Here’s how the Telegraph reports it:

Danny Alexander, a Liberal Democrat Cabinet minister, says the better-off are receiving overly-generous tax relief when they invest money for their retirement. Mr Alexander’s proposals would see tax relief halve from 40 per cent to 20 per cent. He also wants workers on the minimum wage, who earn up to £12,500 a year, to pay no income tax at all. Mr Alexander claims that removing the higher-rate tax relief would save the Exchequer more than £7 billion and make the system fairer. Even restricted to those earning more than £100,000 the Treasury could save £3.6 billion.

“If you look at the amount of money that we spend on pensions tax relief, which is very significant, the majority of that money goes to paying tax relief at the higher rate,” Mr Alexander told The Daily Telegraph. His remarks may open up a new dispute between the Tories and Lib Dems over tax. They are already at odds over Lib Dem calls to keep the 50p top rate of tax and introduce a “mansion tax” on high-value homes. George Osborne, the Chancellor, is expected to strongly resist any calls to scrap higher-rate tax relief. …

Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, wants to move “further and faster” with tax cuts for lower-paid workers — a move that would be funded by higher taxes on the better-off, but which had not been accepted by Conservatives.

At the Liberal Democrat spring conference next month, the party’s members are expected to pass a motion calling for cuts in tax relief for higher-rate savers, with the Chief Secretary likely to back it. “I’m willing to study that motion but I dare say I will [support it],” he says. “I wrote an election manifesto at the last election which proposed going considerably further for precisely the reasons of fairness that I’ve set out. As a Coalition government, we’ve made some decisions in this area already, which go in the right direction. When it comes to people on low and middle income, I am a tax-cutter by instinct.”

For example, restricting the tax relief on pension contributions to 20% (the standard rate for most people) rather than the current 40% for those earning over £100,000 would raise over £3.5 billion more each year. Last year, in a clear sign of the way in which senior Liberal Democrats are thinking, David Laws asked a series of Parliamentary questions fleshing out the details of what would be raised by different moves.

So it is no surprise that Danny Alexander has returned to the theme in the Daily Telegraph:

Danny Alexander, a Liberal Democrat Cabinet minister, says the better-off are receiving overly-generous tax relief when they invest money for their retirement.

Mr Alexander’s proposals would see tax relief halve from 40 per cent to 20 per cent. He also wants workers on the minimum wage, who earn up to £12,500 a year, to pay no income tax at all.

Mr Alexander claims that removing the higher-rate tax relief would save the Exchequer more than £7 billion and make the system fairer. Even restricted to those earning more than £100,000 the Treasury could save £3.6 billion.

“If you look at the amount of money that we spend on pensions tax relief, which is very significant, the majority of that money goes to paying tax relief at the higher rate,” Mr Alexander told The Daily Telegraph.

His remarks may open up a new dispute between the Tories and Lib Dems over tax. They are already at odds over Lib Dem calls to keep the 50p top rate of tax and introduce a “mansion tax” on high-value homes. George Osborne, the Chancellor, is expected to strongly resist any calls to scrap higher-rate tax relief.

Arguing for cutting pension tax breaks for the richest in order to fund income tax cuts for millions is both sensible economics and smart politics. Sensible economics – because the net effect does not undermine the struggle to cut the deficit and in fact is likely to cause an economic boost with the extra spending caused by the income tax cut greater than the reduction in spending caused by the tax rise. Sensible politics – because once again it puts the Liberal Democrats on the side of tax cuts for the millions whilst the Tories are on the side of the very richest.

* Mark Pack is Co-Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and writes a monthly newsletter about the Liberal Democrats.

According Tim’s editorial this morning, following on from a Times article earlier in the week (£), Conservative Cabinet Ministers are sufficiently concerned over how the reforms were being handled to press for the contentious components to be dropped and for only those elements that retain cross-party agreement to be enacted.

The Independent and the Guardian are also reporting disquiet over the Bill at the highest level in the Tory party – the latter also reports that Lib Dems are seeking to secure debate over whether the Bill should be scrapped at Spring conference.

The central argument is that the complicated reforms currently before the House of Lords bear little or no relevance on the financial and demographic challenges that the NHS will face in coming years, and that many of the changes needed to meet those challenges can be put in place regardless of the Bill. Many Liberal Democrats with close knowledge of the NHS have long held this position, seeking to have the Bill scrapped unless significant amendments were secured. It now appears that senior Tories agree that only those elements of the Bill that all parties can agree on should be passed into law, the rest being ditched.

Officially the government remains committed to passing the Bill as it stands, substantial amendments from the House of Lords notwithstanding. Under the surface there are clearly very deep concerns over the political ramifications and those for the health service itself.

The pressure on the Health Secretary and Prime Minister to rethink their position is now undeniable – I would add just this much, that with so many changes to services already underway, they should withdraw the bulk of the Bill and allow the NHS to focus on delivering a first class service at a time of severe budgetary constraint as set out in the Coalition Agreement. There’s little doubt this would be a better outcome than pressing ahead with legislation that now virtually nobody thinks is needed.

The first Liberal Democrat group openly opposed to the coalition is to be launched at the party’s spring conference in Gateshead next month with a warning that the coalition has been a political disaster for the party, as well as a denial of its radical roots.

Launching a website on Wednesday, the group Liberal Left said it hoped to become a rallying point for members opposed to the coalition and those who see the party as a centre-left organisation seeking common cause with Labour, Greens and others on the centre left.

One of its founders, Richard Grayson, conceded that the vast majority of the party was committed to the coalition and denied the group would be working to put a motion to conference calling for the Liberal Democrats to withdraw from its partnership with the Conservatives. He said the focus was more on developing policies on the centre left, and creating a space for a coalition with Labour if necessary after a general election.

* Nick Thornsby is Thursday Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs here.

One interesting answer by the Deputy Prime Minister which caught my attention was on the topic of individual voter registration. Asked by Liberal Democrat peer Lord (Chris) Rennard whether there would be changes to the government approach as set out in the earlier White Paper when we see legislation on the issue soon, Clegg had the following to say:

The short answer is ‘yes’….We set out our proposals [and] a large number of comments, and indeed very heartfelt concerns, have been raised about what it actually would mean for the register in the future….We will be producing very shortly…our response to the Commons Political and Constitutional Reform Committee’s report on this, which will include a lot of our new ideas, responding not to all of the concerns – and some of the concerns we think are misplaced or are exaggerated – but it’s certainly prompted us to look very, very long and hard at a number of issues.

…[w]hat we are trying to do here is firstly bear down on fraud – that’s the central motivation of all of this – but to do so in a way which doesn’t needlessly or carelessly disenfranchise people.

The whole evidence session is available to watch until Sunday night on the BBC iPlayer.

* Nick Thornsby is Thursday Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs here.

1. Polly Toynbee sends tweet encouraging all and sundry to take part in an open-access online poll being run by the BMJ.

2. The Guardian reports result of said BMJ poll.

Then only thing missing, alas, is:

3. The Guardian then realises that reporting a voodoo poll which its own staff have been encouraging people to take part on is low grade self-referential journalism and pulls poll report.

Hat tip: Anthony Wells

* Mark Pack is Co-Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and writes a monthly newsletter about the Liberal Democrats.

And he doesn’t care what anyone thinks, either, as he said to Sky News yesterday.

Thing is, as we all watch the uncomfortably inappropriate close ups, his dad dancing and numerous other cringeworthy snippets, we are compelled to listen to what is actually quite a good song by the Good Suns. A very clever marketing ploy, I think.

Enjoy, or whatever. Just don’t charge the Voice for any post traumatic stress counselling you might need.

* Caron Lindsay is Wednesday editor at Lib Dem Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings

The case has now finally worked its way through the system and he has been banned from holding public office:

A Glasgow Labour councillor has been banned from holding office over alleged comments he made about a case involving the alleged rape of a nine year old.

William O’Rourke, who represented the Greater Pollok ward, was suspended from the party last March after he allegedly suggested that the young victim may have been a willing participant and that the girl “wanted it to happen”.

O’Rourke is alleged to have made the comments at a personnel appeals committee hearing into the case after the care worker who was dismissed for allegedly having sex with the child, O’Rourke is said to have asked if the girl “wanted it to happen” because no force was used and that she was not a “typical innocent nine year old”.

He also made a comment about the child’s mother being a prostitute and went on what the Police Officer described as a ‘rant’ about promiscuous children and the need to lower the age of sexual consent.

Glasgow Labour were accused of closing ranks in order to protect O’Rourke after it emerged Baillies Jim Scanlan and Jim Todd were also present at the hearing, but had said nothing.

O’Rourke’s comments were only made public after a Strathclyde Police Officer who was a witness at the hearing reported concerns and an official complaint was lodged with the Standards Commission for Scotland, which regulates the behaviour of politicians.

UPDATE: Apologies, the story I quoted from above is a little misleading as in fact the Public Standards Commissioner concluded that O’Rourke had not broken the code of conduct. What happened was that the Labour Party nonetheless decided to ban him from standing as a Labour candidate for public office in future.

* Mark Pack is Co-Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and writes a monthly newsletter about the Liberal Democrats.

Every time you make a statement about the election, there are caveats and “but ifs” which follow.

It’s tempting to say that Obama is sunk because of the US economy. However, there are strong signs now of a solid recovery. Last week’s job news was very positive and polls are showing a thawing of anti-Obama feeling.

You could also say that Obama is hated by some. Indeed, the vitriol aimed at Obama by the right-wing is extraordinary. But generally, Obama does well in polls for likeability.

Sometimes, Democrat Presidents struggle to shrug off the image of being soft on foreign matters. I’m thinking particularly of Jimmy Carter, who was crippled (politically) by the Iran hostages affair. However, whether you believe he’s right or wrong, Obama has been stunningly effective in foreign affairs from a US point of view. Bin Laden is dead, al-Quaeda is neutered, the Iran war has “ended”, the Afghanistani war will probably be within sight of an end by November, and no new full-scale wars have started.

You could say that Obama has been a lame duck President because he is forever in a deadlock with Republicans on the Hill. But, legislatively, he has been one of the most successful Presidents in living history, with Healthcare reform and a number of other key legislative packages in place.

While Mitt Romney has struggled to get Republican primary support, he will seem like a more natural, main-stream candidate for the general election. He’s a great fund-raiser and has an extraordinary loyal and wide base of campaign workers.

Sadly, there is one significant factor which may make this US Presidential Election dirtier and more dominated by money than any other recent Presidential race.

That factor is Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 2010. The Supreme Court ruling in that case made it legal for corporations and unions to spend from their general treasuries to finance independent expenditures in campaigns through Political Action Committees, or PACs or SuperPACs. This means that the 2012 US Presidential campaign will be absolutely awash with millions of dollars’ worth of TV adverts attacking each side.

It’s not going to be edifying.

* Paul Walter is Monday Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Liberal Burblings

So what to make of his initial description of his role in charge at the Department of Environment and Climate Change? He said,

Greening the economy isn’t just good for the planet – it’s good for the wallets, purses and pockets.

In choosing to present issues in that way, he’s very much following in the footsteps of Chris Huhne. It is not so much a deep green message that is against economic growth, as a lighter shade of green, saying environmental action is good for economic growth.

It’s a broad tent approach – pitching green measures not just at those deeply concerned about the environment but also at those who are much more concerned about other issues – such as jobs and income.

That’s a wise approach, because long-term policies with long-term objectives require a broad consensus not only amongst politicians but also amongst the public. That requires pitching to the wider audience in just the way he is doing.

* Mark Pack is Co-Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and writes a monthly newsletter about the Liberal Democrats.

Seven hospital trusts struggling with crippling private finance initiative debts are to receive £1.5bn in emergency funding from the government to help them avoid cutting patient services to pay their bills.

The Department of Health is making the £1.5bn available – in grants, not loans – to the seven hospital trusts in England with some of the heaviest PFI debts through a “stability” fund. Trusts will be able to use the money to meet PFI repayments, rather than their usual budgets, as long as they meet four conditions set out by the department.

The move will help trusts such as South London Healthcare NHS trust, which is facing a PFI repayment in 2012-13 of £66.8m under the terms of a deal agreed in July 1998, in the early days of Tony Blair’s government. They will be able to access the £1.5bn over the next 25 years, until the PFI contracts end.

Andrew Lansley, the health secretary, said he had been forced to use taxpayers’ money because certain NHS organisations could no longer afford to honour PFI deals that had been “badly negotiated” by Labour ministers.

You can read the full story here.

* Newshound sets the agenda, as you would expect from a Red Setter

Standing, well wrapped up, in snowy Cumbria, Tim is in typically robust form. He pays tribute to Chris Huhne and says he “wants and expects” him to be back in government soon. He says that the LibDems are concentrating on being “collegiate not destructive” in coalition by ‘behaving like grown-ups’. He pays warm tribute to Ed Davey’s environmentalist credentials and covers a wide range of policy issues.

* Paul Walter is Monday Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Liberal Burblings

Manchester Withington’s John Leech submitted the Early Day Motion and said people should sign an online petition protesting against Turing’s conviction. The gay computer pioneer was convicted for gross indecency in 1952, when homosexual acts were illegal in the UK. Mr Leech said his persecution “by the state for being gay is a scandal that shouldn’t be allowed to stand”. Alan Turing worked as part of the team which cracked the Enigma code at Bletchley Park in World War II and directed the computing laboratory at the University of Manchester, where he helped to form the basis for the field of artificial intelligence.

You can sign the e-petition here;
You can see the Early Day Motion here.

Anti-gambling campaigners have blasted Robbie Williams for starting a poker site. The Robbie Williams Poker community, to be launched online this year, says the main focus is “fun” but some of the games cost money. Lib Dem MP Tessa Munt said the Take That singer, 37, should know all about addiction as he was once dependent on prescription drugs. She added: “I’m outraged by this. It directly targets his fans, including children. The money he makes should go to addiction charities.”

Health researcher Rebecca Taylor, who grew up in the town, has been installed as Euro MP for Yorkshire and the Humber. … Her father Dr Michael Taylor, who still lives in Owlers Walk, Todmorden, is a former Todmorden and Calderdale councillor and her mother Elisabeth Wilson is an ex-county councillor and her grandparents are also committed Liberals. She said: “It is a great privilege and honour to serve the people of Yorkshire and the Humber in Europe as a Liberal Democrat MEP. It is why I stood for selection in 2007 and my commitment to the region has not changed.”

Sir Bob was unrepentant. He said: “If people write seeking my views, I give my views. If he wants to think it’s insulting, that’s his point of view.”

Former Liverpool council leader Warren Bradley was today facing a perjury charge after a police inquiry into electoral fraud allegations. … At the time Cllr Bradley was leader of the Lib Dem group but resigned the day the allegations were made public. He was then suspended from the Lib Dems and he is currently facing being banned from the party. At the time he said: “I totally deny this allegation and am seeking legal advice to that end.”

Cornwall Council said 17 councillors paid late but the authority would not comment on individual cases, arguing it was a personal matter. The Government’s Information Commissioner is considering an appeal against the refusal to identify the members.

* Stephen Tall is Co-Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice, and also writes at his own site, The Collected Stephen Tall.

As The Observer reports:

Fresh revelations have raised a series of questions about the links between the former Conservative deputy chairman Lord Ashcroft and a company responsible for luxury projects across a string of islands…

Who controlled Johnston International, which won building contracts across the Caribbean worth tens of millions of pounds, has triggered awkward questions for the Tories, and above all for their major donor, Lord Ashcroft.

The Tory peer, who has given the party more than £10m, is spending a small fortune on lawyers and spin doctors to deal with inquiries about his relationship with Johnston, whose interests before it collapsed with debts of $30m stretched across Belize, the Turks and Caicos Islands, Barbados, and Trinidad and Tobago.

The company, and its relationship with politicians in the Turks and Caicos Islands, a British overseas territory, plays a central role in a libel action being brought by Ashcroft against the Independent newspaper.

A BBC Panorama investigation, broadcast last Monday, suggested that the Tories’ former deputy chairman had misled the stock market about his links to the firm.

And now an investigation by a court-appointed liquidator into the relationship between Johnston’s parent company, a plethora of interlinked companies and Ashcroft’s British Caribbean Bank (BCB), is raising as many questions as it answers.

You can read about those questions in the full article.

* Mark Pack is Co-Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and writes a monthly newsletter about the Liberal Democrats.

The Lib Dem Voice survey results I mention are covered in the piece Which four Liberal Democrat ministers have most improved their standings in 2011? and for more on why I rate Ed Davey’s record see Community Buying: a welcome move from Ed Davey (an approach very relevant to his new post) and Ed Davey: someone getting the messaging right.

Helped by having known for a long time that Friday’s events might occur, Nick Clegg and the media team handled events very calmly and efficiently in the circumstances I thought, with the reshuffle and surrounding media coverage looked after well.

The reshuffle also throws some light on how far Nick Clegg is willing to take his commitment to greater diversity in Liberal Democrat ranks. Both the new entrants to government are women (Jo Swinson and Jenny Willott), but once again the Liberal Democrat Cabinet ranks are solidly male. How much you view that as glass part full or glass mostly empty depends mostly on your expectations I suspect.

It is likely that in addition to joining the government, Jo Swinson will take over as chair of the Federal Policy Committee – the first time a woman has chaired the body. This is a very influential role in the party, particularly when it comes to general election manifestos, and given that the majority of the electorate is female it is perhaps about time that the party had a talented woman in the post. Jo has also got a very good track record at turning potentially dry, abstract policy into effective campaigns which generate media coverage. Assuming she does take up the post, her influence on the policy process will be fascinating to watch – and very positive.

* Mark Pack is Co-Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and writes a monthly newsletter about the Liberal Democrats.

In the run-up to the general election, you may remember, the tabloids were screaming, saying that if there was a hung Parliament locusts would descend from the sky and the sun would be blotted out, you know… so we needed for those first few months to show the most important thing of all, which is this is a government that works, and actually works rather well.

Of course, after that phase you then get [that] we’re different parties, we do have different instincts, we do have different values. I just think we are quite relaxed in government that we have our differences – sometimes they are played out in private, sometimes they are played out in public.

Nick goes on to discuss what he sees as significant achievements for the party in government, and, in a telling line, describes the difficulty Lib Dem peers face in supporting legislation they wouldn’t under different circumstances:

Let’s be blunt: I am asking, day in, day out, Liberal Democrat peers to vote on things that they wouldn’t do in a month of Sundays if it was a Liberal Democrat government.

The interview covers such ground as reform of the upper house, Nick’s stance on the Middle East and changes to the tax system.

You can read the whole interview here.

Completing the changes, Jenny Willott becomes an Assisstant Government Whip, and Jo Swinson replaces Norman Lamb as Nick Clegg’s PPS.

Congratulations to those Lib Dem MPs taking up new positions in government.

• Electoral timetable for May’s elections: I’ve recently updated my May 2012 election timetable post with extra details
• Liberal Democrat peers on Twitter: having commented adversely in the past on the lack of communications from many of them, I’ve been hunting out how many are using Twitter. You can find them all in this Twitter list (which is a little more comprehensive than the other lists I’ve come across). Let me know if you spot anyone I’ve missed.
• Liberal Democrat achievements: over on Facebook, I’ve started up a daily posting of a Liberal Democrat achievement in government.

* Mark Pack is Co-Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and writes a monthly newsletter about the Liberal Democrats.

(Available on YouTube here.)

But now reality has struck. Though Chris was able to retain his cabinet post while the police investigated the claims (as Tim Farron rather neatly put it, ‘Tony Blair remained prime minister while he was investigated, I imagine Chris Huhne can just about cope with being energy secretary’) it was always clear that in the event of formal charges being laid his tenure as secretary of state for energy and climate change would be terminated. Nick Clegg made clear his own view on BBC1 last Sunday:

“Of course, that is a very serious issue if that were to arise. We as a Government want the highest standards of probity to be in place in everything that is done by Cabinet members.”

Nick and Chris contested the leadership of the party following Ming Campbell’s resignation in 2007. Despite a rather bruising campaign — probably best-remembered for the ‘Calamity Clegg’ jibe made by one of Chris’s team — the two later formed en effective working relationship, with Chris key member of the Lib Dem negotiating team which produced the Coalition programme with substantial chunks of the party’s election manifesto incorporated. It was no coincidence that one of the most detailed policy areas was the environment, a long-term passion of Chris’s, which saw him identified as being on the social liberal / centre-left of the party; yet on the economy, he was a Lib Dem fiscal hawk, trenchant in his support for deficit reduction.

Never one to avoid a fight, there was frequent friction between Chris and his Conservative cabinet colleagues. For example, he controversially attacked Tory chairman Baroness Warsi during the AV referendum for mounting an “increasingly Goebbels-like campaign”, spoke out in cabinet against the Tory tactics of personally targeting Nick Clegg (much to its co-author George Osborne’s annoyance), and took David Cameron to task for his ‘veto’ in December’s European summit. For some this smacked of betrayal. Personally I admired Chris’s willingness to say what he thought without resorting to the more common Westminster practices of unattributable briefings. Not that he lacks sharp elbows when they’re needed, a rare trait in Lib Dems which will be missed by (most of) his colleagues.

Chris will soon face the charges that have dogged him for so long; the rest of his political career will now depend on whether he can disprove them.

There will be few major implications for the Coalition of Chris’s resignation. For all the media excitement today, Cameron and Clegg have had plenty of time to prepare for today’s reshuffle. There may be bigger implications for the Coalition’s environment policies — Chris was a big hitter who achieved a huge amount in a short period of time: will his successor be able to continue Chris’s assertive work? An important first decision will be whether to retain Chris’s influential and knowledgeable special advisors, Duncan Brack and Joel Kenrick (a reminder that resignations have a human impact that extends well beyond the minister alone). Both were drafted in by Chris on his appointment to the climate change and energy post; it’s to be hoped they are allowed to continue in their roles.

* Stephen Tall is Co-Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice, and also writes at his own site, The Collected Stephen Tall.

His statement in full is:

The CPS decision to launch a prosecution is deeply regrettable.  I am innocent of the charges and I intend to fight this in the courts. I’m confdent that a jury will agree. So as to avoid any distraction from my duties or my trial defence I am standing down, resigning as Energy and Climate Change secretary. I will of course continue to serve my constituents in Eastleigh.

Nick Clegg has left the Liberal Democrat Away Day in Eastbourne and returned to London. The BBC is reporting that Ed Davey is expected to be confirmed as Energy and Climate Change Secretary with Norman Lamb replacing him as the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills.

* Caron Lindsay is Wednesday editor at Lib Dem Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings