How Did We Come To This?

Eurozone Meltdown Latest

2012-01-31T17:28:00.004Z

The Eurozone was from the outset a political rather than an economic construct. And therein lies the problem. This humble blogger worked in Brussels when it was being constructed, long before it was even first discussed at the dinner parties of the north London chattering classes. And from its inception it was always a political project promoted by the post-cold war European political elite, and endlessly pushed by Germany and France because they knew damn well they could dominate it.

And that is of course fundamentally why the UK did not join. It did not stack up financially and nor did it suit our politics. History may judge that this is the only decision that Gordy got right. Remember that Tony was all for it and it was Gordy who held the line. Good old Gordy. I knew I liked him!

The current pact being championed at this week’s European Council – a summit for EU leaders, and remember what summits are for children - is in essence Germany placing rules on all the other members telling them that if they fiddle their economies in ways that Germany does not like, then Germany will turn off its financial tap. Which is frankly a bit rich as the much debated rules that previously existed - the now amusingly called European Stability and Growth Pact - was spun as the most robust set of rules that would stop the Euro falling apart, and which Germany and France then utterly ignored when they broke them, strong-arming the other EU members to not censure them against the European Commission’s advice. One rule for the two big guys and new rules for everyone else. Plus ça change, eh?

Anyhoo, tonight is the deadline for entries to the Wolfson Prize being administered by the think tank Policy Exchange, where in March £250,000 will be awarded to the pointy head who comes up with the best 25,000 word solution designing a mechanism for a country to leave the Eurozone. Amazing that one does not exist, really, but there you are.

Factoid of the day - Since 1945, 87 countries have left various monetary unions around the world and amazingly the world’s economy has kept moving. So, not impossible then. Painful, yes, in the short term, but not impossible by any stretch.

The reality today is that Greece is now in complete meltdown. A friend of ours has just returned from Athens and reports that the public sector is hardly bothering to work at all, there are strikes galore everywhere, rubbish is mounting in huge piles on every street corner and the overwhelming majority of young people, university degrees or not, are all unemployed. It is more like Kandahar than a European city.

And of course Portugal’s borrowing costs are now 17% compared to Germany’s 2%. Remember, that 7% is considered unsustainable.

So what is the solution to this mess?

Taking a strategic view, the answer is of course glaringly obvious and every objective commentator has been prescribing the same medicine for at least 2 years:

Fill up the bailout fund, which has been struggling to get to €1 trillion whereas in fact around €3-4 trillion is needed by all accounts
Ring fence Italy as it is simply way too big an economy to be able to bail out
Force/help Greece and maybe Portugal exit the Eurozone

What I still find remarkable is that none of the European political elite, having sold their souls, their electorates and their economies to the Euro project, have the political balls and leadership vision to promote undeniably painful but simply inevitable medicine.

It is utterly perverse logic for the sickest of the PIIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) to still believe that it is in any way in their economies’ interests to stay in the Eurozone. It’s as if they have signed their Eurozone suicide pact and won’t go back. They are happy to sacrifice their economies and political future on the altar of European political dogma. A Portuguese friend of ours who went home for Christmas told me that when she broached the idea that it might be in Portugal’s interest to leave the Eurozone, people looked at her as if she was completely stark raving mad. They simply could not comprehend the idea, such is the political unreal reality that the European political elite have constructed in their home countries.

How can it be in their interest to stay in? To get out of the mess they are in, they need to devalue and free up their economic policy. Neither of which they can do within the Eurozone. The choice is 5 years of pain if you leave or 25 years of pain if you stay. Madness.

Some Cragsbury predictions for you:

Greece will inevitably default in a horribly unplanned manner
Once that dam has broken, Portugal will follow suit sometime thereafter
In the short-term, the UK pound will become a European safe haven currency for investors
Germany will messily cobble things together, eventually, but it will takes years for the markets to trust the Euro again

All of which is avoidable, if the European political elite put away their arrogant, stupid pride and faced reality. Not a hope there then.

Back Romney

2012-01-30T21:44:00.003Z

It is with wonder and awe that I look at our Republican brothers struggling to endorse Mitt Romney. Put simply, the rest of the field has included the mad, the bad and the even worse. The mere idea that Newt Gingrich - a proven liar, adulterer, incompetent and wild maverick Washington insider whom no one would have any idea what he was going to do next - is almost as risible as some of the other jokers who have put themselves forward. Judge a man by the company he keeps: endorsed by Sarah Palin, Herman Cain and the Rev Sun Myung Moon. 'Nuff said.

Hester-gate - The Impact

2012-01-29T21:58:00.007Z

Labour forcing a vote on Hester’s bonus in the next Opposition debate. Pathetic populist bullshit or what? But, with this announcement, it became inevitable that Hester could not therefore take his bonus.

The impacts:

1. Hester is now the worst paid bank CEO in Europe and will be poached within weeks/months for a job paying him 4 times as much.

2. This will now become an annual blood sport for RBS CEOs.

3. We will struggle to find a good enough candidate to fill his shoes.

4. This silliness will have zero impact on other banks.

5. As ever, the 'politics of jealousy' caravan will rumble on.

Economics for Dummies - Lesson 2

2012-01-28T20:25:00.010Z

And so to Hester-gate, aka ‘21st century class war’ or ‘the next ride on the blame shift merry-go-round demonising bankers so that politicians can get away scot free’.

Let’s get straight to the facts:

Arguably one of the most important jobs, if not THE most important of jobs in the UK right now, is to get our damaged and recently part-nationalised banks back on their feet so that we taxpayers can get our money back. With interest. As soon as is practicable.

The last Government brought in Stephen Hester, apparently the best man for the job. He has been endorsed as such by the new Coalition Government as well.

He is acclaimed by everyone to be doing a good job, apart from assorted meanies on the Left who want to throw stones at him because he is a banker and rich. (They’d love to be able to denigrate him as an ex-public school boy too but sadly for them he went to a comprehensive before going up to Oxford. He is also a white Anglo Saxon protestant. If he was very ethnic, the Guardianistas would be less hoping mad but the Daily Mail would be more so).

So far, so good. He’s doing a good job, earning big money but substantially less than he could earn elsewhere in the private sector, accepting this no doubt partly because his current role is one of THE jobs of the moment and thus is a challenge and will be good for his CV, maybe partly out of altruism and probably because he will likely pick up a knighthood at the end of it, assuming he is successful. And assuming he is, the non-executive director roles will come flowing in for years to come.

So, the big three questions of the day:

Q1. Should he have such large potential remuneration in the first place?

Simply, we need the best turnaround expert for this task. And that will cost. Inevitably. Supply and demand and all that - something our Lefty luvvies often try and pretend does not exist when it does not suit their ideology.

Now he wasn’t bumbling along running some dull Government department or quango, earning around £100-200k. No, he was the acclaimed CEO of British Land, one of the top 3 property companies in the UK, one that is well run, cautious and has survived numerous booms and busts very comfortably since 1856. This boy had been earning millions for years being a high flyer at Credit Suisse and Abbey National before British Land.

When you are in intensive care, you don’t say: ‘Take away this acclaimed medical expert who is doing a brilliant job and seems to be saving my life, he is paid far too much. Bring me a more sensibly remunerated doctor.’ On the contrary, you say: ‘Can I get this wizard to make me better any quicker and would it help if I motivated him more by paying him more?’

Unless you are a Lefty, when you make cheap political points about how much he earns, how much more that is than a senior civil servant – good comparison, Chuka, really? – and how much this is in relation to a corporal in the British Army in Afghanistan – and you Peter? All of which, of course, is bollocks.

Supply and demand.

Simples.

Q2. Should he get his bonus?

He should get whatever bonus the RBS’ remuneration committee feels he deserves for his last year’s performance under his contract. Populist bullshit from Lefty politicians, journalists and all the rest is just that. Bullshit.

I, as a taxpayer, want his mind 100% on the job getting my money back not on endless meetings with his chairman, UKFI, Government ministers, his comms team and others about various Lefties views on his bonus.

Q3. Should he take it?

If I was him, after all this bollocks, I’d refuse it and resign. My resignation letter would say:

‘We agreed my remuneration in my contract. Nowhere does it say the Polly Toynbee set gets a vote on what my bonus should be. I have been working night and day to turn this fucked up company around with considerable success and acclaim and all I get is bullshit from people who know nothing about what I am doing, could not understand it if I explained it to them and want to use me as a class war political football. To say I am demotivated would be a fucking understatement. I’m out.’

He would be in a higher paid job by Easter.

PS Loving the paradox of unions which endlessly use every aspect of employment law to defend their often idle and incompetent members whilst seeing no hypocrisy in demanding that a manager’s contract should be completely ignored.

Economics for Dummies - Lesson 1

2012-01-27T15:27:00.011Z

OMG, I have longed to blog again. Many times I have almost started again. I have missed it. So much. But time has been against me. And still is. But daily helpings of the madness of modern British society and all its loopy nonsense, with no one pointing out the cold, hard facts of reality, have compelled me to return. Here goes:

The economics of the Left's 'anti-benefit reform' agenda

First a few facts, delivered to us on this day children, by the ONS - they're impartial, right?

Fact 1 - National mean salary = £26k

Fact 2 - Salary needed to be in the top 25% of taxpayers = £32k

Thus, lowering benefits - apparently outrageously - to a maximum of £26k (which is the equivalent of earning £34k) means that even after this change you can still earn way more than the national average and in fact be in the top 25% of earners. Unbelievable. Unless you are a bishop that is. I have blogged many times before that the Left's well intentioned but economically illiterate over-active philanthropy with other people's money (ie ours) has simply priced the low paid out of work. What incentive does someone who cannot ever earn £34k have to work? This fundamental will never change until we decrease benefits to more sensible levels. So I have a suggestion: why not create a tax ratchet, whereby starting at the new £26k benefit maximum, in each fiscal year from 2012 we decrease that maximum by £500 whilst raising the income tax nil band by £500. This would begin to decrease benefits to levels that will incentivise work but reduce tax/increase income for the low paid whilst having an almost completely negligible financial effect on those horrible greedy rich people politicians want to kick all the time. Simples.

The 4 Rs - Part 1

2010-01-02T08:33:00.011Z

I thought there were just 3 Rs I hear you say. Nope. There’s now 4. Call them Melvin’s 4 Rs.

I have been doing a lot of driving in recent months, in my search for new clients for my illustrious employers. I love driving. I have a car that needs to be driven. No, demands to be driven. And driven hard into the bargain. So as I cruise across the country, fast shifting through my 6 gears, listening to the growl of my engine, a sound that never ceases to delight me, I have had time to ponder some of the deep questions that are facing me, you and society: like, when will our one year old stop screeching to attract attention, when will our two year old stop saying “No” to every question and what are the fundamental things that are wrong with the politics of our society.

The first two are just too difficult to answer and shall be consigned to the ‘too hard’ tray. But the third one I have an answer to. Melvin’s 4 Rs. Here goes:

My 4 Rs are: Risk, Respect, Reward and Regulation. Today, we shall deal with Risk.

We have managed to talk ourselves into an incredibly unreal situation. We want a society that has zero risk. Not just ‘want’, actually. Many really believe that a society without risk is realistically achievable. It’s total codswallop. Risk is everywhere. It lurks behind every car in front of us, around every corner in every street, under every loose paving stone, on every climbing frame in every playground. It leers at us with every use of any cutting implement, it glowers at us as we climb on any form of public transport. It surrounds us, it envelops us in fact. As soon as your first toe hits the bedroom carpet each morning, your daily gamble with risk has begun.

So the issue is not avoiding risk, but balancing risk. If I walk to work in the middle lane of the M25, the chance of me dying is considerably greater than if I use a car, for instance. If I run across the road now, when the lights are green, the chance of white van man mowing me down are higher than if I just wait for the light to turn red. Life is in fact a constant risk balancing process. The question is proportion. And that is where society is going wrong.

The other day I visited a client. Nice building, just outside Birmingham. As I pulled into the car park, through a speaker by the barrier I got a 1 minute briefing about safe use of the car park, before the barrier went up. When I had parked my car correctly, according to the rules, I ventured into the reception area (and before you ask, yes there was a fucking silent flat screen on the wall). I was then given a two page safety brief I had to sign in two places before I was issued a visitor pass. To finish it off, I was treated to a verbal brief from the receptionist on what to do and where to go in the event of an emergency.

WTF?

A superb example of completely unbalanced anti-risk behaviour. Unless we can tackle this ludicrous risk aversion we now have, society will continue to implode. Teachers will be less inclined to take our children on trips out of the school. Lawyers will get richer by ambulance chasing minor injuries. Companies will design ridiculously ultra safe processes that are bureaucratic and expensive. Petty health and safety rules will abound. And this costs UK plc. But most of all, it is changing our culture dramatically. We are much the poorer for it.

Happy Families

2009-12-10T15:08:00.002Z

Just a Coincidence...

2009-12-10T10:32:00.003Z

...that the latest batch of Parliamentary expenses were released at 0600 hrs this morning, the morning after the Pre-Budget Report. No plan there at all. Just a coincidence.

Let's Have Some Common Sense

2009-12-09T12:31:00.013Z

As Mr Eyebrows reminded us today in the Pre-Budget report, we are in the shit. Deep in it. Way past our armpits. There are just a few tufts of hair poking up from beneath the NuLab economic shit that has enveloped us. (And before you Lefties who always email me complain about the bias in that last sentence, remember this: we are the only G20 nation still in recession. Think about it.)

And we also know that we need to give the public sector a haircut. A massive one in fact to reign in public spending. Even NuLab and the Etonians agree on that; they are just arguing about when and how drastic the haircut should be.

So, let me in my sweet simpleminded way suggest some common sense to the thinking behind that public sector haircut.

The social welfare state in the form it has now grown into is ethically and financially out of control and now completely unaffordable. This is the time to be bold and re-model what type of social welfare state we want and can afford.

Four examples of how topsy turvy our social welfare state has become:

1. BOM is a wonderful blog I read daily. I do not agree with all that it says, but I respect its intellectual rigour and common sense economic logic. It had a really interesting post the other day, which in summary and in round numbers said this:

Good thing - 22 million private sector employees (aka the producers).

Bad thing - 12.5 million state pensioners, 7 million out-sourced Government employees, 6 million direct Government employees, 6 million people totally dependent on benefits (of one kind or another), 530,000 employed in further and higher education, 40,000 GPs and 33,000 working at National Rail. Thus 25.5 million public sector employees (aka those for whom the taxpayer pays.

Spot the problem? We have an imbalance. Too few in the private sector paying for too many in the public sector. We need a change.

2. Next, the NHS. Should your next door neighbour pay for you to have bigger tits just because it would make you feel a bit better about yourself? Should the people down the road pay for you to have your cock chopped off if you feel more like a woman than a man? Should the inhabitants of the next town pay for gluttons to have appetite suppressants because they are too fat? Should the taxpayer pick up the bill if you make lifestyle choices that have zero financial implications for yourself but significantly expensive financial implications for the taxpayer, like fags, booze and drugs? You get my drift.

We have an NHS where we have subverted 'no taxation without representation' into 'I do WTF I like and some other fucker should pay for my life choices'. We need a change.

3. Now, employment. Do we want a society where those that are willing to work are worse off if they do because the benefits system is too generous? Don't we want to make work a more attractive option than living on benefits? The so-called benefits trap. Crazy. We need a change.

4. Last, prisons. Under NuLab, we have locked more and more up in prison (and not built enough prisons so then let them out again, but that's another story). However, prison is so cushty that for many of those that end up there it is better than being outside. Here's David Bywater, an ex-prisoner:

"Things can get difficult if you are shoplifting or whatever you are doing. So you think, I will go to a prison for a bit of a rest period. You know you are going to get your drugs, methadone and what have you, so you are better off inside."

Or Andrew Whalley another ex-prisoner recently released after spending 10 years behind bars for a drug-related robbery with a firearm:

"I'm an addict, so if you give me free methadone, free drugs, keep me in active addiction, then release me out of prison, then surely when I come out of prison I've got to commit crime to keep me there." Was he ever offered rehab? "The last course I was offered was a safer injecting course". We need a change.

Now, of course I am being simplistic here. But my main point remains true. If we are to spend taxpayers hard earned cash that we have ripped out of their pay packets, then we should be giving them a good return on investment. Neither of these four random examples are doing that right now. And there are many other examples I could have cited. We need a much less generous social welfare state. Right now, it is too easy to beach yourself there and let the taxpayer pick up the cost. We need a strategic re-balancing.

Now, Lefties, before you cry foul and accuse me of being a self satisfied, arrogant fascist who does not care about those less fortunate than myself, consider this:

We are allowing our generous nature to (a) make the most vulnerable in society more dependent rather than less dependent, actually enslaving them to social welfare dependence and (b) bankrupting the country in the process. Is it sensible for the public sector to be larger than the private sector bearing in mind the latter pays for the former? Is it reasonable for taxpayers to pick up the bill for any damage I inflict upon society or myself; should I not have responsibility for my own actions? Should the benefit system pay me more than I can earn with my qualifications and experience? Should the prison system not be taking me off drugs and preparing me for an honest working life hopefully in the private sector?

So as the Etonians are 'blue sky thinking' about WTF they are actually going to do come 7th May 2010, they should be thinking on this: we need to use the discipline of having to downsize Government to re-fashion what Government should be doing and how it should be doing it.

The Politics of Jealousy

2009-12-08T01:15:00.005Z

I have always thought that jealousy is without doubt the most unattractive of all human emotions. It is totally negative. It has no redeeming features. And, ultimately, it is utterly pointless. Has jealous behaviour ever stopped a partner or friend from misbehaving? No.

But for the last few months we have been engaged nationally in a monumental act of petty, pointless, vindictive and hypocritical political jealousy on a massive, industrial scale. Politicians and the media have been queuing up to bash bankers. The international political class at various summits have been queuing up to do it too. The French, socialist to their finger tips, have been in the vanguard of pushing for EU action to punish bankers and take away their bonuses.

Tomorrow, Mr Eyebrows will publish his Pre-Budget Report and, we are led to believe by the usual heavy trailing in the media that politicians now go in for, he will enshrine this jealousy into policy and no doubt promise legislation to enshrine it into law as well.

This is all just absolutely ass numbing madness. Let me explain...

1. Political dishonesty - We are in the midst of an enormous 'blame shift' operation being carried out by the political class, led by Gordy's Government. Once again for the Lefties, the stupid and those that have forgotten, the banking crisis was caused by regulation that was too lax. Who regulates? Government. Did the banks adhere to the regulation? Yes, to the letter. Thus who is to blame? Duh!

Let me explain this another way. Suppose you belong to an organisation which has some rules. You keep to those rules to the letter. Then the organisation implodes. Is it the fault of those that ran the organisation and its rules or those that worked within it and kept to the rules?

Now do I think the banks should have spotted that regulation was too lax? Yes, of course. We all should. Some did. Not enough, sadly. But the overwhelming major culpability rests with Government. But they don't want to be blamed, so by tapping into our jealousy of those more rich and successful than us, they have shifted the blame to the banks. As ever, once the media agenda was set, the banks have just had to soak it up. (This behaviour is similar to how the police behaved after the that moronic McPherson Inquiry conclusion that the Met was institutionally racist. Once the media agenda was set, everyone queued up to self-flagellate themselves that they were institutionally racist because (a) this tapped into our first world, post colonialism guilt and (b) it was good for your career prospects because that was the prevailing orthodoxy).

2. Economics for dummies - Supply and demand, children, supply and demand - aka the market rate. If you tax entrepreneurial rich people more than they think is fair, they fuck off. They are already doing it: companies moving to other countries (viz Shire Pharmaceuticals, UBM, WPP, Yahoo), hedge funds moving to lower tax states (viz Amplitude Capital, Odey Asset Management, Guy Hands) etc.

If you tax UK bankers more than their foreign counterparts or bankers from certain selected UK banks (that happen to be part owned by the Government) more than their competitors, then they will fuck off to other banks, other financial institutions, other countries. In fact, they already are. 1000 RBS staff have already jumped ship. QED.

And the loser? The freaking taxpayer you numpties! You muppets tried this in the 1970s, remember? Didn't work then, won't work now.

3. Pissing away our unique international positioning - Banking is an absolutely critical part of the UK economy. It attracts massive inward investment. It is one of our key selling points internationally. Dick around with that at your peril.

What message are Gordy and Eyebrows giving internationally? That we are targeting bankers comparatively more aggressively. That we are going to tax the rich harder than other countries. Hmmm. Good for inward investment, d'ya think?

4. Cutting off your nose - Large salaries and bonuses are taxed, shortly at 50% (but that's another story). If you don't pay them, then the Chancellor's tax coffers further diminish just when he needs more cash. Duh! (Where's both my feet. Ready. Aim. Fire.)

All this nonsense is just the politics of jealousy. It is always popular with us Proles to tax the rich more. We're just jealous of their success and their money. It is for politicians to rise above this base stupidity, see the bigger picture, take their own fair share of the blame, and not pander to us dumb Proles.

But then again, I may as well just piss into the wind.

(And for the record, before some Lefty tosser emails me, I am not a banker).

Oh, the Irony, the Irony!

2009-12-07T13:09:00.009Z

1. Having hurled our tax payments at the public sector, ripped out of our pay packets each month for the last 11 years, resulting in civil servants, council officers, doctors, teachers etc - not to mention MPs - earning six figure salaries,

2. Having grown the public sector headcount by 17% since NuLab came into Government,

3. And having presided over public sector productivity actually declining over the last 11 years despite 1 and 2 above,

Today Gordon Brown had the fucking balls to say:

"...I can announce today that the senior civil service pay bill will be cut by up to 20 per cent over the next three years to release savings of £100 million a year...In the wider public sector, some senior pay and perks packages have...lost touch with the reality of people’s lives. Money which should be spent on health, on schools, on policing, and on social services is in some cases going on excessive salaries and unjustified bonuses far beyond the expectations of the majority of workers...It cannot be right that taxpayers fund 300 local authority officials who have salaries over £150,000, or that in total over 300 staff across public sector bodies are paid more than £200,000."

Un-fucking-believable. The brass neck. The balls of the fucker. No shame. Will no one rid me of this troublesome NuLab priest?

Well Said....

2009-12-06T10:59:00.003Z

At last someone says what I think. Brilliant post here on Burning Our Money - one of my favourite blogs - about climate change.

Please will someone just give us clear un-spun facts. We're happy to believe in man-made climate change, just prove it for us, then we're good to go.

Confusing Climate-ology

2009-12-02T09:23:00.003Z

I don't know about you, but I'm completely confused about climate change.

The 'Warmists' exude that smug, arrogance of the self righteous soft Left if you dare to question whether man is actually contributing to this latest rise in global temperatures. And their use of the term 'Denier' for those with an opposing view is a cynical attempt to mimic the 'Holocaust Denier' label, thus anointing themselves with some sort of divine correctitude. Their palpable disdain for anyone with an opposing view irks me.

The 'Sceptics' seem almost rabid in their screaming diatribes attempting to undo the logic used by the Warmists. They all seem to be hysterical, to the point of madness. I struggle with the reality of hitching my intellect to their tow bar.

So where does this leave me?

Well I'd bought climate change. But had doubts. Then Climategate came along. And my doubts have grown. I want my scientists to be free, fair, logical, academic and neutral not lobbyists for a cause, surrounded by allegations (which on the face of it stand up) and thus forced to ‘stand down’ – aka known as asked to fuck off.

Generally, I take the view that governments and scientists don't tend to lie about the big stuff. But they do make stupid errors and pander to irrational and ill-informed public opinion: the ridiculous fuss over microwave ovens when they arrived, the ludicrous nonsense about the safety of mobile phones and their masts, the crazy madness of the Y2K bug, MMR etc - need I go on.

So, I really enjoyed this post on Devil's Kitchen. It was the first really logical attempt by a Sceptic to work the argument through. He seemed to be getting somewhere near to common sense.

1. A scientific and political consensus exists in favour of climate change but the science is far from settled.

2. Before we start down the expensive road of changing everything in the world, actually before the scientific case is proven, should we not explore whether just coping with the impact is cheaper?

Right now, I'm just confused.

Economics for Dummies

2009-12-01T16:33:00.004Z

On the left, all those G20 countries not in recession.

On the right, all those G20 countries still in reccession.

Don't you just love Guido Fawkes' graphics?

Belle de Blog

2009-11-29T09:32:00.007Z

Two weeks ago, a blogger unmasked herself. A research scientist called Dr Brooke Magnanti fessed up to being Belle de Jour, the well known ex-hooker blogger. I say well known. It seems the blog was well known to everyone but me. But now I’ve caught up.

I have followed the story for the last two weeks and all its ups and downs as I had followed the NightJack story before and the Girl with a One-Track Mind unmasking before that.

My interest is because, like her, I blog under a pseudonym. Now, my reasons are different from the three much better bloggers previously mentioned. NightJack was a serving policeman blogging about the madness of everyday policing. Belle and The Girl were hiding the intimate secrets of their lives.

I blog anonymously because (a) I have a professional life and want to divorce my private musings from my work, my employer and my profession, and (b) it allows me to be so much more free with my thoughts and language.

Question: should bloggers be allowed to be anonymous?

Answer: does the right to free speech (accepting the reasonable constraint of libel) no longer exist? After this year's NighJack ruling, it seems not. Silly really, becasue I guess that large organisations can track down bloggers or close them down if they put their mind to it, so why does it matter? In reality, I think it doesn’t. Not at all in fact.

But the media hates blogger anonymity and various journos have tried to unmask some of us, viz the three previously mentioned bloggers and more. Why?

Two reasons methinks:

1.The print media (aka the dead tree press) are failing badly and are on a constant downhill trajectory. Trade and regional titles are closing left and right. Fleet Street margins are now almost non-existent. Why? Because you can now get so much content for free online. Wake up guys. Your business models are fucked. Thus, they love to attack their new growing competition as they fail.

2. Journos love exposing secrets. It’s what gets them notoriety and thus more money. It’s not for principle or any laudable reason, trust me. Just money.

But here’s the thing: exposing bloggers achieves nothing – apart from selling some more papers – and in fact makes society less rich, less interesting and less informed. We know less about the madness of policing now that NightJack is dead.

Blogs that expose how stupid society now is, make fascinating, insightful and riveting reading. I love Random Acts of Reality as it graphically reminds us how appalling our society now is and how the London Ambulance Service has to deal with us binge drinking morons. The Magistrate’s Blog shows us how ridiculous our court system has become. Inspector Gadget and The Policeman’s Blog tells us the reality of policing in 2009.

We need these guys and their insights.

But, I can see that the political class with their arrogant belief in regulating everything, aided and abetted by journos who like King Canute want to halt the rise of free internet content, will conspire sometime in the future to try and regulate the blogosphere. One moron has already suggested it.

Loving This...

2009-11-28T16:06:00.002Z

Manufactured Political Outrage

2009-11-28T09:44:00.004Z

FACT 1 - One of the duties of central banks is to prop up banks when they look like they might collapse, to forestall a run on the wider banking system.

FACT 2 - This is always done secretly and has been all over the world for centuries.

FACT 3 - The Tories and Lib Dems need to prolong the recession story right up to the General Election to help them and hinder NuLab. The fact that the Tories' and Lib Dems' mock outrage lasted just one 24 hour news cycle, tells us all we need to know about their reasons.

The only thing surprising about this week's £62 billion story is that the Governor of the Bank of England thought is wise to tell everyone what he'd done. Transparency is one thing but some things we proles don't need to know. Whatever next? MI5 and MI6 telling us all their secrets?

Update: Could this be the reason why the Governor spilled the beans?

The Beautiful Game?

2009-11-23T18:05:00.005Z

I follow rugby much more than I follow football. In part, this is due to the fact that I have always been so bored by the disgusting behaviour of footballers and their managers. These over-rewarded thugs are poor role models in so many ways.

Dominic Lawson covered this so eloquently in this week's Sunday Times, I feel compelled to share it here.

What is Heroism?

2009-11-22T08:06:00.007Z

So this weekend, much of the Cumbria flood news coverage focused on the sad death of PC Bill Barker. The media hailed him a hero. We all awoke on Saturday morning to breathless reporters telling us how he died, where his body had been recovered, that it was his birthday, how many children he left behind, reading the hastily prepared media release from his wife, his Chief Constable saying that he was a modern day hero etc.

Now I don't want in any way diminish the life of PC Barker. He was no doubt a popular policeman and a good man. What I want to criticise is the media coverage of these sorts of situations.

PC Barker was a policeman doing his job. He was directing traffic on a bridge in the early hours of the morning when the bridge he was standing on collapsed. A good public servant doing his duty when tragedy struck.

But not heroism.

Heroism is a young man who, realising his colleagues were taking heavy enemy fire, that there were already several casualties and more were likely to be killed, got up and rushed straight in the direction of the enemy, just 20 metres away, raking them with automatic fire, allowing the rest of his section to withdraw back to safety so the casualties could be treated. He was later found dead beside the enemy he had killed in his aggressive counter attack (Corporal Bryan Budd VC, 3 PARA).

Heroism is a young man who's vehicle mistakenly came under fire from a pair of American ground attack aircraft (great allies, huh?). Having escaped from the burning vehicle, he returned to it when he realised that his gunner was trapped in the turret and succeeded in rescuing him. Realising that his comrades were all injured, he returned to the vehicle a second time to inform his headquarters of the situation. He then proceeded to help the wounded gunner to safety even while the two aircraft carried out a second attack, hitting him in the lower back and legs. Finally, he returned to the scene of the attack a third time to attempt to rescue the injured driver of another burning vehicle (LCoH Christopher Finney GC, Blues and Royals).

Heroism is a young girl who jumped out of her armoured vehicle and climbed up the side of it to rescue the vehicle commander who had been shot in the mouth, all while being heavily fired upon by enemy snipers at night. One bullet hit her rucksack as she climbed the vehicle. She then helped drag the vehicle commander back into the safety of the vehicle while still being fired upon (LCpl Michelle Norris MC, RAMC).

Again, I am sure PC Barker was a great man who behaved with dignity and great public spirit last week, but we must not let media hyperbole cheapen what real heroism is. As the death toll in Afghanistan mounts and we all become numbed to the regular casualty roll, we would do well to see detailed coverage of how each of our dead gave their life.

Just Love This...

2009-11-15T14:09:00.004Z

A piece of graphical brilliance from Guido Fawkes.

Where Weak Governments Seek Shelter

2009-11-15T07:49:00.013Z

Three wonderful examples from today's media of desperate news management by 'right on' weak politicians:

1. Child Migrant Apology - A totally manufactured 'crisis' over apologising for sins past. Always a good one, this. The pathetic media, always desperate for a contrition story as it serves the current societal appetite for being outraged over nothing. Why apologise to all these ex-British Australians now? Why not in 1997? Or 1998? Or 1999? (I could go on). You have had a number of years to so this, Gordy. Such a desperate attempt to regain control over the news agenda and play Gordy as a brilliant compassionate leader, it's pathetically transparent. Pah!

And while we are on the subject of style over substance political apologies, where do we draw the line? Where is the apology from the Norwegians for raping and pillaging? And for that matter the French for invading Britain in 1066? And what about the Italians for letting Julius Caesar come over here and start the first road building programme? Trendy lefty governments love this sort of crap. Pointless political bullshit, which the media should ignore but suck up like lap dogs.

2. Pointless Summit - A summit that achieves nothing substantial but a photo op (funny how Obama is always there) and a 'really strongly worded communique', viz the APEC summit. I have opined about summits before (here, here and here). Can we all grow up? We Proles can see through the bullshit, you know.

3. Scapegoat-itis - Always blame someone else for your mistakes. Blameshift is a well recorded political tactic. Thus politicians, who have I recall been raping the taxpayer on pay, expenses and benefits in kind for decades, are still desperate to blame the evil bankers and their fat cat bonuses for our financial woes. Again, you fuckwits, it was a failure of Government regulation not a banking failure or greed on the part of any bankers.

I might as well piss into the wind.

I'm Going Flat Screen Mad!

2009-10-28T18:18:00.003Z

So this month has been a frenzy of new business meetings. Melvin and his current employers are working hard to capitalise on the ‘green shoots’, such as they are. This means that Yours Truly has been in lots of clients’ office buildings, taxis, airports etc. Thus, I have observed an interesting phenomenon that has quietly swept across our nation without any comment.

As I blog, I am sitting in the departrure lounge in Terminal 3 at Manchester Airport. In front of me in the lounge are two very large flat screen TVs. Both of them are tuned to Sky News. The news looks interesting. But alas, I have no idea what the news actually is because, despite viewing it in glorious HD colour, I can’t hear a word the presenters are saying because the sound is turned off.

And so it has been in every location I have visited. Enticing pictures. No sound. No idea WTF they are talking about.

I ask you, what is the point of these silent flat screens?

Where did this almost obsessive requirement come from that every building must have expensive, electricity guzzling, CO2 producing flat screens on every available wall? When did that law get passed then? And why is the sound always turned off, rendering all TV viewing almost impossible?

Every reception area I have visited in the last month is festooned with flat screen TVs, sometimes whole walls of them. Always with the sound turned off. WTF is this all about?

I never sit at home with the TV turned on but the sound off. Do you? No.

I seem to be locked in a new 21st century version of Dante’s Hell – wall to all TV pictures but no sound.

Is this an attempt to look, in this media obsessed world, ‘cool’ because we have flat screen TVs in our office buildings? Is that how we define cool? And if it is, as we all now have silent flat screen TVs bolted to every bit of available corporate wall space, doesn’t that now make it ‘uncool’?

How much energy is sucked from the grid each day by these TVs that no one can hear? What is their carbon footprint, I wonder?

In the last few days, I have become slightly obsessed, counting how many silent flat screens I see each day. So far today – petrol station, Gatwick Airport, Manchester Airport, three separate corporate office buildings, one hotel and now back to Manchester Airport – I am up to 48. And it’s still only 1820 hrs. Still time for some more to greet me at Gatwick and on my drive home.

Someone save me from this silent flat screen hell.

Facist Racist Wankers

2009-10-24T10:59:00.006+01:00

The BNP are a hateful bunch of fantasising bigoted, fascist, racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, anti-Semitic tosspots. That much we all know. So I have no need to go over the whole Nick Griffin/BBC debacle. Let me focus instead on some of the side stories that got lost in this week's news:

1. Was Peter Hain hung out to dry? I didn't see many NuLabs supporting him on his one man hysterical attempt to redefine democracy, did you? The silence of NuLab support for him was deafening.

2. Is Nick Griffin mad? I thought his behaviour on QT was very strange. What was all the silly giggling about? Why did he clap when someone attacked him? Why could he not come up with a better answer to the most obvious question of the night - Q. Are you a racist? A. I have not been convicted of racism. Duh! Is that your best shot, Nick? With your Cambridge degree, that was the best you could come up with?

3. Why are the Tories and Lib Dems not landing serial punches on the real reason that the BNP has gained support - the pathetic and risible immigration policy of NuLab. Jack Straw looked ridiculous trying to defend the indefensible and Sayeeda Warsi and Chris Huhne failed to land even a light slap!

4. Why have the Tories not landed serial punches on proportional representation, the electoral mechanism - adored by the Lib Dems (for obvious reasons) and implemented by NuLab in Scotland, Wales and London - by which extremist fringe politicians always get elected here and abroad.

5. Why did the BBC focus all the questions on QT on the BNP? To expose these morons for what they are, a single issue extremist campaign group, where were the questions on the economy, foreign policy, social issues, the NHS, the post strike etc? Griffin would have imploded with nothing to say at all on any other issue than immigration.

The best way to fight extremists is to:

a. Take them head on in debate - their lack of logic, re-writing of history and poisonous views are then laid bare for all to see, and

b. Keep 'first past the post' for all elections.

I'm Back!

2009-10-24T10:22:00.002+01:00

"Due to popular demand, I feel compelled to blog once more. You have all been nagging me, even begging me, so I am casting my own wishes to one side and putting myself forward again to serve the people. If I can help in my small way to make this world a better place, then who am I to stand in the way of progress. Melvin Cragsbury, at your service."

...is how some jumped up wanker of a politician would put it. The truth, of course, is that with two new children arriving in the Cragsbury household at the same time, there was rather a negative impact on that most precious of commodities....my time.

Now that the muppets are more under control, and the politics of the UK are increasingly pissing me off, I can't remain silent any longer. I need to rant.

Let the rant continue.....

Speaker Bercow

2009-06-22T15:44:00.010+01:00

So there we are then. Speaker Bercow.

For what it's worth, in a totally lacklustre competition - a sort of rather dull 'land of the little people' - my comments:

Bercow - pompous little prat, voted by NuLab to piss off the Tories
Young - actually the best speech and probably the best candidate
Beith - sooooo dull
Beckett - absolutely underwhelming
Widdecombe -as ever, totally nutty
Haselhurst - technically good but uninspiring
Dhanda - sooooo weak it was pitiful
Sheppard - boring
McCormack - lovely 1850s throwback, but in 2009, really?
Lord - last ditch attempt at getting a peerage

But is the new Speaker fit for the job? What do we actually need from the Speaker in any case? Simple. Three things:

1. To chair the House in an independent way, helping backbenchers and the opposition hold the executive to account.

2. To run the House effectively.

3. To steal back power for the House from the executive.

Well, first of all we can see how crap Michael Martin was. He failed all three tests tragically. But I struggle to believe that our new Speaker is going to measure up.

The Speaker Show

2009-06-22T15:26:00.003+01:00

The British: "Lions led by donkeys".

I'll comment at the end. None of them inspire me.

Crass Stupidity

2009-06-20T09:05:00.005+01:00

What an arrogantly patronising, nanny state, pointless waste of taxpayers' money.

My anger is only just subsiding.

No, in fact it's not. I am absolutely incandescently fucked off.

Yesterday, La Famillie Cragsbury had a visit from our health visitor. One of those milestone check ups for very young children. Now she is a nice lady; a sprightly 50-60, sparky, lively, originally Canadian. Full of good advice and reassurance. All good so far.

But what has gripped my shit is what she gave us: a purple 'conference giveaway' style plastic briefcase, containing:

2 children's books - Owl Babies, Elmer's Friends
3 handout leaflets
2 posters
1 sheet of stickers

This apparently is part of a Government funded project called 'Bookstart'. I have now looked into it. The facts (such as they are):

Bookstart is a project which you and I, the taxpayer, has thrown cash at for some years now, funding 25% of the project. The basic idea is as follows: "Bookstart aims to provide a free pack of books to every baby in the UK, to inspire, stimulate and create a love of reading that will give children a flying start in life. But most of all we want to show that books are fun."

PC, lefty, 'right on' laudable stuff you might think. But hold on, is that really what taxpayers should be throwing their hard earned cash at? Isn't learning to read at the 0-3 age group a parental responsibility? Why should the taxpayer fund this at all? Nice to do if the money is free, but it's not. It is hard earned cash, ripped out of the pay packets of normal, everyday average men and women whom earn around £25k pa on average. Not Fred the Shed. He's in the top o.1%. No, normal hard working ordinary people, desperately trying to afford books for their own kids. WTF should they be forced to fund other people's lack of application as parents?

As ever an initiative like this has some solid junk science behind it. Here it is, straight from the Bookstart website:

"Wade & Moore undertook an observational study, where parents shared a book with their children, of two to three years, and compared Bookstart families with a non-Bookstart sample.

83% of Bookstart parents read the whole text compared with 34% of non-Bookstart parents. 64% talked about the story, compared with only 24%. 43% encouraged the child to join in, compared with 17%. 68% encouraged the child to make predictions, compared with 38%
68% of Bookstart children looked at books as one of their favourite activities 21% for children who had not received Bookstart. 75% of Bookstart parents said they usually bought books as presents for their children compared with 10% for parents who had not received Bookstart. 43% of Bookstart parents took their children to the library at least once a month compared with 17% for parents who had not received Bookstart. "

Brilliant so, actually we are training the parents, rather than the children. Isn't that what we should be doing at school? Instead of stalactites and stalagmites, instead of oxbow lakes and Venn diagrams, how about teaching the 16 year old girls who will shortly be getting up the duff several times by various itinerant job seekers, how to parent properly as they are likely to have had appalling parenting example up till this point no doubt.

How screwed up is our society? Instead of addressing the disease, we throw charitable and taxpayer resources at the symptoms.

As I said at the beginning, this initiative is arrogantly patronising, nanny state bollocks at its worst and a pointless waste of taxpayers' money. God save us.

Don't Do It, Dave

2009-06-19T11:19:00.002+01:00

So the poster boy of all the gay, media luvvie Tories is back, read it here.

Dave: don't be fooled. Don't let this intellectually hollow, attention seeking, vain, conceited prat get on the candidates list, for God's sake. Being gay, rich, good looking and able to employ a good PR does not make someone a worthy candidate, even in this lightweight style over substance world in which we live.

Massow is a fraud. He has flip flopped back and forth from Con to Lab to Ind to Barcelona to 'find himself' and back. He is a liability.

Chipmunk Update

2009-06-19T11:13:00.005+01:00

So the Chipmunk lives, surviving her vote of no confidence by her local Labour constituency party. The Great Iain Dale will be happy, but will her local electorate?

Afternote: The Appalling Strangeness has a brilliant post on Her Chipmunkness.

The Tipping Point

2009-06-19T11:05:00.004+01:00

OK, so we now know that Iran's Supreme Leader is backing I'm-a-Dinner-Jacket. The next 48 hrs will tell us where all this is going.

Do the various police organisations crack down, mass arrests, bloodshed on the streets, viz Buma, China etc?

Does the popular protest just continue to gather apace and finally force a change, viz Czech Republic, Ukraine?

We wait with bated breath.

Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?

2009-06-18T10:37:00.007+01:00

...or to translate the words of Juvenal, the famous Roman poet and satirist: who will guard the guards?

We have an absolutely fundamental problem in our democracy. The mission creep of the executive, started by Thatcher, accelerated massively by Blair and topped off with supreme disdainful arrogance by Brown, is now the rotten core of our governance system. Examples from just the last 24 hrs alone:

Yesterday's PMQs - A set piece, weekly moment in holding the executive to account has been transformed into the PM refusing to answer any direct question and lying on the record about the executive's own policies.

The Chancellor's Mansion House speech - Despite the banking regulation system created by the executive being demonstrably inadequate, with the Governor of the Bank calling for it to be changed, with the US Government strengthening their system, because it would seem to be admitting incompetence, the executive toughs it out and refuse to change things.

The fake Iraq war inquiry - A chorus of disapproval, now joined by Lords Butler and Hutton - both past chairmen of war-related public inquiries - reigns down on the executive and its cover up operation of what has been without doubt the most outrageous and expensive (in terms of human life) botch up during NuLab's period in power. The executive just arrogantly ignore the criticism.

MPs expenses - Today the feeding frenzy begins all over again. Standby for days of more coverage. There will be more scalps; NuLab minister Shahid Malik is clinging on by his finger nails and will surely go soon but there will be more. The whole legislature, including the executive, are sullied. And the response of the executive has been pitiful, more interested in covering up the detail and using distraction techniques (even today, funny that Fred the Shred's pension deal should be leaked today, huh?) than shedding light and promoting openness.

All these demonstrate the fundamental problem of our democracy: we have an executive that is so powerful that it now listens to no one, has no shame, and does exactly what it wants.

To answer Juvenal's question, no one is guarding the guards. They are out of control.

Iranian Prediction

2009-06-17T10:24:00.004+01:00

Yup, I'm at it again. It's prediction time. Emboldened by my last prediction - that Gordy was going nowhere - which proved correct in the face of much media hype and blogosphere 'irrational exuberance' to the contrary (still waiting to hear from you, Mr Dale), I am up for my next one.

Mrs C, as you will recall, is a dodgy foreigner: Middle Eastern type, all long eyelashes, designer shoes and overly excitable behaviour. Thus, we follow the ups and down of Middle Eastern politics closely. What's going on in Iran right now has major ramifications for the global community, because:

1. If Mahmoud 'I'm-a-Dinner-Jacket' stays in power, bang goes any chance of stemming the flow of arms and cash to Hammas, which in turn keeps Hammas in power, which in turn means that Fatah will not get back into power, which in turn means that no deal between Israel and the Palestinians is possible, thus fucking over any chance of St Obama solving the Middle East crisis. Not good.

2. If Dinner-Jacket is propped up by the Supreme Leader and the Council of Guardians, then things are likely to get worse, which could push the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to topple the clerics and seize control. Not good either.

3. So the best outcome for world peace and all that, is for the Supreme Leader to dump Dinner-Jacket by saying the election result was miscounted, appoint Mir Hossein Mousavi as President and away we go.

Now, contrary to the usual portrayal in all the Western media about mad mullahs burning US flags etc, Iranian politics is always very tactical and cute. They have always been a very rational geopolitical player. Thus, boldly, I am going for option 3 above.

BTW, brilliant article on all this here.

Gotcha

2009-06-17T09:54:00.010+01:00

As regulars will know, I am implacably opposed to ID cards. Here's my reasoning. But this is a good day for freedom, democracy and privacy. Testament to how out of control Gordy's inept Government is, can be found in this wonderful story.

Today Chris Grayling, the Tory Shadow Home Secretary, has changed our national policy on ID cards by effectively pulling the rug from underneath the Government's scheme, rendering it incapable of coming into existence. By writing to the five bidders for the contract, telling them clearly that whatever is agreed this side on the General Election will be ripped up straight after it. These bids cost millions, and what company is going to engage in the bidding process when the overwhelming likelihood is that it will be scrapped almost immediately.

Heads in the Political Sand

2009-06-17T09:42:00.003+01:00

Don't you just love this. Tonight the Chancellor makes his Mansion House speech. Here's the BBC headline:

BANKING REGULATION NOT TO BLAME

So Captain Eyebrows will witter on about how brilliant Gordy's tripartite system is. (Pause). That would be the one that did not spot the greatest recession since the 1930s, right? And also the one that did not have the ability to deal with the recession quickly when it belatedly noticed it, right? Good work Gordy. Good work NuLab.

And the BBC headline from America today:

US PLAN FOR TIGHTER (BANKING) REGULATION

Time for the stupid little trolls in No10 and No11 to admit we have a problem of their own making methinks.

There Goes My Peerage

2009-06-17T09:17:00.003+01:00

In a landmark decision yesterday, the Courts refused to grant an order to protect the anonymity of a police officer who is the author of the NightJack blog (see the story here). In April, the Blogger was awarded the Orwell Prize for political writing, but since the Times went after him, to find out who he was, the blog is now no more (see here). This is a sad day for the blogosphere. There will be ramifications for sure.

But, generally speaking: bugger it! Mrs C has retreated to the cellar.

Prince of Darkness

2009-06-16T11:08:00.003+01:00

The architecture profession, led by Lord Rogers, is all over Prince Charles' meddling in the proposals, now withdrawn, to redevelop Chelsea Barracks. I have a close affinity to this story as will become clear. To recap:

1. Peace dividend - The Government has been flogging off old barracks and airbases since the fall of the Warsaw Pact in the early 90s, cashing in on the endless rise in land values in our property-led economy. (In my recent professional life, I have helped redevelop some of them).

2. Auction - Perhaps the greatest prize the MoD had was Chelsea barracks, a 13 acre site right in the middle of the most expensive corner of London. They had been trying to sell it for years. (In my past professional life, I was based there).

3. A couple of years ago, the now infamous doyen of the UK residential property boom, Candy and Candy - a couple of rather flashy and brash young men backed by lots of Middle Eastern money - stumped up just under a billion quid for the site. The market groaned as this was a considerable over valuation (nearer £250 million was expected) and was perhaps the moment many realised that a property crash was inbound. (I have met Candy and Candy. Their corporate HQ is like a set from a James Bond film. Absolute corporate vanity which reeks of an entirely unsustainable business built on a boom. It is currently imploding).

4. Lord Rogers - Such iconic sites almost always attract a trophy architect. Lord Rogers did not disappoint. A truly spectacular modernist vision was planned. (I've met him too. A surprisingly muddled thinker for such a big cheese. He is a one trick pony: he does modernist, tall and expensive......oh and ego!)

5. Prince Charles - Now Charles has for many years opined about architecture. Let us be clear, he has no architectural training and no experience but lots and lots of opinions. He only likes classical architecture and a group of so-called ‘classical architects’ has surrounded him, drooling over his every utterance. Having been born into a frumpy, 1950s, sycophantic cocoon and never having left it, he kind of thinks that his views on anything matter because….well he is the PoW. Thus, he entirely misses the point of his future role: keep one’s mouth shut, smile at the poor people, cut the ribbon and look regal. That way, the proles continue to like you and don't rise up and question your gilded lifestyle too much. (In my past professional life, I met him too. His mother and father are utterly brilliant people. I mean that. They are a totally class act. Charles is thick, vain and arrogant; a terrible mixture and bad news for the future of Monarchy plc).

6. Misreading by Qatar royal family - Charles decided that the modernist proposals for Chelsea barracks were not to his taste so sent one of his endless and boring letters to the Qatar royal family telling them so. Now in Qatar, the royal family rule everything so you can kind of understand them believing that if the British monarchy does not like the proposals, then they ought to change them so as to not upset their British kindred spirits.

7. Weak council officers - As ever, when confronted with a difficult political problem, the council officers running the day-to-day operations of Westminster Council have stuck their heads in the sand and instead of recommending approval of the scheme, have offered no recommendation, a little used way for local government civil servants to cop out of having to make a decision.

Putting aside what should get built at Chelsea barracks, there is a very fundamental issue at stake here: in a constitutional monarchy, what role does the monarch’s family have in local government decision-making? Answer: none. Prince Charles’ views should be no more influential than mine. Did he take part in the local consultation exercise mounted by the developer? No.

What should happen is that tonight, at Gordy’s weekly evening audience with Her Majesty, Gordy should tell her to get Charles to fuck off and mind his own business, and then quickly through diplomatic channels, get the Qatar royals to continue splashing their cash to redevelop the site, creating much needed jobs in a recession and much needed homes thereafter.

More Proportional Bullshit (Thu 12 June)

2009-06-16T10:16:00.002+01:00

So Gordy has gone public on some amazingly and woolly idea about introducing PR, none of which will happen before the next General Election. A desperate distraction technique wrapped up as an ill thought through, back of the fag packet initiative. Need I say more.

Cuts (Wed 10th June)

2009-06-16T10:04:00.003+01:00

So I blogged about this some time back when I was writing my short Tory election manifesto here, here, here and here. A brief extract:

"In general terms, frankly, it matters little who wins the next election, presumably in June 2010. Why? Well, whoever wins - assuming NuLab actually still has a chance - they are going to have to carry out exactly the same policies: significant tax increases concurrent with massive public sector spending cuts. There simply is no other option. None. Null. Zero."

What I loved about yesterday's PMQ exchange was:

1. So confused, inward looking and out of touch are NuLab now, that they don't even know their own policies.

2. So seemingly on the ball now are the Tories that they know the fine print of NuLab's policies better than NuLab.

3. Finally, the hidden truth, the reality that we dare not speak of, is out in the open. We need to cut the bloated public sector.

On a tactical point, I thought Cameron could have made more of his 'gotcha' moment.

Smug (Tue 9 June)

2009-06-16T09:59:00.003+01:00

I hate to say I told you so. But, I told you so. This time my prediction was spot on. And will remain so until May or June next year.

Not point scoring at all (much!) but I was one of not very many bloggers who clearly said that Gordy was not going anywhere. So, two questions:

1. How come much of the dead tree press and right of centre bloggers got this wrong?

I guess in part it was hope over reality. The dead tree journos wanted it to happen because that would be them sorted for copy for the next 2 months. And the right wing blogosphere were desperate for it because, having endured the ignominy of the Major years and such a crushing loss in 1997, seeing GB collapse Labour into a remnant of its former arrogant self was just enormous erection territory. All this, coupled with the frothy over excitement of the Westminster media village, led to people believing their own hopes rather than reality.

2. Why didn't Gordy get toppled?

Spineless NuLabs who have proved time and again that they are incapable of regicide, coupled with pathetic supine wimpiness when threatened by the nasty whips, alongside self interest in their own bank balance. The last few days is a prima facie example of why normal people distrust politicians and a demonstration of one of the contributing factors as to why election turnout has tumbled in the last few decades.

PS. No witty comments, Mr Dale?

Cyber Attack

2009-06-16T09:53:00.003+01:00

I have been under cyber attack. Worry not. It was not painful. And I'm all better now. Some evil little virus got into my PC and, although it was deleted, it left a nasty little programme that meant that I could not access any search engines. Blogger being owned by Google meant that I was unable to log on to post. It took me some days to work this out I have to say but luckily yesterday all was revealed by a nice bloke called Brian from our IT support. So, I'm back.

I have been writing posts but just not able to post them. So here they all are one by one.

The Real Losers

2009-06-08T10:10:00.007+01:00

So everyone is banging on about GB and when/if he will go. I still stick by my prediction that Gordy is not going anywhere soon, not least because the election results have made it arguably even more unlikely that those backbench NuLabs will vote for the end to their personal gravy train. They will want to spin it out as long as they can, just like the Tories did under Major.

No the real losers no one is talking about. The real losers are...the Lib Dems.

They have had a truly terrible few days. Everyone knew that Labour was going to do badly. Everyone knew the Tories were going to do well (although they did better than many thought possible, perhaps even themselves). But no one saw the considerable falling away of the Lib Dems.

Fourth in Europe. Lost their heartlands in the county council elections. An unexpected fillip in Bristol meant that the media did not lay into them on Friday.

Awful result for Cleggy. If he cannot do well now, then when?

And I suspect that with fascists elected to the European Parliament for the first time by the British, the proportional representation bandwagon that had begun to roll recently in the Westminster village will subside quickly. Thank God.

Proportional Bullshit

2009-06-07T09:59:00.005+01:00

As a measure to deflect public attention away from the shit heap that is their Government, in recent days - post expenses scandal - NuLab has been constantly banging on about constitutional and electoral reform, as if somehow these are to blame for the mess. Lord Mambypamby did it again this morning on Andrew Marr's programme.

This is just political spin, or what we normal people call 'lying'.

The Lib Dems and all the other smaller parties naturally want to bang on about this as well because it suits them too. It is their Holy Grail. It is their key to electoral success. So let's just pause a moment and deal with this distraction once and for all.

The spin goes that PR is more fair, more balanced and more representative by being more proportional. Well, it is definitely more proportional and therefore THEORETICALLY in some ways more fair. But let's park theory and move on to practically, which at the end of the day is what politics is all about.

The reality of PR in this country would mean the following:

1. The public would, at almost every election in history, have lost the ability to chuck a party out of power decisively. No April 1997. No June 2010 (?!). Why? Because in almost every election we have ever had, the party that the public mood had moved significantly against would have been able to stitch up a coalition to keep them in power.

2. The Liberal Democrats would always be in Government. Why? Because either of the two largest parties would need their MPs to form a government coalition.

3. The BNP, UKIP, Greens, English Democrats (whoever they are?) and all the other mad, bad and loony small parties would hold seats in the Mother of all Parliaments. Why? Do the maths.

4. Coalition government is ALWAYS weak government, held to ransom by the minor coalition partners' views. Look around the world. Look at the European Parliament. Look at councils in no overall control across this country.

So if you want to lose one of the few real electoral powers we proles have, if you want one minor party always around the cabinet table, if you want fascists in Parliament, and if you want the UK to have weak governments, then PR is for you.

Can we move on from this cretinous issue now, please.

Sack Marr

2009-06-07T09:55:00.005+01:00

OMG. What a pathetic interview. Andrew Marr needs sacking. He totally let Mandelson walk all over him. He didn't land a punch. And in this week, when the shit shower is still going on, to be unable to handle such an open goal interview is lamentable.

It's My Birthday...

2009-06-06T21:14:00.002+01:00

...so I am having the day off.

Still exhausted from the total madness of the last few days!

Internecine Warfare

2009-06-05T16:51:00.006+01:00

Prezza has written a scorching piece on LabourHome, laying into the campaign leadership (and thus the leadership) of NuLab. He claims there was no campaign strategy, no tactics, no execution.

I am not a Labour activist so I do now know the reality of how ill prepared they were on the ground for the campaign. But I do know this:

It was not how few leaflets they delivered or how poorly they targeted key wards. It was the fact that their Government has led the country into a recession, made it doubly bad by ensuring that our economy is in worse shape than any other developed economy, is now bereft of an agenda and is imploding on an hourly basis. That's what's done for you, John. And the fact that you can't see that, even now, shows how blind Labour is to the current situation.

There is a wonderful comment on Prezza's blog from a bloke called MathewF:

"Utter nonsense. First of all, Purnell says he isn’t standing for the leadership. How very cynical of you to suggest it John - you could almost be working for the Daily Mail. Perhaps you would like to reflect on your attack on Purnell’s character and publicly apologise to him. Are you big enough?

"Perhaps you might also want to reconsider the use of such intemperate language against comrades and fellow members of the Party. It brings us into disrepute - perhaps better to concentrate your attacks on the Tories? And secondly, we were going to lose these elections massively, before Hazel Blears resigned and Purnell (obviously) and Jacquie Smith and Bev Hughes, etc. All women. Perhaps you just don’t like strong women John?

"What has lost us this election is not lack of campaign skills or nice slogans (we have had too much spin, haven’t we?) or the need for more battlebuses, or pledge cards. This is toytown politics. We have lost these elections because we have no programme to put to the people. There is a vacuum at the heart of our Government. We do not know what we stand for as a Party anymore because Brown doesn’t appear to have any idea. He is not a Leader. The Party thinks so and so do the people.

"The most positive message Labour could put in the North West was Stop the BNP (a very necessary message) but what was our programme? Privatise the Royal Mail? Bail out the bankers? Replace Trident? Work the longest hours in Europe? Dilly dally over expenses reform? Always go for a short-term headline? Do in your colleagues? Give me a break.

"Unless and until we can give people a vision of a better, fairer society which will make a real difference to their lives - and for all your speeches and campaigning, they appear singularly unconvinced by 11 years of a Labour Government - we will never regain their trust. We need a fundamental re-think about where we are going and how we want to get there.

"And we need to regain people’s trust. This would be helped if ALL the people we have elected behaved themselves. You personally can’t wriggle off the hook and shirk your share of responsibility for the corrosive cynicism with which ordinary people now view politics, politicians and the political process.

"So don’t assassinate other people’s characters. Most of all we need a new leader who can communicate, connect and earn the trust and respect of the British people. No matter what you say, that Leader is clearly not Gordon Brown."

Need I say more.

Sinking Ship

2009-06-05T16:47:00.002+01:00

I've lost count. Is that 6 or 7 ministers who have now resigned in the last few days?

No MPs to be Prosecuted...

2009-06-05T13:54:00.005+01:00

...as I predicted some time ago, in fact. Read it here.

Why no prosecutions?

1. After the botched 'cash for honours' and Damian Green investigations, the police do not want a third and are looking for any excuse to not have to get involved.

2. If the Fees Office cleared the claims, then it's difficult to find any individual MP at fault.

One rule for us....

The Weirdness of Fast Moving Politics

2009-06-05T11:24:00.006+01:00

The global recession continues apace. UK job losses pile up. Record numbers of business failures. UK national debt balloons. The Bank of England's printing presses are running at full speed.

Obama shakes the geopolitical tree on his Middle East tour. War rages in Afghanistan. Iraq stumbles towards peace. Iran's still sabre rattling.

The UK Government is in turmoil. Ministers resigning everywhere. Open NuLab internecine warfare. Dire election results tumbling in. PM in mid cabinet reshuffle.

And what does the No 10 website tell us today?

Home page - Government to move forward on constitutional renewal

News page - PM marks anniversary of fall of Polish communism

Is the website team off sick? Have they been reshuffled too?

As Predicted

2009-06-05T10:44:00.006+01:00

Labour cabinet members have no balls - no one, bar James Purnell whoever he is - told the one-eyed fuckwit to stand down.

Labour backbenchers have no balls, as it is proven once again that they cannot seem to ever organise a coup.

The winner?

Dave. He will have a wounded, discredited PM left in place. Open goal until General Election day.

Having said that, all you bollockless NuLab MPs out there, can the disaster of Monday's Euro results not rouse you from your stupor?

Mad Times

2009-06-04T09:16:00.002+01:00

So Mrs C and I were snuggled up in bed last night to watch the 10 O'Clock News. After a hard day with our two new children, Mrs C was already in the land of nod when one of the most bizarre things I have ever seen on TV occurred.

On the eve of an election, a cabinet minister gave a clearly hastily arranged live interview appealing to Labour MPs not to dump their prime minister any further in the shit.

But then in recent days we have seen some bizarre TV. The sight of a Government minister being forced to make Government policy live on air.....by an actress and an assembled company of ex-Gurkhas. Or the spectacle of elected politicians trying to justify fraud or ethically dubious behaviour in live interviews.

We are back to those mad roller coaster days that characterised the last few months of Major's premiership.

My bold prediction of yesterday looks more tenuous by the hour! But Gordy's future hangs on two things:

Has a significant group – and by that I mean I guess around 8-10 – of senior NuLab MPs got the balls to say no to Brown's offer of a cabinet post over the weekend or have 70 Labour MPs got the balls to sign a letter telling Brown to go.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how the Government of the United Kingdom will be decided.

Prediction

2009-06-03T11:19:00.006+01:00

Last time I predicted something - that Speaker Martin would not resign....on the very day that he resigned - I got it spectacularly wrong. The Great Iain Dale commented on that post along the lines of "sucks doesn't it", which made me laugh.

Well here I go again: I can see no way that Gordy will either resign or call an election anytime soon, despite the media frenzy and The Sun's Paul Kavanagh saying he'll be gone in a week.

Why? Well, apart from the political editors of the dead tree press, he is under no real pressure to do so. Are there any plots being detailed, day by day, in the press like all through the latter years of Blair's premiership or even last summer when Milliband bottled it? No. Are there Labour backbenchers charging around calling for him to go? No.

The NuLab big hitters don't want the poisoned chalice now, preferring a run at it after the forthcoming General Election. The myriad of backbenchers who will lose their seats are not suddenly going to behave like turkeys voting for Christmas.

So, I see no real pressure. Yes a few deadbeat ministers have resigned before they were ritually slaughtered but so what?

(So that will be him resigning this afternoon and Mr Dale's comment inbound, then).

Wednesday Games - Game 2

2009-06-03T09:27:00.004+01:00

If as an MP you have been shamed into retiring at the next election because you have been exposed for (a) fraudulently using taxpayer's cash to benefit yourself, or (b) unethical behaviour by working the system for your personal benefit or (c) gilding your home with luxury accoutrement's paid for by the taxpayer, do you get:

Option 1 - Thrown out of office and prosecuted

or

Option 2 - Salary and allowances of around £250k pa to spend as you like until the next election, about another £100k in loss of office allowances, the most generous public sector final salary pension scheme ever, to keep the profit on the 2nd property the taxpayer kindly bought for you, and membership of the Association of Former MPs, giving you a Commons pass (which no doubt will help in your new role as a commercial lobbyist).

Did you guess right?

Wednesday Games - Game 1

2009-06-03T09:16:00.006+01:00

Who might gain from Gordy being ousted post the disastrous Euro/local election?

Option 1 - Any likely successor, who would take on the absolute fag end of this Parliament and then face certain death in a few months in a General Election

or

Option 2 - The media who would be guaranteed acres of coverage for months

Hmmm. I wonder who is stoking this story?

Just Like Buses...

2009-06-02T16:53:00.004+01:00

I suppose I should be banging on about all the MPs who are falling on their swords every hour on the hour these past few days. But, you know, I just can't be assed.

Luke's Sick

2009-06-02T13:35:00.005+01:00

Just discovered from a friend that Luke Akehurst who writes Luke's Blog, a Lefty, NuLab, all that I loathe about Labour politics blog - that I have slagged off from time to time, I will admit - is a bit ill. In hospital for some months with some curious disease of which, small minded dickweed that I am, I have never heard and hope I never catch.

Politics aside, I hope old Luke gets better. I need you to occasionally rant about, Luke. To make Luke feel better, as if I can help, I have added his blog to my blogroll.

Keep blogging Luke.

Crime Madness

2009-06-02T09:33:00.006+01:00

So, in The Sunday Telegraph this week, there was an interview with Otis Ferry, the son of Brian and ardent hunt campaigner. Read it here. His is a pretty silly story of the jockeying between pro-hunt and anti-hunt campaigners. He was charged with various fairly stupid stuff, then remanded in prison for four months and then the CPS and the police offered no evidence in court. Says the article:

"It is not just Ferry and his supporters who think he was hard done by. Even the judge who had presided over his case after Ferry was accused of perverting the course of justice could not hide his anger at the defendant's treatment when the charge was dropped."

In the normal course of events, none of this would trouble me. But then today this, an article in today's Metro covering the Home Affairs Select Committee report on knife crime. It included this choice line:

"...just one in five of those caught with a knife was jailed in the last three months of last year, the report revealed."

WTF? Did I read this right? The taxpayer has paid for some dumb assed Hooray Henry to get banged up for four months for a whole load of utterly irrelevant and trivial crap and where it turned out there was not enough evidence to prosecute him in any case, but 80% of those who get caught walking around toting a potential murder weapon just get a caution or a non-custodial sentence. Fucking hellski. What the fucking fuck is going on around here?

Oh, but it gets even madder when you read on. Keith Vaz, the Home Affairs Select Committee chairman and well known utter wanking tosspot, said this:

"'We are seeing a spiralling of the arms race as far as knife crime is concerned,. Young people carry knives because they fear that others are carrying knives. We are clearly failing them."

No we're fucking not you moronic asshole, you are failing us by not making sure that (a) they are educated and (b) they are locked up when they commit a crime. Fuckwit.

And his solution? He goes on to call for a Downing Street summit on the issue. OMG. How NuLab's love calling for summits. I have covered summitry before (here) but let's just remind ourselves of what they are about. If there is one certain rule in life, it is this: when politicians announce a 'summit' you know that:

a. they're in the shit
b. that means that we poor proles are in the shitter with them
c. they have absolutely no idea how to get out of the shit, and
d. they are desperate to be seen to do something to deflect attention from c above

The article ends with a classic NuLab quote from another total thieving tosspot:

"But Home Secretary Jacqui Smith insisted: 'Through tougher sentencing we are carrying out a clear message."

Yup. Tougher sentencing. 80% chance of no prison sentence for wandering the streets with a potential murder weapon. NuLab spin is alive and well.

21st Century Circus Feak Shows

2009-06-01T14:51:00.005+01:00

For the circus, read TV.

For the slick circus promoter, read a TV production company.

For the afflicted freaks (hairy ladies, the world's smallest man, the world's tallest woman, half man/half monkey etc), read celebrity crazed morons seeking their 15 minutes of fame.

What goes around, comes around.

But in 21st century Britain instead of the freaks scratching a living in a travelling circus, their holy grail is the possibility of a year of million pound earnings.

How did we come to this?

New Tory Media

2009-06-01T12:57:00.007+01:00

So The Sun, has come out as supporting the Tories for Thursday's European and County elections. Mildly interesting.

Not that this isn't huge news but who else would The Sun support? The 'NuLab love in' has long since passed.

But factor in that this is a News International paper, where the proprietor (one Rupert Murdoch) has a history of being involved in that particular decision, and who is someone that all main parties try and court. Now that makes it much more interesting.

But here's an even more interesting question: what is the ongoing relationship going to be like between the next Tory Government and The Daily Telegraph? Now that really is interesting.

Told You So

2009-05-28T13:41:00.001+01:00

You can't defy the markets, Ms Kirkbride.

As I predicted here.

Un-Fucking-Believable

2009-05-27T18:12:00.004+01:00

Now I am pro-EU, albeit after hefty reform, but this is just mad:

http://devilskitchen.me.uk/2009/05/yet-more-evidence.html

And They're Off...

2009-05-25T10:37:00.003+01:00

Now if this isn't a first whiff of grapeshot in the race for the title post GB then I'm a banana: Alan Johnson calls for voting reform.

Standby for Harman, Straw, Milliband et al to all start spinning their platform shortly.

McKay and Kirkbride

2009-05-24T07:44:00.004+01:00

I am told by close colleagues who know him well, that Andrew McKay is a good bloke. Honourable. Sensible. Solid. Would have been a good minister etc. So the logic goes that it is sad that he has been forced out.

Good men sometimes make mistakes. Fleecing the taxpayer, as he and his wife have been, was wrong and clearly a mistake.

Thus he had to go and that was clear days ago. He just took too long working it out...as did Cameron.

Kirkbride will go shortly as well. It's just inevitable. If you are wrong, you are wrong. It is as simple as that, however nice you are.

Suppression of Free Speech

2009-05-24T07:34:00.006+01:00

Despite the fact that Poor Old Nadine Dorries still clearly doesn't get it (as posted here yesterday) and that she is a lightweight who said some loopy things on her blog, it is outrageous that the Barclay Brothers have managed to get her blog taken down.

I thought we lived in a free and fair democracy?

I thought we had a right to free speech?

I thought you could say or write anything about anybody, accepting that they may sue you for libel or slander?

WTF is going on? How an earth can a newspaper and/or its owners (get the irony) stop free speech? Someone please explain this to me.

Poor Nadine

2009-05-23T11:28:00.004+01:00

Ahh, diddums. Poor Nadine Dorries MP is worried about the mental health of MPs who are under "unbearable pressure" from the media. Hear it here on R4.

1. No one asked them to stand for Parliament. If you can't take the pressure...

2. Unbelievable hypocrisy. MPs love inflicting pressure on others all the time.

2. They are in the media spotlight because...they have been caught stealing or misusing taxpayers' cash.

3. Tough shit. She may be top Tory totty but she, like that absolute asshole Anthony Steen - the poster boy of arrogant entitlement - still just doesn't seem to get it.

WE, THE PEOPLE, ARE FUCKED OFF THAT THE MONEY WE HAVE WORKED OUR ASSES OFF TRYING TO EARN, AND HAVE BEEN COMPELLED TO PAY TO THE GOVERNMENT, HAS BEEN STOLEN BY YOU FUCKERS, SQUANDERED ON CRAP, AND YOU WANKERS HAVE DONE YOUR DAMNEDEST TO HIDE THIS FROM US.

Democratic Freedom

2009-05-22T21:45:00.005+01:00

Two stories have caught my eye today.

First, the ongoing saga about the racist bigot Nick Griffin attending a Buckingham Palace garden party and, second, the news that the police have constructed a national network of cameras and computers which automatically log car number plates and which will be in place within months.

What links the two, you ask?

Let's deal with the police first. This constant demand for more surveillance is seductive but wrong. Seductive because every policeman, lawyer and Nulab politician can recite facts and examples as to how many more crimes they could solve if we could just watch people more. Wrong because we have tipped over the balance of what is reasonable interference in our day-to-day lives by the forces of the state.

As I blogged a few days ago in relation to euthanasia, we must always make laws for the 99% not the 1%. I am sure we could catch just about all criminals if we took DNA samples of the entire population and watched everyone all the time, but that is clearly unacceptable. And so is establishing a national network to spy on the perfectly legal 99% of us. This could only happen in illiberal Nulab Britain, where democratic freedom is expendable.

Now, should BNP politicians be allowed to take tea at the Palace? Simple answer: yes. I hate the BNP and their racist, thuggish bigotry. But we live in the cradle of democracy. And democracy can sometimes be uncomfortable because those people with abhorrent views are allowed to express them. And, despite the fact that I hate them, I would fight for their right for them to hold and express those horrible views. It's called democracy and liberal fascists like Nulab just don't get it.

Democracy is a fragile thing, one that the current Nulab Government has been doing its best to destroy for some time. Take democracy for granted at your peril. As we can see, it can be easily be eroded.

US Budget Cuts Explained

2009-05-21T15:52:00.001+01:00

Can some clever dude work this out for the UK please...

Hat tip - Donal Blaney

Impressionable Elites

2009-05-20T10:28:00.007+01:00

(Not going to talk about MPs, expenses, the Speaker or any of that shit for a while...hopefully).

A good book I read recently, given to me by a colleague, is called Microtrends: The Small Forces Behind Today's Big Changes by Mark Penn. Penn is a Lefty political strategist who has worked for both Bill and Hilary Clinton. Don't let that put you off. It's an interesting book.

Penn highlights a number of small, often low key, trends that have emerged over recent years which give us a clue about where society is now and where it's headed. My particular favourite is what he calls 'impressionable elites'. Let me explain.

All his polling in recent years has demonstrated an intriguing and paradoxical trend. The higher a person is up the educational scale, the more lightweight their political views and interests. The lower down the educational scale people are, the more inquiring and focused their political views and interests are.

There is logic here. The 'haves' are not struggling for survival. They are comfortable. Food is on the table aplenty, even if in current economic times it is from Tesco not Waitrose. But the 'have nots' are locked in a perpetual struggle for survival, desperately trying to make ends meet.
What this leads to is higher educated people not worrying so much about the detail of political issues, policies, agendas whereas those lower down the education food chain are absolutely concerned about what their politicians stand for because they are hoping that they will help them get a leg up.

This in turn leads the better educated able to gossip about what their politicians are like, rather than what they stand for. They are more worried about how they dress than what they believe in. Meanwhile, the lower educated segment are absolutely glued to what their politicians say and could not give a toss about the lightweight stuff.

Think this through. Read the dead tree press. It's mostly about style rather than substance. They are more worried about what Michelle Obama is wearing rather than what her husband and Gordy are actually agreeing to in their meeting. Think how dumbed down our media have become in the last 10 years. Think about the decline of the BBC news, or Panorama, or why we now have some irrelevant celeb on BBC Question Time. All this is part of that trend.

What The Fuck Do I Know?

2009-05-19T17:04:00.005+01:00

Well I couldn't have got that more wrong if I'd tried!

So, farewell then Mr Speaker. But what gives? Why resign as an MP as well?

I think Gordy must have pulled the rug from underneath him behind the scenes, in a "you're dead meat, we will give the no confidence motion Parliamentary time, go now so that we can begin to draw a line" sort of way. Hence, Martin thinking..."Hmmmm, how to get my own back. I know. A by-election for Gordy right now will fuck him badly." And indeed it will.

The last by-election was also in Glasgow. Horrible day at the office for Mr Brown, that one. This one will be worse. Either stand by for an SNP whitewash or for an anti-sleaze, independent candidate: Martin Bell, again? Ester Rantzen in Glasgow, I think not? A Scottish business type?

But for Gordy it just gets worse and worse. Think what's coming:

HoC official expenses detail release
Daily Torygraph and other media outlets pouring over the detail and comparing entries
Inspector Knacker arrest of various MPs, followed by rumour and counter rumour for months
Euro and local elections horror story
New speaker election
NEC and local party de-selections
Kelly inquiry announcements
Glasgow by-election loss

And all this on top of monthly unemployment mounting up. More business failures. Possible IMF help needed. OMG. It just gets worse and worse.

Dishonourable Arrogance

2009-05-19T10:06:00.007+01:00

Yesterday was an inglorious day.

Since the early 90s under the Tories, and dramatically since Labour came to power in the late 90s, the days of honourable behaviour in public life have long since ebbed away. Perhaps, Lord Carrington in 1982 was the last set piece occasion when it was evident. All those ghastly Tories during the Major years (Hamilton, Treddinick, Smith etc) and almost every Labourite who has tried to stay in office when it was clearly time to go, have demonstrated this point.

We now have a professional political class who cling to power at all costs. Despite the fact that their position is untenable, that they are openly vilified, that they have been publicly disgraced, that they are ridiculed daily in the media, that public opinion is lined up against them, still they try to cling to power, the trappings of office and, most importantly, the big salary that goes with it.

Even the Great Iain Dale has been caught up in the Westminster madness that is the current febrile atmosphere in the political village. In short, Martin is not going anywhere because:

He wants to keep the big salary for another year (ie until the election)
Gordy wants Martin around to take the heat and media attention away from him
Labour MPs will fight to deny as many Labour scalps as possible to the Daily Torygraph
Dave needs to retain as much discredited Labour shit in place as possible to help him at the polls in 2010
Tory MPs want to be able to control who the next Speaker will be, which they cannot do until after the next election when they will have a majority

To paraphrase Michael Winner in those ghastly Esure adverts: "Calm down, Dear. It's only a political scandal".

I'm Expensed Out

2009-05-18T09:54:00.005+01:00

(I've been missing again. Adjusting to having two small children. It appears to be a bit trickier than anticipated. And quite tiring.)

Anyway, I don't know about you but I am sooooooooooooooooooo fucking bored of the expenses scandal.

They wrote the rules for the ease of theft.
And then then stole.
But it was "within the rules".
But not ethical, moral or in some cases legal.
The end.

What's not to get. Kind of interesting to watch the thieves dealing with it. Several phases:

Phase 1 - Denial, hoping it will all go away.

Phase 2 - Clarify that "it's within the rules" and hope that it will all go away.

Phase 3 - Blame shift: "The Fees Office agreed my expenses", hoping it will all go away.

Phase 4 - Bury head in sand by hiding from the media, hoping that it will all go away.

Phase 5 - Speak to whips/party bosses. Announce you are paying the money back, thereby hoping it will all go away.

Phase 6 - Find someone to blame: step forward Michael 'The Incompetent' Martin, and hope that it will all go away.

Morons at work. This is going to change politics. It's not going to go away. There will be de-selections. There will be more scalps. There will be electoral consequences. Brown will continue to look terribly slow and reactive. Cameron is looking good but needs to keep up the pace.

The Tory Manifesto - Part 3

2009-05-12T22:00:00.001+01:00

So having dealt with the big two issues, let's switch to tactics.
In essence, Gordon Brown in 2009 is doing once again what he did in the 2005 Budget. He has put off the necessary action he needs to take until after the forthcoming election. After the Budget in March 2005, the Economist front page said it all.

The same front cover could have been run after this year's Budget. Gordon Brown is being totally dishonest with the electorate. He knows that taxes need to go up and that public spending must be reigned in but he is ignoring these two facts and hoping to distract voters until after the election.

So Dave has an opportunity here. Bearing in mind my previous three Tory Manifesto posts and that there is inevitably going to be some short term bad news, his strategy should be as follows:

First, he should state the obvious - "Gordon Brown has presided over the worst UK financial collapse since the Great Depression. Economies are always cyclical. A recession was always going to happen at some stage. Gordon Brown did not plan for it. He had no plan B. Worse, he spent everything and saved nothing, exposing us to economic meltdown more than most other advanced economies."

Second, he should be honest - "The terrible state we are in will need taxes to rise and public spending cuts, whoever wins the election. Gordon Brown is being dishonest by not telling you this. He is hoping to spin himself back into Downing Street. And then....he will raise taxes and cut spending. That is dishonest and I am not prepared to do that. I am going to tell you the truth, however unpleasant it is."

Third, he should run my long term aspiration/short term pain argument as explained in Tory Manifesto - Part 1.

In short, his strategy should be to show Brown is incompetent and culpable, and then treat the electorate as adults. I believe that the stay-at-home Labs and Lib Dems and the genuine floaters will respond to this, thus giving him a decent majority.

The Tory Manifesto – Part 2

2009-05-11T09:52:00.005+01:00

So the next big item is public sector cuts. How to do this and not shore up the NuLab and Lib Dem ‘Tory cuts’ mantra. My plan:

1. Declare that every Government department will from next year cut its budget by 1% each year for the next Parliament. That will make a 5% cut over the Parliamentary term before inflation is taken into consideration. A significant cut and more likely to be nearer 10% when you take inflation into account.

2. However, two departments will be exempt: defence (putting current overstretch aside, you can’t cut defence whilst you are at war) and the NHS – good for the stay-at-home Labs and Lib Dems (see Friday's post).

3. Commit to raising the retirement age to 70 in five years time, thus giving those due to retire time to plan.

4. Furthermore, announce an NHS review to last two years, led by an independent doctor, to see how the NHS needs to change to be more fit for purpose in time for the next election. Also commit to a defence review once we are fully out of Iraq to review the future size and shape of the armed forces, again led by an independent retired general.

The Tory Manifesto – Part 1

2009-05-10T09:48:00.005+01:00

OK, so let’s deal with the biggest issue first: tax rises. If you are Dave, and you need to be seen by Tory voters as a tax cutter, how do you put up taxes and not been seen as a Lefty? Here’s my plan.

First, we will inevitably need to have higher taxes for at least five and maybe even up to 10 years. Why so short a time I hear you ask, when all the doomsayers are saying it will take many years to pay off the huge Brown debt? The doomsayers are purposefully forgetting two things: the huge profit that will be made when the next Government sells off the taxpayer's share of Lloyds Group, RBS etc and that the soon to arrive inflation problem will wipe out a large chunk of the debt.

So I think his best strategy would be to give us proles a longer term, clear explanation of where he wants to end up but then explain the short term pain. So, remembering my Tory manifesto preamble from Friday, how about this?

By 2020, the Tories would aspire to:

1. Using today's comparable numbers, increase the basic income tax allowance to £12k pa (currently around £6.5k), thus in round numbers taking anyone on the minimum wage out of income tax altogether – practical and good for the stay-at-home Labs and Lib Dems (see Friday's post).

2. Aim to reduce top rate income tax down from the Brown promised 50% back to the current 40% rate but with a longer term aspiration to reduce it further to 35% - good for the Tory tribal vote.

3. Scrap inheritance tax altogether – good for everyone, including many stay-at-home Labs and Lib Dems.

With that clear statement of where Dave wants to head, he can then give us the bad news of how tough things are going to be in the interim and get away with it.

MP Watch

2009-05-09T06:30:00.008+01:00

So you will recall that I have been running a rolling list of MPs who are not fit for office. The last version is here.

Well, in light of the forthcoming July receipt publication and, more specifically, The Daily Telegraph's revelations, I simply cannot keep up with all the outrageous behaviour of our illustrious representatives. In fact, I hereby scrap MP Watch and am starting a new scheme:

Find An MP Who Is Not On The Make And Therefore Deserves Re-Election Watch.

All nominations by comment or to melvin.cragsbury@hotmail.co.uk.

More seriously, for all the revelations, for all the Gordy U-Tube nonsense, for all the crass excuses (think Pickles and think Straw yesterday) and for all the lack of ethics and lack of moral authority ("but it's in the rules"), here are the simple rules that need to be applied:

1. There seems to me to be nothing wrong with the rules I suggested some time ago here. In summary:

a. Cull the number of politicians as we have way too many.
b. Being an MP is a part-time job. Remunerate it as such.
c. Keep the salary as it is.
d. Reduce the secretarial allowance.
e. Do not pay MPs to start a property portfolio. Give them a per diem for any night they have to spend in London. (All this spin about "paying MPs' to turn up", generated by MPs note, is just a smokescreen because MPs do not like this concept as they would take a pay cut).
f. Receipts for everything over £10
g. Annual audits of all MPs expenses by the NAO.

2. MPs need to accept, particularly at this time, that they have got away with being massively overpaid in expenses and pensions etc, and that they now need to take a massive cut. Lead from the front guys.

3. As I have said many times here before, foxes cannot be in charge of the chicken coup. So MPs' remuneration in all its forms needs to be taken away from MPs and handed to an independent body.

4. Any scheme needs to be absolutely transparent, published in full annually and aggressively regulated with a simple punishment if you get it wrong: immediate removal from office and an immediate by-election. Trust me, there would be no fiddling then.

Oh and all this fake outrage at a media exclusive and money being paid for the leak and the police being called in etc, P-L-E-A-S-E. These fuckers have been on the make, been caught, tried to stop the taxpayer finding out, gone to court to try to overturn a decision against their exposure and are only now, belatedly and begrudgingly, releasing some not all of the information.

The Tory Manifesto - Preamble

2009-05-08T13:26:00.006+01:00

So over the next few days I am writing the Tory manifesto. Well, my version of it anyway. Here goes: the preamble.

In general terms, frankly, it matters little who wins the next election, presumably in June 2010. Why? Well, whoever wins - assuming NuLab actually still has a chance - they are going to have to carry out exactly the same policies: significant tax increases concurrent with massive public sector spending cuts. There simply is no other option. None. Null. Zero.

But Dave's problem is demonstrated by a meeting I had this week with a client of mine. He's a property guy. Big cheese. Rich. Very. Always voted Tory. Good potential as a party donor actually. His view: "Well Cameron will win so he doesn't need my vote. But anyway why would I vote for him? I have no idea what he stands for or what he actually will do once in Government. All I've heard is this soft Left, hug a hoodie, green, global warming crap."

All the good poll results have been because NuLab is in terminal decline and ripping itself apart, not because Dave has laid out anything even slightly compelling. And there is the rub. By being a 'New Conservative', Dave has confused us proles as to what he and his party are now all about.

So his conundrum is this: how to raise taxes but not alienate his trad Tories voters whilst cutting spending and not alienating those he needs either not to turn out for Labour or the Lib Dems or to attract to vote Tory once more. Putting aside for now that he of course also needs some 'blue meat' for his tribal vote, I think he has to target three groups:

1. The 'stay-at-home' Labour voters
2. The 'stay-at-home Lib Dems
3. The genuine floaters

He needs the stay-at-home Labs, now so revolted and embarrassed by their current Government, to be so pissed off they...well...stay at home.

He needs the stay-at-home Lib Dems to feel that (a) Dave may not be so bad after all and (b) to realise that to get rid of Labour they need to...well... stay at home.

And he needs the genuine floaters, also pissed off with NuLab, to at least see something attractive about his agenda and therefore give him the benefit of the doubt.

Until now, Dave's strategy has been to stay tight lipped about future policies, agendas, manifesto commitments etc until an election is imminent so that the desperate NuLab attack dogs have little time to savage him. But the time is fast approaching when Dave needs to say something about what he is all about and what he will do.

Hence, my Tory manifesto....

British Dude Brilliance

2009-05-07T18:28:00.001+01:00

This is a brilliant article which everyone should read - http://brackenworld.blogspot.com/2009/05/what-is-nasty.html

Right To Die

2009-05-07T10:13:00.004+01:00

I continue to be amazed at some attitudes to euthanasia. This comment is stimulated by the following:

1. Well documented euthanasia proponent Dr Philip Nitschke was stopped and questioned by police under the Immigration and Asylum Act after arriving from Australia at the weekend. Dr Nitschke, who runs Exit International, was searched, fingerprinted and formally interviewed after being told his workshops could be in breach of British law (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8030416.stm).

2. Nitschke held a seminar on euthanasia in Bournemouth this week (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/5279143/Dr-Death-Philip-Nitschke-holds-suicide-workshop.html).

I have written about this subject before here.

Why do I not have a right to choose when I die? Explain to me someone please, why the state should have the right to either criminalise me for choosing to take my life or criminalise others for helping me carry out my wishes? How arrogantly nanny state is that.

And please don't try to defend the "we have to protect the vulnerable" line that all the churchy types and Lefties use. To say that we will not pass a law because a tiny, tiny minority of people may be adversely affected is ridiculous. Follow that logic and you would never pass any law. No law can cover every situation. Let me repeat for the hard of hearing:

LAWS MUST BE MADE FOR THE 99% AND NOT THE 1%.

I just think that it is an incredibly arrogant intervention in my life and free choice that the state can stop me from choosing when I die if I want to.

WTF were the police doing stopping and interviewing a doctor who had come to this country to give a lecture on a medical issue?

WTF?

2009-05-07T09:57:00.004+01:00

Has anyone noticed the stupid, short London weather bulletin after the local news slot on News at Ten? Am I the only person struggling to understand WTF it is all about?

Peter Cockcroft bounces excitedly in front of a blank screen with no weather map - kind of a traditional visual aid and quite useful for explaining the weather - telling us in very, very brief outline what the weather will be like. He then spends the same amount of time telling us exactly at what time sunrise and sunset will occur. WTF? How does that qualify as a weather forecast?

Our TV tax is paying for that.

Draper Is Dead

2009-05-07T09:51:00.003+01:00

Again, sadly not. But he has been ejected from LabourCrap or whatever that shit NuLab corporate blog is called.

Thought: if someone shows terrible judgement, a complete lack of integrity and then loses their job over it, should they ever get a second chance? Dripper caused a huge scandal for NuLab 10 years or so ago and then crawled back to prominence again. So has Mandy. Twice. Will people never learn.

Brown Is Dead

2009-05-06T09:44:00.005+01:00

No, calm down. He's not dead yet. But he is absolutely dead politically. The evidence? Well not what all the media are raging about. As ever, they are miles off target.

It's not his various policy U-Turns, every day a new one it seems.

It's not that he had to dump McBride and is considering a Night of the Long Knives cabinet reshuffle.

It's not his restless doomed cabinet, who all are so pathetic that they can't bring themselves to plunge the knife in and so resort to the modern politician's old favourite: the well trailed one remark in an otherwise dull speech or interview, which they can 'clarify' later.

It's not that he and his team are completely out of touch with public sentiment (think Gurkhas).

It's not that he has lost a vote in the House (think Gurkhas).

It's not that all his polling is downhill.

It's not that the recession still has more drip, drip, drip bad news for many months to come.

No. It's U-Tube. Watch it again....

Fact 1 - Gordy is a shit public speaker; no rhythm, no delivery, no projection, no humour, no charisma, no character. Nothing. Null. Zero.

Fact 2 - Gordy has no bedside manner. He has no empathy with his audience. When he speaks, he is alien to you. He is like a nervous junior bank clerk who retreats behind formality when telling you that you can't have a loan.

So who the fuck thought putting him on U-Tube would be a good idea? Even Fatty Prescott is mocking him!

The truth is that anything he says is now openly mocked by his own side and the media. He cannot get a good headline anymore. So the strategy is to bypass the media and go direct to the voters on U-Tube, also hoping to make him look cool and hip and relevant by using yoof media (tip - this doesn't work in a buttoned up suit, duh!).

No, this is an act of incredible desperation. The No 10 Bunker has run out of ideas. They are bereft. They have a totally unmarketable product and are having to think of ludicrous ways to market it.

Gordy is dead. It is almost awful to watch. But so much fun.

I'm Back

2009-05-06T09:41:00.002+01:00

Sorry about the radio silence. A combination of (a) a foreign business trip, (b) a laptop that kept breaking whilst on said trip, and much more importantly (c) the arrival of my first two children. Been a bit fraught as you might guess. However, I am now back in the saddle and have sooooo much to rant about. Now, where shall I start?

Banana Republic Britian

2009-04-17T21:03:00.002+01:00

When governments are going under and desperately trying to cling to power, they invariably become more authoritarian in their efforts to stay in power. It's just the way it is, always has been and always will be. It's a truism.

Think of every banana republic despotic regime just before they fall apart: free media is curtailed to prevent criticism, the rich's assets are seized to keep the regime funded, known opponents are all arrested to take the leadership of any uprising out of circulation, curfews are imposed to prevent civil disorder and facilitate state control etc. Familiar concepts, but never in Britain, right?

Well, in a first world, advanced liberal democratic way, we are seeing just this in NuLab Britain.

For the usual banana republic distraction techniques to stop the people from focusing on how incompetent the government really is, read the endless 'initiativitis' so beloved of NuLab, previous commitments reheated for today's press deadlines.

For the usual tough posturing showing how in control the dictatorship is, read the relentless diet of illiberal legislation to target those NuLab don't like.

Instead of capturing the radio/TV station every banana republic seems to have, we see NuLab spin doctors constantly bullying journalists to try to control the media agenda.

Instead of appointing loyal supporters to control key organisations NuLab has politicised the civil service.

Instead of spreading lies about their opposition, NuLab has......oh hold on, they got caught before they could do that.

The normal rounding up of political opponents on trumped up charges has morphed into pushing the police to arrest whistle blowers and their opposition accomplices.

Banana republic brazen lies about 'how brilliantly El Presidente is leading us in these difficult times' - remember Comical Ali - have been replaced by Gordy's outrageous spin informing us how brilliantly we are prepared for economic recession (not according to the IMF or OECD which say in fact we are the most vulnerable).

We are living in a NuLab banana republic. Thank God it's almost run out of time.

Apologies

2009-04-17T21:02:00.001+01:00

Been offline for two days. Broken laptop. Apols. Now back.

Words of the Day

2009-04-14T14:01:00.001+01:00

"Now, you may say that politics has ever been a mucky business, with journalists willingly allowing themselves to be used in the pursuit of the political vendettas of Westminster; but what is striking about the methods used by Brown's courtiers is that they never, ever, employ arguments of substance, still less principle, in their attacks against those who are deemed to have taken an incorrect position. They only go for the man, never the ball."

Dominic Lawson, The Independent

Selected Reagan Quotes

2009-04-14T13:37:00.004+01:00

Whilst UK politics is down in the gutter, here are a few truisms from the great man for light relief. Some are highly relevant to this Easter's shenanigans.

'Here's my strategy on the Cold War: We win, they lose.'

'The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

'The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.'

'Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U.S. was too strong.'

'I have wondered at times about what the Ten Commandments would have looked like if Moses had run them through the U.S. Congress.'

'The taxpayer: that's someone who works for the federal government but doesn't have to take the civil service examination.'

'Government is like a baby: an alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.'

'The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program.'

'It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.'

'Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: if it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.'

'Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed, there are many rewards; if you disgrace yourself, you can always write a book.'

'No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.'

'If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.’

Goody Goody

2009-04-14T13:24:00.003+01:00

You will recall my views on Jade Goody and Jack Tweed (here).

Jack Tweed has been jailed for 12 weeks for assaulting a taxi driver today. My case proven, methinks.

Mad Teachers

2009-04-14T10:30:00.005+01:00

So. Let me get this right.

1. The country is in the depth of an historic recession

2. Unemployment has passed the 2 million mark

3. Unemployment is widely predicted to hit over 3 million by the year end

4. After profligate spending by Gordy the country is teetering on technical bankruptcy

5. Many independent economists are predicting we are likely to need a bailout from the IMF

At this very moment, the teaching unions, after 12 years of bumper pay rises under NuLab and with their final salary pensions intact unlike the private sector, pass a motion at their conference demanding a 10% pay rise.

Should this quite awe-inspiring utter dislocation from reality not disbar you from being a teacher?

Updated MP Watch

2009-04-13T08:31:00.007+01:00

Thanks for all those email contributions from others. Keep them coming....

MPs Unfit to Hold Office (by their own actions)

Labour

Ed Balls - Fiddling his expenses

Margaret Beckitt - Three homes on the taxpayer

David Borrow - Misusing Parliamentary allowances for blatant electioneering

Kevin Brennan - Making taxpayers pay his stamp duty

Gordon Brown - Utter incompetence and making the UK bankrupt

Dawn Butler - Utter incompetence and failing in her job as a whip, as well as making the taxpayer pay for a second home only 11 miles away from her own

Harry Cohen - Fiddling full ACA whilst claiming his main home is really a caravan in Colchester

Yvette Cooper - Fiddling her expenses

Alistair Darling - Stealing from the taxpayer by claiming ACA for 2nd home whilst owning another already in London

Barbara Follett - Claimed £126,952 in second home allowance since 2001 whilst renting out a flat in London, a house in South Africa and a holiday home in Antigua

Nigel Griffiths - Adultery, lying and using his taxpayer funded Commons office for sex romps

Peter Hain - ‘Forgetting' to register £100k of Deputy Leadership campaign funding

Harriet Harman - General vacuousness and financial ineptitude when running for Deputy Leader

Geoff Hoon – Using his allowances to pay for property which he in fact rented out whilst living in a grace and favour Government property

Ann Keen - Claiming double rations of expenses with her husband

Alan Keen - Claiming double rations of expenses with his wife

Ruth Kelly - Utter incompetence when a minister

David Lammy - Utterly incompetent and completely out of his depth

Michael Martin – The most incompetent and dishonest Speaker in history, as well as for fiddling his allowances to build up a property portfolio whilst living in grace and favour Speaker’s House

Tony McNulty - Stealing from the taxpayer by fiddling his expenses (ACA 2nd home for parents)

Michael Meacher - Rented out four properties in London and one in the Cotswolds while claiming £57,468 in ACA

Sion Simon - Utter incompetence and being completely out of his depth on his ministerial brief, as well as (a) making a cringe worthy spoof video of Cameron (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ace0gtn8dJ0) and then trying to defend it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcS7i4wn01o), with an astonishing haircut and way too much aggression – unbelievable that this muppet is a Government minister

Jacqui Smith - Stealing from the taxpayer by fiddling her expenses (ACA for her actual family home whilst pretending to live with her sister), for incorrectly claiming for porn films for her husband (paid £40k by the taxpayer as her assistant), making taxpayers buy her a BBQ, and on, and on, and on

Tom Watson – Misusing his position as a minister by becoming embroiled in ‘McBridegate’, amongst many other evil sins

Keith Vaz - Endless dodgy behaviour and still having the brass neck to try and be taken seriously

Rudy Vis - Using allowances to buy retirement home

Shaun Woodward – Apart from being a slimy turncoat, he claimed £138,546 in ACA while renting out properties in France, New York State and the West Indies, although he and his wife Camilla, a Sainsbury heiress, own a house 200 yards from Parliament and a house in Oxfordshire

Tories

Michael Ancram - Stealing from the taxpayer to fund repainting and moss removal on his family home

James Clappison – Using his allowances to part fund his property portfolio

Alan Duncan - Claimed £143,392 in second home allowance despite owning two adjoining terrace houses in Westminster, one of which he rents to tenants

Chris Grayling - Stealing from the taxpayer by claiming ACA for a flat he rarely uses

Douglas Hogg - Rented three London properties to tenants while claiming £143,651 in ACA since 2001

Eric Pickles - Stealing from the taxpayer by claiming ACA when he clearly shouldn't (although within the rules) and arrogantly trying to justify it on Question Time

Caroline Spelman - Stealing from the taxpayer to pay for her nanny

Theresa Villiers - Making taxpayers pay her stamp duty

Lib Dems

David Howarth - Being a total Lefty wanker by attacking the police for the death of a man during the G20 riot

Charles Kennedy - Drunkenness whilst trying to be elected as Prime Minister

Mark Oaten - Bi-sexual adultery

Lembit Opik - Just for being an attention seeking prat

Sinn Fein

Gerry Adams – Stealing from the British taxpayer by claiming all his allowances whilst refusing to take his seat in Parliament

Pat Doherty - Stealing from the British taxpayer by claiming all his allowances whilst refusing to take his seat in Parliament

Conor Murphy - Stealing from the British taxpayer by claiming all his allowances whilst refusing to take his seat in Parliament

Martin McGuiness - For stealing from the British taxpayer by claiming all his allowances whilst refusing to take his seat in Parliament

Michelle Gildernew - For stealing from the British taxpayer by claiming all her allowances whilst refusing to take her seat in Parliament

Others

Derek Conway - Out and out theft from the taxpayer to pay for his son’s university drugs, sex and rock and roll lifestyle

George Galloway - Appearing on Big Brother and impersonating a cat during Parliamentary session

Andrew Pelling - Adultery, alleged wife beating and having the arrogant effrontery to try and keep his seat

Recess Monkey - Out of Touch?

2009-04-12T08:40:00.004+01:00

Loving this. First line currently on Recess Monkey:

"It's not been a good week for the Tories."

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha...

Labour Blog Watch - as at 0830 hrs

2009-04-12T08:09:00.006+01:00

Those who have faced the truth:

LabourHome - calls for McBride and Draper to go (as ever leading the NuLab pack)
LabourLost - downplaying by Dripper, desperate to keep his job

Those who are non-committal:

Hopi Sen - counter attack on Guido

Those imitating an ostrich:

Alistair Campbell - nothing to say? Surely not
Chicken Yoghurt - nothing
Go Fourth - no screwed up syntax available
Kerron Cross - silent since Wednesday
Michael White - nothing to say?
Recess Monkey - classic opening line: "It's not been a good week for the Tories"
Stumbling and Mumbling - not a thing
Tom Watson - silence, strange that
Tom Harris - "having a weekend off"

Drapergate 2 or McBridegate 1?

2009-04-11T13:29:00.006+01:00

So the delicious story of No 10's dirty tricks department is building to its crescendo. Guido has two tasters here and here, as well as being on Sky today (so much better than the debacle on The Daily Politics, Guido, good work). The Great Iain Dale, also on Sky and BBC today, has opined as well. Dizzy has uncovered the embryonic Red Flag site and Tory Bear has made us all laugh.

Like all of us I am sure, I am salivating at the wonderful Sunday reading awaiting me. The story will unfold for the next 24 hrs in all its glory. I guess McBride will be sacked. Draper already looks as if he has been edged out. Many bloggers will chitter chatter over the next few days, but what are the lessons learnt, particularly for Dave and his incoming tribe?

1. Political parties and their politicians, like all leaders, need to have integrity. And integrity is important. You cannot command respect without it. And like virginity, once lost it can never regained.

2. As a leader, claiming you did not know what your close advisers were doing or that whilst unethical 'it's OK because it's within the rules' just won't wash with the floating vote. The tribal vote will always overlook problems, but they don't win elections.

3. If a staff member has shown a complete lack of integrity, you sack them and - here's the lesson for NuLab - never employ them again as leopards tend not to change their spots. Draper is a proven lying shit and always will be. I am sure Lord Manbypanby will blow up in their faces at some stage too. (Dave - think Jeffrey Archer, think Jonathan Aitken, think David Mellor. Don't ever go there.)

4. The politicisation of the civil service needs to be reversed. Civil servants should be neutral. Political advisers are party animals. They need to be kept entirely separate.

5. The dead tree press will forever more follow the blogosphere. It's been easy for Dave in opposition. It will be harder in Government, and he needs to think now how to keep ahead of that change.

How To...Be A Successful Politician

2009-04-10T15:32:00.006+01:00

Do you remember Client 9? He was the high flying New York Governor, Eliot Spitzer, who campaigned against prostitution and then...was actually found to be one of the best customers of one of most infamous escort services in NY. Well he appears to be the latest exponent of the art of managing a successful political comeback. See him here earlier this week on MSNBC:

Unbelievable. The neck on this bastard. Having been proven to be a serial liar and total fucking hypocrite, he thinks he can worm his way back into mainstream politics.

This got me to thinking: what is the basic skillset you actually need as a modern day politician to be able to withstand the 24/7 media and blogosphere onslaught. Answer: supreme arrogance coupled with no shame.

In yesteryear, John Profumo and the like crawled off the stage and devoted the rest of their life to good charitable deeds in order to rehabilitate themselves quietly in the shadows of society.

Nowadays, in our me, me, me, I deserve everything, celeb obsessed society, there is no slinking off, no days in the wilderness, the bastards just brazen it out using the following steps:

1. Deny (see if you can get away with it)
2. Admit (with exclusive media interview)
3. Apologise (remembering to not write 'sorry' on your hand)
4. Photo op with partner (if relevant)
5. Keep going as you are (and get the next expenses claim in)

Think it through: Mark Oaten, Andrew Pelling, David Blunket, Lord Manbypanby, Jacqui Smith, Eric Pickles et al.

How awful is this world. Off to kill myself.

Bogus Research

2009-04-09T10:16:00.010+01:00

I have for some time admired The Devil's fakecharities.org campaign. (Just wish he'd get a logo so I can put it on my blog!)

But this week, I have been enraged by some astounding bogus research by so-called charities.

First, child poverty. According to Dr Banardos yesterday, "there are currently 3.9 million children living in poverty in the UK, and that's almost a third of all children". WTF? Now I know I drive fast, but as I have flashed through 'sarf' London avoiding the poor people, I have not noticed hordes of pot bellied children covered in flies on every street corner.

No, Dr B's are using NuLab maths, as approved by our triple counting wanker of a PM. If you bother to hit Dr B's website there is a page entitled 'What is Poverty'. In short, this is a page of spin subverting mathematics so they can get to a truly shockingly large number. (I have written previously about how to run a fake campaign and use fake maths, here).

There are not 3 million children in poverty in the UK. These do-gooding fuckwits need to get out more. Suggestion: try visiting Africa, Asia and South America. Those are the odd shaped bits on the map past Islington and further on south of Tuscany.

Second, glass ceilings. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (aka the taxpayer funded evil empire of Trevor Phillips) has today pumped out this, which tells us that:

a. Women earn up to 60% less than men in the finance sector
b. 28% of those working in professional occupations in the sector are women, compared with 42% in the economy as a whole
c. 11% of senior managers are women, compared to 28% in the economy as a whole

OMG, how I am bored with this PC bleating about the glass ceiling. Time for some reality:

Obvious Point 1 - The average age of a director of a City business is around the 50-60 yrs mark, meaning that they would have been entering the City market roughly in 1969-79.

Obvious Point 2 - There were many fewer women entering this market in those days. Things have now changed, but then, much much fewer. (Let's be bold. 30% of the total?)

Obvious Point 3 - It is safe to say that the overwhelming majority of this already comparatively small female cohort went off and had babies. (OK so now let's be conservative. 75% of that original 30%?)

Obvious Point 4 - The majority of this now dwindling number will never have returned to the workplace. (What do you think? 90% non-returns?)

Obvious Point 5 - A small percentage of this now severely reduced number will have rejoined but, after some years out of the market, will have been out of date and will therefore inevitably have suffered in their comparative promotion prospects as compared to their male counterparts.

So on these guesstimates, which I think you'd agree have been cautious, this means that in the 50-60 yrs age range, 10% of the City workforce will now be women. But only 7.5% will have had uninterrupted careers.

Now of course not everyone is good enough to be a board director, but if your talent pool is only 7.5-10% of the workforce, frankly it is amazing that we have any females at the top of any of our City businesses right now. As we go forward, then this will change, but it will be slow and always disproportionate because - and here's a really important point, Trevor - girls have babies and boys don't, you fuckwit.

But of course this obvious maths simply doesn't fit with the trendy, PC, NuLab, bleeding heart, anti-poverty, pro-wimmin dogma of the Left.

I Love the Devil

2009-04-09T10:02:00.003+01:00

Iain Dale says that Alice Miles' recent article in The Times was "the most eloquent exposition" so far in defence of MPs and their remuneration.

The Devil takes a brilliant, funny and irreverent counter view. A must read.

The Latest Lib Dem Bandwagon

2009-04-08T07:02:00.008+01:00

So the moronic Loony Dems are jumping on the bandwagon of the death of a newspaper seller on the sidelines of the G20 violence, calling for a criminal inquiry. Of course our illustrious media are fanning the flames: questions must be asked, is this the face of unacceptable policing, cop violence etc...

Time for some facts:

Fact 1 - The guy in question was in the way of the police clearing a street during a day of mass rioting. They pushed him. He fell. He later had a heart attack. Unfortunate. Were the police responsible for his heart attack? No.

Fact 2 - Should the police have pushed him? Yes. That's what riot police do. They push people out of the way to clear streets.

Fact 3 - WTF was he doing there anyway? I closed our London office for the day and made staff work from home so that they could not get caught up in any problems. Anyone who was stupid enough to be wandering around the City of London during a riot was playing with fire. Idiot.

Fact 4 - At moments of mass public disorder, society asks individual civil servants - be they policemen or soldiers - to make split second decisions whilst in the middle of total madness, always with only scraps of information available at that immediate moment - aka the 'fog of war'. Sometimes these decisions, made in a fraction of a second, can mean life or death.

Fact 5 - These split second decisions are then poured over for days, weeks, months and years by those who want to make political capital out of the incident, their lawyers and of course the asswipes of the media who just want a 'Shock! Horror!' story.

Fact 6 - As a society, we ask these civil servants to behave in a legal, level headed way in totally out of control circumstances. They will inevitably make mistakes. And as a society, we owe these civil servants our absolute support, even when they make mistakes resulting in loss of life.

Society has imprisoned soldiers who in a split second made a wrong decision whilst fighting for their lives in Northern Ireland. Society has bleated on and on about collateral damage or friendly fire in Iraq and Afghanistan. Society has wanked on about the Brazilian electrician slotted by mistake the day after 7/7.

We are asking ordinary people to do absolutely extraordinary things in totally mad, highly stressful and very frightening circumstances. We should always support them.

Anyone who wants to cast the first stone - yes, you David Howarth, you Lib Dem wank pot, prostituting yourself for a few votes - should spend half a day on the front line wearing a flat cap and a DayGlo vest being bottled in central London by a mob of half drunk, half drugged up anarchists.

Update: OMG, it gets worse. The BBC are leading their bulletins with this story. The Today programme on R4 just had David Howarth on. His smug, sanctimoniousness was bowl evacuating in its stupidity. He claimed the police 'shoved' the newspaper seller. Not just 'shoved', an evil crime in itself, but he then added that they 'shoved him hard'.

What.

The.

Fuck.

They were riot police. Policing a riot. Clearing a street. What do you think they were going to do? Write him a love letter?

What David Howarth did not mention:

1. WTF the newspaper seller was doing in the City in the middle of a riot in the first place?
2. WTF the anarchists were doing there at all?
3. The incredible restraint the police showed all day long.

This is politicking at its worst.

This man, who apparently aspires to be a Government Home Office minister, is not fit to lick the sweaty ass of any policeman in this country.

Why We’re In the Shit

2009-04-08T06:56:00.002+01:00

Daily Referendum has a devastating analysis of why we're in the shit, copied below:

Gordon Brown - Lecturer
Paul Murphy - Lecturer
John Hutton - Lecturer
Lord Mandelson - Career Politician
David Miliband - Career Politician
Jim Murphy - Career Politician
Douglas Alexander - Career Politician
Ed Miliband - Career Politician
John Denham - Career Politician
Jack Straw - Barrister
Alistair Darling - Solicitor
Hazel Blears - Solicitor
Harriet Harman - Solicitor
Geoff Hoon - Lecturer/Barrister
James Purnell - Researcher
Shaun Woodward - Researcher
Andy Burnham - Researcher
Yvette Cooper - Researcher
Jacqui Smith - Teacher
Alan Johnson - Postman
Hilary Benn - Unionist
Ed Balls - Journalist

No wonder. Just the mix of professional experience you need in any Cabinet to deal with a global recession.

NuLab Chickens Beginning to Roost

2009-04-07T10:50:00.005+01:00

Two interesting articles in the FT today: here and here.

Point 1 - I predicted this back in February. If you shit on high earners (for example, bankers) and attack their market competitive pay, they bugger off to a company who will pay them the market rate. Think what that might mean for taxpayer owned Lloyds, HBOS, RBS, NatWest, etc…

Point 2 - The top 1% of British earners pay 23% of tax. Reduce their pay significantly and HMRC is cannibalising its own income, purely for political, gallery playing ends.

Point 3 – High earners are internationally very mobile. They move to the best tax regime; think 1970s Britain, the so-called brain drain etc...

All you NuLab luvvies and St Obama cocksuckers might want to remember these three facts the next time you mistake your ‘politics of jealously’ for a reason to attack high earners.

The Variable Value of Life

2009-04-07T10:13:00.006+01:00

2001 - The events of 9/11 (a moment in history which even has its own name) killed just under 3000 Americans. The world stopped. Wars were waged. The aftermath will impact on global geopolitics for generations.

2009 - The Italian earthquake killed around 180 Italians. The BBC flew news teams to the earthquake site for News at 10 that night. Wall to wall media coverage will go on for some days.

2003 - An earthquake hit Bam, a city in Iran. Over 26,000 Iranians died with more than 30,000 injured. I'll say that again: over 26,000 people died with 30,000 injured. Minor mention on the news for a couple of days. The world didn't stop. No wall to wall media coverage.

It would appear society, governments and the media ascribe a higher value and newsworthiness to the lives of different nationalities.

Chip and Pinning Your ID Away

2009-04-07T09:10:00.005+01:00

Chip and Pin likely to be inbound for ID cards we are told today.

For eight years of my life I carried an ID card. It was a forces ID card and incredibly useful. I could instantly prove my identity, long before photo ID driving licences existed which now do that job admirably.

So I joined the debate about ID cards pretty much in favour, absolutely seeing the arguments that (a) it would help crack down on benefit fraud which costs the taxpayer billions each year and (b) that law abiding people have nothing to fear and much to gain. Frankly, I needed to be convinced that it would have any positive impact on terrorism.

I am now adamantly opposed to ID cards. Why? Principally for three reasons.

Mission Creep

First, any Government scheme or law change ends up ‘mission creeping’ itself to an illiberal end, proving what used to be called the ‘thin end of the wedge’ argument. A case in point:

Then - In 2000, NuLab told us the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act was needed to tackle terrorism in the UK.

Now - In 2009, local councils have used this piece of anti-terrorism legislation an average of 25,000 in the last five years to in fact chase dog foulers, parents manipulating school catchment boundaries, people putting out rubbish incorrectly etc...

Now - NuLab tell us we need ID cards to combat terrorism.

Future - What do you think will happen once NuLab mission creep sets in? Minor transgressors of local bylaws will be targeted by overzealous officialdom for totally pathetic offences?

Government incompetence

Second, the constant stream of stories that tumble out of Government about data security, or lack of it: flash sticks lost on trains, laptops stolen, external consultants losing discs, info going astray in the post. It just goes on and on. These highlight Government’s arrogant and lazy attitude to personal data. With all the hoo-ha that each story brings, we see no real attempt by Government to stop this chaos.

I just no longer think Government can be trusted to hold personal data and the idea of giving them my total identity in the future (photo, finger print, retina scan etc) as well as potentially making ID cards ‘smart cards’ that can store health records, cash, chip and pin et al fills me with dread.

Terrorism

It seems that no serious anti-crime organisation, apart from Jacqui Smith’s Home Office, has produced a single weighty argument that ID cards will actually have any measurable affect on terrorism. Thus, the main justification used by the Government simply holds no water.

Join the campaign: http://www.no2id.net/

Culling Politicians

2009-04-06T09:28:00.002+01:00

With reference to my suggested changes to Parliamentary allowances (see here), we have some good news.

No, not that the cheeky bastards last week gave themselves a bigger rise than the rest of the public sector.

Nor that London MPs 'London supplement' has gone from around £3k to £7.5k.

(Just absolutely incredible that both these changes can occur amidst the current public outrage over MPs pay and allowances).

No, the good news is that we have 1312 less politicians in this country. Wahooo! Well, it's a start isn't it.