Ever since the ConDems got into power, I have been constantly perplexed and bemused that they don't allude more publicly to the previous administration's culpability for the mess that the UK's finances are in.
Bob Crow was given airtime on the BBC this week, calling for the populace to take to the streets in defiance of these cuts, which he reckons are needed because of bankers' greed. Actually Bob, it was your party that bailed out the bankers and added significantly to the nation's debt.
Gordon Brown has spent the week in dour old Fife, working on his memoirs. His chief bean counter, Alistair Darling, was similarly silent and inconspicuous this week. And why not? Red Ed would not want either of those two around to remind us all why we are where we are.
And Postman Al, the new Shadow Puppet for Spending What We Don't Have, has accused Osborne of taking a reckless gamble with the spending review. At least it's a calculated and measured gamble, unlike those that Brown and Darling indluged in, which were all about buying votes and perpetuating their time in power.
The Chancellor and anyone else in power that needs to defend the need for economic changes just needs to remember this simple phrase: "It's all Labour's fault".
Monday, 25 October 2010
Tuesday, 28 September 2010
Wednesday, 8 September 2010
A Taxing Problem
Apparently, those astute fellows at Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs have managed to lose £2bn of tax revenue down the back of a computer server somewhere. And since this is the UK, where HMRC have only slightly less powers than the average deity, we the taxpayers are going to be expected to roll over and cough up the dough to pay for their ineptitude.
The increasingly inane BBC Breakfast wheeled in a “tax expert” this morning to explain what those of us unfortunate to receive a demand for £1,400 should do. Aside from returning the envelope smeared in excrement, which would be my suggestion, we are encouraged to plan to lose £100 per month of our income for a year. But don’t worry, said the “expert”, it won’t happen until next April. Whoop-de-effing-do.
But what the dopey presenters didn’t consider, and indeed what has escaped the attention of most of the media, is how did the government allow this much tax to fail to be collected?
Assuming it’s the fault of a computer system – and that seems to be what is being reported – then humans are involved somewhere. Computer software, especially mildly complex programs such as tax calculators for 30 million citizens, does not just write itself, deus ex machina-style.
A minister will have had an idea; a permanent secretary will have engaged with some internal stakeholders to kick off a project; consultants will have been appointed, following a rigorous process whereby the company whose CEO contributes most to the ruling party is employed; internal staff will be re-deployed from mind-numbingly tedious jobs to a position where they can obfuscate and stall the project as much as possible. And eventually an unfit-for-purpose system will be spat out, poorly-tested, over budget and several years late.
Since the system in question is only just now miscalculating our tax, it is safe to assume that it was not commissioned by the present coalition government: it is simply not possible to implement a new IT project in government in four months. So, it must have been a New Labour idea.
But not Alistair Darling’s: he became Chancellor in 2007 and the new software is only now being found out for getting the 2009-2010 tax year wrong. Which means it was probably instigated under the watch of the previous incumbent of No. 11. And since Gordon Brown was tighter than two coats of paint as Chancellor, evidenced by his penny-pinching with the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can bet that the new tax computer was subject to a budget comparable to the cost of the average Daewoo. A second hand one. With high mileage, no service history and three not very careful owners.
Darling is still culpable though, since the new system would have been undergoing testing once he was thrust into the Chancellorship. Although it was probably too late at that point to polish the pooh that Brown had laid during his time at the Treasury.
The £2bn should be re-couped from the salary and pensions of all the ministers that were involved in unleashing the shambles in the first place. Now that Brown and Darling are on the opposition benches – that is so satisfying to type – they should be forced to forfeit a fraction of their stipend to make up the shortfall. A thousand quid from each of them each month should do. Which is a million months. Or 83 millenia. Plus interest. No wonder the country’s finances are screwed deeper than a Chilean miner.
Brown and Darling – still a danger to the nation’s financial health.
The increasingly inane BBC Breakfast wheeled in a “tax expert” this morning to explain what those of us unfortunate to receive a demand for £1,400 should do. Aside from returning the envelope smeared in excrement, which would be my suggestion, we are encouraged to plan to lose £100 per month of our income for a year. But don’t worry, said the “expert”, it won’t happen until next April. Whoop-de-effing-do.
But what the dopey presenters didn’t consider, and indeed what has escaped the attention of most of the media, is how did the government allow this much tax to fail to be collected?
Assuming it’s the fault of a computer system – and that seems to be what is being reported – then humans are involved somewhere. Computer software, especially mildly complex programs such as tax calculators for 30 million citizens, does not just write itself, deus ex machina-style.
A minister will have had an idea; a permanent secretary will have engaged with some internal stakeholders to kick off a project; consultants will have been appointed, following a rigorous process whereby the company whose CEO contributes most to the ruling party is employed; internal staff will be re-deployed from mind-numbingly tedious jobs to a position where they can obfuscate and stall the project as much as possible. And eventually an unfit-for-purpose system will be spat out, poorly-tested, over budget and several years late.
Since the system in question is only just now miscalculating our tax, it is safe to assume that it was not commissioned by the present coalition government: it is simply not possible to implement a new IT project in government in four months. So, it must have been a New Labour idea.
But not Alistair Darling’s: he became Chancellor in 2007 and the new software is only now being found out for getting the 2009-2010 tax year wrong. Which means it was probably instigated under the watch of the previous incumbent of No. 11. And since Gordon Brown was tighter than two coats of paint as Chancellor, evidenced by his penny-pinching with the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can bet that the new tax computer was subject to a budget comparable to the cost of the average Daewoo. A second hand one. With high mileage, no service history and three not very careful owners.
Darling is still culpable though, since the new system would have been undergoing testing once he was thrust into the Chancellorship. Although it was probably too late at that point to polish the pooh that Brown had laid during his time at the Treasury.
The £2bn should be re-couped from the salary and pensions of all the ministers that were involved in unleashing the shambles in the first place. Now that Brown and Darling are on the opposition benches – that is so satisfying to type – they should be forced to forfeit a fraction of their stipend to make up the shortfall. A thousand quid from each of them each month should do. Which is a million months. Or 83 millenia. Plus interest. No wonder the country’s finances are screwed deeper than a Chilean miner.
Brown and Darling – still a danger to the nation’s financial health.
All Labour’s Fault
Four months into the new coalition government and the liberal (with a small “L”) media seem to delight in their daily reporting of the cuts in public services that are going to be made.
However, the news reports are all wrong in one small detail: they need to be prefixed or suffixed with an appropriate phrase to describe why the cuts are being made. Examples might be “Because of the previous Labour government’s mismanagement of the economy and public finances for the last 13 years…”, or “Due to Gordon Brown’s total incompetence as Chancellor and Prime Minister…”,
So, for example, we have in today’s Torygraph “Bank of England's Mervyn King warns over inflation”, which should read “Bank of England's Mervyn King warns over inflation, due to Gordon Brown’s total incompetence as Chancellor and Prime Minister”.
“60,000 police officers 'could be axed by 2015' due to Government funding cuts” from The Daily Mail should of course read “Because of the previous Labour government’s mismanagement of the economy and public finances for the last 13 years, 60,000 police officers 'could be axed by 2015' due to Government funding cuts”.
And lest we forget The Grauniad, “Arts funding cuts will bring down the curtain on our theatre's golden age” is more truthfully “Arts funding cuts will bring down the curtain on our theatre's golden age, because of the previous Labour government’s mismanagement of the economy and public finances for the last 13 years”.
It’s a great game to play when you listen to or watch BBC News, or read a newspaper. Try it, you’ll love it.
However, the news reports are all wrong in one small detail: they need to be prefixed or suffixed with an appropriate phrase to describe why the cuts are being made. Examples might be “Because of the previous Labour government’s mismanagement of the economy and public finances for the last 13 years…”, or “Due to Gordon Brown’s total incompetence as Chancellor and Prime Minister…”,
So, for example, we have in today’s Torygraph “Bank of England's Mervyn King warns over inflation”, which should read “Bank of England's Mervyn King warns over inflation, due to Gordon Brown’s total incompetence as Chancellor and Prime Minister”.
“60,000 police officers 'could be axed by 2015' due to Government funding cuts” from The Daily Mail should of course read “Because of the previous Labour government’s mismanagement of the economy and public finances for the last 13 years, 60,000 police officers 'could be axed by 2015' due to Government funding cuts”.
And lest we forget The Grauniad, “Arts funding cuts will bring down the curtain on our theatre's golden age” is more truthfully “Arts funding cuts will bring down the curtain on our theatre's golden age, because of the previous Labour government’s mismanagement of the economy and public finances for the last 13 years”.
It’s a great game to play when you listen to or watch BBC News, or read a newspaper. Try it, you’ll love it.
Thursday, 27 May 2010
Happy Days
Two weeks into the new Con-Dem, Lib-Con, call-it-whatever-you-want coalition and I feel no need to be wound up about proceedings. Every Tuesday is worthy of a celebration.
Two weeks ago, Gormless Gordon got in his shiny, ministerial Jag for the last time to be driven to Buck House to hand in his resignation to Her Maj. Thirty minutes later, Dave got in his even shinier, newer Jag to be interviewed for the vacant position of Prime Minister and First Lord of the Treasury. “Yes, Dave, you seem like a nice chap, the job’s yours. And you went to Eton, so you’re a shoo-in.”, the Queen is alleged to have said.
Would a “proper”, single party government have been better? Maybe. Would a government unfettered by dampening down its policies to satisfy a minority partner be better? Probably. Would a government with a clear, UK-wide majority be better? Definitely.
But anything is better than having Labour in charge for another 4 or 5 years. Ex-PM Brown is now said to be “considering offers”, ranging from continuing his work as worst leader ever by becoming First Minister of Scotland to appearing as an extra in Holby City, although I think he is better suited to Grumpy Old Men. Labour are currently leaderless, unless you count stand-in boss Batty Hatty Harperson. I don’t. Her shrill posturing at Tuesday's opening of parliament sounded like someone who was reading punchlines from a third-rate comic’s discarded material. Which she was.
Long may it continue: the coalition implementing policies to reverse 13 years of oppressive, extravagant, wasteful government; Labour sitting on the opposition benches in a permanent “harrumph”, lead by (probably) one of the Miliband brothers, or hopefully the copywriters’ choice, Ed Balls.
Happy days indeed.
Two weeks ago, Gormless Gordon got in his shiny, ministerial Jag for the last time to be driven to Buck House to hand in his resignation to Her Maj. Thirty minutes later, Dave got in his even shinier, newer Jag to be interviewed for the vacant position of Prime Minister and First Lord of the Treasury. “Yes, Dave, you seem like a nice chap, the job’s yours. And you went to Eton, so you’re a shoo-in.”, the Queen is alleged to have said.
Would a “proper”, single party government have been better? Maybe. Would a government unfettered by dampening down its policies to satisfy a minority partner be better? Probably. Would a government with a clear, UK-wide majority be better? Definitely.
But anything is better than having Labour in charge for another 4 or 5 years. Ex-PM Brown is now said to be “considering offers”, ranging from continuing his work as worst leader ever by becoming First Minister of Scotland to appearing as an extra in Holby City, although I think he is better suited to Grumpy Old Men. Labour are currently leaderless, unless you count stand-in boss Batty Hatty Harperson. I don’t. Her shrill posturing at Tuesday's opening of parliament sounded like someone who was reading punchlines from a third-rate comic’s discarded material. Which she was.
Long may it continue: the coalition implementing policies to reverse 13 years of oppressive, extravagant, wasteful government; Labour sitting on the opposition benches in a permanent “harrumph”, lead by (probably) one of the Miliband brothers, or hopefully the copywriters’ choice, Ed Balls.
Happy days indeed.
Thursday, 6 May 2010
Silly Punt
According to the Daily Red Rag, a Labour supporter has bet £5,000 on an outright Labour victory tomorrow. He stands to win £75,000 if his horse comes in (to No. 10). Here’s hoping he is wrong and £5,000 poorer in the morning…
Tuesday, 4 May 2010
Sood off, Gordon
Step forward Manish Sood, prospective parliamentary candidate for North West Norfolk in Thursday’s election. In an interesting tactic to get himself elected and popular with his party, Sood is quoted as saying “Gordon Brown has been the worst prime minister we have had in this country. "It is a disgrace and he owes an apology to the people and the Queen”.
I’m not sure why Her Maj needs a consoling hug from the PM, but he could do worse than dedicate his final election broadcast to apologising for his ruination of the nation, sending under-equipped soldiers to fight unwinnable wars and for believing that employing a million extra civil servants is a credible alternative to creating a healthy economy.
Mr Sood is the most honest candidate in the election. And also probably the stupidest. He'd better watch out for low flying Nokias...
I’m not sure why Her Maj needs a consoling hug from the PM, but he could do worse than dedicate his final election broadcast to apologising for his ruination of the nation, sending under-equipped soldiers to fight unwinnable wars and for believing that employing a million extra civil servants is a credible alternative to creating a healthy economy.
Mr Sood is the most honest candidate in the election. And also probably the stupidest. He'd better watch out for low flying Nokias...
Thursday, 29 April 2010
'kin 'ell
The Bank of England Governor, Mervyn King, is alleged to have said that whoever makes the cuts needed to bring the UK back on track will be so unpopular that they will be unelectable for a generation. Well, he's right isn't he?
We've had 13 years of profligate spending on 37 ministerial departments, 300 local councils, 900+ quangos, 3 devolved governments and the EU.
There are probably a million people who could disappear from the civil service payroll without affecting teaching, health, the military and any other front-line service.
That would save a bucket-load of tax through not paying for salaries, pensions and other costs, such as failed £12.7bn NHS projects. That tax would be returned to the economy, which can be used to re-employ the million former civil servants to do something useful. Who would then pay tax and spend money, thus perpetuating the cycle. It cannot happen overnight and will be painful for all involved.
However, this will never happen with Brown and Darling in Nos 10 and 11. Cable wouldn't have the guts or the vision to do anything so radical or creative, unless it is presented to him on an abacus.
The Tories could do it though. They are not afraid to be the baddies. They did it for 18 years, set up a very nice economy thank you very much and have watched while it has been systematically dismantled since 1997. Time to let them try again.
We've had 13 years of profligate spending on 37 ministerial departments, 300 local councils, 900+ quangos, 3 devolved governments and the EU.
There are probably a million people who could disappear from the civil service payroll without affecting teaching, health, the military and any other front-line service.
That would save a bucket-load of tax through not paying for salaries, pensions and other costs, such as failed £12.7bn NHS projects. That tax would be returned to the economy, which can be used to re-employ the million former civil servants to do something useful. Who would then pay tax and spend money, thus perpetuating the cycle. It cannot happen overnight and will be painful for all involved.
However, this will never happen with Brown and Darling in Nos 10 and 11. Cable wouldn't have the guts or the vision to do anything so radical or creative, unless it is presented to him on an abacus.
The Tories could do it though. They are not afraid to be the baddies. They did it for 18 years, set up a very nice economy thank you very much and have watched while it has been systematically dismantled since 1997. Time to let them try again.
Wednesday, 28 April 2010
True Colours
A few observations on Gordon Brown’s self-destruction earlier today:
His forced smile whilst listening to the woman, his on-mic remarks about her being a bigot and his botox apology were all more cringeworthy than watching an episode of The Office or Curb Your Enthusiasm.
“I misunderstood what she said” – so now Gordon is deaf as well as blind?
Are we all going to get a doorstep visit from the soon-to-be-former PM, apologising for his two-faced, mendacious treatment of the electorate?
Makes you realise that all those stories earlier in the year about bullying were spot on.
His forced smile whilst listening to the woman, his on-mic remarks about her being a bigot and his botox apology were all more cringeworthy than watching an episode of The Office or Curb Your Enthusiasm.
“I misunderstood what she said” – so now Gordon is deaf as well as blind?
Are we all going to get a doorstep visit from the soon-to-be-former PM, apologising for his two-faced, mendacious treatment of the electorate?
Makes you realise that all those stories earlier in the year about bullying were spot on.
Monday, 26 April 2010
Dr Who and the Tories
No, not the next episode of the long-running (and long in the tooth) sci-fi series - I’m more of a Jon Pertwee/Tom Baker man - but a warning from the previous Dr Who, David Tennant, that a future Conservative government would be bad for the BBC.
The left-leaning Tennant is afraid that the BBC will be broken up and the cash used to fund commercial television. But what Tennant doesn’t understand is that the BBC is as big a waste of public money as any of the other 37 government departments. I have blogged before about the multiple, parallel news broadcasts and endless re-making of programmes that the BBC has already made several times before (usually lavish costume dramas).
The Beeb should not be immune from the cost-cutting that is needed to bring government spending under control. Indeed, I would have thought that the lefties would be delighted that the licence tax, sorry fee, was spread out amongst more recipients.
The left-leaning Tennant is afraid that the BBC will be broken up and the cash used to fund commercial television. But what Tennant doesn’t understand is that the BBC is as big a waste of public money as any of the other 37 government departments. I have blogged before about the multiple, parallel news broadcasts and endless re-making of programmes that the BBC has already made several times before (usually lavish costume dramas).
The Beeb should not be immune from the cost-cutting that is needed to bring government spending under control. Indeed, I would have thought that the lefties would be delighted that the licence tax, sorry fee, was spread out amongst more recipients.
Now I know the polls are nonsense
A poll announced in today’s Torygraph claims that Gordon Brown, he of the deathbed grimace, has a more trusted smile than his would-be Prime Ministerial challengers.
Now, I am still having trouble with Nick Clegg suddenly being catapulted into the running as leader of the country, based on his performance in the two leaders’ debates (this is an election Britain, not the X-Factor), but I really struggle to fathom how anybody could misconstrue Brown’s rictus frown for anything other than a man with a bad case of constipation.
Then again, if the dimwitted respondents to these polls think that Nick Clegg should be Prime Minister, they will say anything to a pollster to raise a laugh.
Now, I am still having trouble with Nick Clegg suddenly being catapulted into the running as leader of the country, based on his performance in the two leaders’ debates (this is an election Britain, not the X-Factor), but I really struggle to fathom how anybody could misconstrue Brown’s rictus frown for anything other than a man with a bad case of constipation.
Then again, if the dimwitted respondents to these polls think that Nick Clegg should be Prime Minister, they will say anything to a pollster to raise a laugh.
Tuesday, 13 April 2010
Spot the difference
Tory potential Education Secretary and Edmund ("Osmond!!" - say it like Brian Blessed) Blackadder:
Eff All
“A future fair for all”, so says Labour’s alliterative election slogan.
To save everyone from the bother of having to wade through the non-document that is the Labour manifesto, I have a handy cut-out-and-keep summary:
Rebuild our economy: that we single-handedly destroyed through financial neglect and blind devotion to whatever the City did; the rebuilding will be financed by those least responsible for the destruction; those most responsible for the recession will receive bonuses and chairmanships of FTSE-100 companies, or in Geoff Hoon’s case, five grand a day for setting up meetings.
Reform and protect our public services: hire even more workshy layabouts that cannot get jobs in the private sector; pump billions more into making the government bigger and more expensive; and then act surprised when the country wakes up in 2015 to discover we have no other employer but HM Government.
Renew our politics: we’ve had 13 years of power with nothing to show apart from £165bn of debt, £900bn of unfinanced civil service pensions and some free porn for Jacqui Smith’s husband. The only renewal of politics the electorate wants is to see the back of inefficient, corrupt politicians.
To save everyone from the bother of having to wade through the non-document that is the Labour manifesto, I have a handy cut-out-and-keep summary:
Rebuild our economy: that we single-handedly destroyed through financial neglect and blind devotion to whatever the City did; the rebuilding will be financed by those least responsible for the destruction; those most responsible for the recession will receive bonuses and chairmanships of FTSE-100 companies, or in Geoff Hoon’s case, five grand a day for setting up meetings.
Reform and protect our public services: hire even more workshy layabouts that cannot get jobs in the private sector; pump billions more into making the government bigger and more expensive; and then act surprised when the country wakes up in 2015 to discover we have no other employer but HM Government.
Renew our politics: we’ve had 13 years of power with nothing to show apart from £165bn of debt, £900bn of unfinanced civil service pensions and some free porn for Jacqui Smith’s husband. The only renewal of politics the electorate wants is to see the back of inefficient, corrupt politicians.
At least Brown and Co are preparing for life after politics. As with many of the industries that have been forced to lay off workers who then find jobs in call centres, Gordon has been getting in some practice:
Fair for all? Eff all, more like.
Thursday, 8 April 2010
Liberal Conditions
In a speech about the Tories’ potential post-election budget, Nick Clegg appears to have caught the Labour of disease of talking in "could" and "would" language. (For those who don’t know, Nick Clegg is the leader of the Liberal Democrats, a political party with as much chance of governing as my goldfish).
Clegg argues that the Conservatives would need to increase VAT to 20.5%, at a cost of £389 per family per year, to pay for other tax breaks that may (or may not) be introduced. Where the numbers are dreamed up is anybody’s guess, probably from financial genius and former paper-clip counter, Vince Cable.
Actually, increasing VAT is a good idea as it spreads the cost of taxation across all citizens, including those who don't or won’t work. It is also a tax you can choose not to pay, either by abstinence or by purchasing from a country with lower sales tax.
Nice shooting Nick, you got your foot first time.
Clegg argues that the Conservatives would need to increase VAT to 20.5%, at a cost of £389 per family per year, to pay for other tax breaks that may (or may not) be introduced. Where the numbers are dreamed up is anybody’s guess, probably from financial genius and former paper-clip counter, Vince Cable.
Actually, increasing VAT is a good idea as it spreads the cost of taxation across all citizens, including those who don't or won’t work. It is also a tax you can choose not to pay, either by abstinence or by purchasing from a country with lower sales tax.
Nice shooting Nick, you got your foot first time.
Mr. Muscle
Another day, another pledge from the government: no increase in the basic rate of income tax. Aye, right, as they say up here. The famous Scottish double positive, which always means a negative.
I seem to remember this pledge from Labour before: now we have new tax rates, increased NI and stagnant personal allowances - all of which equal tax rises in all but name.
I also remember the "pledge" on introducing Proportional Representation in 1997 and the other one about an EU referendum in 2005.
Brown's pledges are similar to that of a popular cleaning product: can be wiped away and leave a nasty, unnatural smell.
I seem to remember this pledge from Labour before: now we have new tax rates, increased NI and stagnant personal allowances - all of which equal tax rises in all but name.
I also remember the "pledge" on introducing Proportional Representation in 1997 and the other one about an EU referendum in 2005.
Brown's pledges are similar to that of a popular cleaning product: can be wiped away and leave a nasty, unnatural smell.
Wednesday, 7 April 2010
View to a kill
If looks could kill...
Adam Boulton was lucky there wasn't a Nokia handy for Gordo to fling at him.
Adam Boulton was lucky there wasn't a Nokia handy for Gordo to fling at him.
Ordinary People
So, the man currently known as Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, has finally done the decent thing and handed in his 30 days notice to Her Maj. And rather than saying how he will turn the country into a safe place to live, with low taxation, efficient public services and a government that can be trusted, he has hit the trail by stating how “ordinary” he is.
He is an ordinary man from an ordinary town. Ok Gordo, if you are ordinary then you will have probably indulged in some of the following: drinking until you vomit, watching naked bodies on telly, driving too fast, staying up all night listening to loud music, taking an illegal substance, not handing in your homework on time, fiddling your expenses.
Apart from the last activity, Brown is far from ordinary: inability to apologise, stubbornness to the point of appearing to be a brick wall, a tendency to hide the truth behind statistics, failure to get on with his fellow MPs, selective view of the past, less than the average number of eyes. If that is ordinary, no wonder we are in a mess.
But I don’t want an ordinary person to lead the country. I want someone with a bit of character, vision, spirit, drive. A cross between Andy McNab, Jeremy Clarkson and Richard Branson, with maybe a dash of Joanna Lumley to add sense and balance into the mix.
Brown is the last person to be allowed to run the country again. His brand of ordinariness has run the economy into the ground, saddled us with an immediate £170bn debt and a long term £900bn civil service pension deficit, and he has presided over an administration that has brought the whole business of politics into disrepute via expenses and lobbying scandals.
Time for an extraordinary approach.
He is an ordinary man from an ordinary town. Ok Gordo, if you are ordinary then you will have probably indulged in some of the following: drinking until you vomit, watching naked bodies on telly, driving too fast, staying up all night listening to loud music, taking an illegal substance, not handing in your homework on time, fiddling your expenses.
Apart from the last activity, Brown is far from ordinary: inability to apologise, stubbornness to the point of appearing to be a brick wall, a tendency to hide the truth behind statistics, failure to get on with his fellow MPs, selective view of the past, less than the average number of eyes. If that is ordinary, no wonder we are in a mess.
But I don’t want an ordinary person to lead the country. I want someone with a bit of character, vision, spirit, drive. A cross between Andy McNab, Jeremy Clarkson and Richard Branson, with maybe a dash of Joanna Lumley to add sense and balance into the mix.
Brown is the last person to be allowed to run the country again. His brand of ordinariness has run the economy into the ground, saddled us with an immediate £170bn debt and a long term £900bn civil service pension deficit, and he has presided over an administration that has brought the whole business of politics into disrepute via expenses and lobbying scandals.
Time for an extraordinary approach.
Wednesday, 31 March 2010
Mass Debate
I eschewed an episode of Top Gear on Monday night in favour of the “Chancellors’ Debate”, a televised argument between the current holder of the public purse and his two would-be successors. Well, I say two, actually there is only one.
Vince Cable, the self-titled Financial Genius, is alleged to have won the battle of the bean counters by virtue of his insightful commentary on the hindsight that he possesses. Cable produced applause from the audience every time he stated the obvious about house price inflation and easy credit. Unfortunately Vince, elections are not decided by clapometer, unless I missed a meeting. My former neighbour and I use to have conversations over the garden hedge about how unsustainable the economy was. But we were in no position to do anything about it. The Lib Dem treasury spokesman proved last night that his party has as much power as a flat double-A battery.
George Osborne, on the other hand, had Old Caterpillar Eyebrows on the ropes on a couple of occasions, eliciting such eloquent responses as “Er”, “Um” and the classics “the economy needs to be managed by people with experience” and “our economy is best placed to weather the financial crisis”, whilst glossing over the not insignificant matter of how he and his boss got us into the crisis in the first place through their inexperience and mismanagement.
Osborne is also the only one to have actually produced a concrete policy ahead of the election, which is the reversal of Darling’s planned National Insurance increase, a rise that will cost employees between £150 and £750 per year. Labour and the Lib-Dems say that the increase is needed – to fund Darling and Brown’s £178bn of debt, remember – and is not costed. Osborne retorts that the reverse will be funded from savings. I think that when the Tories finally get to see the books and the state of government on May 7th, they will find that they can fund this tax cut and many more from efficiency savings and cuts.
And not that Darling or Brown has ever worried about where their spending will be funded from. Billions thrown at failed banks, who have then rewarded themselves with 7-figure bonuses; billions thrown at two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but still not enough to fight the wars effectively; £12 billion on a failed IT system for the NHS; £10 billion on a vanity Olympics project. Who are Labour to preach on prudent economics?
Vince Cable, the self-titled Financial Genius, is alleged to have won the battle of the bean counters by virtue of his insightful commentary on the hindsight that he possesses. Cable produced applause from the audience every time he stated the obvious about house price inflation and easy credit. Unfortunately Vince, elections are not decided by clapometer, unless I missed a meeting. My former neighbour and I use to have conversations over the garden hedge about how unsustainable the economy was. But we were in no position to do anything about it. The Lib Dem treasury spokesman proved last night that his party has as much power as a flat double-A battery.
George Osborne, on the other hand, had Old Caterpillar Eyebrows on the ropes on a couple of occasions, eliciting such eloquent responses as “Er”, “Um” and the classics “the economy needs to be managed by people with experience” and “our economy is best placed to weather the financial crisis”, whilst glossing over the not insignificant matter of how he and his boss got us into the crisis in the first place through their inexperience and mismanagement.
Osborne is also the only one to have actually produced a concrete policy ahead of the election, which is the reversal of Darling’s planned National Insurance increase, a rise that will cost employees between £150 and £750 per year. Labour and the Lib-Dems say that the increase is needed – to fund Darling and Brown’s £178bn of debt, remember – and is not costed. Osborne retorts that the reverse will be funded from savings. I think that when the Tories finally get to see the books and the state of government on May 7th, they will find that they can fund this tax cut and many more from efficiency savings and cuts.
And not that Darling or Brown has ever worried about where their spending will be funded from. Billions thrown at failed banks, who have then rewarded themselves with 7-figure bonuses; billions thrown at two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but still not enough to fight the wars effectively; £12 billion on a failed IT system for the NHS; £10 billion on a vanity Olympics project. Who are Labour to preach on prudent economics?
Tuesday, 23 March 2010
What's Up Doc?
MPs are supposed to have learned their lessons from the expenses scandal, or so Gordon Brown keeps saying. But Stephen Byers and other MPs proved this weekend that they haven’t, as the stories surrounding the latest trousering scam highlight.
Not only are they constantly using inventive ways to fill their nose bags, but when they get caught, the excuse is always "but it's within the rules and I have done nothing wrong".
Don't they know the meaning of propriety?
Not only are they constantly using inventive ways to fill their nose bags, but when they get caught, the excuse is always "but it's within the rules and I have done nothing wrong".
Don't they know the meaning of propriety?
Thursday, 18 March 2010
Watch your back, Darling
Rumours abound that miniature maniac Kim Jong Il has had his finance minister jailed and subsequently executed. This is because the unfortunate holder of the treasury office in North Korea could not implement the crazy currency plans of his boss, resulting in spiralling inflation. Sounds spookily familiar: out of leader dreams up an economic strategy that results in hardship and mountainous debt for his citizens.
All I can say is, if only we could adopt the same job recognition scheme in the UK…
All I can say is, if only we could adopt the same job recognition scheme in the UK…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
