The outgoing administration now admits to mistakes they previously refused to concede including selecting new Prime Ministers without holding an election.

The new PM "must steer the economy back to sustainable growth after a crushing recession, and tackle record unemployment"

Now if Gordon would just oblige we could take these parallels to their natural conclusion...

Hat tip to Sarah M

5 favourites quotes:

1. "I've got nothing nice to say about the EU at all...... I really haven't"
2. "It saps the life and the icing off of our farmers"
3. "I have no faith that anything good will come out of it. It'll take ages, it'll be disappointing and it'll be unclear and there will be loopholes"
4. "I wish it never existed"
5. "Frankly, I only care about Great Britain"

Hear Hear! Although if the Tax Payers Alliance had found out about his views 6 months ago they could have asked him to act in this:



On a very similar note: half of the Two Fat Ladies Clarissa Dickson Wright rails against the Labour Government, labelling laws and anything else that takes her fancy. Well worth a read. Find it here

Thank you so much to all the readers who voted me to 55th in the Total Politics top 100 Conservative blogs. I have only been doing this for 3 months now so to even be in the list is fantastic.

Click the Top 100 badge to the right for the full list

Thanks again

Yesterday saw the story of Alex Hilton (Labour parliamentary candidate for Chelsea and Fulham and prominent Blogger) setting up a fake website that appeared to be from the Mayor of Baltimore. Mr Hilton issued a fake statement from the Mayor that attacked Chris Grayling for his "Wire" comments.

Many were taken in by the website including the Independent, The Guardian, The BBC and the Baltimore Sun as well as a wide variety of bloggers. Reactions after the realisation of it's fabrication were also varied. Iain Dale found it entertaining, Paul Burgin found it slightly bemusing, A Tory seemed furious (although he/ she is at everything), KeepRightOnline simply mocked those who missed a few obvious giveaways of it's spurious validity. The Indpendent showed anger at being outwitted by a mere mortal but still showed slight hints of humility.

However it was Guido Fawkes' reaction that interested me. In it he attacks so called "churnalism" or the

"form of journalism in which press releases, wire stories and other forms of pre-packaged material are used to create articles in newspapers and other news media in order to meet increasing pressures of time and cost without undertaking further research or checking" (Wikipedia)

While I see his point that one should always check sources before using them the attack seemed to branch further than that into attacking those who simply republish certain stories or other items. As someone who has done this in the past I feel I should offer a quick defence.

1. It is quite possible that no further comment is necessary especially if you are drawing attention to a smaller opinion piece that you whole heartedly agree with but is unlikely to receive a wide audience
   
   
2. Guido seems to often exempt himself from this by adding a single line of red text. Hardly a huge improvement.
   
   
3. As a blogger but also as a student I spend far too much time on the Internet. As a result I probably come across some articles, videos and other items that most people have neither the time or inclination to find but may still be interested by. If I, or another blogger, then links or reproduces these it is presumably an attempt to highlight some more obscure items. After all it seems unreasonable that someone who actually works for a living will have the time to scour every newspaper, blog and tweet to the same extent.
   
   Readers who share similar interests or who have similar tastes can then access such materials without a lengthy search (and hopefully be grateful enough to click an advert or, as many of you already have, vote for their chosen blog/s)

I have great respect for Guido and recognise his readership and experience far exceeds my own but I do think this attack is unnecessary. I use certain sites that exist of nothing other than "churnalism" and find them incredibly useful and time saving.

Perhaps it is no coincidence that those Guido is attacking are of a left wing persuasion?

I'm back after a slightly prolonged absence. Let's start with another great video from Dan Hannan (although the interviewer is just a little bit useless)

From today I will be away from a computer until Tuesday or possibly Wednesday.

I have extended my Twitter feed (above) if you are desperate for my witty and insightful analysis...

Until next week just a few things to mull over:

1. Politicians actually supporting pubs and sensible drinking establishments? Surely not? Cameron's new plans for higher taxes on Strong lager, cheap cider and alcopops to subsidise lower taxes on normal beer, spirits and wine get my approval at least (although I'm not sure DC would want it). I am slightly concerned though that the increases are given in numbers while decreases are just vaguely alluded to. Hopefully this wont be just a money grab where beer and wine is cut by a penny just to fulfill their promise.
   
   
2. Fantastic news that Damian Green has actually won a battle to have his DNA taken off the database. Something to do with him being INNOCENT apparently. Now if they will just remove the other 850,000 innocents from the database we might even start becoming a free country.
   
   
3. I realise "X might give you cancer" (replace X with anything even remotely enjoyable or something you previously thought healthy) is one of the most overused stories in history but romantic candle lit dinners? Really?
   
   
4. Another type of story that I usually just pass over is the "oh look we have taken a tiny step against climate change that none of you can relate to, why aren't you clapping?"
   
   A case in point seemed to be this story about zero emissions formula one cars charmingly titled formula zero (which sounds just a little bit like a breast milk substitute). However I was pleasantly surprised by a couple of sections:
   
   

   "Capable of speeds of up to 120kph, they can easily take on conventional karts but their acceleration is the envy of normal petrol-powered engines"

   
   

   "We're running out of fossil fuels so we need a long term, smarter solution"

   
   

   "The industry can't survive if it doesn't change"

   
   
   Here we have a pursuit of fossil fuel alternatives not for some misguided idea of stopping carbon emissions but the much more sensible reason that we are actually going to run out of them at some point. They are pursuing alternatives to "keep the industry going" and in the process have created a car that can actually out-accelerate the older models. Isn't capitalism fantastic!
   
   
5. I was then further buoyed up by this article with a remarkably and uncharacteristically sensible statement from Lord Adonis. He is still planning on fighting global warming but is suggesting that it is technology not personal sacrifice that should be doing so. Maybe that is why Dave got away with his privately funded flights totalling over 20,000 air miles.

Dan Hannan has come in for a lot of frankly undeserved criticism in the last few days. He potentially could have opened up a much needed ideological debate on the future of healthcare in this country. Instead his enemies have resorted to mud slinging and personal attacks rather than actually engaging and accepting that the NHS is in dire need of massive reform.

Still this hasn't stopped quite a lot of it being funny...

Here are a couple of favourites:

1. From the FT:
   
   

   It is January 2009 in the Downing Street bunker and Gordon Brown’s political fortunes are ebbing. The prime minister’s allies are trying to formulate a counter-attack.

   
   
   Ed Balls: And so we use our finest scientists to create a Tory robot whose extreme views are abhorrent to modern society.

   
   
   Damian McBride: It’s still early days but the pilot is promising.

   
   
   Charlie Whelan: Our cyborg will provide a constant reminder that David Cameron’s “modernising” reforms are skin deep.

   
   
   Gordon Brown: I am intrigued. Please proceed.

   
   
   Ian Austin: He will go on Fox TV every week saying the NHS is an evil deathstar which must be dismantled.

   
   
   Damian McBride: He will speak in the clipped tones of a 1950s BBC presenter. And we will name him . . . Dan Hannan.

   
   
   Gordon Brown: I like it. It rhymes not once; but twice.

   
   
   Sue Nye: How about Edward Redwood?

   
   
   Tom Watson: Surely no one will believe he is for real. How many people do you know who hate the NHS? Outside America, I mean. And won’t people suspect when he just pops up from nowhere? Won’t they wonder why they’ve never heard of him before?

   
   
   Ian Austin: Our creation is an MEP.

   
   
   Ed Balls: I think I’ve spotted the biggest flaw. Cameron will sack him straight away – won’t he?

   
   
   
2. From You Have Been Watching:
   

You know how it is, those long weeks when the children get bored, stuck for new ideas, they’ve had that week away from home and now they’re under your feet again, getting into all sorts of mischief.

Now your worries are over, our new toy will keep them amused for days on end, you can build it up, knock it down, twist it, turn it, and spin it whichever way you like, you can try all sorts of combinations, and it’s virtually indestructible!

But be warned mum, this game will cause arguments galore. Don’t let the little monsters take a pique and throw the toys around and don’t let some other rotter take them away!

Pinched from Curly's corner shop

Today the Government has appointed former Strictly Come Dancing judge Arlene Phillips as its "Dance Tsar".

I realise Brown and co. are desperately trying to employ people as fast as they lose their other jobs to hide what a horrendous mess they have made of the economy but this is a step too far surely? I can't really see Arlene joining the dole queue.

Still aside from the slightly comical nature of this it is very concerning for a number of reasons. I will restrict myself to just 3:

1. Adding another "celebrity" to the Government's ranks is akin to shaking some keys above the public's heads and shouting look at the shiny thing so they don't notice the floor crumbling away beneath them
   
   As Ann Widecombe said this afternoon:
   
   

   "Gordon Brown seems to be every bit as celebrity-obsessed as a teenage girl"

   
   
   
2. I cannot find a mention of if she is to receive a salary If she is or if she just claims expenses it is still too much. A dance tsar sounds about as good a use of our money as a custard shogun.
   
   
3. When discussing plans she said:
   
   

   "People will do things if they are there and they are easy, like brushing your teeth"

   
   I find it hard to take serious anyone or thing which suggests they or it will make exercise easy. It is very reminiscent of adverts on late night TV selling the "latest technology". Exercise is not meant to be easy. If it was then it wouldn't work.

Hopefully it will be an unpaid role. Hopefully it won't reopen the ridiculous debate over whether her dismissal was "ageist". Hopefully it will at least encourage a few people to get a bit more exercise.

However realistically it is a pointless and hopefully inexpensive side show. It is typical of this government and the fact that it can even be floated as a reasonable idea is a damning statement on the state of health and lack of personal responsibility in swathes of the population.
.

Seeing as this is my 100th post and we are in the depths of silly season I thought I would highlight a few of my favourite posts from the past couple of months in a quick round of self congratulatory, self indulgent back slapping.

1. Seeing as it has become topical again I might as well start with my musings on the NHS which preceded the current furore by over 2 months!
   
   
2. From here I shall head back to the beginning (well almost) and my second proper post. In it I suggested David Cameron was behind the leaking of the expenses. Since then however I have learnt that John Bercow was also involved.
   
   Disclaimer: all conspiracy theories are meant entirely in jest and are simply intended as a humorous way of highlighting entertaining or interesting coincidence
   
   
3. However the following day I was shocked out of my reverie by the suggestion that Ed Balls might be Chancellor. There began a series of posts professing my hatred for this man's incompetence and hypocrisy.
   
   
4. Still a month later I was also bemoaning the present incumbent of number 11 and asking the question "What is the point of Alistair Darling?"
   
   
5. Soon after however being completely stunned by Labour's incompetence across the board I was even more surprised to see an all to similar situation in Japan.
   
   
6. Their incompetence was nothing compared to their cowardice however as they demonstrated in the next few days by bottling both the decision to call a by-election in Glasgow (leaving the residents without an MP for 6 months to save their own blushes) and the decision to make the necessary changes to the Freedom of Information act.
   
   
7. It has not all been anti Labour however. I saved some scorn for Clegg and his cronies. Sadly there has been no further change in Lib Dem policy since the meteor storms which would vindicate my assertion that their policies are linked to the stars.
   
   
8. While on the subject of Lib Dems perhaps now would be a good point to link the story of both David Radcliffe's political affiliation and stupidity (although they may be synonyms in his case)
   
   
9. A few posts have even strayed to the edge of politics and seem to have struck a chord while they were there. The destruction of a nice British summer's day following a rant from Jeremy Clarkson seemed to garner something of a response while my rant against cyclists (despite being one) resulted in quite a few congratulatory messages.
   
   
10. Still I think my favourite post thus far has been the frankly Shakespearean way in which Labour MPs resigned building up to the battle of European and local elections. The comparisons to Macbeth practically wrote themselves but I enjoyed it none the less.

Sorry for this self indulgent little trip down memory lane. Normal service resumes tonight or tomorrow.

While I am generally sympathetic to the Singapore healthcare model Daniel Hannan has been proposing (if not his NHS bashing) this is still quite funny:



For those who dont recognise it, it is a reworking of this Conservative poster:

In case you missed this story (unsurprisingly it is not on the front page websites of either the Guardian or the Independent) Australia's Senate has rejected the proposed Cap and Trade Emissions Plan by 42 votes to 30.

Various explanations are offered for this. 5 votes against were apparently Greens who thought it didn't go far enough. Most were from the Liberal/National coalition who had not had time to consider the economic impact. Ian Plimer claimed in the Spectator last month that his "anthropogenic global warming" denying book had a lot to do with it's defeat.

Whatever the reason it is fantastic to see this sort of legislation not simply being passed through due to guilt and a fear of "the consensus".

Maybe now at least one Government will actually have to try to make the case for global warming not simply appeal to the frankly dwindling "consensus" and tut at you until you agree.

"You can do anything but lay off of my blue suede shoes"

Peter Mandelson - 11th August 2009

Hillary Benn has gone all Malthusian on us and is suggesting we need what he calls a "food revolution".

To be fair a lot of what he is saying makes sense.

1. He suggests we need to be more self sufficient which is reasonable if a tad apocalyptic.
   
   
2. He recommends judging the food in the fridge on the way it looks and smells rather than the date on the packaging which again is fairly sensible. After all suppliers are generally just covering themselves with the dates and as a result often give them selves a day or two of breathing room to avoid penalty in our "litigation culture". As a result this will reduce the amount we throw away and mean we scrutinise what we eat more carefully.
   
   
3. He advocates more domestic production of the crops we are capable of doing so using apples as the obvious example.
   
   
4. He also warns of the future of agriculture in this country. Temperatures are anticipated to rise in this country (even if you doubt man made global warming sun activity is rising and the El Niño cycles are predicted to be more volatile in the next few years) so this once again seems fairly astute.
   
   
5. He praises farmer's markets, growing your own food and eating seasonally, things I am very much in favour of.
   

However there is one way of "revolutionising food" which he ignores completely and that is reforming or scrapping the EU's common agricultural policy (CAP).

1. He warns that

   "we saw last year, in some countries, riots because the price of food goes up"

   In 2004 the OECD estimated that the CAP added £6bn to Britain's food shopping bills. Surely if we are facing increasing prices due to shortages we should not be adding unnecessary costs on top of that?
   
   
2. He suggests we will need
   

   "a global market in which people are able to buy from each other that gives you the best combination of ensuring that you can feed people"

   
   Personally I find it hard to see how a market system which excludes and punishes those outside it, in the way the EU does, fits in to this vision.
   
   
3. He criticises the fact that we throw away 30% of what we buy and yet there are still often huge surpluses because of the CAP (although I will concede these are much reduced following several reforms).
   He also points out that this 30% waste is estimated at about £10bn a year. Quite coincidentally if you add the £4bn we pay directly in subsidies to the £6bn we pay as excess on our food we are wasting another £10bn right there.

Still credit is due to Mr Benn. As I say he makes several sensible proposals but surely he is ignoring the elephant in the room on this issue? A revolution cannot ignore the biggest problem simply because it is politically inconvenient.

The Medieval tradition of walking backwards away from the Queen is to be dropped due to health and safety concerns.

There are a number of responses here. Obviously those of an anti-monarchist persuasion will be pleased but is it really that much of a fuss to show a fairly simple sign of respect to the King or Queen?

Those of a stronger pro-Monarchy standpoint than myself will no doubt be outraged at this lack of respect. To them I would say that if the Queen reportedly "takes the view that it's far better for someone to walk normally than to fall over" I fail to see why it should bother anyone else.

What I would say however is that if someone is unable to take a few steps backwards without needing to call National Accident Helpline should they really be meeting the Monarch? Unless there is a medical reason why they can't surely this is the most basic test of suitability?

Perhaps any honour they receive should be rescinded if they fail to back away without tripping over their own feet? Any requests they are making should not be considered until after someone has managed to walk both backwards and forwards? No Government should be permitted to form if it's selected leader is able to put one foot behind the other as well as in front?

I hope people meeting the Queen and her successors will continue to show this most basic sign of respect not just for it's own merit but also to demonstrate that they can. It might also show who ever thought up this ridiculous change for the sake of "elf and safe-t" that we are capable of living our lives without their interference. Then again perhaps these pen pushers are exactly the sort who might need the scrutiny I suggest above and are just taking out their own incompetence on the rest of the population.

Lord Mandelson is returning to "run the country" tomorrow (actually being in charge not just pulling Gordon's strings). He flies back form the Rothschild Villa in Corfu to take the reins although notably not from Number 10. He is instead planning to use his Whitehall offices in what could be an attempt to highlight the fact that power-hungry Harman spent most of her time in charge in Downing Street.

However it seems whether he is sunning himself in the Mediterranean (not for too long or he'll disintegrate) or presiding over his ever expanding "Innovation and Skills" portfolio in Whitehall he can still entirely miss the point on higher education.

The Times is leading with the story that he will "Favour poor pupils" and try to give "applicants from poor families awarded a two-grade “head start” over better-off candidates". Even if we ignore it being completely unenforceable (even for Mandy) it is still a ridiculous announcement.

For a start any attempt to "improve social mobility" and get more kids from comprehensives in to the best Universities should start at the schools. It should not begin by apologising for their failures by effectively subsidising the grades they produce.

Secondly many Universities will already be doing this. They realise that some schools make it virtually impossible for even the brightest students to come out with 3 A's at A level and it is popular wisdom that the personal statement, references and interview matter much more than grades. Mandy seems oblivious to the fact that Universities do serve their own interests and therefore want the best students.

The admission tutors will have years of experience and be able to spot an, on paper, weaker candidate who will work flat out for three years and get a 1st compared to a private school trained, trust funded, spoilt rich kid who will do very little, scrape a 2.2 and then starting work at Daddy's firm. They will certainly be better at this than Mandy and his wide sweeping guidelines.

Finally there is a risk that adding a couple of grades will push kids into Universities that they are not suited to and are unable to keep up with. Some comprehensives do fail their students in some respects. However many, indeed I would venture the majority, are much better than public perception seems to grant them. As a result their pupils will achieve the grades they deserve come results day. Adding a couple of grades on top may push them into Universities that teach above their level and result only in disillusionment and higher drop out rates.

If Mandy really does want to improve social mobility and get children from all backgrounds in to the University then give Ed Balls a kick and concentrate on the failing schools. Stop badgering Universities who will continue to select the most suitable candidates without state interference.

If he really wants to make a difference then pull the rug from under Cameron's feet. Show some real courage and leadership and build more grammar schools.

Classic piece on John Redwood's blog. Discussing reality TV shows he mentions one he considered taking part in:

I was told they wanted me to run a fish and chip shop while the owner had a holiday. I thought about it, and agreed to the preliminary discussion. When I said I would use the presence of the TV to launch a marketing campaign, to swell the numbers using the shop they seemed a little worried. When I went on to say I would hire an extra staff member to handle the extra business, and give the existing staff a profit share as I expected a bumper week with the cameras around they said I would not be able to do that. I think they wanted a script where I was to fall out with the staff, not one where I would motivate them and help them earn a better paypacket.

God forbid these shows actually benefit the other people involved.

After all if the Tory didn't come across as a complete t**t (hat-tip to Cameron) it just wouldn't be good TV...

I particularly love

"Which is healthier? Grilled fish or a battered sausage"

I am also very, very pleased to see The Great Deception on the bookshelf behind his head. A must read for all Euro-sceptics/ realists. A single flick through should be enough to show why we desperately need, at the very least, a referendum on the Lisbon treaty. Go on Michael, dust it off.

Harriet Harman today has abandoned any credibility she still had. She spent the week bemoaning the plight of women in politics and demanding fewer men at the top. Now however there is one man she is backing to enter Parliament.

This man is Jack Dromey. Quite frankly he is a good pick for a Labour MP as he is one of the few men who can measure up to the unbelievable level of incompetence at the top of the party (male and female).

He has been the treasurer of the Labour party since 2004, a period which included the cash for peerages scandal. At the time he claimed he did not know about the £3.5 million that had entered Labour's bank accounts despite being the treasurer. That sort of financial incompetence suggests he might be after Alistair Darling's job in a few years.

Even his own party didn't believe him

Charles Clarke said:

"The treasurer should know about all the fundraising issues that arise" then went on to say he had "serious questions about Jack Dromey's capacity" before finally wondering "how well he was doing his work"

Still Dromey claimed he did not know and was deliberately "kept in the dark" by Number 10. I shall give him the benefit of the doubt on this. At the time he he "vowed never to be excluded from fundraising matters again".

One does wonder therefore why he was once again claiming ignorance in the donorgate scandal which saw David Abrahams illegally donate over £500,000 to the party through his secretary, a builder and a Conservative supporting lollipop lady. £5,000 of this money found its way to fund Ms Harman's succesful deputy leadership bid.

At the time another Labour MP, this time choosing to remain anonymous said this of Mr Dromey:

"Either he knew about Abrahams and he kept it quiet, or he’s such a useless treasurer he knew nothing about it. Either way, he failed to protect the party from this and either way he f***ed up and should go"

I would suggest that this man was being lined up for a safe seat so Harriet could show how incompetent men in politics really are. However that theory sort of falls flat on the basis that she has been married to him for nearly 30 years.

While I will not question him as a husband I do think it is worth questioning Harriet's judgement if she really thinks this man is worth wasting one of Labour's safe seats on. Then again another vote for her as the next leader couldn't hurt. That is if Dromey can work out how to vote and who to vote for at the same time.

My local evening paper yesterday carried the headline " Ashley Blake reveals he is terrified of going to jail". For those of you who don't know this is referring to the story of a BBC news reader and presenter who, after a small fray at the pub he owned went back to the bar, picked up a three foot wooden pole and then hit a 17 year old boy in the face with it. Later he threw the pole over a fence in an attempt to hide it from the police.

He has been tried and found guilty of unlawful wounding and attempting to pervert the course of justice. He is due to be sentenced next month with the judge suggesting that a jail sentence is the most likely outcome probably not least because of a string of prior offences in his youth.

I live about half a mile from the pub where the incident happened and had a drink or two there from time to time. I am shocked that the former owner scarred a young man for life and deceived the police. I am also frankly quite pleased that he is facing a fitting punishment.

What I am concerned with however is the tone of the article and the sympathy he seems to be receiving in the media and with the public. There seems to be an idea that because he has further to fall than most criminals means he should not face this sort of sentence.

He said this in an interview with the newspaper:

"It’s properly beginning to sink in and it’s inevitable that I will lose my job, everything I have worked so hard for"

I can think of little else to say other than the old adage concerning doing crime and time. He can wallow in self pity but to expect any from anyone else should be wishful thinking. To receive any should be unthinkable.

This man attacked someone with a weapon and left them with a constant reminder of the attack every time they look in the mirror. He was a man who came from difficult beginnings, had a wayward and occasionally criminal youth but then made good. In many ways he was something of a role model and proof of what anyone can achieve.

He should have known better and will probably have a lot more time to think about his actions. However at the end of the day he has nobody but himself to blame.

Radiohead have released a song of tribute to Harry Patch who will be buried tomorrow.

It can be downloaded here for £1 with all proceeds going to the British Legion.

The lyrics are based on an interview Harry gave on Radio 4 a few years ago.

A chilling track and a fitting tribute.

Education seems to be the topic of the day with the true extent of Nu Labour's failure to deal with their top three priorities being exposed. Test results published today show more than 3 million children have left primary school without a most basic level of education in the last 12 years.

This year a fifth if children left without being able to read and write properly.

However these figures seem to be fairly unreliable as thousands of papers have been sent back by furious teachers for remarking. So the real question is whether there is a serious problem in teaching or in examinations (or both).

Hopefully the Conservatives can go some way to answering this question with yesterdays policy announcement of an online library of past exam papers.

Michael Gove said this when announcing it:

"The Government treats exam papers like state secrets and refuses to publish them. This is wrong and a Conservative Government will create a free online library of all exam papers and scripts so there is full transparency and academic scrutiny of our exam system"

In order to determine how big the problem in our education system is we need transparency in exams and standards over time which hopefully this will achieve. However Labour are dismissing it as a "gimmick".

While it is not exactly a rock solid policy it is in my book a good move and it is clear that the "media-friendliness" of it is not the reason why Labour are resisting this idea.

They have over twelve years presided over declining standards and masked them with easier exams (having sat all of mine under their rule and studied some past papers in preparation I can attest to this). Revealing any sort of solid proof of this would show their various incompetencies and the scale of the money they have wasted that could have been used to actually help children not just make it look like they are.

This is not all however. This move could start a slippery slope. After all any more transparency in education might actually show how much of a liability to the party, country and human race Ed Balls is.

Another not particularly political post I'm afraid but I do think this is too good an idea not to pass on. You can now pick up parcels from your local pub rather than having to trek to the sorting office. Check it out at useyoourlocal.com or read about it here.

We are constantly being told of village Post Offices and pubs closing so perhaps this is an answer to stop communities falling apart all together? Now if we can just get Post Offices to sell beer...

N.B. the picture on the right is a protest against Harriet Harman who has been spouting more frankly sexist rubbish today this time blaming the financial crisis on too many male bankers. Personally I would blame it on two consecutive and increasingly incompetent Chancellors. They are both male though...

Clearly she is petrified that as scrutiny turns on her as a potential successor to Brown the public may realise how ignorant, inexperienced, under qualified and useless she truly is. Hence the huge "Look I'm a woman OK! It's so hard for me! My various failures are because of the men dominating politics not because I don't know what I'm doing" smokescreen.

Just a quick non-political rant:



I am a cyclist myself (partially because I can't afford any other transport so please keep clicking the ads ->) and so when I see things like what is shown in the video above I get particularly annoyed.

In my experience most cyclists keep to the side of the road, obey all the laws and are generally respectful to other road users. However these people involved in "Critical Mass" are giving all of us a bad name. No wonder I am being moaned at more and more for my preferred means of travel.

There is no need to "celebrate cycling" by blocking up the roads. In built up areas cycling cannot really be more than a means of getting from A to B, preferably without getting crushed under a bus or poisoned by exhaust fumes. Call me old fashioned but I generally think celebrations should be enjoyed and so if I were going to celebrate cycling it most certainly would not be in London or any other town for that matter. By all means get out on the bike, get some exercise and enjoy the experience but do it in the countryside not the city.

All this will achieve is a greater chance that you (and all other cyclists) will be cut in front of, blocked or knocked off your bike the other 30 days of the month by someone who was late for work last friday due to a load of over-excitable morons blocking the roads.

This morning Tory shadow broadcasting minister Ed Vaizey laid out several proposals for the BBC including selling off Radio 1 and forcing presenters who earn over £100,000 to reveal their salaries.

One wonders if the latter will apply to David Dimbleby. His £12million sale of the family business in 2001 and his notorious thrifty business attitude presumably mean he is not without a certain amount in the bank even after purchasing his £1.5million Sussex home.

He has often stated he does not continue working for money but for a love of the job but presumably still takes a salary of some sort. However the fact that he chooses to fly with Ryanair (even if he misses the flight) does cast some doubt on his earnings.

Perhaps he was under Harriet Harman's mysterious control when he booked his flights:

3 quick stories I want to highlight before curling up on by straw bed in the cell under Conservative HQ:

Harriet Harman has shown how utterly incompetent she is in handling the pursuit of any further equality legislation in this country. Her positively discriminating equality bill has already shown this beyond doubt but today she has actually said the following:

“Men cannot be left to run things on their own. I think it’s a thoroughly bad thing to have a men-only leadership"

No mention of meritocracy. No mention of picking those who can actually benefit and run the country. No mention of looking past gender, race or any other irrelevant demographic grouping in order to genuinely benefit the public rather than patronising them.

I suppose this is to be expected. If Labour cared about meritocracy they would not have decorated their cabinet with random pieces of "window dressing". If Labour cared about running the country to benefit it and not themselves they would have dissolved Parliament and called an election by now. And if Labour cared about helping the public rather than patronising them they would not have created the most over-extended, personal responsibility eradicating, counter cultural social security systems this nation or indeed world has ever seen.

Come on Harriet. Do the honourable thing. Resign. Do your bit to return democracy to this country. At least Jacqui Smith recognised she wasn't up to the job.





Secondly there is a chance for one of the more competent members of the cabinet to prove his mettle and potential suitability as a future Labour and perhaps national leader. Tory Bear reported on Alan Johnson's relatively sensible successes in dropping compulsory ID cards and releasing documents on the Hillsborough disaster. Now there is a real chance to show he can make strong and difficult decisions.

Two High Court judges have stated that Gary McKinnon could be tried in this country rather than extradite him to the US. This seems like an obvious choice as it still means he will have to face up to the charges against him but without the emotional trauma of extradition and with the help and support of his family. David Cameron said this:

"Gary McKinnon is a vulnerable young man and I see no compassion in sending him thousands of miles away from his home and loved ones to face trial. If he has questions to answer, there is a clear argument to be made that he should answer them in a British court"

Finally, and on a lighter note, Oxo cubes are to become X shaped after nearly a century of cube shaped stock making goodness. Not particularly political I know but it did remind me of this picture: