Underwhelmed.

So, that's that then. All three leaders have rallied the troops. What have we learned?

Neil Clark (or whatever his name is) doesn't quite understand how he came to be sat at the cabinet table, what he's supposed to do now he's there or how to make sure he stays there without destroying his party. I'll answer those concerns for you; firstly, you got lucky because the Tories weren't good enough to beat the worst PM in history on their own. Secondly; what you're told. Thirdly; you can't.

Ed Moribund wants us to understand that he's sorry for Labour's 13 year pissing money up the wall, invading countries, authoritarian reel. He's very sorry, but it's not his fault. Oh no, it was the other lot, the lot that have gone. And you can tell the difference because all the new people now running the party were conspicuous by the way they stood aside and said absolutely fuck all when all this was going on.

David Cameroid wants us to know that we're all in this together in the national interest and his government will very graciously give us a sliver of the liberties that were not the government's to take from us in the first place. We don't need big government, we need big society, which is best run by. . . the government. The same government that must be elected by FPTP lest the next election see him having once again to do a deal with the oiky Liberal (hah!) Democrats (hah!). He's also going to make sure that no more of our sovereignty is handed over the EU without our say so. That's kinda like me saying that no more of my milk teeth will be handed over to the tooth fairy. That ship has sailed.

And they wonder why turn-out is so low and politicians held in such low esteem. It's a bloody mystery, isn't it?

Wolfer's note: Just in case you aren't aware, and you bloody should be; I'm a member of the Libertarian Party. Small but perfectly formed. Go and take a look at the website and blog if you've not done so.

Beaten to the punch.

The idea of universal benefits is stupid-oopid. Why pay for a free bus pass for a pensioner who has a million quid kicking around their bank account? They're never going to use it, it is a waste of money. Likewise, the old dear who spends the winter in her beachfront house in the Bahamas is hardly likely to need the winter fuel allowance. Granted these individuals are few and far between, but if you can't save a couple of hundred quid, how on earth are you going to get around saving a few billion?

The benefits thing for well off families with kids is a ridiculous idea as well. You could be the richest person in the country, yet have a sprog and the government will bung you a few notes regardless. It is bloody silly and damn wasteful.

Yet, as Dizzy points out, Osborne seems to be thicker than bottled pig shit if he thinks his plan to let people earn £80k a year claim the benefit whilst taking it away from those who earn £44,001 a year is going to win him any friends.

OH reports that the ground is starting to shake under the Tories' feet. Excellent.

Now the unions have appointed the work experience boy over the heads of the membership, Labour will be unelectable.

The Tories will lose support faster than a Commonwealth games sprinter running away from the cobra in his athletes' village flat.

The Lib-Dems will tear themselves apart as those with principles will take up arms against those in the party who will do anything to have even a little bit of power.

Hopefully the AV referendum will come to pass and be carried.

Give it 18 months to 3 years and we could see some real sport as the public realise how ugly, self-serving and deceitful the big three are.

Confusion or delusion?

I'm a little confused about the election of the work experience boy to the big chair in the Labour party. I guess ageism trumps racism and sexism, eh, Diane?

Anyhow, if Ed is as 'Red' as we're led to believe, and if he lurches to the left, as some have predicted, I can only stand and applaud the wisdom of the trade union members who decided to cast their votes for him. If he's the heir apparent to Michael Foot then Labour really will be unelectable for years to come. Remember Labour have never unseated a leader, it just doesn't happen.

Clegg seems to have divorced himself from the membership of his party, that lot who are neither liberal, nor democratic. I'll hand it to the LimpDim membership though, they do have principles, one of the advantages of never having a decent shout at getting power. Unfortunately for Nick, he seems to have thrown one of the biggest principles (that being an abhorrance of the idea of getting into bed with the Tories) out of the window just so he can have a go at pressing a couple of the buttons that Cameron can't be fagged to press himself.

All we need now is for Cameron to be secretly filmed by the News of the World putting kittens into microwaves and the job will be done.

The Lib Dems will haemorrhage support, they're done before they even start. This coagulation government (as Leg Iron so beautifully puts it) will surely result in the death of the Lib Dems. This is probably not a bad thing, as the Liberals can go back to being liberal (assuming there are some properly liberal people amongst them) while the Social Democrats can go back to. . . well, where?



If Mr. Ed really does want to usher in a new era of swivel eyed socialism, those Social Democrats won't be welcome there. SDP, anyone?


I've always felt quite sorry for Labour members. I thought the way the New Labour agenda was smuggled in without the members' consent was a pretty shitty trick. The euphoria of government after so long out must now be dissipating, and the awful, awful truth dawning. But perhaps I was wrong? Surely if Miliband Minority was the best candidate to reflect what I always thought were the core opinions of the Labour party membership, then the membership would have turned out in their droves for him? They didn't.


Indeed Andy Burnham was probably an even more traditional (?) old (?) new old (?) Labour leadership candidate and he hardly got out of the blocks.


So we now have this odd situation where the person who I thought was the closest to the traditional membership was shunned by the membership and elected by the unions. A fact that I'm sure Woodley, Simpson, Serwotka, Crow, et al will remind him of at every available opportunity. If I heard Boulton on Sky News correctly, turnout amongst the trade union portion of the vote was around 10%. So hardly a ringing endorsement of any of the candidates on offer then.


So it leaves with me four questions:


1. What do the Labour party members want?
2. What are the Labour party for?
3. How does a party abdicate responsibility for their leadership elections to a load of people that don't even care enough about the Labour party to join?
4. Why would anyone vote Labour?


I've been saying for a couple of years that it wasn't the election just gone that was the important one, it'll be the next one. Let's hope that the Lib Dems tear themselves apart, that the Tories disgrace themselves and the coalition falls apart and that Labour go back to their old ways, with the unions cracking the whip. If we can get a snap election in, ooooh, 12 to 18 months, all bets will be off, especially if any AV referendum carries a 'yes' vote.

The One That Is Watching It Fall Apart. . .

So we're what? Two months into the coalition? Looks like we'd better reach for the polyfilla 'cause the cracks are looking quite bad already.

Firstly the Tory media seems to have turned on the new coalition new politics big society government, with the Mail, that normally most reserved and austere publication flying into an uncharacteristic fit of rage. Concerned looks over at Conservative Home.

Then of course we've David Davis' little attack in the FT this morning (I've taken it from the Metro, as the FT is as dull as ditchwater, I'm also unsure if it's part of the whole charging for reading on the intermong thing).

The Tory MP was dining with a group of around a dozen non-politicians at a wine bar in Southwark on Thursday and was unaware that several journalists from the Financial Times were eating at a nearby table.

Of course, of course. He was totally oblivious to the fact that there could have been some reporters from the FT sat in a pub which is as close as next door to their offices as makes no difference.

Despite his back bench status Davis is a 'big beast'. He could perhaps be considered unlucky to lose the leadership election to Cameron. His stand on the 4500 days detention (or however long it was) was a vainglorious shot across the bows of his party leader and there is little doubt that he represents the majority constituency of the Tory party. That majority are now looking at the Blair lite leader they have, his relationship with Clegg, and the fact they're spending a lot of time telling everyone what great mates they are. It does look a little like Blair and Brown, doesn't it?

The difference between Labour and the Tories is that the Tories can get rid of their leader in the time it takes to prepare a bowl of cornflakes.

We've also seen a lot of Douglas Carswell since the election, and I don't think that is any accident either. Davis has been setting his peices up waiting for the right time. And where Carswell is, you can be sure Hannan isn't far behind. I'd be surprised if there wasn't some escape route from Brussels to Westminster set up.

The more Libertarian wing of the Conservative party must be looking with unease at this 'Big Society' plan Cameron has. The way he talks about 'allowing' us to take control. He talks about the importance of voluntary service. The first I take exception to, we don't need his permission. The mark of the 20th century politician, a complete incomprehension of the concept that he is there to do our bidding. We are not there to do his. The second I agree with wholeheartedly. But then we have the mark of the 21st century politician, 'it's voluntary, but if you don't do it voluntarily, we'll make sure you're obliged to do it.' Nice.

There seems to be concern that Cameron is pandering to the 50 or so LimpDim MPs rather than the 200 Tory MPs. Well, what did you expect? Cameron wants Cameron to be in power, not the Tories, they are just a convenient vehicle for this. He's shown his true colours with the immasculation of the 1922 committee and the blocking of the election of Bill Cash to the chair of the European Scrutiny Committee.

No, there's very little change here.

But there is an important one. Unlike the Labour party membership, the Tories can remove their leader with great ease, and traditionally will do so with great relish. Not for them the dirty inter-factional infighting we'll see in the run-up to the Labour leadership election. It will be clean and surgical.

Let's hope this coalition breaks up. Let's hope that the LimpDims are hugely damaged. Let's hope that Cameron is left twisting in the wind. Let's hope that Labour have the foresight to elect the ridiculous Abbott or the twisted and poisonous Balls to the leadership, because then we'll have three completely unelectable parties.

I said a couple of years ago that the election after next will be the important one. Well that election will now be the next one. Looks like my predicition could be along the right lines.

The One That Was Waiting. . .

Didn’t take long, did it?

I’ve been waiting for the clangers to drop, and now they’re dropping. It was only a matter of time until this new administration proved itself to be as hopeless as the one that came before.

First there was Oiky Gove’s arseing up of the school lists. Nice one. Too soon to be sacked, I would think. That, and the fact that he’s one of Dave’s star performers. God help them. 13 years they’ve been itching to get back in, and the first opportunity they get, they screw it right up.

And people wonder I have so little faith in the State organising stuff. It’s because of things like this. Just because one is an elected MP and appointed by a bloke who didn’t do enough to win an election that a flatulent amputee giraffe could have won, doesn’t mean that you’re actually any good. Walking into a government office, and sitting in a government chair, behind a government desk doesn’t mean what you do will be any good. People don’t seem to realise this, I have friends who really do believe that if the government takes control of something, it will, somehow, be alright in the end.

I believe that if the government takes control of something, it will, inevitably, a twisted, burning wreck before Countdown goes on air that afternoon.

Then, we have the farce of Clegg’s repeal act. I could bang on about it, but why bother when two of the best in the business, Leg-Iron and Dick Puddlecote, don’t just hit the nail on the head, they drive it through the wood, the workbench and into the floor.

It makes me angry, but what really exasperates me is the low level, mean spirited and small minded idiocy that pervades our lives on so many levels.

I couldn’t care less what you believe, I have no objections. Two caveats; don’t restrict anyone else’s activities, don’t try and make me sing your hymns.

Even worse, when morons, no doubt well intentioned, go and restrict other peoples’ activities on behalf of people who are quite capable of making judgements for themselves. You could pick from a plethora of examples, but let’s take this one from Stoke on Trent Council.

Swimming lessons in some Staffordshire schools should stop during Ramadan to ensure Muslim pupils "do not swallow water", a council has suggested.

Stoke-on-Trent City Council has issued an 11-page Ramadan guide for schools to help pupils who may be fasting when the school year starts in September.

It said swimming was acceptable to Muslims but posed a high risk of swallowing water that may break a fast.

Islam requires Muslims to fast from dawn until dusk for one month per year.

OK, so if the Muslim parents or indeed the Muslim child decides that they don’t want swimming on the agenda, then fine, don’t go. I wouldn’t expect them to be penalised or punished for it. That’s what you believe, then that’s fine. It has no adverse effect on anyone else.

But no, you see, you can’t have that.

Schools with a significant number of Muslim pupils should try to avoid scheduling swimming lessons during Ramadan to remove unnecessary barriers to full participation.

No-one must be allowed to swim. If denying everyone a swim isn’t a barrier to full participation, then I don’t know what is.

I despair, I really do despair. It is precisely this sort of action which means that people of different race, religion, sexuality or any other quality which is relevant only to the individual concerned, will only ever look upon the other with resentment and mistrust.

I fear we can elect as many new politics, coalition governments we like, it will make no difference, the bastards have taken over, I really don’t see what we can do about it, all the time people are scared of being branded racists and Nazis.

The One That Can't Be Arsed. . .

I was going to blog about how Prescott is going to be made Lord Prescott of Melton Mowbray or whatever, but to be honest what's the point?

I was going to blog about David Laws' piss taking over expenses and the accompanying sob story about how it isn't his fault, it's because he's gay.

Here's a newsflash David, we don't care if you like to put it up another man's bottom, believe me, it really isn't that important, I get as animated about homosexuality as I do about people who like the novels of Dick Francis or enjoy eating spinach, it's an irrelevance.

I'm guessing that most people who vote Lib-Dem are similarly unconcerned about a bit of bum fun as well.

What I do get animated about is you using your sexuality as an excuse for the way you've claimed these expenses.

I give up, I really do. Of course new politics was bullshit, of course Labour would look after their own (and the Tories, I see Howard is now Count of Transylvania or whatnot). I'm at a loss as to what the solution is.

I'm not even angry to be honest.

What's the fucking point?

The One That Is Explaining. . .

I've been having a little chat with a friend of mine. He hates the Tories, really hates them. Mention Thatcher in his presence and he goes all blurry round the edges as he quivers with rage.

The problem he has is that he hates the Labour party as it is. I feel sorry for him, he is a decent chap with strong convictions in a political ideology that he thought could be delivered. He and many others like him must be devastated at how their dreams and aspirations have been sold down the river by the people that claimed to speak for and represent them.

This government has hurt all of us. But for those who had a strong belief in the traditional Labour ways it must be very hard to bear. The fact I disagree with that belief system is neither here nor there, to see people being betrayed and used like that in such a cynical fashion is not a nice thing to see.

Anyhow, my friend has taken some solace from the fact that future don't look so bright for the Tories either, and seemingly has found relief in the Telegraph, of all places, and he pointed out this blog entry from Gerald Warner.

What do I think will happen? I'll tell you the same I told him. Rather than it being bad news, it could be very good, it'll just take a few years to sort out. Let's hope we can do it before the EU sweeps our national parliament away.

It's a truism that oppositions don't win elections, governments lose them and there is no way in hell Labour will win. The problem is people don't vote for anything, they vote against the incumbents.

It was obvious in '97 that Blair was a snake-oil salesman, and the Tories were unelectable. Now we have the situation where Labour are unelectable and the Tories aren't even promising snake-oil. For the last 18 months at least Call me Dave has been counselled that all he has to do is keep quiet, I think now he realises he's left it too late to counteract that bad advice. The interesting thing is how with Labour seeing their suppport haemorrhage away, and the Tories seeing their support drain down without even getting anywhere near the levels they would have hoped, the Lib Dems have made no ground whatsoever and indeed has seen a small reduction in their share of the vote.

North of the border, the SNP are a good bet in my book to pretty much wipe Labour off the map, and that is despite them displaying qualities which make them look even more controlling, nannying and dictatorial than Labour. The Scots will never return Tory or Lib Dem MPs in any numbers, so the SNP will win by default. It speaks volumes about the weakness of the established parties in Scotland that the SNP have been able to hold a minority non-coalition government together for so long.

In Wales, Plaid Cymru have very quietly got on with the job and will do similar damage to Brown.

It is obvious that Labour are scared shitless about the BNP in England, and with good cause. It's not because the BNP are evil and racist and all that jazz, it is because Griffin has very skilfully moved them into the ground occupied by Labour when John Smith was leader. Heseltine was right when he said Labour are the BNP without the racism (plus a slavish devotion to the EU), Brown's gulags for slags initiative was straight out of the BNP playbook and is a policy they've promoted for some time. When Harman and her ilk bang on about the dangers of the BNP, the only real danger is posed to the number of Labour MPs in the house. They rend their hair and ask why this is happening and what can be done, like the family in the Cherry Orchard, and don't realise that it is they who have driven their natural constituency to the BNP, it is their policies, and abandonment of the working class, their turning the 'working' class into pets beholden to them whilst the lower middle class are left to foot the bill. I fully expect to see a number of BNP MPs returned in the spring, and it is no-one's fault but Labour's.

All of this should add up to good times for the Tories, but it won't. So obsessed are they with not wanting to upset anyone, not wanting to be branded the nasty party, that they've ended up upsetting almost as many people as Labour - i.e. pretty much everyone. The Tories are a party of wallpaper covering some very deep cracks. Europe being the biggest one, that division has never gone away. Truth be told I think there's an enormous gulf between the parliamentary tory party and the grass roots membership on the subject, and I don't think Cameron's U-turn on the Lisbon Treaty has pleased anyone, nor his lack of guts in calling for the big referendum. Tory voters will turn out in droves for UKIP, a party who are hardly in good condition at the moment anyway.

I'm not sure that Cameron will last even one complete term as PM and we could see both parties descend into civil war very soon. I certainly wouldn't expect to see any incoming Tory government last more than one election.

Still the Lib Dems will not make up ground, mainly because their policies are fantastical nonsence that no-one understands, and the policies that people do understand are completely alien to them.

My prediction? A Tory majority of single figures at best if not a hung parliament, Labour limping in a very battered and bloody second having suffered huge losses in Scotland and Wales and some stinging defeats to the BNP in England and a fag paper between them and the Lib Dems. SNP and PC in Scotland and Wales with a few Lib Dem hangers on and seats for the BNP and UKIP in England.

A hung parliament would be bad, bad news for the Lib Dems. They've made it perfectly clear they don't want to be in coalition, but so desperate are they for a go on the levers of power they'd probably take it in exchange for a couple of the big jobs like Chancellor and Justice and would quietly forget PR which would infuriate their rank and file.

I don't think we're seeing the death of democracy, we're seeing its re-birth. The old buggins rule is on the way out - one more time is all it's got, I reckon. No-one will vote for the government (of whichever colour) because they're shit and no-one will vote for the other lot because we all remember how shit they were last time round. Once people realise that their vote can, does and will make a difference, and that they can vote for something they believe in, rather than against a sitting government they hate, then the sport will really begin.

Of course, the best thing about hung or coalition parliaments is that they can't do much. We've had too much doing over the last twenty years and need some stopping at least and un-doing at best.

I can't wait.

The One That Is Struggling To Understand. . .

Confused, confused, confused.

I’m finding it hard to get a handle on the Sunday political posturing this week. There are two explanations for this. Either, I am too dim and would be better off watching the Sunday omnibus edition of Hollyoaks, or the reason I’m getting confused is that the three main parties have no clue about what it is they actually want, beyond the keys to Number 10.

Where to start?

OK, I’ll start with the LimpDems. My old mate Mac the Knife, who in a previous life had some dealings with the party, is of the opinion that so desperate for power are they that they would sodomise each other in a high-street shop window if they thought it would give them access to the levers of power. Cleggy, obviously keen to be seen as a man of substance on the eve of his party’s conference, has come out with all guns blazing.

Firstly announcing a policy that includes the following cuts:

Cutting the number of government departments to 14 (saving £314.2m per
year)
Halving the number of departmental spin doctors (£7.44m)
Culling or
merging 90 quangos and capping all senior salaries at the Prime Minister’s wage
(£1.182bn)
Cutting the number of ministers to 73 and freezing their salaries
(£1.88m)
Abolishing taxpayer-funded salaries for the leader of the Opposition
and party whips (£0.96m)

Great, go Cleggy! All you need to do now is drop your slavish devotion to the EU, HRA, warmist religious inclination and about two dozen other issues so that you really ARE liberal and democratic and perhaps we can do business.

Ah, you didn’t actually say those cuts would be passed on to us though, did you? I see, so as far as you’re concerned, my money is still actually yours. But then in a separate article from a similar source he states that he will:

‘fight the next general election with a pledge to cut income tax bills by £700 for people on low and middle incomes.’

Some headway then, although there is still this policy of spite that you have more than me, so I’m going to get my friends together and we’re going to take it. The maths is so simple, rich people earn more money. Rich people get hit with high tax. Rich people then either pay an accountant to hide their money in a ridiculously complicated tax system or take it abroad. Charge everyone a sensible and smaller amount of tax, everyone will pay it. You get more money from rich people. 10% of £1m is more than 50% of £100,000. People have more money to spend, so they spend it. This creates jobs, which means you have more people paying the tax.

Anyhow, Clegg is also being tough to those nasty Tories. He’s called Cameroid a ‘con-man’. He

‘accused the Tory leader of saying anything to win the next general election,
saying: "He's put the con back into the Conservatives."

Hmmm, saying anything? What like giving people £700 a year in tax cuts? Wiping out billions of pounds of government spending? Things like that?

For some reason, Cameroid thinks that his Tories and the LimpDems share a lot of common ground.

Mr Cameron urged the Lib Dems to join the Tories in a new "national movement"
claiming there was "barely a cigarette paper" between them on many issues.

Bloody hell! Really? Go and ask your party members about that. Ask them especially about Europe and tighter financial regulation. And you mentioned cigarettes and didn't denounce them as Satan's pencils, you'll probably pay for that, as well.

In an article for The Observer, Mr Cameron said the two parties shared the same views in areas like civil liberties (squash ‘em), education (keep ‘em dim) and climate change (scare ‘em to death whilst emptying their wallets).

Yes, not too much difference there. But why the overture? Does Call me Dave think that the Tories might need some friends? Does he think it will be that close?

Either way, Cleggy isn’t about to act like some school-prom slut, he’s keeping his legs firmly shut. He’s not committing to either side, he obviously wants to inspect the love tackle before jumping into the sack.

But why would he want to join up with a Labour party who only underline that after 12 years in power, they haven’t managed to accomplish anything that one would consider close to their traditional goals. Cue Alan Milburn and Pat McFadden (who?).

The report says those who come from middle and working class families are still at a disadvantage when they enter the jobs market, and that access to professions like law and medicine is becoming increasingly socially exclusive.

Ah, and why is that, then?

The panel found more than half of top professional jobs are still taken by candidates who were independently schooled, even though they account for just 7% of all school children.

It’s the rich! Those bastards, spending their money on making their lives better, that’s why it all has to be taken from them! Or is it because whilst generations of inbreeding has produced offspring who are as thick as bottled shit and have faces which are twelve eighths teeth, they get a proper education rather than the socially engineered politicised rubbish spewed out in the publicly funded education system to those with access to a decent gene pool?

Kids in schools where they are actually taught useful things, actually learn useful things. They probably can’t decorate a Ramadan cushion, or bake a Yom Kippur cake, but then Corpus Christi probably don’t want that in an entrance exam, they want answers to questions that show the prospective student sort of, y’know, knows useful stuff.

You’ve had twelve bloody years, an entire school career. I wouldn’t say the time has been wasted though, as they’ve certainly got richer. Oh look! Here comes Baroness Scotland again!

Now, the beleaguered lawyer is facing claims she had wrongly been paid £170,000 in Parliamentary allowances.

There’s a bloody surprise. The worst of it is, the bastards are claiming this cash and then not even paying their bar bills.

I don’t ask for much in life, but next May, I’d like to see about 400 seats overturned in Parliament and some real people put in.

The message to those who are pissed off with the established liggers: Don’t bloody vote for them!

Lend your vote to the minority party or the Indy. You’ll be amazed how less craven they are, and how things will be no worse than they are now.

The One That Is Going Suitcase Shopping. . .

People who want to become British citizens could speed it up by becoming active members of political parties and trade unions, under government plans.

Right, I really am now losing the will to live.

Question 1; Am I incorrect in thinking that you couldn’t join a political party if you weren’t eligible to vote?

Question 2: I am correct in the assumption that ‘political parties’ doesn’t mean ALL political parties? I’ll bet it is weighted towards the status quo.

They could also lose points for "bad behaviour" which it has been suggested
could include anti-war demonstrations.

I see, so you’d get a bonus for joining a political party, and being ‘active’ as long as the party you join is or supports the government and their policies. Dissent and you’ll be punished.

I’ll polish off the crystal ball. Demonstrate and lose your citizenship as an immigrant. The next step will be stripping those of indigenous extract of their citizenship, it’s all in the name of national security, and it is better if we’re all unified, don’t you agree?

Be aware that people who disagree want to destroy our ‘freedoms’.

I’m past the point of anger now and am settling into the zone marked ‘despair’. There are one or two projects to tie up, and then toddling off to an as yet undecided embassy or high commission to get a settlement visa away from here is looking more and more likely. I’m not angry or fearful, just very very sad at what we’ve allowed our country to become.

The One That Is Saying 'Consider It Done'. . .

Came upon this over at a famous social networking site, it appears to be by the English Democrat's David Platt.

I've always said that a good idea is a good idea, it doesn't matter who has it, and this bloke's ideas are crackers:

A maverick mayor elected after promising to slash council spending, clear the streets of yobs and ditch politically correct services is the torchbearer for how towns should be run.

On his first morning as Mayor of Doncaster in South Yorkshire, Peter Davies cut is salary from £73,000 to £30,000 then closed the council’s newspaper for "peddling politics on the rates".

Now three weeks into his job, Mr Davies is pressing ahead with plans he hopes will see the number of town councillors cut from 63 to just 21, saving taxpayers £800,000.

Mr Davies said: "If 100 senators can run the United States of America, I can’t see how 63 councillors are needed to run Doncaster".

He has withdrawn Doncaster from the Local Government Association and the Local Government Information Unit, saving another £200,000. Mr Davies said, "They are just talking shops".

"Doncaster is in for some serious untwinning. We are twinned with probably nine other cities around the world and they are just for people to fly off and have a binge at the council’s expense".

The mayor’s chauffeur-driven car has also been axed by Mr Davies and the driver given another job. Mr Davies, born and bred in Doncaster, swept to power in the May election with 24,244 votes as a candidate for the English Democrats, a party that wants tight immigration curbs, an English Parliament and a law forcing every public building to fly the flag of St. George.

He has promised to end council funding for Doncaster’s International Women’s Day, Black History Month and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender History Month.

He said, "Politicians have got completely out of touch with what people want.
"We need to cut costs. I want to pass on some savings I make in reduced taxes and use the rest for things we really need, like improved children’s services".

Mr Davies has received messages from well wishers across the country and abroad as news of his no-nonsense approach spreads. Now it’s your chance to spread this most sensible way to run a town council.

There are a couple of things I would take issue with, I think he's fallen into the 'think of the chiiiildren' trap. Not that Children's Services in Donny probably couldn't do with more cash, but it's a bit of a cliche and cop out soundbite.

I'd also question the tougher immigration policy bit, I don't care who comes here as long as, a; they have a passport which actually belongs to them, b; has or gets a job, c; pays their taxes, d; has no access to public funds whatsoever until the end of an uninterrupted 6 year period of tax-receipted employment (that includes paying for their family's education and health care), e; behaves themselves whilst they are here, f; shut the hell up and bugger off if they are caught misbehaving instead of running to the courts over yooman rights, and g; don't make demands about the majority making cultural and social adjustments for them when they get here.

Simples.

Anyhow, that aside, consider it spread, with a large thumbs up and a smile on my face. Bollocks to partisan politics, here's a man I can do business with.

The One That Is Reading The Tea Leaves. . .

I do not like the BNP.

I think I’ve made that quite clear over the time I’ve been writing here.

Harridan Harperson has told the Indie that "Certainly they [the BNP] are a bigger threat than they have been before."

But what does she mean by that? A quite reasonable explanation is that the BNP pose a very real threat to the liberties enjoyed by people living in this country. Of course, I would maintain that coming from an increasingly and alarmingly authoritarian government, that is a bit rich.

Do I support the BNP in anything? Only in their desire to remove us from the EU. Beyond that, there is no common ground between the BNP and I.

Make no mistake about it, Labour will not win the next General Election, the Tories will sweep into power with a very healthy majority. Labour could find themselves in a very dark place if Plaid Cymru and the SNP continue their recent gains. But what happens in the election after that?

How long will it take the electorate to realise that they’ve swapped one government, for another that really offers so little difference that they are almost indistinguishable from that which has gone before?

Is it beyond the realms of possibility that the election after next could see a hung parliament? It is unlikely that the Big Two will lose their position at the top table any time soon, but as they become more and more homogenous, and unable to effect any real change due to the primacy of the EU, will it drive turn-out down, or push people to smaller parties?

I don’t think it is too far fetched to envision a chamber with a splattering of MPs from UKIP, Greens, BNP perhaps even we Libertarians, and substantial gains from the Welsh and Scottish nationalists. This could make a serviceable majority problematic or even impossible. A chamber looking like that would mean that the Big Two (and I’m sorry LibDems, all I see is stagnation from you, the others have muscled in on your territory and you are in danger of being rendered totally irrelevant) would HAVE to compromise and offer some fairly large inducements for the others to play ball.

Could the Tories afford to leave a number of UKIP MPs in the cold and risk open war with their EUrosceptic wing? How would Labour reach out to some truly socialist MPs without empowering the awkward squad? Would the chamber be so volatile and unpredicatble that both the Tories and Labour would have to go and talk turkey with a handful of BNP MPs to get the job done?

I don’t think Labour are worried about losing the next General Election, all but the most deluded are already resigned to it, but they will do what they can to smear and darken the name of the Tories in the process of defeat, Guido says this morning that the next election is likely to be very dirty and negative, and I think he’s right on the money.

The threat from the BNP is not towards our way of life, they just won’t get enough power to make that happen. The threat from the BNP is towards Labour certainly, and the Tories in the future if they continue to act as Blue Labour. Both the Labour and Conservative parties act as if they have some God given right to govern, and they don’t.

Small party gains could make that difficult for them and the BNP provide a nice bogeyman. If a BNP candidate were to be returned to Westminster, there would be rending of hair and gnashing of teeth in the red and blue sections. Imagine how ashamed we would be made to feel, the Mother of Parliaments in the country that fought Hitler, electing a nasty National Socialist or two. Of course, UKIP, Libertarians, English Democrats et al, we’d all be like the BNP. Well, the prime BNP agenda is to pull out of the EU, all the little anti parties would walk through and vote with them for a referrendum on that policy, how could we not be alike?

And just as with Harperson’s battle bus, it doesn’t matter what you call people any more. Leg-Iron is right, it’s been done that many times, and for so long, it doesn’t mean anything any more. Call me what you like, I know what I am, what I feel and what I believe in, and I don’t particularly care if you agree or approve. There are those who have been called racist so many times that they’ve concluded that they must be, so the BNP must be their natural party.

It isn’t that the BNP are hell bent on introducing a Thousand Year British Reich and that more and more people agree with them, the cause is that you have left people with no alternative but to go to the wings. The way you bloat yourselves on our money, aggrandise yourselves, belittle us, lecture us, tell us ‘Thou Shalt Not’ and ignore our requests, means there is no room on the stage, and the people on the wings will push back, lest they fall off completely.

It is your arrogance and vanity that prevents you from seeing that you are architects of your own downfall, incompetent and hubristic rulers making vain proclamations from castles made of sand. The tide is coming in, and there’s nothing you can do about it.

Nothing, except real and meaningful change. I doubt you have the courage or self awareness to do that.

The One That Hates To Agree With Them . . .

The BNP really are starting to emerge (as one correspondent, I think at OH's place, put it) from being a big little party, to a little big party. It gives me no pleasure to say it, but I shall resist the dog whistle reaction and attempt to address the issue in an emotionally detached manner.

In one respect, that being our departure from the EU, I agree with the BNP. I do not think I agree with them on any other subject.

Pravda report that there is an anti-BNP rally being planned in the delightful Kentish town of Chatham, it seems to be an attempt to shame people into not voting BNP. That is bad campaigning, I want to know why I should vote for a party, not that party saying why I shouldn't vote for their competitors.

A BNP spokesman said the rally was run by "Labour front" groups trying to "pull the wool over people's eyes". And it's hard not to agree with him. I had a conversation on this subject with a young lady this afternoon. She reacted with horror when I said I wanted us to leave the EU. In her mind, I was shutting the doors to the world, no trade in, no trade out, no-one moving between the UK and anywhere else.

That simply isn't the case, but the big 3 and MSM condition you to think that if you aren't pro-EU you are a rabid racist/isolationist.

I put my point of view in fairly simplistic, but effective terms. Knowing she doesn't drink it, I offered the young lady a cup of coffee. She said she didn't want a cup of coffee. I them immediately set about brow-beating her for being a drunkard, drinking nothing but vodka and getting pissed up all the time.

She quite reasonably pointed out that she'd like a cup of tea. Of course it doesn't follow that if you don't like coffee you drink your weight in vodka every day, there are alternatives. Well, the EU is that cup of coffee I don't want. I'll settle for a cup of tea as well.

Pravda also report that Merseyside PC, Steve Bettley has been given the gooner following his name being discovered on the infamous BNP member list that was leaked a little while ago. I disagree with police officers being prohibited from membership of any party, but believe that all police officers should check their political affiliations at the door when they walk into the station. It's a shame that senior officers can't do this. But it was ever thus, one rule for us, one for them.

Bettley has denied being a member (well, he would, wouldn't he?), and the BNP has waded in, with spokesman Simon Darby saying 'We are well on the way to being a totalitarian state.'

Well, yes. Labour, Tories, LibDems are bad. Think the BNP would be any different? Not for one moment.

The One That's Had A Go . . .

A few people have tried their hand at this, so I thought I'd give it a whirl:

My Political Views
I am a center-right social libertarian
Right: 2.62, Libertarian: 6.98

Political Spectrum Quiz


I'm actually more Libertarian than I thought, and not as right wing as I thought.

My Foreign Policy Views
Score: -4.19

Political Spectrum Quiz


My Culture War Stance
Score: -4.8

Political Spectrum Quiz



Interestingly my foreign and cultural policy leanings are almost identical to the averages. I think this says less about me and the average and more about Bush, Blair, Brown etc and how out of touch they are.