Getting Irate So That You Don't Have To

Getting Irate So That You Don't Have To
Showing posts with label ZaNu Labour. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ZaNu Labour. Show all posts

Friday, 7 May 2010

Permission To Swear....

...very loudly, and very often.

The country has bottled it and Nick bloody Clegg is now in a position of huge influence, on the back of 23% of the vote. The pressure for reform of the voting system is going to be massive, and if we get PR you can say goodbye forever to the idea of radical right-wing governments that sweep back the frontiers of the State. Things look grim.

To make matters worse, my pet-Labour hates did pretty well.
Emily "stuff the Electoral Commission" Thornberry - won, with an increased majority
David "my tweets have been tampered with" Wright - won, despite a 6 per cent swing
Jacqui "second homes and dodgy videos" Smith - lost, and looked closed to tears. Good.
Dawn "Barak Obama loves me, you know" Butler - just lost in Brent Central. Serves her bleedin' well right.
Kerry "Twit" McCarthy - won, despite a 4.5 per cent swing

Oh, and Balls won and all. What a duff night.

And I didn't even get drunk.

Thursday, 6 May 2010

Wishes For Tonight

The (half-price, from Morrisons) Champagne is in the fridge, along with a few British beers. The whisky is on stand-by in case things get really rough. Either way, the Womble is getting drunk tonight. For one of two very good reasons:

if Gordon Brown loses, I'm getting drunk to celebrate;

if he wins, I'm getting drunk while it's still legal.

But there are a few specific results which could improve the night immensely. Over the years of Labour rule I've been building, mainly in my head, a list of Labour hate-figures, whom I would dearly like to see get trounced tonight. I've blogged about a few of them in the past, but for the avoidance of doubt, here they are.

Emily Thornberry - Islington South and Finsbury, majority 484; she who altered an official Electoral Commission press release and used Commons stationery for her own political ends.

Jacqui Smith - Redditich, majority 1948, who simply ripped the Michael out of us on expenses and tried to tear the heart out of liberties and freedoms.

Dawn Butler - Brent Central, new seat, who pretended to have a personal endorsement from Barak Obama.

David Wright - Telford, majority 5406, who slated the Conservatives as "scum-sucking pigs" on his Twitter page and then lied to cover up the evidence.

Kerry McCarthy - Bristol East, majority 8,621, recently described by Iain Dale as possibly the thickest person in Parliament, who boasted about the possibility of publishing an illegally obtained list of members of the BNP and who twittered the outcome of postal votes in a clear breach of electoral law.

In the context of a few of the other things that happened with expenses and the extent to which ZaNu Labour have destroyed our country you might argue that this is pretty small beer, and in some ways you'd be right. But this little lot are symtomatic of a corrupt, out-of-touch, arrogant group of Labour MPs who abuse the system because they believe they're better than us. May they all get completely stuffed, and may I get completely hammered for the right reasons.

Wednesday, 10 June 2009

A Day's Headlines Under ZaNu Labour

On the way into work this morning I was struck by the following headlines:

NHS faces record budget shortfall (how can this possibly be, after all the bloody taxes we've had ripped from us to pay for increased spending on public services ?)

Metropolitian Police officers accused of water torture (important to say that these are as yet unproven allegations, but I was very conscious that I felt no real surprise when I heard this story)

London hit by tube strike (in the scheme of things it's a pinprick, but public sector strikes of this sort are always a graphic reminder of Labour's past glories)

Law Lords to rule on the practice, instigated by this government, of withholding supposedly incriminating criminal evidence from defendants on the grounds of "national security" (perhaps the most frightening of the lot - the State can basically have you locked up without allowing you to see the evidence against you)

Oh, and an MEP, elected under a system introduced by this government, is prevented from speaking outside Parliament because of a demonstration against him (some demonstrations are allowed in Parliament Square, it seems)

This is Britain today, under 12 years of socialist rule. God knows what it would be like after another five. Let's hope we never find out.

UPDATE: The Law Lords have just ruled that use of secret evidence in the granting of control orders is illegal. Thank God for the House of Lords; they've dug us out of more holes since 1997 then I care to recall.

Friday, 5 June 2009

Glenys Kinnock - Minister For Europe

How incredibly apt that we should have an unelected, troughing bureaucrat in a ministry whose job it is to manage our relationship with a load of, err...unelected, troughing bureaucrats.

I can't work out whom it says more about - the EU or ZaNu Labour.

Thursday, 4 June 2009

+++ Purnell Resigns And Calls For Brown To Go +++

The edifice is crumbling. What a wonderful sight.

Wednesday, 3 June 2009

Music To My Ears

And another one bites the dust. Now Hazel Blears resigns.

If, as I do, you love this country, I guess on one level it's a pretty unedifying spectacle.

One the other hand....

Clegg says "Labour is finished".
Dave says "The Governement is collapsing before our eyes"

....some of us have been waiting 12 years for this.

Wednesday, 6 May 2009

Jacqui Smith's Hate List

Any idea who this man is ?

He’s Michael Savage, an American talk-show presenter, or “shock-jock”, as they call them over there. Since October he’s been banned from entering the UK. Why ? Is he a terrorist ? A baby-killer ? A rapist, perhaps ? Well no, actually, not as far as we know. He’s been banned because he has strong views, and he expresses them.

He’s previously described the Quran as a "book of hate", and has said of children with autism that in most cases it's "a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out."

Just thought I’d let you know what he thinks, seeing as he can’t tell you himself.

So this is what Britain has now come to.

For four long years to 1945 Britain and America fought alongside each other in defence of freedom against the principles held by ruthless dictatorships intent on silencing millions. For decades since then, our two countries have time-and-again stood side-by-side when it comes to defending basic human rights. Let us, very briefly, compare our two nations’ approach to freedom in 2009.

Michael Savage is unquestionably controversial, and revels in so being. He routinely articulates views to which a minority would subscribe and which many would find distastful. In freedom-loving America, he is allowed to broadcast daily on national radio, to an audience of millions. In New Labour’s Britain, he is banned. What could possible better illustrate the effects of 12 years of socialism on the basic right of the individual to express a point of view ?

If Labour get re-elected then it really, really will not be long before Savage’s views and hundreds more are banned entirely in the UK, irrespective of whether or not the people who want to express them actually live here.

Savage has now described Jacqui Smith as a “lunatic” and says he’s going to sue her for defamation. Good on him. On both counts.

For her part, Smith loftily - and somewhat darkly - proclaims: "I think it's important that people understand the sorts of values and sorts of standards that we have here”. Quite. The values we appear to have are these: if we disagree with what you say then you ain’t saying it here.

Our much-loved home Secretary yesterday issued a list of 16 people who are banned from entering the UK on the basis of the views they hold and express. Another six names are being kept secret “in the public interest”, whatever that means.

For a reason I don’t even begin to understand, Smith’s list doesn’t even include Geert Wilders MEP, whom she had detained at Heathrow earlier in the year. It makes you wonder how many other people she’s banned and isn’t telling us about.

For the sake of clarity, here is the complete list of people whom Smith is prepared to admit to having banned. Feel free to Google them to find out what they believe in…do it while you can.

Radio talk show host Michael Savage
American Baptist pastor Fred Waldron Phelps Snr
Phelps' daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper
Hamas MP Yunis Al-Astal
Jewish extremist Mike Guzovsky
Ex Klu Klux Klan grand wizared Stephen Donald Black
Neo-Nazi Erich Gliebe
Russian gang leader Artur Ryno
Russian gang leader Pavel Skachevsky
Preacher Wadgy Abd El Hamied Mohamed Ghoneim
Preacher Abdullah Qadri Al Ahdal
Preacher Safwat Hijazi
Preacher Amir Siddique
Muslim activist Abdul Ali Musa
Murderer and Hezbollah terrorist Samir Al Quntar
Kashmiri terror group leader Nasr Javed

Thursday, 16 April 2009

Green Cleared

Damian Green MP will not face any charges. Thank God for that.

This means that, despite this Government's worst intentions, we still have a Judiciary which is sufficiently independent such that the Executive can't just push it around and tell it what to do. Much as Brown and his cohorts would love to ignore the law of the land and lock up whomever they like, we're not at the stage where they can. Yet.

Attention should now fall (but it probably won't) on the Civil Servants who tried to stitch up Green and his alleged mole Christopher Galley in the first place. These are the people who claimed that the leaks caused "considerable damage to national security". The leaks, in case you've forgotten, centred around:
....a warning to Jacqui Smith that illegal immigrants were being cleared to work in sensitive Whitehall security jobs (the leak was about the warning, not about the clearances, which were already public knowledge);
....a mail to home office minister Liam Byrne telling him about an illegal Brazilian immigrant who was supposedly working in Parliament using a fake ID;
....a letter from Jacqui Smith to Gordon "Sorry" Brown saying that the recession might lead to a rise in crime;
....a list of Labour MPs expected to rebel against the 42 days proposal.
Highly embarrassing, and damaging to the the government's credibility ? Yes, absolutely.
Threat to national security ? You're having a laugh.

The homes affairs committee, having looked into this, has today lambasted the claims the calims that national security was compromised, and says that the police were misled.

For me this goes to the very heart of all the issues around the politicisation of the Civil Service. In very significant areas now, they are not the servant of "the government". They are instead servants of the Labour Party. And despite the fact that Labour are in government, those are two very different things.

The Civil Servants at the centre of this have behaved appallingly. They should be held to account.

Tuesday, 14 April 2009

Komsomol Comes To Britain

I nearly missed this story from the weekend. It's another sign of New Labour's ardent belief in the standing and power of the State vis-a-vis the individual; that the State is everything, and the individual simply exists to serve it.


They want to introduce compulsory community service for anyone aged 19 or under. Compulsory community service. That is, enforced unpaid labour as directed by the State. Where I come from, that's called slavery.


Gordon Brown is quoted as saying: "It is my ambition to create a Britain in which there is a clear expectation that all young people will undertake some service to their community, and where community service will become a normal part of growing up in Britain."

"...a clear expectation that all young people will undertake some service to their community".
This from the Prime Minister of Great Britain.
If only Joseph Stalin were still alive today...he'd have been so proud.

You Go Away For A Few Days, And...

My, my…it’s all kicked off on the blogosphere since I’ve been away, hasn’t it ?

In a way it’s quite pleasing that the highly tedious spat between Guido and Derek Draper has actually led to something semi-exciting at last; I don’t know about you but they were driving me to distraction before last Friday. Like a couple of playground kids, they were.

I’ve only been bringing myself up-to-speed with this over the past 24 hours or so (I was away over Easter, with little access to news). A HUGE amount has been written, and everyone’s been getting VERY emotional about it, so I’m not going to detain you long. But I thought I’d ask myself a few questions in a dispassionate way as possible.

The Womble’s general thoughts ?

The sad fact is that no one comes out of this with a lot of credit. Yes, it says a lot about New Labour and how they operate but it says a great deal about politics generally too. When it comes to mudslinging Draper, McBride, Fawkes and a few others besides have shown them to be as capable as each other. The only exception I’d make is Iain Dale, who has, throughout it all, kept a level of circumspection and dignity. As he said himself last week, he’s far too nice for this politics business.

The first thing you have to say is that it is quite disgraceful that taxpayers’ money should be spent paying people (I’m sure McBride isn’t the one who’s at it – he’s just the only one who’s been caught - so far) to engage in blatant party politics. It reveals an utter contempt for the public purse. To try and generate unfounded rumour / lies, and to kick a politician’s wife (whether she’s down or not) is one thing. To do it at our expense is just taking the Mickey.

Did Brown Know About The Emails ?

To me the idea that Brown knew exactly what McBride was up to is just laughable. I appreciate that when Nadine Dorries went on Five Live yesterday she might have been feeling a little fragile but she only just stopped short of saying that Brown sanctioned the whole thing. She’s completely lost the plot, I reckon. It might have been wiser for her to have avoided the media for a couple of days until she could get her head straight.

If you (sorry, we) pay someone to do something completely underhand on your behalf, you also pay them to make sure that you’re completely ignorant of what they’re doing. McBride, out of loyalty to Brown, will have made quite sure that Brown knew nothing of the details of what he was up to.

Who’s To Blame ?

Well, Damian McBride, obviously, for a start. I just cannot understand how the bloke lives with himself, abusing public finances in that way. But the fact is that he’s just the symptom. The cause is politicians’ (especially Labour’s) growing disregard for our money.

Whilst Brown may not have been directly involved in what McBride and Draper were up to, he, and Blair before him, have created the culture in which this kind of behaviour is commonplace. They have surrounded themselves with all sorts of political hacks funded by the taxpayer. So obsessed have they been about their own image, they have created an entire industry out of news management, and that industry is utterly out of control. It’s poetic justice when, once in a while, they themselves get bitten by the monster they have sired.

How much of this goes on ?

My guess is lots. And lots. Politics is a horrible, tough business. The Tories are carrying on as if they’ve never tried to dish the dirt on anyone. Yeah, right. They must think we’re barking mad. Labour have been caught this time….next time, who knows ?

What Of Derek Draper ?

I’m going to try and keep my promise not to swear, here….

Draper is a thoroughly nasty piece of work and clearly a complete idiot into the bargain. I can’t for the life of me work out why the Tory bloggers have been wasting so much disk space on him, or on his ludicrous creation Labour List. Right now they should shut up completely. There are calls for Draper to “go” from his self-appointed role as Labour Blogger-In-Chief. I’d have thought that getting rid of Draper was the last thing anyone who hates Labour wanted them to do; if he goes he might be replaced by someone who knows what they’re doing – someone who could actually make the Left a force on the internet.

There, managed it (just).

Will Anything Improve As A Result Of All This ?

I doubt it. Labour are so immersed in the sea of spin they don’t know there’s an alternative to it. Brown’s request to Gus O’Donnell to tighten up the role of Special Advisors (SPADs) is itself an exercise in news management; a desperate attempt to look as if he’s being decisive and doing something when in fact he couldn’t give a monkey’s what happens anyway. We saw the same behaviour from him last week over parliamentary expenses and I daresay we’ll see the same behaviour next week over something else. Whether you expect the Tories do be any better if and when they come to power depends on your point of view. Personally I won’t be holding my breath.

What Are The Lessons ?

1. Don’t expect politicians to police their own appointees.

2. Don’t expect politicians to behave like normal, level-headed people. Because they’re not, and they don’t.

3. Don’t talk to the media when you’re feely highly emotional about something (Nadine Dorries take note).

4. Don’t, when you're leading 2-1 in the dying minutes of a crucial game and you're standing on the very threshold of promotion, kick the ball out of play because you’ve got a player injured and expect the opposition to give you it you back. (Sorry, wandered off topic – yesterday was a bit emotional for me, too. Don't, on any account, mention "Bromley" to me. No, really....don't).

Tuesday, 17 March 2009

Build Your Own Logo

Guido has been having great fun with John Prescott's Tory Logo Site.

Here are a couple more ideas...







Friday, 6 March 2009

Where Zimbabwe leads...

Three months ago an Opposition spokesman was arrested; although it might be a rare event in the UK, in Zimbabwe that's pretty much business as usual.


This week, the government has started printing money - business as usual in Zimbabwe.


Now, in Harare, Morgan Tsvangirai has been in injured in a mysterious car crash car crash, and his wife has been killed.


How long do you give Samantha Cameron ?

Thursday, 19 February 2009

The Brown Curtain

When I was a kid there was a thing called the Iron Curtain. It divided Europe in two, and it stood for dictatorship, suppression and the denial of basic freedoms.


Now a modern equivalent is coming into being. It too stands for suppression and for the elimination of the liberty we once assumed was ours by right but which, perhaps, we took too much for granted. It will stand for dictatorship too if the people responsible for its creation think they can get away with it.

A curtain denies people the ability to see through it. It hides things. People on the outside cannot see in and those on the inside cannot see what is happening on the outside.

The people who established the Iron Curtain were determined to silence those with whose views they did not agree. They did this in two ways. For those inside the curtain, the authorities imposed draconian laws; they controlled newspapers and TV, they banned demonstration of opposition and they instilled fear in those who felt like speaking out. To silence those on the outside, it was simple; they just didn't let them in.

As a young man I recall viewing Eastern Europe from afar (and, for one week never forgotten, from the inside) with disdain. I hated the enforced silence of opinion. I despised the authorities for their imposition of ruthless border controls. We would hear stories that so-and-so had been denied entry or detained, or that another radio station had been jammed. For the inhabitants of East Germany, the Soviet Union and all the rest, the receipt of freely-expressed opinion was, in the eyes of their rulers, a luxury they could not afford.

And so, from the isolated Eastern Europeans of the 20th century, we come to the increasingly-suppressed Britons of the 21st. It is, truly, as if another curtain were descending, this time surrounding the island that once stood, bravely but horribly alone, as the free world's one remaining opponent of German Fascism. I shall call it the Brown Curtain, after the man who seeks to wrap his country in a cloak of silent suppression.

The silence, you see, is being imposed upon us. We on the inside are being denied the access to free opinion expressed on outside. Last week it was Geert Wilders, a democratically elected European MP turned away from Britain's borders. Officially he posed a "threat to security". Translation: his visit would offend Muslims, and therefore could not be permitted.

And now, one week on, it's happened again. This time it's two anti-gay campaigners who have been banned. Fred Phelps and his daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper belong to the Westboro Baptist Church in the US. They were planning to visit the UK to protest against a performance of a youth play called The Laramie Project, which recounts the death of a gay university student who was killed in Wyoming in 1998.

You have to say that these two are pretty much off the "freedom radar" themselves. They have been known to picket the funerals of US soldiers killed in Afghanistan because they think their deaths are God's punishment for America's tolerance of gays. Just as Wilders does, these people are fighting for illiberalism and suppression. But as with Wilders, that isn't the point.

It is characteristic of a liberal democracy that it allows the expression of views that run counter to the principles it is supposed to uphold. The foundations of freedom are strong enough that words alone cannot shift them.

Not so in Britain. Here the government does not like such views, so it bans those who wish to express them. The UK Border Agency is quoted as saying of our would-be visitors from America: "Both these individuals have engaged in unacceptable behaviour by inciting hatred against a number of communities". "Unacceptable behaviour". "Inciting hatred". These are the words not of those who seek to protect our liberty. It is the language of dictatorship.

The Brown Curtain encircles us. Next, it will smother us. Unless we stop it.

Thursday, 12 February 2009

Thought Police


So Geert Wilders has been denied entry into the UK. A man democratically elected as a member of parliament in a EU nation has been turfed out of our supposedly free country. His crime ? God knows, you tell me. His intention ? To attend a screening of his film in the House of Lords in front of an invited audience of around 30 people.

The authorities' "explanation" is that Mr Wilders posed a "threat to security"; a comment which could have been lifted straight from any country east of the Berlin Wall 30 years ago. It's pitiful, and ............ You can't come in here, mate... ....deeply worrying.

Such is this government's fear of free debate on racial and religious issues now that they want to ban anyone the Islamisc community might not care for. And such is the government's power after ten years of socialism, they can do it.

Apparently the Dutch government are none too pleased. Maxime Verhagen, their Foreign Affairs Minister, phoned David Miliband to protest. Fat lot of good that'll do him. He clearly doesn't understand that protest and debate aren't permitted here.

You might think it poetic justice that someone who has called for the Koran to be banned is himself prevented from speaking, and in some ways it is. But it's not natural justice. Natural justice occurs when people are given the right to say what they think and let others come to their own conclusions.

The name of Wilders' film is Fitna. There are a few different versions of it on Youtube, so I'm not sure which is the real one. But this certainly looks like something ZaNu Labour would love to ban.

Tuesday, 3 February 2009

Glenrothes - It Stinks

Via Guido and Political Betting comes news of a quite staggering data loss north of that border which isn't really a border even though I wish it was.

The record of people who voted in the Glenrothes by election in November has gone missing.

Here's how things are supposed to happen in elections. In the beginning the authorities are supposed to hold a list of who is eligible to vote. And then when people do vote, the authorities are supposed to cross their names off. To make sure that no one votes who isn't entitled to do so, to stop people voting twice...that kind of thing; you know, to stop this country being compared to Zimbabwe and the like. And, at the end of the process, the list of everyone who has voted should be kept. In a safe place. Not difficult, you'd have thought.

After the election, candidates and their agents are entitled to see the list. They have to pay a fee of some sort, but many political parties ask for a copy so that they can find out which of their supporters turned out. Whether it should be like this is a matter for debate - personally I regard whether I vote or not as no one else's business, but the law doesn't see it like that, so I guess I just have to live with it.

Except in Glenrothes, it really is no one else's business. That is, if the list really has gone missing, and hasn't been nicked, hidden or destroyed by somebody or somebodies with something to hide. All this in a by-election where the stakes were massive, the result a big surprise and the increase in the number of postal votes was colossal.

As far as I know, the list of voters has never "gone missing" after a Parliamentary election. Yet after this one, one of the most significant for years, it has done just that.

Sniff, sniff...I smell ZaNu Labour.

Monday, 26 January 2009

Shhh ! Don't Mention The Recession....

...I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it.

Apparently we're not really in a recession.

Rather, we are experiencing "the difficult birth-pangs of a new global order" . The Scottish Stalinist said that, so it must be true. Yep, a new world order in which countries that haven't mired themselves in debt recover the quickest while Britain has a seat next to Hungary in the IMF's waiting room.

You've got to hand it to the guy (or his script writers); what a wonderful piece of linguistic manipulation. I wonder if they held a competition to see who could come up with the fanciest alternative to the R-word ?


Either way, it's clear that anyone who does mention the R-word is likely to be rounded up and taken to the salt mines. In the same insane Press conference, Brown warned against pessimism and (would you believe it) the danger of "muddling through". Meanwhile Cabinet Minister Andy Burnham (he who already has bloggers in his sights) looks ready to whip anyone caught not smiling: "It is going to be a difficult year but it is important people choose their words carefully. We can talk ourselves into a worse situation." The fact that we can also spend our way into a far, far worse situation, and what's more seem hell-bent on doing just that, is obviously irrelevant.

Thus the New Labour spinning line is clear. The recession , sorry, the difficult birth-pangs of a new global order, are the fault of a) the banks b) Dave c) George Osborne and d) everyone else.

Got that ? Great. Now then, repeat after me...."difficult birth-pangs of a new global order", "difficult birth-pangs of a new global order", "difficult birth-pangs of a new global order"....

Thursday, 22 January 2009

Another One Joins The Hit List

The blogosphere has today quite rightly been getting stuck into Dawn Butler, MP for Brent South. She who claims to have a personalised, endorsement signed by Barack Obama...


"...you should have the audacity of hope and when someone asks you can she do it, you respond yes we can".

Can anyone really, in all honesty, bring them self to believe that an intelligent, articulate man like Barack Obama, hugely conscious of his public image, would ever put his name to such complete drivel ?

This is, in fact, much more the likely output of someone who struggles to put more than two written words together, such as, err....Dawn Butler here.

As Iain Dale, who broke the story says in his second post, credit should go to Unity for a proper forensic examination. This is what bloggers should do; say the things that the mainstream media will not.

Whatever one thinks of the quote and the signature, what is incontrovertible is that Butler has used House of Commons headed stationery for her own campaigning, and that is a clear breach of the rules. Nothing will happen, I suspect, but she should get hauled over the coals for it.

I'm adding her to my small of growing list of irrelevant, nondescript MPs whom I would dearly like to see stuffed at the next General Election:
...Kerry McCarthy,
...Emily Thornberry
...and my own, utterly useless representative (using the term loosely) Kali Mountford, who speaks in the House roughly every other month, who votes less than two-thirds of the time and whose track record on replying to correspondence in a timely fashion is frankly awful.

Wednesday, 21 January 2009

State Police vs Parliamentary Sovereignty Part II

Just in case you thought, after the Damian Green affair, that the Police would never again enter an MP's Commons office without a warrant, it has.

The MP in question is a Conservative, of course.

Hat-tip: Old Holburn

Friday, 28 November 2008

This Is Not A Rant. But The Arrest Of Damian Green Should Keep Us Awake At Night.

OK, so I've come down from the ceiling after the arrest of Damian Green and I'm trying to analyse what it means and where it might take us. I'm not going to rant or shout, I'm just going to describe my conclusions now that I've tried to think it through. And I tell you, it leaves me cold. It scares me like nothing else Brown or Blair have ever done.

I suppose I should start by admitting that, like most other people, I don't know all the facts and yes, it's conceivable that something might come out which renders defence of Mr Green untenable. But I doubt it. The extent to which Conservatives are clearly furious tells me that his behaviour is no different from what opposition ministers (including Gordon Brown) have done for years.

To set the scene, then. It's part of a shadow minister's job to unearth facts about the government's performance it would rather have kept quiet. On that score, Green has been doing a reasonable job (although you might think, given what we know about the efficiency of the Home Office, that there must be a hell of a lot of skeletons left in cupboards he hasn't yet opened).

What he's come up with, while embarrassing for the government, isn't exactly earth shattering: the news that an illegal immigrant was working in the House of Commons as a cleaner is hardly a threat to national security.

He's been using techniques employed since the dawn of politics to get at the government; find an insider who knows the score about various cock-ups and publicise what they tell you. Result: discomfort for the government, perhaps a few votes float from one side to the other and, in some cases one would hope, changes in procedure and behaviour to make sure that improvements take place in government machinery.

Leaking of this sort within government is healthy on a number of counts:
...it keeps ministers and officials on their toes and on the look-out for poor practice, lest it "get out";
...it gives the public an insight into how things really happen and how our money is spent;
...it helps the opposition hold the government to account;
...as I've described above, it has the potential to improve how things are done.

The reason the events of yesterday sent a shiver down my spine was that they appear to represent an attempt by the government to legitimise increased secrecy, to defend incompetence and to strengthen their already not inconsiderable power base.

Not only that, but they've done it in a way which is, it seems, specifically designed to inspire shock and fear throughout public sector employees and, more importantly, journalists and opposition MPs. To send nine counter-terrorism officers round to arrest one man is an appalling abuse of power in itself.

Let's not prat about here. The government is behind the arrest of Damian Green. Anyone who believes that none of them knew this was coming needs their head examining. It quite simply defies belief that no one in Jacqui Smith's ministerial team had prior knowledge. As acts of political brutality go in this country, this was deeply sickening.

The message it quite deliberately sends out is this: unearth stuff we don't want you to find and we'll have you; tell the people what we don't want them being told and you're ours for the taking; ask the questions we don't want asking and we'll turn you, your world, your family and, for that matter, your home and office upside down.

This is not the behaviour of an administration that believes in freedom or is prepared to stand up for it. Instead it is the behaviour of a government which is rotten to its very core, is chock-a-block full of its own self-importance, lacks the intellectual integrity to accept that it can be challenged, and which believes its own propaganda to such an extent that everything else must be suppressed.

Many blogs have today made comparisons with Zimbabwe, this one included. Whilst Zimbabwe may be further down the line in its erosion of democracy and free debate, the parallel has an element of truth about it. Elsewhere it has been claimed that today marks the death of freedom in this country. I hope with all my heart that the prognosis is wrong, but try as I might I cannot escape the view that our whole standing as a liberal democracy is, at the very best, under serious threat. This marks a dark, dark day in our history. Whether we come out the other side of this with our freedoms in tact now depends in part on the strength and courage of Her Majesty's Opposition and, God help us, on the Press. They can either give in to the bullying and the threats or they can stand up and be counted. In no small part, our future lies in their hands.

It is, perhaps, the ultimate irony about this government that after so many people have got away with telling us so many lies about Iraq, immigration, the economy et al that someone should get arrested for telling the truth. Let that be the epitaph of ZaNu Labour.

Thursday, 20 November 2008

Labour's Contempt For Confidentiality

Leg Iron (assuming squatters' rights at Old Holburn) draws our attention to the boasts of an MP that she has the list of BNP members' names and addresses. And a colleague, she proclaims, "is thinking of writing to all the members in his patch, trying to start a dialogue with them about the issues that have led them to join the BNP".

We're not told who the colleague is, but the self-satisfied sow who clearly thinks this is fine and dandy is Kerry McCarthy, Labour member for Bristol East (majority 7,814). Thus she joins Emily Thornberry as someone I would like to see get severely hammered at the next General Election.

McCarthy has in her possession a list of names and addresses of people who have chosen to join an opposition party, and whose membership of that party should have remained entirely confidential. I'm no expert on the Data Protection Act but I'm not even certain that possession of the list is legal. Actually using it for your own ends MUST be against the law (under legislation passed by this government) and yet here is this prize bitch implicitly condoning such behaviour.

And so we've arrived. The prospect of illegal intimidation of members of an opposition party by
government apparatchiks, whose arrogance and intolerance of dissent is exceeded only by their contempt for the laws that they themselves passed.

I've written today to my own MP asking her whether she too has a copy of this list, and seeking her assurances that if she has, or if it comes into her possession:
..she does the decent thing and destroys it immediately;
..she will not contact anyone on it, nor will she encourage anyone else to do so;
..she will not pass it on to anyone else;
..she will pass details of anyone you suspect of using it for their own ends to the Police.

My MP is another Labour operative of the Blair generation, so maybe she too thinks it's fine to get under the skin of people whose names have been illegally obtained. If she ever replies I'll let you know.