Consulting other parties
Well, well.
Lord Butler and the generals may already have won their battle.
Downing Street has just announced that the prime minister has written to the chairman of the Iraq inquiry urging him to consult other parties about how he should go about his business. What's more Gordon Brown wants him to know that it will be up to him to decide what format hearings will be held in.
What we'd all like to know is whether the Schools Secretary Ed Balls gave his boss a nudge when he declared on TV yesterday that the families of those soldiers killed in Iraq would be able to have their say at the inquiry.
PS: The best guide to what's been blacked out and what has not in today's MPs expense database is my colleague Martin Rosenbaum's blog (MPs: The missing information and Filling in the blanks).
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~05~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
More smoke and mirrors to come out of this enquire
Complain about this comment
I don't think the public want truth and reconciliation.
They want blood. You cannot expect to lie to the public without facing the consequences when you are found out.
Whose blood? Well if you look at the MPs expenses claims you'll find that the taxpayer had to pay for shredding his expenses claims.
Complain about this comment
Ed Balls can nudge whomsoever he likes, the problem is that grodon Brown and his inept government have made themselves a national laughing stock.
Once you have become the stuff of popular ridicule you are beyond governing.
So now, wherever they turn, whatever they announce, the bullied and silenced and smeared are standing up and saying they've had enough.
It doesn't matter who they are; Mervyn King, Digby Jones, Lord Butler, General Sir Mike Jackson; nobody in pubic life is going to pushed around by newlabour anymore.
If they won't call an election it appears that the Great British public has simply ceased to do their bidding.
So three cheers for all of those who have stood out and stood up and rejected the dictats of this shambles of an administration who will shortly be consigned to the trash heap of politiacal history.... where the five percent of the British public who voted for them at the last election will soon find themselves.
Dissolve parliament and call an election. You can't govern and you know it.
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown really is a shambles at the moment isn't he.
"I think thatit is vitally important for national security that the review is held in secret unless it's obvious that this is a politically unpopular move in which case I agree that it can be held in public"
Quite hopeless. If he were a dog, we'd be looking at each other with knowing glances realising that we needed to take hime to the vet for the last time.
Complain about this comment
More tricks from New Labour, a secret enquiry into the Iraq war was incredible. The PM really is a joke figure with the public.
Nick, surely you must see the continuous mess ups that this government and PM in particular are making. This is one of the worst judgments the PM has made recently, along with the Gurkhas, 10pence tax rate removal (Still a million low paid waiting for his promise to compensate,including me)etc. I find it hard to believe you still think this discredited government and PM can go on to win the next election.
Complain about this comment
Of course we need a full public inquiry. Iraq has been the biggest British foreign policy disaster since Suez with the added pain of many, many unnecessary deaths. The fact that Labour are still trying to hard their mistakes gives the lie to any idea that they want to be more open to scrutiny.
Complain about this comment
What? A military coup?
But who would they overthrow? Mandelson's appears to be in charge but that doesn't mean anything... who is he reporting to? Monsignor Blair? The Pope?
Our fine democracy has become somewhat confusing.
Complain about this comment
Will Blair be required to give evidence, under oath? And will the families of the bereaved be able to sue Blair personally, if he is found culpable, and relieve him and the missus of some of the millions which they have sunsequently accrued, essentially from Bush administration sycophants?
That MIGHT allow a DEGREE of "truth and reconciliation", no more. But don't hold your breath.
EU president Blair is a much more likely outcome.
Yeuch.
Complain about this comment
So good to see Gordon is now making the tough decisions this country needs right now.
Pass the buck seems to be a jolly good way of proceeding particularly in view of the fact that he asked our armed services to lay down their lives on the basis of (alleged) lies and 179 of them paid the ultimate price.
I hope it makes those who purport to stand by the Labour party proud of what their Prime Minister does in our name.
Complain about this comment
Held behind closed doors
Or in fullest public gaze,
Cynical motives.
Complain about this comment
good news then (isn't it?) if we get a public element to the inquiry - hey, and have you seen the news just in, SFG's pension to be reduced! - I told you, didn't I? ... I told you Harriet wasn't just making idle threats when she said that a while back on the Andrew Marr show
Harriet does NOT mess around
Complain about this comment
First the news:Editorial cut.
P&J:WED JUNE 17th.''......only the very few, can access live events IN SITU''.
That's what the whole letter was about.Nevermind.
''An independent inquiry, in private''.
Perhaps the move to allow at least some of the inquiry to be made public is like allowing a Trojan calf to lie next to the oxymoron.
Complain about this comment
Brown really has not changed anything. As Brown always does, he failed to consult "'cos he's in charge", then dug in his heels "'cos he cannot admit he's wrong" and then, having given everybody time to build up opposition, eventually sort of kind of tries to twist things a bit so he's not backing down, not wrong in his original decision, not putting things right and hoping like mad the Labour backbenchers will allow him to stay in charge.
Brown must set the inquiry to be open except in a few hearings where National Security is really at stake (rather than political embarrassment). The inquiry should have legal powers to force people to give evidence and evidence should be given under oath.
He keeps doing this. Really it is one of his major character failings - that makes him unsuited to leadership. Each time Labour takes a down turn in the polls.
However, soon Labour will have nothing to worry about in the polls - like interest rates. When you get so low you really cannot go down further.
Complain about this comment
I'm changing my mind on our current political situation. I think we have a fantastic process running at the moment. We have Brown making an exemplary succession of errors of judgement, thus ensuring he gets the full flak. Then the opposition parties / media / retired actresses of decent repute get him to change his policies to how they should really be, thus ensuring the country gets the outcome it needs. Could it get any better? Forget the election, let's keep this govt by proxy, it's much more fun.
Complain about this comment
More backtracking and dithering from Brown. The inept 10p tax, trying to keep expenses hidden, the Gurkas and now a secret enquiry. How this man ever got into politics is a complete mystery, he's no better than a petty local councillor.
The only reason the BBC is not baying for his blood is that Brown and his gang all read the same newspaper as the lefty BBC oxbridge clowns that support him and his ridiculous notions of equality for all.
We are not all equal, when will this finally sink in to socialists?
An election cannot come soon enough.
Complain about this comment
When WILL this government be HELD TO ACCOUNT for the dreadful WAR?
MORE WHITEWASH BY captain PUGWASH.
Complain about this comment
it like opening up the family courts to the press, oh but we decide which press and what they can report on , result the same in both cases
nothing that they do not want you to hear. The similiarities are well
Mr Ed Balls + CO
Complain about this comment
Ps Nick
Whats your take on the VSUK scandal then will that be allowed to be
presented in the open ?????????
Complain about this comment
#11 sagamix
Yes, errrrr, well, perhaps although I wish she was Labour leader. Not only does she seem pretty straight but it would also mean that the Lord Mandelson of Hartlepool wasn't running the country.
We are in a dreadful state of affairs.
Complain about this comment
Let's face it - the public, the Armed Forces and Intelligence Agencies all want a mainly open enquiry because we all want to expose the dire political management and meddling of our government. Quite right too.
The enquiry now also needs the following:
1. The power to summon people
2. To require people to give evidence under oath
I'm long past wishing Tony Blair was on trial for war crimes. Instead I'd prefer that the truth was out in the open - once and for all.
Complain about this comment
Most people have allready made up their minds about the war, so any inquiry, in public or in secret, is a waste of time and money. Let us take a public inquiry, this will be a media circus. From the BBC we'll get, from a reporter outside some building with a banner "Day 3999 of the Iraq Inquiry" saying Mr Blair's lawyer said he did not remember xxxx as he was picking his nose at the time, we will then have ten nose picking experts telling us what it means.
At the end of the day no matter what the conclusions the inquiry reach they will not be accepted. For a start Tony (stop the war) Benn has allready said its a whitewash and thats before its even started.
What would be the response be if one of the conclusions was; the war was necessary to prove, once and for all, without a shadow of doubt, there was no WMD in Iraq
Complain about this comment
@14
I totally agree. I am happy for Crash Gordon to continue till the election at this rate NuLabour will have less MPs than the Lib Dems.
TB
Complain about this comment
I cannot describe in words the disgust I feel at these party political power games still being played out by this government.
Candour is a word this PM does not even know the meaning of.
Trying to hide an enquiry behind closed doors means only one thing. A cover up.
The cover up of Blair and his own part in the Iraq war. Blair's chances of becoming President of the EU are now wrecked should such a position unfortunately ever materialise. Brown's own part is still open to question so it is in his own interests to hold an open enquiry if he has nothing to hide.
Brown may think he is the only one who can dictate how this chould be handled but the more pressure that is put on this pathetic man the more he will have to buckle.
The people of this country may not take to the streets lightly like other countries do but they are capable of putting pressure on this government in other ways.
Even though it may take another twelve months to do so.
Complain about this comment
11. sagamix
Sounds like less to do with Harman and more to do with NOTW and the RBS public shareholders.
If she can get his Knighthood rescinded then I will be impressed.
Complain about this comment
A slip of the typewriter, Nick, "up him". Hmmmmmm. Dad's army springs to mind.
You know what, I have a feeling Gordon is about to turn it all in.
Now where is my bunting.......
Complain about this comment
I have just listened to Dennis McShane now try to blame the Tories for the initial enquiry being announced as private. Whenever has Brown listened to anyone other than his advisors, McBride, Wheelan, Mandelson etc?
Ed Balls contradicted him in a TV interview and made it plain that the relatives of all victims, (hopefully including Dr David Kelly's family), deserve a public enquiry. Time is not an issue as even the private inquiry was to report after the next election.
Just the truth, or as much as possible now please - warts and all.
Complain about this comment
I read with bemusement the article Gordon Brown wrote in The Times about how broadband internet access was as vital as water to a household when it suddenly dawned on me what the problem with GB is and it explains a lot about how he runs his Government.
He has gone beyond believeing his own delusional rantings and now actually believes that simply by saying something he can MAKE it true.
When he says that holding the enquiry in private is best, he believes that that will make it so and when he changes his mind and denies that he has changed his mind he thinks that by saying so, he really hasn't changed his mind and we will all realise this.
I worry that next he will announce that he is 6'8", tall, weighs 18 stone and will be playing for the Lions on Saturday.
Complain about this comment
SAGA
I really do like what you write, which ironically reminds me of an old friend, oh whom I haven't seen in years. When we were at university together we had many a heated debate. All in/with good spirits.
What I don't get, is your infactuation with HH.
Still I suppose I quite liked quite liked The BBC's Maestro, and no-one else did so I do take your point.
Harry
Complain about this comment
So, that's another U-turn then, following on from the U-turn on the Gurkhas.
One a month on major policy decisions. Long may Gordon continue shooting himself in the foot by making unpopular decisions out of touch with public opinion and then backing down shortly after.
Oh, and please keep on lying about Labour not cutting public spending, it's working a treat!
Complain about this comment
Well Nick I'll give you a hint
1) money well very little less than 12,000k less that a Cabinet minister makes on the flip-flop and fly expenses scandal
2) embarresement to HMG about over stretch on are wonderful armed services persoanl and the effects PTSD was having on them. And that overstretch was casued by GB from HMG-treasury. Including a whole host
of other equipement issues like "chinook's" and general Helicopter medium
and heavy lift issues. amongst a whole host of others
So they looked for a scapegoat to nip the story in the bud before it could be made public.
They apperentlty could not fullfil there remit of returnin these people
to work, but they were so far gone it was almost impossible too.
Complain about this comment
It appears that after all the events of the past week, Gordon Brown still does not get it. The General Public will not accept any enquiry which is held behind closed doors
Maybe the General Election count should be held behind closed doors so that Gordon can declare himself the winner!
Complain about this comment
The words cake, having, and eating it come to mind.
Funny, wasnt it how Nick Clegg went on financial reform at PMQs yesterday and not Trident, nor even the open goal of the Iraq Inquiry? Now, what would you have done as leader of the Lib Dems if you had received, at the last minute a note from No 10 saying that if you were to lay off any questions about the Inquiry during PMQs, you might well find a major shift in the Government position within 24 hours?
Having used the timescale, high cost and encouraging candour arguments to justify holding the Inquiry in secret, the Government can now gain Brownie points (and avoid Lord Butlers censure) by generously allowing a public element to the Inquiry; but at the same time, by leaving it to Sir John Chilcot, neatly abrogate responsibility when all their worst predictions about obfuscation, length and cost come to pass!
Im sure the New Labour spin culture has had a bad effect on me.
Complain about this comment
14 ChiefWhiteHalfoat
Many a true word spoken in jest.
Complain about this comment
Let's be honest about this: the public want Blair's scalp and to see him answer for words and actions...along with his inner circle of dossier producers and incompetents. Would that be wrong?..not in my opinion.
Complain about this comment
18IR35_survivor
Am being thick here, what is VSUK ?
Tried Google and only thing caught my eye turned out to be an excellent phot blog of Swedish VS UK night clubs.
The Swedes have it.
Complain about this comment
The time spent on the inquiry will be longer than the time taken to make the decision to send people to war. Politicans shedding responsbility as if they were bankers. Politicans have a habit of hiding behind dead soldiers....just a hint: it had something to do with oil.
Complain about this comment
I am hereby calling an enquiry into why this Iraq War enquiry is such a farce.
The Digby Enquiry will be held in public on this here weblog. The enquiry will have no powers to command individuals to attend, and be incapable of apportioning blame to those individuals who are clearly culpable. The aim of the enquiry will be to clear the air surrounding this balls up and sort of sweep it under the carpet.
I might as well pass judgement on the Iraq War whilst I'm at it. It was Alistair Campbell in the study with the typewriter. Yes?
Complain about this comment
A good inquiry chairman will give the nod,where necessary on the private stuff.
''this is what you get,
this is what you get,
when you mess with us''
Good job done, today Radiohead.
''consulting other parties''
York Acomb Stakes, 7 furlongs, in late August ?.
''Have you had your reality bumped lately'' ?
Complain about this comment
#35 sorry see my other post but VSUK was Veteran Supprt Uk, they used
to have a web site that showed that they had spent ESF (euro social fund)
money and made good use of it. helping out service personal with PTSD and
related issues.
but this was too close a call for Blair + CO with issues of over stretch
and the effect that this has on service personal.
but essential a load of Non-issue very raised by GOSE (GOV office SE)
over very minor spending issues and the failure to get these people back to work , which is a tall order if you now about PTSD.
in fact there audio cost more that the alleged issues , now that is a farce.
but they message had to be killed stone bead and it was shame on Blair
and the social justice , moral compass and equality labour party for that
it applied as long as you are not prepared to die for the PM wimms
hope that helps
Complain about this comment
"Older men declare war. But it is the youth that must fight and die" - Herbert Hoover
It's the young men who fought and died who need the answers.
Thanks for mentioning the expenses link - I have already started drafting my letter to my MP with some pretty tough questions....
Complain about this comment
I really feel for those who lost loved ones in this terrible and possibly illegal war. And now the wriggling from Brown is even more disrespectful to their memory. The man has no shame and needs to be escorted to the Priory for his own sake. When will the men in suits (white probably) do the honourable thing and think of the country?
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown the political equivalent of Pa Ubu!
Merdre!
Complain about this comment
#28
maybe it is that bluestocking air about her?
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Having read the responses here maybe this is why Gormless cannot have this held in public.
THE PUBLIC ALREADY KNOW THE REASONS BEHIND THE WAR - THEY JUST WANT TO HEAR IT FROM THE HORSES MOUTH.
There are only 2 conclusions to the inquiry.
1. If the Gormless Government cannot stand up and admit it frauded the whole thing then we know they are spineless liars and are no longer trustworthy and must all be up for treason.
2. If the Government stands up and admits it was for oil, to get a strategic foothold in the middle east, for US and UK colonial expansion, the boosting of the US war economy and arms manufacturers and for the personal revenge of one man's son - then we know they are liars and greedy, self interested wasters who couldn't even get that right - and therefore should be ousted as both incompetent and untruthful.
So come on inquiry - is it option 1 or option 2?
We're all waiting with baited breath...
Complain about this comment
Is Brown deluded?
According to General Sir Richard Dannett he wasn't consulted about the Iraq inquiry, is this right?
Just like the expenses issue nothing is going to go away, no one is going to be satisfied and it will linger in the air like smell of bad eggs until it has all been brought out... Prudence, Transparency forget it - there is non, not with this government, not with Brown.
Lets face it it's just like having criminals being their own judge and jury, Brown and the Labour party will never change if they do there's every chance a Leopard will change its spots.
The whole darn lot need clearing up once and for all not swept under the carpet nor wool pulled over peoples eyes... and every MP no matter what party any dodgy or uncertain 'untowards' needs to be kicked out.
Brown can't do that because for one there will be no one left except the moggies of Downing Street.
Complain about this comment
#27 AndyC555 Good afternoon
......I worry that next he will announce that he is 6'8", tall, weighs 18 stone and will be playing for the Lions on Saturday..........
Your worries are groundless, The British Lions are a squad of individuals with stature and courage!!!
Complain about this comment
#29 yellowbelly1959
Oh come on, you must realise that Gordon is simply the puppet now.... Lord Mandy decided to keep him in place to avoid an election.
I'm not quite sure who's behind Mandy (he's always been a shady Walsingham type character, never the boss). Interestingly, Ed Balls was severely chastised at the end Alistair Campbell's blog today so I think it's a true sign that Brown has certainly gone in spirit even if not the body if his Capos are stepping out of the New Labour line.
Consequently, if you plan to read A Campbell's blog today, I warn you that you'll have to trawl through an awful lot sycophantic nonsense before the Ed Balls bit.
Complain about this comment
People have very short memories. When almost every Brown supporting MP and quite a few tory MP's, goes on tv and says Sadam had to be removed and the war was/is a good thing, they forget that Tony Blair said just before the war (24 hours) that Sadam could stay as leader if he allowed unlimited access and that removal of the leader was not the purpose of the invasion. I sincerely hope the electorate remember what Labour have done over the past 12 years, and some of the opposition.
This PM and his government are a disgrace to the British people.
Complain about this comment
It's sad but true. Gordon Brown just cannot seem to do anything right.
Complain about this comment
Whilst we're on the subject of openess, how about an open examination of our part in the 'War on Terror'?
Once again, there is a strong suggestion that Tony Blair was complicit in torture....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/18/torture-intelligence-abuse
It all apparently changed when the Abu Ghraib abuses were exposed.
Complain about this comment
For those who complain that The Americans were eager to invade Iraq solely because they were worried about the loss of oil supply to The West what would you have preferred? Rocketing oil prices leading to increased costs at the pumps and an inflationary knock up for all goods. I don't think so.
Complain about this comment
This whole farce is so typical of Brown. Everything he touches turns to excrement. He simply has no clue what he's doing.
Complain about this comment
11 sagamix
"I told you Harriet wasn't just making idle threats when she said that a while back on the Andrew Marr show
Harriet does NOT mess around"
======================================
I'm pleased that you think your heroine has got a result here !
Apparently Fred Goodwins pension spot is still over 11 million pounds - which by anyones standard is somewhat in excess of the "no rewards for failure" approach of the "court of public opinion" advocated by Mzz Harman.
Did Harriet actually have anything at all to do with this development ?
Complain about this comment
extreme @ 47
I'm not quite sure who's behind Mandy
I'd say (as so often) the obvious answer is the right answer
... ACLB
Complain about this comment
what a surprise when on Nick's bidding i went to martin rosenbaum's blog.....
my comment was published immediately, reactive moderation is so much better so how about it Nick?
Complain about this comment
blame @ 24
Sounds like less to do with Harman and more to do with NOTW and the RBS public shareholders
on the surface, yes - but also a certain Leader of the House of Commons working tirelessly behind the scenes - that's what I'm betting made the difference at the end of the day
harry @ 28
Maestro! ... yes, that was a shocker
Complain about this comment
Yet another gobsmacking failure of leadership by Gordon Brown. Faced with weakness on this scale, the likes of Michael Hesletine and Kenneth Clark would have buried him. The lack of bite from the current Conservative front bench is almost as staggering.
Complain about this comment
51. sicilian29 wrote:
For those who complain that The Americans were eager to invade Iraq solely because they were worried about the loss of oil supply to The West what would you have preferred? Rocketing oil prices leading to increased costs at the pumps and an inflationary knock up for all goods. I don't think so.
=
It has had the adverse effect - prices have risen after the war because of losses in production due to sabotage and post war chaos. There are two versions of the the oil theory, first - Cheney and mates wanted a pro-Western government installed so that the major oil companies would be invited back in again and they'd all live happily ever after...and secondly, the US wanted to break the Saudi cartel by flooding the market with Iraqi oil, stimulate the US economy and destabilise other rogue oil states like Iran and Venezuala. There were disagreements between the Pentagon and the State Department, the whole takeover was badly handled and although the big US oil companies made a healthy profit from the war, the consumers around the world did not see any benefit. The contracts are still to be finalised, so far as I know. There were no-bid contracts for the big five oil companies blocked last year and now all the major powers are looking for a piece of the second largest oil reserve in the world.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Please take care over the use of the phrase "Tax Avoidance." as you reported last night. This is a perfectly legal activity and most people are able to mitigate tax in a straightforward manner.
*Tax evasion* is the phrase required when someone considers means outside the 'spirit' of common sense and uses obscure chicanery or loopholes or using the letter of the law to justify the unethical reduction of tax.
I've noticed politicians (ironically) using 'tax avoidance' incorrectly, so please don't fall into their trap and legitimise their incorrect meaning of it.
Complain about this comment
This is a non story.
We wait a year for a large splodge of emulsion?
Tony Blair and his mates in the establishment will never be held to account for crimes against humanity.
Is'nt it amazing how many appointed Lords and Knights will protect to the last man, our past and present leaders.
Complain about this comment
This is not just an ordinary u-turn, this is a Gordon Brown u-turn. What's the betting that he will claim that it was always his intention to let Sir John decide what should be private and what should be public.
I really do not know how Mr Brown does it. How can anyone get it so wrong each and every time.
Any way, I am claiming credit for the u-turn. I signed the No 10 petition last night. Who would have thought that the Reactionary name had so much clout!
Complain about this comment
Brown is shameless really, isn't he?
Complain about this comment
The latest report from the generals was as follows:-
The Poltergeist of Downing Street
Number 10, the seat of power, will chill the blood and make you cower.
Venture inside at the witching hour, a ghastly howl then a pottery shower.
Shards of glass, the crack of bone, mind your head its a mobile phone!
Make sure youre never left alone, duck again as a printers thrown!
From every nook is hurled abuse, hands in the air but there is no truce!
A hurtling book, theres no excuse, hit square in the jaw, a tooth is loose!
Calm down beast! Stop right there! Then dive for cover from a tumbling chair!
What to do? To hide, but where? When Gordos enraged, never go there!
Judging by this, the Generals are having a good day.
At this rate the whole enquiry will be thrown into the public domain.
Complain about this comment
If, as a result of these recent machinations, the inquiry into the Iraq war will really be in the hands of its chairman and be exempt from any Government interference. It would be a first! It would make history!
How I wish all inquiries could have been free of Government interference in the past 50 years... Oh how I wish it could have been so!
I really can't see that this one would or could be any different. And, as I said before, it cannot reverse the decision to go to war.
Would an inquiry vindicate those MPs who opposed the war? Would an inquiry put blood on the hands of any single decision maker who advocated the war? Would "Lady Macbeth" be exposed or be free of guilt?
I don't think so.
Those few I know, or have met, who served in the Iraq war, were proud to do so and looked on their role as vital in building up the change of regime brought about by the deposition of Sadam Hussein.
Would an inquiry make little of their hard work and dedication?
I hope not.
Complain about this comment
The problem with Brown is that because of his incompetence he is always reactive as opposed to proactive, a serious flaw in his approach to just about verything.
Complain about this comment
I was wondering if any of your readers would be able to cast any light on why a tragically departed (and very dear) comedian and occasional magician was seen at the launch of the Crossrail project at Canary Wharf the other week?
http://www.private-eye.co.uk/sections.php?section_link=lookalikes&
Complain about this comment
9/11
Simple as
Without that Saddam would almost certainly be butchering away as we speak.
But its so much more intriguing to concoct a great oil controling conspiracy.
Do you know there's even people who believe that the US government was behind the 9/11 attacks themselves to create the conditions to invade Iraq to nick their oil???? And I dont even mean PAT!!
Complain about this comment
61. At 8:24pm on 18 Jun 2009, oldreactionary wrote:
This is not just an ordinary u-turn, this is a Gordon Brown u-turn. What's the betting that he will claim that it was always his intention to let Sir John decide what should be private and what should be public.
You mean just like he was surprised to find out how much information had been redacted from the MPs expenses, despite being given the information 6 weeks ago? I always thought he was an honest man who kept making silly mistakes, now I'm beginning to wonder if he really understands or means what he says.
Complain about this comment
#58 Absolutely right, but the stupid expletive deleteds thought they could swing it. Before the war, Rupert Murdoch said the following:
"The greatest thing to come out of this for the world economy...would be $20 a barrel for oil. That's bigger than any tax cut in any country." *
The rest is history.
*Sourced below:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/feb/17/mondaymediasection.iraq
Complain about this comment
we are lead to believe by the media and the opposition that Iraq is the one burning issue on twelve years of Labour rule. Though, it very rarely features on the doorstep and it has generated 67 postings, so far, here.
Are we being misled?
Complain about this comment
#63 zim
I am beginning to warm to Vogon poetry.
Complain about this comment
71 wasowenright
Sir you are a late convert.
I hope someone is collating them all with a view to publication.
Perhaps interspaced with Geronimojones superb cutting one liners.
Complain about this comment
The more general point to make here is I think despite the recent cabinet attempt to reshuffle, Mandy is not managing Gordon so Mandys elongated job title is personal vanity, no style no substance more make up needed to try and cover the cracks, which anyone living in the real world can see are becoming bottomless ces pits. Another minister resigns, the line in the sand that was attempted a day or two ago has already been washed away a government that is weaker by the day or even by the hour.The optimum credible time for a general election is October. i for see it would be a good time for a number of Independent candidates, and Labour number of MPs roughly the same as the lib Dems and some Tory big guns gone too ( The shadow Chancellors Tennis court expense claim will not be forgotten is just one of many examples) I have in the past voted Tory more often than not but I am not sure who to vote for. I hope by the election a police and HMRC investigation into expences has started and the rules they have hidden behind are suddenly the rules that apply to you and I. With regard to the Iraq enquiry it is much needed for the familys of our serviceman - but we all know they got it wrong - will there be some kind of punishment tarrif for those that made wrong decision - I doubt it
Complain about this comment
#73 1essex1
Do you really feel that bothered by the expenses issue? I can't help feeling that these people have manipulated a system that was set up to avoid having to keep voting themselves pay rises. We all knew it was happening, not in the details but that these allowances were there because MPs pay is a difficult issue to resolve. Thatcher brought it in in order to create the illusion that MP's were doing there part when others were having there livelihoods destroyed by her government.
Now it is out in the open, it is the time to decide how they should be paid in the future. An open and accountable pay structure. Forget all this rubbish about serving the community, even though that is what they are there to do. I expect MPs who support my veiw to get in there and make it happen, which clearly won't serve the interests of some of our community.
But, when we decide how much an MP's salary should be, for the job they do, why should we stop there. I have believed for a long that the reduction of the top rate of tax from 90% to 40% in 1979 was a mistake. 90% tax (super-tax as it was called) created a sort of cap on earnings which we should re-introduce, only now it should be 100%.
That will create a bandwidth, that all salaries will fit into. The great advantage to it, is that everyone will relate themselves to what other people do in our society and it will have a controlling influence on inflation. I believe that if we have a bandwidth ranging from GBP15k minimum wage, to GDP150k maximum wage everyone will get arguably, their fair share.
Complain about this comment
For someone wanting to be 'opne and honest' with the public these two incidents are a master class in how not to do this - and to show how politicians still 'don;t get it'
First on the Iraq inquiry - you announce that the inquiry will be held in secret when part of the original problem was that the whole decision to go to war seems shrouded in secrecy. So you upset people ..
Then you announce that the chair of the inquiry will have discertion as to how it runs - thereby abrogating all responsibility - and so stepping back from any accountability ..
Then you don't manage your stakeholders so that as soon as you announce the decision the armed forces immeadiately start breifing aginst that decision - so you just look confused .. and not in control ..
On expenses the whole lot are available in the public arena potentially
but what do you do - you black out huge swathes of data that specifically prevent people from seeing the very worst, illegal and possibly fraudulent claims when that is PRECISELY what the public are angry about ..
Parliament rules with the consent of the people and the arrogance and contempt shown to those people by these two actions just demonstrates that this governmetns writ is run - they should go the country now and call the election - its not ideal timing but frankly 11 more months of this and the damage to our democratic system may be terminal
You'd hope that MP's that did not go into Parliament for the money but to do good might see that and act accordingly
Complain about this comment
- Questons over Jack Straw relating to torture (and David Blunkett).
- Questions over Jack Straw relating to the probation service and statements he made blaming them for the New Cross murders.
- Hazel Blears survives despite playing the housing market using taxpayers money.
- Nobody knows who's in charge... is it Gordon? Mandelson? Blair?
This government is made of unscrupulous rascals and they must go. Now.
Complain about this comment
#76:
I think it's fairly obvious who's in charge. It used to be Alistair Campbell. Now it's a shoe in that it's Mandelson.
Complain about this comment
This blog is symptomatic of the lefty whining that has ruined this great country. If the enquiry was held in the middle of Trafalgar Square they would complain that it was not open enough and if it recommended hanging Tony Blair for war crimes they would moan that he had not been drawn and quartered afterwards.
Complain about this comment
The Telegraph is going for the jugular:
Full expose of the expenses in the cabinet:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/cabinet-expenses/
Complain about this comment
67,I don't know if Bush was behind 911. Plenty think he was - look it up, google, Youtube, Aaron Russo the Facist to Freedom man - there's plenty to read and debate about it.
Why I wonder where the planes unmarked - ie airline logo etc. Why, I wonder were the security forces already on the ground nearby when the planes struck?
How on earth could this have happened without US fighter planes heading them off BEFORE they reached central NY?
I really don't know but the question remains open and will, for some time.
Complain about this comment
Sicilian, I wonder who paid / is paying the zenster to blog from America? The blogger who isn't even a British citizen, therefore not allowed a vote here. Who pays him - would it be Alastair Campbell, McSnide, Dolly?
Pretty seedy henchmen around Gormless aren't there?
Complain about this comment
76. At 08:51am on 19 Jun 2009, extremesense wrote:
"This government is made of unscrupulous rascals and they must go. Now."
If the fact that MPs have now paid back HALF A MILLION QUID in 'expenses' doesn't prove hands down, for all to see, just how 'honourable' parliamentarians are, then I really just don't know what to say.
But, you're not going to get them to go, now, or at any other time, because the system gives these highly discredited (individually and collectively) members of the House the power to determine (within certain limits) when they go.
I've said it before - and I'll say it again - after the people have elected in their allegedly honourable members of parliament, that is when and where their democratic power comes to a full stop.
After that point, until the current Government's (determined by the party system and who got the most MPs elected) prime minister (chosen by members of his/her own party by a system chosen by them) calls for another election, your democratic choices are limited to either 1) liking what's happening or 2) lumping it.
If we had public elections for the prime minister, then people would have more power to influence things, and fixed term parliaments sound to me to be a good idea.
In my view, given the lack of trust in parliametarians, the people of the UK really might as well be given the chance to vote in some 'celeb' as a prime minister. At least they might fell they can trust that person and they seem to trust very few politicians any more.
So, how about Sir Trevor McDonald, or Jamie Oliver, or Piers Morgan?
And, if you think that idea is a farce, just take a long slow look at our parliamentary system because if anything is a complete farce it is that!
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown; the man who surely has the "reverse-midas" touch. How long can this discredited government stagger on before they get rid of this bumbling fool? Why bother waiting a year before they get annihilated at the polls; don't they realise it will just be an extra year for the Labour party's reputation to be dragged deeper into the mire?
Are they really more interested in staying in their jobs just to feather their nests for a bit longer than doing what is right for the country?
Complain about this comment
wasowenwright asks me if i am really that bothered about MPs expences the short answer is yes very much so.
I see that it was used by some (how many i don't know) to supplement their income. I understand that their is no public appetite for an MPs wage rise and i believe there is some justification for them to have one and we could debate what would be fair.
I am offended by the phrase that "it was within the rules" for the following reasons flipping looks like tax evasion phantom mortgages looks like fraud and claiming for charity donations is just wrong.
the rules that we follow should be the same our MPs follow. I cut my response short not because i don't want a debate i have an appointment to get to
Complain about this comment
Good to see that Blears has the full backing of the people of Salford.
Well, when I say full backing, I mean 33 people.
Just shows how blinkered, narrow and out of touch they have become!
Complain about this comment
Eaton / flame
The link between Al Qaeda and Saddam is just as controversial as the oil theory. Which one is more plausible? Depends on which makes more sense. For me it's the oil.
Taking out one dictator with alleged links to Al Qaeda isn't going to make an international terror organisation disappear.
Taking out one dictator who threatens your country's livelihood by destabilising the oil markets and by so doing open up the possibility of a controlling interest in the world's 2nd largest reserves makes more sense.
Finishing off what the old man started is just icing on the cake.
Complain about this comment
"flamepatricia wrote:
I don't know if Bush was behind 911. Plenty think he was - look it up, google, Youtube, Aaron Russo the Facist to Freedom man - there's plenty to read and debate about it."
Yeah that's right. A conspiracy involving thousands of people, not one of whom has blabbed. Highly sophisticated and only given away by the banners the planes trailed behind them which had "It's all a CIA plot" written on them.
You want to do some googling? Try "911 myths". Not one of the conspiracy stories holds up but of course, that's not as much fun.
Complain about this comment
86. Me
Forgot to mention WMD. Basically because there were none.
Complain about this comment
80 flamepat
87 andyC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_OIXfkXEj0
Pat interesting how you still talk about Charles E hardwidge Why could that be? he isn't andy k! He's dead you know that don't you?
Complain about this comment
77. At 09:14am on 19 Jun 2009, sicilian29 wrote:
I think it's fairly obvious who's in charge. It used to be Alistair Campbell. Now it's a shoe in that it's Mandelson.
Sorry to be a pedant, but that would be 'shoo-in'. An Americanism, suggesting a fixed result in that a horse had been 'shoo'ed towards the line.
Complain about this comment
AndyC555,
I think flamepatricia has a point there- I have always thought it very odd that the fire-fighters were already positioned around the WTC before the first plane struck. Check it up yourself- the video showing the first plane hitting starts with some people being ordered around by police and fire-fighters. Obviously this fact alone does not amount to anything but too many such facts like that and people start wondering what actually happened.
I sat in front of the TV all day watching the live newsfeeds from the 9/11- I thought I have seen all there was to see. What was my surprise when I leraned a few days later about the 'third tower' collapsing- such was the amount of coverage it received. Even now if footage is shown of that day, the third tower is never mentioned. I rather think there was no CIA involvement, but I can understand why other people think otherwise.
Complain about this comment
#86 theblamegame
I agree the control of the oil and getting the supplies going again (though work has only started in getting the oil terminals up and running) is the more plausible.
Al Queda's followers would not take kindly to Saddam Hussian's close friendship with Johnie Walker. In reality Saddam was only a muslim when it suited him.
Complain about this comment
A full, open and searching inquiry is essential. Televised where possible.
Too many serious issues have been swept under the carpet by the Labour Government and they must all be reopened and examined wherever the British people have suffered serious loss because of this Government's decisions. Starting with the loss of life in this war.
Other issues mentioned above remain unanswered:
the finanacial loss suffered by the the poorest by the abolition of the 10% tax band
the loss of their life savings and all income by the 1600 pensioners invested in the the bonds of Bradford and Bingley following the Governemnt's decision to break up the bank
The list goes on but the common factor is that the poorer the person the more they have lost. So much for Labour and Socialism. Liars, fraudsters, cheats and thieves who have impoverished the poorest and enriched themselves at everyone's expense. Speaker Martin - thrown out with 2 pensions and £2.4 million added to his 2nd pension fund. Just one example.
Complain about this comment
I didn't expect our unfortunate PM to do anything other than and 'right angle' regarding the Public Inquiry - he does not have the experience of how to govern or re-act to events - he's a novice isn't he.
Slightly off topic but what irks me the most today is that Clarke on Question Time was trying to influence the way I may or may not vote. Don't know why this annoys me so much other than the fact that it's my vote, not his. Yes, I know MP's try to influence us during an election but he was specifically telling me not to vote for a certain party and it wasn't his.
Complain about this comment
It has often been stated that the war in Iraq was illegal.If so, does anyone know why those responsible for enforcing the law have not taken action? I assume that everyone is familiar with 'the separation of powers'
Complain about this comment
I think Tony Blair should be tried for war crimes along with George Bush.
Not only did servicemen and women lose their lives but so did many many innocent Iraquis.
I just heard Dennis Healey (who served in WWII) on Desert Island Discs saying that he went into politics to help prevent any more wars yet our present politicians seem to be only too happy to go to war.
Wars solve nothing.
Complain about this comment
#90:
Thanks for that. It's the first time I've used the phrase in written form and it was therefore a phonetic error on my part. Always prepared to learn but as long as you get my drift.
Complain about this comment
59. At 7:08pm on 18 Jun 2009, Squegg wrote:
Nick,
Please take care over the use of the phrase "Tax Avoidance." as you reported last night. This is a perfectly legal activity and most people are able to mitigate tax in a straightforward manner.
*Tax evasion* is the phrase required when someone considers means outside the 'spirit' of common sense and uses obscure chicanery or loopholes or using the letter of the law to justify the unethical reduction of tax.
I've noticed politicians (ironically) using 'tax avoidance' incorrectly, so please don't fall into their trap and legitimise their incorrect meaning of it.
=================================
Claptrap Squegg,
Both avoidance and evasion use chicanery, loopholes and the letter of the law to justify reduced liabilities to taxation. You allude to the subtle distinction between what is after spending huge amounts in court costs, legal fees and accountancy fees accepted as being legal or not.
Either you are liable for tax or you are not - if you are not liable you have not avoided anything. If you are liable and not paid then you have avoided paying it or evaded it - simple really. Avoid and evade are synonymous.
It is only the PR wings of the accountancy and banking groups who practice/sell tax planning who thought this distinction up to "justify" their chicanery, loophole exploiting and interpretation of the letter of the law. Companies and wealthy individuals fortunate enough to be able to afford the advice and schemes so devised know very well what it means. Finding legal ways to avoid taxes that the spirit of the law intended them to pay.
I am all for MPs and others continuing to fudge this false distinction.
Complain about this comment
flame @ 80
I love conspiracy nonsense (Prince Philip killed Diana, they never landed on the Moon, Mark Chapman was hired by McCartney etc) but it is nonsense, remember, and so should really be "redacted" from a serious and proper politics blog like we pride ourselves on having here
Complain about this comment
Isn't it ironic that on the one hand they're setting up this enquiry to be a complete whitewash, when on the other hand they're dealing with the other issue of the day with gallons of blank ink.
Complain about this comment
10 etc
I like the way bloggers are using poetry to capture the essence of their views, rather than those long-winded posts which nobody reads (Robin etc).
So how about:
Cameron speaks
Without inspiration
Oh desperation!
Vacuous George
claimed for DVDs on
Value for Taxpayers Money
Admittedly this second isn't so much a poem as a sentence written across 3 lines - it's a work in progress
Complain about this comment
Lack of policy seems to be the order of the day... that and whitewash of course.
http://moralorder.mediumisthemess.com/blog
Complain about this comment
101 laughatthetories
"Admittedly this second isn't so much a poem as a sentence written across 3 lines - it's a work in progress"
======================================
Yes. You started out with a idea, didn't think it through properly, went ahead with it anyway, and you will have to change it later with the final outcome nothing like originally intended.
This is exactly the same approach that the government use to make up what they like to call their decisions. Though I doubt that they extend to three lines.
Complain about this comment
A better example of a whitewash(superficial covering) would be to replace the government with the conservatives at this time. Conservatives were in favour of the war and fiddled their expenses.
Don't call an election!
Complain about this comment
The public face of this inquiry is emerging very hesitantly into the light, and it is beginning to look less considerately planned than a jumble-sale. Surely Gordon cannot be mishandling the politics of the thing already? These are needless errors, but if not swiftly corrected they must surely bring his downfall, and a final one.
Complain about this comment
Being held secret is ridiculous.
The only answer that would not be considered (quite validly) to be genuine is an answer that is not what the government wants.
Complain about this comment
"yet our present politicians seem to be only too happy to go to war."
They're happy for OTHER PEOPLE to go to war. They're happy to SEND someone else to war.
Watch Farenheit 911 for the same view from US politicians.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
There once was a man called Gordon
Who spoke with considerable boredom
He dithered and dallied
Broke so many promises
Then U-turned but rallied
So why is the world's saviour
So unpopular and out of favour
Well the answer is clear
No one believes what they hear
Roll on 2010, the end is near!
Complain about this comment
51. sicilian29 offers rocketing oil prices and more expensive goods as an unacceptable option to the first Gulf War, and toppling Saddam Hussain.
sicilian29 is naive. The world is running out of oil - at least, of reasonably readily-accessible oil. We have to find alternatives sooner or later: why not do it now, and pre-empt the whole subjugating-the-Middle-East-for-oil debacle altogether? It's not impossible - think how inventive people managed to be when the world was involved in a race to 'explore' uninhabitable space (and then fill it with orbiting junk). Teflon, Milium, a thousand spin-offs. Think how inventive people are when they absolutely have to be, as opposed to being driven by some foolish, grandiose notion of kudos.
The money wasted on two wars - let alone the cost in human suffering: ours bad enough, the Iraquis' hundreds of times worse - would have been far better spent on negating the problem.
And certainly the enquiry must be public. To suggest otherwise is utter moonshine. As to 'national security' - as with MPs' expenses, I think the 'security' card is played far too often, and makes the players look ridiculous and shifty.
Complain about this comment
The only upside to the expenses fandango is that the expense allowances weren't incorporated into salary. If they had been we'd have been paying inflated pensions as well
Complain about this comment
Seen the story in the Times about MP's being worth a 10-15% salary rise ?
Never mind ' Things Can Only Get Better' I think it'll be ' I Predict a Riot'
Complain about this comment
#101, 108, 109
For crying out loud! Stop these horrible attempts at poetry. Just because you think they are good enough does not make them so!
To use Terry Pratchet's words: they are 'offensive to the ear and a torture for the soul'.
P.S. Moderators, please step in! If this so called 'rhyming' is not against the house rules than I do not know what is!
Complain about this comment
104 Wilko
How democratic!
Complain about this comment
Good News Everyone you can by MP's expemses at £1.49!!!!!!
Follow the link
http://www.wilkinsonplus.com/invt/0249119
Complain about this comment
101 Laughter
That's really good, what else have you been upto today?
Complain about this comment
#101:
The title of this thread is 'Consulting Other Parties'. Save your partisan anti Cameron/Osbourne bile for another thread. If you want to turn MP's expenses into a party political rant we can come back at you with plenty of transgressors from The Labour Government let alone The Labour backbenchers but we won't because everyone has been at it and it's non productive! I realise you're thrashing out becuause your hero has been wounded but you're making a fool of yourself!
Complain about this comment
#104:
That's hogwash. A majority voted for The Iraq War on dodgy evidence and as far as I can make out a majority of MPs have been either fiddling or taking full advantages of The Expenses black hole. Why single out The Conservatives?
Complain about this comment
#110:
I agree with the fact that my earlier comment on oil was a bit simplistic. I wasn't offering it as an excuse to invade Iraq and I still want a public enquiry into our involvement. I was just getting rather fed up of blogger after blogger claiming that The US only went to war with Iraq to protect Western oil supplies and having a go at them on that basis.
Complain about this comment
9/11
So an elaborate plot involving how many people? The airlines, airtraffic control, the pentagon, the NY Fire department (who were apparently 'in on it' (but not to the extent that they remembered to get out of the building before it collapsed), the people who fixed up the 'remote control planes', all of the people 'pretending' to be relatives of passengers and crew, all the thousands of people 'pretending' to know passengers and crew.
And of course a media and enough enemies of the Bush regime who would love to be able to prove that it was a conspiracy but who haven't found one of the many thousands of people supposedly 'in on it' who they can produce as a witness that it was a conspiracy.
All the structural engineers and architects who have explained at length how the planes' impact resulted in the collapse of the buildings...they're obviously in on it too.
All so the US could invade Afganistan.
i can just imagine the meeting when they discussed invading Iraq.
"Hey, you know that elaborate plot we used to justify Afghanistan? You know, the one where we caused 2 billion dollars worth of damage to NY, killed thousands of our own citizens and risked impeachment and the death penalty if it ever leaked out?"
"Yeah, I remember, the years of planning required, the manpower, the chances of it going wrong, wow what a job that was"
"Well, for Iraq, why don't we just pretend they've got WMD?"
"Damn, wish we'd thought of that earlier".
Complain about this comment
" PS: The best guide to what's been blacked out and what has not in today's MPs expense database is my colleague Martin Rosenbaum's blog"
Nick, very touching of you to support your colleague but don't you think the Telegraph's coverage is just the teensiest bit more detailed?
Complain about this comment
If expense claims can be "accidentally" shredded, I suspect much of the evidences have also been "accidentally" shredded and destroyed.
Complain about this comment
113.
There was a poster called Isenhorn
who with keen ear for poetry was born
Much vexed were they by verse so fey
that it moved them to lose their... bl**dy sense of humour!!
:-)
Complain about this comment
#120 AndyC555
Just remember - it took over 50 years for the Gestapo files to come out and reveal that Hitler was behind the Riechstag fire. From that one incident (the 9/11 of the day) he created the atmosphere of fear to remove the liberties of the people (suspending habeas corpus) and the momentum to take Germany into Poland. Simply update it with 'Patriot act' or 'anti-terror legislation' and 'Iraq' and hey presto - only the names and dates have changed.
That was over 60 years ago - don't you think they've got better at organising their coups d'etat's better than that by now?
...and I don't know where you get all those people involved in the conspiracy from, they don't need to be involved at all. All you need is some trained men to hijack the planes and the absence of any link back to you. All other witnesses were killed in the action.
....and don't forget, Osama Bin Laden used to WORK FOR THE US GOVERNMENT fighting the soviets in Afghanistan - another co-incidence perhaps?
What you ACTUALLY mean is that you CANNOT AFFORD to think the 9/11 attacks to be a conspiracy as it will destroy everything you have ever been taught to believe about Government and it will scare you witless.
In the same way the people who have defended MP's expenses in the face of clear morally corrupt behaviour because to finally admit what the rest of us knew a long time ago (that MOST MP's are out for themselves and don't give a monkeys about their constituents) completely destroys all they were taught making their entire lives a complete lie.
Those of us who live in pessimism are not phased by either a 9/11 or expenses revelation - in fact we would only be surprised if it wasn't true. It stands to reason, some men will do ANYTHING FOR POWER - don't be so arrogant to think your life, my life or anyone else's life is going to stand in the way of a power driven maniac.
I won't say 9/11 was a conspiracy - but I'm not foolish enough to accept it wasn't when there are many, many questions un-answered, and it would appear - un-answerable.
Complain about this comment
99 sagamix
You mean they really did land on the moon?
113 isenhorn
The poems a whitty and clever, my fav is Invader-Zim.
Zim for Laureate.
Complain about this comment
99. 125.
My favourite conspiracy is Gordon Brown.
Complain about this comment
#124 et al
Yeah!...and no one's even mentioned the Bilderbergers yet!...that Dennis Healy has got a lot to answer for!
Complain about this comment
Is it true that BBC staff are banned from even looking up Bilderberg on t'internet?
Complain about this comment
yes, have to agree, far too much cod poetry, song pastiche etc etc - but having said that, I've got one, it's about David Cameron, Head Clown, you'll be surprised to hear! ... to the tune of a Beatles singalong classic of the (very) late sixties, one of their best numbers, some say (though not me) the best song they ever recorded ...
nah nah nah na na na nah
na na nah nah
hey Pseud
yeah nah nah nah na na na nah
na na nah nah
hey Pseud
(pseud pseud a pseud a pseud a pseudy pseud!)
nah nah nah na ...
Complain about this comment
At last, the police are to investigate some of the worst offenders, Messrs Morley and Chaytor. I bet that there are a number of others, from all sides of both houses, who will have an uncomfortable weekend wondering if they are next.
By the way Saga (No. 129) don't give up the day job
Complain about this comment
#129 sagamix
Is that the version from the 'Love' album?
Actually, no, can't really associate Cameron with love.... photo-ops snogging his wife, hmmmmm, but love?
Complain about this comment
I had a boss who used to define communication as "I talk and you listen".
It raises the question as to whether there is any Cabinet discussion on issues. If there had been I'm sure that unless the Cabinet are completely gutless someone would have raised the issue of whether the other Political Parties should be consulted and whether the Inquiry would be in private of public.
It is clear that nothing can change this Prime Minister, he was exactly the same as Chancellor, remember how he used to keep the Budget secret from Tony?
Complain about this comment
Please, I'll do anything if you'll just stop posting these dreadful, incompetent, illiterate, attempts at poetry. Just stop. I'll do anything. Please.
Complain about this comment
outrage @ 133
Just stop. I'll do anything. Please
nothing worse than verse!
sense @ 131
Is that the version from the 'Love' album?
no, it's the original - written about the same time as (following the logic of the 9/11 conspiracy theorists) Martin Luther King was assasinated by the Black Separatists in order to whip up anti white feeling on the streets
reactionary @ 130
By the way Saga (No. 129) don't give up the day job
yes I do apologise - definition of sad, that was - still, you know, he is isn't he?
Complain about this comment
Brown's relationship with just about everyone reminds me of a bullying husband and a long suffering wife. She keeps making excuses for his behaviour and he keeps saying he will reform but never does.
Complain about this comment
Yes by the way to those who find the tendency to post in verse as tedious as it assuredly is, and I am one who finds it so, I suggest the expedient of simply not reading it. For pity's sake don't we have enough to do in this life, including sparing a minute or so of trying to enjoy this blog, without having our sincere attention wasted on some joker's idea of Art? Isn't a wheel mouse frightfully useful?
Complain about this comment
I have searched high and low within Downing Street for another angle on this enquiry.
Fortunately I uncovered a source who was lean and mean and firey.
Many have had a very tough time putting the squeeze on Gordon Brown.
But my new source knows the most intimate secrets in all of London town.
What follows is an excerpt of the latest report: -
Gordons Vest said to his Underpants Where the hell have you been
You reek of sweat, your threads are bare and youre stained with something green!
Gordons Underpants replied to Vest, Oh Ive had a terrible week
Ive been tightly caught in a Prime Ministerial farce, sniffing out a leak.
Gordons Vest was filled with glee, replying Do tell the rest your tail.
You really have my curiosity piqued and Im keen to follow your trail.
Gordons Underpants deeply sighed and prepared to dish the dirt.
But before he got the chance to reply, he disappeared up Gordons skirt.
Vest could hear the muffled sounds of Underpants coughing and spluttering.
He speculated that his good friend Underpants had been choked on Gordons guttering.
If you guess the moral of this unfortunate tail, youll know it has never been so true.
If youre careless when you spill the beans, you'll bite off more than you can chew.
Hopefully we can get a team in there to extricate Underpants safely.
Zim - Over and Out
Complain about this comment
For info - "The Diary of Invader-Zim" may be available in early 2010.
That's unless I find out who leaked it to the Telegraph.
For info: -
Brown - Bad
Zim - Good (as far as you earthlings know ...Muhaahahahahaha)
Complain about this comment
114 flashharry..
How democratic!
Im glad you agree we shouldn't have an election until things calm down. A result based on media hyped anger and cynicism isn't good for the country. I don't understand your next comment though
@115 Good News Everyone you can buy MP's expemses at £1.49!!!!!!
{Link to a plastic plate at Wilko+}
Eh?
----------------------------------
I see Irken Invader Zims operation Impending Doom 2 is in operation. Trying to destroy us all with poetry of mass destruction aquired from the vogons.
Complain about this comment
#120 AndyC555"Just remember - it took over 50 years for the Gestapo files to come out and reveal that Hitler was behind the Riechstag fire"
You mean you don't think that people are able to know things until politicians admit them? That sounds like the sort of dim notion that puts them up to their tricks in the first place. Each to his own I suppose.
But I have to say that was the only bit of your post I understood. Must be me.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Dispute what I say.
Defend my right to say it.
(But not as terse verse.)
Complain about this comment
141. At 8:57pm on 19 Jun 2009, StrictlyPickled wrote:
133,136 etc
Look a bit closer and you will find the jests in one or two of the "supposed serious" ones as well. Quite what do you suppose actually?
Yes, not liking yards of verse is a matter of taste. But while we are told there is no disputing about taste, there's no harm in declaring it. Is there?
Complain about this comment
136. At 8:06pm on 19 Jun 2009, solpugid
You can mock if you must, at my written word.
Complain if you like, that my posts are absurd.
Look a little closer, make a detailed observation.
Then I'm sure you'll conclude, I'm on medication.
Muahahahahahhaaaa hahaha etc
Its the publics god given right to lay their soldiers to rest.
While tirelessly, Gordon Brown schemes, the truth to divest
Too any have buried a Husband a Daughter or Son.
Labour must not hide their lie, lest freedoms undone.
Complain about this comment
144. At 9:39pm on 19 Jun 2009, Invader-Zim wrote:
136. At 8:06pm on 19 Jun 2009, solpugid
Zim, it wasn't you I meant actually. But jolly stuff now I look at it
Complain about this comment
145. At 9:48pm on 19 Jun 2009, solpugid.
Heh heh heh.
Come closer, my latest human recruit.
I'll measure you up for an Invader suit.
You're mission will be to Browns Derrière.
To liberate his Underpants, suffocating there.
Complain about this comment
For all those involved in the rescue of Gordon's Underpants.
Beware, latest reports have shown that a large force of Brownites are waiting in ambush on the Dark Side of the Gordon.
Since my last message was distorted due to interference, I will repeat the destination.
That was landing site code named Derriere.
I repeat Derriere.
God speed and good luck
Complain about this comment
HAH!
Finally!
I have wrested control of this human message log from the one known to you as Robinson.
From henceforth this will be known as the Invader-Zim recruiting channel.
All blog subjects will have mind altering subliminal messages that will convert you to my cause.
All Hail ZIM.
Soon... very soon ... Meh.
Complain about this comment
#148 Invader-Zim
Congratulations on raising the intellectual content of this blog by several levels.
Complain about this comment
Now Gordon Brown (writing in The Grudian" admits that while he was Chancellor of the Exchequer he "didn't know a lot about the banks' sub-prime mortgages" ???
I think he would be more truthful if he ended the sentence after the word LOT!!
Complain about this comment
Nick; interesting comments...and on topic most of the time, at least in early posts. But the rest of the time and pls note people tcommenters ; the latter part of this comments section IS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANTHING. Get yr own blog fr'chrissakes.
Huh Nick, some people. What - suuuum people.
Browns toast, dontcha think!?
Complain about this comment
151. Baseballer - or should we call you Ed Baller?
Off topic?
Not at all.
The base topic is, and always will be Brown.
The clear message,is for him to step down.
So many of the posts that chide and deride,
Are there to expose his abuse of those at his side.
Look for the metaphors and the riddles in rhyme.
The meanings will be revealed in the fullness of time.
Complain about this comment
I cannot believe that Brown has admitted to the Guardian that he didnt know a lot about the sub prime shenanegens !
Even more galling he says the past few weeks has made hime feel "..he could walk away from all this tomorrow".
Please do Gordon, no dont walk. run please.
Complain about this comment
Whats the matter chaps ?
Some do not appreciate the clever poetry which is satire at its best.
Others are now complaining that posts are off topic. Well Nick has lately done more blogs than normal, not surprising, and often the previous subject is far from dead so runs on.
Nicks current blog has a limited life, I mean how much can you coment on
a non event as Brown has already changed tack on the subject.
It is only right that comment continues on all pertinent matters. I was hoping for some comment on the first no jury trial in England. Slippery slope chaps, slippery slope.
Complain about this comment
Brown: recent weeks 'among worst'
Gordon Brown has admitted that the latest crises to engulf his leadership hurt him, and made him think he could "walk away from this tomorrow".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8110443.stm
You're kidding no one mister!
Complain about this comment
Must be open inquiry; the various parties involved have to much to hid. From the Labour government, Blair and the spin to get us to go into Iraq, the subsequent government and MoD failures of equipment and shortages and then the armed forces themselves with poor training and tactics.
No doubt we will also have lessons to learn on the treatment and compensation for people who were involved, the problems don't just go away when the Government declares we are out of Iraq.
Complain about this comment
#155:
Exactly. It just doesn't wash does it? To my mind he's been told to bear his soul in this article by Lord Mandelson himself in order to try and gain some sympathy from The Electorate. If anyone is foolish enough to believe his belated admissions of his failings then so be it but it doesn't impress me one jot!
Swaying seemlessly from bully to victim is so so transparent.
Complain about this comment
#155, #157
I saw the headlines first thing and thought what are the BBC doing as part of this campaign to re-habilitate the Prime Minister? I am just amazed at the brass neck of this, almost cannot find the words. How dare he.....
Clearly this is being orchestrated by Lord Mandelson. Please....the time has come for an election not bearing of souls and trying to tie back in the 'core Labour vote' or 'reconnecting' with one's social principles - call it what you will its just spin.
This Government pioneered spinning, when he was Chancellor he perfected it, to this day I am still staggered by the 10% tax issue and the arrogance of that decision. Many people talk of their Kennedy moment - where were you when Kennedy died? I think of the 10% moment; the point at which Labour betrayed its core voters.
Everything we see now we know is just being spun and is all media manipulation; probably with the good Damien at the back of it as well.
Please, Prime Minister, you have lost us [core Labour voters and all will never forgive you for 10%]. Whilst I admire the loyalty of Saga on this blog and his persistence with the cause I feel the time is up. This country needs a change. We borrowed £30B in the first two months; we are simply living beyond our means in an unsustainable way. It cannot continue. Paying people money to buy cars is no way to run an economy. It is a silly idea, taxes just being moved about and not even money we have earnt as a country; its borrowed from China. Please.....it must change, we have to live within our means. The world does NOT owe us a living. We should earn it by our own innovation and R&D.
Complain about this comment
#158:
Here is the fiction in full:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/20/gordon-brown-guardian-interview
I like the bit about being hurt by what people say. More like 'angered' by what people say. The only response you can make to the statement "I've thought about walking away" is a fairly obvious one whether you be Polly Toynbee, Charles Clarke or just about everyone on this blog.
Complain about this comment
Although not recently a labour voter, I have long respected and admired our current PM, along with a lot of other friends and family, which includes people of all ages and political persuasions. Sadly most of the Conservatives in our family are no longer with us, but I have plenty of good friends who are staunch supporters.
It is not Gordon Brown I have any issues with, but his predecessor. But I have found, when I put anything suggesting this on Nick's newslog my entries are treated as though I have some sort of screw loose!
Maybe I do... but then so do most of the people I know!
I heard Gordon Brown reported as saying he had no idea how much money was being invested in the sub prime mortgage market when he was chancellor.
Nor did I and I was reading press releases about property investments almost every day when he was chancellor. The press releases on property investments promised better returns than stocks and shares, but as most people in the business know, it takes skill and patience to make a steady return out of property and it was inevitable, but difficult to see at the time, these cleverly disguised "creative sub prime products" had no real substance or backing.
I also wanted to say I read somewhere on Nick's newslog that Charles E Hardwick is no longer with us. I just would like to say, how sorry I am. Although I am not necessarily a regular reader or contributor to the log, I loved his anecdotes and view on life and I will miss him greatly.
Complain about this comment
I am not surprised that GB is feeling battered and depressed. I would like to be able to feel some sympathy towards him, it's an impossibly difficult job he has. But I can't, hard as I (genuinely) try, I can't.
I agree with newtactic inasmuch as his predecessor was more deserving of our scorn, but looking at Brown's political record, the way in which he has conducted himself, based on friends', colleagues' and opponents' anecdotes, it looks to me like he is reaping what he has sown. He wasn't responsible for the international recession but the way he distanced himself from all of the UK's problems (notwithstanding a belated half-apology) as the man in charge of finances, is hard to swallow.
The public is now so attuned to Labour spin that this latest 'interview' is going to be taken for exactly that. It is sad to see a public figure in such a high office so ridiculed. It is only down to the paucity of his opposition that he has lasted this long. In fact, given the very unpredictable nature of politics, I would not write him off...but this does sound like a precursor to a stage-managed exit.
Complain about this comment
155 to 159 sicilian et al
I could have "some" respect for these "opinions" if I'd heard similar vitriol about the likes of the cynical "web-Cameron" tripe or the "look how green I am" cycling to work for the cameras ploy.
Your reactions are no less bitter and "mailesque" than they are predictable.
HOWEVER
On a positve note has anyone seen (on BBC4) I think the recent programme about the discovery and drilling for North Sea oil.
It gives a real insight into the Political and Economic backdrop of the 60's 70's and 80's and the massive and I mean massive injction of cash into UK plc and the exchequer from about 1980. Couple with that the equally massive injection from the sell off of the family silver (all the national utillities) it makes you wonder why there was no money left to invest in the NHS and Education?? An unparalelled and unprecedented windfall of wealth!! What happened to it all? . Bizarre how the re-writers of history claim some sort of economic nirvana took place! Very worth watching if you get chance, these programmes tend to do the rounds.
Complain about this comment
we don't get a sober assessment of Brown very often, do we? - the vitriol gets in the way - there hasn't been too much wrong with his policies, in my view - the big picture is he's effected a badly needed (and voted for) shift in favour of more spending on public services - although there's been waste ... as there always is when large sums of money are spent ... most fair minded people would agree that, by and large, public services have improved significantly - sure, the national debt is now a problem (everyone accepts that) but the principal reason for it being such a problem was the requirement ... a necessary evil ... to bail out the feckless, incompetent banking sector - Brown bears some responsibility for the severity of the economic crisis but, nevertheless, it is made in the USA and it is global in its impact - once it broke, Brown has reacted decisively and done pretty much the right things - under tremendous pressure too, and he deserves some credit there - he hasn't handled MPs expenses particularly well but, on that, give me Brown's floundering over Cameron's hypocrisy and ridiculous grandstanding any day of the week - if the economy picks up ... I'm sceptical but let's see ... then the election (with or without a new Labour leader) is not yet the foregone conclusion which many people feel it to be - I can't see a Labour win, true, but I can see a hung parliament
Complain about this comment
What's going on Gordon Brown is breaking my heart here!
"Could go tomorrow"
What the hell is stopping him? Certainly not the public!
Complain about this comment
Boo Hoo, poor old Gordon, he's been hurt by recent criticism and wishes he'd done some things differently.
Funny that, Gordon, as the UK economy has been badly hurt and we all wish you'd done a lot of things differently.
Still having got the economy in a mess by spending vast amounts of money we didn't have, I see your planning to get us out of trouble by spending vast amounts of money we don't have. Great, lesson learnt then.
Complain about this comment
#162:
The vitriol thing works both ways. Fair enough I and others are now completely cynical about Brown's every move but for good reason. His track record is not good when it comes either to competency or truth twisting spin. Cameron may prove to be no better when he is in high office, the difference being that as yet I don't dislike him as a person. If he proves to be as bad as Brown then he won't last long and your scepticism will be vindicated. I am not prepared to give Brown and Nu Labour another chance! 13 years is already far too long.
Complain about this comment
I suppose it would be consistent if Brown did walk away.
Both he and Blair have wrecked the economy between them and embroiled us in wars which seem to have achieved little except the deaths of thousands.
Safe and secure, rich and comfortable, Blair has already walked off and left the mess he created behind. Were Brown to do it as well would just add the final insult.
Complain about this comment
163 sagamix
Yes well, Mr S, I think you would say that, wouldn't you. An alternative view is that the problems we are in now were merely accelerated by the credit crisis. Sure, the credit crisis is worldwide and started in the USA. But the recession is local and is a consequence of over a decade of incompetence at the Treasury. Only in one single year (the year when the 3G mobile phone licenses were auctioned) has the government collected more than it has spent. In consequence there has been a steady build-up of debt which has merely accelerated since the recessionary collapse in tax revenues.
Do you realise how big our debt is? We spend more in loan interest than we do on defence. We spend so much on loan interest that selling the entire land stocks owned on our behalf by the government wouldn't pay a single month's interest. It is almost inevitable that we will see our national credit rating lowered, and that means even higher rates of interest in the near term future. The national debt isn't just "a problem" - we are AWASH with debt.
Saga, I really wish you would stop painting over the cracks and get real about the economic mess we are in.
Complain about this comment
Who is fighting against the tide
Attacked by many a million?
Is it Gordon or Mandy perhaps?
No, it's poem-hater Sicilian.
Complain about this comment
#168:
I agree. His complacency is boundless although there are occasional glimpses of reality with regard to Gordon Brown. I don't think there are many who would predict a hung parliament after another year of jobs and home losses and incomprehensible policy decisions.
Complain about this comment
#169:
Quote me one thread where I have stated a hate for poems. You've got me mixed up with someone else lad!
Complain about this comment
#169
At least get your facts right. I am fighting against the tide opposed by millions am I? I fear you could just be describing yourself after The Council Elections debacle.
Complain about this comment
Off to Denbys Wine Estate and Polesden Lacey now. I'll leave others to carry on the good fight!
Complain about this comment
173 sicilian29
And there was me thinking you would be sipping chianti with the local Godfather.
Complain about this comment
#163 Saga
It is not Brown's intent that is in question, it is his competence.
Somehow all the measures intended to help the low paid have actually worked against those on medium-low wages.
The child tax credit system, though well intentioned, causes working families undue stress. Part time workers have to monitor what thay earn for fear of losing credits, and are told they owe thousands one week then are told they have under claimed the next.
I know he came into politics for the right reasons but he cannot implement any policy without over complicating it.
Complain about this comment
How many times can they not get it?
I see the TImes leader today is on how the publication of the almost uniteligible "redacted" claims and reeipts has given MPs the vapours and they are trying to come up with an undetailed nor receipted list.
Big names supposedly in agreement are now walking away from this now it has hit the fan. Cameron "doesnt recall agreeing" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jeez how could you not say yes I did or no I didnt when asked but a weasel worded dont remember is just.....words fail me.
Complain about this comment
jr perry @ 168
I'm sorry but the numbers don't support what you're saying - our debt, as a proportion of GDP, is lower than that of most comparable nations ... USA, Japan, Italy, Germany (to name but a few) are all worse ... and the recession is no more severe for us than for others (the contractions in Germany, Japan, Spain are greater, for example) - that's not to say the UK economy isn't in a mess (it plainly is) but it is to say that blaming it principally on Brown's "profigate spending" is a sentiment driven more by political bias than objective analysis
Complain about this comment
coats @ 175
I agree with all that, he's complexed up the tax and benefit system to an absurd degree - but the charge that this economic (and debt) crisis is mainly due to his excessive public spending, and the global credit crunch a mere detail, is a bum rap - the exact opposite is the case, the global credit crunch is the issue, our level of public spending in the preceding years being on the margins of the problem - to not accept that, in my view, is a triumph of political bias over objectivity
Complain about this comment
I don't actually want Gordon Brown to walk away - I want him to call a general election. But given his voterphobic tendencies this is unlikely to happen until he can hold on no longer.
I want him to face verdict of the electorate for what he has done in the past few years, and to face the consequences of his actions at the ballot box. But given his McCavity tendencies and his cowardice, I'm not convinced that this will happen either.
The country really does need a change government wise. If New Labour genuinely feel that he is the best person for the job of PM, and there is no other possible leader in the PLP, then a general election should be called. The current situation is not acceptable and if there is no alternative, then they should let the electorate decide. If the Labour Party cannot bring out the required change, the electorate should be given the opportunity to do so.
Complain about this comment
160 newtacticd
You misunderstood my comment nobody has died! re the comment he made last year. Have you ever seen the film 'man on the moon'?
Complain about this comment
# 165 andy.
So, you'd rather he stayed then?
Complain about this comment
#179 strictlypickled
You seem to forget that the public will decide. They have the right to decide and they will at the appropriate time, in just under a year's time. We can't have an election everytime you think there should be one.
How about just relaxing and forgetting about an election until the day one is called. Then go out on the streets and campaign for your favorite candidate, and be happy.
Complain about this comment
Saga, lets have sources for your assertions, please.
I suspect you're blinded by your faith in the Labour Party and Ms Harman in particular.!
Complain about this comment
177 sagamix
Apologies for the delayed response.
Yes, I know very well that you can pull some figures out that suggest that we are not on our own in terms of national indebtedness or in terms of industrial contraction. But those figures are carefully selected, and your interpretation of them is too narrow. For example, what we choose to call National Debt doesn't include National Insurance and public sector pension liabilities; nor does it include liabilities attached to PFI. One of the further problems in the UK is the relatively high personal debt carried by the population at large. Taken together with quite high taxation levels, this means that the personal disposable income (which from a government point of view in this context now has to be thought of as much the margin of income available for further taxation) is very low. Unlike in other countries, national debt cannot ultimately be paid off by increasing taxation, because the money to do that simply doesn't exist. In simple words, because our economy is differently balanced from the US, Germany etc, the national indebtedness that we can cope with is also different and, specifically, less. That is why we are being threatened with a lowering of our credit rating where other nations are not.
I know how you like to dismiss criticism of Brown as political bias, but some time, you will have to remove the pink-tinted specs. Brown's part in this, which is fact and not bias, is that he took us to that limit by failing to balance national income and expenditure through all the years (bar one) of the Labour government. Even now, his rhetoric (very much for his personal short term electoral convenience) is entirely towards maintaining high expenditure levels in future years, which means that until the money runs out, all that will happen is that debt will continue inexorably to rise.
I can imagine a few hippies here and elsewhere saying "so what if the economy hits a brick wall?". At some point, probably not very far off (probably within the term of the next government if Brown were to be re-elected), the external cash supply required to run the economy as it currently is, will effectively be switched off. The pound will collapse. Imports, which we absolutely depend on, will dry up because they will be unaffordable. It will be like living during the Battle of the Atlantic, or, perhaps, like being in South Africa during the anti-apartheid sanctions. Frankly, Saga, we are, economically speaking, just a little way down a rather long, sharp slope, and Brown is pointing down the slope and telling everybody that's the way to go.
In the end, with no change of economic direction, living here is going to be almost unimaginably awful.
Complain about this comment
sagamix 177
You do not believe that old chestnut of our GDP from Government figures do you, that ours is low. Most people now believe our Government debt even with fiscal tightening will reach 100% of GDP and stay there for some time. That is why Standard and Poors the ratings agency was about to down grade us from the AAA status. I have no doubt this will happen some time in the future, this will mean the cost of borrowing will become much more expensive.
Complain about this comment
ref 174 xTunbridge
Um... apologies if this sounds pedantic... Chianti is from the Chianti region of Tuscany. Sicilian 29 would more likely be sipping a Marsala with the Godfather.
Although... Chianti is traditionally bottled in a fiasco, which brings us neatly back to Brown, and secret inquiries...
I'll get me hat.
Complain about this comment
#165 jrp
Your doomsday scenario has been repeated on an annual basis ever since Gordon became Chancellor. He has proved his critic wrong year after year.
Let's wait and see if he is proved right, yet again. I guess though, when he is shown to have got his forecasts right yet again, no-one will give him credit for doing so. Shame.
What colour tinted glasses do you wear?
Complain about this comment
#185 croftie
Nice to see you are back.
When all this happens, you can come back and tell us, "I told you so". Until then, it's just speculation on your part.
Complain about this comment
suse @ 185
You do not believe that old chestnut of our GDP from Government figures do you, that ours is low
another habit of yours (which I find very endearing) is that you respond to what I didn't say rather than to what I did - so, no, I don't believe (and didn't say) that our debt is low, but what it is (and what I indeed said) was that it was lower than many others, for example the countries I mentioned - IMF figures - as for our AAA, I expect that to go, it should have gone already, as should the AAA for quite a few other western nations - very few countries, or companies, should be AAA in this climate
diablo @ 183
refs for my assertions? ... please see above ... IMF figs, not in doubt
Complain about this comment
143. At 9:32pm on 19 Jun 2009, solpugid wrote:
141. At 8:57pm on 19 Jun 2009, StrictlyPickled wrote:
133,136 etc
Look a bit closer and you will find the jests in one or two of the "supposed serious" ones as well. Quite what do you suppose actually?
Yes, not liking yards of verse is a matter of taste. But while we are told there is no disputing about taste, there's no harm in declaring it. Is there?
Well, anybody can be wrong, so I looked closer. I discovered that the drivel being spouted as poetry is even worse than I first opined. No poetry, no wit, no taste, no nowt. I love yards of verse. I roll around in it with all the blissful joy of a dog rolling fox droppings, and I defend your right to express your opinion. Not to the death, obviously, but certainly to the point of a certain amount of personal inconvenience.
But not your poems, so I'll draw a line here and look forward to seeing you on the next blog.
Complain about this comment
sagamix 189
Sorry saga if I misinterpreted your post it was not intended, its just how it read to me. However I completely agree with jrperry 184 so its not worth repeating it.
Complain about this comment
182 wasowenright
"You seem to forget that the public will decide. They have the right to decide and they will at the appropriate time, in just under a year's time. We can't have an election everytime you think there should be one.
How about just relaxing and forgetting about an election until the day one is called. Then go out on the streets and campaign for your favorite candidate, and be happy."
=========================
I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at given my post in 173.
"You seem to forget that the public will decide. They have the right to decide and they will at the appropriate time, in just under a year's time. "
You must be kidding mate !!! Each day that passes means we are another day closer to getting this PG Tips advert of governemtn out of office. For me, that day can't come quick enough - and I suspect that many people agree with that view.
"We can't have an election everytime you think there should be one."
No we can't. But Gordon Brown said in his Guardian interview about "walking away". What did he mean by this? Is it likely to happen? What would happen if he did? The PM making such a statement is a significant comment and invites comment and opinion don't you think ? My earlier comments were my views on those points - is that OK with you ? My wish for an election is no reason to have one, but a PM "walking away" would be a good reason in many peoples eyes.
If Brown does walk away, does that mean an election or another "unelected PM" as Roy Hattersley described it ? If the PM is thinking and openly stating about possibly walking away then I find that concening and not really acceptable. I would like a the government to be led by a leader is committed to the job. A Laboutr alternative may no be any different, even Peter Mandelson said that you could not get a cigarette paper between the policies of any Lablour would be leader and the PM.
"How about just relaxing and forgetting about an election until the day one is called. Then go out on the streets and campaign for your favorite candidate, and be happy."
I'm just commenting on current events as they happen. The election will be here soon enough. As one poster said, Gordon Brown has marched Labour MPs to the Bernard Matthews processing plant. No vote required from the turkeys for Xmas, Xmas is coming to get them , and it's getting closer each day.
On a lighter note, I've always puzzled by your name wasowenright. Do you mean Michael Owen? The once golden who can to eminence in the late 1990s only to be relegated this season - the parallels with Gordon Brown are there !!!!!!
Complain about this comment
wasowenright 187
You said "Let's wait and see if he is proved right..." - an interesting thing to say. No, I am not going to fall into the bear trap of saying "no, let's not wait, because the consequences of his being wrong are to damaging".
But let's take the budget. Here we find first of all the anticipated current year borrowing figures, which all sane mainstream commentators now agree are optimistic (i.e. too small) by some proportion, possibly up to 20%. That's current news, it was in my paper (D Tel) yesterday.
Now let's look at the forward projection of expenditure to 2011, where the figures show a reduction of departmental expenditure overall of 7% - this is the cut that is needed to slow down the rate of debt growth (and so slow down the amount of extraction of debt interest from money that could otherwise be used for more worthwhile expenditure). This 7% is actually the same figure that the Tories use - it's just that it becomes 10% if you ring-fence the NHS, as the Tories have chosen to do. Now contrast with Brown's "Mr 10%" propaganda at PMQs this week, along with his new assertion that Labour will not make these cuts at all (to "maintain investment"). So under Labour we now no longer will have that 7% cut, and so no longer will we have the corresponding gradual control of debt and debt interest which is central to the budget forecasts (all that projection of sharp future growth) from 2011 onwards.
My point is, in two vital areas, we already have to acknowledge that the budget is wrong. The projections are wrong because the starting assumptions are already seen to be wrong. You said "Let's wait and see if he is proved right..." but as you can see, Brown is already wrong. You could say that we have already waited long enough.
My specs are crystal clear and untinted by the way. Thanks for your concern.
Complain about this comment
jrp @ 184
apologies for the delayed response
yes, you'd never hold down a position in the clown "rapid rebuttal" division, would you? - anyway, I can agree with one of your themes, which is, far from being "best placed" to handle the downturn ... a laughable piece of Gordonballs, that was ... we are particularly vulnerable, main reasons being our level of personal debt (which you say) and the fact we are so overweight property, financial services and paper shuffling (which you don't say) - where I differ is in the emphasis you place on our level of public spending in the years preceding the credit crunch and banking bailout - the way I see it, you can advance the argument that we overspent a little, that there was an overshoot, if you will, in the long overdue ... and mandated ... investment in better public services, but you cannot make a respectable case that this overshoot is the main (or even a particularly important) factor in where we are today - if the global CC (and consequent BB) hadn't come along, we would just be discussing whether 40 pc or 50 pc of GDP as national debt should be our equilibrium level - hardly an earth shattering matter - as regards the accounting fiddle which is PFI and the (I agree) worrying issue of the pensions burden/timebomb, well that's a different debate - it's really just this spin that Brown's profligate public spending is at the root of our problems that I want to nail
Complain about this comment
#184
I am a little amused by the talk of "indebtedness" since I thought that is something that not only affected individuals but also the banks and the many commercial interests that have not yet hit the deck. We are lead to believe that by far the majority of these debts are driven by "property" cooling and the increase in negative equity as a result.
So we seem to have a crisis in the "capital" that people and businesses hold that will impact on our available revenue year on year unless the economy returns to growth rather than recession. Individuals in debt without ever having had equity in property or otherwise do not impact on the economy unless their ability to meet repayments is halted.
So losing jobs in the economy is the worse thing that can happen is it not? That being the case then why have we been bailing banks out? Why wasn't there an injection of capital into the building and infrastructure of the country with tendering processes that advantaged the smaller builders and indigenous companies etc?
With disposable income injected into the economy then more jobs stay and less people make claims for benefit. Isn't the real issue in this country the fact that too much "public" money is going straight into the hands of foreign companies and individuals whose interest in UK plc is zilch (even in the Olympic projects on stream now)? Some of these people are in every sector of our market place and do not have UK people or their interests at heart and yet we throw money at them.
Complain about this comment
#193 jrperry
I'm glad you find what I say interesting. You have no choice but to wait, as Brown & Darling are making the decisions. Let's give them the space. In the past Gordon's projections for growth were so acurate that even the Telegraph gave up questioning them. The prediction Alistair gave for the return of growth in the economy for the last quater of this year were ridiculed when made and yet, he may have been a little pesimistic as growth may return in the Q3. If you wish to play the "If" game then the consquences of a Tory government getting in will be even more damaging.
Projections, Projections, projections, speculation, speculation, speculation. Look at the record and make your assessment from that. I suspect though, you have no care as to whether Brown/Darling team work or not because you want the Tories in. So, there's no objectivity in your post.
Just because you've read a slanted portrayal of the budget in the Telegraph, doesn't mean they are right. The record of GB over twelve years is second to none. Come back as the recession retreats and say, the same as I told croftie, "I told you so". But I don't expect you or she will be able to do so. Where did you find all these sane commentators? They have been proved wrong time and again. At the end of last year they were predicting the total collapse of the pound against the Euro. Less than one-for-one. Now look at it 1.1834 and rising.
As the election draws nearer and all this excited talk of change becomes more of a nightmare reality, and the Tories have to address their issues over Europe, I predict that Labour will be returned. The record over thirteen years speaks for it's self.
Let just wait and see. If you want to talk about visions for a fairer society, in the meantime, I'd be glad to battle with you on that one.
Complain about this comment
saga 194
It is all a matter of timing. We were heading for some degree of recession before the credit crunch. The signs were there - problems in the retail sector, contraction of the rental market, rising unemployment. The credit crunch accelerated a process that was going to happen anyway, essentially by providing new ways for money to fall out of the "real" economy. I don't think the generally pro-recession position of the industrial economy is a point of contention between us, but the reasons may be.
I would say that we were extracting too much money from the economy to pay for debt interest (mostly), when at the high levels of tax that we have, economic stability could only have been properly maintained by similar sums of money being used for strategic industrial stimulus. In other words, I'm arguing that our companies which, after all, are where the recession is hottest, would have been better placed if they hadn't had so much money sucked out of them in the form of tax to repay debt interest.
In the above, I aluded to industrial stimulus, and that would be a second tranche of my argument. Spending has indeed been profligate throughout the period of the Labour government. If that spending had been with UK companies, then it would have been much less of a problem, because the money would have been recycled, but in the main it was not. Look at the building projects, various defence capital projects, re-equipment on the railways, even the surprisingly substantial ID cards industry. All of these have involved big contracts with foreign industry. Much of the project labour in the UK has been done by migrant contract workers, so the impact of sucking money out of UK people and industry for so-called "investment" has, in fact, been to pump large amounts of that same money overseas, beyond the scope of our corporation tax, not building the UK skills base and not bringing down our unemployment levels.
So, I'm not arguing that government economic policy would have seen us into a recession right now without the credit crunch, but without a radical change of direction we would have been in a recession in a couple of years anyway. And, of course, in charge of that economic policy throughout has been one G. Brown.
Complain about this comment
#197 jrp
So now you resort to saying that even if we can't pin the blame on GB for the credit crunch, we can speculate that we would have gone into recession anyway. That a very simple game isn't it.
I seem to remember that the Tory 1980s and 90s had three recessions, which we all had to pick our way through as best we could. So, one in thirteen years, isn't that bad is it. If we accept the capitalist position that recessions are a necessary, clearing-out phase, that economies have to go through of course.
When GB announced an end to boom and bust, I think it was the regularity the the Tories had managed that he refered to not that we will never have a "down-turn".
Complain about this comment
177. At 1:23pm on 20 Jun 2009, sagamix wrote:
jr perry @ 168
Sorry, saga, can't let you get away with that. It depends what you term 'debt'. doesn't it. Brown has always been very, very good at Enron accounting.
PFI, the taxpayers 'help' to banks, the unfunded pension liability of public pensions, guarantees to Network Rail are all off balance sheet, according to Brown. Add this to the debt to which he admits and the total overall debt for future generations runs into many times the UK GDP.
And personal debt has exploded in the last 12 years, from somewhere slightly over £500bn in 1997 to nearly £1.5tn now. A three fold increase when, according to Gordon's 'inflation rate' (is that CPI, RPI, RPIX, RPIY?)prices have only risen 23% in that time.
The UK banks have exploded on the back of the failure of the US housing and mortgage market. It has yet to take the horrendous losses that are and will be forthcoming from the explosion of an even bigger property and debt bubble in the UK.
And, Mr S, can you tell me where the hell our Great Chancellor, 'Prudence', the architect of the UK finances for the last 12 years will be getting even further money to have a second bail out of the UK banking system?
Because as sure as eggs is eggs, it's coming.
Complain about this comment
@ 197
hey come on, jr perry, you're sounding like an economist now - your point about a lot of the money going to foreigners is not one I've heard before ... what about BJs for BWs? ... and yet I now hear it twice in a single hour! (given the bloggerperson @ 195 seems to be saying that very same thing in their last para)
Complain about this comment
You can always keep out of a recession if you throw sufficient money at it. The Tories did not and we had three recessions - at the end of which PSBR was falling and the economy was growing.
Cue Labour - any hint of a recession e.g. post 11-9 or dot-com crash - throw money at it - either by spending or encouraging other to spend.
Result. Recessions do not happen BUT government and personal debt explodes. Eventually the government (and borrowers) run out of money to spend - and the whole pack of cards comes down.
This will ALWAYS happen in a debt-fueled economy - for the simple reason that people have to pay back more than they borrow - and the only way more money can be circulated is by borrowing it again - but the extra money then has to be paid back with interest.
And so the vicious cycle continues.
Complain about this comment
blue matter @ 199
straight back on three things from that ...
1. PFI
this is off balance sheet financing - a way of paying through the nose for a project in order to keep the liabilities off the books - it's very good for the private sector consultants and contractors who are lucky enough to get a piece of the action - a particularly clowny approach to public sector investment ... not surprising since they thought it up ... and I spit on it - the numbers involved, however, are not large enough to transform the argument
2. pensions
these numbers are large but it's not moot because neither we nor other countries have ever counted this as part of the national debt
3. UK property bubble
hasn't been one - a myth - property was undervalued for many years and what we experienced was a long overdue upwards correction, driven by lower interest rates and the democratisation of credit - overshot a little (maybe 20 pc) ... like markets always do ... but that's all
Complain about this comment
198 wasowenright
I have no problem with distinguishing the credit crunch from the recession. They are quite fundamentally different things. Why should this be a "resort", as you put it?
Then you launch into some terrace chants on recessions in the Thatcher/Major period, which is well outside what was being talked about. I'm posting on "where are we now?" and "how do we get out of here?". Conversely, for you, recessions seem to be like opponents' goals in a football match: Labour 3, Conservatives 1 as we approach half-time. Did you really read my posts, or did you just filter them for what you thought might need to be rebutted?
Just to make things clear, my point is that a significant reason for the parlous state we find ourselves in now is domestic economic policy, (c) Gordon Brown. Since the latest thing I heard from Brown is that, in order to reinforce his "Mr 10%" propaganda, there will now no longer be the budgeted 7% overall departmental expenditure cuts. So there is no longer a route out of extreme debt and high levels of current account interest payment, which act to reinforce the recession. Therefore until we have a radical change of economic policy direction, we are on a road to ruin the like of which the majority of people have never seen before. Now, if you have a fact-based argument that this is not so, let's hear it.
Complain about this comment
201 weejonnie
Correct and well put.
Complain about this comment
Mr.Robinson, you have not gone on another holiday, so why have you not commented on the latest Daily Telegraph allegation that some M.Ps. and Peers have been claiming for non-existent Council Tax?
This is an extremely serious matter, which, if proven, should lead to criminal court action, or at least to Police enquiries under the criminal laws.
There are many aspects to this complaint, first are they true, should the newspaper keep on drip feeding and so on, what is your view on this?
Complain about this comment
205 b-b-jack
No idea what absentee Nicks opinion may be but I believe it is essential that the Telegraph releases its information in carefully sized packages.
If they had put the lot out in one the assimilation would have been impossible and much may have been missed.
As a previous Labour person I never thought I would say God bless the Telegraph, swallowed hard at one pound sixty for a copy today with all the dirt in it.
How the Govt has the nerve to run the benefit cheats ads at the moment I do not know. Surely they dont think this will divert our attention from their dipping and flipping.
Fav bit in the Telegraph mag, GB at 9/4 sitting outside a duckhouse wearing suspiciously like correctional institution clothing.
I would say that I think those MPs who have claimed little or nothing should have been given a separate section. Otherwise Telegraph, keep it up.
Complain about this comment
Mr Brown was forced to defend his parliamentary expense claims after The Telegraph disclosed last month that he had switched the designation of his second home from London to his Scottish constituency to enable him to carry on claiming after he moved into his grace and favour flat in Downing Street.
None of these controversies would have come to light if The Telegraph had not obtained copies of MPs expenses, as details such as addresses, suppliers identities and correspondence with the fees office have been blacked out or deleted altogether from the officially published versions.
Mr Brown also repaid more than £180 to the fees office after this newspaper pointed out that he had claimed for utility bills at the wrong address at the time he flipped the designation of his second home. Again, this information would have remained secret had it not been for the leak.
The biggest hole in the information released to the public is the addresses of MPs second homes when they claim the additional costs allowance.
Mr Browns expenses for the 2006-07 financial year show that he flipped the designation of his second home from London to Scotland on Sept 17, 2006, just 10 days after Tony Blair announced he was going to stand down as Prime Minister.
Complain about this comment
Vince Cable and Frank Field...
Oh!..why-o-why did neither of you apply to be speaker of the house.
I am so bitterly disappointed!
Complain about this comment
Maybe because neither of them are authoritative in their manner, BankSlickerminustheR?
They are good, thoughtful, intelligent members of the House but I think Ann Widdecombe has the experience AND the presence for the job. Still, that's just my thoughts!
Complain about this comment
True to form just a day after showing a minimal amount of contrition in a Guardian article Gordon Brown says in a News of The World piece that he has no intention of stepping down. We were right to be so cynical about the original claims.
Complain about this comment
#209:
The problem with Anne Widdecombe to my mind is her high pitched, smarmy voice. The thought of her constantly calling out 'Order' fills me with dread.
Complain about this comment
#203 jrperry
The credit crunch is indeed, different to the recession, but the former caused the latter. They need to be considered as one. As I've said before,when people have tried to dismiss the anti-Thatcher argument, by concentrating on the, "here and now", the here and now is a result of history, it can't be seen in isolation.
You talk of, "the here and now" and, " how do we get out of here?". then go on to call for a "radical change in economic policy". Unfortunately, you don't give us a clue as to what that should be.
You try and give your argument credibility by claiming facts, but you don't give any, just opinion.
You then try to add some humour by using tyhe football analogy but get the score wrong. It Tories 3, Labour 1, in a game that the one with the lowest score is seen as the winner. You say we are approaching half-time? This is a game without end. Where did you get half-time from?
Yes, I did read your post but I suspect if I want to read the next one, I just have to get a copy of the Telegraph.
One thing I do think we can agree on is a radical change in economic policy. I don't think we will agree on the direction in which that change should be, but that is a much better cause for us to argue over rather than whether you would make a better Chancellor, or me, or Gordon, or Alistair, or Gideon.
Here are a few ideas.
Pull down the Houses of Parliament and build a Parliament in the round, similar to Europe. Introduce a form of Propotional Represention for voting, and make voting compulsory.
Land reform. Socialise all land.
Introduce a maximum wage, GBP 150,000.
Re-introduce credit controls.
Encourage the transfer of business ownership to the people who are employed in it. Begining with companies of 50 employees or more.
There is more but not now.
Complain about this comment
I think that the whole affair should be held in secrecy. I understand the call that the British Public should hear what went on. I have a problem in that the british public will only hear the media spin of what went on as most are too busy to read the entire proceedings, facts will be highlighted and taken out of context by your ilk of people who pretend to understand what goes on but in fact understand very little except for your own need to make what you said in the past seem right.
Complain about this comment
#213 steve
Good point.
Complain about this comment
213 notfooledsteve
You are right that the media will pick out the juicy bits , that is their way and we all know it.
You have a rather jaundiced opinion of your fellow posters integrity. I assume that is whom you are referring to when you say ".....your ilk of people......your own need to make what you said in the past seem right".
Sir if my assumption is correct I am insulted but will survive. Surprised at waso not noticing what you were calling him though!
One last point just how is the lack of WMDs going to be spun, highlighted and taken out of context ?
Complain about this comment
213, Regrettably, you may be right.
We elect the government and, as such, they are our "servants" although we TRUST them to do the right and honourable thing by us at all times.
Politicians are a breed apart, in it for various reasons, not least for their own selves (as we have discovered).
Even though the Iraq War Inquiry may now indeed be held more openly I am convinced that they will only say what it is in THEIR interests to say.
One big reason to have a parliament as Jerry Springer suggested - ie they have their own careers and actually become MP's on voluntary basis of their own convictions and with their hearts. Wanting to make a difference for the country, not themselves.
Service not Self. Good Motto.
And whilst we are about it - do they have principle accountabilities, job descriptions, yearly assessments and self assessments? Do they submit a "happy sheet" to us the voters so we can say how we think things are going and whether or not WE are satisfied en masse?
Not too daunting a procedure in this highly technical day and age, is it?
Complain about this comment
#213
Surely we are way beyond the "things we said in the past", into the realms of the things that have been said up to very recently about Iraq and Afghanistan and now Iran and Pakistan. And we are surely too embroiled in the scandals that took place in Downing Street, the Palace of Westminster, and the restaurants and diners attended by MPs, civil servants and hacks from the BBC and elsewhere, for this to be another "old boy's chat".
And a war is not something to get sanctimonious about since the lives it has taken are not those of the people who sent us into battle. The ire over Iraq has not been developed through sedition; it has arisen from ordinary people being incredulous over the many lies that have masqueraded as explanations as to how we got to be in these countries at all. And don't we owe all those of our own who have died and the many thousands who have perished as a consequence of our presence in Iraq a decent and honest recounting of what really went on?
The US has been lining up Iran for a long time. Obama may not be prepared to be manoeuvred into a corner but will he last longer than four years? If only to prevent another game of charades when the US call for aid to "invade" Iran by force or stealth we must learn from our past mistakes and at least know what we must do to prevent another tragedy of misjudgement occurring. Maybe we do not have Blair at the helm but isn't there another slick customer waiting in the wings to make us pay for not having a leader to elect?
Complain about this comment
#217 bully_baiter
Good post. Things need to be brought out into the open. the justificaion for the war and now the over long occupations are flimsy at best. The armaments companies have done very well thank you very much.
Unfortunately you comment on Iran is consistent with pressure from the armaments industries. In he First Gulf War the USAF had a "good war", with the fly by wire bombs being laser targetted to detonation with camera pictures serving as a great sales pitch video. The current theatres are almost exclusively on the ground with limited air support.
The bomb Iran campaign is to appease the powerful USAF armament supplier companies. If we have full and open enquiries about wars these lobby groups will have less political influence. Going to war should always be at a last resort, even more so when none of our fearless leaders families are in the Armed Forces. Maybe this should be a pre-requisite in politics in this country: like US Senator John McCain's son is in the US Marines and has served in the Afghan theatre.
Maybe Princes William and Harry should be allowed to serve on the front line. The responsibilty of their welfare would be placed firmly on the political classes and act as a further deterrent to going to war. On Iraq many of the mistakes were down to political intervention over-riding military decisions, but they happened on both sides of the pond. Do you think that America's poodle will do America's bidding once again and keep the enquiry private?
Complain about this comment
212. At 09:20am on 21 Jun 2009, wasowenright wrote:
Here are a few ideas.
Pull down the Houses of Parliament and build a Parliament in the round, similar to Europe. Introduce a form of Propotional Represention for voting, and make voting compulsory.
Land reform. Socialise all land.
Introduce a maximum wage, GBP 150,000.
Re-introduce credit controls.
Encourage the transfer of business ownership to the people who are employed in it. Begining with companies of 50 employees or more...
I agree with all your above suggestions, and would vote for them.
Except:
Pulling down the Houses of Parliament would be an unreasonable act of vandalism. They could be used for many other things. Hopefully things that didn't involve rock concerts, hamburgers or bowling.
Forcing people to vote who have no interest in politics, or who would not be motivated to vote otherwise would only lead to trouble. Silly votes for parties such as the BNP and UKIP for example, because the consequenses would not be considered.
Complain about this comment
BankslickerminustheR 208
I think Frank Field and Vince Cable are far more useful in the positions they hold at the moment. Particularly Frank Field who has worked so hard to get the 10p tax debacle sorted out. It would be a great shame to lose either to the role of Speaker.
To be honest I do not think any of the candidates for Speaker inspire much confidence in the public especially the dreadful John Bercow who has had pretty bad expense problems. However the best out of the bunch would be Ann widdecombe because the public do know her and I believe there is a certain amount of trust in her.
I do understand Sicilians reservations about her voice though.
Complain about this comment
Complain about this comment
212 wasowenright
Just for clarity, I made the points in my earlier posts that
- over a period of time (12 years, in fact) UK national debt had been increased through successive budgets being unbalanced
- high levels of taxation, corporate and personal, had resulted over that period, partly through increased interest charges and partly through maintaining a high level of spending on so-called "investments", resulting in a corresponding high level of drainage of funds, especially from UK companies
- significant portions of government expenditure on a wide range of projects had been with foreign companies and using temporary labour imported from overseas. Therefore government expenditure, resulting from abstraction of very large amounts of money from the UK economy, did not benefit the unemployed, did not raise the UK labour skills base; additionally, profits arising were generally beyond the scope of UK taxation.
These policies (closely associated throughout with Mr Brown) led the UK economy to be prone to recession. Additionally, before the credit crunch, signs were present indicating that severe economic difficulties were impending. I therefore argued that the credit crunch did not cause the recession, but merely accelerated it, by providing further means for removing money from the UK economy.
I thought I had made it clear enough (though perhaps not clear enough for wasowenright) that the principal problems in the economy are debt, payment of debt interest and expenditure exceeding available revenue. The solution, acknowledged in the budget and by the Conservatives, but no longer individually by Mr Brown, it would seem, is to reduce debt by maintaining current overall levels of taxation but reducing current account expenditure. This is the policy change that I referred to. I suspect, however, that you were alone in missing it in my earlier arguments.
Since Brown this week said that Labour would maintain expenditure levels, and since it is clear that there is no source of additional taxation revenue or other revenue (such as from asset sales) on the scale required, then the only prospect available to the UK economy is greater debt. The latest dire news on government borrowing, which is running higher than forecast in the budget, was indeed in the D Telegraph (and the Guardian, Times, Independent.... even the BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8106607.stm late last week).
Once our borrowing levels reach a certain point, we will lose our "highly safe" credit rating (which sagamix was surprisingly cool about), which will push up our borrowing costs even further. In the end, our currency will slip significantly below even the low level that it is currently at, making imports, on which we all depend, unaffordable, and therefore having a severe impact on the quality of life of each and every individual in the land.
The only realistic solution is a radical redirection of economic policy, towards reduction of debt. As noted already and explained in my earlier posts, this can only be achieved by reductions in expenditure, since there is no scope for maintaining current expenditure by increasing taxation or other revenue.
Wasowenright, I see nothing in your post that addresses these issues. You have no hope of finding a solution, because it is clear you don't understand where the problem came from in the first place.
So far as your purported solutions are concerned, rearranging Parliament has no inherent effect at all, nor does a maximum wage or turning all companies over 50 employees into workers' cooperatives. However, your suggestion of socialising all land is worth considering, since it increases the government's saleable asset base. Just to be clear, that means the government takes over ownership of your house without compensation, sells the land to an outside organization (e.g. the Chinese sovereign wealth fund), allowing a capital revenue to repay UK government debt, while you become a tenant. That would work, but I volunteer your house ahead of mine.
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown must be the most politically inept prime minister ever now.
Can anybody ever remember when he made a correct decision himself? His only good decisions seem to be forced upon him by some outcry or other or some obvious base reality that simply had to be dealt with.
We want political leaders with vision, every time it seems Gordon Brown has to fall over political logs in the path before he recognises their existence.
He can not even see logs in front of him wearing yellow high his jackets with a sign in letters 10 feet tall next to it saying ,, beware trip hazard' He still trips over it politically!!
He rules simply by his capacity to carry on no matter how many bruises, cuts and blows to the head he has suffered. Like a boxer who has stepped in the ring for one more fight he has become adanger to himself and what he represents. But has anybody got the guts to help him by telling hi9m the truth about his personal situation and that of the labour parties?
No!
Our leaders are cowards who serve themselves first, their political party second and the nation a very poor third.
Jericoa
Complain about this comment
#209 & 211
Both posts provide excellent reasons for Anne Widdecombe having a shout! If her high pitched voice grates then perhaps MPs will not wish to get quite so excited...
But on a more serious note I agree with Susan-Croft: we don't appear to have anyone with the guile and panache required to sort all the naughty boys and gals out... and do not have a stain on their character.
It is a great pity the Speaker cannot be co-opted.
Complain about this comment
notfooledsteve 213
I feel that may be a little harsh on us all, as I believe that most people on here try to get at the truth and learn from other posts. However the media in the form of newspapers has been very useful to us recently because without them we would never have found out about the true extent of MP's expenses debacle.
I do believe the Iraq inquiry should be held in public for the sake of the families that have lost loved ones. We must for the future learn lessons about what went on behind closed doors which led to such devastating consequences in loss of lives and has cost so much money. It may also help to heal the wounds between our own people who do not agree with our foreign policies and have become alienated from our society. It may also improve our standing in the World if we are seen to be open and transparent about what actual decisions were taken for the UK (with te USA) to invade Iraq.
The Falklands war was very different in my opinion and therefore the inquiry could be held in private. From what I gather most of the public supported it. There does not seem to be any difficulty in the reasons on why we executed the Falklands war as the people are British and therefore there was an obligation upon Britain to protect them. It was also the Falklands that were invaded by Argentina, therefore we did not strike the first blow. This was not the case with Iraq, as we were the ones invading a sovereign nation that had not threatened and was not a threat to us as it turned out. There were no weapons of mass distruction.
People must be held to account for this war no matter how difficult this is to achieve. If not this will remain a black mark on our history. After all this was a war that changed the world in many ways and some kind of resolution must be found.
Complain about this comment
#223:
True. His capacity to attract self inflicted harm knows no bounds. As I said on a previous thread he is a classic example of someone who reacts to potential problematic situations rather than being proactive and nipping them in the bud.
Complain about this comment
#226:
Thinking about it more carefully Mandelson seems like an intelligent sort of chap even although I dislike his persona. Why has he alligned himself so closely to a man who is nothing short of a walking disaster? Does he have an alterior motive?
Complain about this comment
#227 sicilian29
This might provide your ulterior motive:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/5587735/We-cant-have-an-election-until-its-too-late.html
Euro Commission is desperate to keep David Cameron at bay until the Treaty of Lisbon is ratified says David Hannan. He contends that Mandelson is prepared to pay the very highest price of destroying the Labour Party, in order to fulfil the Euro dream.
Sinister stuff.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
sicilian29
Its called power, Mandelson enjoys having power over people and gaining power for himself. A good name for him would be Kingmaker (as in Warwick the Kingmaker who helped to make kings to gain power for himself and hold power over them) I think its as simple as that.
It also helps him get certain things he wants, for instance to move Britain closer to the EU. As he has declared lately we should engage more with the EU and join the Euro.
Complain about this comment
Hi Nick
Since the blog has been chewing the fat about consultaion on the Iraq War Inquiry...any reason why the Beeb and the resident bloggers haven't picked up on the item on Independent Television News Limited 2009 ? .....
"Downing Street denies reports Tony Blair urged Gordon Brown to hold the Iraq War inquiry in secret. It is alleged the former prime minister - who took Britain into the conflict - warned the hearings would amount to a 'show trial' if they were held in public. He is said to have communicated that view to his successor via the Cabinet Secretary, Sir Gus O'Donnell, fearing that a direct conversation would be leaked."
Nick Clegg has commented on it but ,apparently, nobody else. any thoughts?
Complain about this comment
#231:
So are you saying that The Cabinet Secretary leaked the information? How else could the conversation have come out into the open unless there is a mole in his office?
Complain about this comment
#222 jrp
I think I do have an idea where these problems came from. They originated in the freeing up of markets during the Thatcher years. It is as simple as that. I will admit to you that I am not an economist, and that I have no idea how many on this blog would consider themselves to be one. I guess we all have an experience which leads us to conclusions as to how our society should be managed.
The one thing I do know is that for every economic situation, you can find an economist to support the status quo and one to decry it. So what value are they anyway?
Where are the economists who predicted the demise of the pound just nine months ago? The Today programme had them queueing at the door, speculating that the pound will be worth less than the Euro come January. Since then, apart from a few dips along the way, it has risen to above 1.18. Is this a good thing or not? When it was low, there were just as many correspondence saying it was good for our exporters, as cried over the devaluing of our currency. Who's right? Rresumably, now it's gone back up, the situation is reversed.
I say that we are just tinkering with a lash-up that was caused by the housewife in number 10. Who just saw things in the most simplistic of terms and has led the country into the jaws of globalised capitalism.
Now I don't blame you for standing your ground if you are one of the gainers on the international money markets, or you have a bankful of stocks that rise as others toil in the sweat-shops of Asia. We all have to fight our own corner. If you are one, then you will put forward an argument for "Greed is Good". If you are not a major beneficiary of the globalised capital, but you support it because you have been convinced that the crumbs you receive are the best you can hope for, then you are a fool.
Pulling down the Houses of Parliament will be the first step toward pulling this country out of it's obsession with history and make it think of the future. That is why it will have an effect on the economy. It will begin the process of allowing the electorate to ask how we want this country run.
I agree that the Labour Party has failed in the changes it has always promised but that is because the hidden ruling class, that is the Civil Service, prefer to keep things as they are. Change is hard work for them. At the top, they came from the Private Schools and their children will go to Private Schools and as long as no one is allowed to halt their gravy train, then they'll keep working for them. That is why Labour governments get into difficulty, the civil service can create havoc when it wants to.
So, there is another change. As in the US an administration brings in it's own civil service. The lie that has been perpetuated for at least two hundred years that we have an a-political civil service should be exposed for what it is, a lie.
As for your argument for the cutting of expenditure, that's great if you don't need public services. If you're ok then who cares? Did you listen to the moneybox programme earlier in the week? Oh! yes, full of people who were looking to get state funded care for their parents, so they can inherit the value of the family home. So, where will the care come from for them, all see their parents as successful having worked hard to create a pot, and now they have to use it for care homes. It's not fair they say, is there some way that we can manipulate the ownership of the house in order that it doesn't count when the assessment for the state funded care is made?
We hear calls for wanting it all ways. We want lower taxes, lower public spending, but we want to inherit our parents house.
Greed, it is all greed. Socialism is a credible alternative for so many aspects of our life. We just have to be brave enough to take it on.
Complain about this comment
To WAR!
The Blairites cackled and crowed, to revive their rancid poll rating.
With ChimpanBush aping Sapiens, to exploit xenophobia and hating.
But how and who to exterminate for the West's self inflicted ills.
A mirage of WMDs secreted in Iraq, should do to provide the thrills.
Now the dust has settled, the blood of innocents congealed.
Blairy Brownites conspire, desperately, the truth is concealed.
Yet the sweet scent of death, the sight of disemboweled child.
For justice, truth be revealed, so that Labour's lies be reviled.
Ineptitude, now thats a word that sums up Tyrant Brown.
His attitude and arrogance have dragged Britannia down.
While in the shadows evil lurks, in the form of Mandle-Foy.
To further all his selfish aims, there are none he won't destroy.
Brown and Foy, however, are not alone in their devilish guise.
Never forget that many more are as adept at spinning lies.
The foundations of our democracy were the blueprint for the Free.
Demolished now by selfish greed, the WAR of Left Wing lunacy.
Complain about this comment
By King James, Blair's true name, revealed in Prophecy.
Risen from beneath parched desert and desolate sea.
An affront to the lord, in Quartet, now stalking Galilee.
At Megiddo this beast is revealed by one and by three,
Aye Blair's infernal title is indeed- BLASPHEMY!!!
Complain about this comment
223. At 1:09pm on 21 Jun 2009, Jericoa wrote:
Gordon Brown must be the most politically inept prime minister ever now.
Can anybody ever remember when he made a correct decision himself?
He is right in deciding not hold a general election. To do so when he knows he would lose it would be a crowd-pleaser, but otherwise a pretty stupid decision.
Complain about this comment
230. At 2:47pm on 21 Jun 2009, Susan-Croft wrote:
sicilian29
Its called power, Mandelson enjoys having power over people and gaining power for himself. A good name for him would be Kingmaker (as in Warwick the Kingmaker who helped to make kings to gain power for himself and hold power over them) I think its as simple as that.
How about 'Zimri'?
'...all the chiefs were princes in the land
and at the head of these did Zimri stand,
A man so various that he seemed to be
not one, but all mankind's epitome'
Dryden (Absalom and Achitophel). Now he was a proper poet.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
After the Tory sleaze and arrogance, I had hoped Labour might be different. But the Blair / Brown regime can be summarised in ten words of lies.
"White than white. WMD. 45 minutes. No boom and bust."
Complain about this comment
Hmm.....
My Duality revealed in the name of Zimri.
Which of them do you think best describes me?
There is folly in your statement - Now he was a proper poet.
There is no definition of Proper poetry.
Poetry is a very personal thing.
I don't mind if you love or hate my ramblings.
At least you read them and they stir you up enough to comment.
Job done I would say.
If only the words of Gordon Brown were half as effective.
Complain about this comment
Ref 238
Distress call from Invader ZIM.
New Labour has emplyed satellite technology to disrupt my communication.
I have rerouted this via the GPS satellite system in a truncated form so as not to arouse further suspicion.
Despite the message having passed through several filters to clean it up. Hopefully enough of the meaning still remains.
Message 743211298
Yet another custard pie splats all over Balls.
While over a barrel the shrewish Cooper falls.
Turnip headed Wurzel, the one that's stuffed with Straw.
We are all left wondering, who the hell is Ben Bradshaw?
Washing campaign money, look it's haemorrhoidal Peter Hain.
Reeling off these ministers names is sending me insane!
There's two made of rubber, the Brothers Milliband.
Toxic Mandle-Foy has them eating from his hand.
Of course then there's Gordon Brown, the vile wheezy man.
Don't forget old Gordo's Darling, who's career's down the pan.
Labour employs much nepotism in the aid of flower pot men.
I'm not talking of Bill, but the venerable hierarchy of Benn.
Value for money? Let's guess how much Ainsworth?
The cheque's in the post from Johnson's enormous girth.
Hello it's Harriet Harman, born with a silver spoon.
Positive discriminator, minorities everywhere will swoon.
There are many more clowns in the new labour ranks.
When they all retire they'll be directors of our Banks.
Complain about this comment
jr perry @ 222
here's the thing ... you are RIGHT to say we have a debt crisis - not just government debt but certainly including government debt, it's too high, going higher, and it's not sustainable - you're also right (it follows, actually) that we have to cut public spending - that has to (and will) happen whichever party is in power - but (a political point) we have to protect the most vulnerable and (an economic point) we have to guard against cutting too savagely, too quickly ... less the medicine both cures and kills the patient ... and on both those counts, I'd rather have Labour making the decisions than the Tories - where (IMO) you go off the deep end ... and into political bias territory ... is your assertion that, even without the credit crunch and the banking bailout, we were heading for big trouble - don't think so - without that shock to the system, we would just be having a fairly mild debate about whether, after a few years of higher than usual (but necessary and mandated) spending on public services, it was time to rein it in a little and shift back the other way - the normal cycle of politics/economics - what has tranformed that into the rather more lurid "my children's children" type concern about debt which we're seeing now ... a valid concern, btw, I'm not saying otherwise ... is the impact (on debt) of the credit crunch and the banking bailout - given that neither of those two things are the result of Brown's too high (say you) level of public spending, it follows that to attribute the debt crisis to the level of public spending in recent years fails the logic test - or, to put that another way, it's wrong - so, jrp, I agree with you as to where we are, but I disagree as why we got here - and I agree with you what needs to be done, but I disagree as to who should do it, how it should be done, and how quickly it should be done - just read all that back and, yes, can confirm that I'm pretty happy with it as an even handed summary of this thorny issue
Complain about this comment
Iraq was on the receiving end of Blair and Bushes version of: -
BOOM!
and
BUST!
BOOM went the bombs of Smarmy Blair and Barmy Bush
BUST went the buildings, Iraqi people turned to mush.
BOOM went the Oil prices, was that Bushes ultimate aim?
BUST went British Industry as Blair played his dangerous game!
BOOM went Blair's bank balance after, timely, he stood down.
BUST went our economy, power reliquished to Tyrant Brown.
BOOM went sub prime mortgages, to the Government's delight.
BUST went the banking system, losing our billions over night.
The Buck must stop with Bush, Blair and ultimately Brown.
Complain about this comment
Boom then Bust, it's Blairite greed and blood lust.
Brown's unjust, so who in the hell can we trust.
Bang then clash, an engineered market crash.
Blair makes a dash, pockets stuffed with all our cash.
Complain about this comment
242. At 5:46pm on 21 Jun 2009, sagamix wrote:
jr perry @ 222
...we were heading for big trouble - don't think so - without that shock to the system, we would just be having a fairly mild debate about whether, after a few years of higher than usual (but necessary and mandated) spending on public services, it was time to rein it in a little and shift back the other way - the normal cycle of politics/economics - what has tranformed that into the rather more lurid "my children's children" type concern about debt which we're seeing now ... a valid concern, btw, I'm not saying otherwise ... is the impact (on debt) of the credit crunch and the banking bailout - given that neither of those two things are the result of Brown's too high (say you) level of public spending, it follows that to attribute the debt crisis to the level of public spending in recent years fails the logic test - or, to put that another way, it's wrong
I agree with just about of that. However, if we are considering the problem in terms of 'our children's children' (or perhaps even a shorter period of time), then surely we must include the affects of climate-change into the equation, The impact of that on levels of public spending and 'credit' is so enormous as to make any current predictions and strategies fairly meaningless. I'm not suggesting that they are pointless; only that they are meaningless in anything but the very short term unless there is an attempt to factor in the inevitable impact of climate-change on the economy.
Of course, if you were only considering the affect of economic policy on an election result, then climate-change is irrelevent, but as you suggest, 'our children's children' will demand that our noble leaders take a longer and broader view.
Complain about this comment
ref 245
The oil companies have spent millions from their PR budgets in their attempt to have the alarming expression "global warming" replaced by the more cuddly "climate change".
Seems to have worked a treat.
Complain about this comment
archoptimist 231
Yes I heard the same story on Sky that Tony Blair tried to persuade Brown not to hold a public inquiry. That may be spin though and just a way of getting Brown off the hook for opting for a private instead of public inquiry.
However, I was more interested in what Lord Butler apparently said which was that if the media had asked the right questions at the time of his inquiry he would have been able to bring Blair down by his answers. Therefore one must conclude there is something to hide.
Complain about this comment
Its_an_Outrage 237
Very nice, I can see we are all into poetry now. How about though a spot of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, the Rime of the Ancient Mariner to discribe the Blair years. As the main person had to carry an albatross round his neck, as punishment, could this be why Blair had to put up with Brown like an albatross round his neck when he was in office.
Complain about this comment
so ... a new week upon us and one can't help wondering (can one?) what the next big story is - I have a sneaky feeling it's going to be The Mortgage - could be wrong but I hardly think so, do you? ... exciting times!
Complain about this comment
Little Lord Mandle-Foy is a rags to riches tail
The secret of his success is in making others fail.
Lascivious lies, tantalising tales, tricks of his trade,
Selling souls, breaking spirits, careers are unmade.
Conscience, character and chivalry, he can do without.
Beware, my friend, of conspiritors whenever he's about.
Behind his cringing, fawning smile the Devil calmly waits.
Master of Debates, forked tongue rhetoric he ejaculates.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#236
Even if you think not having an election in the near future is the right decision, he reached that decision by accident as it just happens to co-incide with his desire to hold onto power no matter what.
He is bound to get one or two right by accident, but the ammount he gets wrong by design are staggering!!
here are a few classics
Labour has banished boom and bust ..it still makes me laugh!
I will abolish the 10p tax rate..
The ghurkhas ..because it was too expensive when he had just spent 200 billion bailing out bankers afew million for people who risk their lives for the country is too much ...Doh
That very odd U-tube thing.
His recent insistemnce labour will carry on spending ...huh!!
This guy is priceless as a political tragi comedy act.
Complain about this comment
# 243. Invader-Zim wrote:
"The Buck must stop with Bush, Blair and ultimately Brown."
No, they are just figureheads.
The subjects themselves may not be aware, but bribery and coercion of politicians at different levels can take very different forms. In office, it may be expenses and vain-glory. Out of office it can be directorship, consultancy, books deals, speech tours or openings for family members.
Everyone has his/her price. In the expense claim disaster, the amount involved is small. If every one of the 646 MPs is as easily corruptible, then only a few £million is needed to buy the entire British parliament for one use or another, financial, political, military or otherwise. Thank God we still have a few very honourable members so this cannot happen.
But, if you nurture and control the PM, and surround him/her with a few minders, you control the country, its laws, its parliament, its military, its foreign policies, its intelligence services, its police and its people.
No, Bush and Blair are not brave enough to think of this by themselves. Politicians are risk averse and there is too little in it for themselves.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
saga 242 [modified because there seems to be a moderation problem with my 354]
Well, I suppose I didn't expect to get you the whole way down the journey! But I will make a few further points. The increasing indebtedness of the UK economy immediately before the credit crunch was essentially endemic. In other words, with the political attachment that Brown had to particular spending levels, the impossibility of raising significant further tax revenue and the mounting interest from previous years of unbalanced budgets, UK government debt growth was inevitably accelerating. It is unavoidable that when interest payments from previous years can only be met by borrowing in the current year, then cumulative debt levels will rise nonlinearly (the same happens in economic units on all other scales, e.g. families and companies). Brown was therefore taking us to a debt crisis even before the credit crunch.
It's also worth making the point that interest rates are only low now because of the credit crunch and the international effort, largely led by the Fed, to restore fluidity to the money markets. That means that the impact on the UK economy, in terms of debt interest, would not have been proportionate to the slightly lower levels of debt that would have been reached without the credit crunch. Put another way, without the credit crunch, the tipping point, the amount of debt required to set off an economic crisis, would have been lower because interest rates would have been higher. Your idea that without the credit crunch we would simply have been having fireside chats about whether a given level of debt - 55%, 60% of GDP, whatever - was supportable, are really just fond notions. These modest levels would just have been milestones that we would have hurtled past with increasing speed.
I know you don't like it, and you use your familiar accusation of bias when I present you with ideas that don't fit your own political picture, but the concept that we were heading for a recession, or at least a debt crisis, without the credit crunch and purely as a result of Brown's sustained economic policies, is entirely supportable.
Meanwhile, and to give you a chance to change the subject if you feel the need, what on earth are you on about at post 249? Which mortgage story do you think is going to push the new Speaker off the political headlines?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
236,252
"Even if you think not having an election in the near future is the right decision, he reached that decision by accident ........
He is bound to get one or two right by accident ....."
====================================================================
I think 236 meant that given Gordon Browns sole driver behind any decision is his own survival, then not holding an election is the right decision consistent with his objective (not ours!).
In terms of getting things right, don't forget that even a broken clock is right twice each day.
Complain about this comment
jrperry 255
An excellent post and one I entirely agree with. I too wondered which story Saga meant when he talked about the mortgage story.
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown, Alistair Darling and Peter Mandelson are flying to a world economic summit.
Peter looks at Alistair and chuckles: 'You know, I could throw a £50 note out of the window right now and make one person very happy.' Alistair shrugs his shoulders and says: 'Well, I could throw five £10 notes out of the window and make five people very happy.'
Gordon says: 'Of course, but I could throw ten £5 notes out of the window and make ten people very happy.'
The pilot rolls his eyes, looks at all of them, and says: 'I could throw all of you out of the window and make the whole country happy.'
Complain about this comment
#255 jrp
Your answer to saga emphasises how rigid your thinking is. You make play on the fact saga moved slightly toward you view, as you see it, but you have made no adjustment yourself. Underlining your belief that you are right.
Everything you say now, about how all this was going to happen anyway because of what Gordon Brown has done, stimulates the question, who was saying this loud and clear, leading up to the current situation? No-one. There are plenty of these economists and correspondents you put such faith in, saying it now, after the fact, but why were they not shouting from the roof-tops at the time.
The reason, I venture to suggest, is that economics is so unpredictable. If you heard Denis Healy on Desert Island Discs, the other day he was saying how all the plans you put in place can be scuppered by the unexpected decisions that people, businesses and countries make.
Saga's main point to you, that I picked up on was that the bottom line is that he, and I would agree with him on this, would prefer a Labour government in place, sorting this failure of capitalism out, whereas you would prefer a Tory one.
All this high-brow talk of economic strategy is just talk. An argument between all of us about macro-economics, and broad-brush approaches is about as much as anyone can do on this site.
I recently organised a talk for a local group, by an economics lecturer from a local University, he was accompanied by a proffessor in economics from the same University. After he gave his assessment of how we arrived at place we are at, what he thought of what the government was doing to address the problems and where we go from here, questions were put to him. As he gave his opinion, it became obvious that his colleague wasn't entirely in agreement. To what degree we couldn't say, but my point is that there is no one answer.
Complain about this comment
I notice comments about Coleridge's Rime of the Ancient Mariner above. If "the wedding guest" is Tony Blair then his albatross would be the Iraq War, although the inquiry will hopefully reveal, the truth is far more complex than that. Put Gordon Brown in the role of "the wedding guest" with the "watery eye" and Tony Blair is likely to be his albatross.
Whether held in the open or not, the press are likely to pick on the most sensational aspects of the inquiry as they are revealed. Probably more revealing than many things which will come out in an inquiry into the reasons for the Iraq War is the death of David Kelly, the resignation of Alistair Campbell, the underground bombings on 7/7 and the Menezes shooting.
I had understood, since WWll and Korea, our troops have been trained in a defensive role, to master new technological equipment and to be able to fulfill a peacekeeping role within the UN and NATO. This, it has always struck me, is a good reason for keeping a well-trained military force within these islands.
I still find it hard to accept reasons for them to be used for any other purpose.
I hope, but doubt, that all could be revealed in an inquiry.
Complain about this comment
#258 croftie
So, which parts of jrp's post did you agree with and why?
Complain about this comment
253. At 10:43pm on 21 Jun 2009, puzzling
Unless i've missed something, Blair and Bush were and Brown is, in charge.
They all carry their share of the responsibility, guilt and blame.
What in truth was achieved.
Let me think.
Oh yes, I remember, Blasphemy Blair has a huge bank balance full of blood money.
ChimpanBush helped himself and his cronies achieve Oil revenues beyond their wildest dreams.
Last but by no means least, Britain won the booby prize in the shape of Bumble Brown.
How do these leaders sleep at night?
Soundly, since not one of them has a conscience.
Complain about this comment
ref 259 Invader-Zim
Good stuff - except the last paragraph, which should begin, "The pilot rolled HER eyes..."
Gotta keep Harriet happy as well.
Complain about this comment
#263 invader
So, do you believe it to be a failure of democracy? We elect these people, so that would make it our fault wouldn't it?
But that has always been the get-out clause for us, we elect people to represent us and make decisions and then we just slam them for each decision we they make.
Fuelled by the news media who have latched on to the idea that politics can be seen as a branch of the entertainment business. I refer to the comment by Even Davis on the Today programme this morning when responding to Roy Hattersley's desire to see PMQs revert back to serious questions given serious answers, even though tinged with political motives, his response was "But' it's all just a bit of fun isn't it" or something like that.
The fact that PMQs is the media's most promoted representation of the work of Parliament, shows they just see it as entertainment and of now serious concern to us, the listener, reader or veiwer.
Complain about this comment
How is it that the Election of The next Speaker of The House of Commons has been stitched up in favour of Brown's candidate Margaret Beckett? Shades of Robert Mugabe and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad methinks!
Complain about this comment
Brown Pledges 5 Million Pounds to Zimbabwe,
While here on earth, it has been stated that they to save £4.7million from the Territorial Army budget and to do so have cut the reserves man training days (MTD's) and Training.
Well done Gordon, it's not as if the TA is doing anything useful.....like going to Irag or Afghanistan.....
Complain about this comment
265. At 10:41am on 22 Jun 2009, wasowenright wrote:
The fact that PMQs is the media's most promoted representation of the work of Parliament, shows they just see it as entertainment and of now serious concern to us, the listener, reader or veiwer.
But MPs themselves do not help either. At PMQs the place is standing room only, yet in the debate about expenses and that is something very close to their hearts indeed maybe 20 people were in the chamber. It might all be taken more seriously if MPs were quiet when questions were being asked - I can barely hear nick Clegg sometimes; or if the partisan braying were stopped etc.
The fact is chnages to how the House behaves have been mooted time and again and the end result? Just hot air! They deserve all the contempt they are receiving right now.
Complain about this comment
#266 sicilian
That comment is one of the most ridiculous comments ever made here. There have been many references to Zimbabwe on these postings, I guess maybe some of you should go there and experience it, then make a contrast.
If you don't like the process of choosing the new speaker, then tell us how you think it can be done. It is about us, our country and our representatives, it has nothing to do with Zim or Iraq, it is about your involvement in our form of democracy.
If this is the level of intelligent discourse that you can achieve, then perhaps the politicians we have, are all we deserve. Why would they need to bust a gut trying to engage with someone who makes comments like your last one.
Complain about this comment
Ref 265 wasowenright
Rather too many MPs promote themselves as entertainers - eg appearances on "Have I Got News For You", or Blair's tragic "Am I bovvered?" turn. Clowns such as Lemsip Optik, or whatever that Cheeky Girls twit calls himself, fatally dilute the credibility of MPs. Ann Widdecombe has become rich playing the character "Ann Widdecombe". Newspapers are filled with MP columnists being waggish.
These people can't complain if public perception of them fits in with Gore Vidal's memorable description of politics: "Showbusiness for ugly people".
I have no recollection of Vince Cable or Frank Field ever appearing as media idiots. Perhaps that's one reason why most people respect them, and what they say.
Complain about this comment
ref 266 sicilian 29
"Shades of Robert Mugabe and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad..."? Touching upon the politically incorrect there, my man. I may have to inform Harriet.
Anyway, the Torygraph has effective;y rubbished all of the candidates, apart from Doris.
How we'll laugh and laugh, as they laugh and laugh, and slap their thighs, when she puts them in their place if they get out of turn.
What a loveable collection of characters, we'll say.
That's entertainment!
Complain about this comment
For the record: -
ZIM is not short for Zimbabwe.
Despite Gordon Brown appearing like Robert Mugabe.
The UK is not even close to being Zimbabwe.
On the subject of Speaker
The best choice for speaker is ZIM.
Zim is impartial.
Zim is fair.
Zim does not eat his enemies liver with fava beans.
Zim does not play party Politics.
Zim dislikes everyone equally.
Vote Zim
Complain about this comment
excellentcatblogger 268
I agree to a certain extent.
The event is called Prime Ministers Questions it might actually help if the Prime Minister answered some questions. I think one of the reasons it has turned into a farce is because Brown and Blair before him, never addressed the question asked. Also there are too many planted questions. The idea is to hold the Government to account, but how can you do this when the PM refuses to give a reply to the question asked and in turn is the one asking questions of opposition.
Complain about this comment
#269:
Maybe the refernce to Zimbabwe and Iraq was ott but it is borne out of a deep suspicion that Gordon Brown wants to control just about everything that might aff3ect his tenure at Number 10.
The secret vote for Speaker should not be decided by the majority (though not in the minds of the people right now) Labour Party. Three Labour Party Speakers in a row is a farce. It may suit Gordon Brown but it won't impress the people. Did you see Beckett's woeful appearance on BBC Question Time when she was booed by the audience. She may not win the vote but if she does the reputation of Parliament will not be restored and I for one will not greet it with optimism.
Complain about this comment
jrp @ 255
okay enough then - was worth the interchange - we'll agree to disagree as all the reasonable types say - what "would have happened" doesn't lend itself too well to a clear cut answer, does it? ... except in Croftland, I suppose, where opinions are facts and all is certain ... whose mortgage? - Catch The Wind's of course - is there another one?
Complain about this comment
There are four categories of people in the world
The clever and busy (Captains of Industry The work horses)
The clever and lazy (Innovators and visionaries Born leaders)
The stupid and lazy (Joe Public mostly harmless distract with football)
The stupid and busy (Scourge of society never allow them any power)
Category 4 is the most dangerous, particularly as a Prime Minister.
Nobody doubts Mr Bumbling Brown is as busy as a bee.
Country crippled, economic chaos, MP expenses shame.
Breaking rocks, Brown initiates, mindless hives of activity,
Consider Bumbles alacrity, we deduce, its only him to blame!
Complain about this comment
sagamix 275
I see the how you intend to work during the 2 weeks, not nice saga, not nice. Its meant to be persuasion remember.
Complain about this comment
#277 croftie
Persuasion only works with people who have open minds. Your's is closed.
Complain about this comment
#273 croftie
It might actually help if a sensible question was asked in the first place. Cameron has not asked a single question that requires answering for a year or more. It is a two-way process. I was quite encouraged by your qualified support of excellantcatblogger @ 268 but surely you would agree that in order to provide an answer, first a question must be asked?
Complain about this comment
#274 sicilian
What caused this suspicion in you?
Have you an idea who else it could be done. If the election of speaker is to be decided by the members of the house of commons, then the chances are ,that the governing party will choose one of their own. Unless there is an unwritten rule that it should be alternated between the biggest two parties but then what will the Libs say?
Can you tell us what you think is the best way of choosing the speaker?
Complain about this comment
# croftie various
So, our love of poetry is limited, Coleridge is fine if you poke fun at someone else it seems :-)
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS