Naked Ambition

Sometimes, as a journalist, you just have to bow to the sheer quality of someone's writing. Matthew Norman's excoriating profile of Ed Balls in the Independent this week was an exceptional piece of prose. He synthesised the reasons for my deep and at times unfathomable loathing of Balls.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/matthew-norman/matthew-norman-will-blinky-consign-labour-to-history-1956110.html

His inspiration was Balls's appearance on Newsnight on Tuesday night. Paxo was trying to discern how the Labour front bench would negotiate with Lib-Dems when no party wins a clear majority on 6 May. The Balls strategy was not sophisticated; just stonewall and crudely change the subject.

Paxman was not terribly frustrated by his deliberate obfuscation; as Balls answered the wrong question for the sixth time, old Paxo just looked at him bemusedly, as if to say, "you really have no clue what an arse you're making of yourself."

Ed looked pretty pleased with his idiocy, unconcerned his display of arrogance was exactly what infuriates the electorate to the point of apoplexy.

Matthew Norman called him, "cocky, fake, slimy, inelegant, ineloquent, charmless, witless, weird, sinister, glacially cold and luminestently remote," adding, "he may be the most chillingly repulsive politician of even this golden generation."

Brown was unelected by the Labour Party in 2007 because Ed Balls did not want David Miliband or Alan Johnson building a power base to launch their leadership challlenge in 2010. He still thinks he can win although the bookies put him 14-1 fifth favourite behind Miliband (David) at 7/4, his brother Ed as well as Alan Johnson at 6/1, and Hattie Harman at 9/1.

Balls has ensured he will stay in the headlines right up until polling day by picking a huge fight with that notorious bunch of nutter militants, primary school headteachers. Their refusal to administer 'Sats' tests for 11 year olds was supported by 64% but Balls has effectively threatened them with suspension and docking of pay. About 8,500 headteachers are intending to take industrial action from 10 May, that should tell Balls to seek compromise not confrontation.

But that's not the Balls way, he doesn't seem to take anyone's advice. Otherwise he would not be alienating core Labour voters just days before an election. So long as it helps his career, why should he care?

Whoosh! What Was That?

That was your job, mate.

Yesterday's slightly surreal events made me feel almost nostalgic for the days when senior Labour figures simply resorted to using their fists with the voters.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_GLHsq_8KU

Yesterday’s coverage of Brown’s terrible faux pas with Mrs Duffy in Rochdale, appeared to have been scripted by Armando Ianucci for an election special recording of the ‘Thick of It.’

Gordon could have done with Malcolm Tucker yesterday. But he could not spin his way back, there was no squaring the circle. And he was totally wrong about it being a “disastrous” encounter. He did very well to bring her back on board as a Labour voter before then privately insulting her. The point Mrs Duffy made about immigration showed some frustration and narrow-mindedness but that does not add up to bigotry.

The worst point of the car-crash coverage was immediately after Mrs Duffy eye-popping amazement about what had been said about her. She wandered restlessly, bewildered , talking herself “Voted Labour all my life…” choking with anger.

As far as electoral impact goes, I wouldn’t expect a collapse in Labour support just yet. However neither is there much prospect of a 3-4 point bounce. The height of Labour’s ambitions should now be just 30% which means they are certainly odds against (again) to be the largest party.

I heard someone say, the “papers will have a field day.” Clearly they haven’t read as many papers as me, but then again few people do. The triumvirate of hate, the Mail, Telegraph and Sun were unable to ratchet up their coverage, as they had long since reached a ‘10’ on the hysterical scale and had nowhere left to go.

The Mail tried by Stepehen Glover’s column ‘If this woman’s a bigot, then I’m happy, no honoured, to be a bigot too, and so all of us should.’ Well a nation of bigots would only buy the Mail surely?

So for tonight’s debates, God knows how he’ll be handling this one. Presumably Cameron will declare with great dignity to call it irrelevant and then make several snide references to it.

For Brown, it will be a relief to stop apologising for an hour or two. But the credibility he has earned in the campaign for tenacity and doggedness has been blown.

It’s very hard to work through any scenario which places Gordy as PM in ten day’s time.

Vote For Ben

Politics can be a grubby business. During the expenses scandal, Lembit Opik MP blamed the death of his brother (six months prior) on claiming for a council tax summons.

Cameron in his own nauseating manner was plumbing similar depths yesterday. He gave a speech on the evils of the 'Broken Society' and spiced it the intro with a catalogue of horrific knifings. He rolled out Eastenders actress, Brooke Kinsella, whose brother, Ben, was murdered two years ago and gave her a gratuitous “ambassadorial” role on knife crime.

Leaving to one side the fact that violent crime has fallen by over 40% since 1997, this was really shameful stuff. He used the televisual qualities of the pretty Brooke to stimulate media interest and then started again on his drivel about a ‘Big Society’. In response to the annihilated lives of poverty, despair and addiction he offered these insulting platitudes.

“A society where we see social responsibility, not state control, as the principal driving force for social progress. A society where we come together, and work together, to solve problems. A society where we remember every day that we're all in this together.”

There didn’t appear to be anything tangible to report on how the Tories will tackle knife crime. Tough sentencing has, predictably, already had no impact. Even his key section named bathetically, ‘Common Sense and Rigour’ was neither sensible nor rigourous on this point.

All parties accept an enhanced police presence can help prevent violent incidents, particularly in established scenarios like city centres on Saturday nights. However, Conservatives plan to devolve responsibility of Police Community Support Officers to Chief Constables which will lead to a cut in their numbers. Several hundred PCSOs were inspired to write a protest letter to the Guardian today.

Nevertheless Cameron’s campaign national newsletter, known more commonly as the Sun, sought to exploit the naive Brooke Kinsella to the full, by imploring voting Tory was a ‘Vote For Ben.’ Yuck.

Cameron could call the Sun editor to cool it but he must think this odious, gutless line will win votes with the Yout’. Dave struggles to master sincerity. But he’s certainly trying his best.

________________________________________________

In response to the Conservatives barrel-scraping over knife crime, Labour shoved acid-burn victim, Katie Piper up to the lecturn of their daily press conference. Home Sec, Alan Johnson said, “Women like Katie and others would be in greater danger on our streets if we reduce the level of CCTV."

The insinuation that the Lib-Dems and Tories alleged plans to cut CCTV cameras will lead to more such attacks "Women like Katie will be in greater danger..." was just as disgraceful as what Cameron said on Tuesday.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/politics/article-23828702-acid-attack-victim-katie-piper-backs-labour-cctv-campaigner.do

Woo Who?

Small wonder Lord ‘Nige’ Lawson failed to receive an invitation to the Conservative’s press conference on the environment yesterday.

Nigel ‘Biscuit Barrel” Lawson is such a huge denier of global warming he makes Dick Cheney look like Jonathan Porritt.

Naturally, the Cons glossed over the deep schism in their party over green taxes and blithely barked out obnoxious slogans like ‘Vote Blue, Get Green not Brown'. Pitiful stuff which would not get much of a mark at GCSE Politics.

Dave’s strategy grid obviously includes a box saying, “Spend at least one morning wooing the Liberals, or whatever they’re called.” He began his press conference in a familiar patronising tone, forcing himself to overcome, “the vague whiff of nut cutlet,” as historian Peter Hennessy put it.

“Today, I want to speak to people who have progressive ideals hard-wired into their DNA,” he implored. In his mechanical ‘reaching-out’ exercise, on Osborne’s orders, Cams seems to have forgotten his party has been haemorrhaging support to Clegg and Co. since the first TV debate. The fact that even more Labour supporters are going that way is far from compensation.

The polls seem stuck on 33/30/28 (C/LD/L) which would mean Cons not even the largest party and worst of all unmoved from 2005. Labour has had Iraq, a deep recession and near civil war but five years of Dave’s charm offensive and Ashcroft's millions has got the Tories precisely nowhere.

Any remote aspiration Cameron had to recruit at least one Lib-Dem voter to his side was dashed when he made a fierce attack on proportional representation. He might as well have insulted their mothers. Saying a hung Parliament would cost each family £1,000 is patent nonsense.

He was not persuasive, not remotely. Marina Hyde of the Guardian called it, “marginally more charming than Rohypnol.” He was probably as successful as the borderline bigot Ross Perot’s very uncomfortable address to the NAACP in the 1992 Presidential election when he kept pointing at the crowd saying, “you people.”

Dave and George appear to have similar electoral philosophy – stay arrogant and the little people will soon fall into line. No sign of it working yet.

Break the Cycle of Addiction

It's a numbers game, of course, nothing else. Now the Conservatives really have no hope of getting the 40 percent minimum they need to form a majority Government. They are contemplating what to do with the 35 percent they are likley to be left with. It is still quite possible they could even trail Labour in numbers of seats on that mark so they have to at least appear to be considering a constructive approach to the Lib-Dems.

But there lies the core problem for the Cons. Whatever they do is a calculation, seemingly masking their true instincts. They appear to be simply demanding power 'now' or preferably 'yesterday'. Cameron tried to appear concilatory about electoral reform in his Observer interview, "we would behave in a responsible way," he oozed - posturing, posing and preening.

Let's be clear they don't mean it. the Cons are hooked to the decrepit old voting system like an old soak clinging to his Special Brew. The current structure leaves them at least 5% worse off but they cannot contemplate any reform which would threaten their chances of acting like elected dictators. Their behaviour, far from being responsible, shows they crave power and would never deign to share the spoils.

The Conservatives' Parliamentary reforms are but a fig leaf. Reducing Ministerial pay is nothing more than a gimic and cutting the number of MPs by 10 percent will only add a tenth more workload of constituency work to the over-worked remainder.

Hague has been trumpeting his party's dismal 'reform' policies and described ripping up the voting system as only "tinkering round the edges." Cameron's latest on-the-hoof policy is to legislate for an election six months after a change of Prime Minister, whatever the circumstances. As Peter Mandelson said contemptuously, "So the Tories would have insisted on an election in 1940. This just isn't serious politics."

Peter Hain (above) is one of the few senior Labour figures to admit, a huge wave of tactical voting is required to slam the door on the Tories. Holding a referendum on voting reform would then keep them locked out. "I think it is time for everyone to behave intelligently in their own constituencies...if we can beat the Tories this time we can change British politics forever."

The Tories aversion to a proportional system is not entirely irrational although it is undemocratic. The fact remains, most people don't want them in power.

To Thine Own Party be True

The traditions of newpaper journalism are long established in Britain. The first newspaper, the Daily Courant, first appeared in 1702 - one of its first scoops was to announce the death of King William of Orange.

Any newspaper journalist is judged on two main criteria; their contacts and their integrity - even more important than an ability to write well.

Of course, journos have their own political opinions and they are bound to show through. But it should not prevent them reporting news even if it is unhelpful to their party of allegiance. Nor should it mean writing stories which are simply biased beyond any semblance of reality, aimed at simply inflicting political damage. Then they would cease to be a journalist and become simply a party propagandist.

Well, back to the real world. The Daily Mail has escalated its news war on Nick Clegg helped enthusiastically by the Telegraph and the Sun. The Mail's editor, Paul Dacre, whose photo appears above, is most probably a face you would not have recognised. The profile of the media commanders is usually inversely related to their power.

The reporting of the second TV debate was so biased it was breathtaking. The lead Mail article seemingly canvassing various views included only prominent quotes from William Hague, Eric Pickles and George Osborne. Surely the British public is not falling for this? Yesterday's Mail had seven articles and an editorial slating Clegg.

The Sun's editors now feel able to filter any news they deem unhelpfully truthful. It even extends to opionion polls they have commissioned, the YouGov finding which showed 49% would like a Lib-Dem Government, was omitted.

There remains a very strong suspicion these stories are deriving from Andy Coulson at Tory HQ. BBC Political Editor, Nick Robinson said on Thursday, "I now learn that political reporters from the Tory-backing papers were called in one by one to discuss how Team Cameron would deal with "Cleggmania" and to be offered Tory HQ's favourite titbits about the Lib Dems."

Simultaneous to the launch of these visceral attacks is a dual counter attack by Tory front benchers and Sun editors about Labour "lies". These are simply diversionary tactics trying raising the 'rough and tumble' of local leaflet campaigns into something orchestrated by the PM himself.

Proving the link between conspirators of politics and press will be hard, one hopes the public work out the connection, or at least tire of being instructed who to vote for.

The Conservatives may no longer be the nasty party but the way they are playing the media is still quite despicable. The 'journalists' who write this dross may as well trade in their NUJ cards for Tory Party membership.

_________________________________________________

Reading the Sunday Express was recently described by (The Thick Of It) actor, Chris Addison as, "an exercise in futility."

Never more apt than this front-pager this week, which reads like a good spoof rather than anything related to serious journalism.

"DOUBTS over Nick Clegg’s commitment to British interests in the EU intensified last night after it emerged he once led a campaign to return the historic Elgin Marbles to his friends in Greece."

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/171276/General-election-2010-EU-zealot-Nick-Clegg-s-bid-to-return-Elgin-Marbles

So What's the Big Idea?

Say what you like about Norman Tebbit (and many do) but he knew his way around the Tory party. His electoral salesmanship, as Party Chairman, of the benefits of industrial privatisation and the sale of Council houses landed Margaret Thatcher her third win in 1987 and was the high point of her premiership.

The idea of former Council tenants entering the property market was simple, affirming and emphasised a commitment to social mobility. But Cameron's 'Big Society', an obvious attempt to devise a 21st Century equivalent, is complex, daunting and feels just theoretical.

When parents are less than satsfied about results at their children's school, it hardly their first reaction to cast around for others to help set up their own. We expect the neccesary improvements to be made, not to wrest responsibility from the professionals.

Most of us have lives crammed with activity, with barely enough time to watch the news. I don't know anyone who has so much spare time, they actively considered establishing their own job centre co-operative.

There is also considerable unease about putting so many local public services on a commercial basis. Here is Fry and Laurie's fine critique of privatisation. Dated as well as being very topical.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLfghLQE3F4

The selling of the 'Big Society' on doorsteps has been greeted by the public with sparse enthusiasm. One shadow minister conceded to the Guardian, "it needed to be put into more practical voter language". Another called the Big Society 'bollocks'. Le mot juste.

Like many senior Tories, old Tebbit still has plenty of contempt and bile. But fortunately most of it these days is directed at his own party.