EU Reform, the answer on the ballot paper will be Yes or No, but what exactly is the question?

David Cameron began his much publicised European tour of capitals and leaders this week in a vain attempt to prove to both his own party and the nation at large that he is serious about EU reform and that he is willing to take the UK out of Europe if his marginal majority government do not get their own way over a yet to be published set of reforms probably centered around immigration control, and a loser union. Meanwhile the Queen in her address to both Houses confirmed that the referendum within the UK will take place before the end of 2017.

Despite the lack of detail, despite the uncertainty surrounding how he will be received firstly on his 36 hour mini hand shake tour and then in the coming months, it is staggering to discover at such an early stage in the negotiations that we therefore actually have an agreed and published question! “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?” YES or NO. But is that yes or no depending on the substance of the reform? Is that a yes or no depending on whether there is any guarantee that any discussed reform will ever be ratified? Is that a yes or no subject to the other 27 states or territories also saying yes or no in subsequent referendums? Will our yes or no be subject to treaty change? If so how long will that take after the referendum?  I guess to some degree any NO vote despite it being disastrous for the UK is the easier outcome for the government to deal with, as we just withdraw. But how will a yes vote ever hold any true validity if set against such a sea of uncertainty and visible only through such a misty cloud of confusion.

I am now personally so confused that I am forced into thinking the unthinkable, and saying that I actually agree for once with Nigel Farage, not on where we both individually stand on our preferred outcome of the referendum, but on the premise that the whole EU referendum is now little more than a fudge, a trick of smoke and mirrors, a sleight of hand, the referendum is a dead referendum, it is deceased, bereft of life, shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir.

It is an Ex referendum where your X won’t be worth the lead in your polling station pencil.

But don’t expect the mainstream UK media to take such a dismissive attitude to the bill, don’t expect

out MP’s and Lords in the chamber to worry themselves about the niceties of meaningful reform over manifesto delivery of the mechanism for a referendum, and prepare yourself for a poll fest of opinion and counter opinion linking that yes or no question to every conceivable variation of the subject matter imaginable. The Sun will no doubt run a “Would you vote Yes or No if the new EU deal bans page 3 Girls?” The Mail and Express will ask the nation “Should Benefit claimants get the vote?” and The Observer and IoS will no doubt sell endless Pre Referendum EU city tours.

But the real poll, the actual vote, in my humble opinion will be a complete non event, no opportunity for real reform which wrestles control away from the EU corporate giants or gives power back to the people of Europe, no challenge to TTIP, the EU Ministers would never let us have a say, let alone a vote on anything as important as signing away our rights as a democracy to place nation state law over the commercial interests of world capitalism. 

My own party, The Green Party have a simple YES, YES, YES policy on Europe, YES to Reform, YES to a referendum and YES to Europe. But this already discredited new Tory government have their own less attractive option on offer for UK voters. NO meaningful reform, NO voice on the decisions that really matter and NO limit to the spin and political posturing to be deployed in convincing us all that Dave won the day for the Union, all of course in Churchillian fashion!

Time To Change The Tune

There now follows (an extremely funny) party political p!sstake broadcast from the Green Party!

A LOW TIDE EBBS AND A HIGH NOON BECKONS FOR THOSE WHO SHRINK THE STATE AND SINK ITS PEOPLE

I wonder if anyone in No 10 Downing Street reads my blog or the Herald And Post website?? If not perhaps they should start to!

Those who read my earlier blog warning the Prime Minister of ‘trouble ahead” should he continue to fail to respond appropriately to the flooding crisis rocking Britain will know only too well that the “events dear boy events” trap was set wide open for him to fall into, and how spectacularly he has fallen.

Of course all politicians and particularly Prime Ministers and Government Ministers will come under fire in times of severe crisis, that’s only natural, but its how they respond or even more importantly IF they respond that matters, and the response from our government on this issue so far has been woeful.

But how can they respond, how can they call upon the state to respond when the state itself has been dismantled to the point of paralysis?

If you cut the Environment Agency’s budget year on year (down 36% since 2010) reduce its staffing levels to the bone (550 job losses last year another 1700 planned in the year to come) then you know that the agency would not be in a position to meet the ever increasing demands  placed upon it.

Equally if you cut Local Authority budgets year on year, farm out all the services to the private sector and reduce “local Government” down to pre war levels then as much as they might like they are not in a position to respond to the crisis.

It’s the same for our Police Forces, our Fire and Rescue Services, who through cuts to front line staff are no longer able to release “spare” capacity. Our Social Work teams are not able to contribute to emergency plans any more due to crippling case loads and chronic under staffing.

And so when the floods come, the true nature of David Camerons “Big Society” adventure is laid bare for all to see.

Its DIY Britain, house holders ferrying sand and bags from the local B&Q to try and save their homes, Farmers setting up makeshift ferry crossings with their tractors, Local Volunteers themselves worried about their own homes, being stretched beyond any acceptable level to fill in where the previous statutory agencies have failed to deliver.

Today on the Lunchtime news a local “unpaid” volunteer flood warden was interviewed and half way through the interview broke down in tears of frustration, pleading for someone from the government, anybody to step in and respond to their crisis.

Her tears were washed away in the ever rising tide, meanwhile “Dave” will chair another Cobra committee and Eric Pickles will try and offload some of the blame on those whose pockets his department has picked over the years, and more and more people will lose faith with our lack of local democracy and inadequate national intervention.

Some of those whose homes have been flooded will I am sure be less pleased to be told now that their Council Tax is still amongst the lowest in the country, and few if any will be feeling that we are “all in this together” 

In a period of 3 years this awful Tory/Liberal coalition has ripped apart the very foundation of our civic society, they have shrunken the state, removed the safety net, and even more unforgivably they have turned their collective heads eyes and ears away from those calling out so desperately for help.

We in Northampton now the full extent of the misery that is bought about by such severe flooding events, I can honestly say that as the MP for the town during the 1998 Floods that the experience changed my outlook forever, leading more than ever to the point of campaigning to make government stand up to its responsibilities and to act on funding flood prevention and take seriously the challenge of Climate Change.

Often in that period since 1998 under two different Governments I have had to come to a conclusion that “they” our political masters were not listening.

And still the cries for help fall on deaf ears!

EYES ON THE WRONG FLOOD

Its not too difficult to determine a point in time when a political pendulum swings, not too difficult to ascertain when a politicians stock is on the wane, and as has been said a hundred times before its "events dear events" which shift governments more than actions. But inaction and or the wrong actions are as equally revealing.

Over the Xmas period and into January 2014 those events and inactions and wrong choices have been made by our Prime Minister in plenty, probably without him even realising what was happening, perhaps he took his eye off of the ball? perhaps he was badly advised? whatever it was, it now looks odds on that next years general Election will lead into more coalition, but this time with the Tory Party firmly in opposition.

Their position was shaky to say the least, the country remains unconvinced that the economy is on the turn and less convinced that it is as a result of anything George Osborne or the Tory Party have done and in the months to come with inflation turning to deflation and interests rates rising to match other cost of living hikes the pips will well and truly start to squeak.

But David Cameron's new year woes have as much to do with him and his party believing that the rest of us "think" like Dave and George, and that their concerns are our concerns. As a result they were too busy making sweeping statements on immigration to notice the real tide of woe engulfing Britain.

They had their eyes on the wrong flood!

Victor Spirescu, a 30 year old Romanian handyman looked rather bemused when he arrived as one of just two migrants on the first flight of the year  from Transylvania. Victor and his indistinguishable fellow Romanian traveller WERE the flood of migrants to hit our shores as warned by UKIP and half of the Front bench in a downward race to the bottom of EU race relations

29m Romanians and Bulgarians will flood Britain looking for work according to UKIP, thats the entire population of both Countries!  The Tories ever keen to trump their new worst enemy rushed through new legislation to curb the impact the invasion would have on benefits and even Ed Milliband chipped in not wanting to be left out of the xenophobe club by declaring that it was right to address "understandable" fears and calling for EU loop holes to be closed.

But it was Victor who spoke with the most conviction and clarity and honesty when he told the hoards of reporters and officials awaiting his arrival at Luton Airport that

"I don't come to rob your country, I come to work, to make money, to go home"

In the 3 weeks following Victors scary welcome to the UK immigration records show that the "tidal wave" of immigrants had risen to a shocking high of 30!

Meanwhile the defenders of Britain's coastline and inland waterways were playing King Canute with a completely different enemy, climate change and severe weather wreaked havoc as thousands of UK homes were flooded, and families evacuated out of their houses over the Xmas break and beyond as they endured three weeks of torrential rain and gale force winds. The worst weather for 20 years the Met office declared, no part of the UK could escape the soaking, but where was Dave?

By the time he got to Kent to face the cameras local residents were all but  ready to lynch him.

"We were left abandoned" said one another angry at the Prime Ministers belated visit said  

"Until Cameron came we had been left abandoned,When we knew he was coming this morning the police showed up, the council turned up but until then the only people helping us were volunteers. It was just a publicity stunt."

We know how they feel in Northampton, and despite the initial interest by the cameras and the politicians it takes months and years for communities to recover from such devastating flood events, something my colleagues in the House of Commons at the time failed to understand and grasp. Its seems as if they still don't get it?

Oh Dear Dave, bad call that, but then again the Environment Agency wouldn't and couldn't have been their for local residents anyway could they? as Dave's government has axed 550 staff from the EA in recent months as part of the "austerity" cuts and slashed the flood defence budget year on year! They put a little bit back in last year and announced it as "new money" but is still remains well below even the 2010 level of investment whilst the water it seems and the anger continues to rise.

I guess this is part of Dave's cutting back on the Green crap? but he has had his eyes on the wrong flood

Whatever the cause of his woes, the outcome is in my view crystal clear.

Bring on Prime Minister number 54

WIFE'S LOVER? I THOUGHT HE WAS A BURGLAR

Political interference in the judiciary is never welcome, and whilst the House of Commons must always be the "maker" of laws it must always fall to the Courts to determine the innocence or guilt of those in breach of the law.

That is what makes Tory Justice Secretary Chris Grayling's announcement today on the rights of homeowners to defend their own property with aggressive force so unpallatable.

In a pretty transparent attempt to cheer up the right wing of their party and in an orchestrated move to draw attention away from their own failings on the economy and on transport and on health, the right wing of the Government coalition are once again throwing raw steak at the rabid dogs within their fold.

And of course it will all end in tears, political legislation is always poor legislation, rushed through without proper scrutiny it is meant to grab the headlines rather than improve the law. At least the last time a Tory Government tried this on with their 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act only family pets lost their lives, but this time the fatalities will all be human and not all of them Burglars.

To re cap on the existing law, we all have the right to use "reasonable" force to protect our property from intruders, and "reasonable force" is of course  determined in a court of law by a judge and jury. So well does the existing law work that between 1990 and 2005 there were just 11 prosecutions for people tackling intruders in any premises, including only seven involving homes, seven cases in 25 years is hardly a national crisis
 
So in England and Wales, as stated above anyone can already use "reasonable" force to protect themselves or others, or to carry out an arrest or to prevent crime. Householders are also already protected from prosecution as long as they act "honestly and instinctively" in the heat of the moment.

But under the new Tory Plans the wording will be changed to protect the home owner further from prosecution, in all circumstances unless the violence used against the intruder is deemed to have been "Grossly Disproportionate" it will mean that someone who is confronted by a burglar and has reason to fear for their safety, or the safety of their family, and in the heat of the moment uses force that is reasonable in the circumstances but in the cold light of day seems disproportionate, they will not be guilty of an offence.

So how is that phrase "Grossly Disproportionate" to be determined? Well on Radio 4 this morning when asked this exact question Chris Grayling gave an example that say for instance you had beaten the intruder until they were unconscious, then it would be grossly disproportionate to then stab him to death!The Prime Minister when asked the same question by Sky News, tripped out the identical answer.

Now don't get me wrong, we all have the right to protect our own property but the government's intervention to re word and alter an already established and understood legal threshhold has just got a whole lot murkier and a hell of lot more dangerous.

Critics have already labelled the move as a licence to kill and criminal analysts have expressed concern that in response to the move Burglars are now far more likely to arm themselves when "on the Job" as a means of protecting themselves from over zealous attacks fro vigilantes. Other critics have also pointed out that not every intruder in your house is necessarily a Burglar, a whole range of public officials already have a right to enter your property including of course the police themselves.

Senior lawyers have also warned that the proposals are simply a political gimmick which risks confusing the law for all the wrong reasons.

Michael Turner QC, chairman of the Criminal Bar Association, said:

“There’s no concept in British law of allowing someone to use disproportionate force for good reasons. There is absolutely no need to change the law on self-defence as it stands. “This is about making a political headline. It would be an unnecessary piece of legislation which has real potential to be dangerous.”

Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, accused Mr Grayling of showing both ignorance and disrespect for the law. She said: “Terrified householders defending themselves are already protected, so this irresponsible announcement can only be designed to make people afraid or actually encourage vigilante execution.”

But it is the potential for criminal intent that concerns me most about how this new law is to be interpreted. Imagine for instance discovering your loved one was having an affair, now under a Tory Government it would be favourable not to catch them in bed, in flagrante (on the job) instead you can just wait until your partners bit of fluff is in the Kitchen, then come in the back door and bludgeon him/her to your hearts content (to his end if you wish as long as you don't stab him afterwards) break a window from the outsdie to stage a break in and then just inform the Police that "Sorry Guv, I honestly thought he was a burglar"

Likewise the new law could lead to a whole new series of "Home Delivery" attacks and killings, just arrange for the person involved to be at your house, again stage a break i, beat them to a pulp and say once again, "Sorry Guv, I just came home and he was in the house"

The Tories at Conference this week have avoided thus far in using the word "Growth" but let us be clear, with crazy mad cap schemes like this we will undoubtedly see lots of growth. a growth in vigilantism, a growth in weapons being used in burglaries, a growth in the number of defence pleas against attacks at home cases, and of course an inevitable growth in the numbers injured and killed on both sides, home owners and burglars.

Lets just hope it doesn't lead to a growth in votes for a discredited party of the backs of a Daily Mail reading non thinking public. And what will happen next year, heaven forbid if this government are still in power and they need to knee jerk even further to the right? Well how about a bit of Israeli law? legislation there allows home owners to shoot at will at anyone who they reasonably believed to have any criminal intent!

I know I shouldn't put ideas into the heads of the politically insane, but a desperate government can be grossly disproportionate in it's actions

TORY RACISM ALIVE AND KICKING IN 2012

A few days ago the Government for the first time ever released figures relating to the number of foreign born people who are currently claiming working age benefits in the UK.

It's own headline figure of 371,000 soon became headline news in all the Tory Press

370,000 MIGRANTS ON THE DOLE

said the Telegraph who added:

"The migrants, who can claim unemployment, housing and incapacity benefit, are costing taxpayers billions of pounds a year."

NON EU IMMIGRANT BENEFIT SCANDAL

screamed the SUN and told us in a follow up story that:

"FURY erupted last week over the news that we are paying dole to 371,000 foreigners." 

The Daily Mail not wanting to be upstaged by its red top fellow bigots went even further

  THE FOREIGNERS BEING PAID £2 BILLION IN BENEFITS A YEAR INCLUDING 371,000 ON THE DOLE 

and then let Tory Employment Minister Chris Grayling rant on for them when he said:

Conservative general election poster 2010 Romford

"It is not acceptable that people from other countries can claim our benefits if they have not worked or paid tax in the UK. We will root out those claimants who cannot prove their immigration status and in turn they will be stripped of their benefits.

Forgive me if I don't go on to give extra blog space to some of the more rabid and reactionary comments on the web from the usual suspects responding to the Governments carefully crafted press release, but I am sure you get the picture ""bleeding immigrants coming over here, taking our jobs, the food off our table. they're taking the piss, taking advantage of hard working British folk, claiming this, claiming that, living in big houses rent free when young British couples can't even rent a flat from the council..........you get the picture I am sure.

But hang on a minute what was Chris Grayling saying about people from other countries? and those who have not worked or paid benefits in the UK?

You see it turns out that about 54% of those "foreigners" Chris Grayling is ranting on about are actually British Citizens! and most of whom have worked and paid tax here in the UK. A further 29% it seems have been given indefinite leave to remain in the UK, and others are people from the European economic union who are entitled to claim whilst working in the UK. That's right working! because despite the smokescreen a large amount of the 371,000 above are working but receiving "Top Up" benefits to subsidise the low pay of unscrupulous employers.
So just how many of those 371,000 are actually foreign migrants illegally claiming benefits and left amongst Chris Graylings targets for rooting out?  er.... just under 2500! it seems, hardly the headline we were fed is it?

In fact the deeper you dig into the figures the worse it gets for the Government Of the 5.5 million people of working age in Britain who are currently claiming benefits, yes 371,000 are foreign-born, which equates to 6.4 per cent of the total number of people on benefits. That means 6.6 per cent of working age non-UK nationals currently get a state handout, as opposed to a massive 16.6 per cent of British nationals. And not only do less foreign born claim benefits from the state but they also pay more taxes to keep the 16.6 per cent of Brit's in the life style they have become accustomed to.

The ONF data goes hand in hand with Home Office research published in 2002 to assess that people do not arrive in the UK hoping to exploit the welfare state. This research found that immigrants pay more tax that they take in benefits, which was partly explained by the age structure of the immigrant population, which is disproportionately of working age and therefore consuming less state-provided services and paying more taxes.

Furthermore, the UK isn't exactly the welfare paradise for immigrants that some newspapers seem to refer to. Asylum seekers for example are not allowed to claim normal welfare and live on a paltry amount below that which the Government states is the minimum necessary for UK benefit claimants to be able to live. Many live in destitution, sometimes homeless, especially those who are appealing their case. The Refugee Council states that, “most asylum seekers are living in poverty and experience poor health and hunger.

So what therefore lies behind this official government press release and the predictable venom spat out by the right wing press to a nation wanting to believe that their current economic woes are all the work of Johnny Foreigner"?

The answer? RACISM, PURE AND UNADULTERATED.

Conservative General Election poster 1964 Smethick

It may be less up front than this poster left from the 1964 General Election, but this Tory leopard has obviously no intention of changing its spots

Tory governments in the past have played the race card as a smokescreen to their own internally created troubles and as always the media are only too eager to distribute racist and nationalist ideas such as blaming minorities and/or immigrants for unemployment, for so-called ‘benefit fraud’ and for the lack of resources like housing school places or hospital beds. It is easy to scapegoat vulnerable minorities and this official government endorsed racism ultimately sends signals out that foreign people are fair game for wider abuse from the public.

But Hate Crime is Hate crime in my view no matter who the perpetrator and I only hope that some of the British Citizens amongst the 371,000 affected above takes on Mr Grayling and his despotic government and makes a complaint to the Police

The CPS views this type of crime very seriously and say that "it has a real and lasting effect on individuals, communities and the whole of society. By letting people know what they can expect from the CPS when we prosecute racist or religious crime, we aim to improve confidence in the criminal justice system."

They add:

"Racist and religious crime is particularly hurtful to victims as they are being targeted solely because of their personal identity, their actual or perceived racial or ethnic origin or their actual or perceived belief or faith. Black and minority ethnic victims can also be targeted because they belong to other minority groups and may experience multiple discrimination."

This shoddy coalition government including the Lib Dem's who are backing them up in Parliament, and staying noticeably silent on issues such as this above should hang their collective heads in shame.

 

BACK TO THE EIGHTIES

Listening to Radio Four a few weeks back I was taken a back from an off the cuff  comment made by the Rt Hon Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osbourne when he seemed to slip up and announce that Government borrowing at the end of their term of office in 2015 will be higher than it was when they came to office!

Surely not, I heard a thousand people cry, this is the Government of austerity, the "tough love" masters of the national debt. The people who dumbed down the credit crisis by telling Joe Public, we have simply overspent on our credit card and now we need to make the repayments. So what is now going wrong?

Well that's a simple one, and some of us did hint at it before. You see the Government in their haste to cut the deficit has destroyed any growth in the economy 0.5% down in the last quarter of 2010 and 0.5 up in the first quarter of 2011 leaving the economy flat, and if we are not earning and we are still paying off the debt then where is the money going to come from for paying for an ever increasing welfare bill, growing by the day as people across the public sector lose their jobs?

In addition rising food prices as emerging nations demand more of the worlds production, and rising commodity prices for similar reasons are pushing up inflation far beyond any hitherto expected measures and therefore people understandably are keeping their hands firmly in their pockets.

So there we have it, we have hardly any public services left, the cost of living has risen massively, oil prices are up food prices are up, unemployment is up, growth is down and the economy is flat. All leading to us having to borrow more year on year and get ourselves in a deeper mess with less to show for it.

And to think, those of us who suggested investment in public spending to protect growth and spending and keep unemployment costs down were as good as declared insane by the Tories. If only we could turn back the clock? But that's not going to happen. Instead expect more cuts, heightened public unrest, high unemployment, and a return of inflation and massive cost of living rises. Its the 80's all over again!

Perhaps Cameron is far more Thatcherite than his party really thinks he is?

THIS IS NOT LIKE IRAQ! IT'S FAR MORE DEVIOUS

Did I dream the whole economic deficit episode? Were we not so broke last week that our County Council were sacking lollipop wardens and turning all the lights off at midnight? Did I imagine the government making newly trained pilots redundant and scrapping orders for new jets to sit on now plane less aircraft carriers?

I must have done because now all three main political party's are falling over themselves to sound out the War Clarion as Britain engages in yet another costly campaign in the desert and pretends to us all again that it has nothing to do with OIL

How stupid do they really think we are? and having armed and sucked up to Gaddafi for so long are we now expected to just forget the huge part we played, right up to the release of the Lockerbie Bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi in protecting his reign?

And is a civilian life taken in Yemen or Bahrain by their government forces worth less than the life of a Libyan citizen?

These are all questions we must all ask ourselves and answer before we accept any moral justification for Britain involving itself in yet another Middle East meltdown. Why o why a nation like ours supposedly bankrupt wants to jump in both feet first is any ones guess.

Gaddafi is not liked in the West and few from any side would mourn his passing but Libya is a country divided The North and West in favour of Gaddifis reign continuing under him and his son Saif and the East equally determined to overthrow the state. Therefore the UN resolution to enforce a no fly zone and to prevent attacks on civilians was just in its formation and supported by the Arab League with its votes because it made sense.

But is there anyone out there still willing to believe the British or French military when they say they are simply endorsing the UN resolution? Shots of a Libyan jet being brought down on Saturday morning were used as an example of Libyan government aggression against the rebels. Then just a few hours later when it was no longer possible to deny that the fighter jet actually belonged to the rebels and was being used against government forces the BBC changed its tune but not composer by describing its bringing down as still an act of Libyan Government aggression but this time by ground to air troops against a rebel plane!

It seems now as if the civilian rebels have tanks and planes! This has all the hallmarks of a bloody civil war with little signs of an early victor.

This conflict for the West is about Regime change. pure and simple, Gaddafi has had his day and they now need to dispose of him and interfere in the election of tommorrow puppet to the West, and the realisation today (Monday 21st March 2011) that voices in the Arab League are questioning the intent and actions of those carrying out the UN resolution paint a dark picture for the west's involvement from here on in. Already the end game is uncertain, the planning? non existent and the questions as to compliance with the UN resoltion already being questioned by the Arab League, India and others. Call me old fashioned but shouldn't we set the plan for all to see and have clear objectives laid out and decided upon before we start shooting people? Shouldn't we ensure that those plans accord with international law before we go messing around in the internal conflict of another sovereign state

I am not a pacifist. I don't like war, who does? I voted against the Iraq war in the Commons because the case was not proven and I equally supported the action on Serbia/Croatia because it was and it was obvious to anyone that only force alone would stop an humanitarian crisis from continuing, but who are our current political leaders kidding when they try and tell us that civilians dying at the hands of British supplied arms in Yemen and Bahrain are less deserving than civilians dying at the end of a British supplied gun in Libya.

But the real nasty taste left in my mouth from all the weekend news was the race by Clegg and Milliband to jump aboard any passing war horse. we are fully behind the Prime Minister and his actions they said. Well did they ask their respective memberships? of course not and it sums up all that is wrong with British Politics today. Around the Country Labour and Lib Dem candidates will be knocking on doors before the local election polls trying to defend the stances of their respective parties which they themselves had no say in formulating. as we speak a vote in the Commons will be conducted with a Free Vote (if you believe that then you really are gullible) to decide on whether or not we undertake Military action which has already begun!

Over in Palestine there will be continued confusion as to why only some UN resolutions are acted on by the West whilst others are ignored for years and years and years. And in Yemen and Bahrain families will be burying their loved ones with no hope of international support or intervention simply because their OIL flows are either not significant or they flow in a different direction!

Forced regime change in Libya? NOT IN MY NAME. Selective action to cover up the self interest of the West? NOT IN MY NAME. A Party leader telling me how to think and who to support? NOT HERE

IF SOCIETY REMAINS SO ANTI GAY THEN BEING GAY WILL REMAIN SO ANTI-SOCIAL

It would seem that the Conservative Party still hold true to the belief that closets are for far more than just keeping clothes in.

This weeks exposé of William Hague's private life and his alleged affair with PA Christopher Myers has in my view been as distasteful as it was confused.

Rumours as to William's sexuality have circled around in the Westminster village for many many years, I remember only too well the sniggers and whispers in Parliaments corridors that surrounded Hague and Sebestian Coe's Private Judo sessions in Jeffery Archers London flat, I didn't care much for this schoolboy like chit chat then and I feel equally disinterested now in what he gets up to with his personal advisors male or female as long as it doesn't affect the rest of us, but unfortunately in this case it might.

You see for me I have always considered that William might be bi-sexual, but firmly, very firmly, in the closet, I might be right and I might be wrong, but it doesn't affect my opinion of the man in any way, why should it? But the Conservative Party in the main think differently and that's the problem with Tories, even more so for Gay Tory politicians at national and local level; you see they find it even more difficult to talk about their sexuality in public than they do admitting it to their parents. To rub salt into the wounds of the whole gay community they then, when challenged by the press on their private lives go on to make statements which in themselves are so homophobic that they pander to the worst aspects of the gay bashing masses.

William Hague's personal statement this week was both ill advised and distasteful, why on earth he thinks we all need to know about him and Ffions problems with child birth is beyond me? Why he goes out of his way to talk about "improper relationships" and not having had relationships with "any man whatsoever" equally baffles me.

It reminded me of my good friend Stephen Pound MP speaking in the House once on the age of consent bill, he was winding up the Tory (and one Labour) homophobes on the opposite bench wonderfully by playing to their lowest base, one of them questioned his time in the Merchant Navy as if to say all seafarers must be gay. Stephen put on an air of mock outrage and said, "Madam Speaker the honourable member questions my sexuality, I will have him know that I am a rampant heterosexual! rampant! Madam Speaker" all to cheers of Hear Hear from the Tory benches. He then started to outline his sexual conquests before being bought to order by the speaker.  Not much remains in Hansard of this exchange, but those of us present appreciated his skillful exposure of all that is bad about the Conservative Party whenever they get to discussing gay issues. I doubt if they even realised that his whole act was a parody.

But coming back to William, what a fool he has made of himself and what a hole he has dug for himself in the future, because the real story here isn't his sexuality, it's his judgement in hiring an unqualified personal advisor to be paid for by the public purse and then it being revealed that he shared hotel rooms with the same individual. If his denial is so absolute then perhaps he would have been better advised in telling us that as a Yorkshire man that he was simply saving the Government money by sharing bedrooms with his staff to help them reduce the national debt, rather than putting all the details of his poor wife's traumatic miscarriages all over the front pages.

You see William's problem now is that even if he was gay and wanted to come out of the closet and say that he had indeed had a relationship with Christopher Myers then he has just added another lock to the closet door, because to come out now would reveal that he had in fact misappropriated public funds and used his position to employ an unqualified person and pay for hotel rooms on the grounds of their relationship.

So it all comes down to judgement, his in responding in the way he did, and ours as to whether or not we believe his denials, and also whether or not we believe that this whole episode has made him more suitable for high office or less.

What the whole affair isn't and should never had been about is his sexuality, or his private problems within his marriage to Ffion who incidentally is by far the biggest victim of this whole sorry sorry mess.

The national media and the Tory party in the meantime need to both wake up to the fact that being Gay is as natural and wholesome as being married with 2.2 children.

William though should learn to be William, just William and ignore all the tittle tattle and realise that it's his judgement that we all question not his sex life.




- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Airbrushed for change

Sometimes I think the Tory party have taken a conscious decision to simply try to keep their heads down as much as they can until the general election in the hope that just because its "their turn" the electorate will give them the right to govern.

This policy of "don't say anything otherwise we will ruin it" seems to hold water as every policy announcement they do make is followed quickly by a press story telling us all what a gaffe they have just made.

Therefore I was delighted to come across the website www.mydavidcameron.com which has really brightened up the early election exchanges no end.

It all started when the Tory Party released the following supposedly airbrushed image of David Cameron (very waxy indeed) to convince us all to vote for their own special brand of change:




The website www.davidcameron.com then called upon the Great British public to use its on site tool and its sense of political humour to make up their own airbrushed versions of the poster.

The results are hilarious, I urge you all to pay a visit(they are recieving over 100,000 hits a week!) and to be equally creative, but for now by way of example and encouragement I give you my "Airbrushed for Change" top three:


No 3. Proof positive that Labour and the Conservatives have merged into a great oneness:





No 2. Seems a very "Tim nice but dim" take on how to turn things around:





No 1 Thanks Nan, I always said we should listen to our elders (apologies for the swearing she is getting on a bit)




Lets all hope that the rest of the election is so funny.