’s ‘veto’ turns out to be nothing of the kind; at best, it is a partial opt-out. Britain had asked for concessions in return for allowing the other member states to use EU institutions and structures for their fiscal compact. No such concessions were forthcoming, but we have given them permission anyway. The only difference is that, because the deal was done in a separate treaty structure, the PM doesn’t have to put anything through the House of Commons. We had a generational opportunity to improve our relationship with the EU. That opportunity has passed.

“It’s time for the country as a whole to settle the question. This morning, the People’s Pledge announced the most ambitious plan ever for an In/Out plebiscite. It will hold a series of constituency-wide referendums, first in one seat, then in ten, then in a hundred. Every registered voter will get a ballot, the poll will be overseen by the Electoral Reform Society and, in each referendum, People’s Pledge activists will have a major presence on the ground. (See here which constituencies will be in the first tranche).

“I am confident that the campaign will succeed. After today, no one can plausibly claim that it is possible to get powers back from Brussels while remaining within the EU. Obviously, I hope that Britain will vote to come out: that we will leave a cramped and dwindling customs union and rejoin the wider world. But, either way, I promise to accept the verdict with good grace. Stop fretting about the opinion polls, the timing, the parliamentary arithmetic, the coalition. Ask yourself instead whether a referendum is right in principle. Considered thus, it seems not only desirable, but inevitable. The only question is when.”

“Dissent in any debate is a healthy thing but the Liberal Democrats’ eleventh hour intervention over Medway’s bid for city status is a shame.

“What are they trying to achieve by attempting to scupper a bid that previously had all-party support? – (they now deny this). The time to be openly opposing our application was long, long ago, not now the race is pretty much run. Everyone would have respected their point of view, even if they disagreed with it.

“All the points they put in their letter to Nick Clegg could have been made right from the start, yet they seek to damage the bid with the timing of their intervention. That is cynical and treacherous. Point-scoring and political gestures were never part of their modus operandi, but it would appear now they are.

“The Lib Dems have seen their influence wane, which is sad for they have a big part to play in providing a counterweight to the two-party political establishment. Their problem is no one really knows what they stand for any more. And we suspect, neither do they.”

Notes

1. Editorial, ‘Messenger Comment’ Medway Messenger (Strood, 27 January 2012) 22

The Conservative European Parliament member, who recently came second in the election for the Parliament’s President, added his name to a growing list of opponents to the scheme.

Deva, who has been an MEP since 1999 and was previously Member of Parliament for Brentford and Isleworth, visited a meeting of local Conservatives on the Isle of Grain on Sunday where he discussed the issue with Rochester and Strood MP Mark Reckless and Peninsula ward Councillors Phil Filmer, Chris Irvine and Tony Watson.

“The proposal to consult on building a new airport in the region of the Thames Estuary is a complete nonsense,” he said. “If additional capacity is required, the government should be looking to improve existing facilities and infrastructure.

“The government should be doing all it can to protect our natural and unique habitats here in the South East, not wasting time and taxpayers’ money on unnecessary and extravagant schemes.”

Deva also raised concerns about the impact a new airport would have on existing sites – particularly Heathrow, at which over 76,500 people are employed by over 320 companies.

“If this proposal is to succeed, existing traffic at Heathrow will have to be diverted to the new Estuary airport,” he added, “otherwise it will not be sustainable financially with only added and marginal increases in capacity.

“Closure of Heathrow would follow. A folly so great that it is does not bare thinking about.

“The impact which the possible closure of Heathrow could have on the West London economy would be staggering. Heathrow supports hundreds of thousands of jobs and is one of the biggest single-site employers in the UK.

“There will be a considerable amount of anxiety amongst local residents and businesses should the government decide to proceed with this preposterous Thames Estuary airport consultation. I urge the government to think again.”

Cllr Filmer, who was one of the local councillors asked to talk about the issue on Sky News on Sunday, added “we are against an airport being built anywhere in the Thames Estuary.

“We will work hard to persuade the government that such a proposal would cause significant damage to the local environment and is neither a safe, affordable or sensible solution to the country’s future aviation needs.

“A Thames Estuary airport would be bad for Medway and bad for Britain.”

One of the main problems, it is thought, was that pupils wishing to take the test were herded to a small number of test centres (by a blind sheperd, it would seem) – though the schools and Medway Council both disputed the other’s account as to where blame should lie.

Both agreed, though, that something needed to be done to avoid a repeat when the test is taken again later this year. So, eager to get a rough idea of what the pulic thought, Medway Council threw the matter out to a public consultation.

The result was overwhelming.

Of the 76 responses (okay, maybe after 2000 pupils sat the test it was not overwhelming in every aspect), 71 (or more than 90%) said that they wanted to see the test return to the pupils’ own schools.

And why not. Eleven-and-a-bit years ago when I sat the 11-plus, I did so in the comfort of my own school environment with no delays and no pages missing from any of the papers.

Council sources have indicated to me, though, that some primary school teachers are not happy with the idea – because of the “increased workload”.

Yes, the same “workload” they had before the test was taken out of schools.

The issue was discussed at the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee last week and, I’m led to believe, was put to the vote.

I am informed that, whilst the proposal was met with cross-party support (Labour’s Councillors Sam Craven and Dorte Gilry both voted for the idea), there was one notable opponent.

Labour’s Spokesman for Children’s Services Cllr Adam Price voted against returning the test to individual schools.

Which begs the question: is Cllr Price interested in the best interests of the children, or a minority of “hard-up” teachers?

Ed Miliband has criticised the government’s decision to change the inflation index used when calculating public sector pension increases to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) as a harmful cut.

Last year, he laid down a motion opposing the move, saying that it left “public sector workers and the poorest in society disadvantaged permanently, year on year.”

However, in a further blow to his credibility, his party’s accounts reveal that Labour took the same decision with their own pension scheme – wiping millions off of the value of their employees’ pensions.

YouGov’s latest daily polling has Labour on 36% – a drop of 6 points on last month – whilst the Conservatives are five points ahead on 42% – an increase of two points. The Lib Dems are on 9%, whilst others account for 14%.

The headline polling figures are just the tip of the iceberg, though. In a poll conducted between 18 and 19 January, 33% said that Labour “seems to chop and change all the time” (28% Lib Dem, 16% Con) whilst just 12% thought it was “led by people of real ability” (3% Lib Dem, 25% Con).¹

And, according to The Times, a ComRes poll found that, whilst the two parties were neck-and-neck, Labour would be enjoying a three-point lead over the Tories if Ed’s brother David was leading the party.²

Notes

1. Figures obtained from publicly-available documents available on the YouGov website.

2. M Savage, ‘Hypocrisy charge as Labour cuts its pensions after criticising cuts’ The Times (London, 23 January 2012)

‘Elf and safety is a term which attracts much derision on the best of days, but this latest move has forced a mass debate for very different reasons: and it all centres around a small amount of shaped latex.

I am, of course, referring to the decision to require actors and actresses in LA to wear condoms in porn films.

It was, perhaps, a move which was more about image than health and safety – porn stars are already required to undertake regular health checks for STDs – but legislators in LA bowed to a petition which exceeded the threshold requiring a debate.

After all, legal or otherwise, it is an open secret that impressionable under-18s can (and do) access a wealth of material on the Internet, and whilst the stars themselves are already careful to avoid infections and unwanted pregnancies, the visual implication is that no such measures are taken.

However, the new law has not been met with unanmious approval.

Opponents say that it reduces their enjoyment of pornography when condoms are used and question how (without being too vulgar) they can remove them before (ahem) finishing.

Others, though, point out that LA is only a small city compared to the rest of the US and the world – and that porn produced elsewhere can still be condom-free.

At the moment.

Unwanted pregnancies and STDs are (I am led to believe) at alarming rates (though any rate higher than 0 is, to be honest, alarming) and any moves to counter that can only be welcomed.

A concerted effort needs to be made by ISPs and web-restriction software providers (such as Norton) to encourage parents to restrict web access on their children’s computers.

Virgin Mobile currently operate an opt-in policy to adult sites, but also block non-adult sites (including, when I was with them at least) PoliticsHome.

Personally, I believe an opt-out policy from all ISPs and mobile providers would be less draconian (as long as it was smarter with the websites blocked), but allow parents the option to stop their children from accessing adult websites.

There are, of course, software providers who produce content-restricting software, but these carry problems of their own, chiefly that those determined to access pornography are usually tech-savvy enough to disable the parental lock – and so they are only really suitable for younger children.

It is, of course, a complex issue, one to which there are no immediate or entirely satisfactory answers.

However, the decision to reequire the use of condoms in the LA porn industry can, in my opinion, only be a good start in tackling the issue (ahem) head-on.

“I’m very shocked. To be 3-1 up with 20 minutes to go and lose the game is criminal. It is not acceptable, that’s two weeks in a row.

“We cannot defend. The worst goal of them all was the second goal. It’s weak minds and lazy minds. That goal was a complete joke.

“We’ve lost two on the bounce. Twenty games to go, have I got to do something defensively? Yes I have.

“I felt sorry for the new boys who came in. I’m devastated for them because to get us in that great position at 3-1 and lose the game it’s unacceptable.”