Health Warning!

The public is being told to avoid the Amis-Ford-Hitchens altercation. This display of 'animosity' is simply an attempt to win peer group recognition. In order to dominate the hierarchy, these creatures must fight one another in a public ritual that to outsiders appears terrifyingly real. It is in fact nothing of the sort. Genuine spats are never conducted so openly. And the proximity of "The Guardian" is evidence that the contest is purely attention seeking. Members of the public are warned to keep their distance from all such rituals, as they can lead to drowsiness and, in rare instances, coma. The phenomenon will pass rapidly if denied the oxygen of publicity.

The root of all politics

(The Schools Secretary, Ed Balls, is on Radio 4 explaining why schools should be allowed to preserve the right to teach their pupils about sex and relationships in accordance with their own religion despite new legislation making sex education compulsory.)


Humphreys: So, Mr Balls, if the government takes this issue seriously enough to make it compulsory, why the exemption?

Balls: John, this is about the need for a policy on sex education.

Humphreys:  On compulsory sex education. Isn't that the point?

Balls: Not really John. This is simply about having a policy. This government passionately believes in policies.

Humphreys: Yes, and we've had a lot of them over the years. And this particular one is compulsory in schools.

Balls: Yes.

Humphreys: So why not faith schools?

Balls: Because what really matters is that there is a policy.

Humphreys: No matter what that policy is?

Balls: Well yes, it does matter what it is. And faith schools have a very clear policy. They don't want to teach sex education. But that is still a policy.

Humphreys: Well, of sorts. But one based on religious belief.

Balls: We're well-disposed towards religious beliefs. Remember: Labour owes more to Methodism than Marxism.

Humphreys: This is not just Methodism. This is all religious organisations.

Balls: Yes, but that is a secondary issue. For us, the point of policy is policy. We must set the agenda, create a policy platform, if you like. That is why we're in power. It's what power is all about.

Humphreys: So its all about power now is it? And no doubt you want to stay in power. And that means not ruffling too many feathers.

Balls: No one wants to ruffle too many feathers.

Humphreys: And so what is the object of this power then?

Balls: That should be clear by now, John. Just as the object of policy is policy, so the object of power is power.

Humphreys: Really?

Balls: Yes, John. We have been in power thirteen years. I don't need to tell you that. Do I?

Humphreys: So in fact this whole debate isn't really about sex, or sex education at all, is it, Minister?

Balls: I suppose not, John. Not entirely.

Humphreys: It's really just about power. That's all you care about. Staying in power.

Balls: Not all we care about. But you can't do anything without power.

Humphreys: (Ponders) So then, in a roundabout sort of way...? Maybe sex does come in to this debate in the end.

Balls: Sorry John?

Humphreys: Well, they say, do they not, that power is the best aphrodisiac.

Balls: Yes, John. And you know what? We have a policy on that too.

Humphreys: I'm sure you do, Minister.

Bullying: What they are saying

David Cameron - Did New Labour put an end to fagging? I don't know. You'll have to ask them. What I do know is that Brown looks the kind of fellow who could do with a damn good thrashing now and again.

Ed Balls - I can't remember the last time I threatened to kick the shit out of anybody. My wife takes care of that kind of thing nowadays.

Harriet Harman - Can I just make it very clear that there is a wealth of difference between bullying and the kind of pressure a working mum has to put on her partner in order to make the relationship work. I'm sure my husband Jack would agree.

Tony Benn - Well, of course m'father introduced me to a number of famous bullies: Lloyd George, Herbert Morrison, Mosley. And I worked with one or two m'self - Ernie Bevin and Jim Callaghan, to name but two. And y'know what? To a man they said to me "This is going to hurt me more than it will you." And they were right, y'know.

Ann Widdecombe - The Catholic Church should never have dispensed with torture. All it's led to is an orgy of sado-masochism and self-pity. Of course you'll get bullying if you're always telling people that they must 'turn the other cheek'.

The future is here! The GordWeb Anytime Package!

Working with the government we're giving our customers the opportunity to interact with Gord as never before. The GordWeb Portal is expanding its horizons beyond the Internet! We will be rolling GordWeb out to every town centre, every street corner in Britain. Soon you'll be able to communicate with GordWeb not just at your desk, but while you are driving, shopping, or going about your daily business.

GordWeb will create a network of interactive screens and cameras situated in every town, city and vehicle across the UK. Wherever you are you'll see Gord announce his latest policy initiatives. Amazingly, you'll be able to offer feedback at any time of the day or night, via pin-drop sensitive, high-definition cameras mounted nearby. Of course, the response from No10 will not be immediate. Following Home Office examination, No10 will respond, in most instances, via your mobile phone - which will also be connected to the network.

And here's the great bit: Since the package carries the government's Responsible Technology Warrant, users will automatically qualify for a range of citizenship privileges. These will include "priority user" access to essential local and central government services (see leaflet for details), exemption from a range of statutory government databases, plus a whole host of discounts on government-approved mobile technology and neighbourhood surveillance systems.

Responsible citizenship is simply a click a way! Order now and show that In Gord you trust!

(GordWeb is a public-private partnership, developed and administered by Govsurv UK Ltd, part of Govsurv Consortium Worldwide PLC.)

Neo-Liberal Laboratory

Transcript -

(Nick Clegg and Vince Cable have been discussing the implications of a hung parliament and the kind of coalition they might join.)

Nick: We really need to think ahead, Vince. We need a working title, a name. One that says: We'll be calling the shots.

Vince: Isn't it a bit early to worry about that kind of thing, Nick? The actual election should be our primary concern right now.

Nick: Bit early, Vince? Not really. This is crucial. A coalition is the only way we'll ever get our hands on power. That we know. I believe we must set the agenda for that coalition early on, before the election, by constructing some kind of a narrative, some kind of pitch... Before the other parties try to hijack it.

Vince: Hijack it?

Nick: Hijack the agenda. In the event of a hung Parliament, they'll be out there briefing and spinning, telling everyone what a coalition can achieve - whilst basically pushing their own agenda. We must get in there first. Give people our perspective - and this is the point - before the election's begun. Look it can't hurt at least to consider what that narrative should be? Can it? Prepare a vision?

Vince: I suppose, maybe not... You've obviously given this some thought. So what exactly have you come up with so far?

Nick: Okay, so it was actually the name that I considered first. I thought, how do we convey something positive, something that says this is a good thing for the country, not just some cobbled together deal. And I thought... how about calling it the 'Coalition of the Willing?'

Vince: (Uneasy) Not sure about that. Echoes of the Iraq war. Bit of a risky one, don't you think?

Nick: Ah, that's what you might think at first. But who is actually going to war? We're not, that's for sure. However, the name will remind people of an unpopular policy that we opposed. So that's good.

Vince: I see. Yes... well, perhaps it could work if you were to look at it like that... Its all down to the detail ultimately. Are you able to fill me in on that at all?

Nick: Yes, Vince. I was thinking, why not adopt the best of what the old Labour and the old Conservative parties had to offer. It would make us more attractive to the grass roots supporters of both parties - The guys who have felt let down over recent years and want someone to listen.

Vince: I see. In principle it sounds a smart move, but how would Liberals achieve that? Can you be more specific? What do you mean by the best?

Nick: Right, now here's the really important part, I reckon. What was it more than anything else that used to distinguish the two main parties, something you don't get nowadays?

Vince: (Chuckles) I suppose that they were actually different.

Nick: Precisely.

Vince: (Surprised). Oh, sorry, I was being facetious. I thought that was too obvious. (Composing himself) But, yes, it is a serious point too, I admit. And what are you saying? We would be offering something different?

Nick: Got it in one... But more than that: our 'Coalition of the Willing' will in fact be different precisely because everything is so similar nowadays. I know that sounds like sophistry but I am just trying to develop a strategy.

Vince: I see where you're coming from, Nick. But slight problem: This is the Liberal Democratic Party. This isn't what liberals, small or large L, do, surely? We'd effectively be adopting the New Labour and the New Conservative consensus approach to politics whilst, paradoxically, embracing the polarised politics that they'd abandoned.

Nick: Bit of a mouthful that, eh, Vince? Sure we can find something snappier. And don't worry, we will. But the point is, through our 'Coalition of the Willing' we can do what the other two parties cannot possibly do anymore.

Vince: And what's that, Nick?

Nick: Shift sideways. They have moved so much to the centre, that they cannot go any further.

Vince: I see, Nick. So we are shifting our political standpoint? That is what you're saying?

Nick: Well, we're going to have to anyway if we join a coalition. So let's start getting used to that fact right here.

Vince: What are you saying. Moving left? Right?

Nick: Doesn't have to be left or right. Could be left and right.

Vince: That sounds like political schizophrenia, Nick.

Nick: No, Vince. It is all about playing the two sides off against one another. Oldest game in the book.

Vince: Oh its a game, is it?

Nick: (Frowns) Where have you been? It is a game of sorts.

Vince: Is it a solution? That's what concerns me.

Nick: Of course. Left and Right have been invading our territory for years. But here, we will be able to play left and right off against each other because neither has anywhere to go, no more territory to invade.

Vince: Okay, Nick. All very sophisticated, at least in theory. And I am wondering where these ideas are coming from. Hours of reading? Smoke filled rooms?

Nick: (Shrugs) Nothing that new, you'll find.

Vince: But leaving all of that aside... I'm still not sure whether it is really liberal, be it small or large L.

Nick: Well ok then maybe it is time for a brand new name for the party as well.

Vince: What? A name to replace LibDems? I'm not sure that's worth embarking upon, Nick. Not now at least.

Nick: It is and I'll tell you why. We must show people that we are still liberal, but with a slight name change, we will also be offering this new narrative?

Vince: (Looking weary, the penny drops.) And so have you by any chance decided what that name might be, Nick?

Nick: I have indeed, Vince.

Vince: And will you enlighten me?

Nick: Of course, Vince. I'd love to. The new name will be... well, how about The New Liberal Party?

Vince: (Sighs) Yes, Nick. Funnily enough, I thought it might be something like that. And that will encapsulate everything that we have just been talking about, will it?

Nick: Indeed it will, Vince. Indeed it will.

Breaking (Update): Brown asks Rawnsley "do you want some?"

The storm generated by the publication of Andrew Rawnsley's new book, The End of the Party, has taken a dramatic turn. Rumours are sweeping Westminster that Prime Minister Gordon Brown has said to Rawnsley "Do you want to get involved? You hard enough?"
More as it breaks....

Breaking News: No.10 staff deny head-butting Prime Minister | Mandelson election planning

Number 10 staff have been forced to deny that they regularly head-butted Gordon Brown's fist. A new book about Brown claims that staff at Number 10 regularly bullied the Prime Minister, ridiculing his 'clunking fist' and even head-butting it on more than one occasion... More Later....

Also, Lord Mandelson has revealed that the 2010 general election will be the slickest ever held. "Labour's operational planning will be so sophisticated, so efficient that people will wonder for some time to come whether there really ever was an election..."

New Labour, Reloaded

Douglas Alexander, Labour's election campaign co-ordinator today unveiled the party's new operating system. Labour has in recent years received a barrage of complaints about its 'clunky software' that regularly seizes up and crashes, frequently leaving the user unable to work, frustrated and out of pocket. Alexander hopes the release of the operating system will demonstrate that the party deserves a fourth term, on the basis that 'this time we won't screw up the IT'.

"Essentially, we know that we deserve a fourth term. And deep down so do the British people. We have much work still to do - like consolidating power. To quote Gordon, when he was asked for his assessment of the New Labour Project: "It is too early to say. Ask me again at the end of our ninth term. Although it will be too early then as well."

"Historically Labour has used technology as a form of control. And we always will. Forever and ever." he said. He went on to discuss election strategy: "We learnt from studying Obama's campaign how to use technology to empower your supporters. And that is what we want: To empower the people to support Labour."

Asked whether Labour's approach to technology smacked of 'Big Brother', Alexander replied: "The only 'Big Brother' that gets discussed in Labour circles is the reality TV show." He then added, "There is nothing to worry about - assuming you are innocent, that is. And anyway, we'll probably lose all the information in the post."

He concluded: "Don't call us, we'll be watching you."

Breaking News - Bank Exodus

Mayor Boris Johnson's worst fears were realised last night when it was confirmed that an investment banker has moved to Switzerland. Mayor Johnson had been warning for some time that new taxes would spark a frantic exodus from the City of London as bankers headed for "the charms of yodelling, cuckoo clocks and the sparkling dreariness of the Swiss."

The banker, Rudi Euler, who works in 'stock lending' and actually originates from Zurich said, "My bosses say they won't pay me more money because I am always making errors. Then the tax man takes what little that I have. So I am quitting and returning home."

Mayor Boris said, "This is our worst nightmare. Bankers have said for some time now that they would leave these shores if they had to pay new taxes. We must listen to them. These chaps are not crying wolf, you know. Except, of course, for the ones who are."

Public Private Partnership

(Cabinet meeting ends. The Foreign Secretary approaches the PM.)

FS: Prime Minister, wonder if I could have a word with you.

PM: Can't stop now.

FS: It is a matter of some delicacy. Need to get something off my chest.

PM: What is it?

FS: (Cautiously) I'm sorry to say that I've been... I've been sleeping with your wife.

PM: No, no, no. For God's sake! This isn't right.

FS: I know, Prime Minister. And all I can say is how sorry...

PM: No, I mean, this is not how I find out.

FS: I don't follow.

PM: Why has this not been leaked, man?

FS: Leaked? But, I thought....

PM: I don't care what you thought. You know the procedure. The first I should hear of this is via a third party. You don't tell me this kind of thing to my face.

FS: Oh, I see. Are you saying, I leak it? And that is how you find out?

PM: Of course, man. I shouldn't have to tell you that. And while we're at it, what of Anne? How does she intend to tell me?

FS: How?

PM: Yes, how, you idiot? Will I find out through an intimate, sofa based chat with Fearne Britton, or with Piers Morgan, or possibly Kirsty Wark - I hear she's trying to break into this kind of thing nowadays?

FS: (Puzzled) I see. I'm not sure. I had assumed Anne, I mean your wife, would come clean, this evening.

PM: Come clean? Sorry, is this some kind of a joke? Enlighten me. What is 'come clean'?

FS: I suppose, what I am getting at is... She'll tell it as it is, to your face.

PM: Where have you been? (Grabs the Home Secretary who is hovering nearby). Moment of your time, Al.

HS: Yes, Prime Minister?

PM: Right, can you tell me, Al, what you think of my wife? And please give me the so-called 'straight answer'.

HS: (Awkwardly) Prime Minister... I desperately want to sleep with your wife. I am head over heels in love with her and long to dress her in lace and be tied...

PM: (Grimaces) Yes, that will do, Al... Right, now how would I get to hear about your seedy fantasies?

HS: Well, I suppose that... Andrew Marr would interview me next Sunday. After a long discussion on the subject of ID cards, he will slip in a question - he'll ask whether I want to sleep with your wife and perform certain, shall we say, acts with her. I will naturally reply: "The Prime Minister has a lovely wife who is pure of heart. I can without hesitation say that I have no designs on her at the current time, and moreover I have no knowledge of the acts that you describe."

PM: Very good. Thanks, Al. Talk later, if that's ok. (The Home Secretary nods and leaves the room. The PM turns to the FS.) See. He knows how its done.

FS: Well, yes, of course, I do understand... but, you know, I thought that when it came to one's private life, it was a little more... er...

PM: Oh dear oh dear oh dear. You've spent far too long in the Foreign Office, haven't you? You need to move with the times, you really do! Let me remind you: Correct procedure will be followed at ALL times, and I mean ALL times. Is that clear? No allowances to be made for one's 'private life', whatever that is.

FS: So sorry, Prime Minister. I understand. How foolish of me.

PM: OK, now go and do this properly. (Foreign Secretary nods and nervously leaves the room. PM smiles then calls after him). And just one other thing.

FS: (Looking back) Yes, Prime Minister?

PM: Since on this one occasion we have thrown all caution to the winds, I may as well tell you now that I will be recording an interview with Piers Morgan later this week. He will be asking me some very, very searching questions on the subject of my private life... about possible marital difficulties. He'll also ask whether there is any truth whatsoever in the rumour that my Foreign Secretary is about to resign - and leave the Cabinet for good... I will, of course, look sombre, but reply that there is no truth in any of these allegations - and that what we should really be discussing is this party's vision for a fourth term. I will add: It is not the role of politicians to address these kind of issues in the public arena.

Better the devil you know - Section15a Part43c

(After a few drinks one night, Oliver Cromwell and Fairfax discuss "legacy issues")

Fairfax: So, Ollie, what now? Where do we go from here?

Cromwell: Where do we go? We don’t go anywhere. I’m running the show now.  And I’m not into this, “Carry forward the revolution” thing.  Bit of order is what we need right now, I reckon.

Fairfax: Yeah, right. Of course, Ollie. I’m right with you there. But I was thinking, you know, we’ve started something. And I was wondering whether in years, in centuries to come, will all this, this change, still be relevant? What will happen two, three hundred or more years from now? For example, do you think that the peasants will ever get their hands on power?

Cromwell: Peasants? Not if I have anything to do with it, they won‘t. I tell you what, those Levellers… Do they have the any idea what would happen if we let a load of sheep-fondling half-wits decide who’s in charge? Bloody anarchy, that's what. These peasants would vote a dog into Parliament if they were given the right narrative and the animal looked cute enough.

Fairfax: Dog, yeah, right… And what about women, Ol? Do you reckon there'll ever be birds in parliament?

Cromwell: Women? Are you having a laugh? Who the hell would want women in Parliament? They already try to run our lives enough as it is. They’d come in and want to ‘smarten the place up’…  encourage us to ‘be in touch with our ‘feminine sides', but just end up giving us more grief. The thought of it!

Fairfax: I don‘t know… ‘Cromwell’s Cuties’… might brighten this place up.

Cromwell: Don’t even go there.

Fairfax: But you reckon that what we’ve achieved will live on? Parliament will go from strength to strength?

Cromwell: Sincerely hope so... As long as Parliamentarians don’t get above themselves, don’t get greedy. As long as they don’t use their power to line their own pockets, to further their own interests. Then I reckon that things'll be fine.

Fairfax: Yeah, right. Last thing we would want, that: Greedy Parliamentarians.

Cromwell: Just think how crap that would look. We put the kybosh on the ‘divine right of kings‘, only to have, couple of hundred years or so down the line, a bunch of chiselling little crooks claiming the ‘divine right of Parliamentarians‘, and filling their boots and taking bribes and saying, “Oooh, you can‘t touch me. I have Parliamentary immunity. I have special privileges, you know."

Fairfax. Yeah, right. That wouldn’t look good, would it?

Cromwell: It wouldn’t look good at all.

Fairfax: Cos, otherwise… you sort of, might as well just invite the monarchy back, have them back running the show, mightn’t you really… you know, when you think about it?

Cromwell: (Contemptuous, dismissive.) Well that isn’t going to happen, is it?

Fairfax: (Nervously) Bloody right, Ollie. Bloody right …Well, at least, I bloody hope not.

Cromwell: Yes… I bloody hope not either.

Hacker... Humphrey... 20 Years on...?

Hacker:  You know what, Humphrey? When I look back and I think of the frustration I used to feel, when the likes of you and Bernard blocked or stalled what I was trying to do... And when I decided eventually that the only way to make things happen was to clip the wings of civil servants, and the wings, for that matter, of the other institutions that wanted to keep things just as they were... And when I then consider how we positioned our chaps above civil servants and concentrated power in No.10 - because, of course, we were elected politicians - When I think about how we used that power to force through certain policies, to respond swiftly, more dynamically to certain events, to act decisively, to act sometimes ruthlessly... when I think about all of that, and I then weigh up what it actually achieved, what it made better, versus how divisive it might have sometimes been, when I see that politicians did not become better people, they became worse... greedy, grabbing, sleazy... When I consider all of those things, and recall the rows that you and I had back then, in the good old days, about change... You know, I do rather find myself thinking from time to time that... this change we introduced, this sweeping away the old orders, without creating a more moral environment... well, Humphrey... perhaps... it wasn't quite such a good thing after all...

Sir Humphrey:  No... Prime Minister.