IDS' attempts to silence his critics may fail - I hope!
Attempts since the close of the Conservative Party conference on Thursday to intimidate critics of the leadership of Iain Duncan Smith look as if they may well fail. The outrageous utterances of David Maclean, Chief Whip, threatening to punish those who dare to speak out and those thought to be responsible for sowing dissent in the Party, are almost Stalinist in tone. The so-called "career development interview" to which some MPs are to be subjected is a pretty crude attempt to silence opposition - and I cannot believe that it can possibly succeed, but perhaps my belief in the fundamental decency and moral backbone of at least some Conservative MPs is misplaced. No doubt this will become clearer in the coming days and weeks.
Meantime the Independent's analysis, in an article to be published tomorrow, seems to indicate that there are at least some who will refuse to be cowed. I hope they are correct.
Blogging from the Highlands of Scotland
'From fanaticism to barbarism is only one step' - Diderot
Saturday, 11 October 2003
The modern and inclusive Conservative Party
ITV report two Tory aides 'held over assault' said to be 'a homophobic attack on a gay policy adviser'.
It is also reported that the 'Conservative Party said it was not prepared to comment on the allegations'.
Charming....
(UPDATE: Added on Monday 13 October 2003 - There is a fuller story on this in Rainbownetwork)
ITV report two Tory aides 'held over assault' said to be 'a homophobic attack on a gay policy adviser'.
It is also reported that the 'Conservative Party said it was not prepared to comment on the allegations'.
Charming....
(UPDATE: Added on Monday 13 October 2003 - There is a fuller story on this in Rainbownetwork)
Thursday, 9 October 2003
Iain Duncan Smith is not a man capable of being Prime Minister
I've now had an opportunity to study the text of the Conservative Leader's speech in full and to watch some video clips of parts of it. It is clear to me that whilst it was most certainly a rousing speech, its effect will be merely to reinforce the faith amongst many already-existing Conservatives. I cannot see it will attract people who have not voted Conservative before.
Or attract back people like me who used to vote for them.
The Conservative Party still appears to want to talk only to its own supporters. You can read the full text here. It still seems to believe that if something is repeated often enough that people will be won over. Well, under this Leader at least, it ain't ever gonna happen (in my humble opinion).
Granted there is growing disillusion with Tony Blair's 'New' Labour government, but the Conservatives seem to have nothing genuinely new and credible to offer. For example:
and
Now I can't say I quarrel with any of this.
There is just this nagging doubt, though. How is it to be paid for? Well, here's how:
Now I am very sure that there is a great deal of waste in the public services, most notably in the grotesque over-manning (and over-management) in the National Health Service. The NHS exists primarily to provide health treatment to citizens, not for the purpose of providing employment for over a million people - a fact socialists seem to overlook.
However, the pretence that ALL the additional expenditure the Conservatives are promising can be paid for by more efficient use of the resources supplied, whilst STILL cutting taxes seems far-fetched to me. And it doesn't take into account the fact that many recipients of Blair's grotesque 'tax credits' (families and more recently, pensioners) are hardly likely to vote for a Party which is promising to cut or abolish such things.
The political reality is that we live in a country where everyone has a vote - and I wouldn't want it any different! But a consequence of this is that those parts of the population that generate net wealth are electorally hugely outnumbered by those who are net consumers of assets, in tangible financial terms. The 'right to buy' very successfully tapped into the self-interest of many council home residents who had aspirations to own their own homes - quite apart from the other seemingly minor, but hugely important, factors such as the complete abolition of exchange controls soon after the Conservatives last came to power in 1979, which allowed ordinary people to escape from the socialist straitjacket of strictly limited spending money whilst on holiday abroad.
There is nothing equivalent in IDS's speech today to galvanise the support of wide swathes of the population in support of the Conservatives.. Just scare tactics designed to appeal to the xenophobes who lurk amongst us:
The fact that we've been members of NATO for over fifty years? The fact that, in the successful Falklands campaign, the discreet satellite reconnaissance intelligence supplied by the US was invaluable. Not to mention the technical information discreetly supplied by the French about the sophisticated missiles they had supplied to Argentina, and which represented a real danger to our ships.
And I'm afraid that Mr Duncan Smith simply doesn't have the charisma to carry it off. It's all very well having a carefully-crafted speech delivered with the benefit of extensive rehearsal to a largely supportive audience at a Conservative Party conference. It's a different matter being able to cope with the cut and thrust of lively House of Commons debate and Prime Minister's Questions - situations in which he has shown little credibility. I suspect the Conservative Party is doomed to stick with Duncan Smith until the next election, though, if only because like ferrets in a sack they will never agree on who might more sensibly lead them and I doubt very much if Michael Portillo or someone like him could be tempted back whilst illiberal social thinking still seems to govern the Party's parliamentary agenda, whatever it may try and say in speeches by Theresa May.
I've now had an opportunity to study the text of the Conservative Leader's speech in full and to watch some video clips of parts of it. It is clear to me that whilst it was most certainly a rousing speech, its effect will be merely to reinforce the faith amongst many already-existing Conservatives. I cannot see it will attract people who have not voted Conservative before.
Or attract back people like me who used to vote for them.
The Conservative Party still appears to want to talk only to its own supporters. You can read the full text here. It still seems to believe that if something is repeated often enough that people will be won over. Well, under this Leader at least, it ain't ever gonna happen (in my humble opinion).
Granted there is growing disillusion with Tony Blair's 'New' Labour government, but the Conservatives seem to have nothing genuinely new and credible to offer. For example:
|
Promises on tuition fees and police numbers Students won't leave university saddled with a £30,000 debt… We'll scrap Labour's tuition fees and we'll stop top-up fees, too. Violent crime and disorder have rocketed under this Government… And the asylum system is a disaster – spiralling out of control. While Tony Blair travels the world, the world is travelling here. As Oliver Letwin has pledged, under the Conservatives there'll be 80,000 fewer asylum seekers – and 40,000 more police officers. That's twelve more police forces the size of the Lancashire Constabulary. |
and
|
Promises on pensions So we will raise the basic state pension, in line with earnings…to ensure that future generations of pensioners never have to go begging for social security. The abolition of the means test is supported by the savings industry. It's supported by millions of pensioners. And it's supported by me. Most important of all, it's the right thing to do. |
Now I can't say I quarrel with any of this.
There is just this nagging doubt, though. How is it to be paid for? Well, here's how:
|
Promises to cut taxes and spend money better The greatest cause of increasing tax is increasing waste. 70% of taxpayers think Labour wastes their money. And they're 100% right. This Labour Government will never give taxpayers value for money. But Conservatives will. In local government, Conservatives already deliver better services for less tax. As Michael Howard said yesterday in his excellent speech, Conservatives believe in low taxes. We will always be a lower tax government than Labour. And yes… We plan to cut taxes. |
Now I am very sure that there is a great deal of waste in the public services, most notably in the grotesque over-manning (and over-management) in the National Health Service. The NHS exists primarily to provide health treatment to citizens, not for the purpose of providing employment for over a million people - a fact socialists seem to overlook.
However, the pretence that ALL the additional expenditure the Conservatives are promising can be paid for by more efficient use of the resources supplied, whilst STILL cutting taxes seems far-fetched to me. And it doesn't take into account the fact that many recipients of Blair's grotesque 'tax credits' (families and more recently, pensioners) are hardly likely to vote for a Party which is promising to cut or abolish such things.
The political reality is that we live in a country where everyone has a vote - and I wouldn't want it any different! But a consequence of this is that those parts of the population that generate net wealth are electorally hugely outnumbered by those who are net consumers of assets, in tangible financial terms. The 'right to buy' very successfully tapped into the self-interest of many council home residents who had aspirations to own their own homes - quite apart from the other seemingly minor, but hugely important, factors such as the complete abolition of exchange controls soon after the Conservatives last came to power in 1979, which allowed ordinary people to escape from the socialist straitjacket of strictly limited spending money whilst on holiday abroad.
There is nothing equivalent in IDS's speech today to galvanise the support of wide swathes of the population in support of the Conservatives.. Just scare tactics designed to appeal to the xenophobes who lurk amongst us:
|
Appeal to xenophobia Think about it. Our country: no longer able to control immigration. No longer able to choose its allies. No longer able to use British soldiers to defend our interests abroad. Unelected Commissioners would have the final say in almost every government department – affecting every aspect of our daily lives. |
The fact that we've been members of NATO for over fifty years? The fact that, in the successful Falklands campaign, the discreet satellite reconnaissance intelligence supplied by the US was invaluable. Not to mention the technical information discreetly supplied by the French about the sophisticated missiles they had supplied to Argentina, and which represented a real danger to our ships.
And I'm afraid that Mr Duncan Smith simply doesn't have the charisma to carry it off. It's all very well having a carefully-crafted speech delivered with the benefit of extensive rehearsal to a largely supportive audience at a Conservative Party conference. It's a different matter being able to cope with the cut and thrust of lively House of Commons debate and Prime Minister's Questions - situations in which he has shown little credibility. I suspect the Conservative Party is doomed to stick with Duncan Smith until the next election, though, if only because like ferrets in a sack they will never agree on who might more sensibly lead them and I doubt very much if Michael Portillo or someone like him could be tempted back whilst illiberal social thinking still seems to govern the Party's parliamentary agenda, whatever it may try and say in speeches by Theresa May.
The 'quiet man' turns up the volume - but is it enough?
The Conservative Party Leader's keynote address turned out to be quite a performance, certainly the best and most 'relaxed' I have ever seen from him. It seems that the media training he is said to have had over the summer has had a positive effect.
Obviously the faithful gathered in the hall gave Iain Duncan Smith a prolonged standing ovation. The question which remains, though, is whether anyone else other than the media and political junkies such as me will care very much. I have to say I am uncertain about this because I think he did strike some chords which have the potential to attract voters who do not consider currently voting Conservative. For example, I am a committed pro-European, but I too want to see a referendum on whether the prosposed EU Constitution Treaty should be ratified by the UK - I do have a strong belief in democracy and would accept the verdict of the electorate to a fairly presented referendum question, whatever it is. Our Prime Minister, Tony Blair, seems to have decidedly equivocal views on this and many other matters.
I want to study the text of Iain Duncan Smith's speech more closely before I make any further comment about his prospects of remaining Leader.
The Conservative Party Leader's keynote address turned out to be quite a performance, certainly the best and most 'relaxed' I have ever seen from him. It seems that the media training he is said to have had over the summer has had a positive effect.
Obviously the faithful gathered in the hall gave Iain Duncan Smith a prolonged standing ovation. The question which remains, though, is whether anyone else other than the media and political junkies such as me will care very much. I have to say I am uncertain about this because I think he did strike some chords which have the potential to attract voters who do not consider currently voting Conservative. For example, I am a committed pro-European, but I too want to see a referendum on whether the prosposed EU Constitution Treaty should be ratified by the UK - I do have a strong belief in democracy and would accept the verdict of the electorate to a fairly presented referendum question, whatever it is. Our Prime Minister, Tony Blair, seems to have decidedly equivocal views on this and many other matters.
I want to study the text of Iain Duncan Smith's speech more closely before I make any further comment about his prospects of remaining Leader.
Is this the end-game for Iain Duncan Smith, present Conservative Leader?
Iain Duncan Smith will deliver his keynote speech to the Conservative Party conference at Blackpool tomorrow (Thursday). If all the media (broadcast and newspaper) are to be believed, he will have to deliver a blockbuster of a speech to stifle, even temporarily, the growing chorus of discontent with his leadership. As this article in tomorrow's Independent confirms, even grass-roots Conservatives are now prepared to say in public what would until recently have been unthinkable - that they are not happy with their Leader's performance and don't think they can ever win an election with him in control.
The Party seems now finally to be catching up with my own views. I resigned from the Party within days of him become Leader, seeing him as an electoral liability - quite apart from the fact that I consider him to be a reactionary homophobe. Nothing I have heard or seen of this man since he became Leader in September 2001 has caused me to have the slightest doubt of my earlier assessment. This desperate individual is, however, unlikely to go quietly - he was a divisive influence on the Party during the last Conservative government (1992-97) and is unlikely to be any different if his Leadership is openly challenged. Depressed as I am about this whole situation, the membership of the Party has only itself to blame for their foolhardiness and short-sightedness in electing this mediocre man to be their Leader. What a farce!
Iain Duncan Smith will deliver his keynote speech to the Conservative Party conference at Blackpool tomorrow (Thursday). If all the media (broadcast and newspaper) are to be believed, he will have to deliver a blockbuster of a speech to stifle, even temporarily, the growing chorus of discontent with his leadership. As this article in tomorrow's Independent confirms, even grass-roots Conservatives are now prepared to say in public what would until recently have been unthinkable - that they are not happy with their Leader's performance and don't think they can ever win an election with him in control.
The Party seems now finally to be catching up with my own views. I resigned from the Party within days of him become Leader, seeing him as an electoral liability - quite apart from the fact that I consider him to be a reactionary homophobe. Nothing I have heard or seen of this man since he became Leader in September 2001 has caused me to have the slightest doubt of my earlier assessment. This desperate individual is, however, unlikely to go quietly - he was a divisive influence on the Party during the last Conservative government (1992-97) and is unlikely to be any different if his Leadership is openly challenged. Depressed as I am about this whole situation, the membership of the Party has only itself to blame for their foolhardiness and short-sightedness in electing this mediocre man to be their Leader. What a farce!
Tuesday, 7 October 2003
Conservatives and 'inclusivity'
Yesterday Theresa May, Chairman, gave what I thought was a reasonably good speech, if a little didactic at times, on the opening day of the Party's annual conference, this year being held in Blackpool, although Andrew Gimson said in an article in The Daily Telegraph today that it was "beyond parody". In particular one small section, quite near the beginning, caught my attention when she said that the Conservative Party welcomed people as individuals on their own merits: "Rich or poor. Straight or gay. Black or white." I think the Party genuinely does try to do this, but there are still members who do not share this inclusive approach and who are permitted to remain members, or in one very recent case to stand under the [Scottish] Conservative banner at a major parliamentary election.
Even more recently Baroness Blatch, Deputy Conservative Leader in the House of Lords, tried to delay abolition of the hateful 'Clause 28', by introducing a 'spoiling' clause. Luckily she and the Conservative Party were unsuccessful.
So is the Conservative Party inclusive? In many ways it probably is, or at least has the intention of trying to be so. But they still have some considerable way to go before I will believe they really mean what Theresa May said yesterday is their policy - there are simply too many facts stacking up against them.
Yesterday Theresa May, Chairman, gave what I thought was a reasonably good speech, if a little didactic at times, on the opening day of the Party's annual conference, this year being held in Blackpool, although Andrew Gimson said in an article in The Daily Telegraph today that it was "beyond parody". In particular one small section, quite near the beginning, caught my attention when she said that the Conservative Party welcomed people as individuals on their own merits: "Rich or poor. Straight or gay. Black or white." I think the Party genuinely does try to do this, but there are still members who do not share this inclusive approach and who are permitted to remain members, or in one very recent case to stand under the [Scottish] Conservative banner at a major parliamentary election.
Even more recently Baroness Blatch, Deputy Conservative Leader in the House of Lords, tried to delay abolition of the hateful 'Clause 28', by introducing a 'spoiling' clause. Luckily she and the Conservative Party were unsuccessful.
So is the Conservative Party inclusive? In many ways it probably is, or at least has the intention of trying to be so. But they still have some considerable way to go before I will believe they really mean what Theresa May said yesterday is their policy - there are simply too many facts stacking up against them.
Monday, 6 October 2003
Atkins Low Carbohydrate Diet - Week 16
Last week was 'better' than for some time (two months approx.) in that I lost 1.5kg (3.3lb) in the past week and my weight is now (as at Sunday 5th October) 74.0kg, a reduction of 24.0kg since I began (or 52.9lb) - and I now have only 9.0kg (19.9lb) to reach my target of 65kg. Measurement indicators for the week show pretty good reductions, too:
- waist down a further 0.3 inches to 34.2 inches (total reduction so far 10.8 inches);
- hips down 0.3 inches to 41.6 inches (total reduction so far 6.9 inches);
- thighs down 0.1 inches to 23.4 inches (total reduction so far 5.1 inches).
I had planned to move on to the next stage of the Atkins diet, 'Ongoing Weight Loss', in two weeks, but as I have progressed a little faster than forecast I may move to it next Sunday (when I hope to have about 8kg or 17.7lb left to lose, assuming all goes well this week. It is important, according to the diet guidelines, to lose the final amount as slowly as possible and not to try and do it too quickly, as one might instinctively wish. This is to allow me to learn exactly what foods, and in what quantity, my body can tolerate whilst still continuing to lose weight very slowly. Accordingly, if the next week works out, I plan to lose about 9lb over the following eight weeks and the remaining 8 or 9lb (in 'Premaintenance') over the following three months - toward the end of that period I hope to be losing negligible amounts on a weekly basis - then I will know what I can eat, safely, so as not to lose or gain in future - more or less for the rest of my life. For the first time in my life I have control over my eating and appetite and it is not a gain I intend to give up lightly.
Last week was 'better' than for some time (two months approx.) in that I lost 1.5kg (3.3lb) in the past week and my weight is now (as at Sunday 5th October) 74.0kg, a reduction of 24.0kg since I began (or 52.9lb) - and I now have only 9.0kg (19.9lb) to reach my target of 65kg. Measurement indicators for the week show pretty good reductions, too:
- waist down a further 0.3 inches to 34.2 inches (total reduction so far 10.8 inches);
- hips down 0.3 inches to 41.6 inches (total reduction so far 6.9 inches);
- thighs down 0.1 inches to 23.4 inches (total reduction so far 5.1 inches).
I had planned to move on to the next stage of the Atkins diet, 'Ongoing Weight Loss', in two weeks, but as I have progressed a little faster than forecast I may move to it next Sunday (when I hope to have about 8kg or 17.7lb left to lose, assuming all goes well this week. It is important, according to the diet guidelines, to lose the final amount as slowly as possible and not to try and do it too quickly, as one might instinctively wish. This is to allow me to learn exactly what foods, and in what quantity, my body can tolerate whilst still continuing to lose weight very slowly. Accordingly, if the next week works out, I plan to lose about 9lb over the following eight weeks and the remaining 8 or 9lb (in 'Premaintenance') over the following three months - toward the end of that period I hope to be losing negligible amounts on a weekly basis - then I will know what I can eat, safely, so as not to lose or gain in future - more or less for the rest of my life. For the first time in my life I have control over my eating and appetite and it is not a gain I intend to give up lightly.
Saturday, 4 October 2003
New link added
A couple of weeks back I noticed that Jay DeKing ("The Council of Lemurs") had visited. Since then I've been taking a 'peek' at his site occasionally and whilst I can't say I agree with all he writes (which is the same for many of the few others I link to), he does write in a level-headed and pretty fair way. It's always useful to have a variety of views available for study, I think.
A couple of weeks back I noticed that Jay DeKing ("The Council of Lemurs") had visited. Since then I've been taking a 'peek' at his site occasionally and whilst I can't say I agree with all he writes (which is the same for many of the few others I link to), he does write in a level-headed and pretty fair way. It's always useful to have a variety of views available for study, I think.
Friday, 3 October 2003
Gay 'hate law' protection to be extended to Northern Ireland
The Daily Telegraph reports that Paul Murphy, the Northern Ireland Secretary, announced at the Labour Party conference that he will effectively leapfrog other parts of the UK by introducing hate crime legislation covering racial and religious (or sectarian) prejudice, and prejudice relating to sexual orientation.
Whilst 'hate crime' relating to racial and religious prejudice already exists in other parts of the United Kingdom, this was not extended earlier to Northern Ireland because of the perceived difficulty of enforcement in such a fractious atmosphere, where religious secatrianism has been so widespread.
However, at present, there is no protection in any part of the UK for 'hate crimes' committed against persons because of their [perceived] sexual orientation. Only in the very near future will legislation come into force protecting gays and lesbians from discrrimination in employment (unless you happen to work for a religious body, as such bodies have [quite inexplicably and outrageously] gained exemption from compliance).
There will now, quite rightly, be pressure upon the Home Secretary and the Scottish Executive to follow the lead of Northern Ireland to give protection against 'hate crime' to all citizens throughout the United Kingdom, irrespective of their sexual orientation.
The Daily Telegraph reports that Paul Murphy, the Northern Ireland Secretary, announced at the Labour Party conference that he will effectively leapfrog other parts of the UK by introducing hate crime legislation covering racial and religious (or sectarian) prejudice, and prejudice relating to sexual orientation.
Whilst 'hate crime' relating to racial and religious prejudice already exists in other parts of the United Kingdom, this was not extended earlier to Northern Ireland because of the perceived difficulty of enforcement in such a fractious atmosphere, where religious secatrianism has been so widespread.
However, at present, there is no protection in any part of the UK for 'hate crimes' committed against persons because of their [perceived] sexual orientation. Only in the very near future will legislation come into force protecting gays and lesbians from discrrimination in employment (unless you happen to work for a religious body, as such bodies have [quite inexplicably and outrageously] gained exemption from compliance).
There will now, quite rightly, be pressure upon the Home Secretary and the Scottish Executive to follow the lead of Northern Ireland to give protection against 'hate crime' to all citizens throughout the United Kingdom, irrespective of their sexual orientation.
Thursday, 2 October 2003
Year of 'jinxed' holidays
I discovered yesterday afternoon that my planned vacation (to northern Tenerife) beginning next Monday is not now to be. The parent company of the travel firm I booked with has gone bust. My money is (touch wood) ATOL protected. I could have rebooked the same holiday immediately, but would have had to pay again. The refund from ATOL apparently takes about two or three weeks to appear, so I prefer to wait until this is safely achieved before committing more funds to this company; call me cynical or at the very least just careful. I've already cancelled hotel bookings in London before and after this holiday, but unfortunately I cannot do anything about a refund on the flights to and from London on EasyJet; the holiday would have commenced from and ended at Gatwick. So I'll just have to write that off, but luckily it's not a huge amount.
A holiday earlier this year, in March, also came to nought - it was to have been a week at a self-catering lodge on the west coast of Scotland. The lodge offered when I arrived was considerably different (and smaller) than I had booked and paid for, so I didin't go through with it.
On the positive side, today being 1st October, I can now walk on the beach here again with my dog; from April to September the part closest to where I live (i.e. less than 100 metres) is off-limits to dogs because it is a popular bathing beach in the summer. I have to go about a mile to the east or half a mile to the west to get onto the beach in summer with my dog - hardly a crushing blow, but in the winter it's just that little bit more convenient. And today was a glorious sunny autumn day and the sea was almost mirror smooth.
I discovered yesterday afternoon that my planned vacation (to northern Tenerife) beginning next Monday is not now to be. The parent company of the travel firm I booked with has gone bust. My money is (touch wood) ATOL protected. I could have rebooked the same holiday immediately, but would have had to pay again. The refund from ATOL apparently takes about two or three weeks to appear, so I prefer to wait until this is safely achieved before committing more funds to this company; call me cynical or at the very least just careful. I've already cancelled hotel bookings in London before and after this holiday, but unfortunately I cannot do anything about a refund on the flights to and from London on EasyJet; the holiday would have commenced from and ended at Gatwick. So I'll just have to write that off, but luckily it's not a huge amount.
A holiday earlier this year, in March, also came to nought - it was to have been a week at a self-catering lodge on the west coast of Scotland. The lodge offered when I arrived was considerably different (and smaller) than I had booked and paid for, so I didin't go through with it.
On the positive side, today being 1st October, I can now walk on the beach here again with my dog; from April to September the part closest to where I live (i.e. less than 100 metres) is off-limits to dogs because it is a popular bathing beach in the summer. I have to go about a mile to the east or half a mile to the west to get onto the beach in summer with my dog - hardly a crushing blow, but in the winter it's just that little bit more convenient. And today was a glorious sunny autumn day and the sea was almost mirror smooth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)