Last one out the box close the lid

What a difference a day makes - as the song goes.

It seems the UK is to have a coalition government.

Things looked pretty bad over the last day or so. This by contrast to that seems not quite so worrying.

We are seeing a hint of light at the end of the tunnel and hoping against hope it is not the 17:15 to Cambridge and we are not all about to become the stuffed toy on the front of the dust cart, to mix and match metaphors.

Suddenly being polite and reasonable seems to be the order of the day. I do wonder about the timing of Gordon Brown's resignation and if it's timing was designed to strain the chances of a Liberal Democrat/Progressive Conservative Coalition.

Suddenly everyone is busy saying what a statesman he was as if he was dead, I guess he is politically - so I shall refrain from mentioning any inconvenient truths, the gold reserve or pachyderms quietly milling about in the corner of the room.

Experience suggests that the chances are a coalition is likely to come apart at the seams. Driven apart by internal fault lines when push really comes to shove - look at the Lib-Lab pact. Things are certainly going to get difficult before they get any easier, are the Lib Dems up to it?

Still maybe Cameron and Clegg are really serious about government in the national interest and may really be able to drag enough of their parties along with them.

One way they could save a huge amount of money would be to demand Thatcher's negotiated payments discount back from the EU that Blair blithely gave away. Maybe ask for a bigger one of their own.

The UK pays a disproportionately large amount in to the EU to pay for civic improvements in the likes of Portugal and allow French farmers to continue to live in the manner to which they have become accustomed, etc.

Not likely to happen one suspects what with Nick being a Europhile, still it would plug a big hole in the nation's finances.

Maybe we’ll get the best of both Liberal Democrat and Conservative policies and less useful ones will somehow cancel each other out.. Keeping each other honest with each party will acting like the other’s watchdog.

Maybe to save money they will have to hold back the expansion of the state and buy us some breathing space. Maybe some of them will actually even want to do that. Shame that the Liberal Democrats, like Labour and in favour of robbing the dead in the form of low thresholds on inheritance tax. Penalising the south disproportioantely.

I am keeping my fingers crossed - but I am also keeping an umbrella handy against the chance flying pigs coming home to roost turn out to have minimal bowel control.

Goodness knows we need politicians to get over confusing the national interest with their party's interest or even their own personal interest. The thought of them actually doing it seems almost too much to hope for or to actually believe.

Still, they say a cynic is a disappointed optimist, It seems there is a tiny bit of optimist left in me that can still occasionally and probably briefly surface...

It’s only a tiny ‘Obama moment’ of hope that I’ll probably pay for later.

Jumped or pushed?

Well – He of the clunking fist, the old lady dissing, Gordon Brown himself is offering to resign, for the good of his party.

And all the pundits are going “Really!?!” amazed - at least the CNN ones seem to be.

How is this anything other than to be expected?

Gordon knows perfectly well that he has, whatever Labour spin MDs may try to say, led his party to a pretty bad, not to put too fine a point on it, defeat.

The only thing that kept the “dead man walking” actually walking, were the electric shocks supplied by the Dark Lord and puppet master himself – Madleson.

Really it was a choice of jump or be pushed.

Someone had to be the fall guy for what they could see was coming. The Labour leadership was a poisoned chalice no one sane wanted before the election... once they decided they had little chance of an outright victory.

They must all have been thinking “Let's fight like hell for what seats we can save, let Gordon take the bullet and maybe let Dave Cameron make himself seriously unpopular trying to sort the mess we made out - Back in 5 years time”.

It didn’t work out quite like that and now it is a real mess.

Labour clearly had no chance of hooking up with the Liberal Democrats while Gordon was in nominal charge, given his reported relationship with Nick Clegg. Could not make a majority with the Liberals either, not without minority Nationalist parties - and that would be an unstable mess that would barely have any majority anyway.

Maybe on alternate wednesdays if they were lucky.

Unless the Liberals and Conservatives can come up with something that is not Schizophrenic any coalition they make will not be able to last, or function effectively either.

Maybe what we really need is a general election?

Janus

There is something inherently dishonest about the Liberal Democrat's current attempt to appeal to voters.

They are desperate to keep facing in both directions and be all things to all people, including new.

Nick Clegg and his advisors are perfectly well aware that for many disaffected Conservative and Labour supporters an x in their box is a protest vote against their own parties.

Many disaffected Conservative supporters could never bring themselves to vote Labour, but feel it is important to vote, so they vote Liberal, less so in a general election that in Local elections, but they definitely do it.

The same holds true for disaffected Labour supporters. They also can convince themselves that the Liberal Democrats are enough like Labour to vote for them.

So Nick Clegg's dilemma is he needs support from both disaffected Conservative and disaffected Labour supporters. To do this he has to play coy with who and what the Liberal Democratic Party are.

Even today on the eve of the election when directly asked Nick still desperately avoids answering that question as to who he might support in a hung parliament.

He needs Conservative Supporters to see him as practically Conservative and a potential partner to a Hung Parliament Conservative Government and Labour Supporters to see him as practically Labour and a likely potential partner in a possible hung pearliest Labour government.

Obviously the two positions are mutually exclusive. One group of supporters that he is so assiduously attempting to woo are going to be severely disappointed if there is a hung parliament.

Nick Clegg of course wants to put off betraying them and blowing his carefully implied political fellowship until after they have voted for him and it is too late.

If he can get his hands on power just once for just long enough he can push for whatever change in the electoral system most favours his own party at the expense of the others and possibly the UK too.

The Liberal party is dreaming being serious contenders - for the fist time since the Great War.

Oh... remember how sanctimonious Nick Clegg was over Gordon Brown's Gillian Duffy open mike gaff? He had his own moment, maybe he should have been a little less self satisfied about Gordon's


Janus, or Ianus, was the god of gates, doors & doorways, bridges and passages of beginnings and endings. He was also the god of the entrance of the home.

Elections - A bed voters will have to lay in afterwards

It is finally election time in the UK. The date has been set for May 6 and currently there is much talk about the possibility of a ‘hung’ parliament.

This is a parliament where no party has a proper working majority - so basically they are usually pointless, weak, ineffectual and short lived.

There is talk amongst the MSM pundits that some voters may actually be hoping for a ‘hung’ parliament. I wonder if it has been explained to them it does not involve nooses and the lamp posts of Westminster as some sort of public participant entertainment of the type previously associated with Tyburn.

Why? Well it’s since the first televised ‘presidential’ style debate (that were not really debates as such) between the leaders of the parties, Nick Clegg, the leader of the unofficial “None of the above” party. The Liberals, who should not under any circumstances be confused with ‘Laissez faire' Liberals, is benefiting from doing quite well in them and from managing to distance himself from much of the recent corruption and the government’s incompetence.

It is worth noting that there is nothing to stop any, or all, of the parties changing their leaders immediately after the election, as the party leaders are chosen by the parties and are not presidential candidates at all and not voted for by the people.

UK voters, ignorant as many are, should bear in mind they are actually voting for their local MP, who again can switch parties if they wish, just as soon as they are elected if they so desire.

They are not voting for next British Prime Minister.

It will now be in Nick Clegg’s interests to be a little coy as to who he might be willing to do a deal with to help form a government in the event of a hung parliament.

Why? - Because many of his potential votes will be from disaffected Labour and Conservative voters who convince themselves in their disillusionment with their own parties that Liberals are practically the same thing. He will want to keep them all thinking he is the next best thing until after the election. Much like the Welsh and Scots Natonalists who in addition care very little about anyone outside their own areas.

The Liberals can’t be both - and someone will end up being disappointed, possibly both Labour and Conservative supporters who vote Liberal afterwards in the harsh light of day.

Liberals don’t do too badly in local elections where they can’t do harm on a national level with some of their more half-baked ideas.

That is the problem. If we think of it in evolutionary terms, some of the weirder ideas they have tucked away (think harmful genes) have never needed to stand the harsh light of day and never to date had the chance to do any real harm and harm the fitness of the organism that is the UK by becoming active.

I don’t mind what they may do to the Liberals themselves - Mostly keep them out of power since after the first world war so far.

I do care what they do to the UK, as I live in it.

I care in much the same way as I would if I were floating in a small boat taking on some water with some bright spark who thought it might be a good idea to poke holes in it with a screwdriver in order to let the water out…

A future - but would it really be fair for all?

It seems that Labour, or rather the ideologically dedicated ;-) Saatchi and Saatchi, have come up with an election campaign slogan.

'A future fair for all'

Apparently it is supposed to capture Labour and particularly the (possibly literally) clunking fist’s "own personal point of view”.

No wonder they want to distract us from looking at their record in power with airy waffle of the future. A future they know will involve tax hikes and spending cuts that they are even now allowing to grow larger as they try to play them down dragooning their pet economists much as when they wrongly as it turned out attacked Geoffrey Howe.

“Fairness” is one of those Labour newspeak words like “Community”.

As near as I can tell, to Labour and their fellow travellers, fairness essentially means that no one should be allowed to succeed more than anyone else. The thought seems to be that if someone does, or aspires to do so, then it is somehow unfair. They are somehow “unfairly” taking advantage of, intelligence, hard work and plain good luck, or possibly that of their parents in order to succeed.

Essentially to cut people off at the knees so to speak in order to prevent them standing head and shoulders above anyone else. Because to their minds the very act of doing so is of course “unfair”.

S&S’s director of strategy to Richard Huntington would like us to believe that the new slogan “highlights that change is a process”. Really?

Apparently it also rather worryingly “locks together a destination for Britain”

Oh and it seems outrageously contends “that the future for Labour is for the many, compared to the Conservatives”, where he would have us believe the future would “always be for the few."

So then, they are apparently (and possibly allowing their Freudian slip to show) taking a leaf out of the early Russian communists little red book.

Up to a certain point in 1903 they were part of the relatively innocuously titled “Russian Social Democratic Party”. A minority, who didn’t feel they were necessarily destined for success there, going on the way they were, spit away from the party and formed a breakaway group.

Much like our Gordon it seems they presumably cunningly and misleadingly, (rather than ironically), they referred to themselves as “members of the majority”. Possibly in order to sucker those who don’t look too closely at such claims and go with the feel of a slogan rather than it’s relationship with reality.

The Russian word for “members of the majority” is of course Bolsheviks, after 1917 they managed a much longer stint in power than Tony Blair ever did. Such an extended term in power is surely the stuff of the clunking fist’s private fantasies.

It seems to me more realistic to argue that if you want a future where you really do have a fair chance to succeed, without the ball and chain of the incompetent nannying of the repressive Labour state dragging you down then the last thing you should do is vote Labour.

UK Glorious Leader's New Year Speech

The Glorious Leader and saviour of the world Gordon Brown delivers his New Year’s message to his grateful people.

He warned voters not to "wreck the recovery", presumably by voting for someone other than him in next year’s election that has been forced on him.

One wonders if he sees voters who don’t wholeheartedly support him as “saboteurs” and “wreckers”. Maybe they need to be lured out and dealt with for the good of the nation.

One fears the speech may be open to misunderstanding so I have helpfully provided a commentary to assist with certain passages…

Gordon: “important legislation making long-term changes in energy, climate change, health, pensions, planning, housing, education and transport, 2008 will be a year of measurable changes in public services. important legislation making long-term changes in energy, climate change, health, pensions, planning, housing, education and transport, 2008 will be a year of measurable changes in public services.”

Translation: “we will be legislating (as quietly as possible) massive tax hikes to try to cover our pissing away tax payers hard earned cash. We will hide this by pretending it is to save the planet. Maybe we will set some more target that will mess everything up and fiddle the figures to pretend we met them.”

Gordon: ”we will not shirk but see through changes and reforms in the vital area for our future - secure energy, pensions, transport, welfare, education, health and national security.

We will strengthen the democracy and unity of our country. Our priority at all times, our guiding purpose: One Britain of security and opportunity for all the British people.”

Translation: ”So say good-by to some more ancient rights, liberties and freedoms. We will be building power stations where we want and really don’t want to be bothered by your reasonable objections. Oh and if you think you will be allowed to just do things like taking a picture of Nelson’s column or possibly a member of the constabulary shoving an old man over then think again. You can be harassed and arrested for that now.”

Gordon: “ Our strong economy is the foundation. And with unbending determination, in 2008, we will steer a course of stability through global financial turbulence.

The global credit problem that started in America is now the most immediate challenge for every economy and addressing it the most immediate priority.”

Translation: “Our economy that I badly damaged when I was chancellor and carried on treating like my personal piggy bank as PM is pretty shot, but maybe, if I keep saying it’s strong some of you might be stupid enough to believe it. In any case it is the nasty American’s fault and in no way nothing to do with me whatsoever and I do hope you don’t notice everyone else seems to be starting to recover so much more quickly."

Gordon: ”To lead in the skills of the future and create a full employment Britain, we will guarantee young people the right to school or college, an apprenticeship or training free of charge until the age of 18. This is the greatest change in education in our country in half a century.”

Translation: “Unfortunately young people don’t have much hope of getting a job since I did so much to bugger the economy… so I will make sure they stay in full time education - and off the unemployment books as long as humanly possible.”

Gordon: ”To lead in safeguarding the environment, the climate change bill will make Britain the first country to legislate legally-binding cuts in carbon emissions.
And because a good environment is good economics, we will take the difficult decisions on energy security - on nuclear power and renewables - so British invention and innovation can claim new markets for new technologies and create hundreds of thousands of new jobs.“

Translation: ”We will tie a stealth taxation ball and chain round the economy’s leg and as I said build Wind farms and Nuclear Power stations where we damned well please – Got it?”

Gordon: "To build for the future of our families and our economy, we are starting the biggest housing programme to boost owner occupation - and will provide historic levels of investment in transport and infrastructure through Crossrail, at Heathrow and across the country.

Translation: ”We will build crap housing and instant sink estates where we please and by historic we mean something as useful and popular as the Beaching cuts. There’s historic for you”

Gordon: ”we will not be deflected from our commitment to cleaner hospitals and to change to increase the opening hours of GP surgeries.”

Translation: ”Lets hope the thicko voters don’t remember we have had over a decade to fix all this stuff already and just made it noticeably worse. Especially GPs hours with that cocked up new contract we came up with, everyone knows you used to be able to get your own Doctor to visit your home in an emergency, now you have to talk to NHS direct on the phone and then get to make your own way to a centre or call an ambulance if they think you need it.”

Gordon: “We have other promises to keep, from neighbourhood policing in every community to the renewal of our democracy and the revival of confidence in our political process. We will define a new citizenship of rights and responsibilities - and establish a new points system as a condition of living and working in Britain.”

Translation: ”Yes I know you don’t trust the police much anymore after we politicised them got them arresting law abiding members of the public instead of criminals and tied them up with targets and red tape so they cant patrol. But we hope if we start to pick on those immigrants we encouraged in the first place as stealth ideological social engineering maybe you won’t vote for that bastard Griffin.”

Gordon: ”And in 2008, with firm conviction and resolve, we will make the case for the United Kingdom - standing up for the cause of the Union and against secession, showing people in all parts of the country that for so many of the challenges our country faces - from climate change to terrorism - there are no Wales-only, Scotland-only or England-only solutions.”

Translation: ”…and talking of bastards... You little shit Salmond! If you think you are cutting away what’s left of my political support you have another think coming. You just want to be a big frog in a small pond and are throwing away the large big UK pond the Scots are already in charge of - Idiot!!”

Gordon: "And in 2008, with firm conviction and resolve, we will make the case for the United Kingdom - standing up for the cause of the Union and against secession, showing people in all parts of the country that for so many of the challenges our country faces - from climate change to terrorism - there are no Wales-only, Scotland-only or England-only solutions.”

Translation: ”In your face Salmond. – one peep from you and we will nail you with being soft on terrorism, especially after you let that Libyan out of jail”

Gordon: "This season is above all a time to pay tribute to those who serve and sacrifice for our country, often in places far away. And we pledge that the men and women on the frontlines of our security, at home and overseas, will have all the resources they need for our defence and their own safety.”

Translation: ”Hurrah for our good old troops!! See how patriotic I am folks… don’t you pay any mind to the fact that we have looked down on the sort of people who are willing to defend their country for decade. Or that we have cut their numbers, equipment and funding to the bone - while expanding the civil service and useless parasitic Quangos. Or the fact that to actually supply half decent kit after a public outcry we are going to gut other areas of defence funding even more. Hurrah for the troops!”

And hey folks! Don't forget you can take a Labour Manifesto Promise straight to the failing bank of Neverpay.

It's Legal, it's official you can't reasonably expect them to deliver on them.

UK’Stamp Duty’ suspended for 12 months

Has anyone noticed?

New Labour’s much trumpeted partial holiday on ‘Stamp duty’ (for non UK residents this is a sales tax imposed by the state on house sales) is, if it is of benefit to anyone, mostly likely to be of benefit in the north, which at least historically was demographically more New Labour friendly.

New Labour are talking about a holiday for stamp duty under £175K This should cover quite a few properties for sale in the North and proportionately far less in the South, due to regional differences in house prices. Any figures the Government states one suspects will be 'spun' averages.

Could it be that they calculate they have terminally burned their bridges already with the South, so they want to minimise the coming electoral debacle for at least some of their sitting MPs

House sales depend on chains, with new time buyers going in at the bottom of the market and the others in the chain trading up, How far up the chain will theis make a difference?

Of course if you can't get a mortgage in the first place – and that is the major actual problem with the housing market, mortgages having effectively dried up because of the credit crunch. Then what difference will reducing the sales tax of around £1.7K imposed on a few of the sales make?

And let’s not forget that any improvement in the housing market that may actually be had from this piece of spin will have to be paid for in reverse, at the end of the ‘holiday’ in a year’s time, when ther will be a corresponding rush then a step back down in sales.

Is it time to shrink the state to more manageable proportions?

The Telegraph asks an interesting question today “Who is the 'right leader' for our hard times”? Sparked by Broon’s waffle about providing the right leaderhip.

Even more adventurously they ask: “Do we need a politician running Britain at all”?

Maybe the question they should really be asking is: “Do we need anyone running Britain at all”?

Personally I am not really sure I want much so-called leadership at all. Belgium seems to have managed well enough with no parliament recently. Could we manage mostly at a county level?

We have after all a perfectly good royal family to represent the country. The queen probably knows more about politics than any two prime ministers put together. They are certainly more in tune with practical environmentalism than the average politician.

So combine the Royal family with a parliament that has responsibility for maintaining the legal system, the armed forces and the currency. Claw back every last parliamentary privilege and power ceded to the unelected EU commission.

Have a watchdog to police MPs propriety and finances. Make it impeachable to renague on election promises. These people should be the servants of the Nation, not it’s patrician ruling class.

Given that we have had a millennium’s worth of very, very, bad legislation in the last decade let's make it as difficult as possible for them to ever pass any new legislation again. Without at least 75% in favour.

The state should be kept very firmly away from telling the citizen what to do.

Let local democracy, take care of all the other details.

Works for me…

Just how illegal should cannabis be?

Cannabis is illegal. You might not think so from general observation, but it is.

The Authoritarian State in the form of New-Labour’s Jacquie Smith wishes to make it more illegal (Class B) than it currently is (Class C), despite advice to the contrary from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. Probably as much from a desire to try to pretend to be decisive, after the electoral thrashing they have just had. Dave the Bloke’s fluffy, environmentally friendly, Conservative party, hinting at it’s less fluffy antecedents, is apparently solidly with New-Labour on this.

One suspects the police would, on the whole, rather leave it where it is,

Given that the State’s policy on drugs effectively makes criminals out of (one suspects) a majority of the population - the otherwise law abiding, the question that occurs is: “What impact does this have on the population as a whole’s respect for the law?”.

One fears much the same as prohibition in the US, almost entirely negative – except for organised crime. One imagines they might pump a fair bit into lobbying for Cannabis to remain illegal…

UK Tabloid Titillation EXPOSED!!

It is interesting to note that lower end of the UK MSM are at it again.

Not content with secretly filming, distorting and ‘exposing’ the private life of Formula One boss, Max Mosley, they now have their hooks into Lord Laidlaw.

Billed as “A TOP TORY PAYMASTER!” they seem particularly fascinated by the involvement of an allegedly “TRI-LINGUAL BISEXUAL!”, giving the vague impression that being “TRI-LINGUAL!” is some sort of sexual practice, or preference ;-), rather than a sign of intelligence.

In the case of Mosley it seems they distorted the details and falsely reported them to talking heads, who then foolishly give them outraged quotes in return.

In the case of Laidlaw they conveniently tuck the fact that he has also funded inner city academies and youth projects for disadvantaged children way down the story, after the presumably politically motivated, “TORY PAYMASTER!” stuff.

He certainly is a significant donor to the Conservative party, but what has this got to do with the price of fish?

Is it really the business of the Tabloids what someone does in private? As far as I am aware he, like Mosley, has committed no crimes. On the contrary he actually appears to genuinely want to do good. One suspects the press may have sailed far closer to the wind in that respect in their efforts at privacy invasion.

Apart from the fact that unconventional sex was involved Laidlaw has done nothing more than arranging a venue and some professional entertainment. One can see, in this case it might concern his wife, depending on her views of life, but not the rest of us.

Why is it acceptable for the press to trumpet people’s sexual preferences to the world when they are doing no harm? Would they do the same if they had pictures of someone famous on the WC? Quite possibly, one begins to suspect.

These were consenting adults who were presumably enjoying themselves drinking champagne, good wines and in some cases providing a service they were being paid for. Honest value given for honest value received.

Clegg betrays Lib-Dem manifesto promise

As predicted Gordon Brown is a step closer to his eventual EU commissioner hood. He has ridden roughshod over democracy to force the Lisbon Treaty down the nation’s reluctant throat.

Lib-Dem leader Nick Clegg was interviewed last night on Sky News 24 on the 19:00 slot.

They were mostly asking some difficult questions about his sacking of the only honourable members of his shadow cabinet/front bench team, the ones who had voted for a referendum.

The presenter was interested in if he was going to punish any of the other Lib-Dem MPs who had defied the party whip imposing his will, in order to vote as their manifesto had promised they would.

He blustered a bit, but tellingly when they asked what he thought people would think of the way he forced many Lib-Dem MPs to vote against their consciences he suggested the Conservatives had somehow been ‘mealy mouthed’ in trying to make acceptance dependant on a referendum. He said as closely as I can recall “If the Conservatives had their way it wouldn’t change things for one moment”.

He seemed to be acknowledging that even a no vote in a referendum wouldn’t stop, or even delay, the European project, or the constitution – and in this he is probably right. The previous no votes haven’t made a jot of difference, so why should a referendum result?

He is wrong though and it says something detrimental about his character that he thinks this way. Not necessarily wrong about the eventual outcome, but wrong about the futility of standing up for what you believe in, even if you may be doomed to ultimately fail, there is still a chance you could make a difference.

This is something he apparently does not understand. It is to their credit that some of 'his' MPs do.

Watch this space.

The UK Libertarian Party is setting out it’s stall on the net.

What they say so far looks very encouraging.

Let's hope that they come to the attention of enough of the apparently huge numbers of voters who have lost faith with the existing main parties.

…And let’s hope that those voters haven’t utterly given up on politics.

Lib-Dems choose Nick Clegg as leader

Well the Lib-Dems have chosen a replacement for Ming.

It is Nick Clegg. He looks young and personable. It will be interesting to see what he does and if it will result in an actual change in the party.

It is bound to lead to some improvement in their standing.

When I heard him last night he appeared to be trying to pull the tired old Lib-Dem trick (that has earned them the title Fib-Dems) to be all things to all people. Suggesting that both disaffected Labour and Tory voters should vote Lib-Dem.

This might be understandable in the case of some Labour voters, as the Lib-Dems are arguably more left wing, in many respects, these days than New-Lab.

It is difficult to see how any Tories could square voting Lib-Dem with their political beliefs - unless they happen to be an ancient dyed in the wool Heathite Paternalist/Socialists. Also as the Conservatives now finally seem to be a credible alternative to New-Lab it is difficult to imagine they would support a more left wing alternative to New-Lab with less actual prospect of ousting Gordon Brown.

At the moment the smart tactical voting against Gordon Brown will probably have to be for the Conservatives if it is not to be wasted. It will be interesting to see if this changes in the new year…

Sir Menzies Campbell - Resignation

Poor old Ming.

Beware the ides of October - Lying there, in a figurative pool of blood, whilst his good friends Simon and Vince announce his resignation for him. It’s not so much Ming that was merciless - more the Fib Dems.

If Ming hasn’t said it, someone ought to tell the ones with the knives: "You too my son, will have a taste of power"

Are Ming’s days as leader numbered?

It looks like Ming the Merciless’ days may be numbered.

The Fib Dems may be trying to work up the courage to give him a Roman send off, with the "Et tu, Brute" treatment. He had better keep a wary eye out for gatherings of his front benchers.

PM puts brakes on ‘Snap’ UK Election

Evidently Gordon Broon Breeks, having considered all the options, has now decoded against calling a snap general election.

This is clearly because he calculates that if he were to have called one he would be in danger of reducing his majority, possibly even to the point where it actually became a minority – So Snap election, not a good move then.

The problem is that he has apparently been teetering on calling one for some time. Doing it by remote control of course to try and maintain deniability. Hence his minions have been dropping hints and scurrying round laying the ground for one and generally talking the idea up. There is no way all this would have been going on without Gordon’s approval behind the scenes. If it was it would have to make him a pathetically weak leader.

Plus, no doubt he calculated, it might help steal, or drown out, some of the opposition’s conference thunder.

Never-the-less he must have felt pressured to decide, with his window due to close.

Like a hesitant motorist at a roundabout, he had almost plucked up the courage to go - when he realised the opportunity had gone and he would have to wait if he wanted to be safe.

This must have seriously damaged his reputation. Especially after all his hot air about running stuff like that past parliament first, rather than the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show.

Maybe he will argue that all MPs had the chance to watch the show so he was actually using it as a means to address parliament. It’s the sort of dodgy spin Nu-Lab love so much.

Still, as PM he is in a position to use the resources of Government to do his best to undo the damage over the coming months and take the wind out of the opposition’s sales.

We can probably expect some smoke and mirrors to distract us from his brown breeks any minute. Taxes? Troop withdrawals? Maybe even a referendum – though he probably is not that keen to distract us.

So now we have a Government that was elected with a different leader, on a manifesto they have not honoured, quite the reverse in fact Gordon himself has, to date, been twisting to avoid honouring it - If Gordon’s Government can not be said to have a mandate, then where is his?

Conservatives bounce back after Party Conference

According to the Guardian Gordon Brown’s reportedly huge lead against ‘The Party formerly known as the Conservatives’ has dramatically reduced. This could in turn reduce the likelihood of a snap election.

A new ICM poll puts Nu-Lab on 38%, neck and neck with the PFKAT Conservatives also on 38%, with the Fib Dems trailing on 16%.

Those within NU-Lab in favour of a snap election are suggesting that the shift in the party’s relative standings is a blip down to the PFKATC Conference that the Broon went to such efforts to eclipse and upstage.

They will also be buoyed by the fact that much of the improvement in the opposition’s position seems to have been at the expense of Ming the Merciless’ Fib Dems.

They must be calculating that, as some of Broon’s economic chickens come home to roost, over the next six or more months, their chances of yet another term will proportionately decrease.

On the down side there is also the skeleton in their cupboard of their broken manifesto promise over the EU Constitution/’Treaty’, that, if willing, the opposition should be able to use to great effect. Also they will need some time to work out how to trash newly revealed opposition policies, and be wondering if they could do a proper job in time for a snap election.

Some of Nu-Labs more marginal incumbents are no doubt feeling a bit wobbly right now. They must be aware that if there is a snap election Nu-Lab may well take a hit, even if they can retain a majority - and this will be at their expense.

It will be interesting to see if Broon tries to go against his nature and steal the idea of raising the level that inheritance tax kicks in at. He will probably not be able to cope with a one million limit though – too painful.

However much it is, any at all is still stealing money from dead people, who already paid tax on it anyway - morally, not a lot different from stealing the cash out of the pocket of a heart attack victim dying in the street. Still, that’s politicians for you.

Dave Cameron Keen on return to Conservative values - Before Brown steals them all

It seems that Dave the Chameleon is now keen on re-branding himself.

Many members of the party formerly known as the Conservatives must have been wondering what on earth he was playing at, when some of his more ludicrous ideas were touted to the press and bombed with many of his natural supporters, whist simultaneously failing to convince anyone else.

It all almost seemed calculated to alienate his natural constituency whist at the same time be lukewarm at best to floating voters and the hoards of Ming the merciless.

It must have been galling watching Broon make direct appeals to Tory voters and Shadow Chancellor, George Osborne, has finally been forced to fight back, to try to regain lost ground and attempt to prevent the PM looking more far more conservative than his own leader.

So, instead of the ‘heir to Blair’ he is now keen to be seen as the ‘heir to Thatcher’ - Unfortunately it looks like he was a bit too slow again. He turned up at the new busking pitch only to find that Broon got there first.

He really does desperately need to dump the comparison many see with Blair. That is a millstone round his neck.

Gordon Brown has stolen virtually all his clothes while he wasn’t looking (Dave had thought they were out of fashion). Now all he has left to protect his modesty is a dodgy suit he got from Tony that still has several payments left on it. Because of the suit, when he goes out at night people keep mistaking him for Tony and he gets into trouble over that.

Still all is not necessarily entirely lost, there is hope of some light at the end of the tunnel , Dave will probably be hoping that it is not just an oncoming train ;-)

Another party conference - another self serving spinning sound bite

In a speech today at NU-Lab’s Party conference their Health Fascist in chief Secretary Alan Johnson, had the nerve to criticise Dave the Bloke’s "Party formerly known as the Conservatives", claiming they were a "major risk" to the NHS.

Why? Apparently because they are calling for a moratorium in wholesale casualty department closures.

Now it seems on the face of it that more relatively small local casualty departments, able to handle the normal run-of-the-mill stuff - combined with some larger more advanced establishments could actually be beneficial.

The fact is that many in the UK, contrary to the spin pushed by Nu-Lab politicians, will have experienced an increase in the distance it is necessary to for them to travel to reach an A&E Department.

Without moving house, the distance it is necessary for me to travel to reach an A&E Dept has gone up from around 2 and a half miles to seven and a half and now sits at 12 miles. From my own practical experience the time necessary to be dealt with once you have arrived has risen over that same period.

There is no way Mr Johnson can convince me (or probably anyone else other than the Nu-Lab faithful) that this is an improvement.

Certainly not what you might see as; reshaping the NHS to become "clinically led and locally driven", treating patients close to home where possible…