Ed Balls to become Chancellor???

Gordon Brown wants Ed Balls as chancellor

GORDON BROWN is ready to promote Ed Balls, his closest political ally, to chancellor this week in a high-stakes gamble to restore Labour’s political fortunes.

According to a top-level leak from Downing Street, the prime minister wants to make the appointment the centrepiece of a sweeping reshuffle on Friday, after the local and European polls.

With Balls, the schools secretary, one of the most divisive figures in government, the move would be a huge risk, which could trigger a ferocious backlash within the Labour party that could spiral into a leadership challenge.

Excellent…

AJ

Some numbers…

In brief:

Of the top 100 Commons troughers,

• 62% are Labour MPs (against 54.1% of 646 parliamentarians)
• 21% are Conservative MPs (against 29.9% of 646 parliamentarians)
• 15% are Lib Dem MPs (against 9.8% of 646 parliamentarians)
• 2% are other (against 6.2% of 646 parliamentarians) (% figure corrected)

and

Tory MPs cost, on average, about £5500 less than Labour MPs and almost £9000 less than Lib Dems.

Source? Below…..

At www.Theyworkforyou.com there is a useful list of all serving (and past) MPs, which you can download as a CSV and import into excel – get it here.

This was a good start for what I’ve been doing on a bored Sunday evening.

All of the following is ‘errors & omissions excepted (E&OE)’

I added their 2007-2008 expenses, claims and allowances to the spreadsheet.

A little rudimentary crunching told me the following, about 635 of our MPs (the rest of the chaff was cut out of these workings):

Party	MPs	Claims Total	Average	% of counted MPs	% of  counted  claims	Var %
Labour	350	£47,599,244	£135,998	55.1%	55.8%	0.7%
Conservative	193	£25,157,158	£130,348	30.4%	29.5%	-0.9%
Liberal Democrat	63	£8,777,335	£139,323	9.9%	10.3%	0.4%
DUP	9	£1,181,944	£131,327	1.4%	1.4%	0.0%
SNP	7	£837,133	£119,590	1.1%	1.0%	-0.1%
Sinn Fein	5	£682,187	£136,437	0.8%	0.8%	0.0%
Plaid Cymru	3	£412,504	£137,501	0.5%	0.5%	0.0%
SDLP	3	£408,855	£136,285	0.5%	0.5%	0.0%
UUP	1	£125,072	£125,072	0.2%	0.1%	0.0%
Respect	1	£136,390	£136,390	0.2%	0.2%	0.0%

• Labour MPs are the biggest troughers taking 55.8% of allowances paid, while having 55.1% of MPs in the mix here.
• Conservative, while still in the same league are the least trougherous, taking 29.5% of allowances, amongst 30.4% of MPs in the mix here.
• This means Tory MPs cost, on average, about £5500 less than Labour MPs, and almost £9000 less than Lib Dems.

Of the top 50 troughing MPs

• 33 are Labour MPs (66% against 54.1% of 646 parliamentarians)
• 10 are Conservative MPs (20% against 29.9% of 646 parliamentarians)
• 7 are Lib Dem MPs (14% against 9.8% of 646 parliamentarians)

Expand that out to the top 100 and it looks like this:

• 62% are Labour MPs (against 54.1% of 646 parliamentarians)
• 21% are Conservative MPs (against 29.9% of 646 parliamentarians)
• 15% are Lib Dem MPs (against 9.8% of 646 parliamentarians)
• 2% are other (against 6.2% of 646 parliamentarians) (% figure corrected)

Again, on these measure, Tories are less trougherous than the other contenders. Proportionately, Lib Dems come out worst on this measure.

Here’s the top 100 list… click to enlarge.

More if I’m still bored tomorrow… like adding columns for their majorities etc.

AJ

Clarkson Sense….

It’s heartening to see viewpoints such as these propounded in The Sun – beloved by the malleable masses whose opinion must be influenced to ensure a decisive kicking-out of Labour come the next election.

A viewpoint that he and I share:

Brown’s Britain gives me rules rage

…

We used to get by on the phrase "mustn’t grumble", but now the whole country is starting to drown in its own bile.

I’m not angry though. I’m way past angry. You get angry when you hope to achieve something as a result. But I know that we can’t achieve anything, which is why the feeling I have is a shoulder-sagging despair.

…

This is how I get by in this terrible world Brown has created. By ignoring the nonsense.

By refusing to obey written instructions on an escalator to face the direction of travel.

By smoking where I can’t. By breaking the speed limit. By having muddy number plates. And by smuggling my toothpaste on to airliners.

It makes no difference to anyone else. But it makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside.

And it’s a better way of dealing with the despair than committing suicide, which is the only other option.

And again:

Get real, Mr Politician or you’ll find yourself sitting next to a Nazi

…

The main reason why the BNP will do well is because the main parties seem to have completely lost touch with what their supporters actually want out of life.

We have the Conservatives dreaming up policies to suit whatever mood happens to be prevailing at the time, when all their voters want is for the economy to be mended. So that taxes can be cut. And then cut again.

And then we have the fools and madmen in the Labour Party.

Does Gordon Brown, for instance, think that in the clubs of South Yorkshire, where I grew up, people want a smoking ban?

Does he believe that White Van Man sits down to watch Top Gear and thinks: "You know, this would be a whole lot better if Richard Hammond had a vagina"?

Does he think, even for a small moment, that the people who put a cross in his box give even a small toss about "the environment"?

Or that the foundry worker wants to finish his shift and "drink responsibly"?

…

And then there’s the question of immigration.

Of course, I can quite understand why the champagne socialists are worried about the plight of poor Ndjama.

His village has been sacked by rebels, he has nowhere to live and nothing to eat.

Of course they would want him to have a home in Britain.

Fundamentally, they are good people with big hearts.

But mostly they want Ndjama to come here because when he does, he’s not going to be living in their street.

So, Ndjama will go and live in someone else’s street and that person will be quite cross.

Especially when he goes to work one day and finds Ndjama at the wheel of his forklift truck.

…

The Labour Party say that immigration is good for Britain and morally the right policy to pursue.

This may be so. But those who put them in power, emphatically, do not think this way.

We are all tribal. We like being in a group and we distrust outsiders.

We have our family unit, our bunch of friends, the town where we live, the football club we support, and, especially if we are Scottish, the country of which we are proud.

The big-hearted, liberal-thinking chaps and chapesses who advise Brown and his gang of fiddlers may think this is backward and pre-historic.

They think tribalism could even be dangerous. And again, they may be right.

But you wouldn’t allow Man United’s fans to sit among the Barca boys in a stadium because it would end in a fight.

And if you let half of Africa come to Britain – no matter how morally correct this may be – you’re going to wind people up and gift the BNP your seat.

Then we’ll see how tolerant these champagne socialists are.

When they go to work and find themselves sitting next to a Nazi.

Now, the interesting thing here is that he mentions tribalism and the liberal left’s attitude to it.

Socialism is a tribal movement. The Labour Party is a tribal party. Any intelligent reading of his modus operandi tells us that Gordon Brown is one of the most stubbornly and fiercely tribal people we have in British politics.

Damn – a cry of hypocrisy would come in useful here… but I’ve burst that bubble below.

AJ

18 millions gawping idiots had nothing better to do on a Saturday evening…

..than watch Britain’s Got Fuzzy Spackers:

More than 18m people tuned in to watch dance group Diversity’s shock victory over singer Susan Boyle on Britain’s Got Talent, early figures show.

I suppose it keeps the fuckers out of my way….

AJ

Cheers, Chelski…

£95 up on FA cup final bets of £100… Bollinger quaffed. Job done.

Particularly satisfying as I know less about football than Gordon Brown knows about driving a car.

AJ

Hypocrisy…

As a child, my appeals to logic and equality were met by my elders with the rejoinder to “do as I say, and not as I do.”

Aged 10, my primary school report card remarked unfavourably upon my penchant for the employment of ‘adult phraseology’.

I have no reason not to identify myself as a hypocrite – the context of which is my belief and understanding that hypocrisy is a fundamental part of the human condition. We are all hypocrites and to call someone a hypocrite is therefore inherently hypocritical.

Chambers Dictionary:

hypocrisy noun (hypocrisies) 1 the act of pretending to have feelings, beliefs or principles which one does not actually have. 2 the act of concealing one’s true character.
ETYMOLOGY: 13c: from Greek hypokrisis play-acting.

The complete idiot’s guide to psychology:

We’re all actors following scripts.

Billy Rattlerod:

All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.

Wikipedia:

It is a common fallacy (see List of fallacies) to accuse someone of being a hypocrite in an attempt to invalidate their argument. This can be known as an ad hominem attack. In other words, just because someone is a hypocrite, that does not make them wrong.

http://www.livescience.com:

Why We’re All Moral Hypocrites

Most of us, whether we admit it or not, are moral hypocrites. We judge others more severely than we judge ourselves.

Hypocrisy – Ethical Investigations, 2004, by Béla Szabados & Eldon Soifer:

Kant applies the sort of reasoning just outlined in defence of another form of pretence as well, which is even more striking, given our current interest in hypocrisy. This involves presenting oneself as virtuous, even when one is not. Kant welcomes the presentation of a dignified bearing, or the appearance of modesty, even when this is in fact an ‘illusion’, or a case of ‘disguising’ oneself…. But on one standard reading, this is exactly the sort of behaviour that is considered hypotcritical.

http://forums.philosophyforums.com

Inevitable Moral Hypocrisy
Philosophy’s eternal embarrassment

When it comes to ethics and morality we are all hypocrites. Moral hypocrisy is inevitable, part of the human condition, as natural as breathing.
By this I do not mean that people espouse a moral code that they do not follow themselves. If only it were that simple. The hypocrisy of morality is deeper than that.

The nature of morality and ethics can be summed up in two contradictory observations:

1) Morality is subjective, a function of individual perception. Everyone has a unique opinion about right and wrong, every society, culture, and religion its own social rules. There is no logical or scientific proof that any of them are objectively true.

2) We all believe our own morality and ethics to be objectively true. It seems as real and obvious to us as sunlight or gravity.

This paradox has forever confounded philosophers who have sought, by one means or another, to break out of the paradox. To avoid the hypocrisy that they despise in those around them.

But the human condition is such that hypocrisy is inevitable and unavoidable.

Now, what I want to know is when, and how, did the charge of hypocrisy become such a powerful one? Why am I apparently so rare in laughing off such charges as banal and tautological truisms?

“Oooh, you’re sooooooo human!” Doesn’t sound like much of an insult, unless it’s coming from an artificial or alien intelligence. For which I’m prepared to make a grudging exception.

“Oooh, you’re sooooooo hypocritical!” Sounds just like the way to close down most arguments effectively if you’re, consciously or otherwise, handy with logical fallacies.

They are equivalent statements.

Ohhh.. wait a minute… religious conditioning…

How can you say to your Brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.‎

Gospel according to Luke.

Say no more, Derek, say no more.

AJ

Tory Thief Sir John Butterfill….

This expenses thing is getting a bit tedious now. There are some specific cases that are serious for one reason or another, but I really don’t give a shit about £1500 for a duck house, however much Hogg’s moat cost, or even Alan Duncan’s uphill gardening.

But this chap made at least £100,000 in capital gains, on which he avoided paying tax (£40k approx), courtesy of a property in Woking that he renovated and maintained partly at our expense.

But there’s more…. he claimed back the cost of maintaining (and the council tax on) the attached ‘servants quarters’.

The amount of money he made could have been rather more…

An independent source who saw the work at the time suggested that the renovations amounted to the installation of a new wing, with a bedroom and kitchen, and swimming pool, at an estimated cost of between £250,000 and £300,000.

This would have left him with a gain of between £300,000 and £350,000, and a capital gains bill of up to £130,000.

Unreal. I don’t see how I can possibly vote for any of these shits. Cameron must have known this was coming down the line… why didn’t he pre-empt this?

Fuck plagues. A dawn napalm strike on all their houses.

AJ

Amazing disgrace….

It now appears that the tax man is quite interested in some of the MPs’ and ministers’ expense claims. Not least their claiming of personal accountancy fees as ‘expenses’, which is explicitly disallowed in the tax code.

The TaxBuzz blog has more here:

Today’s Daily Telegraph notes that HMRC confirmed that MPs were not exempt from tax laws and that tax must be paid on some expenses. In a statement it said:

“It’s a general principle of tax law that accountancy fees incurred in connection with the completion of a personal tax return are not deductible.

“This is because the costs of complying with the law are not an allowable expense against tax. This rule applies across the board.”

It now seems that more than 40 Ministers claimed and received reimbursement of accountancy fees as part of their Parliamentary allowances.

Those 40 ministers include the current chancellor of the exchequer – head of the treasury and, ultimately, of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. Responsible for creating and amending tax laws, rates and regulations.

What a crock. I wonder if Broon, creator of the most arcane tax system in modern history, also claimed for this. You can bet it’s being kept back if he has. Perhaps for the day of the June elections.

Sweet.

AJ

UPDATE: Today’s Tellygiraffe says that Darling declared his claim as a benefit in kind and paid the tax on it, which puts a somewhat different complexion on it. Nonetheless, he still had to hire a specialist to navigate through the tax system he’s responsible for.

And he’s still a badger-faced porridge-guzzling wanker.

Revenge: A dish best served in Dubai…

It’s not the first time.. won’t be the last.

Briton Sally Antia faces prison in Dubai on adultery charge

Sally Antia, 43, was arrested as she left a Dubai hotel with a man. Appearing in a court in Dubai on Sunday, she confessed to cheating on her husband and paying to fly her lover from Britain to the United Arab Emirates. The 44-year-old man denied the charge.

The pair had their passports confiscated. Mrs Antia, who had spent three weeks in police custody before the hearing, was denied bail.

It is understood that Mrs Antia’s husband, Vincent, 48, also believed to be British, informed the police of his suspicions this month. Divorce proceedings are under way between the couple.

It’s rare, in a divorce, for the husband to stitch up the wife rather than the other way around though… for an embittered bastard like me, this is a refreshing change.

I just do not understand why anyone would want to go to Dubai, let alone live there. But then, I know that I have respect the laws and customs of any foreign countries I visit – if I can’t or won’t, I don’t go there. Sadly, on that, I seem to be in a minority – both of Brits abroad and foreigners here.

AJ

Clarkson & Demetriou

Have you ever seen them in the same place, at the same time?

In a comment on one of my road rage posts, Mr Demetriou commented thusly:

My suspicions are generally rested on the budget far-East brand names now. Anything with a Kia, Daihatsu or Hyundai badge, under 3 years old, is generally guaranteed to bring you ‘Slow Old Cunt Misery’.

In the Sunday Times this weekend, Clarkson wrote:

if they happen to have a Hyundai, or a Kia or one of those Rextons, which is made by a company you’ve never heard of in a country you couldn’t place on a map, then their speed will not be measurable at all.

This is because cars made by companies that earn most of their profits from shipping and cutting down forests, and have an automotive division only because it’s good for the local economy, are almost always rubbish.

No, really. A car made for someone who just yesterday was going to work on an ox will be of no use to people who were brought up on a diet of Ford Mustangs. Cars made for southeast Asia and Africa are tools. And so are the people in this country who buy them.

Co-incidence?

AJ

Nadine Dorries put back in her box by Obo…

In an uncharacteristically non-sweary post, Obo has quite magnificently put Dagenham Dorries in her place.

Let’s face it, Nadine, no matter how you dress it up, MP’s brought this upon themselves. And you can’t even use the "few bad apples" rubbish, because it sounds like half or possibly more of currently sitting MP’s will lose their jobs because of this. It’s not a minority. I am quite certain that 600+ MP’s would have been sacked by my employer for making repeated claims that did not even abide by the very generous Green Book guidance, if my employer used the Green Book. But rest assured, Nadine, my employer’s expense policy is much, MUCH stricter than yours and our expenses checkers are not compliant and do not encourage us to use our expenses as a salary top-up, they are tough and will question the smallest amount of money. I have had to justify spending £2 on a cup of coffee for a customer.

…

What we want is for MP’s to be as honest as they expect us to be. You make the rules by which we all have to live, and then in a display of bare-faced effrontery, exempt yourselves from the most annoying of these. You are allowed to use accountants tax-free to fill in your tax returns; we are not. You are allowed to exempt yourselves from appearing in various state databases; we are not. You are allowed to smoke in your place of work; we are not. You use taxpayer money to subsidise the food and drink in your place of work; we get nothing.

Nice action. Read the rest…

AJ

Changed my mind; definitely voting English Democrat now….

Just as he did with JD’s post, Mr Lead Candidate, on his forum, has posted up my recent missive about them, prefaced with the following comments:

Do these people live in a "knowledge Free Zone"

What does it take to do a bit of research or the Barnett Formula, West Lothian Question etc.

Their reaction to an "English" Flag is simply to cry "RACIST"

This has to STOP !!!!

Oh yes – I’m convinced. This party is going places.

Even if he failed to address any of the points I made, and even if he failed to comprehend my post to the point that he thinks I am an anti-English racist. Which is possibly the funniest thing I’ve heard in a long time.

I can only assume that he’s making unwarranted assumptions based on my nom-de-plume.

AJ

Recycling…. because refuse disposal is soooooo 20th century.

On behalf of the planet, I’d like to thank the Tory council, the Labour government and the Clusterfuck European parliament.

A little council tax discount???

AJ

Voting for the English Democrats? Think carefully….

Seen on the uneffable B&D.

I’ve no knowledge of the English Democrats, but my first and abiding impression of them is that they are a splinter group from the BNP; people who departed in protest at Nick Griffin making people wear a suit that isn’t a uniform with shiny boots and epaulettes.

Or, they’re establishment stooges, looking to split the BNP vote so they don’t win any EU seats next week.

So, although John Demetriou is a touchy and inflammatory cunt to an extent at least matching the quality of his output (blogging? cathartic? Nah…), he seems to be bang on the money with his commentary of the above shower.

In a post looking at the parties in the running for the EU Gravy Train elections next week, he said:

English Democrats are an outfit I have not heard of before this election campaign. Their website is spectacularly bad. Their ‘campaign’ is non existent, unless you include one flyer. And most of all, their policies are depressing in their malformation. They want to properly deal with the West Lothian Question – fair enough, sounds good right? Except they’d do this by setting up an ‘English First Minister, government and Parliament with at least the same powers as the Scottish ones!’

Exclamation mark theirs.

Except, there’s one glaring error here. We already have a parliament, it’s called WESTMINSTER. And by setting up a government, I take it to mean ‘get elected’. Yeah, we got that bit, thanks. And as for English First Minister, er, you mean the PM?

The post got discussed on a forum inhabited by English Democrats – the ring leader of whom is on the party list for the south-east next week.

You may like to educate this guy, he clearly does not understand the concept of an English Parliament.

I think we understand it fine. Just that this chap, running for the swiftly departing G-Train, doesn’t.

See, once we’ve sorted the West Lothian question and done something to neutralise the threat of the Welsh enticing us all to our holiday cottages on the same weekend, Westminster IS the English parliament.

I mean, what are these people suggesting? That we have an additional parliament, as well as Westminster, for English matters? Where would the future political head to? The Westminster parliament that is the fast track to some money, contacts, contracts and a cushy EU role, or a modern breezeblock, MDF & chipboard entity, with as much power as a one-legged arse-kicker, and crucifying ‘transparency’ built in from day one?

I’ve done my bit now, by being reasonable. Here’s what ‘Cassie’ had to say about Mr D.

 

I’ll be fucked if I’m linking to that shit. Clowns.

JD strikes back.

AJ

Ethnic Minority Report…

On 18th of January, I called Obama “Mr Meet-the-New-Boss-Same-as-the-Old-Boss.”

Today the ASI blog did the same.

Via them, I see that Barry’s proposing indefinite detention, without charge or trial, for “future crimes”.

Obama proposed a new system of Indefinite Preventive Detention yesterday in his National Security speech that is stunning in its illegality.

Obama is proposing we keep people locked up not for the crimes they have committed and we prove they committed in a court of law, but on the chance that they might commit crimes in the future.  There will be no trial, for no crime exists to be charged.  There is only the nebulous threat of "future acts" to justify depriving people of their liberty potentially indefinitely.

Is this justice?

Imagine you are picked up off the street for daring to write something provocative in your blog.  Perhaps you vaguely threaten to relocate to Afghanistan and work with a humanitarian aid organization there.  Unkown to you the humanitarian aid organization might possibly be associated with the Afghan resistence.  Perhaps the head of the aid organization is the third cousin twice removed of a suspected warlord causing our march for empire trouble on the border.  Based on that alone you could be kept in a cell forever.  After all, letting you out of that cell might mean you really would do what you threatened and we can’t have that.

Don’t think it couldn’t happen.

Yeah – real liberal there, Bazza.

AJ

Reverse psychology or dumb communism circumvented?

Via ‘Whoops’ I came across what may be called an inspiring tale of the human spirit overcoming crushing authoritarianism. I’m assuming it occurred in the USA.

On second inspection, I read it as a bunch of not as stupid as they appear teachers.

Is it OK to run an illegal library from my locker at school?

Let me explain.

I go to a private school that is rather strict. Recently, the principal and school teacher council released a (very long) list of books we’re not allowed to read. I was absolutely appalled, because a large number of the books were classics and others that are my favorites. One of my personal favorites, The Catcher in the Rye, was on the list, so I decided to bring it to school to see if I would really get in trouble. Well… I did but not too much. Then (surprise!) a boy in my English class asked if he could borrow the book, because he heard it was very good AND it was banned! This happened a lot and my locker got to overflowing with the banned books, so I decided to put the unoccupied locker next to me to a good use. I now have 62 books in that locker, about half of what was on the list. I took care only to bring the books with literary quality. Some of these books are:

>The Perks of Being a Wallflower
>His Dark Materials trilogy
>Sabriel
>The Canterbury Tales
>Candide
>The Divine Comedy
>Paradise Lost
>The Godfather
>Mort
>Interview with the Vampire
>The Hunger Games
>The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy
>A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court
>Animal Farm
>The Witches
>Shade’s Children
>The Evolution of Man
> the Holy Qu’ran
… and lots more.

Anyway, I now operate a little mini-library that no one has access to but myself. Practically a real library, because I keep an inventory log and give people due dates and everything.

On second inspection, I read it as a bunch of not as stupid as they appear teachers.

But is what I’m doing wrong because parents and teachers don’t know about it and might not like it, or is it a good thing because I am starting appreciation of the classics and truly good novels (Not just fad novels like Twilight) in my generation?

Either way, it’s a win.

I still think she’s been played like a good’un.

AJ

I don’t think I understand….

Menezes officer ‘did not deceive’

A police surveillance officer who admitted altering his notes about the death of Jean Charles de Menezes has been cleared following an inquiry.

The Special Branch officer deleted text from his computer note before speaking to the inquest in October last year.

…

Last October, the officer told the inquest he deleted a line from computer notes which quoted Deputy Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick.

…

The IPCC found Owen "acted alone" in failing to disclose the note and then deleting it.

Its report concluded the officer had shown a "lack of understanding" of how he should behave, but had not committed an offence.

It’s another world…

AJ

Hans Bwix? Oh nawww….

North Korea fires two more short-range missiles in defiant act after nuclear test

North Korea fired more missiles into the Sea of Japan this afternoon in a further gesture of defiance a day after its underground nuclear test provoked outraged protests across the world.

Members of the United Nations Security Council worked overnight on a resolution that will reveal the degree of unity among its permanent members.

On Monday, even North Korea’s historical ally, China, joined in unanimous condemnation of the test, but it remains to be seen whether the unusual consensus will extend to concrete steps such as sanctions.

I know what I’ll be watching tonight…

Win.

AJ

Mummy admits ‘I am a lazy cow.’

Look.. here it is… after 3 rounds of our exchange and her concerted attempts to exculpate herself, I finally broke the bitch:

I am a lazy cow.

I rest my case.

And there is absolutely no chance, whatsoever, that I quoted her out of context. None. What. So. Ever. No sireee.

:-)

AJ

How to fail…

Chap in a soft-top sports car in the village. Roof down. Fair enough.

Then, while sat at the side of the road, he makes a call using his plumbed-in hands free kit, hence sharing both sides of his call with the entire world.

Plank.

AJ