Cabinet Office green paper to put forward series of ideas to define the elusive 'big society' in Britain

The Big Society now wants your money from your cash point now being proposed by the coalition all those in favour say Yay Or Nay. Lets see it looks like the to the right has it in the form of Green paper, drafted by Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude, is designed to encourautge philanthropy.

I am convince it is a Big con to make money just look around in today's economic climate public sector funding is being halved three times the rate under this coalition than a Labour Gov would have proposed.


The way how I read into it at the moment is people don't mind knowing what needs to be cut but when you look at the wider implications for the nation the Tories will let their partner in crime to happy to take the fall for it. Nice one Cleggy your the man.

Cash machines should automatically give customers an option of donating to charity, the coalition proposes tomorrow in a green paper designed to define the elusive "big society" in Britain.

The proposal is one of a series of ideas put forward by the Cabinet Office to shift what the coalition sees as the stubborn British refusal to be philanthropic with time or money. Prompts to give to charitable causes might also be developed whenever someone fills in a tax return or applies for a driving licence or passport.

Other ideas aired in the innovative green paper include a thank-you letter from ministers for giving large sums, a national day to celebrate donors, and a televised weekly thank-you to national lottery winners who have donated.

The green paper also considers whether the government should try to set as a social norm that everyone should give 1% of their income to charity, or a fixed proportion of their time. Overall, the green paper, drafted by Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude, argues that the internet and apps are now "providing an unparalleled opportunity to access information on how to make a difference".

Other ideas include developing an app so that retailers automatically send very small donations to charity every time a customer uses a particular search engine to look at the retailer's website.

At present 8% of the UK population contribute 47% of total donations, and with income tax now rising to 50% for those earning more than £150,000 a year, the government faces an uphill task in creating a new culture of giving. Charities also complain that their national funding is being cut by the government.

Following objections from the Treasury, the green paper is noncommittal about fresh tax breaks for giving, but says many of the existing incentives are poorly understood by UK corporations. Payroll giving is perceived as too time consuming by many small businesses, while big corporate donors tend to give to a narrow range of causes likely to be uncontroversial with shareholders.

The green paper, drawing on the analytical work of the so-called nudge unit in No 10, takes a strong view that social action is not something the coalition can or should compel people to take.

The paper says that "it has to be built from the bottom up on the back of free decisions by individuals to give to causes around them". Maude said last night: "We are arguing for new social attitudes that celebrate giving.

"Talking about what we are doing for good causes is often seen as vulgar, but sharing experiences can often inspire others."

The coalition claims there is evidence, for instance, that people will give time if approached properly. The London 2012 Olympics organisers have attracted 240,000 applications to be stewards.

The green paper also suggests it is vital that giving is more visible: "The more people see that their peers are giving, and how much they give, the more likely they are to give, or give more, themselves."

The green paper quotes David Halpern, one of the advisers to the nudge unit, who argues: "Our behaviour is generally far more influenced by what we see other people doing than what we think we should be doing."

He also draws on the pioneering work of the sociologist Richard Titmuss to argue that there is a gift relationship, claiming: "Evolution has endowed us with a social brain that predisposes us to reciprocate acts of kindness, not just blindly to follow anyone and everyone, regardless of how they treat anyone."

As a result there has been a growth in peer-to-peer lending and financing platforms such as Zopa that allow people to give money to individuals or projects that post requests for funding online.

The paper argues that social media such as Facebook "offer enormous potential to normalise giving with developments such as Twibbons that allow people to share their support for a cause in the online environment."

"Transparency should make it possible to tell whether charities are good value through sites such as New Philanthropy Capital's ratings and comparison websites."

Clegg aims to calm Lib Dem fears

How many of us in the Labour Party remember the good old days when we continued to fight among ourselves while we were in opposition and in government. While on the other the Tories had there fair share they were in opposition for 13 yrs and yes they too have their fair share with in house fighting too when they were deciding who they wanted for their leader of the party. What do we all have in common the is most the leaders of the three main political parties are fairly new leaders they all have to go through what Blair, Cameron, and Clegg all had to learn the lessons.

Now some of us may agree or disagree the fact is two of the main three political parties have been voted by the Citizens of the United Kingdom whilst the third the Lib Dem's have come in third. Now we have learnt that that the Lib Dems have turned their backs on the students most of them who publicly signed a Student Pledge that they will not support the rise of tuition fees.

Give credit where it is due the leader of the Student Union did nothing wrong by holding those who signed the pledge to account publicly and because he he condemed the few went out of their way to smash the Troy HQ for this his leadership is on the line. I know which side I will be.

Now here comes the most interesting part of this story which the media has not been quite honest about Nick Clegg in current opinion polls may be bad for the Liberal Democrats - however some specific polling has emerged today that suggests the electoral impact of the coalition agreement could be even worse for the Lib Dems than the headline figures suggest. Polling on behalf of former Tory deputy chairman Lord Ashcroft, published today on ConservativeHome, suggests that there has been a 17.5% swing from the Lib Dems to Labour in Nick Clegg's Sheffield Hallam constituency. Labour have now moved ahead of the Tories into second place in the seat, and are only two points behind Clegg on current polling - making the seat a potential three-way marginal (33/31/28).

Hence Nick Clegg says his party has faced "testing times" in a message aimed at calming grassroots Lib Dem concerns. In his New Year message to members, the deputy prime minister pledged to start 2011 with action on social mobility, civil liberties and the environment.

He also launched a renewed defence of the decision to break a pledge to oppose rises in student tuition fees.

And he insists he had delivered on "every single one and more" of the party's general election priorities.

In the message, sent from Spain, where he is celebrating Christmas with his wife Miriam's family, he told the Liberal Democrat membership: "Well, what a year! A white-knuckle election; a new coalition government; Liberals in power for the first time in 70 years.

"Just eight months ago we were campaigning on our four big manifesto priorities - fairer taxes; extra money for disadvantaged children in schools; a green, rebalanced economy; a new, open politics. And now we are delivering on every single one, and more."

'Difficult decisions'

He went on: "I don't want to pretend it has all been easy. These are testing times for the country and for our party too. Action to tackle the deficit, and the need to reform higher education, have forced us to take some incredibly difficult decisions.

"But that is government. And when we promised people that we were ready to govern, that is the commitment we made. I genuinely believe that the choices we are making will stand the test of time."

He says the decision to almost treble tuition fees, which saw the party break a pre-election pledge, was needed to retain "world-class" universities and protect poorer students.

And he says backing the Conservatives' package of public spending cuts would "make sure future generations are not saddled with the burden of our debt".

"And by showing people that [the] coalition can work, we can prove that plural, liberal politics is best for Britain," he told them.

He says he will start the year by concentrating on "three big changes" in addition to campaigning for a "yes" vote in May's referendum on changing the Westminster voting system to AV - a key concession won in the coalition negotiations.

He set out his priorities for 2011: "Radical reform of our political system and restoring our hard-won civil liberties; boosting social mobility so that no child is held back by the circumstances of his or her birth; and making sure the economic recovery is green and balanced, with opportunities spread across the whole country."

He concluded: "All of us are going to hear some people predict the worst for our party. The same people who have been underestimating the Liberal Democrats for as long as we have existed.

"But we prove them wrong at every single turn. The next 12 months will be no different, because we will continue to build the Liberal, fairer, greener Britain that we all believe in."

Margaret Hodge elected chairman of Commons spending watchdog

Now the truth is coming out when a FormerLabour MP Margaret Hodge says ” Why should the Department for Transport, for instance, be so dependent on consultants”?”

Central government departments spent more than £1bn on consultants and temporary staff in 2009-10, a report by the Commons spending watchdog says.

It said departments should negotiate more fixed price contracts and develop “core” skills among their own staff.

And it warned “uninformed” cuts to spending and training could end up costing more in the long term.

The Cabinet Office says spending on consultants dropped 46% in the months after the election.

And in his evidence to the committee, Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell said that spending on consultants, as a share of spending on goods and services, was about 4% – while in the private sector it was about 15%.

The report by the public accounts committee says that, in 2009-10, departments spent £789m on consultants and an estimated £215m on interim managers. In 2006-7 £904m was spent on consultants – that dropped by £126m in 2007-8.

The report said new measures brought in by the coalition to control the use of consultants seemed to be having some effect but some departments’ spending was “unacceptable”.

It flagged up the Department for Transport, which spends £70 on consultants for every £100 it spends on its own staff while HM Revenue and Customs spent only £2 per £100.

‘Stop-go approach’

A further £700m a year was estimated to be spent on consultants by arms-length bodies, which should be required to report their spending, the report said.

It said departments did not control what they spent on consultant, with 70% of contracts based on the amount of time spent on a project, while only 29% were based on a fixed price and only 1% were based on achieving specific goals.

It also warned against a “stop-go” approach. It pointed out that the Department of Health appeared to be reducing consultancy spending by 95% in 2010-11 but that Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell was anticipating a resurgence in consultancy spending “as new policies are developed and implemented”.

Cabinet Office figures suggest overall spending on consultants dropped 46% in the six months between April and September 2010, compared with the previous year.

Ian Watmore, who heads up the Cabinet Office’s Efficiency and Reform group, told the committee that the drop was largely due to the number of projects and programmes cancelled by the coalition. But he also thought spending would rise again within the five-year parliament, when new programmes were implemented.

The committee said reducing what was spent on consultants “in an uninformed way to make short term gains” could cost more in the long run, adding that HM Revenue and Customs had stopped hiring consultants for six months, which had put an end to revenue-raising tax collection campaigns.

And it warned the pressure to save money could mean cuts to training, which would undermine commitments to develop staff skills to reduce reliance on consultants.

More work was needed on improving civil servants’ skills – particularly in project management and IT, the committee said.

Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus said more graduates were being recruited into those specialist areas but the government was at a disadvantage in recruiting senior people because they “can often earn significantly more in the private sector”. He said it was also difficult to persuade staff to stay in project management roles “due to a preference for policy related work”.

Committee chairman Margaret Hodget said Whitehall was “largely in the dark” about whether consultants were good value for money.

“There are of course legitimate reasons for a department to buy in specialist skills where they are in short supply internally. But departments have become too reliant on buying in core skills rather than developing them in their own staff.

“Some departments depend far more on consultants than others. In itself, that is not surprising. What is unacceptable is the poor understanding of whether the extent of a department’s use of consultants is justified by the nature of its business. Why should the Department for Transport, for instance, be so dependent on consultants?”

A spokesman for the Department for Transport said it had brought in “new, more rigorous controls which require close examination and approval of any requests to appoint consultants”.

It said the department had spent £12.5m less in the 6 months to September 2010, compared with the same period in 2009 but added sometimes the use of consultants was “the best value for money option”.

Leading Senior Tories Cant Be Trusted Then Who Can You Trust

How long with the Coalition will last do I hear people are saying the anwer to that is that they will last for the full five years. Labour is in the perfect position to drive home the message of the fault of the coaltion by driving a wedge between the Tory Right and the Cameronians. the other fault lines between the Libdem Leadership and membership has been driven wide open.


Well. well, who would have throught that David Heath, the deputy Leader of the House, said the Chancellor had the “capacity to get up one’s nose” and did not appreciate what it was like to lose £1,000 a year – the value of the cut in child benefit for higher earners.

It is further alleged by Paul Burstow, the care minister, told reporters from The Daily Telegraph: “I don’t want you to trust David Cameron.” And Andrew Stunell, the local government minister, said he did not know where the Prime Minister stood on the “sincerity monitor”.

Norman Baker, the transport minister, even privately compared the Conservatives within government to the South African apartheid regime, claiming that it was his job to campaign from the “inside”.

The disclosures come on the third day of this newspaper’s investigation into the true feelings of senior Liberal Democrats towards the Coalition.

The deep personal animosity and distrust at the highest level of government between ministerial colleagues can be disclosed today. Their remarks were made during covertly recorded conversations with two undercover reporters posing as concerned Liberal Democrat voters.

In his comments, Mr Heath suggested that the Chancellor, a multi-millionaire, was out of touch with the common voter. “George Osborne has a capacity to get up one’s nose, doesn’t he?” he said.

“I mean, what I think is, some of them just have no experience of how ordinary people live, and that’s what worries me. But maybe again, you know, that’s part of our job, to remind them.”

Mr Baker said some of his Conservative colleagues were “beyond the pale” and also says he does not like the Chancellor.

“I mean, there are Tories who are quite good and there are Tories who are, you know, beyond the pale, and, you know, you have to just deal with the cards you’ve got,” he said.

“I don’t like George Osborne very much … I mean, there are Tories who are all right — Ken Clarke’s all right — there are the ones you can do business with. But what you end up doing in the Coalition … is we play them off against each other.”

Mr Baker also made the bizarre claim that the position of Liberal Democrat ministers was akin to that of Helen Suzman, a South African MP who almost single-handedly sought to change government policy from within the regime in the 1970s and 1980s. Mrs Suzman, who died in 2009, was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize and received numerous death threats.

He said: “I always think in South African terms, should you be Nelson Mandela, outside the system, campaigning for it to be changed, or should you be Helen Suzman, who’s my … one of my political heroes actually.”

“Helen Suzman was in the apartheid regime when everybody was male and white and horrible actually … she got stuck in there in the South African parliament in the apartheid days as the only person there to oppose it … she stood up and championed that from inside.”

He added: “You do get your hands dirty by dealing with things you don’t want to do, and sometimes you get results which aren’t quite what you want. But the issue we have to make, the calculation in coalition, is we have to make as a coalition is do we get stuff that we do want which outweighs some of the stuff we don’t want, and that’s the reality of it.”

The comments are likely to infuriate Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne, who are sensitive over claims about their privileged background, which Labour has also tried to exploit.

They were echoed during a separate meeting with Mr Stunell, a junior local government minister, who was one of the key Liberal Democrat figures in the Coalition Agreement talks.

Mr Stunell told the undercover reporters: “I don’t know where I put him [the Prime Minister] on the sincerity monitor. He’s, umm, he’s certainly a very skilled operator. He’s worked his way through the Tory system and he’s, is he sincere? I do not know how to answer that question.”

Mr Burstow added: “I don’t want you to trust David Cameron … in the sense that you believe he’s suddenly become a cuddly Liberal. Well, he hasn’t. He’s still a Conservative and he has values that I don’t share.”

When asked whether Mr Osborne was out of touch, he replied: “Yes, I know, I know, I know. There are going to be some Conservative politicians in particular who are detached from reality. I mean, Lord Young’s comments, a lot of people are unhappy with …”. This was a reference to his comments last month that Britons had “never had it so good” during the recession, which led to his resignation as Mr Cameron’s enterprise adviser.

Mr Heath and Mr Baker also publicly admit that they oppose the rise in tuition fees, despite voting in favour of the policy in the recent crucial Commons vote. “I’m still wholly against,” Mr Heath said. “I’ll say it perfectly openly, I’m wholly against tuition fees.”

Mr Baker added: “Well, it is a big shock and it’s a big shock to me and I almost resigned over the matter, on that particular one because it was just pretty horrific.”

In today’s recordings, Mr Stunell expresses his hopes that the situation will improve before the next election.

“We knew from the very start of what we were doing that this financial stuff was going to be really tricky. Difficult. I mean, horrendous … and that clearly the first two or three years were going to be absolutely dire … so it’s not all about cutting, there is going to be some good stuff.”

Caught Caught Out By The Media- Vince Cable

First it was Vince Cable now we have learnt from the media that there is more to come in regards to Libdem MPs who are not happy with the coalition.

Ed Miliband was right to publicly to call on the coaltion to sack the Business Secretary as he is untenable for the postion now we have learnt that some members of the coalition and not to mention some back benchers of Tories & Libdems(Libcons) have been caught out by the media.

what fools these mortals be — and such talkative ones too. Vince Cable has enlivened the dull slide into winter recess with a pratfall worthy of the finest pantomime.

The Business Secretary’s boastful indiscretions to constituents, who turned out to be starring in the Telegraph’s version of The Wire, have backfired on the man, his cause and his party.

At first sight, my sympathies lie with people caught out by wiretaps. Most of us have had moments of candour about our bosses, companies or families, which would make horrifying listening if caught on tape.

But Mr Cable isn’t a civilian. He is, as one photo caption put it yesterday, “the second most important Liberal Democrat”, though we must add: not any more.

The revelatory thing is how bitter such a senior figure in the Coalition feels about aspects of the realities of life with the Tories.

Effectively, Mr Cable was portraying himself as a fifth columnist “fighting with nuclear weapons” without launching a war “which destroys us all”.

A minister saying this off the record to a journalist would already be taking a risk. To indulge his hostility to “our Conservative” friends and boast of an ability to bring down the Coalition which is his party’s best — only —crack at power to two visitors to his surgery whom he had never met before is stunningly dim.

This is before we get on to Rupert Murdoch. Of course the Business Secretary doesn’t like him, his ideology or his newspapers. But an intelligent man with a corporate background such as Mr Cable should know his enemy and plan accordingly. He was required to appear objective — and failed the test.

The saga of Mr Murdoch’s plans to expand his BSkyB control and the Government’s referral of the bid to Ofcom is a stealthy game of cat and mouse.

The Tories have no principled objection to the consolidation — but are wary of being seen to pay court to Rupert as slavishly as Tony Blair and Gordon Brown did, so they wanted the regulator to report to Mr Cable, not to them.

Now exactly the opposite of his intentions has come to pass. Who picks up responsibility for the Murdoch referral? Jeremy Hunt, the media and culture secretary, a pragmatic Right-winger and Mr Cameron’s go-to man when things go wrong.

With the EU ruling in Murdoch’s favour, it’s hard to say why Mr Hunt would now stop the bid. That hardly suits the Telegraph, which had lobbied against the expansion — but it’s the price they pay for a sting that turned out more potent than even they could have expected.

If Mr Murdoch could hardly have wished for a better Christmas present, Nick Clegg could hardly conceive of a worse one.

Mr Cable’s continuing tenure is absurd. Whatever the business job entails (and frankly, they make most of it up as they go along), it does require that the incumbent is taken seriously.

Peter Mandelson sculpted the role elegantly around his ability to appear sovereign and sound convincing to business people, while doing not very much.

Mr Cable’s stock was already whizzing down the political FTSE for his dalliance over tuition fees, when he had to reluctantly persuade himself to support a policy put forward by his own department. He is also at odds with the Chancellor over bank bonuses.

The time when he is invited to spend more time with his ballroom dancing would not be far off, were it not for Mr Clegg’s shortage of ministers to replace accident-prone Lib-Dem politicians.
This, and Clegg’s fear of his own party, explains the lifeline thrown to Mr Cable, who remains in Cabinet on sufferance.

I gather that there were several senior Tory voices urging Mr Cameron to make a clean break and that Mr Osborne was less convinced than others that their loquacious colleague should remain.

As today’s further revelations show, the tolerance for the Coalition inside the Lib-Dems is already dangerously low.

If senior Lib-Dems such as Ed Davey, Michael Moore and Steve Webb cannot knuckle down into a five-year power- sharing deal with the Tories and Mr Cable finds it all so trying, why should voters stick with the Coalition in the difficult year to come?

This is a sizeable hangover for Messrs Cameron and Clegg as the year ends. Contrary to smooth reassurances that their deal will stick for the duration, there is no guarantee at all that it will: and it certainly won’t, unless Mr Clegg can assert his authority more firmly in his own ranks. He should have let his turbulent colleague go.

I know many Lib-Dems will instinctively identify with Mr Cable’s criticism of the Government. But if he and others feel so strongly against the Coalition, they should have the courage of their convictions and refuse to serve in it.

To accept the spoils of office and then bandy about criticisms of the Government as ”cack-handed” and “perverse” and deride “Maoist revolution” in public services is beyond hypocrisy.

It’s not all plain sailing for the Prime Minister either. He is beginning to look like a man making some strange decisions purely to keep the Coalition from knocks.

Sacking Lord Young as an adviser for commenting that the recession wasn’t bad for everyone looks downright unjust, when he is prepared to keep a lame-duck Business Secretary in place.

My impression from senior Tory backbenchers is that they are becoming less patient with the imbalance of power, as they see it, inside the Coalition.

Much more of this and the appetite will surely rise for Mr Cameron to cut loose his troublesome junior partners.

That is emphatically not what he wants to do: but this week has shown that he may not be master of the Coalition’s eventful destiny.

A large phalanx of Mr Cable’s civil servants is being removed from his department, a cruelly public humiliation as he concedes control of key areas to one of his “Conservative friends”.

The symbolism could not be clearer. The Business Secretary is a dead minister walking. Far better for him and everyone else if he were to walk.

MPs & TradeUnion Leaders warn on NHS cuts

An influential committee of MPs warned today that the government's demand for a £20 billion NHS budget cut risks a health and social care meltdown.

The health select committee said that such huge savings had never been achieved anywhere in the world and meeting them would pose "a significant challenge."

It warned that deep cuts to services were inevitable if the four-year target was not achieved through "greater efficiency."

"The government's plans for health and social care are based on assumptions which will test these services to the limit," said the committee's Tory chairman Stephen Dorrell MP.

"There is no precedent for efficiency gain on this scale in the history of the NHS.

"Nor has any precedent yet been found of any health-care system anywhere in the world doing anything similar."

And campaign group Health Emergency chairman Geoff Martin warned the savage cuts enforced on NHS trusts would "obliterate" patient care, leading to massive reductions in bed capacity and staffing levels as well as a new wave of casualty and maternity ward closures.

NHS unions also seized on the committee's findings.

Unite general secretary Len McCluskey argued that the Tory-led body's findings revealed "deep qualms that even seasoned Conservatives are showing towards the coalition's helter-skelter plans to reorganise the NHS."

And Unison warned that the coalition's plans to push through reorganisation in both social care and the NHS posed "a huge danger for services and the people who rely on them."

"The last thing patients, staff and health trusts need now is a chaotic reorganisation that has not been properly thought through or costed," said Unison general secretary Dave Prentis.

However a Department of Health spokeswoman claimed that massive budget cuts forced onto the NHS by the coalition were not optional but a necessity.

Let Down By Con-Dems Fail Communities

David Cameron's mantra "we're all in it together" has all the malice and dishonesty of his hero Margaret Thatcher's equally duplicitous slogan "there is no alternative."

Nothing sums up Con-Dem duplicity more than the studied cynicism of the coalition government's Localism Bill launched yesterday by Eric Pickles.

Stripped of the Communities Secretary's slippery misleading rhetoric, the Bill is a naked assault on current jobs and services and equally on local councils as democratically accountable deliverers of essential services.

The government's sweeping reductions to local authority funding in England will result without doubt in savage cuts to employment and service provision, yet Pickles insists that local authorities will be able to do "more for less."

He claims to be guided by advice from the Local Government Association over what councils can manage by way of a reduction in their spending powers.

But the LGA warned three weeks ago that 140,000 local authority jobs are expected to be axed as a result of spending cuts, a full 40 per cent higher than originally estimated in response to the government's October comprehensive spending review.The reason for this is the coalition's determination to frontload many of the cuts into the first year of the four-year spending review.

LGA chairwoman Margaret Eaton said that councils had known that cuts funding cuts were on the way and had trimmed their budgets in expectation.

"But the unexpected severity of the cuts that will have to be made next year will put many councils in an unprecedented and difficult position."

Ministers claim that this savagery is necessary to convince international speculators - called euphemistically "investors" - that the government is acting decisively to tackle the deficit, for which bankers' reckless speculation was largely to blame.

But they are also seizing the window of opportunity to drive through changes that will alter the face of the country, approaching their goal of a slimmed-down state.

That's what lies behind Pickles's chatter about "a new constitutional arrangement" aimed at shifting power down to localities.

He speaks of local people banding together as volunteers to run libraries, post offices and community centres as though these facilities were on a par with managing a local shop.

They are staffed by professionals trained to carry out their duties and, aside from the issue of such people being forced out of their jobs, it is highly unlikely that untrained local groups would be able to take over.

Nor does the Communities Secretary accept any responsibility for a safety net in the event of services being taken on unsuccessfully by volunteer groups. Effectively, the government is washing its hands of its responsibility to fund local services.

And that responsibility is definitely national since government has seized control of local funding through a number of measures, including centralising business rates and capping council tax levels.

The government's perverse decision to increase funding for some of the most prosperous local authorities and to slash that of some of the poorest makes a mockery of "all in it together."

Those at the sharp end of this cynical Con-Dem assault have no choice but to resist it.

Trade unions cannot merely rely on condemnation of these criminal cuts. They have to unite, drawing in communities, to win the arguments and oppose the cuts effectively by every means, including co-ordinated industrial action.

Black Day For Our Public Services

Government plans to grant more power to local communities were exposed by unions today as a sham to disguise huge job cuts and the privatisation of public services.

Communities Secretary Eric Pickles unveiled the Localism Bill which he claimed would be a "ground-breaking shift in power to councils and communities" from central government and would start a new era of "people power."

He described the Bill as a way of empowering communities where local people would be encouraged to compete against private firms to bid to run services.

"This powerful series of measures puts new rights in law for people to protect, improve and even run important front-line services," he claimed.

"For too long people have been powerless to intervene as vital community resources disappear."

Mr Pickles added: "I am expecting councils to provide more for less and a reasonable level of service."

But the Unison union's head of local government Heather Wakefield said the huge job losses faced by councils meant Mr Pickles's claims were simply not possible.

The Local Government Association predicted last month that 140,000 council jobs will go over the next four years as the cuts announced in the Comprehensive Spending Review begin to bite.

The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accounting also predicted that 70,000 of those could come go in the next year alone.

"Eric Pickles may talk about local authorities doing more with less but the public should not be fooled - this is not possible," Ms Wakefield said.

She labelled the day "Miserable Monday" for workers and councils across the country and delivered a litany of the services at risk from the Tory axe.

"Vital local services such as libraries and day centres are already shutting their doors.

"Charges for others such as home care for the elderly and meals on wheels are on the up," Ms Wakefield said.

"Meanwhile, the bankers are still in line for their massive Christmas bonuses. Why are hard-working families paying the price for a recession they did not cause?"

London School of Economics Professor Tony Travers said: "There's no doubt that it will be unlike anything that has been seen before in modern times.

"The scale of reduction in grants, which will be 27 per cent over four years, is without precedent and it's very hard for local authorities to do that without any effect for front-line service."

The Bill will also introduce a "community right to build," giving towns and villages powers to build new homes and amenities.

The National Housing Federation has calculated that councils in the north will lose £104 million a year while those in the south will gain £342m when the scheme is fully operational.

City Councils Through Out the UK & Wales Will Learn Of Funding Cuts 13 Decemember 2010

Eric Pickles, who will today tell councils they will have to do 'more for less'. Photograph: Martin Argles for the Guardian

Councils will today be told to do "more for less" as they are set their funding allocation for the next two years, revealing for the first time decisions about where the frontline cuts to social services, libraries, bin services and leisure facilities are likely to fall.

Town halls are bracing themselves for an average cut of 10.7% in cash terms, as government front-loads the 27% reduction in council spending over the next four years.

The cuts will lead to the first major wave of announcements of the closure of library, sports and childcare facilities, marking the moment that the £81bn national deficit reduction plan starts affecting local neighbourhoods.

The Department for Communities insisted that savings can be found through efficiencies and that only "lazy" councils will slash services and will today separately publish a long-awaited localism bill, setting out how the coalition is going to devolve power locally, to aid the start of the Conservatives' "big society" project.

Eric Pickles, the communities secretary, told the Radio 4's Today programme today that councils should share services to cut costs. "I believe that it is possible to take significant sums out of local authorities by improving the way in which they operate. They've simply got to wake up to the fact that it's no longer viable to have their own chief executives, legal departments, education departments … and they've got to look at ways of doing these things in partnership with local communities," he said.

"I've been offered advice by the Local Government Association as to what councils can manage in terms of the reduction of their budgets and I'm well within those figures for most of those councils. I'm being absolutely upfront, what I'm saying is I expect local authorities to provide more for less … local authorities should not have some kind of alibi that because the cuts are coming from the centre, they have to pass every cut on."

On the bill he added: "This is about a new constitutional arrangement and shifting power own to the locality and with power comes a new responsibility… I believe most councils will be able to react reasonably to these new powers."

Pickles will unveil the localism bill to parliament at 3.30pm today, and simultaneously publish the budget allocations.

Caroline Flint, the shadow communities secretary, said: "The frontloading of these cuts is too fast and too hard ... I think it's a hollow offer from the government, they are basically offering devolution of local authority services, while holding a gun to their head.

"Only a couple of weeks ago the Local Government Association indicated that because of the front-loading of these cuts they would up their estimates of job cuts from 100,000 to 140,000. Of course we can look at ways to deliver local government services, but you need time to do so. This isn't about being for or against cuts it's about how hard and how fast you go."

The Local Government Association (LGA) is predicting 140,000 job losses over the next four years and the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accounting predict that 70,000 of those could come in the next year alone.

Pickles has already slammed the Conservative-run LGA for scaremongering on job losses and making up figures "on the back of a fag packet", but the front-loading of the cuts in particular risks another confrontation between central and local government.

Councils are. However, pleased that the localism bill will also end the ring-fencing of many of their budgets, giving them greater freedom over how they spend their money.

Tony Travers, professor of government at the London School of Economics, said: "There's no doubt that it will be unlike anything that has been seen before in modern times, the scale of reduction in grants, which will be 27% over four years... is without precedent and it's very hard for local authorities to do that without any effect for frontline service."

Council tax has been frozen by the government, so councils face the choice of finding efficiencies, cutting services, or raising charges for car parking, for example.

Police forces will also learn of their new reduced budgets and the education secretary Michael Gove will set out plans for a new pupil premium to fund schools.

Home Secretary Theresa May Considers ban on racist US pastor

Home Secretary Theresa May hinted yesterday that she might ban racist US pastor Terry Jones from entering Britain following an invitation from the far-right English Defence League (EDL).

Mr Jones, who was widely condemned when he threatened to burn the Koran on the anniversary of the September 11 2001 terror attacks, is due to address an EDL rally in Luton on February 5.

He plans to preach "against the evils and destructiveness of Islam" to EDL supporters.

Ms May is thought to be "actively" considering whether to ban the Islamophobic US pastor from entering Britain.

"Pastor Terry Jones has been on my radar for a few months now," she said.

"It wasn't clear that he was definitely coming to the UK but if it is now clear that he's definitely coming to the UK, then of course this is a case that I will be actively looking at."

Anti-fascist campaigners reacted with outrage to the possibility of Pastor Jones's visit.

Hope Not Hate director Nick Lowles condemned the invitation and launched a petition calling for Mr Jones to be banned from Britain.

"Pastor Jones should not be allowed to set foot in the United Kingdom.

"Only extremists will benefit from his visit and, as we know, extremism breeds hatred and hatred breeds violence," he said.

"It is yet another example of how the EDL exists only to sow the seeds of intimidation and division."

Joint national secretary of Unite Against Fascism Weyman Bennett accused Mr Jones of coming to Britain to "whip up Islamophobia and racism."

He said: "We intend on calling a mass demonstration where everyone can oppose the growth of racism and fascism in this country."

A statement on Mr Jones's website revealed that he was to address the EDL rally.

It read: "During the protest, Dr Terry Jones will speak against the evils and destructiveness of Islam in support of the continued fight against the Islamification of England and Europe."

But Mr Jones denied he wanted to increase racial tension in Britain, adding: "I would by no means advocate something, preach something, speak something that will cause that type of riot or disturbance."

Please forward this draft letter to thHome Secretary

Dear Home Secretary,

In early February the Florida-based Pastor Terry Jones intends to
travel to the United Kingdom to address an English Defence League
rally in Luton. His anti-Muslim views made international news in early
autumn when he proposed making the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist
attack an “International Burn a Koran Day”. This brought international
condemnation and eventually he was forced to back down.

Now Pastor Jones wants to give a speech attacking Islam at an EDL
rally in Luton. The EDL emerged in Luton in May 2009 and its first
demonstration ended with 250 people going on the rampage through a
predominantly Asian area of the town. Since then it has become a
national organisation and is the single biggest threat to social
cohesion in this country today.

Pastor Terry Jones’s presence in Luton will be incendiary and highly
dangerous. He will attract and encourage thousands of EDL supporters
to take to the streets, and cause concern and fear among Muslims
across the country. Only extremists will benefit from his visit and,
as we know, extremism breeds hatred and hatred breeds violence. For
these reasons we are asking you to prevent Pastor Terry Jones from
entering the UK.

Yours sincerely

'Liu Xiaobo must be freed' - Nobel prize committee

As many of you may recalled I told the story of peaceful protest that took place in Tiananmen Square whilst I was a trade union delegate which was a part of world tradeunion movement to China during 1980s I mentioned Liu Xiaobo leading activist in Tiananmen Square protests for democratisation; jailed for two year for speaking out on the record of the Chinese Human Rights and Activist who brought the Military Tanks to a stand still in 1989. Then in 1996 he spoke out against China's one-party system; sent to labour camp for three years nd if that was not enough in 2008 co-author of Charter 08, calling for a new constitution, an independent judiciary and freedom of expression; then 2009: jailed for subversion for 11 years; verdict says he "had the goal of subverting our country's people's democratic dictatorship and socialist system. The effects were malign and he is a major criminal".

The chairman of the Nobel prize committee has called for the immediate release of jailed Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo, winner of the 2010 peace prize.

There were two standing ovations at the ceremony in Oslo for Mr Liu, who was represented only by an empty chair.

China has been angered by the award and has waged a campaign in recent weeks to discredit it.

Nobel chairman Thorbjorn Jagland praised China for lifting millions of people out of poverty.

He called it an "extraordinary achievement" but warned China that its new status as a leading world power meant Beijing "must regard criticism as positive".

He said the Nobel committee was calling for Mr Liu to be freed immediately, saying: "He hasn't done anything wrong."

For its part, China's foreign ministry condemned the ceremony as a "political farce".

"We resolutely oppose any country or any person using the Nobel Peace Prize to interfere with China's internal affairs or infringe upon China's legal sovereignty," said the ministry in a statement.

'Quest for freedom'

During the award ceremony, Norwegian actress Liv Ullmann read out a statement that Mr Liu had made in court during his trial in December 2009.

"I, filled with optimism, look forward to the advent of a future, free China," said the statement.

"For there is no force that can put an end to the human quest for freedom, and China will in the end become a nation ruled by law, where human rights reign supreme."

Honouring the new laureate, Mr Jagland placed the Nobel diploma on the empty chair marking Mr Liu's absence.

The Nobel chairman compared China's anger at the award to the outcry over peace prizes awarded to other dissidents of their times, including South African archbishop Desmond Tutu and the Burmese pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

He said Mr Liu was dedicating his prize to "the lost souls from 4 June", those who died in the pro-democracy protests on that date in Tiananmen Square in 1989.

"We can say (Mr) Liu reminds us of Nelson Mandela," he said. The former South African president received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993.

The UN says it had information that China detained at least 20 activists ahead of the ceremony.

A further 120 cases of house arrest, travel restriction, forced relocation and other acts of intimidation have been reported.

The BBC's English and Chinese language websites have been blocked, and BBC TV coverage was blacked out inside China during the ceremony.

Mr Liu, one of China's leading dissidents, is serving an 11-year sentence in a jail in north-east China for state subversion.

Police are stationed outside his home in Beijing where his wife, Liu Xia, is under house arrest.

Chinese pressure

Geir Lundestad, the director of the Nobel committee, said 48 foreign delegations attended the Oslo ceremony, 16 countries - including Russia, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan - turned down the invitation and the Chinese returned their invitation unopened.

Analysts say many of those who stayed away did so as a result of Chinese pressure.

However, Serbia - which had previously said it would not attend - announced on Friday that it would be sending a representative.

The Serbian government, which has warm relations with China, had come under pressure from within the European Union and from political parties and civil society groups in Serbia to attend.

Beijing had sought to prevent anyone travelling from China to Oslo to collect the prize on Mr Liu's behalf.

Article By The Press Association Call to prosecute Clegg for 'fraud'

A law professor is calling for Nick Clegg to be prosecuted for fraud over the controversial tuition fee hike.

Ian Grigg-Spall said the Deputy Prime Minister and Liberal Democrat leader should face police action for publicly pledging before the election to oppose a rise while his party was allegedly secretly drawing up plans to abandon the promise.

Mr Grigg-Spall, a professor of law and member of the National Critical Lawyers Group, said he lodged a complaint at a Sheffield police station under Section 2 of the Fraud Act.

"Under the act you have to show dishonesty," he said.

"It seems absolutely clear to me that dishonesty is actually proven by the details in the Guardian story."

An article published in the Guardian last month claimed the Liberal Democrats drew up plans two months before the general election to abandon a pledge to scrap them as part of any coalition deal.

A confidential document drawn up in March by a senior team planning for possible negotiations concluded that insisting on the move - which was opposed by the Tories and Labour - would be a "headache".

The revelations were detailed in a new book about the formation of the Tory-Lib Dem administration by Conservative MP Rob Wilson, extracts of which were published by the Guardian.

The Lib Dems said the document was a recognition of the reality of negotiating with two parties that were diametrically opposed to the policy to scrap any rise in fees.

Mr Grigg-Spall said he had spoken to several law experts who agreed he had a good case.

Britain Migrant Farmworkers 'Treated As Slaves'

A gang recruited migrant workers and then treated them as "slaves," forcing them to live in dirty, cramped conditions as they picked leeks that would ultimately be sold to Tesco and Waitrose, a court heard today.

The eastern European victims had been promised wages, accommodation and a good working environment but were put to work in harsh weather, often beaten or threatened and housed in "inhuman" conditions, Northampton Crown Court heard.

Prosecutor Jonathan Kirk QC told the court Gurdip Singh Somal ran the multimillion-pound business providing agricultural labour to farmers, recruiting workers to harvest leeks in Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire and Cambridgeshire.

He said: "The case against them is that they cruelly mistreated and criminally exploited these migrant workers."

The defendants, including Mr Somal, were arrested by police and other authorities in November 2008 as part of Operation Ruby, the biggest operation of its kind targeting the exploitation of migrant workers.

They all deny the charges brought against them

All Political Parties should vote against Lib Dems Student Tuition Fees

Lib Dem MPs threw themselves into all kinds of contortions at Westminster today as the party faced meltdown over its betrayal on student tuition fees.

The party's MPs will meet tomorrow night in a frantic effort to work out some sort of agreed strategy for Thursday night's Commons vote on raising annual tuition fees to as much as £9,000.

But the beleaguered band of 57 MPs is split four ways, with some planning to vote for the increase, some against, some wanting to abstain and yet others demanding a panic postponement of the vote.

A spokesman for their commander, Prime Minister David Cameron, refused to say whether or not Lib Dem ministers would face the sack if they vote against or abstain.

Some ministers are considering resignation, with strong rumblings coming from Transport Minister Norman Baker, and also from Edinburgh West MP Mike Crockart, parliamentary aide to Scottish Secretary Michael Moore.

Former Lib Dem leader Lord Ashdown kicked students in the teeth by declaring that Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg had shown "great wisdom and a good deal of courage" in his handling of the issue.

Dithering Business Secretary Vince Cable now appears to be ready to line up for the fees betrayal, after making contradictory statements about the policy - which was drawn up in his own ministerial department.

However, Colchester Lib Dem MP Bob Russell insisted: "Prior to the election, I signed a pledge saying I would not vote for higher tuition fees. And I have no intention of voting for higher tuition fees."

Mr Russell added that he believed the tuition fees package now on offer was "arguably better" - especially for students from lower income families - than the package left behind by "the discredited Labour government."

He argued that Labour involvement in opposition to tuition fee increases "smacks of humbug and hypocrisy."

Southport Lib Dem MP John Pugh said that despite concessions for poorer students "it will still mean passing on indebtedness to another generation."

Leeds Lib Dem MP Greg Mulholland demanded a postponement of Thursday night's vote, predicting that "very, very few" of his party's MPs would support the government.

Urging a "full public consultation" he warned that government proposals "simply haven't convinced people this is the right way forward, and that is no way to make policy."

GCHQ technology 'could be sold

I'm taking a journey back down memory lane during the 1980s how many of us remember The GCHQ trade union campaign began after the decision by the Conservative government in January 1984 to ban unions at the GCHQ (Government Communications Head Quarters) intelligence gathering centre in Cheltenham.

The foreign secretary announced to a shocked House of Commons that independent unions would be banned from GCHQ. The TUC, CCSU, the leaders of all opposition parties, and MPs from all parties erupted in indignant anger at this declaration.

In the short period between the announcement and the implementation of the ban on 1 March 1984, the entire labour movement joined forces to oppose the ban.

Now in we have ConDEm Coalation Government in 2010 who wants to sell of The government's secret listening post GCHQ could sell its technical expertise to the private sector under plans being considered by the government.

Security minister Dame Pauline Neville Jones said ministers were "thinking about" ways in which GCHQ could supply services to private firms.

"It's a live issue," she told the Commons science committee.

Scientists and cyber-security experts are employed at GCHQ, in Cheltenham, to monitor e-mail and phone traffic.

Their work has always been considered top secret, but committee chairman, Labour MP Andrew Miller, asked whether the government was considering the "radical" step of the commercialisation of products, working in partnership with the the private sector.

"You are taking me on to ground, chairman, that we are thinking about," she told the MPs, adding that there were "many ways Cheltenham could supply a service to the private sector".

But she said the government was still considering how that might be funded and what the relationship between private firms and this branch of the security services might be and she could not comment further at this stage.

The top secret Defence Evaluation and Research Agency was privatised by the previous government, and floated on the stock exchange in 2006 as Qinetiq.

Although the cutting edge cyber-security and computer research carried out at GCHQ could potentially generate cash for the government any moves to involve the private sector would have to be handled carefully due to the highly sensitive nature of the signals intelligence material it handles.

Gala Chinese New Year Banquet 2011 to celebrate the Year of the Rabbit

Our Gala Chinese New Year Banquet 2011 to celebrate the Year of the Rabbit, on Tuesday, 15th February 2011. The prestigious event will be held at the Phoenix Palace Restaurant, 3-5 Glentworth Street, London NW1 5PG, and will begin with a champagne reception with canapés at 6.30 pm, followed by a ten course dinner at 7.15 pm.

If you are interested in attending the dinner, please complete the booking form HERE. As in previous years, this event sells out very quickly, so please respond soonest possible.

Senior Shadow Cabinet Ministers and other celebrity guests will be joining us for the evening. As in previous years, the evening will be a night to remember. This, too, promises to be a wonderful occasion, providing an excellent opportunity to enjoy an evening together with other supporters, business colleagues, friends, and a cross section of the Chinese community.

NO Need For Ed Miliband To Contiune To Make Apologies

Can anyone please tell me why Ed Milliband is always apologising for Labour whenever he is being interviewed or appearing on TV? Are you not sick of it now !!!


There is nothing wrong with Labour's Policy in the last 11 years, especially in Blair's period as PM ( the jury on Iraq War is still out ----- let history speak for itself). Sure, we have not got everything right but we got it right in 95% of the Policies. No Party in Power has ever got everything it right 100%.

Ed Miliband seems to suffering from amnesia. He was a very close ally to GB and policy maker under GB's 3-year period as PM. We lost the Election because of GB as PM and supported by Ed Milliband. It is as simply as that and nothing more, nothing less.


Ed Miliband should be honest enough to admit the Election was well and truly lost by Gordon Brown. So I wish he would stop apologising and come out fighting, and say how much Labour has done for this Country and remind people, especially the journalists, all the good things Labour has done. Labour has got nothing to apologise for, especially the Blair years, and indeed a lot to be proud of.

If I can boast about Labour's record with people I meet and people from overseas, why can't Ed Miliband does it !!!!! Sure, some members will say that Labour lost its way when Gordon Brown became Prime Minster. If there is any apologising to be made, then let's apologise that a mistake was made in letting Gordon Brown as Prime Minister instead of remaining as Chancellor Exch, and now let's get move on, leaving Gordon Brown behind us, and don't go on blaming Labour's Policy, especially Ed Miliband, when he had a lot of influence on Policy in the last 3 years of Gordon Brown Government. I make no apologies for saying that I am and have always been a firm supporter of Gordon Brown but there comes a time when I have to say enough is enough nobody can Deny that Gordon Brown was very good at his job as Chancellor Exch.

More Violence Erupts At Student Protests

I was reminiscing during the first UK & the 1989 Massacre in Tiananmen Square student demonstrations which took place in 1989 when a trade union delegation when on a tour to China. The officials where taking us to visit various Public sector Trade unions as I recall at a moment notice the officials usher all of us into a mini van.


Several hundred civilians have been shot dead by the Chinese army during a bloody military operation to crush a democratic protest in Peking's (Beijing) Tiananmen Square in 1989.

Tanks rumbled through the capital's streets late on 3 June as the army moved into the square from several directions, randomly firing on unarmed protesters.

The injured were rushed to hospital on bicycle rickshaws by frantic residents shocked by the army's sudden and extreme response to the peaceful mass protest.

Demonstrators, mainly students, had occupied the square for seven weeks, refusing to move until their demands for democratic reform were met.

The protests began with a march by students in memory of former party leader Hu Yaobang, who had died a week before.

But as the days passed, millions of people from all walks of life joined in, angered by widespread corruption and calling for democracy.

The military offensive came after several failed attempts to persuade the protesters to leave.

Throughout the day the government warned it would do whatever it saw necessary to clamp down on what it described as "social chaos".

But even though violence was expected, the ferocity of the attack took many by surprise, bringing condemnation from around the world.

The then US President George Bush said he deeply deplored the use of force, and the then UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said she was "shocked and appalled by the shootings".

Amid the panic and confusion students could be heard shouting "fascists stop killing," and "down with the government".

At a nearby children's hospital operating theatres were filled with casualties with gunshot wounds, many of them local residents who were not taking part in the protests.

Early this morning at least 30 more were killed in two volleys of gunfire, which came without warning. Terrified crowds fled, leaving bodies in the road.

Meanwhile reports have emerged of troops searching the main Peking university campus for ringleaders, beating and killing those they suspect of co-ordinating the protests.

The big picture begins to come to focus the student who went to what was suppose to be a peaceful demonstration a few rotten apples started to spoil the march be smashing windows of the Tory HQ then ran into the office roof top to throw a fire extinguisher which nearly missed some police officers now many of you will be thinking am a Tory card member the true is I'm a Labour member card holder and proud of it I was on the first march with my young niece in law who wanted to experience it for the first time on the march the only different is the UK Government is not a dictator like China if the ConDem Coalition Government want to save face then it is time for them to listen to the voice od the students.

Students have smashed up a police van and there have been sporadic skirmishes during a series of major demonstrations against tuition fees.

Rallies have been held across the country, including in London, Bristol, Birmingham, Glasgow, Manchester, Cambridge and Brighton.

Police moved to contain the demo in the capital by using the controversial "kettling" tactic - meaning large numbers of people could be held in one place for several hours.

But the Metropolitan Police soon shifted the policy to one of "controlled dispersal".

THE PROTEST SCENES AROUND THE COUNTRY

However, moving the hundreds of protesters held in Whitehall was a slow process and it took until around 10pm to clear the area.

As frustration mounted among the demonstrators, attempts were made to smash a window at the Treasury and a bus stop was set on fire.

Earlier, protesters surrounded a police van in Whitehall, rocking it back and forth and smashing the windscreen with wooden poles.

'Shouting Didn't Do Anything'

Meet Zoe Williams, the lone student who stepped in to try to stop a gang of people trashing a police van during the protests in central London.

Other students tried to halt the vandalism, but it was later looted.

Zoe Williams, who tried to stop the demonstrators, told Sky News she wanted the students to "rationalise" their actions.

She added: "I didn't want other people to get injured - people don't realise that when you rock a van it can fall over."

A demonstrator stands on top of the trashed police van

Thousands gathered in and around Whitehall and Trafalgar Square to protest against the hike in university fees and the planned cutting of the education maintenance allowance (EMA).

The protests around the country have been largely peaceful, although four arrests were made in Manchester, four in Bristol and one in Brighton.

The Met said 32 arrests were made in the capital.

Higher University Fees: The Facts

The students are revolting but the Government says its plans to hike up university fees are misunderstood. Who's right?

However, sporadic violence broke out in central London, where protesters threw wooden poles at officers and tried to break through the police line.

One police officer is thought to have suffered a broken hand, while a second sustained leg injuries. Seventeen members of the public have also been hurt.

Sky News home affairs correspondent Mark White said two metal barriers were thrown at police.

A masked protester sits in a police van

Education Secretary Michael Gove has condemned the disorder. He told Sky News: "I respond to arguments, I don't respond to violence."

But march organiser James Mills said scrapping the £30-a-week EMA would be a "punitive cut".

He added: "If we can find £7bn to bail out Ireland we should be finding £500m to bail out the poorest in the country."

PROTESTER CRITICISES GOVERNMENT AND POLICE

Sky News crime correspondent Martin Brunt said toilets and water have been brought for those protesters being held in place in Whitehall.

It is thought it is the first time such provisions have been made for a contained crowd.

Describing containment as a "widely condemned tactic", Brunt added: "Police will be disappointed they were not able to allow the peaceful protest to continue."

A protester held in place in Whitehall shows his frustration

Demonstrators were heard chanting "let us out" - while at least one protester started to do his homework.

Graham Wettone, a former Met Police public order intelligence officer, praised the police action.

He told Sky News: "It's been a successful operation. It's very warm when you are jumping up and down but when you are standing still it gets cold very quickly."

Fireworks are thrown at mounted police in Bristol

The decision to contain the demo was made amid intelligence that a group wanted to attack the Liberal Democrat HQ.

A statement from the Met said the tactic was employed "to prevent further criminal damage".

Police have been keen to show they are well prepared after claims they were caught out by the high turnout in Westminster on November 10 that led to a riot and 60 arrests.

Gove: Government Won’t Respond To Violence

Ahead of the protest, former Met Police commissioner Brian Paddick told Sky News the police would "throw the kitchen sink" at the demo to ensure there was no violence.

In a speech on Tuesday evening, Nick Clegg called on students to reconsider their opposition to the Government's plans.

He said: "Listen and look before you march and shout. Our plans will mean that many of the lowest income graduates will repay less than they do under the current system."

Demonstrators hanged an effigy of the Deputy Prime Minister

NUS president Aaron Porter told Sky News he wanted students to protest in order to hold the Government to account, but insisted: "There are no conditions in which violence is acceptable."

The protests came on the same day Edward Woollard, 18, pleaded guilty to violent disorder after admitting throwing a fire extinguisher from the roof of Millbank Tower during those protests.

Two men were arrested on Tuesday on suspicion of violent disorder, one in Leicester and another in London.