The Friday Joke - 5/10/2012

 

Nick Clegg walked into a branch of HSBC to cash a cheque. 

As he approached the cashier he said "Good morning , could you please cash this cheque for me"?

Cashier: "It would be my pleasure Sir. Could you please show me your ID?"

Clegg: "Well I didn’t bring my ID with me as I didn't think there was any need to. I am Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister!!!"

Cashier: "I’m sorry, but with all the regulations, monitoring, of the banks because of impostors and forgers, etc. I must insist on proof of identity."

Clegg: "Just ask anyone here at the bank who I am and they will Tell you. Everybody knows who I am."

Cashier: "I am sorry Deputy Prime Minister but these are the bank rules and I must follow them."

Clegg: "But I need this cheque cashed, it’s very important"

Cashier: "Perhaps there’s another way: One day Colin Montgomery came into the bank without ID. To prove he was Colin Montgomery he pulled out his putting iron and made a beautiful shot across the bank into a cup.With that particular shot we knew him to be Colin Montgomery and cashed his cheque.

Another time, Andy Murray came in without ID. He pulled out his tennis racquet and made a fabulous shot where the tennis ball landed in my cup. With that spectacular aim we cashed his cheque..

So sir, what can you do to prove that it is you,and only you, as the Deputy Prime Minister?"

Clegg stood there thinking and finally says "Honestly, I can't think of a single thing I actually do."

Cashier: "Will that be large or small notes, Deputy Prime Minister?"

Why the Tories should sack Cameron and appoint Boris ASAP

Regular readers of this blog will be shocked at what I have to say or wonder if it is some sort of bizarre joke. As it's not Friday, I can assure you it isn't. I take no pleasure in writing this, but sometimes you have to face reality and speak the truth. The UK is faced with a massive economic crisis. It is 100% clear that David Cameron and George Osborne have not got a clue how to address it. That would be bad enough, but they seem to be hell bent on a set of policies which will drive the UK into a steeper decline.

Every Conservative I've spoken to recently has acknowledged three facts

1) Cameron isn't up to the job
2) Osborne hasn't got a clue what he's doing
3) The undynamic duo haven't got a clue what to do next

Cameron and Osborne have a mantra that there is "no plan b". Well there damn well should be, because plan A clearly isn't working. What is even more bizarre is the fact that there are a whole raft of highly unpopular policies which run counter to Tory mainstream thinking and are alienating huge swathes of Tories in their heartlands. To name but a few

* HS2 Rail link
* Heathrow Expansion
* Police cuts

They cannot blame these policy disasters on the Lib Dems. In fact, there are no policy disasters that they can realistically blame on the Lib Dems at the moment. Many Tories mumble that if there wasn't a coalition things would be better, but they can't name a single economic policy of the government that they can blame th Lib Dems for. They hate the Lib Dems for the fact that they are pro European, but even the most die hard Tories doubt that the policies towards the EU would be any different if Cameron had a majority.

Even more worrying is the fact that Cameron and his cronies seem to have no connection with ordinary families. This first became apparent when he failed to win a majority in 2010. Gordon Brown was as popular as the Pox, but Cameron couldn't even get a majority, despite Brown and Bust. The reason was clear, he was Tony Blair without the brains. Whatever one may think of Blair, he instinctively read the electorate correctly, that is why he won three terms. Labourites hated Blair for his lack of ideology and Tories hated him for spanking them three times. The electorate loved him. That was why he won. These days it is hard to find anyone with a good word for Blair, but when he was Prime Minister, we knew who was in charge and we knew that he had credibility. Blair made monumental cock ups, the greatest of which was his support (a la dodgy dossier) for the Iraq war, but he was a proper prime minister who won elections. I was not a Blairite, but like millions of others, I voted for him three times, because he was clever enough to ensure that he seemed like the least worst option.

Which brings us back to Cameron. The Tories have to ask themselves "Is Cameron likely to be the people's choice as least worst option?" Well he wasn't when Labour were lead by Gordon Brown in the middle of a massive economic crisis. Given that Cameron and Osborne have created an economic crisis of their own, they convince no one. Labour have a rather unconvincing leader of their own in Ed Milliband, but even he seems to have the measure of Cameron. Given the likely devastation of the cuts still to bite, there is likely to be an even more gloomy outlook when the 2015 election kicks off.

Which brings us to what any sane Tory would be doing. Cameron had an open goal in 2010 and he blew it. Who is a credible alternative? As far as any Tory I've spoken to is concerned, there is only one. Boris Johnson has been running London for 4 years. Much to the surprise of left wing commentators (like me) he hasn't made a complete cock up of the job. He managed to oversee a triumphant Olympics and despite the woes of the Tories nationally, got re elected comfortably.

He knows that the policies of HS2, Heathrow and Police cuts are plain bonkers and he believes in economic stimulus via large infrastructure projects. During his time as Mayor, he has come to see the value of a bit of joined up thinking, which is why he is lobbying for control of commuter rail routes. He has seen the dangers of overzealous outsourcing at the Olympics with G4S and has even done his bit to boost the UK's manufacturing sector with the Boris bus. Many people have derided the Boris bus as a vanity project, but it has created jobs and is far more environmentally friendly than any other similar vehicle on the road. Had it been a Labour devised project, the Tories would have lambasted it from start to finish, but Boris gets away with such largess.Any visit to the Conservative Home blog will confirm this.

The man question for us is whether Boris would make a better Prime Minister than Cameron. He has two main qualities which would help him enormously. Firstly, he's clever than Cameron. Whilst Cameron seems perpetually mired in dithering, Boris seems able to see a path and then follow it. Whilst many of us don't agree with his decisions, he sees them through. The second quality is that he's far lazier than Cameron. This may seem like a perverse attribute to label a quality, but as a Prime Minister it surely is. Workaholics end up like Gordon Brown, mired in detail and unable to delegate. Boris doesn't do detail, he gives people a job to do and lets them get on with it. He is quite prepared to use whatever tools he has at his disposal to reach an end, whilst making sure he isn't associated with unpopular decisions. A classic example of this was his appointment of Brian Coleman at the LFEPA. Boris didn't want to be associated with clobbering the fire service, so he stuck a loudmouth Tory bogeyman in charge. Colemans obnoxious personality was so overbearing that Boris took no flack at all for the massive attacks on this highly popular service. For a while, I couldn't understand how Boris tolerated Coleman, until I realised just how useful he really was.

Of course Boris isn't an MP and any process to replace Cameron would be extremely high risk, for all concerned. Realistically, even if a bunch of Tory plotters hatched a plot tomorrow, it would probably be 18 months before they could install their man. Just in time for the 2015 election. I suspect that there are moves afoot and they want to get the worst of the cuts out of the way and let Boris come in when there is a perceived upturn around Spring 2014. I think this plan is a bad one. Cameron and Osborne are clearly inept and I suspect that by 2014 things will be even worse. Another suggestion is that if Boris took over, the Lib Dems may pull the plug on the coalition. I personally doubt this. If they did they would alienate right leaning Lib Dems. Having permanently scared off left leaning Lib Dems, they would be well and truly finished. It is clear that Lib Dems have only one place to go and that is onwards on the current path.

I suspect that Boris would have most of them for breakfast. I suspect he would actually work with Vince Cable quite well. Cable is clever and useful to him. Cable knows that Boris gives him an opportunity, because if Cameron goesm Clegg won't be far behind. A Johnson and Cable team would draw up a list of infrastructure projects that both would back and put the differences on the back burner for a year until after the election.

Now you may wonder why I am backing such an unholy alliance? I am not. I think it would be a complete disaster for the UK. Unfortunately with Cameron, Osborne and Clegg, we don't have a disaster, we have a complete catastrophe. Labour has spent two years refusing to face up to a horrible truth. If they could dislodge the Lib Dems from the Tories and form a government, they could conceivably prevent both disaster and catastrophe. Could they prevent a Boris led Tory party? I am convinced that only a nasty accident could stop that. I just think that it would be far easier to stop the Boris bandwagon from a position of having rescued the economy than with him installed as incumbent PM on a rising economy. This blog, written in the week of the Labour Conference, isn't aimed at Tories (though I suspect more than a few will agree). It is aimed at the Labour party. If they don't wake up to the horrible reality which is about to unravel, Boris will do to them what he did to Ken Livingstone in May this year.

If you are in a car accelerating towards the edge of a cliff, you can do one of two things. You can change direction or you can cover your eyes and pretend it isn't going to happen. Both Tory and Labour parties are currently in this position. Sadly, whilst they are driving the car, we are all the passengers.

Breaking News : Brian Coleman to join Barnet Lib Dems

Barnet Lib Dem Leader this morning announced that Brian Coleman is to join the Liberal Democrat Party. The deal has been brokered by Nick Clegg and David Cameron, in an attempt to revitalise the coalition in Barnet. The existing Lib Dem candidate for the GLA elections has agreed to step aside to allow Mr Coleman a free run at the seat.

The Barnet Eye suggests that this is clearly a panic move, sparked by recent reports that Labour candidate Andrew Dismore is a shoe in for Barnet. Jack Cohen added "Although Brian and myself have had our run ins in the past, we are really the best of friends. Brian and his mum often pop in for tea and scones on their way to functions in London". The Barnet Eye rang Mr Coleman for a comment but got the phone slammed down on us. Conservative Leader Richard Cornelius said "I urge everyone in Barnet to support the Coalition candidate. This arrangement is great for Conservatives and great for our partners"

************* Updated 11.20 *****************
In a surprise announcement this morning, the local Barnet GMB branch announced that it is dumping Labour candidate Andrew Dismore and will be backing Lib Dem candidate Brian Coleman. Local branch sec Avi Newon said 'in the GMB we like to back winners'. In a seperate move, Coleman was seen in Brent Cross with Ceo Tom Nathan shopping for wooly jumpers and was heard to say 'i suppose i'll have to grow a beard'

Klegg Exposed !!!!!!

http://www.2000adonline.com/vault/characters/kleggs

Shouldn't that be Judge Cam??????

And as for Big Dave :-


http://www.2000adonline.com/vault/characters/big_dave

NHS reform

Is it possible to have a sane and rational discussion about NHS reform? Let's try shall we?

Ok, so what sort of system of healthcare do we have in the UK. I would say we have one of the very best in the world. If you are poor, you won't be thrown to the wolves because you can't pay for it. If you are middle class and you get a long term debilitating illness, you won't be bankrupted, when your healthcare plan runs out and they kick you off. If your children become ill, you might worry about how they respond to treatment, but you don't worry how you pay for it.

There is also one aspect that is never discussed. If you are stinking rich, what do you get? Well you get all the above + you get the ability to pay for a healthcare plan and jump the queue. This is why I get really sick of millionaires sticking their oar in and moaning about the health service. It wasn't designed for them. They will be alright whatever the healthcare system we end up with. I just saw on the news that the government wants to introduce more choice. This is utter bollocks. How does this supposedly work. "Mrs Jones, you've got cancer. You can go and see Dr Black who is really crap and you'll die in two weeks or you can see Dr Burgundy who is great and you'll live till you're 116, which would you prefer?" What would your choice be? Sounds like a great system, this internal market, doesn't it?

Nope, sorry that's not how it will work. It will work like this. Your GP will know that sending you to Dr Black will cost his budget £50,000 and sending you to Dr Burgundy will cost his budget £100,000. The choice is his, not yours, because you don't have the facts as to who is better. Who do you think your GP will send you to. If he sends you to Dr Burgundy, that's £50,000 less in his budget to pay himself a bonus. What do you think he'll say?

Or look at how private corporations may run wards/services. Just suppose the Barnet Eye wants to go into provision of Health care. Barnfield General want me to take over some provision of services. They give me the choice between running the A&E department or the oncology department. Which would I, as an astute businessman rather run? Simple really. The one I can make most money from. So how do I do this? Well they agree a menu of prices for services and I then look at how I can provide them as cheaply as possible. Just suppose I happen to know that Dr Burgundy is the worlds greatest oncologist and he's working there. Because he's so marvellous, the Wellfishy trust pay him £250,000 a year and he has a whole team of highly trained, long term staff who know what they are doing. I look at this and say "Dr Burgundy is charging £100,000 for a course of treatment. Dr Black in Walford General only charges £50,000 and so he's getting more business and the hospital make more money". What do I do? Do I say "but Dr Burgundy is the finest oncologist in the world". Do I hell. I sack him and break up his team and get Dr White in, who has no track record whatsoever, but can provide the treatment for £40,000. Then I undercut Dr Black. Who suffers? Not me, I make shedloads of money. What do I care, happy days are here.

But three years down the line, when the survival rates start to drop, the consequences become apparent and the true cost is revealed, it is too late. Dr Burgundy has long gone, his team have been scattered and the damage is done. What happens then? That is how "internal markets" work. That is how private companies conduct their business. I'm not saying that all private companies are always bad, or that all health care trusts will act with complete disregard for the patient as described. Of course their are SLA's and quality targets. It's just that at the end of the day, private corporations exist to make profits. If prices are fixed, these can only be maximised by cutting costs. Cutting costs forces out the best people. Where do they go? Into private clinics where rich individuals can afford to pay a premium.

I don't believe that quality of medical care should be purely driven by the ability of the patient to pay. I believe that in a civilised society, we should all expect, as a right, the best quality healthcare. This may be expensive, but if we got rid of the managers, lawyers and accountants who run the internal market, it would be a damn sight less expensive than the current system. I guess the difference between myself writing this and Clegg/Cameron who will actually decide is this. They are millionaires so the effects will never hurt them. Neither of them has ever run a business, so they have no idea what decisions you make on a daily basis to make your business efficient. Perhaps the biggest difference of the lot though, unlike Mr Clegg and Mr Cameron, when I last visited a hospital, I didn't get red carpet treatment because I was an important politician. I wouldn't want it, but how on earth can they pretend to know what sort of treatment the rest of us get?

Barnet Council : Nick Walkley and the art of complete Bollocks

So what have Eric Pickles and the Prime Minister David Cameron got to do with the CEO of Barnet Council being named the 18th most important Londoner?

First check this link (if your computer lets you !)
http://www.lgcplus.com/Journals/3/Files/2011/4/11/LGC50%20Supplement.pdf

Guess who sponsors the award? BT (who stand to make lots of money from Outsourcing contracts with Barnet Council). Guess who was one of the Judges? Max Wide, who was on secondment from BT to work for Walkley in Barnet. I rather suspect that Walkley should be much higher than 18. After the Metpro Scandal, where Barnet paid £1.2 million to a security company which was operating illegally (Barnet hadn't bothered to check their accreditation) I expect the Government to do a wholesale review of how Councils manage contracts. That will be Mr Walkleys real legacy. Not the one he wanted though.

Here is some advanced warning.  The bloggers of Barnet have managed this in a co-ordinated campaign. First we raised awareness with local activists and blogs on the left and right who believe in honest and open government. Then we raised awareness of the press, to ensure maximum possible coverage.

The next phase which will start this weekend (if not before) is concerted effort to raise awareness of the Governement. This will be done via Eric Pickles and with a letter to David Cameron, handed in personally. Oh and we'll drop in on Nick Clegg on the way so he doesn't feel left out.

If they do nothing then the world will know that they are not interested in honesty, openness and proper administration. I want Barnet Council to be the last Council in the UK to behave in such a shoddy manner.

The War on BORK - Have you been Borked by a Borker?

I've sort of invented a new meaning for a new word. In fact I've invented two new meanings for two new words. As I sit here filling in endless pointless forms,  I was looking for a word to describe the process of filling in useless paperwork and my google searches delivered me to this site :-

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=borker

In the description of the uses of Borker it gave the folling example of being Borked by a Bork.

The bork insisted that I come to the office to fill out 20 pages of useless paperwork.

Now Borker is a bastardisation (or a misspelling) of Broker according to the Urban dictionary. I however from hereon in deem that a Borker is also someone who makes you perform useless and time consuming tasks, which exist only to make work for other Borkers. To have to fill in such rubbish is to be Borked. The person who forces you into Borking can be called a Borker. The whole genre of useless paperwork is to be known as Bork and doing it is to be known as Borking.

Now not only have I redefined the word Bork, this blog is today officially launching a war on Borking (or performing useless tasks). I humbly ask Nick Walkley - CEO of Barnet Council, Lynne Hillan - Leader of Barnet Council, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and anyone else who is in any position of responsibility in any organisation anywhere in the world to join this crusade.

I urge Everyone, everywhere to write on the bottom of all useless paperwork "This is BORK".

Most new words and phrases dreamed up by the PC brigade are long and complicated. This blog, being run by a dyslexic thicko is going the other direction. All the new words we will use will be short, funny and sound slightly rude. Having said that, if we ended BORK, we'd save millions of trees, completely get rid of the fiscal deficit and have far more time at work to do useful tasks, such as real work, planning our next trip to the pub or daydreaming about being crushed to death between Uma Thurmans thighs.

Anger is an energy, Anger is an energy, Anger is an energy, ANGER IS AN ENERGY !!!!!

ANGER IS AN ENERGY. Don't ever forget that.  
ANGER IS AN ENERGY.

Some folk have asked me how I manage to write so many blog posts. ANGER IS AN ENERGY- That's how.  We all have a stark option when faced with injustice. We can either ignore it or we can fight it. Whatever you read in the papers about deficits and spending cuts, this is an immensely rich country. The problem in this country isn't that taxes are too high (or too low). The problem is what they are spending it on. Why is it that when I watch the likes of Paxman on TV interviewing the likes of David Cameron, I find myself screaming at the TV. Why? because they never ask the obvious questions.

One big reason I supported the Lib Dems was their commitment (unlike Labour and  the Tories) to not waste £100 Billion on Trident ( a sum which would virtually clear the deficit, unlike the £6 billion George Osborne is proposing). David Cameron scored some heavy blows on Nick Clegg by saying "Oh but what about if a rogue state such as Iran or North Korea threatened us. We'd be exposed. There is such an obvious answer to all of this. Why didn't Clegg say it? Why didn't Paxo ask?

Trident is an American system. We can't actually fire the bloody thing without the Yanks approval. Just suppose that the next President of the USA is a right wing lunatic who decides that he wants to get his own back at Great Britain for the war of Independence? Could we fire Trident at him? What do you think? We have an independent nuclear deterrent in the way a prisoner in jail has independence from being given a kettle. Sure he can make himself a cup of tea, but is he independent?

As to a situation where Great Britain fired a nuclear missile at South Korea or Iran. Did Paxo ever ask Cameron to describe a believeable situation where we would fire one, and the rest of the world stood by and watched. Sadly I believe that someone is likely to use nuclear weapons again. Sadly I suspect it may well be in the Middle East or possibly even the Korean peninsular. There are a few candidates who I think are very likely to fire the first one, but I guarantee that Great Britain is not one of them. In fact I would go as far as to say, there are absolutely no circumstances where Great Britain would fire a Trident Missile at Iran, South Korea or any other rogue state, unless it was as part of a wider NATO or UN action. Even then, it would be part of a coordinated strike with the Americans. They would use our sub, because it happened to be conveniently in the right place.

Do you think that London is a target on the maps of the dictatorships in North Korea or Iran? Do you think that this would change if we didn't have Trident missiles. If you do, you are bonkers. We all know who the Iranians are likely to fire Nukes at. We all know who the North Koreans are likely to fire nukes at. The only thing which actually makes us a target for these countries is our close ties with the USA. Now I'm not advocating loosening these ties, but as a military power, we have an ill funded under equipped army, which can't afford safe vehicles for our troops in combat areas. Why? because all of the money is being spent on a system which is a complete white elephant. What is even more absurd is the people who argue for the next generation of Trident are the same people who argue against action to combat climate change. What poses more of a threat to the world? The effects of climate change or us not having expensive Inter Continental nuclear missiles, which are ultimately controlled by the Yanks? The climate change deniers say "where is the concrete evidence". I say "where is the slightest shred of evidence that any rogue state would ever declare war on Great Britain, without declaring war on NATO or even the rest of the world".

We will give the Yanks £100 billion (or whatever their bit of the cost is) for a completely useless toy.

As I said, ANGER IS AN ENERGY. If ever I need inspiration to write a blog, I just watch this video by Public Image Ltd - The song is RISE. If you can watch / listen to it without having some sort of reaction, then you must have been born on a different planet to me

Bring along your dog - It's the Cameron - Clegg love in

Happy days, David loves Nick and Nick loves David. Have a party, bring along your dog. There's going to be a brave new world of brave new politics and we're all going to be so so happy. Sure I'll sign. Oh whats this. The smallprint. £20 billion of NHS cuts. Thats Ok, I'm not ill. Sod you jack. We've all got ministerial limos now. We're big boys.

Tell me this. Did we get into this mess because nurses spunked the money? Nope. Did we get into this mess because dustmen spunked the money? Nope. Did we get into this mess because teachers spunked the money? Nope. So who got us into this mess? Bankers and hedge funds.

Oh, you say? And where is the super-tax on bankers and hedge funds? Oh we can't tax them, they're wealth creators, you say. Erm nope, they spunked the family silver for their own greed.

I'll reserve judgement on the love in until I see the full detailed proposals for caning these greedy bastards. I guess I'll have to reserve judgement for a long time, won't I? Actually maybe I won't. Maybe I'll say it makes me sick

Death by poison

When I started writing this blog, I made a decision to avoid national issues unless they were unavoidable. The issue of who Nick Clegg goes to bed with is unavoidable. I personally hope Nick Clegg does a full deal with the Conservative Party. PR, reform of the tax system, reform of education, Vince Cable as Chancellor and Nick Clegg as foreign secretary. Now this will all take two years. I would also like to see it be a part of the deal that Parliament will run for a fixed term of two years and David Cameron will under no circumstances call an election before or after two years.

This may surprise anyone who knows my political views, but there are good reasons for this.Most importantly, the economy is F*****D. From what I've seen only Vince Cable has the authority and intellect as chancellor to sort t out. I trust Vince Cable not to indulge in ill thought out slash and burn Tory economics. A Lib/Lab/everyone else deal will just have too many vested interests and the Nationalists will ensure a carve up which will bankrupt us all. London will foot the bill for scotland, wales and Northern Ireland to be spared the knife. However much I hate the Tories, that is not fair and will kill the UK. Why Clegg as foreign secretary. Quite simply because the Lib Dems have called the big issues better than the other parties, most notably Iraq. It will keep him out of the way and let Cameron actually be Prime Minister. Having said that I think two years is quite enough of such an arrangement. If they are all working to a fixed timetable, they won't be tempted to pick petty squabbles and call a crunch election the first time the polls look appealing.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't a prospect I like. The thought that I spent five months campaigning for this kills me, but the Lib Dems have lost their political virginity and they now have a very nasty STD. Ultimately though, if this deal is done, there is one massive benefit. In their desperation to grab power by any means, the Tories will have taken poison. Any change to the voting system will make it harder for them to have an outright majority. This will make the possibility of a hard right Thatcherite Conservative Government a virtual impossibility. A centre right Coalition is a price worth paying of that. As to the performance of this Government. If Vince Cable saves the economy, we all win and the Lib Dems will get credit from the electorate. If he fails, then Cameron is Prime Minister and will be rightly punished.

One thing no one has mentioned at all. What happened the last time we had a Conservative Prime Minister in Coalition with Liberal cabinet colleagues? They saved the country. What happened next - a Labour Landslide victory. To quote Karl Marx "History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce".

Nick Clegg spotted in Mill Hill and the dangers of canvassing

 Gordon Brown is in the news because he took exception to something a voter said out on the campaign trail.

You hear all sorts of views, all sorts of opinions and all sorts of comments. Sometimes you may have talked to someone and thought you've made a great impression and only find out later that you got the complete wrong end of the stick. Let me give you an example of one such event in Mill Hill.

One Lady who I spoke to yesterday told me she was highly impressed with the local Lib Dem campaign in Mill Hill. I was rather pleased having worked hard on it for the last six months. Then she delivered the knockout blow. "I was so impressed with you getting Nick Clegg down to the Mill Hill Broadway on Saturday". I was rather puzzled. "Nick Clegg in the Broadway?". She replied "Yes you know, when you had your stall. He was walking up and down handing out spoof Conservative leaflets".

Suddenly the truth dawned. She'd met Matthew Offord, the local Conservative candidate for Parliament, who had also been doing the rounds. Now I had a dilemma. What should I say. She carried on "I told him he did very well in the debate and he said thank you very much". I realised Matthew must have thought she was talking about the candidates debate at the local Shul. I thought I'd try and break the news gently "Do you know who the local Conservative candidate is?" I asked. "Oh yes, he knocked on my door. He's that chap who looks like Jimmy Edwards. I wouldn't give him the time of day". I asked her if she'd be voting for us. She replied "yes, I've already posted my vote. I always do".

At that I decided that I'd leave it there. I wonder how many other people met Matthew Offord and thought he was Nick Clegg handing out spoof Conservative leaflets? I suppose that given his enormous popularity, if I was Matthew I would take it as a compliment.

Mandelson attacks Nick Clegg

I've just heard Peter Mandelson attacking Nick Clegg for being arrogant and that he has "no right to play kingmaker before a vote has been cast"

Have you got that - Peter Mandelson doesn't like Nick Clegg (please tell all your friends)

How can he have the impertenence to play kingmaker when everyone knows that's Peter Mandelsons job.

I am sure that being slagged off by Peter Mandelson will finish Nick Clegg off completely - Ha Ha Ha !!!!

Leadership debate part II

So we had the second installment of the Leadership debate. As regular readers will know, I always play five a side football on a Thursday night (may have a night off in two weeks though), so I missed it. Afterwards we adjourned to the Three Hammers pub. It was clear to me as I started supping my shandy (it was my turn to drive, so no hard stuff), that whilst politicos are in an orgasmic blather about the issue, the rest of society takes a different view. Last weeks debate was a new experience and people were fascinated. Last night many people watched maybe 20 minutes of it then got bored,once it appeared that all of the intensive coaching Cameron and Brown have had in the last week hadn't transformed them into Superman. I suspect that 90 minutes is far too long for most people.

What conclusions can we glean from the second debate :-

* If you do your homework properly, you do better
* It's all still to play for

When I got home, I watched some of the debate and some of the analysis. I don't think that the two debates have added a single vote to the Tories or Labour. If you watched both debates and hadn't made your mind up, there really is only one winner. Ultimately that's all that matters.

Does this remind you of someone?

Have a look at this clip of Alfie Boe on the Michael Parkinson show. Does he remind you of someone

Alfie Boe  "Stranger in Paradise"

Alfie Boe | MySpace Music Videos

Maybe Alfie isn't the only Stranger in Paradise at the moment !

Nick Clegg judged to have won Leader debate

It's 23:54 on Thursday night an I'm watching Sky News analysis of the Leaders debate. It seems that the instant polls have decided that Nick Clegg won the debate. The pundits seem surprised by this result. I saw Nicks speech to the Lib Dem conference in Birmingham recently. He also did a question and answer session. I'm not surprised at all. I wasn't surprised when Vince Cable won the Chancellor debate either.

Speaker Michael Martin: A deluge of hypocrisy

If Michael Martin has been a naughty boy, sure he should go. Having said that, how many of those queuing up to stick the knife in are blameless. Martin didn't force them to fiddle thier figures or claim for outrageous items, which in any other walk of life, no one would dream of even thinking of claiming for. By all means sack him, but he should be just be one in the queue for the dole office.

Cameron, Brown & Clegg can't force Martin out & leave people such as Chipping Barnet MP, Theresa Villiers, who racked up a whole range of claims for second homes, whilst living less tham an hourfrom the job, in place. If they do they are being hypocrites.