thecredo

Archive for the ‘the labour party’ Category

Prezza, Shanghai, and the Manchester Coppers

In editorial, news, the labour party on May 28, 2010 at 19:27

John Prescott has been sighted at several of Shanghai’s best restaurants recently, as he continues on his speaking tour of the area.  The self-appointed man of the people stands to make (and/or gain) not a few pounds from the deal.

No doubt when he arrives back home to Hull, he will distribute it among the poor in – say – Manchester, where Greater Manchester Police have ruled that officers in the city will not be allowed any unofficial radios or televisions on which to watch the World Cup.

One GMP officer, speaking to the Telegraph, said “I guess that while it might save the force money it will also remove the temptation for officers to watch or listen to bits of games during quiter moments on shift.”

But, where are those quiet moments? We thought they only spent about 13% of their time out fighting crime because of the vast mountain of paperwork they face every day, not waiting around for baddies.

Gripping stuff, don’t you think?

Well, that’s how we see it.

(h/t Tim Walker for Prezza tip-off)

Why it’s important that the car exchange was aired

In editorial, Gordon Brown, the labour party on April 28, 2010 at 21:01

The story has well made the rounds by now. As have the images of Gordon Brown with his head in his hands, looking completely gutted in front of Jeremy Vine.  But, a question has been raised about the ethics of airing the exchange between Brown and a member of his staff following the encounter with Mrs. Duffy.

Well, let’s put this out front right away. The comments were made by a public servant, on a campaign stop funded by the British taxpayer, while sitting in a Jaguar paid for by the electorate.  Of course it’s ethical.

The media exists to provide the citizenry with the information they need to make informed decisions and live freely in a democratic society.

If the Prime Minister thinks they’re bigots, they have the right to know.  Besides, if he was stupid enough to forget he was wearing a live mic, it’s his own damn fault.  Period.

That said, we can’t help but feel somewhat sorry for him.  He’s losing spectacularly.  Lavishly.  He knows that.  His own party is now questioning his position as leader.  The pressure he is under must be immense and while he doesn’t deserve to be Prime Minister, he does at least deserve a certain amount of sympathy.

We’d like to point out that Mr. Vine could very easily have amplified the outcome of the gaffe live on the air.  He didn’t.  That is a credit to him as a broadcaster.  We’ve always thought Jeremy to be a gentleman, and today he really showed his true colours.  Good job, Jeremy.

However, getting back to what we said earlier; it was important that the exchange was aired, having been recorded – accidentally or not.

If the Prime Minister actually believes what he said – and there can be no doubt that he does – then the public needs to know.  It reveals some very important things about his views on immigration.

In other words, throw wide the doors of Great Britain.  To offer up constraints in the manner that Mrs. Duffy would like would be to admit a bigoted, narrow view of what a multi-cultural society ought to look like.

The sage academy of the Cabinet know what it should look like. Nobody else.

Just look at this – from October 2009 (thank you, Telegraph):

The huge increases in migrants over the last decade were partly due to a politically motivated attempt by ministers to radically change the country and “rub the Right’s nose in diversity”, according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.

He said Labour’s relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to “open up the UK to mass migration” but that ministers were nervous and reluctant to discuss such a move publicly for fear it would alienate its “core working class vote”.

Hmmm.

So, if you’re not on board with Labour’s immigration policies, you’re a bigot – and you deserve to have your nose rubbed in it.  Or you’re a working class drone that doesn’t have the right to an opinion.  Or if you do have an opinion, you have a right to keep quiet and let the Dear Leader do What He Knows Is Right For Britain.

In the end, BigotGate is not all that remarkable, as all it does is serve to exemplify all that is wrong with the Labour endeavour, and more specifically all that is wrong with Gordon Brown.

What’s the problem in Pontefract?

In Campaigners of note, the conservatives, the labour party on April 25, 2010 at 09:21

Nick Pickles says we don’t know the whole story of the A&E ward, for one thing.

We’ve seen our local MP Yvette Cooper in plenty of photo opportunities at the hospital, but we can’t go on with more of her empty rhetoric.

I have been contacted by several local NHS staff who have raised concerns the public are not being given the full picture and that the A&E services are set to be downgraded soon after the election.

The new hospital does not have any acute care beds, proper access for ambulances or a morgue. Ambulance crews are already under instructions that Pontefract does not accept trauma patients, while nobody seems to know how many beds the new site will have – I have been told it could be as low as 30.

To try and get to the bottom of this, I have also submitted several freedom of information requests to investigate the figures quoted by Yvette claiming 9 out of ten patients will continue to be treated at the hospital.

Staff have tipped me off that this figure has been achieved by not including patients arriving by ambulance and including some out patient treatments.

I find it astonishing that NHS staff have spoken so openly to me about their real concerns that the current A&E provision will be downgraded as soon as the election is out of the way.

On the eve of a general election people in Pontefract deserve answers from their Labour MPs and not just empty rhetoric.

I have previously contacted the NHS trust demanding answers to my concerns over parking charges at the hospital – after more than two weeks, I have still not had a reply.

Nick Pickles is the Conservative PPC for Pontefract, Normanton and Castleford.

Spit or swallow: The Labour government begins the long goodbye

In editorial, Gordon Brown, the labour party on April 25, 2010 at 08:51

The Sunday Telegraph has reported that the Labour government may have started a long goodbye, following the revelation of persistent in-fighting among senior party leaders.

“Lord Mandelson ordered Harriet Harman, the party’s deputy leader, to “shut up” and told her he did not want to hear from her again, in a dispute over election strategy,” report Patrick Hennessy and Melissa Kite.

Disagreements, some quite bitter, range from campaign strategy to fresh leadership should the Labour party fail to win a majority.

The real story here though is that senior party strategists appear to be preparing to bring yet another unelected Prime Minister to power, this time in the person of David Miliband.  A party that may now – twice in a row – present the country with an unelected PM, ought not to be considering strategy, but withdrawal.

…the major role [in post-debate TV interviews] was played by Mr Miliband – with Lord Mandelson, who had taken the main “spin” role the previous week, absent.

A Labour insider said: “The plan was clearly to promote David [Miliband] and give him exposure with the future in mind. The official reason – that ministers were all being given a turn to mix it up – is obviously rubbish.

Harriet Harman, who is leading the campaign strategy, has widely circulated details of her humiliation at the hands of Lord Mandelson.  Last week, she appeared to have been shifted to the back seat following a row over strategy in which Mandelson told her to “shut up”.

The picture this morning is of a party desperately fighting for its life, in complete disarray with factions fighting internal battles, rather than presenting an image of unity and Harmany (yes, we know). Strategically speaking, the Labour rows could not possibly have come at a more difficult time for the party.

This is definitely not the time to be rethinking campaign strategy, with just two weeks to go before the election.

The fact that one of the factions already has its own name and identity – the “ultras” – only serves to solidify the notion that the Labour party is gasping for breath, and quickly sinking into oblivion.

…the “ultras” faction backs Mr Miliband – and hopes that key roles in a power-sharing government would be taken by Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, and Lord Mandelson, who could achieve his long-cherished ambition of being foreign secretary.

Sources close to the Miliband camp say they would have “no problem” in offering the post of Chancellor to Vince Cable, the Lib Dem Treasury spokesman, with Mr Clegg also given a senior Cabinet job.

May 6 leaves the Labour voter with just two choices: spit or swallow.  One way or another, Labour will be expelled.

Tories promise crackdown on police abuse of civil liberties

In Chris Grayling, David Cameron, Gordon Brown, the conservatives, the labour party on April 15, 2010 at 13:49

Posted via iPhone so don’t write me to bitch about the formatting. 😉

Massive increase in police use of terrorism stop and search

Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:42:00 GMT

Chris Grayling reacts to new Home Office figures revealing a huge increase in the number of people being stopped and searched by the police as potential terrorists.

Many people, particularly amateur photographers, have said that the Government has allowed the police to misuse counter-terror powers to target innocent tourists and bystanders.

“Gordon Brown and Labour have trampled our civil liberties for far too long”, said Grayling.

“Whether they’re trying to impose ID cards, or allowing hundreds of thousands of innocent people to be stopped and searched under Terrorism powers, they always seem to think the state knows best”.

Figures show:

The number of people stopped and searched increased by 66 per cent between 2007/8 and 2008/9, the most recent year for which figures have been released.
210,000 people were stopped and searched in 2008/9 under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000.
Yet only nine people were arrested for terrorism offences. That is 0.004 per cent of those who were stopped and searched under Section 44.
There has been a huge increase in the use of the powers in the last few years. In 2006/7, the year after the 7/7 bombings, only 42,800 people were stopped and searched.
“We can’t go on like this”, added Grayling. “Conservatives will end the abuse of stop and search powers as part of a full review of all Labour’s counter-terrorism laws”.

Francis Maude writes Sir Gus: Election meetings should not be permitted on NHS premises

In Gordon Brown, the labour party on April 12, 2010 at 20:33

This is the full text of Francis Maude’s letter to Sir Gus regarding Labour’s flagrant abuse of an NHS Hospital as the launching pad for their manifesto.

Dear Sir Gus,

I am writing to complain about a flagrant breach of General Election guidance by the Labour Party over their cynical use of a hospital to launch their manifesto.

You will be aware that Labour today launched their manifesto at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham.  As part of this launch, Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman both gave keynote speeches in a new wing of the hospital, decorated with Labour Party branding, and both made political references to it, saying it ‘embodies the timeless ideal of compassion in action’.

This completely contravenes the Cabinet Office’s General Election guidance which prohibits election meetings from taking place on NHS premises:

‘Election meetings should not be permitted on NHS premises’ (General Election     Guidance 2010, Cabinet Office; emphasis their own)

This breach of the rules is completely unacceptable and I ask you to investigate how this was allowed to happen.  In particular, I would be grateful if you could provide answers to the following questions:

·         What communications took place between the Labour Party and the NHS Trust regarding the use of the hospital?

·         Was the Department of Health aware that the hospital was to be used in this way?

What involvement did Sir Albert Bore, the Chairman of the NHS Trust and leader of the Labour group in Birmingham, play in organising this event?

Were any services at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital disrupted by the presence of hundreds of party activists, journalists and politicians at the Labour Party’s event?

Labour claim that this guidance has not been breached as the new wing is a PFI project, not an opened hospital and is therefore owned by private firm.  However, Gordon Brown described it as a ‘new acute NHS hospital that will be open within weeks’ in his speech.  He is therefore clearly using the fact that it is an NHS hospital for electoral gain, contrary to your guidance.  Considering the imminence of the General Election, I would also be grateful if you could deal with this request as quickly as possible.

Yours sincerely,

Francis Maude

A Manifesto of Broken Promises

In the labour party on April 12, 2010 at 20:29

Trust us.  This blog isn’t an Iain Dale love-in.  We don’t even particularly like the guy.  He’s just far too self-important to read more than once a day.  But damn-it, if he ain’t right a lot.

Have a look over here at his latest analysis of Labour’s record on their 2005 manifesto.  It’s quite revealing:

23) p. 84: ‘We will put [the EU Constitution] to the British people in a referendum . . .’

Following the Netherlands’ rejection of the EU constitution and its subsequent collapse it was replaced by the Lisbon Treaty. Despite being ‘substantially equivalent’ to the original Constitution, Labour did not keep its referendum promise. Valery Giscard, former Minister of Economy and Finance in France, admitted Lisbon is the ‘same letter in a new envelope’, and that ‘all the earlier proposals will be in the new text but will be hidden and disguised in some way.’

And, on defense:

24) p. 88: ‘. . . when [UK forces] are committed they will have the investment, strategy, training they need.’

Strategy:
• Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup (head of the armed forces) identifies shortcomings of strategy: defence chiefs ‘simply didn’t have enough time’ to source everything they wanted and more time to prepare would have made a ‘significant difference’.
• Lt Gen Frederick Viggers criticises the lack of strategic direction: ‘It was rather like going to the theatre and seeing one sort of play and realising you were watching a tragedy as the curtains came back.’
• ‘We’ve got huge experience in this country – we’re not using it and we’re putting amateurs into really important positions and people are getting killed as a result of some of these decisions.’

Equipment:
• Sir Kevin Tebbit (former permanent secretary to the Ministry of Defence) condemns defence expenditure cuts: claimed Gordon Brown ‘guillotined’ £1bn from defence spending in December 2003, while efforts to rebuild Iraq were ongoing, which created the need for ‘very major savings’.
• Major General Graham Binns identified a ‘major gap’ in attack helicopters, but that US equipment was in contrast ‘magnificent’.

There are just a couple of example, from Iain.  We urge you to read the rest of it, over on his blog.

Labour actually HAVE screwed the pooch

In Gordon Brown, the labour party, wth on April 11, 2010 at 22:01

So much for safeguarding our personal data, eh Gord?

This story, from all sorts of sources, obviously, just takes the baked pudding.  Iain Dale has some good comment on it, over here, as well.

It is simply not tenable to say, as Labour do, that these leaflets aren’t targeted. Only a quarter of a million have been sent out, so some sort of targeting must have happened. If they didn’t get the data from inappropriate sources, then they must have used Mosaic or Experian to target likely current or future cancer sufferers.

Either way, it’s a disgusting way to campaign.

It’s worth noting that if the Tories, or Lib-Dems had done this, we would be saying the same thing.  “Definitely not on, old boy.”

Brown ignores public, on SkyNews

In editorial, Gordon Brown, the labour party, wth on April 7, 2010 at 18:12

Face it, he did say Labour would listen to the public.  He did ignore a very reasonable question from a member of the public.

But, two points to keep in mind:

  1. He was in a very dangerous situation, from a PR perspective.  Questions in that context aren’t controlled, and there is no recourse to get the guy to shutup if he doesn’t like the answer he gets.  That can quickly escalate into a shouting match.  Bad idea to respond on the spot, all round.
  2. While we think Labour has made a dog’s breakfast of the country – and really do believe Dave will Save – we would have told Mr. Brown he took the best route out he could, under the circumstances, and given his hideous manner with the electorate.

Things he could have done differently?  Well, that’s an easy one.  Wipe that stupid effing smirk off his face!

Or, get the guy’s details and stand him up in front of a crowd.  Tell him his children will be taken care of – later.  That way they control the story, and not the media – and especially not the bloggers, who are going to play a crucial role in this election.  That’s a good thing, by the way.

And now, we shall sit back and watch the Conservatives, the MSM and the bloggers bitch slap him until it blows over.

Boris’ guide to the Election – Pt. I

In Boris Johnson, Gordon Brown, Nick Clegg, the labour party, the lib-dems, wth on April 7, 2010 at 11:49

We didn’t write this, these guys did. And a good job at that.  Click here for the full verision, over on CyberBoris (cheap pics from thecredo)

Boris on Nick Clegg, and the Lib-Dems

“With his purple ties, his neat grey suits and his air of youthful earnestness, he’s like some cut-price edition of David Cameron hastily knocked off by a Shanghai sweatshop to satisfy unexpected market demand.”

“The Lib Dems are not just empty.  They are a void, within a vacuum, surounded by a vast inanition.”

Boris on Gordon Brown

“Gordon Brown has lots of things going against him.  He’s a nail biting, gloomadon popping, anxious, high taxing, high spending, bossing, nannying, interfering kind of Scot.”

With special thanks to CyberBoris, for the quotes.