I was always of the opinion that the Queen Mother was a rather spiteful women who did all she could to stop any kind of healing of wounds within the Royal family regarding the former King Edward VIII whilst holding back the modernisation of the whole Royal setup.
On top of this, she lived a good life at our expense indulging her lavish tastes whilst employing people of questionable moral standards.
So I was not in the least surprised today to read in the Queen Mother's offical biography that she disliked talk of money (so she could avoid any fiscal responsibility) and she disliked Liberal Democrats !
Perhaps it is a badge of honour Lib Dems should wear.
9/16/2009
Why Iain Duncan Smith is right
I used to love IDS when he was leader of the Tory Party. Slightly hapless, vague, lacking direction, uninspiring & ineffectual were words that summed up (probably unfairly) his stewardship of the Tory Party. However, opinions can change.
In recent years IDS has cleverly created a niche of expertise for himself by becoming the Tories equivalent of Labour's Frank Field in becoming an independent minded expert on Social Security and benefits who is able to say the things that their party leaders are not brave enough to say. And so it is today in the latest proposals from IDS.
I note the Tory Party were quick to disown his ideas and said 2they will be looked at but are not currently Party policy", but I think they were wrong to do so.
The IDS plans involve the benefits system actually helping people back to work (rather then telling people to get a job but cutting of their benefits immediately upon employment leaving people high, dry and broke for several weeks until they are paid) whilst also simplifying the whole confused and complicated system.
In my opinion, the proposals could have gone further as I think that the current benefits system encourages people who have never worked to stay on benefits whilst also incentivising having more and more children in order to avoid work.
So well done IDS. Perhaps not such a bad chap after all.
In recent years IDS has cleverly created a niche of expertise for himself by becoming the Tories equivalent of Labour's Frank Field in becoming an independent minded expert on Social Security and benefits who is able to say the things that their party leaders are not brave enough to say. And so it is today in the latest proposals from IDS.
I note the Tory Party were quick to disown his ideas and said 2they will be looked at but are not currently Party policy", but I think they were wrong to do so.
The IDS plans involve the benefits system actually helping people back to work (rather then telling people to get a job but cutting of their benefits immediately upon employment leaving people high, dry and broke for several weeks until they are paid) whilst also simplifying the whole confused and complicated system.
In my opinion, the proposals could have gone further as I think that the current benefits system encourages people who have never worked to stay on benefits whilst also incentivising having more and more children in order to avoid work.
So well done IDS. Perhaps not such a bad chap after all.
9/15/2009
Garth Crooks brings football punditry in to disrepute
In the immediate aftermath of Emmanuel Adebayor's efforts to rile, wind up and taunt Arsenal fans at Manchester City last weekend you would expect football pundits to show a degree if common sense, but not, it appears, Garth Crooks.
When other pundits on BBC's Final Score show were saying that footballs need to show responsibility for the actions and not exacerbate tensions in the crowd by deliberately running 80 yards to the opposite end of the pitch in order to taunt fans, Garth Crooks stands alone in supporting the rights of the overpaid £150k a week prima donnas to cause crown problems because, in his words "They have a responsibility to celebrate their goal". He even backed up his views by complaining that "It's disgraceful that players are not even allowed to celebrate scoring".
What a pillock.
Celebrating is something you do with friends, colleagues, supporter of your team but not those who oppose you. If he cannot see the difference between celebrating with your fans and taunting opposition fans, then he should not be employed as a pundit.
When other pundits on BBC's Final Score show were saying that footballs need to show responsibility for the actions and not exacerbate tensions in the crowd by deliberately running 80 yards to the opposite end of the pitch in order to taunt fans, Garth Crooks stands alone in supporting the rights of the overpaid £150k a week prima donnas to cause crown problems because, in his words "They have a responsibility to celebrate their goal". He even backed up his views by complaining that "It's disgraceful that players are not even allowed to celebrate scoring".
What a pillock.
Celebrating is something you do with friends, colleagues, supporter of your team but not those who oppose you. If he cannot see the difference between celebrating with your fans and taunting opposition fans, then he should not be employed as a pundit.
9/13/2009
X Factor losing the X Factor
They always say "Never change a winning formula". So It is odd to see how much the X Factor has changed this year.
Gone are the cosy intimate auditions done in front of a camera crew and the four judges, instead replaced by performing to 2500 people in an arena making the show virtually indistinguishable from Simon Cowell's other hit show Britain's Got Talent.
Also gone are the unaccompanied auditions instead replaced by full backing tracks making it harder to work out if the singers really are that good.
Gone too are the judges disagreeing about contestants. Now every judge seems to vote yes or no in unison.
And with all this somehow, and don't ask me why, the X Factor has gone from the show too. perhaps it is time to switch to Strictly Come Dancing ?
Gone are the cosy intimate auditions done in front of a camera crew and the four judges, instead replaced by performing to 2500 people in an arena making the show virtually indistinguishable from Simon Cowell's other hit show Britain's Got Talent.
Also gone are the unaccompanied auditions instead replaced by full backing tracks making it harder to work out if the singers really are that good.
Gone too are the judges disagreeing about contestants. Now every judge seems to vote yes or no in unison.
And with all this somehow, and don't ask me why, the X Factor has gone from the show too. perhaps it is time to switch to Strictly Come Dancing ?
Where is the swine flu vaccine ?
When Swine Flu first reared its head we were assured that a vaccine could be available as early as the first weeks of July. This date passed and we were then told it would be August. As August rolled on we were then told it would be September. Now, it appears, it will be October at the earliest that the vaccine will be here.
I've made this point before, but the government's planning for pandemics was based on H5N1 Bird Flu, which has a kill rate of about 60%. This means that for every 100,000 people getting it, 60,000 die. The government's own plan stated that a vaccine should take just four months to start arriving.
Now we are very lucky that this is a mild swine flu, but still it will be six months before the vaccine arrives.
How can the government have got this so wrong, been so slow and the government get away with it without receiving any flak ? If this had been H5N1 (and it might still be at some future date), we'd have had 200,000 dead by now, with another 500,000 in a second wave. Why are the government being let off the hook for getting this flu wrong just because only a few are dying. People are still dying who could have been saved if this government had pulled their finger out.
9/11/2009
Criminal checks for everyone
The latest initiative by the government to ensure that everyone who has anything to do with children, including those parents who give lifts to and from clubs is an astonishing amount of overkill and symbolic of this government's willingness to ignore common sense at all costs.
Whilst we can all appreciate that criminal record checks (CRB checks) are important and necessary for those employed to work with children and those who run childrens' activities, it seems ludicrous to apply this to a further 11 million people.
Clubs and voluntary groups find it hard enough to find volunteers and this move will make that even harder. The government seem to believe that these checks will eliminate all dangers to children but ignore the fact that all offenders have, at some point, been first time offenders. These checks will not stop people with clean records but bad intent having contact with children, so risk will not be eliminated.
The other aspect is the fact that CRB checks are a very good income stream for the government. My old school had to get me CRB checked when I qualified as a teacher. I then got CRB checked again 3 years later when I became a councillor. There was then a change in the status of my school and all staff (including me) had to have further CRB checks. Then I changed school, and my old CRB check (only one year old) was deemed invalid so I was checked again. Two years later my school changed to a Primary school from a Middle school, thus changing it's name, which apparently invalidated the CRB check so all staff were checked again. So by my reckoning in a little over 10 years I have been CRB checked five times, at a cost of £32 each time, costing more than £150. Why a CRB check and a certificate cannot be transferred, take with you from establishment to establishment for a period of five years, only requiring your new employer to phone your previous school or employer to check you have not got any recent convictions, I do not know.
What is the silliest part though was the fact that all 40 plus staff at my school had to be redone just because our school name changed. That's £1300 on checks that were not needed. And now we are being told that school budgets will be squeezed in the recession !
Whilst we can all appreciate that criminal record checks (CRB checks) are important and necessary for those employed to work with children and those who run childrens' activities, it seems ludicrous to apply this to a further 11 million people.
Clubs and voluntary groups find it hard enough to find volunteers and this move will make that even harder. The government seem to believe that these checks will eliminate all dangers to children but ignore the fact that all offenders have, at some point, been first time offenders. These checks will not stop people with clean records but bad intent having contact with children, so risk will not be eliminated.
The other aspect is the fact that CRB checks are a very good income stream for the government. My old school had to get me CRB checked when I qualified as a teacher. I then got CRB checked again 3 years later when I became a councillor. There was then a change in the status of my school and all staff (including me) had to have further CRB checks. Then I changed school, and my old CRB check (only one year old) was deemed invalid so I was checked again. Two years later my school changed to a Primary school from a Middle school, thus changing it's name, which apparently invalidated the CRB check so all staff were checked again. So by my reckoning in a little over 10 years I have been CRB checked five times, at a cost of £32 each time, costing more than £150. Why a CRB check and a certificate cannot be transferred, take with you from establishment to establishment for a period of five years, only requiring your new employer to phone your previous school or employer to check you have not got any recent convictions, I do not know.
What is the silliest part though was the fact that all 40 plus staff at my school had to be redone just because our school name changed. That's £1300 on checks that were not needed. And now we are being told that school budgets will be squeezed in the recession !
9/10/2009
Stuck in Afghanistan
Whilst I never accepted that there was a valid case for the war in Iraq, I have always been firmly of the opinion that Afghanistan, under the Taliban, was a rogue state that promoted and exported terrorism and as a result, our military actions there were worthy of support. I was also deeply aware that many of those in the Taliban were not Afghans and they Taliban were themselves referred to as "Arabs" due to the number of them who were from other countries and enjoying something of a free ride running around with guns on Toyota Landcruisers oppressing local Afghans.
So given my support, it is sickening to think that so many of our troops seem to now have the tag of being out there to support a corrupt leader who fiddled his way through an election which was in many way no more legitimate that the recent Iranian election.
The problem now is that the election fiasco and Hamid Karzai's willingness to legitimise and almost encourage corruption in gives succour not only to those who support terrorists, but also to those too spineless in Europe and the UK to realise that confronting terrorism in Afghanistan keeps it off the streets of the UK.
The only winner of the election in Afghanistan is terrorism, and we appear to be stuck there.
So given my support, it is sickening to think that so many of our troops seem to now have the tag of being out there to support a corrupt leader who fiddled his way through an election which was in many way no more legitimate that the recent Iranian election.
The problem now is that the election fiasco and Hamid Karzai's willingness to legitimise and almost encourage corruption in gives succour not only to those who support terrorists, but also to those too spineless in Europe and the UK to realise that confronting terrorism in Afghanistan keeps it off the streets of the UK.
The only winner of the election in Afghanistan is terrorism, and we appear to be stuck there.
9/09/2009
Alan Duncan
Coming to the issue of Alan Duncan late due to my broadband router breaking on Monday (it had lasted five years being on 24/7 which must be some kind of record), I am slightly bemused as to the goings on around Alan Duncan.
Presumably he had done something wrong, so I assumed wrongly he had been sacked. But no. He has still retained a job as a shadow minister. How odd. Is David Cameron saying Alan Duncan was only partly wrong ? Is he saying he wasn't really wrong at all or is it simply a case that friends of Cameron, be they involved in scandals or fiddling expenses or other errors of judgement are allowed to stay close to power whilst the older Tories who resist Cameron's agenda are told to stand down ?
Presumably he had done something wrong, so I assumed wrongly he had been sacked. But no. He has still retained a job as a shadow minister. How odd. Is David Cameron saying Alan Duncan was only partly wrong ? Is he saying he wasn't really wrong at all or is it simply a case that friends of Cameron, be they involved in scandals or fiddling expenses or other errors of judgement are allowed to stay close to power whilst the older Tories who resist Cameron's agenda are told to stand down ?
9/07/2009
For me there is nothing like the dishonesty of a pseudonym
As the Liberal England blog points out today, there really are questions to be answered by Mr Paul Staines (who likes to refer to himself as Guido Fawkes) about his independence.
The Guido Fawkes blog for some time like to have a veneer of not being tied to one political party or doctrine but has increasingly become more Tory than Iain Dale. Now at least Iain Dale is open about his politics, but isn't it about time we knew the truth about where Guido Fawkes blog now stands politically ?
The Guido Fawkes blog for some time like to have a veneer of not being tied to one political party or doctrine but has increasingly become more Tory than Iain Dale. Now at least Iain Dale is open about his politics, but isn't it about time we knew the truth about where Guido Fawkes blog now stands politically ?
Why I am not a Tory
The fact that young people now cannot remember the Tories in power must be a blessing for them, but for people my age who remember the Tories and were brought up in the Thatcher years have a long held and almost allergic reaction to the Conservative Party which probably acount for the fact that the Tories, although doing well in the polls, are not at the New Labour levels of 1995-97.
I know people who loathe this government but cannot bring themselves to vote Tory because they remember many of the things in this Youtube video.
9/06/2009
My brief views on Libya and Al Megrahi
I have not blogged on the whole prisoner release and Libya before, but there are few things I want to get off my chest.
My view is that Al Megrahi was not guilty of the bombing, planning it or anything else to do with the bombing. The truth is that he was convicted on the basis of evidence from dodgy sources who were incentivised by the US to give evidence that would frame Libya in order to justify the US stance towards that country since the early 1980s.
I don't doubt Libya was guilty of a lot of nasty things in the 1980s. They funded, armed and trained the IRA. But Czechoslovakia too was guilty of this by continuing to produce semtex with no chemical marker (as they promised to do) which would allow it to be detected by sniffer dogs. The Czech's were complicit in working with the Libyans to ensure the IRA was well stocked with grade A Semtex but we say nothing about them. The truth is that whilst Gadaffi was not a nice person, neither was General Franco and the US was happy to deal with him. Likewise the last Shah of Iran was despicable to his people but he too was a friend of the UK and the US.
The truth of the matter is that an innocent man was let go, but sadly the fact that his retrial and appeal never went ahead was the worst thing about this release. It means that those who were really guilty will never be prosecuted or found.
News reports today (exaggerated by the Scum on Sunday) which claim the US is going to withdraw security co-operation with the UK because of Al Megrahi's release are all part of the media spin and the Tory campaign to use this story as another stick to beat Labour with. But they also show a shallow disregard for the fact that real justice will not be done.
Yes, the government have made a dreadful cock up in linking things to trade and denying them whilst the SNP's Justice Minister came over as shallow, dull, slightly dim and unable to say anything other than repeat the same lines over and over again. The SNP have looked just as bad as Labour if not worse.
Anyway, enough of a rant from me. That's my illogically strung together views on this issue. Feel free to tell me I am wrong.
My view is that Al Megrahi was not guilty of the bombing, planning it or anything else to do with the bombing. The truth is that he was convicted on the basis of evidence from dodgy sources who were incentivised by the US to give evidence that would frame Libya in order to justify the US stance towards that country since the early 1980s.
I don't doubt Libya was guilty of a lot of nasty things in the 1980s. They funded, armed and trained the IRA. But Czechoslovakia too was guilty of this by continuing to produce semtex with no chemical marker (as they promised to do) which would allow it to be detected by sniffer dogs. The Czech's were complicit in working with the Libyans to ensure the IRA was well stocked with grade A Semtex but we say nothing about them. The truth is that whilst Gadaffi was not a nice person, neither was General Franco and the US was happy to deal with him. Likewise the last Shah of Iran was despicable to his people but he too was a friend of the UK and the US.
The truth of the matter is that an innocent man was let go, but sadly the fact that his retrial and appeal never went ahead was the worst thing about this release. It means that those who were really guilty will never be prosecuted or found.
News reports today (exaggerated by the Scum on Sunday) which claim the US is going to withdraw security co-operation with the UK because of Al Megrahi's release are all part of the media spin and the Tory campaign to use this story as another stick to beat Labour with. But they also show a shallow disregard for the fact that real justice will not be done.
Yes, the government have made a dreadful cock up in linking things to trade and denying them whilst the SNP's Justice Minister came over as shallow, dull, slightly dim and unable to say anything other than repeat the same lines over and over again. The SNP have looked just as bad as Labour if not worse.
Anyway, enough of a rant from me. That's my illogically strung together views on this issue. Feel free to tell me I am wrong.
All credit to England Ladies
Much as England's ladies cricket team is a considerably better team than the male equivalent, England Ladies football team appear to be doing the same.
This evening England Ladies beat The Netherlands 2-1 after extra time to get through to the final of the Euro Championships. Just one match now from being the top team in Europe !
It is a shame these games are hidden away Eurosport and are not being shown on any terrestrial broadcast channels. It seems very odd given that Eurosport is in part owned by Eurovision of which the BBC is a shareholder and funding body.
Let us hope that the BBC or one of the many unwatched and unloved ITV Channels might pick the final up.
This evening England Ladies beat The Netherlands 2-1 after extra time to get through to the final of the Euro Championships. Just one match now from being the top team in Europe !
It is a shame these games are hidden away Eurosport and are not being shown on any terrestrial broadcast channels. It seems very odd given that Eurosport is in part owned by Eurovision of which the BBC is a shareholder and funding body.
Let us hope that the BBC or one of the many unwatched and unloved ITV Channels might pick the final up.
9/02/2009
You don't have to be thick to work in the local media ... but it helps
On BBC East tonight regarding swine flu"Locally 70,000 people are believed to have Swine Flu"
What ? So nationally last week there were 5,000 new cases but according to the local BBC (the same BBC who thought the Greens would do well in Norwich North and excluded UKIP from the televised debate) there are 70,000 in the East alone. That means that fourteen times as many people have swine flu in East Anglia than there are cases in the whole country at the moment !
Then again, it could be worse. On Radio Norwich, a local radio station which shares the same name as the one Alan Partridge is supposed to work for, showed that Alan Partridge might be a credit to their station when their host this afternoon announced that the answer to the question "Who was the host in 1983 of It'll Be Alright On The Night" was "Graham Norton". And no, there was no irony, no self deprecation, no joke, no apology for getting it wrong. He was deadly serious.
Guess who's back ... Back again ...
If you hadn't noticed (and I'd be surprised if you hadn't), I've been out of the country for the last week and my blogging had been done in advance using scheduled posts (which accounts for their lack of topical issues).
I take the view regarding holidays that you have top have something for people to read as lots of people do like to check in to their regular blogs on a daily basis. But I also don't tell people (except family and neighbours) that I am going away. When I was a councillor I was always surprised that in the weekly councillor briefing it highlighted which councillors were on holiday and the dates they were away. Is there any better way to alert a burglar to your absence other than putting an advert in the paper. Clearly Iain Dale lives in an area with little in the way of crime.
Anyway, back from sunny Menorca and back to work tomorrow.
I take the view regarding holidays that you have top have something for people to read as lots of people do like to check in to their regular blogs on a daily basis. But I also don't tell people (except family and neighbours) that I am going away. When I was a councillor I was always surprised that in the weekly councillor briefing it highlighted which councillors were on holiday and the dates they were away. Is there any better way to alert a burglar to your absence other than putting an advert in the paper. Clearly Iain Dale lives in an area with little in the way of crime.
Anyway, back from sunny Menorca and back to work tomorrow.
9/01/2009
Three years old
I started this blog three years ago today !
Thanks to all my readers who keep me going.
Thanks to all my readers who keep me going.
8/31/2009
How to put me off an issue
Certain pro smoking groups are still trying to get the smoking ban amended to that people can smoke once again in pubs. Personal I like now being able to go for a drink knowing I will not have to wash all my clothes immediately the next day to remove the smell of smoke. However, some groups do have plans for designated smoking rooms which may make some sense. But if one thing is going to put me off supporting them it is seeing that these groups are using Anthony Worrall-Thomson on their adverts.
Like Coral Vorderman, anything he does is an instant turn off for me. His politics too are not to my taste, just like his overly fancy food. Still, if you want to get people on side, why not choose a cook who let his own businesses fold recently because he did not want to secure the loans against his own personal wealth.
8/30/2009
Alan Turing - A real British hero that we should all honour
One of the most annoying things about being British is the fact that our government, indeed virtually every government, never lives up to the high reputation that the people themselves deserve. The persecution of people who serve this country, the continued slap in the face our servicemen receive, the lack of gratitude to people who put their lives on the line is never ending. When you read stories of VC holders having to sell their medals to make ends meet, war heroes having the payments challenged by the government or the story of Alan Turing, you have to wonder what they do it for.
I found THIS article from the Independent which highlights how Alan Turing, the man who broke the enigma code, a man who should be lauded as the person with the greatest single contribution to saving Britain in WW2 was persecuted by the UK government because he was gay, and eventually killed himself as a result. The Pink News reports also on the petition that has been signed by nearly 5000 people already.
It is a shameful blot on the history of this country that a man who did so much to preserve the freedoms we love was treated so badly. So I would support any move to pardon him and feel a more permanent reminder of his contribution to British freedoms should be recognised.
I found THIS article from the Independent which highlights how Alan Turing, the man who broke the enigma code, a man who should be lauded as the person with the greatest single contribution to saving Britain in WW2 was persecuted by the UK government because he was gay, and eventually killed himself as a result. The Pink News reports also on the petition that has been signed by nearly 5000 people already.
It is a shameful blot on the history of this country that a man who did so much to preserve the freedoms we love was treated so badly. So I would support any move to pardon him and feel a more permanent reminder of his contribution to British freedoms should be recognised.
8/29/2009
The charade that is the X Factor audition
Firstly let me say that I am a big fan of the X factor, I have watched it each and every year and along with Harry Hill's TV burp, it is the only programme I watch on ITV. But does anyone for one minute actually believe the contrived series of events that they put out each week when they show the auditions.
Firstly, you only get to perform for the two judges if you are either very good or very bad. Everyone else is filtered out at a series of pre-auditions. You are expected to stand around and wave like a performing seal shouting "We've got the X Factor" so that Dermot can do his links in front of you. If you moan about anything you will be thrown out of the auditions. And finally, the signs saying things like "I've got the X Factor" and "I love Simon" are made by the production team and given out to the people for staged shots. Presumably this is also done for Big Brother.
Don't get me wrong, I know it is al part of the entertainment, but the show is appearing to be more and more contrived and controlled. Why not show some element of the pre auditions ? Why not allow through some of the god people and omit some of those who have no ability at all ?
If you want to read more about the X Factor auditions, there is an excellent article about them HERE.
Firstly, you only get to perform for the two judges if you are either very good or very bad. Everyone else is filtered out at a series of pre-auditions. You are expected to stand around and wave like a performing seal shouting "We've got the X Factor" so that Dermot can do his links in front of you. If you moan about anything you will be thrown out of the auditions. And finally, the signs saying things like "I've got the X Factor" and "I love Simon" are made by the production team and given out to the people for staged shots. Presumably this is also done for Big Brother.
Don't get me wrong, I know it is al part of the entertainment, but the show is appearing to be more and more contrived and controlled. Why not show some element of the pre auditions ? Why not allow through some of the god people and omit some of those who have no ability at all ?
If you want to read more about the X Factor auditions, there is an excellent article about them HERE.
8/28/2009
Colonel Gadaffi looks like one of the Rolling Stones
Is it just me or does Colonel Gadaffi now have the look of an ageing rock star ?He looks like a sort of cross between Phil Spector, Keith Richards and Tom Jones (with no insult meant to any of them, except perhaps Phil Spector).
8/27/2009
What do party conferences achieve outside of political circles ?
With conference season approaching, it does leave me to wonder what they achieve beyond being a get together for the party delegates. In particular though, with Labour and Tory conferences being about talking from the leadership and listening for the delegates, are they a shop window for the public on the way parties operate and are they part of the problem with politics today ?
Taking the conferences in order, the Liberal Democrat conference is always the first to be held, but it is also the most democratic and open of all the party conferences. The Lib Dems do actually debate and decide on policy with members and delegates having a real choice and real involvement. The real fly in the ointment is that fact that you can be guaranteed to have a Lib Dem conference spoilt each year by some nutty motion which might attract the headlines, but puts the party in the dock with the public.
Whilst it might have been necessary when the Lib Dems had 18 MPs to get the press to pay attention, this really is no longer the case. So what is it with the need to have the motions on abortion (1993) , euthanasia (1997) , banning goldfish from fairground stalls (1992), hard porn for 16-year-olds (2001), or controversial policies such as abolishing the monarchy (2003), and liberalising dope laws (2002). Hopefully those days are gone, but it doesn't stop people suggesting some daft motion or other like privatising the NHS or other such craziness. I remember virtually every year having to placate a member or dealing with an unhappy deliverer who was upset at something debated at Lib Dem conference. One would hope that this year will see a real focus on the economy, on civil liberties and on dealing with the problems resulting from the depression.
Labour conferences have gone from one extreme to another in recent years. gone is the socialism, the mass block votes and the real debate. Instead Labour conferences are just incredibly bring. party of this is in part because ruling parties do not have the freedom to allow party conferences to dictate policy willy nilly, but in great part it is more to do with Labour's control freakery. the clearest example of this was the throwing out of a delegate a few years ago by a bunch of heavies.
Last year's conference was credited with giving Gordon Brown the mandate to carry on, but in truth the fact that nobody stuck their head above the parapet to challenge him had more to do with it than the conference.
As for the Tory conference, to describe it as anything other than a drinks party where party bigwigs gives speeches would be wrong. For that is what it is. Policy is never decided, a real debate is not allowed, disagreement is not encouraged and it is in no way democratic.
So what is the point ? Perhaps the biggest thing a conference does it to confirm the general view a party has towards it leader. Remember IDS and his "Quiet man" speech ? Then there was Tony Blair's "Education, education, education" speech. powerful at the time (even if it were a lie). Kinnock taking on the Militant left was also a mile stone. But in recent years the most notably party conference may perhaps have been the Tory party conference when David Davis speech went down like a lead balloon and David Cameron won over the Tory faithful with a rousing speech that nobody expected.
Perhaps though the best reason for a party conference was written some years ago in The Independent when they said
"It is also the one week in the year the party workers - the "poor bloody infantry" who stick leaflets through letter boxes - can let their hair down and have a week-long gang-bang with like-minded people."
Taking the conferences in order, the Liberal Democrat conference is always the first to be held, but it is also the most democratic and open of all the party conferences. The Lib Dems do actually debate and decide on policy with members and delegates having a real choice and real involvement. The real fly in the ointment is that fact that you can be guaranteed to have a Lib Dem conference spoilt each year by some nutty motion which might attract the headlines, but puts the party in the dock with the public.
Whilst it might have been necessary when the Lib Dems had 18 MPs to get the press to pay attention, this really is no longer the case. So what is it with the need to have the motions on abortion (1993) , euthanasia (1997) , banning goldfish from fairground stalls (1992), hard porn for 16-year-olds (2001), or controversial policies such as abolishing the monarchy (2003), and liberalising dope laws (2002). Hopefully those days are gone, but it doesn't stop people suggesting some daft motion or other like privatising the NHS or other such craziness. I remember virtually every year having to placate a member or dealing with an unhappy deliverer who was upset at something debated at Lib Dem conference. One would hope that this year will see a real focus on the economy, on civil liberties and on dealing with the problems resulting from the depression.
Labour conferences have gone from one extreme to another in recent years. gone is the socialism, the mass block votes and the real debate. Instead Labour conferences are just incredibly bring. party of this is in part because ruling parties do not have the freedom to allow party conferences to dictate policy willy nilly, but in great part it is more to do with Labour's control freakery. the clearest example of this was the throwing out of a delegate a few years ago by a bunch of heavies.
Last year's conference was credited with giving Gordon Brown the mandate to carry on, but in truth the fact that nobody stuck their head above the parapet to challenge him had more to do with it than the conference.
As for the Tory conference, to describe it as anything other than a drinks party where party bigwigs gives speeches would be wrong. For that is what it is. Policy is never decided, a real debate is not allowed, disagreement is not encouraged and it is in no way democratic.
So what is the point ? Perhaps the biggest thing a conference does it to confirm the general view a party has towards it leader. Remember IDS and his "Quiet man" speech ? Then there was Tony Blair's "Education, education, education" speech. powerful at the time (even if it were a lie). Kinnock taking on the Militant left was also a mile stone. But in recent years the most notably party conference may perhaps have been the Tory party conference when David Davis speech went down like a lead balloon and David Cameron won over the Tory faithful with a rousing speech that nobody expected.
Perhaps though the best reason for a party conference was written some years ago in The Independent when they said
"It is also the one week in the year the party workers - the "poor bloody infantry" who stick leaflets through letter boxes - can let their hair down and have a week-long gang-bang with like-minded people."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)