It's a silly little story but, as is often the way with the silly and apparently inconsequential stories, it tells us more than we might expect. The Sun reports that:
"Gordon Brown celebrate[d] the Hindu and Sikh festival Diwali at No10 with cakes yesterday - after refusing to name his favourite biscuit. Mums in a live webchat begged the PM to name it - but he would not crumble."
What sort of man can't do this? Chocolate Bourbon; easy, just name the biscuit you like most. But for a man who dithers, who can't make up his mind without opinion polls, and who doesn't like issues where he can't create his precious dividing lines, such a task is near impossible.
Maybe he's waiting for David Cameron to be asked the same question, and is hoping his answer will be a shade on the posh side. Then, no doubt, we'll have Brown pledging £100 million to the Presbyterian Shortbread Foundation.
The BBC's Laura Kuenssberg has just Twittered that the Public and Commercial Services Union say they would strike as a result of George Osborne's public sector pay freeze. Note, first of all, how they didn't threaten to strike yesterday when Alistair Darling announced a pay freeze - albeit one on a smaller scale.
However, the pay freeze is a facade they are hiding behind. The pay freeze will of course affect the income of many of their members, as it will for everyone who works in the public sector. But you only need to spend 30 seconds on the Internet to find out why the PCSU in particular is having a hissy fit. Even Wikipedia notes that "most of its members work in government departments and other public bodies". So the bulk of its members work in the very Whitehall that Osborne has said needs to cut costs by a third, and I'd bet money that a good number work in the Quangos that Ken Clarke said would need to prove their worth or be scrapped.
I am sympathetic to anyone who is feeling the crunch at the moment - and both myself and friends and family are in the same boat. But unions need to grow up about this, and recognise that as the private sector is suffering heavy losses, public sector employees - the number of which continues to grow - cannot be immune from the consequences of the recession.
Talking to the Sun - BBC article linked to because of more information - General Sir Richard Dannatt has said that ministers had to be forced "screaming and kicking" to agree to the needs of the armed forces. And indeed that the military had to operate with "at least part of one arm tied behind one's back". This is all part of the story that Gordon Brown refused to sanction an extra 2,000 troops for Afghanistan, against military advice.
Downing Street has said: "Any suggestion that the prime minister has been unwilling to deploy more troops or provide the necessary resources is simply wrong."
Now, either General Dannatt - a man who has fought for better troop conditions, equipment, and pay - is lying. Or our habitual liar of a Prime Minister - whose party tried to smear Dannant - is lying through his spokesman. It's difficult to know who to believe in such circumstances...
Which is slightly worrying for a Work and Pensions Secretary. Responding to Conservative plans to review the state retirement age, she somehow manages to bring in the Tory inheritance tax pledge:
"They want to hit low paid workers in their late fifties, but they're still backing tax cuts on millionaires' estates. This shows how out of touch David Cameron and George Osborne are."
Listen, you stupid woman. The inheritance tax cut is designed to help everyone who has an estate valued at less than a million pounds. It's not a 'tax cut on millionaires' estates', because it means that the only people paying inheritance tax will be millionaires. Is that really so difficult for you to understand, you Jimmy Clitheroe impersonator from hell?
Update: Prize twat Liam Byrne has also got in on the act, this time also accusing George Osborne of 'talking Britain down'. Byrne is - believe it or not - the chief secretary to the Treasury, so should probably have an even better understanding of how full of bollocks this lie is than Cooper.
Brown's hike to Iraq during the 2007 Conservative conference was, until now, the lowest I thought Labour would go to deflect attention away from a positive Tory conference. However, I now give you this breaking news, which of course wasn't possible to announce during the Labour conference last week:
My hope is that the British people see this for what it is - as indeed they did with Brown's Iraq trip. This is Osborne announcing a NI freeze, and the bunker getting into a panic.
Remember in 2007, when Gordon Brown just had to go to Iraq in the middle of the Tory conference? Well, now Bob Ainsworth has gone on a 'surprise' visit to Afghanistan.
Two things; why can Ainsworth make surprise trips to Afghanistan on the first day of the Tory conference, but just has to go on holiday during the bloodiest month our troops have seen there since the war began?
And secondly, watch the BBC clip in the first linked article. You'll see that during a conversation with a solider who questioned him about troop numbers, Ainsworth tries to squeeze out of the solider a suggestion that they don't need anymore equipment.
I know you're the Cabinet's dunce, but do try to think carefully.
Which of these things is most likely to damage the morale of our armed forces?
A. Asking questions about kit provision and the number of helicopters. B. Having a Defence Secretary with a Cabinet ranking of 21 out of 23 when we're fighting two wars. C. Not providing troops with bomb-proof vehicles in a country covered with road bombs. D. Having a Defence Secretary who is generally seen as the biggest joke since 'Knock Knock...'
Answers to be scribbled in poorly spelled English on the back of a moustache comb, please.
On Monday - indeed in the very post below - I drew attention to Brown's sudden change of heart on TV debates. On the 10 o'clock news that night, Nick Robinson also confirmed that Brown's debate 'challenge' was included in the latest draft of his speech.
And yet, when Brown gave his speech yesterday, there was no mention of debates at all. It had suddenly been removed, and no challenge to David Cameron was forthcoming.
However, a funny thing seems to have happened. Click on the BBC link from Monday - the one that originally began with the line "Gordon Brown is ready..." And what you'll see is that the article has been completely altered to one titled 'We're not done yet, insists Brown', which is effectively a summary of his speech yesterday. I have not changed the link; it's the same page but with completely different content.
So why didn't the BBC leave the original story up? There are literally dozens of stories relating to the Labour conference, so it's not like they just had to get rid of the original content of the article or they'd run out of space. And keeping it up wouldn't have been factually inaccurate since, at the time, it was believed to be true. The fact that what was reported did not become a reality is actually a news story in itself, rather than something that should be swept under the rug. In fact, the only mention you'll now find about debates is in this new article, titled 'PM has made debate decision' - but he's not telling, apparently.
"We're not talking about an election at the moment, we're talking about how we deal with the policy issues. I've always been prepared to debate people... always prepared to join in a debate. I've given more statements to the House of Commons than any Prime Minister I think in the time I've been there, about the public issues of the day. Well, we'll deal with election issues when we come to discussing elections; but for the moment the most important thing is we have a public debate about the big issues."
"Gordon Brown is ready to debate with David Cameron on TV not just during the general election campaign but before it, the BBC understands. The prime minister is said to be deciding overnight whether to include in his speech to the Labour conference a call for a series of debates."
So now he doesn't just want debates, he wants loads of them - even before an election? This is Brown trying to come into the game at half-time, change the size of the goals, and take the ball away if nobody wants to carry on playing. In other words, he's now trying to pretend that debates were his idea and that he has wanted them all along. The man has no shame.
Update - Wed 29th September: I'm too exhausted to blog about Brown's speech today. For must read articles check out the various contributors at the Spectator, as well as Guido - who has an excellent scoop on Brown's 21st century Dickensian workhouses. And did you notice how the speech - in the end - contained nothing about debates at all?
Image from the Guardian. There is no intention on my part to make this a regular series. Brown just needs to stop having his photo taken with people who are so easy to do this with.
"Has nothing happened in the world today? [The Prime Minister of the UK reversed over 10 years of economic policy, that's what] In between bits and pieces for this week's Ken Livingstone edit, [You poor man, having to deal with such dross] I've been checking the news online: this morning we were told by the BBC that Gordon Brown is likely to say the word "cuts" in his speech to the TUC this afternoon. This was hardened slightly to a firm prediction that he would say "cuts", to -- finally -- reports of the speech itself, in which he, um, said the word "cuts". Amazingly, each time I have clicked on "Google News" this "story" has led the international bulletins too. [Again, that's because it's quite important news. A story isn't unimportant just because James Macintyre doesn't understand its significance]
Like a clamouring drum, the media pack and Tory party -- increasingly working together -- [How dare they! In Labour's glorious Britain the press must support Labour and all its glorious achievements, gloriously!] have built up to this moment for days [Which wouldn't have been necessary had Brown not been in economic denial for the best part of forever] (never mind the difference between cuts now and cuts later). Now, like a baited bear, [Baited trout, more like] Brown has been forced to utter the word, after weeks of resistance. [What, and he should be applauded for not saying the bleeding obvious for weeks and months?] And the end result, the icing on the cake? George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, declares -- right on cue -- that the Tories have "won" the "biggest economic argument" and forced Brown into "complete capitulation". [Have they not, then? Has the Labour man who is actually quoted as saying "Tory cuts verses Labour investment", not just admitted that he's going to make cuts? Because that's pretty significant]
So, another day another dollar for the most media-supported Opposition in modern history." [Just where are you going with this? First of all, it isn't actually true. The Mirror is still Labour's spin-machine, and the Guardian is quite a distance from the Tories. Labour, on the other hand, enjoyed near total media support when they were elected in 1997, and have had the BBC doing their dirty work for more than a decade. And secondly, is it not okay for the media to recognise that the Tories are right? Must they always swing behind Labour, despite the damage Labour are doing to this country? Take your thumb out of your mouth, drop that pathetic sense of entitlement, learn something about economics, and grow a pair of testicles...]
A Conservative Home video on today's historic news, just for Jimmy M:
"The Children's Minister claimed today that millions of Britons must be placed on a new Big Brother-style child protection database to stop a repeat of the Soham murders.
Under the plan parents could face a £5,000 fine for driving their children's friends to a sports event or Cub Scout meeting if they have not been vetted first by the massive new government agency.
An astonishing 11.3million people - one adult in four - are likely to come under the watchful eye of the Independent Safeguarding Authority.
Millions of Britons will be placed on a new database to prevent a repeat of the Soham murders in 2002, where Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman were killed. Launched next month, it will be the biggest vetting and clearing system in the world.
Every person who comes into regular contact with children or the elderly, through work or volunteering, must be approved by ISA officials checking for criminal convictions, disciplinary action and even unproven allegations."
So what I want to know is if Gordon Brown is going to volunteer himself for this piece of shit Orwellian database. Because I don't think these are all his kids:
So, Alan Davies is complaining that the BBC has cut his salary for playing Jonathan Creek by 25%.
Two things strike me about this story; the first one being that if you take a job knowing in advance what the salary will be - which Davies no doubt did in this case - you don't then get to bitch about how much you're being paid.
And secondly, if the BBC can make programmes - apparently just as 'well' - while cutting anything from 25-50% from their budgets, why can't they also cut the licence fee by 25-50% and give us some of our money back?
Gordon Brown, commenting on why he is currently refusing to take part in televised public debates with David Cameron and Nick Clegg:
"We're not talking about an election at the moment, we're talking about how we deal with the policy issues. I've always been prepared to debate people... always prepared to join in a debate. I've given more statements to the House of Commons than any Prime Minister I think in the time I've been there, about the public issues of the day. Well, we'll deal with election issues when we come to discussing elections; but for the moment the most important thing is we have a public debate about the big issues."
But we are talking about an election - a pre-election debate. And if you've always been prepared to debate people, why do you limit your debating to election time? Giving statements to the House of Commons is not debating, either - it's giving statements. And a public debate is okay, presumably because that won't involve anyone asking you any questions?
Xiamen University - where the Mirror reports learned scholar and academic John Prescott is to become a guest professor on climate change - has as its motto 'Pursue Excellence, Strive for Perfection'.
Hot on the heels of Kevan Jones's denial that wasn't really a denial, the Chancellor has got himself in a spot of bother. The Mail reports:
"Labour's fragile summer truce over Gordon Brown's leadership was at breaking point last night after Alistair Darling was accused of launching a scathing attack on the Prime Minister.
According to sources present, the Chancellor declared: 'I am trying to talk sense into that man. He just doesn't get it --going on about "Tory cuts" is not going to make an impact on the electorate.
The Mail on Sunday has been told the Chancellor privately vowed to 'talk sense into that man' as he condemned him for losing the battle with David Cameron over public finances."
Darling's spokesman is quoted as saying: "I simply do not believe that Alistair has spoken in those terms." This is not a denial, and either suggests that the spokesman doesn't talk to Darling - if he did, he'd know what Darling actually said - or he does not believe Darling said it in a Victor Meldrew sense.
Labour Bollocks is a blog dedicated to correcting, exposing and deriding the bollocks spouted by this Labour Government. As a Tory, it is true that I find doing this quite delightful. However, since the mainstream media doesn't seem that bothered with close scrutiny of the Government, I felt it necessary to add myself to the growing list of bloggers who carry out this important service. The views expressed on this blog are entirely my own, and do not represent those of the Conservative Party.
