So, after only three weeks, the first coalition resignation....that WAS quick!
Whilst the suggested reason for the resignation of David Laws would be no cause for celebration (although one can understand his fear of being 'outed' whilst sitting in the same cabinet as apparent homophobes such as Teresa May), the real reason is, of course, more basic. HE WAS CAUGHT OUT FIDDLING HIS EXPENSES.
So this is the 'new politics' Dave? We're all going to do it better in future Nick? Really?
What is difficult to understand is how the coalition didn't see this coming. Laws must have known the truth would come out sooner or later. Tweedledum and Tweedledummer must have asked the questions in the appointment process? Or did they just take laws word that he was clean?
So the coalition loses someone who at least had some qualifications and relevant experience for his cabinet post (unlike Gideon). And also a handy scapegoat from the minor partners to take the flak when the going gets tough...as it will.
And even Afghanistan is causing tears before bedtime for the coalition. After the Defence Secretary's gaffe (apparently he is known as 13th Century Fox now) and differences between minsters on any timetable for withdrawal, Cameron has called a summit meeting to sort the policy out.
Back on the home front, opposition is growing to the coalition education proposals. Boy wonder Gove's proposals to 'release' the schools from local authority control and make every school an academy, whilst superficially attractive, conceal a myriad of potential problems. Inevitably, the better schools will grow and thrive (and cream off the more able), leaving sink schools to cater for the remaining pupils on reducing funding. Pupils with statements of special needs can be denied admission to academies unless by application to, yes, Michael Gove.
And the most pernicious aspect of the proposals, the creation of 'free schools'. groups of pushy middle class parents, unhappy with allocated (and probably adequate schools) will be able to set up their own hobby schools and run them.....And where will the funding for these providers of academic excellence come from -especially at a time of financial austerity? Correct -by reducing funding for the remaining community schools, thus further reducing their viability.
So to return to the former Chief Secretary to the Treasury....my concern is that the resignations are starting too early. At this rate the coalition will have fallen apart by the Autumn, allowing the tories to cut and run to the country and possibly win an outright majority. I would prefer at least a year.....
and in later news.....the new Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Danny Alexander (as much treasury experience as Gideon) turns out to have avoided paying capital gains tax when he sold his London flat...nothing illegal, but to quote Nick 'I agree with Dave' Clegg...."There are MPs who flipped one property to the next, buying property, paid by you, the taxpayer, and then they would do the properties up, paid for by you, and pocket the difference in personal profit.’’
Sunday 30 May 2010
Monday 24 May 2010
Are the condem cuts really needed now?
So the two oxbridge educated millionaires stood before the assembled press today (and treasury staff) and set out their plans for over £6billion worth of cuts. Against a background of an improved deficit (for which the Condems will probably soon claim credit?), these cuts are unnecessary and cruel. Cruel to those staff in the various quangos that will lose their jobs by the end of the year (of which more later) and cruel to those families for whom the child trust funds would have made that little difference in later life. And are they needed? Over £6billion worth of cuts runs the risk of turning a fragile recovery into a double dip recession. We've been here before, of course, in the 80's and then the 90's, when an over zealous tory government created millions of unemployed, in fact used unemployment as a weapon against the working people in this country. And they are doing the same again. And where are the libdems, who were vociferous in their opposition to the planned £6 billion...very quiet, compliant and overjoyed at being in Government. And apparently careless of the votes of millions that helped put them there.....
And what do the cuts consist of? Reduced spending on IT projects (which?), reduced use of private sector consultants (with knock on effects?). Reduced budgets in most Government departments, including Defra - so we will have to wait and see how that translates into reduced funding for the Agency. And especially, personally, fisheries....
Some of the quangos that will be terminated by Gideons Law may not be much missed. The Potato Council and the Milk Development Council should possibly be better organised and funded by the industry they promote. But what of the National College of School Leadership - provider of training courses including the NPQH, a pre-requisite for aspiring Head Teachers - is this really doing such a bad job? How will Governing bodies assess candidates for headship in the future? The School Food Trust - hasn't it done good work in improving children's diets - but to the dogmatic tories it is 'part of the nanny state'. What happened to society Dave? Not your bonkers 'big society' but the society where we all work together to make a better world - oh, sorry, I forgot, we have a tory government again, the strong survive and the weak go to the wall....just like Thatcher 's time......
And what do the cuts consist of? Reduced spending on IT projects (which?), reduced use of private sector consultants (with knock on effects?). Reduced budgets in most Government departments, including Defra - so we will have to wait and see how that translates into reduced funding for the Agency. And especially, personally, fisheries....
Some of the quangos that will be terminated by Gideons Law may not be much missed. The Potato Council and the Milk Development Council should possibly be better organised and funded by the industry they promote. But what of the National College of School Leadership - provider of training courses including the NPQH, a pre-requisite for aspiring Head Teachers - is this really doing such a bad job? How will Governing bodies assess candidates for headship in the future? The School Food Trust - hasn't it done good work in improving children's diets - but to the dogmatic tories it is 'part of the nanny state'. What happened to society Dave? Not your bonkers 'big society' but the society where we all work together to make a better world - oh, sorry, I forgot, we have a tory government again, the strong survive and the weak go to the wall....just like Thatcher 's time......
Wednesday 19 May 2010
Coalition dreams and tory schemes....
Clegg made much yesterday of his package of constitutional change, claiming it will be the biggest change for decades. Really? So the last thirteen years, including devolution for Scotland and Wales, new voting systems for the European parliament and so on didn't happen? Or is it just dwarfed by the plans of the new political colossus (slept with up to 30 women of course)....Clegg really needs to get a grip and realise he's not much closer to power than diddy David Steel was a generation ago when he told the libdems to "go back to their constituencies and prepare for government"....it aint what you promise in your coalition agreement Nick, its what you deliver....and you may not be around long enough to do that.
Meanwhile the real PM is concocting plans to ensure his party stays in power for a generation or two. Under the guise of reducing the number of MP's (which will save us money so it MUST be a good thing) he plans to undertake radical redrawing of constituency boundaries, the effect of which will be to reduce the number of urban, labour held seats by up to 20. The libdems, of course,want PR, as pure as possible. But the best they can hope for is AV, and the tories will be allowed to campaign against that so it probably wont go anywhere.
The coalition (or lets be honest) the slightly diluted tory government, has finally published its plans for the next 5 years. Lots of words but little detail -which is, as ever with tories, where the devil is....interesting at the launch of the document, when a clearly uncomfortable Vince Cable (who wouldn't be uncomfortable sharing a platform with Osborn?) revealed that they were 'making it up as they go along'...really? Cable should be reassured about the competence of his fellow Minsters -after all Osborne bring considerable relevant experience to the post of Chancellor having worked as a data inputter in the NHS and a supermarket shelf stacker....
More details are emerging as to why the potential Lab Libdem coalition never got off the ground. Despite the propaganda put around by the libdems, it seems clear now (see here http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2010/05/lib-dems-labour-clegg-tories ) that it was. in fact, the libdems (especially Chris Huhne and Danny Alexander) were hostile to the idea of coalition with labour. Add to this the warm relationship between Cameron and Clegg, and the deal was done. The only problem for Clegg was selling it to the rank and file - hence the spin about the abortive deal with labour.
Meanwhile the real PM is concocting plans to ensure his party stays in power for a generation or two. Under the guise of reducing the number of MP's (which will save us money so it MUST be a good thing) he plans to undertake radical redrawing of constituency boundaries, the effect of which will be to reduce the number of urban, labour held seats by up to 20. The libdems, of course,want PR, as pure as possible. But the best they can hope for is AV, and the tories will be allowed to campaign against that so it probably wont go anywhere.
The coalition (or lets be honest) the slightly diluted tory government, has finally published its plans for the next 5 years. Lots of words but little detail -which is, as ever with tories, where the devil is....interesting at the launch of the document, when a clearly uncomfortable Vince Cable (who wouldn't be uncomfortable sharing a platform with Osborn?) revealed that they were 'making it up as they go along'...really? Cable should be reassured about the competence of his fellow Minsters -after all Osborne bring considerable relevant experience to the post of Chancellor having worked as a data inputter in the NHS and a supermarket shelf stacker....
More details are emerging as to why the potential Lab Libdem coalition never got off the ground. Despite the propaganda put around by the libdems, it seems clear now (see here http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2010/05/lib-dems-labour-clegg-tories ) that it was. in fact, the libdems (especially Chris Huhne and Danny Alexander) were hostile to the idea of coalition with labour. Add to this the warm relationship between Cameron and Clegg, and the deal was done. The only problem for Clegg was selling it to the rank and file - hence the spin about the abortive deal with labour.
Some good news at last when Unite won its appeal in the High Court against BA. Only by 2-1 of course, the right wing judiciary wouldn't make it too easy. And why did BA win the injunction? Because details of a HANDFUL of spoilt ballot papers weren't publicised....how tenuous, how biased, if not downright crooked! Who was the judge - a relative of Willie Walsh? or just programmed to side with management. Billy Bragg got it right years ago - "this isn't a court of justice, this is a court of law" (Rotting on Remand). The only obstacle to settling the strike is the poisonous Willie Walsh - and hopefully the BA board will realise this and sack him. Soon.
Turmoil continues on the world financial markets, following Germany's attempt to restrict some of the dodgy dealing carried out by traders. Why do we tolerate these parasites, who bet against and for european currencies? These people produce nothing of value, just exist to make profit for themselves - and in doing so cause misery for millions. And this is how capitalism works?
Final thought -I enjoy question time on BBC more since the election- nice to see both the tories AND the libdems getting hammered for anything and everything that goes wrong.....Theresa 'shoes' May and Ming the Merciless getting it this week.....Dave says thanks to Rupert...
Day 8 of the Cameroonites or Cleggons....apparently Rupert Murdoch paid a visit to Downing street yesterday...doubtless to receive the grateful thanks of Cameron for all the assistance of the Murdoch empire (it was Sky what won it...well done Boulton....you disgrace to balanced and fair reporting). Doubtless Dave and Murdoch discussed payback and how Dave could help get rid of obstacles to Rupert such as Ofcom (very inconvenient inquiry into monopoly powers cobber....can you do something?)....
Cameron seems determined to nip any possible objections in the bud by annexing the tory 1922 committee -thus ensuring that a possible source of dissent is stifled at birth. Cameron is doing this by promoting a rule change so that all tory mps (rather than just backbenchers) can vote. Normally this wouldn't go anywhere, but with the large influx of new, ambitious tory mps, it probably will.
Meanwhile, the other half of the dynamic duo (the monkey rather than the organ grinder) put forward his vision for a freer society. Which admittedly has some good points, such as scrapping id cards. I'm not so sure about the plans to limit the DNA database - there have been a number of offenders who have been convicted as a result of samples being maintained on this -I think the benefits outweigh the civil liberties risks.
The odd couple are still persisting with their plans to set the percentage of mps for dissolution to 55% despite growing opposition. It will be interesting to see if they can muster the 51% of votes needed to pass the new law.....
Meanwhile, in the alternate reality that is labour in opposition, the list of candidates for labour leader grows. Ed Balls has now joined the list, along with the token outsider, John McDonnell. Balls seems to be positioning himself to the left of the Milibands - he has good union connections and has spent the last 2 years on the rubber chicken circuit delivering after dinner speeches to local labour parties. All the candidates talk of reconnecting to the voter - not an unusual sentiment, I seem to recall the same from labour in the 80's and the tories in the 90's/00's. Labour certainly has a lot of reconnecting to do to overcome the handicaps of association with Iraq, the credit crunch and all the other ills defined by the media. The media seem to be building a campaign against Balls - which may be telling in itself - perhaps they fear he may make a decent fist of it? The main attraction of the Miliband brothers seems to be their visual appeal - either could appear attractive alongside Cleggamon. But is that really how the labour party wants to pick its leader?
Cameron seems determined to nip any possible objections in the bud by annexing the tory 1922 committee -thus ensuring that a possible source of dissent is stifled at birth. Cameron is doing this by promoting a rule change so that all tory mps (rather than just backbenchers) can vote. Normally this wouldn't go anywhere, but with the large influx of new, ambitious tory mps, it probably will.
Meanwhile, the other half of the dynamic duo (the monkey rather than the organ grinder) put forward his vision for a freer society. Which admittedly has some good points, such as scrapping id cards. I'm not so sure about the plans to limit the DNA database - there have been a number of offenders who have been convicted as a result of samples being maintained on this -I think the benefits outweigh the civil liberties risks.
The odd couple are still persisting with their plans to set the percentage of mps for dissolution to 55% despite growing opposition. It will be interesting to see if they can muster the 51% of votes needed to pass the new law.....
Meanwhile, in the alternate reality that is labour in opposition, the list of candidates for labour leader grows. Ed Balls has now joined the list, along with the token outsider, John McDonnell. Balls seems to be positioning himself to the left of the Milibands - he has good union connections and has spent the last 2 years on the rubber chicken circuit delivering after dinner speeches to local labour parties. All the candidates talk of reconnecting to the voter - not an unusual sentiment, I seem to recall the same from labour in the 80's and the tories in the 90's/00's. Labour certainly has a lot of reconnecting to do to overcome the handicaps of association with Iraq, the credit crunch and all the other ills defined by the media. The media seem to be building a campaign against Balls - which may be telling in itself - perhaps they fear he may make a decent fist of it? The main attraction of the Miliband brothers seems to be their visual appeal - either could appear attractive alongside Cleggamon. But is that really how the labour party wants to pick its leader?
Sunday 16 May 2010
vive la differences....
So day 5 of the new tory government (with added libdem hypocrisy). Cameron has journeyed to the far north to meet the wild man of the north....well, Alex Salmond anyway. I suspect there wasn't a meeting of the minds, but a wily political operator like Salmond would have been trying to work any angles on Dave. The boy Hague (I still find it difficult to believe he used to deliver pop bottles to our neighbourhood in Rotherham) has jetted off to meet Hilary Clinton in the US - but didn't appear to have the same effect on her that David Miliband did....
Former libdem leader Charles Kennedy has written in the sunday papers of his objection to the coalition agreement (he abstained on the vote)....so thats the first split. The second may not be long in coming. Apparently due to proposed changes in the numbers of euro mps, the Lisbon treaty will have to be re-ratified by each parliament. Already the tory eurosceptics are lining up to demand a referendum on the process -something that the libdems will find hard to swallow.
There doesn't appear to be a stampede for the post of labour leader. David Miliband has declared his candidature, as has brother Ed. Yvette Cooper has ruled herself out, leaving husband Ed to ....go forward if he so chooses. Its all a bit incestuous at present....it needs Jon Cruddas to stand at least...and where are the female candidates?
And just to show that you cant keep some would be MPs down, however wild and wacky their views, it appears that Philippa Stroud, Tory candidate for Sutton and Cheam who was rejected by the voters of that constituency (ungrateful wretches that they are, did they not realise what a STAR they were being offered?), has found her way into the house, by way of being appointed a special adviser to ex tory leader Ian Duncan "so boring he could put mogadon to sleep" Smith. Yes, thats right, the director of the Centre for Social Justice who came to prominence during the campaign when it was revealed that she had been involved in churches that had tried to 'cure' homosexuality by praying to drive out the demons. I kid you not. And this bigot is now close to the government of this country? Should make for some interesting conversations with Gregory Barker, Nick Herbert and Alan Duncan -all openly gay members of Cameroons ministerial team....
Former libdem leader Charles Kennedy has written in the sunday papers of his objection to the coalition agreement (he abstained on the vote)....so thats the first split. The second may not be long in coming. Apparently due to proposed changes in the numbers of euro mps, the Lisbon treaty will have to be re-ratified by each parliament. Already the tory eurosceptics are lining up to demand a referendum on the process -something that the libdems will find hard to swallow.
There doesn't appear to be a stampede for the post of labour leader. David Miliband has declared his candidature, as has brother Ed. Yvette Cooper has ruled herself out, leaving husband Ed to ....go forward if he so chooses. Its all a bit incestuous at present....it needs Jon Cruddas to stand at least...and where are the female candidates?
And just to show that you cant keep some would be MPs down, however wild and wacky their views, it appears that Philippa Stroud, Tory candidate for Sutton and Cheam who was rejected by the voters of that constituency (ungrateful wretches that they are, did they not realise what a STAR they were being offered?), has found her way into the house, by way of being appointed a special adviser to ex tory leader Ian Duncan "so boring he could put mogadon to sleep" Smith. Yes, thats right, the director of the Centre for Social Justice who came to prominence during the campaign when it was revealed that she had been involved in churches that had tried to 'cure' homosexuality by praying to drive out the demons. I kid you not. And this bigot is now close to the government of this country? Should make for some interesting conversations with Gregory Barker, Nick Herbert and Alan Duncan -all openly gay members of Cameroons ministerial team....
Thursday 13 May 2010
the honeymoon continues....
So, day 2 and the honeymoon continues. Both the happy couple still gaze lovingly into each others eyes, and pledge loyalty in order to do the job they feel they have been appointed to do (self appointed, no one saw any box on the ballot form for the ConDem party). Early days, and neither of the newlyweds has discovered the other's bad habits yet (although Miss Nick must know about Master Dave's brutal put downs after the election campaign). And all the attendants at the marriage are putting on a great show of mutual adoration, leaving 10 Downing Street in carefully choreographed pairs, smiling and joking as if, deep in their souls, they didn't loath and detest each other to the core.
More details emerge of the future direction of the country. No ID cards - which is welcome but may well come back to bite each time there is a terrorist incident where id cards could have had a deterrent effect. No third runway at Heathrow - we may need to wait and see on this one, depending on how BAA can mobilise industry and the CBI to change the decision.
The first action of Michael Gove, new Education Secretary (who looks like he's just nipped out of the Sixth form common room himself), is to rebrand the Department of Children, Schools and Families back to simple Education. I suspect that may be his least damaging action (although some degree of cost -I thought we were in a financial crisis?)....the tory policy, unfettered by Libdem objection, to allow the creation of 'free' schools (for 'free' read the better off deserting local authority schools to look after their own while the less well off are left to stew - is that your 'Big Society' Dave?). Even worse, the possibility of even more divisive, selective, isolationist religious schools.
Ministerial appointments continue. The Department of Fisheries, Rural Affairs and Agriculture has been delighted to welcome the new minister, Caroline Spelman. Is this the same Caroline Spelman who had to repay over £9000 in expenses claimed for a nanny? Just asking....
It seems that the coalition is determined to stay in power, even by bending the constitution to ensure that it does (Nick and Dave - is this the new cleaner politics then?). The idea seems to be that in order to bring this government to a close before the envisaged five year term, it will need 55% of the votes in the Commons. Correct me if I'm wrong, but usually a simple majority is needed to bring down a government. The current regime seem determined to bend the constitution to suit their aims, and it will be interesting to see what view the Lords take on this...
Enough for now, Melanie Phillips is on question time, and I need all my concentration to focus on her particular brand of bigoted, right wing, Daily Mail philosophy.....
More details emerge of the future direction of the country. No ID cards - which is welcome but may well come back to bite each time there is a terrorist incident where id cards could have had a deterrent effect. No third runway at Heathrow - we may need to wait and see on this one, depending on how BAA can mobilise industry and the CBI to change the decision.
The first action of Michael Gove, new Education Secretary (who looks like he's just nipped out of the Sixth form common room himself), is to rebrand the Department of Children, Schools and Families back to simple Education. I suspect that may be his least damaging action (although some degree of cost -I thought we were in a financial crisis?)....the tory policy, unfettered by Libdem objection, to allow the creation of 'free' schools (for 'free' read the better off deserting local authority schools to look after their own while the less well off are left to stew - is that your 'Big Society' Dave?). Even worse, the possibility of even more divisive, selective, isolationist religious schools.
Ministerial appointments continue. The Department of Fisheries, Rural Affairs and Agriculture has been delighted to welcome the new minister, Caroline Spelman. Is this the same Caroline Spelman who had to repay over £9000 in expenses claimed for a nanny? Just asking....
It seems that the coalition is determined to stay in power, even by bending the constitution to ensure that it does (Nick and Dave - is this the new cleaner politics then?). The idea seems to be that in order to bring this government to a close before the envisaged five year term, it will need 55% of the votes in the Commons. Correct me if I'm wrong, but usually a simple majority is needed to bring down a government. The current regime seem determined to bend the constitution to suit their aims, and it will be interesting to see what view the Lords take on this...
Enough for now, Melanie Phillips is on question time, and I need all my concentration to focus on her particular brand of bigoted, right wing, Daily Mail philosophy.....
Wednesday 12 May 2010
A marriage of inconvenience?
So the deed is done, the paper is signed, and we have a coalition government for the first time in 70 years. If the spin coming from the tories and the libdems is to be believed, all is sweetness, light and harmony. Really? Really? So from now on Simon Hughes and the grossly eurosceptic Bill Cash are bosom buddies? Liam Fox from the tory militant right tendency is happy to share his political world with the likes of Vince Cable? And this from two parties that were at each others throats not 7 days ago (a week, of course being a long time in politics). David Cameron, during the election, damning in his condemnation (although are we now a ConDem nation?) of hung parliaments and their inevitable horse trading and deal making.
Bookies have evens on an election within 6 months - and they are rarely wrong. It is possible to already see the beginnings of fault lines running across the face of the agreement. The libdems have 'dropped' their plans for a mansion tax (shame!); the tories are 'deferring' their cherished plans to increase inheritance tax thresholds. Interesting choice of words. Wait for the rumblings of discontent from grass roots of both parties....
Applications for membership of the labour party rocketed last night and even (if this can be believed) caused the labour party website to crash. Even ignoring that, it is certain that there are hundreds of libdem activists, candidates and voters waking up this morning feeling betrayed and intending never to vote libdem again. Because, lets face it, for all his talk of the need for strong and stable government, this deal is all about Clegg and his desperate, overweening desire for power. And now he has it...well, the heights of Deputy Prime Minister ( a post that was invented to accommodate Heseltine's vanity and continued in order to ensure that John Prescott felt loved); a post that is as effective as cameron allows it to be (will Clegg stand in at PMQ;s I wonder?....)
In a few weeks the byelection in Thirsk and malton (normally a safe tory seat) will be held. Apparently, there will be a choice of Libdem AND tory candidates. Really? And how are voters meant to choose between them? Will the two candidates travel round together (like Tweedledum and Tweedledumber), agreeing with each other on every policy point?
The future, for labour, looks a lot brighter. A defeat that could have been much worse, but still leaves a healthy nucleus from which to rebuild. A chance to re-focus and reinvent, to elect a new leader (the momentum seems to be with D. Miliband) and prepare for the next election. A number of years (uncertain at present) to win increasing numbers of council seats and control of councils, pull off surprising byelection wins, and generally hold to account both tories AND libdems. It will be interesting to see how much fire labour can turn onto the libdems - it will be unusual being able to attack them for ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING rather than the usual libdem way of talking much and doing little....
All I need now (on a personal level) is for some multi billionaire to buy out Stadler and Waldorf at Liverpool, Rafa to stay and LFC to buy David Villa this summer...now I am dreaming...
Bookies have evens on an election within 6 months - and they are rarely wrong. It is possible to already see the beginnings of fault lines running across the face of the agreement. The libdems have 'dropped' their plans for a mansion tax (shame!); the tories are 'deferring' their cherished plans to increase inheritance tax thresholds. Interesting choice of words. Wait for the rumblings of discontent from grass roots of both parties....
Applications for membership of the labour party rocketed last night and even (if this can be believed) caused the labour party website to crash. Even ignoring that, it is certain that there are hundreds of libdem activists, candidates and voters waking up this morning feeling betrayed and intending never to vote libdem again. Because, lets face it, for all his talk of the need for strong and stable government, this deal is all about Clegg and his desperate, overweening desire for power. And now he has it...well, the heights of Deputy Prime Minister ( a post that was invented to accommodate Heseltine's vanity and continued in order to ensure that John Prescott felt loved); a post that is as effective as cameron allows it to be (will Clegg stand in at PMQ;s I wonder?....)
In a few weeks the byelection in Thirsk and malton (normally a safe tory seat) will be held. Apparently, there will be a choice of Libdem AND tory candidates. Really? And how are voters meant to choose between them? Will the two candidates travel round together (like Tweedledum and Tweedledumber), agreeing with each other on every policy point?
The future, for labour, looks a lot brighter. A defeat that could have been much worse, but still leaves a healthy nucleus from which to rebuild. A chance to re-focus and reinvent, to elect a new leader (the momentum seems to be with D. Miliband) and prepare for the next election. A number of years (uncertain at present) to win increasing numbers of council seats and control of councils, pull off surprising byelection wins, and generally hold to account both tories AND libdems. It will be interesting to see how much fire labour can turn onto the libdems - it will be unusual being able to attack them for ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING rather than the usual libdem way of talking much and doing little....
All I need now (on a personal level) is for some multi billionaire to buy out Stadler and Waldorf at Liverpool, Rafa to stay and LFC to buy David Villa this summer...now I am dreaming...
Tuesday 11 May 2010
Watching.....
Right then Posh Boy , lets see what you've got.
And we'll be watching.
Everything you say
every game you play....we'll be watching you.
Every vow you break , every job you take
every single day,
everything you say,
we'll be watching you.
Every health service cut, and every school that's shut
every smile you fake,
every heart you break,
we'll be watching you.
And Clegg can see,
hes just gone tory,
and he'll get his dues,
when we ditch the blues,
every day you stay, drains your time away
and when your time is done,
and you've had your fun,
we'll be watching you....
Now I'm sure there's a tune I could put that to.....
And we'll be watching.
Everything you say
every game you play....we'll be watching you.
Every vow you break , every job you take
every single day,
everything you say,
we'll be watching you.
Every health service cut, and every school that's shut
every smile you fake,
every heart you break,
we'll be watching you.
And Clegg can see,
hes just gone tory,
and he'll get his dues,
when we ditch the blues,
every day you stay, drains your time away
and when your time is done,
and you've had your fun,
we'll be watching you....
Now I'm sure there's a tune I could put that to.....
Resignation and succession?
So now it looks as if Gordon Brown is about to resign. He is bowing to the inevitable, as there was little or no chance of labour forming a workable coalition. I have some sympathy for him - he expected to become PM earlier but was denied this by this by Blair, and by the time he assumed the role, was given an impossible hand to play. And so he led labour to inevitable (but not overwhelming) defeat.
In a funny way, I feel quite optimistic, and politically at least, refreshed and re-invigorated. Because this government had become tired, old and past its sell by date. It was making bad decisions (such as the ludicrous digital economy bill), and ended up trying to make desperate and unsustainable deals with other parties. It had become depressing watching a seemingly endless succession of byelection defeats and council losses. Perhaps now labour will rebuild from a local base (and the increase in councils and councillors on Thursday was encouraging).
Gordon Brown gave a dignified and generous resignation speech outside Downing street, to some applause. He spoke of returning to the best job in life, being a husband and father. And then walked with his family to the car to take them to the palace for the formal resignation. I would think that part of Brown will be relieved to be away from the pressures of office. No one should have to put up with the character assassination, lies and distortions that he has endured from the rabid right wing press pack.
Nick Robinson (the official BBC Conservative spokesman) spoke sympathetically about the support Brown had received from his wife Sarah. But then he can afford to be generous, as the overwhelmingly right wing press have at last got the result they so desperately wanted.
So now we wait for the outcome of the deal between the tories and the liberals. I assume the least the liberals have gained from the tories is a referendum on PR, probably alternative vote system. Which tories will be free to campaign against. And how will the referendum be organised - as simple majority means that the voting system changes? Or will there be some sort of qualifying level, say 75% for any change to take place?
Interesting times.....
In a funny way, I feel quite optimistic, and politically at least, refreshed and re-invigorated. Because this government had become tired, old and past its sell by date. It was making bad decisions (such as the ludicrous digital economy bill), and ended up trying to make desperate and unsustainable deals with other parties. It had become depressing watching a seemingly endless succession of byelection defeats and council losses. Perhaps now labour will rebuild from a local base (and the increase in councils and councillors on Thursday was encouraging).
Gordon Brown gave a dignified and generous resignation speech outside Downing street, to some applause. He spoke of returning to the best job in life, being a husband and father. And then walked with his family to the car to take them to the palace for the formal resignation. I would think that part of Brown will be relieved to be away from the pressures of office. No one should have to put up with the character assassination, lies and distortions that he has endured from the rabid right wing press pack.
Nick Robinson (the official BBC Conservative spokesman) spoke sympathetically about the support Brown had received from his wife Sarah. But then he can afford to be generous, as the overwhelmingly right wing press have at last got the result they so desperately wanted.
So now we wait for the outcome of the deal between the tories and the liberals. I assume the least the liberals have gained from the tories is a referendum on PR, probably alternative vote system. Which tories will be free to campaign against. And how will the referendum be organised - as simple majority means that the voting system changes? Or will there be some sort of qualifying level, say 75% for any change to take place?
Interesting times.....
Post election blues?
So here we are, election day + 4, and still no sign of a government. On Friday and much of the weekend it looked as if the likeliest outcome was some form of Lib/Con agreement, with the LibDems supporting a minority Tory administration. That , of course, was before we found out about the secret talks going on between labour and the libdems. And that was followed by Gordon Brown indicating his wish to resign to allow a labour leadership contest. (Did he jump or was he pushed? Was the dead hand of the prince of darkness, mandelson, behind it all?).
The Conservative press, this morning, were predictable in their rage and frustration at the lib dems (not quite as raging as Sky's Adam Boulton -of which more later...). Both the Express and the Mail poured scorn on the lib dems and tried to claim the moral high ground ( although how the Mail, given its history of campaigning for jews fleeing Hitlers Germany to be sent back, can claim any moral superiority is beyond me). It appears that the right (including most of the press and Murdochs empire) is angry that their script is not being followed - which is probably why Adam Boulton spat out his dummy and nearly came to blows with Alistair Campbell on sky news last night - ofcom has received a number of complaints!).
There seems to be two alternatives - a tory minority government supported by the libdems or soem sort of so-called 'rainbow coalition' of all the other parties. My view, for what its worth, is that the latter would be a disaster. Much as it surprises me to agree with former home secretary John Reid, it would be a coalition of the defeated. I dont see how it would last any length of time, would involve damaging concessions to the nationalists, and I think the electorate would punish all involved by giving the tories a working, if not a huge, majority. Of course, if this is the way we go, AND the voting system changes as Brown has proposed (to AV), that would pretty much scupper any future tory government, given the apparent centre left majority in the electorate.
My feeling is that this was a good election to lose. Labour and the libdems would be well advised to let the tories rule as a minority, regroup (and elect a new leader in the case of Labour) and get ready to fight another election in 6-12 months after the tories have implemented their over zealous debt reduction plan and given us a double dip recession.
On a personal note I feel more optimistic than I did leading up to the election. A tory goverment with any sort of working majority would have been free to make their savage cuts to public services. At least with this result actions will be as needed and with a degree of consensus.
The Conservative press, this morning, were predictable in their rage and frustration at the lib dems (not quite as raging as Sky's Adam Boulton -of which more later...). Both the Express and the Mail poured scorn on the lib dems and tried to claim the moral high ground ( although how the Mail, given its history of campaigning for jews fleeing Hitlers Germany to be sent back, can claim any moral superiority is beyond me). It appears that the right (including most of the press and Murdochs empire) is angry that their script is not being followed - which is probably why Adam Boulton spat out his dummy and nearly came to blows with Alistair Campbell on sky news last night - ofcom has received a number of complaints!).
There seems to be two alternatives - a tory minority government supported by the libdems or soem sort of so-called 'rainbow coalition' of all the other parties. My view, for what its worth, is that the latter would be a disaster. Much as it surprises me to agree with former home secretary John Reid, it would be a coalition of the defeated. I dont see how it would last any length of time, would involve damaging concessions to the nationalists, and I think the electorate would punish all involved by giving the tories a working, if not a huge, majority. Of course, if this is the way we go, AND the voting system changes as Brown has proposed (to AV), that would pretty much scupper any future tory government, given the apparent centre left majority in the electorate.
My feeling is that this was a good election to lose. Labour and the libdems would be well advised to let the tories rule as a minority, regroup (and elect a new leader in the case of Labour) and get ready to fight another election in 6-12 months after the tories have implemented their over zealous debt reduction plan and given us a double dip recession.
On a personal note I feel more optimistic than I did leading up to the election. A tory goverment with any sort of working majority would have been free to make their savage cuts to public services. At least with this result actions will be as needed and with a degree of consensus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)