Saturday, 14 January 2012


There are rumours that Ed Miliband is on the way out. The bookies have cut the odds on his not leading Labour into the next election. Gossip from Simon Carr of the Indy, suggest he may be gone by Easter.  
So who have they got to replace him? Surely his brother wouldn’t consider being second hand Rose? In any case would he be any better? So, would it be Ed Balls, close bosom friend of the retired chef de cuisine of the stew that the country is in, Gordon End to Boom and Bust Brown?

Ed’s wife Mrs Balls, knowing how her husband covets the job, would surely never take it from him. And the rest? Burnham, Murphy, Alexander? They’d all be just as bad.

Labour are lost. Tony Blair made them Tory Light in order to make them electable in the south of England, where half the UK population lives. It was a good move politically. They got 13 years of government out of it, and Blair himself became a multi millionaire on the back of his war crimes. But ideologically they have never really got over this, because they don't now know that they are for.

They used to be about the "working man": the factory worker, the miner, the foundryman, the ship builder, the agricultural worker, but Thatcher got rid of most of them, put them on the dole, or on the "sick", and sold the rest shares and houses.

It wasn’t enough to be for the workers anymore; there weren't enough workers.

So they elected themselves a complete loser. A man who oozes indifference; who seems even when he is telling you how passionate he is about something, lacks any kind of sincerity. A man who, from day one, has been a dead loss weight round their collective neck.

Cameron is not clever. He’s cunning and devious, but he’s not good with facts, lacks depth and gets easily flustered if people push him. The Flashman tendencies are never far from the surface, which makes him incredibly vulnerable. He’s already been forced to apologise for wisecracks, and biting sarcasm delivered in barely controlled temper.

And yet this second rater can't begin to unseat him. Just imagine if there was a prime minister who was clever and knowledgeable!

Look at some of the things the government is doing will completely change the character of English life: eg, introducing a two tier health service where the rich will pay for better treatment IN NATIONAL HEALTH HOSPITALS, and where, because of the shortage of facilities, the poor will wait till their betters are seen to, scanned, exrayed, operated upon, looked after in ICU, de-fibrillated...  for their turn, if all the staff haven't gone home by that time.

And then there are measures that will cause hardship in the whole of the UK. Cameron once said that it made him physically sick to think of a guy who had stolen, say a couple of bottles of water, being allowed to vote. (I imagine because he fondly imagines that most of them would vote Labour; the people who count usually being able to call in the odd favour to avoid such indignity.)  Well, it makes me physically sick to think that I belong to a society that sends patients with life threatening illness to a job readiness interview, or denies severely disabled children benefits when they come to 18, and thereby denies them any independence, because they’ve never paid any National Insurance.

And still this Labour can’t get get the upper hand, because they can’t really argue with most of what Cameron says. Even tonight Balls was saying that it's unlikely that they would reverse any of the Tories cuts.

It doesn’t matter much whether it’s Miliband Maximus or Minimus, Balls male or female, Andy Birnham or anyone else for that matter. Labour hasn't got any soul left. Once their raison d’être was lost, they were lost. In the south of England they compete for the same votes now as the Tories do. Nowhere else matters that much, for that is where the elections are won and lost. 

That's why the Tories too were useless in opposition. They don’t seriously OPPOSE each other any more.

This should have been the Liberal’s opportunity to make a massive comeback, and they blew it, which is, I think, unfortunate for everyone in the UK.

Pics: Ed, David and Andy, all apparently describing things of varying sizes


  1. I said it before and I'll say it again that the only difference between them is the colour of rosettes they wear at election time. Their manifestos are the same paper mache with various percentages of coloured dye but all carry the same message Me Me Me. Time to Occupy.

  2. He was never really on his way in was he Tris? :)

  3. Tris

    The three English party leaders are all from the same mould, all are public school educated millionaire torys, there is no difference between Cameron Clegg or Moribund.

    On Moribund all that can be said about him was that he rose without trace, and he will sink the same way.

    The problem for the red torys is who will replace him. Not a deep talent pool there. I was thinking that with a bit of luck it would be Murphy, but Labour would never pick a Scottish leader after Hen Broon. Pity spud with Iain Gray as his deputy would be a dream team.

  4. Did you see blinky Balls saying that he agreed with all the cuts and won't change any of the Tory policies ?
    The BBC and their friends in the Unions were obviously outraged but will this be Balls plan to take control of Labour ?
    Fragrant Yvette will probably be sleeping in the spare room tonight. The two millionaire socialists will be at each others throats over this.

  5. Tris

    Andrew at A Scottish Liberal is hinting that Willie Rennie will say something interesting the The Sunday Herald tomorrow.

    That would be a first, but Rennie and interesting in the same sentence, Oh dear.

  6. I was just reflecting Cynical, that there is no opposition. As you say, they wear different coloured rosettes but more and more they are saying the same things. The only reason they bother to argue is that they have to try to look superficially different to the voters so that they can get their turn on the gravy train, and weekend shoots at Chequers.

    Occupy.... Yes, but the punishments for disorder are getting stiffer and stiffer. Throw away the rule book, said the UK government leading to jail terms out of all proportion. Threats of water cannon and rubber bullets for the next lot which will probably be during their sainted Olympic games or Mrs T obsequies, whichever comes first.

    Rough treatment for the people who occupied St Paul's even from their state owned church...

    No protests allowed near their parliament.

    They don't have opposition in parliament and they won't brook it outside. Not really democracy any more

    It's beginning to resemble Albania before the revolution.

    And in such situations evil and incompetent men triumph... Cameron for example.

    I saw the post on political betting Cynical. I notice that the Telegraph seems to think that 40% for, 43% against is a crushing defeat for the SNP... That gives us 17% who are to decide... We need to persuade them that Cameron's Britain is a place they don't want to be. He's doing that for us.

    Did you know that 9 people a minute were joining the SNP during the carry on the fool had last week? Thanks Cameron, you boosted our funds by VAST amounts, you idiot.

    Carry on Cameron... the new Ealing Studios comedy with Kenneth Williams as a hapless, hopeless prime minister, David Camergoon, Bernard Breslaw as Boris the mayor, Barbara Windsor as Margaret Biguns Thatcher and Arthur Lowe as Gideon Whip Me Osborne.

    And starring Gordon Jackson as Alex George Cowley Salmond.

    An epic Carry On caper that will have you rolling in the glens.

  7. Nah SR. He was crap from the first minute. I wonder if he will make Easter? It's like 1997 all over... He was definitely their Willie Hague.

    Now who's going to be their Quiet Man IDS?

  8. I saw that from Andrew Dubs, and after I got off the floor and back on my chair I wondered could it possibly be... or was he just winding our Andrew up...?

    Well, I'd welcome the Liberals saying something sensible and putting THEIR point of view, as opposed to London's Tory point of view, which if I were them, I'd leave to the Tories.

    Of course Andrew's article was mainly about Henry McLeish's take on it.

    I can't think that Lamont will be overly happy with his intervention. He's a good as told her she's got it all wrong. Not a brilliant thing to happen in your first couple of weeks.

    But if she insists on joining Ruth Davidson's bandwagon, what on earth will happen to Labour at the next election. Another party swallowed up in the distaste for the Conservatives that Ruthie told us was a thing of the past...

    Silly woman.

  9. Aye Monty, I saw him, and pathetic wasn't the word. My granny's cat could make a better, more interesting speech.

    I saw that tape of the kids falling off to sleep as House Elf Gove lectured them on his education theory...yawn... I can feel myself drifting off even thinking about it. But even wee Govey wasn't as dull as Balls.

    And yes, once again I noticed that, if we vote Labour it won't be any different from voting Tory. Still the poor will suffer; still the rich will prosper. And most importantly the MPs will prosper even more.

    Hopefully we will be out of the hated union by then.

    The trades unions are incandescent, but seriously no one pays that much attention to them any more.

    If they try to strike probably Cameron will send in the rubber bullets and water cannon to put them back to work, or...and he has already promised this, he will tighten trades union law. No strikes on pain of the same imprisonment you get from stealing a bottle of water... or extradition to Turkey.


  10. Ha ha, Dubs. Spud... and Lard Elmer of Fudd. What a team they were.. what a resounding success they made of the election last year.

    Nope, it won't be a Scotsman, if for no other reason he might not be with them after the next election. presumably if we can't use the pound adn have to send the pandas back to China, I cant see them having Scottish MPs at Westminster.

    Of course without Scotland it's going to be a cold day in hell before England has another labour Government.

    I suppose they could have that irritating female, what's her name Harwoman.

    Or ... Nope, can't think of anyone at all.

    BTW, I don't know who it was who said it today, but someone said... if there was independence (although he/she probably said "separation"), it would mean that English people would be foreigners.

    So what?, I thought (I actually think of them as that now)... and then it occurred to me that in their eyes, foreigners were bad... you know that narrow little Englander (and little Scotlander too) attitude.


  11. Tory hoose a post one colin rose.

    To accuse nationalists of having a chippy and irrational prejudice towards our English neighbours is not an attempt to smear, it is simply stating a fact. In my experience, nats will say things about the English, which they would not dare say (or at least not publicly) about black or asian people. This is not banter, this not humour, this is racism. The SNP is well aware of this deep resevoir of prejudice, and Mc Alpines comments are clearly geared towards tapping into it. Shame on her.

    I have responded.

    "Do you have examples or is that just an assertion? If it is just an assertion, which I suspect, then please retract it if not please provide a link.

    Mods if colin rose cannot supply a link I hope that you correct his assertion to keep your site's integrity intact, thank you."

  12. Fair comment CH.

    "In my experience", he says.... what experience?

    As for the notion that people don't say things about black or asian people...POLLLLIZZZZE. English and Scots alike.

    And my neighbour, an elderly man of limited intellect and amazing thirst, asserts that the disreputable appearance of the neighbourhood is all down to "foreigners".

    [Of course what it is all down to is locally born Scottish drug dealers.]

    The few "foreigners" that live in the street are the ones that grow vegetables, and offer to sweep the stairs and help with the garden, unlike the accuser who prefers to spend his time in the bowling club bar.

    Another neighbour blames all local crimes on "foreigners" [although most if it is carried out by aforementioned drug dealing or consuming lowlife].

    So yes. I noticed that Mr Rose had a go at me, or my comment n there but I'd lost interest by the time I saw the notification.

    So yeah, racism exists, and people say it out loudly, and of course I've heard some comments about English, but I went to school in England where I was given a hard time over being a jock, and my mother later worked in London where the same racism existed. If you don't pay any attention to it, it doesn't hurt you.

  13. Tris,

    Interesting article in the Herald about racism in Scotland.

    And another about drug traffic:

  14. Tris

    Re Henry McLeishs take. I think he is one of the few Labour members who are trying to think this through.

    Most people are concentrating on what will happen to Labour in Scotland if it is all jolly unionists together against the SNP. However I think there are also serious long term implications for Labour nationally i.e. England if they join the unionist tagteam.

    In Scotland it is a not hard to predict that a lot of whats left of Labours support in Scotland sickened by Iraq and Blairs tory light, but clinging to the hope that Labour might, just might, return to their Scottish socialist roots will see Labour sharing a platform with the torys as an acknowledgement that they would rather see Scotland ruled from Westminster by torys than Holyrood by Scots. This might be the final straw that finally convinces them that Labour will never return to their roots.

    The other point Labour do not get, or just ignore, is just how much damage will the torys do to Scotland if they defeat independence. Is there anyone in Labour stupid enough to think that Dave and Boris will treat Scotland fairly if we are left powerless? Maybe however Labour would rather have a chance to grab power in a Scotland decimated by torys and all that entails than support a fair prosperous Scotland.

    In England if the torys defeat independence, and lets not kid ourselves this is a straight SNP tory fight, the others are just holding Daves jacket, the torys will be returned to power for a generation. Dave saved the union etc you could write the script already and they will milk that for all that it is worth.

    Labours present position would appear to me to be a classic loose, loose situation, with not a lot of though. No change there then.

  15. Yea racism. My two children attending their local highland primary school were called Scottish bastards by English primary school children who had just moved into the area.
    Wonder who told them to say that ??

  16. tris,

    This should have been the Liberal's opportunity to make a massive comeback, and they blew it, which is, I think, unfortunate for everyone in the UK.

    It's better to look at where the three UK parties share a common outlook and then look at what their differences are, if any.

    1. All three parties are British nationalist and instinctively oppose an independent Scotland.

    2. All three parties believe in retaining the British Establishment in its current form.

    3. All three parties believe that a successful political career path in the UK always ends in the House of Lords with a title, a pension and a flunkey serving tea.

    4. All three parties are chasing the same vote in Middle England.

    5. The career path of most of the top men in each party are remarkably similar. University, some form of politically linked or media job and then an MP.

    The Lib-Dems have failed to take their opportunity because they are so similar to the other two and to make a massive comeback they would have to differentiate themselves from the Conservatives and Labour which would entail a huge about-turn not only in the policies of their party but in the mindset of their members and elected representatives.

    The only thing which marks them out is federalism and federalism would require changes to the British constitution and to the Westminster Parliament. A no, no as far as the Establishment is concerned and the Lib-Dems are part of that Establishment. In any case the Lib-Dems abandoned any attempts at instituting federalism in the UK almost at the inception of the party.

    If Labour and the Conservatives are the two cheeks of the same arse then the Lib-Dems are right in the middle.

  17. Cheers Gedguy, I'm off out into the countryside, I'll have a gander tonight.

  18. that was what I meant Dubs.

    I thought that when the Tories and Labour merged to almost the same party, it was the opportunity for the Liberals to take the initiative and provide an opposition. because a part from a little sniping and bitching about the colour of ties they were wearing, there was no real differences in ideology.

    The Libs traditional federalism could have come to the fore; they could have used their "leftish" credentials to be a party of the soft left, while the other two moved further and further right.

    All that doesn't stop you going to the lords if that's your cup of tea. And going there doesn't have to stop you being a good guy... at least some of the time. You can speak out, and speak up. You have a platform and although you don't have power, you can make life hard, for the government because you're a lord and a trouble maker... you'll be in demand on the radio and to write in the papers.

    Of course you may end up like the government scientist, Dr Kelly, who "committed suicide" in the woods... or whatever he did.

    I agree that they let themselves become establishment, but they didn't have to. Under Charlie Kennedy, if only he hadn't taken to the drink, they could have been spectacularly radical. He was young and clever, and well liked. He could have been great.

  19. Well, kids don't hate naturally, Anon. They don't see colour, they don't see fat, they don't see disability... or rather they see it, but because they are just learning, everything is new and different, so being black or speaking Gaelic first, or being in a wheelchair is no big deal.

    Adults with their silly petty prejudices teach their kids that kind of crap.

    The best way to knock it out of people is to ask them to explain why they just made the racist remark.

    I did it with one of my groups of unemployed lads, who complained that the "wogs" (Pakistanis) were taking all their jobs, which was the reason they were still not working (rather than that they liked to stay in bed until about 3 in the afternoon).

    What jobs, I asked, were they taking?

    Because I'd been round most of the factories in Dundee and I'd never seen one, not one, working in them; and I'd been round the building sites with the same result, so where were they working and depriving my boys of a good job?

    In the shops, they told me knowledgeably.

    Oh yeah... so, I asked, would you like a job in one of the shops? Because I could probably swing it for you, I suggested. The hours are long but, if that is what you want...

    5 am to sort the papers and then pretty much straight shift till 10 at night...then clear up, count money....

    Did any of them fancy that, because I could see what I could do....?

    No, they didn't, it seemed.

    I was waiting for them to tell me that Ninewells Hospital was full of foreign doctors...

    I think I might have had a job getting them in there!

    Hate of that sort is usually irrational and born of ignorance and intolerance passed down by adults.