You can really tell who is either or a tourist or new to the Westminster Village by one thing; staring in awe at Big Ben. When I first left school a month ago to start work with a think tank in London, I couldn’t help but eye the grand tower in all of her majesty every time I walked past Parliament.

My first day working in the Westminster village was quite surreal. I walked past David Davis, who was on his phone, jacket swung over his shoulder (West Wing style) looking rather harassed by life. Arriving at the think tank in London I was given a stack of database work and was informed “if you want to make friends, offer to make tea and coffee.” I am embarrassed to admit that I’d never made a cup of tea before then; the confused looks I received from a few people who’s tea bags bobbed up and down in their cups served in reminding me I was but a lowly and naive intern.

Being an intern isn’t all bad though. It’s really a necessary step to more work; nearly any politico will regale you with stories of their own past servitude. It has been brilliant fun working around Westminster, too. I must admit I have suffered regular pangs of giddy school girl excitement when seeing ‘Political Celebs’ walking around Westminster. I’ve noticed Alan Duncan, John Prescott and Des Browne all wandering about in varying degrees of haste and/or confusion.

I faced a baptism of fire in leafleting at the Conservative party conference. As I had to jostle to hand out event invites, to a backdrop of a religious speaker kindly informing all and sundry that legislation could only be found in the Bible, my frustration at the people who’d walk past and ignore my kind offers of leaflets quickly turned into pangs of guilt at my own recollections of ignoring the distributors of the London Lite outside of Charing Cross each day.

My month with the think tank was one I will ultimately remember fondly. My one major change in behaviour is that I no longer stare in awe at Big Ben, but walk swiftly passed grumbling inside about tourists who walk in groups of five side-by-side as slowly as is humanly possible. I suppose I may well be on my path to being a Westminster politico.

Early plans to create a giant "Big Brother" database holding information about every phone call, email and internet visit made in the UK were last night condemned by the Government's own terrorism watchdog.

Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, the independent reviewer of anti-terrorist laws, said the "raw idea" of the database was "awful" and called for controls to stop government agencies using it to conduct fishing expeditions into the private lives of the public.

Let us also not forget that the Bill has previously been condemned by the Information Commissioner, another watchdog. This is from Hansard Dated 17 July 2008:

"Viscount Bridgeman (Conservative):

My Lords, in view of the concern expressed by the noble Baroness about privacy, will the Government withdraw their plans for a communications data Bill to set up a database logging every private phone call and e-mail? There has been enormous opposition to the idea, including that from the Information Commissioner."

At that time the Government said that it was too early to comment:

"Lord West of Spithead (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Security and Counter-terrorism), Home Office; Labour)
My Lords, the noble Viscount is referring to the IMP. It is very early days as to where we go on this and it relates to entirely new methods of how telecommunications firms will transmit and move data. It is also early days to see how this will impact on any aspects of intercept. We have come to no decisions on any of that. It is still being looked at. It is too early to make any statement."

This is what the Information Commissioner has said (Independent again, today):

"Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, has described the plans as "a step too far for the British way of life". Yesterday his office added: "It is clear that more needs to be done to protect people's personal information, but creating big databases... means you can never eliminate the risk that the data will fall into the wrong hands."

These people are supposed to protect us from the interfering state, but the bulldozer just keeps on coming regardless (again from the Independent today):

"Today the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, is expected to signal the Government's intention to press ahead with proposals to collect more details about people's phone, email and web-browsing habits as she warns that the terrorist threat to Britain is growing."

My Comments

• Somehow by process or processes unknown this proposal moved from "too early to comment" to a set of pretty much concrete proposals in the space of not much more than a fortnight of Parliamentary sitting time with a 2 month break in the middle.
• "Too early to comment". The BBC Pods and Blogs programme broadcast an interview with a Telecomms Engineer concerned that there were investigations into the feasibility of using "automatic" monitoring "probes" in the IT and Telecommunications infrastructure as far back as (I think) April; automatic monitoring is the key issue since it removes the need for case-by-case authorisation and facilitates "fishing expeditions".
• Last time round, the consultation turned into a non-consultation when one of the key proposals "under consultation" was implemented before the non-consultation consultation had even finished. Spy Blog says it could happen again.
• We can swat 42 days after heaven knows how much resolute campaigning, but the thing we really need is to pull this surveillance culture out by the roots like a rotten tooth which has started giving the whole system blood poisioning.

I think we have to worry about all those people who were on the brink of retirement who have seen their pension pots slashed in value. For people like me it hasn't really hit my pocket as hard as others. I dont have any share - but if I did I could sit it out and be fine in the long term. The value of the house we are trying to sell has been slashed - but we don't need to sell it, so again we can wait.

Some people aren't so lucky. They are coming up to retirment and are suddenly facing a shortfall. The house they were going to sell to fund their life after work just won't fetch as much as it used to. And then of course there could be those small businesses who may face cash flow problems and may end up going to the wall as they are unable to secure short term loans.

Obviously there are people who can always benefit from every financial sitaution - and that's just how the market works. Buy low and sell high.

My fear is that those who can afford it the least will yet again be hit the hardest.

Then I realise everyone is wearing purple ties. Yesterday Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling wore them for their economic crisis press conferences. Nick Clegg was sporting one in the Chamber. I'm pretty sure David Cameron wore one this week. I saw lots of them on leading politicians in Manchester and Birmingham, I'm pretty sure Labour's conference stage backdrop was purple (the past few weeks have been a bit of a blur), and a couple of newsreaders were wearing yesterday as they reported this weeks banking crisis and the grim warnings of recession.

Purple has always been the colour of emperors and their ilk. It was the colour of the Roman empire's leaders because the dye came from a rare shellfish and symbolised the elite. Pope's wore it for the same reason.

Now it is the tie colour of choice of our political leaders. Labour used to be red. The Conservatives were blue. Today we are all purple, the perfect mix of red and blue on a colour pallete. Perhaps this is the true legacy of The Third Way.

Elsewhere, The Guardian reports that Sarah Palin's folksy, "you betcha" style is winning 'em over in grassroots America. I’m confused. Have we not had a folksy "you betcha" style US President for the last 8 years and everyone hates him?