By-election in Crewe

So, before Gwyneth Dunwoody is even in the ground, the Labour party has called the by-election. I am in two minds about this. I will admit, when I first read the news, my second thought was 'wonder what her majority was?', a bit tasteless in retrospect, but we are all political anoraks here, whether we will admit it or not. So, if I thought that then I guess I can't condemn Labour for doing what they have done. However, it still just doesn't sit right. There is a big difference between having a look at a majority and actually calling a by-election. I would have thought the least the Labour party would do is wait until her funeral, before starting the political fun and games.

But no, it seems they are scared, so want to rush the campaign in an attempt to keep the seat. Politically, I understand where they are coming from. Personally, I think it is tasteless and quite contemptible.

119p a litre?!?!

Good Lord. I remember in the Israel-Lebanon war a couple of years ago when I nervously watched petrol climb from 91p to 99p a litre. There was all this talk of commotion when petrol hit the £1 a litre price but now that it seems to climb every day people seem less willing to shout out about it.
It's ludicrous, we know that most of that price is tax so can't the government cut it until oil is less than $120 a barrel?
After all, the only reason diesel is now higher than petrol is because of these 'tree hugging, cider swigging, leaf clothed Rod Hull lookalikes'.

Apologies & Exciting news

I must apologise for my lack of blogging recently. I have had a rather serious bout of tonsilitis which coincided with my trip home to Leeds. Hopefully I'll have time to blog more now.

Anyway, big news! Myself (and hopefully Arnie) will be at the Conservative Party Conference 2008 in Birmingham. We'll be blogging continuously throughout, giving you up-to-date news and an account of exactly what's going down.

Let us know if you'll be there and we can say 'Hi'.

Directly elected Mayors?

Well, a think tank has come out in support of every town in England having a directly elected Mayor. You see, currently the legislation is there to allow this, but 5% of the inhabitants of a district need to sign a petition calling for a directly elected mayor, before a referendum can be held. Easier said than done, I am sure you will agree.

I don't know, I half agree with the proposal. I do believe big cities should go down this road, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham, places like that. As we have seen in London, a directly elected Mayor can have profound consequences on a city, re-energising politics, and providing a figurehead for the city. At the moment, most Council Leaders are anonymous figures with no name recognition at all, but this proposal could change all of that. These figures would have the public support to push forward radical proposals.

However, I do have some misgivings. My understanding is that currently a directly elected Mayor can overrule the council chamber on a great number of issues. This needs to be worked out. After all, what is the point of a councillor if they hold no power, and can have their views summarily overridden by the executive? Also, the think tank (IPRR) suggest this for every single district in England. For that proposal, I completely disagree. Where districts are closely related to big cities, I can see the argument. However, most aren't. A 'Mayor of Leeds' would be a powerful figure, could we say the same for a 'Mayor of Suffolk Costal'?

UKIP gets an MP!

Big news folks. Just as I predicted, the former Conservative MP, Bob Spink, who had the whip withdrawn over a constituency matter, has joined UKIP. So, UKIP now has representation in both houses of Parliament.

I am in two minds about this. On one hand I am moderately pleased, because someone in the Commons will now be able to properly articulate the point of view that calls for a withdrawal from the EU. However, on the other hand, I feel this is not the right way to go about achieving that representation. The people of the Castle Point Constituency never elected a UKIP MP, they elected Bob Spink, and as much as we like to think otherwise, it was to do with what colour rosette he was wearing, the man himself didn't have a massive amount to do with it.

In this age of party over candidate, how about an automatic by election for every defecting MP?

Equality legislation..

Before I start, yet again I apologise for how light the blogging is in the last few days. I am swamped with work, and will be for a couple of weeks.

Anyway, yes, equality legislation. You may have worked out, I have my misgivings about this 'equality' business. Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that we should not strive for a more equal society, it is just the way we are going about it that concerns me. Instead of actually moving towards equality, we are just moving the discrimination from women/ethnic minorities to men. I don't see how that is any less evil than where we were originally.

However, I am not the person who makes these decisions, so there we go. In fact, I only bring this up again because of something rather absurd I have read, today. You see, it seems the Government is concerned by royal succession. A perfectly acceptable topic to be concerned about, I am sure you agree. What is amusing me is the tools they are using to alter how succession to the Crown is governed. Currently, the first born male gets the job, even if there is an older female. This situation has existed for centuries, so it is nothing new. I am not saying I agree or disagree with that rule, it is just the way it is.

Step forward this Government. The Solicitor General (a woman, for your information) has decided to rectify this injustice, and change the rules so the first born becomes monarch, regardless of gender. Fine, no big deal. However, how is she going to achieve this? That is right, using a piece of equality legislation.

Is is just me, or does using equality legislation on a role that is populated using the principal of hereditary succession seem a bit silly?

Gwyneth Dunwoody has died?

Iain Dale is reporting that Gwyneth Dunwoody has passed away, this evening. If this is true, it is a sad day. Mrs Dunwoody was a very impressive MP, never afraid to speak her mind, standing up for what she thought was right, rather than taking decisions based on instructions from the whips office.

This is a massive loss for the Labour party, Parliament and everyone involved in politics, no matter what party you are in.

Oh dear

Angela Smith seems to have taken a leaf out of Gordon Brown's book. You see, earlier she suggested she was going to resign from the government. But now she has decided not to, and 'unresigned'. It seems dithering is not a trait confined to Gordon Brown, in the present government.

Surely her position must be untenable now, though? Earlier on in the day she made it clear she was ready to resign, as the abolition of the 10% rate was unacceptable to her. However, for her now to go back on that, and decide not to resign after all? She has publicly stated she disagrees with a fundamental part of the government's economic policy, so how can she continue to serve in that government? Especially as she works as a PPS for the second in command at the Treasury (I could make a joke about that making her Alistair Darling's PPS. I wont).

This is even worse than a resignation. A resignation shows a split in government, pretty bad, I think you will admit. But what does an unresignation show? Incompetence? Idiocy? A lack of principal? Hardly virtuous traits in the eyes of the electorate..

Junior Minister resigns

Oooh, big news tonight, boys and girls. It seems that a junior member of the government, Angela Smith, has done the honourable thing and resigned. She puts this down to the abolition of the 10p tax rate.

This would be big news under any circumstances. However, if we look at who she was a PPS to, we see why this is especially important. Basically, Mrs Smith was the assistant to the number two at the Treasury, Yvette Cooper, who is married to Gordon Brown's number 2, Ed Balls. This is not just a random Labour PPS, this is a woman who has been involved in detailed economic policy making, hardly a peripheral figure. So, although this is not the end of the world, it must come as quite a blow to Gordon Brown, at a very difficult time.

I am not old enough to remember the last days of the Major government (well, I can remember the 90's, but children don't pay a great deal of attention to politics). I imagine it felt something like this.

Wendy Alexander

On a personal note, I apologise for the quantity and quality of my blogs recently. It is the last three weeks of University, so things are a bit hectic at the moment. You might have to put up with Ben making the majority of the posts for a few more weeks (I feel your pain :P).

As a committed unionist, I try to make time in my day to read the Herald and the Scotsman, after all, it is always important to know what is happening in northern Britain*. I too often find that the BBC considers anywhere outside London and the South East region an after thought, barely worth reporting on. I would read the Western Mail, I tried once, I tried really hard, but it was just so boring. I assume once the Assembly turns into a Parliament then Welsh politics will become a bit more interesting (I hope, anyway..), so maybe I will give it another go then. At the moment, I would recommend giving it a miss, though.

Anyway, what I want to talk about is something I read in the Herald today. It was a report of a press conference given by Wendy Alexander, leader of the Scottish Labour party in the Scottish Parliament (that is such an unimpressive job title, it wasn't great before, but now the last four words have been added on, it is terrible). It was a text book Scottish Labour performance. Instead of offering a positive alternative agenda, the Herald report makes the entire press conference sound like one long attack on the Government. According to Wendy, the Scottish Government is 'one big let-down', her attack seemingly suggesting that the sky will fall if the SNP are allowed to continue for much longer. Some of her criticisms were frankly absurd, including one relating to the fact that Scottish university students were given less in grants and loans than their English counterparts. Well, duh. If we English didn't have to pay £3k in tuition fees each year then we wouldn't have to be given such loans. She also criticised the free prescription plans. Wonder if she condemned the WAG for doing the same thing?

I could go on. I wont, though. I don't want to attack every point she made, because some might be valid. What I actually want to do is just to say how silly this strategy is. I have said it before, and I will say it again. The SNP are in government now, and they seem quite popular. From an English perspective, the Scottish Government strikes me are perfectly competent. That is why Wendy will never make any headway with this strategy. Negative attacks won't work, they just look like scaremongering. Labour seem to have learnt nothing from the drubbing they got in 07, I just hope they don't quickly learn some lessons before the elections this year..

*I am only playing, don't take me seriously.

Well done AMs

I must congratulate the AMs on passing the pilot for a badger cull to stop TB. This must have been a very difficult decision as nobody in their right minds would want to resort to killing many animals. However, one of the possible causes was spotted and should this cull work then the AMs will all be letting go a huge sigh of relief. Last year, 7905 cattle were slaughtered because of TB, up from 669 in 1997. The compensation bill for affected farms was £15.2m in 2007.
Therefore, extreme circumstances call for extreme measures. There is a reason this is happening and scientists have proven that a cull would cause the spread of the disease to cease dramatically. Do these 'animal welfare' folk want to see lots of badgers be humanely killed or let them spread the disease to thousands of animals killing more and more each year. I know which I'd choose and I'm glad the AMs have common sense too.
Let us all hope that the scientists were right and this will work.

The Lib Dems are rubbish in Scottish councils

I was talking to a friend of mine who is rather involved with politics in Scotland yesterday and she told me the only reason the Lib Dems fail in Scotland is over refuse collection.
Apparently, when the Lib Dems were in power over a few councils they said that instead of rubbish being collected once a week it would be once every fortnight. Eventually the streets had mountains of rubbish and the place started to smell. So you think they'd bring back the once a week collection? Wrong. Instead they said that every two weeks they would only collect 'six black bags per household' or something daft like that as it "would help the environment". The situation became worse and the Lib Dems were forced out at the next elections. Still they think it's a good idea to keep an extremely unpopular policy that's forced them out of many council areas.
Are they really that stupid or stubborn? If they had admitted they'd made a mistake they would still have councils north of the border. Fools!

Beware of homosexuals!

I spotted this old 50s 'educational' film on youtube. Thought you might like to see how times have changed in 50 years.
It's a shame that some countries still think like this. I know some places in America still do.

Gordon Brown: Economy is my sole focus

So reports the BBC, anyway. Although I am not sure, surely even Mr Brown wouldn't be so foolish to say such a thing.

I mean, really, this just gives so much ammunition to his opponents. It makes him look like a control freak, who is not letting Alistair Darling do his job. It means that he can't deflect any blame with the 'I am not the Chancellor anymore' line. But most of all, it makes him look like someone completely unsuited to the role of PM. How can someone be a good PM when he or she just focuses on one area? After all, could you imagine Tony Blair saying 'foreign affairs is my sole focus'? No, of course not. He might have been most at home when it came to international issues, but Mr Blair wasn't only a foreign affairs man, he could talk about NHS reform, infrastructure development, constitutional issues, all sorts. It was the same with Mrs Thatcher. Can we imagine her saying that the economy was her only focus? No, she involved herself in many areas.

It is the job of the PM to provide the overall direction to the government, not micromanage economic policy. I can only think of one other Prime Minister who focused so closely on one issue, a man who had great expectations placed on his shoulders, and who had previously held the great office of state corresponding to his issue of focus. Well we all know what happened to Mr Eden, don't we?

At the moment we have a government with no direction, and two Chancellors. Something has to change.

Italian election..

Quick one this. The BBC are reporting exit polls which show the centre right 2% ahead of the centre left in the Italian elections, in both the Lower and Upper houses.

You will have to trust me when I say this is one of the worst possible outcomes, for Italy anyway. You see, for reasons beyond me, the Italian political system allows both houses to hold binding no confidence votes on the PM. This is not a problem in the lower house, as the electoral system there is designed to produce a majority. However, in the upper house we have a form of PR, with no percentage limits either, so no one gains a majority unless they win a majority of the votes, and 'fringe parties' hold all of the power.

This forces the bigger parties to work with these 'fringe parties' to keep a majority in the Upper house. No problem, you might think. However, there is a problem. You see, these fringe parties are notoriously unreliable, and are prone to leaving coalitions for stupid reasons. So, a coalition will stagger on for a year or two, without enough authority to take the tough decisions, and then will fall. The left will win the next election with a tiny majority, and the process will repeat.

I think that this will be Italy's 62nd Government in 63 years. The poor Italians, we thought our politics was bad, but theirs..

Malc offers a good analysis here, it is worth a read.

Zimbabwean Embassy

Ha, this is the funniest thing I have seen all day. It is a prank call made to the 'Zimbabwean Embassy' by a South African radio station. You must watch it.

Hat tip to left field for this.

Disturbing news from Nepal

Elections for the Constituent Assembly in Nepal going on, at the moment. You see, a few years ago the Nepalese constitutional monarchy turned itself into an absolute monarchy, claiming that the democratically elected government was unable to fight the authoritarian Maoist rebels. Obviously this didn't go down too well with the general population. So, in the face of large scale demonstrations last year, the King had to surrender power, and it was agreed a 'Constituent Assembly' would be elected. This Assembly was to be tasked with the role of drafting a new, democratic constitution.

At this point, enter the Maoists (Communists). They decided to participate in the elections, as their armed struggle wasn't really going too well. They even paid lip service to the ideas of democracy and freedom. However, they didn't seem to completely get it, as there were reports of massive intimidation and violence, in an attempt to persuade people to vote Maoist.

Well, results are now starting to trickle in. The election is an AMS one (like Wales and Scotland), so constituency results are coming first. This is why I am disturbed. You see, the results show the Maoists winning in a landslide. It is my opinion that a party which is not inherently democratic will never fully adapt to a democratic system, it will always view it as an annoyance, at best. Look at Zanu-PF, Hamas, or the Nazi party, these were democratically elected, in free and fair elections, but they were not democratic organisations, and at the first chance, they subverted the democratic process.

Have the Nepalese thrown their chances for democracy away in a democratic election? As stupid as that sounds, I fear it might just be the case.

Opinion Poll alert!

Quick one this, as my policy on opinion polls is to generally avoid blogging on them. Not that I think they are a waste of time, on the contrary, I reckon they are very important, but other websites such as Politicalbetting.com can provide much better analysis than I ever could hope to. However, before I go onto what I do want to talk about, just for general information, the poll is 44, 28, 17, and it is from Yougov.

Anyway, what I actually want to talk about is the Liberal Democrats. The Lib Dems are a left of centre party, no doubt about it. So, we have a left of centre party that has steadily growing parliamentary representation, and a left of centre party that is in disarray, led by the least inspiring party leader I have ever seen. Even less inspiring than John Major, really.

So, why are they not overtaking Labour?* They tried desperately to replace the Tories in 03 - 05, remember the 'real opposition' stuff, but that was doomed to fail. No country can have an adversarial system of politics where the two main parties are both left, it just wouldn't work. Now they have a real chance. Yet we are just not seeing it. The Lib Dems still seem happier attacking the Conservatives, but the opportunity really is here for the taking. It is probably a once in a generation thing too, I can't see things ever being this bad for Labour again, for 20 or 30 years. Think about it. A Cabinet with no talent, a third term inept government, a stench of sleaze, and to top it all off, a frankly rubbish leader.

Nick Clegg could go down in history as the man who brought the Liberals back to the forefront of British politics, but at the moment I reckon they are throwing their chances away.

*On a more general point, I can't believe more people would vote for a Gordon Brown led party than a Nick Clegg led one.

Has Boris ever had a gay relationship?

Wow, just wow. Boris Johnson has an interview published in today's Telegraph, it is really worth reading. Why do I say that? Well, I think it manages to capture Boris perfectly, because he manages to switch from being a serious political figure discussing policy, to a funny and likeable chap in the space of one answer to a question. I don't know of any other political figure who can do that, without looking like an idiot.

I don't want to stress the point too much, but it is worth a read. The idea about traffic wardens is quite inspired. Quite how it would work, I am not sure. But, if the finer points of the policy are worked out, it could be excellent. After all, we have so many traffic wardens on the streets, who are generally seen in a negative light by the public. To have so much visible man power yet to waste it in a role that inspires disgust does seem rather silly, but if London could harness them and reorientate their roles, it could cause a massive change in society.

Alas, that is not what made me want to talk about this blog though. What I really wanted to discuss was how he responded to the 'Nick Clegg' questions. To me this shows perfectly the difference between an average politician and a great politician. I imagine if Nick Clegg had been asked if he had ever had a gay relationship, he would have said no (I wont assume otherwise), and that would be that. Boris answered "I'm not bisexual so far, not that I would condemn myself if I later discovered I were.".

Perfect answer. I need say no more.

Poole Council

Have we all seen the news coming out of Poole, Dorset? Quite shocking. In fact, really very shocking. Just in case you haven't seen, I will summarise. It seems Poole Borough Council has been putting parents under surveillance, using powers created for anti-terrorism purposes, to see if they lied on their children's school applications.

Parents lying is a problem. However, this is not a proportionate response. This is about as far from proportionate as you can get. In fact, if cracking a nut with a sledgehammer is considered disproportionate, this has to be somewhere closer to cracking a nut with a ten tonne weight. You can't use anti-terrorism powers to spy on people who might have lied on school applications, not in a democratic country. The Chief Executive and Leader of that Council should both go, at once. The green light to use those powers must have come from the very top, and to approve such a thing shows a major lack of good judgement.

The government always says that anyone who opposes their anti terror plans is 'soft on terrorism' and 'weak', well, this should be a lesson to anyone who buys that line. If an organisation is given powers in an area, it will use them as much as it can, and then it will ask for more powers. It is no one's fault, it is just a fact of life. That is why we must be very careful before surrendering more of our civil liberties, because before we know it, we could end up living in a very unpleasant country.

Missing Children

We are exactly 3 weeks away from the one-year anniversary of Madeleine McCann's disappearance and we seem to still be no closer to finding her.
What the McCann's have done however, is not only to campaign in finding Madeleine but to also find the other missing children that go missing every day.
The media may have jumped on the McCann and Shannon Matthews bandwagon but the McCann family are now using their high profile position in the media to raise awareness and attempt to change the way that missing children are reported.
On the Missing Children Website I searched for children missing in the United Kingdom in the past 5 years. 31 results were found and none of them I remember spotting in the papers.
I agree with the McCann's, we do need a higher alert when children are missing. Yes, most are going to be false alarms but for the one or two children that are saved because of this would surely make every penny worthwhile.

For more information on the projected EU-Wide Alert system (similar to the US Amber alert) click here.

Big Issue People

I must admit to having a lot of respect for those that sell The Big Issue. There are many homeless people on the streets of all cities across the UK and it's great to see some of them actually attempting to lead a happy life.
I must state that I am against homeless people who feel the need to shun all support and to beg. Yes, people may say this is a lifestyle choice and these people are happy doing so but I am sick and tired of being asked for money by a scruffy little man and his dog up to his eyes on an unknown substance.
The Big Issue foundation is an excellent charity that not only helps the homeless gain some money through a trader position as oppose to a begging one, but it assists these people in getting the support they need whether it is to get off drug/alcohol dependencies or simply to find basic accommodation for them to start building their lives up again.

Naughty boys in Hackney

Wow, a big story in the Indy today, which I am surprised is not getting more media attention. For those of you too lazy to read, it basically says one Conservative and one Lib Dem conspired to rig council elections in the London Borough of Hackney, so Labour would lose power. They succeeded. One was sentenced to 4 months in prison, one to 6 months.

It is not good enough. The wishes of the electors of this area were simply ignored, these two men trampled all over the notions of democracy, and free and fair elections. That is a crime as bad as any, it is the taking away of our basic right to express ourselves through the ballot box, one of our fundamental rights. As such, no punishment is too light. Sentences are automatically halved, and then you can get extra time off for good behaviour, I think. So, a few weeks in prison for subverting the democratic process, what a disgrace. They should not see sunlight for years. Maybe then people would think twice before postal vote fraud.

This illustrates another problem too, you know. This shows just how easy it is to manipulate elections now we are doing postal voting en masse. I appreciate the arguments for it, it might increase turnout and participation, but I will put it like this. What is better, a free and fair election with a low turnout or a rigged election with a large turnout? Postal voting should only be an option for people who are unable to get to the polling station through injury or infirmity.

To continue like this means we are no better than Zimbabwe.

Could you imagine Jacqui Smith saying this?

We all know South Africa has a massive (and growing) problem with violent crime. It has turned some areas of South Africa into virtual no-go areas, with a gunman on every corner. Finally a member of the South African Government has shown some fighting spirit, and suggested that police must 'must kill the bastards if they threaten you'. Strong words, and maybe with a spirit like that South Africa will finally re-establish itself as a safe place to be.

I don't want to sound gloomy, but I do fear Britain is going the same way as SA. There are some places in Leeds I just would not feel safe to be, never mind just on a night, but during the day. Our Government's response? More PCSOs and 'Community Partnerships'. Now don't get me wrong, I am not advocating an immediate shoot to kill policy, but I am trying to make a serious point, we do need to toughen up on gun (and violent) crime in this country, before things really do get bad.

Sian Berry..

Firstly, I know the picture is of Caroline Lucas, not Sian Berry, but there you go. So, onto the content of this post. You might have guessed that I am not the world's biggest fan of Sian Berry (politically anyway..), especially after her strange outburst a couple of weeks ago (see here). Sadly, Miss Berry has simply confirmed my concerns today.

In an interview with the BBC, she explained how she stopped voting Labour because of their climbdown over the fuel protests, dismissing the concerned public as nothing more than 'half a dozen blokes with lorries'. Oh dear, to me that just demonstrates Miss Berry is out of touch with most normal people, at least those outside London and Oxford anyway. I don't mean to attack her for this. After all, a look at her background tells me she went to Oxford, one of the least car friendly places in the country, and now lives in London, the least car friendly place in the country. That is why I don't want to attack her, because she probably doesn't know how people outside London and Oxford depend on cars, but we do. To get a train to Leeds, I have to walk to a train station, on the edge of a council estate that has major social problems, and then run a 50% chance of getting a train actually made out of an old bus. Do I want to do that?

It is for that reason I think Miss Berry would be a disaster if ever elected, anywhere. Her comments on transport seem to betray the fact that she is unable to appreciate a point of view different from her own. Just take this 'Alliance Against Urban 4x4s' nonsense. If you don't know, this group, which she involves herself in, goes around causing unnecessary anxiety to 4x4 drivers by sticking false parking tickets on them, if they park in a city. Of course, these people who live in inner London but commute using a massive 4x4 are fools, but not everyone who parks a 4x4 in a city is like that. People who live in the country do occasionally drive into cities, you know? It is the same thing, a cause pursued with good intentions, I do not doubt, but one with an ultimately unrealistic goal.

Maybe I was wrong about Chavez..

Well, reading the news today certainly suggests as much. If you don't know, today Venezuelan national TV has pulled the Simpsons from the morning children's TV slot and replaced it with Baywatch. Apparently, the Simpsons is 'inappropriate' for children, as it sends 'the wrong messages'. I wonder what messages Baywatch sends to 11 year old boys? Wholesome ones?

Maybe I was wrong about Hugo, maybe Venezuela is on course to become a Socialist Utopia after all..

Plaid Cymru - Oh dear

Short one this. Plaid have launched their local election campaign. It all looks like pretty reasonable stuff, nothing to set the world on fire, but nothing particularly bad either. However, all of their good work has been undone, in my eyes. If we look at the BBC News article on it, here, we see something very disturbing, at the bottom of the page..

That is right, they used the term "innov8 policies". Oh dear. Is that a typing mistake by the person who wrote the article? I hope so, I really do. If not, who on earth decided to adopt that slogan? This English language abuse, it makes me sad.

This tells an interesting story..

An annual staff survey, published by the BBC, has revealed that less than half of NHS staff believe patient care is top priority for hospital trusts. I wish I was surprised. I am not.

I should be shocked. After all, these figures paint a startling picture. A picture of a service that appears to have forgotten what its primary purpose is, and is instead more concerned with administering itself. But I am not. I can only speak for my local trust, but I have what is close to first hand experience. Two generations of my family have worked for the trust, and they all say exactly the same thing. The system is completely broken. They say that the NHS spends more time administering itself than it does dealing with illness. The survey shows they are right.

I was tempted to leave it there, this is a paragraph I wasn't sure about writing, but I will give it a go anyway. What should we do to solve the problems? Well, privatisation is clearly not appropriate, for a number of reasons. However, I think a radical solution could be to split each hospital trust down into small, autonomous units. I do think the main problem is that the NHS is too big, people at the top have no idea what people at the bottom are doing, and vice versa. I don't want to be too specific, as I am no NHS expert, but lets move the money closer to the people who actually administer the health care, and give them some flexibility on what to do with it.

Another idea I have been toying with for a while is the direct election of the head of each hospital trust. In this circumstance, I think learning from the USA would be a great idea. We don't have direct elections enough here, and it is time to change. If the head of a hospital trust was elected, he or she would have a much better reason to make the trust run well. After all, if the next election is in six months would you fancy taking a big bonus or would you want to reinvest it?

But like I said, these are just ideas. The two proposals could be considered mutually exclusive, but I am not sure. If this directly elected figure was given a more strategic role, it could work. So, any comments, suggestions, abuse?

I have finally taken the plunge..

..and joined a political party*. Before we go any further, I hope this wont scare the more left wing ones amongst you away, I certainly don't intend to change my blogging style.

This is all new to me, you see. No one in my family has paid any interest in politics before, and no one has ever joined a political party. I write this blog, but that is about as far as my involvement goes. So, exciting times.

How did you all first get involved? What do I actually do now? I have absolutely no idea..

Is fondness for corruption necessary..

..when it comes to getting a job in the EU? I mean, come on, most political organisations do contain a bit of corruption, it is a fact of life. But the EU seem to turn it into an art form. Look at the judgement of the Court of Auditors, refusing to sign off the EU's accounts for over a decade. How about the Santer Commission, and all of the nonsense that came with that. MEP's expenses, anyone? These aren't isolated incidents either, the institution seems to be corrupt at every level.

That is why I was amused when I read the Indy today. Normally I would be appalled, but I have grown so used to EU corruption that it just amuses me now, I am resigned to it, all I can do is laugh. You see, according to the Indy, Bertie Ahern is likely to become the first 'EU President'. This is the same man who claimed money he was given in 1993 was a 'loan', but then admitted he has yet to pay back any of this loan. This is the man who claimed in the 90's not to have a bank account, when he was minister of finance, and instead kept a substantial sum of money 'in his own possession'. Hardly someone prone to openness and transparency then..

Why I find this so absurd is when we look at the previous favourite for the job. That man, no other than one Tony Blair, was hardly whiter than white now, was he? Can't they actually find someone who is not prone to corruption on a large scale? It seems not..

Jack, I thought you had the balls

Yes, silly blog title, I admit. I was looking for something a bit wittier, but nothing really came to mind. If anyone has any suggestions, feel free to comment.

Anyway, to the story at hand. A bit of friction seems to be emerging between two of the 'big beasts'* in the Government. Ed Balls appears to have done his best to wind Jack Straw up, succeeding to such a great extent that Jack threatened to punch Ed (now I hope the title makes sense). The issue? Something relating to youth crime.

When cabinet ministers are at each other's throats over insignificant issues like this, it really does suggest serious problems at the heart of government. People like Ed Balls are be part of that problem, without doubt. Many consider him to be the only man in cabinet who is as rude as Gordon Brown, and he is without doubt one of the least likeable ministers around.

It is just a shame Jack didn't have the balls to made good his threat..

*I use the term 'big beasts' loosely. When I hear 'big beast' I think of people like Ken Clarke, or Charles Clarke (maybe you have to be called Clarke (and fat) to be a 'big beast'?), I suppose Jack Straw also fits into that category. Ed Balls though? No, not really. It says something about the quality of the cabinet when I am even considering calling Ed Balls a BB..

Pete Doherty FINALLY goes to jail!

Pete Doherty has been sentenced to 14 weeks in jail for breaking a probation order.

After a 30 minute hearing this afternoon at West London Magistrates' Court, a spokesperson for the court confirmed that the Babyshambles singer was jailed for "breach of time keeping, non compliance of his order and using different drugs".

Doherty was handed a two-year suspended jail term in October last year by district judge Davinder Lachar.

Lachar also gave Doherty a 12-month drug rehabilitation order, as well as an 18-month supervision order as part of the sentence.

He was also made to pay a £400 fine for driving without insurance and £75 for not possessing a valid MOT certificate.

I hope that should he continue to break the law then he will find himself in jail more and more. Finally a judge with the brains to put that idiot behind bars.

What a joke!

All colleges 'forced to go green'

New colleges will have to meet tough environmental guidelines

All newly or partly built colleges will have to adopt wind turbines, solar panels or other renewable energy, under plans to cut global warming.

And all new colleges in England will have to emit no carbon by 2016, skills secretary John Denham has said.

The requirement comes in a £2.3bn package, announced in November, which aims to provide new further education facilities in all areas.

Firms carrying out the building work will also have to employ local people.

They will also have to invest in the skills and training needs of their staff, by offering formal training plans and work-based learning.

It comes after Prime Minister Gordon Brown said all major public infrastructure projects should lead to investment in apprenticeships.

Mr Denham said: "In 1997 there was no dedicated capital budget for further education colleges.

"The record £2.3 billion we are now investing sets out our most ambitious plans yet for sustainable college buildings."

The Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills said some 150 colleges were due to benefit.

This includes those in Sheffield, Leicester, Derby, London, Surrey and Grimsby.

President of the University and College Union Linda Newman said it was important that colleges set good examples in tackling climate change.

She added: "I would also like to see colleges sourcing their needs locally where possible, stimulating the local economy, and developing green transport-to-work plans and other initiatives with college staff unions, students and the local community.

"UCU is also encouraging the greening of the curriculum: colleges and universities must become key players in informing and equipping the public to respond to climate change."

I find this rather...well appalling. Surely the money can be put to much better use elsewhere? Schools are desperate for money to help them get text books, staff, equipment but now what do the government want to waste money on? Windmills and Solar panel sheets.

I certainly don't agree with 'schools need to set an example by informing the public to respond to climate change'. They already teach it as a fact, refusing to deny it as much as Al-lah Gore.

Only give money to crap like this when the basics are checked and found to be in an exemplary condition.

Conspiracy Theories

The times has an excellent article on actually true conspiracy theories. Here are three of the best.

1. Harold Wilson's political secretary, Marcia Falkender, made his life such a misery that the Prime Minister's doctor, Joe Stone, hatched a plot to murder her. He told other Wilson aides repeatedly that his plan was foolproof and would not be detected. He dropped it only when they refused to co-operate.

2. In 1959, when Francois Mitterrand was already a famous politician, he narrowly escaped an assassination attempt outside the Luxembourg Gardens in Paris. His car was riddled with bullets but he leapt to safety. When the gunman and the organiser of the attempt were arrested they were able to prove that the whole thing was a fake organised by Mitterrand to win favourable headlines and implicate General de Gaulle. Charges against the "assassins" were dropped. Mitterrand was later elected President of France.

3. Presidential candidate Edmund Muskie was forced out of the 1972 race for the White House by a series of documents that later turned out to have been forged. One, produced on Muskie's letterhead falsely alleged that U.S. Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a fellow Democrat, had had an illegitimate child with a 17-year-old. Another letter alleged that Muskie had made disparaging comments about French Canadians. These letters were in fact the work of paid agents of the campaign to re-elect President Richard Nixon.

In South Wales? Watch the news tonight!

http://therightstudent.com/2008/03/homophobic-chavs-causing-gbh-have.html

You can probably remember this article I wrote about a homophobic attack on two of my friends a couple of weeks ago.

Well ITV News S.Wales will be doing a full report on this tonight at 1800.

UPDATE: You can watch the interview on the website here.

Why were the PLA providing security in London?

Quick one this. I meant to blog on the farce surrounding the Olympic torch in London yesterday, but really, I couldn't think of a great deal to say.

However, that has now changed. What I want to talk about is why the Chinese were providing security for the torch (the people in the blue suits). As far as I can ascertain, these were members of the People's Liberation Army, the Chinese armed forces. Why on earth did we have the armed forces of a ruthless dictatorship providing security in our capital? I can only imagine how the police felt, being told that you were not allowed to do the job you had trained for, in the city you work, and instead being instructed to defer to a foreign army. In Britain the British security services should provide security. If the British security services are unable to provide adequate security, we need to know why, and we need to rectify the problem. A sovereign state is a state that has a monopoly over the use of force within its borders. Yesterday we gave our sovereignty away. Who the hell decided that?

I would love to know, for I think it is a disgrace.

Abolition of 10% tax rate..

What an absurd decision. I remember at the time thinking 'this will come back to haunt you'. If you don't remember, Mr Brown presented it as a tax cut (cutting the basic rate from 22% to 20%), which threw everyone, for about 10 minutes.

Was that 10 minutes of good publicity worth it? I think not. No one is talking about the small tax cut, the media are running with 'Gordon Brown raises tax burden on poorest to give middle classes a tax cut'. This is the same Gordon Brown that said '(the introduction of the 10% rate) will benefit 2 million of the most disadvantaged in society'. He was trying to play politics and throw the Tories, but to do it in such an obvious way raises serious questions about his judgement, in my opinion. The Labour defence that you can 'claim it back in tax credits' is risible. Have they ever tried to claim tax credits? A member of my family has, let me tell you, it is an incredible amount of hassle, and in the end you are usually overpaid, which results in a threatening letter about 3 mont