For once I agree with David Cameron

For once I agree with David Cameron who summarised the result of the Crewe and Nantwich by-election as being the end of New Labour. We can only hope he is right.

For me, New Labour was always the very last thing this country needed. We had one very successful Conservative Party and the last thing we needed was a second one. New Labour in many ways was all about the Emperor's new clothes. Seemingly shiny, new, different, but was actually very very conservative, very "safe", indeed very much about centralising. Ahh, I hear Torie's cry, that's not what we're about, but in reality the last Tory government was as centralising as any government in history. preferring Government QUANGO's to democratically elected officials, preferring to take powers from local authorities rather than devolving them.

But just like the Emperor's new clothes, suddenly a boy from the crowd suddenly shouts out "he's got no clothes on", or in this case "this lot haven't got a clue", and suddenly everyone sees new Labour for what they are. A bunch of Charlatans who build their "economic miracle" on the back debt, cheap consumer credit and PFI projects that have saddled this country with debt for decades to come.

As for the Crewe result itself, I doubt many Tories could have really expected such a good result, and lets make no bones about it, it was a really good result for them. But more than that, it was absolutely dreadful for Labour.

One thing that did occur, and it is something that Conservative's will see as an excuse, but is a point I have observed and believe to be true. Despite the Lib Dems slight slip, 14% was not dreadful and shows a core base of support that will come out and vote Lib Dem even when they were clearly in third place to start with. But more than that, it still speaks of a slight hesitancy, a slight concern from those with long memories about the Conservatives. Some people who are absolutely sick of labour didn't want to support them but still cannot bring themselves to vote Tory. Don't get me wrong, of course the Tories won over new supporters in droves, but in the 1992-1997 years, in seats where Labour were a clear and distant third like the Lib Dems were in Crewe, saw Labour's third place vote fall to less than 5% (Newbury and Christchirch come to mind) as non Tory voters got behind anyone who was best placed to defeat the then Conservative government. It seems that despite the great success for the Tories, they have not quite got this groundswell yet. I think David Cameron knows this which is why he has dampened down expectations today and said there is still work to do.

Whatever, there is little doubt that people want a change of government and I think politics in this country needs to be freshened up. I am not keen on a Tory government under David Cameron (I know too many people who have met him, know him, have dealt with him and have little time for him, and that includes some Tories), but whatever colour the next government is, it will not be a Labour government, and we should all be pleased for that.

Nick Clegg most secure party leader ... according to Betfair

I was having a look through Betfair earlier and was interested to see that of all the party leaders, Nick Clegg appeared to be the most secure.

How did I measure this ? Well not one person has made a bet on Nick Clegg stepping down as lib Dem Party leader. A small amount has been bet on David Cameron and as you might guess, a much larger amount had been bet on Gordon Brown going.

Tories break data protection laws in Crewe and Nantwich by-election

We all thought labour were incompetent when it came to protecting data, but the Tories showed today that they too have not got the first idea of how to keep peoples' personal data secure.

It appears the Tories e-mailed details of 8,000 people and their voting intentions to a radio station, and in the process broke the law.

Oh dear !

Will anti foreigner violence push South Africa to take Zimbabwe seriously ?

The world is utterly sick of the pathetic way most of Africa has dealt with Robert Mugabe. Southern Africa's sycophantic have fawned over Mugabe for years and despite ruining the best economy in Africa, despite letting thousands of his citizens starve to death, and despite deliberate pre-mediated government inspired violence, South Africa and its leaders insist there are no problems in Zimbabwe.

Yet in the last few days South Africa has been hit by rioting and xenophobic violence by South Africans against foreign migrant workers, the largest group of which is Zimbabweans. Despite three million Zimbabwe citizens forced to flee from Zimbabwe under Mugabe, South Africa has claimed there is nothing wrong, but clearly South Africa's own citizens disagree.

Perhaps it will take the South Africans people to make their leaders wake up to the problems in Zimbabwe. Sadly, South Africa's appalling attitude to Mugabe has allowed him to get away with murder, but it has drive its own citizens in recent days to murder too. We used to shake our heads in horror at the way the Apartheid Regime in South Africa thumbed its nose at the world as it allowed thousands millions to be disenfranchised, children were not educated and political torture and murder was common. Now South Africa turns its back and allows Zimbabwe to do all these things.

History books will treat Nelson Mandela well, but those that succeed him and his party, the ANC, will forever heave blood on its hands.

Premier League refs DO tend to favour certain teams

When football teams get a dreadful decision from an official commentators and FA officials tend to claim that luck evens itself out over a season. However one website proves this is not the case.

The rather good Right Result website shows what the points totals for teams would be, throughout the season, based on a panel of experts viewing games and looking at the real decisions the referees should have made. for example, when free kicks are awarded instead of penalties, when penalties have not been awarded, where penalties have been awarded that shouldn't have been or where players have scored who should have been sent of previous to their goal.

Based on the what the independent plan have to say, it is clear that referees show a clear bias towards Chelsea and Arsenal, but this bias does not affect the prper outcome of the league. What is interesting though is that clear benefit Liverpool have had from dodgy refereeing decisions. it appears that the right result should have been that they came 5th, not 4th in the League, and had Everton received their fair share of the decisions, Everton would have pipped Liverpool to 4th place in the league, and the £10 million of Champions League money.

So despite what people would have you believe, referees do show bias towards certain teams.

Is it Three Jobs Boris ?

I heard on Radio Five Live earlier that Boris Johnson was going to use money from his Telegraph article he writes to fund some promotion of "Classics" (Latin and Ancient Greek) in the capital.

The thought struck me that Boris is Mayor of London, MP for Henley and also a writer for the Telegraph. Surely "Three Jobs Boris" has enough to do. So when will he resign his Henley seat ?

When you exaggerate or tell lies you've lost the argument

On the topic of abortion rights I am firmly of the opinion that as a man my rights have no real validity as it is a woman's choice whether she does or does not have a termination, so I will not be joining other bloggers in lecturing women on the issue.

However, I take issue with Nadine Dorries, the Tory MP who is proposing that abortions from 20-24 weeks should be stopped. Her key argument, and she raises this over and over again on the radio and in other media, is that more and more premature babies are surviving prior to 24 weeks. This is simply untrue. The current statistics show a small rise in survival rates, but it is considered to be statistically insignificant because of the tiny number of babies born at this point. Using dodgy statistics might be something politicians use in leaflets, but it is not something to use when debating something so serious.

I have a friend who is a nurse in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) at the Norfolk and Norwich hospital, which was also the unit my son was in when he was born prematurely. My friend makes clear that the chances of survival before 24 weeks is tiny, but jumps markedly in week 25 and 26. And those that do survive prior to 24 weeks all have health problems that will be with them for the rest of their lives ranging from breathing problems, eyesight and hearing loss and slow development and learning difficulties. Put simply, the rosy picture that Nadine Dorries paints is not a true one.

I've always worked by a general principle that the facts prove themselves and don't need exaggeration in order to prove them. When you start telling lies you've lost the argument.