The LibDem leader Nick Clegg has challenged Conservative leader David Cameron to a duel to find out who is 'more savage'. The party leaders who, it is universally acknowledged, were chosen because of their youthful good looks and their charisma are both becoming increasingly concerned that this is the only reason why they were chosen.
Lately it has appeared pointless attacking the Prime Minister Gordon Brown as everyone else is already doing a good job of it. But it makes a lot of sense for The LibDem and Conservative leaders to round on eachother in order to prove which of them is the 'hard man' of politics.
Clegg has accused Cameron of not being 'savage' enough with spending cuts. He has suggested that there should be a longterm freeze in the public sector pay bill, scaling back of future public sector pensions and the withdrawal of tax credits from the middle class.
The Conservative leader who has previously avoided scaring the electorate with drastic spending cuts is sure to hit back with a withering attack on Clegg and is likely to announce broader plans to decrease public debt. Now that the 'c-word' has become acceptable, none of the party leaders can any longer feel shy of fighting in this particular arena.
What is clear is that throughout the past few years the three leaders have worked so hard to cling on to the same ideological turf that it now seems that the only way that any of them can distinguish themselves is by punching eachother's lights out in a public brawl.
Saturday, 19 September 2009
Friday, 18 September 2009
No more cover-ups or denials
It is official: Gordon Brown has run out of things to cover up. The Prime Minister whose reputation for double-dealing has flourished of late is now facing a crisis of confidence, as he searches for new departmental policies and secret deals to hide or to deny ever existed.
Brown is currently defending himself from claims by the Tories that he mis-led parliament during a month-long campaign in which he accused them of planning 10% cuts to public services. A recently leaked Treasury document shows that at the time officials were themselves forecasting 9.3% cuts.
The Prime Minister's determination to move away from the spin of Old New Labour to the straightforward lies of New New Labour has undoubtedly borne fruit, most notably in the case of the Al-Megrahi release where he denied that an oil deal with Libya was in any way involved. Since that time, Brown has more or less universally been acknowledged to be a double-dealer.
But is it possible that time is running out for the man who has governed Britain for the past two years on a diet of untruths, cover-ups and denials? Can there be anything left to hide for the man who is assumed to be lying almost every time he opens his mouth nowadays?
Perhaps, the man who started out as he meant to go on when he denied back in 2007 that he was planning an election, could have just one more card up his sleeve. The ultimate denial for this Prime Minister would be the denial that there is going to be a general election in the next nine months and that he is going to lose it. But in the case of Gordon Brown it is not totally inconceivable.
Brown is currently defending himself from claims by the Tories that he mis-led parliament during a month-long campaign in which he accused them of planning 10% cuts to public services. A recently leaked Treasury document shows that at the time officials were themselves forecasting 9.3% cuts.
The Prime Minister's determination to move away from the spin of Old New Labour to the straightforward lies of New New Labour has undoubtedly borne fruit, most notably in the case of the Al-Megrahi release where he denied that an oil deal with Libya was in any way involved. Since that time, Brown has more or less universally been acknowledged to be a double-dealer.
But is it possible that time is running out for the man who has governed Britain for the past two years on a diet of untruths, cover-ups and denials? Can there be anything left to hide for the man who is assumed to be lying almost every time he opens his mouth nowadays?
Perhaps, the man who started out as he meant to go on when he denied back in 2007 that he was planning an election, could have just one more card up his sleeve. The ultimate denial for this Prime Minister would be the denial that there is going to be a general election in the next nine months and that he is going to lose it. But in the case of Gordon Brown it is not totally inconceivable.
Wednesday, 16 September 2009
"I see them everywhere"
Dan Brown's latest conspiracy theory novel, The Lost Phallus, has the hero Robert Langdon chasing penises. The book is true to the spirit of his first two novels, Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons where the Professor uncovered the mysteries of secret sects using his genius for decoding symbols. The plot is hair-raising and has Langdon alternately being chased or obstructed by nutters who are determined to keep their phalluses to themselves.
In the latest novel the plot revolves around the symbols not of religion but of government and commerce. The Washington Monument is central to Langdon's 'penis obsession' but The Eiffel Tower and Taipei 101 also play big parts in the proceedings. Langdon believes that the leading world powers were actually established by sex-mad political leaders who all signed up to the notion that "Power is the best aphrodisiac." He also thinks that early mystics hid clues to facts that would blow apart our understanding of reproduction.... and that they hid those clues in famous monuments.
Naturally Langdon is seen as a meddler by the phallocentric 'keepers of the secrets of reproduction' and they send a crazed scientist called Dawkins to get him. Dawkins will do absolutely anything to protect the truth. However, once Langdon has got the 'bit between his teeth', there's no stopping him and before long he starts seeing penises everywhere - even in his breakfast cereal.
The story ends dramatically with a giant gorilla climbing the Washington Monument, holding the Professor's 'female helper' Fay Wray in his sweaty palm. This is seen as a symbol of the repressed sexuality of the political classes. Meanwhile Dawkins is dispatched whilst trying to beat Langdon at a game of 'advanced symbology'. And Langdon's friend Professor Derrida claims that "The inner truth of gender is a fabrication." Nobody knows what he means by this. But it appears to do the trick, and the world's politicians soon come together and promise to be more transparent in future about their 'sexual relations' with 'those interns' etc.
The drama ends memorably with the symbologist Langdon raising aloft a large dildo and stating: "I have at long last got to grips with this sacred object."
In the latest novel the plot revolves around the symbols not of religion but of government and commerce. The Washington Monument is central to Langdon's 'penis obsession' but The Eiffel Tower and Taipei 101 also play big parts in the proceedings. Langdon believes that the leading world powers were actually established by sex-mad political leaders who all signed up to the notion that "Power is the best aphrodisiac." He also thinks that early mystics hid clues to facts that would blow apart our understanding of reproduction.... and that they hid those clues in famous monuments.
Naturally Langdon is seen as a meddler by the phallocentric 'keepers of the secrets of reproduction' and they send a crazed scientist called Dawkins to get him. Dawkins will do absolutely anything to protect the truth. However, once Langdon has got the 'bit between his teeth', there's no stopping him and before long he starts seeing penises everywhere - even in his breakfast cereal.
The story ends dramatically with a giant gorilla climbing the Washington Monument, holding the Professor's 'female helper' Fay Wray in his sweaty palm. This is seen as a symbol of the repressed sexuality of the political classes. Meanwhile Dawkins is dispatched whilst trying to beat Langdon at a game of 'advanced symbology'. And Langdon's friend Professor Derrida claims that "The inner truth of gender is a fabrication." Nobody knows what he means by this. But it appears to do the trick, and the world's politicians soon come together and promise to be more transparent in future about their 'sexual relations' with 'those interns' etc.
The drama ends memorably with the symbologist Langdon raising aloft a large dildo and stating: "I have at long last got to grips with this sacred object."
Tuesday, 15 September 2009
"No more laymen, brothers!"
One year on from the collapse of Lehman Brothers market watchers and political leaders alike are delighted that ordinary folk now understand collateralised debt obligations (CDOs) and other structured securities. There is a sense that, now that everybody understands the complexities of the market place, it is far less likely that maths geeks and rocket scientists will ever again be able secretly to develop and trade the toxic waste that brought down that financial behemoth.
It is widely accepted that banks will have to show greater accountability in the coming months and years. Congress is working through President Obama's overhaul of the regulatory system and in the UK, Gordon Brown is making noises about how cross he is that bankers are paying themselves large bonuses again. But the key to long term change in the running of the global financial system has inevitably to come from the ordinary voters, the taxpayers who will have to hold future political leaders to account, and through them, the banks as well. And for that to happen they have to be able to understand the nature of the products that those banks trade.
And so it is with this in mind that Prime Minister Brown has decided to authorise a new range of derivatives that mean something to ordinary people. He and Chancellor Darling will sign off the first wave of these in the coming months. They will include poker derivatives - after all everyone and his aunt does poker nowadays. They will also likely agree roulette derivatives - roulette being another hot home counties favorite; pawn shop derivatives - much in vogue nowadays, what with the recession; lottery derivatives - everyone loves a punt, and remember, it could be you; and, slightly more controversially, mortgaged-up-to-the-hilt derivatives - a personal favorite of the Prime Minister.
"Let me make myself clear: The era of bankers having all the best tunes is over." Said Gordon Brown today. "It is time for people to understand what many of us have understood for a long time: The financial markets are not going away. So if you cannot beat them you must indeed join them. And the best way to do that is for this government to spread plain, intelligible casino capitalism to the masses. So that is why I now offer you 'The People's Derivatives'."
It is widely accepted that banks will have to show greater accountability in the coming months and years. Congress is working through President Obama's overhaul of the regulatory system and in the UK, Gordon Brown is making noises about how cross he is that bankers are paying themselves large bonuses again. But the key to long term change in the running of the global financial system has inevitably to come from the ordinary voters, the taxpayers who will have to hold future political leaders to account, and through them, the banks as well. And for that to happen they have to be able to understand the nature of the products that those banks trade.
And so it is with this in mind that Prime Minister Brown has decided to authorise a new range of derivatives that mean something to ordinary people. He and Chancellor Darling will sign off the first wave of these in the coming months. They will include poker derivatives - after all everyone and his aunt does poker nowadays. They will also likely agree roulette derivatives - roulette being another hot home counties favorite; pawn shop derivatives - much in vogue nowadays, what with the recession; lottery derivatives - everyone loves a punt, and remember, it could be you; and, slightly more controversially, mortgaged-up-to-the-hilt derivatives - a personal favorite of the Prime Minister.
"Let me make myself clear: The era of bankers having all the best tunes is over." Said Gordon Brown today. "It is time for people to understand what many of us have understood for a long time: The financial markets are not going away. So if you cannot beat them you must indeed join them. And the best way to do that is for this government to spread plain, intelligible casino capitalism to the masses. So that is why I now offer you 'The People's Derivatives'."
Monday, 14 September 2009
Product Debasement
There are concerns in some quarters that the decision by The Department of Culture to allow product placement on commercially produced programmes in the UK will plunge broadcasting standards down to a new low. The Culture Secretary Ben Bradshaw is proposing a three month consultation before finally confirming the lifting of the current ban on product placement in a bid to allay these concerns.
There could however be some exciting new developments resulting from product placement. It is believed that edgy teenage dramas such as Skins and the Inbetweeners will allow the manufacturers of condoms, sex toys and 'lubricants' strategically to 'place their products' as and when appropriate. It is also thought that major cocaine, heroin and marijuana dealers will pay producers big money to show drugs as being freely available - and even possibly good - for young people. Arms manufacturers hope crime dramas will showcase their hardware, allowing a certain make of gun or of knife to be waved freely around in a threatening manner, with, say, the hero always carrying the more expensive, more refined model.
Commercial broadcasters and advertisers claimed today that ordinary viewers had nothing to fear from seeing product placement on their favorite programmes, since it would not generate anything out of the ordinary. Said one: "What's weird about seeing people in the Rover's Return or Queen Vic sipping insipid keg beers and piss-poor lagers before diving into their pot noodles and pork scratchings? And what is the problem with DCI Jane Tennyson washing down her Nurofen Plus with half a litre of Smirnoff? It's kind of what you'd expect anyway."
"The sort of people who watch programmes containing product placement will feel very much at home with the trash that producers will be placing. And let's face it, there could not be anything more naff and degenerate on television right now than mainstream television adverts... like that one with an irritating nodding dog or that directory enquiries one with those pathetic mustachioed men. Not to mention those ghastly sponsorship announcements at the beginnings and the ends of programmes. So can standards on commercial television really get much worse? Somehow I think not."
There could however be some exciting new developments resulting from product placement. It is believed that edgy teenage dramas such as Skins and the Inbetweeners will allow the manufacturers of condoms, sex toys and 'lubricants' strategically to 'place their products' as and when appropriate. It is also thought that major cocaine, heroin and marijuana dealers will pay producers big money to show drugs as being freely available - and even possibly good - for young people. Arms manufacturers hope crime dramas will showcase their hardware, allowing a certain make of gun or of knife to be waved freely around in a threatening manner, with, say, the hero always carrying the more expensive, more refined model.
Commercial broadcasters and advertisers claimed today that ordinary viewers had nothing to fear from seeing product placement on their favorite programmes, since it would not generate anything out of the ordinary. Said one: "What's weird about seeing people in the Rover's Return or Queen Vic sipping insipid keg beers and piss-poor lagers before diving into their pot noodles and pork scratchings? And what is the problem with DCI Jane Tennyson washing down her Nurofen Plus with half a litre of Smirnoff? It's kind of what you'd expect anyway."
"The sort of people who watch programmes containing product placement will feel very much at home with the trash that producers will be placing. And let's face it, there could not be anything more naff and degenerate on television right now than mainstream television adverts... like that one with an irritating nodding dog or that directory enquiries one with those pathetic mustachioed men. Not to mention those ghastly sponsorship announcements at the beginnings and the ends of programmes. So can standards on commercial television really get much worse? Somehow I think not."
Sunday, 13 September 2009
Ashes from the Phoenix
The Prime Minister Gordon Brown today praised the Phoenix Four for the orderly way in which they ran MG Rover into the ground. He is said to be impressed by the restraint and forbearance that they showed, leaving the car maker less than a billion pounds in debt and siphoning off into their own bank accounts a paltry fifty or so million pounds between them.
This week inspectors published an 830 page report costing £16m into the collapse of the car firm in 2005. It stops short of accusing the Phoenix directors of wrong doing, but it does suggest that whilst the car firm ran up huge losses, they paid themselves huge bonuses which they stashed in off-shore bank accounts. They ran roughshod over corporate governance guidelines and switched key assets out of the company into their own name. When the car firm went under 6,000 employees were thrown out of work.
However Mr Brown is said to be impressed by the small scale of the losses and the moderation that is evident from the minimal bonuses that the Phoenix directors paid themselves. In particular he is said to be ecstatic that in the light of the catastrophic losses of the automobile industry in the US, which ran to tens of billions in the case of Ford and General Motors in recent years, the losses at MG Rover are in fact to be welcomed.
"Compared to the losses in the US," said Mr Brown, "These really are small beer. It is also clear from the recent inspectors' report that there is absolutely no evidence of government incompetence, and even if there was, it would be of little consequence." Mr Brown concluded: "Let us be clear, the collapse of MG Rover is history. And on such occasions as these I like to quote the words of that late, great car maker, Henry Ford: History is bunk."
This week inspectors published an 830 page report costing £16m into the collapse of the car firm in 2005. It stops short of accusing the Phoenix directors of wrong doing, but it does suggest that whilst the car firm ran up huge losses, they paid themselves huge bonuses which they stashed in off-shore bank accounts. They ran roughshod over corporate governance guidelines and switched key assets out of the company into their own name. When the car firm went under 6,000 employees were thrown out of work.
However Mr Brown is said to be impressed by the small scale of the losses and the moderation that is evident from the minimal bonuses that the Phoenix directors paid themselves. In particular he is said to be ecstatic that in the light of the catastrophic losses of the automobile industry in the US, which ran to tens of billions in the case of Ford and General Motors in recent years, the losses at MG Rover are in fact to be welcomed.
"Compared to the losses in the US," said Mr Brown, "These really are small beer. It is also clear from the recent inspectors' report that there is absolutely no evidence of government incompetence, and even if there was, it would be of little consequence." Mr Brown concluded: "Let us be clear, the collapse of MG Rover is history. And on such occasions as these I like to quote the words of that late, great car maker, Henry Ford: History is bunk."
Saturday, 12 September 2009
Four intellectuals in pursuit of a theorist
Last night Newsnight Review broke new ground when it managed for the first time in television history to interview four leading academics / writers who all took exactly the same line on Charles Darwin. The BBC has often in the past been accused of trying to generate debate for the sake of it, of engineering conflict, even of sowing seeds of discord. Some critics have suggested that a public service broadcaster has a duty to take a more singularly educational line.
In the past the Beeb has sadly resisted banging that drum in the name of objectivity. But last night its flagship Newsnight Review came out unequivocally on the side of Charles Darwin and invited four like minded liberals to engage in a classic 'set-piece love-in'.
It is hard to say who loved whom more. Did Margaret Atwood love Dawkins more than Darwin because he had effectively spread the word, was a more influential writer (nowadays at least) than Darwin? Did Ruth Padel love herself more than her great-great grandfather (Charles Darwin) because she felt a sense of occasion that simply did not exist in the Victorian 'dark ages' when his efforts were largely unappreciated... even derided? Or did the token fellow in the dog collar who clearly loved Darwin also love Richard Dawkins deeply, madly, passionately simply because... well, hey, a Christian can learn to love evolution, can't he?
At one point the discussion descended into animal impersonations when Margaret Atwood offered the insight that we don't know if animals sense impending death and we never will do, but insisted that it was a point still worth harping on about - it was the kind of consideration that she bungs in her novels, needless to say. Dawkins, ever the selfish genius then rolled over and tried to make love to himself, intermittently mentioning the words 'the prime directive', and suggesting that masturbation is simply an extension of the selfish gene.
But surely the night will forever belong to interviewer Martha Kearney for her unceasing and devoted sycophancy in the face of four trenchant Darwinists and her courageous attempts to agree with everything that these very public intellectuals said, skillfully avoiding tricky questions like, "If you are that confident about your beliefs, why do you tend to belittle those who don't sign up to them?"
It was a love-in alright... a night from television history that we'll be talking about for quite some time to come, testimony to the power of faith and language and intellectualism, and of course to the real 'prime directive,' the power of the BBC.
In the past the Beeb has sadly resisted banging that drum in the name of objectivity. But last night its flagship Newsnight Review came out unequivocally on the side of Charles Darwin and invited four like minded liberals to engage in a classic 'set-piece love-in'.
It is hard to say who loved whom more. Did Margaret Atwood love Dawkins more than Darwin because he had effectively spread the word, was a more influential writer (nowadays at least) than Darwin? Did Ruth Padel love herself more than her great-great grandfather (Charles Darwin) because she felt a sense of occasion that simply did not exist in the Victorian 'dark ages' when his efforts were largely unappreciated... even derided? Or did the token fellow in the dog collar who clearly loved Darwin also love Richard Dawkins deeply, madly, passionately simply because... well, hey, a Christian can learn to love evolution, can't he?
At one point the discussion descended into animal impersonations when Margaret Atwood offered the insight that we don't know if animals sense impending death and we never will do, but insisted that it was a point still worth harping on about - it was the kind of consideration that she bungs in her novels, needless to say. Dawkins, ever the selfish genius then rolled over and tried to make love to himself, intermittently mentioning the words 'the prime directive', and suggesting that masturbation is simply an extension of the selfish gene.
But surely the night will forever belong to interviewer Martha Kearney for her unceasing and devoted sycophancy in the face of four trenchant Darwinists and her courageous attempts to agree with everything that these very public intellectuals said, skillfully avoiding tricky questions like, "If you are that confident about your beliefs, why do you tend to belittle those who don't sign up to them?"
It was a love-in alright... a night from television history that we'll be talking about for quite some time to come, testimony to the power of faith and language and intellectualism, and of course to the real 'prime directive,' the power of the BBC.
Thursday, 10 September 2009
Yes, more clusterfucks
The financial markets are reeling today after the statement made by Alan Greenspan that a financial crisis will "happen again". Traders, taxpayers and Radio Four listeners had been hoping that after last year's near meltdown everyone had learnt their lesson. But Greenspan stated quite unequivocally, "This is not the first, and it will surely not be the last clusterfuck that the Western economies experience."
Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling have worked tirelessly over the past year to ensure that last year's crisis is never ever repeated. Gordon Brown, in his brand new initiative to put an end to 'boom and bust' has even considered restricting the bankers' bonuses many have blamed for the excessive risk taking activities that sparked the crisis in the first place... Although he has of late disgarded this idea in view of the fact that it would of course put an undue and some might say unnecessary burden on relations with his 'paymasters' in the city.
Whatever the case might be, the people have agreed one thing: Noone ever wants to see a repeat of the near collapse of Western financial markets that was witnessed in 2008. So it is with great sorrow and unhappiness that people have digested the statement made by Greenspan yesterday. Whoever would have thought that greed and recklessness and the desire to feather ones own nest at the expense of others could occur ever, ever again? And who would ever imagine that politicians, in all their wisdom and their kindness and in all their ability to absorb and understand history could allow such dreadful events to be repeated?
Perhaps... it is time to think the unthinkable... Perhaps it is time to ask whether our great, our wondrous leaders really are the brilliant, the benevolent, the masterful beings that we have always, always held them to be.
Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling have worked tirelessly over the past year to ensure that last year's crisis is never ever repeated. Gordon Brown, in his brand new initiative to put an end to 'boom and bust' has even considered restricting the bankers' bonuses many have blamed for the excessive risk taking activities that sparked the crisis in the first place... Although he has of late disgarded this idea in view of the fact that it would of course put an undue and some might say unnecessary burden on relations with his 'paymasters' in the city.
Whatever the case might be, the people have agreed one thing: Noone ever wants to see a repeat of the near collapse of Western financial markets that was witnessed in 2008. So it is with great sorrow and unhappiness that people have digested the statement made by Greenspan yesterday. Whoever would have thought that greed and recklessness and the desire to feather ones own nest at the expense of others could occur ever, ever again? And who would ever imagine that politicians, in all their wisdom and their kindness and in all their ability to absorb and understand history could allow such dreadful events to be repeated?
Perhaps... it is time to think the unthinkable... Perhaps it is time to ask whether our great, our wondrous leaders really are the brilliant, the benevolent, the masterful beings that we have always, always held them to be.
Wednesday, 9 September 2009
The Doors of Perception
Hard though it is to believe, the UK's two main parties are on the verge of civil war. Conservative right is attacking Conservative left and Labour left is attacking Labour right. And it is all over which idiot, or bunch of idiots, in either party, left the doors of perception too wide open because they wanted a bit of 'wiggle room'. So what is at stake?
- On the Labour front: Recovery - When is a recovery not a recovery? When is the word recovery premature? Is 'recovery' going to become the word most associated with Labour in the run up to the next election?
- On the Conservative front: Spending - How much should a future Conservative government cut public services? Is Mr Osborne faint hearted in his approach? Does he need to slash and burn more? Will spending cuts be associated with the Conservatives in the run up to the next election?
For both parties, perception is more than ever really the problem (rather than the solution). Everyone wants to stand in the middle of the road nowadays, despite the old Nye Bevan aphorism that such people tend to get run over. But ever since New Labour moved everyone closer to the centre ground in the late 90s, the political parties have been too terrified to move away, just in case the sidewalk holds even greater horrors. At least in the middle of the road, you can keep your enemies close and never suffer such accusations as: "Look, he/she is on the wrong side of the road." At least no-one need appear to be like the proverbial 'chicken', always thinking about crossing to the other side... And if everyone is doing political cross dressing nowadays then no-one can point at the other guy and laugh.
Problem is that the natives, and the party activists are getting restless. They are starting to realise that even though the next election should be one of the 'big ones', with a hell of a lot at stake, no-one is really sure what actually is at stake. Gordon will claim 'recovery' is here and carry on as before, and Conservatives will insist on spending cuts, but not on the scale that some in the party, and the city and even the civil service would expect.
Politics is about nothing else if it is not about massaging public perception. We know that, "You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time." At some point the truth... the natives... the party activists will catch up and say that something is not quite right? Surely?
Although who knows? Gordon Brown might well play a blinder and call a general election at the beginning of the Conservative Party Conference this autumn. It would certainly wrong foot the opposition. Maybe that is the best the Gordon can hope to do right now.
As George Dubya Bush put it: "You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on."
- On the Labour front: Recovery - When is a recovery not a recovery? When is the word recovery premature? Is 'recovery' going to become the word most associated with Labour in the run up to the next election?
- On the Conservative front: Spending - How much should a future Conservative government cut public services? Is Mr Osborne faint hearted in his approach? Does he need to slash and burn more? Will spending cuts be associated with the Conservatives in the run up to the next election?
For both parties, perception is more than ever really the problem (rather than the solution). Everyone wants to stand in the middle of the road nowadays, despite the old Nye Bevan aphorism that such people tend to get run over. But ever since New Labour moved everyone closer to the centre ground in the late 90s, the political parties have been too terrified to move away, just in case the sidewalk holds even greater horrors. At least in the middle of the road, you can keep your enemies close and never suffer such accusations as: "Look, he/she is on the wrong side of the road." At least no-one need appear to be like the proverbial 'chicken', always thinking about crossing to the other side... And if everyone is doing political cross dressing nowadays then no-one can point at the other guy and laugh.
Problem is that the natives, and the party activists are getting restless. They are starting to realise that even though the next election should be one of the 'big ones', with a hell of a lot at stake, no-one is really sure what actually is at stake. Gordon will claim 'recovery' is here and carry on as before, and Conservatives will insist on spending cuts, but not on the scale that some in the party, and the city and even the civil service would expect.
Politics is about nothing else if it is not about massaging public perception. We know that, "You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time." At some point the truth... the natives... the party activists will catch up and say that something is not quite right? Surely?
Although who knows? Gordon Brown might well play a blinder and call a general election at the beginning of the Conservative Party Conference this autumn. It would certainly wrong foot the opposition. Maybe that is the best the Gordon can hope to do right now.
As George Dubya Bush put it: "You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on."
Tuesday, 8 September 2009
More Allsopp, Channel 4.
Despite calls from some quarters to ban Kirstie Allsopp, the government is currently considering plans to encourage More 4 to roll her show out 24/7, in the hope that this might help rekindle the property market before the next election. The presenter of Location Location Location, although the daughter of Charles Allsopp, 6th Baron Hindlip, could be considered a little suburban due to her obsession with buying and 'doing up' property. But this is what makes her popular with the prospective homebuyers, television executives have decided .
On a day when it was reported that young homeowners face legal action and bankruptcy after their 'off-plan' flats plunged in value, commentators are wondering whether television presenters who have 'pushed' the dream of untold wealth through property ownership, should be allowed the oxygen of publicity. Clearly Channel 4 thinks that they should and Gordon Brown, looking fondly back to the glory days of rampant property speculation, would like to take this one stage further.
Brown would like to create a 'rolling' property channel where suburban TV personalities would help home buyers up and down the land find their dream homes. Brown hopes that the perception that everyone is 'doing property nowadays' would swiftly return the market to the febrile state that existed pre-2008. "Who said that I did not put an end to boom and bust?" said Brown. "What happened to the property market last year was just a side show. Clearly the quickest way for everyone to get rich again is to believe that everyone can get rich again. So my advise to you, the British people is: tune in, turn on, shell out."
On a day when it was reported that young homeowners face legal action and bankruptcy after their 'off-plan' flats plunged in value, commentators are wondering whether television presenters who have 'pushed' the dream of untold wealth through property ownership, should be allowed the oxygen of publicity. Clearly Channel 4 thinks that they should and Gordon Brown, looking fondly back to the glory days of rampant property speculation, would like to take this one stage further.
Brown would like to create a 'rolling' property channel where suburban TV personalities would help home buyers up and down the land find their dream homes. Brown hopes that the perception that everyone is 'doing property nowadays' would swiftly return the market to the febrile state that existed pre-2008. "Who said that I did not put an end to boom and bust?" said Brown. "What happened to the property market last year was just a side show. Clearly the quickest way for everyone to get rich again is to believe that everyone can get rich again. So my advise to you, the British people is: tune in, turn on, shell out."
Monday, 7 September 2009
They, like, hurt my feelings, man.
A controversial tribunal decision that company practices discriminate against employees with strongly held views on drug taking will be challenged in the courts. Executive Tim RoadChief who is a member of the Native American Church of Navajoland claimed that he was unfairly dismissed by the airline British Virginways because of his insistence on flying planes whilst high on the hallucinogenic Mexican cactus peyote.
Tim Roadchief believes that his philosophical belief in 'North American Peyotism' should allow him the same protection against discrimination as other religious beliefs. Roadchief was dismissed after an incident where in the midst of one of his 'vision quests' involving fasting, solitude, and quiet but steady contemplation, he attempted to fly a Jumbo Jet from New York to London.
Virginways bosses dismissed him on the spot, but Roadchief's lawyer has filed an action claiming that the law needs to be clarified for the increasing numbers of people who take a philosophical stance on the drug taking environment and 'altered states'. "People should be able to express views and act accordingly without fear of retribution or discrimination."
Tim Roadchief himself commented: "All I tried to do was bring onto the plane my friends Cedar Man, Fire Man, Drum Man, and Earth Mother. These guys were carrying nothing more than an eagle bone whistle, various feather fans, water drum, and prayer staff. I kinda believe in this peyotism shit man, so like it follows that it must be religious discrimination if the boss man then dismisses me for acting on those beliefs. Don't it?"
Tim Roadchief believes that his philosophical belief in 'North American Peyotism' should allow him the same protection against discrimination as other religious beliefs. Roadchief was dismissed after an incident where in the midst of one of his 'vision quests' involving fasting, solitude, and quiet but steady contemplation, he attempted to fly a Jumbo Jet from New York to London.
Virginways bosses dismissed him on the spot, but Roadchief's lawyer has filed an action claiming that the law needs to be clarified for the increasing numbers of people who take a philosophical stance on the drug taking environment and 'altered states'. "People should be able to express views and act accordingly without fear of retribution or discrimination."
Tim Roadchief himself commented: "All I tried to do was bring onto the plane my friends Cedar Man, Fire Man, Drum Man, and Earth Mother. These guys were carrying nothing more than an eagle bone whistle, various feather fans, water drum, and prayer staff. I kinda believe in this peyotism shit man, so like it follows that it must be religious discrimination if the boss man then dismisses me for acting on those beliefs. Don't it?"
News in Brief: Monday Morning City Round Up.
- The Two Handed Economist: The economist famous for predicting the credit crunch has offered his view on prospects for economic recovery. He has quite unequivocally stated that, on the one hand there could be a U shaped recovery, but on the other hand there could be a 'double dip' (sometimes referred to as a 'W'). When asked whether this was really a prediction, he replied: "Yes indeed, it is a prediction... a prediction of all possible scenarios." Would a U-shaped recovery be a thin-U, he was then asked... Or fat-U? The angry economist replied: "Fat-U too."
- An equality watchdog has suggested that women have much smaller boners than men. A survey commissioned by the equalities and human rights commission has shown that women in the Square Mile are not getting it on as much as men, leading some to suggest that 'Sex and the City' is a myth.
- The European Network and Information Agency has warned of an alarming increase in bank account 'skimming' across Europe. Despite a high profile campaign over the past few years, banks are still whacking customers with exorbitant charges for minor overdraft transgressions. In addition, despite interest rates being at an all time low, banks are still squeezing customers with high levels of interest on mortgages, loans and credit card debt.
- An equality watchdog has suggested that women have much smaller boners than men. A survey commissioned by the equalities and human rights commission has shown that women in the Square Mile are not getting it on as much as men, leading some to suggest that 'Sex and the City' is a myth.
- The European Network and Information Agency has warned of an alarming increase in bank account 'skimming' across Europe. Despite a high profile campaign over the past few years, banks are still whacking customers with exorbitant charges for minor overdraft transgressions. In addition, despite interest rates being at an all time low, banks are still squeezing customers with high levels of interest on mortgages, loans and credit card debt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
