This office was part of the New Labour flock of quangoes set up to provide jobs for its clients and cronies and any government serious about promoting academic standards and freedom and real ‘social mobility’ should have scrapped it and all its works and pomps within nanoseconds of taking office.

That this organisation still exists raises grave questions about the real intentions of the ‘Coalition’. That Vince Cable should want to appoint the Vice-Chancellor (sic) of the University of Bedfordshire to this post shouldn’t surprise anyone, given Vince’s heavily left- socialist leanings. That the ‘Prof’ is a known advocate of the sort of courses I used to advise my own students to avoid like the plague and thus not principally interested in serious scholarship is probably his best qualification in Vince’s eyes.

But the Prime Minister should surely be able to overrule his Cabinet member on this issue, even if he is a Liberal Democrat. This is especially so when the relevant House of Commons committee has refused to endorse the appointment, having interviewed the ‘Prof’ at great length. Yet Downing Street says that DC is powerless! Powerless to stop this man trying to impose his failed social engineering experiments on some of the foremost academic institutions in the world.

DC should watch out, lest people begin to believe either that he really IS powerless, or that he actually supports the continuation of Labour’s failed social engineering, as approved by some but not all Liberal Democrats. Neither of these perceptions will help him become leader of a majority government.

Again we have the usual childish blather about ‘Labour cannot win’ and suggesting (a) that Helen Whately is unknown ( after living and campaigning here for 3 years!), but (b) they know her well enough to know for whom she works. The Daily Telegraph dubbed Ed a ‘saint’ for not having a second home (at 16 minutes by fast train from Waterloo I should think not, but there we are!) so they make much of that.

Ed scratches around to find all the things that have happened locally in the past 13 years for which he can claim some credit. He, of course, claims all the credit even if he had rather little to do with them and wasn’t on his own in things he did play a part in – like Surbiton Hospital. He also claims credit for working with Joanna Lumley to get a fair deal for Gurkhas. I hope he had their permission to use their pictures and names for political purposes!

All the above is par for the course, though it’s depressingly familiar and intensely partisan – which readers thinking a ‘hung’ Parliament would be a good thing would do well to bear in mind. The reaction on the doorstep is that people are getting rather fed up with this approach, which insults their intelligence.

What concerns me more, though, is Ed’s predilection for being photographed with serving Police officers, face to camera. When you’re the MP that’s OK because it goes with your public office. But when you’re not (and Ed is right now no more than the Lib Dem parliamentary candidate) then you’re using the images of serving officers for party political purposes and that, surely, compromises the impartiality of the Police. When I stood for Parliament in 1983 and 1987, I was told very clearly that this must not be done unless the permission of the Police has first been obtained – and yet this isn’t the first time Mr. Davey has done it. Perhaps he’s cleared it with the Borough Commander, but he hasn’t done so in the past. He didn’t in 2005 – I know this because I asked!

Also causing concern is a big photo showing Ed with children in lessons at what I take to be an Infants’ School. Again, I was always told that this was taboo unless you had the permission of their parents  to photograph their children (or, better still,  the parents were there with their children)AND subsequently to use their images for political purposes. At the very least the images should be smudged – but they aren’t. I do hope Mr Davey and his agent have cleared all these points.

Recently I was asked along with other councillors to volunteer to have a young person work alongside me for a short time so they could get an idea what councillors actually do. It’s part of their citizenship education, I think. I could hardly refuse, given my background.

However I was apparently unsuitable because of the absence of a recent CRB check. As it happens I had a CRB check about 5 years ago and still have the Certificate to prove it. I have served continuously as a councillor ever since, so the Council knows whether I have done anything criminal during that time.  But it appears that the check was out of date and would have to be renewed – at cost, of course.

These vetting procedures sound all very well in theory but one wonders whether the supposed need to repeat them regularly is a real one or a job creation scheme wrapped up in another revenue raising scam by You Know Who.

Apart from a great meal we were treated to an amusing after dinner speech by Justine Greening MP, just coming to the end of her first term as MP for Putney. It was very appropriate as she and Helen Whately have much in common and we’re all hoping that Helen will join her as one of a growing body of young Conservative women in the House after the Election.

I was particularly heartened to meet new people from Surbiton Hill who have recently joined the Association and one of our candidates in St. Mark’s Ward who helped to organise the very successful Farmers’ Market in Maple Road last Saturday.

It really is great to see the energy and dynamism of new people coming into the party these days. For myself I am more enthusiastic about the quality of the slate of candidates we have ready for next year’s Council election than I have been since Wansdyke in 1976. I can’t wait to see what they’ll do in the Guildhall!

Now there’s an e-petition from Helen Whately and others, which I’m supporting, together with Nick Kilby.

Please see the link in the article posted on the Surbiton Hill Councillors’ ward blog and sign the petition on line. More than one person per household may sign