Do you smell a rat?

Voters are lurching one way or the other over which system, AV or FPTP, is better for the country rather than simply considering which system is 'fairer'. Politicians I respect have come down on both sides, as do the arguments. To take the easy way out is not to abstain but simply let things be and vote 'No' but that is beginning to have a bit of a whiff about it.

There are increasing accusations of untruths and unfair funding. Despite being a free vote, it has been revealed that the 'No' campaign has been funded mainly by Tory party donors and that the 'No' campaign has received 100% support from the Conservative party, the party that is already set to gain from boundary changes. So a 'No' vote could result in the unfair possibility of one party dominance, possibly with a minority vote which would serve no-one's best interests.

Some voters have already lost sight of what the referendum is all about using the campaign simply to attack the Deputy Prime Minister over what they regard as broken promises yet there are reports that the Prime Minister has broken his promise to Nick Clegg that he would not campaignvigorously for a 'No' vote as part of the coalition deal.

The Jenkins Report suggested a change from the first past the post system back in 1998 but the Conservative response was to pledge a fight against any moves to reform. While the Labour party is split on the issue the party most likely to benefit must be the Liberal Democrats who for years have suffered badly form disproportionate representation based on the number of votes received.

To vote 'No' on the basis of perceived experience of the coalition goes against expert opinion so in fairness the vote should be 'Yes'.

Read More

Cameron accepts Thatcher's advice

Not the grocer's but agrocer's daughter, the then plain Mrs Thatcher offered some advice to her opponents, "You turn if you want to, the lady is not for turning".

Mr Cameron clearly took that hilariously received advice to heart. Today we have yet another U-turn as the Government reprieves the BBC World Service. And sensibly so!

Read More

"We are all in this together" (17)

The communications industry

Read More

The Murdoch Cameron show

Look where you will, despite the enormity of thefamine in Africa and thetragedy in Norway, the Murdoch stories will not go away illustrating the seriousness of the problem for the Tories, the top two, Cameron and Osborne, in particular.

Every stone upturned produces further revelations about the extent of Murdoch'sinfluence and thepower wielded by his organisation in British politics but amongst all the stories emerging there can be few as devastating for the Prime Minister as the account from across the pond of 'The Cameron Collapse'.

Update

There's more and more and yet more - money this time. Did I hear bankers mentioned?

Read More

A Question of Balance

Once again I allowed myself to become irritated by watching Question Time on Thursday. It was like a repeat of the Carol Vorderman show in drag with that offensive little pip-squeak David Starkey ranting from a similar Tory election script. Whilst I welcome a variety of opinions (within reason) such tirades become wearisome especially when formed from a narrow historical perspective. Some will recall his 2009 dismissal of the Scottish, Welsh and Irish nations as ?Feeble?. People in glass houses?.

Much was made by most of the panel, and the Chairman of course, of the links between the Labour party and its trade union sponsor Unite as a result of its dispute with British Airways. That was fair game but what are we to make of the report that the Tories have forced the BBC to drop their intensive investigation into the affairs of Lord Ashcroft in the run up to the general election? Can the implication be that they have something to hide? So much for transparency and balance.

Of course funding isn’t a problem for the really high earners in our society. A joke was made on Sport Relief last night that if every footballer donated a week’s wages we could buy Africa. Not being a fan of round ball games I may be biased but I find the astronomically high wages of footballers offensive especially given the bad example many of them set with their aggressive behaviour and disgusting habit of spitting all over the pitch which is then echoed by yobs spitting on the street and spreading diseases. “Spitting spreads germs” is a sign we ancients recall seeing on public transport.

Just as, if not more, offensive is the reported £60m bonanza for the president of Barclays. From the Telegraph: “The package is based on a £384,000 salary, but through a combination of perks including share bonuses, Mr Diamond could earn more than 150 times that amount”. Ignoring the perks, can anyone deservedly earn a salary sixteen times that of the average wage even if he does want to build the biggest investment bank in the world - especially if it is on the back of the tax payer as Vince Cable aptly put it?

David Cameron?S plan to impose a tax on banks to repay the billions used to bail out financial institutions is most welcome as is Alistair Darling?S expected Government support for a global bank tax. Whoever wins the next election and by whatever means, someone needs to do something about these greedy bankers.

Read More

Leaders Debate, Round 2

This time I watched the debate on the TV ? Until my wife found me dozing and transferred me to the computer. I don?T think I missed much so I was surprised at the result of the first poll for the Sun showing that Cameron was the clear winner with 36% of the votes, a result not sustained in other polls I should add. This time I thought the combatants more evenly matched indicating that there had been much hard work in the background since last week.

Again I thought the debate illuminating, not for what was said, but watching the facial expressions and body language when the leaders were not speaking. I thought Cameron looked the least confident, though much better than last week, while Clegg looked the most assured and Brown rather awkward. Most of the audience looked bored stiff with one member desperately trying to conceal a huge yawn.

The ?Get Clegg? Campaign fell badly after the Telegraph?S shameful attempted smear with ?Twitters? Picking up the thread and blaming Clegg for everything from the death of Kennedy to responsibility for Samantha?S pregnancy. The desperation of the press may be explained by David Yelland, a former editor of the Sun, who explained that previously the Liberal Democrats were deliberately ignored by the press.

Yelland said, ?Make no mistake, if the Liberal Democrats actually won the election ? Or held the balance of power ? It would be the first time in decades that Murdoch was locked out of British politics. In so many ways, a vote for the Lib Dems is a vote against Murdoch and the media elite.? Hmmm!

Postscript

More than 100 viewers have complained to the broadcasting regulator (Ofcom) accusing the debate Moderator (Sky News political editor Adam Boulton) of breaking strict impartiality rules by raising newspaper reports about political donations paid directly into the Liberal Democrat leader's bank account. There is no suggestion Clegg broke any rules and bank statements were produced to prove it.

Boulton -> Sky -> Murdoch - Hmmm again!

There's another interesting take on the broadcast in this Blog: http://www.Craigmurray.Org.Uk/archives/2010/04/sky_leaders_deb.Html

PPS

http://www.Bbc.Co.Uk/blogs/newsnight/michaelcrick/2010/04/polling.Html

- Hmmm yet again.

Read More

Voting Dilemma

I thought David Cameron?S claim to power amusing. He has constantly preached change with little attention to detail. His message was the same after the results were published suggesting that the Labour Government had no mandate to govern. An interesting observation looking at the votes in percentage terms with almost two thirds of the votes cast against the Conservatives.

His party has the greatest number of seats but calculated simply on the basis of share of the vote, the number of seats would be 234 rather than 306 while the Lib Dems shoot up from 57 to 149.

Gordon Brown was quick to offer Nick Clegg a referendum on electoral reform which must be tempting for the Lib Dems, far more so than the suggestion of yet another committee of MPs offered by David Cameron.

Back in March The Constitution Society published an article on the Tory proposals for electoral reform. It makes interesting reading:

http://www.Re-constitution.Org.Uk/news/articles/16/ .

Postscript

Far more graphic view on the share of the vote:

http://www.Newstatesman.Com/blogs/the-staggers/2010/05/electoral-reform-stay-table#reader-comments

Have a look at the John Cleese video for a good titter.

Read More

Campaign castrated

Before dinner I was watching the George Alagiah show at 6 o?Clock on BBC1. He referred to today?S Gordon Brown ?Bigot? Gaffe four times. First in his preamble, then in the main story which was again summarised after the mid-show break (during which gesticulating George as the star of the show shuffles and sometimes signs his papers, pretending that he is not reading the idiot board), then finally in his closing summary. This from the BBC which the Right claim has a Left wing bias!

Having dealt reasonably deftly with a chance encounter with a certain Mrs Duffy, she and Mr Brown went their separate ways on good terms. Mr Brown climbed into his official car with his microphone inadvertently switched on and effectively castrated his new ?Communicating with the people? Campaign with a careless aside made in private, so he thought.

One might argue over whether the Prime Minister should have made such comments but leaving that aside, what did broadcasting a private conversation achieve? The effect on Mrs Duffy being forced to listen to hurtful comments eagerly egged on by one of Murdoch?S Sky reporters was devastating judging from her televised reaction. A struggling widow concerned about the future of her grandchildren, she had been justifiably pleased that she had done her best for them by expressing her concerns directly to the Prime Minister. Now she is left dazed at the centre of a media scrum with policemen guarding her door.

As ever The Telegraph has been at the forefront reminding the public of previous gaffs by public figures but let’s face it, many of us make comments which we wouldn’t want broadcast, sometimes in vain attempts at humour, other times out of sheer annoyance just to let off steam. Things said in the heat of the moment rarely add anything meaningful to debate. The issues remain the same and, in this instance, with the same question: Who is best placed to sort out the problems we all face? If it were Gordon Brown (I am not suggesting that he is) what service has been provided by divulging information that should have remained private? We are no wiser, nothing has been solved and a poor widow has been reduced from elation to despair. What a good show!

Round dua

From yesterday's Fabian Society Blog, Next Left:

"The Sun's political editor has been reported saying "It is my job to see that Cameron ****ing well gets into Downing Street?.Despite earlier rumours, BBC political editor Nick Robinson has suggested tonight that The Sun did not, after discussions, buy the story or any exclusive interview with Mrs Gillian Duffy after today's political storm after Gordon Brown's insult, because they did not think it was "interesting" enough."

Need one say more?

Read More

Leaders Debate, Round 3

The third debate was a disappointing anticlimax.

Perhaps my expectations had been too high giving way to an overwhelming feeling of boredom. Regardless of the questions asked the session became a re-run of the same over-worked lines, the main variations coming from the party leaders? Deliveries.

At last David Cameron delivered as people had expected him to in the previous debates having observed his performance since becoming leader of the Conservative Party. A polished act, far better than before but I thought it weaker on substance. ?Change? Is all very well and captures the public mood but change to what? Change for change sake could simply result in us being out of the frying pan and into the fire. If he had demonstrated clearly how his vision for change would be for the better, he may have retained his previous higher poll ratings.

Cameron?S lack of clarity has resulted in the momentum for ?Change? Being transferred to Nick Clegg enabling him to offer the electorate a complete change from the two-party system. The Liberal Democrats had been largely ignored until the Clegg bombshell shook the two main parties, and the media, out of their complacency. He had it all to play for last night but failed to deliver a decisive blow and appeared the least confident of the three. Nevertheless he presented a new, clean image which will appeal to many especially the younger voters.

That leaves Labour's Gordon Brown. Once an image of ?The Joker? Came to mind, probably as a result of his attempts to appear less dour, I was stuck with it despite the fact that he is the Prime Minister and spoke with the authority of experience in office and an obvious passion for what he believes in. But if people have decided they want a change as the polls imply, he has an up-hill struggle even if John Major did manage to surprise the pollsters. So ?Change? In one form or another appears almost inevitable.

I applaud the BBC for their staging of the final event but illuminating I think not. The TV debate innovation gave Nick Clegg the opportunity to burst the bubble which will no doubt prick the Cameron conscience for ever if he fails to win an outright majority. The irony of it all is that the mood for change that was latched onto by the opposition looks likely to be expressed in a manner none of the leaders could have anticipated.

Don?T forget to vote for the common good.

Read More

What They Won’t Tell Us

Unlike the previous ‘Leaders’ debates I found this evening’s Election Uncovered: What They Won’t Tell Us programme on Channel 4 very illuminating and didn’t drop off once this time. I was initially concerned about an unexplained empty chair and the absence of Shirley Williams, one of my long time favourite politicians regardless of party (she was one of the SDP’s ‘Gang of Four’). Seeing her name as a participant was one of my reasons for watching. The other being that, as usual, there was nothing else worth viewing despite the myriad channels we appear to have on NTL plus Freesat, but that is another story. Fortunately the Baroness turned up half way through the programme having been caught up in a traffic accident.

Unlike the personality contest that the ‘Leaders’ debates had become, this programme looked at the hard choices that have to be made by the next Government. Four polls were conducted for the programme: Economic Recovery where 58% thought that we were on the road to recovery; Honesty in Politics where 60% thought politicians less honest than they used to be. On the question of believing the Party leaders telling the truth about the tough decisions about cuts, 38% trusted Gordon Brown, 36% trusted David Cameron and 53% trusted Nick Clegg.

On Pensions people were offered the choice between working for longer or having a higher standard of living. Of those polled 61 % opted to work longer and 23 % lower standard of living.

In what was perhaps the most surprising poll, 70% thought it perfectly possible to make cuts without harming Front line services. This was the most illuminating part of the programme clearly demonstrating that tough choices have to be made and how the parties have been reluctant to be honest with the electorate, hence the high vote.

Some people, including the Governor of the Bank of England, have suggested that whoever forms the next government will be so unpopular that they will not be re-electable. That would serve the best interests of no-one. A possible solution, ironically mentioned by Shirley Williams after her late arrival, was that there should be an inter-party unity team to agree a consensus for dealing with the financial crisis. The final show of hands vote was for a hung parliament which could be the best chance of achieving such a consensus.

What is clear is that the ‘Something for nothing’ mentality of many Britons, ancient and modern, is unsustainable. Services have to be paid for. Even with the planned efficiency savings tax rises are inevitable. For the sake of unity these must applied equitably to avoid a greater burden on the poor.

Read More

Two Faces

Oliver Letwin?S face was a picture when William Hague announced that the Tories had ?Gone the extra mile? To promise an Alternative Vote referendum. Written all over it was the sense that government was slipping from their grasp and Lord Ashcroft might ask for his money back. No surprise that the Tories made their concession only after Gordon Brown fell on his sword in the public interest to pave the way for the so-called ?Rainbow? Progressive alliance if the Tory/Lib Dem talks fail.

It has been reported that in order to make this concession David Cameron had to agree that the Tory Right would be represented in any cabinet probably with three seats. One of the names mentioned was that of their former primo uomo, Michael Howard, famously described by the great Tory diva, Ann Widdecombe, as having ?Something of the night about him?. An odd choice given the Tories frequently expressed views in this campaign about rejected politicians.

Throughout the campaign I have thought that David Milliband had a knowing look about him, like the King in waiting. He may yet be but for how long with such an assortment of minor parties needed to maintain a majority. Concessions required by them may be unrealistic leaving us in a worse mess. If the Tory party can satisfy Lib Dem anxieties and the threat of gerrymandering has been completely removed it seems reasonable that they should have their chance to form a government. What a disaster for their leader if that does not happen. So close to the ultimate prize of Prime Minister yet he could, as Ann Robinson might put it before she winks off to the news, ?Mr Cameron, you go away with nothing. Goodbye!?

Postscript

With a decision expected it is interesting to see on the BBC News another change of face by Oliver Letwin resuming his previous broad grin. Deal done?

Read More

Order, Order

Reuter photo of a demonstrator leaving Millbank through a shatterd window

As Lib Dem Deputy PM Clegg rose to justify his party's shabby treatment of their student supporters during Question Time in the House today, his Con Chief, the ex-Carlton Communications PM Cameron was busy explaining to his Chinese audience that British students would be picking up the tab for their tertiary education. While not defending lying to the electorate, the disciplined Lab MP Phil Woolas must be reflecting on the difference.

Read More

"We are all in this together." (3)

"David Cameron launched his "happiness index" yesterday as he announced that the Government would measure people's quality of life as well as economic growth."

It's all relative!

Read More

"We are all in this together." (2)

"Never had it so good!"

Macmillan's (in)famous words have been repeated by the Prime Minister's enterprise advisor, Lord Young, who has claimed that most Britons "never had it so good". The Prime Minister has rebuked Lord Young saying that the remarks were "insensitive and inaccurate". Rather like the Government saying that we are all in it together when some are, and many others soon will be, much deeper in it than others.

An interesting Christian perspective is available here.

Postscript

Lord Young pays the price.

Read More

Take you pick

From Dictionary.Com, a few definitions that may appear relevant

pledge:

?Noun

1. A solemn promise or agreement to do or refrain from doing something

5. Something given or regarded as a security.

8. Obsolete: a hostage. [Hmmm!]

?Verb (used with object)

10. To promise solemnly: to pledge one's support.

12. To stake, as one's honour.

13. To secure by a pledge; give a pledge for.

No suggestion of lying there but in future the electorate should remember that a pledge is as worthless as the piece of paper it is written on. That apart, the Lib Dems in the coalition have decided they must do the honourable thing and support the Government measure they are jointly responsible for.

But Mr Cameron is not out of the woods. What of his Big Society Agenda?

"It's about liberation -the biggest, most dramatic redistribution of power from elites in Whitehall to the man and woman on the street."

The students demonstrating on the streets would like to think so.

Read More

Another nice mess

As my friend Barack said to me George, "Well, here's another nice mess we've gotten o urselves into!"

The world and his wife it seems are piling on the pressure to tell us Brits that we should remain in Europe. To leave would be a catastrophe. If that is so, why in the world has Dave 'gotten' us into this mess at enormous cost financially and politically?

'Paddy Pantsdown' wagged his finger throughout BBC Question Time on Thursday as he previewed what President Barack Obama was to say about American blood being shed in Europe in the US's contribution to the 1917 - 1918 and the 1941- 1945 wars fighting for freedom in Europe. As Albert Steptoe once said, it might have been the '17 - '18 and '41 - '45 wars for them but it was the '14 - '18 and '39 - '45 wars for the rest of us.

All in the 'IN' camp at home and abroad appear to be reading from the same news sheet prepared and circulated by No 10. That is in addition to the ?9 million of tax payers money they have spent on circulating propaganda for the 'IN' campaign. So much so that it is difficult to trust anything that is said or written about the consequences of leaving Europe.

Paddy Pantsdown claims that every important world organisation and every world leader "with the exception Vladimir Putin" wants us to remain in Europe. Indeed, the President of the United States has gone so far as to threaten that the UK would be left at the back of the queue when negotiating future trade deals with the US if we left, not that Obama will be President in that eventuality. But so much for friendship and our 'special relationship'. When self-interest rears its head it is OK in the US but not in Great Britain!

For many I suspect the head says IN but the heart says OUT. The decision would be easier if the self-perpetuating bureaucracy in Brussels desisted from regulating everything they can think of plus anything else they had not thought of when it comes to light. If Turkey is allowed in that will allow another flood of economic migrants with all the dangers already apparent as they try to impose their alien ideology on their hosts. The last thing we need is more failed multiculturalism.

My feeling is that the British people have had enough of being told what to think and what to do and are inclined to vote with their hearts, sink or swim.

Read More

Irresponsibility in 'the most important decision in a generation'.

Photograph: Murdo MacLeod for the Guardian

The first duty of the Government is to afford protection to its citizens.

The political rhetoric is becoming worse by the day. Yasser Arafat is dead. Had he been alive, no doubt his name would have been added to that of Putin and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of Islamic State, as those being most happy if we were to leave the EU - but it is up to us!

It is our sovereign choice says Cameron while implying that only the stupid could contemplate leaving. So if our "friends" all around the world would like us to stay and the consequences of leaving are so disastrous, why has the Government led its citizens to the position of committing economic suicide?

The first duty of Government is to afford protection to its citizens, something the Government is plainly failing to do if their dire warnings are correct. To hand the fate of the Nation to the 'ignorant' is the height of irresponsibility so could it be that there is more in this for the great and the good, the not so great and the questionable, along with big business whose main aim seems to be to rip off British consumers while paying as little tax as they can get away with?

The Brexit leader, ex-London Mayor Boris Johnson has 'lost it' according to Heseltine, as he accused Boris of "losing his judgement".

That's rich coming from the Mace lifter.

Postscript [26.05.2016]

After Hestletine cometh Sugar.

I must be honest, I don't like the man. For me he is an overrated chancer, possibly because in my youth, comparatively speaking, I had the misfortune to buy some his Amstrad junk which he later described as "the biggest load of rubbish I've ever seen in my life". His haughty performance on Newsnight [advance to 28 min] last night did nothing to change my mind.

The 'In' campaign becomes more bizarre by the day with more and more dire warnings of the perils of leaving to such an extent that giving people the opportunity to vote is like offering them a revolver.

Please God we can have a more sensible debate in the little time that is left.

Read More