+Here’s two headlines from the paper of record, the Daily Express (11/02/24):
'Game on!' Reform being tipped to 'shock the political world' with by-election victory’ On what ’tip’ is this shock result predicted? The only pollster quoted in the article had this to say: ‘Respected pollster Andrew Hawkins told Express.co.uk: "I don't think Reform can win Wellingborough but I do think they can beat the Conservatives."’ Well, that’s a bit of a let-down for Reform UK isn’t it? Anyway, here’s another Express misleading headline: Brianna Ghey's mum Esther breaks silence on trans row whipped up by Keir Starmer The key quote in the story is: ‘Esther Ghey, who was in the chamber to attend a debate on mindfulness with her MP Charlotte Nichols, broke her silence with a comment on her Peace & Mind UK Facebook page. She said: "I don't wish to comment on reports of wording or comments recently made. My focus is on creating a positive change and a lasting legacy for Brianna.’ And later we hear from: ‘Brianna's father Peter Spooner [who] yesterday called on Mr Sunak to apologise for the "degrading" and "dehumanising" comments.’ (emphasis added) Hence Esther Grey wasn’t actually 'breaking her silence' on a row ‘whipped up by Keir Starmer.’ I’m not convinced that some of the contributors (I won’t call them journalists) at the Express understand English, no matter how proud of being English they are. But the key point here is with attention spans in rapid decline many people will read the headline and nothing else—it’s like well, that’s just what I thought and I’m not going to bother reading the rest of it. I must emphasise I don’t say this in a condescending way, because I find myself doing the same thing often enough, not least with headlines about yet another Starmer u-turn. How many times do you want to read the actual story to reinforce your opinion? The thing with these Express headlines though is that they are deliberately misleading, designed to reinforce existing prejudices rather than invite any further questions. ‘Grab a headline’ is now more important than ever (not least for a dying press). Yes, I pick on the Express (it is an egregious example) but this behaviour is common across the media, and especially so in response to the new rabid ‘news’ channels with whom the legacy outlets think they are in competition with. It’s a zero sum game and it’s been fully engaged. +Retired Admiral Lord West has remarked on the failure of our aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales to sail to take part in a NATO exercise saying that this is why we need two aircraft carriers (in case one fails). The earlier departure of HMS Queen Elizabeth was also cancelled due to some mechanical issue. So Admiral Lord West is clearly wrong. This episode tells us that we need four aircraft carriers, just like we have four Trident subs. Everything in the MoD’s realm should be multiplied four times, to be on the safe side. And then doubled again. After all, Putin The Great is lurking off Spurn Point, just waiting to take control of Withernsea.
0 Comments
+Labour hopes that ridding itself of the £28 billion green investment pledge will take the sting out of Tory attack lines prior to the next general election. But this kind of begs the question: what Labour policies will the Tories attack next, potentially signalling yet another Starmer u-turn? I am surprised the Tories haven’t yet had a go at Labour’s ‘New Deal for Working People.’ They may not want to make too much of the promise to end zero hours contracts or ending ‘fire and rehire;’ perhaps they won’t even go for Labour’s pledge to give new employees from day one full employment rights. But lurking in the New Deal for Working People is strengthening trade union rights and repealing the Trade Union Act and other recent Tory attacks on workers’ rights. Strengthening collective bargaining rights must also send shivers down Tory spines. So I expect the ‘Labour in the pockets of trade union barons’ line to predictably re-emerge, especially given continuing high profile strikes in rail and the NHS. There is of course the added problem of Rachel Reeves’ fiscal rules blah-de-blah, which suggests generous pay deals will be off the table under a Labour government. Will Labour want to strengthen trade union power under a new regime of austerity lite?
+Labour’s candidate in the Rochdale by-election, Azhar Ali has made a grovelling apology for suggesting in social media after the Hamas attack on 7th October that the Israeli government knew in advance of Hamas’s plans. Labour top dog Pat McFadden has condemned his remarks. But it’s too late to kick Ali off the ballot for the election on February 29th. So if he’s elected, no doubt he’ll have the whip suspended immediately. Ali’s mistake was possibly reading the following report in the New York Times (30/11/23): ‘Israeli officials obtained Hamas’s battle plan for the Oct. 7 terrorist attack more than a year before it happened, documents, emails and interviews show. But Israeli military and intelligence officials dismissed the plan as aspirational, considering it too difficult for Hamas to carry out. The approximately 40-page document, which the Israeli authorities code-named “Jericho Wall,” outlined, point by point, exactly the kind of devastating invasion that led to the deaths of about 1,200 people. The translated document, which was reviewed by The New York Times, did not set a date for the attack, but described a methodical assault designed to overwhelm the fortifications around the Gaza Strip, take over Israeli cities and storm key military bases, including a division headquarters. Hamas followed the blueprint with shocking precision. The document called for a barrage of rockets at the outset of the attack, drones to knock out the security cameras and automated machine guns along the border, and gunmen to pour into Israel en masse in paragliders, on motorcycles and on foot — all of which happened on Oct. 7.’ On these things it seems we must remain silent. Media reports on Ali's apology fail to question whether what he said may have some truth to it. So it’s official, Starmer has dropped his £28billion green investment pledge—his biggest U-turn yet. Is there anything he can be trusted on? He caves in at every opportunity to Tory attacks, rather than rigorously defending his policies, such as they are. So it’s a Tory gain, and if they garner a few more U-turns they may well reduce their losses at the general election, although they still seem on course for defeat. The biggest loser of course is our bid to tackle climate change, once again demoted in the face of political expediency. This is the narrative that long predated the ULEZ affair, another case where Labour failed to defend its policy. What I wonder will Labour’s manifesto be called? ‘Crumbs Off The Table?’ Nobody now seems keen on identifying themselves with the case for sufficiently tackling the climate crisis—a reluctance it seems which is now enveloping the EU, as it faces a rightwing insurgence. The loudmouths in our midst will happily sink the ship, so long as they can monopolise the lifeboats, should there be any.
+The definition of popcorn, “maize of a variety with hard kernels that swell up and burst open when heated” seems kind of apposite for the new variety of Tories gathering around Liz Truss under the name ‘PopCon.’ This group, which includes haughty nutter Jacob Rees Mogg and naughty nutter Lee Anderson in its starry line-up wants the UK to be dragged back to a state of true Conservatism, which I can only imagine harks back to Victorian times, since it can’t possibly reference the Conservatism that embraced Gaitskellism, or a wartime period when Attlee served as Churchill’s deputy, or indeed Ted Heath’s pro-Europeanism, or even for that matter Cameron’s ‘hug a hoodie’ lark. So what is the true Conservatism that the PopCorns want? We know the answer of course: it’s the very unBritish concept of Trumpism, which widely defines freedom but narrowly delivers it into the hands of its privileged promoters. From what I see of this new ‘movement’ which may superficially appeal to the ranks of the ageing Tory Party is a libertarian shift which if fully revealed would probably alienate many in the Tory gerontocracy. Yes, they may have a distaste for ‘wokery’ and political correctness as we used to call it, but are they ready for the economic shock treatment the Trussites wish to inflict on Olde England? I doubt it.
+According to the Politics Home website, 54 Tory MPs have said they're standing down at the next election. Best to jump before you’re pushed, eh? Saves the indignity of a Portillo moment. Also, 18 Labour MPs have announced their pending retirement (including two currently suspended, more may be added to that category). Labour MPs thinking of retirement should however hold off from prematurely announcing their intentions. The leadership would like nothing more than a handful of very late announcements which would allow them to bypass local members and parachute in one of their own—I well remember in Hull West Stuart Randall resigning at the very last minute, allowing Alan Johnson in. Randall’s reward was a seat in the Lords, although he had to relinquish any hopes of becoming PM (a role which the Hull Daily Mail thought he was ‘tipped’ for—absolute hyperbolic bollocks of course—but what are local papers for?). 'A chip off the old block' could take on a new dimension, thanks to that visionary chap Elon Musk and his company Neurolink which has just implanted an interactive chip in somebody’s brain. This—of course—has only been done to pave the way for all sorts of restorative treatments for people with neurological problems. Nothing but good will come from it, just like atoms for peace. And one day we’ll all have an IQ of 200 as we’re all fitted with artificial intelligence. Naturally, I predicted this over 20 years ago, when I gave a talk to the Morley Labour Lunch Club. I suggested that the miniaturisation of electronic technology would allow the equivalent of a mobile phone to be inserted and connected to the brain. We’d become telepathic overnight. I suspect that this eventuality may still be 25 to 50 years off, but the current research will pick up pace, not least in China where mind control must be a gleaming prospect for a society where technology is already heavily used for social control. It could allow for the (unavoidable) receipt of the Great Leader’s thoughts, whoever he or she may be at that time. And any negative thoughts you may have will be monitored 24/7. I don’t read fiction these days, but I bet there’s a slew of science fiction novels on this very subject, each one with its own dystopia. But right now the technology is only being developed for the benefit of humanity. Right?
Bankers can keep their bonuses and we’ll have a bonfire of financial regulations! Was Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves only six years old when the great financial crash of 2008/9 happened? Labour’s sucking up to the City is now becoming obscene, there’s even been suggestions of tax cuts for the wealthy, but I know you can’t trust everything you read on click bait. The problem here is that the hints aren’t out of kilter with the direction of travel.
Who’s behind Labour’s revolutionary new approach as outlined in its document Financing Growth: Labour’s Plan for Financial Services just published? We have Sir Douglas Flint, who in June 2006, in recognition to his services to the finance industry, was appointed a CBE. Flint became group chairman of HSBC at the end of 2010 In 2014, he criticised banking regulations as "disproportionate", "unwarranted risk aversion [which] threatens to restrict access to the formal financial system to many who could benefit from it"’ (Wikipedia entry); we’ve got David Schwimmer, CEO of the London Stock Exchange Group with twenty years’ experience working at Goldman Sachs; there’s Dame Elizabeth Corley, chair of Schroders (with a sideline writing crime fiction); there’s Nigel Higgins, Group chair of Barclays who spent 36 years at Rothschilds; then there’s Sir John Kingman, a highly integrated member of the financial establishment with much experience handling the mess said establishment makes and is a member of the Trilateral Commission; then there’s Anne Glover, a venture capitalist, a non-exec director of the Bank of England and another CBE; of course Sir Ron Kalifa is here too, another knight of finance he too is a non-exec director of the Bank of England and was commissioned by the Tories to conduct a review of fintech, for which Rishi Sunak was duly grateful; Charles Randell was a former chair of the Financial Conduct Authority and is yet another CBE; and look! There’s Baroness Shriti Vadera, a Gordon Brown favourite, formerly a minister and now chair of Prudential, and a real mover and shaker (sometimes criticised for her tough style). Bringing up the rear, so to speak is a mere OBE, Susan Allen, CEO of the Yorkshire Building Society, formerly of Barclays and Santander. So! When Starmer and Reeves say Labour represents change they really mean it! I would have had more optimism on that front if we had seen one or two trade union voices here, or the likes of Lord Prem Sikka, and don’t we have any local Thomas Pikettys or Joseph Stiglitzs? Dream on. Labour’s aiming for such a humungous change, it has to be handled very smoothly if it’s to work, in fact it’ll be so seamless I doubt many people will even notice the ‘change’ and in four or five years’ voters may choose something else entirely, maybe as indicated in the article I highlighted yesterday. The document does express support for getting more women onto company boards and support for the mutual sector, both things which Labour in the past hasn’t actually done a great deal about aside from talk. Much of the rest is couched in terms of supporting continuing reviews, brushing up existing initiatives and tweaking things here and there. Most definitely not a major reform of the way the economy works. Its great vision is kind of summed up in the final paragraph: ‘Labour will look to deliver a modern ‘Tell Sid’ campaign for retail ownership to highlight the value of British people supporting British businesses.’ Well, we know what happened there. Recent comments by Labour’s Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves have made it clear that the party’s previous commitment to spending £28 billion per annum on green investment is now fully ditched. This is because the ‘economic circumstances have changed’ apparently. This makes a change from saying we can’t say what we’ll do until we see the books. Rachel’s team clearly have their own crystal ball. I doubt that the economy has changed all that much since the ‘pledge’ was made. But perhaps it was only ever intended to be a headline grabbing thing at the time. I wonder. What would Winston Churchill have done in 1940, when it became clear the British economy was facing it’s toughest ever test? Well into the Phoney War, did he say ‘the economic circumstances have changed’ - so we’ll drop down a gear or two on our commitments? I imagine the appeasers around him—still hoping for an accommodation with Hitler—were whispering ‘we can’t afford this war!’
It’s all about the short-termism of politics of course—adequate climate change action can always be postponed. There are many ways Labour could find the dosh to fulfil this pledge, it just chooses not to. What’s going on in the real world is made startlingly clear in an article posted on Inside Climate News, which I thoroughly recommend: With the World Stumbling Past 1.5 Degrees of Warming, Scientists Warn Climate Shocks Could Trigger Unrest and Authoritarian Backlash - Inside Climate News Here we are nearly at the end of the first month of the new year. I didn’t make it an alcohol free month, nor indeed a ‘veganuary’ - can’t do without cheese and eggs I’m afraid. Or wine. So nothing happening there. One needs one’s comforts in these rather bleak times, times when of course millions are denied their comforts. Maybe that should read billions. The sheer scale of global problems is now overwhelming, and I don’t see any particular politician with the wherewithal to get a grip—it’s more a case of watching a group of loudmouthed privileged passengers fighting over those famed Titanic deckchairs (but to his credit, Trump wouldn’t have bothered with a deckchair, he would have commandeered the first lifeboat). The fights our world leaders are engaged in are pre-modern (I’m using that phrase as a sort of crutch) namely to gain territory, to keep territory, and to subjugate the other. How is it possible that we have got this far down the road of climate catastrophe when these idiots (not just Putin) are still so obsessed with sacrificing hundreds or thousands of lives just to raise a flag in some obscure village or town? And yes, I apply the same criticism to Hamas and their partners in senseless killing, Israel, since these days one doesn’t want to be accused of being ’one-sided.’
Well, we know that when humans are faced with a bit of a crisis they can go into distraction mode. If the house is in flames, at least make time to have a hoover-up and do the dishes. Indeed, go looking for dirty dishes to prolong the distraction. But as I’ve written before, great minds (Russell, Einstein et al) have considered this problem and nobody has taken them up on their ideas, such as world government or a single global military force. Other ‘great’ minds briefly believed that world peace would be secured through the globalisation of trade, like no two countries with MacDonald’s would ever go to war with each other. What do we hear from the globalisers now? Just a bit of fretting and tut-tutting between canapés at Davos. And we’re just seconds away from midnight on the Doomsday Clock. January 29th 2024, note for the diary: it was wet and gloomy all day. I caught a bit of BBC Radio 4’s Sunday programme this morning, which featured a piece on child abuse in the Church of England. One current reverend, who had been abused by the late disgraced Bishop Peter Ball thought the C of E’s response to the whole issue was shameful and shallow, a matter of continual reviews, inquiries and delay. His criticism of the church was utterly visceral. But isn’t this the norm for an organisation whose response to anything to do with sex is hand wringing and wriggling, if not squirming in embarrassment that such to-do-ments could possibly creep into their hallowed portals? It seems that much of the Sunday programme’s time is spent hearing religious squirming, where those blessed with access to revelatory truths discover a certain discord with reality. And we’re supposed to take them seriously? As a fan of Saint Richard of Dawkins I can only marvel and despair at the credulousness of so many religious followers. Perhaps it’s time for a latter day Martin Luther to come along from within the cult and not merely nail 95 theses to the door but to knock it down entirely and suggest that from now on everyone should learn how to think for themselves. Obviously I come from a Judeo-Christian heritage whether I like it or not, but I apply the same critical approach to the alleged ‘holy’ fathers (all men) of the Muslim world, who love nothing more than slaughtering each other just because of a family split many centuries ago. Why exactly should that schism be our business now?
We seem to be in preparation for something. Only days after Starmer was photographed on manoeuvres wearing his camouflage outfit and looking very much like a bunny rabbit on its first outing, several UK army generals have suggested that such is the dire state of the army we may need to sort out a ‘citizens’ army’ to fend off the impending invasion of Britain by Putin. We all need to go and get our camouflage gear in readiness. Well, not quite all. The Daily Mirror has helpfully listed 60 health conditions which would prevent one from being recruited, including having active piles. Diabetics are deemed useless too along with anyone with a heart condition (can you imagine BANG!!? Surpriiise!) Given the nation’s state of health it’s hard to imagine anyone being available for service. 8 million of us are on NHS waiting lists for heaven’s sake. So the government’s spokesperson has flatly denied that conscription is on the cards. What we’re seeing is just some posturing by generals who aren’t courageous enough to speak out directly about how the Tories have done so much to decimate the UK's defence forces, never mind Vlad the Bad. Anyway, it’s good to know that at least one member of the opposition is kitted out and ready for the fight, on the beaches, in the streets and on the landing fields. Give the lad a pitchfork!
|
Archives
March 2024
|