If there was any doubt that the Murdoch flagship tabloid Sun was going to make things hard for Pa Broon, it has been dispelled by a characteristically nasty and exploitative piece of journalism over Brown’s hand written letter to the mother of a soldier killed on active service in Afghanistan.
Brown writes those letters in a black felt pen, because his eyesight is poor, which in turn leads to the effect looking untidy and scrawled. No checking is done by his staff, as he puts the letters in envelopes and seals them himself. This suggests it’s a very personal thing.
But the recipient wasn’t happy that Brown had made more than one spelling mistake – including, apparently, the dead man’s name – and so that very personal communication has appeared in the Sun. Along with the transcript of a phone call made by the PM to her.
The Sun line is that Brown doesn’t care enough about those being sent to fight, and sometimes to die, on our behalf in Afghanistan. But if he didn’t care, he wouldn’t bother with the personal letters, or he’d get them typed and just scribble a signature. For Sun hacks, this thought is not allowed to enter. They are under orders to kick Brown until they get him out of Downing Street, and Steve Bell has caught their attitude bluntly but accurately in this cartoon.
For Young Dave, this should prove instructive: it is an example of what may lie ahead if he fails to tear up the BBC’s charter, doesn’t take a suitably anti-EU line, or decides not to drop the TV impartiality rule.
Then Rupe will turn the attack dogs on him.
Wednesday, 11 November 2009
Way To Go, Rupe
You have to hand it to Rupert Murdoch: not only has he exonerated the wayward Glenn Beck, “star” of Fox News Channel (fair and balanced my arse) over Beck’s assertion that Barack Obama was a racist, he has said that Beck was right. Rupe has, however, said that Beck should not have said that, so perhaps we will now see a different form of words coming out of Fox in an attempt to say the same thing.
Maybe not: this is as near to Beck being given the green light by his boss as makes no difference. Murdoch is, effectively, giving the finger to anyone who says his talking heads are out of order, and letting everyone know that there will be more of the same (as if we needed telling) because of course Fox campaigned against Obama during the Presidential race. And Fox lost.
So Rupe, via Fox and whichever of his other media outlets he so directs, will be putting the boot into Obama until they see the back of him. That, given that most Presidents manage a second term, could mean another seven years of the same.
[UPDATE: Rupe's been backtracking, as the Guardian has reported]
Maybe not: this is as near to Beck being given the green light by his boss as makes no difference. Murdoch is, effectively, giving the finger to anyone who says his talking heads are out of order, and letting everyone know that there will be more of the same (as if we needed telling) because of course Fox campaigned against Obama during the Presidential race. And Fox lost.
So Rupe, via Fox and whichever of his other media outlets he so directs, will be putting the boot into Obama until they see the back of him. That, given that most Presidents manage a second term, could mean another seven years of the same.
[UPDATE: Rupe's been backtracking, as the Guardian has reported]
Tuesday, 10 November 2009
Far From The Madding Crowd
Some of those less charitably disposed towards those migrating to the UK use a variety of language to discourage: one such is that the place is “full up”, which a glance across all that open country shows to be so much drivel. The UK has an awful lot of space, but not as much as some countries on mainland Europe. A journey into the heart of Portugal’s Alentejo region today proved the point.
The Alentejo is, more or less, the region to the north of the Algarve. There are few towns, some smaller settlements, then the landscape is one of few trees, and yet fewer people. At night, looking out from the train speeding its way from Lisbon to Faro, all is dark – completely dark – for many miles at a time. Apart from farming, little else is done here.
At the junction station of Funcheira, I left the well filled and comfortable Inter City train headed for Lisbon, and joined a railmotor – a single coach train – to complete my trip to the Alentejo town of Beja. Along this route, only two services each way are provided daily, operated by vehicles recently rebuilt, but underneath dating from the mid 1950s. After looking at the extent of the refurbishment, one briefly wonders why they went to all the trouble, only to realise that it was rebuilding or nothing: train services in this part of the world enjoy what is called a “marginal” existence.
Indeed, there was only one other passenger on the journey to Beja: there were no takers at the two stops en route. No doubt at holiday times and weekends the services are busier, but there is little money being made here. Lineside telegraph poles, long out of use, have become birds’ nests. There are yet more wayside stations, all now abandoned. No freight – probably the reason for their existence – passes this way any more.
Beja is a typical Alentejo town, smaller than Évora to the north, but also occupying the high ground, and with remains of walled fortifications clearly visible. Here, the dominant civilisation for several centuries was Moorish, and, yes, Muslim. Now the dominant force is the unrelenting traffic, which, coupled with the cobbled streets, creates a constant background rumble, even within the pleasant park which sits below the Pousada de São Francisco.
The return journey brought better loadings: all of nine passengers boarded the railmotor at Beja, and there were even takers for the two stops: how they had travelled into town is unclear. Certainly, having a last train at 1417 hours tends to restrict the social world of anyone so constrained. At Funcheira, the crew changed ends and headed back to Beja: how much longer the Portuguese equivalent of what we in the UK call the “social” railway will continue is not known.
The Alentejo is, more or less, the region to the north of the Algarve. There are few towns, some smaller settlements, then the landscape is one of few trees, and yet fewer people. At night, looking out from the train speeding its way from Lisbon to Faro, all is dark – completely dark – for many miles at a time. Apart from farming, little else is done here.
At the junction station of Funcheira, I left the well filled and comfortable Inter City train headed for Lisbon, and joined a railmotor – a single coach train – to complete my trip to the Alentejo town of Beja. Along this route, only two services each way are provided daily, operated by vehicles recently rebuilt, but underneath dating from the mid 1950s. After looking at the extent of the refurbishment, one briefly wonders why they went to all the trouble, only to realise that it was rebuilding or nothing: train services in this part of the world enjoy what is called a “marginal” existence.
Indeed, there was only one other passenger on the journey to Beja: there were no takers at the two stops en route. No doubt at holiday times and weekends the services are busier, but there is little money being made here. Lineside telegraph poles, long out of use, have become birds’ nests. There are yet more wayside stations, all now abandoned. No freight – probably the reason for their existence – passes this way any more.
Beja is a typical Alentejo town, smaller than Évora to the north, but also occupying the high ground, and with remains of walled fortifications clearly visible. Here, the dominant civilisation for several centuries was Moorish, and, yes, Muslim. Now the dominant force is the unrelenting traffic, which, coupled with the cobbled streets, creates a constant background rumble, even within the pleasant park which sits below the Pousada de São Francisco.
The return journey brought better loadings: all of nine passengers boarded the railmotor at Beja, and there were even takers for the two stops: how they had travelled into town is unclear. Certainly, having a last train at 1417 hours tends to restrict the social world of anyone so constrained. At Funcheira, the crew changed ends and headed back to Beja: how much longer the Portuguese equivalent of what we in the UK call the “social” railway will continue is not known.
Broadsword to Danny Boy
Time of next broadcast uncertain, as Richard Burton told Michael Hordern in Where Eagles Dare. It’s not wartime here in the Algarve, but the uncertainty is just as fraught. Access, no doubt, will return, and with it there will be more from Zelo Street.
Posts, when they appear, may be the odd day (or two) out of sync. Whatever.
Posts, when they appear, may be the odd day (or two) out of sync. Whatever.
Where Low Season Warms – 2
It’s possible that the influx of tourists was unseen when the Algarve was being opened up to the modern world late in the nineteenth Century. So when the railway arrived from the north, its builders knew they needed to serve places like Faro, where the station is centrally sited, but would only have seen Albufeira as a fishing village, so a station was provided and named after that village, but it was some distance inland, in another village called Ferreiras.
So to access the rail system from downtown Albufeira, you need to either call a taxi or use the connecting bus service run by local provider Eva. The connections aren’t always good, and there is good reason for Eva not to be too keen on delivering punters to the railway: much of the market is in travel to and from Lisbon, and Eva runs its own coaches along the route. Moreover, it has two competitors in the coach market, although fares are no lower than by train.
Meanwhile, back in central Albufeira, it’s clear that many of the restaurants I visited back in December 1996 are closed for the low season this time round. One reason that came to mind is that, in addition to the exchange rate woes, many alternative winter destinations have come on the market in the intervening years. But here is a potential silver lining for the Algarve: those new destinations are invariably long haul ones, and the cost of flying may start to rise, and soon.
So to access the rail system from downtown Albufeira, you need to either call a taxi or use the connecting bus service run by local provider Eva. The connections aren’t always good, and there is good reason for Eva not to be too keen on delivering punters to the railway: much of the market is in travel to and from Lisbon, and Eva runs its own coaches along the route. Moreover, it has two competitors in the coach market, although fares are no lower than by train.
Meanwhile, back in central Albufeira, it’s clear that many of the restaurants I visited back in December 1996 are closed for the low season this time round. One reason that came to mind is that, in addition to the exchange rate woes, many alternative winter destinations have come on the market in the intervening years. But here is a potential silver lining for the Algarve: those new destinations are invariably long haul ones, and the cost of flying may start to rise, and soon.
It Was Twenty Years Ago Today
Actually, tomorrow will mark that twentieth anniversary: two decades since the fall of the Berlin Wall, bringing an end to the DDR along with reunification of Germany. Few good things came out of that partitioned city, though the film industry profited through films like Funeral In Berlin, the second in the Harry Palmer series. The need not to know too much about Berlin’s geography is demonstrated when a coffin is moved across the border: the actual spot, the Glienicke Bridge, is on the border between Berlin and Potsdam – it’s nowhere near the former East Berlin.
The wall, despite East German propaganda telling that it was to keep spies out of the East, was clearly built to keep East Berliners – and other East Germans – from fleeing to the West. But it also gave reassurance to the US, UK and French forces who between them controlled West Berlin, because it meant that the Eastern Bloc powers had given up the idea of taking West Berlin for themselves.
And so, from the early 60s until late 1989, anyone caught making an escape attempt from the East was shot, and even if alive after the shooting, the escapee would be left long enough that they would bleed to death. It was a symbol of the cruelty of the totalitarian state in the East, and allowed those who peddled the idea of “monolithic Communism” to prevail.
There were also more bizarre aspects of partition: it was possible to drive from West Germany to West Berlin, by using motorway “corridors”. One condition of this access was that occupants of vehicles using the “corridors” were not permitted to look other than straight ahead: gazing over the fence at the DDR was banned.
The wall, despite East German propaganda telling that it was to keep spies out of the East, was clearly built to keep East Berliners – and other East Germans – from fleeing to the West. But it also gave reassurance to the US, UK and French forces who between them controlled West Berlin, because it meant that the Eastern Bloc powers had given up the idea of taking West Berlin for themselves.
And so, from the early 60s until late 1989, anyone caught making an escape attempt from the East was shot, and even if alive after the shooting, the escapee would be left long enough that they would bleed to death. It was a symbol of the cruelty of the totalitarian state in the East, and allowed those who peddled the idea of “monolithic Communism” to prevail.
There were also more bizarre aspects of partition: it was possible to drive from West Germany to West Berlin, by using motorway “corridors”. One condition of this access was that occupants of vehicles using the “corridors” were not permitted to look other than straight ahead: gazing over the fence at the DDR was banned.
Where Low Season Warms
Last week – well, in the North West at least – Autumn drove in with a vengeance: every day it rained, and the wind blew much of the remaining leaves off the trees. The nights have gone cold, and the daylight retreats steadily. The decision was taken for Zelo Street to migrate temporarily to somewhere with more warmth and daylight.
So, after the last EasyJet early afternoon flight from Liverpool to Faro of the current season (filled partly with Benfica fans returning the long way from Liverpool to Lisbon), and a quick spin round the resorts by shuttle bus, I’ve arrived at the crossroads between new and old in the Algarve – at Albufeira. This evening, despite the steady breeze, the temperature is in the high teens, and this afternoon was in the low 20s.
So it might have been expected that the place would be buzzing. It is not. Overprovision of accommodation – which means that a pleasant apartment can be had for just under fifteen pounds a night – and the poor exchange rate is not encouraging Brits to visit. So when the receptionist told me that the bar was closed, because it was low season, it wasn’t totally unexpected.
That, of course, is relative: if those temperatures were recorded in the UK, it certainly wouldn’t be low season. But here in Albufeira, restaurants are struggling for custom, and empty bars blare out their sounds in the hope of drawing in folks to watch the football. In the meantime, I passed by all of these to revisit a little restaurant called O Zuca, at the foot of the Travessa de Malpique, which I last visited almost thirteen years ago, where locals hang around the bar, and the TV shows one of the national channels. This evening featured the Portuguese version of Pop Idol, and I can confirm that the supply of hopefuls whose ambition exceeds their ability is as plentiful as in the UK.
Updates as and when over the next two weeks ...
So, after the last EasyJet early afternoon flight from Liverpool to Faro of the current season (filled partly with Benfica fans returning the long way from Liverpool to Lisbon), and a quick spin round the resorts by shuttle bus, I’ve arrived at the crossroads between new and old in the Algarve – at Albufeira. This evening, despite the steady breeze, the temperature is in the high teens, and this afternoon was in the low 20s.
So it might have been expected that the place would be buzzing. It is not. Overprovision of accommodation – which means that a pleasant apartment can be had for just under fifteen pounds a night – and the poor exchange rate is not encouraging Brits to visit. So when the receptionist told me that the bar was closed, because it was low season, it wasn’t totally unexpected.
That, of course, is relative: if those temperatures were recorded in the UK, it certainly wouldn’t be low season. But here in Albufeira, restaurants are struggling for custom, and empty bars blare out their sounds in the hope of drawing in folks to watch the football. In the meantime, I passed by all of these to revisit a little restaurant called O Zuca, at the foot of the Travessa de Malpique, which I last visited almost thirteen years ago, where locals hang around the bar, and the TV shows one of the national channels. This evening featured the Portuguese version of Pop Idol, and I can confirm that the supply of hopefuls whose ambition exceeds their ability is as plentiful as in the UK.
Updates as and when over the next two weeks ...
Major Shooting
We have garrison towns in the UK – places like Catterick, where the military come together in some numbers. But we have nothing of the size of Fort Hood in Texas, home to tens of thousands of soldiers, plus many more who provide retail therapy and otherwise supply the base.
It’s difficult for us to conceive of this scale of operation. Even more difficult is the understanding of why and how a senior officer – a major is as high a rank in the US Army as in ours – should turn on his fellow soldiers and shoot several of them dead.
But it has happened, and now thirteen have died after Major Nidal Malik Hasan’s attack on Friday. This is grim enough, but Hasan, who has survived despite himself being shot, is a Muslim, and the hate mail has already started.
President Barack Obama has called for calm, and in this he has the support of both Democrat and Republican leaders in Congress. This is signally important: the potential for a backlash, perhaps fuelled by paranoia, is ever present. Hopefully, commentators from all sides of the political spectrum will lend their weight to Obama’s call.
It’s difficult for us to conceive of this scale of operation. Even more difficult is the understanding of why and how a senior officer – a major is as high a rank in the US Army as in ours – should turn on his fellow soldiers and shoot several of them dead.
But it has happened, and now thirteen have died after Major Nidal Malik Hasan’s attack on Friday. This is grim enough, but Hasan, who has survived despite himself being shot, is a Muslim, and the hate mail has already started.
President Barack Obama has called for calm, and in this he has the support of both Democrat and Republican leaders in Congress. This is signally important: the potential for a backlash, perhaps fuelled by paranoia, is ever present. Hopefully, commentators from all sides of the political spectrum will lend their weight to Obama’s call.
Friday, 6 November 2009
No, No, No, No, No
Nobody who was there at the time will easily forget Margaret Thatcher’s apparent approach to the EU. Here was a leader standing firm against all those ghastly foreigners: we could trust her to put our interests first, to arrest the intrusion of Brussels into our lives. The fact of the matter, however, was rather different: Thatcher signed the Single European Act, and in 1983 it was Labour, not the Tories, who went into the General Election on an anti-European platform. There was, on occasion, a significant variance between the media image of Thatcher on Europe, and the reality.
This dislocation has apparently been lost on Young Dave, who earlier this week, as he pragmatically dropped the idea of putting the Lisbon Treaty to the electorate in a referendum, told of the powers he was going to repatriate from the EU. It seems that he made his announcement without checking out the terrain first. And some leading politicians across Europe are not at all taken with the Tory approach.
The reason is as straightforward as it is obvious: the negotiations that eventually produced the Lisbon Treaty took several years, and each member state expended a great deal of time on them. Following the second Irish referendum, and the Czech President signing off the Treaty, there has been a sense of relief that the arguments are over, and that the EU can move on – to things that really matter, like trade, the financial crisis, and the environment.
Hence the exasperation with Young Dave (although not universally as forthright as that aired by France’s Europe minister), who gives the impression that he is saying whatever it takes to get voters on side and himself into Downing Street.
This dislocation has apparently been lost on Young Dave, who earlier this week, as he pragmatically dropped the idea of putting the Lisbon Treaty to the electorate in a referendum, told of the powers he was going to repatriate from the EU. It seems that he made his announcement without checking out the terrain first. And some leading politicians across Europe are not at all taken with the Tory approach.
The reason is as straightforward as it is obvious: the negotiations that eventually produced the Lisbon Treaty took several years, and each member state expended a great deal of time on them. Following the second Irish referendum, and the Czech President signing off the Treaty, there has been a sense of relief that the arguments are over, and that the EU can move on – to things that really matter, like trade, the financial crisis, and the environment.
Hence the exasperation with Young Dave (although not universally as forthright as that aired by France’s Europe minister), who gives the impression that he is saying whatever it takes to get voters on side and himself into Downing Street.
Strike? What Strike? – 2
The series of strikes by postal workers has now been called off. I am not surprised. Not only was the impression given, as I posted recently, that the strike may not have been totally solid, but the time of year is also significant.
Some years ago, I was moving house – fortunately an uncommon event, given the stress it causes – and the chain, with its attendant paperwork, was ready to go. Almost all were agreed that we should proceed – except one: it was late November, and the dissenter was a postman. Nothing, but nothing, would stand between him and his Christmas pay packet.
So it is with the current dispute. All will now be well until Christmas is behind us. After that, nobody should assume that, merely because a truce has been called, the state of industrial relations will be any more cordial. The only significant reason for calling off the action is to ensure that postal workers get their seasonal pay day.
Some years ago, I was moving house – fortunately an uncommon event, given the stress it causes – and the chain, with its attendant paperwork, was ready to go. Almost all were agreed that we should proceed – except one: it was late November, and the dissenter was a postman. Nothing, but nothing, would stand between him and his Christmas pay packet.
So it is with the current dispute. All will now be well until Christmas is behind us. After that, nobody should assume that, merely because a truce has been called, the state of industrial relations will be any more cordial. The only significant reason for calling off the action is to ensure that postal workers get their seasonal pay day.
Thursday, 5 November 2009
Variable Principles
There has been a resignation over Young Dave’s new Euro-policy, but most folks will not have noticed: the show of principle has come from Dan, Dan the Oratory Man, who will be concentrating on pet projects such as localism, and direct democracy. Dan, along with his equally eccentric chum Douglas Carswell, are hot on this kind of thing, and equally hot on telling us all that nobody under the age of 52 has had a chance to vote on Europe.
This, on more than one level, is utter drivel. The reference being made is to the 1975 referendum – the only one in the UK’s history – which was ostensibly to confirm our membership of the then EEC. The reality, however, was that Harold Wilson’s Labour Government was split over Europe, and the referendum was merely a device to allow him to hold the party together.
Moreover, we have had several opportunities to vote on Europe since that time: in 1979, 1983, 1987, 1992, 1997, 2001 and 2005. That’s seven opportunities. Granted, the issue of Europe is only one of many that are presented to us at General Election time, but the opportunity to register dissent has been given.
Furthermore, if Hannan and Carswell want to be consistent and credible, they might usefully consider other occasions when major decisions have been taken without specific consultation of the electorate. They proclaim a commitment to localism, yet have not told of the lack of consultation on centralising of power away from local authorities, notably by the Tories when the GLC and the Metropolitan Councils were abolished.
They make no complaint about the lack of referenda before committing the UK to a succession of military adventures – a commitment in human and monetary resources more substantial than Europe. There is no comment on the joining of NATO, the UN, the commitment to Polaris, to its update, to its replacement – all commitments made without public consultation. No mention is made of the wholesale tinkering with the UK’s rail and bus networks, made without public consultation, which has seen the railways costing far more, and the bus, outside London, becoming a remaindered transport mode, with most of those who can afford a car switching to one.
Nor is there any complaint about the Thatcher Government foisting the Poll Tax on the country without prior consultation. All of the foregoing impact the daily lives of the electorate more substantially than the EU, yet there is no call from this uniquely eccentric duo for referenda on these matters, and a regret that we have not been afforded one for decades. And until Hanann and Carswell can apply some consistency, rather than becoming hung up over their obsession with Europe, I for one will not be taking them seriously.
This, on more than one level, is utter drivel. The reference being made is to the 1975 referendum – the only one in the UK’s history – which was ostensibly to confirm our membership of the then EEC. The reality, however, was that Harold Wilson’s Labour Government was split over Europe, and the referendum was merely a device to allow him to hold the party together.
Moreover, we have had several opportunities to vote on Europe since that time: in 1979, 1983, 1987, 1992, 1997, 2001 and 2005. That’s seven opportunities. Granted, the issue of Europe is only one of many that are presented to us at General Election time, but the opportunity to register dissent has been given.
Furthermore, if Hannan and Carswell want to be consistent and credible, they might usefully consider other occasions when major decisions have been taken without specific consultation of the electorate. They proclaim a commitment to localism, yet have not told of the lack of consultation on centralising of power away from local authorities, notably by the Tories when the GLC and the Metropolitan Councils were abolished.
They make no complaint about the lack of referenda before committing the UK to a succession of military adventures – a commitment in human and monetary resources more substantial than Europe. There is no comment on the joining of NATO, the UN, the commitment to Polaris, to its update, to its replacement – all commitments made without public consultation. No mention is made of the wholesale tinkering with the UK’s rail and bus networks, made without public consultation, which has seen the railways costing far more, and the bus, outside London, becoming a remaindered transport mode, with most of those who can afford a car switching to one.
Nor is there any complaint about the Thatcher Government foisting the Poll Tax on the country without prior consultation. All of the foregoing impact the daily lives of the electorate more substantially than the EU, yet there is no call from this uniquely eccentric duo for referenda on these matters, and a regret that we have not been afforded one for decades. And until Hanann and Carswell can apply some consistency, rather than becoming hung up over their obsession with Europe, I for one will not be taking them seriously.
Departure Time? – 2
Speaking out against a military campaign is always tricky for members of a governing party: the lesson of what happened to the Democratic Party in the late 60s over Vietnam, that ultimately let Richard Milhous Nixon into the White House, reminds us of the potential for disaster.
So it can be taken for granted that any Labour MP that speaks out against the adventure in Afghanistan will have thought long and hard about the consequences beforehand. Pontypridd MP Kim Howells, who has been in the Commons for thirty years, has had that thought, and has spoken out.
Meanwhile, the parallels with Vietnam continue to stand out: the latest estimate for the size of force needed to “turn the tide” is half a million, more than twice the number at present available – and that includes Afghan troops. It was the numbers put forward to “pacify” South Vietnam that convinced the US Government that, as it was not going to put so many in harm’s way, it could not win.
The re-run Afghan election, pushed for by the US, has not happened, so Hamid Karzai – corruption or no – has been confirmed as President. The observations made by J K Galbraith on those similarly confirmed in South Vietnam may be usefully recalled:
“With President Diem, the Nhu family and the politicians that followed as in a revolving door, the impression of villainy was inescapable”
[The Age of Uncertainty, p. 249]
Finally, the comparative size of those resisting is similar: in Vietnam, the size of the South Vietnamese army was several times that of the VietCong, yet they could not match them. In Afghanistan, the number of NATO troops is several times that of the Taliban pitted against them, and, again, the resistance has not been crushed.
The lessons of Vietnam are there for those who are willing to learn. For a Labour Government, avoiding the appearance of weakness at times of conflict seems to make for an especially wilful commitment to carry on: thus those lessons, which have weighed heavily on Kim Howells, may be some time permeating the remainder of that particular body politic.
So it can be taken for granted that any Labour MP that speaks out against the adventure in Afghanistan will have thought long and hard about the consequences beforehand. Pontypridd MP Kim Howells, who has been in the Commons for thirty years, has had that thought, and has spoken out.
Meanwhile, the parallels with Vietnam continue to stand out: the latest estimate for the size of force needed to “turn the tide” is half a million, more than twice the number at present available – and that includes Afghan troops. It was the numbers put forward to “pacify” South Vietnam that convinced the US Government that, as it was not going to put so many in harm’s way, it could not win.
The re-run Afghan election, pushed for by the US, has not happened, so Hamid Karzai – corruption or no – has been confirmed as President. The observations made by J K Galbraith on those similarly confirmed in South Vietnam may be usefully recalled:
“With President Diem, the Nhu family and the politicians that followed as in a revolving door, the impression of villainy was inescapable”
[The Age of Uncertainty, p. 249]
Finally, the comparative size of those resisting is similar: in Vietnam, the size of the South Vietnamese army was several times that of the VietCong, yet they could not match them. In Afghanistan, the number of NATO troops is several times that of the Taliban pitted against them, and, again, the resistance has not been crushed.
The lessons of Vietnam are there for those who are willing to learn. For a Labour Government, avoiding the appearance of weakness at times of conflict seems to make for an especially wilful commitment to carry on: thus those lessons, which have weighed heavily on Kim Howells, may be some time permeating the remainder of that particular body politic.
Wednesday, 4 November 2009
It’s That Joke Again
Global warming is on occasion a difficult subject to get across: how to demonstrate to the sceptic and undecided how cows grazing in a field can have an effect on the size of the polar ice caps.
Fortunately, Steve Bell has this week brought us an update on the most crude, yet direct humour to explain it all. The final part of the jigsaw appears tomorrow.
Fortunately, Steve Bell has this week brought us an update on the most crude, yet direct humour to explain it all. The final part of the jigsaw appears tomorrow.
Enter The Donkey Trainer
Over the years, calls for referenda on a variety of subjects (usually, but not exclusively, to do with the EU) have been met with a uniform response from those opposing the call: you don’t like what the Government does on any given subject, you can vote them out at the next General Election. The flip side of this argument is that, if your party gets elected, it then has a mandate to deal with a variety of issues – including Europe – as it wishes, without further public consultation, for up to another five years.
This, back in 2007, as I noted the other day, was not good enough for Young Dave. He gave his “cast iron guarantee” that the Lisbon Treaty would be put to a referendum. And he gave it to the readers of the Murdoch flagship Sun. So who has said today – about an hour ago as I write – that a General Election victory would confer a mandate to renegotiate the UK’s relationship with the EU? Step forward Young Dave. Apart from blaming Labour and the Lib Dems for the Tories’ problems – perhaps Pa Broon and Ming Campbell sneaked in and wrote his Sun article without him noticing – Cameron has now all but abandoned the referendum idea.
Well, except for any future transfer of power to the EU, that is. But here there is a potential grey area. Is a change from unanimous vote to qualified majority voting (QMV) a transfer of power or streamlining of decision making? Who decides? Is the accession of more member states, making the six month presidency a rarer event for the UK, a transfer of power or merely an acceptable price for enlargement? What if enlargement means a reduction in the number of each member state’s bloc of MEPs? Is that a transfer of power?
More likely is that a future Government, of whatever stripe, will have sufficient room for manoeuvre to make the Cameron referendum promise meaningless. But his followers will undoubtedly show unanimity and fall in line. I note that Tim Montgomerie at ConservativeHome has expressed disappointment at Cameron’s speech, but expect him to be nodding obediently after he sees which way the true blue wind is blowing.
Had this process involved Labour and Alastair Campbell, the news would have concerned followers being “on message”, and there would have been accusations of “spin” and “control freakery”. Those Tory cheerleaders who routinely assert their independence of thought have already, as I’ve noted, shown that their freedom of expression is in fortunately coincident step with the party leadership when it matters to the latter. Expect nothing different following this afternoon’s speech.
[UPDATE: almost immediately after first publishing this post, Iain Dale has fallen obediently into line. Ee-aw!]
[UPDATE 2: Tim Montgomerie says that there are lots of more important things that a Cameron Government would need to get on with, and he's not going to talk about Europe for a few weeks. Ee-aw!]
This, back in 2007, as I noted the other day, was not good enough for Young Dave. He gave his “cast iron guarantee” that the Lisbon Treaty would be put to a referendum. And he gave it to the readers of the Murdoch flagship Sun. So who has said today – about an hour ago as I write – that a General Election victory would confer a mandate to renegotiate the UK’s relationship with the EU? Step forward Young Dave. Apart from blaming Labour and the Lib Dems for the Tories’ problems – perhaps Pa Broon and Ming Campbell sneaked in and wrote his Sun article without him noticing – Cameron has now all but abandoned the referendum idea.
Well, except for any future transfer of power to the EU, that is. But here there is a potential grey area. Is a change from unanimous vote to qualified majority voting (QMV) a transfer of power or streamlining of decision making? Who decides? Is the accession of more member states, making the six month presidency a rarer event for the UK, a transfer of power or merely an acceptable price for enlargement? What if enlargement means a reduction in the number of each member state’s bloc of MEPs? Is that a transfer of power?
More likely is that a future Government, of whatever stripe, will have sufficient room for manoeuvre to make the Cameron referendum promise meaningless. But his followers will undoubtedly show unanimity and fall in line. I note that Tim Montgomerie at ConservativeHome has expressed disappointment at Cameron’s speech, but expect him to be nodding obediently after he sees which way the true blue wind is blowing.
Had this process involved Labour and Alastair Campbell, the news would have concerned followers being “on message”, and there would have been accusations of “spin” and “control freakery”. Those Tory cheerleaders who routinely assert their independence of thought have already, as I’ve noted, shown that their freedom of expression is in fortunately coincident step with the party leadership when it matters to the latter. Expect nothing different following this afternoon’s speech.
[UPDATE: almost immediately after first publishing this post, Iain Dale has fallen obediently into line. Ee-aw!]
[UPDATE 2: Tim Montgomerie says that there are lots of more important things that a Cameron Government would need to get on with, and he's not going to talk about Europe for a few weeks. Ee-aw!]
The Smearing Rationale
Another day, another forced apology: the Daily Mail has paid out 25,000 notes – plus an undisclosed, and probably far larger, sum in legal costs – to actor Kate Winslet after she sued following another mean spirited hatchet job. Given that those who have the resources will take action to defend their reputations from attacks by the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre’s pisspoor hacks, one could be forgiven for wondering why the paper keeps on smearing, when they know what will follow.
There is, as ever, method in this particular madness. Dacre has, as I’ve told on many occasions, a knack for supplying stories that chime with the views, fears – and prejudices – of his target audience. The idea that actors aren’t very nice people, or are dishonest enough to say one thing for public consumption while doing another behind closed doors – the offending article called Winslet “irritating” and said she lied about her exercise régime – fits the template of sneering envy, that “it’s alright for them, what do they know about how real people live?”
Moreover, the uplift in sales that the steady stream of knocking copy generates means keeping profits up, and therefore maintains the ability of the Daily Mail to charge advertisers top dollar. Put simply, it’s worth the occasional carpeting in the courts to behave like this.
And, the clinching argument for Dacre and his shock troops, is that the apology and court appearance are invariably going to come some way down the line from the article that provokes the lawsuit. By that time, some of the mud will have stuck, and another reputation will have been stained: the idea that there is “no smoke without fire” is central to the Daily Mail mindset. And this will carry on, for one depressingly simple reason.
It sells newspapers. Any higher principles do not enter.
There is, as ever, method in this particular madness. Dacre has, as I’ve told on many occasions, a knack for supplying stories that chime with the views, fears – and prejudices – of his target audience. The idea that actors aren’t very nice people, or are dishonest enough to say one thing for public consumption while doing another behind closed doors – the offending article called Winslet “irritating” and said she lied about her exercise régime – fits the template of sneering envy, that “it’s alright for them, what do they know about how real people live?”
Moreover, the uplift in sales that the steady stream of knocking copy generates means keeping profits up, and therefore maintains the ability of the Daily Mail to charge advertisers top dollar. Put simply, it’s worth the occasional carpeting in the courts to behave like this.
And, the clinching argument for Dacre and his shock troops, is that the apology and court appearance are invariably going to come some way down the line from the article that provokes the lawsuit. By that time, some of the mud will have stuck, and another reputation will have been stained: the idea that there is “no smoke without fire” is central to the Daily Mail mindset. And this will carry on, for one depressingly simple reason.
It sells newspapers. Any higher principles do not enter.
Tuesday, 3 November 2009
Enter The Refusenik Donkeys
Today, as I predicted recently, push finally came to shove over in the Czech Republic. The country’s Constitutional Court ruled that the Lisbon Treaty was in accordance with the Republic’s constitution, and soon afterwards, President Vaclav Klaus signed. Thus the Treaty has now been ratified by all 27 EU member states and will come into force within weeks.
For UK Eurosceptics, this shifts the focus back home, and on to Young Dave, who as I mentioned yesterday, gave his “cast iron commitment” to a referendum back in 2007, only to give the appearance last week that he is now refining his stance. The idea that a referendum would no longer be necessary, having been spun shamelessly by a variety of obedient Tory propagandists, has been greeted with horror by the party’s awkward squad, typified by Bill Cash, quoted by the Maily Telegraph as saying that the country needs “a full referendum on Lisbon as ... promised. No ifs or buts”. Barry Legg, former Tory MP now with the Bruges Group, asserts that Cameron has “broken his word”.
And now we hear that the most ardent Eurosceptic Tory, shadow Foreign Secretary William ‘Ague, has had to break the news to the world that his party will not be offering the electorate a referendum on Lisbon. Master ‘Ague has conceded, as I noted yesterday, that Lisbon will not be possible to unpick once ratified, and his boss needs to get his fresh policy position out there without further delay, to give him the chance to win over the doubters and head off any transfer of loyalty to the flat earthers of UKIP, whose leader Nigel Farage will doubtless have been toasting the Tory change of tack.
But Young Dave did give an unequivocal promise to hold a referendum. And he gave it in the pages of the Murdoch Sun. His move to map out a new stance on the EU is necessary and pragmatic, but even with the most enthusiastic of spinning, it will be easy for his detractors to accuse him of dishonesty.
Welcome to real world politics, Dave.
[UPDATE: Nosemonkey has an excellent post, Liveblogging The Lisbon Apocalypse]
For UK Eurosceptics, this shifts the focus back home, and on to Young Dave, who as I mentioned yesterday, gave his “cast iron commitment” to a referendum back in 2007, only to give the appearance last week that he is now refining his stance. The idea that a referendum would no longer be necessary, having been spun shamelessly by a variety of obedient Tory propagandists, has been greeted with horror by the party’s awkward squad, typified by Bill Cash, quoted by the Maily Telegraph as saying that the country needs “a full referendum on Lisbon as ... promised. No ifs or buts”. Barry Legg, former Tory MP now with the Bruges Group, asserts that Cameron has “broken his word”.
And now we hear that the most ardent Eurosceptic Tory, shadow Foreign Secretary William ‘Ague, has had to break the news to the world that his party will not be offering the electorate a referendum on Lisbon. Master ‘Ague has conceded, as I noted yesterday, that Lisbon will not be possible to unpick once ratified, and his boss needs to get his fresh policy position out there without further delay, to give him the chance to win over the doubters and head off any transfer of loyalty to the flat earthers of UKIP, whose leader Nigel Farage will doubtless have been toasting the Tory change of tack.
But Young Dave did give an unequivocal promise to hold a referendum. And he gave it in the pages of the Murdoch Sun. His move to map out a new stance on the EU is necessary and pragmatic, but even with the most enthusiastic of spinning, it will be easy for his detractors to accuse him of dishonesty.
Welcome to real world politics, Dave.
[UPDATE: Nosemonkey has an excellent post, Liveblogging The Lisbon Apocalypse]
Monday, 2 November 2009
Enter The Nodding Donkeys
The signs of policy reversal were there last Tuesday: Young Dave gave his regular press conference and was quizzed on the R-word – as in Referendum. He was pressed on whether he would hold one if elected, even if, as seems likely, the Lisbon Treaty will have been ratified by all 27 EU member states. And his reply was rather less than the unequivocal commitment he had given readers of the Murdoch flagship tabloid Sun earlier.
Cameron knows that the idea of “un-ratifying” the Lisbon Treaty is not a credible option, and so he needs to take a sensible and defensible policy position – and do so as soon as possible. The longer he leaves it, the less time he will have to work on those potential supporters who were spoiling for a referendum, and the less time to convince a sceptical media that he’s not just backing away from the fight he promised. So he’s not talking of unpicking Lisbon, and far less of withdrawal.
So far, so pragmatic: at first, Nigel Farage and his fellow UKIP flat earthers may think all their birthdays have come at once, but the more time that Cameron has to work on the disaffected, the more chance he has of getting enough of them back on side to see off UKIP dreams of Parliamentary seats. And Young Dave is at this point singularly fortunate to have a sector of the blogosphere which is satisfyingly obedient.
Anyone needing confirmation of this need look no further than ConservativeHome, and its leading light Tim Montgomerie, who has given the Cameron view a detailed, but ultimately craven endorsement. His wriggling around the wording of the Sun commitment, had it come out of Tony Blair’s Downing Street, would have been denounced as the most blatant act of spin. Any lingering thought that ConHome was a source of independent thought has been banished by this shameless act of capitulation.
And Montgomerie is not the only one nodding obediently: I’m sorry to see that Iain Dale (and there is no blogger greater than he) has fallen in line in similarly craven fashion. Iain would do well to consider the less than obedient stance taken by his sometime co-conspirator Paul Staines, who blogs as Guido Fawkes: Staines is clearly not impressed with the new Tory line (although I note he’s agreeably close to my position on the subject of illegal drugs, right down to identifying the legendarily foul mouthed editor of the Daily Mail, Paul Dacre, as what Young Dave might have called a “roadblock to reform”).
Europe, as before, appears to be a less than comfortable place for the Tories. And we’re still around half a year away from a General Election.
Cameron knows that the idea of “un-ratifying” the Lisbon Treaty is not a credible option, and so he needs to take a sensible and defensible policy position – and do so as soon as possible. The longer he leaves it, the less time he will have to work on those potential supporters who were spoiling for a referendum, and the less time to convince a sceptical media that he’s not just backing away from the fight he promised. So he’s not talking of unpicking Lisbon, and far less of withdrawal.
So far, so pragmatic: at first, Nigel Farage and his fellow UKIP flat earthers may think all their birthdays have come at once, but the more time that Cameron has to work on the disaffected, the more chance he has of getting enough of them back on side to see off UKIP dreams of Parliamentary seats. And Young Dave is at this point singularly fortunate to have a sector of the blogosphere which is satisfyingly obedient.
Anyone needing confirmation of this need look no further than ConservativeHome, and its leading light Tim Montgomerie, who has given the Cameron view a detailed, but ultimately craven endorsement. His wriggling around the wording of the Sun commitment, had it come out of Tony Blair’s Downing Street, would have been denounced as the most blatant act of spin. Any lingering thought that ConHome was a source of independent thought has been banished by this shameless act of capitulation.
And Montgomerie is not the only one nodding obediently: I’m sorry to see that Iain Dale (and there is no blogger greater than he) has fallen in line in similarly craven fashion. Iain would do well to consider the less than obedient stance taken by his sometime co-conspirator Paul Staines, who blogs as Guido Fawkes: Staines is clearly not impressed with the new Tory line (although I note he’s agreeably close to my position on the subject of illegal drugs, right down to identifying the legendarily foul mouthed editor of the Daily Mail, Paul Dacre, as what Young Dave might have called a “roadblock to reform”).
Europe, as before, appears to be a less than comfortable place for the Tories. And we’re still around half a year away from a General Election.
It Was Fifty Years Ago Today
Recently I stopped off at Watford Gap services. Just to stretch my legs after a non stop drive from the Channel Tunnel. The place seemed quite civilised, and a far cry from the days when it was operated by Blue Boar and food was served on cardboard plates, the nadir of motorway catering. I didn’t realise that a moment in history was fast approaching.
Because today is the fiftieth anniversary of the day when Ernest Marples, a man whose business dealings may not have stood scrutiny in today’s political climate, opened the first substantial stretch of motorway in the UK (the very first motorway, the M6 Preston by pass, opened in 1958), the M1 from Watford to Crick. The latter was very much in the middle of nowhere, except for the connection to the A5, a return to the old road system, but that was to miss the point. Soon, the M1 drove north once more, not stopping until it had opened all the way to Leeds in 1968.
Photos of the road at the time of opening – the Guardian has a compilation available – show almost empty carriageways. There were in those early years no speed limits, though many cars could not cruise at better than 50 to 60 mph. The speed differential with those that could take advantage of the open road, like the 150 mph capable Jaguar E-Type and Aston Martin DB5, must have made for some hairy moments, even with the light traffic volumes. The 70 mph limit was inevitable.
Also inevitable were barriers between carriageways, warning signals (increasingly sophisticated over the years) and the all pervasive cameras. And all the time, the desire for mobility has risen as the cost of motoring has fallen, so now we can look back fondly at those newly swept, empty carriageways, but we cannot return there.
Thus the march of progress.
Because today is the fiftieth anniversary of the day when Ernest Marples, a man whose business dealings may not have stood scrutiny in today’s political climate, opened the first substantial stretch of motorway in the UK (the very first motorway, the M6 Preston by pass, opened in 1958), the M1 from Watford to Crick. The latter was very much in the middle of nowhere, except for the connection to the A5, a return to the old road system, but that was to miss the point. Soon, the M1 drove north once more, not stopping until it had opened all the way to Leeds in 1968.
Photos of the road at the time of opening – the Guardian has a compilation available – show almost empty carriageways. There were in those early years no speed limits, though many cars could not cruise at better than 50 to 60 mph. The speed differential with those that could take advantage of the open road, like the 150 mph capable Jaguar E-Type and Aston Martin DB5, must have made for some hairy moments, even with the light traffic volumes. The 70 mph limit was inevitable.
Also inevitable were barriers between carriageways, warning signals (increasingly sophisticated over the years) and the all pervasive cameras. And all the time, the desire for mobility has risen as the cost of motoring has fallen, so now we can look back fondly at those newly swept, empty carriageways, but we cannot return there.
Thus the march of progress.
Sunday, 1 November 2009
The Laws Don’t Work – 6
Another day, another advisor lost, this time voluntarily: Dr Les King has followed David Nutt out of the door, from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. Meanwhile, Home Secretary Alan Johnson has been doing the media rounds with the line being that Nutt had crossed over into the political arena and was effectively campaigning against the Government.
Meanwhile, Nutt’s assertion, that cannabis is less harmful than alcohol or nicotine, has not been countered, and it’s entirely possible that it never will be. What may worry the more righteous part of the media, who remain ever vigilant against those who are less than totally “tough on drugs”, is that the assertion about cannabis relative to alcohol and nicotine may take hold – and that the electorate may start asking questions, perhaps even debating the issue in a rational manner.
This, as I noted when considering David Nutt’s dismissal, is what needs to happen if we are ever going to get away from the status quo, where illegal drugs are demonised, the debate is irrationally suppressed, and the misery of the many continues, while the criminally inclined few reap the benefits.
Meanwhile, Nutt’s assertion, that cannabis is less harmful than alcohol or nicotine, has not been countered, and it’s entirely possible that it never will be. What may worry the more righteous part of the media, who remain ever vigilant against those who are less than totally “tough on drugs”, is that the assertion about cannabis relative to alcohol and nicotine may take hold – and that the electorate may start asking questions, perhaps even debating the issue in a rational manner.
This, as I noted when considering David Nutt’s dismissal, is what needs to happen if we are ever going to get away from the status quo, where illegal drugs are demonised, the debate is irrationally suppressed, and the misery of the many continues, while the criminally inclined few reap the benefits.
The Full Nelson
While being a little disappointed that I predicted some follow up on the Afghan helicopter situation during the Andy Marr Show today – and there wasn’t any – the appearance of new Spectator editor Fraser Nelson on the paper review was entertaining and interesting (though some on his own area of the political spectrum might have taken exception to the Johnson-family-as-Blackadders remark).
His views on a range of subjects do not coincide with mine: for instance, as seems fashionable with so many on the libertarian right, he has a problem with man-made climate change. But, so what? It’s another subject where debate is to be had, though whether many outside his comfort zone will be converted I doubt.
The subject I previously covered that did come up in discussion of the day’s newspapers was that of currently illegal drugs, and the dismissal of Professor David Nutt. Nelson argued that, whatever the comparative harmfulness of marijuana versus tobacco and alcohol, it was down to how society as a whole views that range of drugs that would decide their future status.
And in this he is right: here, as with other issues, there is a debate to be had. The problem, as I’ve said many times, is that it is not possible for that debate to take place in a reasoned and rational manner. Perhaps Nelson could develop his take on that subject – I’d be more than interested to hear it.
His views on a range of subjects do not coincide with mine: for instance, as seems fashionable with so many on the libertarian right, he has a problem with man-made climate change. But, so what? It’s another subject where debate is to be had, though whether many outside his comfort zone will be converted I doubt.
The subject I previously covered that did come up in discussion of the day’s newspapers was that of currently illegal drugs, and the dismissal of Professor David Nutt. Nelson argued that, whatever the comparative harmfulness of marijuana versus tobacco and alcohol, it was down to how society as a whole views that range of drugs that would decide their future status.
And in this he is right: here, as with other issues, there is a debate to be had. The problem, as I’ve said many times, is that it is not possible for that debate to take place in a reasoned and rational manner. Perhaps Nelson could develop his take on that subject – I’d be more than interested to hear it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
