I received an amazing array of responses including “bringer of justice” – “open access” – “holder of integrity” – “freedom to intrude” – “to be corrosive”.

For myself, I was under the impression that to be a blogger it was about honesty and fairness, to rise above the gutter that the mainstream media inhabits so often.

I care not if you are reading this and thinking I am only writing this because William Hague is a Conservative, you’re wrong. This would have been written whoever the public figure was and my recent stance on Twitter would’ve remained the same that what Paul Staines has done has brought a bad stench on the world in which we bloggers inhabit.

I know not why Guido decided to go after Mr Hague and/or Mr Myers in such a fashion. I have shared my suspicion a number of times on Twitter and shall do so again in the next sentence.

I personally believe that Paul Staines was given a tip off from a past victim of his who is trying to ingratiate themselves with Guido. That tip off may have only been that the room was shared and an over eager imagination set to work.

I know not why I feel so strongly about this but perhaps it has something to do with the world that I feel so strongly about, the one with honesty and fairness has been badly sullied due to the actions of a once great activist.

I don’t have an issue with the premise of what Guido has done but I do have a major issue with the way in which he undertook his work, it is reminiscent of the gutter press at its very worst.

Perhaps he is obliged because he has column inches to fill, perhaps he is obliged because of the expectation that weighs on his shoulders, perhaps he’s stepped over the line of what it means to be a blogger?

Update on Legal Case: Application to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)

Following the announcement from the Supreme Court that it would not be accepting the application made by Northern Rock shareholders to appeal the earlier decision of the High Court, the legal case continues to make its way into the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, although it could take up to 3 years for the case to be heard and a decision known.

The submission of the Small Shareholders case has now been presented to the ECHR in Strasbourg in a document totaling some 90 pages. This is a complex document detailing the legal case which argues against the Government’s Compensation Order. That Order laid down specific instructions to the Independent Valuer which dictated terms that were artificial and meant he had to assume circumstances that were non-existent.

These brought about the announcement earlier this year from Andrew Caldwell that no compensation is payable to the former shareholders of Northern Rock.

We will continue to support the small shareholders, headed by lead plaintiff Dennis Grainger, who are now to progress their case to Strasbourg, arguing the case “afresh” (as opposed to an appeal), in a court where the judges have historically had no compunction in making EU-member governments such as ours accountable for the violations of the human rights of EU citizens.

This action is being taken as we believe this to be the last step required to overturn the Governments Compensation Order and therefore the Independent Valuers claim that your Northern Rock shares were worth nothing at the time of nationalisation.

The Group believes that they were worth between 350p and 650p per share, these figures being based on the offers made to the Government from Lloyds, Virgin, Olivant and the Northern Rock Management Team prior to nationalisation, and also the inherent true net asset values, where market value convention would suggest at least 125% of said net assets.

We will however maintain updates on the Northern Rock page of the UKSA website as further action is taken, information gained and decisions heard. This web page can be found at:www.uksa.org.uk/NorthernRock.htm

Note that as this will be a lengthy process, you may receive less frequent newsletters in future from us.

Support, funding and donations
The Northern Rock Shareholders Action Group wants to raise £30,000 to fund the legal action being taken which now sees the submission being made to the European Court of Human Rights.

In addition to the fighting fund target, the Group needs to cover all the costs of contacting shareholders and to pay for office staff time to facilitate the campaign. The office facilities are made available by the UK Shareholders’ Association (UKSA) – a voluntary body funded by its members’ subscriptions – but UKSA does not have the funds to support the campaign financially. For effective collective action, please give generously.

Thank you to all those supporters who have donated to support this campaign. More than sixteen thousand supporters have now generously donated, and we are very grateful for their financial help that not only helps fight the legal battle but also covers some of the costs of keeping you informed of progress.

There are many former shareholders that we haven’t yet been able to reach. To this end, we would ask that you forward on this update to any friends, family and work colleagues who you feel may have an interest in the case or may know someone who would.

Whilst the Government has significant resources to defend our case against them, we are operating on a voluntary basis and still need donations and financial support to continue the fight on your behalf and any donations are gratefully received.

Donations can be made directly to UKSA at the following link:

http://www.uksapay.org.uk/donation.cfm

Further Action Being Taken
In the interests of maintaining communications with the new Conservative/ Liberal Democrat Government and in alliance with its pledge of fairness for all, this Committee has prepared a submission, with significant input from committee member Pradeep Chand.

The basis of this letter which is intended primarily for Chancellor, George Osborne and Treasury Select Committee Chairman, Andrew Tyrie, sets out our beliefs:

Our Appeal – Fair Value, Going Concern
The Legacy of Regulatory Failure and Value Destruction by Labour
The Contradictions and Blatant Discrimination of Labour Policy
Valuation and Compensation
Proposals for Resolution

This letter can be read in full at:www.uksa.org.uk/NorthernRock.htm entitled “UKSA Open Letter to Chancellor and TSC”
Please advise address changes
Please advise any postal or email address changes to UKSA3@btconnect.com (telephone 0208-468-1027). It is particularly important to do so for email address changes otherwise we may lose touch with you altogether. And please include some other identification such as your postal post code and your name so we can identify you in our database when sending us such communications.

On-going Chairmanship
Chris Hulme and Shum Ghumman are continuing to act as co-chairman of this action group and their contact details are:

Shum Ghumman Chris Hulme

T: 07872 617 737 T: 07775 794 291

On behalf Northern Rock Shareholders Action Group

Email: uksa3@btconnect.com

Web: www.uksa.org.uk

Note that all previous “Update” notes on Northern Rock that we have issued are present on the following web site page:
www.uksa.org.uk/NorthernRock.htm .

PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL TO NOTIFY CHANGES OF EMAIL OR POSTAL ADDRESSES OR FOR ROUTINE INQUIRIES. THOSE SHOULD BE SENT TO: uksa3@btconnect.com, Tel: 020-8468-1027

Whilst content to write the post I thought it would carry much more weight and heartfelt concern if it came straight from the heart and therefore this post is courtesy of Carolyn Webster whom I am sure you will agree feels very passionately about this subject.

NHS Wales. In the care of whom?

I have pretty much relied on the NHS for my children.

One child was referred to Great Ormond Street hospital at 3 months old, she’s fine now. The other child will need the NHS for the rest of his life. His condition is not life limiting.

The medical staff and therapists in the NHS who have played such a vital role will continue to play that part for the rest of his, hopefully, long life.

It is due to this absolute dependency of the NHS that when I read an article posted by Aberdareonline posted WAG must not put NHS managers before nurses I was horrified.

To make mattes worse this information has barely received any media attention.

In Wales, the control over the NHS is devolved to the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG).

This means that out of our budget managed by the Labour/Plaid Administration (yes, Labour still hold a little power somewhere), not only do we get free prescriptions, but it seems that we can now afford to maintain a policy that protects the jobs and salaries of the Chief Executives and other directors of former NHS Wales Trusts (all previous trusts were amalgamated to form 11 trusts).

In the real world, there would have been a round of redundancies, and redundancy payments, a bit of Gardening Leave, maybe a leaving do. But no, these non-job holders get to keep their jobs and salaries for 10 years.

This is despite a WAG annual operating framework where Local Health Boards are instructed to make a 3% reduction of the workforce of those above a band 5 salary scale post every year for the next 3 years. Basically this directive means that over the next 3 years, 2000 nursing and midwifery posts are threatened.

But meanwhile those Chief Executives, whose roles were in effect made redundant are safe for another 10 years.

So, Senior Management. Which of you will step forward to help my son speak?

Which one of you will care for him after another medical procedure?

Which one will hold my hand as I cry at another hurdle faced by my son?

Come on. Who cares?

There is a lot of speculation and argument about the exact situation of Laws and his partner, his sexuality and his right to rent rooms from his alleged lover. This is all going to become rather messier than it is even at present. I shall not enter into discussion regarding the private life of David Laws and I believe others should let that alone too but that is entirely up to them.

What I believe should happen now is that the Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg should act by advising his Minister to resign his post by the end of the weekend. Now is the perfect time with Parliament being in recess, this would give chance for a new Cabinet Minister to get up to speed over the next few days.

This would also remove any overhang from the old politics that we so eagerly sought to move away from. This will also enable the Coalition, the Lib Dems and David Laws to stand on the moral high ground and enforce the reality of honest politicis upon the nation.

I believe right now that David Cameron is probably briefing Nick Clegg to the effect of the above and it will become clearer within the next 24hrs that David Laws will resign his Cabinet post for the sake of the Coalition, the nation and what is right for British politics.

Yes, Laws was in the wrong but Britain does not need another 5 years of hypocrisy from our Government and the Coalition does not need to be handing easy targets to the Opposition.

As described to me on Twitter by @SnappingLawyer this morning “The show must go on!”

It is fair that Nadine, Kate and others can call the vote for the chair of the Speaker, after all, this House is supposed to be the bastion of democracy, the last place whereby man can call his master to account.

With that in mind it is somewhat disappointing that Twitter is full of self-interested bloggers today calling Nadine a liar and a spiteful person. What Nadine is doing in fact is issuing more chance for free speech than these bloggers ever have or ever will.

Personally, I hope the vote is called for Mr Bercow today. The vote would take place as an open vote, we would all know where those die-hard MPs had voted or indeed where those newbie’s had voted. Or, whether either had abstained.

One could argue that to usher in the new form of Politics, leaving behind the old term bias and scandal we need to have a vote on the Speaker. In my personal view Jon Bercow has done an admirable job, not spectacular but admirable, he, however, has let himself down on a number of ocasions but I put that down to the heat of the moment in the Political meltdown that was the death of the previous Government, a man is permitted to mourn.

So, at 14:30 Sir Peter Tapsell, The Father of the House will call for the Aye’s and the No’s and there will be sufficient No’s that in Sir Peter’s mind the House will split and a vote forced.

That vote will see the return of Jon Bercow to the role of Mr Speaker and leave Ming Campbell rueing his missed opportunity.

Jon Bercow will be returned not because he is necessarily the best man for the job but because this would be one change too far in too quick a time for the House to subsume. It is right that his authority is tested but the public would not thank the Coalition for what would be seen as a “dirty tricks” campaign to unseat The Speaker of the House.

Jon Bercow will be returned simply because now is not the time to do this.

Whilst it would be fun to put a picture up here at this stage I shall abstain, you get the image, no help needed.

If, as it is becoming a little clearer this afternoon that a deal is on the cards between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats I want to go on record that I DO NOT TRUST NICK CLEGG, nor some of the other “negotiating” team, (official ones or not) and yes, that’s you Mr Cable.

I live in a Lib Dem marginal whereby a very hard working PPC was beaten, partly by the Labour vote, partly by the UKIP vote and partly because of Class smears by David Heath’s team possibly by an over enthusiastic supporter. These overtones of rotten politicis disgust me, they play all nice with local businesses but they launch into a tirade of abuse when given the chance. Quite simply I cannot take what a Lib Dem in my constituency says as the truth.

So, if you want to work out where I stand on this pact thing just read my blog posts from this morning at one stage even advocating a minority Government, at others suggesting the Lib/Lab pact should go ahead, all with good reasons. I am not comfortable with a Con/Lib pact but I trust David Cameron, William Hague and George Osborne not to have sold my Party down the swanny and that the percentage of the UK seats won by the Lib Dems is proportionate within any Government.

Let’s wait for the real (if there is any) announcement.

....well, would you?....

Enough said!

Labour could yet come out of this whole fiasco smelling of roses and still save Britain!

If Labour refuse to do a pact with the Liberal Democrats at the same time as the Conservatives refuse to do a pact with them this will put Nick The Arrogant squarely back in his place having missed the only boat they will ever be offered.

Labour have already set the ball rolling to replace their leader, if they allow a Conservative minority Government and assist by voting the Queen’s speech through they can, [almost] legitimately stand for Election in 10 months time on a mandate of CHANGE and FRESH FOCUS.

I personally think if that were the case the Conservatives would still be returned with a working majority and I am ready for that challenge.

Can we count on the Labour Party doing the right thing for the country?

Jack? Jack? Where's my Jack?

As for Nick (The Arrogant) Clegg whilst claiming to do what is best for the country has lurched to his natural side.

Nick The Arrogant

Yes, the Conservative Party gained a majority but not a working overall majority. There are polls and arguments going on in every Party at every level as to why each Party failed to do better, this should be apparent more in the Lib Dems than any other Party but it is not, at least not just yet.

Labour claim they want AV but only because it favours them. Lib Dems claim they want PR but only because it favours them. We, are content with FPTP but it does not favour us, if we change boundaries and make each constituency the same size then that will favour us. but, we are where we are and it is sadly FPTP that got us in this position.

Now then, the Lib Dems had a crap night on Thursday there are no two ways about it but they had a great morning on Friday because it allows them to hide their dreadful performance at #ge10.

It is now the Lib Dems who hold the card, not much of one but just enough to determine who may or who may not lead the next Government. But all of a sudden Nick Clegg has become rather arrogant.

He is almost holding the British electorate to ransom, pretending to scrutinise what is on offer from both the Conservatives and Labour Parties. He talks of a deal in the coming days, he talks of needing further details yet he talks of doing what is right for the nation.

I want a Conservative Government but I don’t want the David Cameron to sell the Party down the line and I don’t believe he will. What I don’t want is some arrogant jumped up two-bit player getting off telling journalists, MP’s and the electorate that he is taking his time.

Nick, either step up to the mantel, make that statement and right now I don’t care if you go Lab/Lib or Con/Lib, I want a Conservative Government but I don’t want one so badly as to have to bow to you.

We,ve already said
Goodbye
Since you gotta go, oh you’d better
Go now go now, go now (Go now)
Before you see me cry
I don’t want you to tell me just what you intend to do now
‘Cause how many times do I have to tell you darlin’, darlin’
I’m still in love with you now
Whoa-oh-oh-oh

We’ve already said
So long
I don’t wanna see you go, oh you’d better
Go now go now, go now (Go now)
Don’t you even try
Tellin’ me that you really don’t want it to end this way
‘Cause darlin’, darlin’, can’t you see I want you to stay
Yeah, yeah

Since you gotta go, oh you’d better
Go now go now, go now (Go now)
Before you see me cry
I don’t want you to tell me just what you intend to do now
‘Cause how many times do I have to tell you darlin’, darlin’
I’m still in love still in love with you now
Whoa-oh-oh-oh
I don’t wanna see you go but darlin’, you better go now

Dave offers a comprehensive package offering Nick the chance to get many of his policies on the agenda.

How will it pan out? In my mind Brown will seal the deal with Nick who cannot see through the lies and subterfuge. Brown and Clegg will seal a deal, stitch up the Conservative Party and the final sweetener will be Brown to stand down with D Miliband to takeover as PM.

Britiain then faces another 5 years of an unelected leader of the ruling party and a decidedly dodgy Government that will only be challenged when the truth of how bad the books are in about 3 years time.

I fear it will be a sad day and the man who deserves to be PM may never get there.

Tomorrow is the time where the power of independent thought could throw this wannabe Labour leader on the Political scrapheap for good. Britain, do the RIGHT thing.

This is not a blog post contributed by some fanatical (can’t see the wood for the trees) grass rootist, this is not an anti-Government or anti-Labour rant, no, this is the genuine, honest account of a hard working, take nothing for nothing British worker who has seen good times and bad times. A contribution by a man who has never earned over £12k in any given year in his entire life, owns his own home, has never sat back and demanded that society owes him or his family anything yet who has everything he needs.

This is a contribution that I am proud to host this morning as I truly believe it shows how so many people on the streets of Britain are thinking and feeling this morning. If you enjoy this contribution (whether you feel you agree or not please consider using one of the “share this” buttons at the foot of the post, if you only use Twitter there is one specifically for that too).

Finally, this contribution is unedited in any way save for one small spelling error as I feel I at least owe that much to the contributing author, my father, Alan Wicks.

My life as a Tory

My introduction to politics came when I was fairly young, my parents (in particular my Mother) were staunch Conservatives, as a result of which, when I was about 10/11 years old I would be found outside the polling station at election time “telling” for the Tories (Although Tories was considered a bit of an insult then when it was really known then as the Conservative and Unionist Party).

I would be “telling” from the opening of the polls, which in those days was much earlier, before heading off to school. After school on Polling Day I would go with my Parents to the Party Committee Rooms at the bottom of our road to help record those voters we knew had voted and chase up those who had still to vote.

These were days when everyone knew very few people who owned a motor vehicle, but those supporters and activists who did own a car would volunteer to drive the elderly and infirm to the polling stations to cast their vote. Although young, I can still remember attending the “Count” at Hornsey Town Hall and cheering the result when our candidate won.

The first Election I can really remember was when Sir David Gammon was up against the Labour Candidate R.A.Pestell, in 1952 when Sir David won with a vote of 36,417 vs 25,643, Out of an electorate of 75,131 there was an 82.6% turnout (unlike the apathy of today) giving Sir David a majority of 17.36% (OK, I do not remember the figures which I have obtained today from the internet, but I do remember him winning).

I can recall him coming into the committee rooms whilst I was there and coming over to speak with me, being the youngest person there.

When Sir David died he was succeeded in his post by his wife Lady Muriel Gammon.

I always voted Conservative for the rest of my life when I voted in a General Election or ByElection, but not always did I manage to get to the polling stations. When Margaret Thatcher became PM I was obviously very happy and expected good things for the future, and in general I was not dissapointed, I agreed with most of her policies but must admit to being disappointed that she was not able to implement all of them.

I still feel that the Principles behind the “Poll tax” was a lot fairer than either the previous “Rates” or current “Council Tax”, something I know will probably upset a lot of people, even fellow Tories, but there again, I am talking about “principles” behind the concept which was not necessarily recognized by everyone.

By the time Tony Blair and New Labour won the right to govern I must admit to being secretely a little relieved because there had been so much infighting within the Tory Party and so much reported sleaze that I felt it was good that they would have a short period to regroup, fully expecting Labour to fail within a couple of years, therefore giving us a chance to regain power.

Blair’s claim of an open government, no sleaze etc sounded good, but it soon become obvious that sleaze is only something that is practiced by the ruling party, at least, it is normally only the ruling party that gets the stick for it, if it is the Opposition party it tends to be overlooked, unless there is a pending election.

Anyway, I was getting more and more frustrated with the way Labour was completely changing our lives, controlling everything we do and making more and more things illegal, without even properly consulting with us that I was absolutely overjoyed when I discovered that my youngest son had applied to CCHQ to become a PPC.

I had never to my knowledge pressurised him in any direction regarding Politics or Religion, I believed my kids should follow their heart and I would support them in their beliefs, even if it differed with my own, it at least meant they were making sensible judgements of their own and not being pressurised into their opinions.

We had never, as far as I can remember had any serious political discussions so I was extremely supportive of his ambitions.

I was disapointed when he was turned down due to the volume of applicants on this occasion, and slightly relieved at the same time when I realised what it could cost him financialy at this particular time in his life, but I know he is determined and he is planning on following his heart and applying again in the future and he will have my 100% support.

I said earlier that I had always voted Tory in major elections, though I must admit on a couple of local elections I have voted Independent rather than follow the party line if I knew the Independent candidate and believed they would be the best person for the job irrespective of my Conservative beliefs.

I have also worked with the Liberals (pre LibDem days) in a local dispute, something I started and they tried to jump in, I was happy for their support, but they certainly did not ask for or gain any voting support from me.

I firmly believe that this country is now in a terrible state and that we desperately need a change for the future and that the Tories are the only Party that can give us this.

OK, I know there is going to be a long period of real Pain in order to recover our position in the world, but there is at last a chance of a light at the end of the tunnel, when Britain can once again be great, we can be proud of our once great nation and we can prosper, our kids will once again be properly educated, our businesses will prosper, bringing employment opportunities to nearly everyone and our streets will be safe to walk once more.

And finally, when we hear someone say “Trust me, I am a politician” we can believe and trust in them.

Work still progresses on this issue and here is an update:

Northern Rock Valuer’s Final Assessment Notice
You will no doubt now be aware that on the 30th of March, Andrew Caldwell announced his unsurprising decision to value our former shareholding in Northern Rock as worthless.

In his Final Assessment Notice, he quotes the artificial valuation assumptions on which he is bound by law to base his valuation. He is not bound though by moral or professional standards to accept such terms but has chosen to accept them nonetheless.

This latest statement is no different to that given by him in December 2009 where Mr Caldwell requested representations to be made to him, representations on behalf of well over 130,000 small shareholders that appear to have fallen on deaf ears.

As invited by Mr Caldwell, we will be seeking reconsideration of the nil valuation with the hope that such requests receive the required consideration although it would seem that, as long as the Governments artificial terms of reference are allowed to stand in law, Mr Caldwell having accepted the appointment of valuer, may have no choice but to choose law over moral obligation.

You can also take action to further represent your views to Mr Caldwell, which we have detailed below.

Only the day before Mr Caldwell’s statement, the Chancellor stated that Northern Rock had enough Capital: the Special Liquidity Scheme announced only weeks after Nationalisation of Northern Rock would have provided the liquidity required to continue as a “Going Concern”. This key assumption required to arrive at a fair value was not allowed under the Compensation Scheme Valuation Order.

With over £500 Billion available under the Special Liquidity Scheme and Inter Bank guarantees from April 2008 Northern Rock would have continued as a solvent, liquid, profitable entity, therefore supporting the small shareholders claim that their Human Rights have been violated firstly by the Compensation Order and finally now by Mr Caldwell’s report.

Did investors have the correct information on which to base their decisions?
Only two weeks after Andrew Caldwell valued the former shareholding in Northern Rock as worthless, the small shareholders now find the information on which they based their investment decisions was flawed.

The FSA announced their fines of Mr Barclay and Mr Baker for their part in manipulating figures on the performance of Northern Rock’s mortgage book but as yet we have to hear the involvement of Mr Applegarth. So far, Mr Applegarth has been legally gagged and prevented from commenting, but did he and his fellow Directors also know about this manipulation or were Mr Barclay and Mr Baker really alone in this decision-making?

Where were the regulators in analysing their information? Or have we forgotten the regulators involvement, or lack of, in the lead up to the financial crisis. Or the legislators, including Gordon Brown, who as Chancellor changed the limits applicable to the borrowing capacities of banks and building societies 12 years ago.

Where ‘fairness’ now appears to be a political buzzword in campaigning, the small shareholders would like to see evidence of fairness in practice, not just in a manifesto for votes.

It would seem that the government would lay the blame solely at the door of ‘greedy bankers’. Whilst this may be true in part, the outgoing Government bred the said greed in pedigree conditions.

These latest fines fully vindicate the small shareholders claims of ill treatment not only by the governance and regulatory framework but also by the institutions in which they invested. Such governance turned a blind eye and failed miserably to protect the rights of investors large and small.

What action can you take?
As with his December statement, Mr Caldwell has invited former shareholders to make share their views and thoughts through written representations to him on why he should reconsider this assessment.

To reiterate from our last update, it is important to recognise that this news completely vindicates our assertion that the terms of the compensation order were manifestly unfair, and the fact that this valuation has finally been released will remove much of the uncertainty that the government and its lawyers have hidden behind in their (now demonstrably false) allegations that the terms of their compensation order adequately allow for the payment of fair compensation to shareholders.

To this end, former shareholders should write to Mr Caldwell as he has invited them to do so, by the 5th of May 2010. Former shareholders should also make representations to their MPs who sanctioned the legislation that brought about the demise of our assets.

To assist, we have prepared template letters for the valuer. Please feel free to edit this template and include your own thoughts, comments, frustrations and anger in your own letters.

The template can be found on the website at: www.uksa.org.uk/valuerletter

Your letters can be also be emailed to Mr Caldwell at:

northern.rock@bdo.co.uk

You can locate the contact details for your MP at: http://findyourmp.parliament.uk/
Update on legal case: Application to European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)
Following the announcement from the Supreme Court that it would not be accepting the application made by Northern Rock shareholders to appeal the earlier decision of the High Court, the legal case continues to make its way into the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, although it could take up to 3 years for the case to be heard and a decision known.

We will continue to support the small shareholders, headed by lead plaintiff Dennis Grainger, who are now to progress their case to Strasbourg, arguing the case “afresh” (as opposed to an appeal), in a court where the judges have historically had no compunction in making EU-member governments such as ours accountable for the violations of the human rights of EU citizens.

The unfair rules given to the “Independent” valuer by the UK Government ensured that the result would always be as appears below. Now Alistair Darling is set to sell shares at a massively inflated price to the gullible British Public whom it stole them from in the first place.

NORTHERN ROCK – Important Information

Further to our previous communication of 15th December 2009, we write to inform you that in accordance with the Northern Rock PLC Compensation Scheme Order 2008, the Independent Valuer, Andrew Caldwell, has determined that as at the Valuation Date, 22nd February 2008, Northern Rock PLC Ordinary shares had no value.

Accordingly, the Independent Valuer has determined that the amount of compensation payable by the Treasury to former Northern Rock PLC shareholders is Nil.

Important Information & Other Key Dates:

The Independent Valuer announced on 29th March 2010, that having carefully considered written representations following his Consultation Document he had prepared another document, the Final Document, which can be viewed in its entirety on the Independent Valuer’s website at www.northernrockvaluer.org.uk.

For reasons set out in the Final Document, none of the representations made have caused the Independent Valuer to change his proposed approach to the valuation or his provisional views on the amount of any compensation payable by the Treasury.

Having applied the Valuation assumptions the Independent Valuer has determined that at the end of the assumed administration there would be a net deficit of approximately GBP5.68 billion. There would therefore be no surplus at the end of the assumed administration for distribution to shareholders.

Accordingly, for the reasons set out in the Final Document, the Independent Valuer has determined that the amount of compensation payable by the Treasury to former shareholders or those whose rights to receive shares have been extinguished is nil.

Should you wish to seek reconsideration of the Independent Valuer’s assessment, requests for reconsideration can be submitted in writing to Andrew Caldwell, c/o BDO LLP, 55 Baker Street, London, W1U 7EU or alternatively by e-mail to northern.rock@bdo.co.uk, noting your postal address, no later than 4th May 2010. Please note as a nominee company we are unable to submit comments on your behalf.

We will notify you in due course upon receipt of any further information from the Independent Valuer.

Is this how you aim to halve the deficit Labour?

and last year you said

Only the Liberal Democrats will clean up Westminster, reform expenses

…and given that Chris Huhne said this at your spring conference

Remember not a single Liberal Democrat MP flipped their home.

Not a single Lib Dem MP avoided capital gains tax.

Not a single Lib Dem MP in London claimed a second home allowance at all.

How can you explain this headline MPs’ expenses: Lib Dem MPs broke rules by taking landlord payments

Is there any chance of YOU standing up to apologise in next weeks #pmqs?

I made comment that I would seek to report this infringement by 11th March. It is perhaps encouraging that today (2 days before the deadline) I have received the following via e-mail:

—–Original Message—–
From: Ed Balls
Sent: 09 March 2010 11:11
To: Gary Stuart Wicks
Subject: RE: Feedback from Ed’s Website

Dear Gary,

Thanks for your email. We are currently reviewing the site content, and will update it where appropriate.

Best wishes,

Kate

Kate Williams

Office of Ed Balls MP

________________________________

From: Gary Stuart Wicks [mailto:xxxxxxx@gmail.com]
Sent: Fri 26/02/2010 08:18
To: Ed Balls
Subject: Feedback from Ed’s Website

This mail comes from the http://www.edballs.co.uk/index.jsp?t=contactEd page of the website.

Name: Gary Stuart Wicks
Email: xxxxxxx@gmail.com
Telephone No.:
Comments: Good morning.

Last evening whilst viewing your Website I noticed a number of discrepancies within your Privacy Policy and, I believe a number of areas whereby your site breaches the Data Protection Act 1998.

I took the liberty of writing a blog post to highlight the said discrepancies and areas I believe that may cause you problems.

It is extremely important that ALL (especially Government) websites, businesses and those gathering personal data do so with a full commitment to the DPA and that they fully understand their legal obligations.

This is not a partisan witch hunt but the beginning of research to discover how many government affiliated sites fail to meet their own legislation in an endeavour to bring EVERYBODY up to the same standard.

My blog post that relates to this issue can be located at the following URL:

http://www.wicksie.com/blunder/ed-balls-mp-plagiarised-his-mates-homework/

You will notice the 14 day deadline prior to any action being taken such as reporting the issue to the DPA and the ICO to facilitate your work to correct this “oversight”

If you wish to contact me with regards this issue then please do so via the address given or comment directly on the blog post.

I look forward to a swift resolution of these breaches.

Best regards
Gary Stuart Wicks

It would seem we have a partial success on our hands for common sense and more importantly for what is RIGHT.

I am not counting my chickens just yet but rest assured I shall continue to monitor the situation and report back accordingly.

I do cede that Ed’s office has taken the first positive step to rectification of this matter.

It’s not a riveting read to be honest so I do these things so that you don’t have to and if you wish to buy me a beer sometime for that gesture then I shall be most grateful. Anyway, I digress…

Whilst considering Ed’s arrogance and his outright refusal to answer any of my 42 questions I have posed him on Twitter I decided to visit his Privacy Policy to see how “robust” [his favourite word of late] it actually was. What I found is below:

Privacy Policy

IP addresses and log file data

The Labour Party site does not automatically capture or store personal information, other than logging the user’s IP Address or the location of your computer or network on the Internet, for systems administration and troubleshooting purposes. (If you are connected to the Internet you have an IP address, for example an IP address might read “154.198.99.9″). We also use IP addresses in the aggregate to track which pages people visit in order to improve the quality of the site.

Data collection and use

You may be asked for personal information if you complete one of the forms on this site. Please see below the information we ask for and what this information is used for.

In each case we will only use the information about you for the purpose for which you provide it. The Labour Party does not sell or disclose this information to outside organisations or individuals, nor transfer it outside the United Kingdom. You may remove or change your details at any time. You have right of access to your personal information held on our files by written request to the data protection officer (address below) and on payment of an administration fee.

Site registration and email service (to receive Ed Balls newsletter)

When you register onto the site or subscribe for Labour eNews we ask you for contact information (such as your name and e-mail address), geographic information (such as your postcode and constituency), and other details about you and your interests. This is used to help us provide you with information to match your interests. We may also use it to alert you of campaigns you may be interested in and events happening in your area.

You can remove your name at any time from our e-mail subscription list by sending an unsubscribe request.

If you are registered onto the site, you can edit your registration and enews subscription details at any time through your personal on-line form. If you have not registered on the site and you wish to change your contact email address you need to unsubscribe from our mailing list and sign up again using your new information. If you are registered on the site as a member and you use the site to change your registration details (eg. address or email address) this information may also be used to update your membership record on the Party’s membership database to ensure it is up-to-date and accurate.

Cookie

A cookie is a tiny text file that is stored on your computer. We may use cookies in order to tailor your experience on our site according to the preferences you have specified. However we will only access the information that we stored in your cookie file. We will not access any information stored in a cookie by other websites. Our cookies do not contain any personally identifiable information.

Information on children

We do not knowingly collect personally identifiable information from children under the age of 16 without permission.

Links to other sites

Our site contains links to other sites and servers. The Labour Party is not responsible for the privacy practices or the content of such websites.

How we protect your information

Our website has security measures in place to protect against the loss, misuse or alteration of the information under our control. Our server is located in a locked, secure environment.

Choice/unsubscribe

We provide you the opportunity to opt-out of receiving communications from us easily and promptly. Our unsubscribe requests are processed weekly.

Correcting your information

If you need to correct the information you provided us with when you subscibed to our e-mail list, you can do so through your personal form provided on-line. If you need to change your e-mail address, you can unsubscribe from our mailing lists and sign up again using your new information. Or if you have registered with a username and password you may change your details at any time via the login page without needing to re-register.

Contacting us about privacy

If you have any questions about our privacy policy, the information we have collected from you online, the practices of this site or your interaction with this website, send an email to: ed@edballs.com or telephone us on 01924 898158.

You can also contact us at the address displayed on every page of this site.

We will continue to evaluate our efforts to protect your information and will update our privacy policy whenever necessary.

I won’t blame you for not bothering to read that but I shall pull out a few snippets for your delectation:

IP addresses and log file data
The Labour Party site does not automatically capture or store personal information

The Labour Party does not sell or disclose this information to outside organisations or individuals, nor transfer it outside the United Kingdom

When you register onto the site or subscribe for Labour eNews

We may also use it to alert you of campaigns you may be interested in and events happening in your area.[what Normanton???Come on Ed]

If you are registered on the site as a member and you use the site to change your registration details (eg. address or email address) this information may also be used to update your membership record on the Party’s membership database to ensure it is up-to-date and accurate.

Links to other sites
Our site contains links to other sites and servers. The Labour Party is not responsible for the privacy practices or the content of such websites.

Our server is located in a locked, secure environment.[no Ed, it isn't!]

In case you haven’t understand from the above Ed is either pretending to be the Labour Party as a whole or he has stolen the Privacy Policy from the Labour Party Website.

Is he equal to the Party? He may think he is…

I have reproduced the LabourParty.org.uk original Privacy Policy below so you can compare for yourself.

IP addresses and log file data
The Labour Party site does not automatically capture or store personal information, other than logging the user’s IP Address or the location of your computer or network on the Internet, for systems administration and troubleshooting purposes. (If you are connected to the Internet you have an IP address, for example an IP address might read “154.198.99.9″). We also use IP addresses in the aggregate to track which pages people visit in order to improve the quality of the site.

Data collection and use
You may be asked for personal information if you complete one of the forms on this site. Please see below the information we ask for and what this information is used for.

In each case we will only use the information about you for the purpose for which you provide it. The Labour Party does not sell or disclose this information to outside organisations or individuals, nor transfer it outside the United Kingdom. You may remove or change your details at any time. You have right of access to your personal information held on our files by written request to the data protection officer (address below) and on payment of an administration fee.

Site registration and email service
When you register onto the site or subscribe to our emails, we ask you for contact information (such as your name and e-mail address), geographic information (such as your postcode and constituency), and other details about you and your interests. This is used to help us provide you with information to match your interests. We may also use it to alert you of campaigns you may be interested in and events happening in your area.

Joining the Party and renewing your membership online
We collect the required information in order to check you meet the conditions of and help you fulfil the opportunities provided by membership of the Labour Party. At your option, we ask for additional information such as gender, date of birth and trade union membership to help us provide a better membership service to you.

To volunteer (pledge your support)
We ask for your contact details, postcode and information on the type of volunteer work you are interested in. This information helps us identify suitable volunteer opportunities for you within the Party. Your details will be forwarded to the appropriate local or regional party officer who can then contact you.

Donating to the Party
The information we ask for is used to process your donation and, if you donate more than £200, to check that you are on the electoral register. If you donate more than £1,000 to a Labour Party unit (eg. Constituency Labour Party) or more than £5,000 to the Labour Party nationally in the course of a calendar year, your name and the amount of your donation will be reported to the Electoral Commission for publication on their public register of donations to the Labour Party. Donation Information will be stored on our membership database and used to keep you informed of Labour news, campaign and other opportunities to support the Party.

Cookie
A cookie is a tiny text file that is stored on your computer. We may use cookies in order to tailor your experience on our site according to the preferences you have specified. However we will only access the information that we stored in your cookie file. We will not access any information stored in a cookie by other websites. Our cookies do not contain any personally identifiable information.

Information on children

The Labour Party does not process any personal details from individuals under the age of 15 without parent/guardian consent. Details of under 16s are processed for membership purposes only.

Links to other sites
Our site contains links to other sites and servers. The Labour Party is not responsible for the privacy practices or the content of such websites.

How we protect your information
Our website has security measures in place to protect against the loss, misuse or alteration of the information under our control. Our server is located in a locked, secure environment, with a guard posted 24 hours a day. When you contribute online, we use a secure server to protect your credit card number and other personal information during transmission. The details are transmitted through Thawte to ensure absolute security.

Choice/unsubscribe
We provide you the opportunity to opt-out of receiving communications from us easily and promptly. Our unsubscribe requests are processed weekly.

Correcting your information
If you need to correct the information you provided us with when you subscibed to our e-mail list, you can do so through your personal form provided on-line. If you need to change your e-mail address, you can unsubscribe from our mailing lists and sign up again using your new information. Or if you have registered with a username and password you may change your details at any time via the login page without needing to re-register.

Contacting us about privacy
If you have any questions about our privacy policy, the information we have collected from you online, the practices of this site or your interaction with this website, please contacy us by clicking here or telephone our call centre on 08705 900200.

You can also contact us at the address below:
E-campaigns team
Labour Party
39 Victoria Street
London
SW1H 0HA

Our data protection officer can be contacted at the following address:
Melanie Onn
Labour Party
39 Victoria Street
London
SW1H 0HA

We will continue to evaluate our efforts to protect your information and will update our privacy policy whenever necessary

Quite simply Ed Balls has stolen this text and used it on his own site.

Even if he attempts to claim he had permission to use this then it shows that anybody who has given information such as e-mails etc via edballs.co.uk has no legal assurance that their information will be held and used correctly.

I put it to you, Ed Balls, Sir that you MUST change your Privacy Policy to correctly reflect the Website content you present.

Your failure to do this in a timely fashion (and I suggest that timely fashion is 14 days from today so I am putting a deadline of 11th March 2010) will result in both you and your Website administrator being reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) under a breach of the Data Protection Act (DPA).

I welcome your suggestions as to how you propose to do this.

—–
UPDATE: After writing this last night I was amazed when I logged into Twitter this morning to find a number of people seemingly unaware of how important this little find is and how little awareness of the Data Protection Act there is out there and what you can expect of how your data is held and used.

The “Tweets” that awaited me this morning ranged from “when will you get a life” through “a moment to tedium” to “get back to fighting the good fight on the issues that matter” and “absolutely spot on, but what does the DPA do”.

Well, as for fighting the good fight and getting onto the issues that matter, this does matter, this matters a great deal. There are millions of businessmen and women, businesses, civil servants and the like out there slushing around on a daily basis having to ensure their wares meet the regulations set out within the DPA and further constraints set out by the ICO so why not expect that a Crown Minister complies with the law of the land?

If you have given your details via the Ed Balls Website I repeat you have no assurance of how that data is treated, the DPA exists to protect you and your data.

The Privacy Policy on the site is misleading and incorrect. I am prepared to bet good money on the fact that Ed Balls uses a standard commercial host and to make the statements he is making I would like very real proof of evidence, or at least I would had I been churlish enough to give my data over to his site.

I have contacted Ed Balls via his Website to inform him of his non-compliance and await a reply.

This once great nation that stood proud and true is all but broken, her epitaph reads as such:

And that will be England gone,
The shadows, the meadows, the lanes,
The guildhalls, the carved choirs.
There’ll be books; it will linger on
In galleries; but all that remains
For us will be concrete and tyres.

With notable thanks to Philip Larkin for his “Going, Going” poem of January 1972

However, as of today I am introducing a new category for the award of a NEWARK to the most spiteful, vile, horrible, ridiculously contempt statement made by a member of a Political Party or by one of its PPCs.

How fitting that I choose today to issue the first NEWARK to DAVID WRIGHT MP following his outrageously stupid Tweet from yesterday afternoon.

In this instance, rather than describe the events that led to DAVID WRIGHT becoming the first recipient I shall simply let the excellent Twitterer ToryRadio tell the story.

At what point did you realise the scum sucking phrase had been used David Wright?

The claim that the twitter account of David Wright just doesn’t add up IMHO.

Let run through some of the tweets. Anyone can go through all the tweets to and from @davidwrightmp here. No mention of account being hacked until the story is picked up on by mainstream media. Funny that!

…read the entire post HERE

DAVID, want to get your hands on the NEWARK? Give me a call, drop me a line and I shall send it right over so everyone can see how much of a NEWARK you really are!

This, in my opinion is the most descriptive set of words ever compiled to discuss the dreadful subject that is Gordon Brown and the effect he has had on Britain.

The lyrics to “Death on two legs” follows as does a “soundtrack” video.

Watch and READ: For those ex-military, WATCH AND READ

Death on two legs

You suck my blood like a leech
You break the law and you preach
Screw my brain till it hurts
You’ve taken all my money
And you want more
Misguided old mule with your pig headed rules
With your narrow minded cronies
Who are fools of the first division
Death on two legs
You’re tearing me apart
Death on two legs
You’ve never had a heart of your own
Kill joy bad guy big talking small fry
You’re just an old barrow boy
Have you found a new toy to replace me?
Can you face me?
But now you can kiss my ass goodbye
Feel good are you satisfied?
Do you feel like suicide?
(i think you should)
Is your conscience all right
Does it plague you at night?
Do you feel good feel good?

You talk like a big business tycoon
You’re just a hot air balloon
So no one gives you a damn
You’re just an overgrown schoolboy
Let me tan your hide
A dog with disease
You’re the king of the ‘sleaze’
Put your money where your mouth is
Mister know-all
Was the fin on your back
Part of the deal? (shark)
Death on two legs
You’re tearing me apart
Death on two legs
You’ve never had a heart (you never did) of your own
(right from the start)
Insane you should be put inside
You’re a sewer rat decaying in a cesspool of pride
Should be made unemployed
Then make yourself null and void
Make me feel good i feel good

Do you agree? Do you have a better alternative?

Daylight robbery is rife in Britain once again.

In the run up to the General Election #GE10 it has become apparent that the Business Secretary’s contempt for charitable organisations has reached new lows as he robs charities to claw money back the for reckless spending machine that is the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP).

Last month Lord Mandelson decided to remove an exemption for charities from music licensing rules which quite simply means that from April 2010 those organisations will have to choose between paying large bills if they hold events with recorded music or do without the music completely.

You robbing bastard!

By law all retail outlets are bound by the Performing Rights Society (PRS) representing composers and songwriters, there is no exemption for charities.

However, a large majority of these organisations must also purchase a licence from Phonographic Performance Ltd (PPL) representing performers and record companies. Currently there are two small clauses in the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (Sections 67 and 72) that exempt charities from this requirement.

Lord Mandelson has decided to remove this exemption following a public consultation by the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) ensuring this is in place for April this year. Is this another sign that #GE10 will be in March?

Let’s consider a few areas this affects so we can see just how bloody silly this really is. A charity shop with music in the background would be forced to pay. Carnival floats that play music would be forced to pay. A carer’s association or nursery playing music to entertain the children would be forced to pay.

Think it’s wrong? You know where to put your X on polling day at #GE10.

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was, since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape.

He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as:

- Knowing when to come in out of the rain;
- Why the early bird gets the worm;
- Life isn’t always fair;
- and maybe it was my fault.

Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don’t spend more than you can earn) and reliable strategies (adults, not children, are in charge).

His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a 6-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.

Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children. It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer sun lotion or an aspirin to a student; but could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

Common Sense lost the will to live as the churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims. Common Sense took a beating when you couldn’t defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar could sue you for assault.

Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement. Common Sense was preceded in death, by his parents, Truth and Trust, by his wife, Discretion, by his daughter, Responsibility, and by his son, Reason.

He is survived by his 4 stepbrothers; I Know My Rights, I Want It Now, Someone Else Is To Blame, and I’m A Victim

Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone. If you still remember him, pass this on. If not, join the majority and do nothing

Hat tip to @TownTwinner for this realistic and sad reflection of life in Brown’s Britain.