Whining Widdecombe’s nasty spin bitchslapped

Vodpod videos no longer available.

On the face of it, a reasonable argument.

“These were the rules, you stuck fastidiously by them, every line of your expenses shows you stuck by them”

If that had been the case, and if we were of a mind to be reasonable about this, which I think we can all agree we’re not, Anne might even have point.

Let’s briefly remind ourselves of what some of those rules were :

“The fundamental principles required MPs personally to ensure that their use of the ACA was: (a) necessary for the performance of their Parliamentary duties; (b) not extravagant or luxurious; (c) in accordance with the Nolan principles of selflessness, accountability, honesty and leadership; (d) strictly in accordance with the rules governing the allowance; (e) above reproach; (f) took account of the need to obtain value for money; and (g) avoided any appearance of benefit, or a subsidy from public funds, or diversion of public money for the benefit of a political organisation. These principles together amount to a general requirement of propriety.”

Not looking so good now, is it ? just off the top of my head I can see at the very least that a,b,c,e and f have in fact been violated with arrogant impunity by any number of MPs.

Any other group of employees who had been found to be committing such widespread breaches of the rules(MPs), along with whoever was supposed to be operating the internal controls, but wasn’t (the fees office), thereby being complicit in enabling the breaches, would indeed find themselves in a court. But not for an employment tribunal, Anne, for a fraud hearing.

Shortly after which they would most likely find themselves in prison.

Advertisements

Reform, huwah! What is it good for ?

Someone floated a question on twitter yesterday asking

Can someone please explain why electoral reform is the answer to an expenses scandal?

I felt sure then that I knew the answer (because then you can talk about an election without actually having to have one), but now I wonder if it might not be that at all.

I wonder if the Labour Party is promising us reform – even though the only reform we asked for was for most of them and much of the opposition to resign pending public lynching and prosecution; in that order – as a bribe.

It is traditional for governing parties facing uncertain prospects in the next general election to offer the electorate some kind of bribe in the form of lower taxes, more spending, or draconian and poorly thought through knee jerk legislation against the demon de jour.

For a party facing certain annihilation the impetus to offer something that might convince us must be even larger.

But Labour has nothing left. The coffers are empty. They can’t promise lower taxes or a higher spend because there isn’t any money. After twelve awful years in power, much of which they have spent creating 3,000 new offences, criminalising and demonising their way through their long list of bogeymen, there isn’t room left for any more draconian knee jerk legislation than we’ve already got. At least not of the popular kind. Continuing one upmanship in this area has led to the point where the kinds of legislation still on the wish list are those that would have ashamed the East German Stasi themselves. DNA retention, universal surveillance, mandatory ID papers, etc. Hardly vote winners.

And it does seem that, despite the fact that everyone except the hardest core of activists and trot mentalists now openly despises them, the PLP genuinely believe they still have a chance of turning it round if they can just find that one winning policy. It truly is cargo cult politics.

Perhaps delusions are infectious ?

You are guilty of child abuse until we say you aren’t

Bad news for parents who chose to educate their children at home instead of sending them in to the soul destroying wasteland cherishing arms of the state education system.

A review of home education in England is expected to recommend a national registration scheme for home educators.

Now whenever the Stalinist apparatchiks of the state start talking about building a database ‘register’ of anything you just know that it’s only going to be the tip of a very unpleasant iceberg.

And so it proves to be in this case.

It is also expected to say local authorities should have the right to visit any child taught at home.

Because ?

the government has also been concerned that home education could be a cover for abuse.

Despite the fact that

the review has not found any evidence that home education was being used specifically to conceal trafficked children, or forced marriages.

So on exactly no evidence, the state demands the right to enter your home because they need to make sure you aren’t abusing your children.

And just so you don’t make the mistake of thinking that really this is just about local authorities responsibility to ensure children are educated

The review is not expected to propose any minimum standards or set subjects.

As Peter Hitchens points out in here

I haven’t any evidence that any members of the House of Lords abuse their children, because there isn’t any. But on this logic, that state of affairs would presumably entitle the Department ‘For Children’ to probe their Lordships’ House for evidence of such abuse.

This is, simply, a hysterical witch hunt. Worse, it is the state’s apparatchiks treating our children as their property.

It’s prime instigator is unpeakable harpy and Children’s Minister, Delyth Morgan. She clearly has a bee in her bonnet abut the who child abuse thing, and believes that the state must have primacy over our children, and the rights of parents, in order to protect them.

She also obviously has a prurient obsession with the sexual habits of others, as she issued a further press release this week that contains this absolute gem

The full extent of sexual exploitation is hidden as it mostly takes place away from streets in private homes. It can take many forms from the seemingly ‘consensual’ relationship where sex is exchanged for attention/affection, accommodation or gifts to serious organised crime and child trafficking. What marks out exploitation is an imbalance of power within the relationship with the perpetrator holding some kind of power over the victim, increasing the dependence of the victim as the exploitative relationship develops.

That’s right. Your relationship may seem consensual, but even you can’t be sure until you let Delyth Morgan Sex Stasi into your house to check. Presumably they like to watch.

Excellent coverage of the whole issue of Authoritarian Statists and the NSPCC vs HE, liberty and democracy can be found at Bishop Hill Blog.

Democracy and the BNP. An FAQ for the Righteous

Further to my previous post on the fascism of the anti-fascists, a few quick notes based on a heated debate that took place yesterday, and was no doubt repeated around the country.

Below are rebuttals to a few points that kept being made both on the net and on TV.

It is OK to abandon democracy and curtail freedom of speech for the BNP because they

Are criminals

So what ? So are millions of people who trip speed cameras. Do we deny then the right to an opinion ? You can not change the rules simply to fit one category of criminal that you don’t happen to like*. We deny suffrage to prisoners. Those who are not held at Her Majesty’s Pleasure are not denied any of their democratic rights.

Have vile policies and intents*

Indeed they do. But it doesn’t matter. You don’t have to agree with a party’s policies or intents in order to allow them a democratic voice. I don’t agree with most of the Labour manifesto. It is utterly irrelevant what their policies are. They are a legal political party with democratically elected representatives. Period. If no one else likes their policies, no one will vote for them. That’s kind of the definition of democracy.

Use violence and intimidation*

That may be so, although the only reports that I could dig up are in militant left rags that are hardly credible sources, but let’s assume that it is so.

But then again, there is this story

An arson attack at the Shrewsbury home of a British National Party member in the run-up to the local elections is being investigated by police.

A Union flag was taken from Alan Coles’s garden, in Underdale Road, and set on fire, in the final act of what he called a three-night campaign of abuse.

Mr Coles said it was not the first time he has been abused for his political beliefs.

He stood unsuccessfully for the BNP two years ago in local elections and during the campaign protesters broke his wing mirrors, made defamatory posters and put swastikas on the windows, he said.

That looks awfully like intimidation to me.

Or this one

POLICE say they have seized a deactivated Kalashnikov rifle, imitation handguns, knives and a number of devices “made from fireworks” as part of a terrorism investigation.

Two men aged 25 and 19, a 16-year-old schoolboy and a 20-year-old woman were this morning still being held at Launceston police station under the Terrorism Act.

The investigation came about after a sharp-eyed police officer stopped a 25-year-old man – believed to be Andrew Sprague – on Friday night daubing anti-fascist graffiti along the North Street subway under Exeter Street, just a couple of hundred yards from Charles Cross police station.

It is understood the man had sprayed the word “Antifa” – a militant anti-fascist organisation with international links.

Antifa eh ? Let’s look em up

PHYSICAL CONFRONTATION

Fascism is a violent ideology. Throughout history, fascists have used violence against those who oppose them. Antifa is a continuation of the antifascist tradition of confronting fascism physically when it is necessary. Physical confrontation is only one of our tactics though, we do not aim to fetishise it as one tactic above all others, nor will we allow a hierarchy to develop based on the kudos of street-fighting. If an individual member feels unable to engage on this level they are no less worthy as an anti-fascist than any other member of the group, however those with a moral problem regarding this issue should be advised that this is not the group for them.

Or this one

More than 30 gas-guzzling cars have been attacked by eco warriors, police said.

The tyres of the 4X4 vehicles were slashed and notes were left blaming drivers for climate change.

The campaign of destruction, over the last three weeks, has taken place in areas of Manchester popular with students.

The notes said the attack was not on the owner but on their choice of car.

Can you smell the hypocrisy ?

Represent a minority * viewpoint

No, don’t laugh. Donna Guthrie of Retards Unite Against Fascism told the BBC that it was OK to deny the BNP their freedom of speech (what’s left of it), which is legally defined as a basic human right because a) they are fascists and b) they got such a small share of the vote at the EU elections.

Really. So according to her, it’s OK to remove the human rights of minorities so long as they’re a minority that you really, really don’t like. Martin Smith made more or less the same point on Newsnight.

When did the Righteous have that meeting ?

And when the fuck did “I may not like what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” become “No platform for fascists” ? Oh wait, yes, I remember now.

More on “No Platform” later, perhaps.


* Eagle eyed readers will notice that these are exactly the same arguments that fascists supposedly use to vilify groups and then, e.g. cart them off to death camps. If they are the wrong arguments when they are in the mouths of fascists then they are the wrong argument in the mouths of the UAF and their lumpen trot mentalist cohorts.

Cargo cult PLP roll over for trinkets

So craven are they that those of the PLP that bothered to turn up to Grodon’s tub thumping session yesterday – and according to Dale it was mostly the borg drones party loyalists in any case – were, with a few notable exceptions, pacified with the promise that one day there will be a proper prime minister (the pilot) and some real policy (the cargo).

For now, they seem to have accepted a few shiny meaningless policy trinkets. Nebulous baubles that will doubtless fail to materialise, or have little meaning if they do. For a start, they only have until May, how much policy can you really get into that gap ? Knock off a few months from the far end for the general election campaigning, a few off this end for all the supposed reforms, another few for Gordon to fly around the world on his magic carpet dispensing largesse to the world’s shattered economies and healing the sick and the lame, and what’s left ? Six months ? Less ?

It will take that long to just to write the terms of reference for an Iraq inquiry. As far as the post office issue is concerned, El Gordo can simply delay it, something he would probably have done anyway. He really has no choice since EU legislation says he has to open it up to competition and state monopolies don’t do competition.

He can just slide the issue off to one side and leave it as well poison for the nasty tories to deal with after they win a landslide at the next general election, boo hiss to them, destroying our national assets, etc.

Frank Field thinks they were terrorised into it, BoJo thinks they did it for the money.

Toynbee, of all people for god’s sake, nails it

Dazed, gripped by delusion, the party tonight bottled it

Worth a read just for the utterly surreal sight of Labour’s in house rag and chief cheerleader putting the boot very firmly in.

Whatever it was that caused them to fold it was a mistake. As I blogged yesterday, failure at this point to remove Brown and have an election will damage the labour party beyond repair. The PLP members who backed Brown last night have failed not only to put country before party but failed to put the party before themselves, choosing to lash themselves to the mast of a sinking ship.

As Red Ken is so busily pointing out on the news channels though, it isn’t just the PLP that Brown is beholden to, there’s the rest of the party as well. The activists and the unions, I can’t help wondering if Byers launching his attack from the Progress meeting is a sign of things to come. There was some awful borg drone progress labour loyalist on TV afterwards rolling out the now familliat “Gordon’s poo smells of roses” spin, but reports from within the meeting beg to differ, as this tweet shows

A very clear majority of the room @ Progress meeting in future of Labour applaud Stephen Byers call for Gordon Brown to stand down #progress

mattcooke2012   Jun 8   20:19

It is in the interests of the PLP to stay where they are, they’re mostly going to lose their jobs anyway. those that aren’t due to outright lose their seats will likely be replaced by their constituency parties bringing in ‘clean skins’ in a a desperate attempt to garner support.

I imagine that the rest of the party members, who have no seats to forfeit, no salaries or pension benefits to lose, and with lifetimes of emotional and financial investment, will feel somewhat differently about the prospect of seeing it sacrificed at the alter of avarice

Oh sweet, sweet, irony.

UPDATE : Paul Waugh of the Standard, who did an entertaining job of reporting the event via twitter, has the inside skinny including this gem

The biggest laugh of the evening came when Geraldine Smith, a leading rebel on the Royal Mail plans, said: “Something very strange happened to me on Sunday morning, watching Andrew Marr….I started to love Peter Mandelson.” The Business Secretary is said to have allowed himself a small smile.

Yes, yes that is strange. Vile bootlick.

Smith went on to say Brown was the best man on the economy Labour had.

And that, my dear trot mentalists, is exactly the problem.

Mandleson : All the fault of the media

Yes that’s right, Blears is quitting because of the press. My god, he’s right! How dare the media in a democratic nation ask questions of the elected representatives, the bastards!

He also said he had a meeting with her this morning. Oh yes ? Went well did it Peter ?

Idiot.

%d bloggers like this: