Advice to Political Agents: Part 94

A friend of mine has just bought a book, published in 1935, entitled "Rules and Conduct for Agents in a Parliamentary Election Campaign". The opening chapter includes the following priceless advice:

"A Candidates' Agent should ensure that motor cars are available to transport voters to and from the place of poll. This is particularly important in rural constituencies which contain high numbers of farmers, crofters, woodsmen, countryfolk and the physically lame. It is advisable that a flatbed truck is procured onto which even the most severely crippled can be hoisted and transported to the voting place."

Invaluable. Flatbed trucks at the ready please!

Fisking James Macintyre

The New Statesman has a long, proud history. Yesterday that reputation was tarnished. Political correspondent James Macintyre wrote an blogpost which contained this shocking sentence...

I believe the Conservative Party is institutionally racist.

He then went on to make various allegations against Tory MEP Dan Hannan, who he clearly believes is racist too. He cites some quotes from a piece about Barack Obama without providing any context. He also omits to say that Hannan supported Obama. The New Statesman later removed the article from its website, but it can still be seen HERE. I thought it deserved a light fisking. His words are in red (as well they might be)...

The cat is well and truly out of the bag.
Is it? How? Do explain. Are you sure you don't mean that the white hoods have come off?
In the past, there has often been an element of fogginess to rows about Tory racism as they erupt (though in this area, there is never smoke without fire).
Two cliches in one sentence. Where's the sub? Evidence please.
What exactly is the relationship between the anti-immigration Monday Club and the Conservative Party?
There isn't one. Iain Duncan Smith removed them as an affiliated organisation some years ago. But you probably didn't know that. Or if you had, you'd have mentioned it. Well, wouldn't you?
Does hailing Enoch Powell amount to closet racism?
No. Next.
He was a good parliamentarian, after all.
Nice of you to admit it.
Is a racist joke a sign of true feelings about the matter?
It might be, or it might not be. Is telling a joke about the Irish racist, even when they do it themselves?
I believe the Conservative Party is institutionally racist. I always have done.
Good of you to set out your stall. Evidence please.
I have witnessed too many "jokes" or sideways looks when talking about immigration with Tories -- and done too much research into racism in the party over the years -- to think otherwise. But many would disagree.
Indeed they would. Of course there are racists in the Tory Party. There are, whisper it, also racists in the Labour Party and the LibDems. Try walking into Wallsend Labour Club if you're black and observe the reactions. That doesn't make the Labour Party "institutionally racist. Do try harder...
I would ask those people to read Daniel Hannan's blog for the Telegraph (not some dodgy recording at a Monday Club meeting, but words written down by him), on the question, raised correctly by the former president Jimmy Carter, of whether the rows in the US over President Obama's health-care plans are fuelled by an unspoken racism (which they are).
Yes do read it, because you would then see that Hannan was agreeing Carter, saying that some of the opposition to Obama's healthcare plans is driven by racist motives. You'd have thought
Macintyre would have welcomed Hannan agreeing with his own view. But oh no...
Hannan neatly proves Carter's point by saying: "Barack Obama has an exotic background and it would be odd if some people weren't unsettled by it."
And this is evidence of racism? Oh perlease. Is the word exotic the supposedly racist word? Send round the thought police now. Obama is not out of the typical US President mold. It's not just his skin colour, it's his family background, employment background etc. People are always fearful of the unknown. That's all Hannan was saying.
"[Obama seems to] have family on every continent".
Er, yes, that's a fact. Again something rather different to your average US President and likely therefore to cause comment.
"[I]t could hardly fail to leave a chunk of people feeling that Obama wasn't exactly a regular guy."
Er, yes, and that's evidence of what exactly? Don't tell me; racism. Oh dear. Is that the best evidence on offer that Dan Hannan is racist? Which particular Labour SPAD fed you all this guff?
So, who is Daniel Hannan? He has been in the news lately for running down the National Health Service on American television. Is he an obscure MEP? No. David Cameron rewarded him for the fallout over the NHS row with a new frontbench European job on legal affairs.
No he didn't actually. It was nothing to do with Cameron, and as a political correspondent you ought to know that. The job was given by the leader of the new grouping.
But are they close? Yes.
Actually, no. But don't let an inconvenient fact get in the way.
Like Michael Gove, Hannan is a former newspaper columnist (you may remember he tried to smear me in the Telegraph, a subject to which I will return in future weeks) in whom Cameron invests reliance.
Ah, now we're getting down to it. So this is all done to get back at Dan Hannan for something he wrote in a column about you. Diddums. Get over it. Rise above it. Grow up.
Reports claim the next Tory election manifesto is even being inspired by his 2008 book The Plan.
Yes, and so it should. It contained a number of excellent ideas, some of which, whisper it, are beign adopted by Labour - David Miliband in particular.
Now I know this post will result in howls of fury and clever-stupid ridicule from various partisan Conservatives pretending to be neutral truth-seekers. I will be dismissed -- as I was by Hannan -- as a "Labour spin doctor". But please, just reread those quotes, take a deep breath, and think about those words.
I have, I did, and I still think you're talking bollocks.

Many other bloggers have rightly called Macintyre to task for his comments. I was tempted to write a knee jerk denunication too, but decided instead to put some questions to him and get his side of the story. It was done by email so I will print my questions and his responses in full..

Q. What on earth were you thinking of?
A. What I was "thinking of" was that I believe the Tory party to be institutionally racist. I stand by that and look forward to the opportunity to expand on it.
Q. Did you know Hannan supported Obama and still does?
A. Yes I knew Hannan "supported" Obama for whatever that was worth. It makes no difference at all to his comments justifying racism towards him.
Q. Why was the article removed, and was it done with your knowledge?
A. No comment.
Q. Seeing as it was removed, would you like to offer a public apology to both Dan Hannan and the Tory Party?
A. No. Would Hannan and other Tories like to apologize to me for their smears?
Q. Why have you told another blogger that you can’t comment? Either you stand by your words or you don’t.
A. I stand by them. The "no comment" was about the removal of the post.
Q. Have you and or the NS been threatened with legal action?
A. No legal action threatened to my knowledge.

This, of course, begs more questions. He seems to be standing by his comments completely but sheds no light on why his article was removed from the NS website.

In his short time with the New Statesman Macintyre has become known as the most partisan political correspondent the magazine has employed in its recent history. Despite excellent pieces like THIS article about the McBride affair, he's seen by some as too close to some of his political friends. THIS somewhat nauseating piece about the wonders of Ed Miliband and Douglas Alexander is a case in point. It lends weight to the view of some that he's not a "political correspondent" by any normal definition of the term - he's an opinionated commentator. Nothing wrong with that at all, but why not admit it? However, whatever one thinks of his reporting style, his interviews are excellent - full of good questioning and insight. If I were his editor I'd get him to stick to interviews.

So what's the fallout from this? I cannot see how any Tory politician will want to speak to Mr Macintyre in the near future, let alone be interviewed by him, if he really does believe the party they represent is 'institutionally racist'. At a time when the NS is trying to cosy up to the Tory Party it is a shame to say the least that this storm has been provoked, and I suspect this was the real reason the article was pulled.

Could it be because the NS co-chairmen Mike Danson and Geoffrey Robinson read the riot act due to the timing? Two weeks tomorrow, for the first time I can ever remember, the New Statesman is holding a reception at the Conservative Party Conference. If I were James Macintyre I might discover I had a subsequent engagement in my diary...

Screwing Up by Mark Oaten

Rachel Sylvester and Alice Thompson have interviewed Mark Oaten about his new book, which my company has published, in today's Times. Read it HERE. Here's an extract...

Even before the scandal broke, when he was the frontbench home affairs spokesman, he was regularly taking antidepressants. He thinks at least a fifth of MPs have mental problems, although he says: “Round here it is a taboo subject. Very few will admit to not coping with the stress. You can’t be vulnerable or weak if you are waiting for the next promotion.”

There is, he says, “something in the DNA of politicians which makes them vulnerable to mood swings and being depressed. They are likely to be obsessive, risk-taking and slightly depressive”.

His explanation is that certain character flaws make people want to stand for Parliament. “My risk-taking makes me a good politician and a bad one. But the risk element is only one side. It is even more common for MPs to need to be loved. Ego and needing to be liked are dangerous traits.”

Many MPs are, he believes, damaged souls. “You seek your parents’ approval, then your family’s, then the party’s and then the voters’. I see politicians in their early thirties doing exactly what I was doing — running around the television studios, checking their BlackBerries, taking every opportunity. I want to say, ‘Calm down, go home to your family’. I wish someone had said that to me.”

The pressure is, in his view, made worse by the difficulty in making real friendships at Westminster. “There is a bonding between MPs, but it can’t be genuine — you are always ultimately competing. You are rivals.” He hopes that his memoirs will serve as a warning to other politicians. “I would like them to learn from someone who screwed it up and got it wrong.”

Mr Oaten’s downfall was spectacular. When he saw two journalists outside his front door one morning in January 2006 he had no idea that they had discovered his liaisons with male prostitutes. After speaking to them he had to go inside and tell his wife everything while their two young daughters carried on having breakfast in the next room. Even now he cannot quite explain it to himself, let alone to her.

“Everyone is desperate for an easy answer about why I went to an escort. I had doubts about my sexuality, I wanted to experiment, I was stressed out, feeling low about getting older. The press kept talking about the fact I was losing my hair. I was feeling out of love with myself.”

The rent boy was 23. “I wanted to recapture my youth and be near a young person — it was important that he was younger. I had a belly appearing and bags under my eyes. I wanted to experiment with younger people. It is not uncommon for 40-year-olds to want to experiment sexually.”

He found the number at the back of a magazine. “It was very late at night when I went to his flat, there was an element of risk-taking. I knew it was dangerous, there was an adrenalin element.”

Over the next six months he visited regularly. The News of the World said that he enjoyed three-in-a-bed “romps” and “humiliation”. “We never actually had intercourse. We talked, had a conversation about where he lived, but I was only there for about half an hour each time. We didn’t watch TV or relax together. He had a flatmate — that was the other one. He didn’t become a friend. I don’t even know his real name.”

There were lurid allegations made, which he says are untrue. “There were the most graphic descriptions on websites about what had happened, which were wrong but I couldn’t sue. It would drag everything up.” It was almost a relief to him when the story came out. “I could get counselling, talk to Belinda and try to feel more comfortable about who I am.”

When Mark first talked to me about publishing his story I was in two minds. On the one hand I felt it would be an interesting story to tell, but on the other I was determined not to push him into areas he didn't want to go. In the end he has produced a highly readable, very personal book about what life is really like in Westminster with graphic descriptions of the kind of pressures experienced by politicians of all parties. Neither of us pretend that it is a great work of literature. Mark writes as he speaks. It's a very conversational book, but also quite an emotional one. If you want a book full of lurid detail you will be disappointed. That was never the intention. But if you want to read a warts and all story of a politician living on the edge, in danger of falling into a chasm of depression but coming out the other side, you'll enjoy it.

Buy the book HERE.

In Conversation With David Starkey

In the latest issue of Total Politics I have an IN CONVERSATION interview with David Starkey. He sure knows how to give good interview. You can read the full interview HERE, but here are a few extracts...

What do you think of politicians as public speakers?
Very few are any good at all. I can't really think of any current ones who are. I was never impressed with Blair. Cameron is all right.
Blair was quite a good platform speaker because he could act.
Yes, but if you are to be a really impressive public speaker, there's got to be content, and of course there never was. There was blather of common places. And also, I don't think with really good public speaking you should be too keen to please. Blair has a labrador quality.
Isn't that endemic in politics though?
It's endemic in current politics. I don't think Churchill fell over himself in his desire to please. I suppose what has really happened is that the idea of the major political speech as sustained exposition - explanation, policy - that has largely vanished, because most of them don't have any policies to explain. By no means are all the 'great' 19th century speeches really great, but some of them are.
Wasn't that because they had no other way of explaining things, whereas nowadays there are?
But how often are they used? How often is there any real exposition of policy at all? What's astonishing is that we have a Prime Minister who is supposed to be an intellectual - I've never seen any evidence of this, but we are told all the time that Brown was a brilliant student and briefly held a university position. I've never heard one word from him that suggests connected thought. If you look at the alleged 'great rescue' of the economy there are two ways you can explain it. One is that he was grounded in serious understanding of Keynesianism and all the rest of it, and the other is that Brown is doing what he's always done best which is throw money at things. And nothing he has said has persuaded me that it was anything other than the latter.
Is there a figure in Tudor history you would liken Gordon Brown to?
Gordon Brown actually reminds me more of a figure of modern literature. There is a real feeling of Kenneth Widermerpool about him from Anthony Powell's Dance to the Music of Time. Widmerpool is the dreadful, plodding figure, who's only good sport at school is cross-country running. While all his brilliant, charming contemporaries bugger it up, Widmerpool rises! It seems to me that with Brown there is a complete sense of humour and charm bypass. There is that relentless bludgeoning quality with his alleged 'brilliant performances' as chancellor, the machine-gun fire of statistics that were always at least ten degrees from the point. But no charm, no wit.
Do you think we're now seeing the results of that type of education, where very few politicians seem to have any sort of historical knowledge or perspective at all?
That's absolutely right and it also goes along with a particular type of society - if you like the Californisation of the world. One of my American friends said many, many years ago - decades ago - that what you've got to understand in California is that with that blue sky and eternal sunshine and lonely beaches, the concept of the past can't exist. We're all Californians now! And I think a very interesting example was someone like Princess Diana - from the grandest, upper-crust English background - and yet her references, modes of behaviour, appearance and dress suggested she was born in Orange County. Didn't she think that Duran Duran were more or less the best thing since sliced bread?
And she was right! Couldn't you actually come up with a character from any age of whom you could say that about?
Well, the airhead isn't a new phenomenon. But what was still particularly interesting was what sort of fecundity she represented. And most of the young women on television it seems to me seem to belong in this kind of Orange County 'never never land'.
Talking of women in history, you've come in for some flak recently for your comments about the so-called feminisation of history.
I can't imagine why. It seemed to me such a sensible, gentle comment. If you have a large number of women historians, writing for a readership where a very large percentage are women, you will get a certain kind of editing and presentation of history. It was no more than that.
Couldn't you make the counter argument that men writing about history put a particular slant to it also?
Of course you can. That's precisely what I was saying: that certain sorts of things are put into the foreground like personal relationships, the role of the wives and so on - and I have after all written the defi nitive book on Henry and his wives - but certain other things are put into the background, like war and religion.
You also sparked controversy with your remarks on Question Time about Scotland being a "feeble little nation".
It was a joke! The question was did I think the English should treat St George's Day the same way the Scots and all the rest of them treat their saints' days - St Andrew, St Patrick and my answer was no. That would mean we would become a feeble little nation like them and we're showing every sign of doing just that. H.G. Wells has this wonderful phrase - "the English are the only nation without national dress". It is a glory that we don't have such a thing. If you want to be academic about it, there are two completely different patterns of nationalism in the British Isles - the Celtic nationalism of Scotland, Wales, Ireland, which is entirely typical nineteenth century European nationalism, an invention based on folklore, supposed authentic peasant cultures which are entirely fictional, national dress, national music and some goddamn awful national poet like Burns. English nationalism went through that phase under Henry VIII. But if you do really want me to go back to being abusive - I would say that Scotland's decisions with the Libyan bomber confi rms everything I said about them. If you want to see what happens when a country becomes 'little' - when you have a government that wouldn't make county councillors in England, and a Minister of Justice that is an underemployed solicitor - that's what you get. And I am not anti-Scottish, I love Scotland - my childhood holidays were there - apart from that fact it pissed with rain all the time. But Scotland's greatness took place not in medieval history when it was a catastrophe of a place, but in its long, long association with England and Britain. The transformation of Scotland from this deeply backward Presbyterian horror of the early 17th century - where you still hang a lad in the 1690s for denying the existence of the Devil - to this extraordinary 'Athens of the North' of the Scottish enlightenment, the amazing products of Glasgow University in the 18th century, is when Scotland looks out as part of a greater whole. What's happened of course is that Scotland is now looking in. It has become exactly like medieval Scotland - the clannishness, the introversion, chucking money at the Edinburgh Festival to make it 'more Scottish', that awful Parliament, the dreadful Parliament building. The self-indulgence of the whole thing, the complete sense of in-growing toenail; I mean Edinburgh has turned into a city where you can see its toes growing in.
What do you make of what this government has done to the constitution?
Catastrophic. One of the great problems is that when you have no written constitution, there is nothing that is actually entrenched. It's only respect for convention that holds you back, and Labour has a very bad record in this regard - going back to the Parliament Act - of forcing major constitutional change unilaterally. Always, of course, in the name of social justice and nice things like that. The situation that we find ourselves in now is that our structure of government is broken.
So what's the Starkey recipe for fixing it?
We need a version of the American constitution. When you think of all the silly fuss over the office of Lord Chancellor - when did a Lord Chancellor last do any serious harm? The alleged confusion of political and judicial functions. What's been so striking about a lot of Labour constitutional reform is that on the one hand it's done big things that it shouldn't have done, and it's also done little things that there was no need to do like fiddle around with the position of Lord Chancellor. The catastrophe is one body being both the executive and the legislative. It means that it does neither job very well. In particular our Parliament is useless as a legislature. It's why our legislation is so awful. It's why, of course, MPs have actually got no function. MPs now are, at best, overpaid social workers. What we need, I think, is something very much like the American model, and I would go the whole hog. I would have a directly elected Prime Minister. The emergence of somebody like Gordon Brown, who is so totally unsuited to the office and never actually been subject to the test of election, would be unthinkable in America, because from primaries onwards you are subject to this test. We should have something very much like the American cabinet, which is outside the legislature. We should have an elected Lords. The obvious basis for the Lords are the old counties. The catastrophe of the semi-abolition of the old counties under Heath was a catastrophe. Incidentally, there's only been one government that's as bad as this and that's Heath's. Heath and Joseph together were a catastrophe. Every single thing they touched turned to something brown. I would create a second chamber that has two members elected from each county.
You were quite rude about the Queen. What about Prince Charles, what's your view on him?
I wasn't rude about the Queen...
You called her a "provincial house wife".
Well that's right. It's what she is. And provincial house wives are not without virtue, my mother was one. They are not without virtue at all, and ...
Why were you happy to receive your CBE from a "provincial housewife"?
I didn't, I received it from the crown. [Laughs]. She's had the virtues of solidity, of good sense, of rugged determination to stick at the job, and she's had the vices of a complete lack of imagination, of style, of no interest in anything but horses and farming.
I learnt the other day that she's a supporter of my team, West Ham United.
Well there you are that's even more of a problem then isn't it [laughter]? Charles, you know, is almost the mirror image. I like the idea that somebody gets excited about things like architecture and the environment. Far too few people in Britain do. He's also got an extraordinarily impressive track record, which really is worth thinking about, in organisational terms. Think of things like The Prince's Trust. It's one of the few bodies in Britain that's got any kind of serious record in genuine rehabilitation, of genuinely getting the young out of this dreadful rut of three-generational unemployment - and as you know we now have some 20 per cent plus of the nation stuck in that rut. Anybody that can help [them] get out is a good thing. I mean, poor Prince Charles, he is in one sense profoundly conservative, but like me he's a child of the 60s. And you know he found himself, like Henry VIII, shipwrecked against concepts of marriage as a kind of public act, and the desire for private happiness - and he didn't have Henry VIII's available methods of solving the problem [laughs].
What do you think of Nick Clegg?
[Sighs] Do I think anything at all of Nick Clegg? Quite a good looking young man but I mean... There's a sort of 'who he' quality about him isn't there?
Going back to the Scotland, Wales issue, are you in favour of an English Parliament?
In the current arrangement you certainly need something like that. We probably need a genuinely federal system. I can see lots of reasons why, for historic nations that have come together as Britain did, this would actually be a rather good way of managing things. What I think is much more important, and I care about much more, would be a revival of local government. We've recently acquired a house in America in a little town on the Chesapeake called Chestertown. It's 4,500 people, it's a retirement community. I was entranced by the town. The core of it's 18th and 19th century - lovely and safe and handsome and a civilised community - but what strikes you about it is that it's like going back to my childhood in a rather bigger town, Kendal in Westmorland [now Cumbria] which was then 20,000 but is probably a bit bigger now.When I was a boy, Kendal had its own fire service, it had its own police force, it had its own mayor and council that were responsible for virtually everything that mattered. Chestertown still has. Now we have this ludicrous argument for the professionalisation of services but if you're in Kent, where I am, they're all 30 miles away. Ditto police. Four thousand five hundred people is twice the size of medieval York. London under Henry VIII was 50,000. Medieval York was capable of sustaining its guilds, contributing to the building of its cathedral, that vibrant civic life. Again one of the reasons for the kind of disease and sense of atrophy in national politics is that politics should build itself from the grass-roots up. The roots have withered because people genuinely don't control their own lives. It's absurd that the basic unit of government in London now is well over quarter of a million. Antony Jay published a book arguing that the natural human unit is about a legion or a regiment - it's about 1000 people. [He argues that] a group like that, where a high degree of common knowledge is possible, is the obvious unit. I think it's too small. Again you see what's so different about America is that the federal government can't change local government. Local government - the county, city structure - is an absolute given. It's embedded within the law. Look at the number of different arrangements that have been made for the performance of justice in the last 15 or 20 years. There's a complete disconnection between units of local government and how the judiciary works, whereas in America there are the courts at county level, the courts at state level, the courts at federal level, and there is a very close relationship between those areas and political boundaries. Again, look at the courthouse. We've spent all our time knocking wonderful Victorian courts down. In America the courthouse is nearly always one of the great centres of a town or township with an immense pride and history to it. Whereas we've gone in for perpetual deracinating change. I mean look at the National Health Service, the millions, billions, trillions that have been squandered on perpetual rejigging, rejigging, rejigging.
Oh come on, you know you're not allowed to criticise the NHS. You've almost committed anact of treason if you do that.
Bevan I think was basically deranged. Why should that particular set of arrangements become the definition of patriotism?
Particularly after 60 years.
It bears about as much relationship to modern Britain as, you know, the Christianity of the Bible does [laughter]. It's a joke, but we've touched on a very interesting point. With the loss of belief in real political institutions what you do is retain belief but it becomes a kind of mere sentimentalism. The most powerful force in English public life currently is an absolute sentimentalism. And the worst sort of sentimentalism is that which surrounds the National Health Service. It leads to a refusal to think seriously about things. Again the embrace of certain types of multiculturalism and whatever, they're forms of gross sentimentality. Refusal to analyse, refusal to look fairly and squarely at consequences.

Read the full interview HERE. You can subscribe to the print edition of Total Politics HERE.

The Daley Dozen: Friday

1. Paul Waugh on Gordon's use of the 'c' word.
2. Tory Radio on an election internet free for all.
3. Cranmer exposes the disgusting nature of James Macintyre's 'racism in the Tory party' article.
4. PoliticalBetting.com reveals the odds in the Bedford mayoral race.
5. Pink News announces that Adam Price MP is standing down from Parliament.
6. Sharpe's Opinion looks forward to a trip to the LibDem Conference.
7. I think it is safe to say that Donal Blaney is not a fan of Ivan Massow. He is not alone.
8. Working Class Tory on Eric Pickles & the LibDems.
9. Lynne Featherstone MP has had a makeover.
10. Stephen Tall on the state of the LibDem blogosphere.
11. Dizzy's a bit hacked off with the Telegraph.
12. Norsheen Bhatti explains her decision to defect from the LibDems.

And finally, make sure you add Iain Martin's new blog to your favourites. He's moved from the Telegraph to the Wall Street Journal.

UPDATE: Just seen THIS post from Quaequam's James Graham. He reacts to charges of bullying and unburdens himself. Well worth a read. He's a pussycat really.

Quote of the Day

"There is no way Derren Brown is going to control the nation.
It's bad enough that we have that Gordon Brown doing the same thing.
We do not need another Brown trying to achieve something equally as stupid."

From a Yahoo Message Board

Another LibDem PPC Sees the Light

On the eve of their conference, the LibDems suffered another defection to the Conservatives today. James Keeley, their PPC in Skipton & Ripon, has jumped ship, becomimg the ninth LibDem PPC to quit the LibDems for the Tories in the last couple of years, along with one MEP and more than 50 councillors.

Defections are never one way traffic, but this does now seem to be a bit of a trend.

Off Message Labour Candidates: Part 94

I suspect Labour's candidate in Folkestone & Hyde, Donald Worsley, might be in trouble after his comments to the Romney Marsh Times.

“Top of the reasons for the euro [elections] disaster must surely be the Government’s failure to honour its Manifesto pledge to call a referendum on a New European Treaty. Such serious pledges once given must never be denied.”

Indeed so.

Will the Irish Capitulate to Blackmail?

You might be forgiven for not knowing this, but in only two weeks' time -on 2 October - Ireland goes to the polls to vote for the second time on the Lisbon Treaty. Bearing in mind how much coverage it got the first time around this side of the Irish sea, you might well ask why it has received scant coverage this time. Could it be because certain people think if it doesn't get hyped up the Irish will vote the "right way"?

Looking in from the outside it seems to me that the mainstream parties are trying to use the terrible economic circumstances to pressurise the people into voting yes, on the basis that if they don't the inward investment which provides to many jobs will not be forthcoming. I'd like to think the Irish people will be intelligent enough to see through this, but all the polls still point to a victory for the Yes campaign. Despite this, Andrew Hawkins from ComRes has just twittered that he expects a 'no' vote. I hope he's right, but as they say north of the border, I have me doots.

Logic should dictate that the Irish would stick to their guns. Nothing has materially changed since they voted 'no' the first time apart from the fact that the levels of threat from EU leaders as to the consequences of another 'no' vote have increased. Do the Irish want to get a reputation for raising a white flag to blackmail? I do hope not.

Slugger O'Toole has twelve essays on the Lisbon campaign, from both perspectives.
Nabidana (a Tory living in Dublin) has some decent posts on the campaign.

The Daley Dozen: Thursday

1. Your Mandate list the Top 7 Unguarded Moments of politicians.
2. Tory Rascal has a sneek preview of Labour's conference agenda.
3. Our Kingdom diagnoses what's wrong with the LibDems.
4. Red Rag analyses the travails of Baroness Scotland.
5. Nigel Evans MP on how to breathe new life into farming.
6. Paul Linford on the lost albums of Paddy Mac.
7. Paul Waugh on Ed Miliband's sibling loyalty.
8. A LibDem Voice writer supports an English Parliament.
9. Charlotte Gore on Nick Clegg's move towards the Tories.
10. Simon Fletcher says 'move along now, nothing to see here'.
11. Norfolk Blogger loves Iain D...
12. PoliticalBetting.com on the woes of the Irish No Campaign.

Quote of the Day: Scotland Edition

"We are cracking down hard on employers who flout the immigration laws."
Baroness Scotland, Lords Hansard, 13 June 2007, col 1697)

Sniffing the Wind

The IPPR think tank events at the Labour and Tory conferences have rather contrasting titles. At Labour their fringe is titled

'New Labour - dead or alive?'

Meanwhile, their event at the Tory conference is rather more upbeat...

'What should the first 100 days of a conservative government look like?'

The IPPR isn't the only think tank to have lost confidence in Labour: NESTA has two events at Lib Dem conference this year, three at Labour - and five at Tory conference.

I think it's called sniffing which way the wind is blowing.

Is Capitalism Wrong?

Last night's Richard Bacon Show on 5 Live covered a lot of ground. Probably the most interesting discussion came between 12 and 1 when we had a discussion under the theme: "Is Capitalism Wrong?" The two guests were Mark Littlewood from progressive Vision and a Marxist Professor called Alex Calinnicos.

It got quite heated between me and the good Professor at one stage after he made some disparaging remarks about a woman who called in who had started her own business. He was very happy to slag off the capitalist system but at no point was he able to come up with suggestions for anything different or better. I cannot abide academics who pontificate about the faults of something without being able to articulate an original thought of their own about how to solve it. I am sure he writes very learned books, but even his critique of capitalism seemed to be fundamentally flawed. The discussion can be heard from 1.39 until the end of the programme on the iPlayer.

Earlier we talked about Jimmy Carter's outrageous comments about critics of Obama's healthcare plans are driven by racism, Baroness Scotland's troubles and why the British are so bad at complaining.

Why Post Office Workers Should Strike

Apparently one of the reasons for post office workers voting on strike action is the outrageous demand from management that post office staff should work five day weeks, eight hours a day. How very dare they.

The Trouble With Baroness Scotland

When I was on the Richard Bacon Show last night the news came through that Baroness Scotland was in trouble for employing an illegal immigrant as her housekeeper. I made the point that if she was an American politician her resignation would follow within 24 hours but I doubted that would happen here. Now, I am not so sure. Her defence was that she had seen documents which appeared to prove the status of the housekeeper. But as Guido points out, that isn't actually a defence in a court of law. And if she isn't prosecuted, won't that set a precedent for other employers who, through maybe no fault of their own, find themselves in the same position. One rule for the rulers and one rule for everyone else?

Also, it is said that the woman concerned had been paying tax and has a National Insurance number. She was originally here on a student visa. Shouldn't there be a system for NI numbers to become invalid once a visa runs out? It's called joined up government.

LBC at 8 and Five Live From 10.30pm

There will be two doses of my dulcet tones on your wireless this evening.

At 8pm I'll be talking about the news events of the week on LBC for an hour alongside Claud Moraes MEP and LibDem London Assembly member Caroline Pidgeon.

And then at 10.30pm it's two and a half hours with Richard Bacon on 5 Live as presenter's friend. We're discussing how pushy you should be in complaining about bad service, whether criticism of Obama's healthcare plan is motivated by racism, and in the midnight debate asking 'Is Capitalism Wrong?'

If you've got views on any of those issues take part in the programme by texting 85058, emailing bacon@bbc.co.uk or calling 0500 909693.

And before that I'm off to the Garrick to the launch of Ion Trewin's biography of the late great Alan Clark. Just in case you're interested.

Labour Gives More Taxpayers' Money to the Unions

Outrageous. THIS is the way Labour is funding its election war chest. It uses taxpayers' money to give to the Unions to "modernise" through the Union modernisation fund. And then the unions give it back to the Labour Party in the form of donations. In other areas it would be called a kind of protection racket.

Trade unions’ efforts to support vulnerable workers were given a boost today as Lord Young announced Government funding for fourteen new projects at the TUC Annual Congress.

A total of £2.46 million will be made available to help unions improve their ability to meet the needs of hard-to-reach groups of vulnerable workers. It will be matched with at least an equivalent union contribution.

The money will be distributed under Round Three of the Union Modernisation Fund which provides financial assistance to trade unions and their federations for innovative projects with the potential to transform their effectiveness. Bids are assessed by an independent Supervisory Board comprising individuals from union, academic and industry backgrounds.

I presume this sort of thing will be among the first to be banned by a Conservative government. If the unions want to modernise they can pay for it themselves.

An Evening With Sir Les & Dame Edna

Last night I went to see Sir Les Patterson and Dame Edna Everage at the Royal Albert Hall. What a disappointment. I last saw them on stage about 15 years ago. I remember leaving the theatre with my cheekbones hurting because I had laughed so much. It was rather different last night. It started well with Les Patterson delivering 15 minutes of the kind of filth we have grown to love him for - but then it all went wrong. He then proceeded to deliver a rambling monologue, accompanied by a full orchestra, about a story called "Peter and the Shark". It wasn't funny, it wasn't memorable. In fact, it wasn't anything. Few people could work out the point of it, apart from filling 25 minutes.


Then Dame Edna came on and did her usual stuff, all of which was amusing and well received. She then brought out this huge file and then spent thirty minutes giving is a musical history of Australia, again accompanied by an orchestra and also a full choir. There were moments of humour, but for the most part it was dreadful. The only bits of light relief came when she missed her cues completely.

OK, I suppose the Albert Hall isn't the idea venue for pure comedy, but I think most people just wanted pure, unadulterated Dame Edna and Sir Les. And what they got was something very different. I'd estimate that a sixth of the audience left before the end. I have to admit I was very tempted to join them.

An Adult Invitation to John Prescott

You'd think a former Deputy Prime Minister might have a bit of decorum, wouldn't you? Possibly not in John Prescott's case but you can live in hope. Apparently Mr Prescott took exception to this rather innocuous passage in my recent post about my trip to Armenia.

One great thing about Armenia is that they cannot abide John Prescott. Apparently he came here as an election observer and achieved the unique distinction of annoying both the government and the opposition.

It's the truth. He was there for the Council of Europe overseeing the Armenian elections. For all I know he did a sterling job, but I was left in no doubt about what the Armenians thought about him.

I'm told that Mr Prescott is furious with me and that he was behind the release of some prisoners in Armenia and that he is really proud of what he did there. Now if you were a former Deputy Prime Minister and a world statesman, what would you do? Give me a call and explain your role? Drop me an email? Write about it on your blog? No, not in Mr Prescott's case. He has a different way of dealing with the likes of me. He gets his son to photoshop an image of me to post on Twitpic.


Oh how we laughed! I won't respond in kind. What I will do is invite Mr Prescott to tell us what he achieved in Armenia and I will happily post it on the blog. Isn't that the adult thing to do?

PS Isn't this sort of prank further evidence that most of John Prescott's Tweets and much of his blog is actually written by his son, David? Nothing wrong with that, but why not just admit it.

Brown: "We'll Cut Too, But Not Just Yet"

I haven't read anyone else's view of Brown's speech to the TUC yet, but I have to say I thought it was the worst delivered speech he has made. It was full of stumbles, hesitancy and repetition. Indeed, I am sure he repeated a whole passage twice. Listening to it in the car on 5 Live I did my usual thing of trying to imagine I was a floating voter listening to it. And there was nothing in it that would have persuaded me that here was a man with a vision for Britain's future. He still used the same tired old phrases. I had thought that Darling had persuaded him not to use the line about saving 500,000 jobs as it couldn't be substantiated, but he used it again in this speech. His criticism of the Conservatives was so laboured that it seemed as if he was just going through the motions. Indeed, it was a little odd for him to criticise Conservative public spending cuts, when his people were spinning that he was about to copy them. It's a major strategic error for Brown to go down this road.

However wrong the phrase "Labour investment, Tory cuts' was, it was a simple message to sell. I challenge anyone to come up with a four word slogan for the current Labour policy. "We'll cut too but it won't hurt as much" or "We'll cut too, but not just yet" is the best I can come up with.

What was most intriguing was the moment when Brown said Labour would spend less on unnecessary things and low priorities. Which rather begs the question as to why any money was being spent in the first place on unnecessary things...