Labour Has A Great Opportunity

Labour has a great opportunity. The end of Brown presents them with the chance the Party has been seeking for 7 years. Blair wanted to end Brown in 2001, but shied away from making the break. He often talked of sacking him after that. In 2007, the Party shied away from challenging him as leader, even though many were on public record saying that he would be dreadful, including David Milliband. Now events have moved the situation to the point where a risk will have to be taken, despite all the cautious instincts of those who could have prevented Brown from getting this far.

Now they have to act.

It cannot be a minor reshuffle of the cabinet. This must be a fully open Pop Idol media-covered leadership election, with as many people standing as wish to do so. If the Party does that, it would win the respect of the people, who would be willing to give the new leader, elected democratically in full public view the benefit of the doubt, and a chance to show what they could do.

The Party could also do much to rebuild trust with the people by holding the referendum as promised in the manifesto on the Lisbon Treaty. It would show that the new leadership believes in democracy, and that they are listening to the views of the people. These two highly public events - first a Labour leadership contest, and second a referendum on Lisbon would reset the political agenda for all parties, and maybe, just maybe, save Labour from a crushing defeat at the next General Election.

The 29 Labour rebels who voted for the Conservative referendum amendment should provide one or two of the candidates. Kate Hoey, Gisela Stuart, Graham Stringer, Frank Field should select their leadership candidate, who should declare their intention to run. The end of Brown opens up great chances, but to avail themselves of this opportunity, Labour will have to take a risk, expose themselves to the vagaries of a democratic process, or drift into permanent Gordon Brown bureaucratised oblivion. After all, it wasn't all that long ago that Labour were fair demons at the democratic game. Bring it on!

I don't see that THIS is the answer, just more of the same old New Labour!

Shut Up Hillary. It's Over.

Last week Hillary penned an article published in Virginia saying that she still had the support of 'working class white Americans', and said later she regretted writing the words.

Now she's gone a step or two further mentioning the assassination of Robert Kennedy in an inappropriate manner.

From Stephen Collinson of AFP.

"We all remember, Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California, I don't understand it," Clinton said.

Obama spokesman Bill Burton condemned her comment as "unfortunate" and said it "has no place in this campaign."

Clinton appeared to reference the Kennedy killing at the end of the 1968 Democratic presidential race to show that previous Democratic nominating contests have stretched well into June.

But referring to political assassinations is fraught with sensitivity, especially for supporters of Obama, who accepted Secret Service protection last year, long before the time it is offered to most presidential candidates, because of unspecified threats.

Clinton quickly launched a damage control effort, saying that the Kennedys had been in her thoughts, after Senator Edward Kennedy was diagnosed with brain cancer this week.

"I regret that if my referencing that moment of trauma for our entire nation, and particularly for the Kennedy family was in any way offensive. I certainly had no intention of that, whatsoever," Clinton said.

"My view is that we have to look to the past and to our leaders who have inspired us and give us a lot to live up to, and I'm honored to hold Senator Kennedy's seat in the United States Senate from the state of New York."

Sometimes it's best to recognise when it's time to pack up. Hillary who has fought a great contest, is obviously not capable of seeing that she is now doing her Party, herself and her country damage by carrying on. Shut up, Hillary. It's Over. You've lost. He's beaten you. OK.

The Prime Minister Who Never Should Have Bean

In Saturday's Telegraph - Simon Heffer joins the chorus -

The realists in Labour - of whom there are many - know what they have to do. Otherwise some of the present Cabinet will be lucky to end up as lollipop ladies in a couple of years' time. The thought of not just unemployment, but of unemployability, will, I fear, concentrate minds. "Pro bono publico, nil bloody panico", a wistful Labour MP said to me yesterday, quoting the late Tory MP Rear-Admiral Morgan Morgan-Giles.

But panic, I fear, is precisely what is now required.

Oborne writes in Saturday's Daily Mail

Claims that there is no simple mechanism to replace a Labour prime minister are misleading.

Under party rules, 20 per cent of Labour MPs (that means 71) must publicly call for a leadership election. In practice, however, Gordon Brown would step down if enough MPs want him to go.

A delegation of Labour grandees - the most likely members of such a group would be former leader Neil Kinnock, Justice Secretary Jack Straw and the former acting leader Margaret Beckett - would advise Gordon Brown of their fears. It would be impossible for him to resist.

So Crewe and Nantwich has had a seismic effect on the Labour Party.

This weekend it is in a state of panic and moral collapse. Luckily for the Prime Minister, the timing of the by-election coincides with the Whitsun parliamentary recess, meaning that MPs will be away from Westminster for the next ten days and giving him time to consolidate his leadership.

But this is only a mild consolation. June and July are traditionally feverish months at Westminster, dominated by conspiracy and plot at the best of times.

This summer, with well over 100 Labour MPs fearing they will lose their seats at the next General Election, they could prove deadly for Gordon Brown.

And yet Oborne doesn't quite get it. He thinks that if Gordon calls in the Blairites - Charles Clarke, Reid and Milburn , and offers them top jobs in cabinet, that would save his Prime Ministership.

Brown is congenitally unable to rescue the situation - full stop. Oborne must realise that.

The Blairites might buy him time, but the situation will only get worse, the longer Labour leaves Brown in situ. Blair regrets not sacking Brown in 2001. Now the country lives in regret until someone does something and gets rid of the Prime Minister who never should have been.

The likes of Clarke, Reid and Milburn had their chance when Brown was awarded an uncontested coronation. All of them could have insisted on a proper contest to select the new leader. Had they done so they would have won admiration. Now in the public's mind they are all tarred with the same brush.

The only MPs around who are unsullied by Brown are the eurosceptics (See Stringer Shows A Bit Of Leg below).

Blair too will tend to be a hated figure until Brown goes, and so too the Blairites. The public will only be satisfied when Brown has gone, and all those associated with him and Blair, along with him. Any of the previous regime who want careers subsequent to Brown should keep their heads down until Gordon has gone, and make way for entirely new faces.

The next few weeks are bound to create an opening for some new blood from Labour's ranks. If the eurosceptics choose their best candidate, they would have a great chance of rebuilding the public's confidence. I have never met Gisela Stuart but I've heard great things about her, and admire her courage. She was the one Labour MP who told Gordon and the public the truth. Maybe it will be her.

(In the comments, another person proposes Kate Hoey)

UPDATE - Matthew Parris of The Times also says 'Brown Must Go Now' - but offers little of substance to explain how he will be got rid of, and what will replace him. See HERE. Brown will no doubt overestimate his strengths as he always has done, and make one more disastrous mistake which will be the end of him. We've heard of Lame Duck Presidents. We are now watching a very different proposition - the 'Dead Duck Prime Minister' now inevitably approaching his denouement.

As Charles Moore says in The Telegraph - The natural next step is a leadership challenge to Mr Brown., as if he knows that's logical but he cannot quite believe that it's true himself. One sentence on the topic is all he can manage.

Politicalbetting.com website also in unable to take it all in, saying that Brown will somehow last two more years.

Events are moving so fast that people cannot absorb them.

The Guardian makes it clear that the Labour cabinet is not yet ready to address the depths to which Brown has sunk, and it rather implies that Gordon Brown is also in denial.

Labour figures said it was significant that the only cabinet ministers to appear on the high-profile broadcasting programmes were key allies. "Where was the rest of the cabinet?" one senior party figure asked.

The unease about Brown surfaced after a meeting of the political cabinet on Tuesday. "People did not come out thinking they had seen a brilliant masterplan that was going to get Labour out of this," said one senior figure. Another source said: "The political cabinet was awful. The tank is empty."

The main criticism is that Brown appears unable to go beyond saying he is the best man to deal with challenging economic times, a message that failed to sway voters in the local elections and in Crewe and Nantwich. Labour source stress there is no appetite for a direct challenge against the prime minister. Cabinet ministers are said to be discussing what to do. The most they are planning at the moment is to persuade Brown that he needs to "change his script"."The cabinet is not revolting against Gordon Brown," one infuential figure said. "It does wish that he could work it out. The first stage is to move out of denial."

Maybe things will clarify for everyone next week, once some of the dust has settled. But with no initiative likely to come from the cabinet, that leaves it open for those not in the cabinet to initiate the process of removing Brown from office.

Guido sees a different outcome - see HERE.

The lumpen left of the Labour Party reckons the answer to voter disenchantment is to abandon the centre and turn back to the old ways. A fish rots from the head, the weakness of the party leader makes it more likely that this rot will take hold.

Paul Mason, Newsnight's shop steward, could barely contain his excitement last night reporting the prospect of a battered Brown introducing higher taxes on high earners, windfall corporate taxes and the expected soon to be announced "equality agenda" - in other words leveling down. This will be kamikaze left-wing stuff. Britain is already sliding down the economic competitiveness league, the Irish are welcoming FTSE 100 companies making the taxodus from HMRC's demands. Gordon will now be weighing up a shift leftwards, to shore up his position within the party, giving some red meat to the activists and pundits like Polly Toynbee. It will be a change of policy direction based entirely on self -preservation.

The Toffs campaign was done just to appeal to the left wing activists. Now the whole country will be run around class bitterness, Guido thinks. Either that, or they just get rid of Brown. The latter will be the line of least resistance for Labour MPs who wish to keep their seats.

Prague Tory writing in the comments on Guido points out a story from Bloomberg -

He who pays the piper calls the tune? Personal donations to Labour have fallen by 90% in a year. 88% of their donations now come from trade unions.

Stringer Shows A Bit Of Leg

Reported by The Ghost Of Harry Flashman on politicalbetting.com at 12.02 pm-

Labour MP Graham Stringer called for a leadership challenge to save Labour from electoral “disaster”.

He told the BBC News Channel: “It is the responsibility of senior members of the cabinet to say we are going in the wrong direction” - and he said one of them should declare their intention to stand against Mr Brown.

“Without that we are heading for electoral disaster at the next election and I desperately want the Labour Party to win,” he added.

Graham Stringer was one of The Gang Of Four who stood up against the Lisbon breach of promise by Labour and rebelled, openly backing the I Want A Referendum Campaign. The others were Frank Field, Kate Hoey and Gisela Stuart. They were savaged by Geoff Hoon for their efforts. See SKY report HERE

It would be an interesting development if these four reassembled to promote a bid for the Labour leadership. Stringer's comments suggest that there is some serious thinking going on to try to move Labour into a eurosceptic Party once more, as it was until Blair changed Labour's tack on the EU before winning power in 1997.

If McDonnell is the most likely Left Wing stalking horse, then Stringer is the first sign of an attempt to swing the Party against Europe. The BBC will be delighted, of course! Stringer gets all of a sentence in the Beeb report 'The End Of New Labour' HERE.

UPDATE - A third Labour MP, Alan Simpson has opened up on Gordon Brown, as reported by the BBC at 13.22 pm HERE "Brown Faces Leadership Concerns".

Interestingly, all the three who have openly questioned Gordon Brown's leadership come from the 29 who voted in favour of the Conservative amendment to the Lisbon ratification debate in the Commons, proposing a referendum.

The 29 Labour MPs who broke ranks over the referendum issue were as follows -

Colin Burgon Elmet Lab aye
Ronnie Campbell Blyth Valley Lab aye
Frank Cook Stockton North Lab aye
Jeremy Corbyn Islington North Lab aye
John Cummings Easington Lab aye
Ian Davidson Glasgow South West Lab aye
David Drew Stroud Lab aye
Gwyneth Dunwoody Crewe & Nantwich Lab aye
Frank Field Birkenhead Lab aye
Mark Fisher Stoke-on-Trent Central Lab aye
Roger Godsiff Birmingham, Sparkbrook & Small Heath Lab aye
Kate Hoey Vauxhall Lab aye
Kelvin Hopkins Luton North Lab aye
Lindsay Hoyle Chorley Lab aye
Lynne Jones Birmingham, Selly Oak Lab aye
David Marshall Glasgow East Lab aye
John McDonnell Hayes & Harlington Lab aye
Austin Mitchell Great Grimsby Lab aye
Anne Moffat East Lothian Lab aye
George Mudie Leeds East Lab aye
Denis Murphy Wansbeck Lab aye
Alan Simpson Nottingham South Lab aye
Dennis Skinner Bolsover Lab aye
Graham Stringer Manchester, Blackley Lab aye
Gisela Stuart Birmingham, Edgbaston Lab aye
David Taylor North West Leicestershire Lab aye
Paul Truswell Pudsey Lab aye
Mike Wood Batley & Spen Lab aye

Is this the most threatening zone for Gordon Brown after Crewe & Nantwich? Here he is defending himself, I would say, nervously, wouldn't you? VIDEOLINK.

UPDATE - Could he be closer to falling than people think?

What about this suggestion from a PBer 5 minutes ago?

Does anyone else think we could be a lot closer to a general election than most people assume? The big question is whether Gordon can survive, and it has be be said the chances are looking increasingly slim. Labour MPs know that its almost impossible to launch a formal leadership contest, and yet they have a golden opportunity ahead in the 42 day vote. If Gordon loses this, surely its game over? To lose a vote on the government’s flagship anti-terrorism legislation would be catastrophic, I can’t see how he could survive. If/when he has gone, there will be a leadership election and a new PM - but could Labour really go on until 2010 with a second unelected leader? I just don’t think its feasible, and the public simply wouldn’t stand for it.

I dunno, its just a hunch I have… Anyone else thinking along the same lines?
by Henry C May 23rd, 2008 at 3:37 pm

If enough Labour MPs publicly express disloyalty day by day, and progressively weaken Gordon's position, then the Commons vote might be used as the mechanism to unseat Brown. But it would need a head of steam building up first.

UPDATE - Saturday - Simon Heffer joins the chorus -

The realists in Labour - of whom there are many - know what they have to do. Otherwise some of the present Cabinet will be lucky to end up as lollipop ladies in a couple of years' time. The thought of not just unemployment, but of unemployability, will, I fear, concentrate minds. "Pro bono publico, nil bloody panico", a wistful Labour MP said to me yesterday, quoting the late Tory MP Rear-Admiral Morgan Morgan-Giles.

But panic, I fear, is precisely what is now required.


And Oborne in Saturday's Mail

Claims that there is no simple mechanism to replace a Labour prime minister are misleading.

Under party rules, 20 per cent of Labour MPs (that means 71) must publicly call for a leadership election. In practice, however, Gordon Brown would step down if enough MPs want him to go.

A delegation of Labour grandees - the most likely members of such a group would be former leader Neil Kinnock, Justice Secretary Jack Straw and the former acting leader Margaret Beckett - would advise Gordon Brown of their fears. It would be impossible for him to resist.

So Crewe and Nantwich has had a seismic effect on the Labour Party.

This weekend it is in a state of panic and moral collapse. Luckily for the Prime Minister, the timing of the by-election coincides with the Whitsun parliamentary recess, meaning that MPs will be away from Westminster for the next ten days and giving him time to consolidate his leadership.

But this is only a mild consolation. June and July are traditionally feverish months at Westminster, dominated by conspiracy and plot at the best of times.

This summer, with well over 100 Labour MPs fearing they will lose their seats at the next General Election, they could prove deadly for Gordon Brown.

And yet Oborne doesn't quite get it. He thinks that if Gordon calls in the Blairites - Charles Clarke, Reid and Milburn , and offers them top jobs in cabinet, that would save his Prime Ministership.

Brown is congenitally unable to rescue the situation - full stop.

The Blairites might buy him time, but the situation will only get worse, the longer Labour leaves Brown in situ. Blair regrets not sacking Brown in 2001. Now the country will live in regret until someone does something and gets rid of the Prime Minister who never should have been.

Dublin Could Yet Torpedo Lisbon

This is the banner on the home page of Libertas, the Irish organisation running the 'NO' campaign prior to the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, coming up next month. The leader of Libertas is 39 year old Declan Ganley (pictured below), and he's doing a storming job, catching out Irish government Ministers who are misleading the people about the terms of the Lisbon Treaty (click on Libertas for details), especially as to the loss of Ireland's veto to QMV over any terms that the EU agrees to in WTO negotiations.

Farmers are worried. In Ireland farming carries political clout, as it is a far bigger part of the economy than in Britain, for example.

'Stop lecturing us and telling us how grateful we should be,' said one farmer.

'Why would we support an institution that's taking away our livelihood?' said another, according to today's WSJ.

The WSJ lists out the areas of concern as follows -

Farmers are concerned that they will be forced to compete with cheaper imports, as well as seeing their EU subsidies reduced at the same time. Trade Unions fear that the Treaty will weaken their members' rights. Peace activists say that the Treaty will force Ireland to beef up its military, and anti-abortion groups worry that the Treaty will force Ireland to alter its anti-abortion stance.

The Yes campaign denies that any of these fears are necessary. But all in Ireland are aware that the competitive tax regime in Ireland with the 12.5% Corporation Tax has done a lot to attract business and FDI into Ireland. If tax harmonisation policy becomes enforceable from measures brought in subsequent to Lisbon, again by QMV, which they will, then Ireland's economic competitiveness could start to seep away.

The country is already suffering from a property price downturn and rising interest rates, and the Irish are not so willing to suspend their doubts about the EU as they were. earlier in May a poll put the YES and the NO votes neck and neck, but with 30% undecided. All the big parties are backing the Treaty, as is the media, but the lone voices of Declan Ganley and Libertas, backed by Sinn Fein might yet pull off the vote. The battle is on.

UPDATE - Dan Hannan in this week's Spectator is upbeat about the chances of Lisbon being sunk by the Irish referendum HERE.

And his colleague Roger Helmer MEP East Midlands (Conservative) has this to say in his monthly newsletter -

The mood in Ireland is swinging against the Yes Campaign. A recent poll of small businessmen in Ireland showed 74% against. Ten thousand Irish farmers marched in Dublin against the Lisbon Treaty. They are worried about Peter Mandelson's world trade position. Recently Mandy called the Irish farmers "liars". This was headlined in Irish papers. You can imagine how such a comment from an English Commissioner was received. One Irish NO Campaigner called Mandelson "The gift that keeps on giving".

The Yes side are getting very worried, in Dublin and in Brussels. They can't move the vote to a later date, because they know that developments under the French Presidency (July/Dec '08), especially on tax and agriculture, will strengthen the NO vote.
It is difficult to see how the EU could respond to a NO vote in Ireland, but it would be a huge boost for our cause. Fingers crossed for June 12th..

An Irish Take on the Lisbon Treaty

In the (Irish) Sunday Business Post, Tom McGurk argued, "If you thought the Maastricht and Nice masterpieces needed a whole afternoon in a political seminar to understand, then try Lisbon. It is the Finnegans Wake of EU treaties, a master-class in confusion and obscurity. It would be funny if it weren't so serious; indeed, were any student in Europe to submit the Lisbon Treaty as an academic political thesis, they might well be thrown out of their faculty."

The last word should go to a thoughtful Irishman, Anthony Coughlan, who explains in simple terms what Lisbon would mean for Ireland, if it were to be ratified. Read HERE.

Crewe Says 'We Want Change'.

The Crewe & Nantwich result tells Labour one thing clearly. Replace Gordon Brown now. John McDonnell MP has already opened up on Gordon, criticising his leadership, since the result, and hinting that he's ready to start the bidding. Daily Referendum Blog says that McDonnell is unlikely to be the last.

But what about Nick Clegg? He made it clear last week that in a hung Parliament he would back David Cameron and allow him to form a government on condition of policy agreement. But with Conservatives hitting on the high 40s in elections and polls alike, the Conservatives are not likely to need him.

The Lib Dems make me laugh. Their share of the vote fell from 18.6% to 14.6%, but as Labour did even worse they can claim a relative statistical gain, that is a swing vis a vis Labour of 7%, which they are doing on their website libdemvoice.org. See HERE.

The fact is that the Lib Dems might have expected to pull in second, given their formidable byelection record, but they only achieved half the number of votes that went to Labour. With the Conservatives on the rise, powered by public anger at Labour's economic record, the Lib Dems are becoming invisible, or maybe they too are collecting some of the public anger for the mess that has been made out of Britain's once formidable economy.

People want to dump Labour and see change. The Lib Dems are not going to deliver that. They offer nothing the voters need.

The Henley byelection, the seat vacated by London Mayor Boris Johnson will be next. If the Lib Dems don't perform there either, Gordon Brown won't be the only party leader vulnerable to replacement. Clegg could soon be on the slide too.

EU Fails To Deliver Its Side Of The Bargain

An article in the International Herald Tribune, written in Berlin today by Judy Dempsey HERE covers the report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington and compares it with a recent Italian report, both covering the subject of Europe's defence capabilities. The Washington report reveals a lot about American disappointment with its European allies.

From the IHT - The report coincides with a major American reassessment of EU defense and security policy under which Washington would support a more muscular EU, provided that European defense spending was sufficient for a radical improvement in military capabilities on this side of the Atlantic...

The report focuses on 2001 to 2006, a period when the EU was deploying soldiers almost every year in new places, from Macedonia in the western Balkans to Bunia in the Democratic Republic of Congo. In this time, the total number of European troops involved in foreign missions - peacekeeping and other military operations - increased to more than 80,000, from 65,000...

But military spending by most European countries over the same period was "negative or slightly positive," the report says.

"Largely for political reasons, the EU member states cannot have any large increases in defense spending," Guy Ben-Ari, one of the authors of the analysis published in Washington, said in an interview. "There are other pressing priorities - for example, social welfare programs - and particularly against the background of aging populations."from 2001 to 2006, France, Britain and Spain spent more than 3 percent of gross domestic product on defense. But Italy spent 1.47 percent, and spending in Germany and Sweden sharply declined.

Giovanni Gasparini and Lucia Marta, authors of a separate report on EU defense spending published last month by the Istituto Affari Internazionali in Rome, suggested that Germany had "had difficulties in respecting its commitments" as a result of the drop in spending and said that a 'feeble increase" in Italy's defense budget had "made it difficult to maintain operational levels."

The picture painted is one of complete inadequacy and failure on the part of the Europeans to live up to their side of the political bargain. America continues to deliver total political support to the EU and is getting zilch in return. The Italian authors try to offer as optimistic a view as they can about Europe, but really the counter-view they paint is laughable, as follows -

At the same time, while total troop levels fell by 12 percent across the bloc, defense investment per soldier rose by 26 percent.

"If this trend continues it may mean smaller, better-equipped European militaries in the years to come," the report says.

On the other hand, it may just mean smaller and higher paid militaries in the years to come. The Italian report continues,

Also, even though defense spending among some of the EU's big and medium-sized countries remains controversial domestically, security expenditures are increasing on police forces, protection of ports and airports, and developing new intelligence systems.

The Washington report doubts whether the low spending being made will result in improved military capabilities.

Ben-Ari said that public willingness to accept such increases may reflect support for a "soft power" approach to security preparedness and conflict resolution.

This raises questions of whether the European Union is more interested in strengthening its "soft power" profile than in projecting the image of a bloc prepared to use hard power as well, and of whether increases in security spending will ultimately result in improved military capabilities.

In plain English the Americans are saying that the EU is not interested in making any commitment to increased defense spending at all, and will not have anything to offer America in terms of sharing the defence load around the word. This leaves the Bush Administration's whole European policy which Bush has pursued for the last five years high and dry, and the world overly exposed to powerful new military operators such as Russia.

The report puts it like this -

...the Bush administration has backed the idea of a militarily stronger European Union. Victoria Nuland, the U.S. ambassador to NATO, in a speech in Paris three months ago, made this clear but added that it would require a radical improvement in military capabilities, with a far more focused policy on defense spending.

Well Victoria (Pictured). It ain't gonna happen.

Bush just doesn't get it. He was surprised when the Europeans failed to back his attempts to offer NATO membership to Georgia and the Ukraine, while he he gave full backing to EU requests to support the Kosovan independence moves from Serbia. With Europe and therefore the USA having inadequate military power to back up these strategies, Putin, who is spending 50% of his GDP on defence, and who pays his troops far less than Europeans and as a result gets far more bang for each buck, only has to issue the minutest military threat, and the white flags are flying in Brussels.

Whenever the next US President gets around to looking at the situation, surely he will find that America is wasting its time giving all its support to the EU, and that it is time to move on to pastures new. America would prefer dealing with the EU than with Moscow, but the realities of the situation are that America will have little choice but to change allegiances, and negotiate with the Russians. The EU is unwilling to defend itself, and so others who will accept the primary responsibility of government, that is to defend, will gradually usurp their power.

British Prime Minister Approaches The End

Andrew Gimson of The Telegraph (Pictured) is never short of a good phrase, but today his writing betrays a freshness, a tingle of excitement which he has done little to disguise. It's as if at last he can see that politics could become a bit of fun once more with people open to new ideas and open debate.

How can that be, you might think with Gordon Brown still in place, probably the dullest and least capable Prime Minister ever to be appointed to that position in the history of the post? Gimson, you see, thinks that Brown could be gone at any moment.

After watching Brown's most recent performance at PMQs, he writes as follows -

The great battleship wallows helplessly in heavy seas. It has lost power, its steering gear is shot to pieces and there is even something wrong with its huge guns, which can no longer be trained on the enemy but fire occasional defiant salvoes into empty space.

Only its thick iron plating has saved this mighty ship from going to the bottom, but one feels it is only a matter of time and it could be sunk as early as tomorrow morning.

I don't know what information Gimson possesses, if any, which might persuade him of the happy thought that Brown might be gone so soon. Maybe he's heard of whispers in corridors in Westminster advising that Brown won't survive a coming attempt to unseat him after the Crewe & Nantwich result is in, and that the groundswell of opinion within the Labour Party to get rid of him is growing to a critical level. See this video report from timesonline.co.uk where the reporter finds that Labour voters want Gordon Brown to go HERE.

As one commenter says, when the opposing parties put Brown's picture all over their campaigning material, and the Labour Party puts anyone's picture they can find other than Brown, such as Alex Ferguson, things have gone beyond the 'manageable' level. Brown will have to go.



(Cartoon from The Daily Express)

GIMSON'S JOY

The other reason for his great joy is the first Press conference given by Mayor Boris Johnson at City Hall, which he describes like this -

The depressing sight of our stricken Prime Minister was offset by an ebullient performance at City Hall by Boris Johnson, the new mayor of London, who was facing his first question time.

Like the best kind of schoolmaster, Mr Johnson managed to bring life to a session which could have been deadly dull, and to strike up an immediate rapport with the members of the London Assembly.

When Darren Johnson, a Green, invited him to consider that party's proposed alternatives to the new bridge planned for the Thames in east London, the mayor was at once interested: "What are they? Do you envisage a kind of catapult?" That's where a traditional classical education as enjoyed by Mr Boris Johnson can be so valuable.

Caesar was forever flinging his legions across the river, but it is not an idea that would occur to everyone.The depressing sight of our stricken Prime Minister was offset by an ebullient performance at City Hall by Boris Johnson, the new mayor of London, who was facing his first question time.

Like the best kind of schoolmaster, Mr Johnson managed to bring life to a session which could have been deadly dull, and to strike up an immediate rapport with the members of the London Assembly.

When Darren Johnson, a Green, invited him to consider that party's proposed alternatives to the new bridge planned for the Thames in east London, the mayor was at once interested: "What are they? Do you envisage a kind of catapult?" That's where a traditional classical education as enjoyed by Mr Boris Johnson can be so valuable.

Caesar was forever flinging his legions across the river, but it is not an idea that would occur to everyone.

Mr Johnson said the Greens were thinking of a cable car, but there was an exhilarating sense that Mr Johnson is open to new thinking.

The next question, from Tony Arbour, a Conservative, was about the siting of bus stops. The mayor replied: "Tony, I'm reluctant at this stage to make a big announcement about who will have sovereignty over the siting of bus stops."

Mr Johnson said the Greens were thinking of a cable car, but there was an exhilarating sense that Mr Johnson is open to new thinking.

The next question, from Tony Arbour, a Conservative, was about the siting of bus stops. The mayor replied: "Tony, I'm reluctant at this stage to make a big announcement about who will have sovereignty over the siting of bus stops."

In 2006 Gimson published a book titled ' BORIS - The Rise Of Boris Johnson'.

American Shames Herself

Al Jazeera is the only news network to provide balanced and true reporting around Serbia's elections. The BBC has replicated the EU's version that because the pro-EU Party had won 39% of the vote, making it the largest Party overall, it had 'won' the election. The problem is that a coalition of other parties has joined up to reach a clear majority and form the new government. The coalition does not include Tadic's Party. Now, most shocking of all, the American Ambassador has joined in, talking the same anti-democratic nonsense as the EU.

From AJ -

Cameron Munter, the US ambassador in Belgrade, (Pictured) said on Thursday that a Socialist-Radical-DSS-NS coalition would be "surprising" because that it "wouldn’t be in line with the people’s will at the elections".

"At the elections, the Serbian citizens clearly chose Europe and their country’s European future.

"We expect and hope that a Europe-oriented government capable of meeting the needs of its citizens will be formed, in keeping with that clearly expressed will," he said.

In fact only 39% voted for Tadic and his Party's willingness to sacrifice Kosovo in favour of fast track EU membership. That makes exactly 61% who voted otherwise.

Kosovo focus

The Socialists have said Kosovo is a priority
Branko Rusic, vice president of the Socialists, told Al Jazeera that they will talk to Tadic, because he won the election, but stressed that his party needed guarantees that no one will give up Kosovo for a uncertain European future.

"We need to have a government that keeps the national interests of Serbia," he said.

"I mean a Kosovo inside Serbia according to resolution 1244 [which repects the sovereignty and territorial integrity of serbia].

"The citizens of Serbia proved that they needed much more social justice, and they did that by voting for us," he said.

We are all used to the EU being unable and unwilling to accept democratic process, which brings the result it doesn't want. But for America, the bastion of world democracy to be making anti-democratic statements is shameful. Americans take pride in the fact that the USA rescued millions from oppressive undemocratic regimes. Who would have thought that the day would come when America would be heading up European anti-democratic oppression of its own.

In Serbia the Nationalists have won the election, and America should publicly recognise that fact. The USA should not be drawn into the EU quagmire, which it is now allowing to sully its once golden reputation for freedom. Maybe Cameron Munter is a friend of Hillary Clinton, another American who doesn't appear to accept that the clear cut results of open democratic process should be observed.

From apnews, Even after it was clear Obama was on a path to the nomination, Clinton hasn't been able to resist the occasional jab such as criticizing his health care plan. And in a newspaper interview following her West Virginia win last week, Clinton noted she was beating Obama among "working, hardworking Americans, white Americans" - a characterization that drew widespread criticism. Clinton later said she regretted the comment.

The Al Jazeera correspondent in Belgrade is Omar Khalifa.

Will Gisela Stuart Stand If Gordon Falls?

You have to hand it to Birmingham MP Gisela Stuart. She tells it like it is. The media is full to the brim with articles and reports mentioning Gordon Brown's inability to provide leadership. But how many of them were onto Brown's hopelessness as early as October 2007? Gisela was right there, and not mincing her words either, as this headline from the Birmingham Post demonstrates, dated October 16th.

She then lead the Gang Of Four rebellion against the Lisbon Treaty ratification through the Commons, roping in Frank Field, Kate Hoey and Graham Stringer to make a committed and public stand against Gordon Brown's breach of Labour's manifesto promise to hold a referendum. Sadly the rebellion fizzled out and only 29 Labour MPs voted to back the promised referendum. Pictured - Gisela Stuart on left.

Commentators scratching around looking for anything that shows the courage and commitment of leadership in the ranks of Labour MPs might take note. Gisela's got the kind of 'cojones' that turning the Party's disastrous situation will take.

As James Lyons of The Mirrror noticed on the 23rd January 2008, Gisela, under threat from Labour Whips mysteriously disappeared. She was predicted only to return once Lisbon had been finally ratified through the Lords. See HERE. That's the measure of how frightened Gordon Brown had become of her, that he insisted she be removed from Westminster. Were Brown now to fall after the Crewe and Nantwich result comes in however, she might be tempted to make an early reappearance.

Ably assisted by L. Bagshaw in her Edgbaston Constituency (presumably no relation of Louise!), she must surely be keen to find any way she can to overturn the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty which she so strongly opposes. One way to do that would be to fight for the leadership of the collapsing Labour Party. As The Mirror says, 'has anyone seen Gisela?', the only MP who dared challenge Gordon Brown face on and tell it like it is?

If Gordon doesn't fall and the Lisbon process be halted, things are looking pretty terminal for Britain's independence. See Daily Referendum HERE.

Ron Paul: 'America Got It Wrong In Kosovo'

Ron Paul is the latest Congressman to go public in criticising America and the EU for backing Kosovan independence. The EU programme is indefinitely stalled as the handover from the UN has been successfully blocked by Russian diplomacy. In Belgrade the 'no EU without Kosovo in Serbia' coalition has won the election, and the situation is unravelling fast.

From Voice Of America -

The US should not have imposed their will in resolving the Kosovo issue

stated Republican congressman from Texas Ron Paul.

Instead, Washington should have refrained from intervention in order to find a long-term stable solution for the Serbian province.

Stating that the principle of self-determination might be acceptable in a case of a sovereign state swallowed by the then Soviet Union, the US congressman emphasized that Kosovo is not such a case and that a more cautious policy should have been led.

Senator Obama will be agreeing with every word, I am sure. Hillary Clinton will not be. Nor will McCain. Wise Americans are gradually learning that attempting to cooperate with the EU is proving a waste of valuable time and resources.

From today's Al Jazeera English version - HERE -

Americans go to the polls on November 4 after one of the most tightly contested and open presidential races for some time in what may be the election that truly questions the role of the US as a global power.

Voters face an increasingly struggling economy at home and an increasingly costly war abroad. A range of other issues such as health care, immigration and the impact of globalisation will play a part in the 2008 contest.

Age Is Only An Attitude

I'm away on a two day course learning about social networking sites and e-commerce at a luxury hotel in Makati, Manila. After day 1, I'm not sure this topic is really my thing, apart from the blogging section, of course. I am the oldest in the audience by about 15 years, but as I was told, age is only an attitude. Blogging will be light.

Labour Spin Becomes Parody Of Itself

PHONE CALL EARLIER TODAY.

Hi Is that Gordo? This is Tamsin. (Labour candidate for Crewe & Natwich)

Hi Tam. How's It Going?


Errr well, not bad overall...


Great.

Well, there is one thing I have to tell you, Gordon. This 'Toffs' campaign is going down very badly with the electorate up here.

Yes I Know Tam. But the activists and the Party love it, don't they, and keeping the Party happy is crucial.

But Gordon we want to win this seat, don't we? Haven't we got anything else to tell the voters?

I suppose we do have a few other messages we could use (opens drawer - shuffles papers around). What about this one? - 'Hug A Hoodie'. It went down very well when we ran that last time. Shall we rerun it?

Gordon, anything is better than this Toffs thing.

OK, Tam. We'll run it...but we must keep the activists fired up, you know. My position depends on it. We'll rebadge it so people don't twig what we're up to - Tories Soft On Yobs suit you?

Anything's better than Toffs, Gordon.

OK it's a done deal.

PICTURED - Moyra Tamsin Dunwoody-Kneafsy with Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. She claims they have never met.

(Hat Tip to Guido for various pictorial illustrations and relevant information)

Beware The Washed Out Labour Spin Machine

Labour spin-doctors, once the most feared in the land, able to twist the truth round so many times it was no longer recognisable, seem to be remarkably limp these days. They are trying to come to terms with Cameron's surge and Brown's collapse, and you have to hand it to them. They are certainly trying. But they've made so many attempts to 'colour' David Cameron in - literally - that their efforts are fast becoming a blur, and little fire is landing on the target.

At the beginning it all seemed so easy. Blair ruled the airwaves, and Cameron was presented a lightweight competitor by the Labour propaganda machine. One day he was on an iceberg riding a husky sled, the next bicycling around Westminster.This was not a serious attempt to look like a national leader, so Labour tried to take a ride on Cameron's own re-branding efforts and ridicule them. They produced the chameleon on a bicycle.






Others who were objecting to Cameron 'from his own side' of the political spectrum were not happy at Cameron's unwillingness to address serious issues, and EU Referendum framed him as a butterfly chasing greenie.




Just occasionally Cammers would tease with a bit of serious politics and draw a volley of nervous fire for his efforts. The Sun showed a picture of Cameron apparently determined to send Britain back to the Dark Ages, by undoing Human Rights legislation. But the Cameron roadshow moved on to other topics, dodging the attempt to portray him as a caveman in the process.


There was a brief attempt to spin him as a Thatcherite in disguise, but as Cameron pointed out, he was only a teenager when Thatcher resigned. That approach didn't wash either.












Then the photo of Cameron (2) and Boris Johnson (8) emerged in The Mail, enjoying an evening at the Bullingdon Club while Eton schoolboys, which seemed for a moment to fire up a potential way to tar Cameron with the 'Toff' brush. It is still exciting Labour activists greatly, but the public are not too interested. They want someone who can run the country and don't give a fig where they come from.

Labour are lost, and don't have a clue either how to develop their own policies or portray their opponents. Maybe they should create a website where their supporters could submit ideas as to what to do next. They could hardly do worse than they are doing. This is the leaflet they are putting out in Crewe and Nantwich. It's not even up to BNP standard.

UPDATE - According to Guido today, Gordon Brown authorised the Toffs Campaign personally. That gives rise to a further thought. Brown cares little about winning elections now, as he knows his chances are gone. On the other hand he is 100% determined not to be ousted from office by his own Party.

So he's throwing large chunks of red meat to his activists to keep them sweet. If that theory is correct, we can expect numerous devices designed to appeal to Labour Party members, Trades Unions and activists. Britain better be ready for a desperate battle with Gordon Brown squatting in his Downing Street bunker, not bothered about the further destruction of the country that has rejected him, and out to please the extremists that still occupy key Labour Party roles. He will lose interest in doing anything that might appeal to the majority. Tin hats on, folks, if that's the case.

Brown, who began as Stalin, then became Bean, could yet end with a Hitlerian crescendo.