According to the Times online website Liberal Democrat MP for Northavon, Steve Webb, is calling on the energy regulator to have an urgent re-think about whether it was tough enough in its verdict on npower last week.

Ofgem ruled that the energy company had not properly informed its gas customers about the changes to its tariffs in 2007, leading to thousands of them being overcharged.

However Ofgem’s ruling relates only to 200,000 of npower’s two million gas customers and the compensation it is ordering the company to pay works out at only £6 per household.

Many of npower’s customers are outraged at what they see as the derisory level of compensation being proposed. They are also angry that there is no easy way for ordinary consumers to challenge Ofgem’s ruling.

After trying to take their case to both Ofgem and the Office of Fair Trading they were told that neither body will take complaints from individuals.

Steve Webb the former Liberal Democrat Shadow Energy and Climate Change Secretary and now Shadow Works and Pensions and Secretary, said he will be calling on Ofgem to meet him at Westminster and re-consider its verdict.

Steve Webb, said: “I am disappointed at the meagre level of compensation being offered to npower customers who have been overcharged. My concern is that Ofgem’s findings haven’t done justice to the losses that people have suffered through npower’s actions. “I will be asking for an urgent meeting at

Westminster to go through the details of their findings. I shall be asking some searching questions about the way they have carried out their investigation into complaints about npower’s overcharging.”

According to the Mail online Lord Mandy is once again under the political spotlight; it is claimed that he is at the centre of a ‘favours for friends’ row over the controversial proposals to expand Heathrow.

Details emerged of the extraordinary access the Business Secretary’s close acquaintance Roland Rudd - who represents airport operator BAA - had to the top tiers of Government.

Mr Rudd, the City’s most powerful PR, or his company Finsbury Ltd met with ministers at least five times in ten days in the run-up to Labour’s unpopular decision to go ahead with plans for a third runway, and once a few months earlier.

It provoked angry allegations that Lord Mandelson used his political influence to help his friend persuade ministers to push through the £9billion project.

Mr Rudd, who is rumoured to be worth £50million, has had a long friendship with Lord Mandelson, who is godfather to his son.

Mandelson as campaigned strongly in favour of the expansion of Heathrow, and at one Cabinet meeting, he ‘banged his head’ on a table in frustration at anti-runway ministers.

The Daily Mail have revealed the extraordinary access Mr Rudd and his firm, which lists BAA as one of its biggest corporate clients, was given to people at the levers of power.

Mr Rudd was also involved in last summer’s ‘Yachtgate’ affair involving Lord Mandelson.

The Trade Secretary was in Corfu, staying on the yacht of Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska – who is a client of Finsbury through Basic Elements, the holding group for his investments.

Another guest was Shadow Chancellor George Osborne, who was later suspected of leaking unfavourable remarks made by Lord Mandelson about the Prime Minister.

That upset a third guest, millionaire business heir Nat Rothschild – who is also represented by Mr Rudd and who, on the advice of Mr Rudd, launched a damaging media offensive against Mr Osborne.

  The intriguing details of the ministerial access granted to Mr Rudd were uncovered by Liberal Democrat Shadow Transport Secretary, Norman Baker from Parliamentary questions.

Norman Bakersaid: “These revelations provide, at the very least, evidence that Peter Mandelson has been doing favours for friends. Again, his position as a Cabinet minister is compromised by his shadowy personal contacts.

“It is astonishing that Roland Rudd, who has enjoyed lavish hospitality with Oleg Deripaska at the same time as Peter Mandelson, was granted so many meetings with ministers over such a short period of time
“We know Mr Rudd’s firm represents BAA, so now we need to know how he came to be granted such favourable access at the time Lord Mandelson was lobbying so hard in the Cabinet for the third runway.

“It is not surprising that people jump to the conclusion that there is an old pals act going on here to try to influence Government policy. We need an investigation to be carried out to see if there have been breaches of the ministerial code. It is in the public interest.”

New figures from the Department for Children, Schools and Families show that the number of pupils in our area who miss school is falling, to the same level as the national average.

The absence figures are decreasing, asd are the number of pupils who are classed as persistent absentees  ( defined as those who miss more than 30 days of school each year).

In 2007 and 2008, 438 of North East Lincolnshire’s 7,960 secondary school pupils (5.7 %) were classed as persistent absentees, and these children are responsible for more than a third of all school absences, compared to the national average of 5.6 %.

The previous year, 7.6% of pupils were defined as persistent absentees, with 8.3 % of pupils falling into the category between 2005 and 2006.

The overall rate of absence from secondary schools, which measures the number of half days missed, fell from 8.68 % the previous yearto 7.46% between 2007 - 2008.  The nationalaverage is 7.36 %.

Liberal Democrats have a longstanding and well deserved reputation as real champions of education. 

The Further and Higher Education paper which we will be debating at Spring Conference in Harrogate in a couple of weeks time gives us an opportunity to enhance this reputation and adopt new, radical and distinctive policies for the next election.

As an MP for a constituency with two universities and the country’s second largest FE college I appreciate first hand the importance of us making a clear statement of support for those in Further and Higher education.

It is no secret that many of our held and target seats are in similar areas and I am confident that the package that the working group is proposing will give us a real electoral advantage.

Students in Further Education (FE) and Higher Education (HE) have been miserably failed by this government. Full-time undergraduates are leaving university saddled with enormous debts and those who might want to study part-time are being put off by the prospect of having to pay their fees up front. The Conservatives are promising only more of the same. We will show that there is an alternative.

The paper being debated at conference renews our commitment to scrapping tuition fees for full time students.
With new graduates being saddled with at least £9k worth of debt from fees alone and facing a challenging job market in the current climate our fees policy has never been more needed.

Our policy will ensure that nobody is put off going to university because of a fear incurring debts from fees. But our proposal does not just stop there.

It also rightly goes further than we have done previously; we are proposing to abolish fees for those part-time undergraduates and adults taking their first level three course.

This is an important step forward in our policies, demonstrating our support for those learning in less traditional ways. Many people are not able to study full-time, or are studying in FE rather than HE, but this should not mean that they should be financially penalised.

In addition to abolishing fees for those studying part-time and those taking FE courses we will extend maintenance grants to adult FE students on the same basis as HE students. It simply makes no sense for the state to support undergraduates but not those adults wanting to achieve better qualifications in further education.

As a party, we have consistently argued that those who had a poor experience of education when they were younger, deserve a second chance and it is only right that we offer support equally in this area.

We will also look closely at how existing funds are allocated to help get people back into work.

More and more people are losing their jobs and struggling to access the training they need to start new careers. People finding themselves out of work need to be helped so that they can find suitable training courses without worrying about the costs. 

To do this we will re-focus the money committed to the employer led train to gain programme on individual adult learners so that they can access the training they need.

Closely connected to this is the issue of adult apprentices.

Employers get a raw deal, having to pay the college based training costs of their apprentices and hence there is little incentive to take on adult apprentices – particularly when businesses are already struggling to make money. Instead businesses should be encouraged to take on adults who are keen to re-skill in a workplace.

We will expand the number of adult apprentices and fully fund them, easing the burden on employers. Our party has a long and proud tradition of supporting high quality education for all, from first days at school to time at university and college.

This paper sits firmly in that tradition alongside the schools and colleges paper which will also be debated in Harrogate. With these policies we will continue to be the party of education.

Stephen Williams is Shadow Secretary for Innovation, Universities and Skills; and MP for Bristol West

Mr Cable said that the focus on Sir Fred Goodwin’s pension has been a “smokescreen” to conceal the “much bigger issue” of the asset protection scheme.

“What the government could do is to say to Sir Goodwin if your company had gone bankrupt like and other company you would have been given a compassionate sum from the pension protection scheme.

“I don’t think anybody has any sympathy for this guy at all, it’s not that he was well paid, it’s that this was someone who led a bank into utter disaster. He should be apologetic and contrite, not hedging and trying to get more from the tax payer. He obviously has got no sense of shame.”

He added: “What I am worried is that this issue is distracting attention from the sums of money that are being used in the latest stage of the bailout.

“I don’t want to lose track of the main point here that hundreds of billions are now being pledged to this bank RBS, this gives them an opportunity to dump their very worst assets on the tax payer.

“The government did not assume effective control, didn’t put directors in, trying to operate at arms length and all these problems are now coming out.”

Clear out your potting sheds and donate your surplus gardening equipment and tools.

That is the request from the council’s food for fitness team, which is appealing to residents to give their surplus plant pots, compost and garden tools to schools, to encourage children to learn about growing their own fruit and vegetables.

Donated equipment can be dropped off at Room 9, Nunsthorpe Resource Centre, or telephone (01472) 502625 for collection.

Arrangements to collect equipment can also be made by emailing sarah.harvey@nelctp.nhs.uk or pamela.moore@nelctp.nhs.uk

Sarah Harvey, from the specialist health promotion service food for fitness team, said: “We go into schools promoting healthy eating with cookery courses, assemblies, displays, tasting, breakfast clubs, tuck shops and growing clubs.

“We are also hoping parents, grandparents, guardians who have some spare time and interest in gardening may like to become volunteers to work with children in schools to pass on skills and knowledge in the growing clubs or if they enjoy cooking to assist teachers to deliver cookery courses in schools.

“It is such a pleasure to work with the pupils growing and cooking with the produce they have looked after. The cookery courses are very enjoyable for all concerned as we sit down at the end of the session around a set table and taste and discuss what the group have made that day.

“This is a very rewarding part of our work and we hope with encouragement children will be growing, cooking and eating healthier for a longer, healthier lifestyle.”

All 43 police forces in England and Wales have recently committed to meet the promises contained in the national policing pledge.

The policing pledge (new window) is a new and clear deal on what people can expect from their local force.

It gives residents an unprecedented say over how their communities are policed. It also allows them to hold the police to account if they don’t fulfil their promises.

The public can also be confident that their local police are working to a national standard of service that is the same throughout the country, while still focusing on local priorities.

Radical reforms underway

The pledge was just one part of a package of radical reforms set out in the policing green paper (new window) earlier this year. 

Since then, police forces have worked hard to implement the changes required by that paper, and the full-scale commitment to the pledge by all forces is a clear indication of the fundamental change now underway. 

Making you more confident in your police

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said that ‘for the first time’ people have been given a set minimum standard of service police must provide. The changes, she said, are designed ‘to increase your confidence’ in the police.

She added, ‘The public are our strongest weapon in tackling crime, and the policing pledge is a clear deal on what you can expect from the police.

Ken Jones of the Association of Chief Police Officers said, ‘The national policing pledge for the first time sets out a clear framework within which customised local pledges can be developed. The tide of centrally driven targets and mandated activity is being turned back.’

The Home Office is intending to retain DNA profiles of more than 800,000 innocent people, despite a ruling by the European court criticising their retention, recent reports suggest.

Last December the court criticised the “blanket and indiscriminate nature” of the current UK DNA database.

The database includes information on people who have never been charged with an offence.

In January the home secretary Jacqui Smith said that she would publish a white paper setting out a “more proportionate, fair and common-sense approach”.

The Guardian newspaper quotes Home Office sources claiming that the government had no plans to destroy the controversial samples and will preserve the original samples used to create the database.

The DNA database now includes five million entries, of which more than a million are children and over 850,000 people who have not been found guilty of any crime.

It is believed the Home Office and police are looking for ways to demonstrate better just how useful DNA profiles are in solving crime.

Statistics released yesterday in a parliamentary answer to the Liberal Democrats show that 1.1 million children now have their DNA stored. 

Commenting on the figures, Lib Dem home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said: “We already know that guilt and innocence are of no concern to ministers, but clearly neither is the negative effect the database has on children.

“It is unacceptable to keep the DNA of children on record in perpetuity for the most minor of offences. Unless convicted of a sexual or violent offence, under-16s should not have their DNA stored on the database.”

Liberal Democrat Justice spokesman Jenny Willott said:

“There is something horribly Big Brotherish about a society that is adding over 5,000 kids a month to a DNA database when they’re not even old enough to get a National Insurance Number.

“These shocking figures demonstrate just how many children are being dragged into the criminal justice system by the Government.”

According to new research 80% of people agree with the use of directed surveillance powers in their local area.

According to a PSB study which was commissioned by the New Local Government Network, the public strongly support local council’s use of surveillance techniques such as covert video recording to tackle anti-social behaviour, drug-dealing and theft, but the survey found that the public are less favourable towards councils using the technology to check that residents are putting their bin out on time or living in the correct school catchment area.

64% of those questioned said that they think that it is appropriate for councils to use directed surveillance to tackle drug dealing, whilst 62% thought it was appropriate for organised crime; 59% for theft and 50% for benefit fraud.

Only 17% of those questioned thought it was suitable for councils to use the powers to check residents weren’t breaking school catchment rules and only 14% considered that it should be used to check whether people were putting their rubbish out on the wrong day.

The survey also found strong support for local police to have a greater say in how councils use the powers, with 61% of respondents saying that assigning a local police officer to monitor surveillance operations by a local council would make them more favourable towards their council’s use of surveillance powers in general.

The use of surveillance powers, which is set out in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, is currently under review and consultation by the Home Office.

A number of councils have been accused of using the powers disproportionately, for example monitoring the rubbish of household bins to examine how much non-recycled waste was being thrown away, or employing staff to monitor local paperboys to ensure that they are employed with the right permits.

In a report accompanying the polling, NLGN argues that councils should be allowed to use powers to tackle offences that are of high priority to local people, but that it should be more transparent about where and why it using any monitoring.

Authors, Nick Hope and James Hulme argue:

“It would be a mistake if all monitoring and surveillance efforts by local authorities were treated as equally ‘sinister’, when many efforts help fight local criminality and have strong public support.

New technology can help to produce more effective law enforcement; in the same manner that DNA technology has helped to solve more crimes, so a sophisticated use of monitoring powers in limited circumstances can reduce offences and lawlessness.

“However, it is clear that a new contract of understanding is required between local authorities and their residents to use the powers proportionately and only on issues that have a high priority in the local area.

Our research also shows that citizens would like to see greater input from local police and as such we recommend appointing a senior local police officer to work with the council to decide where action is justified.‘

We also encourage councils to hold regular, open public meetings with residents and police to discuss why they use certain surveillance techniques and the impact they are having on combating crime and anti-social behaviour.”  

Sir Fred Goodwin, the former chief executive of Royal Bank of Scotland claimed last night that Lord Myners, who is a close ally of Gordon Brown (and Minister for the City), personally agreed an £8m increase in the pension pot of Sir Fred Goodwin when he stood down last October.

The banker, who is determined not to give up any of the money, wrote to Lord Myners yesterday complaining about government attacks on the £693,000 annual pension he is receiving from RBS, saying that the Financial Services Secretary to the Treasury personally approved the deal during talks with the bank.

Last night, in a reply to Sir Fred’s letter, Lord Myners disputed the banker’s version of events and said the decision not to volunteer a cut in his pension was “unfortunate and unacceptable”.

The payment of Sir Fred’s pension, which is worth more than £13,300 a week, has required RBS to double the cost of funding his retirement in its accounts. Stephen Hester, the new RBS chief executive, said the bank now estimated the cost of Sir Fred’s pension at £16.6m, almost twice the £8.37m listed in its most recent annual report.

What really annoys me is that we are now paying for this pension week in and week out. It is grossly unfair that he will probably be paid more in one single week than the many people who live in the Yarborough Ward receive in a full year.

This is totally unacceptable. We need action from this government rather than meaningless words

Liberal Democrat Shadow Chancellor, Vince Cable said the Government should halt Sir Fred’s pension payments and challenge him to sue.

“The man who brought the bank to grief at enormous cost to taxpayer while many employees lost their jobs has just walked away with this personal fortune. If he has any sense of decency he will surrender it,” he said.