Guido Fawkes a hypocrite?

The whole thrust of Guido Fawkes' Newsnight piece last night was that lobby journo's require "access" and suck up to the great and good in order to get it.

He's right here, as Nick Robinson admitted, its part of the job (as they see it).

However, has Guido, in a quite beautiful bit of irony, done the same thing?

During Newsnight he engaged in an argument with Micheal White regarding the "second email system" inside Downing Street, which may or may not have been used by Labour staff involved in the cash for honours issue. Guido says he broke the story that the system exists, and White said it simply didn't. Crucially, Guido then said "Well, Nick Robinson was the source for that".

Oh dear.

Naming a source like that? Very bad form, especially for someone who's appearing in shadows lest his top secret identity be revealed.

Then Guido blogs an explanation stating that he didn't mean what he said, and that Nick Robinson wasn't the source for anything, he merely spoke to him about the issue that day. Hmm, something doesn't quite fit here, lets consider the options.

• Robinson is the source. In which case Guido just outed him on National TV, then quite grovelingly back tracked in order to protect his relationship with his source. Ironic isn't it?
• Robinson isn't the source. In which case Guido was very clearly mistaken (and if it wasn't accidental he plain lied) in the interview, which is just plain stupid.

So then, which is it? I doubt we'll ever know, but either way its exactly the sort of behavior he spends so much time berating others for. One thing I am sure of, the UK Political Blogosphere was not well represented last night.

Guido on Newsnight - A Review

Earlier on today I voted that Guido should take part in a Newsnight panel discussion.

Well, I'm glad I did. I'm a fan of Guido, I enjoy his blog and I'm glad he does what he does. However, his appearance on Newsnight was piss poor.

Ok, so Micheal White was amazingly smug (more than he needed to be), but Guido was nervy and struggled to get his words out. Not the demeanor of a revolutionary. It probably shows why the web is his best medium, to be honest, or as my mate Jason says, "Austin, you have a face for Radio".

The accusation's Guido makes are probably valid (re: the westminster back scratching), hence my reading his blog at least as much as any "mainstream" site. We're blessed to have both, and it was worth it just to see Paxman get properly pissed of.

One thing did occur, Guido's reputation is completely tied to the Lord Levy issue. If there are no charges, he'll end up looking like the kid crying that the game isn't fair. If there are charges, Micheal White will look like a first class pratt.

Fun either way!

Another huge Lib dem by-election victory

Over the last few weeks everyone in my neck of the woods (Ashfield) has been working hard on a Notts County Council by-election. The seat in question has always been rock solid Labour. However, the lazy Labour Party and the "resurgent" Tories were shown up last night by an absolutely stunning result for Jason Zandrozny (our Candidate) and Stuart Bray (agent and shortly Deputy Director of Campaigns).

Full result was:-

UKIP - 70
Labour (defending the seat) - 435
Tories (who assume that as their leader now has hair they can win without trying) - 222
Liberal Democrats (who work hard for people and deliver real results) - 1979

So, a 44% swing and the death of the Tories in Ashfield.

A big personal thank you from me to everyone who helped, to Nick Clegg and Simon Hughes for their time,  and to Stuart Bray, who's value to the party cannot be underestimated. When will the other parties learn?

Oh, and my best to Geoff Hoon, who's backyard is collapsing under him.

Wheely Big Issue

I was more than a litle surprised, I have to admit, to see the story about fortnightly bin collections become lead the line on BBC Breakfast. Firstly because its just not that interesting and secondly because I thought that's what most places did now anyway?

Scientists tells us, with their usual confidence, that having your main rubbish bin collected only every other week is not a health hazard.

I can offer some insight here, as Ashfield District Council, on which I sit, has done this for quite some time. There are significant cost and environmental benefits to doing this, mainly as only having your normal bin collected on alternate weeks forces people to either use their recylcing bin or drown in a heap of black bags.

However, there are significant problems. All over Ashfield last summer bins were often seen crawling with maggots, whether the owner had properly disposed of thier rubbish or not. The reality is that the current style wheelie bins are simply not suited to storing rotting food for 14 days outside in the heat. It's not a health hazard per se, maggots won't kill you, but it is disgusting. So, yes to 14 day collection, but also yes to better wheelie bin.

Must find something more interetsing to write about next...

Rise of the Machines

Am I the only one who's concerned that the UK's new military satellite system is called Skynet?

Couldn't listen to the news this weekend without a chill running down my spine.

A sickening hint from Levy

"There is a general feeling that this is all about 'get the Jew'," Rabbi Schochet told The Daily Telegraph.

This is a quote from Lord Levy's Rabbi and close friend. I seriously hope that this is someone not thinking what they're saying, if they start to surround this whole debacle with allegations of anti-semitism it will will take a real turn for the worse.

Not Racist? Not the Point

Last night on the news, and on various Tory websites today, we've had people defending Patrick Mercer.

The defence, which came from black soldiers he commanded amongst others, is that "he's not a racist". I've no doubt that's true, but its not the point. Nor was he simply stating a fact, that racial abuse went on in the army, as some claimed.

What he said was that racial abuse went on in the Army, and that he thought this was OK.

Its that attitude that need banishing. Its not about free speech or political correctness, its about people thinking its OK to be racially abusive. If nothing else, the effect this will have on Army's recruitment will be significant, at a very difficult time.

However the real problem for Cameron isn't that Patrick Mercer said what he did, its the fact that he thought it. How many other Tory front benchers think racism is OK, but have enough political sense not to say so?

Same old Tories.

Lib Dem Head of Media resigns

Word reaches me that Mark Littlewood, head of media in Cowley Street, has resigned. Mark was named as the "conference briefer" who claimed that Ming's speech last week was a precursor to a Lib/Lab coalition.

I have to admit none of this surprises me. I only spoke to Mark once, very briefly, in Brighton, had he wasn't too discreet at the time about his thoughts on the next election.

All talk of coalitions needs banning, or the Tories will simply screw us at the next election. Which is why this is probably for the best.

Welcome to the New Conservatives

"That's the way it is in the Army. If someone is slow on the assault course, you'd get people shouting: 'Come on you fat bastard, come on you ginger bastard, come on you black bastard.'"

 "I came across a lot of ethnic minority soldiers who were idle and useless, but who used racism as cover for their misdemeanours."

That was Tory MP Patrick Mercer.

He continues:

"But equally, a chap with red hair, for example, would also get a hard time - a far harder time than a black man, in fact."

Well, that's ok then.

To be fair to Cameron, he's distanced himself from this. But it shows the limitation of the project. Cameron can be a nice as he likes, but most of his party are stuck somewhere around 1911, when this sort of outburst was acceptable.

I mean, the guy is saying that racism is ok, as long as you do it to everyone.

Tough luck Dave, you're in the wrong party.

Now the battle with the Lords begins

So, the will of the Commons is a 100% elected second chamber. Strange one that, and somewhat unexpected. In principle it suits me down to the ground, but it also makes the whole process from here much more difficult.

A 50/50 split, or even an 80/20 split, would have been a step along the road. The 100% option takes us all the way there is one step. The Lords, and many in the commons (mostly Tories, if one examines the division records) will be digging their heels in for a fight over this, and immense political will is required to make it happen.

This is where the problem lies. Our Government is one of fudge, spin, presentation and in the worst way "compromise". Not compromise to get the best solution, compromise to upset the least number of people.

Blair has always been all things to all people, and that's what this government is. That's why we have no decisive action, why the Home Office is effectivly controlled by the Daily Mail, and why it took 7 years to ban fox hunting. Even when they decide they do want to do something, they're so scared of upsetting anyone that its never followed through.

So, good intentions and all, but this will be bogged down for years, until we have a Government with the bollocks to govern, rather than be the worlds biggest marketing machine.

Levy's Fucked

Lord Cashpoint is in serious trouble. It was always going to difficult to prove beyond reasonable doubt that peerages were sold, its much easier to prove that lies were told.

This government is addicted to lies. It started with Bernie Ecclestone and ends on this.

The Tories were driven out of office on the back of cash for questions. What Labour have done is so much worse.

They've sold our democracy to the highest bidder and then lied to cover it up. This is a crime against the British people, and every member of the Government should be ashamed to be part of it. We will not forget, or forgive, quickly.

Facebook

Despite not being a cheating Spad, I thought I'd get my head round Facebook anyway. So, I now have a profile, my first real dip into "social networking", which is what I thought I did most weeks in the pub...

Taking pleasure in being disliked

When I first became interested in politics (some time around 1997, ironically), the two main parties rarely acknowledged that the Lib Dems existed. A turning point was reached in 2005 when the Labour Party, for the first time, launched a very direct and very expensive attack on us (the famous "if 87 people vote Lib Dem the world ends" job).

They did this for a simple reason. Even though the mathematics was bollocks, the concern was real and well founded. They knew that the 3rd party votes could cost them seats, so they did what we've all done in elections, and squeezed them.

Frustrating? Yes. A complement? Certainly. The fact that such an attack was required (it made up a huge part of Labour's final week) was a clear validation of three party politics.

The reason I raise this now is the Tory response to our conference (just one example). Tory bloggers want a Tory government, which is fair enough. We neither expect nor get impartiality from them, and you won't find much here.

So, why do the Tories on the web seem to spend more time having a go at us than Labour? Its because they know what we know. Liberal Democratic votes, both those of the people during the election and those of our MPs afterwards, will be crucial in the future political balance of this country, and there is a fair chance they'll decide who's head next rests on 10 Downing Street's plumpest pillow.

So, my friends, we should not be frustrated by some of the frankly amazing interpretations of Ming's speech, for anyone who considered it a platform for a Labour coalition is a fool, and a nervous fool at that.

Lost Property

Niles took his hotel key home with him, and wonders how many keys will be posted back to Harrogate by Lib Dems this week.

Given that we're Liberals, I'm more interested in the things the Hotel proprietors of Harrogate now need to post back to us...

Spot the people you know

Here's the offical "reaction" video to Ming's speech. Spot the people you know, and look out for a certain 24 year old district councillor handing out leaflets in the background...

Whipping Pleasure

Google can be a cruel mistress. This morning some poor surfer landed on this very weblog having googled "whipping pleasure". I'm sure their visit was a brief one.

Conference roundup

The conference blogging took a bit of a back seat this year, partly as there is simply less to talk about in Spring rather than Autumn, and the fact I've only been here for 2 nights (which seems like 5 minutes).

Two highlights are worth talking about. The first was the Trident debate. Its a pleasure to be in a party which can have a mature and honest debate with itself, and where the leader has the same single vote as the rest of us. Those people who wanted to amend the policy so it committed to us never replacing Trident made a fundamental error, their wording removed the immediate 50% cut in our nuclear arsenal. This allowed Ming Campbell, is true FOCUS leaflet style, to simply put it to the delegates that they could vote for a policy which reduced the number of warheads we had, or not.

Should be noted as well that Ming's speech was actually quite good. He spoke with passion and clarity, and I'm sure that the the vote would have been lost with the intervention.

The second highlight was the launch of the Beveridge Group, which is a new "social liberal" policy forum. Evan Harris and Paul Holmes spoke very, very well about their fundamental values, and Paul in partcular very eloquently took apart some common misconceptions about eco-liberal issues (in particular the effect of tuition fees). The presence of Steve Webb was interesting, as he will be shaping our next manifesto.

I have, of course,  picked the highlights before Ming's main speech. A mistake? I fear not. Despite his  good work on Trident, long impassioned speeches are simply not the man's strong suit, so I'm keeping my expectations in check. I just ask one thing. Please can he read from the autocue if he has one, rather than from notes in his hand. It's one thing for a high profile politician to actually need notes (I can hear Cicero turning in his grave), but having them stare at their own navel whilst reading them is really below par.

Here's hoping I'm surprised.

Update: The glee club was alright as well :-)

Update 2: I was actually impressed by Ming, his best speech so far as leader.

Is it just me?

Been away from this for a few days, so forgive me for digging a week back for a small rant.

Conservatives like to tell us they believe in the freedom of the individual, in a small government and fiscal responsibility (not that that actually happens). The dirty little secret is that they aren't like that at all.

Tories are, at their core, authoritarian.

If you take that desire to tell people how to live their lives and combine it with power at a national level, you inevitably get a dictative state  (which anyone who experienced the Major Government  and "back to basics" will recognise instantly,).

David Cameron, who's spent the last year trying to be everything we don't expect a Tory to be, slipped right back into old habits the other week when discussing gun crime. He suggested the laws should be passed to "compel" fathers to live up to their responsibility. Bottom down, freedom of the individual? No, nanny state. At least the socialists have the decency to not pretend they believe in individual freedom.

Whipping it Up

I had the pleasure of seeing a preview of Whipping it Up last Saturday. A great show very much in the Yes Minister mold, lead superbly by Richard Wilson.

He was very much in the Victor Meldrew mode, but it worked well, and old people swearing (a lot) is funny in itself. The audience was quite old (full of aging politicos I think), which did mean the one and only joke containing the C word caused H & I to nearly wet ourselves, and completely passed the rest of the audience by.