Gordon the Spinner!

Gordon Brown has just become Prime Minister, announcing to the world that he wants change. This, put simply, implies the guy before made mistakes. But whilst Mr Tony could tell a few porkies, he didn't appear to tell them as well as Gordon.

"I think at all times I've tried to be straight with the British people," Gordon Brown told BBC editors recently. Which implies that he hasn't always been. It's a typical Brown statement. Sounds so reassuring. But by using the word "try" he has allowed himself to feel he is not implying he was always truthful, when he knew at times he may not have been!

Panorama revealed on Monday (I've only just watched the programme tonight) that Brown told John Humphrys on the Today programme that he never knew that Bernie Ecclestone gave a £million to the Labour Party (when he did!). He was caught lying. For a son of the manse his inate ability to decieve comes as quite a shock. I always thought Brown was more or less OK on this, in the sense that out and out lying was not his scene. Panorama gave a different impression.

So, two days in, and it's all the same. Changed for two minutes, basically!

Read More

Secret Evidence in HM Prisons

Harry Roberts was a notorious cop killer of the 1960's. I remember all the talk at the time, 1966 it was, and I was a teenager. A long time ago. The news was never quite so "in-depth" in those days. Roberts was not given the same long-term notoriety as Myra Hindley, probably because he didn't kill a child, or get involved in a "monster from hell" type crime. I do like the double standards of the tabloid press! It serves us well, doesn't it. Killing a policeman is bad, killing three was terrible, but the crime always seem to stay stuck in the 60's. Much as Harry Roberts' identity.

Currently Roberts is biding his time in a low security risk prison near Newton Abbot, in Devon. However, the powers-that-be have decided he should stay in jail well past his 40 year sentence time limit. According to the BBC he lost his last appeal for parole because of "secret evidence". Like what exactly. That he has done something to upset the governor? Either he is a threat to society or he is not. I would hazard a guess they think he is not a risk but that they think they face a risk if they let him out, from revenge attacks or something. That's what all the secret evidence is about.

It is not about "he served his time and dues to society" stuff, but about the Home Office (or the "Justice" Ministry now) making sure they don't get stuck in any legal mess due to unforeseen circumstances. Roberts has been given the right to seek a judicial review over his failed parole bid. More costs to the taxpayer and all because the "secret evidence" is so secret!

I have no clue as to whether Roberts is a reformed person or whether he has ever felt remorse for his actions. But a low-risk prisoner sweating it out in rural Devon should not be messed around by a government, whose own history is one of incompetence in penal matters. Secret evidence is the kind of stuff for swivel-eyed dictatorships. It is not a right and proper way in a country that wants to have a transparent system.

So if Gordon Brown wants change, let him advise Jacqui Smith, the new Home Secretary, to eliminate "secret evidence" from such cases and let us know, through due legal process, why Roberts can't have parole. It's not difficult, it's easy.

He's either a risk or he is not!

Read More

He's gone. Just like that!

Some say our way of replacing Prime Ministers is a bit brutal. It certainly is in today's media spotlight. Helicopter-based cameras bearing down on Downing Street, reporters saying "Ooh, look, there goes an excercise machine!", and much other indelicate prattle.

It's swift, it's final and it's a spectacle. Tony Blair actually pulled it off with a great theatrical flourish. He was a politician that turned into a good actor. That's great House of Commons stuff. Not so good are actors turning into politicians, or in England at least. Glenda Jackson, Andrew Faulds, Michael Cashman have tried their luck to greater or lesser extent, but with no lasting glory. The House of Commons is an arena for performers who have the ability to be quick-witted, and on that point alone Blair was first rate!

Once he knew he was going and once he knew the date, he seemed to be counting down the days. The day itself was just like watching a senior prefect leaving school for the last time. Next term it will be same place, but a few new people will be joining. And a new prefect will be in charge!

Read More

Changing parties - changing names

On the eve of Gordon Brown's moving day - when he actual moves into the house next door - a very peculiar thing happened. A Tory MP who is against gay adoption, thought banning fox hunting wrong, and who voted against tuition fees, is actually crossing the floor of the House of Commons to sit with Gordon's Gang. Who is this principled guy? His name is Quentin Davies!

Actually, he's not so principled. He has often said very rude things about Gordon. After all Quentin was a merchant banker, so whilst on the Tory benches he would say nasty things about Gordon. Now he says nice things, or so he thinks.

I have met this principled man. In a previous incarnation he was the Conservative candidate in the Birmingham Ladywood by-election of 1977. I canvassed for him. Even then he came across as a pompous prat, but then I was young and willing to serve! We were in a tower block of flats, the sort with a central lift shaft and depressingly dirty stairs going down around this shaft. On either side were the grim doors to the grim flats. His election literature had him down as John Quentin Davies. I took this to be his name. I knocked on a door and enquired as to whether the voter would support John Quentin Davies. I don't remember his answer, but Davies bounced up to me in a rattled manner. "Don't say John Quentin Davies! They'll think I've got a double-barrelled name and I'm some bigwig. Just say John Davies". So John Davies it was. Didn't do him much good though, he lost.

After the election, some time later, I saw he popped up on a news bulletin from a Paris studio of the BBC giving us some bon mots about Maggie's European adventures. Then he went back into obscurity. And in 1987 he finally arrived in the Commons as an MP. Whenever I saw him, now billed as Quentin Davies, and a trainee bigwig, I rememembered that day in Ladywood. The Labour Party are welcome to him. He won't sit well with most of them. Ferral spivs and spinners, given to deception and misconception mostly.

David Cameron can sleep well tonight. He's no longer the leader of a man who's own bedrock is somewhat crumbly. Wouldn't it be interesting if Quentin Davies resigned his seat tomorrow along with that other great fan of Gordon Brown and stood as Labour candidate in the forthcoming Sedgefield by-election. He could then re-invent himself as John Davies, the candidate who is definitely not a bigwig. David Cameron could see himself campaigning in Grantham and Stamford in support of a new candidate that wasn't such a merchant banker!

Read More

Liberals Browned Off!

Gordon Brown's a cheeky chappy. He grandly talks about (or actually is reported as talking about) forming a government of the greatest minds. That would be OK if we'd had a general election and no single party could muster the support necessary. However, he's just taking over from Blair, so requires no such grandiose planning.

Also, I though he and Ming were good pals. Not exactly good manners, let alone good politics. Thankfully, Lord Ashdown turned the Prime Minister-in-waiting down. If I were a Liberal Democrat, I would not think this a sound move. If I were Peter Hain, I'd marshall my supporters and find out what the clunking fist owner was really up to!

This whole episode does highlight one odd point about cabinet government in the UK. The Cabinet is basically a committee of the Privy Council, although New Labour tinkering has caused a few creaks to enter the constitutional fabric. Any Prime Minister can ask anybody to serve. All he requires is the confidence to advise the Queen that he commands the support of "the majority of his peers in the House of Commons" and that the person is, or will be, a Privy Counsellor. Interestingly, a cabinet member need not be a member of either house of Parliament. Patrick Gordon Walker was Foreign Secretary in 1964 having lost his seat in Smethwick. But his inability to win the subsequent Leyton by-election of January 1965 sealed his fate as a long-term cabinet member. Harold Wilson was forced to accept that the public would not accept someone outside Parliament, neither would the majority of parliamentarians.

Read More

I know what's best for you!

The chief man of the EU babel tower, that ever so keen democrat Jose Manuel Barroso, has told EU members not to block progress towards an EU treaty. He thinks that would not be in their interest. This is the man who poo-pooed the result of the French and Dutch referendums. The man who thinks No means Yes, and Yes means "I knew you would see my point of view!".

The EU is run by people who care little for national sovereignty, care little about the institutions of ancient countries. They want a brave new world of central command where being a big fish in a big pond (where the pond suits the big fish!) is all the rage. The UK and Poland are apparently sticking out against all this and are opposed to key elements of the treaty, with Warsaw against changes to voting rules. Barroso can't take this. It is against his natural instincts as a big fish.

Perhaps Barroso should read Animal Farm by George Orwell? That might shake him out of his control tendencies and set him on a path of sincere respect for democracy, rather than having a lofty disdain for it!

Read More

ID? Identity Disaster!

The identity card scheme will become a "great British institution" on a par with the railways in the 19th Century, Home Office minister Liam Byrne says. Well he would, would't he? New Labour seems populated with people who would have performed well as the school sneak. There is a slightly sinister undertone to all their activities.

He said it was "time to get on with it" and predicted that the National Identity Scheme "will soon become part of the fabric of British life". In his dreams! By that time there will have been a general election, and hopefully there will be a House of Commons consisting of members who will vote out most of the nightmarish tendencies of this New Labour control regime.

Read More

A "collective failure of judgment"

I don't know what it is about this New Labour regime, but most in office appear to be hapless wonders. Des Browne gives all the appearance of some kind of contestant on the Apprentice. He's not certain what's going to be said next about him. He will, of course, battle his way forward with cliches and pithy comments.

Today he announced that two inquiries into the capture of the fifteen Royal Navy personnel by the Iranian authorities have identified "shortcomings", but have said no one person was to blame. Browne said the report into the capture had identified "a series of vulnerabilities", such as inadequate training in boarding. On the decision to allow two sailors to sell their stories, there had been a "collective failure of judgment". After a bit of flannel and waffle, it basically comes down to the fact that nobody is carrying any can for this debacle. And certainly not Defence Secretary Browne!

Read More

Cameron's Causes

It seems David Cameron is marching on with his ideas. Tough on ideas and tough on the causes of ideas! The latest wheeze to get people back into the Conservative voting fold (actual membership is another matter) is electing the leaders of local government. Lord Heseltine, who heads up Cameron's City Taskforce called for a "massive transfer of power" to local government. Basically, the idea is to get a chief bottlewasher running a city like a corporation. On Saturday, Heseltine was quizzed on the Today programme. When told that most people rejected elected mayors, and that regional assemblies were not popular Heseltine waffled on about democracy. He mentioned low turnout and how his ideas would fix that. Low turnout is due basically to politicians being seen as corrupt and self-serving. Good hard-working local councillors get elected and re-elected, mostly regardless of party. Heseltine seemed to imply that his ideas were good and we are getting them whether we like them or not (always assuming the Tories get in!).

I seem to remember that we've been here before. The Great Grocer hacked our counties about in the name of democracy and we had the Local Government Act of 1972. That gave us wonderful places like Cleveland, Humberside and Avon. In Warwickshire, we had half the county tipped into some called "The West Midlands County" which died a death about twelve years later.

What people want, particularly in England, is accountable local government run by councillors who act in a transparent way. There was nothing wrong with our counties, nothing wrong with our towns, and nothing wrong with our parishes. But they couldn't leave it, could they? In Heseltine's report, he calls for directly elected leaders to serve a four-year fixed term, paid a salary "commensurate with the level of responsibility" and subject to "loose scrutiny" by an elected assembly. That needs scrutiny in itself! Are these leaders going to be anybody, or should they have a suitable CV to go with the job. And what sort of elected assembly are we talking of?

As I say, tough on ideas and tough on the causes of ideas!

Read More

Sex and the City

It seems that the sort of things you see at the bottom of ponds are alive and well in the City of London. Last night I watched a very good programme on BBC2. It was all about sex discrimination in a bank. The sort that buy and sell "money" for clients whose greed and vulgarity know no bounds. We've only just had a whistleblower programme revealing the darker side of Barclays Bank. I wonder if the sort of things Barclays limply tried to say they knew nothing about are still going on (especially in their Guildford branch!).

The BBC show outlined how ghastly these social misfits are. Most of them have little or no morals, and they have a thin veneer under which are desperately lonely people fuelled only by their inadequacy to break out from the greed treadmill. Interestly, the main character in this fictional tale (although based on a whole raft of testimony) was a woman whose mindset was changed by pregnancy. The men were portrayed as, well, not very nice to say the least.

"Daddy what do you do at work?" "Well, son, when I leave home I become a bastard, I treat people with utter disdain and contempt. Personally, I trust nobody, but at least I earn millions. That's why we live in a big house. I have to feel tough, and responsible, and in charge. But making money and riding roughshod over people, if I have to, and mostly I do, is what it is about. However, when I come home, I'm Daddy, so..............."

These people make Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hide look like amateurs. I'm very pleased that we are now beginning to lift the lid on their activities. It's only a pity that the Blairite regime saw no reason to. Probably because they emulate most of it.

Sarah Parish was excellent as the woman caught up in the quagmire of deceipt and greed. But the four actors playing the principle characters in the office were great too. Brilliant depictions of how these types behave. If you haven't seen it, it's on Virgin Media's "Catch-up TV".

Apparently there is a huge sexual discrimination claim worth more than $1bn currently being brought against a major investment bank in London and New York as a class action for 500 women. I wonder if this bank has similar people working in it. Most of the cases end in gagging clauses, which implies the banks don't lend themselves to truth and transparity anyway. Last night's example showed an offer of £500,000 go shooting up in minutes to £3million. Money is meaningless to them. Power, corruption, and greed have entered their souls.

If you meet an investment banker at a party or some other function be very wary. Whilst not all are surely bad, a lot are living with Lucifer!

Read More

Blair! What a...........

I've been off the air so to speak for about a month. Blogging took a back seat, I'm afraid, partly because I had both children down with chicken pox, one after the other. Plus a new job in the family, etc, etc, all taking my mind off things. All of which doesn't imply that my mind is not buzzing with indignation and incredulity a lot of the time. In fact, I've got a month's load of buzz to cope with.

It wouldn't be normal if Blair didn't pop into the brain cells for a probing. This time the weasel is telling the country he's not about to stitch us up. The Sun newspaper has him rumbled. This is what George Pascoe-Watson, the Political Editor reckons Blair's "tidying up" EU Constitution will include -

A PERMANENT EU President with 3,500 staff.
UNELECTED European judges getting unprecedented powers to set UK law.
BRITAIN surrendering its seat on the UN Security Council.
AN EU foreign minister representing the UK on international issues.
SLASHING Britain’s voting powers by a THIRD.
GIVING UP for good Britain’s hard-won veto on EU directives.
BOWING to EU laws on criminal justice and policing.
A RAFT of job-destroying shopfloor laws.
DESTROYING the City’s reputation as the world’s greatest money market.
HANDING the European Commission the power to meddle in any part of British laws it chooses.

Now even if half this was true, you'd think Blair would have the decency to tell us. But no. Is it any wonder that the citizens of the UK are not just a tad Euro-sceptic but exceedingly Blair-sceptic. The Sun has done us a favour highlighting what this spiv is attempting to do.

Why did we let him become Prime Minister? Well, it was not the majority of us but that majority is completely divided in what to do about him and his New Labour agenda. Think about it! Only 20% of the total electorate gave Blair the benefit of their vote in 2005. Maybe some of them are regretting it. But can't the 80% do something to see he doesn't stitch us up?

Read More