The Trouble With Role Models

Lord Taylor, the dodgy peer, is off to chokey for fiddling his expenses and good riddance to him and to all the other crooked politicians who are either in chokey or should be. I have no sympathy whatsoever for any of them, let them rot.

Two things particularly hit me about Taylor. The first being his plea that he fiddled his expenses because he didn't get a salary and that other peers told him to do it. What a clown! There are unemployed people living on a pittance, without the extremely generous alowances and expenses available to peers which are way beyond their out of pocket expenses, and the overwhelming majority of unemployed people don't resort to fiddling.

The second thing that struck me was that his defence barrister pleaded leniency, and no prison sentence, as Taylor was a role model for young black people. Oh really? I'll bet most young black kids, like most other kids, have never heard of him. And, if you assume that he was a role model for black kids, isn't that all the more reason to punish him, and punish him harshly for so badly letting them down?

I think that the old role model defence is trundled out by people who don't really know what's what. It is used, in this case as a cheap shot for leniency, or more usually to whip anybody who is rich and famous who slightly misbehaves, such as footballers and pop stars. It's codswallop. Whining about role models is a side effect of the modern obsession with fame and stardom.

What those who whine about role models are saying is that famous peoples' behaviour will be copied by kids . Or to put it another way they are saying that young people are incapable of thinking for themselves and merely impersonate the rich and famous. I don't believe that, I think most young people are more intelligent than that and can differentiate between right and wrong.

What concerns me much more than the behaviour of the rich and famous is the impact of real people on young people. The bad fathers, uncles, teachers, neighbours and others who young people meet on a daily basis. Now they really are role models and my money is on the worst of them being the first to jump to accusing poor famous 'role models' for their own inadequacies and kids' poor behaviour.

Sound of Music Flashmob-Antwerp Station

Career Opportunities At McDonald's

Well if these two muppets can flip burgers, anyone can:

Libya's Gadaffi Paranoid Claims The Telegraph!

The propaganda around the new imperialism sometimes raises a wry smile.

In this article the Telegraph claims Gaddafi is paranoid because he's scampering from place to place convinced that NATO is trying to kill him.

When people bomb the shit out of every place you go I'd call legging it a healthy self-survival instinct rather than paranoia.

Nigel Farage's Part In The Destruction Of UKIP

There is an excellent piece on Richard North's EU Referendum blog about the part Nigel Farage has played in the demise of UKIP as a credible force for withdrawal from the EU.

The discussion forum is a particularly interesting read. For years people with real talent have been driven out of UKIP by Farage and his henchmen, people like Richard North, Robin Page and many more. What is left is a clique of Farage loyalists, mostly on the payroll, who are more interested in the childish smearing and name calling of anybody who questions their leader than in engaging in serious politics.

To those of us who once thought UKIP was the answer, it is sad to see that it is now a big part of the problem.

David Campbell Bannerman: Another UKIP MEP Quits

I wasn't surprised to hear that UKIP MEP David Campbell Bannerman had jumped ship to join theTories. I always felt he was more of a Tory than a UKIP type, but I still find it odd that somebody can spend so much time in a party campaigning for withdrawal from the EU, then jump ship to join a pro-EU party like the Tories. But I suppose there's nowt so queer as folk, especially in politics. No doubt the UKIP lies and smears directorate will be going into overdrive as I write, ready to smear and blacken the name of yet another defector.

As UKIP have now had MEPs for twelve years, and those MEPs have brought nothing but wasted resources, wasted opportunities and embarassment on the Party, maybe it's time they did the honourable thing and withdrew from the whole EU gravy train and fought their battles in the UK, the only place the war for independence can be won. After all, judging by their results in the latest local, general and parliamentary by-elections, having MEPs is doing the cause no favours, unless a few booming bank balances and pensions count as success.

So UKIP have now lost Nikki Sinclaire MEP from the party, and Mike Nattrass MEP and Trevor Coleman MEP from their far right-wing grouping in the European Parliament. I wonder who'll be next to jump ship? No se, y no me importa!


The term "lions led by donkeys" springs to mind. Or should that be "lions led by a donkey"?

John Hemming MP, Another Lib Dem Buffoon

Lord knows there are enough already, but John Hemming has now added to the number of known Lib Dem buffoons. MPs are elected to represent us and to legislate, not use the House of Commons to indulge their insatiable egos.

If you don't know Hemming is the MP who abused parliamentary privilege to name Ryan Giggs as the footballer who had his privacy protected with a superinjunction. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the superinjunction, and I think they are pretty horrendous, why should MPs of all people be allowed to flout the law and get away with it? If MPs can flout laws they don't like then why can't I? My view of Ryan Giggs is that he's been a fool, should have taken his medicine and got on with it. If he had done that the embarrassment would have been over weeks ago.

Of course the problem with Lib Dems is that they seem to think they are morally superior to us mere mortals, hence Hemming pulling a cheap stunt like he did. Hence why Chris Huhne is making such a fool of himself. Hence why Vince Cable is making such a fool of himself. Hence why the Lib Dems were wiped out earlier this month in the local elections, and will be slaughtered at the next general election.

Interesting to see that it has taken a member of the House of Lords to confront the issue of superinjunctions with dignity. Lord Wakeham has written the following letter which appears in the Telegraph:

Dear Sir,

The Prime Minister is right to say that the current situation with regard to privacy injunctions is “unsustainable” and to highlight that the problem is not one of the judiciary’s making because they are simply interpreting the law as it stands.

At the time the legislation was going through Parliament, I predicted that this intolerable state of affairs would inevitably flow from the way in which the European Convention on Human Rights was incorporated into our domestic law through the Human Rights Act. It was clear to me that because Parliament was relinquishing control of the issue, the resulting law would inevitably go further than we wished – despite the fact that Jack Straw, when Home Secretary, said that the legislation was not intended to create a general law of privacy – because the Courts would be forced to hand out increasing numbers of injunctions. And the reason for that is that in privacy matters, unlike in libel, the Courts inevitably err on the side of the applicant when considering whether to grant an injunction, and not on the side of a newspaper. That is the root of the inherent “unfairness” the Prime Minster referred to, and why this shambles has arisen.

Section 12 of the Human Rights Act attempted to enshrine in law the PCC’s common sense Code of Practice which protects an individual’s right to privacy as well as defining the public interest which justifies intrusion, with a view to cases being sorted out by the Commission and not the Courts. It has clearly failed to deliver that goal and the problem needs urgently addressing.

There are no palliative routes. The Courts cannot sort this matter out on their own. Nor is the answer simply in “strengthening” the Press Complaints Commission, which already has considerable powers but is often unable to deploy them because it is too frequently bypassed for the Courts in high profile cases. Instead the Human Rights Act may have to be amended, possibly by limiting the role of the Courts to dealing with issues that impact only on public authorities and the State (as the drafters of the Convention envisaged). That would leave the media outside the direct supervision of the Courts on privacy issues and enable the PCC – which can react much more swiftly to changes in newspaper technology than the law will ever be able to do so - to reassert its primacy in this area, as Parliament always intended.

Yours faithfully
Lord Wakeham
(Chairman, Press Complaints Commission, 1995-2001)
House of Lords, London, SW1

So of course the Lib Dems want to wreck the House of Lords:

The Liberal Democrats are another party whose desire to radically reform the House of Lords goes back a long way.
They were the last government to seriously reform the House of Lords when the passed the 1911 Parliament Act, which dramatically reduced peer power.
In their submission to the Royal Commission they set out plans for a directly-elected "Senate" made up of 261 members.
The Senators would be elected from across the UK using the massive constituencies used in the European elections.
Elections would be held every two years with a third of the senate being elected at each poll.
Predictably for the Liberal Democrats the elections would be held under proportional representation.

From the BBC website.

No wonder the few remaining Lib Dem activists are foaming at the mouth about their party joining the Coalition, now they are in the full glare of publicity, being junior partners in government, we can all see what they are really like.

Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press

OK I wasn't going to, but it's a blog not a tablet of stone.

I'm in a quandary. I instinctively dislike censorship, but I also respect peoples' desire for privacy.

I believe in freedom of the press, but find the seedier elements of the press, the tittle tattle tendency, vile and obnoxious.

I believe in parliamentary privilege, but not irresponsible flouting of the law hiding behind parliamentary privilege.

Was Ryan Giggs' superinjunction there to protect his privacy, from allegations of infidelity in a pretty seedy media, or was it an attempt at curtailing the freedom of the press?

If you oppose the superinjunction would you care to write on the internet, about every little indiscretion you've ever committed, everything you've ever done wrong, no matter how excruciatingly embarassing, for all the world to read?

What's the difference between press intrusion and press freedom? Indeed is there one?

I'm just wondering, because I don't think this issue is black and white.

The Clash-London's Burning

I could bore the pants off everybody going on about whether the superinjunction was a good thing, an effort at stopping press intrusion into somebody's private life, or whether it was curtailing press freedom. In fact, as it is still in place that should be in the present tense.

But I'm not going to because the whole world and his brother, whatever that means, will be pontificating about that this morning. So instead here is the only band who didn't seem to be poseurs in the late '70s early '80s, I always felt The Clash really meant it. Full tilted anger producing brilliant music:

Ryan Giggs

Ryan Giggs Ryan Giggs tried to gag the press,
Ryan Giggs Ryan Giggs what a bloody mess,
He's himself to blame, we all know his name...
Ryan Giggs, Ryan Giggs, Ryan Giggs
 
At least that's what MP John Hemming said in the House of Commons today. Or something similar.

James Delingpole on President Obama, Or Is It O'Bama?

I always have a laugh when US politicians claim Irish ancestry. Especially when you find out that their claim actually rests on once drinking a pint of Guiness in O'Flaherty's Bar in Boston. Well, Clinton was up to it and now Barack Obama is up to it.

But I can't beat this wonderful article by James Delingpole. So I won't try. You must read it, it's Pure Genius.

Charitable Giving

I first worked for medical charities in the mid 1980s and it was extremely challenging but satisfying and rewarding. We had a job to do, in my case recruiting training and supporting volunteers, and were by and large left to get on with it. We were expected to get results but the management was light and the bureaucracy minimal. Our members' needs, not the staff's needs were paramount

My last experience of the charity world was absolute agony. The charity resembled the most bureaucratic, management obsesssed arm of the NHS. It was like a particularly unfunny version of Yes Minister. Staff were expected to log virtually every movement on a computerised management system that wouldn't have been out of place in the DDR, and  unable to do anything without first doing risk assessments and a huge pile of associated health and safety paperwork. And don't mention the dreaded police checks and the hated proposed Independent Sageguarding Authority, thankfully dumped by the Coalition.

In my experience too many charities are now run for the benefit of an ever expanding paid workforce, partly because of government red tape, partly because of empire building. In the last fifteen years I increasingly heard staff complaining that volunteers couldn't be trusted to do X, Y or Z. My reaction invariably was; "why not?". The voluntary sector, thanks to government interference and an increased dependency on government funding, has been nationalised. Which means that its role as an independent force to fight for its client group has been diminished, it won't bite the hand that feeds it, the government.

The Coalition is about to introduce tax reforms to encourage donations to charity, which is to be welcomed. But it really needs  look at the whole ethos of the voluntary sector in this country. Cash is crucial to charities as it is to any organisation in any sector. What the voluntary sector needs to do is to encourage volunteers and volunteering, in many ways much more difficult than raising funds, especially if you are just tapping into taxpayers' money through grant aplications.

But volunteers and volunteering are at the heart of the voluntary sector, and my sense is that in recent years the charirty world has lost its heart.

Fight in Bolivian Parliament

Bolivia is one of my favourite countries. We were there in '91 for a stint and managed to get to watch the Bolivian championship play off final between Bolivar, and The Strongest, who are both from La Paz. 

The people are amazingly friendly and the first sight of La Paz, as we were driven down from the airport in El Alto, is something I will never forget.

What was most striking was the high proportion of indigenous Amerindians in Bolivia compared to many other Latin American countries we had visited. We were also struck by the gentleness and friendliness of the Bolivian people who spent a large amount of their time sat around chewing coca leaves.

So I was particularly surprised by the following film of politicians fighting in the Bolivian Parliament. After decades of coup followed by coup I suppose it's better to have the politicians fighting each other than the army fighting the people. What price would you pay to see the Tories geting stuck into Miliband, Huhne and co?


Mind you, at least the Bolivians fight like real men, I suspect Miliband, Huhne and co would be a bit too camp for it to be called a real fight.

Another Christian Murdered in Iraq

Attacks on Christians in Iraq continue with a young Christian beheaded this week after being kidnapped. Since the invasion of Iraq in 2003 up to 573 Christians have been killed in religiously and politically motivated attacks. But where is British media coverage? It seems they are far too busy whitewashing what we are supposed to have achieved following the invasion.

The full story can be read here.

Kenneth Clarke On Rape-A Female Perspective

I don't often quote or link to the Independent, it is usually too pinko-liberal and therefore incredibly boring. But Mary Dejevsky has a very interesting piece on the Kenneth Clarke business. She puts it it into perspective to a large degree, in a way that a certain element in Britain would never accept from a man. Following is the crucial paragraph:

But all Clarke actually did was to make a modest factual error – not the most heinous offence in an extensive live radio interview – in suggesting that there were grades of rape. In practice, judges make distinctions about degrees of seriousness every day in their sentencing, while upholding the law that defines rape as rape. The two are not incompatible.

There are certain areas in public life that certain groups have made no-go areas for general discussion let alone dissent, and Dejevsky is critical of the extreme feminists in this instance. She follows the above with:

As crimes go, of course, rape is surrounded by a singular mystique. But mystique does not belong in a court of law. And the outcry, such as it was, about Clarke's words was itself based on a misconception about rape cases and British courts. Recent figures show that convictions in rape cases are now on a par with those for most other crimes – at just short of 60 per cent. Yet the old, old statistic – that only 6 per cent of reported rapes result in a conviction – is routinely wheeled out to "prove" that rape is different.

For once I can commend the Independent for an an extremely informative and balanced article, dare I say a must read to those who have been foaming at the mouth over Clarke's comments. Miliband Jr might find it especially informative after his foam flecked, hysterical rant in the House of Commons this week .

Bob Dylan Nudging 70

I've seen Bob Dylan numerous times over the years and I'm glad about that. Sadly the last time I saw him, a few years ago in Manchester, it wasn't so great. His voice has gone to such an extent that I had trouble recognising some of the songs until he was halfway through. I still found it a wonderful occasion although my beloved, not a Bob Dylan fan, found it truly dreadful.

Having said that I think his recent stuff is still extremely listenable as he seems to have written it to suit his voice. As he approaches his seventieth birthday it is inevitable that his voice is a little rocky, he's been touring virtually non stop for decades, which must have taken a toll.

There's an interesting piece about Bob Dylan, and ageing rock stars in the Telegraph today.

Is Kenneth Clarke Evil?

It seems that Ed Miliband has once more gone into hyperbole overload. Kenneth Clarke must be immediately sacked, he can longer speak for women apparently, if he ever did. Bear in mind this is the Miliband who claimed AV would be the "triumph of hope over fear". Not prone to exaggeration at all then.

I have no time for Clarke, the man is a clown. But is he really an evil monster who wants to go soft on rapists? Here's what seemed to cause the furore when he was interviewed on BBC5Live:

The presenter, Victoria Derbyshire, interjected: “Rape is rape.”


But Mr Clarke replied: “No It’s not.


“If an 18-year-old has sex with a 15-year-old and she is perfectly willing that is rape, because she is under age, she can’t consent, anybody who has sex with a 15 year old it’s rape.


“But what you and I are talking about is a man forcefully having sex with a woman and she doesn’t want to, that is rape, a serious crime, of course it’s a serious crime.”

Should that 18 year old receive the same sentence as a man who breaks into the home of a stranger in the middle of the night and rapes her at knifepoint? I would suggest not. I would further suggest that a reasoned and mature debate about the clumsy words of Kenneth Clarke could be very useful, but yet again Miliband seems incapable of being calm and collected when he sees the opportunity for a cheap political shot.

The full interview can be heard here.

Refugees from Arab Countries and the European Union

In a fine example of typical European Union hypocrisy France, Italy, Denmarks and others are desperately trying to quit the Schengen Agreement because of the flood of refugees from North Africa, proof that the EU is nothing more than a sham. It's great when the members states are growing fat off the subsidies, but rules and agreements are quickly ignored or broken when they don't suit them. Let' hope it proves to be another nail in  the coffin of the EU.

Italy has done a smart thing and is issuing the current wave of migrants from North Africa with papers allowing them to travel throughout the EU. Italy knows full well the aim of the majority is to get to France and the UK.

But there is a real problem for Britain to face too. How many more immigrants can this country absorb without reaching a major crisis? Why is it that when countries are supposedly liberated people suddenly jump ship and flee the supposedly liberated countries? Why is that the boatloads of refugees we see on TV news are virtually 100% young males? Have they fled such dangerous situations without regard for their women and children? If you don't trust the TV news I suggest a tip to Calais where you can see the queues of young males trying to get into this country.

Of course those bleeding heart liberals at The Guardian blame Italy for the refugee crisis.  Of course the Independent blames the UK for the perceived refugee crisis. How very typical. Maybe those who were getting carried away at the supposed overthrow of tyrants in the Middle East in recent months might like to consider why so many people are now fleeing the new freedom loving and tolerant regimes in Tunisia and elsewhere.

And if our bombing of Libya was to protect innocent people, who are these thousands of people fleeing the bombing, the guilty?

Latest Private Eye-What A Wonderful Front Page!

Link to the Private Eye website.

Let's Do The Timewarp-The Queen In Ireland

I heard an interesting piece on the radio this morning and thought it was part of the BBC's Domesday Project. Either that or that I had actually travelled back in time to the 1980s when the IRA were blowing people up and the Liberal Democrats had an ounce of credibility. But no, it was definitely being broadcast live, this very morning.

The piece was about the Queen's visit to Ireland and the participant was some kind of Irish socialist republican, he sounded extremely bitter and insular. He constantly referred to the Queen as 'Elizabeth Windsor'. He's obviously a seriously extreme revolutuionary calling her that!. When pressed he didn't want her there, or Obama when he visits soon because their governments kill innocent people in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. As most governments in Europe are sending troops to help in those places he was pressed on which heads of state he would welcome. He couldn't name any because he was talking tosh. But the old chestnuts repeatedly popped up about the potato famine, the six counties and how British troops are occupying part of Ireland and we should go and let the Irish be united.

I have no beef with anybody in Ireland be it the Republic or Northern Ireland. My view has always been that if a majority in Northern Ireland want to remain within the United Kingdom then so be it. When a majority want to be part of the Irish Republic then good luck and goodbye. I feel the same about Scotland and have said before that if the people of Cumbria wanted to join an independent Scotland then so be it. That's democracy.

What disturbed me about this particular republican on the radio is that he represents a 'dissident' Irish republican outfit. 'Dissident' being a euphemism for 'terrorist'. He sounded just like a throwback to the dark days of the 1970s and '80s. It was quite sad to hear and a timely reminder that there are still lunatics, on both sides in Ireland, just waiting to return to the path of violence. That's why I think the Queen's visit is so important to Anglo-Irish relations. The overwhelming majority of Irish peope are decent, law abiding people just wanting to live their lives in peace and prosperity just lik the res ofus. But nobody should be complacent.

One final thought. When the little Irish dissident was spouting about the cost of security for the visit in these straightened times, and wanting the British out of Ireland, I don't remember hearing him asking us to take the billions of pounds we baled them out with when we go.  Strange that.