Will Iraq stick to Brown?
July 3rd, 2006Focus shifts to the cost of the war
Much of the political damage done to Labour by the Iraq war is personally associated with Tony Blair. Many in the Labour party — whatever they think of Blair, Brown or indeed anyone else in the Cabinet — will be relieved at this aspect of Blair’s resignation when it happens: at least, they assume, the successor will not have been tarnished by the war in the same way. Conversely, the other parties will expect attacks over Iraq to be less effective for them.
Smart politics for those who aren’t fans of Gordon Brown — within or outside the Labour party — would be to try to get him personally associated with aspects of the war. Accordingly, 30 MPs (drawn from Labour dissidents, the Lib Dems and a few Tories) have tabled an amendment to the Finance Bill which would require the Chancellor to report annually on the costs of the occupation of Iraq, with a parliamentary vote required to release the next year’s funding.
There is a bit of a dilemma for the Tories here: if they support the amendment, it must have a good chance of picking up enough Labour rebellions to pass. But for the leadership to get behind it too wholeheartedly may draw some attention to the support that the majority of the party’s MPs gave to the war at its start. It might be best for them to sit on their hands and even if the amendment fails, take passive advantage of the heat being turned up on Brown.
If this changes your view of either the state of the parties at the next election or of Brown’s chances of succeeding to the Labour leadership, the markets are currently saying:
Largest party in next Parliament: 0.95/1 Con; 1.11/1 Lab
Next Labour leader: 0.43/1 Brown; 7.6/1 Johnson; 18/1 bar
Philip Grant
Guest editor
Mike Smithson returns on 10th July.
MessageSpace Advertising
Iraq, Afghanistan, (and Dhafur/Zimbabwe where we do SFA) will continue to haunt the government. Pouring more troops in to Bush’s ‘war against turr’ is like ****in’ for virginity. The situation in Israeli-occupied Palestine, where we are tarred with the Zionist brush, makes it worse. Western military might, however well-meaning is seen glabally as anti-muslim and will recruit more and more foolish young men into ‘martyrdom’ the more we put in: incidentally it also tarnishes ‘democracy’ which is increasingly viewed by those who have not really experienced it as just another ‘front’ for US imperialism.
Well, I’ve found the amendment on the Commons’ website:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/197/amend/60630a02.htm
But it doesn’t give the full list of signatories, so it’s not clear how many opposition MPs have put their names to it.
Is it likely to be called for debate?
1 - I have rarely read such a load of codswallop. Zebidee do you realise that even left wing columnist do not talk in such outdated terms as you are in your posting.
“Western military might, however well-meaning is seen globally as anti-muslim” - no it isnt. Go to Kuwait, go to Indonesia, go to Oman, go to Qatar or Bahrain (I could go on), all Muslim countries, and you will find that your statement is not true. If you then look at non-Muslim countries it is even less true!
The idea that the West is “tarnishing democracy” by its mission in Afghanistan is also nonsense. There we are trying to uphold the rule of a democratic central government against a theocratic Taliban resurgence which has committed crimes of all kinds against international law. Would you rather we did nothing?
Iraq has been debated to tedium on here but many of us still maintain that removing Saddam Hussein was a good thing to have done. It was the aftermath that was not properly handled. Iraq now has had a series of enthusiastically supported democratic elections.
I will leave your statement about “Israeli occupied Palestine” (an entity that doesnt exist) for a later debate!
I think it’s largely down to events in Iraq etc as to whether they do any political damage.
As your article points out Iraq is not something the Tories can make much out of even if they wanted to.
Only the LD’s can continue to mine this issue but even then I think theres a danger in over doing it - a continued focus on Iraq may start to actually undermine any percieved credibility(like The Independant).
The LD’s also run the risk of attacks from both major parties re Cynicism.
I think opponents would be better concentrating on other issues to attack GB on as when Blair goes it may have reached the point where the benefits stop and further attempts look increasingly cynical.
Also by the time this amendment goes through ,he is unlikely to be The Chancellor for very long, if at all.
There is, of course, another possibility. That the insurgence in Iraq is largely overcome and the Iraquis settle down to some kind of stability, thanks to Bush and Blair.
All the negative assumptions have been based on Iraq becoming another kind of Vietnam which is not what I think will happen.
Before everone chokes with laughter, remember the Lebanon a few years ago? We used to joke about things being ‘about as welcome as a weekend away in Beirut’ but these days the area is stable, prosperous and democratic.
IF Iraq does come through it might be Gordo who is there to take the credit.
Afghanistan is another matter entirely, but in UK politics terms it’s not such a hot potato.
[1][3][6] Two simple points which I try to keep in mind at all times on the subject of Iraq.
First, the real reason for the invasion was the CIA’s intelligence assessment - not seriously disputed from anywhere on the political spectrum AFAIK - that Saudi Arabia, where the standard of living has been cut in half in a generation, would fall to Islamists sooner rather than later, and that America (and by extension the West in general) needed another secure source of oil, Iraq being the obvious candidate.
Second, Iraq, as I am beginning to bore even myself let alone anyone else here by saying, is an artificial creation (by the Sykes-Picot pact) of Britain and France, corresponding to no natural or cultural borders. The problem about putting that right is that involves creating Kurdistan, which would be a viable country - but doing that would (i) hack off Turkey; (ii) feed Arab paranoia, the moreso because (iii) Kurdistan would control - apart from oil - the headwaters of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.
4. Yes, there is a danger for the Lib Dems that they will start to be seen as a boring single-issue party in some quarters - a kind of leftish version of UKIP.
I think crossland is right on this insofar as the political impact goes (I won’t get into the argument on rights and wrongs itself - I recognise the risk that zebidee is right, but inaction would have risks too). If Iraq gets much better or much worse, it could have some additional impact on British politics, but it’s a dodgy issue for the Tories and the LibDems are in danger of making it the equivalent of ‘Europe’ for the Tories - an issue where much of the electorate has a lot of sympathy for what they say, but think the party is obsessed with. Some will never vote Labour as long as anyone connected with Iraq is still in the leadership, but people who feel that strongly are mostly going to vote LD or Respect, not Tory, and probably don’t need further urging.
Afghanistan is a slightly different case, incidentally. On the one hand the recent clashes are new, so people may take a fresh look (nearly everyone has pretty well decided what they think about Iraq), but on the other the battle is being fought in obscure border areas with less scope for portraying it as a huge conlfict affecting whole cities. There is also less party division on the issue - most well-known critics of the Iraq war, such as Robin Cook, supported the removal of the Taliban because their link to terror in the West was clearer. The Tories are concentrating on things like “Do we have enough helicopters deployed?” which is a perfectly reasonable question to raise but not a campaigning issue.
I was opposed to the Iraq war but like everybody else I hope it all turns out right in the end. But to say that Iraq should no longer be an issue when the fighting is still going on and we still have troops in Iraq is ridiculous. Of course it’s an issue.
What doesn’t seem to be an issue is that none of the main parties think we should simply leave now or set a date for leaving. But as long as the Iraq war is going on it is far from yesterday’s news however much some might wish it to be so.
I disagree with Nick that “the LibDems are in danger of making it the equivalent of ‘Europe’ for the Tories.” I get no impression that Iraq is at all a devisive issue within the Libdems. Rather it is once again the tories, and of course Labour, who have divisions on this issue and have had right from the start.
7 Innocent Your first paragraph is conspiracy theory stuff without a shred of evidence to back it up. Not denying something is no proof of validity. And in matters spying there is never any comment on anything at all.
Your second paragraph, however, is spot on and the reason that Iraq was created was because it was all the bits left over after Syria and jordan were, in effect created from the ruins of the Ottoman Empire. Not a good start for any country, and it seemed only a minute or two before the Iraqis were attempting to get rid of the few foreign troops left in the country and having bloody coups amongst themselves.
OT, I’m afraid, but I missed the interesting debate on the WLQ yesterday.. baby duties…
It seems to me that the WLQ is one snake that isn’t going back in the basket. Now the Tories have made the WLQ a frontline issue - and now the media have followed up - it is bound to gain ever more salience. And for good reason, as the present situation is democratically absurd and insupportible, as we all know, deep down.
So I’d like to ask the Labourites on here, in the spirit of open debate, what they think we could do about it, other than ignore it, which is their forlorn policy of the moment. i.e. Taking into account the fact that nearly all of us want to preserve the Union, what bright ideas do Labour people have for properly solving the WLQ? A Federal Britain? What else?
Regions for England have been tried, and have failed, so we don’t want that answer!
So - NickP, etc, hypothetically speaking - if you were forced to accept that the WLQ needs addressing (as I believe you will be quite soon) what solution would you like to see?
11. Saudi Arabia was an artifical construct as well, albeit one constructed by home-grown imperialism (by Ibn Saud) rather than Western activity. So is Syria, and Lebanon and to some extent Jordan as well. I think it’s too early to assume Iraq must inevitably fall apart into its consituent bits, though the possibility is clearly there.
Nick, Re Afganistan, the public are a fickle lot, unlike the (Labour) Party who once having taken a position may hold it through thick and thin. If Afganistan looks like going wrong then people will quickly forget that they supported the initial operation and start asking “What are we there for?” and “How long are we staying?” and “How much is it costing both in lives and cash?”
Even now the answer to the first of these questions doesn’t seem to be widely understood.
Having read the article in The independant the other thing that stikes me is that it would effectively require the armed forces to go through a yearly budget tussle with parliament as it waited for any expenditure to be ‘agreed’.
Not at all useful , antagonistic to the armed forces and surely even Cameron at his most ‘compassionate’ would balk at picking a clause 4 moment with Her Maj’s finest.
O/T (apologies) but here are the latest real time results in the Mexican Presidential election if anyone’s interested. First link is national totals & second is for individual states. I think Calderon (conservative from President Fox’s PAN party) will just see off Obrador (PRD, left-wing). 84% counted and I think the 1% or so vote lead will hold (about 400,000 lead in the popular vote). The PRI’s candidate Madrazo is getting a pasting, with just 20.5% - the PRI dominated Mexican politics for much of the 20th century and Madrazo may not win any of the 32 states.
http://www.reforma.com/
http://elecciones.reforma.com/prep2006/PRESIDENTE/nacional_Pre.html
15 - Much appreciated - just spent 10 mins on google trying to find something of that sort and was just about to ask. Calderon to win would be my expectation from here, although presumably there is a differential in regions that haven’t yet declared.
BTW - who won the by-election prediction competition?
There is a (good) case for giving the US political support.
But there is no case for giving them financial aid. Paying for an American replacement for trident? Which the UK cannot operate with the say-so of the yanks?
There is a big cost of our roles in Iraq and Afghanistan, where we are making expensive political gestures. And where does this govt choose to save some money? By under-equipping British troops, combining the worst of all worlds.
It would take a politician who was much more light on his feet than GB, to come out of that smelling of roses.
6 - Whilst I genuinely hope you are right that Iraq will be a stable, functioning democracy in 5-10 years time, it seems rather unlikely. Thankfully, you are right that is not another Vietnam - we will eventually cut and run because there is little option. There will then be a rather unpleasant civil war after a short period and the challenge will be to stop Iran from taking advantage. The most damning long term criticism of the Iraq War will be that it was intended to make the region and the world more stable and will almost certainly do the reverse. Will it stick too Brown (or indeed Cameron)? A bit but not so much - people associate it with Blair to a pretty large degree.
Could everyone please stop spelling “independent” with an “a” in place of the final “e”? It is one of those little things that annoys me!
Not to sound terribly, coldly cynical about it, but both the Tories and the Dems have to come up with some Nixonian “plan to end the war.” It worked for him back in 1968 and if they come up with something that sounds halfway doable (bring in the UN, beef up the NGOs, blah blah blah), they should be able to gain some more political traction with it.
12 Unfortunately no-one saw the region as vital to Britain’s interests and from 1921 onwards much of Churchill’s policy, as Colonial Secretary, was directed to saving money on administering the territories that fell into our hands as the Ottoman armies retreated. Churchill had bought half the Iranian( not as Wiki say, Mesopotamian) oil fields for Britain before the first world war to secure oil supplies for the navy and they were more than adequate and as an investment it proved a stupendous success. So oil really did not come into it in the Arabia and Mesopotamia. The Balfour declaration made Palestine the policy pivot for the region.
I do realise that history began on that historic day in 1997 when our Great Leader, Kim Il Tony, otherwise known as Soundbite Sammy, took over the world.
Those of us who have some knowledge of pre-history (i.e. pre the gorgeous, svelte Cherie moving into No 10 with her personal hairdresser and crystals guru, and kicking the poor cat out) were a bit concerned about the Iraq invasion, remembering the trouble that the British army got into when it liberated what became Iraq from the Ottoman Empire, and expected to be welcomed with open arms by a grateful populace. There were something like 2000 British casualties in the following few years.
There is alleged to be a military maxim “Don’t march on Moscow”. There should be another one “Don’t get involved in Afghanistan”. The British fought three wars in Afghanistan in the 19th century, and didn’t enjoy any of them. There was a single survivor of the first expeditionary force. We all remember how the Afghans fought a full Soviet army to a standstill, and it was not short of materielle. George MacDonald Fraser, author of the excellently-researched Flashman books, and who fought in the victorious XIVth army in Burma against the Japanese (so he knows what war is about) described the Afghans as the best natural guerilla fighters in the world. I heard a lady journalist on the Today programme this morning, who was caught in an ambush with a detachment of 3 Para (veterns of Iraq), saying that they were shocked by the skill and audacity of the Taliban. They could have asked their predecessors, or even the Soviets. She also also said they called repeatedly for air support, but there wasn’t any to be had. Tony Blair and John Reid (then Defence Secretary) have sent an inadequate force, inadequately equipped, to face a ferocious fighting people in an area where the opium poppy is the only source of income, and announced they would put a stop to opium production. That loud-mouthed fool, Reid, is supposed to have said he didn’t expect a shot to fired, or something like that. When the Afghans get into their stride, Iraq will pale into insignificance.
My comments above ignore the question of whether we were right or wrong to get involved in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s just that we are going to lose a lot of good men, and achieve very little in the process.
Zebidee follows on from his disgraced Lib Dem predecessor in Oldham East and Saddleworth. the unlamented Chris Davies who was forced to resign as Lib Dem leader in the Euro Parliament after insulting a constituent and publicly drawing attention to her Jewish origins.
However Zebidee does exist in a parallel universe, one in which we have lived for the past century under a Lieral Governemnt and that the only objection to this hegemony comes from poor deluded fools who need medical help.
Frankly Zebbers only a well to do male aged 117 can ever have voted for a Liberal Government in this universe. That is the actual reality
Lennon at 16 - there is a clear winner in the competition & I have sent the results to Book Value with a brief covering article. I will resist the temptation to leak any results!
15- thankyou and am interested. Looked for a time that Mexico was following the pattern of Central/ South America in shifting to the left. Mexico is of particular global interest considering its closeness to the US (geographically and Bush’s personal connections). Still I think the closeness of this result echoes many other recent elections, and this one it appears is still “too close to call”.
Re; Iraq- I think the political element of this has burnt out, aside from the rainbow coaltition of the usual suspects- LD’s, old Tories, and old Left- the political damage has already been done, will be carried by Blair, and Brown will largely be seen as a pragmatist when he becomes PM.
On a human note I find the (now mandatory condolescences) at the start of PM questions deeply upsetting- all these names have a face, family and a lifetime of lost aspirations behind them. That is before considering the weekly slaughter of 100’s of lives in Iraq, many innocent. The architects behind this Iraq disaster, words cannot describe the supreme folly of this enterprise…
[11] You can’t have it both ways - accusing me of lacking a shred of evidence and then claiming that in the nature of the beast I couldn’t have any anyway
I only spent a couple of minutes googling and found these for starters:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195167430/002-3088906-0388843
http://meria.biu.ac.il/journal/1999/issue4/jv3n4a4.html
[20] Wasn’t there a chap in Iran called Mossadeq who nationalised his country’s oil so that we had to overthrow him?
RE 21, you should not let common sense get in the way of policy.
Essentially Iraq is seen as “Blairs War” and his vigourious and continued defence of the position together with the perceived detachment of Blair and Brown has provided the Chancellor with something of an umbrella on the issue. Even as and when Brown becomes PM, I wonder if Brown will be seen as inheriting the problem rather than being part of it. On balance I favour the former.
The Tories remain in a cleft stick on the issue, essentially they remain wedded to Blair. Nationally the Lib Dems retain the sharpest political hand, the strength of which is in direct relation to the volatility and endurance of the insurgency.
The Tory party & Cameron were enthusiastic cheerleaders for the Iraq occupation & illegal war.
To hear Tories now you’d think they voted against it.
We’ll make sure the voters don’t forget though….
21 (Fergus)- very interesting and informed post. In warfare, more than any other activity, the outcome is absolute and dictates the morality of the original enterprise. The outcome for the Iraq war is “when” not “if” we cut and run, leaving the country in the midst of a civil war. Let us see then how many people then will still claim it was the right thing to do.
Innocent Those are part of the conspiracy industry, just rather better presented than Blobby Moore and his diatribe against white men.
Because something is not denied cannot be taken as proof of its truth.
Iraq is degrading into a background issue as did Vietnam for Harold Wilson in the 60’s. It tainted him, and he had no troops on the ground from day one. He had no dodgy dossier. He had the Soviet Empire to blame. Blair and Brown have none such and terrorism on the streets where Wilson only had student demos.
Iraq will taint everything that this government does whoever leads it, whether that is right or wrong is immaterial, it is how things go in politics.
When a new leader was a key member of the cabinet that has made the decisions all the way through and has publicly said that he is totally behind the policy, there is no escape from the taint.
The damage will be less obvious when Brown takes over but it will continue to undermine the Labour party’s efforts to make a fresh start. That task after a decade in power is difficult enough but the straws on the Camel’s back will mount and mount. Iraq, sleaze, terrorism and the authoritarian approach that so suits Nulab, party funding, more waste, budget problems (chickens clucking home), devolution and so on with Iraq and increasing casualties in Afghanistan as a bloody splatter on all those nice election leaflets and manifestos and across our screens as the Dour One says, ‘It wasn’t me, guv’.
The Tories and LibDems don’t need to make a frontal assault on the war to make it damaging. It will do that of itself. They do need to expose the incompetence of the government and that they are doing more and more.
As Kevin suggests, closer to the election a plan to leave with honour in the Nixonian style with a determination to implement it as he did, would be by far the best way to serve the country and dish Nulab.
OT. Interesting “discussion” at ConservativeHome on Dinky Dunky’s proposal yesterday that it’s almost impossible for there to be a Scottish PM in the future. To my surprise many posters find the proposal a dud.
20. It is ironic that so much of the world’s oil should turn out to be located in places subject to political instability and religious fundamentalism…or is it? essay question for some of our younger PB.commers - is oil the cause of political instability in the Middle East, or is such instability inherent due to other factors? on my desk by Friday please, supervision to follow.
B2W - clearly you’re going to say that any evidence I come up is part of the conspiracy theory, so there’s little point in my googling further, is there?
Mind you, you’ve got some way to go in this school of debate… I well remember being clobbered in the 1980s by black activists who held that, slavery and apartheid no longer serving the interests of us white racists, we’d developed rational argument and the concept of mental health instead
A pedant writes: don’t get him started on separatist feminists, either, B2W, not if you know what’s good for you…
4 Only the LD’s can continue to mine this issue but even then I think theres a danger in over doing it - a continued focus on Iraq may start to actually undermine any percieved credibility(like The Independant).
… as demonstrated by the steadily growing readership?
34. What lively company you keep!
5 Afghanistan is another matter entirely, but in UK politics terms it’s not such a hot potato.
If British soldiers keep dying at the rate they have in the last week it soon will be.
And the combination of Afghanistan and Iraq will become a bigger sum than the parts because of what they say about our relationship with Bush and general foreign policy.
[36] I’m here, aren’t I?
27 Iraq has the potential to be seen as ‘Blair’s war’, but Brown will have to make it so and others, the Lib Dems in particular, will work hard to pin it on him too.
If they have any sense the Lib Dems will push very hard on the financial cost both to pin it to Brown and to help defend their own financial proposals.
Accusations by Brown that Lib Dem plans are ‘unaffordable’ will be harder to sustain if the Lib Dems can retort about the cost of war.
The Beeb is reporting that the Mexican Presedential race remains “too close to call” :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5137528.stm
37. I’m impressed by the balancing act Blair has played on foreign policy, myself. An even handed spinelessness towards the US on matters military and security, and towards the EU on matters domestic and economic. Perhaps he could be dubbed a ‘fettucini eating surrender monkey’ (or was it fish & chips?).
40 - Using the links that Paul gave earlier - they show Calderon ahead by 406,000 votes with 90.69% counted. By my quick calculations Obrador needs to win the uncounted by 45% to 34% (I assumed PRI and Others have same vote share which is unrealistic but quick). Still reckon the presidency’s going to Calderon, but by a margin of less than 0.75% (Currently 1.12%)
22 - No-one, least of all Chris Davies himself, is defending his comments, but before being too critical it’s worth reading the full background.
http://www.exeterpsc.org.uk/reports/Chris%20Davies%20130506.doc
Potentially interesting development in the nuclear politics cum Scottish elections as Labour MSP for Dumfries Dr. Elaine Murray has indicated that Scottish Labour will campaign on a manifesto not to block any plans by Blair to continue and enhance nuclear power in Scotland :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/5138858.stm
35…but not by its remarkably steady financial losses of around £10mn per year.
43. Re. Chris Davies - at best he has made a stupid mistake in engaging in a slanging match with an irate correspondent, at worst he has let the mask of his own prejudices slip. Either way, there seems plenty of scope to be critical and he has done the right thing in stepping down.
Based on the preliminary results, the Mexican presidential election is *officially* too close to call. This is according to the Electoral Institute. The *official* result will not be known until Wednesday, after all the ballots have been checked.
The good news is that the PRI seems to be out of the running. Without being unduly cynical, it was for very many years the mechanism for getting your snout into the trough. The trade unions were part of the system, as were the armed forces and the employers organisations. In exchange for keeping quiet, and more importantly keeping their followers in order, their leaders were given highly remunerated jobs at public expense. Political opponents were bought over with promises, or else eliminated.
In a different context, of course, it would have been the natural home for people such as Blair and Cameron.
I imagine Brown will check with his pollsters whether or not to involve himself in the Iraq affair. Research is a brilliant tool to give a snap-shot of what people are thinking now but it’s not necessarily any use at all at being predictive.
Brown has certainly been privately polling to find out what voters think of him and it’s likely he heard words like ‘dour’ and ‘Scottish’. As a result he has been smiling too much and indulging in Cameronesque publicity stunts at football matches that are frankly idiotic.
Someone has to tell him that an unspun tough Scottish politician with a prudent financial record might be just what the country wants. I have a strong hunch that Cameron have got it irreversably wrong and an unspun tough honest politician might fit the zeitgeist of the next few years perfectly
47. Your last paragraph is unworthy of you, Sage.
47. [sniggers] but not of course for such heroic anti-establishment radicals as Ming Campbell, Paddy Ashdown or Jeremy Thorpe…give us a break!
46 - I agree, I don’t think there’s any doubt that he was in the wrong, and was right to resign, but the actual facts are a good deal less damning than the headlines in the press implied.
39. You raised an extremely good point there:
“Accusations by Brown that Lib Dem plans are ‘unaffordable’ will be harder to sustain if the Lib Dems can retort about the cost of war.”
Given Gordon’s famous ‘prudence’, and the fact that the days of huge increases in spending (err…sorry…’investment’) in public services are over, all of the parties will be looking at the cost of Blair’s overseas adventures.
What a tempting target - cut and run to save money, and thereby save yourself having to make painful cuts in public services, or raise taxes.
Both opposition parties seem best placed make the most out of this, since they always have the most explaining to do about “where is the money going to come from?”
With both Afghanistan and Iraq, Gordon Brown (presumably) will have a whole pile of “events” on his plate when Blair departs.
I have friends on attachment in Khelmand and their assessment is increasingly bleak: not enough resources to do the job. Unless this is addressed, then the mission will not succeed.
As for Iraq- I think that there is some evidence that the Americans are thinking about the endgame- the redeployments underway seem to indicate some vague timetable for withdrawal- if only to avoid the mindset that the troops will be there forever (now THAT would be mission creep).
In any event it is not just a case of landing on an aircraft carrier and declaring the job done. Both interventions are in deep trouble and there is the increasing risk of a significant increase in casualties amongst our forces because they have not got the tools to do the job. That is what we all fear- but although the Conservatives continue to support the intervention, it would be Labour who would have to live with the political consequences of such a dreadful outcome.
51. Perhaps, but in politics perception is everything and there is no excuse for ignoring that. Stupidity is as great a crime in such a case as revealing unpleasant personal views. I am still not convinced he isn’t guilty of both.
No, Baskerville (49). If there is effectively only one party, which controls all patronage, then anybody who is interested in power and wealth will join it. The alternative is to be totally passive, or to resist and run the risk of being eliminated.
I think Blair and Cameron would have had no difficulty in being “incorporated”. The fact that Thorpe, Ashdown and Campbell opted for a small party with no immediate prospect of national government, suggests that they would not have been won over in such circumstances.
6. As a newly installed Beirut resident, having left behind the strawberry millitants and patio phalangists of SW19, I can confirm the astonishing quality of life in Lebanon (well, for affluent expats anyway).
What astonished me, though, was how Iraq plays diferently here. People only talk about it when pressed and the overwhelming view is that things are not as bad as they’re painted.
Israel? Well that’s a different kettle of salt-baked fresh fish.
55. But if you turn your argument on its head, Eric Heffer (you may be a little young to remember him), Tony Benn, Jeremy Corbyn, Dennis Skinner at al. must all be presumed to be potential lackeys of the corrupt establishment too, given that they joined a big party with a real prospect of governing. Perhaps ‘magic mushroom’ would be a better moniker than ’sage’…
I am fascinated by the odds that you quote for the next labour leader:
Is the Johnson that you mention Boris Johnson?
3. ‘Codswallop’.
Is that ‘codswallop’ from Rik W, globally-sought leader of the Notsopopular Front for the Liberation of Palestine from Palestinians, or Rik W from the Stern Gang (South Sutton branch)?
One can only presume that if Muslim Britons were to declare the entire area from Bolton to Bradford (with some ’satellites in Birmingham, Derby, Stoke and Luton) the religiously-defined ‘State of Misrael’, from which they would eject hundreds of thousands of Yorkies and Lancastrians before importing millions of Muslims, from Morrocco and Nigeria through to Indonesia and Scechuan, then Rik W would be out there calling for the flattening of Bakeswell and Glossop with kiloton bombs in the desperate hunt to kill-off the Pasty-eating ‘terrorists’ exiled in Derbyshire. And, no doubt, seeking a paid post advising the builders of the twenty foot steel fence which would be erected around the border of ‘Greater Misrael’, which would take in Preston, Chorley, Middlesborough and parts of Greater London.
Yes, Pot (57), except that the “establishment” they joined and wanted to further was of a different kind: ie Socialist. The Labour Party was extremely currupt in its traditional heartlands, wasn´t it?
59. Is Zebidee actually the Chris Davies featured in an earlier post?
Of course not, Pot.
The level of pomposity on this site is rising with the summer temperatures.
63. What is pompous about asserting that members of all parties except the Liberal Democrats have no moral compass and are potential collaborators with an authoritarian regime?
63 Jamie. Except in Scotland where it’s raining in some areas !
64 P&K. We’re doing irony now !
Re 64, The Liberal Democrats have no moral compass either…
Stepping into the Iraq debate Charles Clarke says the failure to find WMD in Iraq “undermined the war on terror” :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5140614.stm
67 Benedict. It’s difficult to encompass how, without a compass you find a party political moral compass ?
66 Jack, well make sure those collars are well-pressed! I was amused by the comments about Chris Davies coming from ‘Pot(sic) and kettle’.
67 Benedict: you do not need a compass if you already know where you are and where you are going!
66 I was about to post that it was dangerous to do irony - and up popped Benedict.
Anyway I am pleased to see the PRI get a stuffing, although the other two aren´t angels either.
65. Bloody Jocks - always have to be different don’t we ?
I am not 57 or 64
Zebidee previously admitted to being Tony Dawson failed Lib Dem candidate for Oldham East and Saddleworth in 2005.
He more than met his match with Phil Woolas who was adept at throwing back the mud - by the bucketfull.
Looking at his entry above he is obviously a student of the “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” Entry 59 goes well beyond good taste or even the hyperbole that usually accompanies enthusiastic/deluded Lib Dems.
72 Jamie.
Didn’t you realise that as we Scots run everything, we’re now turning our hand to the weather.
Derek. Where are you living in Beirut? One of my favourite places. You aren’t in advertising are you? Most ex-pats seem to be working for agencies. I always stay in the Gabriel. Swim in the morning and ski in the mountains in the afternoon!
Could I possibly suggest that discussing the Palestinian Isrealy conflict here is not going to get us anywhere?
Also, I have posted an article on my blog with my take on the war on Terror over here:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2006/07/war-on-terror.html
Sorry for the shameless plug…
I used to live in the same building as Abu Yousef, he formerly of Black September, until a visit by a future israelie prime minister.
75 Roger. And they say “Champagne Socialism” is dead.
74. Yes - I have taken a leaf out of Gordo’s book tho - have all the benefits of being a Jock but live in England for the weather
BTW Jack - Old Minger was commenting on the WLQ all Sunday - have you not told him that its a non issue with voters (IYHO) ?
Incedently there is a sizeable slice of Isrealy opinion that would agree with Chris Davies original press release. (there is also more that would disagree).
79 Jamie. Don’t tell all and sundry you’re a Scot, otherwise Rik and pals will propose that on-site we only comment on Scottish matters !!
I’ll have a word with our Viscount, he’ll put the Minger right.
BTW the election result we’ve all been waiting for is announced tomorrow - Speaker of the HoL. For a change I’m looking forward to a little bit of Scottish influence in the establishment with the election of the doughty Countess of Mar !!
81. Jack - I vote in England tho - hence I can comment on all matters except fox hunting in Scotland
82 Jamie. Even worse !!!! A Scot who lives and votes in England.
Sshhhhhhhh, the Tories will ban that too if you’re not careful !!
Working jack! We take our hosts from the Comintern,” Sattchi-ski Sattchi-ski” up to the mountains to get rid of any bourgeois thoughts they might have picked up from the St Georges bar
83. S’ok I’ll pay them off with my Barnett formula hand outs
I now see why whoever used to run ‘LibDem Watch’ closed it down. He must have had a trawl through this site a few times, and thought ‘why bother?’
83. It would make sense in at least one case I can think of.
68. Jack, Clarke seems so seriously off his trolly post removal from office, he can pen garbage like this:
“The experience with suspected weapons of mass destruction undermined confidence in the capacity of our intelligence services to make accurate assessments of the risks that we face,”
It was the EXPERIENCE OF ROTTEN INTELLIGENCE (starting of course with Blair/Scarlet on WMD but also continuing through the Vauxhall assasination to Forest Gate) which undermined public confidence, not just in the intelligence communities on operational matters but in politicians like Clarke on making related decisions about legislation etc. And he goes on to call for the Law Lords to debate the reasons behind the government’s proposals on terorism. Does the man not undertand the concept of seperation of powers between judiciary and executive? It is his lot who draft the sloppy laws which anyone with an O level in the subject could guess would get the treatment they get in the courts on the evidence presented, and then (attorney general, the (sic) ‘independent’ law officer) bringing prosecutions without proper preparation and assessment.
87 joker. Poor Ronnie Corbett !! A little harsh I think.
……………………..
Meanwhile the takeover continues :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/5136458.stm
Re 88, Zebidee. Unfortunately this government thinks that the choice is between safety and liberty which is a false choice.
Ultimately any anti terror campaign is a political on fought with propaganda, and these laws are a propaganda gift to the enemy.
If you want to stop a terrorist you need to know who he is and that involves far more resource on intelegence. What the precise law is, is not relevent. See my article on my blog for more.
OT, but what has happened to the English?
I read on another website a comment by an Englishman, rather upset by his team’s defeat, blaming the manager (well, that’s normal) but saying that he, the foreign manager ’showed no emotion’ while some of the English players were in tears.
I lived in Sweden for years, and I can tell you that Swedes are not given to wearing their hearts on their sleeves, nor of snivelling in public, and I remember when Englishmen weren’t either. The Englishmen of my vintage (which is around that of Sven Göran Eriksson) were hard, competitive sportsmen, but they were SPORTSMEN, and they took defeat with dignity. What gives with all this crying and emotional drama in public? Where has the stiff upper lip gone? Don’t they know that men don’t cry, the big jessies, and that, win or lose, the important thing is to play the game?
PK I suggest that you need to do a little more research before stating ‘certainties’.
I certainly have no more time for the Elders of Zion than I have for George W Bush or Osama Bin Laden. But I do agree with a previous poster that discussing the Middle East in depth here may not be the right place, unless of course Betfair are offering spread betting on the date of commencement of WW4.
RE: your comments on my posting 59, .I doubt very much whether Rik W and co have ever been anywhere near a killing war. The truth hurts. Similarly, 47 Sage, you are not only right about Blair & Cameron re PRI, you could also throw in Putin, Clinton . . . . .
>If you want to stop a terrorist you need to know who he is
and of course to decide he is not a terrorist on your side!
The problem is that Blair and co seem quite happy to lock up lots of people whio they ‘think’ (i use this word loosely) might be terrorists, on the argument that the trawl may catch a few hundred sprats but we’ll get the mackerel. Trouble is they’re getting seals not mackeral, and the sprats are not too happy with being locked up wrongly for some notion of ‘the greater good’ which doesn’t even seem to get the greater good.
It would be interesting to se a law promulagated upon which the Secretary of State moving the Bill said: “I realise that the outcome of this law will be to lock up a few dozen innocent Members of Parliament and members of the Royal Family and the odd Fleet Street editor or proprietor. . . but I am sure this has to be done for the greater good of the nation.” (actually what a *****ed good idea - without the terrorist threat!)
Lots of candidates, Zebidee (92), but, since I know most about our own domestic ones, they are the ones that really stand out for me.
Blair starts by sewing up his closest rival (who continues to be sewn up), then takes over the Labour Party and ditches all its policies, thus getting hmself elected as prime minister, but without really having any other purpose to it. He then carries on for nine years - or whatever - and all his actions turn around staying in office and seeing off rivals.
And now Cameron, with the help of his chum, Frank Luntz, sews up Davis, takes over the Tory party, ditches all its policies - all in an attempt to get himself elected as prime minister. What he will do when (if) he finally gets there, nobody has the slightest idea. But it seems to me quite clear that the objective is to take over power.
It´s all rather pathetic really.
RE 93, that is perhaps part of the point of my argument on my blog, which really is nto an argument for here either.
Meanwhile all is not well in PrezzaLand (Like PizzaLand but more sausage !) according to Guido and Iain Dale …. links right >>>>
96. Why get rid of Pressa now tho ? He’s doing everyone non-red a service..
91. A couple of decades of the infantilising effect of watching soap operas and daytime TV, I reckon.
Well Tony Dawson/Zeb. There are lots of theories about world Jewish conspiracies surrounding Bush/Blair/Putin et all.
Once you start treading up that path then it usually starts to come out adn you are no different.
94.Politicians trying to take power? the sneaky good-for-nothings! who would ever have thought they could stoop so low!
We have even got our retaliation in first against a certain leader of the Conservative Party:
Cameron
Origin: Scottish
Meaning:Crooked nose
101 - Anybody know what ‘Oates’ means?
101 - Whereas the Gaelic translation of Campbell is so much more flattering?
101 . Better to have a nose that is crooked rather than long and wooden a la TB..
103 - Crooked mouth, isn’t it? Not that I would proclaim that one too loudly myself..
105 - I’d forgotten about your Argyll connections Alastair. I’m heading through to the Inveraray Highland games in the middle of the month. Can’t deside whether to enter the wretling competition or just stick to the caber tossing. I wouldn’t care to speculate on which of these Jack is an expert!
[102] [103] Hey, Don’t shoot the messanger
[102] (n) Conspirator who claimed that there was a Jesuit plot to assassinate Charles II (1649-1705)
[103] According to my Great Uncle Mac, just being a “Campbell” was crime enough. When my Uncle Graham names his son Campbell there were some very heavy silences….
106 - I understand Jack is a master at dancing the highland fling, Max.
We’re off to Inveraray next week to visit family - very much looking forward do it.
59 - Zebidee, I come from Glossop, anyone is willing to flatten it if they so wish.
99 Pot, the only person I can see citing any ‘conspiracies’ is you (good?) self. What attacks on ‘Israel” terror have got to do with the Judaeic religion heaven knows. Presumably by your logic, the Pope should worry when people condemn the ‘Christian’ campaign of attempted global domination of George Bush. Bizarre. You’re not Melanie Phillips in drag by any chance, are you?
59 - Zebidee, I come from Glossop, kudos to who anyone is willing to flatten it if they so wish.
109 & 111 - Don’t know how that happened there, two versions which I didn’t send!
The actual version which makes sense, is -
Zebidee, I come from Glossop, kudos to anyone who is willing to flatten it if they so wish.
34 Innocent Ah, you get it, now, eh? You cannot vin, Mr Brond.
92. That is a disgraceful call zebidee, RikW may never have been in a killing war a comment which you base only on your suspicion. Whether or not RikW has is besides the point he has signed up and agreed to be sent to a ‘killing war’. If the Co bit meant me, I was a mine sweeper I destroyed underwater ordinance, a bloody difficult enough job without a jobsworth civilian making accusation against men willing to go out into hell holes to serve their country. My apologies if enough of our opo’s weren’t killed for your liking.
There is one major problem that Brown will face over Iraq/Afghanistan, that he cannot avoid it in power the way he has done so far.
The major problem that people have with Iraq is that Blair is in hock to his neo-con friends across the water, Brown’s only get-out is to reverse this. The question is, ‘has he got the guts?’ and, frankly, I don’t think he has. How will he be able to reverse or the Blair/Bush link without being seen as opportunistic and worsening US/UK relations.
Given that Brown will have little choice but to follow the Blairite position on Iraq he will be inevitably tarred with the same brush.
O/T With Murray collapsing like a pack of cards looks like this is a real annus horribilis for British sport……
The idea that a Scot or an MP from a Scottish constituency cannot be PM of the UK is daft. Of course he or she can. I suspect Duncan fell into the same trap as a few newspapers have: using the ” Scottish question” as a summary for the whole issue. Either way it was a careless hare to set running.
The problem at the moment is that such a person would be de facto the First Minister of England. If that person were an MP in an English constituency, fine but the WLQ does not go away. If from a Scottish constituency it simply makes the WLQ become the Scottish Raj question and it would zoom to the surface and become pre-eminent. Every problem would soon be couched in an argument about democratic legitimacy. A disaster for the UK
Why the Labour party cannot accept that England needs the same consideration as Scotland, I do not know.
Personally I would go for full federal status and be done.
The first person to mention Melanie phillips has lost the argument………..
(Though i asgree with Zebedee that Pot..Black does use the same bizarre logic)
OT. Andy out
Outplayed today, but he’s young …..
Jack W’s favourite Highland Political Sport is Tossing the Spin Merchants …. it’s a whirl !!
118. Murray is from a long line of McChokers - see Coulthard and Tom McKean..
I think like Owens leg Murray’s temperament isn’t fit for purpose…….
107. Not Captain Oates of ‘I’m going out now..I may be some time’ fame?
Titus Oates would have got on well with Zebidee I think. They could have spent many happy hours trying to outdo each other by inventing ever more outlandish conspiracy theories.
116 B2W. The difficulty with the last 2 paras is you present the solution to a problem that England, so far, isn’t ready to vote for, if the regional votes are any guide.
WLQ watch - is the bulge under the carpet beginning to show ? Worrying times for LDs and Labs…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5140152.stm
[117] That’s not quite right, Roger. The first person to suggest that Melanie Phillips is ever so slightly paranoid is the one who’s lost the argument… (q.v. my post [34] above…)
[116] Yes a Federal Britain is the only answer to the West Lothian Question. Been Lib Dem policy for decades- nice to see those who once condemned, now accept it.
[121] Well he has certainly been some time now, and his dinner is getting cold.
119/120 Jamie/Roger. Somewhat harsh. Most tennis players don’t reach their peak until mid twenties, which is in Federer terms is worrying. In any case, unlike Henman, grass is Murray’s worst surface. Plenty of time for Andy.
123- I like Home Rule so much I want the English to have it too.
I doubt Blue2win meant having regional English parliaments as part of a federal solution, Jack W - rather an English one alongside Scots, Welsh and NI ones. I could see the voters going for that. To keep the costs down you could form the ‘federal’ parliament by delegations from the four national ones. The House of Lords would in such a setup look at UK-wide legislation only. Quite a neat solution?
122 - The voters know when they’re being sold shoddy goods (usually), the equivalent of greater self governance for three of the nations in the UK is, of course, the same for the fourth one.
If there had been assemblies for, say, Central Scotland and North Wales, then there would be a similarity., I doubt that Scottish or Welsh voters would vote for those so no surprise that English voters ignored it too.
I still fail to see why, if the union was to be changed so greatly as with devolution, why the whole of the UK were not to vote on it. That was the initial mistake from which the current dog’s breakfast has emerged.
125 Cicero Exactly who are you talking about?
I have believed in the federal solution since studying the Irish debates held the 19th Century and Churchill’s later take on it when he led the Home Rule negotiations after the first world war. That study was a few years ago. What about you?
128. ‘Keeping the costs down’ would be a pretty relative concept…
Blue2win 116. Last night Alastair Matlock was agreeing with the Liberal Democrats, over an elected upper chamber. Now you are advocating proper federalism. Then of course there is a British bill of rights, Gradually the Conservatives seem to be saying on every constitutional issue that the Liberal Democrats are right.
It’s getting painfully close to the two parties converging. So why don’t we take one name from your party - say ‘Party’ and one (perhaps two) from ours - say Liberal (and maybe Democrat) and we could have a new party - called the Liberal Democrat Party. It would make British politics so much easier and saner for everyone
Am I out of step with most Lib Dems then in not wanting a federal Britain? I just don’t see the point. We need to be focusing on devolution to real local level.
132. Splendid idea, especially since the LDs moved our way over taxation.
128 Fred. Far too sensible to be enacted !!
I just don’t want the HoC to become a chamber with diferent classes of MP. It’s the UK parliament, not a convenient tool for English Tory MP’s to sabotge UK wide Labour governments, almost like the old House of Lords.
135. Can’t we just leave it the way it is?
133 Valerie. The two are not mutually exclusive. The important thing is to follow the power not the buildings.
Merger of Tories and Lib Dems = Closure of PB.com ……. you two mobs agreeing is time to increase the order for sick bags !!
123. “and the notion that England will never now accept a Scottish MP as prime minister is being put about - most loudly, it has to be said, by Tories attempting to undermine Gordon Brown”
Exactly! Even Alex salmon described it as a cheap Tory attempt to keep Gordon Brown out of office. ……
I heard that archetypal Tory Frederick Forsyth telling all and sundry why Dave Cameron wasn’t fit for purpose. Even though people like me regard him as only slightly above Melanie Phillips in the Sid and Doris Bongers stakes there’s no doubt that he speaks for a lot of mainstream Tories. It’s easy to see why Cameron is clutching on to this transparent piece of gerrymandering. He wants to reconnect with the headbangers.
121 Sadly,I know nothing of Titus Oates, though I have oft left my tent to go wandering in the snow. I have, however, (S K Penketh 114), been in a country alongside homeless women and children petrified by death pouring from the skies and it sharpens the mind up no end. No I never dreamed of including you from your postings you seem so young. I have every respect for those who dismantle Ordinance, as I trust you have for those whose involvement with the enemies has been somewhat more hand-to-hand.
131. Well yes…but in my approach we would only have one set of elections, so no duplication of MSPs/AMs and MPs as now.
130/125. Joseph Chamberlain argued for ‘Home Rule All Round’ rather than messy unilateral devolution - in the Irish context -more than a century ago. The Liberal high command at the time weren’t keen and he ended up joining the Tories.
There are for me only two stable systems, a fully federal one or the unitary one we had from the abolition of Stormont in the early 1970s until 1997. My preference would have been the second, but having gone 50% of the way down the road to the first system, I think we must now go the whole way.
Jack @137 I was thinking more in the realms of extinction - i.e. if the Tories are reduced to accepting that we have already thought of all the best solutions there really isn’t any point to them any more is there
OTOH when did them having a point ever stop them 