I read with amazement today that Gordon Brown has chosen to give Des Browne two cabinet positions - Scotland and Defence.
At a time when our armed forces are under-resourced and overstretched, fighting in conflicts in the Middle East that have come to define this Government, it is unbelievable that Gordon Brown should consider the welfare, composition, structure and funding of our service personnel a “half job”.
Continue reading ‘So Britain only deserves half a Defence Secretary?’
Well, after all of the fanfare and headlines, it’s finally happened: Gordon Brown is now Labour Leader with Harriet Harman (you know, the one who was booted out of her old cabinet post for not being able to master her brief) as his faithful deputy sidekick.
The first row over the their “Break with Blair” has already broken out - did Harman say that Labour should apologise for the war in Iraq? Who cares? As a member of the Government, she must adhere to the convention of collective cabinet responsibility (or do a Brown and go abroad if things get heavy).
It has been reported in today’s Guardian that Menzies Campbell and Gordon Brown have held private discussions about senior LibDems joining Brown’s Labour cabinet.
The names in the hat for positions are Nick Clegg and one Vince Cable, Gordon Brown’s old friend from their days as Labour candidates in Scottish politics.
So, the penny drops.
On April 17th I posted an article on this site asking why the LibDems weren’t opposing Labour - now we know. At the Liberal Party spring conference, Campbell spoke about his “5 Tests” for Brown - now we know that was the opening gambit for power-sharing.
I opposed the £10,000 per year MP “communications” allowance. Vince Cable rebelled against his own party and voted for the allowance with the Labour party, grabbing himself more taxpayer’s money for his spin machine.
Vince Cable, like his party leader, has been silent on opposing Labour and been conspicuous in his absence from attacking Brown’s policies - this is because he thinks there’s a job in it for him if he becomes a Labour poodle.
Gordon Brown is the MP who has never voted for a transparent Parliament, never voted on equal gay rights and disappeared whenever there is trouble on the horizon.
In his last budget he created his 100th tax rise, having sold off our gold reserves at a knock down price and pillaged our pension funds. He has tried to squeeze British people and British businesses out of everything they have and yet failed to oversee a proportionate improvement in our public services.
It appears that I am now Twickenham’s only opposition to this Labour Government, which I will continue to do, even if Vince won’t.
We are owed an explanation from Vince Cable on what is plans are:
Are you going to be Twickenham’s LibDem candidate at the next General Election?
Will you accept a place, if asked, in Gordon Brown’s Cabinet? If so, what are your conditions for joining the cabinet?
Does that mean that you support Gordon Brown’s record as Chancellor?
Did you know about this plan when you stood as the Liberal Democrat Candidate in the 2005 General Election? If so, why did you not tell your constituents about this?
Please ask your friends and family to write to Vince and demand an explanation from him on what his and his party’s plans are with Gordon Brown and the Labour Government.
Since it was reported that Salman Rushdie had been awarded a knighthood in the recent honours list, there has been an outcry from some countries, notably Iran and Pakistan, denouncing the honour as proof of “Islamophobia” in the highest echelons of British society.
Effigies of our flag and the Queen have been burnt, and the Pakistani Religious Affairs Minister, Ejaz-ul-Haq, indicated in a debate in their parliament, that this could be a justification for suicide bombing in the UK. Additionally, Iran has reiterated its Fatwa against Rushdie.
Further to my piece on the 15th May, a BBC internal report has concluded that the BBC is “institutionally biased”.
This is confirmation of what many of us have thought for a long time. To ensure there is no confusion here, the report indicated that there was a left-of-centre bias, not only in factual and news programming, but politicisation of dramas, comedies and other entertainment.
This is an important report and an important conclusion. I have always maintained that a service that is funded by the taxpayer, whether it is the BBC, public services or indeed the civil service, must work to serve all of their constituents or stakeholders and not serve their own agendas.
This therefore brings the funding of the BBC back on to the table as a political topic. Like many people in this country, I have a historical affection for the BBC, which was once world-class in its impartial, factual reporting. I am uncertain that this is now the case, and I hope that the report on bias in Middle East reporting that the BBC went to great pains to suppress from the public, will now be published openly.
What do you think?
I would like to hear whether you think there should still be a publically-funded broadcaster in the UK in the C21st.
Recent comments