He's forever blowing bubbles....

I've always thought that the West Ham song about blowing bubbles would sound better if it went "they fly so high, nearly reach the sky, they're like West Ham, they fade and die", but on the performance I just saw at Upton Park I don't think that would be fair.

However, better than the football was witnessing Iain Dale singing the song in a mockney accent. There was also a wave between him and the Police minister Tony McNulty who was up in the posh seats wearing a suit... football transcends politics after all.

West Ham won 2-0 if you're interested, Middlesborough were absolutely woeful, and Carlos Tevez was all over their defence like a bad rash. Cheers for the ticket Iain.

Brown blames Cameron for his pension deception

Highly amusing I thought but Gordon Brown sent out his lieutenant Ed Balls on to the Today programme this morning to put out the line that the pension story and the billions lost were all as a result of David Cameron's advice to Norman Lamont. The entirely partial Jim Naughtie then happily parroted the line more than once. Watching politicians do desperate things is funny.

Chocolate Jesus exhibition cancelled

How truly bizarre? An Easter art exhibition at a Manhatten hotel which contains a life size, "anatomically correct", chocolate Jesus, has decided to close after complaints from the Catholic Church. The statue is made from 200lbs on chocolate and stands as if Jesus is on an invisible. I'm presuming that the thing that Church disliked is that he has no loin cloth on and is flying commando.

Proof of Brown's pension grab exposed after two year battle by the Times

This morning's Times has published evidence received through the Freedom of Information Act that show that Gordon Brown was repeatedly warned about the impact his £5 billion-a-year raid of pensions would have and still went ahead with it. Brown was told, in no uncertain terms, his plans "would make a big hole in pension scheme finances".

Gordon Brown has consistently denied he has caused the current crisis in the pension system, yet these documents make it clear that he was not only told what would happen, but that he blundered on forward, even when alternatives were offered such as phased introduction of his changes. On the back of his tax grab Budget of the low paid, and the news that only 1 in 4 people actually claim tax credits, the documents show that Brown was told his changes would "lead to a reduction in pension benefits for the lower paid" and he still went ahead with it.

The Treasury denial to the Times is quite amusing as well. They called it a "travesty" of the information they received (which took two years to extract from the Treasury) and claim that "[a]nyone who pretends these decisions have led to the funding problems for pension schemes in recent years, while ignoring the impact of the dot.com crash, the pension holidays in the 1980s and 1990s, and the rise in life expectancy is simply distorting the facts."

Pelosi refuses to support British troops seized in Iran?

The US based Power Line blog is reporting that the leader of the House of Representative in the US Congress, Nancy Pelosi, has been allowing a resolution of support for Britain over the seized Navy sailor in Iran to languish all week without bringing it to the floor of the House. It quotes a letter from Congressman Eric Cantor to Pelosi which says,

Dear Madam Speaker:

Fifteen kidnapped British marines and sailors recently became the latest victims of a systematic Iranian campaign of terror and international defiance. The illegal seizure of the British forces is a signal that Iran views us as powerless to prevent it from realizing its aggressive ambitions.

For the sake of our standing in the world, our allies and most importantly the 15 British personnel and their families, I urge you to bring H. Res. 267 to the floor today before we adjourn. The resolution calls for the immediate and unconditional release of the British marines and sailors. It would also call on the U.N. Security Council to not only condemn the seizure, but to explore harsher sanctions to counter the growing Iranian threat.

It also quotes a Republican congressional staffer incredulity at the situation.

Cheers Nancy, thanks for the support.
Hat Tip: Theo Spark

Gregory Campbell MP you are neither big, clever or funny

EDM 1253

That this House notes the recent results of the Northern Ireland football team in the European Championship qualifiers, including the 2-1 win over Sweden; acknowledges the fact that after this latest result Northern Ireland now sits top of their group; salutes the outstanding performance of Lawrie Sanchez, all the team including top scorer David Healy, and their magnificent supporters; and encourages all the other home countries who currently occupy lower positions in their groups to take as their inspiration the country whose unofficial anthem is We're not Brazil, we're Northern Ireland.

Plaid Cymru have anti-English PPBs and now the DUP is having a dig at us and the bloody Scots. When will the madness end?
Note: Steve McClaren sucks

The joy of being a small party like Plaid Cymru

You can come up with stupidly ideas and never worrying about having to implement them. Like grants for first time buyers to get a house, or even better, free laptops for every child when they turn 11. Honestly I'm not joking, it's in the PPB. I particularly enjoyed the anti-English tone of it, it would be difficult to be more blatent.

Who knew the Doctor could do impressions?

The truth behind "renewal"?

Department of Transport not on target to hit target?

We all know about diversity in the workplace, and the joy of all-wimmin shortlists in the Labour Party. Getting more women into things is a big drivers for everyone it seems, except perhaps when driver is the job.

According to the Government, there are less women drivers today in the Government Car and Despatch Agency than there were in 2002, but they also have a target to increase the number by 2011.

Looking at the five year trend though they don't look like they're having much luck. Currently, only 5.63% of the drivers in the GCDA are women, and the previous four years look like this.

• 2002-03 5.68%
• 2003-04 4.76%
• 2004-05 4.04%
• 2005-06 4.76%

Now I know what people will say, they will say "ahhh but the trend is up", and indeed it is. The actually figure is still lower than it was a few years ago, and I wonder why, when releasing the figures, Stephen Ladyboy didn't say what the 2011 target was and instead said it was in the action plan he had placed in the Commons Library. It couldn't be that they're going to miss it could it?

For the record, I don't see the point in having a target in the first place. Best people for the job should get the job. Period. I enjoy laughing at the failure though.

DCMS fails to make profit at ticket tout conference

Apparently, the Department of Culture, Media and Sport often holds what it calls "summits" for particular industries. They don't actually cost very much but they had one recently on ticket touting which cost, according to the DCMS, £0.00. Surely they should've made a profit?

Karl Rove rapping?

President Bush's close advisor Karl Rove errrr... rapping. It happened at a Radio and Television Correspondents' Association dinner. He's much better than Keith Hill. The other old people dancing with him are also some sort of Politico types I think.

The computer that evolves.. yes really

A team at a Norwegian University have built the first evolutionary computer hardware. In order for the hardware to increase it's own performance, it uses genetic algorithms to evolve.

What their hardware does is par up “genes” in the hardware to find the hardware design that is the most effective to accomplish the tasks at hand. Just like in the real world it can take 20 to 30 thousand generations before the system finds the perfect design to solve the problem, but this will happen in just a few seconds compared to the 8-900.000 years it took humans to go through the same number of generations.

HAL is coming!
From here via here.

All-party Parliamentary Report on Antisemitism

The Government has just announced that it is to have a new strategy to tackle antisemitism in Britain which should be welcomed. However, the words Livingstone, Galloway, nor Respect do not appear in it which is odd.

There is a rather bemusing sentence in the report which is actually a reference to the original All-Parliamentary Report that the Government is responding too. It says,

We conclude the a minority of Islamic extremists in this country do incite hatred towards Jews. The undoubted prejudice and difficulties that British Muslims feel and their justified sense of increasing Islamophobia cannot be used to justify antisemitic words and violence.

Now is it me or that a self-contradictory little conclusion? On the one hand it saying that antisemitism is wrong and totally unjustified, and then on the other it seems to be saying that Muslims' views of Jews are justified, but that they should all just keep quiet about it. Effectively the statement itself has a sub-text that could quite easily be interpreted as a nod toward antisemitism.

Might this explain why the Government itself refused to acknowledge that aspect of it? See page 8, point 15 which shows the above paragraph and then the Governments response which removes it.

Lib Dems fear zombie crime spree?

We can't even trust the dead now?

Mr. Clegg: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many bodies are registered for Criminal Records Bureau check.

Perhaps he's worried about Ming?
N.B. I am full aware of how appalling poor this joke was. You do not need to tell me so.

Ministry of Justice website is exactly where I said it would be

As I exclusively predicted back in February, the new Ministry of Justice website is going to be located at www.justice.gov.uk. After just over a month of rewriting the address to a DirectGov website (put in after I broke the story) it now proudly displays the following message:

"Ministry of Justice
On 29 March 2007 the Prime Minister announced that a new Ministry of Justice will be established. The changes will come into effect on 9 May 2007."

They still haven't registered security.gov.uk yet though, maybe they will just keep the Home Office website instead.

Government confirms woeful Internet voting security procedure

The idea of Internet voting is not something that fills me with fluffy warm participation feelings as it is well documented. Exposing the voting for local or general elections on the public Internet is, quite simply, universally stupid anyway. However, I've just learnt what the security protocols for getting, and exrecising an Internet vote will be and it's actually quite frightening.

According to the Constitutional Affairs minister, Bridget Prentice, if you want to vote via the Internet or by phone you will have to pre-register the same way you do for postal votes. In other words you fill in a form and either post it, or give it to someone to hand in.

In order to "secure" the Internet voting system there will apparently be a "combination of two codes, one provided by the elector and one by the local elections office" which will be used to "identify electors when they log on to vote".

So let me get this straight. I choose a code which the system has to know in conjunction with one issued to me by the electoral officer? How does my code make it onto a system? Something tells me I won't be entering it myself, something tells me I will have to put it on that form that I hand over to some random town hall person, post, or even worse, hand it over to a party political collector.

I dread to think what format the "code" will take. If its four figures you can guarantee that people will use their PIN number. That will be their PIN on a form with their name and address on it too. If it is six figures, they'll probably use their date of birth.

Call me a cynic, but as we saw with all-postal vote pilots, there are going to be massive appeals and claims about abuse of an Internet system, and the so-called security measures that will apparently protect voting integrity is frankly pathetic.

Earl Day Motions: the placebo for action?

Besides health and safety fascism, one other thing that really gets my back up is the anti-Enlightenment tendency toward mysticism and scientific nonsense. My blood pressure increases even more when I see people try and claim that there is some sort of scientific value in utter nonsense. Homeopathy is one such mystical bollocks that is peddled as being a genuine and actual treatment for illness.

I've mentioned it before on here I think, but homeopathy is based upon the most non-sensical approach to active ingredients in a treatment ever known. The theory goes like this. Take x of active ingredient, dilute x with water by the power of ten, then do it again, and again, and again. The more you dilute the active ingredient, so the homeopathy fans says, the stronger it becomes. The water from the initial dilution you see, has memory.

In homeopathy there are different weaknesses strengths of active solution. The weakest strongest is so diluted the active ingredient is about the equivalent to a couple of grains of salt in the Atlantic. Any impact of homeopathy can be explained anyway by the placebo effect.

This bring me neatly on to a motion tabled by Rudi Vis MP calling on the Government to ensure that homeopathy and other quack alternative snake oils therapies be protected and provided on the NHS because they are "national assets".

There are many people who think the EDM system is a bit of waste of time, and is simply a means for Parliamentarians to be seen to be doing something. In this case they're right, ironically the motion is a placebo for action about placebos.

Blair gives misleading answer to Parliament about ePetitions?

It looks like the the person responsibile for the e-petitions on the Downing Street website who was called a "prat" by an unnamed minister after allowing the road pricing petitions up is off the hook.

When questioned about the cost of administrative support of the ePetition system, Blair answered saying that "it is potentially part of the work of all those involved in e-petitions and handling correspondence in my office" so it would be impossible to quantify the cost.

I have but a one word response to that, which is, characteristically, "bollocks". If everyone is potentially responsible then why is it, when you submit a petition as I did for a joke, you receive confirmation from team@petitions.pm.gov.uk and the email is signed "-- the ePetitions team"?

Call me old fashioned, but Blair's answer seems to me to be somewhat misleading. If he has an "ePetitions team" then he cannot equally claim that the ePetitions are managed by everyone in his office. Unless of course he's just made-up the "ePetitions team" to make it look like he has staff dedicated to it, but he wouldn't do that would he? That would be dishonest!

No, no, no, no, no!

A star (Eddie Griffin) ruining a not at all reasonably priced car!

So wrong.

Microsoft sends secret dossier on reporter, to reporter

After my personal amusement yesterday of a civil servant sending me an FoI response having used an old senior management internal memo with track changes switched on, Microsoft's PR firm have gone one step better.

Wired journalist and contributing editor Fred Vogelstein has posted on his blog about an email he received from Microsoft’s PR firm, Waggener Edstrom, which contained a thirteen page memo on how the PR company was going to deal with him.

Something tells me the PR company may be losing their contract soon, or more likely the silly sod that sent it will have been fired. Read more here and download the document here.
Found via TechCrunch

You can always rely on YouTube

Iain posted about this on Monday and gave a Windows media link but it's also available on YouTube and deserves airing. Jack McConnell, leader of Scottish Labour, saying that the SNP can win.

No more blogspot address

I have finally pulled my thumb out of the proverbial and registered dizzythinks.net which I have been promising myself I would do for quite literally months. The old blogspot address will still bring you here so there is no rush to switch links, but you may want to change the link anyway in blogrolls etc.

Macavity scrubs himself clean of spilt porridge

If ever one needed evidence of how much control freakery there is from the Treasury into other departments spending consider this little gem. If the Home Office is found to have totally screwed up (I know, it's rare!) and thus finds itself subject to making a compensation payout, it has to go cap in hand for permission from Brown to pay out anything above £20,000.

The figure, given out in a written response to Mark Francois MP yesterday by the Home Office Minister, Liam Byrne, means that when the news broke last May that prisoners were receiving masses in compensation, it wasn't actually the Home Office that authorised it.

Whilst the prisons minister, Gerry Sutcliffe for it is he, took all the flak in the press and the Home Office found itself engulfed in yet another scandal, it was actually our good friend Macavity who was to blame. As you'd expect though, when everyone looked, Macavity wasn't there.

Guido does segment for Newsnight

What's this? Guido on Newsnight? Michael Crick's replacement perhaps? Guido interviews Nick Robinson, Adam Boutlon and Jeremy Paxman about the fact that the mainstream is forced to worry about its relationship with politicians at the expense of proper reporting.

There's a great quote from Paxman "that's complete bollocks" and he gives Guido his "incredulous" look too. Watch it here.

Disabled people's personal data stolen from Government Agency

According to a very short response from the DWP Minister, Anne McGuire, in the last 12 months, the Independent Living Fund, the agency that provides help to the severly disabled has had one backup tape of personal data stolen.

No further information was given, but assuming it's an industry standrard type tape, such as DLT8, that could, at least theoretically, represent about 40Gigs of personal data about a significant group of extremely vulnerable people.

Hopefully someone will follow up on this, as to lose a backup tape is bad enough, but if your information security procedures are so poor that tapes full of personal data can be lfited, what does that say about the multutde of other central database the Goevrnment has built, is building, or wishes too build?

Is Hilary Benn's campaign finally taking off?

An "unofficial" Hilary Benn supporting website has appeared called Backing Benn, although so far they'v only managed to post a joke video by Gwierdo of Mr Benn.

However, someone kindly linked to the video below in their comments which is much funnier. I have no idea who the guy is, but he really doesn't like Peter Hain, that's for sure! I shall calling him Ranting Billy! It's also labelled as part one, so I imagine there is more to come (warning contains naughty words).

Poll says Gordon Budget was wonderful?

Bucking the trend of every other pollster, the Independent is running a piece on a poll by Communicate Research which apparently shows a slip in the Tory lead and also shows that the population think the Budget was brilliant and Gordon Brown made them all richer.

The headline lead figures are not really of interest to me to be honest, it's this apparent data that shows we're all really chuffed with the Budget that I am confused by. I've yet to speak to anyone who didn't either (a) consider it a con, or (b) get annoyed that it hit the poorest.

The SNP might not just wipe out Labour. UKIP should fear them too

Were I a member of UKIP this morning the news of the Populus poll in the Times about the Scottish election would have me worrying. Instinctively one might wonder why the Scottish elections should worry what is, perceived to be at least a single issue party around the on the matter of our membership of the European Union, but I shall explain.

If, as the poll suggests, and the SNP wipe out Labour in the Scottish elections then one of their key policy platforms is a substantive referendum on full independence from the United Kingdom.

Now, I don't know what the chances of winning such a vote is for a party that is predicted to achieve 50% of the vote in May, but what seems clear is that the possibility of a referendum being won by the SNP seems far more likely today than it has for some time.

Should such a referendum be held and won then it will effectively be Scotland that resolves the West Lothian Question with the nuclear option. The destruction of the Act of Union, and thereby the end of the sovereign existence of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will remove all questions about English votes for English matters.

So where does UKIP fit into all this you may wonder? Well, as most people know, the European Union as it is today is the sum of its treaties. In the case of our membership, it was the UK that negotiated entry and agreed to become a signatory. An SNP referendum win on independence will effectively nullify all those treaties. After all, if the nation state that joined no longer exists, then, as they say, "all bets are off".

Scotland will, if it so chooses (and I can't see her not doing it when the money from England disappears), negotiate its own membership of the EU. Likewise, it will be down to what is left, be it separate nations or a new Union between England, Wales and Northern Ireland, to find a settlement on it’s relationship with the EU.

Consequentially, and party politically, as the United Kingdom will technically not exist it means the playing field on which UKIP places itself is suddenly, and dramatically, altered changed. The simple move of breaking the Act of Union will instantly propel each of the home nations out of the EU and will provide the means for renegotiation on whatever terms we so choose. Be it rejoining; be it EFTA; or be it "sod off".

The question is, what happens to UKIP? Now, I imagine my UKIPer friends will point out to me that their party is undergoing a re-branding strategy and will soon emerge as the Independence Party. This is all well and good, but how many members, and crucially voters will it retain? I’d suggest that many will simply flock back to the Tory Party that they originally left once the EU issue is resolved.

Consider this as well; many of the most active people in UKIP are libertarian free marketeers (which is not a bad thing in itself). However I’d hazard a guess that a large majority of its vote is simply made up of traditional Tories whose only problem is the single issue of Europe.

Arguably, the party that UKIP and Nigel Farage should fear if any is not the traditional three, but actually the SNP. It is the SNP who threaten to end the Union, and along with it the very relationship with Europe that UKIP (and a lot of Tories too) want to see changed.

Government launches "visionary" crime strategy

The Home Office has issued a press release about its new "visionary strategy" for tackling crime. The press release is titled:

"Targeting the criminal to stop the crime: Government launches major new vision on security, crime and justice"

I'm impressed, it never occurred to me that if you just stop the criminal you'll stop the crime!?
Image by Theo Spark

The peril that track changes can be to a civil servant!

Why is it that no matter how many times people in offices use Microsoft Word they never check to see if the "track changes" feature is still on on the document they are working on? I ask this because this morning I discovered that the person who provided with information in an FoI which I wrote about here seems to have made that very mistake!

Whilst I did indeed receive answers to my questions, I also received, hidden away in the document, a memo from 2004 sent by the Director of Contact Centres for JobCentrePlus to all the others Field Directors and Deputy Directors of JobCentrePlus, and all did not seem well back then.

Apparently they experienced "painful" internal communication issues when it came to reporting and escalating emerging IT and telephony problems. The memo says that it "has been clear for some weeks now that the current systems for communicating and escalating IT issues which seriously impact CC business, and hence links to local office operations, are not serving us as well as they have in the past."

The memo then went on to detail the "current situation" and blamed communication failures on it having to deal with two contracted channels. The memo said that "not only are there two major contractual routes to deal with, each have different systems for recording incidents but also and to add to the issue each have different service levels agreed as part of legacy contracts - and this is just IT."

I wonder if they still have those dual contracts causing them problems three years on? Clearly they still have issues with IT training where they should be beating into their staff that just because you delete something, especially where Microsoft is involved, it doesn't really mean it's gone! If you forget that people might suggesting that you're not fit for purpose!

Cabinet Office press releases cost around £3000 each?

Apparently the Cabinet Office employs eight press officers at a cost to the taxpayer of £475,000 per year. Now I don't know whether that is excessive or not, the Cabinet Office does quite a lot I imagine, so figuring out if it's excessive the best I can really offer is to look at their output for the last year.

From the beginning of January 2006 to date, assuming their website is correct, those eight press officers have issued a grand total of 150 press releases, with my lowly B grade GCSE maths, I work that out to be approximately 18 press releases each (or about 1.5 a month).

If one assumes that press officers - for the most part at least - do press releases, then that works out to approximately £3166 per press release. Now some people may think I'm being unfair, press officers also answer the phone and field press enquiries for their money.

Perhaps someone can tell me how busy the Cabinet Office press office actually is though, because even if they received a hundred calls a day, that still means the cost of their employment compared to their press release output is rather high no?

Almost £300 million spent on closed IT projects in the DWP

Since 1997, the Department of Work and Pensions and it's predecessor have done exceptionally well in spending money on IT projects which it then cancels. In total it has managed to spend over a quarter of a billion pounds on such projects (£289.4m).

Just over 90% of that expenditure was on just two projects, the Customer Accounting and Payment Strategy, closed in 1999-2000, and Benefits Processing Replacement Programme (BPRP), closed during this current financial year.

Worryingly, the latter project, at £127m expenditure is only the "estimated costs" at the time of closure, so Lord knows what the actual figure might be. The DWP has tried to sweeten the wastage though by stressing that in the case of BPRP just over half of the £135m money spent (around £73m) still provides "future value to the Department" so it's actually an investment!

This does of course mean that they've acknowledged they managed to piss £62 million up the proverbial wall on a project that effectively failed.

Does HIlary Benn know what he's doing?

In May 2002, after the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan and removal of the Taliban regime, a multilateral fund was set up by the World Bank called the Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund. As you've probably guessed this fund existed for the reconstruction of Afghanistan.

According to the World Bank it has two primary purposes, first to "provide for the recurrent costs of the government, such as the salaries of teachers, health workers, civilian staff in ministries and provinces, operations, and maintenance expenditures; and bulk purchases of essential goods for the government. Second, it would support investment projects, capacity building, feasibility studies, technical assistance, and the return of expatriate Afghans".

By September last year, the 25 nations donating to the fund had pledged $1.7 billion of which $1.4 billion had been received. That's an awful lot of money that can probably help do an awful lot of things in Afghanistan. Given this it's not unreasonable to think the Government would want to let it been known how well the reconstruction projects are going, however, there is a problem, they don't actually know, and it would cost them too much to find out (do they not have Google?).

In response to a question from the shadow Foreign Secretary, William Hague yesterday about what large scale reconstruction projects have been completed in Afghanistan since 2002, the International Development Secretary, and Labour Deputy leadership hopeful Hilary Benn said, "[t]his information is not available and to obtain it would incur a disproportionate cost."

Isn't it good to know that the man responsible for dishing out aid in a country we have a military presence in knows what is happening with the cash?

Clarke dares Brown to "steal" Tory democracy proposals

The democracy task force set up by David Cameron and chaired by Kenneth Clarke is apparently set to report that there should be root-and-branch of the ministerial code and the way in which Government operates to take Britain away from the "sofa politics" that has been created under the current President Prime Minister.

In an interview with the Independent he also said that he hoped Gordon Brown would "steal" the idea so that the next election can have all-party agreement on the matter.

However, he went on to describe Brown as "the ultimate autocrat," and that "[i]f you think Blair is a control freak, wait until you see Brown", so his hope is obviously quite thin that Brown will steal the plans.

The plans include an end to the Royal Prerogative on declaring war, along with taking the control of the ministerial code of conduct out of the supervision of the Prime Minister and instead handing it over to a committee of MPs who could publicly criticise the PM if rules were breached.

The Indy has more details about the proposal here most of which seem pretty much common sense. The most significant move is the proposal to halve the number of special advisers in the different department in an attempt to de-politicise the Civil Service.

Clarke decision to effectively dare Brown into accepting the proposals and stealing them is an effective move. After all, if he rejects them all he will be effectively showing his contempt for democratising a broken system and so give even more weight to view that he's a complete control freak.

Fraudulent benefit fraud figures?

Following on from my post earlier regarding the prosecution success rate in comparison to calls to the Benefit Fraud Hotline I can exclusively reveal to you further Benefit Fraud Hotline statistics obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

In the six years preceding the previously mentioned figures, the average number of calls each year to the Benefit Fraud Hotline was 199,191 (rounded up by 0.25). At the same time the average number of prosecutions achieved as a result of these calls for each year was 628. This actually represents an average hit rate of 0.31% so things are looking up from earlier (as an average at least)!

However, in addition to these figures there is also the question of the operating cost of the hotline. On Friday, in response to a question from the Tory MP, David Ruffley on this matter, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary at the Department for Work and Pensions, James Plaskitt said

"[t]he operational costs of administering the national benefit fraud hotline include the costs of administering the report-a-benefit thief online service. These costs cannot be separated. The available information is in the following table."

The table then presented to Parliament (at the top of this page) simply detailed the budget allocation, rather than the operating cost for the hotline on the basis of the reasons given in the quote. Now, this may of course seem perfectly reasonable, after all, the hotline costs and another "grass on your neighbour" project have a joint budget that cannot be separated, it makes sense to simply display the budget allocation instead right?.... wrong!

In figures I've received under FoI, the operating costs for NBFH during 2005/06 is not the £986,000 joint budget that Parliament was told and is in fact significantly higher for just the NBFH. The FoI response states clearly that the "actual operating costs for NBFH during 2005/06 was £1,212,901". This represents an overspend of £226,901 on NBFH alone.

The FoI response (drawn up in January) goes on to state that the "forecasted operating costs for 2006/2007 are £1,497,425" which is in marked comparison to the supposed budget allocation of just £597,010 in the Parliamentary response. This forecast represents an overspend of £900,415 on just one project in a budget that, according to the Government, exists for two distinct projects.

This leads to a few important questions. Firstly, who and how is the overspend being paid for? Secondly (and perhaps most importantly), isn't someone somewhere being fraudulent (how ironic) with the benefit fraud hotline figures?

It's just like watching tennis!

Lord Greaves asked Her Majesty's Government: Whether the next census will include questions on ethnicity and proficiency in languages, including proficiency in English.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.

Letter from Karen Dunnell, National Statistician, to Lord Greaves, dated 22 March 2007.
"It is not possible to confirm what questions and response categories are to be included in the 2011 census until the consultation and testing programme is complete and formal approval is given by Parliament in 2010."

Please be advised that no frying pans were hurt during the extraction of teflon.

Government scraps two year old quango in favour of super-quango

The Government has announced that it is to create a new super-quango called Animal Health on April 1st (presumably it is not a joke). The super-quango will merge the current State Veterinary Service with the Dairy Hygiene and Egg Marketing Inspectorates and the Wildlife Licensing and Registration Service.

They even have a flashy new logo (pictured) which I'm sure was commissioned at an exceptionally cheap price. I imagine the cost of merging the office, the stationary, office moves, job changes etc won't cost alot either.

The State Veterinary Service was formed in 2005 so its managed to exist for a whole two years before being axed. When it was launched, the DEFRA minister Ben Bradshaw said,

'[t]he development of the SVS as an agency provides real opportunities for better strategic liaison in public health and animal health and welfare at a national, regional and local level, and for the SVS to develop its capabilities to the full.'

Presumably he's now tacitly saying that wasn't true? After all, the merger is apparently about efficiency, so by implication the previous set-up was inefficient. What better way I ask you is there than spedning money on a merger and creating a bigger bureaucracy to solve a problem you created in the first place? Pass the sellotape someone, they found another crack!

MPs call for sexual orientation question in the UK Census

Thankfully there are pretty much no signatures on this motion which calls on the Government to add a question to the census about what you choose to do with your genitalia. It's bad enough that the Government is trying to add all sorts of question to the census about how much we earn, without having them intruding into our bedrooms too.

The motion was tabled by a Lib Dem, and has been signed by a couple of people from the other two main parties, but I just don't understand why. They claim that it is necessary to know which way each of swing in the name of assessing the equality legislation that has come into place. This is plainly bollocks.

The Government has no right to know what any of us choose to do in consensual sexual acts, and it worries me that a Conservative MP would sign a motion saying it should. Who, and frankly, what you choose to have sexual gratification with is none of the state's business unless it is specifically against the law (and even then in some cases the law can be bollocks anyway).

Benefit Fraud Hotline has a 0.28% prosecution hit rate

Between February 2006 and January 2007 the National Benefit Fraud hotline received 211,355 calls according to a written answer from the DWP. Some of these calls may have been the same person checking up on the status of their snitching, but even so it's quite impressive.

Of course, the National Benefit Fraud hotline is an 0800 freephone service, and knowing what sort of deal the Government blagged from BT or other third party Telco is an unknown quantity. generally speaking though a company wishing to have an 0800 number gets charged around 4p per minute for the calls coming into it.

If we assume that each call probably last at least 2 minutes (holding and then speaking to someone), that makes a rough cost of around £170,000 for calls, which frankly isn't that bad.

However, there is a downside (isn't there always), during the same period there was a massive 608 prosecutions for benefit fraud as a result of evidence provided to the hotline.

That represents about a 0.28% success rate of calls which lead to prosecution. This could suggest that the line is a bit of a waste of money, or it could represent the fact that there are a lot of people out there who really hate their neighbours, or maybe both.

The Big Brother DVLA adverts

We have nothing to fear from a potential Big Brother state. Increased surveillance is nothing to worry about because the Government would never use it for bad. That is the line that we are so often parroted by the Government about any means of surveillance, or any concerns raised about the increasing pervasive intrusion into our lives.

And yet, whilst the Government maintains this line they simultaneously commission television adverts which have a dark and invasive backing tracking, in conjunction with a large server on a road bridge. As a car drives underneath the viewer is told that they must pay their road tax because "you can't escape the computer".

Now, whilst that particularly line is not actually true (there are hundreds of people escaping the computer), why the need for an advert carrying dark and oppressive undertones of the all=seeing state computer when we also get told that any fears about a dark and oppressive all-seeing state are simply paranoid delusions?

Clearly the Independent is just in two minds

Last week I wrote about the Independet's front page list on fifty reasons to love the EU. Number 42 on that list was that the "EU gives more, not less, sovereignty to nation states". This morning's Indy carries a headline "Merkel seeks treaty giving EU more powers by 2009" and its leader article calls this step "bold" and pours scorn on British euroscepticism in all its forms.

An interesting editorial juxtaposition to say the least.

The car that runs on air

This is not a joke. There is now an engine developed that means a car can run on air? Surely this is the Mecca of all engine development? Not only does it keep the climate change rabble happy, but it is ludicrously cheap to run.

OK, so it only goes 68mp so far, and yes, it probably takes four days to reach that speed. But the possibilities are endless are they not? The only downside is that it's French, which means the bits inside will probably fall off in the first week.

The Ministers for Doublethink write in the Times

There is, this morning, a particularly absurd piece in the Times by Jim Murphy and James Purnell (both ministers at the DWP). Besides it being one of those "Blairites for Brown" type pieces it argues that the key battle in the near political future is between conservation and aspiration.

On the one hand they claim we have Cameron who wishes to conserve and maintain the status quo, for he is, they charge, not only a Conservative but a conservative too. And on the other we have, presumably them, who are all about encouraging aspiration and change.

The absurdity occurs in this piece on multiple levels, not only philosophical, but practically. Firstly, the position in which they paint David Cameron and the Tory Party is fundamentally flawed. They claim that all Cameron wishes to do is conserve the state as it is today, to take a "steady as she goes" approach and not improve things.

If we humour that position for a moment, then the implication is that Murphy and Purnell are condemning their own policies and Government. They are essentially arguing that the current situation is bad (which as a matter of fact it is) and that anyone who wants to conserve it, as they claim Cameron does, is on the wrong side of the argument. It is a spectacular display of doublethink.

Meanwhile, whilst they attack their own policies, they also fail to understand what conservatism really is. Small "c "conservatism does not mean "no change at all", it does not mean that you cannot, for want of a better term, progress to a better position. It simply means that you do not believe in change for changes sake on all matters. Nor do you beleive in rapid change without allowing changes you do make to take effect over time.

If you listen, for example, to David Cameron's speech to the Tory Conference last year you find that his conservatism is about taking a cautious approach to change. You do this by avoiding the big narrative theories about how society works. You shed the platonic view that the world is an homogeneous entity to be directed to known outcomes based on grand narratives. Instead you acknowledge the world's complexity, the law of unintended consequence, and thus avoid the trap of compartmentalising your position around a rigid ideology.

The ministers go on to argue that they represent a position which rejects the status quo (and their own policies) and instead concerns itself with aspiration. Interestingly they do not however put forward plans from their own portfolios to, for example, reform the anti-aspirational tax credit system which locks the lower paid into welfare dependency, punishes saving and discourages self-empowerment through the pernicious rate at which credits are reduces when you work more.

The result of their argument is therefore to effectively damn the policies they are responsible for whilst simultaneously supporting them, and then deliberately describe conservatism as a belief that will lock us into the failed policies that they themselves wish to continue. The pinnacle of this intellectual vapidity and doublethink comes when the two minister charge Cameron and the Conservative Party of wishing to maintain the status quo of elitism.

They always say that those in positions of power have a tendency toward myopic views of their own positions, but in this case they seem to be totally blind to what they have just said about themselves.

A monetisation experiment

I'm not 100% sure whether I will actually do it or take it seriously, but I've just registered an account with Blogsvertise who are one these "pay-per-post" type sites. Whether or not I decide to actually do it depends on what Blogsvertise actually request a post about. At the end of the day I'm not going to write about something unless I actually want to.

I've also just registered for a proper Google Adsense account to see how that goes. There may have to be some work done on the template to accommodate adverts without them being to intrusive though. I can't stand sites that are too busy and this one is getting there.

This whole Blogsvertise thing is just an experiment really to see how it goes, one of the requirements is that you post about planning to do it, and when you do write something for an advertiser you have to link to it three times, I'm assuming the same rules applies to the first post informing your readership that you've sold out. Having said this I am a Tory, so trying to make a bit of cash is hardly unsurprising is it?

I hope you all look forward to seeing a post about how I really like some pointless food blender! Like I say, if the things that they want me to write about don't fit in with what I generally do already then it won't be happening. I am interested to know what people think of such schemes, I did actually write about them back in October saying that the key to doing it was being upfront about it in the first place. I have also registered for PayperPost as well to see what they're like.

The Budget you didn't see

Prisons Minister caught in another scandal

The Prisons minister, Gerry Sutcliffe, appears to have been caught out attemtping to politicise the Civil Service. The Sunday Times have an email which shows his office attempting to draw up a lists of probation officers categorised by how positive or negative they are to Government legislation.

In the private sector such lists would be called "shit lists", which exist simply to allow people to know who should or should not be treated fairly, or worst of all, managed out of the door. This comes a week after Sutcliffe became embroiled in a "cash for access" lobby story also revealed by the Sunday Times and comprehensively covered by Iain.

Politicians are not "above the law" and should not get special treatment

If the exclusive in this morning's Sunday Telegraph is correct, then I have to say I have serious concerns about the Metropolitan Police's political independence. They say that Inspector Yates was told, in no uncertain terms, that if he interviewed Blair under caution, thereby treating him as a suspect and not a witness in the "cash for honours" investigation he would resign. Their source said

"Make no mistake, Scotland Yard was informed that Mr Blair would resign as Prime Minister if he was interviewed under caution.... They were placed in a very difficult position indeed."

Difficult position is not the word, the Police should not be placed in a position like that ever, their job is to act according to political consideration, their job is to act according to the nature of a criminal investigation. A caution does not mean, necessarily, that you are a suspect anyway, the caution exists to ensure that the possibility of someone lying is made less likely.

The implication in the Telegraph story is that the investigation is waiting for him to step down voluntarily first before interviewing him under caution. If the story is correct, then the complaints about the length of time the investigation is taking actually reflects on Downing Street rather than the Met, but, simultaneously, undermines the position of the Police as an independent organisation that upholds the rule of law.

Imagine, if a non-political person found themselves a point of interest in an investigation and might have to resign if interviewed under caution. The Police would simply ignore a request to only be seen as a witness to avoid the embarrassment of having to quit. What is the point of the rule of law if its prosecution is constrained by political considerations? It completely undermines the notion that people are equal before the law.

Have the Brownites moved against Miliband?

There is a very strange story doing the rounds this morning regarding Miliband. First up we have the Mail on Sunday citing "sources close to Miliband" saying "[w]e have received a clear signal that the PM wants David to have a shot at it".

Then we have the Observer citing a senior Blairite "who has been close to the Prime Minister since the Nineties" that has said "[Blair] thinks that if David runs with conviction and mounts the right argument, he'll win. He'll win, because by the end of a leadership contest, the ground will move."

What is strange? Well firstly, the two sources cited that are essentially saying the same thing are being presented as one from each camp, Miliband and Blair, but then David Miliband himself suits the description in both cases. However, why play his hand now? What purpose does it really serve Miliband in terms of winning a leadership challenge if he did run? He could easily muster 44 signatures anyway so it would come down to the hustings.

Given this, I really can't see what Miliband or the Blairites have to gain from this sudden flury of anonymous briefings which seek to portray Blair's mind. However, I can see what the Brownites have to gain from briefing in this way. Tactically it puts Blair into an awkward position where he will find himself having to publicly deny any possible support for Miliband.

As the Observer article points out as well, Brown was apparently fuming last week about what he saw as Blairite orchestrated moves against him. Interestingly the Observer mentions the Lord Turnbull incident as well, which I personally thought had far more to it than meets the eye. What;s for certain is that over the next few months the anonymous briefings are going to continue thick and fast, and they'll need to be viewed with the "Labour leadership campaign" filter switched on.

It's a bit like watching toddlers squabbling without the biting and spitting.

Update: It will be interesting to see the choice of words used by the PMOS when asked about this apparent endorsement.

Free trade is the only fair trade

I don't like fair trade. I realise that might be an unfashionable thing to say these days, but the way I see it the only fair trade is free trade. The only reason so-called fair trade products even exist is simply because we restrict trade and impose tariffs. The result of tariffs is that producers need to charge more for their products to cover the tariff but buyers refuse to purchase at the increased prices.

Of course, in this "ethical" world, we're all led to believe that its the buyers who are at fault for not paying people enough for their products, but the truth is the buyers find themselves in that position as a direct result of the tariffs.

Thus, a buyer in Britain wanting to import goods from Africa finds the purchase subject to import tariffs. The cost of the tariffs means they have to drive down the cost of their source purchase price to satisfy their business objectives. Its true they have the advantage of knowing that the people they are buying off of have no choice, but it is still the market that dictates where they purchase.

So to fill the gap and make us think that people like Tesco and Sainsbury are the bogeymen, we have the growth of fair trade. But fair trade schemes are run by middle men. True, the far end vendor gets a better price - fair is not the right term as its totally subjective - but the middle men running the schemes are making a profit on the top.

What you actually have with fair trade is a scheme that helps the guilt-ridden soft Left middle classes think they've been ethical, when in fact they're engaging in a con driven by middle men that are exploiting their guilt to create a new marketplace. The true irony of fair trade is that its driven by a capitalist-suspicious political wing, but relies entirely on capitalism for its existence and continuance.

Perhaps, just maybe, it would make more sense to break down the barriers of tariffs and make global trade truly free again? Mind you, in the case of the EU and USA this would mean their farmers would have to deal with competition, and that means its a vote loser.

Hence we have the fair trade market instead which patronises growers whilst simultaneously taking the piss out of middle class Guardian readers without them even realising it. I guess the latter point could be seen as quite a good thing though.

There is an alternative....

Novell gets in on the act!

Cherie: "Don't you know who I am?"

What is it with this woman? Seriously. Putting aside the sleaziness of New Labour in terms of sheer politics, the way in which Cherie Blair acts is constantly baffling. When she's not flogging signed copies of the Hutton Report, she's reportedly at airports demanding the rules be changed for her because she's the wife of the Prime Minister.

Downing Street has denied that this incident happened as the super-soaraway Sun described. Amusingly Downing Street says there was no argument that took place, but agrees that "an 'extended talk' with staff beyond normal safety questions" did take place. So...errr.... I guess that clears that up then!

It could be your last plane trip!

Remember kids, if you fly you kill the planet and you might not come back either! How long before a politician tries that as the line?

Mental note: Avoid Air France

Macavity Brown

The Burning Debate in the Commons

WARNING: This video is of Parliament in the style of the Devil's Kitchen. If you find bad words offensive don't press play. It is certainly the most important debate of today though!

As ever, Friday brings with it amusement and YouTube surfing! And never let it be said that I'm not childish!

Iranian forces capture Royal Navy personnel at gunpoint?

The BBC is reporting that Iranian forces have captured 15 Royal Navy personnel at gunpoint. The sailors and marines are apparently from HMS Cornwall.

DWP gives a red light to its traffic light system

The Department of Work and Pensions has said that it is no longer operating its spin traffic light system which flags up written Parliamentary question that could provide embarrassing answers.

In response to a question from Theresa May, the DWP has said that having run the trial "to identify questions of which press office should be made aware, and for which Ministers wish separate media briefing to be developed" it has "subsequently decided to discontinue" it.

What I think they mean is that they got caught. The question is, how many other departments are still running the "informal" spinning operation?

DfT spends £1.6 million on its website

The other week I posted and gently took the mickey out of Depart of Transport for its "Act on CO2" website. At the time I wondered how much much it cost to produce, and I've just learned that it came to a cool £110,270.

However, the geeky web nerds amongst us might also have noticed that the whole Department of Transport website went through a bit of a rebranding and redesign at the beginning of January, and no expense was spared! The total cost for the redesign was £1.5 million quid. Something tells me the hit to cost ratio might be poor!

Nixon had Watergate, Brown has a picket gate!

Picket, pick it, get it? I can do tabloid see?!

Good work on the part of Guido for the video. Although his corrupting influence in my house this morning was of concern. I was reading Order Order and my two year old walked up to the screen, pointed, and said "Guiiiiiiii do"

Ben Macintyre you're wrong

Well he's only part wrong to be fair. If you wondering Ben Macintyre is, he's a comment writer in the Times and this morning in he opened his article like this.

"We know what was written in the first telegram, sent by Samuel F. B. Morse in 1844: "What hath God wrought?" We know the words spoken by Alexander Graham Bell when he made the first telephone call in 1876, to his assistant, Thomas Watson: "Mr Watson - come here - I want to see you." (The "polite telephone manner" had not yet been invented.) But we have absolutely no idea what was said in the first e-mail, just 35 years ago.

Actually we do have an idea what was written in the first email and depending on how you define first we even know it exactly. Email was first proposed on July 20th 1971 in RFC 196 and was then developed by Ray Tomlinson for use on the Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET) - this is the network which paved way for we now call the Internet.

During his development he sent test messages which said "QUERTYIOP" and "ASDFGHJK", so if we consider those the "first emails" then we know what was being said. However, if we consider the first email to be one sent to other people whilst we don't have the text we do have an "idea what was written" in it.

The first email announced email to the world. It essentially said, "this is an email you can send messages of ARPANET with it, you have to use the @ character to send to someone such as geeknerd1@station2". It was sent betweent he two machines pictured on the right.

Of course Ben was trying to make a point about digital media not being constant and not actually making paper dead. His argument is that we delete so much these days that digital media was a false promise. Persoanlly, I'd disagree. Only things that people want to delete get deleted, the same as books are disposed of when people choose to dispose of them. There are many archivists out there, some personal, some organisational, you just have to know where to look.

Will Edwards drop out of the Democratic race for White House?

Apparently Senator John edwards has called a news conference for an important announcment. At the end of the 2004 VP run his wife was diagnosed with breast cancer and he has always maintained that he would not run for the Whiote House again until she had a clean bill of health.

The Edwards campaign team has announced that his wife is having a follow-up appointment to a rountine test she had on Monday. Apparently the campaign advisors are not playing down the seriousness of the announcement expect today.

Are we about to see the first big name pull out of the race even before the primary begins?

Update: Looks as if he has announced that his wife's cancer has returned by the "campaign goes on"

Lord Falconer announces the Restriction of Information Act

Yesterday, the Lord Chancellor put forward his arguments at Lord Williams of Mostyn memorial lecture for why the rules governing the Freedom of Information need reviewing and tightening.

"The Government approaches openness on the basis of improving how government operates, for the benefit of the public. Many sections of the press do not approach it in that way. Instead, many approach it on the basis of what gives them most information exclusive to their journalistic outlet.... The job of the Government is not to provide page leads for the papers, but information for the citizen. Freedom of information was never considered to be, and for our part will never be considered to be, a research arm for the media."

The phrase, "they don't like it up'em" springs to mind doesn't it?

A British Olympics football team in 2012?

There is an interesting motion tabled in Parliament calling on the English, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish Football Associations to pull their fingers out about an official British football team at the 2012 Olympics.

The EDM notes that the FIFA President Sepp Blatter the voting rights and standing of the home nation sides would not be affected at the FIFA table should we form a British side.

Personally I think it would be great to have a British team made up of the best from across the Home nations. However, someone in my office pointed out that perhaps we should have a mini-home nations tournament play-off and whichever home nation wins becomes the British side?

How Sony killed its brand

Have decided to bump this video up to the top again (originally posted in February) as tonight Sony finally release the PS3.

Until the HD format war is over it's not worth buying a PS3 IMHO.

The tax that Gordon Brown didn't mention

With all the Budget talk you'd think there was no other news, but yesterday the Lyons Report was buried published in local government finance. The Government "welcomed" the report as well which essentially means it's highly likely to become policy.

What was in it? Well lots of things, but the most important was "rubbish tax". A "pay as you throw" proposal as it were. The more rubbish you produce the more you pay for it's disposal (as well as paying your increasing Council tax which will go up even further when revaluation happens).

Not to worry though. All those low earning families hit by the budget and likely to be hit by a rubbish tax need to make one simple investment of about £50. An incinerator bin (pictured).... don't worry about the pollution, it's called the law of unintended consequences, something this Government specialises in.

The papers don't buy it Gordon

Yesterday afternoon I mused that this was all about the headline of "Gordon the taxcutter" and wondered if the line would hold. It's fair to say I think that it hasn't, although the most interesting point out of most commentary is the likelihood of an election next year when the 2p cut comes into effect, no doubt the plan being to triangulate the Conservative position. Anyway, this is what the papers say.

• The Independent asked "2p or not 2p?" as its economic commentator Hamish McRae put it "despite the cut in the headline rate, the total tax take rises both absolutely and proportionately."
• The Daily Mail and its sister freesheet Metro led with "Gord giveth and Gord taketh away" and it's website leads with The TRUTH about Gordon's 2p tax cut. Let's not forget too that the Mail has a tendency to be nice to Gordon because of its editor's friendship with him.
• The Daily Telegraph is saying that "Brown's tax cut trick stuns Conservatives". I wasn't stunned, I actually laughed my head off when he did it in the office and got funny looks. Needless to say though, the Telegraph is right to call it a trick.
• The Times leads with a neutral headline about a "Two Penny Budget" and made it clear within the first paragraph that this was a "give with one hand, take with the other" budget.
• The unofficial Labour paper, The Guardian predictably leads with "Brown cuts income tax by 2p" and follows up with "It's a tax con not tax cut say Tories.". As I pointed out yesterday, it's not just Tories that are saying that. Channel 4 news are not exactly Tory and they were scornful last night of the sleight of hand.
• The Daily Express leads on Diana... only joking.. they simple say " TAX CUT: IT'S JUST A BIG CON". No one reads it anyway so it doesn't matter.
• The super-soaraway Sun heaps praise on Gordon for cutting income tax by 2p with a pun headline that I saw but cannot now remember. They also praised him in "The Sun Says" column. There is coverage of reality of the budget but it plays second fiddle to the headline rate cut. Gordon will undoubtedly be happy with it.
• The Daily Mirror thinks Gordon Brown is wonderful, and bizarrely says thousands of poor families will be better off - quaintly ignoring the millions who won't. No sup rises there then.
• The Daily Star leads on Danielle Lloyd being cheated on by Teddy Sheringham, it also has tits.
• The Financial Timescomment section says it's a "Budget worthy of the Kremlin"

So that's ten papers, one that doesn't care, and only 3 not playing up the great Svengali nature of the budget. So what's the overall verdict from Fleet Street? Well 30% think Gordon is great, 60% think he's pulled a fast one, and the last 10% don't think he has big enough tits.

You have to love today's Peter Brooks cartoon in The Times though. It sums it all up so perfectly.

It was all about the headline really

It's been well commented on across the blogosphere that today's Budget effectively increased tax for almost everyone except those within a tiny sliver of earnings somewhere between £18K and £25K. This has been caused by the scrapping of the 10% rate at the bottom and the planned re-alignment changes to NI at the upper rate. The argument about those at the bottom then finds itself depending entirely on the tax credit system.

According to many Labour supporters it is not accurate to say people at the bottom will be hit because tax credits have been increased. However, whilst tax credits themselves have been increased they continue to exist in a system which means the marginal rate of tax for people on credits zooms in to the upper percentiles above 50 because of the impact of a pay rise or god forbid someone wanting to do overtime.

So what we effectively have from the budget is a tax hit on the relatively well-paid (I refuse to say rich because I'm not rich and I'm in this group) through NI increases, whilst simultaneously locking the lowest income groups into a credit system that maintains their reliance on the state for subsistence and discourages social mobility through overtime (let alone savings). This is of course assuming that all these people claim, and based on figures that I've read in Hansard there are many who do not (for whatever reason).

For anyone wondering who the people hit at the bottom are earning the £10 to £13K mark, they are, according to the Office of National Statistics.

• Playgroup leaders/assistants £12,466
• Kitchen and catering assistants £12,343
• Hairdressers, barbers £12,226
• Launderers, dry cleaners, pressers £12,077
• Bar staff £11,799
• Retail cashiers and check-out operators £11,766
• Floral arrangers, florists £11,651
• Elementary personal services occupations £11,617
• Waiters, waitresses £11,428
• Leisure and theme park attendants £10,698

Having said all this though, you have to ask yourself, what was the purpose of this Budget given it has hit so many people across the spectrum with tax rises? Take a look at the front page of the Evening Standard (and tomorrow's papers) for your answer. This Budget was about getting "Gordon Brown cuts your income tax by 2p" as the splash. Thus far that seems to be the headline, whether it will hold across the press until tomorrow when the full analysis is published remains to be seen.*

If Brown had been really brave he would've left the basic rate the same and scrapped the 10% rate by increasing the tax free threshold by that extra couple of grand instead. That would have a real impact on enabling people at the bottom to move up the ladder by keeping more of their own money in their pockets, but then that doesn't create an easy "Brown cuts income tax" headline does it?

* It's worth noting that even Labour bloggers have been discussing the "this is really a tax rise" line. It's not just Tories.

Update: Have just noticed Ed Vaizey making the same point about the headline on Comment is Free.

Best of the Brit Blog Awards 2007 Nominee

I've just received an email saying this blog has been nominated for London Metro's Best of the Brit Blog Awards in the politics section. The section is being judged by Tory MP and blogger, Ed Vaizey. I don't expect I shall win as I am in illustrious company with the Devil himself, and probably Guido and Iain too.

Should anyone else wish to nominate me they can do so here if they like! *hint hint* ;-)

The 326 page Budget

Gordon Brown's (probably) last Budget speech lasted approximately 50 minutes. You can read all about the headline stuff on the BBC. You can also download the entire Budget document here. It's 326 pages long, which, if he was telling us everything it would mean he covered 7 pages a minute, something tells me the devil will be in the detail (and hell) of reading.

Brown raises Income Tax

OK, Iain says I should be live blogging so here goes. I cannot deny that I have started sticking knives in my arm because of boredom, but some interesting observations.

• Prescott is definitely eyeing up Gordon Brown's arse and occasionally licking his lips. (Iain stole my joke!).
• Most of the Cabinet hasn't managed to get a seat and are all standing at the back. This is good so they now know what it's like to stand up for over an hour and be bored like we commuters do.
• Every time Brown announces something about department X it cuts to the relevant minister who is on tenterhooks wondering whether they are about to be screwed. But he's not a control freak honest.
• Brown has decided to keep the zero rate for road tax on the cars that either don't get made anymore or cannot be bought here.
• As expected he is increasing tax credits. At the same time he claims he wants to "reward saving". So he's a liar.
• He's re-packaged and re-announced the YTS/New Deal. Basically he's done a "partnership" deal with Sainsbury, Tesco etc who have agreed to "maybe" take the people in the scheme on. So no change to the way the New Deal worked at all.
• Apparently, we married people just need transferable allowances on Capital Gains Tax. What normal family person ever has to consider capital gains tax?
• Oh look, here's the big one. A 2p cut in the basic rate of income tax to 20%. But given he's just scrapped the 10% tax rate altogether he's just off-set it and dragged a ton of people into the 20% tax rate. He's basically just increased income tax whilst making it look like he's cut it.

Ok, made a mistake earlier with some allowances. Have recalculated. Basically if you're poor you're income tax has gone up, if you'r not poor (but not rich) you're income tax has gone down. Coupled with the realignment of NI, it's a tax raising budget. Incidentally, should anyone mention tax credit increases they are a misnomer because they assume that everyone takes them, and not everyone does.

We should also note that he didn't mention the tax free allowances remaining pretty much static and certainly not in line withe the retail price index inflation rate which is the one that we ordinary people experience at the coal face. With a 0% inflation rate he is increasing income tax, add in the 4+% RPI and you have an even harder pinch on the lowest earners, thereby increasing their reliance on the state for handouts. Further encouraging the culture of dependency.

Tory Councillor convicted of pimping?

I am finding it difficult to believe that this guy is actually still a member of the Conservative Party, let alone an elected councillor.

Apparently, Alan Burkitt, a Sandwell Tory Councillor for Charlemont with Grove Vale ward, (who I imagine Bob Piper knows) pimped his girlfriend with learning difficulties on eBay for £50 a time making £1,300 in the process. He pleaded guilty to pimping and managed to escape a prison sentence.

Two questions, has the whip been withdrawn? And if not, why not?

Update: Apparently because he has received a suspended sentence he loses his seat. Good.

Wiretapping service opens in the US, Is there a gap in the market here?

Interesting report over on Techcrunch about a company called 2Recall who are providing an 800 number service in the US to allow people to record their telephone conversation. As the article points out the whole notion of tapping calls in the US federal system is a bit of a legal minefield, but it got me wondering if such a service could provided here.

The law governing recording phone calls in the UK generally falls under four pieces of legislation. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 ("RIPA"), Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practice)(Interception of Communications) Regulations 2000 ("LBP Regulations"), Data Protection Act 1998, Telecommunications (Data Protection and Privacy) Regulations 1999 and the Human Rights Act 1998. The thing is, what is clearly defined is recording in the workplace but recording calls at home is not.

Under these pieces of legislation, depending on who you have interpreting it, it is perfectly legal for anyone to record their home telephone calls without informing the other person so long as they have no intention of making the content of the communication available to a third party.

The question therefore arises, would a secure recording facility that had measures in place to ensure content of communications was not accessible (encryption would solve that) to anyone but the person recording it be legal? If it is, is there a gap in the market for such a venture? Guess we'll have to watch, wait and see.

99 tax rises under Brown - let the balloons fly

The pre-budget response with balloons.

I do like that tune.

Just for the kids!

Another Government website has been launched, this times it's Direct Gov for Kids. I particularly liked the fact that you can't click on the hospital and get an explanation of it.

Presumably this is because they'd have to say, "This is a hospital, it has more managers than beds and is actually £15m in debt. The company that run the car park made nearly the same amount last year though."

N.B: Before anyone says it, yes, that is Internet Explorer. The flash player in Firefox has a tendency to make VNC control go screwy.

The Green Car Cabinet?

Whatever your personal opinion on climate change, CO2 and man's role in it all, the Government has made its position abundantly clear. The evidence is unambiguous, we must all be as green as possible. Now you'd expect, given that traditional concept of collective Cabinet responsibility everyone would act the same in official terms, especially on the matter of the cars they use.

Cabinet members have a choice of two possible cars, the ugly and very uncool hybrid Toyota Prius, with its 104g/km carbon emission rate, or the much nicer, although still uncool because it's a diesel, Jaguar XJ with 176g/km carbon emission rate.

The choice for Cabinet members should be clear you'd think? The Government has a stated position, we must all reduce our carbon footprint as much as possible. There is no option but the Prius (poor sods). So all 11 Cabinet members who have cars are using the Toyota? Errrrr... no.

Six of them are using the Jaguar Xj and only five are in the Prius. I'm not sure who is in what though, perhaps someone can email me and let me know? Either way, Cabinet collective responsibility clearly doesn't extend to the whole carbon footprint thing. I bet they (and what's looks like my party too) would love to tax us into reducing ours though. Do we say not as we do... as ever!

DEFRA washes its hand of mercury light bulb disposal?

Anyone reading my site knows that I have an issue with energy saving compact fluorescent light bulbs. I don't have a problem with them on energy efficiency grounds, but more the issue of the mercury each bulb contains and the fact that whilst the EU is proposing to ban old style lght bulbs and force us all to use CFLs no one seems to be asking about safe disposal. They can neither be recycled or put in landfill.

Yesterday in the Commons, the Tory MP for the Vale of York, Anne McIntosh asked the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, David Miliband what the manufacturing and more importantly the disposal cost of CFLs were over traditional incandescents. The answer from Ian Pearson was indeed telling. Basically, DEFRA have no idea how much it costs to dispose of a CFL because it's nothing to do with them but is a commercial consideration held by commerical companies.

On the basis it's fair to assume that DEFRA haven't considered the mercury content of the light bulbs and it's impact on the environment at all. If they had they would have a good idea of the requirements and impact cost to Government of disposal at both national and local level. So DEFRA now joins the Home Office in not being "fit for purpose" but I think most people knew that anyway.

Fifty reasons to love the EU?

This morning's Indy has been very clever, it's front page (pictured) has fifty reasons to love the EU, where number fifty is "Lists like this drive the Eurosceptics mad". Now, as a sceptic of both rampant europhilia and rampant euroscepticism I have to say there is another reason that lists like that drive people mad. It is, quite simply, because chucking a mismatch of subjective and often factually inaccurate stuff on the front page of what claims to be newspaper is bollocks.

Take for example the number one spot on the list, "The end of war between European nations". The European Union didn't do that at all. It was American aid, through the Marshall Plan, and the strength of the strategic alliance of NATO that brought peace and stability to Western Europe. What's more the statement should be caveatted with the words "so far". You can't predict the future.

Number four of the lists say "The creation of the world's largest internal trading market". The important word in that sentence is "internal". What it actually did was create the single largest protectionist trading bloc on the planet which is killing Africa's ability to trade on an equal footing whilst subsidising inefficient European farming.

And let's not spend to much time considering the rather amusing and inherent inherent contradiction between number 16, "Europe is helping to save the planet with regulatory cuts in CO2" and number 23, "Europe's single market has brought cheap flights to the masses, and new prosperity for forgotten cities".

Anyways, I'm not going to fisk the list (which would be very easy) because that will just get me labelled as a eurosceptic and europhiles will point at number fifty and say "see!", I can leave the fisking to DK and Trixy. What I wonder is when will the Independents' habit of palming off op-ed as news on it's front page end?

Hugo's Budget Blog!

Hugo Rifkind, People columnist at the Times has only gone and got himself a special Hugo tracks Gordon's Last Budget blog. I'm sure he'll have some live wit and sarky humour for us all tomorrow, but in the meantime he's begun early with a Bralin portrait!



Image originally by The Spine

The Ted Nugent medal

Danny Finkelstein over at the Times Comment Central has a new competition looking for centre-right music. I have submitted my entry which is a hymn to family stability by The Vandals called Too Much Drama. Here is the live version, I like to drive too it.

Evil cow goes on rampage in Miami

I'm telling you all that the end times are coming and the bovine are planning their moves. Yet again we have another rampaging cow incident, this time in Miami, Florida.

What's more, the sheer EVIL has been caught on camera. When will our leaders stand up and do something about this impending doom I ask? Sod climate change and nuclear proliferation. It's the cows! Maybe Norman Baker MP will say something about this global bovine conspiracy before we face Apocolypse Cow?

For more on EVIL COWS see here and here.

ECHELON, the Wilson Doctrine and an MP's question

An interesting set of questions from Oliver Heald have appeared this morning regarding the Wilson Doctrine. Heald asked Blair whether the doctrine "applies to the use of the ECHELON by the UKUSA Community."

Now technically ECHELON doesn't exist, but most people - certainly in the technology community - know that it does. The real question is how advanced it really is a part of signals intelligence.

Anyway, Blair's answer was interesting as he simply referred back to a written statement he made on the doctrine back in March 2006. That statement made no mention of the doctrine being applied to ECHELON and UKUSA signals intelligence, so I guess it's fair to assume that the doctrine doesn't apply.

To be honest i wouldn't expect it would apply anyway, and I think it's a fairly safe assumption that listening goes on in ECHELON big five community. The real question for me is why did Heald ask? Was he just causing trouble and looking for some shift in positioning, who does he have suspicion that some MPs have been tapped?

Lib Dem MP starts his questioning about the "David Kelly conspiracy"

It looks like the Lib Dem MP Norman Baker wasn't kidding when he said he was convinced that Dr David Kelly was murdered rather than having committed suicide.

In yesterday's Hansard he has begun his digging of the matter by starting with the Oxfordshire coroner. The implication in his questions is that the Government leaned on the coroner to hold the inquest quickly and avoid the surfacing of disputed evidence.

I should note I'm not endorsing his conspiracy theory, I'm just noting that he's started his investigative questioning. I expect many more questions will be made in the coming weeks as he's quite a tenacious bugger.

Party Animals in danger!

Have just spotted a rather amusing question in Hansard about when the roof terrace at parliament will be re-opened to researchers (and presumably MPs). Should anyone be wondering why it was closed int he first place, it was because of Health and Safety - as ever.

What were the risks? Well based on the answer which said "work on the roof terrace has been limited to providing temporary fencing to prevent access to areas where people can and have put themselves at risk" I'm going to presume it was to stop the researcher jumping off the edge.

I guess the real reason the question is being asked though is blind panic about the smoking ban coming into force in July. All those party animals need their nicotine fixes! In the name of health and safety they came, and now they are going to let them up there to kill themselves slowly instead. Oh the irony!

Polar opposites?

As I read the news this morning I couldn't help but doing a double-take when I read the tale of a rather cute polar bear cub in Germany called Knut (pictured). Knut was born in captivity and abandoned with his sibling by the mother. The sibling died, but he has survived thanks to hand-rearing.

Why the double-take? Well apparently, animal rights activists in Germany are demanding the cub be given a lethal injection because showing compassion and hand-rearing it is an act against nature and the cub will grow up not to be a proper bear.

Seriously, the "animal rights" people think the best thing to do is kill the thing, because, presumably, it's right to be a wild animal are being oppressed, therefore it's better off dead. Frank Albrecht, an animal rights campaigners is quoted as saying

"Hand-feeding is not appropriate to the species and is a grave violation of the animal protection laws.... Legally speaking, the zoo should kill the baby bear. Otherwise it is condemning the bear to a dysfunctional life and that too is a breach of the law.... It is not correct to bottle-feed a small polar bear. He will always be fixated on his keeper and will never grow to be a proper polar bear....One should have had the courage to kill him much earlier."

Again I find myself searching for "you couldn't make it up" key on my keyboard. If you kill an animal the animal rights campaigners moan, when you show compassion and save an animal they moan that you should've killed it.

The thing is, this bear was born in captivity, will be brought up in captivity, and will live it's entire life in captivity, so why dopes it need to be killed just because it has a good relationship with a human being? The tabula rasa is just that, it is not an oppression of it's rights for it not to be allowed to exist in the other way, but surely, if one believes in its rights, killing the fluffy little bugger is an oppression of its right to life?

The Stalinist Détente?

Every now again you get a great juxtaposition in the newspapers. Not only does it provide an interesting situation but it allows you to say juxtaposition without sounding like a YBA. I'm going to use today's Times as my example source but frankly I could equally use the Indy or probably the other papers had I read them.

Splashed across most of the papers somewhere is the news that Lord Turnbull has given an interview to the Financial Times in which he said of Gordon Brown, and it's worth noting,

"[Gordon Brown] cannot allow [Cabinet members] any serious discussion about priorities. His view is that it is just not worth it and ‘they will get what I decide’. And that is a very insulting process.

Do those ends justify the means? It has enhanced Treasury control, but at the expense of any government cohesion and any assessment of strategy. You can choose whether you are impressed or depressed by that, but you cannot help admire the sheer Stalinist ruthlessness of it all."

The chancellor has a Macavity quality. He is not there when there is dirty work to be done."

Pretty savage stuff you have to admit, nothing to surprising either I'd say. It is a commonly held view that in the control-freak stakes Brown is probably even worse than Blair. I enjoyed seeing the Macavity reference, although I am not for one moment suggesting that Lord Turnbull nicked it from me.

Skip on through the pages of the Times though and we come to the news that Brown backs Blair over public service reform. This is the public service reform agenda that they've now been banging on about for ten years without actually delivering, but let's put aside that detail for a moment. We then have Peter Riddell on the same pages saying that "Brownites and Blairites are starting to work together", we are, says Riddell, experiencing mood music tantamount to rapprochement.

At this point I find myself thinking my favourite word in the whole world.... bollocks. On the one hand we have apparent easing of tensions between the two men at the top, and on the other we have a peer (admittedly crossbench), who was Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service who holds his position through Blair's patronage. A peer who also just happens to be a paid senior advisor to the consultancy firm that has received over £100m of public money for helping to draw up the Blairite "Pension Transformation" reforms.

Whilst some commentators make allusions to rapprochement and a thawing of the Cold War at the top, I'd rather make allusions to that being an illusion. It's interesting that Stalin should be invoked because frankly, it looks like a very Stalinist, ergo Soviet, détente.

Home Office forgets who the Home Secretary is?

Sometimes you have to wonder what idiots they employ in the Home Office, especially in the Press Office. The latest Home Office press release is about thought hate crime, and says

Hate crime can be reported in a number of ways including 3rd party reporting (where members of communities who are affected by hate crime can report it at locations other than at a police station and to someone from their own community who is not a police officer) and on-line reporting at http://www.report-it.org.uk. This can be anonymous.

However, the online thought police website Report It contains a "Message from the Home Secretary - David Blunkett" and doesn't actually look like it's been updated for nearly 3 years. You'd think someone would have the sense to check it before sending the link out to everyone. Still not fit for purpose then?

Evil drills are hurting my unborn child!

Following on from Guido's post about the Government advice and pregnancy, I wonder how Caroline Flint feels about evil jackhammers?

And they say merkins don't do irony!

Peter Hain goes from despair to where?

Croydonian has just posted about Peter Hain and commented on how Hain lists classic welsh bands as his favourite including the Manic Street Preachers. Now far be it from me to think that Hain is cynical choosing these bands, but as a Manics fan of old I was wondering which songs Hain might like best. Perhaps he likes the opening track off "The Holy Bible", called "Yes"

For sale? dumb cunt's same dumb questions
Virgin? listen, all virgins are liars honey
And I don't know what I'm scared of or what I even enjoy
Dulling, get money, but nothing turns out like you want it to
And in these plagued streets of pity you can buy anything
For $200 anyone can conceive a god on video
He's a boy, you want a girl so tear off his cock
Tie his hair in bunches, fuck him, call him rita if you want
I eat and I dress and I wash and I still can say thank you
Puking - shaking - sinking I still stand for old ladies
Can't shout, can't scream, hurt myself to get pain out

Then I wondered if maybe he preferred the second track on that album called "Ifwhiteamericatoldthetruthforonedayitsworldwouldfallapart". The song basically calls anyone on the right a racist. Or perhaps he prefers "Archives of Pain"?

Then again, he might be more of a "Generation Terrorists" man and enjoys the second track on that album with it's memorable chorus,

Natwest, natwest-barclays-midlands-lloyds
Blackhorse apocalypse
Death sanitised through credit

Having said that he gets funding from private equity people, so maybe it's not his most favourite. I bet he really likes "You Love Us" with it's classic line "Parliament's a fake life saver" though.

Something tells me that Hain hasn't really listened to the Manics very extensively. Instead, a "walking abortion" of a campaign manager told him to say he liked them. If it's a woman I imagine "she is suffering" as a "spectator of suicide".

Hain's new deputy leadership campaign website is here

Chris Huhne the gold digger

Interesting point to note in the Register of Member Interests for the Lib Dem Environment spokesman, Chris Huhne. It seems he has registrable shareholdings in a gold mining and exploration company called Centamin Egypt. I imagine they're really environmentally friendly though.

Senior Lib Dem refuses to endorse Campbell

Where would we all be without the Indy's You Ask the Questions? This morning we've been given the delight of Vince Cable, the Lib Dems Treasury spokesman. One highlight was him admitting that he's boring. However, as with most interviews it's what he doesn't say that's interesting.

Specifically he avoided endorsing Ming Campbell, and when pushed on whether he regretted not running for leader himself he sidestepped the question. When he was then asked about Campbell's decision to drop PR as a requirement for any form of coalition government he sidestepped again and failed to endorse the policy.

The rumblings against Ming Campbell go on then, omission is a wonderful thing in politics isn't it? Oh yes, he said he would have a leadership bid in 2012 too - although he was probably joking because he'd be a really old fart by then.

I think, therefore I type

I've just read a very cool tech story over at ComputerWorld. Apparently, and Austrian company has demonstrated a "Brain-Computer Interface" (BCI) which enables a user to wear a cap and control a computer through the power of thought... well sort of.

Just like speech recognition the system needs to be trained - which apparently takes a few hours. It does not however read thoughts but measured electrical voltage fluctuations which it maps against it's known training dataset.

Currently it is only able to type about 18 characters a minute, but it is also a massive step forward the system showcased a two years ago which was only capable of measuring binary electrical fluctuation e.g go left/go right control of a cursor.

More details here

Cameron calls for annulment of construction regulations

I have to say I was surprised to see a motion tabled by David Cameron (that is to say it's normally backbenchers that table motion rather than frontbenchers). The motion states,

That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 (S.I., 2007, No. 320), dated 7th February 2007, a copy of which was laid before this House on 15th February, be annulled.

If you're wondering what the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 are, they basically make the client responsible for health and safety in building projects. What this means at the lowest level is that when householders, for example, employs a builder to convert their loft, they as the "employer" are responsible for the health and safety of the builder.

At the higher level on building contracts, it means that the contracting client is now responsible for providing the builders with welfare facilities on site, and is ultimately responsible for their health and safety rather than the builder's direct employer.

Essentially, what this means is if someone, for example, agrees a construction contract with someone like Balfour Beatty, Balfour Beatty would no longer be responsible for their own employers when working on site.

Having read up on the regs I can see why the table has been motioned. The regs are just burdensome and ill-thought out nonsense, but then I hate the Health and Safety fascists as is well known. Bring back personal responsibility!

Jesus wept....

I'm not too sure what to say. This is GodTube, it's kind of like YouTube, but just about.. well... God. In the interests of deity factionalist balance we also have IslamTube too... yes honestly.

It was only launched a few weeks ago apparently and it's wonderfully moderate. You can even watch American and British soldiers being blown up on it, or useful videos abouts jihad in Iraq!

Computer graduates versus Hacker Showdown

Recently, in the US an event called the Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition was held. It's quite simple concept, take the very best computing college graduates, give then an insecure network and tell them to secure it, all the while their is a team of four hackers attempting to break in, in every way they can conceive possible. Makes for an interesting read if you're geeky like me.

The Virtual Bluetooth Keyboard

You know how it is, you desperately need to have a keyboard available to you at all times but you just don't have the space in your pockets. Never fear, the solution is here for just £189.99 (assuming you use Windows, Palm or Blackberry).

Below is a virtual keyboard that uses laser technology and bluetooth radio to operate. Anywhere you go you project the laser keyboard and start using it. It even has realistic tapping sound to make you feel at home.

OK, OK, it is an expensive gadget but it's also unbelievably cool.

Two ministers caught in "Cash for Access" scandal

According to this morning's Sunday Times the Minister for Thai Affairs(1), Stephen Ladyboy(2), and the prison's minister, Gerry Sutcliffe have been named by lobbyists on tape as directly help their business through the leaking of sensitive information.

An undercover reporter had been working at the firm Golden Arrow Communications where th allegation surfaced. Allegedly Sutcliffe has offered his Whitehall Diary to the lobbyist, whilst Ladyboy is alleged to have leaked information about road charging.

Former Labour MP, Ivan Hendersoon, who now works at Golden Arrow is on tape saying, “He [Sutcliffe] is saying to us, ‘Come on, you use me’. That is what Gerry is actually saying . . . ‘I am there to be used. I want to help you. Use me’.”

Of Ladyboy he said, “Every time I e-mail him, he comes right back . . . He says ‘Ivan, this is what the score is’. He has never turned me down yet. He has gone over the top really. It is a bit dodgy sometimes.”

Personally none of this surprise me very much. This Government has by far and away been one of the most sleaziest this country has ever had. What's most annoying is that whenever it has these scandals it goes for the "let's draw a line and move forward" rubbish and pretends nothing has actually happened.
(1) He's really the Transport Minister.
(2) He's actually called Ladyman but I am puerile.

French Idol

Crazy!

An apology to Andy Burnham

I have, in the past, said that Andy Burnham MP, the Health Minister, looked like a 1950s throwback. However, I learned today that he listed his fanaticism in the order of Everton Football Club then the Labour Party.

Clearly I was mistaken about the way Andy looked, he doesn't look like a 1950s throwback at all. In fact he is a very able and excellent minister with a sound understanding of where priorities must lie.... i.e. Blue first in all circumstances.

Please accept my apologies Andy.

Blair ain't bovvered

Who's gonna be the first to say "am I bovvered" at the next PMQs then?

Guess this forms part of the legacy. Give my money to Comic Relief here

The Way of the Blogosphere!

Funny because it's true! I love Fridays!

Archivist saves and squirrels away each and every discussion forum message. Do you remember having a bad day back in 1996 when in one of your messages you may have said a few things that were...well, perhaps a little...hasty? Don't worry, Archivist still has it and will post it to the forum if you begin to get the upper hand in battle. Archivist can be a very effective and fearsome Warrior. However, archivist's effectiveness is severely hampered should the trait be mixed with the warrior known as Lonely Guy.

Lonely Guy doesn't get out much, and often his social isolation can drive him to do battle just for the human contact. Compassion dictates that we shouldn't get too upset with his antics. Nonetheless, Lonely Guy can be very fierce. Remember, he has nothing better to do than stew over real or imagined insults.
Flames Warriors

Why is Hoon only giving half answers?

Think tanks often get cash from Governments, the Smith Institute and IPPR have certainly received funding from this Government. However finding out how much can often be tough as with all political questions and answer the detail is often mislaid within what seems at first glance a response.

Take for example a question asked by Oliver Heald MP to the Foreign Office about what funding the FCO had given to IPPR and it's limited trading company since 1997. Geoff Hoon's answer was most interesting, he simply said,

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has made 10 payments to the Institute for Public Policy and Research (IPPR), and no payments to IPPR Trading Ltd since May 1997. The payments range in value from £9.49 to £40,000. It is not possible to establish the precise details relating to earlier payments without incurring disproportionate cost, but from the information available all payments were for goods or services received from the IPPR, rather than funding to this organisation.

Worst case scenario? They've paid IPPR £360,009.49 since 1997, best case they've paid them £40,084.41. Something tells me it's closer to the worst case than the best else why avoid detailing it?

Don't misunderstand me here, I'm not saying paying money for research is wrong per se. What bothered me is the rather blatant obfuscation.

Labour MP gets lost in Portcullis House

Pity poor Edinburgh North MP Mark Lazarowicz! It looks like he's been having trouble getting around Portcullis House to the point that he's found himself having to ask what progress the House of Commons Commission has made on "improving signage".

Should anyone see him wondering around the corridors aimlessly do give him a hand. Perhaps at the same time you could suggest he visits Specsavers and gets himself a new goggles prescription. Oh yes, and stop drinking the tea from the big aluminium urn too!

The dehumanisation of undergraduates

When I started University I didn't go straight from school like most people do. I wasted a year of A-levels and instead went to college for another two years and messed around with computers instead,. This meant that when I did finally enter University I was 19 rather than 18. This isn't really a meaningful point, but what struck me as annoying at the time was that I was an adult, I was independent, I could vote, I could get loans, I could go to war and die for my country and yet, when it came to applying for a grant it was not me that was assessed but my parents.

To me, as a young adult this was patronising. The state had decided that whilst in all meaningful circumstances I was an adult, when it came to getting help through University I was not an adult at all. I was infanticised as merely a unit of my parents (limited) wealth. What irked even more was that my mother was not working anymore (she was dying of cancer) but her salary in the previous tax year where she was working was counted by the system as a means to calculate their joint wealth. The result was that I didn't get a full grant.

Now don't get me wrong here, I'm not bothered by that fact per se because when I was an University I did what many students do and got myself a job, whilst hocking myself to the hilt as well. What always got me ranting though was this assumption by the state that my parents would pay the shortfall for my University education. Now I was lucky, my Dad did help me out of a hole on more than one ocassion, but there remained this assumption by the state that he would.

The reason I raise this is because this morning's Times carries a story suggesting this pernicious and unfair assumption is now going to be applied - not to means-testing for funding - but extended into the very process of applying for University at UCAS. Essentially, if a prospective undergraduate's parents are professional graduates themselves, then they will have to disclose it on the application form. This is being proposed in the name of fairness and equality to access, but whatever way you dress it up it is straight out discrimination steeped in the politics of envy.

More though it belittles and actually dehumanises the undergraduates applying. Where the grant system treats undergrads as children and starts from the assumption that they are the sum of their parents wealth, this move assumes their access to University should be based upon the sum of their parents experience. It actually represents the very worst type of social engineering, because instead of treating undergrads as autonomous individuals, it treats them as simple units of historical production within the quasi-scientific hyperbole that is historical determinism.

Simpsons Fox News Debate

You have to have respect for Fox being willing to show something that royally rips the mickey out of they're own flagship news channel.

Hat Tip: Crossed Pond

The Thogger Awards

It appears that Danny Finkelstein has nominated me for something called a Thogger Award - thinking bloggers. Basically it's a meme and clearly I'd like to first thank God, my wife, my producer, my director, did I mention God? for the award. I would of course like to nominate some other people for Thoggers and trust they will nominate some of their own choice as well. My nominations go to:

The Crossed Pond
Croydonian
The Devil
Trixy
Ellee Seymour

More praise for energy saving light bulbs....

Here's an interesting one, an Early Day Motion by Labour MP, Sharon Hodgson, all about how wonderful energy saving light bulbs are for the carbon emissions but no mention of the danger to our rivers and the water table from the mercury that they contain. It really ought to have a bit tagged on which calls on the Government to urgently review recycling and disposal facilities for the mercury time bomb being created.

BREAKING NEWS: Self proclaimed Tory is partisan

Not that anyone is probably interested in my personal life, but the other day I set myself on a journey. I was mildly bored and informed a number of other bloggers about this boredom. I decided, because I am utterly puerile and childish, to wind up a certain other blogger who likes to get himself all fired up and write lengthy posts.

Now don't get me wrong, there are some bloggers out there who can achieve the "long post" post with amazing mastery. For example, Paint over that Crossed Pond is probably the master of holding a reader's attention even when he's talking about something boring. Then there are those who don't. They usually fail simply because they right in sporadic disjointed sentences which make the reader want to scroll, or even worse, close the window.

Anyway, I digress, I got bored and decided it was time to poke the hornets nest and see how far I could get the hornets to go whilst getting away without a single sting, and yesterday I achieved just that. In less than a few hundred words I provoked the tirade, the ultimate culmination of a good bait, the essay post.

If people must read it then they will need to either figure out who the said blogger is, or go to Iain Dale's and look for the spam linking in the comments. What did this essay post say? Well, it basically highlighted all the inconsistencies I never said I didn't have and presented them as evidence of my part in the great blogging conspiracy. It also exposed me, a card carrying member of the Tory Party, as partisan. I know that might come as a shock to you, I had to double-check myself.

I can't deny that I'm proud of myself for this childish game, because, quite frankly I am. What makes it all the more amusing is that the blogger in question actually thinks that I care. Yes, honestly. He think that me, a nobody really, actually gives a toss about what he says about me and the perceived injustices that he's crafted in his head.

See what you have to remember is that this guy's like Al Gore. Where Gore invented teh Interweb (All Praise the Gore!), he invented the blogosphere. And anyone who pollutes it with the wrong opinions is well, just wrong. Of course, he himself pollutes the search engines through the use of crosspost linking, link spamming and backtrack, so that when you search for something you get tonnes of irrelevant results. Truth be known though, I only said that to wind the spammer up a little more. At the end of the day though, a scumbag should be called a scumbag.

Anyways, that the breaking news, a Tory (see it says it over there on the Right) is partisan. He's also a bit of piss-taker in his spare time and just fancied playing with a wooden spoon. He promises to write something about politics, or maybe the new 8-way cores that Apple are about to promote later on.

Tesco to diversify into running jails. Every little helps?

If ever anyone needs evidence of the straight out knee-jerk headline grabbing policy making of the Government, then John "not fit for purpose" Reid and the Home Office are a shining example. Splashed across the front page of this morning Times we hear that the lasting initiative - which has certainly done it's job in the headlines stakes - is that we're going to have secure cells in Tesco and shopping malls where shoplifters can be held for four hours of short-sharp shock therapy. Just for good measure they also want the police to carry mobile fingerprint scanners and take readings from anyone they think might have committed a crime.

Now clearly there are two primary objection here. The first, in relation to jails in shops is that you're basically engaging in summary justice for criminal offences and scraping habeus corpus. No longer will the court be available to you, instead you just have to hope the copper that you see didn't have an argument with their spouse that morning.

Of course, this does open the way for a wonderful thing called "bribery" in which the person nabbed innocently asks, as one would in say Uzbekistan, "is there some sort of fine I can pay instead officer?"

Added to this if the offender is merely the local drunk nicking his daily bottle of scotch, it's quite likely he'll appreciate the comfortable and warm surrounding of a secure prison cell for four hours where he can have a quiet kip without being disturbed by one of peers relieving himself next to his head.

The second objection is mildly less caustic. It's the age old concept of liberty and the presumption of innocence. I know liberty is an annoying concept for the authoritarian Left, but you know, to me it's kind of fundamental. If you have a scenario in place whereby the Police can simply stop anyone they choose on a hunch and then fingerprint them in the street without charge you're actually flipping the presumption on it's head. We're all guilty now.

As I've said before, welcome to Brit-Cit.

Huhne threatens Tory MP with mercury poisoning?

The Lib Dem Environment spokesman, Chris Huhne, has apparently threatened to smash a box of energy-saving light bulbs over the head of the Tory MP, Nigel Evans. After the allegation that he tried to get Channel 4 not to show it's controversial global warming documentary, Evans tabled a motion calling on him to be censured. In response, the man who says he's "liberal" apparently threatened him with violence..... which is nice.

When interests provide context?

On Monday, I posted saying I thought the idea of VAT on air travel was loopy. It seems Tim Hames at the Times thinks so too, although whilst I had just one word, he's got quote a few, and in doing so pretty much rips Cameron and Osbourne apart bit by bit.

What's noticeable though is that he appears to have an undeclared interest in supporting the travel industry. Last year he was a speaker and "moderator" at the Institute of Travel and Tourism conference in Gran Canaria. In fact, it looks like he's quite a regular. The ITT say he's a "familiar face at the helm" and a "veteran" of their conferences.

I guess it's all about context at the end of the day? No?

Motion to support Irish Saint's Day party in Montserrat?

I find myself utterly bemused and confused by the following motion that has been tabled

That this House joins the people of the British Overseas Territory of Montserrat in celebrating St. Patrick's Day on 17th March; recognises the shared heritage and special relationship between the peoples of the United Kingdom and Montserrat that date back to Christopher Columbus's epic journey in 1493; notes the resilient nature of those living on the Emerald Island of the Caribbean in recovering and prospering following the eruption of the Soufriere Hills Volcano in 1997; and calls upon the Government to continue to strengthen the close constitutional, economic and cultural ties that bind the peoples of Montserrat and the United Kingdom together.

Don't get me wrong, St Patrick's Day is great excuse to get drunk (assuming one really needs one), but what on earth does celebrating the Patron Saints Day of Ireland really have to do with the United Kingdom and Montserrat? Patrick was welsh anyway! It's all very odd.

Stupid Downing Street Petition of the Day Award

Today it goes to.... Banning ISP download caps

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Ban Broadband Providers to remove the Download Cap. What gives the ISP the right to impose a cap on how much you can download a month?

Odd grammar aside, perhaps the fact that you're accessing the Internet across their DSLAMs, their network, and their own bandwidth gives them right? After all, they need to maintain the integrity of their network so have to ensure idiots that fire up fifty porn torrents a day get the slap they deserve.

Is Hilary Benn about to endorse Michael Meacher for leader?

How interesting, there's a video interview on Michael Meacher's MySpace site which was conducted by Alex Hilton (aka RecessMonkey and LabourHome).

In his other job, Alex is also playing a significant role in Hilary Benn's deputy leadership campaign team. Are we about to see Meacher and Benn as the dream ticket? Dear God no!

Where are the technologists, hackers, and engineers?

Why is it, when the Committee wants to talk about an important subject like personal Internet Security they go and have people they invite marketing people along instead of technologists and security experts?

Apparently, the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee is going to be taking evidence today from council members of ISPA - the Internet Service Providers Association. Who will be giving evidence? James Blessing, Chief Operating Officer at Entanet; Matthew Henton, Head of Marketing at Brightview and Camille de Stempel, Director of Policy at AOL.

Not one serious technologist or security expert there that I can see. The closest thing is Blessing, who started out as a radio producer. The result in these circumstances is that you usually get people who consider themselves "strategists" promising all sort of things that are either (a) not technically feasible or worse (b) haven't been invented yet.

The first step in personal Internet security lies with the fundamentally poor security model in the leading Operating System. The second step is decent education of what is sane and what is insane to do online. And the third step is to engage with the white hat hacking community to ensure that what you suggest isn't instantly circumvented.

Blair intervenes to sack anti-sleaze watchdog that criticised him

Last year the Sunday Times ran an interview with the anti-sleaze watchdog, Sir Alistair Graham in which he said the Government was just as sleazy as the past Tory one. At the time I posted about how Blair had suggested to the Evening Standard that funding was going to be cut from the Committee for Standards in Public Life and speculated that it was too be Graham's punishment for speaking out.

However, it looks like Blair may have gone one step further and just sacked Graham instead. According to a report in this morning's Times, Graham will step down in April when his contract ends with no successor after Blair personally intervened to ensure he went. It's certainly an odd state of affairs to be in when the man who said Government must be "purer than pure" is deliberately intervening to force an anti-sleaze watchdog out of his job for simply doing the job he was employed to do.

Exclusive: Oaten writing coalition manual for Lib Dems?

It looks like the Liberal Democrats' recent interests in coalition government is growing. The MP for Winchester, Mark Oaten, is apparently spending the remaining days on his taxpayer-funded salary writing a book about the subject rather than serving his constituents.

This has involved him writing to a number of think-tanks on House of Commons paper asking for any work they may have done on the topic, and letting them know he’d like to chat with them. Presumably he's angling for an invitation to speak.

Cameron's changing parting?

Danny Finkelstein has just posted suggesting that the side David Cameron parts his hair has changed. I'm not sure how this is possible though as parting are usually dictated by where your crown is and I'm pretty sure you can't have two crowns (can you?). My instinct tells me it's a straight "flip image" in photoshop.

Opinions?

Update: Apparently, there are freakish people out there with two crowns.

Update 2: Have done some digging, and he was on BBC News yestedray and it was not on a new side. However, ITV and the Standard both have pictures from yesterday's stories with it on the other. I'm still punting for mirror flip in a graphics package. I could be wrong though.

Update 3: Pointless observation. Let's assume he's changed it. He did part on his right, but from the front it appears on the left. Whilst Brown on the other hand parts on his left and from the front it's appears on the right. It's all in the body language oh yes!

Update 4: I have been reliably informed that the parting really did change side, plus a comment has pointed out a sort of mole thing that is on his chin in the same place on both pics.

The future of the Internet? IP over TV?

According to the Washington Post a coalition has formed between Microsoft, Google, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Intel and Philips with plans to develop and offer high-speed Internet access over the TV airwaves. This might not seem it but it is really is big news for UK if the coalition pull it off technically (and have few doubt they won't).

As we gear up for full 2012 Digital Switchover, which will see the analogue signal "swicthed off", it could very well mean a massive license sell-off of the free'd up spectrum like previous mobile license sell-offs. I wonder how long it will be before a start-up ISP is formed in preparation?

eBay auctions and stupid questions

There's little better than an amusing Q&A on eBay to brighten up lunchtime.

This one has the potential to get into the Hall of Fame, and all over a little mini that sold for £155. Enjoy!

"I am not interested in shipping it to Botswana or anywhere else, unless you send me cash/diamonds/lunch tokens in a registered envelope. And please no stupid questions! Last time I put a motorbike on here, someone asked me if it had a good spare wheel with it! Another asked me how many people it seated:rollseyes: The fecking gene pool was empty that day. So if you are from Arkansa go bother someone else, like your sister."

We should stop thinking in CO2 terms

One day, in the not too distant future I hope, politicians will stop playing one-upmanship with environmental policy and will also stop all this silly talk about CO2. No I'm not about to say CO2 is not the cause of the current warming the planet is experiencing, in fact, I couldn't care less which side is right on that matter really.

After all there are clearly many eminent climatologists, oceanographers etc etc on both sides who know far more about the subject than I could ever hope to know. The problem is is that CO2 output is not really where our concern should be targeted.

What we should be doing, as I have said more than once on this blog, is resolving the scandalous waste of energy that exists between power plant generation and the consumer destination. Currently, the estimate is that we simply lose 60% of all that energy we produce. Sod the environmental arguments, that waste is just insanely stupid and evidence of wholesale incompetence on our part.

Imagine if we could reduce that wastage to say just 10%? We could continue to consume at the same rate that we do now, whilst actually producing 50% less energy. This would consequentially shut up the "CO2 obsessives" at a stroke, irrespective of whether they're right or wrong. At the same time we might actually see energy prices falling as well.

The question is, is it possible? The answer, I believe, and so do parts of the Green lobby, is yes. We need to just look at Woking Borough Council where it is happening as we speak. They are over 90% self-sufficient for all the energy of Council owned properties (including rented accommodation) through the use of local, decentralised combined heat and power generation, as well as photovoltaic usage, solar panels and a variety of other sustainable sources.

In fact, Woking is only connected to the National Grid for matters of resiliency, and energy prices are an order of magnitude lower in their properties. Instead of us banging on about reducing carbon emissions we should be conentrating on decentralising our power generation thereby reducing the massive wastage enroute to the consumer.

Lib Dem accounting laid bare?

You have to admire the ability of Parliamentary Answers to obfuscate wherever possible you really do. Take for example a response to a question about the cost to the public purse of providing hospitality via the Commons dining rooms. Nick Harvey, the Lib Dem MP for North Devon who represents the House of Commons Commission said,

"After inclusion of purchase costs and the cost of staff directly engaged by the Refreshment Department in the booking and delivery of banqueting services, a net profit of over 960,000 was made from hospitality and other events held in the House of Commons private dining rooms in 2005-06."

Sounds great doesn't it? A net-profit of nearly a million quid! However, don't get too excited he followed it by saying,

"This figure does not include overheads such as accommodation, procurement, utilities, staff training or pension costs which are not calculated separately."

He might as well have just said, "However, this figure is utterly meaningless". It's almost as disingenuous as Brown and his PFI fiddles.

Could this explain the thieving at the Department of Transport?

Last week I did a post about how theft of computer equipment at the Department of Transport amounted to about 65% of the total theft of computer equipment across Government.

I don't know what the statstics look like for the other departments, and it would be interesting to see them, but apparently the DoT has currently got 4,711 valid passes issued to private contractor and consultants for it's properties.

Five finger discount time perhaps?

Damned if you do. Damned if you don't

I have a confession to make. I am starting to enjoy reading the Independent in the morning. Don't panic though, I'm not enjoying it because I agree with it, I'm enjoying it because it provides me with things to blog about before I go off and seek other equally enjoyable topics.

This morning they had a piece with the headline "UN condemns 'pathetic' global response to Darfur". When I read my instant thought was the translation "UN condemn itself for its own pathetic response to Darfur". Reading on though, it becomes clear that actually, what was meant was that America and Britain were to blame.

Apparently, America and Britain have failed to act to enforce the UN's will and that is WRONG. Obviously when it decided to enforce multiple UN resolutions on Iraq that was wrong too though. And you can bet that had America and Britain taken some sort of lead and acted, the angle would probably be that America and Britain were riding roughshod over the wishes of other UN members.

C'est la vie!

What do we do when the lights go out?

Over the weekend I wrote about the problem of mercury in the compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) that the EU hopes to make the standard as it manipulates the market to phase out the less energy efficient incandescent ones.

In the comment thread someone cited this report that was issued by the US Environment Agency explaining that the mercury overall from CFLs was less than incandescent so we really shouldn't worry ourselves with it. I'd just like to pick that up for a second in a separate post.

The document made its argument through a comparison of the output of mercury emissions generated in a coal power station to light an incandescent bulb over its lifetime, compared to the same scenario for a CFL. However, whilst this is technically correct, it is also a little disingenuous.

Whilst the mercury emissions into the air are less from the coal power station when it is powers a CFL, there remains a light bulb in a person's home which contains about 40% of the total mercury that would be emitted from incandescent power generation (4mg) and cannot simply be disposed of in landfill or a recycle bin.

If we do some rather crude calculations, by the time we're all using CFLs, there will be, approximately, 1,600,000,000mg (1600kg) of mercury spread across the country in individuals homes which will need to be handled correctly for disposal (4mg mercury x average 20 bulbs per household x approx 20,000,000 home).

It is all well and good to show how the overall mercury emission is less, but the argument not only ignores the question of disposal, but is also based on the assumption that every CFL in the country will be powered by a coal power station, which is clearly not the case anyway.

This is not about arguing a "don't phase out incandescent light bulbs" point, it's about asking what we're all expected to do with the average 80mg of household mercury we're all being asked to buy when the lights go out.

Toynbee to address the Bow Group?

That very nice man Satan has just informed that Polly Toynbee is addressing the Bow Group tonight. I've also heard that a certain very Britsh dude is attending as well. Yes, Polly Toynbee addressing the Bow Group.

We're through the Looking Glass.

Scammers set up fake Metropolitan Police website

Get your "anti-terrorism" certificate here
It will probably disappear soon, The Register says Inspector Knacker is dealing with Aussie colleagues to get it taken down. Note as well how Firefox knows, don't expect IE too.

ReactOS 0.3.1 released

If anyone has a spare machine kicking around and fancies playing, ReactOS have just released 0.3.1 of their operating system.

If you;re wondering what ReactOS is, it's basically a free open source "built from the ground up" implementation of a Microsoft Windows XP compatible operating system. That means it looks like Windows, acts like Windows, and you can install Windows apps on it with ease.

The only difference is it is free and you can rewrite the code for it if you are that way inclined. I've played around with it off and on for a while now, and to be honest I've found it to be more stable than Windows and it will run most everyday applications. Click the image on the right and you'll see how familiar it is.

Government offers tips for creating traffic jams

Brilliant, another new website initiative from the Government that said it was cutting back on websites a few months.

This time it's a website called "Act on CO2", which, as you've probably guessed, is full of useful tips on how you can stop yourself feeling guilty whilst the sun continues to get hotter. I thought I'd take the opportunity to provide my version of the tips.

• Pump up to cut down - apparently under-inflated tyres will make you use more petrol. So pump them up. But not too much or you'll have a crash! Basically, check your tyre pressure, something that the Highway Code tells you to do already.
• Less clutter in your car means less CO2 - empty your boot and make the car lighter! Don't remove the spare wheel though. Try to cut down on breathing whilst driving as well.
  
• Driving at an appropriate speed reduces CO2 - Don't speed, and remember going 70mph uses 9% more fuel than going 60, and 15% more than going 50. Don't worry about the fact that doing 50mph on the motorway will annoy everyone around you. Do not worry about the tail backs you cause. Yes, it means more traffic queues spewing out more pollution in concentrated areas, but if you're in an area you hate anyway don't feel guilty about it - especially if it's France.
• Less stopping and starting means less CO2 - All that stopping and starting and moving four metres in traffic jams is bad. Instead watch the traffic ahead and ride the clutch. You're clutch can be replaced, the planet cannot be. The Government accepts no responsibility for buggering your gearbox.
• Over revving accelerates emissions - Don't be a boy racer and pointlessly rev the car whilst at a stand still. Try changing up a gear earlier as well. Yes, this might go wrong and you may bugger your gearbox, please previous point regarding responsibility in this matter.
• Idling is wasting fuel - Stop wasting fuel in traffic jams. Turn the engine off. What do you mean you're stereo isn't rigged directly to your battery and requires the ignition to be on to listen too? The planet is more important than you're desire to listen to Kylie.

Do have a look at the rest of the site. I imagine it cost a small fortune to set up and will receive very little traffic. I bet they don't think twice about the power consumption of their servers though.

News management first, kids second?

Back in 2002, the Government scrapped compulsory foreign language teaching for 14 to 16 years old. Today, Alan Johnson has announced that foreign languages will become a compulsory part of the curriculum for 7-14 year olds.

What confuses me is why they have not just made it be compulsory to 16 and have done with it? Let's be honest, if you've been learning something since you were seven you're probably going to take the GCSE at 16 for it. I imagine there will only be a minority of people who drop the subject.

It couldn't that the Government doesn't want to go the whole hog and be faced with admitting it was wrong and has had to U-turn could it? It seems to me that even when they're doing something they look like they're thinking of the headlines.

Climate Change is Australia's fault but there is a solution

Yes I know it sounds radical, but honestly it's true. Australian sheik Mohammed Omran (apparently a friend of that other aussie muslim who said women deserve to be raped because they are lumps of meat) has found the cause of climate change and offered the solution.

It's very simple you see, Australians have no faith in Allah which has consequential brought about warming and drought. The solution is just as simple, convert to Islam. In fairness it is cheaper than VAT on air travel and equally as loopy!

Another day, another evil cow!

When will the politicians learn that it's not terrorism, or nuclear weapons, or climate change that is the true threat to our existence but instead the bovine rebellion being fermented within. Just last month we had an evil cow incident in the US, and now, hot on tail of that the madness has moved to the one nation where the enemy within is actually a symbol of idolatry!

Last week in Bengal the global bovine conspiracy turned this time not to it's human master but to it's farmyard friends. In a small Bengalese village the chickens were disappearing and so the farmer, Ajit Ghosh, stayed up at night to see what was the cause and the tale he recalled is truly horrifying!

"Instead of the dogs, we watched in horror as the calf, whom we had fondly named Lal, sneak to the coop and grab the little ones with the precision of a jungle cat"

Something must be done about this! If we ignore it any longer Simon Heffer may go feral and start killing people after boring them first with his whinging!

Chief Constable slams "lazy populist editing" of the Independent

On Friday, the Independent in its formal role as the silly front cover newspaper, ran a page which said "I'm not racist but..." and then talked about the Patrick Mercer episode, as well as the incident of alleged racism by police in Yorkshire.

This morning, the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police has written to the paper and berated them for it. He said

Sir: You've seen a few seconds of CCTV footage, without context. I've seen all of the film; read the statements; read Ms Comer's signed custody record; read the CPS advice. You see fit to judge the incident ("I'm not racist, but... "). I refer it to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. Lazy journalism. Lazy populist editing. Not worthy of your reputation.

Bravo I say, except for maybe the last bit about the papers reputation. The angle they took was absolutely in keeping with their current reputation as a paper that peddles op-ed front pages as news.

Only an idiot could've believed in 60K new builds

This morning's Mail on Sunday, has revealed that the first "affordable homes" that John Prescott said would be £60,000 have gone on sale for £175,000. I remember when this policy was first announced by Prescott and frankly it was always pie in the sky spin from the start.

Whilst the construction cost of a home might be possible for £60K, the market value of such a property was always going to be massively higher once complete. For a start the construction companies was always going to have a margin to meet to justify taking on the contract.

I guess the most amusing thing is that the housing minister, Yvette Cooper, is doing the ostrich dance by insisting that some of the homes on the estate in Newport Pagnall will be "affordable". She doesn't actually say what "affordable" means in monetary terms but that's not a surprise, she hardly wants to find herself the subject of a story about how she got it wrong.

Only a complete idiot could've genuinely believed that the houses were going to be sold for £60K, which I guess explains why Prescott was involved.

Cash for Honours - Another Smoking Gun?

It's Sunday, so you just know that Cash for Honours will be covered by someone, and the Sunday Times is saying there is another document that the police have which is even more damaging than the Turner memo.

They've also expanded slightly on their previous story from Jaunary about a meeting which took place between Lord Levy, Ruth Turner, Jonathan Powell and John McTernan in which a "cover-up" strategy was discussed.

The Sunday Times is saying that it has spoken to a "Senior Whitehall source" which says that Police have evidence which contradicts what the key figures have said, and that Levy will face charges of selling honours and perverting the course of justice. Jonathan Powell is also expected to be reinterviewed under caution shortly.

Labour MP to stand down in key marginal

The Labour backbencher for Calder Valley, Chris McCafferty has announced she's standing down at the next election. She's cited the fact that is 62 now and doesn't want to be in Parliament until she's 70 as reason for making the announcement.

Personally I think it's more likely to do with the slim 1,367 majority she has. What's the point in facing humilating defeat if it can be avoided by standing down?

The end of the light bulb is coming to save the environment... sort of

It was last November that I first wrote about the Government's desire to scrap Thomas Edison's classic incandescent light bulb on grounds of energy efficiency and saving the planet. Back then they conceded that could not simply ban them because of common market rules but they could lobby within the EU for them to be regulated out of existence instead.

According this morning's Telegraph they, that is the EU, have now agreed to do just that. The intention is for the lights to go out on Edison's invention by 2009, and we'll all then be using energy saving compact fluorescent bulbs instead (pictured).

However, whilst CFL's do indeed use less energy, and yes, certainly save on your bills over time, there is a downside. You see, you can't just chuck them in the bin when they're dead. OK, that's a lie, you can do it, but you probably shouldn't. Why? Well they contain quite high levels of mercury so it would be bad for the environment if you did. The phrase "swings and roundabouts" springs to mind doesn't it?

You can bet that DEFRA hasn't considered (a) the impact of millions of non-recyclable mercury laced light bulbs being dumped in the bin, or (b) the monetary and consequential energy costs of disposal facilities either.

Think of the Children!

Proof that it's a slow news day

What more can I not say?

Quote of the Day from the Fink

From Danny Finkelstein

Verso have sent me a press release expressing their sadness at the death of Jean Baudrillard. I would be sad too, except that I do not believe his death took place. Save for as a media event, of course.

How postmodern!

Government announces "Penis enlargement products are a scam"

From the Office of Fair Trading via GNN

The OFT has obtained assurances from a United States based company that it will no longer distribute certain mailings advertising its penis enhancement product in the UK....

Described as 'a considerable advance for male sexuality', mailings made claims about the efficacy of the product and also included photographs of men who claimed to have increased the size of their penis as a result of using the product, one man by up to four inches....

Christine Wade, OFT Assistant Chief Executive, Consumer Advice and Trading Standards said: 'Anyone receiving an unsolicited healthcare mailing who is unsure about the authenticity of the claims being made should always seek a medical opinion.'

Well I never knew that, I thought they really worked!

Seriously though, I think Ms Wade missed the point. If you've got "issues" you're hardly likely to pop along to your doctor and have a friendly chat about how to make it bigger.

Crossing the floor once is ok, but three times?

Last night on Vox Politix they had a guest on who is one of the potential Conservatives candidates for London mayor, Winston McKenzie. Now I'd never heard of him as a candidate so I did a quick Google and found a worrying post about him on the Croydon Life blog which alleged that

"he was an equalities advisor to the LibDems but leaves them to campaign for a blanket ban on immigration [for Veritas]; he loses election after election; his business is opposed by the police; he is advised politically by a boxer and a former mayoress; and he brands the Tory Council racist, then a few weeks later wants to represent the Conservatives."

Now I have no idea how true any of that might be, but if it is, I'm not sure a former Lib Dem who went over to Veritas then on to us is necessarily the sort of conviction politician that we need running London. I could be wrong though and he might turn out to be a brilliant performer at the Open Primary (whenever the hell it actually happens).

The Lefties are getting restless!

Labour MP Gordon Prentice, for it is he, is not a happy chappy it seems. He has been asking the Duchy Lancaster and Prime minister about the cost of an event held last week at Downing Street where 60 members of the public were invited to a "citizens forum" to discuss Blair's pointless policy review.

He didn't get a straight answer from Hilary Armstrong on the cost she simply referred him back to when she said the estimated cost was going to be £90,000 instead (I am assuming this means the real cost exceeded that else why avoid the question). He then followed up his question by asking her,

"if she will invite 60 randomly selected members of the Labour Party into Downing street to discuss the issues raised in the Government’s policy review."

You'd think, after all this time, he'd realise that the one group Blair is unlikely to ever listen to (if he ever does indeed actually listen) is the Labour Party - especially the wing Prentice belong too.

Patrick Mercer quits after "racist" comments

There is a reason I have put the word racist in quotes. It is quite simply because based upon what I have so far read on the BBC (the Times article is not working) he seems to have been talking historically about his time in the Army and just being thoroughly honest, albeit illjudged as well. The BBC reports him as saying,

"They prospered inside my regiment, but if you'd said to them: 'Have you ever been called a nigger,' they would have said: 'Yes.'... But equally, a chap with red hair, for example, would also get a hard time - a far harder time than a black man, in fact....But that's the way it is in the Army. If someone is slow on the assault course, you'd get people shouting: 'Come on you fat bastard, come on you ginger bastard, come on you black bastard.'"

Now personally, speaking, on that bit alone, I'm not sure what he said wrong, it was just telling the tale of his life in the Army. What should he have said? "Oh no! Everyone was really lovely to each other when they were on a training ground"? Anyone with half a brain would know that would be bollocks.

However, I'm guessing it was this bit that really did it for him,

"I came across a lot of ethnic minority soldiers who were idle and useless, but who used racism as cover for their misdemeanours.... I remember one guy from St Ann's (Nottingham) who was constantly absent and who had a lot of girlfriends.... When he came back one day I asked him why, and he would say: 'I was racially abused.' And we'd say: 'No you weren't, you were off with your girlfriends again.'"

I can certainly see, politically, how the first sentence in the second post could be construed as being racist, although I can equally see it as someone stating the matter of their empirical experience.

It seems to me that this is one of those times when resignation is the right thing do for political reasons (and Danny Finkelstein has a good point to make on that here), but at the same time I do have a wider cultural concern. This relates to the argument that if once perceives offence (in this case racial offence) then it makes it so, irrespective of the intent of the person making the original comment.

Do not misconstrue that statement though, I do not know Patrick Mercer from Adam* and for all I know he could be a raving racist thug or equally he could be a saint. However I don't think that detracts from the wider concern about how the perception of offence is often, today, equated with intent to offend.

Sadly though, there are many people out there who do have a chip on the shoulder and use racism, sexism, or whatever other victim group-ism for achieving ends (there are also many who don't who are genuinely subjected to discrimination). When it happens I personally think people should be called on it and offered some salt and vinegar.

I also think that in Britain we have a problem with race. That problem is that we don't talk about it enough. Unlike America, we had no giant civil rights movements, the result has been that the issue of race is framed in debate in much more pernicious and oppressive way.

If you talk about race, and if you are not careful enough with what you say, you find yourself charged with all sort of things, as I imagine someone will say about this post probably. However, we really need to deal with the way we deal with our use of language and the difference between actual deliberate discrimination and simple name-calling with no malice intended which is part of life whether one likes it or not.

I say all this, incidentally, as someone with ginger hair.

Update: I've been thinking about this post on the way home and wish to clarify something. When I talk about "name-calling" I'm referring to peer groups and the manner in which they speak to each. They will, quite often, use language which, in isolation could be deemed racist, but within the group is not considered so.

* OK that's a slight lie, I met him once outside Doughty Street whilst I was smoking a ciggie with Rachel North, the conversation consisted of "Hello, I'm Patrick Mercer". I'd hardly call it an interest though.

Blair looks up at Brown from the bottom of a whiskey bottle

Apparently, some desperate Labour councillor has shelled out £100 for a bottle of House of Commons whiskey signed by Gordon Brown. At the same fudnraising auction the bottle of whiskey signed by Tony Blair only managed to make £50.

Something tells me it that just the one bottle of scotch may not be enough to cope with a Brown premiership.

Conservatives to embrace Open Source

The idea that an incoming Conservative Goevrnment will embrace Open Source development and opportunities is great news. There is today very little that can be done on Windows that cannot be done equally as well on Linux without the crazy licensing costs.

What's more, if Open Source is embraced we won't find ourselves with the travesty whereby the amount of public money being spent on software is confidential from the public.

The Penguin and the Devil are coming, and there is definitely momentum amongst MPs.

Find me a shrubbery!

Great news everyone, the Land Registry offices around the country had an official skiving week just before Christmas to save energy. Apparently,

"Over the winter period, each office competed to save energy. The battle for cutting energy consumption was closely fought, but Swansea Office emerged on top by cutting energy consumption by 28 per cent, beating the rival Wales Office by one per cent.

Swansea Office liaised with contract maintenance electricians and restaurant staff to establish what non-essential equipment could be switched off from 23 December to 1 January. These included desk lamps, photocopiers, plasma screens, PCs and vending machines."

So they spent a week sitting in the dark using carbon copy paper and pens whilst drinking warm cans of Coke! They must be really pleased with their achievement as well because they won a prize too!

"The prize, a set of shrubs, will be presented to staff at the winning office on Friday 9 March."*

Apparently, the prize will be presented by one of the Knights who say Ni!
* This is NOT a joke
GNN Source

UN International Year of Sanitation

Apparebntly, next year is the UN International Year of Sanitation. Perhaps as part of it they can lobby the French to get rid of these bloody things?

Home Office has no idea what tagged offenders are doing

Over the past few years we have had a steady stream of Home Office initiatives to apparently control offenders. One of those initiatives has been the introduction of electronic tagging. this is generally used for people released from prison early under license, or often for those on bail.

The idea is pretty simply, you tag an offender and the tag is set-up so that if the offender leaves their home between certain times it bleeps somewhere and the Police know that the person is breaking the rules of their license/bail.

There has been much speculation on what the effectiveness of such tagging actually is. There is also the argument that it is used primarily to release prisoners to free up prison space.

Now, given the very "new technology" nature of tagging you'd think the Home Office would be monitoring what those who are tagged are up too. You'd think that they'd be keeping track of how many people tagged commit crimes when tagged wouldn't you? Well they don't.

In fact, the Home Office has absolutely no idea how many offenders that have been tagged are actually committing crimes when tagged. According to the Home Office minister, Gerry Sutcliffe, crimes by offenders that are tagged "are not currently reported".

This probably shouldn't come as a surprise though, back in 2005 the BBC reported that the Home Office conceded there was no evidence that tagging lowered re-offending. The only difference now is the Home Office has conceded why there is no evidence, they haven't bothered gathering any.

You have to ask yourself the question, if you're going to introduce new technology which is intended to control offenders outside of prison, would it not make sense to see if that technology was actually creating effective outcomes? If the Home Office had not driven by headline-grabbing news management for so long perhaps they might have?

Indy columnist says Downing Street was source of leak?

This morning's Independent carries a comment piece by Steve Richards which is interesting. Putting aside the fact that it's one of those "the Police have nothing, they are reaching, put up or shut up Yates!" pieces it seeks to destroy what Richards calls the "myths" around the Cash for Honours scandal. However, in doing so Richard said something that struck me as odd. He said,

"there is widespread and partially inaccurate speculation that someone in Downing Street was the main source of the BBC story."

If it's "partially inaccurate" then by consequence what Richards is also saying is that the speculation is "partially accurate" isn't he? I wonder what he knows.

Also, across this morning's papers we have a follow-up to what the Evening Standard ran last night about Ruth "I fell in with the wrong crowd" Turner. Apparently her mum says she is being isolated.

What has not been repeated, as far as I can tell, are the quoted "friends of Ruth Turner" in the Standard who said she was so loyal she would sacrifice herself for Blair. Hmmm ..."friends of..." I wonder who that might actually be? She may very well be loyal to Blair, question is, is he too her?

Send Google maps to your BMW?

Whether this is real or fake, it would still be very cool feature.

If it is real, there's massive scope for abuse I think (depending on how it sends the data). The phrase "hack a beamer" springs to mind. I'm guessing the car will periodically check some sort of mailbox that BMW host.

They've only bloody done it!

So it seem the Commons has, with a whacking great majority, voted in favour a 100% wholly elected second chamber. I have to admit when I saw this on the TV I said "yes!". Whilst I'm not sure whether I still agree with all my personal preferences last July, I still think that having a wholly elected chamber is the right thing to do, although how long it will take for it come to fruition now I have no idea. It's safe to assume the Lords will delay it.

One thing I did say back in July though was that we shouldn't be afraid of genuine bi-cameralism in this country, and hopefully this represents that realisation. The questions that remain of course are how the system would work and ensure that power between the two houses is balanced correctly.

Interesting times.

Update: For those that don't want to read my archive this is what I said should happen (I think now I would probably alter the salary point and perhaps some/or all of the others) :

1. The chamber must represent the proportional party shares of the national vote for the Commons.
2. The quasi-sincecures for Lords members should be ended by introducing term limits.
3. The positions should be paid at the national average salary rate.
4. The Parliament Act should be amended to account for the chamber's new legitimacy.

The last of the above refers to the situation whereby - in it's current state - the Parliament Act could be used to overrule a democratically representative House of Lords whilst not holding a share of the national vote over 50%. The Parliament Act should therefore be amended so that it cannot be invoked where the party in Government in the Commons does not command an overall majority in the Lords, thus safeguarding against the "elective dictatorship".

James Murdoch endorses Cameron?

Apparently, James Murdoch has agreed to share a platform with David Cameron at a Conservative "green business" summit to be held next Monday along with a number of other business leaders. The Financial Times also reported that the event will coincide with a an event Gordon Brown is hosting on the environment.

How significant is this I wonder? It's certainly quite a coup to have the CEO of Sky, and son of the main man of News Corp on the platform. Obviously the scheduling of the event to clash with Brown's is deliberate.

It's also happening just two weeks after Alistair Darling took the decision to get OFCOM to start an initial monopoly investigation into Sky's purchase of a significant ITV stake. Are we witnessing the impact of that decision and the first moves away from Brown by the Murdoch Empire?

China blocks Livejournal

According to a report on LiveJournal the Chinese Communist authorities appears to null-routed all traffice towards LiveJournal, thereby restricting Chinese bloggers freedom to public.

If anyone is interested in knowing exactly what is, and what is not allowed to be viewed from the Communist dictatorship then visit the Great Firewall of China to test and find out.

Milburn and Clarke snub Johnson and Blears?

The Events Diary at Milburn and Clarke's Anyone but Brown 2020 Vision website makes for interesting reading. The only events they have listed are a three part series of lectures over consecutive weeks in March.

Apparently the series will provide a "great opportunity to hear from the candidates" for the Deputy Leadership of the Labour Party. We have Peter Hain first, Hilary Benn a week later, and finally Harriet Harman in the last week of March. No further events have been booked.

I guess Alan Johnson and Hazel Blears now knows where they stand!
They snubbed Jon Cruddas too but that's hardly a surprise.

UPDATE: Thanks to Croydonian for pointing out I forgot the Chipmunk.

A posthumous knighthood for Bob Paisley?

There is currently an EDM in Parliament that has been amended a couple of times relating to the former Liverpool manager, Bob Paisley which now states;

That this House notes that the former manager of Liverpool FC, the late Bob Paisley, was the most successful football manager in the game's history in the UK winning in nine seasons six league titles (runners up twice), three League Cups, one UEFA Cup, one European Super Cup, five Charity Shields, three European Cups, 21 Manager of the Month and Six Manager of the Year awards; further notes that he was highly respected and held in great affection for his outstanding knowledge and experience of the game and for his modesty as immortalised by his words "Mind you, I wasn't only here for the good years; one year we came second'; and supports the petition on the Downing Street website for him to be awarded a posthumous knighthood.

Clearly this is an outrageous abuse of the EDM system, a complete waste of taxpayers money, and I'm sure Peter Black, Nich Starling and Stephen Tall would agree with me.

After all, the man was a red! And just like the Murphy's, I'm not bitter. Oh yes, and I hate Barcelona now for being woefully poor last night.

Thieving at the Department of Transport

I think the Department of Transport may need to review their vetting procedure when it employs staff (including their security guards). Apparently in the last 12 months they've managed to have £31,891 worth of computer equipment nicked from it's departmental offices.

As it happens the Tory MP for Monmouth, David Davies, has been asking how much stuff worth more than £100 has been nicked in the last 12 months from pretty much every Government department over the past month.

Give or take a thousand quid, computer equipment theft amounts to around £49,000 in the last 12 months. This means the Department of Transport is responsible for about 65% of all the computer thieving across Government.

No wonder the buggers want to bring in road pricing with the massive IT costs, it's probably all gonna be fenced out on eBay.

That Ming Campbell speech in full

Genius!

From The Spine via Trixy

Leeds Labour - organised like a well-oiled machine!

Oh dear, they don't seem to be very organised in Hilary Benn's constituency. Perhaps this is why the fancy Benn4Deputy website that RecessMonkey is supposed to be doing has still not appeared yet.

Leeds Labour - a well-oiled political campaigning machine!

The changes are shifting?

The lyrics and the images really do work quite brilliantly together, if not a little sacchrine at times.

Hilary Clinton's fake accents?

Apparently, this is recording is of Hilary Clinton as she toured some southern states. Assuming it's genuine, it's amazing that a woman from Chicago would so cynically put on fake accents for her audience.

Having said this, I'd love to hear Gordon Brown's mockney.
Hat Tip: The Crossed Pond

Consultancies and the revolving door from Whitehall?

Consultancy spends by New Labour is never a pretty sight, and it never ceases to amaze me quite how much public money is thrown in the direction of these firms.Over the past three years for example, the Department of Work and Pensions have spent a total of £216,179,665 on consultancies fees.

These fees have been paid to a number of firm but the single biggest company to gain has been Booz Allen Hamilton for its "Pension Transformation" work. In fact they received just over 50% of it, to the tune of £109,100,0000.

From what I can tell, Booz Allen Hamilton specialises in public sector money making projects. It also employs the former Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service, Lord Turnbull as a senior advisor to the firm.

Never let it be said that the revolving door from Whitehall to Industry does not remain in motion.

Womens Football Taskforce

Apparently the Department of Culutre, Media and Sport is going to set up taskforce to promote womens football.

Now, whilst I do of course lament the thought of yet another "taskforce" and the Government spending involved, I have to admit at the same time that anything that brings the Everton Ladies captain, and England left -back, Rachel Unitt to our screens more is a good thing in my mind.

We should end sexism in football, some of the footie chicks are a delight to watch.
Image from Footie Chick

Parliamentary Question of the Day

It's good to start the day with something funny.

Mr. Heald: To ask the Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the impact of the Downing street e-petition initiative; and whether he plans to give a bonus to the staff members responsible for the project.

If anyone is wondering the answer was basically "sod off" but done in Parlimentary-ese.

It's always someone else fault isn't it?

Slow news days always mean I end up looking at the Health and Safety Executive website at lunchtime just to see what annoyances and idiocies my tax money is being spent on for the given week. The latest campaign is called "Watch Your Step" and is all about sliping, falling or tripping at work (the last of those is always going to be dangerous, especially when the walls start melting).

Joking aside this is a rather odd campaign. It is titled "Watch your Step" which implies some level of personal responsibility, and then proceeds to offer advice on how blame always lies somewhere other than the tangle-footed idiot carrying three cups of coffee who forget to tie his shoelaces.

Take responsibility, but sue the company anyway is the message being put out. I particularly like the fact that "watch where you're going" is not included in the list of how to prevent trips, falls, and slips. Oddly though, making sure you "look out for your colleagues" is. If you can't sue the company sue your mates instead!

What I want to know is, if I see a "trip hazard" what do I do if I have not had manual handling training and get a baackpain as a result? Can I sue the HSE for telling me to act to make my work place safer?

Privy Council abolition through proclamation. Is it even possible?

According to a report in yesterday's Sunday Telegraph, there are plans afoot to carve up the Privy Council by the Government. The memo that was published, which was from the Cabinet Secretary to the Prime Minister gave advice on how to make the announcement suggesting that the abolition of the Council should be done as a "low-key" written statement from Blair.

The question arises, what exactly is "low-key" about abolishing an entity that has existed since the 12th century? That's a pretty significant constitutional change and whether the announcement is made "low-key" or not, the act itself is massive. Also, why is a senior civil servant thinking about how to put out a message in what appears to be political terms?

I find myself reminded of the day that Blair simply scrapped the position of Lord Chancellor not realising that it would require amendments to reams of legislation over the past 400 years. It was a classic example of Blair thinking he was a President, not a Prime Minister.

Admittedly I am no legislation expert, but I wonder how many references exist throughout legislation to the Privy Council? I'm guessing quite a few, which would make it's abolition through proclamation very difficult indeed.

Brownite MP suggests Clarke and Milburn are "doing an Oaten"?

The Brownite MP, Martin Salter, appears to have done his bit in the continuous back biting and internal arguments that is splitting the Labour Party. In a motion tabled on Friday about the Blairite outriders website he noted

"the large number of parliamentary and political events that took place on 28th February 2007, including the meeting of the All Party Jazz Appreciation Group and the Adjournment Debate on Maggot Debridement Therapy, as well as the launch of The2020vision.co.uk a Labour discussion forum; notes however that 545 out of the 563 hon. Members and Peers in the Parliamentary Labour Party failed to attend this launch; and further notes that the venue for launch was the City Inn Hotel, the same venue chosen by the hon. Member for Winchester to launch his unsuccessful leadership bid for the Liberal Democrat Party."

Whatever is he implying about Clarke and Milburn at their choice of venue? It gives a whole new meaning to the word "smear" *shudder*.

As an aside, I love the fact that on Martin Salters personal website he has the tag line "the hardest MP we've ever had" and other testimonials. His ego puts some bloggers egos to shame!

Don't have hot baths if you want babies!

What better way to start the morning than with some bad science. And what better place to find bad science than the Independnent. According to this article, scientists have shown that the old wives tales about having too many hot baths reduces male fertility is possibly true. However when you read what the research actually found such a conclusion is far removed from the reality of the research.

Apparently, in a three-year pilot involving 11 men, they found that when the group stopped being exposed to so-called "wet heat" five of the 11 men began showing significant increases in active sperm count. From this the conclusion has been drawn that hot baths makes your little swimmers swim less.

The problem though is that the conclusion is an inductive one. They have not shown that reduced fertility is caused by hot baths, they have simply discovered that less than fifty percent of their sample started becoming fertile after stopping hot baths. They have leapt to the inductive conclusion that hot water was the causal factor, when there could have been any number of external causes for the increase.

Bad science is, these days, quite popular. It's especially popular amongst those that are following "Kuhnian paradigms" within scientific communities. Climate Change zealotry is such an example, where results that do not fit the paradigm get dismissed out of hand. However, in the case of climate change science this is often, as I mentioned over the weekend, due to politics rather than scientific refutation. How many times do we hear the argument that a scientist is "working for oil companies" as a rebuttal of their work rather than scientific refutation?

Incidentally, we also often hear that those that question climate change are "flat earthers", ironically it is actually the ones that throw that charge around who are guilty of such intellectual tomfoolery. Flat earth theory was based upon an ad populum argument, much as we are told, quite openly, that climate change is when we hear the word "consensus" thrown around.

Just to clarify though before someone throw the accusation of "climate change denial" at me, my criticism is a philosophical about the terms of reference for the discussion on the subject, not whether either side is right or wrong.

Could the leaker be charged as well?

It occurs to me, if the CPS and Guido are right - and Downing Street were responsible for the leak of the email to the BBC in the hope of creating a "trial by media" scenario - wouldn't that leak itself constitute an attempt to pervert the course of justice? Could the leaker, if exposed, be subject to charges too?
Image nicked from Guido

Is someone smearing UKIP?

It seems that it never rains but pours for UKIP at the moment with bad press. This morning's Telegraph has a report in it about a senior official in the party having donated money to a group called American Friends of BNP whilst he was living in the US.

If I were someone in the UKIP leadership I'd be wondering whether there's an active smear campaign going on against the party from some quarter. In the past two weeks UKIP have received more column inches and coverage than they've probably had in the last six months. All of it damaging, and none of it in least bit positive.

Ann Coulter calls John Edwards a faggot

John Edwards seems to have turned the insult to is advantage now by using it to encourage fund raising. He'll probably owe Coulter a favour now, she's such a hate figure the video will probably raise huge funds.
N.B. If you are wondering what she is referring too see the post below this one.

American actor agrees to re-education after being homophobic?

How bizarre, apparently a cast member of Grays Anatomy has agreed with his bosses at ABC to go into psychological rehabilitation after he allegedly made an anti-gay comment towards another member of the cast during an argument.

I don't know what to say other than it is a bizarre state of affairs, and far from it being rehab it sounds more like re-education to me, which has a kind of *shudder* feeling about it.