clawsfour

Climate change deniers, creationists, and Conservatives

This is the opening video from the UN climate conference in Copenhagen.

Interesting to see the number of right wing deniers of climate change theory (are there any left wing deniers?) already on YouTube complaining about state control and tax rises arising from the climate change hoax. I wonder to what extent there is a correlation between climate change deniers and creationists? 

Of course, there is no reason that a creationists shouldn't accept that the impact of people on climate change is a reality. Apart from the fact that they are A: bonkers and B: ....oh, no need for the B:

Hopefully there will be sufficient progress in Copenhagen to ensure that climate change remains top of the agenda for our politicians (of course in the UK, that also means returning a Labour Government next year). A big worry will remain, acording to the Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) study is that the carbon parts per million target will be agreed at too high a level to prevent the acidification of our oceans.

Coral bleaching, on top of damage through fishing and pollution, could lead to the loss of 60 per cent of coral reefs within the next 20 years according to the study leader Pavan Sukhdev.

The Conservative Party under Cameron have set out time and again that they are opposed to targets and opposed to legislative intervention to reduce the impact of our industrial society on the future climate. as a recent example, Cameron wants TVs to switch off (rather than have a standby mode) but only if it is in the interests of the profits of his friends rather than the interests of the planet.

It is already difficult to identify clear blue water between Cameron, creationists and climate change deniers at the moment. And if Cameron gets elected it will become increasingly difficult to identify clear blue water.

Cameron's poverty of thought

It's not often I post stuff direct from the Labour Party, but the message I just received from General Secretary Ray Collins did remind me of some of the Garbage coming out of the Tory Conference last week. So I couldn't resist sharing.

David Cameron clearly thinks that if he shouts loud enough about Labour, no one will ask him about his own policies for the poorest in Britain. 

 It’s pretty amazing stuff from a man who wants to give £200,000 to those set to inherit millions while cutting tax credits and child trusts funds of ordinary families. 

 And now David Cameron’s attacks on Labour have been taken apart by the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies, stating that "direct tax and benefit changes made by the previous Conservative governments acted to increase income inequality, whereas those made by since 1997-98 have benefited the poor by more than the rich". 

We need your help. 

The long campaign for the General Election has started. If we are to take the Tories on, call them on their nonsense, and convince people to vote Labour we need every single one of our members and supporters to help in any way they can.

And this is the video that prompted the email.

And, for completeness, the Labour Party would like you to "Donate £10 to help us campaign – every penny you give us will be used for campaigning".

The Conservatives won't deserve anyone's vote...

... Until its deputy chairman has reassured the public he is domiciled here and paying his taxes like everone else.

So says today's Evening Standard and if it's good enough for the right wing press (which today brings a new meaning to the free press) then it's good enough for me.

The Tories are still unable to say that there largest donor is either registered to vote or to pay tax on this country. Yet they still take his money and the Electoral Cimmission still don't call for a prosecution. Just imagine the outcry if Labour was taking cash from overseas.

It's not over 'til the referee has played six minutes of injury time...

Once again everyone writes us off prematurely.

Obviously we have the age and experience. The opposition are youthful and energetic.

We have a little bit of guile. They are brash and in your face.

We shouldn't be the underdogs, but we find ourselves behind. A long way behind.

But then we get our act together. Our leader plays a blinder. We begin to draw level.

And finally we beat Torquay 5-3 on penalties in the Johnson's Paint Trophy.

Next May/June the stakes will be a little higher, but the Tories have already given us - and more importantly the public - enough ammunition to start eroding their temporary lead in the polls. And Tory lead councils up and down the land are doing their best to help, showing that when Tories say "we're all in this together" it really means that we bear the brunt of their cuts in services they never use.

The philosophy was set out by the Tory Leader of Southampton Council, Alec Samuels:

We do not in principle favour ‘free this and free that’, such as swimming or transport, school meals or computers or whatever it is.

Southern Daily Echo, 17 Oct 2008

Cllr Eddie Lister, Tory Leader of Wandsworth, says local councils should hike up the prices of local services as far as they can go:

We will look to increase charges as far as possible beyond inflation so that consumers of the services are bearing the full cost without any hidden subsidy from the taxpayer. 

It is worth taking a trial and error approach to see just what the market [I presume he means residents like you and me] will bear.”

Big Ideas, Building on Conservative Fundamentals, Localis 2008

So when George Osborne says, "we're all in it together" just think carefully about who the 'we' are. Are you part of the 'we' made up of nurses, and police and teachers and other public service workers on £18k a year or more who face a Tory pay freeze? Or are you part of the 'we' made up of the 3,000 most wealthy people in this country who will have their inheritance tax cut paid for by the pay freeze for public service workers?

And when you've thought about that for a bit, think about how many people you know who are thinking about voting Tory this time. You have around six months to make sure they know who 'we' are.

Cameron doesn't sack Osborne shock.

According to the Times, George Osborne 'flipped' his second home.

The Shadow Chancellor bought the Cheshire farmhouse close to his constituency ten months before winning the Tatton seat in June 2001.

Instead of taking out a mortgage on the property he funded the purchase by increasing his borrowing on the London home where he and his wife had lived since 1998.

After his election he designated the London house his “second home” with the Commons authorities, even though it was his main residence, so that he could claim the mortgage interest payments on his expenses.

Two years later Mr Osborne took out his first mortgage on the house in Cheshire and made that his official second home. He has since claimed up to £100,000 of taxpayers’ money to cover interest payments on the farmhouse, which is situated on the edge of Peak District National Park.

The arrangement also enabled Mr Osborne to reduce the loan on his London home, which he later sold for £1.45 million, to less than £200,000.

Tory Leader Cameron, of course, wouldn't dream of sacking a Bullingdon Club colleague.

The Times also carried an informative piece about the Bullingdon Club.

The Bullingdon Club of 1992: pictured are (1) George Osborne, (2) Harry Mount, (3) Chris Coleridge, (4) Lupus von Maltzahn, (5) Mark Petre (6) Peter Holmes a Court, (7) Nat Rothschild, (8) Jason Gissing

The Bullingdon Club - immortalised in Evelyn Waugh's 1928 novel Decline and Fall - projects an image far from the classless, centrist Conservative Party that Mr Osborne and Mr Cameron have so painstakingly developed.
Famous for trashing restaurants and other riotous behaviour, the society was described in a 2005 article by the Oxford Student, the university's official student newspaper, as drawing "its membership from Oxford's super-rich, enticing them to a life of secrecy, champagne drinking and ritualised violence".
Its habit for rioting, although toned down from its notorious past, reemerged again in December 2004 when police arrested all 17 of the club's members for wrecking the cellar of a 15th Century pub by smashing more than a dozen bottles of wine into its walls. Four members - including Princess Diana's nephew Alexander Fellowes - spent the night in prison.
While many of the society's rituals remain secret, joining the Bullingdon Club is known to involve putting up with having your room trashed beyond recognition and seeing your drinking tested beyond all sane boundaries. And there is also the small matter (and indeed, for its wealthy members, it is only a small matter) of buying the uniform, which costs around £3,000 in total.

Mr Ten Per Cent

Back from a couple of days off (very nice thank you) to find that in one bound the Tories have revealed the truth behind the mask.  

I've been saying for some time that as soon as the microscope turned toward Tory policy, the real choice at the next general election would become clear.

Well the Tories have helpfuly set out the choice for themselves. Andrew Lansley, who has form in terms of opening up the Tory secret agenda, has blown the gaffe. And Alan Johnson, Labour's new Home Secretary, has kindly written to me (along with one or two others I imagine) to make sure I didn't miss the news.

Bella

Today the Tories finally admitted just how much they want to cut from our public services. I’m writing so that you have all the facts because we need to get this message out there in our communities up and down the country.

I think a lot of people listening to the BBC this morning will have been shocked when they heard David Cameron’s health spokesman Andrew Lansley stating that the Tories would make 10 per cent spending cuts in the vast majority of government departments. It wasn’t a gaffe – even though Mr Lansley seems to have gone to ground at the minute, he hasn’t been sacked for revealing the truth about the Tories’ plans.

I’ve only been Home Secretary for a few days, but I can already see what an impact a 10 per cent cut in that budget would have. Looking at the figures in my department, it would mean front line police officers would be subject to real cuts next year, leaving our streets much less safe. And I’m sure there would be similar risks when those kinds of cuts hit public transport or the skills and science budgets.

Labour’s investment in police officers and community support officers is vital to making our streets safer. Since 1997 there are over 14,000 more police officers and nearly 16,000 community support officers. We now have 3,600 neighbourhood policing teams across the country - one for every community. We know that there is no appetite in this country for cuts that would undermine the fight against crime.

It’s up to everyone in our party – MPs, ministers, activists and trade unionists – to make sure that we get this message out to the country. It's time to tell David Cameron - Mr 10 Per Cent - that no one wants his Tory cuts.

Best wishes

Alan

Now look under the stone that is Lord Ashcroft's donations

18 months after the Electoral Commission called in the Metropolitan Police to investigate the donation made by David Abrahams to the Labour Party by proxy, the Crown Prosecution Service has delivered its judgement on the investigation. Unfortunately not on their own web-site but let's assume Sky have got it right. It is now - CPS Press Release.

They point out the rules have been broken - constituting a criminal offence - but that the people investigated, including Peter Watt who was forced to resign as Labour General Secretary over the issue, did exercise due diligence.

This issue revolved around the fact that David Abrahams - a permissible donor - gave money to other permissible donors, who then gave money to the Labour party. This was done by Abrahams to protect his identity - failed. There is no doubt that donors must make full disclosure of the fact that they are using third parties to make a donation. David Abrahams did not. However, it was his money. He was a legitimately allowed to make a donation. The people he gave the money to were legitimately able to make a donation.

So having spent an extraordinary amount of tax-payers money to discover that an offence has been committed for which no-one was to blame, perhaps the powers that be could now get on with the investigation into Lord Ashcroft who it is alleged is an impermissible donor using overseas money to find the Tory Party.

As the Daily Mirror first revealed, the Electoral Commission started an investigation into the peer last year.

It followed claims £4.76million had been transferred from the Central American tax haven of Belize to Lord Ashcroft's UK-based company Bearwood Corporate Services.

The firm is one of the biggest donors to the Tory party, giving £4.74million since 2003.

Electoral law says donations can only come from UK-based companies. Tory vice-chairman Lord Ashcroft, said to be worth more than £1billion, has used the money to bankroll Tory candidates in marginal seats.

And no doubt those who accused the thoroughly decent Peter Watt of acting criminally will now be queueing up to apologise. (update - statement form Peter Watt reported here)

Grayling handbagged by Livingstone

As my regular readers will know, I'm not a great fan of Ken Livingstone.

However he has probably delivered a knockout blow to Tory Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling on a Newsnight discussion about the inadvertent leak of sensitive information by the Assistant Commissioner, and head of counter terrorism, Bob Quick.

It is a joy to watch. So get to iPlayer and watch it again (as soon as it appears there). And someone with more technical know-how than me put it on YouTube so everyone can see it.

The killing blow was leaving Grayling spluttering and unable to answer the charge that only Al-Quaida would be happy with his position on the the leak. 

This isn't cheap jibes about second home allowances. This went to the heart of who do you trust to run the country.

Future Home Secretary? Not any more.

Let's shoot their fox

I'm not against cruel and barbaric activities per se.

I would be a hypocrite to say if the lives of family, friends, or anyone really were threatened I'd call for Amnesty International rather than Jack Bauer. Watching Saints play at home has only been good for the soul. Probably. And sometimes the natural world, red in tooth and claw, seems close to the mark - leopard seals tossing penguins, cats playing with mice and so on.

But it takes the Conservatives to suggest a return to the both pointless and barbaric activity of hunting to exhaustion and butchery wild animals. For blood lust pleasure alone.

The Labour manifesto of 92 had some sanctimonious stuff in it about the nature of a country's people being judged by the way they treat their animals. It was poorly expressed but at its heart, correct.

The media is begining slowly but surely to take an interest in what the Tories stand for. In the last few days, three things of note. Confirmatipn of a tax-give-away to the richest 3,000 people in the country. A clampdown on pay for nurses, doctors and police. And barbarism returniing to the country.

The Conservatives remain the nasty party. It's time to shoot their fox once and for all.

Money for nothing

In today's Times. 

Sir, Rather than query what is or is not allowed in terms of MPs' expenses, the pertinent question may be to ask whether there are any aspects of day-to-day life that MPs actually pay for themselves.

I won't embarrass this fuckwit by naming him (obviously) here. Look it up yourself.

However, the point is that MPs have fallen so far in public esteem that people can get away with this low humour. You can tell it's meant to be humorous by the gratuitous use of the word 'pertinent' - never used in this way outside the broadsheet letter pages.

There is not a single person in the country - or anywhere come to that - who 'actually pays for themselves' in the fatuous sense of this letter. Whether your money is earned, claimed, inherited, won or found under a rock it always comes from someone else. Exactly like MPs' salaries and expenses.

The target here should not be the claimants - a very right wing view, always blame the claimants - but a system which has grown like Topsy. And that is where parliamentarians are justly criticised.

It shouldn't have taken them so long to start to reform a system which, even if it is right, doesn't smell right.

Commenting on the necessary reform would be a better use of the letter writer's ink than the impertinent use of misplaced outrage.

Although it wouldn't be his ink if someone hadn't given him the money which came out of the price I paid for something.

And for those of you want a slightly more thoughful positon than my little rant try Luke Akehurst's piece here.