​Electoral Calculus’ latest prediction, based on aggregated polls, suggests Labour at the next election would have 136 seats, Tories 22, Reform 362 and Lib Dems 62. I don’t think such a result is likely but it is a stark warning to Labour to get its act together. What chance is there of this happening? It’s a struggle to find any optimism. What is needed is clearly an enemy without, although given the depleted state of the Royal Navy I doubt the UK could even wage a successful war against the Argentines should they choose to invade the Falklands again. So Thatcher’s remedy for her unpopularity probably couldn’t be repeated. (And I wonder if anyone on Labour’s backbenches would replicate Tam Dalyell’s tenacity in seeking out uncomfortable truths.) Who could we go to war with and over what? Rockall, perhaps. Clearly Starmer has already made a choice and they are the ‘strangers.’ 

​Israel has formally annexed another 22 areas of the West Bank in order to legitimise the creation of new settlements, which one of their regime’s ministers said was a ‘strategic’ decision to prevent the creation of a two-state solution. Given that most Western politicians trot out the line that they are ambitious for a two-state solution when are they going to tackle Israel’s crimes head-on? International law decrees all the settlements are illegal. It’s time all the ‘examples’ attached to the (actually interim) IHRA definition of anti-Semitism were dropped. Israel cannot claim to be amongst the ‘family’ of democracies. It may retain some definitionally sufficient institutions to qualify as a ’democracy’ but that’s a thin veneer for a modern form of fascism. Can fascism conceal itself under the cloak of democracy? Of course it can! New tricks abound in our savvy age—an age in which Goebbels would have thrived.   

A couple of hours after writing that I came across this on Labour List:

'NAZI: Attorney general Lord Hermer has likened Tory and Reform politicians who want to pull Britain out of international courts to Nazis. In a speech to the Royal United Services Institute, he said the claim that international law can be put aside when conditions change “is a claim that was made in the early 1930s by ‘realist’ jurists in Germany, most notably Carl Schmitt.”' (emphasis added)

​Need I say more?

I wonder how many MPs were the third child in their family. Quite a few I imagine. I was once among their number. I’ve no idea if any benefits such as child allowances accrued to my family’s great wealth due to me being a third sprog, but in the days when a family of five was seen as the norm there was no stigma attached, if indeed the two-child allowance cap may be interpreted as a stigma. It is certainly a penalty. Rachel Reeves family came with only two children, perhaps a third was prevented by her parents’ divorce. I don’t suppose her personal circumstances have influenced her decision thus far to retain the cap. But it looks like the polls will undo her fiscal rectitude and a U-turn will be announced shortly. This I think will not reverse the government’s unpopularity, it will merely make them look even more unfocused and indecisive. The U-turn will be sold on the suggestion that now that the economy is improving it can be afforded and hard working families should see the benefit. Apparently with the IMF forecast that GDP will grow by 1.2% instead of 1.1% (Wow!) now is the time to be generous. And we know how committed Rachel is, she says so herself:  “How do you achieve your potential as a country if your kids aren’t being given the best education and the best opportunities in life? You can’t.” (her website’s home page, emphasis added) I’m afraid on this one it’s heads she loses and tails she (and the government) loses. 

+In an unseasonably cold and windy Quebec (I’m told the weather here can be capricious) I came across and briefly joined a trade union demo outside the Quebec parliament building. I’m not sure what it was about, although it would be easy to guess, and the crowd were being fired up by some fiery speeches (judging by the placard part of the demo was about international student teacher’s rights). Police were guarding the entrances. Stalls were dishing out free food and with the addition of a couple of street performers there was an air of carnival, rather than impending insurrection. I wonder if Monsieur Premier Legualt was watching with an admonishing finger from a high window. Waiting for a bus that never arrived the next day I discovered that there was an all-out strike on.

+On the plane back to Toronto (I came by train but the nine hour journey back would have been impossible) it fell to me to admonish a fellow passenger for playing his electronic device without wearing headphones. Am I alone in being irritated? I asked him to wear some, but this seemed to him deeply offensive and he in turn admonished me for being ‘impolite.’ I still can’t figure out how this two-year old managed to look like thirty and had grown a beard.

+How soon will Mark Carney’s reputation for technocratic, adult competence last I wonder? None of the political pressures have gone away and having no parliamentary majority governing Canada will be tricky. The further demonisation of Trump will be necessary, a task it has to be said which will be made easier by Trump himself. Hopefully the UK will be watching to see how this goes. Canada is far more dependent on the States than we are.

+On the subject of newspapers or lack thereof. Quebecans seem more interested in them than people in Anglo-Canada, with wide availability. All in French.

+Back home and I’m reminded of Enoch Powell’s second most famous phrase ‘all political careers end in failure’ or words to that effect, attributed to him. I’m not sure it’s entirely true, but for the moment I can’t think of an example that disproves it. It must depend to a large extent on the individual politician’s ambition to achieve something. But I suspect all politicians, like most humans will experience regret. Here’s an example (New Statesman, 16/5/25): “What people didn’t understand was what had caused the financial crisis – it was easy for the Conservatives to blame the government. They didn’t understand: a) it started in America, and b) it was caused by profligacy and greed in the financial sector. No banker ever went to prison, because our laws were not strong enough to deal with that – bankers should have gone to prison. I never got that message across . . .” Well, no you didn’t Gordon, because it wasn’t long prior to the crash that you were praising bankers and easing financial regulations. (emphasis added)
Here's an imagined conversation:
Gordon: Did you enjoy the main course?
Fred: I’ve had better
Gordon: Well, now it’s time for some just desserts
Fred: What do you mean?
Gordon: (after waiter reveals police uniform) I mean you’re under arrest
Fred: You can’t do this! My pension’s bigger than yours!
Gordon: Not any more it isn’t. I’m going to say, (sotto voce) -  in ten years’ time or so - that I think bankers should be in prison.
Fred: Will I get privileges?
Gordon: Yes, you get to call the screws ‘Sir’
Fred: You said regulations should be lighter. You praised people like me. What’s going on?
Gordon: Take him away! I never knew him! That was then and this is now! I need to save the world!

​

+I’ve been on a fact-finding trip to Canada (what some people might call a holiday, but MPs habits die hard) to see what ‘America’s’ richest neighbour will do next in the context of Trump's onslaught. My visit has reminded me that not all opposition to Trump emanates from the left, since Ontario's 'Progressive Conservative' premier Doug Ford, who I once took to be just a mini-me Trump called an election earlier this year and was re-elected on an anti-Trump ticket (cast as 'protect Ontario’). Perhaps other rightwing leaders will follow suit and see what distance they can find between themselves and Donald (in some cases it may be too late, Fartage included). Another thing which may have swung things Ford's way was his $1,000 bribe given to electors. Sorry, not a bribe, a cost of living grant. How Conservative is Ford? He was quoted in the press saying he was against hard spending cuts, but I don’t know if he meant it.
 
+To change the mood in the UK perhaps Rachel Reeves could do no worse than change her surname to that of the Canadian Finance Minister's, he is none other than Francois-Phillippe Champagne. C'mon Rach, pop the corks!
 
+Most informed people abroad will have heard of the separatist movement the Quebecois, who have a significant caucus of MPs in the federal parliament. Now Canada faces another separatist voice emerging (again) from Alberta, the home of Canada's oil tar sands, one of the world's greatest sources of filthy carbon emissions (the filth is not just in the CO2 emissions, but in the huge lakes of sludge arising from the mining/refining process). Albertans don't think they're getting enough recognition from central government (plus ca change) and their provincial government has passed a Separation Act which allows for a referendum and to enable them in the meantime to ignore federal laws they don't like, if I have understood things correctly. One problem for the legislators is that they seem to have overlooked First Nation people who have treaty rights which precede the confederation of Canada. But I doubt that people who think tar sands are wonderful (and they do) will care much for the rights of the indigenous population. A background worry here is that Trump may wade in and seek to aid the Albertan bid for freedom. One way to weaken Canada. Surely a big beautiful pipeline could be built behind the backs of Ottawa pols? How long will Canada's new found solidarity last?
 
+I watched a few adverts on Canadian TV. Some, if not many seemed to want to emphasise how Canadian their products are. Chrysler for instance. Their cars are 'assembled' in Canada and run on Canadian roads!
 
+In Montreal, where the Maple Leaf flag seems slightly less in evidence. But the Quebec premier, François Legualt has made common cause with his far distant federal cousins in Alberta - by suggesting that Albertan oil could be shipped to Europe by developing a pipeline across the north of Canada to a port on the mouth of the St Lawrence. This, thinks Legualt might help him teach Trump an 'economic lesson.' He wants to meet Trump and tell him personally of his fantasy. If Legualt makes the mistake of speaking in French to Trump, POTUS might think France has surrendered. Presumably Legualt has been influenced by neighbour Ontario's Doug Ford in ramping up rhetoric against the bully in order to deliver popularity at home.
 
+Here in Montreal I am not impressed by the importation of the US's tipping culture. Just being served with a pint in a bar demands a minimum 15% tip. 'Demands' being the operative word. This comes on top of the local purchase taxes, which are not, as in the UK, combined in the advertised price. A meal seemingly costing $35 ends up at $46. Since these are Canadian dollars, that's still quite cheap (also bearing in mind food portions here are American) but all the same, it would be nice to have some idea in advance what the final tally might be.
 
+The convicted criminal Conrad Black has a regular column in the National Post, the rightwing paper which I think he once owned. Black reminds me of Thatcher's mouthpiece Bernard Ingham, who had a regular slot in the Yorkshire Post, sustained by an uninterrupted flow of bile not just against the left but 'the way things are going.' Reading Black one is left with the impression that the election of Pope Leo XIV is going to turn the tide on the evils of the Enlightenment (thanks to a reinvigorated Catholic church) and the falsehoods of the atheistic, soul corrupting temptations of our nihilistic society today will be exposed, albeit without mention of rapture. Poor old Conrad, he thinks he deserved his Trump pardon, even if it didn't come from the Good Lord Himself. 
 
+Buying a newspaper in downtown Montreal is next to impossible. I asked in the city's biggest bookshop, Indigo, if they sold newspapers (they had magazines). A look of puzzlement came over the assistant's face. Newspapers? So old fashioned! The same I think goes for buying postcards and their oft associated postage stamps. These are all remnants of a bygone age, and I must admit searching them out marks you out as a dinosaur. However, I did read a story that Canada Post is considering stopping household deliveries. The business, it appears is bankrupt. So the best way to preserve it is purely in the memory of it. The same thing threatens Royal Mail. I did eventually manage to buy a copy of the Globe and Mail, there were four copies left on an otherwise bare newsstand in Montreal station. These days who wants to pay $5.75 for a small selection of news and views and a chance to get ink on your fingers? 

Well, enough facts for now! Here's a picture of Premier Legualt practising his best 'telling off Trump' mode.

Today the end of the war in Europe was commemorated and rightly so. Some commentators have noted that the Soviet contribution to victory was somewhat overlooked. This is reminiscent of Stalin writing Trotsky out of history and photographs. But I’m sure that’s no-one’s intention. As we know history is pliable and will suit whatever the contemporary narrative demands. But one thing (only one?) does annoy me. This is the regular trotting out of our royals to lead the nation’s moment of reflection. Yes, some of them have served in the military, but the King’s time, judging by his medals you might think must have been one long period of mortal combat. He’s got so many medals when he wears them he’s clearly in danger of leaning to one side. So far as I can tell, the whole lot have been awarded for just ‘being there,’ that is in the main for being a royal. Half—five—of his medals relate to the Coronation and his mother’s various jubilees, medals in other words designed to create a colourful chest of wonderment for the credulous. Why does this irritate me? Because those who actually earned their medals are somehow degraded, the whole calculated issuance of medals becomes a cynical charade. I am not against medals per se, but I might add that during the war we are now celebrating the 80th anniversary of the ending of, officers and ’other ranks’ would generally get different grades of medal for acts of bravery. It must have been assumed that officers were imbued with a more noble form of bravery, deserving of crosses as opposed to common or garden medals. Is this just me griping about not getting a medal? After all, my service in the RAF did lead to my supply squadron getting an award for data transmission accuracy (how I courageously mastered the reading of punch tape and the telex machine). I think everyone who served in the forces during the reign of Her. Maj. should get the appropriate medal(s). And perhaps one or two more for accurate marching up and down. Then perhaps King Charles could look us in the eye and say ’Well done!’ and we’d all be very pleased with ourselves.

This appeared in the Independent today:
 
‘Sir Keir Starmer is under growing pressure from his own MPs to reverse the government's controversial cuts to winter fuel payments, with a group of 45 Labour MPs demanding he “act now” to respond to concerns over the policy following Labour's disastrous performance at the local elections. The Red Wall caucus of MPs issued a damning verdict in the wake of the results, warning that voters across the UK had told the Labour Party “loudly and clearly that we have not met their expectations". Downing Street continues to double down on the policy, with the PM’s official spokesperson telling reporters on Wednesday that the public “didn’t elect this government to be knocked off course”
 
What does this tell us? That the ‘Red Wall’ MPs are a spineless bunch? They acquiesce in the abolition of Winter Fuel Payments, but as soon as Labour gets an electoral drubbing they develop the spine to say ‘boo!’ And they may wonder why voters are pissed off. Of course there’s more to the story than WFPs, there’s that more than nagging doubt that this government, especially given its majority, has the imagination or politics to actually reshape how the country is run. Nor does it have the language. Consider the last sentence of the above ’official spokesperson’s’ complacent, patronising comment. ’We won’t be knocked off course’ comes straight out of an AI drone’s script, except here AI stands for ‘artificial ignorance’ where a pretence is made that the reason Labour got smashed is because people are deeply concerned that the government could be ’knocked off course.’ It is precisely because of the ’course’ you dimwit! Never mind. A career in consulting awaits these pricks. 

VE Day, as the anniversary of ‘Victory in Europe’ is called is being commemorated. Coincidentally I’ve been reading some stuff my father wrote about his wartime experience. War appeared a very quotidian thing, enlivened occasionally by being shot at. Interviews on the Beeb have included Jonathan Dimbleby reminiscing about his father Richard’s war commentaries, not least from Belsen. But oopps! How did this get past the censors? Jonathan expressed to me what sounded like some surprise when he noted that in Monday’s VE parade in London there was a Ukrainian contingent. He reminded us that Ukrainians had allied themselves against the Allies in the war. That’s a bit embarrassing isn’t it? Should we wonder about Putin’s suggestion that he doesn’t like Ukrainian Nazis as Russia itself comes up to ‘Victory Day’ - celebrating a victory that is, which took tens of millions of lives (many of which I am sure could have been avoided if Stalin was not such an idiot)? Meanwhile, over in Gaza, what’s left of it is promised a new cleansing by the Lebensraum policy of Israel’s Nazi-in-Chief Bibi. Are we still not permitted to compare his government to Nazis? Isn’t his government not of the western, democratic mould? What exactly is VE Day all about?

There won’t be much stone throwing going on at the Conclave to elect the next Pope (He who is without sin, etc., etc.—John 8.7). With all their pomp, sartorial excess and ceremony I think we can safely assume that the participants all suffer from the first of the seven deadly sins, pride. A few of the other sins can probably be thrown in too, envy perhaps? Listening to a Cardinal on the Beeb the other day all the talk was about the ‘Holy Spirit’ which will somehow manifest itself like a cloud of incense wafting around the contenders’ Zucchettos. The Cardinal said that the new Pope will not be chosen as we might elect a politician, since they are not seeking a Prime Minister or President—rather missing the point that the Pope is a de facto head of state. Of course, what happens in a Conclave is strictly secret, so it is easy for those in the know to suggest that the recent film ‘Conclave’ is fiction. Well it is, but when fiction gets that believable it is hard to eradicate what truth there is in it. How many gay cardinals are there is one question which could usefully be asked. I wonder too how many cardinals have actually heard a word from God? How exactly is this word communicated? In the same way that Peter Sutcliffe, the ‘Yorkshire Ripper’ heard the voice of God in his head, or perhaps some ISIS barbarian? And where was the voice of God when Justin Welby needed it (this blog is not sectarian)? Having said all that, I think if I were a cardinal I would cast my vote for the man who communes with God (himself) every day. Pope Donald. A man with no moral issues