As the BBC says "A penetrating insight into a fascinating period of government, or the latest bit of spin from a Blairite propagandist trying to rewrite history?"
I'd go for the latter.
I haven't read the book yet, but apparently it contains no mention of the feuding, rows, bitterness and awful relationship between Brown and Blair as it would be damaging to the Labour government. Well obviously, we cant have the truth as we'd see the government for what it really is behind the carefully crafted facade of spin and lies
Missing out the relationship between Brown and Blair in his diaries is like missing out the bit about the boat sinking in the film "Titanic"
Monday 9 July 2007
Saturday 7 July 2007
Gordon's New Orleans
Terrible floods. Millions and millions of pounds of property damaged. People appealing on TV for help and assistance. A media that just doesn't care, the damage is far, far away and after all these people are poor. Who cares?
An arrogant and remote executive far away in the capital that doesn't even notice nor care. After all it's nearly time for holidays. Anyway there's few votes in it. No one cares?
New Orleans battered by Hurricane Katrina and that terrible flooding in August 2005?
No. Hull, July 2007 And a government that just doesn't give a toss.
An arrogant and remote executive far away in the capital that doesn't even notice nor care. After all it's nearly time for holidays. Anyway there's few votes in it. No one cares?
New Orleans battered by Hurricane Katrina and that terrible flooding in August 2005?
No. Hull, July 2007 And a government that just doesn't give a toss.
Aha, the first bit of Brown sleaze. The first of many I'm sure.
Apparently just before seizing No.10 in the Brown coup, he signed over his £700,000 pied-a-terre in London to Mrs. Brown. See the article in the Torygraph
Why would he do such a thing?
I have no problem with him owning a 700K flat, nor signing it over to his wife. It's his private business. But....
Apparently Sarah Brown has released equity in the flat with a mortgage, something many people do. However generally people do this either to raise cheaper finance as they intend to buy another property, or they intend to rent it out and repay the new mortgage from rental income.
If she rents out the property then she will surely take advantage of her personal tax allowance and the tax thresholds in order to reduce her tax bill as the rental income will be declared as personal income. Sarah apparently has no source of income, so she can use her full personal allowance and the banding up to 40%.
If the income was in Mr. Browns name, given we taxpayers are generous enough to pay him £180K, he would pay 40% of every pound of rental income in tax to his government.
So he screws us for every penny, yet potentially saves himself a few quid in tax through signing his flat to his wife. Let's see if gets rented out.....
Apparently just before seizing No.10 in the Brown coup, he signed over his £700,000 pied-a-terre in London to Mrs. Brown. See the article in the Torygraph
Why would he do such a thing?
I have no problem with him owning a 700K flat, nor signing it over to his wife. It's his private business. But....
Apparently Sarah Brown has released equity in the flat with a mortgage, something many people do. However generally people do this either to raise cheaper finance as they intend to buy another property, or they intend to rent it out and repay the new mortgage from rental income.
If she rents out the property then she will surely take advantage of her personal tax allowance and the tax thresholds in order to reduce her tax bill as the rental income will be declared as personal income. Sarah apparently has no source of income, so she can use her full personal allowance and the banding up to 40%.
If the income was in Mr. Browns name, given we taxpayers are generous enough to pay him £180K, he would pay 40% of every pound of rental income in tax to his government.
So he screws us for every penny, yet potentially saves himself a few quid in tax through signing his flat to his wife. Let's see if gets rented out.....
Wednesday 4 July 2007
Let's look at "Clunking Fist" Brown's announcement to parliament yesterday:
Ignoring Gordon's role in the Blair government, for which he will be held accountable, I have one major problem with this.
I've studied the 2005 Labour Manifesto, Britain Forward Not Back and I can't see a single mention of any of these points. Perhaps it's my old eyes deceiving me and some Labour troll can point out where exactly the New Labour government campaigned on these points.
Other than Lords Reform, exactly what democratic mandate does Gordon Brown and New New Labour have for any of this?
Er, None.
- Handing to Parliament the power of the executive to declare war
- Handing to Parliament the power to request the dissolution and recall of Parliament
- Removing the power of the executive to ratify international treaties without decision by Parliament
- Removing the executive's power to make key public appointments without effective scrutiny
- Removing the power to restrict Parliamentary oversight of the intelligence services
- Removing the PM's power to choose bishops
- Reducing executive power in the appointment of judges (PA Story January 13th 2006: The Chancellor will also signal his intention to push through significant constitutional change if he succeeds Tony Blair as Prime Minister as expected. He will confirm his readiness to give up the PM's prerogative to declare war and peace without the approval of Parliament, and suggest that he may also be willing to give up the power to appoint judges and bishops)
- Removing the executive's power to direct prosecutors in individual criminal cases
- Reducing the executive's power over the civil service itself
- Reducing the executive's powers to determine the rules governing entitlement to passports
- Removing the executive's powers to determine the rules governing the granting of pardons
- Citizens may have the ability to trigger legislation by petition
- Reducing the advance sight government departments have of the release of statistical information from as much as five days currently to 24 hours.
- The possible use of citizens juries
- A National Security Council would be created within government
- There will be a statement before the summer recess on reform of the House of Lords (PA Story January 13th 2006: And he will make clear his determination to complete the reform of the House of Lords during a fourth Labour term)
- He will publish a new Ministerial Code, with a new independent adviser whom the PM can ask to scrutinise ministerial conduct including conflicts of interest
- There will be a public debate on the case for a Bill of Rights or a written constitution
Ignoring Gordon's role in the Blair government, for which he will be held accountable, I have one major problem with this.
I've studied the 2005 Labour Manifesto, Britain Forward Not Back and I can't see a single mention of any of these points. Perhaps it's my old eyes deceiving me and some Labour troll can point out where exactly the New Labour government campaigned on these points.
Other than Lords Reform, exactly what democratic mandate does Gordon Brown and New New Labour have for any of this?
Er, None.
Thursday 28 June 2007
A change for the worse
A little tear formed in the corner of my eye, a lump in my throat and a missed breath. as Tony was applauded out of parliament by 651 MPs, of which about 640 hate him and 651 were glad to see him go. Except perhaps Tessa Jowell.
Forgive me for pointing out that this was a show of utter and abject hypocrisy. Blair has not left because he had a better offer from his mate in the White House, or because he needs to complete his memoirs (he'll ghost them), or even because of his dickey heart. It's because he's been pushed out at knife point by Brown and his cronies.
Brown's demands for Blair to go had become shriller and more threatening by the moment, the Iraq war had caused febrile Labour MPs to survey their small majorities, do the maths on their fat-cat MP salaries, expenses and gold plated (with diamond accents) pensions versus what they will get if they were booted out of parliament so they reached for the emergency lever marked panic.
Compound that with Israels war with the Islamists of Hezbollah in Lebanon, where the Labour party went into collective meltdown over Blair's alignment with Bush and his refusal to demand a ceasefire, or criticise Israel. Tom Baldwin, the ludicrous Sion Simon et al, Tom having earlier discussed tactics and approval with Gordon (..sorry delivered a toy for Gordon's new son) staged a "coup" through synchronised resignation from their paperclip and photocopying junior ministerial jobs.
But it was enough and Blair knew the game was up. It was either going to end smoothly as it did on the 27th June, or very bloodily with about 20 knives sticking out of his back and a blood spattered Gordon grinning in the background. Tony chose the option without the blood. Wouldn't look good in the memoirs, or on the US lecture circuit. Better to go with a pretence of choosing.
Brown is now PM and the Brown terror has begun.
This is the new improved Gordon, whiter than white, with a new hairstyle and teeth. He's inclusive, cuddly, likes his colleagues, open and friendly, and even smiles, but only when the cameras are looking. He has become the change.
We'll see...
Forgive me for pointing out that this was a show of utter and abject hypocrisy. Blair has not left because he had a better offer from his mate in the White House, or because he needs to complete his memoirs (he'll ghost them), or even because of his dickey heart. It's because he's been pushed out at knife point by Brown and his cronies.
Brown's demands for Blair to go had become shriller and more threatening by the moment, the Iraq war had caused febrile Labour MPs to survey their small majorities, do the maths on their fat-cat MP salaries, expenses and gold plated (with diamond accents) pensions versus what they will get if they were booted out of parliament so they reached for the emergency lever marked panic.
Compound that with Israels war with the Islamists of Hezbollah in Lebanon, where the Labour party went into collective meltdown over Blair's alignment with Bush and his refusal to demand a ceasefire, or criticise Israel. Tom Baldwin, the ludicrous Sion Simon et al, Tom having earlier discussed tactics and approval with Gordon (..sorry delivered a toy for Gordon's new son) staged a "coup" through synchronised resignation from their paperclip and photocopying junior ministerial jobs.
But it was enough and Blair knew the game was up. It was either going to end smoothly as it did on the 27th June, or very bloodily with about 20 knives sticking out of his back and a blood spattered Gordon grinning in the background. Tony chose the option without the blood. Wouldn't look good in the memoirs, or on the US lecture circuit. Better to go with a pretence of choosing.
Brown is now PM and the Brown terror has begun.
This is the new improved Gordon, whiter than white, with a new hairstyle and teeth. He's inclusive, cuddly, likes his colleagues, open and friendly, and even smiles, but only when the cameras are looking. He has become the change.
We'll see...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
