And he's done just that. The Scotland Office this afternoon published a 'referendum timetable' that would allow a vote on independence in September 2013, a full year earlier than the Scottish government is currently proposing. In the annoucement notice, Moore said:

"No one has yet explained to me why the people of Scotland should have to wait nearly three years to make the most important decision we will ever make. It is not in the interests of the Scottish people to build up uncertainty and make them wait.

"The timetable I have produced today shows there is no good reason forthe Scottish Government’s go slow approach. We can follow all theproper procedures and parliamentary processes and still have areferendum in September 2013."

In a further installment in the guarded war of words between London and Edinburgh, Moore, accused the Scottish government of wanting "to kick the referendum can down the road" and said that sitting around on the referendum could impede further devolution as outlined in the Scotland Bill:

"Before we can move further powers to Edinburgh we need to know if Scotland is to remain part of the UK. That is entirely logical. We should settle the independence question as early as we can."

While Cameron has made it quite clear (most recently in his speech in Edinburgh last week) that his preference is for the United Kingdom to remain broadly as it is now, the momentum and initative on the issue of independence has, so far, been with Alex Salmond and the SNP.

Now, with Moore's proactive timetable, the Westminster government are back in the fray, attempting to make the running again.

For more on Moore's views on Scottish independence, read our interview with him from last year

However, David Cameron wasn’t forced onto the back foot in this week's session. If the Health and Social Care Bill remains in deep trouble, there remains a weak pulse. The PM’s spirited defence caused some damage with the revelation, from a leaked document, that Andy Burnham did not want the NHS risk register published. He repeatedly asked Ed Miliband why he wouldn’t ask about the risk register and the ‘substance of the reforms’. Opportunism is one of the best weapons available to an opposition leader but Cameron is trying to make it an insult on the NHS, when he taunts Labour with that charge.

This doesn’t revive the fortunes of this government’s most beleaguered reform, but it shows that Ed Miliband can’t have everything his own way, even if the Labour leader tried to claim the Bill ‘will become his poll tax’. But I still wait for the government to be able to change the narrative on these reforms.

The Bill is hugely complex and the NHS is a hugely complex organisation, but the simple lines have been drawn on this. The Health and Social Care Bill remains a huge problem for the coalition government. Both leaders have plenty of fight in them over the NHS but neither appear able to deploy the game-changing move in PMQs. Yet.

Responsibilities
Our promotional guru will have four key tasks:

• Developing strategy for and managing interface with Parliament to support readership objectives
• Developing strategy for and managing our digital outreach, principally through email newsletters and social media
• Develop and implement a marketing plan to support the Total Politics Events team marketing objectives
• Develop and implement a strategy to achieve Total Politics subscription targets

Skills and experience
Required:

• Proven track record of successfully marketing niche brands
• Proven track record of driving digital and social media marketing strategies
• Outgoing personality with exceptional communication and interpersonal skills

Desired:

• Public affairs experience
• In-depth knowledge of UK politics and Parliament

Salary
£23,000-26,000 depending on experience.

How to apply
Send an email to jobs@totalpolitics.com stating in no more than 50 words why you should get the position and provide a link to your LinkedIn profile. Do not send a covering letter or CV.
 

The retired British businessman from Kent is accused of conspiring to sell components for Iranian missiles, but maintains that he did not know the batteries shipped through his freight company were destined for Iran.

Talking to Total Politics, Jo Johnson described the case as "a constitutional issue with national twist".

He suggested that his constituent would be under "incredible pressure" to agree to a plea bargain to "avoid lengthy incarceration" before a trial.

Johnson added that Tappin could be seen as an example of "British middle-class respectability" who was to be "catapulted robotically to the US".

Tappin is expected to testify before the home affairs select committee about the US-UK extradition treaty, and the evidence session may actually delay his enforced departure from the UK.

Tappin is not alone in fighting extradition to the US. Other cases including 23-year-old student Richard O'Dwyer, who is accused of breaking US copyright laws, and computer hacker Gary McKinnon.

Sir Scott Baker's independent review of the UK's extradition arrangements last year concluded that the current treaty between the US and the UK was both balanced and fair.

But critics believe this is the latest case to test the review's findings.

Johnson will raise the case at PMQs later today.

Yesterday, speaking on a motion relating to the remuneration of EU staff, he gave us another reason to celebrate his entrance into the House of Commons. He used the word "floccinaucinihilipilification".

Behold:

"I have great sympathy with what the hon. Gentleman says. We ought to start thinking about withholding money. I have long had doubts about how the EU works and the ratchet, but I had the idea that the judges—though they may have a political objective; though they may be in favour of a federal Europe; and though they may push the law to the most extreme point to make the case for a federal European state—would not break basic principles of natural justice. The principle is nemo iudex in causa sua—a famous principle judged on and upheld in this country for centuries, and not just in this country, but abrogated in the EU.

"I am glad to say, Mr Deputy Speaker, that the requirement not to be rude about judges applies only to judges in this country. It does not apply to judges in the EU, so let me be rude about them. Let me indulge in the floccinaucinihilipilification of EU judges and quote from the book of Amos about them:

'For I know your manifold transgressions and your mighty sins: they afflict the just, they take a bribe, and they turn aside the poor in the gate from their right.'

Those are the judges of the EU. Her Majesty’s Government are right to stand up to them. They do not deserve their money and it is iniquitous that they have allowed themselves to be judges in their own cause. It is a breach of justice; it ought to be criminal."

This speech has got everything we love about the Mogg - he spoke in Latin, he quoted from a little-read book of the Bible, and he used a fantastically polysyllabic word most of us haven't even dreamed about (apart from perhaps in spelling bee-themed nightmares).

Before you ask, "floccinaucinihilipilification" is a real word. According to an online dictionary, it means 'an act or instance of judging something to be worthless or trivial'.

All hail the Mogg for managing to inject a point of interest into an otherwise extremely dull bit of parliamentary business...

Today The prime minister and culture secretary Jeremy Hunt hold a round table discussion with representatives from footballing authorities to tackle the issue of racism in football at No 10 Downing Street

Today Andrew Lansley announces that GPs could soon be directing people to free apps to allow them to monitor their own health

Today Foreign Office minister Alistair Burt meets with members of the Syrian opposition at the FCO ahead of this week's Friends of Syria meeting

Today Shadow defence minister Jim Murphy launches the Labour Party's defence policy review at Policy Exchange in London

9.30 Pensions minister Steve Webb speaks at the launch of an Institute for Fiscal Studies launches report on raising household saving

11.15 Theresa Villiers gives evidence to the transport select committee on Air Travel Organisers' Licensing (ATOL) reform

12.00 Prime minister's questions

12.00 Pakistani foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar delivers an address entitled 'Pakistan in a Changing Regional and Global Environment' at Chatham House

14.15 Scotland minister Michael Moore gives evidence to the Scotland affairs select committee on a possible independence referendum

17.15 Mayor of London Boris Johnson joins a training session and meets Police Community Support Officers in Richmond

19.00 Business secretary Vince Cable speaks at an event looking at how capitalism can be reformed for the benefit of society

19.00 Former deputy prime minister Michael Heseltine gives a speech at the Tory Reform Group winter dinner

What's been said

David Laws writes in The Guardian that we can cut taxes for middle- and lower-income Britain while asking for a bigger contribution from the top 1%-5% of earners

The workfare scheme isn't slave labour, argues Alice Thomson in The TImes (£). It's a foot in the door for young people

We need expensive energy to drive both conservation and the development of unconventional sources, says Hamish McRae in The Independent

Alex Salmond may welcome Rupert Murdoch's support, but the rest of his party aren't so sure, says Alan Cochrane in the Daily Telegraph

This article is from the March issue of Total Politics

“In the arena of human life, the honours and rewards fall to those who show their good qualities in action,” wrote Aristotle. He may have been clever, but I think even Aristotle would struggle to explain how, in just 10 years, average CEO “honours and rewards”– according to the High Pay Commission – went from a juicy £1m to an eye-watering £4m, while average pay rose from around £17,000 to around £25,000.  

This is just not a UK situation. In President Obama’s State of the Union address in January he referenced the rich avoiding their fair share of taxes, which was taken as a sideswipe at Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney’s big salary and small tax bill.

The problem for that relatively small cohort of individuals committed to defending the right to be paid huge sums is quite simple: newspapers report “growing public anger” about the situation without having to justify whether the public really is angry and, if so, how angry.

One thing we know for sure is that the public realises the situation is getting worse and frets about it: in a ComRes/ITV News poll in November 2011 two-thirds of people said that pay inequalities had worsened over the previous 20 years, and even more – 71 per cent – said they feared that having big inequalities was bad for the country’s social stability.

But do people’s perceptions tally with reality? In 2010, ComRes conducted a poll for BBC Radio 4, asking people how much they thought individuals should be paid, in order to compare the mean answers for different professions with their actual remuneration.

The answers were revealing (see table below).

How do we apply this to the present debate? Firstly, the old defence that people would not complain about premiership footballers being paid a fortune, and should not therefore complain about ‘star’ CEOs’ pay, fails on two counts. One: people believe premiership footballers are hugely overpaid. Two: they think FTSE 100 CEOs are massively overpaid.

Secondly, overinflated executive pay is not confined to the private sector. According to the poll, the public also thinks secondary school heads and train drivers are overpaid. We don’t need to conduct a poll to realise that the same would be true of the top band of council CEOs who are paid over £250,000. The prize for creating the highest ever public-sector salary goes to Ken Livingstone, who paid transport commissioner Bob Kiley a whopping £1.146m salary in his final year in the job – plus a £2m settlement for standing down.

Surprisingly, the percentage gap between what people perceive to be a prime minister’s salary and his actual pay is relatively small – he is seen as being only 20 per cent overpaid compared with secondary heads, who are thought to be 70 per cent overpaid. But it begs the question as to whether a man regarded as overpaid should lecture business chiefs about their own salaries.

A wider consequence of the problem is that the corporate community risks getting a bad name. Happily, perceptions of business per se are holding up well, despite the ‘dark decade’ that included the Enron mop-up, Lehmans and Fred the Shred. The ‘Business is Good for Britain’ campaign recently launched by the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) published a poll showing that the public overwhelmingly believes that businesses are good for Britain as long as they comply with the law, pay their taxes and make a profit.

Current plans for curbing pay revolve around linking executive remuneration to company performance, to be achieved by both substantial means – giving shareholders a binding vote on a company’s remuneration report – and those less obviously effective, such as “encouraging a wider range of people to join corporate boards”.

The ‘shareholder vote’ point is a good idea, but in practice may change little. GSK’s remuneration report was famously voted down, but that’s memorable for being an exception. We do not yet know whether, if such a report were more than advisory, shareholders would vote even more sparingly because of the seriousness of the consequences – akin to the argument that juries in murder trials wouldn’t deliver a guilty verdict if the death penalty were to return. Another worry is that 40 per cent of the FTSE 100 is foreign-owned, and so lines of accountability are not straightforward.

The key question is whether the public would accept that high pay could ever be justified. My hunch is that people will complain more about executive pay while the economic climate is difficult, but that their anger is directed at what they believe damages their own finances rather than at inequality. Whatever CEOs are paid, more people think bankers are overpaid, suggesting that the financial crash and the group who caused it remain more toxic than those whose rewards are insufficiently linked to a company’s performance.
In the current round of spleen-venting, however, attempts to justify the status quo have little resonance, as the table below shows:

If footballers and pop stars are paid millions, there is nothing wrong with high-performing business leaders receiving the same

Agree    33%
Disagree    55%
Don’t know    12%

It is immoral for people running large companies to be paid millions of pounds

Agree    64%
Disagree    25%
Don’t know    11%

Having pay inequalities is a good thing; it incentivises people to know they can earn a lot of money if they work hard

Agree    37%
Disagree    50%
Don’t know    13%

Around two-thirds of the public believe it is “immoral” that people running “large” companies should be paid millions of pounds. This is surely a dangerous figure, since it suggests that many companies act ‘immorally’ by paying their top people salaries of that scale.

Yet, I’m not convinced that the public mood is as critical as the bare poll figures suggest. Those most likely to describe executive pay as “immoral” are the most vigorous customers of the National Lottery. If being rewarded with millions for your work is immoral, what does it say about buying a Euromillions ticket? Who most deserves their millions?

Hedge fund managers will still make huge sums, CEOs will resist taking pay cuts and supine investors will nod through salary packages that to ordinary individuals will seem stratospheric. Perhaps we’ll be saved from revolution by the simple realisation that we’d all like to be paid that sort of money.

Andrew Hawkins is chairman of ComRes

The exhibition runs at the Hayward Gallery in the Southbank Centre until 13 May

The education secretary also said Scottish secretary Michael Moore, chief secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander and others needed to find a lawful solution to the referendum question alongside Alex Salmond.

"We need to – and I am utterly convinced of this – persuade Scotland that its future is stronger in the United Kingdom than it would be if we were to separate..."

"There is a threat to that from Scottish separatism, but there is also a threat – underappreciated –  from English separatism as well. There are some people on the right who say, 'Well if the Scots want to leave, let them.' That seems to me to be entirely the wrong attitude…

"Remember the big picture. The country that we were born into is Great Britain for a reason. It is Great Britain because we stood together and stand together... I fear that we will undermine something precious and our country will be a diminished presence in the future."

Separately, Gove spoke of the need for journalists to stand up for their freedoms.

"It is undoubtedly the case that serious crimes were committed [by journalists], but we know that the crimes were serious because they broke – if the allegations are proven – the already existing criminal law," he said.

"There are laws against the interception of messages. There are laws against bribery…

"There is a danger at the moment that what we may see is judges, celebrities and the establishment – all of whom have an interest in taking over from the press as arbiters of what a free press should be – imposing soft or hard regulation when what we should be encouraging is the maximum amount of freedom of expression and the maximum amount of freedom of speech…

"Politicians should recognise that we have nothing to gain and everything to lose from fettering the press that have kept us honest in the past."

And the education secretary also took the opportunity of dining in front of a room full of journalists to take a pop at Chris Huhne.

"[My son] explained to me that Sir Alex Ferguson has decided to dispense with the services of Wayne and have Coleen Rooney in the forward three, because Sir Alex has heard that these days it's the wife that takes the penalties."

And it was not just the Lib Dems who were on the receiving end of Gove's sharp tongue – the Labour Party also received its fair share.

"I am a member of at least three endangered species," said Gove. "I am a Scottish Conservative – one of the last breeding pair, I am a Blairite – apparently you can only survive the artificial hothouse environment of the coalition cabinet because we are extinct in the wild (or the Parliamentary Labour Party), and I am also – and in this respect, I may not be an endangered species but almost unique – convinced that Ed Miliband is a visionary politician who one day will go on to become a great leader of the Labour Party."

Praise, indeed.

It seems to have made him shy – at health questions today, he seemed more than happy to let his junior ministers do most of the talking. He provided a masterclass in what I think we might have to start calling ‘ministerial backseat driving’, which takes the form of glaring at the shadow health team over his glasses and gesticulating around Simon Burns’s back.

Incidentally, the Speaker took advantage of Burns’s greater-than-usual despatch box time to hit back at that ‘sanctimonious dwarf’ line Burns had used about him, referring to the health minister as “an emollient fellow”.

When Lansley did get to his feet, it was clear that his temper was not far from the surface – he was noticeably irate in his answer to Ben Bradshaw’s question on whether he would publish the outcome of the Mid Staffordshire inquiry in time to inform the debate on reform, and when shadow health secretary Andy Burnham asked whether it was true that NHS employees who registered their opposition to the reforms were to face disciplinary action. Once Dennis Skinner joined in, calling for the bill to be dropped, Lansley was so provoked he scarcely seemed to be drawing breath.

Even when Lib Dem MP Andrew George asked the simple question “will the minister drop the Health and Social Care Bil”, it was Burns, not Lansley, who rose to his feet to say “no”. George commented on this, saying: “Any more rational process would have resulted in the dignified withdrawal of the bill long ago… Frankly it should be the secretary of state answering this.”

To that, Lansley had no answer.

UPDATE My colleague Amber has just filed Michael Gove's remarks on the subject of dropping the health bill from today's press gallery lunch:

"Absolutely not…  I don't think and haven't said to anybody that we should drop the bill. Quite the opposite. I think that the legislation that is going through will, firstly, empower professionals. Secondly, guarantee patients more effective and faster treatment. And thirdly, ensure that the money that we rightly dedicate to the health service is used more efficiently to help those most in need more quickly than ever before. This reform is necessary and I think that Andrew has been brave and right and principled in pressing ahead with it. The old lady who confronted him yesterday came from a political tradition not a million miles away from, well, the left. I don't think she was a member of the Surrey Heath Ladies Luncheon Club. And I thought that Andrew handled her as he handles all public occasions, with grace and composure."

Complementing our cover spread is an interview with Chloe Smith, economic secretary to the Treasury. I have heard plenty of grumbles from Conservatives MPs about her rapid promotion, so thought it was time to feature her view of what it’s like to be given an envied ministerial position by the PM in the most powerful department of all. Rob Wilson does a terrific job of getting Smith to reveal a surprising off-duty hobby and much more besides.

We also explore David Cameron’s frame of mind on the economy with George Pascoe-Watson’s great column. Find out how, even with memories of ‘Black Wednesday’ in 1992 as Norman Lamont’s special adviser, Cameron stays calm with a trusted but small group of confidants. If the arguments between the economic dictums of Keynes and Hayek resonate for you, check out our essay on the recent book examining both.

Away from our Budget coverage, Amber Elliott goes inside the different power bases of the Parliamentary Labour Party to explore its current moods and movements. There is much more to discover beyond the now-famous lasagne parties. I hope you find plenty to get stuck into in this month’s issue.
 
Ben Duckworth, editor of Total Politics

Inside this issue, now available on newsstands:

• Interview with Chloe Smith, economic secretary to the Treasury
   
• Exclusive photoshoot with George Osborne by Andrew Parsons
   
• An examination of Labour’s power bases by Amber Elliott
   
• Debate: Should we change the law on assisted dying? Nadine Dorries MP and David Winnick MP disagree
   
• How David Cameron is staying strong on Plan A. George Pascoe-Watson discovers who David Cameron takes advice from on the economy
   
• Ed Miliband’s problem with the trade unions. Dan Hodges examines why trade unions and the Labour leader can’t get on
   
• Making prison work - Conservative MP Paul Maynard on why his party shouldn't consider non-custodial sentencing to be a 'soft on crime' approach
   
• Tribal warfare - Alex Salmond's biographer David Torrance on Scotland's political tribes and why the political is so often personal north of the border
   
• In conversation with Chris Skidmore and Tristram Hunt. Ben Duckworth talks to two young MPs who have found cross-party consensus on history teaching in schools
   
• Stanley Johnson, former MEP and father of the Mayor of London, writes on the real origins of the eurozone crisis and Roy Jenkins' role in it
   
• Keynes v Hayek - Keith Simpson MP reviews a book that pits the two great economists against each other
   
• Jo Phillips examines how the Palace of Westminster could be turned into a truly modern Parliament building, complete with architect's impressions of how it might work

Organised and hosted by the Rehab Group, participants raced around Victoria Tower Gardens, tossing pancakes as they went. After a finish too close to call due to a fair amount of cheating from all teams, MP-cum-football referee Tracey Crouch narrowly beat Nick Robinson in a single round run-off.

See our slideshow for pictures of the event, which played host to such figures as Adam Boulton, Nick Robinson, Julian Huppert MP, Tracey Crouch MP, and TP's very own editor, Ben Duckworth.

Tunisia must write its constitution in the next 18 months.

The North African country has no history of democracy. Elections last November, on a 42% turnout, elected Ennadha, described as "a religious party" as the largest party and it has formed a coalition government with Ettakatol, described as a "social democratic party", and the Congres Pour la Republique, a party whose ideology I strive still to identify but whose pragmatism appears impressive.

Big questions need to be answered. What role will women play in the new Tunisia? Will the tension between religion and secularism be resolved? How will the ambition of Tunisia's young people for prosperity be fulfilled? Which fundamental rights will hold sway?

A new Parliament in Tunisia is taking the practical steps needed to draft a constitution: assembling committees, having it prepare a draft, deciding who to consult, how to respond, how to approve the finalise Constitution.

Tunisia was the country which led the Arab Spring. The terrible death of Mohamed Bouazizi led to street demonstrations, the deposing of a dictator and free elections. The hard work of government continues.

So when we have our next bout of navel-gazing, working out how to reform the House of Lords, spare a thought for the people of Tunisia, a new democracy in a hurry.

Today Nick Clegg announces £126m being made available for providers to fund programmes to help 16 and 17-year-olds who are not in education, employment or training return to school, apprenticeships or employment

8.00 Justine Greening and Mark Prisk announce the first electric vans eligible for new Plug-in Van Grant

9.00 Nick Herbert hosts a roadshow in Ipswich to discuss the arrival of police and crime commissioners in police forces later this year

10.00 Rachel Reeves makes a speech at the IPPR in London

10.15 The Rehab parliamentary pancake race takes place at Westminster, with MPs, Lords and journalists racing

10.45 Caroline Spelman addresses first day of the National Farmers' Union's conference in Birmingham

14.30 Andrew Lansley takes health questions in the Commons

15.30 The Commons considers the Lords amendments to the Welfare Bill

15.30 The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills hosts an F1 exhibition as a celebration of the industry's multi-billion pound contribution to the UK economy

16.00 William Hague and Pakistani foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar hold a press conference following the UK-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue

19.00 Deputy governor of the Bank of England Charlie Bean addresses the Scottish Council for Development and Industry

What's been said

Why David Cameron should be afraid of Nicolas Sarkozy, by Mary Riddell in the Daily Telegraph

We are drifiting towards war in Iran, says Gideon Rachman in the Financial Times

Steve Richards in The Independent says we're halfway to a U-turn on the NHS already

We need to know who funds these thinktank lobbyists, argues George Monbiot in The Guardian