The Returning Officers

Blogging Will Be Lighter

2005-05-25T20:28:00.000+01:00

A quick discussion with my fellow Returning Officers has led to the decision to keep the blog open for occasional posts until the next election campaign. For more on Guido's view see my post on my own blog. Thanks for your support and attention.

Errr, OK

2005-05-23T17:06:00.000+01:00

Not sure what to make of this...

THE ELECTION GROUNDHOGS ARE UP FOR SALE!

Gordon and Granita the Groundhogs have worked with the Conservative Party during the 2005 General Election Campaign. Named after Gordon Brown and Granita, the famous restaurant that Tony and Gordon dined at in 1994, the groundhogs have worked tirelessly with the Party for the whole campaign.

This is a great opportunity to own a piece of election history. Gordon and Granita came out of hibernation in February and remained with the campaign until polling day.

They "come complete with a certificate of authenticity signed by Michael Howard and Lynton Crosby", apparently. It's not really the same as the snow leopard I adopted as a child.

Said 2005 ephemera can be bid for here, though clearly the email plea suggests that there's not been many takers so far. Still, Lynton's autograph hey? Phwoar!

No Mandate for New Labour in England

2005-05-08T08:19:00.000+01:00

Charles Moore in the Torygraph points out that Blair won office on the lowest number of votes since 1922, and it is the smallest share (since women got the vote) that has enabled the formation of a government with an overall majority. Its been three-quarters of a century since the governing party got less than 10 million votes. Its an even worse result when one considers that the population in 1922 was so much smaller. See also this FT article.

The Tories Gored Labour in England, winning the popular vote by 60,000 more votes than Labour. (The Tories picked up 8,086,306 votes, Labour trailed with just 8,028,512.) So its fair to say that England is under foreign occupation by a Scottish socialist party unsupported by the population, with only 1 in 5 of the English backing the regime. Expect the Campaign for an English Parliament to gain traction if not actually start an insurgency.

Guido commissioned his own research which shows a slightly different result, taking into account all eligible voters the final results were really:-

Nullist 39%
Labour 21.4%
Conservative 19.7%
Lib. Dem. 13.4%
Others 6.3%

©NotmeGuv, 2005

It was the None-of-the-Aboves wot won it...

We're All Brownites Now

2005-05-06T12:55:00.000+01:00

Am now working to more deadlines than a global courier service but the election's over and so's this blog. As post-election atmospheres go, this is a weird one and no doubt Tony Blair agrees with me. Obviously Egregious George's election was unfortunate. Otis Ferry, what a muppet. Tim Collins, har-har. Chris Maines, what went wrong there? Iain Dale, blimey. Stephen Twigg, Chris Leslie, hmmm. Barbara Roche and Geraint Davies means two new GLA members soon. Roger Casale probably needs to go back to politics lecturing. Peter Law, words fail me.

Someone ought to do a Tory leadership contest blog. I'm not volunteering myself but it would be amusing to note the twists and turns. Then again, Liam Fox is just amusing full-stop.

Update 1: looks like Guido will be the unofficial Tory leadership contest blog.
Update 2: reshuffle was a non-event, Amos, Beckett and McCartney still in, Murphy out; Reid not at FCO; Browne, Hutton and Miliband promoted; Blunkett gets some of first Cabinet post back but no 'enforcer' role; Department for Productivity, Energy and Industry?

Yeah, Probably For The Best

2005-05-06T12:49:00.000+01:00

The Tories are going for weakest link politics and having failed to break that 'psychologically important' 200-seat barrier, Howard's off to spend more time with his ~~coffin and cape~~ Liverpool season ticket.

Interesting then that he wants to change the party's rules on electing a successor and has made his hope for a "younger leader" known.

Oh, and the Spectator's 'hypothetical' analysis today:

A victory for Howard would be a stunning vindication of his courage, resilience, patience, powers of organisation and penchant for spasmodic acts of apodeictic ruthlessness.

Whatever happens this Thursday, the Conservative party owes Michael Howard a huge debt of thanks.

...

If the Tories lose, there will be the usual gleeful post-mortem. It will be asserted that the Tories once again contrived to sound nasty, and that the campaign focused too much on immigration.

...

The dismal truth is that Labour has temporarily brainwashed the electorate into believing that there is no way of improving public services without continuing Gordon Brown’s campaign to turn Britain into a kind of Sweden.

Damn their oily hides, as Mr Burns would say.

Reg Keys Speech

2005-05-06T02:48:00.000+01:00

Blair had the grace to look choked. He never has visited the wounded soldiers has he?

Strangely, I Don't Feel Dirty

2005-05-05T18:08:00.000+01:00

Unlike the Honourable Fiend, I did choose Labour today, not that it's any of your business, of course. But to my mind the choice was stark, anodyne backbench councillor or Greg 'the Africans are coming' Hands, with the result being the closest in London by all accounts. No nosepeg required, therefore.

Not that our virile PM (too much information, Tony) should take this as any kind of personal endorsement, after all, it was only lesser-evilism. It seems Will Self agreed with my choice too, bizarrely, according to today's Standard.

If only I'd kept my flat in Whitechapel though, I'd have marched to that ballot box with a fixed grin.

I spent this morning and early afternoon with some foreign observers and the diminished public interest on the ground was palpable. Tonight will be spent watching with a glass of wine in hand, sleepy but thinking of the time off in lieu.

Bullish in Defeat

2005-05-05T17:17:00.000+01:00

Bozzer dictates a garbled message via The Spectator's attempt at blogging while out on the stump today:

"I've just been standing in a Conservative committee room watching the votes spool ever upwards like house prices in Oxfordshire; I am therefore full of confidence that whatever happens we are now seeing the end of the Blair premiership. Even if – which I do not for a moment concede – Tony Blair hangs on to his job tonight, he will find it increasingly unbearable. Not only will he face a revived and invigorated Tory party, but also ranged behind him will be the vengeful spirits of his backbenchers, consumed with self-loathing for what they supported in Iraq, and determined to jugulate Mr Tony as soon as they can."

An inverted pyramid of piffle, if you ask me.

Don't Vote, It Only Encourages Them

2005-05-05T10:55:00.000+01:00

Click on Image - requires Flash and sound

Surely it's self-defeating for a 'returning officer' to issue such instructions? Anyhow, here's another new site for the election, slightly against the spirit of your intentions. Don't worry, it'll all be ovah soon.

Saves on counting. I think you'll find the nullist party is going to win tonight with around 40% of the vote.

My missus hails from a country with compulsory voting -- that's the stuff of your nightmares really.

Canterbury Tales

2005-05-03T13:31:00.000+01:00

To the garden of England, where Tory Julian Brazier is embroiled in another photos on campaign literature row, according to today's Independent. He reckons his Labour opponent's own literature is "very poor". I wouldn't stand for that sort of claim, Recess.

Someone wants £10 @ 20 /1 odds on Betfair for a Labour win in Canterbury. Good luck Recess. Did I ever tell you about the embarassing time years ago when Julian and I...

Coyote Ugly Politics

2005-04-30T21:40:00.000+01:00

A trio of viral ads found via Harry's Place that deserve a wider appreciation. After the whole UKIP nonsense and those botched subtitles on the Greens' solitary showing, they're better than what the parties have come up with.

I have to confess to really enjoying the UKIP broadcast, it was like a Harry Enfield piss-take, with Dr Who style EU monsters gobbling up Britain. (Why couldn't Roger Knapman have a shave?) You are right, it was so bad it was good...

So Bad It Was Good

2005-04-29T18:27:00.000+01:00

The Ukip party political broadcast aired just now. Think Alan Partridge. Think Rusty Lee warning on the dangers of immigration (what does Wincey Willis make of it though?). Think "minds immeasurably more bureaucratic than ours"...

Blair on Iraq : "Move On"

2005-04-29T13:52:00.000+01:00

Arise Lord Banks of Stamford Bridge

2005-04-29T00:26:00.000+01:00

Much ado in store when the dissolution honours gets its wider dissection tomorrow. Those heartlands Labour MPs who got the relevant nudges and declined them will rue the day when they fail to get in the second chamber next time round under different circumstances.

Andrew Neil referred to this crop as a political C-list and called for Guy Fawkes to be added to liven things up. What could he mean?

As for so-called republican Tony Banks...

Give Rover Management An Award

2005-04-28T14:40:00.000+01:00

Tucked away inside the Labour business manifesto, is the commitment to

"Introduce a new award for Phoenix Entrepreneurs to encourage positive public recognition for individuals whose first business did not succeed but who have come back, worked hard and built successful enterprises."

Given the recent demise of Phoenix MG Rover, surely their choice of words is more than a trifle insensitive?

Hat tip: Thom Dyke

Indeed. What next, a Dame Shirley Porter Award for Voter Registration?

Blair Out-Tories the Tories - Again!

2005-04-28T12:25:00.000+01:00

Michael Howard said that one of the first acts of his government, if elected, would be to publish Lord Goldsmith's advice on the Iraq war.

Erm, Blair's just done that.

Update: sensing a possible backlash as a result of this, Labour sought to divert attention moments later with another gag-laden email from John O'Farrell.

The Word on The Street

2005-04-27T12:12:00.000+01:00

As Huggy Bear used to say, is that David Miliband will be taking a lot of interest in how Lords reform pans out after the election.

Aussie Re-inforcements Arrive

2005-04-27T09:33:00.000+01:00

Sipping my usual 'special order' coffee in Starbucks on Victoria Street yesterday, Guido thought he saw a familiar face (given the special bit is generous slug of cognac from my hipflask, I may have been mistaken). But the shiny slap head, the Aussie twang, it seems to me that it must be, the one, the only, Mark Textor. Here no doubt to help his old mate Lynton give the Tories a final Aussie style finish. Guido fears that it is going to end sadly for Crosby-Textor and the Tories.

But they at least put up a proper fight this time.

And 10 out of 10 to Saatchi for the audacious robbery of New Labour's new campaign slogan. Labour's pitch to the public sector payroll vote "If You Value It, Vote For It" has become "If You Value The Truth, Vote For It".

Click to Enlarge

I'm not thinking what they're thinking ie. portraying the Tories as the underdog and imploring people to vote anti-Labour to prevent a forgone conclusion, will work. They have a different electoral system over there.

You Heard It Here First - Unless You Read Recess Monkey 5 Minutes Ago

2005-04-26T09:42:00.000+01:00

Brian Sedgemore, retiring MP for Hackney South & Shoreditch has defected to the LibDems, causing a headache for Labour Candidates trying to show the public how right wing the Liberals can be.

Is it possible that Charles Kennedy offered him a Peerage after being rejected for an Honour by Blair? Traditionally, the two main opposition leaders nominate 5 people for Peerages at dissolution.

Oh the joys of rushing to post! Great minds think alike (or were watching Newsnight at the same time).

Not sure Sedgemore would go for a peerage, after all, he did used to attack 'The Establishment'. And there's the small matter of the Lib Dems' Approved Peers List -- surely Charles Kennedy wouldn't go above the heads of his own party's democratic structures?

So chaps, which bit of the Sedgemore battering do you disagree with? Recess is I know a fan of Brian. Do you renounce Sedgemore and all his works and pledge loyalty to Blair?

There is a lot of truth in what he says, half the PLP loathes Blair, half of the candidates do as well. Much of the activists (who are generally more left-wing) will not campaign for him and many voters find him indistinguishable from the Tories. That latter point is key to his success. Will conscientious socialists hold their nose and vote for New Labour? I suspect a lot will vote for the most left-wing candidate, which in many cases will be the LibDems.

I have never rated Brian "eminently forgettable" Sedgemore and, for once, agree with Blair that no one will have heard of him until this morning. I must admit to enjoying his and Mayor Ken's hate/hate relationship over recent years, which no one other than those concerned seem to know where the beef is. I expect Ken smirked over his cornflakes this morning.

In fact, if you want positive proof to the extent of his lightweight-ness then read Oliver Kamm's detailed examination of Sedgemore's historic contribution to the Labour Party. I also agree with Kamm's conclusion, we should be happy for Brian now he's found his real political home.

As for Recess, he's just a romantic lefty and is aware of Sedgemore's breezing through the pages of Tribune over the years.

Thanks for the irrelevant gossip, but without sounding like Paxo, answer the question - which bit of the Sedgemore battering do you disagree with? Do you renounce Sedgemore and all his works and pledge loyalty to Blair?

I'm baffled as to what I'm supposed to be agreeing with or disagreeing with. Was it a battering? Sounded like a bitter rant by a has-been to me. How can I renounce someone I never rated? Why do I have to pledge loyalty to anyone? I'm sure your question has humour value but as far as I am concerned these events have absolutely no personal relevance to me whatsoever.

I Like My Liberalism Tough

2005-04-25T23:27:00.000+01:00

'Veteran former Labour MP defects'

I'm inclined to say 'meh' here, after all, he'd been nudging closer and closer to them throughout the last Parliament and it's not as if he was standing for re-election. A Labour to Tory defection would be more newsworthy but I suspect that this defection fits in perfectly with The Independent's agenda, which is why it's their front page lead. I'm not quite sure how Brian Sedgemore, someone on the Campaign Group left of Labour who used to write books about 'The Establishment', will be received by his new party, but I shan't deprive them of their opportunity to gloat.

Perhaps he was swayed by the magnetic charms of Don Foster...

Flaming Mungrel

2005-04-25T16:20:00.000+01:00

OK, it's only a couple of comments in a thread over at the Guardian's blog, but is this the nascent stirrings of a 'Deport Lynton Crosby' campaign? Worth a shot for the would-be Dom Jolly types out there.

Tough on Dictatorships, Tough on the Causes of Dictatorships?

2005-04-25T15:16:00.000+01:00

Well (for balance), if the Lib Dems can ape Michael Moore then Labour might as well get all Aung Sang Suu Kyi on us...

(NB: not actual Labour propaganda)

This Returning Officer is Outraged

2005-04-25T11:38:00.000+01:00

Bethnal Green is a tough battle-ground, George Galloway (Ba’athist party) is up against Oona (War party). Fortunately, if you fear Baghdad style voter-intimidation a handy official looking card will have popped through your door.

POSTAL VOTES CENTRE,
FREEPOST NAT C14962,
NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE,
NE3 3BP

The card contains a box where voters can fill in an address other than the one they are registered at in breach of Electoral Commission guidelines. Who could be behind this scam?

Don’t be surprised when Galloway calls the police in on May 6th.

If You Value It, Vote for It

2005-04-25T11:33:00.000+01:00

Labour unveiled their new slogan last week. www.IfYouValueItVoteforIt.com Oops...

Remember : A Vote for Labour, is a Vote for the War in Iraq

2005-04-24T12:09:00.000+01:00

Next week will be focused on Iraq if everyone but Blair and Campbell have their way. The LibDems, the only party that has been consistent and truthful on the issue, plan to make it the issue du jour Monday to Friday. According to Campbell's ~~emailed~~ leaked memo to the Sunday Times, the Labour spin will be that Saddam would still be in power rather than in prison. The problem with that argument for Labour is that a lot of their activist base would rather not have seen British soldiers fighting and dying alongside the Yanks in Iraq and detests Blair for cosying up to Bush. They would rather have let Saddam stay in power than have the U.S. marines in Baghdad. The LibDems have to target their message to those disaffected Labour voters. For anti-War voters the choice is vote LibDem, Green or stay at home.

Hmmm. Guido reckons he knows from where Cowley Street got the idea for that clever "Labour for war" graphic.

Immigration : What's the Difference?

2005-04-23T10:00:00.000+01:00

Blair Lied and Admitted it to Paxman on Live TV

2005-04-23T07:51:00.000+01:00

A reader emailed Guido about Blair's admission to Paxman regarding David Kelly "I don't believe we had any option but to disclose his name". Guido was a bit slow and missed the point (sorry Ron), but further reflection suggests it was significant. In January 2004, Peter Oborne wrote a Spectator cover story calling Blair a liar and charging that he chaired the meeting where it was decided to reveal David Kelly's name, which led to his suicide. Al Campbell's diaries also shed some light on the matter. The spin counter attack was fierce, Oborne was ferociously rubbished by Blairites, in retrospect the critical paragraph of Oborne's piece appears verified by Blair himself.

But it seems impossible to avoid the conclusion, on the basis of the evidence before the inquiry, that Tony Blair personally played the primary executive role in the sequence of events that led to the naming of Dr Kelly and onwards to his death in an Oxfordshire field. Two or three days after Kelly’s suicide, the Prime Minister was asked, ‘Did you authorise anyone in Downing Street or in the Ministry of Defence to release David Kelly’s name?’ He replied: ‘Emphatically not.’ He was asked again: ‘Why did you authorise the naming of David Kelly?’ He answered: ‘That is completely untrue.’ It is said around Whitehall that these two responses form no part of Lord Hutton’s investigation, since the Prime Minister uttered them after Dr Kelly’s death. I have racked my brains over Tony Blair’s answers for ages, but have been unable to avoid the conclusion that he was lying.

Under pressure witnesses tell police interviewers or cross-examining barristers the truth inadvertently. Being grilled by Paxman is exactly like that, did Blair let the truth slip under pressure on live TV?

UPDATE: Michael Ancram has written to Blair asking him to clarify his comments.

Verdict: Howard

2005-04-22T20:03:00.000+01:00

Diabolical. Blair doesn't know how many immigrants are already here and Howard doesn't know how many they'd allow in. Paxman was loving every second of it, clearly. A word to the wise, Michael: "people", "example" and "ample" are not the best words to enable you to come across well on TV. If he gets in on May 5th then I'm moving into Phil Collins' vacated abode.

Err, did you make a cup tea at some point? Howard said the numbers would be less than currently and that he thought it would be less than the estimated 150,000 officially allowed in by Labour. The CBI boss of bosses disagrees, Digby Jones thinks the same as this son of immigrants - we need able workers, we don't need welfare funded immigrants. So let 'em all come - for work, not welfare. Some countries demand that you bring an amount of cash and a ticket home if you want a work permit. Why not here? Why can't genuine refugees get work permits? I don't understand why they are not allowed to work, many want to work and they should be allowed to do so.

Mrs Fawkes was horrified by Howard's pledge to tear up the UN Refugee Convention, but even Blair himself said that it is outdated.

I don't think they'd let you in to Switzerland.

So you thought it was a good performance from Howard? I'm not disputing that willingness to work is a pre-requisite but under Howard's proposals it's not an issue. You can't argue with maths. Blair expressed an opinion on it with the scope for reform. Howard simply proposed to withdraw, which would rank the UK alongside such tolerant and democratic regimes as Saudi Arabia and North Korea.

My residency will not be an issue on May 6 as Howard has as much chance of becoming Prime Minister as I have of been elected the next Pope (and besides it's EEA, but that's not the point...).

I think Paxo rattled Blair and Kennedy much more than Howard. The truth is that is that many so-called refugees are actually economic migrants. I don't have a problem with that. "You can't argue with maths." What are you talking about? I'd like to argue it, but I have no idea what you are saying.

Woy Jenkins took the same view as Howard does today thirty years ago. What has changed?

Well, of course. Kennedy has much to be rattled about and Blair is quite flappable as he remains incredulous as to why anyone could see the world differently from him. Howard took it in his stride as he's been there before and even tried to turn the tables on Paxman at one point. My point about maths was the once an upper limit was fixed, genuine refugees would be turned away because a numerical upper limit was in place. My stance on immigration is not only concerned with people fleeing regimes but also people fleeing poverty, so your point about economic migrants means nothing to me. There is a case for relaxed immigration controls on humane grounds but more practically it would also allow for more focused efforts on tackling the inter-related worlds of drug-related crime and the sex traffic trade. In many cases the police simply don't know who's here being exploited or doing the exploiting. So both Howard and Blair are being driven into a cul-de-sac.

Getting back to Howard's performance, pieces of paper: what was that all about? Who cares what Roy Jenkins said 30 years ago? We're talking about now. To me it just showed someone grasping for justification from elsewhere as he knows his party is now more associated with the BNP's new-found mantra of "They're thinking what we're thinking".

Well Hellloooo There!

2005-04-22T15:11:00.000+01:00

Hey ladies, it's the Lib Dems! And they're very persuasive, apparently, if you catch my drift.

And if you don't take a fancy to Charles, Ed or Vince, there's always ~~Paul~~.

Now here's a popular guy. If you catch my drift.

So I am a leftie after all... I'm glad that's been confirmed

2005-04-22T13:42:00.000+01:00

Here's a test that more accurately measures your political opinion on the basis of MPs' votes rather than on party lines. It also cleverly tells you how you compare with your local MP and who you should vote for - in policy terms rather than tactical voting terms.

recessmonkey@gmail.com

It's Easy Enough, Surely?

2005-04-22T10:25:00.000+01:00

Look, does anyone know what their party's policy on Council Tax is?

Charles Kennedy didn't seem to that day. Michael Howard is against a revaluation legislated for by the government he served in and following a policy he formulated. And now this.

Wake me up when somebody does something competent, please.

A Little Local Difficulty

2005-04-21T23:46:00.000+01:00

Politics really is just one continuous slap in the face as far as the Hartlepool Tories are concerned.

Murdoch Sews Up Channel 5 Licence

2005-04-21T08:19:00.000+01:00

Verdict: Blair

2005-04-20T22:54:00.000+01:00

Blair: fazed by own party's policy on Council Tax, couldn't say why he disagreed with Local Income Tax. Appeared to be looking over his shoulder when probed on handover to Brown and even seemed to sneer a little over the whole unity thing.

Paxman: at least seemed as if he wanted to be there, unlike with Kennedy. But also seemed a little weary in parts, has Charles Kennedy roped him into early morning childcare duties or something? Ah wait, he's storing it all up for Howard on Friday, as he knows we all remember Derek Lewis.

Blair was asked EIGHTEEN TIMES how many illegal immigrants are in Britain — but refused to give a straight answer. Asked to reveal the number of failed asylum seekers, the PM insisted it was “pointless speculating.” Paxo doggedly refused to let it drop, asking for a “rough idea” — then demanding: “Is it tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands? Millions?”

Mr Blair floundered: “I’ve said, I don’t think there’s any point in speculating. I . . .”

Paxman: “But you have no idea.”

Blair: “Well, it’s not a question of having no idea.”

Paxman: “Prime Minister . . .”

Blair: “. . . and what is the backlog, and we are dealing with all of those issues.”

Paxman: “Prime Minister, you have really no idea of how many failed asylum seekers there are illegally in this country.”

Blair: “I can’t . . .”

Paxman: “You don’t know.”

Blair: “. . . because people are here illegally . . .”

Paxman: “You don’t know.”

Blair: “. . . it is difficult, for the very reason that . . .”

Paxman: “You don’t know.”

Blair: “Hang on, for the very reason that the previous government gave, you cannot determine specifically, how many people are here illegally.”

Paxman: “You have no idea.”

Blair: “What you can say is, here are the number of people that are actually currently applying for asylum . . .”

Paxman: “Yes.”

Blair: “This is the backlog of claims that you’re dealing with. And these are the people who are being removed from the country.”

Paxman: “Do people not come to you and say, we think Prime Minister there may be 100,000 or 200,000 or 50,000 or 500,000.”

Blair: “We . . . it, they, they don’t come and say that, what they . . .”

Paxman: “So you have no idea.”

Blair: “ . . . do say is. No, hang on a minute . . . ”

My advice to Howard is have a sore throat on Friday or crack some joke that blunts any machine gun rapid fire question repetition.

Whatever figure he'd given would have been too many as far as some were concerned. Surely it's better to look like a lemon than create a rod for your own back? Politicians aren't generally known for giving straight answers.

I know it's the political equivalent of yelling 'Freebird!' at a concert, but it would be good if Paxman could repeatedly question Howard about the former MP for Arundel and South Downs, perhaps even going so far as to ponder if as party leader he'd "threatened to overule" the association chairman.

Cannabis Candidate in Canterbury

2005-04-20T20:44:00.000+01:00

The Legalise Cannabis Alliance are like, you know, having a laugh. So you know, Vote Rocky. Man.

Canterbury, Canterbury... that constituency sticks in my mind, for some reason. Who's the Labour candidate there again?

Murdoch 'swayed by Toynbee'

2005-04-20T20:37:00.000+01:00

There simply cannot be any other explaination and if there is, I'm not buying it.

'The Sun backs Blair'

Defection 'a devolved matter' - Prescott

2005-04-20T13:59:00.000+01:00

An amusing transcript of John Prescott's weary visit to the valleys today.

Though "Bugger off - get on your bus you amateur" is surely one of the key quotes of the campaign thus far.

What's the betting this won't be printed on the Prescott Express campaign site?

False Prophets Beware

2005-04-20T12:12:00.000+01:00

Events in Bethnal Green and Bow take a bizarre turn.

'Hate mob attacks Galloway' - Evening Standard
'Islamists' hit Galloway meeting' - BBC News

Backing Clare

2005-04-19T13:08:00.000+01:00

Backing Blair have heeded some of the 'advice' given to them over the past week and revised their strategy it seems.

However, there's some who'd need a (legalised) handgun pointed in their face before they voted for Kate Hoey and they're Labour Party members (particularly the ones who lie and say they live in Streatham CLP). A few years ago rumours abounded that this was the most popular website in her Westminster office.

Kate Hoey at least thinks for herself, unlike the Blair clones who just do as they are told and vote on message 100%. The odious George Galloway would be almost worth voting for just to get rid of Oona for that very reason.

You're just trying to provoke me here, aren't you?

I am sure that Hoey's independent spirit was a wonderful discovery after being sacked as Minister for Sport. Remember, this is a woman who not only shifted allegiance in football teams, but also sides in the Northern Ireland dispute.

Something Fishy for Breakfast?

2005-04-19T10:27:00.000+01:00

You are a businessmen, you give a £50,000 donation to the Labour party, you get to have a business breakfast with the Prime Minister, you give a second donation of £50,000 to the Labour party while the government is weighing up who should be awarded a £32m contract you are bidding on. Surprise, you get awarded the contract, you make £20m profit on it. What value for money for the taxpayer, what a return on investment!

Loaded now, you give another £500,000 donation to New Labour, and get made a life peer by Mr Blair six weeks later. The amazing life and times of Paul Drayson and Tony Blair...

Now voters might want to find out what that breakfast meeting was about, that is after all what the Freedom of Information Act is all about. Was something fishy on the menu? We the people like to see what are rulers are up to, what deals they make, after all its our democracy innit? Ms Abraham the parliamentary ombudswoman agrees: "I consider that very little harm would be caused by the release of the comments attributed to [Lord Drayson] and that any potential harm is outweighed by the public interest in making that information available."

The government claims to have shredded documents that could have revealed why the now Lord Drayson received the invitation from Downing St. The Cabinet Office said: "Any other relevant documents had been routinely weeded and destroyed in accordance with normal records management and destruction policy".

Hey, that's politics with integrity...

I'm more impressed with this man's 1990 Candy Flip-style haircut. No wonder he owns a drugs company.

Many Rivers of Blood to Cross

2005-04-19T10:23:00.000+01:00

To paraphrase a BMA slogan of the late 80s, what do you call a man who ignores grandees' advice? Michael Howard.

I'd get that dog-whistle fixed, Lynton.

According to the Guardian. Do you think Tory leaders should follow Guardianista prescriptions the way Blair does as Murdoch tells him? (Incidentally, all you Labour voters hoping to vote Blair get Brown, Blair has apparently assured Murdoch that he will serve the full 4 year term.)

No, or else Howard Flight would still be an MP.

Letwinomics

2005-04-19T01:26:00.000+01:00

Labour and the LibDems stand accused of dirty tricks after pointing out that the Tory spending plans are £15bn short. A Tory insider, who refused to be named, told Recess Monkey, “We believe Labour and the LibDems are using a secret, computer-based system known only as “arithmetic” to find holes in our spending plans. Our treasury team has been alerted to the existence of this secret “arithmetic” software and we hope to incorporate it into Letwinomics before the 2009 General Election.”

One Tory’s spending plans are clearer than those provided through Letwinomics. Redbridge Councillor Lee Scott hopes to take the Labour marginal of Ilford North on May 5. So confident is he of a win that his wife is already telling people that she will be working for him in the Palace of Westminster. Although Lee seems to be banking on an impending pay rise already, pensioners in Redbridge are not so lucky after he, as a Councillor, doubled the maximum charges for Home Care Services for the elderly and disabled from £5,000 to £10,000 per year.

Hold on, last week Ed balls, Gordon's annointed amongst us, claimed after weeks of alleging that the Tories had a "secret agenda" to cut £35 billion, that by 2008 a Conservative government would be spending £15 billion a year more than Labour. The flip just flopped. What is the current state of the smear? Black-hole? Cuts? Short-fall or over-spend? Could you all stick to one consistent smear. Argue amongst yourselves if you like. If you can't agree, best you 'do a Letwin' and disappear for the rest of the campaign.

Tory Apparatchiks Hoodwink Dimbleby

2005-04-19T01:10:00.000+01:00

I have just watched the end of Jonathan Dimbleby's election programme with Michael Howard. Someone raised the issue of the Tory private healthcare voucher scheme. After getting a bit of a kicking and vigourously defending this state subsidy for those who go private, Howard got a break when JD asked the audience who liked the idea.

After a moment of silence, a voice piped up and the camera zoomed in a young lady who proceeded to endorse the vouchers and Michael Howard.

Funnily enough, I know this young lady, whom I first met in the Red Lion. She was introduced to me by Annesley Abercorn, the chap who successfully organised a Tory fundraiser at Stringfellows.

The young lady's name escapes me, but I do recall that she's a confirmed member of the Conservative Party and employed at Conservative Campaign Headquarters during the election.

I was desperately fumbling with my phone so I could take a picture of her for you but couldn't work it out before she was off screen. But not to worry, I've found a picture of her behind Howard's right shoulder at his campaign launch on 5th April.

Strangely, Michael Howard failed to recognise this girl who has been working in his office - either that or he was deliberately trying to mislead the public by having well-briefed, planted apparatchiks in the audience. If you know the name of the girl involved in this subterfuge, do remind me.

Hmmm. Tory in Audience of Political Programme during Election Campaign Shocker!
All parties try to get their people in the audience Recess, don't they?

The thing I don't understand about all this Tories will Privatise the NHS stuff is that I thought it was New Labour policy. Choice, private sector, profits etcetera. Thatcher never dared, but Milburn and Blair, they've already got operations paid for by the NHS being done in the private sector - sometimes even in France or Germany. What's the difference? Wittily, Michael Howard has even signed Labour's Keep the NHS free petition. Ha!

(I recognise that girl's face. Great pair of legs too if I recall correctly).

Verdict: Kennedy

2005-04-18T23:10:00.000+01:00

Lightweight. Paxman asked routine questions about health problems, Council Tax, gravitas. Couldn't even fudge the regressive sting of a big bang local income tax. Acknowledged he'll never be PM because of the electoral system.

That Respect Manifesto in Full

2005-04-18T13:16:00.000+01:00

And the award for most predictable preamble in history goes to...

"As we have seen over the war on Iraq, there is a huge democratic deficit in Britain. Millions marched against the invasion and millions more opposed it. Yet their wishes were ignored, while those of George Bush were dutifully carried out."

The IFS have probably got better things to do with their time but page 18 reads like Andy Gilchrist's restaurant bill spending commitment-wise.

Of course, 'anti-war party to contest some seats' is not likely to garner much attention, so what better way to do that than threaten legal action against someone. It was an illegal war and this will be an illegal election etc. Galloway must love that witness box.

As another blog is fond of pointing out, George might get to spend a lot of time with the caller on line two after May 5th. And if he doesn't win, it's a fix.

And watch this space too.

Sleepwalking to Victory II

2005-04-18T11:24:00.000+01:00

Quite. Though this problem among the ancillary arm of the entertainment industry could be neatly got around by simply making this chap Leader of the Lib Dems. As reluctant liberal AN Wilson commented in the Evening Standard recently, the current postholder isn't really up to appearing on the chatshows he's so derided for, never mind being an MP. Not surprisingly, I've heard this said among one or two active Lib Dems too, albeit with a few caveats attached.

Sedgefield Strife

2005-04-18T09:42:00.000+01:00

Ramsay MacDonald was defeated whilst Prime Minister in a North Eastern constituency we are reminded by Derek Cattell, a member of Sedgefield Labour Party’s executive committee for ten years, who is quitting in protest at the Iraq war which he says raises questions about the "honesty and integrity" of Mr Blair’s leadership.

Derek Cattell, who is also a regional organiser with the GMB union, is putting his weight behind Reg Key's campaign, saying he can't vote through gritted teeth for Blair. The anti-Blair feeling in his own constituency went largely un-reported outside the left-wing press, but in late March protestors assembled outside Trimdon Labour Club to lobby the A.G.M. of Sedgefield Constituency Labour Party, (the people who select Blair), where an increasingly vocal anti-Blair, anti-New Labour element is feeling the full weight of a New Labour counter-attack. Veteran Labour party members are excluded from meetings and dissenters are given the full treatment in the way that only comrades can.

Reg Keys, the father of a British soldier killed in Iraq, is standing for election in the Prime Minister's constituency. He says: "the last time I saw my son, Tom, was at a railway station when he marched off down the platform with his head held high, proud to do his duty for his country. He believed what he was told. But the Prime Minister misled the country, and Tom and 84 other soldiers who had their oaths of allegiance betrayed came home in coffins - having died for a lie. It's time to bring accountability back into British politics."

Guido is pleased to report that David Shayler has stood down in favour of Reg Key's campaign and that the Reg Keys for Sedgefield Campaign is picking up most of the disgruntled Labour voters. Still no sign of a white suit, yet...

My only problem with what you've just written is that this guy you're referring to is no big-hitter (there's only one big-hitter allowed in Sedgefield and that's John Burton, Blair's Agent, for whom the phrase about fish and ponds automatically springs to most people's minds), pretty much someone who could be relied upon to sit on a committee of 20 and turn up for meetings that the rest of humanity couldn't be arsed with. If a senior officer of Blair's local party had resigned, then OK. But as it stands, meh.

Actually, no, my other problem is that the Tories would have taken us to war on less of a premise, as it happens. Even then, if they'd been in power between 2001 and now we wouldn't even know what that premise was because of a lack of freedom of information legislation (so-called freedom of information legislation, as Howard would probably refer to it). The Tories' opposition to war is based purely on the grounds that they weren't the ones who started it. So let's have a debate among the other candidates in Blair's constituency about it, not just focus ire on one individual.

Are You Caning What We're Caning?

2005-04-17T16:36:00.000+01:00

Guido holds forth on the sneakily-announced attack on yoof sub-culture by the hordes of kill-joy Lighthouse Family fans.

I can't stand mushrooms in any form and hallucinogens haven't really held any appeal for me since the last Tory government ceased to exist and reality wasn't so unbearable for alienated youth, but that's no reason to ban them. Considering Alastair Campbell's declared loathing of the Daily Mail, it's surprising that the Labour Party is appearing so desperate to embrace its agenda with a policy that Melanie Phillips herself could have written.

It'll merely reinforce the Labour Party's perception as 'enemy of the student' as well, though as the Fiend points out, the Lib Dems' hopes of galvanising that section of the electorate is not without problems.

Incumbent Embarrassment

2005-04-15T20:07:00.000+01:00

Bob Spink, MP for Castle Point has decided to break all decent boundaries and announce "What part of "send them back" do you not understand?" in his local press. Although this has been received with outrage across the country, voters in Canvey Island are supporting their incumbent... however they think he's referring to people from Benfleet.

Michael Howard has so far refused to sack Spink, even though he is quite patently a scumbag.

Recess Monkey is offering a prize for the best guess at Spink's next campaign, but I think I may have won already with...

"It's not racist to hate brown people"

Meanwhile, in deepest Wantage, Tory hopeful and former Equitable Life lobbyist Ed Vaizey is under fire for his racist contribution.

The poster is in the village of Faringdon. The caucasian woman at the front is the Mayor of the town. The residents include the main supersmarket owner who has been in the town for 33 years, some nurses and the owner of the only two Indian restaurants in the area.

Recess Monkey's campaign for this week is to encourage readers to email Ed asking him to remove the poster and perhaps advising him where he should put it.

Ed's email address is ed@wantageconservatives.com

And tell you what Ed, as a favour to you for not suing me over this, despite telling me you would, I promise not to ask you which of Michael Howard's speeches opposing the declassification of cannabis were written by you - as long as you take down and publicly disown that disgusting poster.

Calm down, its only an advertisement dear. Are you saying that immigration is not a topic to be discussed and if you do it is racist? Or are you just getting hot and indignant for political gain? Are you really suggesting that a dripping wet like Vaizey is racist? You just made up that stupid "It's not racist to hate brown people" quote - have a drink - get some rest. I've met the Labour candidate for Wantage and see he's standing on the right in the picture, (nice guy, but a bit posh for me). Would he be the person opening fire on Vaizey? I pity people who throw out the word "racist" so readily when there is so much real bigotry about. It devalues the term.

FACT: The party with the most ethnic minority candidates is.. the Conservative Party.

Hang on a minute, Recess made a perfectly valid point about Bob Spink (a vile and utterly contemptous individual for his racist sales pitch, BTW) and you're trying to paint the Tories as the party most committed to ethnic minority representation? I'm actually quite alarmed at the impunity with which the Tories see fit to band around such racist propaganda as part of their mainstream these days. We're not talking about some swivel-eyed loons addressing a private meeting of the Monday Club either -- 'Are You Thinking What We're Thinking?' was the slogan of the Front National in France last time round.

Your point about ethnic candidates is not lost on me though. I think the Labour Party are beginning to wake up to the fact that their system doesn't deliver on this front but hey, it's the election, so maybe next time, yeah? To think that a rather ambitious Labour member said to me a couple of years back that times couldn't be any worse for white males wanting to be selected.

I have no idea what Recess is going on about regarding Bob Spink. Under the heading "Stop Asylum Abuse" It reads: "Bob leads the fight in parliament to stop asylum cheats. If we don't act, nasty fringe parties will. Labour has tripled illegal immigration and only one in five failed asylum seekers is removed. What bit of 'send them back' don't you understand Mr Blair?"

Spink adds in an interview "If the [main] political parties don't act on this issue then right wing parties will rise in popularity. That would be bad for everyone."

Terrible? Are you aware that Mr Blair does actually understand? It is in fact a Labour Party manifesto commitment to "send 'em back". Does Recess support Labour party policy on immigration? The rhetoric is tough, the difference is that the Tories will actually do it, Labour will just say they will do it. Let there be no doubt, Labour policy on failed asylum seekers is "send 'em back." Blunkett makes it clear in interviews that he meant it.

Guido is a believer in free trade and free markets, a crucial element of which is free migration. So open the borders to all who want to come and contribute by all means, just don't give out any welfare benefits. What aggravates the white working classes, hard working asians, blacks and everyone else, is that they not only do they have to compete with new arrivals in the labour force, but they have to queue with them at the benefits office and in the NHS GP's surgery. That perception is the main reason why racist parties thrive in low income areas and not high income areas - regardless of the actual racial mix.

"Proud of Britain" is an old NF slogan and Labour's new election slogan - so what if its true that the Jean Marie Le Pen's FN used "Are you Thinking what We're Thinking" - it is also a lyric from the theme tune for the kids TV show the "Banana bunch".

So Labour use an old NF slogan with a Union Jack Flag background and have a policy of sending back asylum seekers. In reality, only the LibDems have a liberal immigration policy.

You don't have to convince me that Labour's knee-jerk capitulation on immigration is short-sighted and shameful but we're talking about the Tories here and their pathological obsession over immigration, one or two MPs in particular. By giving credence to the term "send em' back", Spink gives cover to more overt racists. It's gutter politics really. I thought the Tories were supposed to be genteel and possess airs and graces but they even make this Northern comprehensive school lad wince with their scuzziness.

The Flat Rate Tax Rocks

2005-04-15T13:25:00.000+01:00

Veritas is positioning itself as anti-EU, anti-immigration and pro-flat-rate-tax. That flat-rate-tax idea rocks, any betting the Tories will probably have it as policy in 2010?

The idea is being pushed by the Adam Smith Institute, maybe it won't be government policy on May 6, but in 2011 it has a good chance of making it to the statute books. The Economist has it as the cover story. So Veritas is on the cutting edge of policy here, if not in other areas.

Progressive taxation is so 20th Century, tax competition is where its at in Europe.

I dunno, I mean I just can't dissociate flat taxes from either Ross Perot or the US Libertarian Party. It's a minority cause among the GOP too. In fact, the only person I've heard advocate it recently in the US was the fat bald loser character on King of The Hill.

With that in mind, are you suggesting that one of Britain's two main parties is only a couple of years away from shattering the '3% either way' consensus around maintaining the tax system in its current form and about to propose something which will be panned as the national equivalent of Margaret Thatcher's much-hated Poll Tax? You might pine for a flat tax yourself but I think you're over-inflating the market for take-up within the self-professed wimpish Tory Party. Even Maurice Saatchi's proposals from a few years back were largely ignored as too radical for the party to countenance (Tax Freedom Day Bank Holiday included, it seems).

The Economist used its front page to call for an end to the British monarchy a few years ago. Sadly, it didn't happen.

Or I could be wrong in my refusal to think out of the box and Kilroy might yet be hailed as a pioneer of something with obvious appeal to the British public. But you're assuming that the Tories will have dragged themselves out of their current disarray by 2011.

Steve Forbes, is the main U.S. advocate for a flat tax. A bald (close) loser in the GOP primaries in 2000, perhaps you have him confused. You Whitehall types need to pay more attention, flat tax is now the system of choice for the New European democracies Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia - with opposition parties in a number of other countries adopting it as policy. Lets not forget Jersey, Hong Kong and Guernsey. The flat tax is simpler, fairer, more efficient, and better for the economy. Flat Tax in Britain is going to happen.

Kilroy is just a trend chaser, he sees which way the wind is blowing... Whatever happened to Tax Freedom Day?

Well, we've adopted New Europe's hatred of romany folk so a flat tax might not be such a big step after all. But the Community Charge factor would still weigh heavily in any public debate so I remain to be convinced. I mean, there was a riot in 1990 only metres away from where I'm sitting over the mere idea that millionaires should pay the same rate of local taxation as the less well off.

I really enjoyed being on that riot.

Unwittingly, you initiated a sequence of events that was to prove a formative political experience for a pre-teen Peter Cuthbertson then (or so he used to state in his biog). Rock on!

Does He Talk Like That At Home?

2005-04-15T12:18:00.000+01:00

Answer me this: has John O' Farrell ever said something that wasn't attached to some witty pun? Take this latest Labour email for instance:

"But this weekend you could be one of thousands of Labour supporters across the country descending on Labour's key seats. This looks set to be an even greater mass mobilisation of political activists than the rush to join Robert Kilroy-Silk's Veritas Party. Think of Mao's long march; think of the unemployed walking from Jarrow. Your trip to South Dorset will one day rank alongside such epic treks in the history of ~~socialism~~. (Every time I try and type that word the head office computer crosses it out)."

Lest I risk sounding like someone in a student's union with my own witty admonishment, oh, the mirth!

Update: Chicken Yoghurt does a better demolition job.

Where Do I Sign?

2005-04-15T10:55:00.000+01:00

Noel Gallagher has come up with possibly the most compelling argument to vote Labour. Ever.

"Another reason to vote Labour is if you f**king don't and the Conservatives get in Phil Collins is threatening to come back and live here. And let's face it, none of us want that."

I'd also vote for any party that promises not to allow Phil Collins through our sacrosanct borders.

Hmmm, you have a point.

Dave Spart Blogs

2005-04-14T12:00:00.000+01:00

Not quite, but Respect candidates Lindsey German and Tom Woodcock are, showing that Tony Blair and Charles Kennedy can't hog cyberspace.

Lib Dems in Axe Council Tax Shocker!

2005-04-14T11:33:00.000+01:00

Anyone who believes that political life today is the manifestation of style over substance really ought to read the Rich Text File version of the Lib Dems' manifesto, which is going for a very retro mid-1990s effect.

That said, 'Battlebus' would have made a good name for an election blog, as opposed to the one we thought up one night over drinks in Soho. You should have seen the ones we didn't use.

Update: At the opposite end of the Euro spectrum, Veritas also launched their manifesto today. Apparently they "won't allow British people to be intimidated by the political elite telling us what to think and say." and want a flat tax.

Brillo

2005-04-13T19:43:00.000+01:00

"I wondered if you had any recent examples of this?"

My colleague Guido and The Guardian's Election Blog on the apparent never-ending shame of Andrew Neil.

11,000 Reasons Not to Vote Labour

2005-04-13T19:29:00.000+01:00

That's actually not my opinion but the Tory response to this news is breath-taking in its avoidance of one or two certain facts. Two Brains says:

"On the day they launch their election manifesto, Government figures show unemployment has risen by another 30,000 last quarter. And as if the troubles at Rover weren't bad news enough, another 14,000 manufacturing jobs were lost."

As with Rover and wars in the Gulf, they probably shouldn't draw too much attention to their own track record in this area. Or is that all water under the bridge now?

Banned?

2005-04-13T18:28:00.000+01:00

Up and coming pop groups used to like to get publicity for themselves by getting banned. The new Tory campaign video is allegedly not for TV broadcast because its too controversial and personal. Not sure about that myself. See it for yourself - Liam Fox emailed it to me. Where is the director's cut version?

They Lost On Points

2005-04-13T15:39:00.000+01:00

Hon. Fiend gives his take on the manifesto, pretty much arriving at the same conclusion as me in that if 1983 represented "the longest suicide note in history", then you'll just want to commit suicide out of sheer boredom after reading this offensively-anodyne document.

Where I depart from Fiend is that the section on immigration is a thoroughly shameful aping of Tory policy on the introduction of a points system. Some might say that's not so much yawn-inducing as vomit-inducing in its grasp for populist approval. So much for choice.

However, that's not how the Evening Standard sees it, given its 1992-esque lead article tonight. Why don't they just admit they're Tories?

Update: Thanks for pointing out that the Standard subsequently toned down the anti-Labour rhetoric and injected some equivocacy into what ran in the final edition. Is Veronica Wadley wobbling in her bid to be the next Paul Dacre?

D-Day

2005-04-13T14:54:00.000+01:00

The 2005 UK General Election Blog reports that Ladbrokes have Davis and Letwin down as the Tories most likely to lose their seats on May 5. Not so much a clinical decapitation strategy as the Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

I've always has Davis down as the kind of no-nonsense politician who appeals to that most militant variant of Daily Mail reader who spends every weekend in B+Q and fantasises about Charlie Dimmock, but a Tory moderniser recently tried to convince me that Davis has a socially liberal side and he's a leader they could do business under. The evidence for this was Davis giving houseroom to a scandal-hit gay Tory once.

Someone better tell the people who run the Ditch Davis! site that's sprung up then, as they list one of the reasons to defenestrate the Shadow Home Secretary as him being "opposed to equality for homosexuals: he voted against the abolition of Section 28 and equalising the age of consent". Obviously homosexuality is only permissible for Top Tories and not the rest of society in his worldview.

Four More Years

2005-04-13T14:34:00.000+01:00

The Tories' rather bland new cinema ad.

I'd like to see the one Lynton Crosby wanted to use.

Cldn't Give a XXXX 4 Lst Ordrs?

2005-04-12T22:10:00.000+01:00

It only took four years but better late than never.

(it's the only way you'll ever catch me in one of those places too)

On Message?

2005-04-12T21:49:00.000+01:00

You decide:

56K Dial-up
100K Broadband

(needs Real Player)

Tory Web Jape

2005-04-12T13:57:00.000+01:00

Winchester Tories are seeking payback for Gerry Malone in 1997.

Mark Oaten reckons it's "pretty pathetic".

See for yourself at www.markoaten.co.uk (as opposed to www.markoaten.com).

'Trick' election website blasted'

Spinning From Their Graves

2005-04-12T10:42:00.000+01:00

Hat-tip to Respect Watch for alerting us to the Respect election address for Tottenham (PDF), which makes the bizarre claim that if Bernie Grant was still with us he'd support Respect.

Obviously if Enoch Powell was still alive he'd be endorsing Ukip. Or so goes the logic.

Is your one of your local candidates making bizarre claims of beyond the grave endorsements? If so, email us at doris.stokes@returningofficer.com

There's Something About Gordon

2005-04-11T16:03:00.000+01:00

Tony Blair has David Shayler and Reg Keys standing against him.

Jack Straw has his work cut out defending his majority against an ex-employee.

Peter Hain shares the Neath contest with the Pot Pensioner.

There's even a tactical voting site against Alan Milburn and Oona King is not without her troubles.

So why then is no one planning to take on Gordon? Well, unless you count this guy. Even so, is he that much of the nice guy of British politics that he's above being taken out?

New Kid's On The Blog

2005-04-11T15:13:00.000+01:00

Mrs Fawkes delivered Ms Fawkes, after 27 hours in labour, on Sunday. Born within the sound of Big Ben's Bells at St Thomas's Hospital, opposite the Houses of Parliament. Guido is lost for words at the sight of his 7lb 6 oz's of pure cliché.

It should be pointed out that Guido is not the only recent father as my household was increased by one, 10 days ago, with the arrival of Rafael into this world (doing my bit for Anglo-Brazilian relations). Hence the increase in bloggage over paternity leave period that will cease now I am back at work and immersed in analysing the Tory manifesto and the wash-up Acts.

It must be something about blogging and fatherhood as these guys also had a recent arrival themselves.

So now they know the real reason virile bloggers wear pyjamas.

Kennedy's wife goes into hospital to give birth and he launches a blog, on the same day? There's something going on here.

And no jokes about her going into Labour, please.

Jack Straw's Castle

2005-04-11T12:28:00.000+01:00

The ex-diplomat standing against Jack Straw in Blackburn, Craig Murray, now has his own blog.

Coming to a Marginal Near You

2005-04-11T11:32:00.000+01:00

Eggs at t' ready, it's the John Prescott Express. Stand by for such interesting campaign snippets as:

"John was not campaigning today because of the Pope’s funeral."

Banana Republican

2005-04-10T18:26:00.000+01:00

A few days ago, we posted about John Hemming (Deputy Leader of Birmingham City Council and Lib Dem PPC for Birmingham Yardley) and his Quixotic bid to bring about a judicial review on the use of postal votes in the General Election.

Rightly or wrongly, Cllr Hemming requests that those interested take a look at his blog for more adequate context.

Hain In The Rear

2005-04-10T17:33:00.000+01:00

On first glance, Peter Hain's remarks about the Shiraz-quaffing dinner party set would appear to be yet another New Labour attack dog concentrating more on lashing out at what should be his own side rather than the Tories (aping Aaronovitch, basically, though we've heard it all before with that "forces of conservatism" speech). However, it's no secret that Hain is widely-despised among the more solidly right-wing folk within the Labour Party for being part of 'Liberals for Labour' and his remarks might be more in mind with what might happen after the General Election than before it.

One person's intervention in the electoral process within Hain's own backyard might make the downgrading of cannabis more of an election issue than he would have wished, not least because it wasn't exactly universally popular with his Cabinet colleagues and it might see his own liberalism pushed to its limits. Or something.

Never A Frown

2005-04-10T11:32:00.000+01:00

When they airbrushed Blair off those leaflets, they really meant it, you know.

Elsewhere, there's a bit of a to-do over Lib Dem spending commitments.

'Blair's deal to stitch up leadership for Brown'

Are Ya Awwwrrrrriggghhht?

2005-04-09T16:08:00.000+01:00

Seeing as no one else has mentioned it, it was on this day 13 years ago that Britain went to the polls in a General Election.

If you want to seriously kick it old skool web-wise then here you go. For those who are too young to remember, this video clip will help.

A prize of some description to the first person to argue that the Sheffield Rally's historically-perceived effect on the outcome for Labour is a 'myth'.

Helpful Herbert

2005-04-09T09:17:00.000+01:00

Owing to "ideological differences" and time constraints, it's probably best if me and Guido don't get into a debate on here over the rights and possible wrongs of Nick Herbert's selection as the stand-in for Howard Flight last night, but here's a round up of the blogland reaction to this piece of inevitable news:

Guido liked it.
Stephen Pollard liked it even more.
Tory Trouble also liked it, but for possibly different reasons that aren't too hard to discern, as did these chaps.
Paul Anderson seemingly didn't like it.

Either way, I agree with my co-blogger that it's a shame that the Tories can't stand for elections on tax-cutting platforms anymore.

What's the big deal? Tories aim to cut taxes, Socialists aim to raise taxes. This is news?

Who are these 'Socialists' you speak of, sir? BTW, aiming is not the same as doing. Labour cut the basic rate of income tax twice. There's little left for the Tories to consider, any cuts would have to be drastic to yield any direct benefit for anyone.

The Labour party constitution still says its a socialist party. (My grandmother would never allow us to say 'socialist' in the house. "I won't have that kind of language under my roof", she used to say, "Call them 'bastards' instead.")

We could start saving by closing down Ms Hewitt's DTI before she closes down the rest of British manufacturing industry. That should save a few hundred million in taxes (on electric lighting alone). In fact I think that is actually LibDem policy. We could also get rid of half-a-million bureaucrats off the back of the tax-paying workers without too much trouble.

Taxes are up and incomes are down, except for the ultra-rich. The bottom 20% of earners pay a higher proportion of their income in tax than those on average incomes, because they pay disproportionate amounts of indirect taxes. Why should the lowest earners subsidise means-tested benefits, such as Gordon's Working Tax Credit which is available to people earning £55,000 a year after its been expensively administered by bureaucrats? Tax cuts work for workers. Raising tax thresholds to £10,000 would take a million people out of the tax-man's clutches. Simple.

'Bastards' like Harold Macmillan then? Labour's constitution might say it's a democratic socialist party (and even then, the Clause IV provision that states it was 'seived' substantially compared to the previously overt one) but it's just a party of individual socialists (unless you follow Herbert Morrison's maxim that 'socialism is whatever a Labour government does'). After seven years I think it's safe to say that Mr Blair has dropped the pretence and we all know he's content to be the Third Way CEO of UK Plc until the reigns can be handed on ~~to Gordon~~. Aside from that, what you're proposing is not dissimilar from the James Review and, in fairness, you're commenting on Whitehall as it stands pre-May 5. A major shake-up is likely after then.

I actually agree with you to some extent on taxes for the very low paid but I suspect it wasn't those that Messrs Flight and Herbert had in mind, nor Oliver Letwin when he conceded that grassroots Tories, and indeed grandees, were openly referring to him and Howard as "wimps" for not following a more instinctively radical tax-cutting agenda.

Macmillan might have been to the left of Blair, Mandelson, Milburn et al, but he was a Tory. So MIW - you support tax cuts for low earners. Good. What government waste will you cut to finance them cuts?

Macmillan once said that Toryism was "paternal socialism". A meaningful reorganisation of Whitehall could finance these limited tax cuts, yes. So could tax rises for the upper income bracket.

The Other Election

2005-04-07T19:48:00.000+01:00

I couldn't help but raise a wry smirk at tomorrow night's TV listings as BBC2 are showing a film called Kiss Me Guido. Which reminds me, what happened to my co-bloggers Guido and Recess Monkey, both of whom were shortlisted for the Guardian's Political Weblog Awards? They said that the vote was to close on Monday but it seems very much open at the moment and there's no word on a winner.

Guido was way out in front, last time I looked, but along with most of the other shortlisted bloggers withdrew in a token protest, leaving only Recess Monkey on the shortlist. So who wins? The only remaining willing candidate or the unwilling candidate with the most votes? I suspect Guido will raise a yawn at this but for those who voted, well, it would be nice to know the outcome.

Despite a few days of frenetic blogging on their part recently, The Guardian has so far has been silent on the matter. I won't cry 'banana republic' at this stage but I've heard of secret ballots, never secret results.

Labour's Not So Secret Agenda

2005-04-07T19:19:00.000+01:00

The Tories are playing at Labour's own Secret Agenda game. The research unit has identified 200 Labour MPs who actively call for tax rises. And the list, which takes in almost half the parliamentary party, includes the taxer-in-chief Gordon Brown, Alan Milburn, plus another 24 other Labour ministers.

Letwin hyperventilates "This list dramatically exposes Labour's secret agenda to raise taxes. Mr Blair and Mr Brown are both sponsored by a Union that has called for a windfall tax on bank profits."

Letwin wants to know how Labour will plug the "black hole" in Gordon Brown's finances and pay for his bureaucrat's bonanza, Letwin asks "Are these the taxes that Labour will put up, or will it be National Insurance again?"

Sleepwalking to Victory

2005-04-07T17:01:00.000+01:00

Health's an issue in any election campaign, but not usually a party leader's (unless we're talking about Charles Kennedy, of course). So why has the question of 'Howard's cough' seen the polarisation of the fourth estate into their respective camps so early on in the campaign? The Telegraph's attempt to portray their man as a human dynamo having an off day was faintly amusing but the best aspect of the Mirror's story has to be this:

"Aides are worried he could become irritable and start snapping at the public if he is tired or ill."

Aside from the sheer entertainment and political value of such a scenario, even the Telegraph had to muse on the fact that things aren't what they used to be:

"Michael Howard has insisted he is up to the election campaign after it was reported that he can become irritable without a long sleep.

"I'm fine on six hours a night," Mr Howard told GMTV.

Six hours may be less than the eight required for an average person but it compares poorly with the four hours Margaret Thatcher famously needed when she led the party."

If things get really bad, they can always call on Sandra Howard to come out with something in rebuttal.

'HE'S BLOWN IT' - Mirror
'Howard has the stamina' - Telegraph

Tickly cough, eh? Oooh, Terrible. Blair had a bloody heart attack!

That's It Then

2005-04-07T16:47:00.000+01:00

Lib Dem PPC and postal vote obsessive (no, really, he is) John Hemming has used some surplus cash to try and get the General Election postponed.

The Fiend has more on it, including a swipe at Blunkett's frankly bizarre reckoning.

'Legal move threatens to put off poll'

Election Porn

2005-04-07T14:01:00.000+01:00

Still no sign of that Morning Star election blog, but The Spectator get in on the act a little later than everyone else. While it's all very 'modern', I wonder if Andrew Neil will vet the posts personally?

Speaking of whom, The Sun bring some bawdyness to it all by getting the Labour-rooting Page 3 'stunner' to dis-robe (though not in front of Trevor Kavanagh, alas). Prompting one person to remark to me that Alan Milburn is more used to seeing things going tits-up than tits out.

I Name That Demographic in One

2005-04-07T13:54:00.000+01:00

It's enough to give Philip Gould a headache as C1s and C2s are just not enough to base your pitch on these days, you have to get personal.

Thus, these two would probably vote Lib Dem:

"Ben and Chloë are liberal-minded, cosmopolitan people. They include students from the “urban intelligence” group who may still be upset about the Iraq war."

Would probably take an endorsement from Michael Moore to get them to vote Respect. That's a comment, George, not a suggestion.

Another Day

2005-04-07T13:44:00.000+01:00

Another jocular mass-email from John O'Farrell on behalf of the Labour Party, this time imploring members who might be inclined to sit the election out to donate (at least that's the inference I got from the pitch). He signs off:

"P.S. Oh and if you know any Tories, pretend that Labour is only accepting Euros, that'll really wind them up!"

It'd probably wind Gordon up too. And those anti-EU Labour headbanger-types-who-you-would-otherwise-never-have-heard-of. So it deserves to be spread around assiduously. That is all.

Bring Back National Service

2005-04-06T16:06:00.000+01:00

Michael Howard wants to give 'yobs' a "dose of fear", apparently. But why?

"The proliferation of so-called "human rights"; and Mr. Blair's failure to draw a distinction between right and wrong - all this has left Britain unable to get a grip on rising crime and disorder."

If you ever spit out "so-called" during a political argument then you're already on dodgy ground. Fact.

'Howard: Taking a stand against yob families'

Timing is All

2005-04-06T16:02:00.000+01:00

First BNP story of the election so far, not exactly a vote-booster for them.

'BNP leader charged with race hate'

Suspect BNP voters won't be deterred by that story.

They're All At It Now

2005-04-06T12:03:00.000+01:00

The Times joins the Guardian and the BBC in starting up an election blog. I expect the Morning Star are still putting the finishing touches to theirs.

Thought George Galloway might have started one up here, but alas, it is not to be.

Dead-Tree-Press online, weird, The Times call their offering a 'log'. This blog explosion is boring, with everybody canniballistically quoting each other. Still Guido is intrigued to find out who won the Guardian Backbencher's Political weblog awards - polling closed on Monday. You would have thought they might mention it on their shiny new election blog. Wouldn't you?

Particularly as Recess Monkey was the only contestant left after the other nominees jointly withdrew on April Fools Day after the Backbencher told everyone to cheat.

Still Tom Happold reckons its his party and he'll award whomever he wants to. Should be interesting.

Update: anorak-ish Woy Jenkins disciples Make Votes Count now also have a blog. It's remarkably sparky for such a dry subject matter (hat-tip: that metablog)

More: Look, I hate to break it to you, but this isn't a blog. Try harder.

Even More: We already mentioned Red Pepper's own 'spicy' election blog, but here it is again for the sake of comprehensive-ness.

Don't Like Something?

2005-04-06T11:36:00.000+01:00

Just label it as befitting or disgracing a "banana republic" then. It's the political insulte du moment:

"Mr Livingstone is acting more like a 'tin pot dictator' in a banana republic than a responsible leader who listens to what Londoners want," said Conservative congestion charging spokesman Angie Bray."

'Tories criticise mayor over c-charge hike'

In any case, the "Kengestion Charge" is a live political issue where I live as it's on the border of the proposed extension and apparently, my Tory hopeful tells me in his latest e-bulletin, house prices will plummet if it goes ahead. Talk about politics of fear. A good job my landlord doesn't live there then.

And there was me thinking that Banana Republic was a moderately upscale US clothing retailer. I wonder what my banana-fixated co-blogger has to say on the matter?

WTF?

2005-04-06T10:50:00.000+01:00

Respect express solidarity with Gordon Brown and ape the whole Lib Dem "only Respect can win here" refrain? (in a normally safe Labour seat no less)

It could only be George Galloway's address to the good people of Bethnal Green and Bow (PDF).

Oh, but it doesn't stop there. How's this for a vainglorious boast?

"George was in the frontline against the immoral and illegal war in Iraq and was thrown out of the Labour party for doing so. He is, by common consent, the best speaker in the House of Commons. And when he speaks the world listens."

Common consent of who? He's never there! The world listens? Shyeah right, if you say so.

Open-Door Recruitment Policy

2005-04-06T10:02:00.000+01:00

OK, Paul Marsden doesn't want to be a Lib Dem anymore, but it's possible that others might.

To that effect, the party has a PPC's page on its website which lists yellow hopefuls on May 5th. It's just this section of it that's bothering me:

"Interested in standing?

If you are interested in becoming a candidate yourself, please email the Candidates Office (England) or the Scottish or Welsh Liberal Democrats."

Despite the small matter of an important legal deadline, all I can say is go for it, if that's your bag.

Any takers?

LibDems in Election Dirty Tricks Shocker

2005-04-06T00:30:00.000+01:00

After Tory cuts gaffes and Labour's surreptitious audio recordings, the LibDems now stand accused of dirty tricks.

Rumours abound that dire poet and MP for Shrewsbury & Atcham Paul Marsden (retiring due to ill health) has applied to rejoin the Labour Party - having defected from Labour to the LibDems less than four years ago.

This can only be a devious and calculated move by the LibDems to undermine Labour's election chances by associating the party with one of the country's most reviled and unattractive politicians.

Thanks to a new friend for the tip.

To rat out on your party once is something, but to re-rat is really special.

Anyway this reminds me that the Returning Officers are still short a LibDem connected blogger to balance up our election coverage. We had one potential blogger, but he was a candidate in a winnable seat so decided either not to risk it or to devote the time to his campaign. Contact us if you are interested. Sense of humour essential.

Anoraks Back in Fashion, One Month Only

2005-04-05T16:43:00.000+01:00

Aside from pizza and minicab flyers delivered by foreign chaps on less than minimum wage (others could be on less than minimum wage after the election if someone else gets in), most of us are likely to encounter party propaganda on our doormats over the coming weeks. I've already had a fair bit as I live in a key London marginal (I happen to live in a marginal council ward within it so have been given more attention than most as well) which had to select a new Labour PPC recently (so that was more even more crap on my doormat).

The Guardian want YOUR crap apparently, as do the New Politics Network. So much for it only being of interest between the doormat and the bin.

Joined-up Campaigning

2005-04-05T13:49:00.000+01:00

It's all happening in Labour's Northeastern heartlands.

First the Lib Dem campaign in Hexham has a few internal communication difficulties and then the Labour Group Leader on Newcastle City Council is reprimanded by the police for "throwing a missile at [Charles] Kennedy and other Lib Dem candidates".

Labour Rocked to Foundations by Defection - Not

2005-04-05T12:41:00.000+01:00

Blair's been to the Palace and we're on for May the 5th.

Another General Election blog has launched, the appropriately-named 2005 General Election blog (though it's more of a meta-blog really), under the stewardship of Nick Barlow.

Elsewhere, as Paul Anderson rightly comments, this really is the non-story of the election thus far. They'll have to do better than that I'm afraid. But I suspect they won't.

It would have been better if he'd left it until the count.

Tend to agree, loser candidate switches parties, not front page stuff. Good day to do it though.

Update: even the Beeb have an election blog now, which lifts the lid on that Alastair Campbell blog nonsense. If he can't even operate a Blackberry...

Everyone has a blog now, even dead-tree-journos. I think we are at a tipping point. Its information overload with no quality filter.

In The Job Description?

2005-04-04T00:58:00.000+01:00

I know there's an election about to be on, but Wonkette-style stories, already? Oh well...

"A MEMBER of the Scottish Parliament has been caught on CCTV committing a sex act within the parliament’s grounds.

The MSP, who has not yet been identified, appeared on CCTV screens with a male aide performing a sex act on him."

'MSP seen on CCTV in sex act with aide'

Think I need to put in a Freedom of Information request...

It's The Constitution, Stupid

2005-04-04T00:00:00.000+01:00

Some people suffer from obsessive/compulsive disorder. I, unlike most Labour MPs, seem to suffer from obsessive rationalism and as such I've generally thought of myself as a natural republican on, um, rational grounds. But to be honest, the recent debacles, of which the press raked over considerably today, have actually engendered some feelings of sympathy for the royals on my part.

My co-blogger on here Recess Monkey, when he's not busily contesting blog polls, is as I am sure you're aware, hoping to become a Labour MP in the near future and has even got a constituency lined up to that effect. Today he did his bit and declared allegiance to the monarchy, way before he might legally be required to were he to overturn a Tory majority in order to do so. He ought to be careful though, not all Labour PPCs are given free reign to enter Lord St John of Fawsley territory.

It is an absolute mess though. In spite of successive Fabian pamphlets imploring action, New Labour ignored the need to tidy up the legislation surrounding the royals' existence and now Charles has to suffer the indignity of having soon-to-be-ex-MP Chris Leslie ruling on it all for him. Still, the one thing that makes the charade of that existence bearable is the fact that news stories like this remain yet to be written:

RED-FACED Labour officials last night denied that any underhand tactics determined the party's decision to instruct its union affiliates not to ballot their members on the electoral college votes for its candidate in the UK's first presidential election. The decision, revealed in a leaked report to be considered by the party's national executive, will boost those in the party who believe it should not contest the election and instead give its support to the House of Windsor's own candidate...

Straw Men Have Feelings Too

2005-04-03T21:30:00.000+01:00

In a column piece that has drawn no small measure of applause from others in blogland, David Aaronovitch exorcises a lot of inner demons over, well pretty much everything:

"Besides, after Libya, Lebanon and the Iraqi and Palestinian elections themselves, isn't there at least an argument to be had about the spread of democracy? Why aren't the liberal classes up in arms about Zimbabwe and Darfur? Why do they squeal over the non-existent threat to Rowan Atkinson from laws to stop incitement to religious hatred, and fall totally silent about young women being executed for adultery in Iran? Couldn't the task of any decent centre left be to take Bush et al up on their words about liberty in the world? To take Blair up on Africa and climate change?"

That's a lot of questions. I'm not denying that he has a point on some things, but shouldn't he just set up a blog for this sort of invective?

The piece that appears to have got him rattled in the first place, John Lanchester's LRB review of Stephen Pollard's Blunkett biography, is here, if you want to read it. What astonished me when I read that first time round was this section:

"The Labour Party of semi-fond memory was a broadish church but it had some consistent currents within it. It was left of centre, socially liberal, anti-authoritarian, anti-American, pacifistic, anti-big-business, keen on benefits for the poor, and in favour of nationalisation."

I must have dreamt Chuter Ede's tenure as Home Secretary, Ernest Bevin and the creation of NATO, the Callaghan government and the trade union old right's longstanding role as a praetorian guard fond of small-c conservative social policies, then.

Mandy, You Plonker!

2005-04-03T20:15:00.000+01:00

Our representative in Brussels seems to have lost his touch when it comes to his much-vaunted media-handling skills:

"Peter Mandelson, the European Union trade commissioner, has been accused of behaving like an "illegal street hawker" in his dealings with one of the world's largest press corps by leaders of the 1,000-plus journalists based in Brussels."

So it's possibly a good job he's come back to his native patch to try and get back in the saddle again:

"Tony Blair has drafted in Peter Mandelson to help finalise Labour's strategy ahead of the general election he is expected to call tomorrow."

Tomorrow?

"Tony Blair has decided to delay naming the date for the general election for 24 hours because of the Pope's death."

Oh well, will give those planning special blogging projects for the election a little extra time for those last-minute tweaks.

Family Values

2005-04-03T20:04:00.000+01:00

John Redwood's ex-wife was married to him for as long as I've been alive. I'm not surprised she's decided to let off a little steam of late:

"The 56-year-old is also putting the finishing touches to a book, provisionally entitled Living With a Vulcan."

'He is capable of awful cruelty. He is a Vulcan, not a human being'

No bitterness at all.

Bitterness can lead to all sorts. Writing a book is a good start. The Telegraph might give her a column a la Margaret Cook.

Jesus 'A Bit Gay'

2005-04-03T19:47:00.000+01:00

No, not Jerry Springer The Opera but the Rt. Revd. Gene Robinson:

"Jesus was an unmarried, "non-traditional man" who did not uphold family values, "travelled with a bunch of men" and enjoyed an especially close relationship with one of his disciples."

'Jesus might have been homosexual, says the first openly gay bishop'

Which leads me directly to this story of yesterday concerning a new beermat campaign by the Labour Party. An attempt to return to the party's hard-edged trade union roots perhaps? Not quite:

"Labour activists are hoping that gay voters will find inspiration at the bottom of their pints, by launching a beermat campaign to win their support.

The mats, distributed to clubs and bars by the Labour Campaign for Lesbian and Gay Rights (LCLGR), say a vote for the Liberal Democrats would "let Tory hate back in". Sponsored by the GMB union, they tell drinkers: "Go to bed with Charlie ... wake up with Howard."

That's enough to turn anyone, surely? From voting Tory, obviously. "Go to bed with Nicholas Soames, wake up with Nicholas Soames" would be enough to persuade me to put my X pretty much anywhere, it has to be said. But why stop there? "Go to bed with Oona King, wake up with..."

Yeah right, like I have to spell it out for you.

It's not the first time the party has used beermats to put its message across though. In 2000 they made much hay of William Hague's 14-pint boast using a similar technique. So he's single-handedly to blame for all this binge-drinking probably:

"City centres should be stripped of pubs and bars to combat Britain's escalating binge-drinking problem which is fuelling anti-social behaviour, MPs will say this week."

So much for "Cldnt give a XXXX for last orders?" then. Those supping up with a LCLGR beermat beneath their drink should enjoy their pre-election tipple. It could be their last.

Ideally if I went to bed with Oona I'd like to get no sleep whatsoever.

That's *sexist*, that is.

Poor Get Even Poorer in Brown's Britain

2005-04-03T08:51:00.000+01:00

Somebody is going to get fired at the Department of Work & Pensions, because a 357-page report reveals that the poorest 10% of families are becoming even poorer. The devastating official figures reveal Brown’s tax-and-spend agenda is hurting Middle Britain while failing to help the most vulnerable.

The poorest 5.8 million Britons are the only group whose take-home incomes are falling, despite Brown’s numerous anti-poverty drives and job-creation schemes, the real income of the poorest - after tax, welfare and housing costs - fell from £91 per week in 2001-02 to £90 the year after, and £88 by April 2004. It was the worst two years for Britain’s poor since the recession of 1991.

The figures are drawn up by statisticians from the DWP together with the Office for National Statistics (ONS). The report, Households Below Average Income, shows that the groups most likely to vote, such as pensioners and parents, have been the main winners from Brown’s tax credits and redistributionist policies. What a surprise.

The study shows that the poorest 10% are being pushed further to the fringes of society. Their total income has fallen from 3% of the UK total in 1997-98 to 2.8% in 2003-04. Welfare is the main source of income for the poorest 11.6 million in Britain, who rely on benefits and tax credits for 53% of their income. In this group, earnings account for only 39% of income. When housing costs are included, post-tax take-home pay of the top 10% rose by 1.4% between 2002-03 and 2003-04; during the same period, the poorest 10% saw their income drop by 2.2%.

The next worst-affected group was the middle earners, who suffered from a massive 12.9% rise in council tax and a 1% rise in national insurance. The DWP data shows that the poorest 10% have consistently suffered since Labour came to power in 1997, with their income rising in only two of the past seven years for which figures are available.

Recess Monkey claimed that the recent report by the respected Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) suggesting that the average British household had seen a slide in income for the first time since the recession of the early 1990s was "discredited".

So how does he explain this?

Numbers nicked from the Scotsman. You don't think I'd actually read the report...

LibDem Youth Strategy

2005-04-02T09:40:00.000+01:00

Guido has figured out the LibDem youth strategy, first they promise an end to tuition fees, second legalise dope and magic mushrooms (hooray!), third support porn for hormone-crazed teenagers.

Then they focus funds on campus based campaign groups to get them to go knock on doors. Brilliant.

Tory Bandwagon Rolls On

2005-03-31T14:09:00.000+01:00

So today the Tories are trying to take advantage of the Office of National Statistics report showing that average incomes have gone down by 0.2% in the last year. But if you look closely at the figures, which are adjusted for inflation, average household incomes have gone up by about 20% since the Tories were last in power. Can someone please explain how this is an anti-Labour story?

This all stems from a spinning of the ONS figures by the discredited Institute for Fiscal Studies, a think-tank that is so far up Michael Howard's bottom, it can sharpen his fangs.

So why does Gordon Brown quote the IFS so much when it suits him? If you tax us to death, we will have less to spend. Simple 'innit? By the way, the IFS is not a think-tank Monkey, its a government funded research institute, doh!

Child poverty is up as well. It was, according to the New Statesmen, better under Thatcher...

Jamie Tells Blair

2005-03-31T11:02:00.000+01:00

"Look mate, the whole country has had it up to here with the shit you dish out. No wonder your daughter throws up."

I don't see what's wrong. Oliver has highlighted an issue and the Government has responded accordingly. It's called lobbying and Jamie Oliver has been successful. Considering the millions spent on lobbying by industry, it's nice to see that ordinary people can influence government too.

As for your reference to Tony's daughter, I think it is beneath contempt of you to bring her into this and I'd very much like it if you'd delete all references to her from this site.

What's the betting Oliver will leap up in the Sunday Times 'Power List', whenever it comes out, followed by demands to give him a People's Peerage etc.

It's a slippery slope, a Jamie Oliver-influenced political world can only mean re-releases of Toploader's 'Dancing in the Moonlight' and a statesman role of some description for Vernon Kay. I'd settle for George Orwell's vision of progress, that of a boot stamping on a human face, any day of the week compared to that.

Any truth in the rumour that Laurence Llewelyn-Bowen is to take over town planning from Prescott? Its an odd way to run a country.

Jamie said "This government doesn't give a shit about kids." What was he highlighting there Monkey? Why when Ruth Kelly came into office and published her plans for education originally, (after Jamie had seen the then Education Secretary, Charles Clarke), was there no extra money allocated for school meals? Bandwagon? More like a Spin-propelled-policy-panic. Could it be Jamie's hit TV show resonated with voting parents? So if the contestants of the next Big Brother series were to hit a popular nerve would government policy change in the future? Jamie is not "ordinary people" incidentally, he's a famous multi-millionaire businessman with hit TV shows and books, I don't think he'll be voting for your lot.

Oliver has already said he would be a natural ~~Tory~~ Conservative, as is his family's wont, were it not for his admiration and respect for "Tony". Pass that sick bag, someone.