ALEX SALMOND BOOED AND PRINCESS MIDDLETON'S BOOBS

It has been brought to Munguin's Republic's attention that we have been tardy about mentioning Alex Salmond being booed at the Olympics Parade in Glasgow. 

So, in order to right that wrong, here we are. You can hear it on this video, just:

ALEX SALMOND WAS BOOED IN GLASGOW

I can also point out that the Scotsman reports the story, calling it a George Osborne moment (although they might easily have called it a David Cameron moment, or a Teresa May moment or a Jeremy Hunt moment... but not by anyone called James Naughtie.)

The first minister was, however, later cheered when he said that although London has set a high bar, Glasgow would be even better. Fortunately Mr Davidson will not be getting his way, stopping the Scottish government having any part in the organising of the games (with the consequential inevitable result of the removal of 80% of the funding, which the Scottish government is supplying ...the rest being found by Glasgow Council).

*****
Now, moving on, can we please stop the fuss about Kate Middleton's boobs.

There are simply more important things going on in the world than some rich woman being photographed with her top off. And as she is not really royal, we still have no way of knowing whether having blue blood makes you differently put together.

If you are in the public eye, and if in fact you need to stay in the public eye to justify your very existence (as Philip once admitted the royals did), then you make sure that you don't get naked in public (note to Harry too), even if it's in a château in France, owned by your husband's uncle (or a hotel room in Las Vegas with your posh mates and some local tottie with an eye to the main chance).

Simples!

Now for some people that's going to be a hard one to take, but on the other hand, she's a girl who only a short time ago was called Kate Middleton, and now suddenly she's HRH Princess William, Countess of Strathearn, Duchess of Cambridge and probably a whole pile of other things too. She has an endless supply of money, she only has to snap her fingers for a legion of servants, dressers, footmen, butlers, flower arrangers, chauffeurs, page boys, under parlour maids and tweenies to come running. 

And one day she will be Her Majesty the Queen. Nice work if you can get it.

It was her choice. So covering up when she's on holiday (like most people who don't have access to châteaux are obliged to do by law) is a small sacrifice by comparison.

Much amusing stuff has been said about this, but Richard Desmond (of Channel 5, porn tv, Hello and Daily Star/Express fame...'Dirty Des' as he is unaffectionately called by Private Eye) jumping up and down about it is beyond funny. 

And the fact that the royals are calling the woman who took  and sold the pictures "greedy" is a bit of a joke too. No greed in that family... eh? Princess Michael, Prince Michael, Prince Andrew, Princess Wessex, and of course the Queen applying for funding set aside for the very poor to provide central heating.

If there is one royal story that should be told it is that putting Harry back in Afghanistan appears to have cost several people their lives, several more their good health, and the destruction of 5 fighter aircraft at an enormous cost. Smart move! 

Why, on earth does he not just stick to going around the country helping kids, at which he excels?

RANDOM THOUGHTS

Fair's fair. I'm a republican, but I can praise individual royals' work when it's good. I've always said that Anne is a star with her Save the Children work. But today I take my hat off to Harry. He may be a bit of a prat sometimes, but he's done a good job of showing other royals how they can behave on tour. He's been a credit to his mum and to Britain the way he's been connecting with people, especially with kids.  You'll not get any bowing and scraping or any idiotic titles and styles from me, Harry; just a well done, mate.

Hague is going to be sued (couldn't happen to a nicer bloke) for providing intelligence to America which then drone bombed  Pakistan killing totally innocent people. Lawyers said that they had "credible, unchallenged" evidence that Hague oversaw a policy of passing British intelligence to US forces planning attacks against militants. And this time he, or they, or both,  got it wrong! We really have to learn that this isn't the good old colonial days when we could go around killing natives with abandon.

On the same theme, I wonder what kind of payback there is going to be for the murders of 16 Afghans, including 5 kids, carried out by a "rogue" soldier. There is sure to be some. It might be better to use this as an excuse to get the hell out of there, with our apologies for the mess we are leaving it in. 


Talking about leaving messes behind us, I was reading this morning that fashionably dressed men in Iraq are being attacked and killed. The Telegraph reported that up to 90 people, all but 2 men, have been killed for being trendily dressed and having floppy hair. It is assumed by the religious fanatics that now hold sway in the country (that we went in to liberate from a dictator), that anyone who is dressed fashionably is a homosexual, and that justifies killing them. Clearly the fanatics should get out more. Oh and to Bush and Blair...well done guys. You certainly liberated the Iraqis.


According to the Independent, the bill for London's Olympics has increased by another £2 billion. You would never credit that we are all in this together, would you? Just how much more is this fiasco going to cost.

Again, this time in the Telegraph, (enough to take you breath away, this one), the London government is going to support people buying homes worth up to £500,000 in an effort to revive the middle class dream of home ownership. Apparently rescuing the banks from their own stupidity and greed, and then handing them further billions of pounds in quantitative easing hasn't actually stimulated any lending (and we all know why that is: they needed it all for their bloody bonuses and salaries). So the government is going to have to guarantee their loans too, out of our money....at a time when house prices are going down. Smart thinking, Cameron.


And finally, while we're on the subject of the idiot Cameron, I noticed in one of the "idiot" papers yesterday that Cameron is going to get a ride in Airforce One. Imagine that! The paper pointed out with glee that President Sarkozy has never been invited to ride in the President's personal plane, ergo that President Obama had a very special relationship with Britain and Cameron. A bit of a leap.  I think it's highly unlikely that the  intellectual Mr Obama, who got where he is despite his origins, and because of his brain, would have much in common with Cameron who got where he got because of his connections and despite his brain.

BAD NEWS AT HOME AND IN AFGHANISTAN...

OK, so I've been really busy today, and it's not that nothing has happened in the world...


These young guys killed in Afghanistan in this endless and stupid war, and on a day I heard that a mate of mine from the gym will be going out there. And Cameron can only say that it's a "desperately sad day for Britain". I'd say to Mr Cameron: Enough, no more. Do something. Get them out before there are any more.


And, of course, there was the almost unbelievable news that to save a few miserable pounds this bunch of heartless, thoughtless, ......hatchet wielders, are going to close Remploy factories all over these islands depriving disabled people of jobs. This, juxtapositioned with the way that they are pushing sick and disabled people off Incapacity Benefit, is almost unbelieveable in its absurdity. 


It can't have gone unnoticed that, by a strange co-incidence, these same  ...erm people have decided that around 5 million middle class people should be spared income tax on their state retirement pensions, because it's a bit complex.


So I suppose the money for this had to come from somewhere. And why not the disabled? Easy target. Never mind that they are supposed to be hosting the Paralympics in London this year. 


So, anyway, as I started to say, I've been so busy that I've not had time to write anything. But I did find this video on Youtube of my beloved Pet on French TV. 


She'd agreed to do the show well in advance, and then she got this humdinger of a cold, but she turned up anyway, and after the host had explained to the audience just how sick she was, she went on ....having forgotten her mouchoires en papier...and sang...well more or less sang.  What a trouper!


Au Secours... means HELP!


And for good measure 52 years later her new album includes this:

JUST IN CASE YOU FORGOT MPs, THIS IS EARTH

You couldn’t make this up. The poor wee MPs think that they shouldn’t have to be bothered by a complicated and chaotic expenses system where they have to provide receipts for the things they want us to pay for.

And so they demanded, and were granted, a debate on the subject. The Telegraph reports: The packed session lasted five times longer than the most recent debate on the conflict in Afghanistan, with MPs abandoning their usual custom of quitting Westminster early on Thursday afternoons to attend to constituency duties.

(Or whatever else they like to do on Thursdays and Fridays....)

Obviously this was a matter far closer to their hearts than the fate of the troops out in Afghanistan, who strangely seemed to be so much closer to their hearts at election time. Isn’t it odd how one’s sympathies can change so dramatically.

By all accounts it was an extremely heated debate with MPs losing their tempers and laying down the law. They would not, said Tom Harris, be treated like that.

Treated like what Tom? Oh yes, like ordinary people, having to prove every last halfpenny, being sent back after waiting in a queue that seemed to last forever, because one tiny scrap of evidence was wrong... Like a post office maybe, or the tax office, or the passport office, or the benefits office Tom? Is that what you people will NOT be treated like?

You were all running around 6-8 months ago pretending to be whiter than white. Oh yes, we need new system, new rules, tighten up, oh yes voters we are definitely going to do that. But then the votes were counted and ...well, there you are. Your expenses are 5 times more important than the war you sent people to fight in.

Ann Clwyd the little soldier, was angry than MPs reputations had been smeared by the expense scandal. Surely not! Isn’t that awful?

She complained that someone had come up to her while she was campaigning (this is the time that MPs actually meet the public) and shouted “thief”. She said, in a very un-feminist way, that if she had been a man she would have run after him and punched him on the nose.

A Tory, Roger Gale complained that there was mistrust in IPSA... Hello! What planet are these people on?

Let’s see. More than half of them fiddled their expenses. There had to be a grass roots change including sacking the Speaker!!! Mistrust Roger, you nob? I wouldn't trust any of you with a pound coin.

The new people authority was appointed because MPs and Lords were stealing... what did they expect from the new staff? Blank cheques.

Here’s the deal MPs: We pay the IPSA to check up that you people aren’t stealing any more, and god knows some already are, with their first class train fares, and renting out the houses that we bought for them, and living in the cheaper rented accommodation sorted by parliament.

Labour MP Clive Efford said: “I have spoken to MPs who have been in tears about the financial situation that they have been put in by Ipsa, who are not here speaking today."

Well why are they not there, or did you just make that up? But if they were in tears matey...welcome to our world. Nothing works and nobody cares. That’s the world you created for us. Have some.

I don’t think these people have the foggiest idea just how angry the public is with them. There is a new air of defiance about us though. Maybe one day soon they will find out just how angry we are.

Pics: (1) The House of Commons; (2) Tom Harris’s plea to members of his own party to elect him to the shadow cabinet. They didn’t. He has categorically denied that he has stopped writing his extremely successful blog because he was told to by Ed, whom he doesn’t like and didn't vote for, but from whom he wants a job. (3) Ann Clwyd, training to be a poodle if only she weren’t just a weak and feeble woman! (4) Roger Gale, bless him, so out of touch after 27 years as an MP that he thinks any of us give a toss what he thinks about mistrust in the IPSA. Time he got another job and saw what life is actually like. Tescos are looking for people.

ENGLISH PRINCE: SOLDIERS' TARGET PRACTICE: DEAR MPS

While I wait for an opportunity to listen to today's FMQs, I decided to get a few minor irritations off my chest. (Please note that when I refer to "dear MPs", I mean that they cost a lot, and not that they are in any way beloved.)

I note that Prince William, who is part of the England bid to host the World Cup, has said that he is English. "I love football, we English love football and it would be an honour for us to host the World Cup."

That’s cool with me. They are welcome to him. It was probably a little slip in his speech, but he has proved how he feels about his own identity.

I can’t help thinking that it is a sign of desperation that one of the world’s most iconic footballers joining the prime minister of England wasn’t felt enough to win the prize: they had to trot out an English Prince as well, and one who has just received massive publicity for announcing that he is going to do what millions of other people do every year, get married.

Still, I suppose you have to use what you can get. Perhaps the glittering of Williams’s metaphorical crown will make up for the cheesy PR prime minister, and the fact that there was, yet again, crowd trouble at an English football match last night.

***

I wonder if I was the only person to shake his head in wonderment this morning when I heard about the sentencing of an American soldier who, as part of a gang went on a drug induced rampage killing Afghan civilians for no apparent reason, except that they were there.

The soldier did the American equivalent of “turning Queen’s evidence” by telling about his mates, in order to get a reduced sentence for his part in the shootings. For sport (aren’t there any wild animals in Afghanistan for the huntin’ shootin’ fishin’ set?), these brave boys, heros maybe, went out and shot anyone that crossed their path.

It’s hard to believe but ex-Sgt Robert Stevens was a medic. I shouldn’t care to be treated by him. He says that he didn’t actually kill anyone himself, but would you believe him? Anyway, pour encourager les autres, he was given a 9 month jail sentence and busted down to private.

Not only did he go around with a gang that was killing human beings for sport, a filthy and despicable thing to do, he has also given terrorists every reason to hate, even more, the westerners who are in their country (at the invitation of the Afghan government of course, but we can all remember what they American government said, and didn’t want us to know, about the Afghan government, don’t we). This piece of filth will, more than WikiLeaks, have the blood of his comrades on his hands. So was that an appropriate sentence? And they want to execute the Wikileaks’ Assange for treason. Wow!

***

And surprise, surprise the Honourable (?**?!*!?**?) members are angry about their expenses and the body that administers them. (It appears they have stopped handing out money willy nilly for no other reason that the MOPs demand it.) The greedy, useless 650+ have claimed over £3 million in the last 3 months... sheesh... including Conservative Keith Simpson, who received £20,752 over the period - mostly for travel expenses to and from his constituency in Norfolk. Now correct me if I’m wrong, but Norfolk isn’t that far from London; certainly not as far as Scotland, so how was he travelling? We already know that they have been working a housing fiddle already, and apparently some are still charging first class rail fares.

Now they want to waste yet more of the time that WE pay for to debate the matter in the House on the subject. Now, we know that they think we are stupid and all have memories that hardly stretch from one episode of Emerdale to the next, but I really do think that they should be aware that we are hurting out here despite what the Noble Mr Young thinks; it’s cold and gas bills are soaring; we are paying back the excesses of a small number of stupid people... them included. So a wee piece of advice to them.

Shut up, get on with your bloody jobs at £66,000+ and keep your greedy, fat heads down, before the public turns, and you find them chopped off and lying at your feet.

Just a thought.

Oh and before they try to have me arrested for Treason, I mean that in a metaphorical sense. (Sorta.)

ANDREW EMBARRASSES HIS MUM AND THE PRIME MINISTER, BUT MAYBE NOW WE WILL GET ACTION

It’s not that often that you’ll find this blog to be overly sympathetic to members of the royal family. However, credit where credit is due. We may be republicans, and disapprove of position as of birthright rather than by ability and hard graft, but I hope we’ll always be fair to people who have little choice in the matter.

I would say that I respect the fact that the Queen has kept out of party politics as much as she possibly could during her reign. Par contre I have deplored the fact that Charles has poked his nose in and wasted ministers’ time by sending for them and demanding this that and the next, in line with his particular interests.

I therefore instinctively disapprove of Andrew’s excursion into political waters the other day when he was visiting Universal Engineering in Weymouth, Dorset, who make armoured vehicles.

He blasted the MoD for not ordering the vehicles which Andrew reckons would have saved British soldiers’ lives. His exact words were: “ I would say to you that regrettably they will not get off their fat backsides. The MoD are completely hopeless at these kind (sic) of things.”

He was speaking in his capacity as Ambassador for British Trade and Industry. (The Dorset based company is presumably hoping to exprt these vehicles to other countries.) However, the MoD has been swithering (Scottish word meaning being indecisive) over whether or not to order them for our own troops in Afghanistan. Indeed, Ainsworth went to inspect them when he was Secretary of State for Defence and that’s undoubtedly well over 6 months ago. Still we have no decision.

OK. Andrew shouldn’t have said what he did, but in his defence his office says that he thought that he was talking to a private meeting of the directors. He did not know there was a journalist present. Well, of course he should have known. He should have been advised, and regardless, he shouldn’t have criticised his mother’s government.

He has embarrassed her.

But, on this occasion, even if he was wrong to do it, I’m glad he has brought the matter to the fore. This is more important that Charles and his interference in building plans. This is a matter of the lives of people we send to fight.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If we can’t afford to fight a war, which we can’t, because we can’t afford to house and feed the poor, then we should not be at war.

Vehicles that can withstand twice the blast of any Taliban bomb would have saved lives. We didn’t buy them, even from British manufacturers... It’s shameful, particularly when the MoD is top heavy, full of high rankers on extremely comfortable salaries with fabulous expense accounts and awesome pensions, and a book deal when they retire.

So Andrew was in the wrong and by now I daresay the Queen has hauled him over the royal coals for embarrassing the prime minister and the defence secretary, but if this does make them get off their fat backsides and do something well, I can forgive Andrew. Just this once.

I’m sure he’ll be extremely relieved to read that!

WHY CAN'T WE SHOW MORE RESPECT?

I have just read with disbelief of an incident in Afghanistan which makes my even angrier than usual when reading of the UK’s involvement in that country.

Three British soldiers have been killed by a rogue Afghan soldier while on joint patrol in southern Helmand. This is not the first time have NATO trained Afghan personnel turned their weapons on British soldiers. In November last year 5 of our soldiers were killed by an Afghan soldier in a training base. The President of Afghanistan, Mr Karzai has written to the Prime Minister to apologise.

As an aside, once again it raises questions about how much infiltration of the Afghan army there has been by the Taliban. Clearly, I suspect, a great deal. The truth of the matter is that the Afghan president, a former employee of ex-Vice President Cheney of America, is happy to have the forces of NATO in his country, but we should not necessarily infer from that that he carries the population with him. After all, despite our claims that we are there to bring democracy to the country we all know that Mr Karzai was only elected President of the country by a rigged election process, to which we have given our tacit approval, thereby implicating us in the corruption.

That we have lost another three of our lads and, according to the Telegraph’s reporting of the story, another two injured, is sickening enough. But what I find completely unbelievable is that this story is in the press, and not just the Telegraph, but I see it features in The Guardian and The Mail and the BBC too, and at the time of writing, the families had not been informed. The Telegraph actually carried the line: The families of the soldiers involved in the incident are being informed, but anyone worried about relatives serving in Afghanistan can call a special helpline on 08457 800 900, as if it were some minor incident.

For heaven’s sake surely, even in the dog eat dog world of competitive journalism, we should be able to agree as human beings rather than journalists, that not a world of deaths or injuries of lads putting their lives on the line in the forces should be reported by the press until immediate families have been informed and time for more distant members to be contacted. The newspapers involved should hang their head in shame (credit here to the Scottish papers and the Independent); and someone at the Ministry of Defence (preferably the secretary of state) should be hung out to dry over it*.

Can you just imagine how unthinkably awful it must be for someone to read this online and dial that number with shaking fingers, possibly to be held in a queue..... ?

I know that many of us do not approve of this war, but it is not the fault of the lads or even their most senior officers that we are fighting it. It was a decision taken by government and approved in parliament by a majority of members. So no matter how disapproving we are of it, let’s treat the people at the sharp end and their families with more respect.



* It did occur to me that I was criticising newspapers using this story before the families had been informed, and yet drawing attention to it myself on this blog, and that that was perhaps a little of hypocritical. The penetration of this blog, however, is so minute in comparison to the newspapers and the BBC, that I decided that that was probably paranoia more than instinctive decency.

I DON'T NEED LESSONS IN SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY FROM A BULLINGDON BOY

In an article written for the Sunday Telegraph our Prime Minister has laid out the duty that every citizen, or rather subject, has to support the troops in Afghanistan.

He says that it is the whole nation’s “social responsibility” to put troops at the “front and centre of our national life”. He goes on to say that with Britain at war in Afghanistan, the public has to give full and unequivocal support to troops and their families.

In an attempt to invoke a wartime spirit of another time... and another war... he states that there is huge respect for the Forces and that he wants it expressed more loudly and more proudly.

Mr Cameron says: “Silent gratitude isn’t much use to anyone — so next Saturday (Armed Forces Day) I hope we see an explosion of red, white and blue all over the country. Supporting our Armed Forces isn’t just a government responsibility, it’s a social responsibility.”

Now anyone who reads this blog on a regular basis knows that I have the deepest respect for the armed forces. The bravery of the lads out in Afghanistan is literally awesome and I’m humbled by it. Every time I hear of another death, I weep inside for the waste of a young life, be it Canadian, American, English, Scottish, Afghan... A life is a life and a waste is a waste.

However, Mr Cameron, understand this:

Firstly, most of us don’t need to be told what our social responsibility is. We know, thank you.

We are not children and we resent being nannied and told what to feel, think and do by someone who’s been in the job 10 minutes and prior to that was an ineffectual opposition leader who couldn’t better the worst prime minister in living memory.

No Mr Cameron, I’ll not take lessons in social responsibility from someone who spent his years at Oxford in the Bullingdon getting wrecked and wrecking restaurants, just because he could, because had a rich daddy who would pay up.

So don’t tell me how to behave.

Secondly, respect for anything is only respect when it is heartfelt and meant. Not when it is ordered by the prime minister, or by anyone else. You really haven’t learned much for all your expensive education, have you?

The war Britain is fighting is unwinnable. Afghanistan will never be conquered. Statistics out today show that the situation is getting worse daily. We’re in this war because America wanted us in it. And we’ll come out of it when Mr Obama, or his successor, tells us to. If you had any real feelings for the troops you’d arrange their withdrawal within the next 2-3 months.

As an opposition, with the country behind you, you could have argued to take the troops out. You could have fought tooth and nail for more money, for a decent Secretary of State, for better conditions and more compensation for the returning injured troops. All of that should have been at the centre of your agenda, and you should never have stopped until you defeated what passed for a government in the last few years.

But you didn’t do any of that and when you got to Downing Street you put wide boy Lame Liam bloody Fox in charge. What a joke.

And now you’re telling us to get out the red white and blue next Saturday on Armed Forces Day?

You should be ashamed.

INADEQUATE TRAINING AND INAPPROPRIATE VEHICLES: THAT'S WHAT WE GIVE OUR TROOPS

Four soldiers were unlawfully killed after troops were given inadequate training.

So ruled Wiltshire Coroner David Masters who, at the conclusion of a six-day inquest into the soldiers’ deaths, went on to say that he would write to the Ministry of Defence to raise concerns about equipment shortages and gaps in training which led to the deaths.

The four soldiers died when their Snatch Land Rover detonated a roadside bomb at Lashkar Gah, Helmand in June 2008.

The use of the Snatch Land Rover is controversial, given the high number of soldiers that have died in them. The vehicle is unsuitable for the terrain in Afghanistan; it cannot be driven over soft ground and gets stuck in small amounts of water, meaning that troops using it must use roads and tracks where the enemy can anticipate them, and plant roadside bombs. So many deaths have been attributed to the use of this inappropriate and dangerous piece of kit that the lads refer to it as a mobile coffin.

The troops’ commanding officer, a colonel whose name was withheld, told the court that he had raised concerns about the lack of safe vehicles and was told that as no others were available they would simply have to make do.

Mr Masters noted that there was a limited pool of vehicles available and that there was a general shortage of vehicles available.

Major Sebastian Morley, one of the soldiers’ commander in Helmand, has resigned since the deaths accusing the government of being criminal for ill-equipping troops.

The court heard too that there were shortages of metal detectors, essential kit, which meant that soldiers had not been trained in their use before they were sent to Afghanistan. They had been forced to seek guidance once they were already in the theatre of war. One of the witnesses said that they had had to work it out themselves with the use of the manual.

Mr Masters concluded that there was a theatre-wide shortage of that piece of vital equipment. He said that the lack of the metal detectors slowed the convoys thus increasing the risk of attack.

"In my judgment there was an inadequacy in training for this unit and its members," he said.

Well of course I realise that this is (yet) another, different war from the one that the Chilcot inquiry is investigating at the moment, but, if all we hear is true, Iraq was funded properly, everything that the commanders wanted they got, the troops were well fed and well trained and equipment was plentiful.....whereas in Afghanistan the troops are ill-equipped, badly trained and under-funded with sub standard kit and rations.

Right! A word to the wise, Mr Brown....... OUR HEADS DO NOT ZIP UP THE BACK!

Picture: A Snatch Land Rover

"IF I'M GOING TO DIE, I WANT TO DIE A SOLDIER"

Time after time it breaks my heart to see kids, not much more than children; lads who have only just started their real life, lose that life in this stupid, awful, pathetic, unwinnable war.

On Friday young Peter Aldridge died in an explosion in Helmand. Rifleman Peter Aldridge, for all his youth, was already more of a man than most of us back home. He had faced things most will never have to face and seen things couldn’t begin to cope with. He was the 250th British soldier to die in Afghanistan.

His family said that he died a hero, and added: “He was determined to get his first tour of duty under his belt. He believed in the Army and was proud of his job and we are so proud of you Peter.” He said that if he had to die, he wanted to die a soldier.

His commanding officer, Lieutenant Colonel Rupert Jones, said: “The last thing Rifleman Aldridge said to the medic treating him at the scene was to tell his mother that he loved her.”

If that doesn’t break your heart, then it must be made of stone.

To the Prime Minister I would say: Bring these lads back Mr Brown. Please, before any more of them, still in their teens, still more schoolboys than adults, are killed. To Peter, I say: Thank you. You did this for us even if we don't deserve it. You did it because it was your duty. We are, or should be, grateful and proud of you and all your colleagues.

.................

The Wonder of Woolas

If Mr Brown had had anyone at all that he could have used as a replacement minister responsible for immigration, it would have been a good idea to have sacked the present incumbent pretty soon after he was made to look like a complete and utter muppet by Joanna Lumley over his ridiculous misreading of the “court of public opinion” concerning the Ghurkhas’ case.

Clearly, having trawled the back benches in the Commons and the Lords, and looked around anywhere and everywhere, under park benches for all I know, looking for someone, anyone, from anywhere, that could take the job, he has failed (again).

And that is why we were all entreated yesterday to listening to the unlovely Phil Woolas (OK, I’ve heard all the jokes... probably?), rumble on about how perfectly reasonable it was, in the current economic climate, for him to pay out bonuses of around £10,000 each to the senior executives of his Border Controls Agency.

He claimed that they were very brave men and women who put their lives on the line for us.

WHAT?

Firstly, I don’t want to put down the work that some of the members of that department do. There are hands-on people working undercover trying to find traffickers, indeed people who probably do risk life and limb in the pursuance of a good result. But we’re not giving them bonuses. The people who are getting the ten grand extra of our money are senior management.

Mr Woolas told the Today Programme “We’ve got a superb management team that is getting on top of what is probably the most difficult public policy area in political life. There are 285 million people who visit the United Kingdom every year, and organising that mass movement of people to protect our borders from the people who have bad intent is a huge job.”

He indicated that to do that job of protecting our borders from all these people with bad intent he needed to get the best people. Apparently, unless you pay massive bonuses to managers they just won’t do a hand’s turn. I’ve often wondered why governments of all political shades seem to find it necessary to pay vast amounts to get good managers (otherwise you just get rubbish), but seem content to have one of the lowest minimum wages in the EU for ordinary workers.

(In any case, it seems that all that extra money hasn’t really made any difference at all. We all know that the government’s immigration policy and practice went off the rails years ago. We have no idea how many immigrants are here; we have no idea how many released from prison are not deported... indeed, we have no idea......... of anything. Oh, and another thing, whilst it is relatively important to guard the borders, I'd think it was a bit of an exaggeration to think that it was the "most difficult public policy area in politics". Hmmm, talk about being up your own Woolas!)

Anyway, he added insult to injury by making the remarks on the day that the 100th death of a British soldier in Afghanistan this year was reported. Of course, I don’t make any distinction between the 100th and the 99th or the 3rd, but there is for some at least a symbolic importance to the number 100.

These front line troops are entitled to a bonus after 6 month tour of duty. It amounts to somewhere in the region of £3,500 for a normal infantryman out there fighting the Taliban. Now I wonder if Mr Woolas would like to compare and contrast the various dangers that a soldier in Afghanistan, on the front line faces with those of a typical manager in the Borders Agency moving his desk to that side of the room, or arranging his flowers on the coffee table we provide him with....

Like I said at the beginning, surely, surely in the whole country (coz Brown has long since given up trying to appoint ministers from the Commons) there must be someone with just a little more savvy that this dim-witted placeman, whose foot seems to reside permanently in close proximity to his mouth. He’s not even likeable; he comes across as a smug, self satisfied, supercilious moron. Phil Woolhead would be every bit as appropriate a name for him.

THIS CAN'T BE RIGHT, CAN IT?

I’ve just read, over on the Ranting Penguin blog, something that I completely missed on Sunday, and which has left me totally speechless, not to mention incandescent with anger.

According to The Times, there are civil servants from the Ministry of Defence working over in Afghanistan. Fair enough, there are soldiers out there in Afghanistan, and there must be back up ancillary work that requires an administrator to do it. And so it is right that we have a group of civil servants out there. The civil servants work at army bases, and may accompany Ministers in walk abouts, but they volunteer for the job, they are not deployed in the front line, and none has been killed in Afghanistan.

Now we come to the bit that might be considered to be rather strange.... OK, strange is not the right word.

A junior infantry man, on a six month tour of Afghanistan will receive a boost to his wage for undertaking the dangerous and difficult work that he will encounter out there. Good, I hear you say. No complaint there. On his £16,681 annual salary, he will receive something in the order of £580 a month as a bonus. On the other hand, a junior civil servant gets a bonus of..... wait for it.......£6,750 a month on top of his salary.

Alan Johnson defended the bonuses that the civil servants get (it seems that Mr Aintworth was unavailable (or too stupid) for comment), saying they did difficult and dangerous work.

Does the Home Secretary know what soldiers do?



(Sorry I couldn't get the links to work.... don't know why)

CONGRATULATIONS MR PRESIDENT

I’m at a loss to understand why the Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland telephoned the President of Islamic Republic of Afghanistan to congratulate him on his appointment.

From my reading of it Hamid Karzai has the position of president because his regime is so corrupt that his opponent in the presidential runoff, Dr Abdullah Abdullah, withdrew from the process. The first ballot had been “characterized by lack of security, low voter turnout and widespread ballot stuffing, intimidation, and other electoral fraud” (Wikipedia). There had also been a considerable number of deaths in the violence caused by the election, including the deaths of British soldiers.

Apparently Dr Abdullah realized that the second ballot had little hope of producing a different result and withdrew in order to save lives that would be lost were he to pursue further his hopes of becoming president.

Within hours of this corrupt man taking his place as president of a country for which our troops are providing security, Brown was on the phone to him. Contrast that with the fact that the phone at Bute House has still never rung with a congratulatory word for the First Minister of this country two and a bit years after he took office. Fortunately for Alex Salmond any kind of backing from Mr Brown is about the last thing he (or indeed anyone else ....ask Tony Blair...) needs.