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...