London has less water than Sudan, apparently

I'm told (by an eco-warrier friend of mine) that, on a per person basis, you'll find more water in Sudan than in Greater London.

Good job that London Mayor, Ken Livingstone, is offering all Greater Londoners DIY Planet Repairs Toolkit for £0.

Sign up for yours - for free - here.

Shrewd Opportunism?

Chris Huhne is merely thinking of his own political capital in writing to the Metropolitan Police Chief, Sir Ian Blair, demanding an investigation into the latest party funding row.

Perhaps he is hoping it will do for his reputation what it did for SNP MP Angus MacNeil's in "Funding-gate" pt 1.

Yet whilst Gordon Brown's suggestion yesterday that the donations were "unlawful" may imply a police investigation is necessary, that Chris Huhne is attempting to "cash in" (pun not intended) on the issue is quite base.

It might help him in his attempt to get the poisoned chalice that is the Lib Dem leadership, but it hardly paints a rosy picture of British politics in general.

As if potentially unlawful donations aren't bad enough, this petty sort of playground politics makes our legislators look like a bunch of ferrets in a sack.

The smart thing for opposition parties to do in this situation is to give the impression they are concerned with the consequences of this latest furore, and with the actions of those involved, without appearing to be shamelessly capitalising on it.

In praise of ... Ben Brogan's Blog

Whilst I don't particularly care much for the institution he writes for, Ben Brogan's blog is probably one of the best British political blogs on the internet.

Which is why I've added him to my blogroll. Also added is the Spectator's Coffee House Blog and Boulton & Co from Sky News.

Alas, blogs I had hitherto respected - such as Iain Dale's Diary and Guido Fawkes - are becoming increasingly difficult for me to read. The former because it lacks incisive analysis and sounds far too often like the sort of razor-sharp political analysis you'd get at a WI Coffee Morning, and the latter because it is turning into little more than a Labour attack blog (still, Guido is remarkably well written).

Sleazy Peasy

Today, two quotes, juxtaposed.

"So Labour and the Lib Dems have made a pact jointly to hurl sleaze accusations at the Government and Tory MPs. That makes a change ... For Labour, sleaze is a cover to divert attention from the emptiness and obscurity of its somersaulting policies and promises. For the Lib Dems, it is a publicity stunt."

Woodrow Wyatt, Oct 1996

"If history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens, how incapable must Man be of learning from experience."

George Bernard Shaw

Conservatives, take heed. Labour, take stock.

Common sense prevails

On Friday, members of the Oxford Union voted by a margin of two-to-one to allow Nick Griffin and David Irving to participate in a debate on free speech. In the circumstances, this is the right decision.

Of course, there will be demonstrations tonight by those opposed. Maybe even counter-demonstrations by supporters of the BNP. But MP Evan Harris puts it well when he says:

"Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris, who is billed to speak at the forum, said it was the "views of these extremists which are a disgrace" and "not their right to hold their views".

"I have spent my whole political life opposing racism and bigotry, but it is vital to demonstrate that they will be defeated within our existing laws.

"The measure of our country's respect for free expression is our willingness to allow it for the most objectionable and offensive lawful speech, not just for those with whom we agree."

From BBC News Online.

Max Hastings also writes on the issue in the Guardian today. See here.

Thieves exploit benefits claimant data loss

With the police still pulling apart the HMRC offices in Washington, it hasn't taken long for daylight robbers to cash in on the loss of millions of benefit claimant records.

Experian, one of the UK's two credit-reference agencies, have just sent me a marketing message asking me to sign up for their online CreditExpert service. In the email, they reference the loss of millions of child benefit records as a good reason to do so. The CreditExpert service allows you to access your credit reference for a 'small' £70 annual fee.

I've got to say, I find the timing and pitch of this email to be a little cynical and quite distasteful.

I'm not against encouraging people to check their credit record on a regular basis. Indeed, this is advisable (I do it). But it is possible to get paper records for just £2 a time, instead of paying £5.99 a month for the priviledge of accessing data held about you.

Tories: "Let's give them a hard time. They're all foreigners."

Those pesky foreigners have been up to no good again. But luckily, three erstwhile Tory MPs were ready and waiting to give them a hard time.

I just wonder if the reception given to credit ratings agencies by the Treasury Select Committee would have been warmer if they had been British....?

London prides itself as an international financial centre but some MPs noted “they’re all foreigners” amid other insults as they privately disparaged the three main credit ratings agencies ahead of a parliamentary committee hearing this week.

Representatives of Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s Investors Service and Fitch Ratings came before the Commons Treasury select committee on Tuesday during hearings into financial stability and transparency in the wake of the Northern Rock debacle.

Before the hearing, three Conservative committee members began discussing the upcoming interrogation unaware their remarks were being picked up by the microphones on parliamentary TV. Michael Fallon, a former schools minister and the leading Tory on the committee, turned to Graham Brady and Peter Viggers, and said: “We must be as rude as possible to the credit agencies”, and that “they’re an absolute shower”. One MP said: “They’re all foreigners”.

More at FT.com.

Freedom from speech

I think I'd be right in saying that there are some political figures who we'd probably all be better off never hearing from again. But to suggest prohibiting these politicians from freely airing their views is - in my opinion - a slippery slope to the sort of state we could all do without.

Which is why I'm watching a gathering storm over in the dreaming spires of Oxford with growing interest.

Earlier this year, the President of the Oxford (debating) Union invited - amongst others -Nick Griffin and David Irvine to speak on the issue of freedom of speech. The student union, national union of students and the Oxford Jewish society are up in arms about it.

In short their argument is this: platforms shouldn't be given to fascists and holocaust-deniers.

I have two problems with this line:

1) The only way we are going to be able to confront the hideous beliefs of organisations such as the BNP is to have an open debate about them. After all, if we hide them under the carpet, then they are not going to go away. So, let's win the battle of ideas fairly, instead of legislating against certain beliefs. Aren't those that suggest preventing arguments they don't like from ever being heard just as bad as the despots who defined a large part of the twentieth century? Why is fighting fascism with fascist techniques at all desirable?

2) Ultimately, it is very patronising. Why should the Oxford Student Union, the NUS or the Oxford Jewish Society be better placed to decide what I should be able to listen to and what I shouldn't be able to listen to than any other organisation? Why do I even need someone else to tell me what is good or what is bad? Surely I can make my own mind up?

What's worse, though, is that it seems the argument has extended further. Now some believe that: platforms shouldn't be given to those who are fascists and holocaust-deniers, or to those who decide to participate in debates with fascists and holocaust-deniers. See this Facebook group for proof.

The last line of the description is particularly chilling:

This is not a group for discussing the rights and wrongs of appearing with the BNP. It is a group for those who have made up their minds and want to act. Dissent will be crushed - crushed nicely and politely, but crushed nonetheless.

This rhetoric is very disturbing from those that believe themselves to be on the liberal/left of politics. Perhaps we're simply 'all fascists now'? I certainly hope not.

I believe in the freedom of speech, not the freedom from speech. And I'm surprised that a certain proportion of the intellectual heavyweights of Oxford's undergraduate population have failed to sufficiently make that difference...

Show us your vision, Gordon

Gordon Brown called off an election to show us his vision. It's time he started doing so.



When Gordon Brown told Andrew Marr he wouldn't go to the country this year - nor next - in order to renew Labour's mandate to govern, he said:

"What I want to do is show people the vision that we have for the future of this country in housing and health and education and I want the chance, in the next phase of my premiership, to develop and show people the policies that are going to make a huge difference and show the change in the country itself."

And yet, it seems as if the only vision Gordon has is of personally retaining the keys to Number 10.

On inheritance tax and tax breaks for married couples, the government have stolen the Tories' clothes. On capital gains tax, they blundered and backtracked. On migrant workers, they have shown that they do not have a grip on the issue, nor a positive message for why migration is in the interests of Britian. On the latest EU treaty, Gordon has singularly failed to articulate the benefits of European membership, nor moved the debate from "do we even want to be in Europe?" to "what sort of Europe do we want to be in?" Instead, he will compel Labour MPs to force through the treaty without a proper debate.

If this is leadership, then it is second-rate.

Whilst the current government still represent the least worst option, they are in danger of being overtaken by a sort of complacency about a) the strength of their opposition and b) how they continue to demonstrate to the electorate that they have the ideas to drive the country forward.

The one thing I can't stand about Conservatives is the patronising way they assume they deserve to lead the country, without actually proving why. Looking at the direction the current Labour government is heading in, I'm seeing a similar arrogance. It reminds of me of the last line in Orwell's Animal Farm:

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but it was already impossible to say which was which."

Labour were the future once. For all our sakes, it's time they started being the future again.

Surely Huhne is on drugs or something?

The Huhney-Monster today launched his bid to become leader of the Liberal Dimocrats.

Who in their right mind would want to do that?

His flashy website states:

"The Liberal Democrats need an articulate, radical and effective champion. Chris Huhne will take the fight to our opponents. He will champion our name as a progressive, liberal party ready for power."

I wonder if the radical nature in Chris will see him advocate the same policy towards drugs that he espoused whilst a student at Oxford University. Namely:

"Surely no society has the right to impose its prejudices on its minority dissidents in the respect of their personal beliefs and actions. The university community has recognised that as fact. Drugs can no longer be despised as part of an escapist modus vivendi, and can be assessed as an accepted facet of our society."

Source: ISIS Magazine, sometime in the 1970s.

Huhne is crazy to want the poisoned-chalice of the Lib Dem leadership - perhaps he's off his mash on ecstasy-pipes....?


Hat-tips: Times Online, Guido Fawkes

Vati-con

The BBC is reporting that the Vatican has suspended a high ranking official after he admitted he was gay.

Being, as I am, a child of the politically-correct 1990s, the very act itself is rather astonishing, and on the face of it a rather indecent act. Sacking someone because they are gay is not de rigeur in the modern world. But it is precisely this sort of saga that goes further than just awakening my politically-correct indoctrination: it weakens my respect for Christian religious institutions and their teaching.

In pursuing such trivial things in our society as sexual preference and contraceptives in such a high-profile way, the Vatican may think it is doing us all a favour. Rather, they are being horrifically narrow-minded. To avoid confusion, I use the phrase narrow-minded in this sense: homosexuality is a mere spec on the canvas of the religious teaching of the Bible (to say nothing of whether the Bible actually incites hatred against homosexuals), and to focus on these specs misses the bigger picture.

The bigger picture is that we live in a world full of anger, theft, hatred, murder, warmongering, genocide, rape and so on. If the Christian faith is nothing else, then it is a means by which we can reconcile our competing claims in the pursuit of a common end; it a method of fostering 'brotherhood amongst men'.

By focusing on the specs, the Vatican fails to see the bigger picture.

And in the process, it fails us.

BBC accused of "dumbing up"

Apparently the BBC has been caught in a "dumbing-up" controversy over the news that Natasha Kaplinksy has quit the Corporation for Channel Five.

The BBC have hit back, saying they are not "dumbing-up" but merely responding to viewer demand...*


*This may or may not be true.

Move over, 18 Doughty Street

The new "kid" on the political-internet-TV-block is CampaignTV, which launched yesterday.

It's essentially brought to you by the people behind Labour favourites Silverfish TV, from whom video content will be provided.

I must say, on first impressions, CampaignTV is better designed than "the other side", and also has better content. (And there's no Iain Dale in sight.)

I just wonder whether it (like its competitor) will stoop to patronising the majority of the electorate by claiming that anyone who disagrees with its editorial line is, essentially, a child....

In praise of ... the new BA ad

It's not often that adverts manage to be both entertaining and clever - the sort of advert that you don't skip on Sky Plus.

British Airways' latest offering is just that. And their new slogan "upgrade to BA" should be applauded as marketing genius.

Have a look for yourself...



PS Other airlines are available.

How Cameron can beat the clunking fist

The Financial Times' Dear Economist column is well worth a read. It's written by Tim Harford, author of The Undercover Economist (a book I've read, and not unlike Freakonomics).

A few weeks ago, the column featured the story of "J" who wants to run for student union President and is willing to put up some cash to help him in his quest.

I just wonder if David Cameron ought to take heed from the wise words of the Economist. Given the talk of an early poll, it might be his only way to win an election...

Dear Economist,

I am an economics student, and intend to run for president of the student union this year. The elections are won on the basis of whose name is seen the most around campus. Given that it is improbable I will win, I am willing to offer a pot of hundreds of pounds to people to help campaign – dependent on my winning. What is the most efficient use of this pot? Hire one person to go flat out? Or spread the money around?

Cheers
J, England

Dear J,

If you are able to fool your potential recruits into taking you seriously, you will find willing volunteers – and you may indeed win. But you seem like an obvious loser to me. If your fellow students are as dismissive of your chances as you yourself are, they will find your offer unattractive.

They will refuse to help, and you will lose. Either way, your situation – like that of many politicians – is dependent on a self-fulfilling prophecy.

You need to find some way to take advantage of your position as a hopeless outsider. I would recommend putting a decent bet on yourself to win – you should be able to find long odds. The prospective winnings would make your offer more generous, which could make all the difference.

As for how to divide the money, I recommend that you run a prize draw, winning volunteer takes all. That would make the cash payment more attractive when your campaign is sparsely supported and the incentive is most needed.

In any case, the economist John List has shown that prize draws are a great way to raise money for charity. Your campaign certainly sounds like a charity case to me.

Economist.

Source: FT.com

Northern Crock

David Cameron is engaging in a bit of political opportunism this morning, by laying the blame for the Northern Rock credit crisis at the door of the government (well, it beats having any actual policies, doesn't it?).

Without wishing to mention that the liberalisation of the consumer credit market took place under a Conservative government, one has to question the validity of his argument.

There are two points worth making: the first is on the point of access to credit; and the second relates to the relationship between debt and Britain's economy over the last 10 years.

It's important that people have access to credit in order to be able to engage in consumption smoothing. A credit constrained world benefits only those with enough liquid resources at the outset (i.e. the very rich); at one level, access to credit (almost paradoxically) helps those on lower incomes more than those in higher income brackets, as it allows them to maintain spending in periods where their income falls short of their outgoings, and pay off debt when their income exceeds outgoings (at least, theoretically). Credit is therefore a redistributive device in the sense that it allows individuals to smooth consumption over their lifetime.

Of course, there need to be reasonable safeguards on lending - but it is, and should rightly be the responsibility of lenders and borrowers to lend/borrow on an affordable basis. The Government should introduce regulation only to the extent that it provides adequate safeguards to the wider economy and to individuals. It shouldn't involve itself in more wholesale policing of credit agreements between individuals and their lenders, as this would drive up the costs of borrowing and would in turn restrict access to credit.

David Cameron suggests that "under Labour our economic growth has been built on a mountain of debt. And as any family with debts knows, higher debt makes us more vulnerable to the unexpected. In short, the increases in debt in the UK have added a new risk to economic stability." Whilst this as a factual observation has some truth in it (debt has risen over the last 10 years, and borrowing exposes individuals to the risks of unexpected events), it misses the point.

A stable economy - where people feel assured that inflation and interest rates will remain stable and low (in historic terms) - actually increases the likelihood that people will borrow against the expectation of stable income streams over the long term. Increased debt is a symptom of a stable economy, not necessarily a cause of an unstable one.

The year after the Black Wednesday debacle, total gross lending in the UK increased five-fold. Why? Because people felt more confident that lending would not expose them to the risks that they had endured during the 1980s and early 1990s. It is no surprise that gross lending has increased in every year since 1993 - a period that has seen low and stable inflation rates, and decreasing interest rates (a trend that was accelerated under Labour).

Whilst low interest rates might encourage borrowing, higher interest rates discourages it. The recent rises in interest rates will encourage more and more marginal borrowers to pay off debt more quickly and revert to saving instead. The consumer credit market, in this way, is self-regulating.

In David Cameron's rush to acquire a few floating voters, he has failed to grasp the facts of the matter. His comments today about consumer credit are simply a load of Northern Crock.

Big Blogger is watching you

In future, the Government may monitor blogs in order to keep abreast of public opinion.

Today Iain Dale notes Simon Dickson's surprise that Helen Boaden of BBC fame reads Dale's blog. But it isn't just the bigwigs of the BBC who are monitoring the "web-atariat"

Soon the machinery of Government will get in on the act, providing briefings to Ministers and key civil servants on what blogs are saying about the issue of the day.

You have been warned - Big Blogger is watching you...

Stupid bankers

News today that a bank in Second Life, the virtual reality game, has closed due to insolvency following a ban on gambling inside the game.

The bank could not meet demands for withdrawals after last month's ban, prompting a banking crisis.

All very weird.

The wrong side of the moon

Proof, if proof be needed, that making an ass of yourself doesn't pay...

A Belfast student is in an African prison for allegedly "mooning" at the home of a Senegalese governor.

Patrick Devine, 19, from County Donegal, was arrested on 27 July for allegedly dropping his trousers as a dare in Saint Louis in Senegal.

Source: BBC

Photo of the day - Fat Cats

The BBC sometimes have bizarre "In Pictures" items. None more so than this gallery of 'fat cats'.

But our favourite was this one of "gin cat"...

Has Mark Oaten gone mad?

Is a fresh bout of baldness turning the disgraced former Lib Dem home affairs spokesperson into a lunatic?

Winchester MP, Mark Oaten, is to use BBC Radio 4's Hecklers programme in order to suggest all prisons be demolished and replaced with care homes and schools - or some such rubbish.

Whilst the importance of offender rehabilitation should not be underestimated, the whole purpose of a criminal justice system is to ensure that crimes against fellow citizens go punished.

Putting ALL criminals into hospital will not provide the deterrent that exists with the threat of imprisonment.

Getting to say what you think is all very well, Mr Oaten, unless what you've got to say is a load of unworkable crap...

Update:

Just received the Guardian's Backbencher email which has the following curious titbit:

ON TV AND RADIO THIS WEEK
Tonight, 8pm, R4: Hecklers

Mark Oaten argues we should abolish all prisons. Curious, really, because only a month ago he asked in a written question how many prisoners would be released from Winchester jail under the earlyrelease scheme in the next 12 months. The Backbencher can only assumehe wanted to highlight the merits of the scheme for the benefit ofhis own constituents. [emphasis added]

Arriva Derci

Sir Tom Cowie, life President of the Arriva Group, has today suggested he will no longer financially support the Conservatives.

Cowie, who has donated £630,000 since 2001, blames David Cameron's "arrogant" style of leadership for the move.

Yet it is his comments on why he is no Gordon Brown fan that I find intriguing. He says:

"I am very angry about him taking £500 a week in extra taxes on my pension and what has David Cameron done about it, absolutely nothing ... how would you feel if you are 85 and you suddenly had £500 a week taken away from you?"

Well Sir Tom, if I was an 85 year old who could afford to give the Conservatives donations at a rate of £2000 per week over a six year period then I suppose £500 in extra taxes wouldn't amount to a great hill of beans...

Foot in Mouth

A friend just sent this transcript of an interview to me on the foot and mouth "crisis"....

BBC radio interviewer: "It must have come as a real shock to wake up to the news this morning?"

Local Tory MP: "Not really. I heard about it on Sky news last night."

Long pause...

Aforementioned friend works for Sky news, so the veracity of the transcript has yet to be established...

Have I Got Moos For You

An interesting take on the Foot & Mouth "crisis"...

Boris for Mayor?

Boris Johnson's application form to be the Conservative's candidate for London Mayor shows exactly why he shouldn't get the job.

For example, under a question titled "Examples of Challenges Faced", Boris writes:

"Negotiating Hyde Park corner by bicycle. Outcome: survival"

Exactly why this makes him qualified to be Mayor eludes me.

Red Ken may be - well - too red for me. But at least he has vision and purpose - something lacking thus far in Boris' bid to be the most powerful man in London.

Boris is undoubtedly a funny person. But he should stick to Have I Got News For You. As Mayor, it wouldn't just be Boris who is a laughing stock - it'd be the whole of London too.

That sinking feeling

News today that Cameron bailed on his former Kensington home just months before serious subsidence issues occurred.

I suppose the logical question is whether he will be employing that strategy with the Conservative Party if things continue to go awry....

Who are you kidding, Gordon?

Gordon Brown suggests that the UK is the best place in the world to go on holiday.

Not sure we would agree with that, Mr Brown...

Cabinet 'media tarts' for July

Recreating Iain Dale's Media Tarts for the Cabinet reveals a few surprises.

The table below shows the hits on Factiva - a similar resource to Lexis-Nexis - for the Cabinet for July.

A few points of note:

• Hilary Benn's position at 11th is interesting, as it suggests that Gordon Brown has been the figurehead for much of the flooding issue which dominated the headlines throughout July. Similarly, Hazel Blears - the new Communities Secretary - has received little media attention this month depsite the flooding issue.
• Perhaps Douglas Alexander and Lord Malloch-Brown should have received more attention for their comments on the "special relationship" between the US and the UK.
• Alistair Darling at 4th defies the lack of announcements from his department in the last month.
  
  

1	Gordon Brown	4622
2	Jacqui Smith	532
3	David Miliband	472
4	Alistair Darling	463
5	Ed Balls	349
6	Jack Straw	302
7	Alan Johnson	221
8	Douglas Alexander	212
9	Ruth Kelly	210
10	Harriet Harman	201
11	Hilary Benn	195
12	Hazel Blears	191
13	Yvette Cooper	174
14	Des Browne	170
15	The Lord Malloch-Brown	166
16	John Hutton	139
17	Tessa Jowell	137
18	James Purnell	133
19	Peter Hain	126
20	Ed Miliband	114

Taxing times

The Liberal Democrat's proposals to add another £10 fuel surcharge to internal flights should be grounded.


Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for the environment, says that this would raise £12bn over 5 years which would be reinvested into alternative, and more fuel efficient forms of transport - rail for example. Their argument is that by raising tax, internal flights would be curbed, which is good for the environment.

However, this sort of tax measure puts the cart before the horse.

Introducing this sort of blunt instrument will not, as the Lib Dems suggest, have a material impact upon the amount of people taking internal flights. Flying between London and Edinburgh, say, is not a strict substitute with taking the train - there are many advantages to taking the plane, of which one is the cost.

But in order to substitute away from air travel into rail travel, the quality of service, speed and reliability need to be increased in advance of the increase in tax.

Otherwise the introduction of the tax will in all likelihood be absorbed by the travelling public and will amount to little more than a revenue raising instrument, thereby failing as a serious Pigouvian tax.

In The Thick Of It

Chris Langham has been found guilty downloading images of child pornography, reports the BBC.

This is a truly sad end to his acting career, during which he recently won a BAFTA for his performance as Hugh Abbott in the Armando Iannaucci comedy The Thick of It.