Nick Boles MP, a key Cameron ally, attended this year's secretive Bilderberg meeting.
His trip doesn't prove he is a shape-shifting alien - although I am open to suggestions on his space-lizardiness - but it does show the ugly nature of what Boles called the "leading and well-known" folk in charge.
The Bilderberg Group brings together 120 or so top politicians and businessmen for a conference every year.
It was founded in the '50s after some pro-US European politicians asked the CIA's help to get some kind of "Atlanticist" business-oriented event going.
This top nobs' secret conflab makes many suspect Bilderberg is an agenda-setting conspiracy.
Personally I think it is something like a Tolpuddle Festival for the ruling elite - somewhere they can meet to thrash out a few ideas, express some solidarity and have a good time.
Of course, at Tolpuddle we self-consciously affirm solidarity of working people. But our elites are supposed to be all about business competition and national rivalry.
The obvious solidarity at the top shown by Bilderberg doesn't sit well with the official story about competitive free markets and patriotic nations.
It suggests the participants feel more in common as members of an international ruling class than they feel in competition with each other.
People in the US are brought up to firmly believe in free markets and patriotism, so they are often most offended by Bilderberg meetings.
Some get so angry that they start believing Bilderberg is a powerful conspiracy, showing the world is run by Illuminati, alien lizards or Knights Templar.
Over here, I think we are more likely to shrug our shoulders and think "there goes the establishment, scratching each other's backs again."
Bilderberg conference proceedings are secret, but we do know the attendees. They are a creepy bunch.
Boles, a former flatmate of Michael Gove's, was a key member of Cameron's "Notting Hill Set." He founded the Cameroonian think tank Policy Exchange and was this year's Tory "rising star" at the conference.
More senior Tories also usually attend. This year it was Ken Clarke. George Osborne went to the preceding four Bilderberg conferences.
Boles told his constituents that Bilderberg was all about "leading figures" in politics and business.
This June's conference, held in the Marriott hotel in Chantilly, near Washington, also hosted Marcus Agius, the "leading figure" who had to resign as Barclays chairman because his staff had been fiddling the figures.
Other "leading figures" at the conference include Peter Mandelson, who had to resign from government twice, only to reappear as an unelected European Commissioner.
HSBC boss Douglas Flint was also there. He hasn't had to resign. Yet.
It's hard not to be suspicious when the bosses from firms like Shell, Vodafone and Airbus meet with centre and right-wing politicians in secret.
Boles offered more evidence on the creepy character of the Bilderbergers.
His entry in the Register of MPs' Interests says the American Friends of Bilderberg paid for his ticket.
US tax returns show Friends of Bilderberg directors include Henry Kissinger, James Wolfensohn and Richard Perle.
So the pals who paid for Nick's jolly Bilderberg trip are the man behind the bombing of Cambodia, the man who led the World Bank at its worst and a leading promoters of the lies behind the Iraq war.
I'm returning to my short series - Firms-who-squeeze-millions-from-the-government-to-help-the-unemployed-but-mostly-help-themselves.
According to its latest annual report, Seetec, a firm that relies almost entirely on government-funded training schemes, paid founder and owner Peter Cooper a £1.7 million dividend.
Seetec's turnover has rocketed to £53m. It is doing very well, making £14.6m in profit.
In 2006 Seetec's turnover was just £1.6m, and its profits were just £200,000.
The firm has grown 50-fold and the profits have increased 70 times over in just five years.
This growth in turnover, profits and money for Cooper and his firm is entirely dependent on government contracts.
The company describes itself on their own website as follows: "Seetec is one of the UK's largest and most experienced providers of government-funded employment and skills training programmes."
It boasts about recent visits from Chris Grayling, Sayeeda Warsi and David Cameron in support of its government work.
Seetec made cash on Labour's "benefit-busting" schemes. Its annual report looks forward to making much more from the taxpayer under the coalition, saying the firm is doing well "maximising the value of its current contract pipeline and as a result of tender wins announced in May 2011 under the government's new Work Programme."
The Department for Work and Pensions gave Seetec contracts to run the Work Programme in east London, the east of England and Greater Manchester, Cheshire and Warrington worth a combined £220m.
Seetec's annual report warns that "the key business risk is the company's substantial reliance upon income from government-funded initiatives" - a phrase echoed in the accounts of its larger competitor A4E, which lists its overwhelming reliance on "revenues from the public sector" as a "principal risk."
Seetec says it will avoid the dangers of their "substantial reliance" on the government by "procedures to ensure compliance with government requirements and that all new project specifications are met."
However, its Ofsted inspection reports are very mixed. Out of six full inspections, half were "good." But two got the second-lowest mark, "satisfactory," while one was "unsatisfactory."
The most recent report, released this January, covered Seetec's Train to Gain and government-supported apprenticeships. The provision, for 1,000 apprentices and learners, was judged only "satisfactory."
A 2010 report into Seetec's Pathways into Work scheme in the Black Country found the provision was "inadequate" as "the number of participants who enter employment is too low" and was "considerably below the contract target."
Its unimpressive work, like the weak performance of other contractors like A4E, Maximus, Ingeus and Working Links, suggests the government is committed to privatising welfare despite the actual results.
If you appreciated this article then please consider donating to the Morning Star's Fighting Fund to ensure we can keep developing your paper.