Why Frederick Forsyth is talking rubbish about NHS investment

One of my favourite columnists is Federick Forsyth in the Daily Express every Friday. Unlike the inane babble spouted by most tabloid celebrity columnists, who have dull lives and merely peddle tittle tattle, Fred has lead an interesting life and has plenty to say. I don't agree with most of his politics, but he makes interesting and well argued points and can bring a wealth of experience and anecdotes to support his views. This week however he demonstated that he really doesn't understand government or running a business. In his column, under the title "Doublespeak Politicians just love to 'invest' " he betrays a fundamental failure to appreciate what the govt is supposed to do with our money. He says

HAVE you noticed that politicians and most especially Left-wingers never mention the word “spending” when they unveil their economic plans? Thus Jeremy Corbyn, in a long, recent list of proposals, managed to blow several hundred billion pounds on the “investments” he would like to make if, heaven forbid, he ever actually got into power. 
Let’s be frank. If you really invest, the money remains yours and you can retrieve it when you want unless you have been daft enough to sign away your right to do that. And invested money provides a “yield” or “return on investment” – the ROI – which is the point of wise investment. But when it is spent, it’s gone. 
Thus, you cannot “invest” in the NHS. So billions are spent on it. OK, it’s a good expenditure to provide a nationwide healthcare service free at the point of delivery. But it is not an investment. We are never going to see it back or get an annual dividend dropping on to the doormat. 
Mind you, we live in a world of euphemisms, platitudes and smarmy untruths. 
Perhaps someone should create a parallel dictionary: what big business, advertisers, officialdom and politicians tell you and what it really means in plain English. It would be quite a big lexicon because what is said and what it really means is very rarely the same nowadays.

Mr Forsyth states "You cannot invest in the NHS" on the grounds "invested money provides a yield or return on investment". Sadly Fred really hasn't thought this through. There are three ways in which his statement is factually incorrect. First, there are many opportunities for investment in the NHS which will produce a yield for the taxpayer. Mr Forsyth should know better than anyone that technology is always offering investment opportunities, to increase efficiency in the way we do things. I will give one example. Fifty years ago the process of taking X-Rays was done by large departments. All of the results were stored on film and there was a huge requirement for a library system for the prints. These had to be kept for decades so comparisons etc could be performed. Modern technology means they are now digitised. This frees up land, reduces the number of staff required to run X Ray departments and means they cost far less to run. As the government funds this process, the investment in new equipment has produced a very real and tangible return for the taxpayer as the they have to levy less tax to pay for X rays. This process has been repeated in every part of the NHS. Had the governement not invested in this modernisation and we still used the 1950's way of doing things the NHS would cost many billions more to run.

The second way in which the NHS delivers a return for the government is when investment in new treatments mean that people who were previously unable to work are able to be treated and return to contributing to the economy. The NHS is just one strand of the UK economy, the government is responsible for the whole thing. It is true that the NHS is largely a cost centre, but it is a necessary one as it keeps the population fit and in good shape for work. This lowers the bill for disability benefits. I am a living example of how this works. Since 2011, I've been under the care of the NHS for cancer. In January I had a new treatment for prostate cancer, which has only been available for 4 years. The treatment is non invasive and thus far the results are good. By investing in screening and development of such treatments, people like me don't get ill with cancer and have to live on benefits at huge cost to the taxpayer. I have a friend who recently had stents for a chrnic heart condition. Twenty years ago he'd be living on cardiac drugs or even dead. If he was dead, the taxpayer would be picking up the bill for his family. Lowering the tax bill by having lower levels of chronic illness is a great example. Perhaps the greatest return on investment has been for immunisation programs that have eliminated diseases such as polio, measles and mumps. Improvements in osbstetrics have also massively reduced the number of problems with births. These have contributed massively to reducing the cost of running the nation. If this is not a wise investment, I've no idea what is.

The third way in which investment in the NHS produces a dividend is perhaps the most obvious, even for someone like Fred, who clearly doesn't get business. The NHS is continually developing and pioneering new treatments. Once these have been perfected, they are then licensed and sold around the world. The UK is a centre of excellence and doctors come from all over the world to learn about the innovations we provide. This generates huge amounts of money for the GDP.

Fred Forsyth says that because we won't get a dividend check through the door, it is wrong to define it as an investment. I couldn't disagree more. The dividend check is paid in the way the NHS is continually using technology to develop new treatments, to make more people well again and that citizens of the UK pay less money than any other developed nation for first class medical care. 

There are all manner of reasons someone will invest. Some people invest to recieve a big dividend check. Some people invest in companies, because they know that there won't be dividends for years (even decades) but the company is developing producst that will make the share value rocket (early google investors are an example of this). Then there are people who invest in shares to get a shareholder benefit. For years I held shares in The Restaurant Group. They gave every shareholder 12 vouchers a year that gave them 30% off the full price of a meal for up to 12 people. As the restarants like Frankie and Bennys, Chiquito and Blubeckers were favourites of my family and kids, my £1000 investment was recovered in 2 years of savings on family nights out. For me the best "shareholder benefit" of the NHS is that I am still alive and you really can't get a better benefit than that!

The nonsense of claims that Jeremy Corbyn is an anti semite

First of all, let me put my cards on the table. I disagree with Jeremy Corbyn on the issue of Israel. If I were an Israeli citizen, I would see no earthly reason why I should be lectured on respecting the rights of organisations that are a) committed to my complete destruction and b) prepared to use women and children as suicide bombers etc in an effort to kill innocent Israeli citizens. As a UK citizen, I recognise the fact that Israel is a rare thing in the middle east. It is a democracy with a functional legal system. I also have no sympathy at all with Hamas who are an extremely unpleasant organisation. When we lecture Israel on how it should respect Palestinian citizens, those of us in the west completely forget just how little respect we showed for the civilain population of Dresden, Hiroshoma, Nagasaki etc. The Soviets were no great respecters of the civil rights of the Germans either, with millions of German women raped after the fall of Berlin. So who has the moral authority to criticise the actions of the Israelis under a never ending onslaught? That doesn't mean that I think the Israelis are entirely blameless in every action they have taken. I certainly don't think the actions of illegal settlers help the situation. I often read of attacks in Gaza where I'd rather they hadn't retailiated with such force and I for one would prefer a less hawkish government there that would try harder to engage with moderate Palestinians. But at the end of the day, I understand why Israelis elect hard line governments and I can't really say I blame them.

Jeremy Corbyn takes a completely different view of the situation. In recent days, various parties, from the Jewish Chronicle, to the Daily Express to some senior Labour figures have tried to portray him as an anti semite because he is sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. It seems to me that there is a sizable and rather dishonest bunch of people who push a philosphy that Pro Palestinian = Anti Semitic. Whilst it is beyond doubt that some anti Semites see the Palestinian issue as a useful one to nail their flag to, for the vast majority of people sympathetic to the plight of ordinary Palestinians, the concept of anti Semitism is abhorrent. Because the issue is rather emotive, it seems that sense and reason sometimes is the last thing which is given consideration.  A typical example is Stephen Pollards column in todays Daily Express. Pollard is the highly respected editor of the Jewish Chronicle and not normally one to make wild or outlandish claims. Pollard states

"Because there are questions hanging over Mr Corbyn with which he refuses to engage. Questions which go to the core of his beliefs. During the leadership election, a number of worrying links have been exposed between Mr Corbyn and some of the most noxious and vile – and, in some cases, violent – anti-Semites. Mr Corbyn is a long-standing critic of Israel and advocate of the rights of Palestinians – an entirely honourable position. Most British Jews also support the emergence of a Palestinian state.But there is a pattern in some of Mr Corbyn’s associations – a pattern not of campaigning against Israel or for Palestinians but of attacking Jews"

This sets the tone of the article. All manner of "guilt by association" type allegations are made. However Pollard fails to cite a single example of anyting in Corbyns 32 years as an outspoken Parliamentarian that supports the case that his is an anti semite. Corbyn has made a name for himself speaking out for deeply unpopular causes. Long before the Guildford 4 and Birmingham 6 were acquitted, Corbyn spoke out on their behalf. At the time they were seen as members of the IRA, who were conducting a vicious terrorist campaign against the UK. Corbyn pulled no punches and despite the fact that his position was deeply unpopular and that he was regularly vilified by the press, he continued to speak out on behalf of these wrongly convicted innocent men. So the concept that Corbyn is an anti semite is based purely on the fact that he's associated with some people who clearly are, not on his own views.

Is this a sustainable theory? There are several things which Stephen Pollard has completely ignored in his analysis. Firstly Corbyn is clearly an intellectual. One of the things intellectuals tend to do is enjoying listening to all manner of arguments, deconstructing these to help them form an opinion. If you only ever interact with people who you agree with, ultimtely you learn nothing. One of the people quoted as being supported by Corbyn is Paul Eisen. I'd never heard of Eisen prior to the article. I thought I'd do a bit of research. He wrote an article for "Righteous Jews" entitled "My life as a holocaust denier". Just in case you are wondering what the Righteous Jew website is all about, it says

To be considered and selected, a "Righteous Jew" must

1. Consider himself or herself to be Jewish. He or she does not have to be religious. Non-practicing Jews and even atheists can be considered.
   
   
2. Have demonstrated solidarity with Palestinians as human beings, deserving of being treated equally with all other people in the lands between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, one country with equal citizenship for all.
   
   
3. Have faced disparagement, discrimination, or even death as a consequence of his or her standing up for the rights of Palestinians.

It is not important why a "Righteous Jew" has defended Palestinian rights or whether his or her actions were based on friendship, altruism, religious belief, humanitarianism, or simple human decency. Candidates may be considered posthumously.

Now I can only describe the views of Paul Eisen towards the holocaust as extremely odd. I am quite sure if I was Jewish and had lost family in the holocaust, I'd find them offensive. I am not a big fan of long, boring articles which are full of waffle and use all manner of ridiculous and extremely tenuous connections to justify the unjustifiable. But unlike Corbyn, I am not an intellectual. My idea of a good night out is a few beers and a loud punk rock band. Corbyns is to sit around discussing absurd theories with people he may or may not agree with.  It is very hard to argue against anything if you don't understand the arguments which your opponent is making.

The second thing which Stephen Pollard misrepresents is the fact that Corbyn is very polite. When he introduces people at meetings and rallys as "my friends", he is not saying "after this is over, we are going down the dog and duck for a few pints, followed by a curry and on Saturday we are going to watch West Ham together". He is simply being polite and trying to make people feel welcome. Pollard cites the case of Raed Salah as an example of him communing with all manner of vicious anti semites. The article says

According to Mr Corbyn, Salah is a “ very honoured citizen” who “represents his people extremely well”. You might think from that Salah is some sort of Mandela figure or even a Yasser Arafat. But Salah is not an anti-Israel campaigner. He is an anti-Semitic hate preacher.

Now it is pretty clear that Saleh is a firebrand and has some very extreme views. At a first glance you may think "why on earth would Corbyn want to engage with such a man? The answer is quite simple. The clue is in Pollards own statement. Yasser Arafet was views as the devil incarnate in many quarters when he first hit the scene as the leader of the PLO. I have no doubt that Mossad would have bumped him off given half a chance and  many of my Jewish friends would have cracked open the bubbly to celebrate. The point was that he was eventually engaged and brought into the process. He was  lauded by many as a "very honoured citizen" and a man who "represents his people very well". The sad truth is that the likes of Saleh have influence and followers. Churchill stated that "Jaw Jaw is better than War War". The concept that peace in the middle east can be achieved without some sort of engagement with such people is ridiculous. I can 100% understand why Pollard finds it sickening to laud such people and in some ways he's not wrong. The sad truth though is that if you are Prince Charles, ultimately you have to shake hands with Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness even though they are responsible for the death of your favourite uncle. Sadly history tells us that peace doesn't happen when nice, reasonable people on both sides decide that too many people have died and it is good for their people to stop.  Peace happens when the complete bastards, who care nothing for anyone or anything beyond their own power and extreme views are somehow engaged.

I do not beleive in appeasement of repugnant ideologies, at any price, for a quiet life. It doesn't work. I do however recognise that total rejection of dialog is no more effective.  There has to be a middle way and this involves polite dialog with people you don't agree with. Stephen Pollard, in the Jewish Chronicle, challenges Corbyn to do various things to "prove he's not an enemy of the Jewish community". It seems to me that Stephen Pollard thinks that failure to go around condemning all and sundry is enough to make someone an enemy. To me this is a ridiculous position to take. What he wants is a Labour leader who is simply interested in shouting at the world, rather than someone who may actually want to start a dialog and undertand the issues in a bit more depth.  Take for example point 6 on Pollards list

6. Why have you failed to condemn the anti-Semitic posters and banners that dominate the annual Al-Quds Day rally, sponsored by the Stop The War Coalition, which you chair?

If Corbyn was to spend his life denouncing every poster, every slogan, every t-shirt that was worn at every rally he's supported, he'd spend his life shouting meaningless slogans. As editor of the Jewish Chronicle, does Pollard endorse and support every word that written in it? Does he denounce every statement from the extreme reaches of his community? Maybe he does, but I am sure he's got far better ways to spend his day. Ultimately we judge you, me, Jeremy Corbyn and Stephen Pollard by what we say, what we write and what actions we take. I am sure Pollard knows a few vile characters that he's perfectly polite to. I certainly do. To get the information I need to write this blog, I try and keep my lines of communication open to all parts of the community. This means that sometimes you have to be polite and listen to people spout nonsense. In the course of researching this blog, I've heard some of the most vile things. Two issues locally, the Eruv and Etz Chaim school have prompted some people to make extremely anti semitic statements to me. I have on several occasions been deeply shocked by some of these statements. It would have been quite easy to write blogs which completely denounced the anti Eruv and Etz Chaim campaigns as hotbeds of anti semitism. I didn't for the simple reason that these voices didn't represent the campaign and it would have been highly unfair to the 99% of people who had quite reasonable objections. To have reported some of the statements and named some of the individuals would have simply inflamed the community in Mill Hill. As both the Eruv and the school are established and the world hasn't ended, it seems that common sense has prevailed. I suspect that I could have written blogs which ended up in punch ups and court cases. Would that really have served our community well? Denouncing people and sloganising is not always the best way.

In truth, I don't think it will matter a fig who wins the Labour Party leadership battle, in relation to the UK Jewish community or the security of Israel. One could make the case that Israel would probably be safer and more secure had the Corbyn view prevailed with regards to the Iraq war. As a betting man, I don't believe that whoever wins the Labour nomination will ever become Prime Minister. Burnham and Cooper are clearly completely useless, Liz who? is a nonentity. I suspect that Corbyn will prove to be a far better leader of the opposition than his opponents care to admit, but unless the Tories have a melt down over the European referendum, the maths simply isn't with him, especially if the Blairites spend the next five years plotting and indulging in rifts and wars. I've often wondered what are the circumstances in which Israel could secure a lasting peace agreement with its neighbours. This can only come when the influential Palestinian groups abandon the requirement for the destruction of Israel in their constitutions. If they had the political savvy to do this, I suspect that they could get most of what they want and the Middle East could become an area of peace and prosperity. Sadly, it seems that there are very rich and powerful forces which are hell bent on preventing this ever being considered. Sadly the biggest losers are the Palestinian people, who seemed condemned to live in a vision of hell. I suspect that what motivates Corbyn is compassion for these people, rather than any hatred of Jewish people. Until the likes of Stephen Pollard can actually provide  some documentary evidence to the contrary, I will continue to believe this. One thing is 100% clear to me. If Corbyn was put before a court of law charged with antisemitism, based on Pollards evidence, he'd be aquitted in minutes and Pollard would be laughed out of court.

Barnet Parking Wardens - The shape of things to come

Barnet is outsourcing Parking to a company called NSL.What sort of company are they? I've no idea, I'm not an expert eye on parking enforcement companies. What I do know is that one of their former employees in Westminster described them as "Ali Baba And The 40 Thieves". I am endebted to todays Daily Express - http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/293808/Warden-sacked-for-being-fair - for exposing exactly what we can expect.  Here is another quote from the article:-

Mr Berkani, who worked in west London for Kensington and Chelsea Council’s parking firm NSL, says bosses cited one colleague as an “excellent example” for issuing 35 tickets, known as Penalty Charge Notices, in a single shift, and a manager said it was “good revenue for the council and that everyone should generate the same revenue as him”.

At a recent council meeting, Barnet Traffic supremo and Tory GLA candidate hailed this outsourcing as a core Conservative policy. Here is a video clip of Coleman explaining how marvellous such enforcement will be for Barnet motorists and taxpayers.



In the next clip, you have the head of parking, John McArdle describing how the contract will work.



Now you may agree with Councillor Coleman that having a company such as NSL issuing parking tickets in such a manner is a great idea. When I read the following quote from Mr Berkani in the Daily Express, I took a rather different view.

Mr Berkani, 45, told a London Employment Tribunal: “It soon became clear that it was commonly accepted amongst my work colleagues that the whole operation of civil parking enforcement was dishonest and mainly designed to extract as much cash as possible, via both fair means or foul, from the motoring public.

“I have seen during the course of my employment… things which I would never imagined could exist in a country like England, which I have always understood and believed upheld and applied the law in a fair, open and even-handed manner.”

Targets for the number of tickets to issue per shift were “impossible to achieve in an entirely legal and ­honest manner,” he said.

I trust that when it comes to May and you get the chance to pass your verdict on Brian Coleman's bid for re-election to his £50,000 a year part time job at the GLA, you remember what you are voting for and what Mr Coleman considers core Conservative policies to be.

The Daily Express names and shames Barnet Councils "Greedy Pen Pushers"

Cut these greedy pen pushers and free the nation !

This is the call to arms from columnist Leo McKinstry in todays Daily Express. Given that this blog has been calling for such action for years, we wholeheartedly back Mr McInistrys comments. Reading through Mr McInistrys article I was not surprised to find that the very first example he chose to give of council wastage was Barnet. In Barnet Council there is a culture of waste and a culture of not caring. Front line services are cut left, right and centre, such as wardens for the residents of sheltered housing,  call centres are moved to far flung shores under "Future Shape", in the process destroying local jobs, yet the council wastes millions on consultants to advise that there is a shortage of senior management. As the monstrous Future Shape "savings scheme" rolls into town we find that they are recruiting "senior assistant directors" on huge salaries to implement it (odd how in Barnet Council, savings always involve more managers). This blog detailed all of this a couple of weeks ago. Leo McInstry clearly agrees, he says in todays Daily Express :-

Too much public sector recruitment is nothing more than an employment racket for over-paid bureaucrats. Only this month, for instance, Barnet Council in North London has advertised for three assistant directors on salaries totalling over £300,000

We couldn't agree more, or put it better ourselves. Barnet Council CEO Nick Walkley and Leader of the Council Lynne Hillan should hang their heads in shame. The Daily Express is a staunchly Conservative paper and for a Tory Council to be named and shamed by such a paper is a complete humiliation. What we need is a council which takes an axe to the bloated management structure and uses the huge savings it can make to ensure that front line services to the weak, frail and elderly are defended.This blog is not a right wing slash and burn rag. We are left leaning and passionately believe in maintaining public services. This can only be done by efficiently managing our resources and getting rid of highly paid managers doing non jobs. Given the millions Barnet has spent on consultants, only to be told "hire more managers" it is clear that the bosses in their North London Business Park Ivory Towers just don't get it. I hope being named and shamed by the Daily Express is the reality check they need.

I have this question for Mr Walkley and Ms Hillan as they have their morning coffee. How do you feel about the fact that out of all of the hundreds of councils in England, the Daily Express chooses Barnet Council as the very first example of "an employment racket for over-paid bureaucrats" in an article titled "Cut these greedy pen pushers and free the nation"?

P.S Note to Boris. Your hand picked appointee to run the Fire Service (LFEPA) is the kingmaker who pulls the strings in this failed regime. Wake up and sack him.

Is Gordon Brown a Homodoxian?

There is a great article on page 13 of todays Daily Express. It is all about rarely used words. Strangely enough many of these come in would come in quite useful when writing blogs about the current election.

For example HOMODOXIAN. This means "A person who has the same view as you". I immediately thought of Gordon Brown and his "I agree with Nick" - definate homodoxian if you ask me.

Then there is KAKISTOCRACY. This means "government by the worst citizens". Strangely enough. I suspect if any party wins the election outright, a majority of the British people will be ruled by a party they didn't vote for and will find this term quite useful. In all the arguments against PR, one which is never deployed is that at least the majority of voters will be represented by the government. Isn't that meant to be called DEMOCRACY.

Another word in the article is KECK. This means "To make a sound as though one were to vomit". I'm sure we've all done this as we've seen oily politicians lie through their teeth on TV in recent weeks.

One word I quite liked is MARIALITY. This means "Excessive or undue affection on the part of a wife for her husband". Whilst I don't expect any candidates spouse to come out and say "He's a blithering idiot and I only married him for the cash and the limo and if it wasn't for the kids I'd be off with the milkman", usually my reaction to any appearance from any spouse where they talk about their husband is to KECK.

How's about PARACME. This means "The point at which ones prime is passed". Nuff said really.

Another word which should be used more in the current campaign is TACENDA. This means "Things not to be mentioned, matters that are passed over in silence". Such as how to fund the defecit?

With all our MP's expenses, a word which may come in useful is QUOMODCUNQUIZE. This means "To make money in any way possible". Again Nuff said.

In the past when I've done blogs about unusual words, I've had a great response. People enjoy the more obscure reaches of our language. Many older readers will remember the TV game show "Call my bluff".  I was reading through the various parties manifesto and I sometimes think that these are like that show. I sometimes think it would be interesting to reprise that show with the three party leaders.

One other footnote. Being dyslexic, I'm afraid that I instantly forget these words. When I've done blogs on language before, people have spoken to me months later and said "That blog on COULROPHOBIA was brilliant". I had to confess I hadn't got a clue what they were on about until they said "You know, the fear of clowns", so please bear with me.

If I were Richard Desmond, I'd back the Lib Dems

The Daily Express used to be the newspaper with the largest circulation in Great Britain. It used to sell four million copies a day. Today it sells just over half a million. Why? Because it has lost touch. Earlier this week Leo McInstry wrote a whole page of comment explaining why the Lib Dems are a bad idea. Now whilst he's entitled to his view, if I was his boss, proprietor Mr Richard Desmond, maybe I'd take a different view. There's no shortage of papers spouting right wing nonsense, most of whom do it far better than the Daily Express and to a far wider audience. I wonder if Mr Desmond has considered how many people vote Lib Dem, either in Council or general elections. There are many millions. None of these have a newspaper which supports their views. There is a whole mass market which is being ignored. There's a chance (increasing every day) that the Lib Dems will play a massive role in the new parliament. It is a copper bottomed, once in a generation opportunity. If I was the owner of a national newspaper and I wanted to catch the public imagination, what better way to become the story and set the agenda. What better way to show that you have reconnected?

There was an interview in the Guardian on Monday with David Yelland, former editor of The Sun. This details how the national papers ignore the Lib Dems. Given the millions of supporters, I just can't believe that it would be bad business for a tabloid to give these voters the choice of a paper which reflects their views.

The Rog T Express takes shape !!!!!

I've had unprecedented interest in my scheme to take over the editorship of the Daily Express. Some of the idea's have gone down well, some haven't. Everyone likes the idea of freshening up the image, getting away from the same old, same old stories, and getting some new faces in.

As I had 5 minutes free, I thought I'd knock up my first test issue. Of course, I've not secured any advertising yet, so it's free of that and I don't have the fancy design team to make it look proper (or even the patience to spell check it, but that never harmed the Guardian in the good old days). This is just a hint as to how the front page might look and a taster to let you see what sort of stories you could expect. One big change. I've got rid of the Crusader as my logo. This has too many negative connotations for many of my target readers, being a symbol of imperialism. I've replaced it with a cucumber. This is because Cucumbers are cool. Sadly I haven't really secured the services of Beth Ditto or got three legged dogs on Page 3 either.

My good friend Derek, suggested that I should adopt the strategy employed in the film "The producers" and employ the worst team possible, to achieve an extraordinary success. Here's the team he suggested. Maybe he didn't realise just how serious I am in my offer to the Express to revive their fortunes.

Derek's "T" Team.

Environmental Editor - Jeremy Clarkson
Home Design - Pete Docherty
Cookery - Bear Grylls
Architecture - Bob The Builder
Womens Editor - Peter Stringfellow
City Editor - Sir Fred Goodwin
Football Editor - Sarah Ferguson
Racing Tips - Robert Runcie
Religious Editorial team - Ant and Dec
Boxing - Julian Clary
Celebrity Editor - Gordon Brown
Pub reviews - Harriet Harman

What do you think - A winning team?

I want to be the editor of the Daily Express

I'm deadly serious and I have a plan to make it the best selling paper in the UK and make Richard Desmond even richer. Let me explain, but first let me give you a little history. If you don't want the history of this bonkers idea and just want to know my business plan to reinvigorate it, skip the next paragraph.

Being dyslexic and getting kicked out of English literature for achieving a score of 0% in my mock O level for English (I did the wrong paper & our teacher Miss Walsh hated me so saw it as a great opportunity to get rid of a class troublemaker). I've always enjoyed playing with words, writing song lyrics etc, but I never thought about journalism as a career. I would never have thought of blogging if Emma Hutchins at the Hendon Times hadn't asked me to do a blog. It never occurred to me that anyone actually read it. When I parted company with the Times and started this blog last October, I thought maybe 20-30 people would look at it. I didn't bother to put counter stats on it until February. This was because, being an egomaniac, I couldn't stand the thought that no one might be reading it. Then one day I saw a blog by Iain Dale, who is probably our top blogger, saying he got 350,000 hits a year. I was intrigued. I put the stats counter on and I was truly amazed by the number of hits I get per day. One of my little ideosyncricies is that I love the Daily Express. This is purely because my Dad read it and it reminds me of him. It covers football pretty well and as it's a pretty right wing paper it gives me a broad perspective, balancing my leftie views. Every month I read the circulation figures. Every month it seems to sink a bit further. When my Dad got off the troopship in 1942 and first bought it, it had 4 million readers. In the Guardian media on Monday it had sunk to around 3/4 of a million. If I were Richard Desmond, I'd do something pretty radical. If he gives me £250,000 a year (a large sum, but he's a rich geezer and I'll make him a pot of money), I'll transform it for him. Here's how.

Why is the Express failing? Because it sits in a shrinking marketplace and is worse at it's job than it's main competitor, the Daily Mail. Both are chasing the white, middle England,middle aged, Middle class reader. As such they both are right of centre and England-centric. Wheras the Daily Mail knows what it is and knows what it wants to be, the Daily Express doesn't. I think the Daily Mail lite strategy is a hopeless and doomed plan. I believe that my plan would keep the existing readers and add millions of extremely loyal new ones. It would be a hard road, but it would save Richard Desmond money and reinvigorate the brand. There is one thing which most people have forgotten about the Express. When it was launched it was "The paper for the Empire". Thankfully the Empire is long gone. There is something much better in it's place. The Commonwealth. This is a club of all creeds and colours. The point? Things change. Great Britain is a hugely diverse society. That is the secret of our success.

What would the Express be like if I edited it? Well, you've seen the Barnet Eye which is Uber Local. I campaign for justice, value for money for the taxpayer and honesty and transparancy. I'd get rid of the "broad brush" Labour bashing and start getting specific scoops on specific issues where huge amounts of money are being wasted. I'd like to think that any government department that was not performing would dread waking up to see the next Daily Express headline. I'd champion Mp's who are campaigning for sensible policies and give those who, shall we say, could do better a hard time.

I would transform the staff of the paper. I'd keep those people who are doing a good job, but I'd make the staff younger, more ethnically diverse and more streetwise. I'd give people fresh from college, with radical ideas a break. I'd get "guest editors" at the weekend - I'd ask people such as Lynton Kwesi Johnson, Johnny Rotten, Beth Ditto, Amir Khan and Shappi Khorsandi the seat.

Young readers. I think all of the papers fail much younger readers. Every weekend, I'd have a "Young Express" section and I'd give it over entirely to a different school to edit. It would promote interest in the paper, it would give youngsters a chance to experience journalism and would create massive viral interest. I'd ask schools to submit their proposals and I'd give them 2 pages. I'd pay the schools at the going rate, so they'd get a good kickback. I think that this would also breed great brand loyalty.

I'd also have a Daily "readers picture special". People love taking photographs and I'd co-brand it with retailers, so if you won you'd get a £10 voucher from Boots or another interested company. Everyone loves great pictures. In the digital age it's easy.

Sports coverage. I think the Express generally does this well, but I think it should be expanded by 2 pages, to cover world sports better. There are millions of immigrants and people with associations with other countries. For instance, every Irish pub in London will be packed to the rafters this weekend, to watch the GAA final, but there will be virtually no coverage. This is such a missed opportunity to widen and broaden the readership.

Scoops and stories. The world of news has changed. Many stories are broken by bloggers. I'd have a "local news" section and I'd source this entirely from blogs, obviously paying the blogger for the story. It would promote the blog and widen the appeal of the paper.

Money section. I'd be far more tabloid. We get all of these comparison tables etc, but this means nothing to most people. I'd write the stories along these lines "If you have a mortgage of £100,00 per year and you are being paid more than £XXX.XX a month you should could save this much and spend it down the pub by changing to these products". Apart from sex and football, money is the thing people are most interested in, but the press coverage is completely unreadably dull. I'd make it sexy. Much as I despise the woman, I'd make Jordan my "Money Editor", because she understands cash.

Music. Richard Desmond gets music, but his paper doesn't. I'd have a full 2 page music section every day. Page 1 of this would be edited by an 18-25 year old and would be street. Page 2 would be edited by a 40 something and deal with established acts. If you've ever noticed that when papers give away CD's there's always 6 rubbish tracks on them. I'd put 6 good tracks by unknown bands and promote the fact like mad. Papers do this to reduce the cost as the licensing is far cheaper, but many new bands would give their songs for a token payment just for a massive publicity boost.

Gaming. This is really badly covered. Featuring this properly would bring young readers to the paper.

My team. This will shock you. As my deputy I'd poach Brian Coleman from Barnet Council. I think he'd be a great deputy-editor. I'd make him do restaurant reviews. If someone needed shouting at or being horrible to, he's just the man. It would save the taxpayer a fortune. I'd love to be his boss. He'd give a right wing balance to my leftiness. I'm sure having him promoting the Tories at a National paper would help them no end. I'd make Steve Claridge my football editor. He's played at every level (and every club!) so he'd be great. I've already said I'd have Jordan as my money editor. I'd make Johnny Marr (Smiths/Cribbs) my music editor and I'd make Jonathon Ross my celebrity editor (if I could get him for sensible money). I'd put Linton Kwesi Johnson(see picture) in charge of hiring and firing staff. He's a man I'd trust to get me people who have something to say. I wouldn't change it overnight, I'd gradually do it over six months, a section at a time, so as to not alienate the loyal readers who have stuck by the paper.

I asked a couple of mates for some other suggestions. I don't know if I'd employ any of them, but it made me chuckle :-

Andrew Gilligan - Farming Correspondant (ideally qualified)
Mike Freer - The Horoscope (He's Barnets answer to Mystic Meg with his record on predictions)
Arsene Wenger - Spot the Bad Tackle competition
Boris Johnson - He could redisign thecover (like he let TFL get rid of the River Thames from the tube map)
Anne Widdecombe - Agony Aunt
Ken Livingstone - Pub reviewer (He knows all about Newts)
Richard Barnbrooke - Style and Fashion guru (nuff said)
Amy Winehouse - Healthy living editor
Sir Fred Goodwin - Pension planning
---------------------
I don't know about you, but I'd love a mid market paper that campaigns for a better country, is honest, decent and in touch. I believe successfull brands are built from the ground up. Sure this is a pipedream, I've no experience, no history and I'm an opinionated arrogant sod with an over inflated ego,my phone won't ring and I won't get a £250,000 job. I can live with that. Having said that, just think about it for a minute though? Does it sound like a paper you'd buy or am I a complete nutter?

This prejudice makes me sick

I imagine that like everyone else I was shocked and saddened to read about the tragic death of David Cameron's son Ivan. I've got three beautiful children and I can think of nothing worse than what the Camerons are experiencing right now. Having said that, upon reading the media coverage, I found myself shocked and angered by the way in which some of the media have covered it. I am a volunteer helper with a charity involved with the disabled. I've been involved with this since 2001. I started helping as I've been blessed with many gifts in life and so helping people who haven't been quite as lucky seemed a good thing to do. Before I became involved, I had a vague idea about the issues facing people with disabilty. In the 1960/70's when I was at school, terms such as "Spastic" and "Mongy" were thrown across the playground as terms of insult. I knew a boy who had suffered from the Thalidomide drug and he was sometimes referred to as "Thlid". At the time we thought nothing of these derogatory terms, fortunately the climat has changed to make such terms completely unacceptable. People deride political correctness, but in cases such as these I for one think we've matured as a nation.

I have a cousin who is my age who suffers from Downs Syndrome, so I wasn't totally unaware of the issues, but I wasn't involved in her care or the problems she faced. I was too busy playing football with her brother when we were growing up. When I started helping, the first shock I had was that it wasn't a chore, it was a joy most of the time. There are two different strands of disability, physical and mental. Often people assume the two things go hand in hand, but Stephen Hawking shows that nothing could be further from the truth. I've sat, drank beer, played cards and even been to see Status Quo with our group. I love them all. Even the most seemingly mentally impared people can sometimes shock you with their humour and wit. One of our group, who has severe issues and has a vocabulary of maybe 20 words, once had the group in absolute fits of laughter during a church service. A priest had been giving a sermon that had probably started to go on just a little too long. Whilst the rest of us suffered in silence, at a natural pause for breath, with perfect timing, our friend showed he'd learnt a new word and shouted at the top of his voice "Amen". The priest took the hint & wrapped up. Everyone else sniggered.

What may you ask has this got to do with the coverage of the passing of Ivan Cameron? Well should any of our group pass away we get a phonecall to let us know. Should I drop dead tomorrow, the group will get a call and they'll say "Tragic News, Roger has passed away". The same message would go out whoever it was. When I saw the story of Ivan Cameron in the Daily Express, I saw this is headline :-



Ivan was David Cameron's son. He wasn't defined by his disability, he was a valued and cherished member of the Cameron family. It seems to me that the implication of the headline is that it's something less of a tragedy because he was disabled. The story is that he's passed away and he's David Cameron's son. He died because he suddenly became ill. As best I can tell from the coverage it was unexpected. That can happen to us all. I have no objection to a story mentioning his problems in the context of the article, but to define this beautiful child by his disability is disgusting, in the way this headline has.

This is the reason that when I push someone in a wheelchair, who has a higher IQ than me (not that hard), into a shop, the assistant invariably talks to me. It's like when we go for a beer, they say "What does he want" even though the only thing wrong with my friend is he can't walk.

I've become a better, stronger, funnier, happier, more mature person through my charity work. I've also had some great times. I suspect that if you asked David Cameron, he'd say he's become a better person through knowing his beautiful son for 6 years. If David Cameron ever becomes Prime Minister, the whole Country will benefit from his experience of the life and death of Ivan. This was Ivan's gift to the world. Let's treat it as such and not pigeonhole him and demean him by just dismissing him as merely "disabled".

My thoughts and prayers are with the Camerons at this time. I hope they find peace in this difficult time