MEMO: Those who stuck with Tony made money
February 1st, 2007
Could losing the confidence of the House be what actually does it?
One of the great adages on Politicalbetting is that “Nobody ever got rich betting against Teflon Tony”. Certainly he has proved the betting markets wrong time and time and again those who have had faith in his survival gene have made money. Just look at the record:-
So don’t underestimate this guy. His ability to surprise and deal with the moment is extraordinary and clearly he wants to make it very hard for Gordon to succeed him.
-
You can see some outside event developing that only he can handle for the party, for the nation or for the planet in his own messianic style. You can hear the tremble in his voice now as he looks at the camera calling for everybody to back him in this one final endeavour.
So he might have had a bad PMQs yesterday, the honours inquiry might be getting closer and closer and parts of his party are in open rebellion. So what? This guy is a superstar.
My current position in the Blair leaving date betting to to lay (bet against) April-June being the quarter that sees him go.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Mike, I have to agree. The only way I can see him going is if he is draged out kicking and screaming, and only Yates can deliver that, if, and only if Lord Goldsmith agrees.
“You can see some outside event developing that only he can handle for the party, for the nation or for the planet in his own messianic style. You can hear the tremble in his voice now as he looks at the camera calling for everybody to back him in this one final endeavour.”
There will always be one more thing to do. Incedently it is the lack of sincerity in that quivering lip that makes my fists itch so much.
Meanwhile the daily fascsit, sorry, Daily Mail thinks Al Qaeda was behind the latest terrorist plot. For why I don’t think so see here:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
Part of the picture is that now Brown doesn’t want him to go before May 2nd, because he will then probably begin his premiership with a drubbing at the polls.
Sort of agree…
But I wonder whether Blair has decided on a 1st May departure date.
It gives him his 10 years as PM and allows 24 hours of glowing media coverage before Scotland, Wales and local polling day.
Labour’s drubbing is probably lessened (and if not it doesn’t matter) as the main story is about his 10 years as PM (accompanied by all those ‘things can only get better images’).
It’s what I’d do if I was advising him.
Don’t you think that resigning just 48 hours before polling day will look odd and that some people would think the worst?
1 - I think you’re absolutely right. The only people who can force Blair to go are the police - well, Yates. The PLP has no real incentive to act - he’s going anyway, why make any more hassle and in-fighting just to give Brown a couple more weeks or months in the job?
Also:
Cruddas - Deputy contenders ’should resign’:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6318979.stm
I think you might have added to:
Those who stuck with Tony made money…. or got a peerage ;o)
Mike
I know what you mean about Tony and I’ve certainly made money sticking with him. It’s a difficult call, so I’ve split my bets - 2/3rds to Q2 and 1/3 to Q3. I still think it will be the former but am glad I have the ’saver’.
Seems a bit of a convoluted argument when you can just lay England to win a cricket match every four days or so
You’re really betting now, Mike, because this is so uncertain.
The fact is the investigation makes a departure both less and more likely.
Less likely, in that if something happens - Powell or McTernan are next to get arrested, say - Blair will dig in his heels - if he had been wanting to go he will think himself bound to stay so that the nation not see him as hounded from office.
More likely in that if charges are brought, a Cabinet rebellion will force his actual departure.
It’s up to the detectives.
Otherwise I think he will go in August or September.
9 I was with you until the last line, Commentator! If he goes in Q3, it’s likely to be July, although for betting purposes it makes little difference if he does hang on a further month or two.
We’re in the endgame and as any chess player will know, endgames can end suddenly.
Ah, what a lovely and surprising start to this set of comments. We can never have too few links from Benedict to his blog.
Doesn’t the fact that Blair has held on so long tell us not that he is a ’superstar’ (once, maybe), but rather that his Labour colleagues (sic) are woefully out of touch with reality?
As others have pointed out, there’s a huge amount of uncertainty with this market because of the potential impact of unknowable events - especially the police investigation (strange how easily we get accustomed to the Prime Minister / his close associates being investigated for potential criminal wrongdoing).
Mike’s main point is correct, though. It is extremely difficult to force out a sitting Labour prime minister who doesn’t want to go - and Blair doesn’t look like a man keen to leave the stage. The formal machinery is cumbersome and would drag on for weeks if not months, which given his declared commitment to going this year will pretty much prevent it being used.
For these reasons, I can’t agree with those who think he’ll go before May on tactical grounds. It’s wholly against the nature of the man for him the think that Labour could be helped in any way by his going. If the results at the local / regional elections are as bad as currently predicted, there will undoubtedly be enormous pressure for him to go but again, his departure date will probably require his consent.
The only two exceptions to that rule would be if the police investigation fingered him personally - for example, if he were to be arrested under either act that others have been - or if Gordon were to withdraw support politically.
I’ve posted before that I don’t think the police would want to take such a high risk step with such enormous consequences, when if they do need to arrest him they can wait until he’s out of office. Were Gordon to withdraw support - say by encouraging a cabinet resignation following May’s elections (he certainly wouldn’t resign himself!) - Blair’s position would become untenable, but Brown’s political capital would also be badly - possibly irrepairably - damaged, too.
So what’s likely. Well I posted on an earlier thread that the Q1 price is too short. Around 13/1 for him to go in the next eight weeks, especially with the unclear Betfair definitions, seems to me to overestimate the possibility of something forcing him out - and he won’t go of his own accord before the end of March. Q2 probably is just the favourite for his resignation, though I don’t think we’ll have a new PM until Q3 as he’ll want to attend the summer summits. We saw last year that under huge pressure he will shift his position. I’d predict that the pressure that will follow May’s elections will generate the timetable for departure - but it won’t be an immediate resignation.
13 Yes David, that’s about as good an assessment as can be made at present. It puts the most likely departure date towards the end of June but possibly a little earlier or later, depending on the kind of events you mention. This is why I have ‘covered’ Q3 but my main bet is on Q2.
Personally, I think the May election results will be decisive. It’s true he can’t be forced out but if they are disastrous, he would be under great pressure to step down and would probably want to do so anyway.
“You can see some outside event developing that only he can handle for the party, for the nation or for the planet in his own messianic style. You can hear the tremble in his voice now as he looks at the camera calling for everybody to back him in this one final endeavour. ”
do you mean the soap operish (fakish) kind of acting he usually engages in?
Doesn’t the fact he has been forced to say he’s going next year (instea of the “third full term” as Tessa Jowell contined to repeat..for a moment I thought she couldn’t say anything else apart from that line) undermine a bit Mike’s point? He’s going in the end.
And since the whole premise of the piece is that Tony is great and no-one shouldn’t bet on leaving early, following it, you should bet on July-Sept as it’s the last period available to fulfil his promise.
What event could he use to stay on? The invasion of Iran maybe?!
45 minutes to save the Earth etc etc!!
45 minutes to save the Earth from Rik !!
Apparently the former Conservative spokesman for paperclips and allusory defections has been bitten on the rump by a deadly Lib Dem puff adder. Rik now urgently requires a fellow Conservative to suck the poison out !!!!!!!!!
Step forward Tories ……………………. someone ?????
Sing … It’s all quiet on the right … it’s all gone quiet on the right …..
Sorry, Mr Willis … you’re going to die !!! ….. you’ll just have to take sollace in Benedict’s Blog ….. it’s very quiet there !
Just to remind people of the rules. If 70 Labour MPs call for a leadership contest, there would then be a vote at the next party conference about whether to have a contest or not.
So in other words, it’s pointless… Even if there was a PLP rebellion (which there won’t be) it would have no significant impact on the timing. Mike is totally right.
RE 11, MikeL
Blair will not now put personal interest before his own- his departure date must be after May to allow Brown the best possible start. Labour is going to get drilled in May whoever is in charge- this should not cloud Brown’s start.
As to all the personal attacks on Blair that this site frenetically engages in- I am no fan- but the guy is a colossus- he has made Labour electable again, and brought the Tories to the brink. He has pulled British politics to the centre ground, and transformed the accountability of British government. He has resided over the longest period of economic growth, low unemployment and inflation that this country has ever experienced. He has helped redistribute resources without the middle classes particularly bothering. He is bringing British public sector institutions upto the level of their European counterparts. He has helped build a sustainable peace to Northern Ireland, and has raised the profile of Britain internationally (from the nadir of Major).
His failing is Iraq- and the consequences thereafter.
War against Iran, well Liam Fox has been calling for that! He’s in the US now assuring the yanks, that when DC takes over, we’ll be ’shoulder to shoulder’. After all the RAF has to find something to do with their shiny new Typhoons, ‘Ones been shot down, oh my gawd, do you know how much those things cost!’
re 7 well I too will make money whenever he goes - as long as he’s not been lying again and it is before October
O/T French presidential election update
A new candidate this mornig: José Bové, a former leader of a leftist/environmentalist/anti-globalization farmer union. He became famous 6 years ago by leading the destruction of a Mac Donald’s restaurant by a crowd of angry cheese producers (He became immediately very popular, welcome to French politics…)
He can be considered either as the fifth far-left candidate (with the 3 trotkytes+ the communist) or the sixth ecologist candidate (although at least three won’t be able to run)…
He joins the field of the “other candidates” (other than the big four, Sarkozy, Royal, Le Pen and Bayrou) who all seem limited to poll scores under 4%. However the addition of yet another leftist candidate is not good news for Ms Royal.
Polls of the day : Ipsos sarkozy 52 royal 48, IFOP Sarkozy 54 Royal 46 (those polls were leaked on tuesday but only published today)
“I have been under significant pressure to review my decision to step down this year in the light of the worsening security situation and the failing economy.”
I have been touched and deeply affected by the representations I have received from many cabinet colleagues who, like many independent observers, feel that the only *current* serious contender for my job, Gordon Brown, is neither the right person to take the Country forward nor the best person to lead our Party at this time.”
Accordingly, now that Inspector Yates’ enquiry is complete and the matter closed I have decided to agree to cabinet requests to stay on for the time being.”
25. Chris, I thought he already was in the race. His potential presidential bid has been sometimes mentioned even here in Italy (he’s “known” here too)
Well, I don’t usually do the ‘I told you so’ stuff as I’m sometimes wrong (Dunfermline!), but I’ve been saying here for years that people who don’t like TB completely misread his steadiness and enjoyment of the job. They also misread (as does the rubbish tabloid calling itself the Independent) the mood of the PLP. It’s always possible to find grumbling MPs, but by and large Labour MPs like TB, think he does a good job and don’t have any appetite for forcing an early changeover. I’ve been saying for ages that it’ll be June or July, and I think July is more likely in terms of the actual handover (but I advise anyone betting on it to check the definition of the bet with the bookmaker - the leadership resignation to trigger the ballot in likely to be in May). The idea that he’ll reverse what he’s said and hang on longer than Q3 is equally misplaced.
TB is making himself a lightning-rod for the next few months, and if the Tories choose to direct fire on him, they’re straying from the ‘TB’s all right but things are gonna be awful afterwards’ line that they were taking up to now. A mistake, I’d have thoughty, but ’tis up to them.
Ah Marcus glad your there, question: I see that Torbay is going to be allowed a licence for a, ’small casino’ in the event that anyone would apply to open a casino there, (Paignton Green?) would you be pro or anti?
29. Coldestone. He’s pro! He has replied you 3 threads ago (or click on his name and read his blog)
coldstone- one reason why I cannot stand listening to the critcism about Iraq from the new Tories- Rifkind, Clarke aside- the Tories were more gungho, and in hindsight are now criticising the venture based on poor planning, taking the cowardly Kerry line.
Iraq was and is an unmitigated disaster- illegal to boot and Blair and Labour should have paid electorally in 2005. Its consequences are still impacting on British domestic policies as the government seeks more and more draconian measures in this phony war of terror.
I can say all the above because I have always opposed Iraq- I even thought the war on Afghanisatn was a huge mistake. I hated the Taliban but thought this action would add fuel to the fires of Islamic hatred. But I cannot really stomach any Tory based critcism. Hypocritical, opportunistic and cowardly!!
Thanks Andrea, must have missed that, when I was out. Might apply for a job, when it opens!
27- well he announced first his candidacy in september then withdrew and joins again the race… The best joke is that he thinks himself (as the other 4) that he is the candidate able to unite the far-left…
19 Hey, look who’s back! Does Matron know about this?
Welcome back, Jack. Site’s not been the same without you.
Re 26, Marcus, yes that is the sort of anouncement I expect him to make
19.JackW, welcome back and I hope you are feeling a lot better.
28 In fact Nick Palmer by leaving office when despised most Blair’s legacy will be to bequeath Brown a fresh hand, and create a real feeling of change.
The turn on Tony factions- fuelled by the tabloids, disgruntled labour MP’s, and now the Tories could be a masterful piece of spinning to provide the best start for the successor.
31 Tyson - “…And in hindsight are now criticising the venture based on poor planning, taking the cowardly Kerry line.”
It’s also the Sir Christopher Meyer line and therefore rather more credible.
The Tories also have the get-out line that they were not as fully briefed as the Government as to what the Security Services were saying. It is just about possible that an astute Conservative leader might, given the same dossiers of evidence, just about have smelt enough of a rat to hold fire.
I doubt it, but you have to grant it is possible.
22. Rubbish. Blair is a political magician, no doubt, but his failings far outweigh his merits. The main achievement of this Labour government has been economic stability and continual growth - for that they must be properly credited. But Brown is the one who should get the credit. Why? Because Blair, given half the chance, and convinced of his own messianic destiny, would have taken us into the euro - and consigned us to the high unemployment and low growth of the eurozone over the last decade.
Apart from that Blair, as a congenital and pathological liar, has traduced and poisoned the British political system with his mendacity. He cannot open his mouth without telling a fib, his mother tongue is falsity, his speech is pure dissembling, his vocabulary is that of a used car salesman on methamphetamines.
Because of his aversion to the truth, he is also responsible for introducing those two political viruses to the British political bloodstream - Peter Mandelson and Alistair Campbell, two odious, bullying, manipulative slimeballs, a pair of of the nastiest men ever to work in Westminster. With his own lies and his employment of other liars (like Mandelson and Campbell) Blair has reduced voter confidence in politics to catastrophically low levels.
Because Blair lied about Iraq, the biggest issue of the decade, it will be hard for any other government ever to win the people’s trust on an issue as grave as going to war. This is incalculably damaging for our country.
Furthermore, Blair is a dangerously vain and insecure man who hides his failings and self doubts with a carapace of charm - like all charlatans and philanderers. All that matters to Blair is his own image. This is why he is so desperately clinging on to power, in the futile hopes that his legacy will not turn out to be, yes, the charred corpses in Iraq.
He will fail, of course. When they finally drive a stake through Blair’s career, people will remember him only for this, for Iraq, and the lies he told to take us there.
Blair is a bowel movement of a man. A voided bladder making pitiful noises.
36. ChrisD, what do you think of this?
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/output/2007/02/01/newsstory9247338t0.asp
Helpful or unhelpful for the tories?
(btw, Stuart and other SNP pb.comers, Sandra White has a piece in today’s Morning Start if you’re interested and you don’t usually buy the MS)
35….. “And it is, of course, with deep regret that I accept the resignation of the Chancellor who has done a sterling job for Britain etc… stop laughing Cherie…”
I am always amazed (as a foreigner) of the incredible violence of Brit newspapers aginst your politicians…
I quote the Daily telegraph this morning :
“As for Mr Blair, this once formidable figure has gone beyond being an embarassment. he has become an absurdity.”
Nothing of that scale can be printed in France, even against Le Pen (despised by 805% of the population) or Chirac(universally distrusted). Somehow, I regret our journalists’ sense of understatement, but i’m not sure I would like such kind of journalism in my own country…
31 Indeed IDS was famously egging on Blair. But even the junior Tories had a bash. eg. April 2002
13. Mr. George Osborne (Tatton): If he will make a statement on preparations for future military action in Iraq. [50952]
The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon): We have made plain our concerns about Iraq’s continued development of weapons of mass destruction and the potential threat the Iraqi regime poses to the international community. Allowing those programmes to continue unchecked is simply not an option. However, no decision on military action has been taken and no such action is imminent. Any decision that we make will be taken carefully, cautiously and in accordance with international law.
Mr. Osborne: Both the Prime Minister and the American President have made it clear that military action against Iraq is at least an option, even if no decisions have been taken. Can the Secretary of State reassure the House—or at least, the Opposition—that intensive
preparations are under way for the contingency of military action, including a possible ground campaign; otherwise, the threat against Saddam Hussein is hollow?
Re 40, Marcus,
again!
re 41. that comment about Blair seems tame to me. They left out the bits about liar and war criminal after all.
test
Regarding May, the word on the streets in Wales, is that Labour vote is collapsing by typically 25%, but that voters have generally not yet decided who else to vote for. Now that is pretty disastrous and even Blair could not spin this one…………
For the joy of Nick Palmer the Indy also has a powerful piece by Austin Mitchell
http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article2204089.ece
Re 46, Penddu, That would be bad for Labour.
Last year we had a byelection around here in a Labour held ward. We picked up severe disilusionment amoungst Labour activists and expected a vote collapse.
Their vote went up by a couple IIRC. However they lost the seat as the Conservative and Lib Dem vote overtook them, and the Lib Dems narrowly won the seat.
So we will have to see what happens in May. Could be a blood bath. Could also be higher than usual turnout.
22. Rubbish. Blair is a political magician, no doubt, but his failings far outweigh his merits. The main achievement of this Labour government has been economic stability and continual growth - for that they must be properly credited. But Brown is the one who should get the credit. Why? Because Blair, given half the chance, and convinced of his own messianic destiny, would have taken us into the euro - and consigned us to the high unemployment and low growth of the eurozone over the last decade.
Apart from that, Blair, as a pathological liar, has traduced and poisoned the British political system with his mendacity. He cannot open his mouth without telling a fib, his mother tongue is falsity, his speech is pure dissembling, his vocabulary is that of a used car salesman on coca leaves.
Because of his aversion to the truth, he is also responsible for infecting the British political bloodstream with Peter Mandelson and Alistair Campbell, two odious and manipulative bullies, a pair of the nastiest men ever to work in Westminster. With his own lies and his employment of other liars (like Mandelson and Campbell) Blair has reduced voter confidence in politics to catastrophically low levels.
Because Blair lied about Iraq, the biggest issue of the decade, it will be hard for any other government ever to win the people’s trust on an issue as grave as going to war. This is incalculably damaging for our country.
Furthermore, Blair is a dangerously vain and insecure man who hides his failings and self doubts with a carapace of charm - like all charlatans. All that matters to Blair is his own image. This is why he is so desperately clinging on to power, in the futile hopes that his legacy will not turn out to be, yes, the charred corpses in Iraq.
He will fail, of course. When they finally drive a stake through Blair’s career, people will remember him only for this, for Iraq, and the lies he told to take us there.
39 - Andrea, I think it’s a mixed bag - the policy position Ted is taking is a popular one (reflected in the fact that the SNP, despite their pro-EU rhetoric, have the same policy I think) and should play well in the North East (which, as the SNP stronghold, is why the SNP also have this policy).
However, I think that elsewhere it would be seen as infighting (even if it isn’t acrimonious). Then again, a blanket of apathy would seem to be the more likely national reaction.
19 - Good to see you on the mend Jack. Was it you I spotted on the plane to Inverness on Sunday looking worriedly out of the window as the racing figure of Matron dashed across to Tarmac as we took off?
39.”“Being the architect of this policy Ted feels the honourable thing to do is to tender his resignation.” I am not surprised by this and I think that it will cause some problems for us in some area’s.
42
I seem to remember back in ‘98, the then shadow Foreign Secretary(?) Michael Howard, attacking TB and Bill Clinton for not being gung ho enough,when it came to Saddam, he was urging military action then. The idea that the Tories only went along with Iraq because of the dodgy dossier etc is risible, the record is clear, ‘they were for that war’ Now whether you were pro-or-anti is irrelevant, but don’t tell people you weren’t when you were. Obviously Labour have to carry the can, as it was a Labour PM who pressed the button, but the Tories can’t be allowed to get away with the, ‘if only we’d known’ excuse. Michael Howard tried to distance himself from the Iraq policy, got a slap from the Whitehouse, next thing you know he’s back on side saying, not only did he support the war, but he believed in ‘regime change plus’.
50.Stephen B, I am not sure about it fuelling a sense of infighting but it will be highlighted in some area’s in the North East. It will certainly helped Alex Salmond in his fight for the Gordon seat!
50/51. Thanks Stephen and Chris
52.Coldstone, I think that many conservative backbenchers have the right to feel they were mislead as I imagine some Labour MP’s and many voter’s do on this issue.
55 AAAAh poor old things!!!!!
54.Andrea, I saw a story about Berlusconi yesterday and I meant to ask you what the reaction in Italy was, I see that it is getting a bit of coverage on Sky news today.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6318165.stm
57. Chris, yesterday all talks (TV, newspapers) were about it! Almost scary and a bit sad too (political debate being reduced about Silvio and Veronica problems through letters to left wing papers!).
Anyway he has apologised and it seems she’s reflecting on his apology
58.
55. Yes, agreed. Iraq was a failing by the entire British political elite, by all ministers, shadow ministers, and Westminster MPs, apart from a few, very few, honourable exceptions - like Robin Cook and Ken Clarke.
However - I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - the situation is spookily analagous with the ERM disaster. In 1992 the Labour party was just as keen on ERM as the Tories (indeed some soft lefties were more keen on ERM than the Tories, for europhile reasons). Yet when the ERM disaster unfolded, it was the Tories who reaped all the damage and bile, and rightly so: they were the government, it was their decision. Meanwhile, the previously pro-ERM Labourites tip-toed off-stage, then came back shouting about Tory economic incompetence.
Labour can’t have it both ways. They took us to war. They made the terrible decision. They must reap the consequences. The Tories should get a slap on the wrist, but Labour should be eviscerated.
The sin of Iraq is compounded, moreover, because it is such a greater mistake than ERM - half a million dead people, after all - and because Labour actively lied about Iraq - and because they are still trying to wriggle out of an enquiry, quite disgracefully.
34/36/50 PtP/ChrisD/Stephen B. Many thanks.
Short visits for the present ….. just to keep Rik honest and Andrea out of the clutches of the Rutland constabulary !!
I hope to be more fully Jack Wued in a few weeks or so.
That last comment was for Coldstone. Me numbers are playing up this morning!
61. Jack (welcome back), I think I can abandon the Rutland miniature as Book Value promised me to purchase some hot gay Libdems to convert me to the yellow cause!
jonathan at 42- Osbourne was a raving loony ideological right winger with a penchant for hang Mandela memorobilia, but then since most of the Tory parliamentary party were ideologically right the bloodlust for Iraq was pretty entrenched, even in the earliest days, and moreover they (likes of Fox, Davis, Osbourne, Davis) will not be able to disguise a bloodlust for Iran.
peter at 38- the whole international community thought Saddam had WMD, even Blix was hedging his bets. The dossiers were thrown together, half baked and ill considered. They were not even proof read, simply because in the end everyone expected to uncover some WMD. A few old rusty tins of gone off Ajax would have sufficed. But no- Iraq had been so monumentally starved that even Saddam had been unable to build even the most pathetic stockpiles.
The 45 mn danger bit was over egged, and anyone with any sense knew that Saddam held about as much threat to the international commmunity as a limp lettuce.
But- hey- the US needed a great victory after 9/11, a war over some illiterate 3rd world headcases in Afghanistan was not good enough, and fighting Saddam represented pretty much the kind of battle against evil that plays well with mainstream audiences.
Pity the US couldn’t be bothered beforehand to find out the difference between a sunni and a shia, and pity even more that Blair had backed Bush unconditionally.
55 Chris D - He certainly said ‘Trust me, I know what I’m doing’ and when it became clear that he did not, those of us who took him at his word were entitled to feel misled. Some will take the Sean T line and attribute this to his natural perfidiousness; others, like me, will point to his excessively Atlanticist tendencies in matters of foreign policy.
Doesn’t make much difference though. Either way, it was a policy disaster of the greatest magnitude.
52 Indeed, there is alot of rewriting of history going on by Tory HQ and in the minds of people on this site. The Tories led by IDS were beyond gung-ho years before any dossier was produced. They have no right whatsoever to claim they were misled.
I fear that they will get away with it though. Obviously, Labour find it difficult attack the Tories. The Lib Dems have every right to do it, but it will require a serious PR brain to get this right. All this is a minor issue compared to sorting out the mess, yet itl it is very distasteful and dishonourable when Tories salivate over this and claim holier than thou status.
I see that Mark Oaten has said Celebrity Big Brother tried to have both him and Belinda, but he refused because “he did not want to become a laughing stock”
60
As I said before a Labour PM pressed the button, Labour takes the blame. The Tories re Iraq are beginning to sound like the Germans after the war, you never found one who fought the US/British they only ever fought on the Eastern Front. If David Cameron or any Tory who supported that war, wishes to stand up and say IDS was wrong to give full hearted support to the government, please let him/her say so, with the exception of those you mentioned, haven’t noticed too many do that yet.
Re 61, JackW, good to see you back!
64 Yes, Tyson, I couldn’t agree more. In particular, you do well to remind anybody who might have forgotten that pretty much the whole international community believed Saddam had WMDs.
Nevertheless the EU and the UN advocated a more restrained approach. TB could have sided with them. He didn’t. He was wrong.
Re 67, Andrea, Mark Oaten did not want to become a laughing stock? *cough* almost chocked on my tea!
64,Tyson, I could accept your attempts to “sex up” the shadow cabinet’s foreign policy, if you were not trying to “dumb down” this Labour governments record.
The 45 mn danger bit was over egged, and anyone with any sense knew that Saddam held about as much threat to the international commmunity as a limp lettuce.
Depends if you count Israel as part of the international community. I would not have put it past Saddam to spend less than 45mins firing a Scud (or some Scud equivalent) at Israel if he could.
Michael White in todays Guardian says one of Blairs top Labour enemies said “Even I`m queasy about the Police treatment of Tony”
Wonder who that was, and why the sympathy now.
Coldstone - I have heard Boris Johnson stand up and say the war was wrong, and a disaster - and he even apologised for supporting it. More Tories should do the same. Of course it is difficult with British soldiers still out there - for people to say the war is a futile cataclysm makes the army’s honourable and ongoing sacrifice look absurd.
I’ve just been reading Ben Brown, the BBC guy, on the Iraq war. He writes that he knew that Saddam had no WMD, that there was no gas to attack with, that the whole thing was a pretend reason for an invasion. He could be lying, but it has the ring of truth. The thing is Bush would have attacked Iraq anyway - it was Blair who needed WMD as an excuse. So the lies came from Tony, mainly.
Anyway, the main thing now is to sort out the mess, and bring to justice those primarily responsible for the disaster - Bush, Blair, Brown, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc. The fact that some Labour reptiles are still trying to prevent an inquiry, which is the very first thing we need, particularly sticks in the craw.
We need an inquiry. To start with. If this inquiry condemns the Tories, so be it. But if it condemns the Tories it will surely crucify Labour.
63 Andrea. So you’ve abandoned the miniature member for Rutland in favour of book value’s cast off’s !!
How easily you were swayed by the prospect of erotic focus leaflets and no holes barred tufu orgies !!
I’ve clearly been away too long and feel my first task is to return you from the dark side of the yellow peril to the sanctuary of the wholesome gaydom of Rutland’s finest and smallest ….. Remember Andrea … “Multum in Parvo” !!!!!!!
75
Accepting what you say: will Mr Cameron before the next GE make the following statement: ‘In the event of a US attack on Iran, the government of the UK, (if I am PM) will not under any circumstances, support that attack, either diplomatically or militarily, in fact we will oppose that attack unless that attack has been sanctioned, by the United Nations’. Will he? will he hell!
76.JackW, the best way to rescue Andrea would be a campaign to raise Hunky Dunky’s profile again. He seems to have gone very quiet recently, I am wondering if the minature member for Rutland is being hidden at the back of the cabinet.
53 - Chris, I think the term ‘infighting’ I used was wrong in retrospect but agree that it Ted B’s stance has the potential to be exploited as an example of disunity. I don’t think it harms Ted though.
Mind you, the SNP were always going to play the policy change as another example of the Scottish party bowing before the demands of the London party and betraying the interests of hard-work fishing communities of Scotland etc etc so we’ll get a hit on it one way or another.
75 Sean T
Have you ever noticed? When you are cross. Your sentences get shorter. And shorter. Honest.
Coldstone. With all due respect, Iran is a silly comparison. Compared to the pea-shooters and potato guns that Saddam was wickedly hiding in his palaces, the Iranians really ARE going for WMD, and they really ARE a threat to world peace - given that they have expressed a desire to wipe Israel off the map. If Iran was about to attack Israel in an attempt to kill five million Jews I’m sure even the most ardent Stop The War lunatic would have to accept the need for an assault on Iran.
This truth merely points up yet another melancholy aspect of the Iraq debacle. Iraq was a sideshow, a cul de sac, a wrong turning. Iraq was the wrong war to fight at the wrong time in the wrong way with the wrong methods. Moreover it has empowered and emboldened militant Shia Iran - a true enemy of the West. Iraq was just stupid, stupid, stupid, quite apart from anything else.
Peter the Punter. That. Is. Just. Rub. Bish.
80. Stephen B, I think that if anything it will enhance Ted’s reputation and I admire him for it. Have you still got your blog because I notice you are not linking your name to it?
77. Arguably an attack on Iran would be far more justified from the perspective of preserving regional security and UK national interests than the attack on Iraq was. It would however be operationally far more difficult, with an actual occupation out of the question.
More messianic stuff from Brown reported in the Scotsman:
“This generation - our generation - has it in its power to ensure that these preventable diseases, from malaria to diphtheria and TB, can be abolished and this generation has the chance - because there is no scientific or technological barrier to do so - to ensure for the first time in the history of the world that every child has the chance of education,” said Mr Brown.
Lots of talk about technology while with Bill Gates, lots of talk of money to fund it but no idea how to deal with the real problems: corrupt politicians, ineffective administrations and tired international thinking.
82
I’m going to make a copy of that seant, because when Iran turns into an even bigger disaster than Iraq, and you start to wriggle off the hook I’ll have great pleasure in quoting it back at you.
Your great concern for the 500,000 deats in Iraq, could look like small fry compared with a mass military attack on Iran. I do hope the relatives of the thousands of UK forces who will die in that attack can draw some consolation from the fact they are dying for Israel. An Israel which of course in 1948, was quite happy to kill British soldiers in the King David Hotel, and hang them from trees on one occasion!
82 I agree with you, Sean T, that Iraq was the wrong war, not least because it drew resources away from Afghanistan. Now that was worth fighting for and was winnable and there was a perfectly plausible post-war plan in place.
Iraq has made the Afghanistan project so much more difficult, if not impossible.
I see that Russia was warning North Korea to be careful with its nuclear ambitions yesterday. They seem to be waking up to the fact that they are on the North Korean’s ICBM doorstep too.
86 No. Good stuff from Brown. It’s better to try something than to blame others.
Coldstone military action need not be a full scale invasion.
86. Yes, sadly pathetic stuff, though perhaps more of a ‘Dr.Livingstone’ mentality than a ‘messianic’ one. Presumably this is intended to appeal to idealistic middle class voters, though I wonder how well this wishy-washy neocolonialism will go down more generally.
Sensible people know little can be achieved in Africa without effectively taking over the administration of the countries there - something which I suspect there is little enthusiasim for at any level.
88.PtP is correct, and taking our eye of the ball in Afghanistan to invade Iraq will come back to haunt us.
84 - I was running with iBlogs but they disappeared into the ether one day (rather frustratingly). I have set up a replacement on another blog site but just haven’t found the time to add anything of interest so it’s withering a little at the moment. There’s also not really enough news to keep it going and I suspect that I’m not opinionated enough to get worked up and report on everything that bothers me!
Jonathan These sorts of things have been tried for fifty years, and cost half a trillion dollars and the result: the per capita income in Africa is lower now than it was before the money was spent.
Universal education programmes that are being suggested are old hat dressed in new technology.
Coldstone. I didn’t say I favoured an attack on Iran, let alone an invasion - read my post. What I said was, if it looked like Iran was about to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Israel, then surely any western leader would come to the aid of the Israelis, militarily. The Americans certainly would, and I hope and believe any British PM would too. For instance we might provide logistical help, intelligence and special forces assistance, etc, if the Israelis tried to take out the Iranian nuclear sites.
What is out of the question, barring global war, is a ground invasion of Iran. It would be virtually impossible to win, incredibly costly in lives, as well as probably immoral.
So feel free to quote me back if there is a war with Iran, because I never said I wanted one, and certainly I’m not suggesting an invasion.
92 “Sensible people know little can be achieved in Africa without effectively taking over the administration of the countries there - something which I suspect there is little enthusiasim for at any level.”
Complete and total hogwash.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poliomyelitis
92
On the other hand, military action has a habit of escalating, you start with an air attack, when that does not achieve its objective, (it rarely does) then its, ‘time to send in the PBI’ if you are a Tory, believe me do not go into the next election saying, ‘Vote Tory we’re going to war with Iran’ not unless you want the Libdems to get 60% of the vote.
87 That’s a bit tough, Coldstone! We all make ourselves hostages to fortune when posting here. Don’t discourage us.
Btw, I’ve always admired the public figures who post here because they risk highly public ridicule. It amazes me that no tiny-minded lurker has yet gathered up the collected postings of some such figure and got one of our wonderful tabloids to print the more embarrassing items - entirely out of context of course.
Re 92, Chevalier de la Foi, Actualy much can be achieved there with capitalism, and the ever expanding mobil phone network. In fact it is doing wonders already!
99
I think it would take more than myself, to discourage anyone from posting here. I’ve already had someone go into the archive and print out something I posted earlier which contradicted something I’d just posted. Devil’s advocate is surely part of the game, you may not believe what you are posting, but exploring arguments and beliefs by contradictory discussion is what its all about.
86 & 92 - Witan and Chevalier
Radical measures are called for in response to your comments on Africa.
Kindly go to Benedict’s Blog (sic). Find the thread on Mobile Phones in Africa. Read it. All of it. Report back here.
(Acknowledgements to Sean T re literary style.)
Sky says Blair was questioned again by Police last Friday…
99. PtP - who can you be referring to, apart from Nick Palmer and (very occasionally) Stewart Jackson?
Re 102, Peter the Punter the URL for that is:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2007/01/mobile-revolution-in-africa.html
RE 104, Rod, What? that was kept quiet!
104 I had Nick in mind, Chevalier, because I know him best but there are certainly others, including of course Stewart Jackson.
Journalists misled by No.10 spokesman - Adam Boulton.
Police requested a news blackout, which was lifted today!
“Very Dodgy” - Boulton. “Public Misled.”
82-seant- you are the worst kind of neocon- talking about the “wrong war” implies now that your bloodlust wants to take us into another, this time with Iran. All your sanctimonious words on Iraq- when actually you are chomping at the bit to have us go through the carnage of a much greater endeavour. And all this based on the folly of a few words from a crackpot who has said he wants to wipe Israel off the map.
Actually, if you look at the dynamics of Iran Mahmood’s popularity is on the wain. It would be impossible for someone like him to get a stranglehold over the country like Saddam. The youth of Iran are very similar to our own, and quite westernised. And yet within this context people like you are urging on a military conflict that would be catastrophic for the world.
I had some sympathy with your posting about Iraq. You are however the worst kind of warmonger- and whatever you say now on Iraq will ring hollow to me.
…Now go read that thread, Chevalier!
Downing St: “Don’t know” if Blair will face further questions…
Accord to the radio news Blair was questioned by the police last friday.
Coldstone I doubt any party relishes war. I doubt even Blair thought, “What fun lets bust up the desert and fix old Saddo”. Any politician thinks hard before making war. It cost lives and treasure and is always a very uncertain business. Whether it was justified or a good judgement call is a legitimate discussion, as is any mis-selling of the reasons. But I will not accept that Blair went into this light heartedly or without fairly serious thinking, in some burst of macho breast beating.
It seems to me that there are three positions that you can take as a government or potential government.
Firstly you can be pacifists and say never war whatever the situation
You can say never a first strike only retaliation
You can say jaw jaw before war war, but never rule out any option.
In nuclear terms all parties have gone for for number two. Whether this will hold as nukes proliferate is anyone’s guess. But so far, that is the universal big power policy.
In conventional terms there is a party difference.
It is the third that the Tories and Labour espouse ( rule nothing out and let your potential enemies know it).
It is the first, in effect, that the LibDems propose for Iraq with their pull out by October proposal.
Elfyn LLwyd MP: could still be charges for perverting the course of justice EVEN IF there is insufficient evidence of the cash-for-honours. Believes charges WILL be brought in the next four weeks…
Jack super to see you back. Glad they didnt remove the hypothingy or whatever gives you your HHQ (High Humour Quotient) and your ability to spot the ridiculous.
To bring you up to date: Blair is hanging on by his finger tips, Nick Palmer has clearly been promised a cabinet post (or at least a bishopric) by Gordon - his enthusiasm for the dour one knows no bounds, Mike has a book coming out and is getting worried that he may lose his shirt if he cant extract himself from his massive lay on Gordon (he keeps posting incresingly desperate Gordon might not make it pieces), and apparently Benedict has a blog (though even he admitted a couple of days ago that noone looks at it)!
Welcome back!
109. I’ve read it. Benedict’s comments seem entirely in tune with my view..’Africans don’t want or need our charity’.
I’m delighted to see a grassroots-led communications revolution under way - but the apparent success of this only reinforces my opinion that GB-style large scale ‘grands projets’ aimed at ’solving’ Africa’s problems are not the answer. These schemes are aimed at making the leaders of the West feel better about themselves more than anything else.
92 “Sensible people know little can be achieved in Africa without effectively taking over the administration of the countries there - something which I suspect there is little enthusiasim for at any level.”
97- Jonothan- Chevalier’s comments are typical of many on the right. Just plain idiotic. Freed from the shackles of international debt many of the African economies are flourishing- well above the likes of China and Ireland.
Gosh between the absolute hypocracy of posters like seanT, with the head of steam gathering on the right to attack Iran, and the idiotic, anachronistic mutterings of the likes of Chevalier, I really do despair at right wing politics per se.
Re 115, Chevalier de la Foi, To some extent I agree, Africa needs trade not aid, preferably more inter African trade as well, however there is a place for some aid. It is just better delivered on a small rather than huge scale.
103 Woah! Under caution?
118. No, with no lawyers present.
PtP I am sure Benedict’s blog is magnificent ( damn I always thought I would never give him a plug) but having worked in Africa on and off for thirty years, some of it very recently, and much of it related to matters of education and administration, I think I may have some insight from hard experience.
Most disheartening is when you see people work hard to set up schools and educate their kids out of poverty and a daft bureaucrat or politician comes along and mucks the whole thing up with corruption or war or tribalist envy. And it happens across the continent.
There are bright spots: but there are lots of dark corners too.
116 Tyson You said “Freed from the shackles of international debt many of the African economies are flourishing- well above the likes of China and Ireland.”
Where would that be?
118&119. This news might explain the story of Tony Blair’s facial expressions and general demeanour in that interview on Sunday.
http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2007/01/28/is-this-the-face-of-a-man-who-wants-to-carry-on/
Ho hum. One of the reasons I don’t usually bother with seanT’s posts, apart from the hopelessness of finding any common ground, is that he so readily slides into copious obscene abuse of people he doesn’t know - someone it’s all MPs, sometimes all ex-Communists, sometimes specific people like TB or Mandelson. Today offers a fairly choice series of bilious outpourings clogging up the thread. I get the impression that he’s in love with his own rhetoric and sees himself as a sort of latter-day Swift. I’m afraid I just think his rants are self-indulgent.
E.g.
“Apart from that, Blair, as a pathological liar, has traduced and poisoned the British political system with his mendacity. He cannot open his mouth without telling a fib, his mother tongue is falsity, his speech is pure dissembling, his vocabulary is that of a used car salesman on coca leaves.
Because of his aversion to the truth, he is also responsible for infecting the British political bloodstream with Peter Mandelson and Alistair Campbell, two odious and manipulative bullies, a pair of the nastiest men ever to work in Westminster. With his own lies and his employment of other liars (like Mandelson and Campbell) Blair has reduced voter confidence in politics to catastrophically low levels…
Blair is a bowel movement of a man. A voided bladder making pitiful noises.”
Yawn.
123. If you disapprove of personal attacks so much, perhaps you ought to refrain from them yourself.
Benedict
when people are dying they need aid, largescale aid, quick and immediate; for countries to develop they need to invest in their infrastucture- schools, hospitals, roads- again requiring largesacle aid, and the ability to invest in capital projects rather than debt relief, and to compete they need fair trade.
To suggest that aid merely creates dependancy and prolongs suffering, if replicated in policy, will lead to the countless deaths of 10’s of millions.
You know it is this kind of right wing pontificating on Africa that drives me to want to end border controls altogther- after all a life is a life- and I would glady see 100,000 starving people roll up in Kent, and re-housed in rural Oxfordshire without any of this Englishness rubbish banded about.
On balance I think I’m with Nick on this one.
Tyson these charts might help you.
http://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/afrec/subjindx/164econ2.htm
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html
http://globalis.gvu.unu.edu/indicator.cfm?indicatorID=45&country=ZA#rowZA
http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-african-countries-by-gdp
120 I urge you to read the thread, which will give you some indication of my own acquaintance with Africa.
It will also I hope dispel some of the gloom you express. The deal-doers at CDC tend to use the word ‘patchy’ about investment opportunities in sub-Saharan Africa. Well, if that sounds like a ‘half-full or half-empty’ statement, you have to admit it’s a damn sight more optimistic than was possible not so long ago.
121-Witan- try and find a link for international GDP growth rates 2006-7- I remember seeing the likes of Botswana, Nigeria and others in the top performing countries.
The GDP of Africa reduced from 1980-2000 so these kind of growth rates represent something pretty significant.
RE 125, Tyson, when there is a crisis there is a need for aid, and quickly. The problem with other large scale aid projects is governence and where the money goes.
With fair trade people on the ground get richer and as that happens they are less prepared to accept the corruption.
I did not say stop aid, what I did say was taht alrge scale aid projects frequently go wrong.
Besides which education could be one mess of a very large aid project, or a multitude of small ones.
Education is also very important for helping Africa.
123 “…And sees himself as a sort of latter-day Swift.”
Knock it off, Nick. He’s not that modest.
“I would glady see 100,000 starving people roll up in Kent, and re-housed in rural Oxfordshire without any of this Englishness rubbish banded about. ”
I don’t think many of our fellow citizens would.
I cannot see it would be in Brown’s interest to be PM in the next 3 months:-
Cash for peerages inquiry needs to be wrapped up before Brown takes over, otherwise it will taint him in the office as well. For all of Tony’s failing’s cannot see him letting the party he loves getting a potentially double hit for something on his watch.
The local elections in England, sucidal for a scots sun of the manse to be Labour party leader at such a time.
Scots elections - If they are bad for Labour Brown will get blame.
If i were a betting man i would therefore stay with Blair till at least May! (Ironic joke - probably turn the telly on and found the Blairmister has resigned!)
Brown has got enough problems as it is due to the link between the axis of Blair~Brown. Blair may hate Brown but Brown may yet if the allegations prove to be true have to do a Gerald Ford for Blair!!!
My money is on Nick Palmer being a Minister at the department of media, sports and culture - when brown takes the helm due to his active presents in gambling industry websites!!!
“Most disheartening is when you see people work hard to set up schools and educate their kids out of poverty and a daft bureaucrat or politician comes along and mucks the whole thing up with corruption or war or tribalist envy. And it happens across the continent.”
Politicians and bureaucrats do that sort of thing in rich countries also. But the effects are more lethal in poor countries.
121 - Tyson, how about answering Witan’s question @121? We can then all judge whether your rhetoric meets the reality. His post @127 suggests you might have a tough job.
129 - Nigeria! You want to cite Nigeria as an African success story?
Nick Palmer, you funny old vegan sausage. Thanks for the critique, glad to see you are not only reading my posts, despite your claim, but cutting and pasting them! Do you have a clippings file of my comments for future use? I can send you them privately if you like.
Has anyone noted that Blair has been interviewed AGAIN by the police?
121: a good example is Tanzania, which is managing 6%ish growth recently. It’s not China certainly, but 6% sustained adds up really quickly.
Communists are the cheap relations to the UK’s socialists. I don’t think the two are really comparable, I would rather live in this country anyday under our UK socialists than commie regiemes anyway in the world.
An interesting point for the Labour party here is the recent programmes on BBC2 on the cold war. It shows what a threat a commie invasion of this country was in the cold war and if not an invasion an annihilation. In the 80’s alot of people were in denial in the Labour party include some of the kingpins at the top now. It is nice to see they have woken upto the threat and it goes to show what good judgement the electrate had in the 80’s in keeping them out!
Talking about BBC2, did not think