The Germans think this British politician may be the most dangerous politician in Europe? Really?

A while ago The New Statesman published a thought provoking piece suggesting that Angela Merkel was Europe's most dangerous politician. It's a controversial article that even mentioned Hitler and Merkel in the same piece. You can imagine the reaction in Germany...

Anyway, Spiegel has now published its own list of Europe's 10 most dangerous politicians. Some of the names are as you'd expect (Le Pen), others are debatable (Tsipras)...and then there's the single British name on the list.

Can you guess who it is...

Here he is...

Click here to see what they say about him.

But remember. Be afraid. Be very afraid...

Who's leaving the cabinet then?

I'm having another poll - on who readers of this blog think will leave the cabinet.

Not who you think SHOULD leave - who you actually think WILL leave?

You can tick as many (or as few ) names as you like. The poll then records total votes for the person, and shows what % of people who have voted selected that individual for the chop.

Have fun. It's already interesting how wide the field is - and it's only just gone live.

If you're viewing the blog on a mobile - scroll down to the bottom, click on 'view web version' and you'll see the poll in the top right.

Conference Agenda. 66 Pages Long. I'm still pondering Page 1.

For those who haven't seen it, the agenda for conference has been published as a PDF and very comprehensive it is too.

At least I think so. I'm still wrestling with the cover.

Now, I am all for singularity of thought. One of the first lessons you learn in comms is 'say one thing, simply and clearly and it has more chance of sticking than any one of half a dozen things said at the same time'.

We say one thing. This is good.

But are we saying the right thing?

Our message is : 'Fairer Tax in Tough Times'.

I can see the attractiveness of this sentiment. Raising the threshold on Income Tax is one of the few triumphs of the last budget - indeed it is almost the only thing left standing - and it is unashamedly a Lib Dem owned policy, a rare thing indeed. Plus we are clearly on a course to continue this process, aiming at raising anyone on the minimum wage out of income tax altogether. Excellent

But I do have a few issues with Fairer Tax as our single central thought.

Firstly, it's tax. Yes we had a good tax policy. But taxes are not popular. They are unpopular. Do we want to be known as the party of tax, be they fairer or not? I'm not so sure...

Secondly, as we're in government, we own 'all' tax policy. Or at least, this is what this line suggests. Do we want to own the cut in the higher rate tax? the VAT rate? The so called Granny tax, Caravan tax, Pasty tax? We seem to be saying we are in charge of fair tax policy? Is that really such a totally good idea?

And thirdly - if this government is about one thing - it's not tax. The central plank of our being in government, the reason we come back to over and over again, and why we put up with so much, is because the single most important thing is - not tax, but deficit reduction. And there's a lot more to that than fairer taxes...

So full marks for technique from me - but lower marks for artistic impression I'm afraid...

Why Vince Cable should be in charge of our Creative Industries

My latest from the New Statesman. I though fairly uncontroversial. Comments suggest otherwise...

Having spent two weeks glued to the Olympics, I am as anxious as the next Brit that we don’t lose the impetus and continue the fabulous development of sport in Britain. But the last two weeks have demonstrated another area at which we beat the world hands down – one that will need just as much attention as our sporting endeavours if we are to continue our world beating performance.

The closing ceremony was a paean to Britain's second largest industrial sector -the creative industries. We celebrated music, the performing arts, fashion, architecture, and design, all of which we are world leaders in. Add in film and video - who will ever forget Danny Boyle’s opening ceremony - and TV and radio - the BBC has had praise heaped on it from around the world - and you understand that both ceremonies are a demonstration of why the creative industries will be key to any economic recovery. Indeed, this is recognised at the highest levels of government - Vince Cable made a speech stating as much just a few weeks ago:

We should be proud of how our creative industries have meshed with technology and engineering to produce products that Britain and the rest of the world wants to buy. British designers from Brunel and Burners-Lee to James Dyson and Vivienne Westwood have been admired around the world for generations. They have all contributed, not only to Britain's reputation as an innovative nation, but also to our economic growth.

Yet strangely, the creative industries do not fall under the purview of Dr. Cable. Because they are managed, not by the Department of Business, but…by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport.

And this seems a touch anachronistic. I am sure the minister with direct responsibility for the sector, Ed Vaizey, is doing a fine job. But the decision to put responsibility for an industry worth around 6% of GDP and employing more than two million people in the UK under DCMS control does smack of politicians having it marked down as, well, a touch fluffy.

Well, it's not. It's world leading, profitable, attracting business from the all the fastest developing economies in the world (who recognise our pre eminent skills in this area) and vital to the recovery. Shouldn’t it be treated as such and given a home in the Department of Business, Skills and Innovation? After all, - Business, Skills, Innovation - it seems to tick all those boxes.

More on the outside space in schools debacle. I'm still livid

Following on from my earlier post on the loosening on the rules over provision of open space in State Schools by the DoE, there has been some clarification.

It seems the rules on selling playing fields remain unchanged (good) but rather, the 'loosening' applies to the provision of play areas and the like.

Which I don't think think is really a lot better.

For example, in my children's school, the playing field is part of the playground. We have an area for chickens, a gardening area with a thriving gardening club, a fantastic wildlife garden (opened by David Attenborough no less), and terrific play and climbing areas.

It would be awful if schools were encouraged to minimise these areas in order to sell land for investment. And we must not allow it.

I now hear Labour are to force a vote on this measure in The House (though I see Tom Watson erroneously refers to playing fields). And that this measure is the brainchild of Michael Gove and Lord Hill of Oareford (C). ie. No Lib Dem involvement.

We would do well to support the Labour motion. Children need more areas to play in. Not less.

Isn't this stark staring bonkers?

We're relaxing the rules on provision of space for school sports? Really? After the Olympics we've just had? REALLY?

Apparently so.

How mad is that?

Given a third of our medal winners went to private school (when 7% of our kids are privately educated), there is surely a case to say that we should be doing the absolute opposite?

Lets not start playing 'who sold off the most playing field' games

Could someone just sort this out please?

Sharpish.

Cabinet Reshuffle Rumours. David Laws back to Government but not Cabinet?

Yes, there have been a whole load more rumours that David Cameron is sitting on a beach in Majorca with a sharpened pencil and a large sheet of paper, reshuffling away...

So here is the updated list. Black type means its a rumour I have published previously. Red means its a new addition. Mention of the current cabinet minister's name against a post means I have read somewhere that they are staying put. A blank against a job means I have heard literally no rumours about the incumbent or anyone else taking the job. That now covers just one department - Communities (though I have now heard Eric Pickles also mentioned in other roles).

Lots of changes but a few highlights include:

Consistent tales that David Laws will return to government - but not Cabinet. Reading this multiple times...

A promotion for Chris Grayling. His name comes up a lot, notably as Tory Party Chairman or at Justice

Sir George Young is consistently mentioned as on the way out - although of course Leader of the House is currently not a cabinet post (just attends cabinet).

Two ministries may merge. Neither of them is DCMS. Could there be a merger of Energy with Environment? And with it, a promotion for Ed Davey (or at least twice as much work...)

Anyway, here's the current list.

Prime Minister

David Cameron

Deputy PM

Nick Clegg

Chancellor of the Exchequer

George Osborne

Vince Cable

William Hague

John Redwood

Philip Hammond

Michael Gove

Theresa May

Foreign Secretary

William Hague

George Osborne

Michael Gove

Home Secretary

Theresa May

Michael Gove

Chris Grayling

Education

Michael Gove

Liz Truss

Health

Andrew Lansley

Ken Clarke

Jeremy Hunt

David Laws

Chief Secretary

Danny Alexander

David Laws

Justice

Nick Herbert

Theresa May

Theresa Villiers

Chris Grayling

Scottish Secretary

Jo Swinson

Alastair Carmichael

Welsh Secretary

Cheryl Gillan

David Jones

Maria Miller

Northern Ireland

David Liddington

Business

Andrew Mitchell

David Laws

Danny Alexander

Margot James

Environment

Baroness Warsi

Maria Miller

Caroline Spelman

Ed Davey (if the department merges with Energy)

Energy

Ed Davey

House of Lords

Lord Howard

Minister without Portfolio (Chair of Tory Party)

Grant Shapps

Michael Fallon

Michael Gove

Jeremy Hunt

Andrew Mitchell

Chris Grayling

Eric Pickles

Defence

Philip Hammond

Work & Pensions

Iain Duncan Smith

Communities

Transport

Andrew Mitchell

Theresa Villiers

Chris Grayling

International Development

Baroness Warsi

DCMS

Jeremy Hunt

Justine Greening

Ed Vaizey

Hugh Robertson

And while we’re at it – more speculation. People I have seen tipped to be leave (there’s a major surprise in there but I have read it so feel I must be comprehensive) or be promoted to the cabinet.

Tipped to leave

Ken Clarke

Caroline Spelman

Jeremy Hunt

Baroness Warsi

Andrew Lansley

Vince Cable (that’s the surprise)(now reading this regularly)(though I have also read may still attend Cabinet as leader of the House)

Cheryl Gillan

Justine Greening (or at least a sideways move)

Owen Paterson (still attending cabinet as Leader of the House)

Michael Moore

Ed Davey

Tipped to be Promoted

Grant Shapps

Maria Miller

Chris Grayling

David Laws

Jo Swinson

Alistair Carmichael

Greg Clark

Lynn Featherstone

Andrea Leadsom

Margot James

Anna Soubry

Claire Perry

Nicky Morgan

Harriet Baldwin

Theresa Villiers

Mark Harper

Nick Herbert

Ed Vaizey

Lord Howard

Michael Fallon

David Jones

Liz Truss

John Redwood

David Liddington

Hugh Robertson