The Sun made very interesting reading this morning with their hatchet job on John Reid. Their front page headline depicted Reid with his brain missing alongside the headline JOHN REID'S BRAIN IS MISSING. Inside there was a two page demolition job on Reid by George Pascoe-Watson, who has become as close to Gordon Brown as Tom Baldwin was to Alastair Campbell. The Dour One will have jad a wry smile on his face this morning. That's not to say Reid doesn't deserve a good kicking for his total and utter failure to address the prisons crisis.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Cherie Blair's 'Super Tanker' Sweep
Rumours that a scouse speaking Prime Minister's consort was seen scavenging on the pebbles on Branscombe beach this afternoon have been hotly denied by the PM's Official Spokesman. "If Mrs Blair wants free bottles of perfume and a motorcycle, she knows exactly where to get them," he insisted.
The Two Faces of Douglas Alexander
From yesterday's GLASGOW HERALD...
"Transport Minister Douglas Alexander said: "Research shows that talking on a mobile phone while driving affects your concentration and ability to react to dangerous situations. It's impossible to do two things at once and do them well."
How could one possibly disagree with Douglas Alexander, Secretary of State for Transport, Secretary of State for Scotland, Chief organiser of Labour Party elections in Scotland...
"Transport Minister Douglas Alexander said: "Research shows that talking on a mobile phone while driving affects your concentration and ability to react to dangerous situations. It's impossible to do two things at once and do them well."
How could one possibly disagree with Douglas Alexander, Secretary of State for Transport, Secretary of State for Scotland, Chief organiser of Labour Party elections in Scotland...
How Very Unprofessional...
There comes a moment when you're broadcasting live when you have to maintain your composure. Here's one of those moments when I totally lose it. And all because Simon Clark of FOREST quoted Dizzy's blog and called Transport Minister Stephen Ladyman, Stephen Ladyboy. From such small things come three minutes of classic 'corpsing'.
Click on this link http://www.18doughtystreet.com/on_demand/60
PS Apologies for the lack of formatting, pictures and links. Blogger still won't let me do anything apart from posting text.
Click on this link http://www.18doughtystreet.com/on_demand/60
PS Apologies for the lack of formatting, pictures and links. Blogger still won't let me do anything apart from posting text.
The Two Faces of Law Enforcement
In many ways what follows is a case study in what many feel to be the somewhat distorted priorities of current law enforcement. Those who are trying their best to uphold the law and make a small error get clobbered, while those who seem more intent on crime and commit far worse offences seem to emerge from the system relatively unscathed. This is an extract from a letter to John Reid from the Managing Director of McMullens Breweries...
"The first incident I refer to is the ‘sting’ operation at the Lord Kitchener in Barnet, a well run pub with a good reputation locally. Last summer it was deemed to be a law enforcement priority of resources to send into this pub two young persons who appeared to be over 21 but were in fact only 17 to see whether or not they could succeed in being served an alcoholic drink. Our barman thought that one of them was underage and refused to serve him. The other he decreed to be of legal age. An error of judgement in a pub which generally caters for middle aged customers. Clearly I cannot defend serving alcohol to 17 year olds, even if they do look much older but the consequence of this charade was an £80 ‘on the spot’ fine for a decent young man - the sort of person who we should all be encouraging to make his career in this industry. In addition we as the premises licence holder along with the Designated Premises Licence holder were taken to court and prosecuted at great cost to both the tax payer and to my company. I am glad to say that we were both acquitted.
"The second incident occurred on Friday 9th December, 2006 at the Fishery, Elstree a destination food pub in the country. A middle aged male customer who appeared to be drunk was refused service as were his friends in the same party who tried to buy drinks for him. The response from this group was terrifying for both our team and our other customers. They were not only abusive to, but assaulted three of our staff, two of whom were young waitresses. They proceeded to throw brass bar trays across the bar smashing glassware and bottles of wine on the back bar and badly bruising two members of my team. When they heard that the police were being called they fled. This group were known to the manager as they are employed by a local company. In response to our manager advising a director of the company that the matter was being dealt with by the police two of this group volunteered themselves at the local police station. Staggeringly the punishment for their crime was a caution! One can only speculate on the action the police would have taken against my team if they had discovered that these people had been served more alcohol – almost certainly not a caution!
"I hope these two recent examples of incidents which are far from ‘one offs’ help to highlight how far we have gone in this country to redefine the principles of justice let alone advertise our law enforcement priorities. I find it incredible that you encourage your police force to commit resources to entrapping, and fining honest hard working pub employees who make an error of judgement but take no action against a person who admits to assault and criminal damage. Interestingly you will also know that underage persons who actually manage to con their way into purchasing alcohol are rarely if ever fined or prosecuted!
"I am sure your opinion polls are beginning to tell you that honest hard working people are increasingly concerned by our political elite as more and more examples of this sort of ludicrous behaviour by the state comes to light.
"I feel bound to write to someone and have chosen you, not because I think it will result in any change to your political priorities, although I hope it will, but I have a duty to my team to ‘do something’.
"How do you expect this industry to attract and keep the quality people we need when on the one hand we are constantly undermined by both our politicians and their law enforcement agencies and on the other hand we are not supported when assaulted by the scum in our society?"
"The first incident I refer to is the ‘sting’ operation at the Lord Kitchener in Barnet, a well run pub with a good reputation locally. Last summer it was deemed to be a law enforcement priority of resources to send into this pub two young persons who appeared to be over 21 but were in fact only 17 to see whether or not they could succeed in being served an alcoholic drink. Our barman thought that one of them was underage and refused to serve him. The other he decreed to be of legal age. An error of judgement in a pub which generally caters for middle aged customers. Clearly I cannot defend serving alcohol to 17 year olds, even if they do look much older but the consequence of this charade was an £80 ‘on the spot’ fine for a decent young man - the sort of person who we should all be encouraging to make his career in this industry. In addition we as the premises licence holder along with the Designated Premises Licence holder were taken to court and prosecuted at great cost to both the tax payer and to my company. I am glad to say that we were both acquitted.
"The second incident occurred on Friday 9th December, 2006 at the Fishery, Elstree a destination food pub in the country. A middle aged male customer who appeared to be drunk was refused service as were his friends in the same party who tried to buy drinks for him. The response from this group was terrifying for both our team and our other customers. They were not only abusive to, but assaulted three of our staff, two of whom were young waitresses. They proceeded to throw brass bar trays across the bar smashing glassware and bottles of wine on the back bar and badly bruising two members of my team. When they heard that the police were being called they fled. This group were known to the manager as they are employed by a local company. In response to our manager advising a director of the company that the matter was being dealt with by the police two of this group volunteered themselves at the local police station. Staggeringly the punishment for their crime was a caution! One can only speculate on the action the police would have taken against my team if they had discovered that these people had been served more alcohol – almost certainly not a caution!
"I hope these two recent examples of incidents which are far from ‘one offs’ help to highlight how far we have gone in this country to redefine the principles of justice let alone advertise our law enforcement priorities. I find it incredible that you encourage your police force to commit resources to entrapping, and fining honest hard working pub employees who make an error of judgement but take no action against a person who admits to assault and criminal damage. Interestingly you will also know that underage persons who actually manage to con their way into purchasing alcohol are rarely if ever fined or prosecuted!
"I am sure your opinion polls are beginning to tell you that honest hard working people are increasingly concerned by our political elite as more and more examples of this sort of ludicrous behaviour by the state comes to light.
"I feel bound to write to someone and have chosen you, not because I think it will result in any change to your political priorities, although I hope it will, but I have a duty to my team to ‘do something’.
"How do you expect this industry to attract and keep the quality people we need when on the one hand we are constantly undermined by both our politicians and their law enforcement agencies and on the other hand we are not supported when assaulted by the scum in our society?"
Quotes of the Day
"As for talking on a mobile phone, I could no more do this while driving than I could split the atom while changing a nappy" - Tory MP Michael Gove.
"The river of lies" - What staff call the water feature in the reception area of the Home Office.
"I can't imagine being addicted to a noise - except, obviously, the sound of my voice" - TV political pundit Andrew Marr.
"The scavengers of Branscombe beach reminded me of those in Baghdad after the fall of Saddam, and my reaction was just the same - disgust" - Alan Cox, of Swanage, Dorset, in a letter to The Daily Telegraph.
"The Government has now become like the ship stranded off the Devon coast - it's washed up, it's broken up and they are just scrabbling over the wreckage" - Tory leader David Cameron during Commons exchanges with the Prime Minister.
"For us to set an arbitrary timetable ... simply saying we will pull British troops out in October come what may, would send the most disastrous signal to the people we are fighting in Iraq" - Prime Minister Tony Blair.
"It is sad that he prefers the mentality of the bunker to the open thinking of debate." - shadow foreign secretary William Hague criticises Mr Blair for not attending the Iraq debate.
"What could be more important than that the Prime Minister should be here to debate the issue of Iraq at a time when British forces are at risk every day in respect of their lives. Isn't that the kind of leadership we are entitled to?" - Sir Menzies Campbell.
"The river of lies" - What staff call the water feature in the reception area of the Home Office.
"I can't imagine being addicted to a noise - except, obviously, the sound of my voice" - TV political pundit Andrew Marr.
"The scavengers of Branscombe beach reminded me of those in Baghdad after the fall of Saddam, and my reaction was just the same - disgust" - Alan Cox, of Swanage, Dorset, in a letter to The Daily Telegraph.
"The Government has now become like the ship stranded off the Devon coast - it's washed up, it's broken up and they are just scrabbling over the wreckage" - Tory leader David Cameron during Commons exchanges with the Prime Minister.
"For us to set an arbitrary timetable ... simply saying we will pull British troops out in October come what may, would send the most disastrous signal to the people we are fighting in Iraq" - Prime Minister Tony Blair.
"It is sad that he prefers the mentality of the bunker to the open thinking of debate." - shadow foreign secretary William Hague criticises Mr Blair for not attending the Iraq debate.
"What could be more important than that the Prime Minister should be here to debate the issue of Iraq at a time when British forces are at risk every day in respect of their lives. Isn't that the kind of leadership we are entitled to?" - Sir Menzies Campbell.
How Many Civil Servants Does it Take to Write a Blog?
It seems there is costs the taxpayer even more than David Miliband's. Ladies and Gentleman I give you Mr Jim Murphy, Minister at the Department of Social Security. Here's a very revealing PQ from David Ruffley.
David Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much the Minister for Employment and Welfare Reform's blog has cost to administer in each month since its inception; what the budget for the blog is for 2007-08; and how many unique visitors to the blog there have been since May. [102066]
Jim Murphy: The Welfare Reform and Child Poverty blog was launched on the DWP internet site on 16 October 2006. Costs to develop and administer the blog were met from existing resources, and current staffing levels. Ongoing maintenance equates to half the time of one member of staff. From October to date this has cost £1,487 per month.At present no funding decisions have been made about the financial year 2007-08. Since it was launched it has attracted 1,987 unique visitors resulting in 4,731 visits
Now, if this blog has been up for three months, and is costing £1,487 per month, this means that the blog is costing over £2 per visitor. And the subject of the blog… Child Poverty! As Mr Littlejohn would say, 'you couldn't make it up'. If you look at the blog, in the last month, there have been just 4 posts (which read like press releases...). And they are paying half a member of staff to maintain it ?
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/pensionsreform/weblog/
If I tell you that I post on average between five and eight times a day and it takes me less than an hour a day, you will see why I'm bloody good value for money and the DWP is not!
David Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much the Minister for Employment and Welfare Reform's blog has cost to administer in each month since its inception; what the budget for the blog is for 2007-08; and how many unique visitors to the blog there have been since May. [102066]
Jim Murphy: The Welfare Reform and Child Poverty blog was launched on the DWP internet site on 16 October 2006. Costs to develop and administer the blog were met from existing resources, and current staffing levels. Ongoing maintenance equates to half the time of one member of staff. From October to date this has cost £1,487 per month.At present no funding decisions have been made about the financial year 2007-08. Since it was launched it has attracted 1,987 unique visitors resulting in 4,731 visits
Now, if this blog has been up for three months, and is costing £1,487 per month, this means that the blog is costing over £2 per visitor. And the subject of the blog… Child Poverty! As Mr Littlejohn would say, 'you couldn't make it up'. If you look at the blog, in the last month, there have been just 4 posts (which read like press releases...). And they are paying half a member of staff to maintain it ?
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/pensionsreform/weblog/
If I tell you that I post on average between five and eight times a day and it takes me less than an hour a day, you will see why I'm bloody good value for money and the DWP is not!
Ming Campbell's Direct Hit at PMQs But His Policy on Iraq is Deeply Irresponsible
While I deeply deprecate the LibDem policy, announced this morning, of withdrawing all British troops from Iraq by the end of October, Ming Campbell scored a direct hit at PMQs with his follow up question. He almost spat it out...
"If he feels so strongly why doesn't the Prime Minister stay and debate the subject"
Or words to that effect. Blair replied rather lamely that he was debating it now. It really is a disgrace that Tony Blair hasn't taken part in a debate on Iraq in the Commons for years.
But back to the LibDem policy of withdrawing all British troops from Iraq by October, I have to say this is one of the most irresponsible policy announcements I have heard from them for a long time - and that's saying something. It sends all the wrong signals to those in Iraq who rely on British troops to keep the peace and undermines their authority. Naturally we shold be arguing for a phased withdrawal when the job is complete, but it is impossible to argue that our mission in Iraq has been completed - or is anywhere near being completed. Now is not the time to make publicity seeking gestures.
UPDATE: 2.25pm. A lot of people have left comments accusing me of this, that and the other, so let me address the various points raised here, just to make my position clear. If we pull out now we will exacerbate the danger of a full scale civil war. If that cannot be described as 'irresponsible' I don't know what would. The 'mission' I refer to above is to gradually restore order and bring about a situation where people can safely go about their business and the Iraqi Police and security forces are capable of keeping the peace. That point has not arrived. When it does, no one will be happier than me. To say we should pull out in a matter of months leaving the Iraqis to their own devices is the equivalent of moral cowardice. Whatever one thought of the reasons for invading the country in the first place, we are where we are. Wishful thinking and hindsight are wonderful things, but are not what I am seeking to debate in this post. INAMICUS asks what the Tory strategy is in the debate today. I suggest he watches the debate. ANYONEBUTBLAIR asks what is the exit strategy for our troops. He says: "If Shias want to kill Sunnis and Sunnis want to kill Shias then let them get on with it and not stand impotently in the middle dodging the bullets. I am utterly ashamed to be English and to have Blair as PM." Let's bear in mind that none of this would be happening if we hadn't invaded in the first place. We are there now and have to live with the situation as it is rather than what we would like it to be. What about all the Iraqis who are't shooting each other and just want to live in peace. Do we not have a responsibility to them? Blair and Bush did this in our name. Many of you may not have agreed with it at the time and still don't now. But to bring our troops home now would just be to abandon these people to a situation of absolute carnage. LEON thinks I am a Neo Con. Not true, but a debate for another occasion. Sorry to have gone on in some detail on this, but it is so important and I wanted to make my position clear.
"If he feels so strongly why doesn't the Prime Minister stay and debate the subject"
Or words to that effect. Blair replied rather lamely that he was debating it now. It really is a disgrace that Tony Blair hasn't taken part in a debate on Iraq in the Commons for years.
But back to the LibDem policy of withdrawing all British troops from Iraq by October, I have to say this is one of the most irresponsible policy announcements I have heard from them for a long time - and that's saying something. It sends all the wrong signals to those in Iraq who rely on British troops to keep the peace and undermines their authority. Naturally we shold be arguing for a phased withdrawal when the job is complete, but it is impossible to argue that our mission in Iraq has been completed - or is anywhere near being completed. Now is not the time to make publicity seeking gestures.
UPDATE: 2.25pm. A lot of people have left comments accusing me of this, that and the other, so let me address the various points raised here, just to make my position clear. If we pull out now we will exacerbate the danger of a full scale civil war. If that cannot be described as 'irresponsible' I don't know what would. The 'mission' I refer to above is to gradually restore order and bring about a situation where people can safely go about their business and the Iraqi Police and security forces are capable of keeping the peace. That point has not arrived. When it does, no one will be happier than me. To say we should pull out in a matter of months leaving the Iraqis to their own devices is the equivalent of moral cowardice. Whatever one thought of the reasons for invading the country in the first place, we are where we are. Wishful thinking and hindsight are wonderful things, but are not what I am seeking to debate in this post. INAMICUS asks what the Tory strategy is in the debate today. I suggest he watches the debate. ANYONEBUTBLAIR asks what is the exit strategy for our troops. He says: "If Shias want to kill Sunnis and Sunnis want to kill Shias then let them get on with it and not stand impotently in the middle dodging the bullets. I am utterly ashamed to be English and to have Blair as PM." Let's bear in mind that none of this would be happening if we hadn't invaded in the first place. We are there now and have to live with the situation as it is rather than what we would like it to be. What about all the Iraqis who are't shooting each other and just want to live in peace. Do we not have a responsibility to them? Blair and Bush did this in our name. Many of you may not have agreed with it at the time and still don't now. But to bring our troops home now would just be to abandon these people to a situation of absolute carnage. LEON thinks I am a Neo Con. Not true, but a debate for another occasion. Sorry to have gone on in some detail on this, but it is so important and I wanted to make my position clear.
We Must Keep the Politicians in Politics
I think I need to lie down. I have just read David Blunkett's column in The Sun and to my utter horror agreed with him - not once but twice. He believes Hilary Benn is the best candidate for the Labour Deputy leadership, as do I, but his second point is rather more profound.
In a rambling piece about how John Reid is wrong to want to break up the Home Office Blunkett makes a wider point...
"...The alternative to politics is officialdom. And there is a trend in all three major political parties to believe that if difficult questions of reform need to be answered without damagaing the credibility of politicians, they should be taken out of their hands. Trouble is, you simply can't. Just because someone has been appointed to some agency to make decisions doesn't mean they don't have political views. It means they have kept their head down or - even more damagingly - they have never had to make a decision in their lives. It also means that when they get it wrong they can't be punished by the voters, like politicians are...What we need is quite the opposite - a transparent, open political debate, with decisions taken by politicans who respond to voters' concerns, knowing that if they don't their careers can be ended with the stroke of a pen at election time."
Blunkett is absolutely right. Whenever I hear a politician saying "we need to take the politics out of [insert subject] I reach for the sick bucket. All they are doing is abrogating responsibility for clearing up a mess. And surely that is what politicians are there for. It's something that the Conservatives are just as guilty of as Labour and the LibDems. Liam Fox made an announcement along the lines of "let's take the politics out of the NHS" a few years ago. Just the sort of language that may appeal to the centre voter. But it's wong-headed. We cannot leave NHS reform to bureaucrats. It's for politicians to lead the debate on big issues like the NHS. If they can't do that then they shouldn't be 'in the arena' at all. Politicians must lead the debate and lead public opinion. Delegating responsibility to unelected officials is an easy way out in the short terms, but all it does in the long term is store up problems.
In a rambling piece about how John Reid is wrong to want to break up the Home Office Blunkett makes a wider point...
"...The alternative to politics is officialdom. And there is a trend in all three major political parties to believe that if difficult questions of reform need to be answered without damagaing the credibility of politicians, they should be taken out of their hands. Trouble is, you simply can't. Just because someone has been appointed to some agency to make decisions doesn't mean they don't have political views. It means they have kept their head down or - even more damagingly - they have never had to make a decision in their lives. It also means that when they get it wrong they can't be punished by the voters, like politicians are...What we need is quite the opposite - a transparent, open political debate, with decisions taken by politicans who respond to voters' concerns, knowing that if they don't their careers can be ended with the stroke of a pen at election time."
Blunkett is absolutely right. Whenever I hear a politician saying "we need to take the politics out of [insert subject] I reach for the sick bucket. All they are doing is abrogating responsibility for clearing up a mess. And surely that is what politicians are there for. It's something that the Conservatives are just as guilty of as Labour and the LibDems. Liam Fox made an announcement along the lines of "let's take the politics out of the NHS" a few years ago. Just the sort of language that may appeal to the centre voter. But it's wong-headed. We cannot leave NHS reform to bureaucrats. It's for politicians to lead the debate on big issues like the NHS. If they can't do that then they shouldn't be 'in the arena' at all. Politicians must lead the debate and lead public opinion. Delegating responsibility to unelected officials is an easy way out in the short terms, but all it does in the long term is store up problems.
Blogger, Are You Listening? I Say, Are You Listening??
[tears what's remaining of his hair out in frustration] Those nice people at Blogger have suddenly removed the facility on my blog to add pictures or links. Anyone else having the same problem? Naturally people will say I should have moved to Beta, but again, those nice people at Blogger won't let me as my blog is too big and I am at the end of the queue. Aaaaaaaagh [/tears what etc etc]
UPDATE: Fantastic! It's snowing in Tunbridge Wells. Loving it.
UPDATE: Fantastic! It's snowing in Tunbridge Wells. Loving it.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Imitation is the Sincerest Form of Flattery...Or Perhaps Not
Do you think I should sue? http://chipendale.blogspot.com
More Changes to Candidate Selection Rules on the Way
As Sir John Junor used to say, 'there will be dancing on the streets of Auchtermuchty' this evening, as the Conservatives announce the apparent demise of the 'A' List. It appears that all members of the Approved Candidates List will be able to apply for seats in future, (albeit in their own region), although constituencies must ensure that at each stage of the selection process, half of the candidates chosen are female. So instead of all women shortlists we're getting half women shortlists. I am not against this on principle but the onus on the Party must now be to increase the proportion of women on the approved list, which is barely more than 30 per cent.
John Maples, Deputy Chairman for Candidates said: "The 'A' List has helped us to make significant progress, and so far nearly 40 per cent of selected candidates are women. The new option toughens up rules on women and allows more candidates to apply for seats in their region."
I assume that this means there will be regional lists drawn up and that non 'A' Listers will only be able to apply for seats in their own area. Hopefully this will be clarified shortly.
The proposals, according to PA, are being put to the Party Board next week.
Nanny State Latest: Conversation to be Banned in Cars?
The latest manifestation of the Nanny State is that soon we will be banned from using Hands Free mobile phones in cars because "the act of holding a conversation is distracting" to the driver. So the logic of that is that no one should be able to talk in a car and the Police should be able to arrest people for opening their mouths in cars. I suppose one could pretend to be a mime artist!
The use of a Hands Free mobile phone will enable the Police to give an on the spot £60 fine and the driver will get 3 points on their licence if the Police feel the driver isn't in control of the car properly.
Why don't they go the whole hog? They could ban smoking while driving too while they are at it. I would have thought having only one hand on the wheel was far more dangerous than talking while driving. they could ban me from listening to Meat Loaf in my car too. Or from looking out of the window. Surely being distracted by the view is just as bad as being distracted by a conversation?
In fact, let's ban cars. Because that's the agenda of these 'safety fascists', whether they admit it or not.
The use of a Hands Free mobile phone will enable the Police to give an on the spot £60 fine and the driver will get 3 points on their licence if the Police feel the driver isn't in control of the car properly.
Why don't they go the whole hog? They could ban smoking while driving too while they are at it. I would have thought having only one hand on the wheel was far more dangerous than talking while driving. they could ban me from listening to Meat Loaf in my car too. Or from looking out of the window. Surely being distracted by the view is just as bad as being distracted by a conversation?
In fact, let's ban cars. Because that's the agenda of these 'safety fascists', whether they admit it or not.
Monday, January 22, 2007
On Blogger TV Tonight...
Joining me at 9pm on Blogger TV on 18 Doughty Street tonight for a discussion on why so few women blog are Rachel North, Ellee Seymour, Caroline Hunt, Andy Mayer and Kerron Cross. We'll also me discussing the trustworthiness of blogs and my guests will give their best blogs of the week.
The new 18 Doughty Street website should have been launchedlast Monday today. The website company guaranteed it for 7am this morning. They're now guaranteeing it for tomorrow morning. Sigh.
UPDATE: Blogger TV is available HERE on the Watch Again facility.
The new 18 Doughty Street website should have been launched
UPDATE: Blogger TV is available HERE on the Watch Again facility.
Tom Watson's BitchBlog
Tom Watson's blog is becoming bitchier by the day. Today's 'bitchblog' reads...
David Blunkett opposes John Reid’s arguments to restructure the Home Office. He says that breaking the department up will create a “Balkanisation” of government. Now I know I was right to support John yesterday.Saucer of milk, anyone? Mind you, as I'm reading Blunkett's diaries (review to follow when I have finally finished the wretched book...) I have to say he's got a point.
Has UKIP Changed Tack on Standing Against EuroSceptic Tories?
If Guido Fawkes is right, then Malcolm Pearson's price for defecting to UKIP was a high one. See HERE. I'm not sure I believe it, as it would be a complete U-turn on behalf of the UKIP leadership who have always said they wouldn't stand against MP supports of Better Off Out, but non-MP EuroSceptic Better Off Out supporters could basically 'go swing'. If Nigel Farage has changed tack then he can prepare for some fierce rows within his own Party. But as I said, I'm not sure the story is actually right. ConservativeHome has some further analysis HERE.
Let's Get our Streets 'Naked'
If you think the Tories never come up with interesting ideas on transport, think again. The Times reports HERE that the Conservatives want 'naked streets'. Ooh er, missus. This means that many traffic lights, road signs and white lines would be removed from many high streets with the aim of improving road safety and reduce congestion.
I think this is really interesting thinking. For too long in this country we have been taken in by transport planners, who seem to be judged on the number of new traffic lights they can erect. It's crazy to have so many traffic lights on roundabouts, for example. This also highlights the amount of redundant 'street furniture' there is. I was driving up the A2 through Bexley last night and there seems to ba some sort of road sign every ten yards along a half mile stretch. Several of them tell the driver that they are driving on the, er, A2. Really useful that. I have no doubt at all that we could remove half the road signs in Britain with no trouble at all. They're an eyesore and an intrusive form of visual pollution. I almost wonder whether they shouldn't have planning permission, but I would never want to hand more power to the planners. They're dictatorial enough as it it.
Road humps, chicanes and other physical measures designed to reduce
the speed of vehicles would be removed and the question of who had priority
would be left open deliberately, making drivers more cautious... In the town of
Drachten, the removal of traffic lights at one major junction has resulted in
accidents falling from thirty-six in the four years before the scheme was
introduced to two in the next two years. The average time for each vehicle to
cross the junction fell from 50 seconds to 30 seconds, despite a rise in the
volume of traffic... The idea of removing traffic lights was supported in a
report published last month by the Institute of Economic Affairs. Martin
Cassini, the report’s author, said: “Removing lights removes barriers to traffic
flow and improves behaviour. If you observe a junction where the lights are out
of action, there is rarely congestion. People approach slowly, wave each other
on and filter in turn. Lights and other controls hamper instead of harness human
nature, causing untold delay and harm.”
I think this is really interesting thinking. For too long in this country we have been taken in by transport planners, who seem to be judged on the number of new traffic lights they can erect. It's crazy to have so many traffic lights on roundabouts, for example. This also highlights the amount of redundant 'street furniture' there is. I was driving up the A2 through Bexley last night and there seems to ba some sort of road sign every ten yards along a half mile stretch. Several of them tell the driver that they are driving on the, er, A2. Really useful that. I have no doubt at all that we could remove half the road signs in Britain with no trouble at all. They're an eyesore and an intrusive form of visual pollution. I almost wonder whether they shouldn't have planning permission, but I would never want to hand more power to the planners. They're dictatorial enough as it it.
Widdecombe Family Hounded Out of Their Home
You may have seen Ann Widdecombe on the Tonight with Trevor McDonald programme recently, where she ventured onto sink estates to talk to hoodies. It appears that the family she stayed with overnight have been hounded out of their home after having had their front door set on fire. I hope that the TV company have ensured they have been properly rehoused. What a society we live in.
The Westminster Hour: A Review
Anyone that knows me will know that I am usually a few minutes late for appointments - not in the Boris Johnson class, but late nevertheless. So to have arrived at my speaking engagement this morning 15 minutes early is a proud achievement indeed. Anyway it gives me time to praise a BBC political programme - no, don't fall off your chair in amazement.
Last night I listened to the Westminster Hour for the first time in a very long time. Sundays at 10pm is not a time I am normally listening to the radio, but I stayed overnight at Doughty Street last night. Carolyn Quinn has taken over from Andrew Rawnsley as the presenter. Her first interview was with Hazel Blears. She seemed more relaxed than usual and actually addressed Quinn's questions rather than come out with the expected New Labour line to take. Unlike her TV colleague Andrew Marr, Carolyn Quinn was determined to get some answers out of Blears on Cash for Peerages and to an extent she succeeded, without getting anything hugely newsworthy. She then had two MPs to preview the week ahead, followed by a couple of other features including a ten minute piece by Dennis Sewell on localism.
All in all I found the Westminster Hour a breath of fresh air. It has a presenter who knows her political onions, asks good questions but remains pleasant and more importantly supports West Ham. It covers issues which are of equal interest to the Westminster village and the world outside but more importantly is a political programme without a political agenda.
If they're not careful I will become a regular listener.
PS This positive review has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they mentioned this blog three times. No, Siree. Do you think I'm bought that easily?!
Cassilis Gives Up Blogging
A few weeks ago I added the Cassilis blog to my daily reads. It had become an increasingly unmissable blog and was well written, to the point and entertaining. So it was a bit of a shock to discover this morning that its author has decided to give up blogging. He says...
You can read Cassilis's full explanation for giving up blogging HERE. Each to his own, and all that, but is he right? Has blogging failed to live up to its potential in this country? Are we all self obsessed and unwilling to'advance genuine debate'? Answers on a postcard please. Meanwhile, I'm off to give a little talk to business people over breakfast on the issue of 'trust'. The things I do to earn a crust...
Looking back over what I've written is a depressing experience
- there's a few half decent posts and I know I can pull a half-decent paragraph
or two together but by the standards I set myself (however ludicrously high they
may have been) I haven't succeeded. What's more the medium itself isn't what I
envisaged it to be - the hype surrounding blogs is all about an alternative
media, the democratisation of journalism and the 'voice' of the ordinary people.
But bloggers aren't ordinary people - most of them, like me, are political nerds
or obsessives who get off on the idea of interacting with like-minded people.
Looking back over the six months or so I've been doing this the posts that have
generated the most comments are those that deal directly with blogging itself
(or comments from mainstream pundits on blogging). I've already acknowledged
that my writing isn't a fraction of what I wanted it to be but there's no reason
to think it's any better or worse when I write about blogging. So the fact that
the topic that generates most interaction is blogging itself tells you something
about the medium - most of us read blogs to see if anyone has read our blogs,
given us a link or has any interesting widget in their sidebar that we could
pinch. Comments are used rarely to advance genuine debate or discussion - simply
to say ' hey, here's what I think and I have a blog too'. It's all about the
traffic no matter what anyone tells you.
You can read Cassilis's full explanation for giving up blogging HERE. Each to his own, and all that, but is he right? Has blogging failed to live up to its potential in this country? Are we all self obsessed and unwilling to'advance genuine debate'? Answers on a postcard please. Meanwhile, I'm off to give a little talk to business people over breakfast on the issue of 'trust'. The things I do to earn a crust...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)