How to get on in life

As if we needed reminding that in this world it's not what you know but who, it transpires that Jacqui Smith is to front an investigation on BBC 5live into the porn industry

It's not enough that she's paid handsomely as a 'consultant' (i.e. back door to Parliament) for minimal work, on a gold-plated minister's pension for two years of ineptitude, and is actually being considered for appointment to the BBC Trust but she gets a stint in the media to present on an issue that led to her own downfall

Now it's clear where the production company are coming from, she was hit by a porn scandal and she's known so there's a good angle here, much like the 'Anne Widdecombe meets people she dislikes' documentary, but she is no more an expert on the issue than you or I, and considering her frankly appalling stint as one of the chief lawmakers of the country it seems rather a kick in the teeth that she is handed cushy jobs for simply having a public presence

She is, in short, a metaphor for what is wrong with our political system - she comes through the party system, is quickly promoted because she's a woman, put into a supposedly vitally important and prestigious role under an unelected and unwanted Prime Minister without any sort of qualification or experience for the job because essentially, there's no other candidates left, then f**ks up pretty much every decision and is forced to resign after less than two years due to a combination of ineptitude and revelations about fraudulent claims. She is then one of the relatively few Labour MPs to booted out of her constituency (I believe the appropriate term would be 'flogged') and is she punished for all this...

...no, she is given not only an MPs wonderful pension, but a ministerial one - now I do not mind MPs and ministers receiving pensions (although I'd rather they reflect the reality of the modern workplace) for their public service, but when a person has been parachuted into the role, with no accountability, and is generally regarded to have failed, is it right that they are rewarded for their failure?

Put simply there is no reason not to take these jobs, if the party offers you an important job in the government why not just take it? It's win-win as the worst that can happen is the media criticise you and you might lose your seat, for which you will be paid, there's no punishment, just get up there and do whatever you want

Then, to rub it in to us plebs who struggle to make ends meet, these people are handed consultancy work for large corporations, being effectively paid our yearly salaries in minutes - they have no skill, no experience, just an 'in' to the major parties, while we are told to work hard and be rewarded for our efforts in a 'meritocratic' system, if you get in to the political game all you have to do is pat the right backs and you'll find yourself right at the top being handed jobs you would otherwise never be considered for

sigh...rant over

Crack the champagne!

It's a minor victory now, but I've waited for this day for nearly two years so I still feel a lot of pleasure in looking at the BBC front page: Home Secretary Smith to stand down

The fascist ignoramus is going!! Of course, her replacement will still be a Brown lackey who is probably even less qualified, but she has been so bad, so evil, so idiotic, so unqualified that I really don't care - the new Home Sec could be Stalin for all I care, they will have their hands tied for the next eleven months

Who will it be? It seems best-mate Balls is going to Number 11, and personally I think the only people capable are Straw and Johnson, and I doubt Straw would take the job again, so maybe it'll be a way to placate the Johnson fan club, these are of course just my unfounded ideas - it'll probably be a squeaky clean backbencher

But she's gone, no matter that the future is hardly bright, it's like when you just escape a deadly situation and you don't care that you're probably still in another, you're still relieved

I'll leave with this comment from the Harperson to demonstrate the complete load of bollocks politics really is: "I think she is an outstanding home secretary."

I know who else is 'least wanted'

In a rather strange, totalitarian move that I'm sure is to calm the people that they are protected from really dangerous octogenarians like Fred Phelps, the government has published a list of 'undesirables'

Now, if you've read any of my blogs I don't need to tell you my views on banning people for what they say, it's basically thought-crime

And for once I agree with the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) - they say people should be allowed free speech and should only be detained for committing an actual crime - very true, but hang on

Remember Geert? That same freedom loving council felt that he was an 'open and relentless preacher of hate' and supported his ban, as did Lord Ahmed

They seem to have changed their tune now that it is Muslim preachers of hate in the government's sights - what exactly is the difference? I am happy to let both in, and was really looking forward to the Phelps getting their heads kicked in when they came over (just the adults)

I don't really need to say how hypocritical their stance is

Of course calling a bunch of hateful men with wacky names a threat always goes down well with Sun readers, not so much white Dutchmen - so well done to the Government for being consistently fascist there

Also - Jackboots says it 'should be a privilege' to come to Britain

Hang on...don't all EU citizens have a 'right' to come here? So we have a government who on one hand espouse greater integration with 26 other countries, and on the other 'protect' those national borders from people they don't like

So which is it? You can't support a superstate like the EU and sign treaties on the sly, and then ramp up national security against our fellow EU citizens, at least not from an ideological point of view (bear in mind we aren't talking convicted criminals here)

A sorry state of affairs, and I wonder if the "Law and Order" Tories will decrease these thoroughly totalitarian laws

One should of course remember that these policies against 'hate speech', while not wildly popular with average citizens, are used in pretty much every western country and are not exceptional to us, they are politically acceptable

Thanks to this government, Britain has lost it's long held reputation as a land of freedom - a land where communists, fascists, liberals and traitors used to be able to come and write and speak freely when they could not back in their own homeland...I wonder if Oswald Mosley would be allowed to speak now like he did seventy years ago

Of course, there is one country that stands against it...yup, the US - dammit, I want Bush back

I'm meltingggggg......

Is it just me or are actually seeing Labour crumble before our very eyes?

I know we've been saying things like 'death knell' every week but the past week has seen some pretty big shifts

Like the mooted U-turn on the totalitarian database and the expenses farce, which I think is perfectly described by Nick Robinson:

Remember that first of all, he said that this wasn't a matter for him. Then he said that it was a matter for an enquiry, after the next election. Next, he said that the enquiry should be quicker, before going on to pre-empt it with a proposal for a daily attendance allowance which was broadcast on YouTube and therefore not open to questioning either by MPs or by the media.

Finally, last night, he effectively abandoned that idea in a letter carefully released after a news conference in Islamabad and once he was protected from questioning on a flight to Warsaw.

That's about four U-turns and no solution on the horizon - our 'PM' has gone from being too slow, to being too rash, to dropping the issue

Now that's good government - 'I'll say lots, then drop it' would at least be a reasonable political manoeuvre

Unfortunately Gordon is not blessed with the political grace that his predecessor had, he initially cocked up the response and was foolish for thinking he can get away with dropping the issue

There is a very clear image in my head now, of a battered old juggernaut who has somehow found himself on a cliff top road, following the curves and bends on the cliff, with a sheer drop of 100 metres at the side of the road

Old Gordon careers forward, putting the truck in the wrong gear, turning too late and smashing his back end through the barrier, but he chugs along, swaying wildly as he constantly slides on and off the edge of the cliff, how he has got this far no one knows

It would be quite impressive to watch really, if we were watching on the telly, rather than being in the back of said trailer

I mean what else is there, Gordon? The Home Office look set to backtrack on the database, even ID cards seem to be under increasing pressure (they may be citing costs, but as if it makes a difference, it's a climb-down) and Eco-towns are doomed

Seriously I can't think of any other legislation, so why exactly are we prepared to put up with this for another year? While I welcome a decrease in legislation numbers that had rocketed under Labour, we're talking big, useful things here - most of those 3,000+ laws were just EU fodder - but now there are no big plans, just Gordon trying to stay in power and Straw and Harman's pet projects - that's surely not right

I worry that all this collapse will do is justify Jacqui Smith's removal, not the government's

All this is an indication of how much we are abused by the parties - no policies, no ideas - just power, that Labour want to keep hold of and the Tories are happy to take by default

I could also go on about how the situation is what makes these climbdowns so powerful - you can't be seen to be weak so you have to stick to a failed policy until it is beaten to a bloody pulp, and that's no good for anyone

Politics really is broken

(P.S. Why exactly is Gordon off on another world tour, a week after his Easter holidays?)

Shut up

Seriously, woman - put a sock in it

It is not because you are a woman, it is because you're a charlatan who can't even admit you've done wrong

You want some equality? How about we kick you in the nuts

*No doubt that jab at rich Tories with property (despite the wealthiest MP being a Labour minister) has come from on high, just like at the Crewe and Nantwich by-election

I really am sick of this - stop f***ing voting for these people

Sanctimonious tripe

I was feeling lazy today, Jacqui Smith's defence riled me somewhat, but it's old news - and then I found this little piece of rot from Alice Miles in the Times

She is defending MPs - of course she derides having to pay for the occasional miscreant and bemoans the system - but most are good, she claims, and she bleats on about how the system is wrong and how we need to put this behind us, all fine

But this masks her defence of MPs and ministers -

Political life is cruel to families. Imagine the life of a minister working 18-hour days in London (and often abroad), with a constituency in a far-flung corner of the country and a young family caught in the middle. Imagine the extra childcare costs they must pay when foreign summits demand a spouse at their side: the £8-£10 hourly rate for a nanny, plus up to £5 an hour in tax and insurance - and all for the privilege of not seeing your child all weekend.

Notice how she has referred to ministers, not MPs - very few MPs go to international conventions with their better halves, the senior ministers do, those who are paid more than double your typical MP and allowed first class travel

True it does split up families, and I have never begrudged those living in the far-flung corners of Britain their home comforts, but welcome to real life - many workers have to do ridiculous commutes, and spend weeks away from their families - they do not get such rewards, nor is their worklife so good, or influential

Remember that these are the 650 most powerful people in the country (in theory) - and that their work consists mostly of speaking and listening, there are no managers, overheads or targets chasing them around, just a 'review' after five years - the hours are flexible, and the bar cheap - this is not a bad price to pay for being away from home 3 or 4 days a week, especially considering the almost 20-week period where you can work from your constituency

This is complete fudge from Ms Miles - talking about childcare for when the parents are away on state business - this really only refers to a handful of members, and I repeat - those who are on far more than an MP's salary. Hell, have a childcare allowance - I don't mind

She then defends the renting out of London property for those in grace-and-favour homes, once again she distorts the facts - there is nothing wrong with renting out a property, what is wrong is claiming expenses on the other

As a normal citizen you should be expected to run one home, we all need a home, right? A second one is required to work in two places, so you have an allowance for it - if you are given this second home then you should not be claiming for a third - I don't care if Darling lets out his London flat, but he has no right to claim expenses for his Edinburgh home while he has a freebie provided

Miles shows her true colours when she continues:

It is all very well for David Cameron to promise to remove the second-home allowance from any of his ministers with grace-and-favour properties...and many of his senior colleagues can afford to keep two homes. Labour ministers, on the whole, are not as wealthy.

That old 'Tory elite' chestnut - unfortunately these days Labour is full of wealthy members, many of whom are second generation politicians, Harriet Harman for one, and as I pointed out yesterday - Geoff Robinson. The old argument that Labour MPs are all working class heroes no longer washes, (particularly when you compare Blair and Brown with both Thatcher and Major) there probably are proportionately more of the 'elites' in the Tory ranks, but unfortunately it is Cameron's image that has allowed Labour to claim they are the sole offenders - you will find a pretty similar picture in both these days (sickening isn't it?)

Then we get an impassioned plea for Sarah Brown - who apparently can't afford the £9,000 top she wore to the G20, and had to rent it

'She doesn't have a job so her husband can lead the world' - call me stupid but doesn't her hubby earn over £180k a year? Considering that's in the top 1% of earners and many housewives can live comfortably on much less, I don't think there's a huge issue here - maybe she can't burn nine grand on one top, but believe me she can spend a lot more than 99% of the wives in this country

I think the only point that comes across from Alice's sympathy is that Gordon is tight-fisted, or that she's a feminist and Sarah must not be allowed to live off her husband

This article in a well respected newspaper enrages me - it smacks of arrogance, of the sort that I've seen in several broadsheets recently - I think these writers are getting a little out of touch with reality

She brands the expenses as minor, and says that Jacqui Smith has far too an important job to do - unfortunately I disagree, ignoring the fact that Smith has never once shown any sort of use as Home Secretary, or evidence of being qualified for the role, she has deliberately abused the system - not a few bathplugs (which I'm willing to bet was on a plumber's receipt), but household furniture and decor, and a cable TV package - the porn was a mistake and is not the main issue here. What people like Miles don't seem to get is that it is not the porn that enrages us, it is that she has claimed her family house as an expense - it is not appropriate professional conduct, and the people will not stand for it - I have said it time and again, the fact was she was making personal benefit off expenses - you cannot deny that

Smith and Miles' defences are both a joke hidden behind a pathetic facade of 'the system'