Labour and Lib Dem politicians have stepped up demands for the PM to explain ministers’ involvement with Atlantic Bridge David Cameron has been accused of allowing a secret rightwing agenda to flourish at the heart of the Conservative party, as fallout from the resignation of Liam Fox exposed its close links with a US network of lobbyists, climate change deniers and defence hawks. In a sign that Fox’s decision to fall on his sword will not mark the end of the furore engulfing the Tories, both Liberal Democrat and Labour politicians stepped up their demands for the prime minister to explain why several senior members of his cabinet were involved in an Anglo-American organisation apparently at odds with his party’s environmental commitments and pledge to defend free healthcare. At the heart of the complex web linking Fox and his friend Adam Werritty to a raft of businessmen, lobbyists and US neocons is the former defence secretary’s defunct charity, Atlantic Bridge, which was set up with the purported aim of “strengthening the special relationship” but is now mired in controversy. An Observer investigation reveals that many of those who sat on the Anglo-American charity’s board and its executive council, or were employed on its staff, were lobbyists or lawyers with connections to the defence industry and energy interests. Others included powerful businessmen with defence investments and representatives of the gambling industry. Fox’s organisation, which was wound up last year following a critical Charity Commission report into its activities, formed a partnership with an organisation called the American Legislative Exchange Council. The powerful lobbying organisation, which receives funding from pharmaceutical, weapons and oil interests among others, is heavily funded by the Koch Charitable Foundation whose founder, Charles G Koch, is one of the most generous donors to the Tea Party movement in the US. In recent years, the Tea Party has become a potent populist force in American politics, associated with controversial stances on global warming. Via a series of foundations, Koch and his brother, David, have also given millions of dollars to global warming sceptics, according to Greenpeace. Labour said it wanted to know how, in 2006, when David Cameron travelled to Norway for his famous photo opportunity with huskies to promote his new-look party’s “green” policies, his senior colleagues were cosying up to US groups that were profoundly sceptical about global warming. Writing in the Observer , the shadow defence secretary, Jim Murphy, said the Tories still had many questions to answer and claimed that “while David Cameron’s compassionate conservatism has been undermined by his actions at home, it could be further damaged by connections overseas”. Murphy writes: “With each passing day there have been fresh allegations of money and influence and it appears that much of the source was the Atlantic Bridge network and its US rightwing connections. We need to know just how far and how deep the links into US politics go. This crisis has discovered traces of a stealth neocon agenda. For many on the right, Atlanticism has become synonymous with a self-defeating, virulent Euroscepticism that is bad for Britain.” Fox resigned on Friday after admitting that he had allowed his friendship with Werritty, a lobbyist who portrayed himself as an adviser to the defence secretary, to blur his professional and personal interests. His resignation followed a drip-feed of revelations about the links between Werritty and businessmen and organisations with defence interests. The revelations over Atlantic Bridge have triggered questions about the role played by Fox, chair of the charity’s advisory council, and that of four of its UK members: William Hague, George Osborne, Chris Grayling and Michael Gove. As a UK charity, the organisation enjoyed tax breaks but had to comply with strict rules prohibiting it from promoting business interests. The charity’s political agenda, which it articulated in conferences devoted to issues such as liberalising the health sector and deregulating the energy markets, chimes with the thinking of many on the right of the Conservative party whom Cameron has been keen to check as he holds the Tories to the centre ground of British politics. Lib Dem peer Lord Oakeshot said: “Dr Fox is a spider at the centre of a tangled neocon web. A dubious pattern is emerging of donations through front companies. We need to establish whether the British taxpayer was subsidising Fox and his frontbench colleagues. What steps did they take to ensure Atlantic Bridge didn’t abuse its charitable status?” Werritty, the group’s UK director, was funded by a raft of powerful businessmen including Michael Hintze, one of the Tories biggest financial backers whose hedge fund, CQS, has investments in companies that have contracts with the Ministry of Defence; Poju Zabludowicz, chairman of the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre, who chairs a US munitions company; and the Good Governance Group, a private security firm set up by a South African businessman, Andries Pienaar, who also has an investment firm, C5 Capital, focused on the defence sector. The potentially explosive mix of big business interests and politicians that triggered Fox’s demise is the subject of an investigation by the cabinet secretary, Sir Gus O’Donnell. Murphy said it was essential that the government then referred the wider issues to Sir Philip Mawer, the independent adviser on ministers’ interests. “He should look at the issues in their entirety to establish precisely how this never happens again,” Murphy said. Questions are being asked over the role played by an organisation called the Sri Lankan Development Trust, whose headquarters were listed at the Good Governance Group. The trust paid for three of Fox’s trips to Sri Lanka. In a statement the group said: “Our involvement with the Sri Lankan Development Trust was not done for profit or at the behest of any clients.” Arriving at the Ministry of Defence to take up his new role in charge of the department, Philip Hammond, the new defence secretary, said Fox had “done a great
Continue reading …Oh, look. Greg Sargent informs us that not only do most people understand what the Occupy movement is about, the majority of them support it: Americans favor Occupy Wall Street far more than Tea Party: Despite nonstop GOP and conservative disparagement of the Wall Street protests, the most detailed polling yet on Occupy Wall Street suggests that the public holds a broadly favorable view of the movement — and, crucially, the positions it holds. Time released a new poll this morning finding that 54 percent view the Wall Street protests favorably, versus only 23 percent who think the opposite. Interestingly, only 23 percent say they don’t have an opinion, suggesting the protests have succeeded in punching through to the mainstream. Also: The most populist positions espoused by Occupy Wall Street — that the gap between rich and poor has grown too large; that taxes should be raised on the rich; that execs responsible for the meltdown should be prosecuted — all have strong support. Meanwhile, the poll found that only 27 percent have a favorable view of the Tea Party. My handy Plum Line calculator tells me that this amounts to half the number of those who view Occupy Wall Street favorably. In fairness, the Tea Party has been in existence since before the 2010 elections, and even has had a seat at the governing table during the debt ceiling and government shutdown debacles, which clearly took their toll on the Tea Party’s image. Occupy Wall Street is just getting started. But it does seem clear that a confluence of events — the protests, Obama’s jobs push, Elizabeth Warren’s Senate candidacy, and the national backlash from the right all these things have provoked — are pushing populist issues such as fair taxation and income inequality to the forefront of the national conversation. It turns out we don’t live in Tea Party Nation, after all.
Continue reading …Oh, look. Greg Sargent informs us that not only do most people understand what the Occupy movement is about, the majority of them support it: Americans favor Occupy Wall Street far more than Tea Party: Despite nonstop GOP and conservative disparagement of the Wall Street protests, the most detailed polling yet on Occupy Wall Street suggests that the public holds a broadly favorable view of the movement — and, crucially, the positions it holds. Time released a new poll this morning finding that 54 percent view the Wall Street protests favorably, versus only 23 percent who think the opposite. Interestingly, only 23 percent say they don’t have an opinion, suggesting the protests have succeeded in punching through to the mainstream. Also: The most populist positions espoused by Occupy Wall Street — that the gap between rich and poor has grown too large; that taxes should be raised on the rich; that execs responsible for the meltdown should be prosecuted — all have strong support. Meanwhile, the poll found that only 27 percent have a favorable view of the Tea Party. My handy Plum Line calculator tells me that this amounts to half the number of those who view Occupy Wall Street favorably. In fairness, the Tea Party has been in existence since before the 2010 elections, and even has had a seat at the governing table during the debt ceiling and government shutdown debacles, which clearly took their toll on the Tea Party’s image. Occupy Wall Street is just getting started. But it does seem clear that a confluence of events — the protests, Obama’s jobs push, Elizabeth Warren’s Senate candidacy, and the national backlash from the right all these things have provoked — are pushing populist issues such as fair taxation and income inequality to the forefront of the national conversation. It turns out we don’t live in Tea Party Nation, after all.
Continue reading …Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) was named by John Boehner to be part of the Super Committee on Debt, due in part to his chairing the Ways and Means Committee. It is a choice assignment which Camp has been eager to cash in on : On the same day that House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., got picked to join the 12-member Congressional super-committee that is charged with deciding the country’s spending and taxation fate, his political action committee sent out [an invitation to a $2500 a head "meet & greet"] Just think, for $2,500, you too can have “fun” as Camp’s PAC refills your wine glass over chats about mortgage interest deductions, profit repatriation and S-Corporation pass through rates. We need no longer guess whether Pfizer will have a chance to play a role in the upcoming negotiations, thanks to the Pfizer PAC host duties. Ah…capitalism! The privilege of hosting Camp’s meet and greet came with a steep $5,000 price tag as well. So being on this extra-constitutional Super Committee is a profit deal…that makes so much sense. But if you can’t pony up the cash, it appears to be much more difficult to get through to Rep. Camp, no matter what lip service he pays to being available to his constituents . After attending the American Dream rally in DC, internet radio goddess Nicole Sandler, Marcy Wheeler of Emptywheel , Andrew Harman of Change to Win , Sandy Carpenter of ForRespect.org paid a visit to Camp’s office on the Hill. After being told that Camp was in Congress and they could speak to an aide, the group was asked to wait in the hall. But Camp’s staff wanted to make sure they stayed there, locking the door of the office. Then a gentleman came out and distributed the card of the Legislative Director they should speak to, saying that the director was busy with the congressman. Funny thing, that. Turns out that Camp’s Legislative Director, Rob Guido, was the guy handing out the cards, telling the protesters that the Legislative Director was busy with the congressman. Bet you if they had $2,500 checks in their hand, Guido would have had no problem introducing himself properly. And that’s why we have Occupy Wall Street protests.
Continue reading …Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) was named by John Boehner to be part of the Super Committee on Debt, due in part to his chairing the Ways and Means Committee. It is a choice assignment which Camp has been eager to cash in on : On the same day that House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., got picked to join the 12-member Congressional super-committee that is charged with deciding the country’s spending and taxation fate, his political action committee sent out [an invitation to a $2500 a head "meet & greet"] Just think, for $2,500, you too can have “fun” as Camp’s PAC refills your wine glass over chats about mortgage interest deductions, profit repatriation and S-Corporation pass through rates. We need no longer guess whether Pfizer will have a chance to play a role in the upcoming negotiations, thanks to the Pfizer PAC host duties. Ah…capitalism! The privilege of hosting Camp’s meet and greet came with a steep $5,000 price tag as well. So being on this extra-constitutional Super Committee is a profit deal…that makes so much sense. But if you can’t pony up the cash, it appears to be much more difficult to get through to Rep. Camp, no matter what lip service he pays to being available to his constituents . After attending the American Dream rally in DC, internet radio goddess Nicole Sandler, Marcy Wheeler of Emptywheel , Andrew Harman of Change to Win , Sandy Carpenter of ForRespect.org paid a visit to Camp’s office on the Hill. After being told that Camp was in Congress and they could speak to an aide, the group was asked to wait in the hall. But Camp’s staff wanted to make sure they stayed there, locking the door of the office. Then a gentleman came out and distributed the card of the Legislative Director they should speak to, saying that the director was busy with the congressman. Funny thing, that. Turns out that Camp’s Legislative Director, Rob Guido, was the guy handing out the cards, telling the protesters that the Legislative Director was busy with the congressman. Bet you if they had $2,500 checks in their hand, Guido would have had no problem introducing himself properly. And that’s why we have Occupy Wall Street protests.
Continue reading …Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) was named by John Boehner to be part of the Super Committee on Debt, due in part to his chairing the Ways and Means Committee. It is a choice assignment which Camp has been eager to cash in on : On the same day that House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., got picked to join the 12-member Congressional super-committee that is charged with deciding the country’s spending and taxation fate, his political action committee sent out [an invitation to a $2500 a head "meet & greet"] Just think, for $2,500, you too can have “fun” as Camp’s PAC refills your wine glass over chats about mortgage interest deductions, profit repatriation and S-Corporation pass through rates. We need no longer guess whether Pfizer will have a chance to play a role in the upcoming negotiations, thanks to the Pfizer PAC host duties. Ah…capitalism! The privilege of hosting Camp’s meet and greet came with a steep $5,000 price tag as well. So being on this extra-constitutional Super Committee is a profit deal…that makes so much sense. But if you can’t pony up the cash, it appears to be much more difficult to get through to Rep. Camp, no matter what lip service he pays to being available to his constituents . After attending the American Dream rally in DC, internet radio goddess Nicole Sandler, Marcy Wheeler of Emptywheel , Andrew Harman of Change to Win , Sandy Carpenter of ForRespect.org paid a visit to Camp’s office on the Hill. After being told that Camp was in Congress and they could speak to an aide, the group was asked to wait in the hall. But Camp’s staff wanted to make sure they stayed there, locking the door of the office. Then a gentleman came out and distributed the card of the Legislative Director they should speak to, saying that the director was busy with the congressman. Funny thing, that. Turns out that Camp’s Legislative Director, Rob Guido, was the guy handing out the cards, telling the protesters that the Legislative Director was busy with the congressman. Bet you if they had $2,500 checks in their hand, Guido would have had no problem introducing himself properly. And that’s why we have Occupy Wall Street protests.
Continue reading …Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) was named by John Boehner to be part of the Super Committee on Debt, due in part to his chairing the Ways and Means Committee. It is a choice assignment which Camp has been eager to cash in on : On the same day that House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., got picked to join the 12-member Congressional super-committee that is charged with deciding the country’s spending and taxation fate, his political action committee sent out [an invitation to a $2500 a head "meet & greet"] Just think, for $2,500, you too can have “fun” as Camp’s PAC refills your wine glass over chats about mortgage interest deductions, profit repatriation and S-Corporation pass through rates. We need no longer guess whether Pfizer will have a chance to play a role in the upcoming negotiations, thanks to the Pfizer PAC host duties. Ah…capitalism! The privilege of hosting Camp’s meet and greet came with a steep $5,000 price tag as well. So being on this extra-constitutional Super Committee is a profit deal…that makes so much sense. But if you can’t pony up the cash, it appears to be much more difficult to get through to Rep. Camp, no matter what lip service he pays to being available to his constituents . After attending the American Dream rally in DC, internet radio goddess Nicole Sandler, Marcy Wheeler of Emptywheel , Andrew Harman of Change to Win , Sandy Carpenter of ForRespect.org paid a visit to Camp’s office on the Hill. After being told that Camp was in Congress and they could speak to an aide, the group was asked to wait in the hall. But Camp’s staff wanted to make sure they stayed there, locking the door of the office. Then a gentleman came out and distributed the card of the Legislative Director they should speak to, saying that the director was busy with the congressman. Funny thing, that. Turns out that Camp’s Legislative Director, Rob Guido, was the guy handing out the cards, telling the protesters that the Legislative Director was busy with the congressman. Bet you if they had $2,500 checks in their hand, Guido would have had no problem introducing himself properly. And that’s why we have Occupy Wall Street protests.
Continue reading …
Equalities minister says ‘hideous suggestions’ by David Cameron’s advisers must be swept away Lynne Featherstone, the Liberal Democrat equalities minister, has attacked the “hideous” ideas of David Cameron’s closest aides in a sign of coalition tensions over the government’s family policies. In a wide-ranging interview with the Observer , Featherstone said it was vital the coalition delivered on its family-friendly rhetoric, amid concerns that the government is haemorrhaging support among disillusioned female voters. In a forthright attack on some of the advisers shaping government policy, she criticised the role of Adrian Beecroft, a venture capitalist tasked with reporting to the prime minister on how to cut regulation on business. Beecroft is understood to have recommended a U-turn on government policies on shared parental leave and flexible working. The proposals, outlined in a white paper, would allow couples greater freedom to co-ordinate maternity and paternity leave. A separate proposal would make it easier to request flexible working hours. Featherstone told the Observer that Beecroft’s recommendation that the moves should be shelved was not acceptable and would be “swept away”. She also made her feelings clear over a recent “blue sky” proposal from Steve Hilton , the prime minister’s director of strategy, suggesting that the government could scrap maternity pay altogether. Featherstone said: “Well, I might talk about scrapping Steve Hilton.” Such language is a sign of growing concern within the government that it is looking out of touch with female voters and that those close to Cameron are not getting to grips with the problem. Beecroft was brought into Downing Street over the summer to offer ideas to Cameron on laying the groundwork for economic growth He is understood to have proposed a series of measures to lift regulation, which a number of Conservative ministers are minded to support. But Featherstone, MP for the north London constituency of Hornsey and Wood Green, said: “Whatever is in this Beecroft report, I think, will be swiftly swept away. These are hideous suggestions … What I would say about them is that it would be absolutely extraordinary if we were to abandon our commitment to those flagship policies. “It is absolutely vital that we deliver on our rhetoric around family-friendly issues. I wouldn’t support that, Nick [Clegg] wouldn’t support that, and quite frankly David Cameron was campaigning last year on being the most family-friendly government. I would be very surprised if he supported that.” There are worrying signs that the government’s policies are hitting women disproportionately, while measures to encourage equality in business are simply being ignored. Last week the number of unemployed women hit 1.06
Continue reading …
Echo of Norman Tebbit’s ‘get on your bike’ speech in initiative to encourage people to chase jobs around the country The government is to launch a “house swap” programme, reminiscent of Norman Tebbit’s call for the jobless to “get on your bike”, in an attempt to encourage people to move around the country to find work. The controversial plan to tackle the unemployment crisis means people living in social housing will be helped to uproot their families in order to chase jobs. Details of the scheme are yet to be finalised, but it is understood the plan would involve a nationwide database of house swaps and the removal of any barriers to people in social housing moving between regions. “House swap” emerged in a week when David Cameron was forced to admit that it was “very disappointing” that unemployment had risen by another 114,000 in the past three months to 2.57 million – a 17-year high. The prime minister added that the government would “do everything it possibly can” to tackle the crisis, amid concerns that ministers do not have any answers to the problem. The scheme will be launched in the coming weeks. Grant Shapps, the housing minister, wrote in Inside Housing magazine last week that it would “boost the prospects of tenants wanting to swap their social home to take up new job opportunities, be closer to their family, or move to a property better suited to their needs”. He added: “Home swap direct will mark the start of a new drive to improve mobility within social housing.” Lord Tebbit, who famously called on the unemployed to “get on your bike” during the Tory party conference in 1981, told the Observer that he fully endorsed the scheme and hoped there would be further moves to promote a mobile workforce. “When I was a young man I needed to be near to Heathrow in order to attend every day the training school there to achieve a flight navigator’s licence,” he said. “I lived in digs. I did what any rational person would do. “When I look around I find that an enormous number of jobs are taken here from people who have come from Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania. They have moved sometimes over a thousand miles to find a job. “I read now that no one goes from the east end of London to Kent to go hop picking. They come from central Europe. Anything which can be done to make it easier to move to jobs is obviously a good thing.” However, critics said the scheme added to the impression that the government blamed the lack of mobility among the unemployed for the country’s rising joblessness. Iain Duncan Smith, the secretary of state for work and pensions, caused a furore last year when he suggested the UK’s workforce was too “static”. Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the Public and Commercial Services Union, said: “All the language around getting people back into work has been directed with the implicit message that people aren’t prepared to be mobile to find work. But the unemployment figures out this week show that in any category, but particularly if you are young or a woman, there are just no jobs available. “We are supportive of initiatives which help people move if they want to move, but what the government really needs to be focusing on is creating jobs in our economy rather than cutting them.” TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said the focus should be on job creation instead. “Across the country there aren’t enough jobs for people to do and most job hunters are going to be understandably reluctant to uproot their families and move hundreds of miles from their support networks,” he said. “If the government really wants to help the millions of unemployed, it would come up with a plan B for the economy.” Tony Tom Murtha, chief executive of Midland Heart, one of the country’s largest housing associations, added that the new plan along with other initiatives was only “papering over the cracks” and that the government needed to start building more social housing which, through a “virtuous circle”, would create jobs. Karen Buck, Labour shadow work and pensions minister, said she was concerned about the incoherence of the government’s policy, which appeared to encourage people in social housing to move to where there were jobs while forcing those with large families out of cities, where most job opportunities lay, by capping their housing benefit. She said: “Everyone supports measures that help people to take job opportunities, so why are government welfare cuts and council housing allocation policies having the opposite effect by forcing job seekers away from cities where opportunities exist and into the places where unemployment is highest and they are least likely to find work?” Social housing Housing Unemployment Communities Economic policy Daniel Boffey guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …You may remember Ed Henry as a former reporter from CNN who now works for Fox. Today he earned a Roger Ailes gold star in movement conservatism during Obama’s Thursday presser with South Korea’s Myung-Bak : Fox News Chief White House Correspondent Ed Henry experienced a tense moment with President Obama during a Thursday press conference. The President held a joint press conference with Lee Myung-Bak, President of South Korea. Ed Henry had the first question of the conference and asked Obama if he considered the alleged Iranian assassination plot to be “an act of war.” Henry decided to quote a Mitt Romney statement from last week when asking for the President’s plans to address Iran’s alleged terror plot. Henry asked the President “what specific steps will you take to hold Iran accountable? Especially when Mitt Romney charged last week, quote, ‘If you do not want America to be the strongest nation on Earth, I am not your President. You have that president today.’” Obama paused and answered, “Well I did not know you were the spokesman for Romney,” and smiled down at Henry. Henry discussed the exchange with Megyn Kelly on her show and defended his decision to quote Mitt Romney in his question. “I was trying to put it in the broader context of not just Mitt Romney, but there are a lot of Republicans out there who would charge that this president leads from behind,” he said. “…Instead, he decided to go after me a little bit.” Henry has clashed repeatedly with Obama’s spokesman, Jay Carney. He went on and complained to Megyn Kelly. But shilling for Mitt Romney’s position on the situation and quoting him because he’s the Fox News preferred choice as GOP 2012 presidential challenger is pretty pathetic.
Continue reading …