The Monster behind the wheel

I've just completed a short shopping trip. I took the car, as I always do. Part of me knows that this is ecologically unsound, but it's shouted down by the part of me that's lazy. On reflection I would be better walking as it would mean my blood pressure remained at a manageable level. I almost always get irritated while driving and I become a much less pleasant human being. During my five minutes on the road I turned into a snarling sarcastic grump rather than the more laid back person I normally am. Nobody really did anything terrible. I wasn't forced off the road by a bus driver with a death wish and I didn't have to deal with pedestrians with suicidal tendencies, but I still managed to tell people off within the bubble of my own car. My language was awful and, as a father of a young son, I'm a bit worried about this. It's only a matter of time before I'm hauled into his school to be told that he's written a story about a racing car that says ,"Don't indicate then, I'm f***ing psychic".

A blog worth checking on

Carl Minns is the leader of Hull City Council. He's a Liberal Democrat and has some interesting points to make about politics, popular culture and his home city.

http://carlminns.blogspot.com/

Why tone is so important

Prime Minister's Question Time followed the usual pattern of the opposition accusing the government of breaking promises and the PM accusing the opposition of having no policies and no answers to the country's problems. David Cameron is a fairly slick operator and was particularly effective in making Gordon Brown look cumbersome and , at times, dishonest. Mr Cameron hasn't been quite as effective since becoming Prime Minister. It is a more difficult job,but he should be able to see off the hostile questions he receives. Today he was caused more problems than he should have been by questions about the appointment of a personal "vanity" photographer. It seemed to be a relatively easy question to brush off, but his prickly response meant that it appeared to strike home. He does have a habit of visually appearing exasperated when he receives questions that he believes are beneath him. This arrogance will be what viewers take away from PMQs rather than the substance of the argument.

Is the phrase "Social Cleansing" harmful to those opposed to housing benefit changes?

Thursday's "Question Time" was a dispiriting programme. The politicians were uninspiring and the liveliest performers were notable for their presentation rather than for what they had to say. Simon Schama had the air of a man who'd broken the record for coffee consumption while the hedge fund manager, Hugh Hendry has a career ahead of him in panto.

In the early stages of the programme Ed Davey was asked about Boris Johnson's comments on Kosovo style social cleansing of London. He said The London Mayor should apologise and also criticised fellow panellist Chris Bryant for making similar comments in The Commons.Talk of cleansing in a social or ethnic context is always going to be provocative because of reminders of terrible ethnic cleansing enforced by guns and bombs in The Balkans less than twenty years ago.
So the question is, "Will housing benefit changes lead to social cleansing?". The changes will bring in £65 million a year, but, according to Channel 4's Fact Check, it is associated housing benefit changes which cause the main problem. The way that Housing Benefit is calculated will be changed and its value will also be reduced in line with other benefits because it will be linked to CPI. Housing Benefit changes will bring in a total of £600million and London will be the city most affected by the changes. 139 households receive more than £50,000 a year - all in London. 80% of the households that receive more than £20,000 a year are in the capital.

My main concern is that we may see a rise in the price of mid price rental properties because of a shortage of housing in London linked to the relatively large number of people being forced to move to less expensive properties. It is also counter productive to have parts of London with very few poorer people. A social mix is desirable for social and economic reasons. That said, I don't believe that we will see "Social Cleansing". Most people will do their best to stay where they are and , in the short term, they will be successful in doing so. This may well lead to a problem with debt for some of the poorest people in the country.

The word "Cleansing" in this context has been counter productive for those fighting the changes. People know about "ethnic cleansing" and don't see benefit changes in the same way. A more effective way of gaining public support in London would have been to highlight the impact on the housing market at mid range and to point out that clamping down on the number of people receiving £50,000 a year in housing benefit would bring in less than 6 per cent of the amount handed out by RBS in bonuses this year.