Labour Bollocks

Salary Fiddling, Labour Style

2010-06-06T23:02:00.002+01:00

The Telegraph reported over the weekend that one of Gordon Brown's final acts in No.10 was to slash the Prime Ministerial salary by around £50,000. The PM was previously entitled to a salary of some £132,000 on top of the £64,000 he received for being an PM - and this is the salary that Brown treated himself to while in No.10. I would assume it's the special PM entitlement bit that has been slashed, bringing the total PM salary down to around £145,000 - only a few thousand more than members of Cabinet.

Leaving aside the fact that I think the PM should be well paid - and paid a decent amount more than members of Cabinet - isn't this just classic Gordon Brown? In fact, it's classic Labour. Take a look at this table of PM salaries - on page 7.

Look what happened the moment Labour came to power in 1997; the PM-exclusive portion of the salary went up from £58,000 to £100,000. Nothing quite typifies Labour as well as them putting up their own salaries upon gaining power, and then massively slashing them when they lose it.

Labour Tits

2010-05-15T12:50:00.004+01:00

And I'm talking literally; I'm not just being rude about someone. Behold the most popular options given when I recently did a Google search for former GMTV presenter and now Labour MP for Ashfield Glorio De Piero:

And So...

2010-05-11T23:01:00.002+01:00

... it has come to pass that the Conservatives are back in Government, and with some Lib Dems as well.

Really odd feeling at the moment; slightly surreal and a slight sense of frustration that in the end coalition was needed. However, I'm of the opinion that with the harsh economic situation we face a minority administration would have been short-lived. Further, another election wouldn't have been held until the Autumn, and we would have had the Tories having to make very difficult decisions for six months and possibly getting the blame for it all.

Whether this blog continues depends on a few factors. It doesn't seem particularly useful to run a blog attacking the opposition, but if Ed Balls becomes its leader I can certainly see it continuing. So it will exist in hiatus, with a few updates, for the next few months - while I decide what to do.

Thanks to those of you who continue to read.

Quote Of The Day

2010-05-03T20:09:00.004+01:00

From Aristotle at Political Betting:

"I’ve always thought it was considerate of Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper to have married each other, thereby ensuring that only two people get to live miserable lives rather than four."

Ugg, He's Smiling Again

2010-05-01T19:08:00.003+01:00

You would have thought that after the weird smile when he came out of Mrs. Duffy's house, and the weird smile at the end of his closing statement during Thursday's debate, that somebody would have told Brown to stop smiling. Sure, they should have told him this years ago, but in the last few days even people who didn't really know about his odd smile have started to notice. And yet this was him earlier today. The look on Sarah's face is priceless. Picture from Sky.

Brown's Freudian Slip

2010-05-01T15:23:00.005+01:00

Sky has the footage of Gordon Brown being heckled by a frustrated Labour supporter during his visit to a glass factory in Sunderland earlier today. They say:

"But the 38-year-old said he felt the Labour campaign was orchestrated and Mr Brown only spoke to party activists and did not get to talk to real people.

The IT worker, who comes from Sunderland but lives in London, said: "It's the fact that it's been such a controlled campaign.

Real politicians are going around talking to real people and Mr Brown isn't doing that. Mr Brown needs to see real electors, not just hand-picked people."

But because the focus is on the heckler, nobody seems to have noticed Brown's rather unfortunate misspeak around the one minute mark, where he says:

"So I have come here, to a region of fighters, to talk about the fight ahead. Not Labour's fight in this election, but our country's fight for recovery. Because I fight every minute of the day for my future... the future of Britain's hard-working families."

Ooops!

I've Worked Out The Smile

2010-04-28T20:44:00.003+01:00

It has been quite a day for Gordon Brown. Other, better people have already speculated on what the consequences might be, so I'm not going into that. But I was fascinated by Brown's response when he left Mrs. Duffy's house. Guido has a great screengrab of the smile he displayed here.

Why would you smile like that? A poster on Political Betting described it as 'the sort of face you'd see on a little kid who has just stolen his sister's ice cream and got away with it'. And it has long been speculated that Brown's smile is forced and put-on. However, I'm starting to become convinced that by forcing himself to smile more, it has inadvertently become his 'I don't know what to do with my face' look.

Remember this story from last July? It's exactly the same thing going on; Brown probably wants to look sad, solemn, serious but perhaps a bit proud and patriotic as well. Yet because his face has become trained to betray his emotions, this is what he ends up looking like.

Foreign Office Notices Big Volcano

2010-04-18T17:56:00.007+01:00

I'm grateful to the folk at Political Betting for bringing this to my attention. Below is a snapshot from David Miliband's Twitter page:

Now, just how long has this volcano been spewing out ash? And just how long has it been causing problems? Several days, and yet the Foreign Office only seems to have noticed sometime yesterday. How long does it take to setup a hotline? After plane crashes and national disasters, I've seen them operating within hours.

I also gather Gordon Brown had his first meeting on the subject around an hour ago. There's nothing like quick and decisive action in Government, is there?

Conversations On A Train

2010-04-13T22:50:00.003+01:00

Overheard on a train from London to Hertfordshire this morning; a man trying to explain to his wife why the legal aid-claiming Labour MPs annoyed him so much:

"Imagine that I stole your purse, and that I then took money out of the purse to pay for an expensive lawyer to argue that you had no right to accuse me of taking it in the first place. Wouldn't that piss you off?"

"I suppose." *sigh*

Clearly some people find political sleaze more infuriating than others.

More Blog Fantasticness

2010-04-11T20:42:00.002+01:00

Labour's daily blog thing is like a gift that keeps on giving. First of all, there's Gordon's really quite disturbing use of a sausage shop as a metaphor for the economy:

"...Netta Martin, who runs a cafe and take away in Alloa. Her business was under real pressure during the recession, and she saw a big fall in sales of her speciality – rolls with hot sausage (which as she rightly pointed out – should not be confused with her hot sausage rolls). But now that we are on the road to recovery, sales of Netta’s rolls are back on the increase and she is confident her business will grow this year. That’s the reality behind the statistics of the recession and recovery; sales of rolls and sausage in Alloa are up..."

And then there's Sarah's delight that, in a campaign where her husband has only met old Labour supporters in their houses or union-vetted shop workers, everyone she meets on the streets seems to be supporting Labour:

"Waking up in our house in Fife was today’s special treat, followed by a walk down Kirkcaldy High Street. We met voter after voter after voter – and all of them Labour."

Then there's a passage where Gordon, the master of detail and analysis, can't tell the difference between a two-year-old and a seven-year-old:

"Gordon has a lovely conversation with a little girl and her Mum when he asks how old she is and she says 'seven' and Gordon talks to her about all the best bits about being seven; her Mum interrupts 'but she is only two!' and Gordon says 'I’m not going to tell a girl she is not the age she wants to be! Seven it is'."

But the best bit is where Sarah crushes Ed Balls's black little heart by making it abundantly clear that Gordon has better friends:

"Good to see Pete Livingstone too – one of Gordon’s very oldest friends from school and someone who isn't sure what’s more exciting – his best friend being up for re-election as Prime Minister, or his home football team being in the semi-final of the Scottish cup tomorrow."

Fly Away Brown - Or Not

2010-04-10T23:12:00.004+01:00

From the BBC's election tracker:

"The Labour leader's flight back from Scotland to Stansted was delayed for half an hour on the tarmac at Edinburgh after the plane's computer system needed to be re-booted. On the tannoy during the flight, the pilot said: "This is probably the most high-profile flight I have ever done and right now I'm really embarrassed by the delay, but safety must come first."

In the light of today's sad events in Russia I'm not going to say anything nasty; it just seems that Brown isn't having the best of luck with his planes - one recently carrying as reading material an edition of the Spectator about why people should vote Conservative.

Who Is Writing Gordon's Blog?

2010-04-10T20:05:00.002+01:00

Since the start of the election campaign, the section of Labour's website dedicated to reporting Gordon Brown's speeches and statements has been turned into a kind of blog diary. And it's not a very good one; not just because most of the entries are boring, but they're also ineptly written. You can say a lot of things about Gordon Brown, but poorly educated he is not. And while I wouldn't necessarily expect Brown to write these things himself, it's a fairly golden rule of press releases that nothing is sent out in somebody's name when they haven't checked it first. So either Brown isn't checking things being written in his name, or he doesn't care what they say. Some choice examples:

"I spent the afternoon in something with a strange name, but a big impact."

"I spoke to an audience of economic thinkers, people involved in business and Labour supporters about what it was like having the job I do during the financial crisis, and about what we do now to secure Britain’s recovery and build an economy that's online, high-tech and green."

"This is Sarah and me walking down the room for my politics speech earlier and these were in the green room, preparing with Oona King, the host of the question session at Microsoft."

"Yesterday when I came back from speaking with Her Majesty the Queen I gathered the Downing Street staff to thank them for the continuing friendship they’ve shown to our family and particularly to say how much I appreciate all they’ve done to ensure Sarah and I can give the boys an ordinary childhood as far as possible."

I'm no grammar Nazi, but if I were a teacher there would be red pen all over these short extracts.

Ed's Scary Defence Of Rubbish Scheme

2010-04-08T20:45:00.000+01:00

So today saw another day of campaigning; the Tories launching their National Citizen Service and Labour telling successful businessmen to go and roger themselves with sharp sticks. Of course, with the Tories launching a policy, Labour's attack dogs couldn't wait to get their teeth stuck in. Ed Balls, Gordon Brown's favourite ugly puppy, said:

"Despite today's announcement, the truth is that David Cameron's Conservative Party still stands for opportunities only for some young people and not all.

All we saw today is a flaky plan to cut the Prevent programme which is a key part of Contest, the UK’s counter terrorism strategy."

Leaving aside the word 'flaky', the second sentence there appears to be true. However, what Ed Balls has conveniently forgotten is that the Prevent programme is an utter pile of shit. In fact, not only is it an utter pile of shit, it has actually been making the problems it was supposed to tackle even worse. And that's not me talking, that's the opinion of Parliament's Communities and Local Government Select Committee, chaired by Labour MP Phyllis Starkey. The committee concluded just over a month ago that that:

"As delivered so far, the Prevent programme has stigmatised and alienated those it is most important to engage, and tainted many positive community cohesion projects, says a cross-party committee of MPs. Moreover, the government’s strategy to limit the development of violent extremism in the UK sits poorly within a counter-terrorism strategy."

There is an issue that looks set to come up a lot during this campaign, and that is Labour trying to scare people into thinking the Tories are going to savage and slice all the most precious things the government does. So today he decided to claim the Tories would cut vital funding for preventing terrorism, and that in a way this attack comes as no surprise. But it also makes the choice at this election very clear; by stressing the apparent importance of this scheme, what Balls has actually said is that Labour know it's a load of crap but are going to continue funding it anyway. Much like with the National Insurance issue, they have identified waste, but have no intention of diverting the money into something more useful. What people need to ask themselves is whether that's a sensible approach for government to take, because there's a very clear answer to that question.

And So We're Off

2010-04-06T22:36:00.003+01:00

Okay, so I know posts around here have been slow recently - but did you really think I'd miss the calling of a General Election? Actually, thanks to my work's very annoying firewall - that blocks Blogger the majority but not all of the time - I very nearly did.

But I'm back now, and with a pledge that during the month ahead I plan to blog far more frequently than I have of late. I don't want to put a number on it because whenever I do that sort of thing it never works out for me.

But I'll be around more - both on here and on other blogs I enjoy reading - to add thoughts, discuss stories, and do all that other stuff we only get to do every 4 or 5 years.

Exclusive - BBC Denies Brown's Question Time Record

2010-04-02T19:09:00.008+01:00

Last week, I submitted the following Freedom of Information request to the BBC:

"The number of appearances (with a breakdown by year) that Gordon Brown MP - current Prime Minister and former Chancellor of the Exchequer - made on the BBC's political panel programme 'Question Time', between 18th July 1992 and 27th June 2007."

Perfectly reasonable you might think, since the BBC would certainly be in the best position to tally the number of times any guest appeared on their show. But it seems I was to be denied by both the BBC's decision to hide behind FoI legislation and their own apparent incompetence. They responded:

"Please note that your request is outside the scope of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and unfortunately this information is not readily to hand.

The information you have requested is excluded from the Act because it is held for the purposes of ‘journalism, art or literature.’ Part VI of Schedule 1 to FOIA provides that information held by the BBC and the other public service broadcasters is only covered by the Act if it is held for purposes other than those of journalism, art or literature. The BBC is not required by the Act to supply information held for the purposes of creating the BBC’s output or information that supports and is closely associated with these creative activities; however, on this occasion we’re happy to provide the above information in response to your request."

There are so many issues to take with this response. First of all, to claim they have 'provide[d] the above information in response' is absolutely taking the piss. What they've told me is that they don't have it to hand - which is pretty irrelevant, since the Act requires them to compile it even if there are costs involved, which can then be passed on to the requestor - and that, even if they did have it to hand, they still wouldn't give it to me anyway. But more fundamentally, how on earth does this handy 'journalism, art or literature' exemption possibly extend to a question like mine under any reasonable circumstances? The question is no more probing or secretive in nature than asking them how many episodes of Gardeners' World have been made, or who decided the Tardis should be blue.

The BBC have something of a track record of hiding behind this tidy section of the FoI Act. This is a great example; all this person wanted to know was how much the BBC spent on programme pilots that were never commissioned. Essentially, he wanted to know how much public money had been thrown down the toilet, and the BBC hid behind the Act to deny him the information.

According to the IMDB, Brown was on Question Time 11 times between 1988 and 1996. That's actually more than I expected, though it's no surprise that he stopped appearing once he became Chancellor and would actually be confronted on some of the decisions he made. This information might not be accurate, but at this stage it looks like the best we're going to get. And also isn't it rather odd that IMDB at least has enough data to take a stab at the appearance numbers, but the BBC don't apparently have it to hand?

I will be appealing this to the Information Commissioner's Office, since I do not believe that the Act should extend to the very peripherals of programme-making. Since the ICO is part of the Ministry of Justice I doubt I'll get anywhere, but I'll report back on any developments.

What Is The Point Of 'Lord' Sugar?

2010-03-26T22:39:00.002Z

No, that's not a rhetorical question. But I did think it was worth taking a look at what 'Ludalan' has been getting up to since he was given a peerage and tasked with being the Government's 'Enterprise Champion. What I wanted to know was, did this appointment really require Alan's elevation to the Lords, or was that just Brown giving an old chum a little gift and stimulating an otherwise dull story?

The answer can be found in two facts. First of all, according to Public Whip, Lord Sugar has never voted in the House of Lords. He doesn't feature on this list of current peers, and the only reason for that has to be because he's never voted. And secondly, I was only able to find three instances in Hansard of Lord Sugar speaking; and one of them was his maiden speech in November 2009 - the gap between him taking his seat in July and then is explained by the massive summer recess.

No doubt Sugar would explain this away claiming, as he originally did when accepting the peerage, that his role is politically neutral and that he wasn't joining the Government. Unfortunately, the House of Lords website seems to think differently.

Ed Balls Has A Favicon

2010-03-01T14:53:00.002Z

Hearing a rumour that the Schools Secretary can't spell - which turned out to be true - I ventured over to Ed Balls's website.

It's a fairly standard affair, with the exception of two things that had me giggling. The first being the image of him in the banner - windswept, holding a mug and yelling at someone in the distance. The second is that he has a favicon - that little image that says 'ED' on the left of the address bar. Favicons only really work when they are identifiable logos; see the Twitter one in the first link above, or the Telegraph T as another example. But 'ED'? There's something slightly nerdy about it; like monogramming your underpants, or something.

It's Not The Government's Money, Prescott

2010-03-01T11:14:00.004Z

Iain Dale is already taking the Labour hypocrites to task over their Lord Ashcroft blustering, after the Tory peer confirmed his 'non-dom' status. He even gets into it on Twitter, which is something I confess I don't always look at.

However, there are two Twitter posts of a certain pile of butter that sum up all that is wrong about Labour. And it's not to do with the central issue of Ashcroft donating to the Tories, but rather that by - completely and utterly legally - being a non-dom, he was somehow depriving the Government of its money. I've screen-grabbed the posts, just in case Prescott becomes the latest Labour MP to pretend to have their Twitter posts altered:

Here is the Labour attitude laid out for all to see. Despite earning it, this money - according to Prescott - is not Michael Ashcroft's. It belongs to the Government; it is for the Government to take to spend on whatever it wants, despite it not actually having any part in its creation. No wonder we've had over 100 tax rises since Labour came to power; they don't think your money actually belongs to you. They think you're just keeping it in useful locations for the Government to take, to spend and to squander.

Brown's Police Commitment Is Bollocks

2010-02-28T21:21:00.005Z

The Guardian is reporting:

"Brown will challenge councils and police authorities to meet the government's pledge to protect and improve frontline law enforcement as the public spending squeeze hits... My challenge to local authorities and police authorities around the country is to match our commitment to protecting frontline policing – or else explain to their communities why they are not prepared to do so."

No, sorry, Mr. Brown; I'm letting you get away with pretending you've ever been committed to protecting front line policing. Nor am I letting you throw down the gauntlet to mostly Conservative councils and the Mayor of London at a time when you're starving them of funding. Some facts:

In 2007/8, police spent an average of just 6 hours a week on patrol – 14% of their time. In contrast, they spent 22% of their time doing paperwork. The Telegraph says:

"The proportion of time on the beat has dropped by almost ten per cent in just three years while the amount of paperwork has risen by the same proportion, despite Government pledges to slash red tape."

But what about the cost of doing all that paperwork? Surely that has gone down and been made more efficient, so Labour can get loads of police on the streets by using the money saved. Well, apparently not:

"In 2004/05, the average staff cost for dealing with a serious violent attack was £5,890 but that had increased by 59% to £9,376 by 2007/08.

The average staff cost for tackling a less serious violent incident increased by 22% from £178 to £216."

Gordon Brown has always lied. It's in his blood, and I sometimes wonder if he can help himself. But we've got an election coming up, and people deserve the right not to be lied to by this man - especially over something as important as law and order. If the media really want to scrutinise Brown's and Labour's track record on this issue, it's all there in plain sight. They've just got to be bothered to notice it, and not swallow the bollocks.

Lucky Brown Wasn't At School

2010-02-22T23:17:00.005Z

It's just as well Gordon didn't bully someone in a school on the grounds of race, religion, ethnicity, gender or sexuality, or he'd be totally fucked.

Thankfully, he is alleged to have done it in his own office, and purely on the grounds that he is a small and nasty man. So that's okay, and won't be recorded properly.

Gordon's Tragic Wheeze

2010-02-03T22:05:00.002Z

The BBC reports:

"Britain's Got Talent judge and former newspaper editor Piers Morgan will interview Prime Minister Gordon Brown on his TV chat show, ITV has announced.

"He's one of the most famous people in the country yet remains a man of mystery to many," Morgan said.

The hour-long interview, which will be broadcast on 14 February, will precede a new six-part series of Morgan's Life Stories, which starts in March.

Morgan said Mr Brown was "an absolutely perfect subject" for the show.

"I have known Gordon Brown for over 15 years - he is a man who has enjoyed great triumph, suffered terrible tragedy, and will soon face the biggest challenge of his career," Morgan said."

It's actually a quite brilliant plan from Brown's point of view, though it reveals just what lengths he's going to go to in the months ahead. Because I can think of nothing more effective at making him look better by comparison than sticking him next to the epic shitbag that is Piers Morgan for an hour.

Mandy Is Getting Desperate

2010-01-31T13:14:00.003Z

There are certain attacks that Labour use when they are clearly in the wrong and can't think of anything else to say. They tend to be used by the more useless or unpleasant ministers, like 'Battlin' Bob Ainsworth and Liam 'Where's My Coffee, Bitch?!' Byrne. So to see Baron Mandelson of Foy in the County of Herefordshire and of Hartlepool in the County of Durham using them makes me wonder if his nerves might be a bit on edge. He said, when discussing the Conservatives and the economy:

"It is talking Britain down when David Cameron compares Britain ludicrously in everyone's eyes to Greece, and when George Osborne describes Britain as an exhausted runner at the back of a long marathon race unable to summon the strength to build our economy,'' he told The Politics show.

That is disgraceful, it is irresponsible. It's also unpatriotic."

Leaving aside the fact that nobody should have to take lessons in patriotism from a man who would quite happily see this country run from Belgium, France and Germany, this is a line that only gets churned out when trying to stifle a perfectly valid argument. See Bob's opinion that mentioning our complete failure to provide our troops in Afghanistan with sufficient helicopters is somehow unpatriotic. And someone with Mandelson's political ability shouldn't really be using Bob Ainsworth as a guide on how to get a message across.

A Picture Says A Thousand Words

2010-01-24T18:16:00.003Z

This is the look on Bob Ainsworth's face as he became the first Minister to let slip the date 'May 6th' in relation to the General Election. Just says so much, doesn't it? Screengrab from the Mail.

Sugary Goodness

2010-01-16T18:25:00.003Z

First of all, thanks to Plato for bringing this Labour PPB from 2005 to my attention. You need to get past all the guff about Tories killing babies and old people, but your reward for doing so is an absolute gem of a quote from Alan Sugar:

"What people don't seem to realise is for the past seven years under the leadership of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown - they have done a fantastic job. And the trouble is people won't know what a great job it is until they get themselves into a situation where things start to go pear-shaped again."

Two great ways you can interpret this. The first being that people don't realise how fantastic Labour are until they're in a position to claim loads more delicious benefits, which is hardly something to really look forward to. Yes, Labour have made a jobs market that sucks, but thankfully the dole system is super. But then I suppose it's all about the core vote. And the other interesting thing about it is that once the economy took a knock, it became very apparent what a piss poor job Brown had actually done. The moment the nation's finances went a bit "pear-shaped", the huge debt, massive borrowing, and the inability of our economy to fight the recession all became apparent. Well, for most people - I'd been saying it for years...

Telegraph Can't Add

2010-01-09T21:40:00.003Z

I'm reading this article on the Telegraph website with a sense of bewilderment. 'Week of bungled plots boosts Labour in poll' is the headline, except it isn't actually true.

Sure, it's true in the sense of what newspapers do when they're bored, stupid, and/or want to play around with a narrative for a while. But it's not the actual truth.

What they've done is compare the ICM poll done over the last couple of days, which had the split at 40/30/18, with another ICM done for the paper at the beginning of December showing 40/29/19.

Except there was another ICM done over a week after that one - for the Guardian - which had the split at 40/31/18. It's one of the most important rules of polling to compare polls with the previous one from that particular organisation; not the last one for that particular paper. It's sloppy, wrong, and it makes the Telegraph look rather simple.

Miliband Backs Brown - Sort Of

2010-01-06T19:09:00.006Z

First of all, welcome to 2010.

Secondly, the BBC are really outdoing themselves with their 'hug Gordon' strategy after today's coup - what number is that 4 or 5? - which now appears to have failed. 'Ministers lining up behind Brown' is currently the headline of this story. It may as well be 'Glorious leader in good health and looking forward to crushing capitalists with iron fist'.

But what's really interesting is David Miliband's statement - which has just been issued. The way he decided to stay on after letting James Purnell jump off a cliff during the summer shows he has no backbone, and this statement pretty much confirms that. Miliband said, according to the Spectator, that he is "working closely with PM on foreign policy issues & support the re-election campaign for a Labour Govt that he is leading."

Updated with full quote from the Spectator.

Happy New Year

2009-12-31T21:56:00.004Z

Before I head out and get too drunk to type, I just wanted to wish everyone a very happy new year. I've always thought it's a bit of a daft thing to celebrate, but frankly in this day and age we don't have enough opportunities to see friends and family and have a good time. So here's to to calendar!

Burnham Flip-Flops On NHS Parking

2009-12-30T12:16:00.002Z

A story from September:

"Health Secretary Andy Burnham says Labour hopes to scrap hospital parking charges for in-patients in England if the party wins the next election. He said patients would get a permit to cover the length of their stay which visitors could use to park for free."

A story from today:

"Andy Burnham has outlined proposals to phase out hospital parking charges for inpatients and some outpatients which he says have caused 'great resentment'.

The health secretary pledged a 'fairer' system for relatives and friends of people admitted to hospital in England. He said an eight-week consultation would ensure plans were affordable at a time of pressure on NHS finances.

The consultation is looking at whether to abolish fees for all inpatients' visitors - or just those admitted for a long stay."

It's as clear a flip-flop as you're likely to see. First, the plan is for visitors to have passes allowing them to park for free. But now that particular aspect of plan needs to be consulted on. I also love the way the word 'fairness' is creeping in to every single Labour announcement, in an attempt to draw Brown's famous dividing lines with the Tories. Quite how it's fair to charge anyone for parking when they visit a hospital is beyond me, but I'm sure Burnham knows what he's talking about.

Government Stealing From NHS Charities

2009-12-29T11:39:00.004Z

This story in the Mail is doing the rounds this morning:

"Ministers have been accused of planning to seize control of £2billion in assets managed by hospital charities.

Critics called the move a secret plan to slash NHS spending. More than £300million handed over every year in donations to children's hospitals and cancer charities could be 'nationalised'.

Under new rules coming into force in April, hospitals will have to list the income and assets from their charitable arms on their main balance sheet.

There are fears that this will see donations to health charities subsumed into the general health budget, which already faces huge strains due to Britain's soaring budget deficit."

What I find interesting about this is that I've already seen it happen. When an old lady in my village passed away a couple of years ago, leaving no family members - she bequeathed her entire estate to the local cottage hospital that had cared for her during her final months. However, because of a technicality - she had left the money to the hospital, rather than the hospital's charitable fund - the Department of Health swooped in and claimed the money for itself, to incorporate into the central NHS budget. It took over a year to rectify the situation, even with the support of a local Conservative MP and the media.

The fact that the Department of Health now looks to be making this sort of money grab a more commonplace occurrence is very worrying indeed.

Merry Christmas

2009-12-25T12:42:00.001Z

I know I mentioned it yesterday, but it was somewhat entangled with bitterness.

I wish everyone a very happy Christmas and - as is customary - a fantastic New Year as well.

Leftie Christmas Hypocrisy

2009-12-24T17:37:00.004Z

Large-bottomed leftie and general annoyance Arabella Weir once said, regarding the possibility of Boris Johnson winning in London:

"I will go on hunger strike and throw myself in front of the next horse at Ascot if he wins. Failing that I was going to say I'll sleep with him, but he'd probably say yes. So instead I'll chain myself to the railings of his house. And then I'll move out of London. How do we trust a guy who says he knows about London, when he's just taken three of his kids out of state school and put them into private schools? That's a man in touch with the people. He's loathsome. He's everything that's wrong with the upper classes at their worst. Limited, pompous, without any breadth of vision or sense of inclusion. But I don't even think he thinks he's up to the job. He said it for a laugh, is my guess, and now he's got to go through with it."

As far as I am aware, she is still to move out of London. I certainly haven't seen a self-important press release stating as such and, as she's a self-important leftie, you could bet your house on one being forthcoming if she were actually to do it.

But it's also very interesting to see her prattle on about the 'upper classes', especially in the light of her latest TV appearance. She featured as one of the guests on three-Michelin-starred chef Heston Blumenthal's Christmas Feast programme.

That's right; Ms. Arabella 'I'm in touch with the common folk, would never send my kids to private school, and aren't rich people awful' Weir, agreed to be a series known for producing extravagant and luxurious dishes cooked by one of the best chefs in the world. I presume that had, say, Boris Johnson, gone on this programme, that would have been absolutely ghastly? But of course it's absolutely okay for a champagne socialist to gorge themselves on caviar, ambergris, silver-dusted chocolate and loin of venison.

A very merry and absolutely non-lefty Christmas to you all.

Classic Irony

2009-12-19T13:50:00.003Z

Driving through the home counties earlier today, and saw a sign for 'Lapland Experience'.

Stuck over the sign was a piece of paper saying "Sorry, closed because of snow."

Another BBC Moment

2009-12-12T17:30:00.007Z

Observe the screenshot below, taken from the BBC Politics page at 5.30pm today. You'll note that a Conservative MP has been ordered to repay £9,500. You'll also note that an MP of indeterminate party leanings has denied making a claim for repairs to a bell tower - even though the evidence clearly shows he didn't differentiate between the bell tower and the other items in his claim. As we know, it's Jeremy Hunt in the first case, and Labour's own defecting toff Quentin Davies in the second. Can anyone fathom a guess as to why 'Labour' is missing from the headline about their naughty MP, whereas 'Conservative' is not? Or, for that matter, why in the Labour MP's case it's the denial that's the angle of the story, rather than the claim itself?

Who Is This Man?

2009-12-06T19:57:00.003Z

Yes, just who is this slender-faced, smiling, confident and youthful looking man? Apparently it's the Prime Minister himself, though you'd never guess it without the caption. This is the image Labour currently use on their website for Brown's biography page; either it's from several years ago, or he has been treated to an epic amount of airbrushing.

Brown has form in this regard. I remember last year - and if someone finds it for me I'll give them an online pat on the back - Guido had a story about a photo of Brown used in a new policy document about health and fitness, or something along those lines. The photo was from 1995 or thereabouts, and captured Brown looking far more appropriate for the paper's subject.

Don't You Know Who I Am?

2009-12-06T13:16:00.003Z

I'm wondering if Harriet Harman has secretly been promoted to some level of importance beyond that of the Queen. Because, if not, I'm struggling to understand how the following stories are consistent with each other.

From the Mail:

"The Queen is to be forced to go through an identity check every time she flies into and out of Britain.

For the first time, Her Majesty will be compelled to give her full name, age, address, nationality, gender and place of birth to immigration officials, who will then check that she is not on a list of wanted terrorists."

And from the Guardian:

"Harriet Harman was facing the prospect of acute political embarrassment today after a decision to prosecute her for allegedly driving without due care and attention and driving while using a mobile phone.

A witness was reported to have said that after the accident Harman wound down the window of her red Fiesta and allegedly said: "I'm Harriet Harman. You know where you can get hold of me."

So the Queen, who is on our money and stamps, and who is one of the most recognisable people in the world, has to confirm who she is every time she enters her own country? But Harriet Harman, known principally for hating men and being a thorn in the side of common sense, appears able to leave the scene of an accident with a cursory snifter of information?

Apple For Teacher Pakistan

2009-11-29T15:23:00.004Z

In an organisation as big as the Government, it is inevitable that mixed messages sometimes get out. That's what happens - not everyone can sing from the same hymn sheet all the time. But sometimes it's still possible to be amazed at the crass stupidity of whoever coordinates the timing of announcements and policies.

On Friday, we had Ed Balls telling English schools to cut back on their heating bills and stop cleaning themselves to save the somewhat paltry sum - in terms of overall Government spending - of £750 million.

And today Gordon Brown, alongside telling Pakistan that they really, really should have caught Bin Laden by now - never doubt Brown's ability to state something that is both populist and obvious - has apparently pledged some £665 million to rebuild Pakistan's education system and weaken extremism.

It really is like someone is hiding in the core of Government, purposely feeding really stupid ideas to the PM and Ministers to regurgitate.

Double Standards

2009-11-29T12:57:00.002Z

Always the way, isn't it? You say 'I'll be back this weekend', and then your Internet connection breaks in such a severe fashion that the next step up from what it did would be to burst into flames and set your house on fire.

Anyway... I see that Otolose Loloahi Tapui, the former cleaner of Attorney General Baroness Scotland, has been charged with immigration offences. It's interesting, isn't it, that the cleaner is charged with criminal offences, but the learned Baroness can get away with a fine and calling the whole thing a 'technical' and 'administrative' breach?

I look forward to the day when, after stabbing four disenchanted voters to death, some expenses-fiddling Labour MP turns around to claim it was only 'technical killing', any not something more serious.

Blogging To Resume

2009-11-18T21:55:00.001Z

Apologies for the month-long absence.

I had enormous pressures at work, followed by a trip abroad, followed by more pressures at work.

However, I plan to get back to blogging over the coming weekend.

Biscuit Update!

2009-10-18T15:32:00.002+01:00

Following on from yesterday's story that Gordon Brown refused to say what his favourite biscuit was, the Prime Minister himself has Twittered:

"...absolutely anything with a bit of chocolate on it, but trying v hard to cut down."

So that's half an answer at least. Tune in on Wednesday to see if he can chose between a digestive or a cookie.

Brown Takes The Biscuit (Or Not)

2009-10-17T11:23:00.002+01:00

It's a silly little story but, as is often the way with the silly and apparently inconsequential stories, it tells us more than we might expect. The Sun reports that:

"Gordon Brown celebrate[d] the Hindu and Sikh festival Diwali at No10 with cakes yesterday - after refusing to name his favourite biscuit. Mums in a live webchat begged the PM to name it - but he would not crumble."

What sort of man can't do this? Chocolate Bourbon; easy, just name the biscuit you like most. But for a man who dithers, who can't make up his mind without opinion polls, and who doesn't like issues where he can't create his precious dividing lines, such a task is near impossible.

Maybe he's waiting for David Cameron to be asked the same question, and is hoping his answer will be a shade on the posh side. Then, no doubt, we'll have Brown pledging £100 million to the Presbyterian Shortbread Foundation.

Union Grumbles Are Pathetic

2009-10-06T17:45:00.001+01:00

The BBC's Laura Kuenssberg has just Twittered that the Public and Commercial Services Union say they would strike as a result of George Osborne's public sector pay freeze. Note, first of all, how they didn't threaten to strike yesterday when Alistair Darling announced a pay freeze - albeit one on a smaller scale.

However, the pay freeze is a facade they are hiding behind. The pay freeze will of course affect the income of many of their members, as it will for everyone who works in the public sector. But you only need to spend 30 seconds on the Internet to find out why the PCSU in particular is having a hissy fit. Even Wikipedia notes that "most of its members work in government departments and other public bodies". So the bulk of its members work in the very Whitehall that Osborne has said needs to cut costs by a third, and I'd bet money that a good number work in the Quangos that Ken Clarke said would need to prove their worth or be scrapped.

I am sympathetic to anyone who is feeling the crunch at the moment - and both myself and friends and family are in the same boat. But unions need to grow up about this, and recognise that as the private sector is suffering heavy losses, public sector employees - the number of which continues to grow - cannot be immune from the consequences of the recession.

One Of These People Is Lying

2009-10-06T13:16:00.002+01:00

Talking to the Sun - BBC article linked to because of more information - General Sir Richard Dannatt has said that ministers had to be forced "screaming and kicking" to agree to the needs of the armed forces. And indeed that the military had to operate with "at least part of one arm tied behind one's back". This is all part of the story that Gordon Brown refused to sanction an extra 2,000 troops for Afghanistan, against military advice.

Downing Street has said: "Any suggestion that the prime minister has been unwilling to deploy more troops or provide the necessary resources is simply wrong."

Now, either General Dannatt - a man who has fought for better troop conditions, equipment, and pay - is lying. Or our habitual liar of a Prime Minister - whose party tried to smear Dannant - is lying through his spokesman. It's difficult to know who to believe in such circumstances...

Yvette Cooper Doesn't Get Big Numbers

2009-10-06T11:52:00.004+01:00

Which is slightly worrying for a Work and Pensions Secretary. Responding to Conservative plans to review the state retirement age, she somehow manages to bring in the Tory inheritance tax pledge:

"They want to hit low paid workers in their late fifties, but they're still backing tax cuts on millionaires' estates. This shows how out of touch David Cameron and George Osborne are."

Listen, you stupid woman. The inheritance tax cut is designed to help everyone who has an estate valued at less than a million pounds. It's not a 'tax cut on millionaires' estates', because it means that the only people paying inheritance tax will be millionaires. Is that really so difficult for you to understand, you Jimmy Clitheroe impersonator from hell?

Update: Prize twat Liam Byrne has also got in on the act, this time also accusing George Osborne of 'talking Britain down'. Byrne is - believe it or not - the chief secretary to the Treasury, so should probably have an even better understanding of how full of bollocks this lie is than Cooper.

Proof Of Labour's Chumpness

2009-10-05T19:49:00.004+01:00

Brown's hike to Iraq during the 2007 Conservative conference was, until now, the lowest I thought Labour would go to deflect attention away from a positive Tory conference. However, I now give you this breaking news, which of course wasn't possible to announce during the Labour conference last week:

My hope is that the British people see this for what it is - as indeed they did with Brown's Iraq trip. This is Osborne announcing a NI freeze, and the bunker getting into a panic.

Now It's Bob's Turn

2009-10-05T11:59:00.003+01:00

Remember in 2007, when Gordon Brown just had to go to Iraq in the middle of the Tory conference? Well, now Bob Ainsworth has gone on a 'surprise' visit to Afghanistan.

Two things; why can Ainsworth make surprise trips to Afghanistan on the first day of the Tory conference, but just has to go on holiday during the bloodiest month our troops have seen there since the war began?

And secondly, watch the BBC clip in the first linked article. You'll see that during a conversation with a solider who questioned him about troop numbers, Ainsworth tries to squeeze out of the solider a suggestion that they don't need anymore equipment.

A Question For Bob Ainsworth

2009-10-01T22:38:00.002+01:00

I know you're the Cabinet's dunce, but do try to think carefully.

Which of these things is most likely to damage the morale of our armed forces?

A. Asking questions about kit provision and the number of helicopters.
B. Having a Defence Secretary with a Cabinet ranking of 21 out of 23 when we're fighting two wars.
C. Not providing troops with bomb-proof vehicles in a country covered with road bombs.
D. Having a Defence Secretary who is generally seen as the biggest joke since 'Knock Knock...'

Answers to be scribbled in poorly spelled English on the back of a moustache comb, please.

BBC Edits To Spare Brown's Blushes

2009-09-30T21:38:00.004+01:00

On Monday - indeed in the very post below - I drew attention to Brown's sudden change of heart on TV debates. On the 10 o'clock news that night, Nick Robinson also confirmed that Brown's debate 'challenge' was included in the latest draft of his speech.

And yet, when Brown gave his speech yesterday, there was no mention of debates at all. It had suddenly been removed, and no challenge to David Cameron was forthcoming.

However, a funny thing seems to have happened. Click on the BBC link from Monday - the one that originally began with the line "Gordon Brown is ready..." And what you'll see is that the article has been completely altered to one titled 'We're not done yet, insists Brown', which is effectively a summary of his speech yesterday. I have not changed the link; it's the same page but with completely different content.

So why didn't the BBC leave the original story up? There are literally dozens of stories relating to the Labour conference, so it's not like they just had to get rid of the original content of the article or they'd run out of space. And keeping it up wouldn't have been factually inaccurate since, at the time, it was believed to be true. The fact that what was reported did not become a reality is actually a news story in itself, rather than something that should be swept under the rug. In fact, the only mention you'll now find about debates is in this new article, titled 'PM has made debate decision' - but he's not telling, apparently.

Compare And Contrast

2009-09-28T22:16:00.005+01:00

Gordon Brown, 3rd September 2009, said:

"We're not talking about an election at the moment, we're talking about how we deal with the policy issues. I've always been prepared to debate people... always prepared to join in a debate. I've given more statements to the House of Commons than any Prime Minister I think in the time I've been there, about the public issues of the day. Well, we'll deal with election issues when we come to discussing elections; but for the moment the most important thing is we have a public debate about the big issues."

But now the BBC reports that:

"Gordon Brown is ready to debate with David Cameron on TV not just during the general election campaign but before it, the BBC understands. The prime minister is said to be deciding overnight whether to include in his speech to the Labour conference a call for a series of debates."

So now he doesn't just want debates, he wants loads of them - even before an election? This is Brown trying to come into the game at half-time, change the size of the goals, and take the ball away if nobody wants to carry on playing. In other words, he's now trying to pretend that debates were his idea and that he has wanted them all along. The man has no shame.

Update - Wed 29th September: I'm too exhausted to blog about Brown's speech today. For must read articles check out the various contributors at the Spectator, as well as Guido - who has an excellent scoop on Brown's 21st century Dickensian workhouses. And did you notice how the speech - in the end - contained nothing about debates at all?

Unbearable Tosspot Meets Conceited Git

2009-09-23T20:41:00.002+01:00

Image from the Guardian. There is no intention on my part to make this a regular series. Brown just needs to stop having his photo taken with people who are so easy to do this with.

Labour Supporter Meets Transvestite

2009-09-16T18:53:00.002+01:00

Image from the BBC.

James Macintyre Stamps His Little Feet

2009-09-15T21:13:00.003+01:00

In this tragic blog post at the New Statesman:

"Has nothing happened in the world today? [The Prime Minister of the UK reversed over 10 years of economic policy, that's what] In between bits and pieces for this week's Ken Livingstone edit, [You poor man, having to deal with such dross] I've been checking the news online: this morning we were told by the BBC that Gordon Brown is likely to say the word "cuts" in his speech to the TUC this afternoon. This was hardened slightly to a firm prediction that he would say "cuts", to -- finally -- reports of the speech itself, in which he, um, said the word "cuts". Amazingly, each time I have clicked on "Google News" this "story" has led the international bulletins too. [Again, that's because it's quite important news. A story isn't unimportant just because James Macintyre doesn't understand its significance]

Like a clamouring drum, the media pack and Tory party -- increasingly working together -- [How dare they! In Labour's glorious Britain the press must support Labour and all its glorious achievements, gloriously!] have built up to this moment for days [Which wouldn't have been necessary had Brown not been in economic denial for the best part of forever] (never mind the difference between cuts now and cuts later). Now, like a baited bear, [Baited trout, more like] Brown has been forced to utter the word, after weeks of resistance. [What, and he should be applauded for not saying the bleeding obvious for weeks and months?] And the end result, the icing on the cake? George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, declares -- right on cue -- that the Tories have "won" the "biggest economic argument" and forced Brown into "complete capitulation". [Have they not, then? Has the Labour man who is actually quoted as saying "Tory cuts verses Labour investment", not just admitted that he's going to make cuts? Because that's pretty significant]

So, another day another dollar for the most media-supported Opposition in modern history." [Just where are you going with this? First of all, it isn't actually true. The Mirror is still Labour's spin-machine, and the Guardian is quite a distance from the Tories. Labour, on the other hand, enjoyed near total media support when they were elected in 1997, and have had the BBC doing their dirty work for more than a decade. And secondly, is it not okay for the media to recognise that the Tories are right? Must they always swing behind Labour, despite the damage Labour are doing to this country? Take your thumb out of your mouth, drop that pathetic sense of entitlement, learn something about economics, and grow a pair of testicles...]

A Conservative Home video on today's historic news, just for Jimmy M:

Will Brown Be On The Paedo Database?

2009-09-11T20:02:00.008+01:00

The Daily Mail reports:

"The Children's Minister claimed today that millions of Britons must be placed on a new Big Brother-style child protection database to stop a repeat of the Soham murders.

Under the plan parents could face a £5,000 fine for driving their children's friends to a sports event or Cub Scout meeting if they have not been vetted first by the massive new government agency.

An astonishing 11.3million people - one adult in four - are likely to come under the watchful eye of the Independent Safeguarding Authority.

Millions of Britons will be placed on a new database to prevent a repeat of the Soham murders in 2002, where Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman were killed. Launched next month, it will be the biggest vetting and clearing system in the world.

Every person who comes into regular contact with children or the elderly, through work or volunteering, must be approved by ISA officials checking for criminal convictions, disciplinary action and even unproven allegations."

So what I want to know is if Gordon Brown is going to volunteer himself for this piece of shit Orwellian database. Because I don't think these are all his kids:

Let Me Get This Right

2009-09-11T19:50:00.002+01:00

Gordon Brown can't apologise for:

Saying he abolished boom and bust.

Labour's role in the expenses scandal.

Not giving our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq sufficient equipment to keep them safe.

Building up the largest budget deficit of all time.

'Smeargate'.

Absolutely anything he has done since he got his hands on the reins of power.

But he can apologise for things that happened when he was a year old.

I see...

Cut-Price BBC

2009-09-05T22:21:00.002+01:00

So, Alan Davies is complaining that the BBC has cut his salary for playing Jonathan Creek by 25%.

Two things strike me about this story; the first one being that if you take a job knowing in advance what the salary will be - which Davies no doubt did in this case - you don't then get to bitch about how much you're being paid.

And secondly, if the BBC can make programmes - apparently just as 'well' - while cutting anything from 25-50% from their budgets, why can't they also cut the licence fee by 25-50% and give us some of our money back?

What Is He Talking About?

2009-09-03T21:41:00.002+01:00

Gordon Brown, commenting on why he is currently refusing to take part in televised public debates with David Cameron and Nick Clegg:

"We're not talking about an election at the moment, we're talking about how we deal with the policy issues. I've always been prepared to debate people... always prepared to join in a debate. I've given more statements to the House of Commons than any Prime Minister I think in the time I've been there, about the public issues of the day. Well, we'll deal with election issues when we come to discussing elections; but for the moment the most important thing is we have a public debate about the big issues."

But we are talking about an election - a pre-election debate. And if you've always been prepared to debate people, why do you limit your debating to election time? Giving statements to the House of Commons is not debating, either - it's giving statements. And a public debate is okay, presumably because that won't involve anyone asking you any questions?

Nurse!

The Ironing Is Delicious

2009-08-23T19:58:00.002+01:00

Xiamen University - where the Mirror reports learned scholar and academic John Prescott is to become a guest professor on climate change - has as its motto 'Pursue Excellence, Strive for Perfection'.

Darling's Struggling Spokesman

2009-08-22T23:00:00.001+01:00

Hot on the heels of Kevan Jones's denial that wasn't really a denial, the Chancellor has got himself in a spot of bother. The Mail reports:

"Labour's fragile summer truce over Gordon Brown's leadership was at breaking point last night after Alistair Darling was accused of launching a scathing attack on the Prime Minister.

According to sources present, the Chancellor declared: 'I am trying to talk sense into that man. He just doesn't get it --going on about "Tory cuts" is not going to make an impact on the electorate.

The Mail on Sunday has been told the Chancellor privately vowed to 'talk sense into that man' as he condemned him for losing the battle with David Cameron over public finances."

Darling's spokesman is quoted as saying: "I simply do not believe that Alistair has spoken in those terms." This is not a denial, and either suggests that the spokesman doesn't talk to Darling - if he did, he'd know what Darling actually said - or he does not believe Darling said it in a Victor Meldrew sense.

Kevan Jones Issues Non-Denial Denial

2009-08-19T21:16:00.004+01:00

Guido and a few newspapers have been carrying a story that someone inside the Government is trying to smear General Sir Richard Dannatt, seemingly in revenge for his highlighting of poor troop conditions and equipment problems. Guido has put the blame squarely on Kevan Jones - Brown lickspittle and Minister for Veterans.

The BBC are now reporting that Jones has issued a denial, saying it is "a silly season story", and that:

"General Dannatt and I have worked very closely on a number of personnel related issues, because we both care deeply about service men and women.

"I look forward to continuing our working relationship with Gen Dannatt, both now as Chief of the General Staff and beyond into his retirement."

Except that's not really a denial. If he wanted to deny it he would say something about it not being 'true', or it being a 'lie'. The way his statement has been worded does not actually indicate that what has been said is false - simply that Jones considers the story silly.

Perhaps the real treat of the BBC article though is this section:

"But the BBC has established that Labour peer Lord Foulkes has submitted parliamentary questions about Gen Dannatt's expenses which he wants the MoD to answer during the summer recess.

In particular, he wants information on how often the general has used a helicopter for travel within the UK."

This effectively confirms that someone in the Government is actively trying to dig up dirt on Dannatt. And it makes Jones's denial look even weaker - which is certainly saying something.

The DSFC Isn't Even Trying

2009-08-16T21:12:00.004+01:00

The BBC have a story discussing the Conservative plans to alter the way school league tables work; granting fewer points to schools where pupils pick 'soft' subjects, and preventing schools from trying to cram pupils into the lower end of the A*-C bracket. They are good, sensible, proposals - read the article for more. The DSFC has issued a statment to rebutt the allegations that there are 'soft' courses:

"We simply don't recognise the labels 'soft' or 'hard' A-levels - all subjects are rigorously measured against each other to maintain standards, overseen by Ofqual."

The rather unfortunate thing being that the BBC article itself contains the following:

"Critics say practical qualifications, such as cake decoration, pottery and flower arranging are being given equivalent value to traditional A-levels.

One example given included a course in tanning treatments which was worth 45 points in school league table scores - the same as an A grade in one of the four units that make up an A-level."

So you can either chomp your way through Great Expectations and half of Henry V, or learn how to turn on a sunbed and how long you should toast each side. No soft subjects here, no sir.

How Did I Miss This?

2009-08-15T18:21:00.002+01:00

A story in the Mail that's a couple of days old; we officially have a 'Dance Tsar'.

Not much to add to that - just let in sink in yourselves. And be sure to check out the video of Dr. 'Eyelashes' Burnham; I particularly like the bit towards the end when he says that many people with depression just need to do exercise to make themselves feel better.

Ainsworth Has No Shame

2009-08-12T23:12:00.003+01:00

In an interview quoted by the Telegraph, Bob Ainsworth hides behind a veneer of patriotism to sneer at those who question our tactics in Afghanistan. Some choice quotes:

"This sense of purpose and momentum has not translated to the home front in the way that it might have."

First of all, don't you dare try to suggest that people don't support the troops themselves. That is not what is happening. What people are seeing is coffins coming back on an almost daily basis, filled with men often barely out of their teens. People are lining the streets in their thousands to pay tribute to these men. What so many object to is the reason why those men are in coffins; because you've given them vehicles that don't protect them against bombs, in a country where pretty much all the roads are covered in bombs.

"Some in the UK believe the fight is not worth it."

Maybe so, but they're entitled to an opinion. Not everyone has to agree with what intellectual titan Bob Ainsworth thinks. I myself think it probably is worth the fight. But it would help if our troops were properly equipped. There's a difference between something being worth a fight and something not being worth a slaughter.

"This defeatism has been exacerbated by political arguments about British troop levels, vehicles and helicopters that often misunderstand the nature of coalition warfare."

Don't you tell us we don't understand warfare when it's blatantly obvious that you barely understand tying shoelaces. Here's a reminder of you not knowing where our troops are, or indeed where they are going - so don't lecture us. Asking legitimate questions about our troop-to-helicopter ratio, our lack of bomb-proof vehicles, and our general equipment is not 'political argument'; it's a matter of major national importance.

We can support the troops without supporting the Government. We can question how well the Government provides for our troops without being against the mission goals. And we can take pride in our armed forces without moustachioed gits with double-digit IQs telling us to do so.

Hazel's Highway Code

2009-08-10T22:33:00.005+01:00

The story of Hazel Blears getting her tires slashed and windscreen smashed has done the rounds already, so I'm not going to cover old ground. But what I would like to know is how on earth she thinks this car is acceptably parked. From this picture in the Mail, you can see it's jutting out at the rear end, it's on a double yellow line, and - if you look at the video on that Mail page - you'll see it's awfully close to a junction. Labour MPs can't even park properly; no wonder they can't run the country.

Policy Failure Welcomed By Lefties

2009-08-09T21:38:00.004+01:00

In a move which suggests he's now the boss of pretty much everyone, Peter Mandelson has outlined a new education policy - one which discriminates against people with reasonable lives. Yes, it may soon be Government policy to artifically boost the grades of students from poorer and working class backgrounds, to ensure that universities have a proper spread across the social spectrum. Never mind ability, talent or commitment; the most important things you may soon need to get into university are a father with a flat cap and a charlady for a mother.

Also, this policy is further proof - as if we needed any more - that Labour has failed to level the educational playing field as they said they would. If there weren't still shithole areas with awful schools then this policy wouldn't be necessary. As sorry as I am for pupils with little choice but to attend those schools, and as unacceptable as it is for such schools to still exist, an additional wrong of fiddling the system in this fashion is just not acceptable. It's unfair to those it disadvantages, and patronising to those it is supposed to benefit. Furthermore, aren't Oxford and Cambridge going to be delighted to have students who have just scraped Cs trying to get to grips with their incredibly challenging courses? They'd have to lower their academic standards, which would then bring down the reputation of said universities - and others.

The BBC - in Pravda mode - boasts that: "Campaigners have welcomed an idea to give poorer students a two grade 'head start' to help them get places at the leading universities". The campaign group in question is Million+ which, as you can see, is a think tank/pressure group with a membership comprised of former polytechnics and new universities. In other words, a hotbed of trendy lefty thinking agrees with a policy right out of the Soviet playbook.

This policy is an absolute disaster waiting to happen. It shows how spectacularly Labour's educational reforms have failed, and that they're now resorting to desperate tactics to further their social engineering goals. It will undermine the educational standards of our best universities, cheapen their degrees, and will piss off an awful lot of people in the process.

Update - some excellent thoughts on this from Constantly Furious.

Gordon's Volunteering Questions

2009-08-04T22:08:00.002+01:00

No doubt you will have seen that our dear leader plans to grace the presence of some lucky do-gooders, and do a week of voluntary work during the summer break. But I have some questions for him:

If you were so worried about it being seen as a publicity stunt, why did you allow the information to seep out, and then confirm it? When Johnny Depp gave £1 million to Great Ormond Street and dressed up as Jack Sparrow for he sick kids he just did it, and the information slowly came out. He didn't issue press releases or whinge about it being seen as a publicity stunt. He did something nice, and eventually we heard about it. You're telling us you're doing something nice in advance, while expressing disappointment that we know about it.

If you are doing anything involving children or vulnerable adults, I trust you have had a CRB check and that everything is in order? I also trust that you waited your turn, and weren't branded with anything nasty like these poor people.

Are you doing anything involving phones? Because if you are, I'd advise that you try not to smash any of them against walls, that you don't call up random members of the public in the wee hours, and that you don't start regurgitating tractor statistics when people in need of help start telling you how difficult it is to find a job and make ends meet.

Since this is going to be done in private, I assume there will be absolutely no more information released, and that you won't be referring to it in the future as part of another tragic attempt to look normal?

If you do start to release such information, can you assure us that you're working for a legitimate organisation or group, and that some Labour activists haven't just been rounded up and told to play volunteers for a week to make you look good?

Sign On... Stay Here

2009-08-03T20:48:00.004+01:00

Today was meant to be a good day for Labour. They were set to unveil a new points-based system for determining British citizenship, thereby making it harder for people to do what happens at the moment - migrants move here, and pretty much get automatic citizenship after five years.

I should also stress that a points-based immigration system (designed to stop people before they actually got into the country) was proposed by the Conservatives in their 2005 manifesto - Labour said it was 'racist'.

But in a show of uselessness that will come as no surprise, it turns out that some of the things migrants will have to do to earn points are just taking the piss. As this article from the Telegraph states, they will be able to earn points by learning how to make benefit claims. Yes, the plan is honestly to reward them for doing one of the key things that people against unlimited migration complain about. That's not to say every migrant is a scrounger and only here for benefits - of course that isn't true. But how does it help the public perception of migrants if they can actually solidify their claim to stay here by taking our money? So, on their day of toughness, Labour have ended up looking ridiculous - no doubt content in their Socialist world where benefits are an important part of citizenship.

How To Blow A Million Pounds

2009-08-01T10:51:00.002+01:00

The Department of Business, Innovation and Skills has announced it will partially fund 500 trips abroad for graduates finding it tough to get a job. There's nothing inherently wrong with these trips; I know a few people who have been on ones like this and had thoroughly enjoyable experiences. I also know how tough it is for people to find jobs at the moment; where I work, the new employee who sorts the post and makes tea is an Oxford graduate.

But, how will eight weeks building huts and trekking in South America, Africa or Asia actually help these people get jobs? At their best, these sort of trips encourage people to work as part of a team, but they very rarely teach people new skills and things that would significantly improve their chances of getting a job. And at a job interview, there are any number of things you could mention as examples of working as part of a team, so I doubt these trips will be much use on that front either.

I can't help wondering if it's just another way of stopping 500 more people signing on and making the unemployment statistics look even worse. But hey, it's only a million quid.

No Bob... It's Because You're Rubbish

2009-07-31T23:30:00.004+01:00

Poor diddums. Bob Ainsworth thinks people are picking on him because he's from the Midlands, a bit simple and has a moustache. However, despite those being perfectly valid reasons to pick on him, the main cause of the disdain so many people feel for poor Bob is his general ineptness. See him on form against Paxman when he was Armed Forces Minister.

Yvette Cooper Is An Idiot

2009-07-27T19:25:00.000+01:00

Yvette Cooper is drawing up plans for the UK to recognise Workers' Memorial Day, to commemorate those who die at work every year. In theory, this could also become an additional bank holiday. She said:

"It's a tragedy that some people go out to work and then never return home to their families. I want to look at what the UK can do to remember the thousands of workers who have lost their lives. I know there are many ideas including a lasting memorial."

You have to question the intelligence of anyone who thinks this is a legitimate ground for the creation of a new bank holiday. And you certainly have to ask whether Cooper really is as much of a moronic shit as she seems for suggesting this in a month where 22 British servicemen have died in Afghanistan - including two more today. Does she not think that maybe, just maybe, a bank holiday to commemorate those - hundreds of thousands - who have lost their lives defending and protecting this country might be more appropriate?

Voice Of The Resistance

2009-07-27T15:31:00.002+01:00

I'm pleased to say that I have been asked to contribute to the Voice of the Resistance blog. I will be making my first post there as soon as possible. I also intend to not simply duplicate my posts from here, which will continue as normal. A little musical resistance for you...

J.K. Won't Be Happy

2009-07-27T14:44:00.004+01:00

J.K. Rowling - author and Labour donor - won't be happy with Harry Potter himself coming out for the Lib Dems. Unfortunately, Daniel Radcliffe rather fits the trend of actors not quite understanding how politics works, despite seeing fit to lecture us about it. He said:

"If all the people who liked them voted for them you could change politics overnight and we could have a proper three-party system."

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't an election the time of the political cycle where people who do actually like parties go and vote for them? If someone is motivated enough to support or even like a political party to a reasonable extent, you can bet money they'll be voting for them when a general election rolls round. Could it be that young Mr. Radcliffe believes the Lib Dems to be more popular than they actually are? It certainly fits in with the acting profession's political mentality of thinking that something must be important for us simple common folk because it's important for them - the great, lofty thespians that they are.

Submarines For India - No Helicopters For Us

2009-07-26T16:41:00.003+01:00

Last year Gordon Brown promised £825 million to India in 'development aid' - spread out over the next three years. So in the region of £275 a year is going to India from the UK.

Today, we read that India has just launched a nuclear submarine. Out of all the countries with nuclear capabilities that some might consider to be a bit iffy, I still probably trust India the most. But why are we giving them £275 million a year when they have enough money - or perhaps even use the money we give them - to buy advanced nuclear weaponry instead of investing in their dilapidated national infrastructure?

We're either giving money to a country which is spending it on nuclear submarines, or we're giving money to a country which already has enough in the bank to buy nuclear submarines. Does anyone want to work out how many Chinooks for our own troops we could buy with that money?

Gordon's Solemn Face

2009-07-25T21:16:00.004+01:00

Brown puts on his serious face to pay tribute to the last solider to fight in WWI's trenches - Harry Patch, who sadly died today at the age of 111. For some reason, politicians and media folk are all forgetting that Claude Choules is still alive in Australia. Technically, he is the last British veteran of WWI left alive. But it looks as though because he no longer lives in Britain, we're going to have a memorial service now anyway.

Nick Clegg's BBC Promotion

2009-07-21T22:30:00.002+01:00

Found in this story:

I'm sure that Alan Duncan will be pretty pissed off.

Chris Bryant's Nagging Holiday

2009-07-16T18:35:00.002+01:00

The BBC is reporting that Chris Bryant - Foreign Office Minister and Secretary of State for Smearing the Tories and Wearing Pants - has popped off to Corfu to visit British tourists. And why, you might be asking? The answer seems to be; to point out the bloody obvious:

Foreign Office Minister Chris Bryant will tell tourists and travel companies about the risks of falling foul of the law or becoming victims of crime. He said many Britons go "go a little bit wild" on holiday but he wanted to ensure they "have a safe one". Mr Bryant added: "We want to make sure that people have a great holiday".

It must be nice to be a Minster; free trips to Greek islands to do some useless nannying, and then spend a week in the sun. I wonder how much this little jolly cost the taxpayer?

I Have Fisked Ben Bradshaw

2009-07-03T22:44:00.001+01:00

Earlier on, Iain Dale wrote a thoughtful open letter regarding the comments Ben Bradshaw and Chris Bryant made yesterday about the dirty, wicked and evil Conservative Party. Iain is a big boy and doesn't need anyone to jump to his defence, but Ben Bradshaw has posted a response at LabourList which effectively amounts to rubbing Iain's belly and telling him to have a warm glass of milk and a lie down. It addresses precious few of the points Iain actually made, and even throws in a few more extra slurs for good luck.

I like Iain Dale, [A qualifier, before saying something patronising] but I’m afraid he has got it wrong this time and at the same time has exposed one of the problems of blogging. [You being the big blogging expert all of a sudden?]

In his open letter to me and Chris Bryant MP, he bases his assertions on a BBC article which focused on one or two things that Chris and I said – from a two hour debate, at which I don’t think Iain was present. [Your point being? If I had a two-hour conversation with you which was perfectly pleasant, except for the 15 seconds where I mentioned that Gordon Brown might be a kiddy-fiddler, which bit do you think you'd remember?]

In fact the Pride Political Debate, held to launch Pride celebrations in London, was a good-natured affair [Until you started smearing, that is] in which Chris and I debated with the Conservatives Nick Boles and Nick Herbert MP, and with Stephen Williams MP of the Liberal Democrats.

In Iain’s open letter, he comments that "We should try to find common cause rather than constantly to seek cheap political advantage". I understand why the Tories would want to remove the politics from the debate, [That's not actually what Iain said; what he said was that you should stop using Streicher-esque language to scare gay people away from the Tories] since their politics have not exactly measured up to the equality agenda [No, they haven't measured up to your party's equality agenda, which isn't a surprise seeing as how they're a different party] recently or in the further past. [In the further past, Alistair Darling was a member of a political party which glorified mass-murderer and gay-hater Joseph Stalin. How far back do you want to go?] As a Labour Minister I am proud to explain and communicate Labour’s policies and to show that Labour has a strong track record of achievement in ending discrimination. [No human being writes sentences like that - this must have come from a piece of literature produced by Labour HQ]

During the debate, I recognised and welcomed moves from some Conservative Party members such as John Bercow [Had to mention Bercow, didn't you, like he's some sort of pariah on these issues? He's just a toadie who cuddled up to you lot to get elected. Why not mention Cameron himself, or the fact that the Shadow Cabinet has gay members for the first time ever?] to drag their party [Kicking and screaming, no doubt; since we're all a bunch of gay-haters] into the 21st Century and sign up to the equalities agenda, but warm words from some of the more progressive Tories can’t hide the poor record of many Conservative MPs [Again, the Chancellor of the Exchequer loved someone who murdered 50 million people] and activists. [Activists have records now? A Labour activist once spat on me as I handed out leaflets outside Embankment tube station, so I guess that makes all Labour activists hate-filled fuck-faces?]

I also welcomed David Cameron’s recent change of language on equality and expressed a hope that the day will come soon when we do not have to debate this at all. [And yet you keep going on about the past voting record of Tory MPs]

In turn, Nick Boles and Nick Herbert MP made staunch defences of their party, acknowledged their mistakes [How modest of them. I'd like to see a Labour MP admit they have ever made a mistake about anything. Why don't you start and apologise for telling people to go to their GP for dental treatment, or saying that the NHS computer system isn't a useless piece of crap?] and talked about their advances, and were very gracious in their praise for what the Labour Government has achieved. [All praise Labour! We are not worthy!]

However, I commented that "there is still a deep strain of homophobia that still exists on the Tory benches". [There's a deep strain of Stalin-loving on the Labour benches] I do believe that many Tory backbenchers remain unreconstructed, [Fine, they disagree with you, and that upsets you. But don't use words like 'unreconstructed', as though human thought can just be broken down and put back together in a 'better' way. No wonder I'm hearing the words 'thought police' more since Labour came to power] as even a cursory glance at their voting and Hansard records will confirm. [A cursory glance at Gordon Brown's record says he doesn't give two shits about having an Iraq war enquiry, but we still appear to be having one - albeit a half-arsed one]

The Tory reaction to the debate, seeking to shout loudly in order to stifle discussion [Actually, I think they're shouting loudly because yourself and Chris Bryant just called them bigots] about their current stance on equality and gay rights, shows they still aren’t in the right place on this and have missed the point yet again. [More 'reconstruction' afoot, I think...]

David Cameron has apologised for his support of Section 28, but the argument has moved on. [Again, you keep bringing up age old Tory voting records, so it clearly hasn't moved on]

Why are the Conservatives rejecting important equality legislation for LGBT people in the shape of the Equality Bill? [This is a classic Tony Blair trick - find the most 'positive' thing an otherwise piece of shit bill does, and say that's why the Tories are against it. Just think of all the times Blair went on about the Tories being 'soft on crime' for voting against numerous ghastly bills which contained one or two things about making sentences tougher. I don't know precise individual thoughts on the LGBT content. What I do know is that this is the bill that reduces the male sex to something just above a paper bag full of semen on the employability ladder, and that's a good enough reason alone to vote against it]

Why did Cameron and his frontbenchers oppose fertility rights for lesbians? [Because they have a different opinion from you? Because they think that priority should go to people who can't conceive because of medical reasons and not because basic human biology won't let them? Because they think fathers are important figures? Any number of reasons, but the fact that they disagree with you on this doesn't make them wrong]

Why are they, right now, opposing laws to prevent incitement to homophobic hatred? [Because, knowing how rubbish your laws like this tend to be, and how the police are so keen to enforce your 'agenda'; they're worried about swathes of people being arrested simply for going lip-wristed and saying "Oooo, get you" in a comical fashion etc]

And why are they forming alliances with far-right, nasty homophobic parties in Europe and why aren’t gay Tories like Iain speaking out about this? [In the European Parliament, Labour MEPs currently sit (in the Party of European Socialists) with a former IRA member, a Polish anti-Semite, and an Italian Communist who thinks 9/11 was a conspiracy and Russia was right to invade Georgia. The PES is also invited a Turkish party which supports a terrorist group to join as a sort of 'associate member', and expelled an Austrian MEP for daring to raise the issue of expenses abuse. Speak out, Bradshaw - speak out...]

Despite some Tories’ slightly hysterical reaction, [Considering that Chris Bryant essentially said that the Tories were going to do devious things to gay people if they ever got back into power, I think the restrained anger - rather than hysteria - on display is entirely justified] they cannot deny that over the years [You said we had moved on...] and even up to the present day they have voted against nearly all of the equality legislation that this Labour Government has introduced. [My goodness, where to start? They don't always have to agree with your viewpoint. Your approach to 'equalities' isn't necessarily better. They are the Opposition. Some of the legislation was really fucking horrible] Although the mood music has changed from Cameron, I’m afraid I remain to be convinced that the Tory backbenches have really changed. [Funny, because that Jake poll which had the Tories getting 38% and Labour on a piss-poor 20% of the gay vote suggests most gays aren't nearly as blind, stubborn and spiteful as you. And where the hell have you exposed one of the problems with blogging?]

Compare And Contrast - Ministers And Nazis

2009-07-02T23:14:00.005+01:00

Two quotations from Trust No Fox, a children's book published in 1936 by prominent Nazi Julius Streicher:

"One thing always keep in view, Once a Jew, always a Jew!!"

"Don’t trust a fox on the greensward, And never a Jew on his plighted word!”

And two quotations from today, from Ben Bradshaw and Chris Bryant:

"A deep strain of homophobia still exists on the Conservative benches."

"If gays vote Tory they will rue the day very soon."

0% Growth - 0% Economic Credibility

2009-07-01T21:54:00.002+01:00

My favourite bit? The look on Tessa Jowell's face. She clearly wasn't paying attention, but is suddenly grabbed by the stupidity of what Brown said. She then looks over at the Tories, almost resigned to the fact that they going to take the piss.

ID Cards - Apparently Not Jacqui's Fault

2009-06-30T21:19:00.005+01:00

Today Alan Johnson announced that ID Cards will no longer be compulsory, which means that pretty much nobody will get one. The scheme is effectively dead. But never missing an opportunity to deflect blame, Johnson also said the Government should never have allowed "the perception to go around that they were a panacea for terrorism."

Maybe so, but doesn't this comment rather suggest this was some sort of rumour that the Government failed to stop - rather than it being the Government's fault? Here's Jacqui in May: "ID cards will deliver real benefits to everyone, including increased protection against criminals, illegal immigrants and terrorists."

Pretty unequivocal, I think.

I should also point out that their stupid little 'fine you £1,000 if your eye colour is wrong on it' database is very much going ahead.

Hilary Benn Found Dead

2009-06-27T11:52:00.002+01:00

Police are searching for a one-eyed son of a manse today after Environment Secretary Hilary Benn was found dead - cut in half, and shoved into a dustbin. It is believed the last people to see Benn alive were BBC radio employees as he guested on Any Questions, saying:

"When times are tough you need to tighten your belt... If I look at my department's budget, it is going to go down a bit and therefore we will have to prioritise."

Elected For The Wrong Reasons - Bercow Now Has To Prove Himself

2009-06-22T21:47:00.004+01:00

And so John Bercow has been elected as the next Speaker of the House of Commons, beating fellow Conservative Sir George Young by a margin of 322-271.

It is one of the worst kept secrets in politics that Bercow has long desired to be the Speaker. As early as 2005, there were rumours of him cosying up to Labour MPs - safe in the knowledge that with enough Labour votes he could frustrate the Conservatives as much as he liked. Watching him nodding along to Tony Blair in the Commons was just one of many attempts to get in Labour's good books, as were the cards and supportive letters known to have been sent. And all this was done while simultaneously speaking out against the line of his own party, and sitting on the biggest Conservative majority in the country.

And this is why he was elected today. Talk of him being a reformer comes only from his words and not his actions, and is also based largely on his age and various phantom reasons Labour MPs have created in order to justify voting for him. Bercow was elected today because Labour MPs wanted to stick it to the Tories - to give them one of their own as Speaker, but also the one they wanted least. Do not let any journalist or Labour MP get away with the lie that this was Labour putting aside party politics; this was party politics at its most gruesome and petty.

However, this does not mean Bercow cannot be a good Speaker. In his speech of thanks he made a promise to be impartial, and has already warmed up the language of reform. In fact, he may well prove to be an excellent Speaker, and genuinely capable of being nonpartisan, professional and respected. But those things are part of a reputation he now has to earn; they are not perks that come automatically with the position. He takes the role in the knowledge that he has been used as a political stick with which to beat his own party, and in more ways than one he is responsible for that. But with his election now confirmed, the fact is that Bercow now has to do the job to his utmost and make the reasons for his election an irrelevance. Because if he doesn't, his election will just be another sad episode in this current series of Parliamentary tragedies.

Harvard And Yale Crash Out Of Ivy League

2009-06-20T22:25:00.002+01:00

From the Mirror:

For My Fellow Commuters

2009-06-09T21:41:00.003+01:00

Just a reminder that the RMT members striking for the next 48 hours are doing so because they want a 5% wage increase and guaranteed job security in the middle of the recession, and because they want two LU employees reinstated who were fired for endangering passenger safety and alleged theft.

Iraq Enquiry - Gordon Doesn't Give A Rat's Arse

2009-06-06T21:52:00.004+01:00

The Telegraph is reporting that Gordon Brown is planning to launch an enquiry into the Iraq War, presumably as part of his latest political fightback. It is absolutely vital that at no point is he given credit for doing the right thing if this goes ahead which, based on his record of keeping his promises, isn't a certainty by any means. And the reason for this is because he has quite possibly the most spineless and uninterested voting record on this issue it is possible for an MP to have.

As you can see on the Public Whip website, Brown has voted just twice in 16 votes on the subject of an Iraq enquiry, and on both those occasions it was to prevent an enquiry from taking place. Some MPs have lower vote percentages on that site - as a result of voting against an enquiry on several occasions - but Brown's record typifies him. It shows he utterly indifferent to this issue, and when he is around to vote he does so in a way which will protect himself from criticism or investigation.

The man is a snivelling, two-faced coward, and don't let any journalist - or normal person, for that matter - be impressed if Gordon goes ahead and does the right thing.

D-Day Thoughts

2009-06-06T19:21:00.005+01:00

Without entirely giving away my age, I'm two generations away from my family members who served and fought in WWII. One was in the WAAF, one was a Desert Rat, and one was a British soldier billeted with the French Resistance. The latter saw D-Day take place first-hand, and was haunted by the experience for the rest of his life.

I have learned a lot from the experiences they have relayed to me, and I still find myself overwhelmed when contemplating the sheer loss of life. Maybe I'm a wimp, but I just cannot picture myself dealing with the perils of war. The bravery involved in simply being part of such a conflict is something that I often feel is beyond me.

All those relatives are now deceased, though they all survived the war and lived to old age. But I have often pondered the fact that, knowing them as I did, they appear to have felt exactly the same way as I did before they were involved in the war. Those who served spent most of their time terrified, exhausted and surrounded by horrors few of us can contemplate. So as we honour and pay tribute the courage, the bravery and the sacrifices made by those who fought and died, I also think it is vital to remember them as people - as fellow human beings and not as simplified archetypes. In many ways that makes what they did even more astonishing, and is also why they must never be forgotten.

Gordon Brown - YouTube Loner

2009-06-06T15:20:00.005+01:00

Above is a screenshot taken from the Number 10 YouTube page; the one with the really creepy videos of the Prime Numpty pretending to answer questions and doing his ghastly smile. As you can see, there is only one subscription listed on that page - and it's Peter Mandelson's BERR. By contrast, WebCameron has nearly 2000.

What I want to know is this? Does this mean that Number 10 has only subscribed to BERR, or that BERR is the only user to subscribe to Number 10? I suspect the latter, and confess I'm not really a YouTube person. But by not putting my weird face all over it like Gordon Brown, it's not like I'm pretending to 'get it' either.

Worst Cabinet Of All Time?

2009-06-05T22:15:00.007+01:00

I suppose it makes sense that the certified worst Prime Minister in history has constructed the most useless, pathetic and untalented Cabinet of all time; it's just a shame for all of us that it had to happen when we are alive. The more choice individuals:

Prime Minister - Gordon Brown

The psychotic, hateful, one-eyed, delusional son of the manse himself. Often talks of his Presbyterian upbringing, which is actually an anagram of 'betray sniper' - something I hope he'll do in the very near future.

Chancellor of the Exchequer - Alistair Darling

Once thought to be a decent man in a tough job, now exposed as a dick making a hash of it. Flipped his second home more times than a McDonalds employee does burgers, and charged the public to do his tax return. Also got to pick his own Cabinet position, which is nice. Oh, and he's a tax dodger.

Foreign Secretary - David Miliband

Also got to pick his own job. Achievements to date include looking like an idiot while holding a piece of fruit and pissing off the leaders of India. He also appears to cut his own hair and seems incapable of growing a proper moustache.

Home Secretary - Alan Johnson

A man who once admitted he was not capable of being Prime Minister is rewarded for his honesty with one of the four Great Offices of State. Is too stupid to realise that taking this job taints him during the leadership campaign that will occur once Gordon has betrayed the sniper.

Business, Innovation and Skills Secretary - Lord Mandelson

The first of seven Lords in Gordon 'Power to the People' Brown's new Cabinet. Twice resigned from Government for being a sleazy bag of shit, and known throughout the world for being a sleazy bag of shit. Now also holds about three other titles as well - despite not being elected by anyone - and is believed to have convinced Adam and Eve that God's fruit is delicious.

Health Secretary - Andy Burnham

Only point of note during his time at the Culture, Media and Sport department was his desire to control the Internet like some sort of Socialist puppet master. Is believed to employ the same make-up techniques as Barbara Cartland, and is married to a woman with a ridiculous name.

Defence Secretary - Bob Ainsworth

Rumoured not to understand the difference between things that are really small and other things that are really far away, Ainsworth is famous for being the first Armed Forces Minister not to have a clue where our troops are or where they might be going. Is David Miliband's moustache coach, and was once mistaken for the cartoon man from the Inland Revenue adverts.

Leader of the House of Commons - Harriet Harman

Lunatic feminist who believes herself worthy of being Prime Minister solely on the grounds that she's a woman. Her career of ministerial ineptness behind her, Harman is laying low and waiting for Brown to set himself on fire. She will then piss the flames out with her mighty lady wee and take his place.

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary - Hilary Benn

Has enjoyed a relatively good life, despite being burdened with an insane father who he happens to share speech patterns with. Was appointed by mistake after Gordon Brown, taking Caroline Flint's criticisms to heart, believed he was a woman.

International Development Secretary - Douglas Alexander

Has kept his job by virtue of being Scottish, despite sucking spectacularly at everything he has ever attempted. Was blamed by Gordon Brown for the botched 'election that never was' in 2007 after the Prime Minister realised that he was a lot easier to bitch-slap than Ed Balls.

Communities and Local Government Secretary - John Denham

Moved from the now defunct Innovation, Universities and Skills Department, Denham made a name for himself by making a retarded decision over second degrees. Is believed to have absolutely no personality whatsoever.

Transport Secretary - Lord Adonis

Known to be hated by Gordon Brown for coming up with the Academy system for schools and for being a mate of Tony Blair, Adonis does not live up to his name when seen in the nude. Is ideally suited for the Transport brief as he travelled on a bus once.

Children, Schools and Families Secretary - Ed Balls

Finishing second to Joseph Goebbels in a competition to find the nastiest little shit ever to walk the face of the earth stung Balls at an early age. As odious and repulsive as he is obsequious, Balls remained in this job because the rest of the Cabinet hate him so fucking much they couldn't bare to see him promoted. Has been known to insert himself entirely up Gordon Brown's arsehole as a party trick.

Energy and Climate Change Secretary - Ed Miliband

Not content with copying Tony Blair's annoying speech patterns and smug tone of voice, the younger Miliband has also gone the extra mile and shortened his not particularly posh name to something folksy and charming. Used to wrestle his brother for the opportunity to take girls to the Fabian Society. The loser had to cut his own hair.

Northern Ireland Secretary - Shaun Woodward

Quite possibly the richest MP, Woodward is entirely responsible for David Cameron being elected to Parliament. Because of this, and because he has a butler, Gordon Brown keeps him locked in a small box under his desk, feeding him sliced pieces of Jacqui Smith's bottom. Once visited his constituency but didn't like it very much.

Work and Pensions Secretary - Yvette Cooper

Known as much for her marriage to Ed Balls as for her famous Jimmy Clitheroe impression, Cooper is a classic example of someone who is clever in theory but not in actuality. Despite being loaded with degrees from prestigious universities, Cooper generally fails to give the impression that she actually understands anything she talks about. She and her husband surprised the medical establishment when the combination of their DNA didn't result in offspring that looked like the baby in Eraserhead.

Chief Secretary to the Treasury - Liam Byrne

Spurned on by a chance meeting with two individuals who didn't think he was a noxious little twat, Byrne first became an MP in 2004. Over the following five years he has established himself as one of those people who we'd prefer never to have come into politics. Is known for his dangerous driving habits, as well as the ability to invert his body in such a way as to enable him to kiss his own anus. In 2007 he stabbed an intern to death for bringing him an espresso instead of a cappuccino.

Minister for the Cabinet Office - Tessa Jowell

Is still around despite having been useless at every job she's had since Labour came to power. For that reason is believed to possess photos depicting Brown and Blair with their nipples chained together while hitting each other with toilet plungers. Tried to outrun Sebastian Coe when working on the Olympics bid, but fell over and broke her brain. Few people noticed.

Minister for Europe - Glenys Kinnock

Found at the bottom of the barrel, Kinnock is ideally suited to this role thanks to her years of experience selling Britain out as an MEP. The most memorable event in her life is believed to have been when she was dragged into the sea by a gigantic ginger tosser.

Scotland Secretary - Jim Murphy

Has the job by virtue of being Scottish. Is known for doing charity runs to disguise the fact that he's a smug little turd. One described the Conservative Party as 'irrelevant' in the House of Commons. Is hotly tipped for the new position of Minister for Things That Come Back to Bite You on the Arse.

Culture, Media and Sport Secretary - Ben Bradshaw

Is one of the few Cabinet members who you won't be able to picture in your mind, even if you close your eyes and think really hard. Was a particularly disastrous Health Minister, having told people needing dental work to visit their GPs, spoken in favour of parking charges at hospitals, and being the only person on the planet who thought the NHS computer system worked really well.

Wales Secretary - Peter Hain

Epitomising the total lack of options available to Gordon Brown, Hain returns to the Cabinet after spending four months in an oven, covered in a honey glaze. Has been given the Welsh Office to run because it doesn't involve any money, and is therefore perfect for a man who doesn't seem to understand where it comes from or where it goes.

Mandy Spins Like Mad

2009-06-04T23:15:00.000+01:00

Not just to keep Labour MPs in line, but to broaden the current crisis engulfing Labour into something cross-party, when it clearly isn't. From the Telegraph:

"Don't please, through your actions, make it any worse for the Labour Party than for the other parties who have all got to come to grips with this crisis affecting British politics."

Obviously he's talking about expenses. The problem, however, is that all the polls - with the exception of a rather fruity ComRes - have said that the Tories are actually doing okay on this issue - largely thanks to Cameron's leadership.

And the other, wider, problem is that this isn't really about expenses at all. It's about Labour picking the wrong man as their leader; it's about that man quite possibly being the worst Prime Minister in history; and it's about the public coming to realise that this government - whoever leads it - is morally, intellectually and politically bankrupt.

Purnell's Letter - I Smell 'Vision' Crap

2009-06-04T22:49:00.003+01:00

So Purnell has gone - sideburns and all. While some, such as Danny Finkelstein are focusing on the comments he made about Gordon Brown's position in his resignation letter, I've noticed another very telling section. Depending on how you read it, it's either extraordinarily defeatist, or arrogant in the extreme:

"We therefore owe it to our country to give it a real choice. We need to show that we are prepared to fight to be a credible government and have the courage to offer an alternative future."

On one hand, you can read this as election talk. That he sees the party as needing to take a new direction and ask the people to chose whether they want New Old New Labour, or the Conservatives. Or, he is honestly of the opinion that it is the job of a sitting government to fight to be a 'credible' government, and to offer an 'alternative'. Just think what that sounds like for a moment. Am I the only person who hears shades of 'there will be no election because I want to set out my vision for Britain'?

Gordon Surfaces To Talk Crap

2009-05-30T13:44:00.005+01:00

Iain Martin of the Telegraph has been wondering whether Gordon Brown is still alive, since we haven't actually seen him for a couple of weeks. But today an article written by him - and I use the word 'article' loosely, since it's a mere 475 words - appeared in the Sun. And it all seems so very familiar. Article in full, with my comments in red:

I came into politics because I wanted to change the world. [Modesty at its best] I love this country and, like most British people, I’m proud of the way that we decide things democratically. [Like picking our Prime Minister?]

We've got no big history ['We've got no big history' - what sort of fucking grammar is that?] of extremism [I seem to recall an organisation called the IRA, but what the hell] in this country because our Parliament - the oldest in the world - has always been a symbol of how we decide things fairly together.
But our democracy has been discredited by the scandals of recent weeks — revelations that have made me furious because it seems some people have been serving themselves and not the public. [Like spending £6,000 of our money on a cleaner when you earn nearly £200,000 a year, and claiming the Additional Costs Allowance every year, despite having at least one grace and favour home since 1997?] So I’m determined to do whatever it takes to clean up politics. [Good - sack the Cabinet, resign and call an election]

I’ve moved quickly to take action, and there is no way that those who have defied the rules will be standing as Labour candidates at the next election. [No, you waited to see what the Conservatives would do, and then copied them, only not as well. Hence your stupid 'star chamber' idea which only looks at whether the rules were broken - a far narrower remit than the Conservative version. Since the rules were so vague and useless, the majority of Labour MPs will be let off the hook - despite the tough talk] But every single MP needs to reflect on what recent weeks have taught us — that the public feel bitterly let down by politics and they want politicians to be showing what we are doing to help them. [Actually, I think we'd much prefer to not see you stealing our money] The first thing is to clean up the system and for MPs to get back to their constituencies and face the public. [Go on then, lead by example]

But equally important is for my Labour MPs to explain to families and businesses what we are doing to fight back against the global recession. [Ahh, a subject change to your favourite hobby horse] I was pleased to be able to meet yesterday owners [Seriously, syntax?] of brand new cars who have been able to take advantage of the Labour Government’s new scrappage scheme for vehicles over ten years old. [The most important policy in a generation, surely?] Thirty-five thousand have taken up the offer in just a few weeks. [Yes, because Labour trailed it for ages before actually introducing it. What we have seen is an accumulation of people - come back to me in 6 months and tell me the numbers are just as high] The scrappage scheme is just one example of the things Government can do to give people a helping hand when times are tough. [People who find things so tough they still have money to buy a new car?] New help to give homeowners reassurance against the threat of repossession is another. [Do you mean this scheme? The one that precisely two households have taken up?]

That is the kind of thing that I and all Labour MPs came into politics for [You came into politics to earmark £285 million for two households and help people with mortgages? I thought you came into politics to change the world...] — and we need to make sure that every one of our constituents know what is on offer to help people through these difficult times. [But Tory constituents can go hang - right?]

But to restore lasting trust in politics we also need to change the House of Commons so we put the public in control and ensure MPs are closer to the people they represent. [I don't know whether this is another call for PR or what, but it's rather rich for you to suddenly notice the gulf between the public and politicians when you've spent the last 12 years trying everything within your power to widen it]

We need new powers at local level, like giving people powers to call to account their local councillors [And all this has precisely what to do with MPs? Nothing - it's just another gimmick to make people feel like they have power over their lives] or giving young people more influence on local budgets and services. [Why the hell do you think this would be a good idea?] Above all, we need changes that will allow Sun readers [Just Sun readers?] to better hold us to account as we focus on the big issues that matter to their lives — saving their jobs and houses [Unemployment is rising at record rates. Also, two households...] from the impact of the downturn, investing in good public services [And smothering them with red tape] and cracking down on crime. [Does anyone actually believe you are doing this anymore?]

Those are your priorities [Don't tell me what to think, please] and my priorities [No changing the world anymore, then?] , and this Government’s focus as we build Britain’s future. [Hopefully one which won't involve you at all]

A Rhetorical Question?

2009-05-28T22:00:00.002+01:00

Why have precisely none of these MPs been discovered claiming too little?

Thought of the day, there.

Darling Has No Shame

2009-05-25T12:45:00.000+01:00

The idea of Alistair Darling being a good guy in with a bad crowd seems to die a little more every day. Now it has emerged that he, along with eight other members of the Cabinet, put accountants on their expenses. His statement on the issue was:

“Like many MPs, I employed an accountant to prepare tax returns for each of the years in question to ensure that the correct amount of tax was paid.”

First of all, precisely nobody employs accountants to ensure they pay as much tax as possible. Accountants are hired to make money work better for you, and to ensure your interests are served; not to hand over big bags of your earnings. And secondly, he didn't employ an accountant - we did.

Alan Johnson Is Just Another Shit

2009-05-25T11:20:00.002+01:00

There's a lot of talk at the moment about Alan Johnson overthrowing Gordon Brown, and leading the Labour party to electoral victory - or a lesser loss than they might experience under Brown. There is also a slightly worrying trend for people to forget that Johnson:

a) Admitted he wasn't up to the job of being Prime Minister
b) Has been a Minister under both Brown and Blair
c) Has absolutely no real political achievement to his name whatsoever

I guess that just shows how limited Labour's options are, but it also demonstrates that Johnson isn't this peripheral figure - he's been deeply involved in everything Labour has done for the last 12 years. In other words, why on earth should he be considered to be something different and new?

And his Times article today shows precisely how he isn't going to change anything, mainly because his prerogative is fixing the system to benefit Labour. In essence, he calls for AVP - a form of Proportional Representation - to be adopted after a referendum that would be on the same day as the next election. Picture the scene; the Tories win the next election but, thanks to Labour spending plenty of taxpayers money on the advertising campaign, AVP is then introduced. Come the next election, Labour cosy up to the Lib Dems, form an alliance, and keep the Tories out of power for ever. On the other hand, I suppose we can take some comfort from the fact that if Labour look like they're going to lose the referendum vote, it will probably be scrapped. They have a degree of form in this area.

This is how the current Labour brain works - what is good for Labour and bad for the Tories comes before what is good for the country. By coming up with this ridiculous suggestion - the only purpose of which is to make it easier for Labour to win elections - Johnson shows his true colours. He is not a breath of fresh air, a knight in shining armour, or a working class lad done good. He's a duplicitous turd, a partisan obsessive, and a control freak with a staggering sense of entitlement to power.

Georgia Gould Is Up Her Own Arse

2009-05-22T21:46:00.004+01:00

Now that Labour has fought its dirty internal battle to pick its PPC for Erith and Thamesmead, spurned contender and do-nothing Georgia Gould has given an interview to the Evening Standard. She said:

"I've never denied that I'm incredibly privileged but that doesn't mean I'm not a hard worker or genuine in my beliefs. I was democratically voted head-girl at Camden School for Girls, a high-achieving state school, and I went to Oxford, so I could have gone for a high-paying glamorous career. But I do this because I am passionate about it and I love it! Though I do understand," she smiles, "that some people will call me a walking contradiction."

Gosh, she won an election at school. How well that must have prepared her for a life in professional politics. And yes, she could have gone for a high-paying glamorous career, if she demonstrated she had the talent for said career. But the thing is, she has never actually put herself to that sort of test. She has come out of Oxford with the delusional belief that she's making some sort of sacrifice by going into politics, and that she should someone be appreciated for doing that.

The problem here isn't that she's rich, educated, and from a handsome economic background. My party is lead by a man who went to Eton and Oxford, is married to the daughter of a Baronet, and is a distant relation of King William IV. The problem is that Georgia Gould wants to get into politics because she thinks it's a good gig, not because she has shown any talent for it, or indeed any talent in the world outside politics.

Brown Finds Money Behind Sofa

2009-05-21T22:19:00.004+01:00

How else can you explain this?:

29th April 2009 - "We have got to balance our responsibilities to those who have served our country with the finance that we need to be able to meet these obligations - and not base our offer on money we cannot afford."

20th May 2009 - "I believe it is possible for us to honour our commitments to the Gurkhas and to do so in a way that protects the public finances."

The man is absolutely devoid of shame.

Anyone Speak Broon?

2009-05-16T18:53:00.003+01:00

Writing in the bastion of intellectualism and investigative journalism that is the News of the World, Gordon Brown has said:

"[I am] under no illusions that repayment will not necessarily be sufficient sanction".

Can someone please tell me what on earth that means? Doesn't the inclusion of 'not' make it mean the opposite of what he means to say - that repayment alone is not going far enough?

Standards Complaint

2009-05-16T15:25:00.002+01:00

This afternoon I submitted a complaint to the Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. The complaint is against a female Labour MP, and relates to breaches of the guidelines relating to the proper use of the Communications Allowance. The complaints themselves are concerned with her website, and in particular:

- that it is covered with Labour party logos.
- that it is used to publicise Labour-angled publications.
- that it is used to make claims about Labour's record in a partisan fashion.

I don't want to say much more, just in case it prejudices my complaint and/or leads to crafty changes on the website. But I'll keep you informed of any updates.

Yikes!

2009-05-10T00:26:00.002+01:00

Blogging to resume - and hopefully with a bit more regularity - by the end of next week. Too much going on at the moment, and I don't even have expenses forms to fill in.

Picture from the Mail.

How Much Do They Not Get It?

2009-05-03T11:22:00.002+01:00

From the Mirror:

"The Government plans to hit internet firms like Google and Facebook with a new online advertising tax to give more cash to the bloated BBC.

Ministers are desperate to find extra money for state-owned broadcasters.

But it would leave firms like Google with demands for over £100million — and force internet companies to charge for services such as email, search engines and social networking.

A Whitehall source said: 'We need to fund public sector broadcasters like the BBC and Channel 4. The latest idea is a tax on online advertising. The money would go to the broadcasters.'"

Stories like this show two things; that the government doesn't understand the Internet, and that they're quite happy to tax everyone into an early grave. I would also bet money on this scheme costing more to implement than it would recover in taxes. Can you imagine the complexity of trying to tax adverts on Google or Facebook? A tired and desperate idea from a tired and desperate government.

Prescottian Logic

2009-05-02T12:03:00.004+01:00

From the Today programme:

"The big decisions are right, but I hear people say 'I don't like this smile'. For god's sake do you go on an aeroplane and ask the pilot has he got a smile or not? Can he land the plane?"

What Prescott doesn't understand is that it's not the smile in itself that's the problem. If Brown was competent and honest, and not a social and political retard, we wouldn't care about this creepy smile. But because Brown is an incompetent, lying and mentally disturbed man, the smile is another part of this unpleasant image. So no, I wouldn't care if my pilot had a creepy smile; I'd care if he was adamant that flying it into a mountain was the best way to land it.

Breaking News - Gordon Brown States Sodding Obvious

2009-04-28T22:45:00.003+01:00

During his visit to Poland, and while not being called an economic retard by the Polish PM, the BBC paraphrase Gordon as saying:

'Auschwitz is a testament to past evils but also to the enduring human spirit, Gordon Brown has said during a visit to the former concentration camp.

The prime minister said the camp, in what was Nazi-occupied Poland, served as a reminder that future acts of inhumanity.'

I am now looking forward to his pronouncements about the grass being green and cows going moo.