CubeStormer!

Yet another use for the British-designed (by Acorn, originally) ARM chips is this machine for solving Rubik's cubes. It is not exactly slow!

Bridging the Network

The bedroom Acorn RiscPC computer no longer communicates across my network here, ever since the old Telewest Cable modem failed and was replaced by a four-port "hub" (nothing to do with airports!) with wireless capability.

Now, four wired ports were never going to be sufficient for my needs as I had things then, so I now have the two portables both operating over wireless networking and the wired connection from the one in "Mission Control" (as I call this room) has been removed.

The other one, located in the bedroom, I had already set to wireless networking, so no change was needed.

However, the other bedroom computer (ha ha! Take that, Modesty Blaise!) – a RiscPC – had previously communicated with my eight-port LinkSys router via a pair of Belkin wireless devices, one plugged into the RiscPC and the other into the router.

The router will not work with the Virgin hub (at least not with the limited tinkering I have done so far) so my new idea is to wire the bedroom RiscPC into the portable's network port and use that machine (in RISC OS emulation mode) as a "bridge" between the wired and wireless networks. It will be interesting to see (a) if this works at all and (b) if the bedroom RiscPC is visible only on the connected portable or is transmitted across the whole network. I suspect it might be the latter, but haven't yet reached the point where I can test it.

Why not?

It's because that RiscPC has only a 10Base2 (BNC connector) network interface. I have a gadget to convert the signal to 10BaseT (RJ-45/UTP) which I have wired up, but I can't find the mains power unit for it. There is relatively little still boxed up here, but I have spent a whole afternoon untangling various cables from one packing box and it wasn't among those.

Okay, so I shall carry on looking during the next couple of days, and no doubt report back what transpires. As I backup these "secondary" computers only monthly, on the first day of each month, it would be handy to have this working by some time tomorrow (1 April)!

UPDATE: I've found the power supply for the gadget, and the bedroom RiscPC and the hard-wired portable can now see each other; but that is all. Not a problem: I shall simply 'pipe' anything to or from the RiscPC via the bedroom portable, which is no trouble at all. Indeed, this gives that machine more work to do, which is no bad thing.

Hallo Gallow!

So, "Gorgeous" George Galloway of the Respect Party has taken the previously safe Labour seat of Bradford West tonight. It is not a great surprise, as it is a seat well suited to his admittedly politically shrewd positioning.

Basically, George is in this business for George and no-one else, and he has found a niche where he can "sell" himself over others by taking a line that appeals to the majority of the electorate in certain parts of the country.

It's simple enough, obvious, and likely to work, even in safe seats (as today's result shows). Also read this by Cranmer, which explains Galloway better than I can summarise.

Here are the full results (party names only)...

• Respect – 18,341 votes
• Labour – 8,201
• Conservative – 2,746
• Lib Dem – 1,505
• UKIP – 1,085
• Green – 481

As Mr Eugenides has opined, this is both a great day and an appalling one for British democracy. Kicking Labour out is always a good thing, on principle, and in a safe seat in the party's heartlands it is even better.

Getting the ghastly Galloway back in mainstream politics is of course an appalling prospect; but hopefully there'll be enough constituency issues to keep him out of Westminster most of the time, busy in Bradford in order to protect his advantage for the next election. We really don't want to find him in the Chamber or Committee Rooms any more than the absolute minimum of occasions, and I think that is indeed what will happen in practice.

As for that part of the country: frankly, it long ago ceased to be part of Britain as we knew it. I dealt with the place a lot when handling some of the Ugandan Asian situation while I was working in the Immigration Dept of the Home Office, and that was well over thirty years ago. Bradford, especially that part of it, had already changed substantially by then, and the trend was clear. I recall that time very well...

Thus the overall effect within Parliament is to reduce the number of Labour MPs by one, which is welcome, and not much else will happen that will impact the country as such.

I can live with that!

The Three-S Syndrome

What a sad life it must be, being a Labour person, when more or less the whole of your waking life is tied up with "the three S-es" upon which the party is universally dependent: Spin, Slur and Smear.

We see it from them all the time, both locally and nationally, and we look on with pity more than anything else – or at least I do. There's some genuine talent and real potential going to waste because of this propensity. No-one wants a perpetual liar, spinner, or otherwise negative and untrustworthy individual, apart from those similarly inclined – and even those will never actually trust them fully, for obvious reasons.

Today's offerings, from two local Labour councillors, are so risible that I shan't even provide the links in an attempt to save them some of the embarrassment.

One claims the tanker strike we are now seeing was "engineered by the coalition government" (no it wasn't: it was your Union buddies) and the other claims that the Council Tax was frozen because of them (no it wasn't: it's government policy, was in the Medway Conservatives' budget, and all Labour members on the council voted against that budget, but didn't put up any proposals of their own. I don't even recall any significant mention of the freeze by any Labour member that evening).

They are also trying to suggest that they saved the Marlowe Park Medical Centre from closure three days hence (no they didn't: it was only Mark Reckless MP's "shuttle diplomacy" that achieved that. Labour made no real contribution at all – they were just publicity-seeking for themselves).

Erith Labour, attached to Ladbroke. Lab here had more dubious upstairs neighbours for years!

Meanwhile, a group of them has been to Erith where the increasingly ghastly Ken Livingstone visited.

The one small thing one can say in Ken's favour is that he is the second worst and nastiest Lefty politician in Britain, pipped to the number one spot by George Galloway who is also currently in the news.

They really are low forms of life, and to be associated with either tells a story, as I touched upon just days ago.

No-one decent ever would have anything to do with him; and it is hardly surprising that Ken is losing votes and party members daily. Galloway's pandering to certain elements in direct pursuance of his own political ambitions is if anything even worse than Ken's ongoing (years-long) style of behaviour and attitude, though not by very much.

The 3-S battle between Galloway and his Labour opponent in tomorrow's Bradford West election is turning out to be an interesting twist. Who is better at it? The result might give us a clue or two, or it might not...

Watching for a Purpose

Long-term readers here will know that I keep a permanent watch out for Common Purpose "graduates" (so-called!) in my home/council area, aided by this database.

It has been fruitful, along with other techniques I (and others around here) also employ, including having confirmed suspicions I had held about certain individuals working within Medway Council during my time there.

Two council officers I surmised at the time were among these have turned out to have been on Common Purpose courses by the time I encountered them.

One of those was the Assistant Director – no less – who presented the deliberately-misleading data I mention here, and tried to save face and defend it after I had obviously rumbled her. A really dodgy individual, pushing the secret CP agenda!

These techniques, meanwhile, have helped me to refine my own observation methods, which in turn should improve my ability to spot these people early on and tune my dealings with them accordingly. I try to hold the names of all known "graduates" in my head, but like to have a belt as well as braces, as the old saying puts it.

I observe them and test them in ways that I doubt even their training would spot – something I haven't mentioned before, but now it doesn't even matter if they get wind of this information, as things have moved on in that regard.

These bods are still all over the place, for example no fewer than thirty of 'em in Kent Police, so this is an ongoing matter and will be until the whole lot are purged from our public services and no more can ever come in. I'd encourage all others to do the same. Watch, question, expose to the light (which they really hate!), and isolate them from their sources and places of information/influence where possible. It is the only way to be safe!

In my case, I have of course taken all the precautions I have mentioned before, to ensure it is far and away in their best interests that nothing unfortunate happens to me. The balloon goes up, courtesy of my network around the country and elsewhere in the world, if I fail to signal that I am fine.

The Commie-Pines

I'm sure I am not the only one to have spotted the similarity between Labour folk and the Pontipines.

The latter are in reality teeny-tiny (despite productions aids such as camera close-ups to make them appear larger/more significant than they really are), numerous, red all over, and spend most of their time making a lot of noise by calling out "Me-me-me-me!"

As for the other group...well, they're much the same, even if their "Me! Me!" message is camouflaged within a lot of waffle. A presentational difference, nothing more...

Labour Not For, Not Against!

So what happened at the (well publicised in advance) vote in the Commons last night on the reduction in the top rate of Income Tax, to which Labour have been saying they strongly object? Locally the budget has been branded by Labour here as being for the millionaires on the basis of this one move.

Of course, there are innumerable millionaires within the Labour ranks and their buddies; and the whole point of the tax rate reduction was to increase tax revenue from those who pay the top rate. History shows very clearly that this always happens at a lower tax rate, and it's for obvious enough reasons. Thus in criticising the change, Labour show themselves to be either utterly thick, ignorant or just dishonest. My guess is that between them they are all three...

Anyway, at last night's vote, Labour were whipped to abstain – i.e. not vote for or against. Two of their number did apparently turn up, as Guido reports – and it's all in Hansard anyway, just in case of any doubt. Guido has more on this here, including a link to a series of leaked emails that confirm the story.

Thus the voting last night went with the Ayes, who numbered 319 (fewer than half, note, even allowing for those like the Speaker who don't vote, so it could have been defeated!) and the Noes numbered a mere 22.

It's the right result, of course; but Labour's credibility on this whole issue is now absolute zero.

Cash for Access

It is disappointing to find that a bad practice that was apparently rife in the Tony Blair era and continued in the Gordon Brown years also afflicts todays Conservative party. This is the idea that big-money donors to the party get to have access to the party leader who is also the nation's Prime Minister.

Okay, that in itself doesn't mean very much; and it is one way to let the outside world in to talk about how things are and perhaps even suggest some ideas for consideration – a kind of crowdsourcing from outside the at times somewhat isolated Westminster bubble. Provided that is all it is, it is probably relatively harmless. After all, even President Obama is known to have several donors at any one of his own dinner events...

It is only if and when that is a route to influencing policy directly – a kind of buying of favours that suit oneself – that it becomes distinctly dodgy. I don't think that has happened in David Cameron's case (and trying to "join up the dots" between attendees and policies doesn't suggest it either) but there is always a perception that it isn't quite above board.

Fortunately, to aid us in that dot-joining exercise, Cameron publishes the names of all those who attend these fund-raising dinners – the first Prime Minister to do so.

UPDATE 27 March: Do read this, which puts it into a sensible perspective. It's written by an American, so references to "checks" and "checkbook" actually mean cheques and chequebook.

Of course, this whole business has now become another excuse for the Lefties to suggest that taxpayer funding (i.e. from the public purse) of political parties should be considered again – but that isn't the answer, and it certainly isn't something I'd support. Labour is making a fuss, predictably enough, but as Guido has reported over the months and years, they aren't in any position to criticise.

Interestingly, now that the funding amounts-by-source for each of the "big three" political parties for last have been made public by the Electoral Commission, we can see some interesting aspects to that funding – nothing exactly surprising to anyone who has been paying attention to this sort of thing, but useful to have documented. Martin Shapland has kindly produced a graph of those figures, thus...

Ignore the Conservatives for the moment, and see how the Lib/Lab situation shifts if Labour's Trades Union funding were to be removed. I wonder what effect that might have on the Lib Dems' poor polling, and Labour's far higher than deserved, if the former hadn't been at such a huge financial disadvantage relative to the latter.

Back with the Conservatives: notice how it is individual donations that dominate there. Yes, as with the other parties, there will be some big 'uns in there; but (as I am well aware from my own experience and from talking to guest speakers from elsewhere) it is the sheer number of donors that counts most of all, and means so much in regard to party popularity around the country.

The ever-sharp and clear-thinking Douglas Carswell MP has also today set out his "four thoughts" on party funding here, and I think he has it well and truly surrounded, as the saying goes. In fact, what he says at the linked post  largely agrees with what I have written here and previously on the broader topic. It's short, and well worth checking out to see if you agree with Douglas's take.

What's a GertBoard?

This demonstration should give you an idea...



Yes, it's a hardware interface add-on for the Raspberry Pi. It reminds me so much of the sort of thing my brother and I (mostly him) built ourselves, back in the early 'eighties at the family home in Morden. The row of LEDs and the momentary-contact pushbuttons are so reminiscent of a very basic computer (with 1 kiloByte of memory!) built into a silver-and-green casing that I had, with a Motorola 6800 CPU at its heart.

Ah, those were the days! The memories the GertBoard thus brought back to me were quite powerful, and reminded me of just how much I still had to learn in those times.

Anyway, we are now some thirty years on, and still the spirit of "breadboard innovation" and experimentation lives on. It really is important for the future, to help prevent stagnation in some of the fields in which the technology can continue to flourish and develop.

Word of the Day – 26 March 2012

Embiggen – a word that has apparently existed since 1884 but seems to have fallen out of use in favour of enlarge, and was brought back into popular awareness in The Simpsons a while back.

I spotted it on a 'flash' player options menu (see right).

Third Heathrow Runway

The news that broke yesterday evening and that today is looking more like possible near-future policy is that a military runway, not far from Heathrow, could be transformed into what would in effect be a third runway for that airport. This is at Ruislip – a place I visited (along with USAF facilities close by) some forty-five years or so ago.

That could work quite well, if it is eventually decided upon, and should reduce or perhaps even eliminate the pressure for a new hub airport in North Kent. It would also protect exiting jobs at Heathrow, which are threatened by the prospect of a replacement airport elsewhere.

Obviously we're still at the "options to be considered" stage of the aviation review, so nothing has actually changed yet. Technically, government policy has not changed regarding the third runway – but indications are that this policy might now be able to change as this isn't exactly at Heathrow(!)

However this does look promising, and more achievable (and quickly) than creating a whole new airport in this corner of the country, which in reality is likely to take at least a decade and a half, probably much longer.

For now, though, the "politics of all this" bulleted paragraphs in Paul Goodman's above-linked article is very interesting – especially the Boris and Justine Greening sections. He finally concludes that Gatwick will most likely be where the expansion will be. I'm not so sure. My thought is that we are far from a decision, but at least there is some lateral thinking going into this process.

Also, as I have written before, it will this time deal with the underlying issue without leaving the threat of its being revisited in future still dangling over us all, which had been the case for the past decade.

Justine Greening's own words this past week give a strong clue about the nature of what the decision will have to be: something that retains our "hub competitiveness" – so long-term projects such as the Thames Estuary airport and variations are effectively ruled out anyway: we'd lose that competitiveness while the new facility was being designed, prepared for and built.

As usual, clues are to be found by anyone paying close enough attention and with a little understanding of how (and why) these things work as they do. I repeat my recent urging for the local campaign of opposition to continue apace; which is necessary for all sorts of reasons; but I retain my confidence that a better solution than "Boris Island" or similar will be the end result of this review, boosted further by this latest (i.e. Ruislip) addition to the mix.

RIP Jocky!

"Here comes Jocky up to the Ochee, looking stocky and feeling cocky!" – Sid Waddell

Here's a tribute from a couple of years ago to John Thomas Wilson whom we all knew as "Jocky", and who left us today after a period of ill health. He was just 62, my own age as I write this...

Couch and Potatoes

I've had a couple of requests for photos of my lounge, because of the nesting tables I recently bought from nearby Argos, and actually quite enjoyed assembling. Here are some views of the finished products in situ...

The nesting tables in place, with coasters and TV etc handsets

The string holding this large picture up has snapped, so I'm looking for wire!

That large picture will be hung on the wall behind and above the sofa

 

The dining table is here set for one, but is easy to re-configure for 2 to 4

Head in the Clouds

Well, only for ten minutes a day, to watch the new Cloudbabies programme on CBeebies.

After all, who does look after the sky and all that is within it?

Okay, so the basic premise is a bit daft, really, but it's quite enchanting in its own way – and I've decided that I'd like to have my own skyhorsey!

The artistic design of the programme is of a similar type to that of Octonauts, which is ideal for this purpose. Unusually, the whole programme is produced within the UK, unlike other series where the animation is done in overseas places such as India (e.g. Everything's Rosie) or Canada (where Waybuloo's CGI is done).

For me, it'll be good to know, when I next go out in the sunny midday, just who it was who polished the sun to give off such a brilliant shine; who brushes Fuffa Cloud every day; and at nighting-time I shall be looking out for Little Star in the heavens – provided he has woken up in time, that is!

The Company You Keep

It is often said that someone's character can be judged by the company that person keeps. I think that can be carried too far on occasion, but it is generally a good indicator. Similarly for support for someone, especially electorally.

Thus we find that London mayoral (re-)hopeful Ken Livingstone is being seen by the company he has tended to keep, and the attitudes he has displayed, to have had a direct and negative effect on his one-time and potential supporters.

They, for their part, are in their droves no longer (or not even for the first time, for some Londoners) supporting Ken and will not be voting for him, regardless of their party support or affiliation. UPDATE: even Guardian columnist Jonathon Freedland will not be voting for Ken.

Now, there are always some of those who will not vote for their own party's candidate in this (i.e. London mayoral) election, and even Boris has around fourteen percent of those, though this proportion is falling and has been doing so for quite a few weeks now. Ken's figure is now well over double that proportion at over 30% and rising, as Labour Uncut shows here, also commented on by Guido here.

It's worth reading both of these, but best starting with the Labour-friendly Uncut site's post. As their graph is being used by Guido, and there is no "do not copy" message, I think it should be safe to copy here too, so I have. It's very telling, and the trend is clear and almost certainly irreversible by now.

This all accords with what I have been writing myself in recent times, especially regarding the size of a Boris majority that I am expecting at the Mayoral election a few weeks from now. If the above graph is extended to early May, based on current (and seemingly established) trends, Boris will be down to around eleven percent and Ken would be up to around 38%.

That is just so vast that Boris will get a landslide win. I am still expected something a little less spectacular than that, but certainly a very comfortable win.

Of course, one can also look at this post's title from the other direction, in that one can judge the character of anyone does support and even actively campaign for Ken. I know which of Medway's Labour councillors have done so, and shall be reminding the electorate in their wards when they come up for re-election.

Indeed, one has to assume that those councillors could well have the same – or at least compatible – outlook to Ken's on Jews, terrorists, elected GLA members of all parties, and many other matters besides. No doubt there will be attempts to wriggle out of that by those Labour folk – but it won't wash!

I doubt very much that they'll be getting back in next time...

You-Kip If You Want To

Follow this link for pictures of meerkats that look like UKIP leader Nigel Farage in various poses.

Perhaps the resemblance is a meerkoincidence...

The Dimbledance

This dance would certainly have livened up at least the opening moments of what was a rather dull BBC Question Time yesterday evening...



I was co-moderating contributions as usual, and am now getting sufficiently skilled with the somewhat clumsy "producer's console" that I was able to participate myself much more than I had done previously as a moderator – it had been essentially one or the other but not both together (not helped by my evening medication beforehand).

David Davis was very good indeed, even getting a fair amount of applause from the (bussed-in public sector-plus-students) strongly Left-leaning audience, and Melissa Kite was generally okay too. Despite all the (increasingly blatant) wangles, fixes and other manipulations to rig the programme to suit their own political agenda, even their carefully-selected audiences have over the last few months often failed to behave as Auntie had planned.

It's yet another (and in this case big) indication that the British public has turned a corner and is waking up to reality with greater understanding, aided by the Information Age's everyday facilities that are nowadays available to all, readily and relatively cheaply. At Question Time all the plotting and preparation still pay off to some extent, but the trend appears to be consistently in the direction of "less effective".

Thus even the current polling high for Labour (at last more than a point or two lead) – which is largely because of inertia in the sheer mass of the public-at-large – will probably collapse again within the next few weeks; and this time it might even vanish altogether and permanently.

Fork in the Road

Which way to go?

Those reading this who are old enough to remember Tom Baker as "the Doctor" might well recall the multi-part story Genesis of the Daleks.

At one point (as in the picture here) the Doctor has the means to stop the Daleks at their point of creation, so that they will never become a threat to the universe and all other life forms who live within in, much of which he has witnessed during his travels in time and space.

At this instant, he asks himself and Sarah-Jane and Harry with him,

"Have I the right?"

It is a surprising and unexpected but very important moment, as the Doctor realises not only that it would be genocide to kill the first batch of Daleks and destroy their growing chamber (or whatever it was called), but also that they'd probably re-build and start again anyway, and all the good that resulted from races and planets facing the Dalek threat around the cosmos would not happen after all.

Thus I find myself in a not entirely dissimilar position. I have built up a huge library of material (safely backed-up around the world: none of this level of material is kept where I live) that would be very damaging indeed to Labour, especially locally, if it were ever released.

It is that powerful, and fully corroborated with signed and sworn statements from residents and all sorts, ensuring it could not be deflected or diminished materially. It all shows just how filthy they really are, unambiguously and it will stick. A few people have been aware of this for some time, and I have dropped a few hints as to the nature of some of the content, but most of it is as yet completely new to almost everyone.

If I were to release even some it, say in a series of 'blog posts in the months before the next local elections were called here, it would mean local Labour almost certainly losing all or (if they are particularly fortunate) nearly all of their seats, probably for a generation or more. It's all safely encrypted and only I and a handful of others (holding additional safety copies) have the key.

So the question is: should I do so (and I'd arrange for those others holding the copies to do so in my place in case anything should happen to me in the meantime – in fact, I already have a cut-down version of that arrangement in place), or do I not have the right?

There is so much good that comes from (most) other political parties being (broadly) squeaky-clean, especially at local level, to offset the negative impact of (mostly) Labour, that might therefore not be there if the reds were to vanish from the scene. Then again, so much effort is wasted on the non-productive chores of rebuttal and other combat manouevres that one wonders whether letting them still play is being fair to the community purportedly being served by these parties.

It is a tricky one; and I shall consider this question very carefully before deciding which way to go. At least I have a good two and a half years before having to make that decision and act on it...

Ken's 'Bus Is Real!

It has been spotted at Borough market this afternoon, so it does now exist. Submitted for information, and in the interests of fairness and completeness.

Well, I've heard of a Night 'Bus: perhaps this is a Newt 'Bus...

Obama Kenyan Birth Certificate

This has recently come to light, has now been checked and verified, and has now started appearing on websites. I picked up the following image files from Barking Spider's site.

I am copying the two images here simply for reference purposes and offer no further comment...

Ken's Dues and Jews

Oh, dear! It's not a good time to be Ken Livingstone, first with his tax affairs revelations (nothing illegal, just rank hypocrisy for critisicing others for doing what he does himself) and now with his long-known attitude to particular ethnic/national groups coming to a rather nasty head.

Once again it is Andrew Gilligan covering the story of the letter obtained by the Jewish Chronicle that was sent by a group of six Jewish Labour supporters (including a Rabbi) to Labour party leader Ed[ward] Miliband regarding Ken's attitude to their faith. Of course, there have been numerous clues in the past, of which one of the best known is his dealings with al-Qaradawi (pictured together at the linked article). Here is the letter in full.

As if this wasn't bad enough, Livingstone's campaign to regain the London mayoralty this coming May has kicked off in a rather negative fashion, as outlined here. For Medway residents reading this to note, there is a mention of the possible estuary airport at that Spectator article, but don't let anyone be fooled: it's just jumping on bandwaggon stuff, as many sussed out right from the moment he first touched on this topic a few weeks ago.

Elsewhere in the campaign launch, Ken's thrust seems to be somewhat muddled and confused, far too personalised and policy-light – at least as far as credible policies are concerned. Ken has 'previous' with some of the topics he has dug up to push again, so fewer people will be taken in this time around. He needs something new, distinctive and – most of all – believable to offer in the election, and there just isn't anything at all, so far anyway.

Lethargic and Lacklustre on the Left, on a Roll on the Right

With opinion polls and the betting markets generally (though not in all cases) having moved quite distinctly towards Boris and away from Ken recently, I have a growing feeling that the mayoral election is effectively already decided, and am expecting a fair-sized Boris majority this time. Londoners don't want a surly, lacklustre old Trot to be their mayor again, whether they're Jewish or otherwise.

UPDATE 22 March: Almost on cue for the above, here are Londoners in Croydon giving Ken a welcome for his visit today...

Here's the story of what happened re the above placards during that visit.

National Budget 2012

So that was the Budget, the majority of which we either already knew for sure or had accurately surmised.

For those reasons, I hadn't commented or guessed at anything myself, as you might have noticed.

There are plenty of summaries, point-by-point analyses, and other commentary on what was in the final product, delivered in a one-hour speech by Chancellor George Osborne, so I shan't go into any of that here.

I have downloaded a few documents and web pages from the HM Treasury website and shall no doubt be poring over those in the days to come.

So, for me this was a very politically astute Budget, far from ideal in a number of areas, but as it needed the support of the Liberal Democrat MPs it was always going to be a compromise. Not many (if any) Lib Dems understand the Laffer Curve, for example – it's simply beyond them, apparently – so the half-way reduction of the top rate of income tax from 50% to 45%, where going down to 40% would have been better for revenue receipt, was inevitable.

I think it works politically, overall, as the idea has to be to show the Lib Dem MPs that changes such as this, counter-intuitive though they might appear to the more simple-minded (and they do give that impression!), do actually result in higher revenues from the better off. History shows this, here and elsewhere in the world; but not until this toe-in-the-water move has shown results here and now will it be possible to 'sell' the idea of going any further to Lib Dem backbenchers in particular, and to the wider party, say at party conference.

I look at this Budget as an in-between exercise, with much more Conservative policies and ideas to follow in the years to come. This is a good investment in the future, as no-one on Earth knows what the outcome of the 2015 election is going to be, and it is not beyond the realms of possibility that the Yellow Team could still be in coalition after that event. That's unlikely, but it is wise to plan ahead for the possibility.

Today's Budget, though, is already good for business and for the lower-income individuals and households, though inevitably there was an element of taking some of it back with the other hand. That's hardly surprising in these still very difficult times. Indeed, my own projection is that our nation will not even be in anything like a 'safe' position for another six years.

Without a Conservative overall majority from May 2015 (i.e. a further coalition) that will be nearer ten years, by my assessment, and if Labour get back in again it will never happen. It is that stark.

Fortunately, as the years progress toward that election, the electorate will see who is doing a good job, and will vote for a continuation of that. If Labour keep Ed[ward] Miliband as their party leader, they are extremely unlikely to win that election, especially after "Red"'s performance today when responding to the Budget.

That was likened by commentators to something more suited to a debate at the Fabian Society, and one commentator made the perceptive remark that E-Mili has no 'situation awareness', failing to adapt to where he is and what he is supposed to be doing. Even Ed Balls looked bored! At least he was captioned correctly on the TV channel I was watching, unlike on now numerous occasions now...

He really is a non-entity, as a fair number of Labour loyalists have admitted, so I see no significant threat from 'Old' Labour at the 2015 election. Thus all of George Osborne's contingency planning will probably turn out to have been unnecessary – but we shall see at that time!

UPDATES:

(1)  Read this for a quick breakdown of Populus's snap poll on today's Budget, but with caveats as outlined in the first few comments to that post.

(2) Around here, Medway Labour were quick to do what they do all the time, which is to spin it all negatively. It was probably written weeks ago, it's so formulaic and predictable, and tweaked earlier today before being published. For all I know, there might even be a valid point or two in there somewhere, but it simply isn't worth ploughing through all the dross to see if there is anything. That's the effect their approach has to many (almost certainly tens of millions) of their intended audience, and they never learn and improve...

(3) A few first impressions of the Budget from City of London folk.

Tweet of the Day – 20 March 2012

From local Conservative councillor Chris Irvine, quoting his opposite number on Medway Council, the omnipresent Cllr Tristan Osborne, thus...

"A glowing endorsement from Labour @CllrTrisOsborne for @Ed_Miliband: "Labour may or may not have the right leader to win in 2015" Ha ha."

There is always lots of fun to be had from local Labour, as regulars here will have noticed. Much of it is between the two above – what one might term "the Chris and Tris Show", playing on Twitter most nights of the week.

The local Labour folk tend to bring it on themselves, and there really is so much more than one could easily do – but we tend to be comparatively gentle. We do more 'ribbing' than anything else, unless there is something very serious that needs to be addressed in a way more appropriate to that situation.

Hub Airport Update – 20 March 2012

Now that the planned review of aviation needs is starting, it seems an appropriate moment to document some of what has been happening in this area.

First, Medway Council has set aside a modest fighting fund to cover any costs of opposing the airport.. This is sensible, ensuring that existing budgets are not burdened by additional costs in their area that are purely as a result of the hub airport opposition campaign. There are at least half-a-dozen other reasons that I could easily surmise, thinking tactically.

The council's deputy leader, writing in the Medway Messenger and on-line here, informs us that they are working with other councils in North Kent and in the parts of Essex that would also be impacted by one or another of the variations on the hub airport theme. Wisely and pragmatically, they too are working on providing credible alternative proposals to put on the table.

Their approach has been a lot more intelligent and correctly focussed than those who have taken it upon themselves to email-bombard the Chancellor (why? This is a Dept of Transport matter, not a Treasury one) and resorted to referring to him as "Georgy Boy" or "Gideon".

That's a brilliant way to get him on-side, I don't think! Yes, it's Lefties abusing this vital issue for their own tribal party purposes, despite the lip service they pay to this being a cross-party issue-driven campaign.

For the benefit of all those potentially affected, our politicians and their party members owe it to them to behave appropriately and in a way that will not give the decision-makers the idea that we are a load of cretinous Lefties so we don't count for much.

Fortunately, unlike the contempt held for this community by Tony Blair and his comrades (as was reported at the time of the Cliffe Airport débacle), the present government is well above that sort of bwhaviour; but no competent campaigner ever does anything avoidable that could conceivably put those pulling the levers of power in a negative frame of mind toward the campaign. Take it from one who consistently wins campaigns, primarily through understanding how best to run them.

Anyway: also at the Messenger is this article concerning the review, mainly just reporting facts about what is coming up. The "Cameron U-turn" reference is I think a little misleading: back in 2010 the estuary airport (or variant) was tried to be killed off before it gained traction; but it did anyway so now needs dealing with formally and definitively, otherwise it'll never go away.

I have commented to this article, including that aspect of the issue that now faces us all, as follows...

Yes, the other John is correct: this has to be included.

Only by formally considering all options, dismissing the wrong 'uns and putting into place the right solution(s) can this issue finally be put to bed, authoritatively and definitively.

Think of it from the viewpoint of those in favour of the hub airport. They'd never leave it alone if they had any grounds for claiming that it wasn't dealt with properly and fairly.

The ONLY way it can be eliminated, and effectively permanently, is (a) to be considered and decided against, and (b) actual alternatives put in place, thus pulling the rug out from under the 'pro' lobby.

It is to the current government's credit that – unlike those who originally dreamed up the whole idea and blighted us with it (Labour) – they are trying to make sure it isn't left dangling any longer, threatening to return at any moment.

 The comments so far have mostly been useful, though one "Tris" (and we all know who that is!) posted his usual lame anti-Conservative message, this time free-standing with no meat to the comment at all. This does seem to continue to bear out others' assessments that it's just a mental illness, and I have been forced to reach much the same conclusion. At least it might be treatable so some good can come from this.

Meanwhile, those of us who are genuinely focussed on ensuring the threat of a hub airport around these parts is permanently eliminated, rather than putting tribal party political interests over and above that aim, will continue to battle on.

I am confident we shall succeed, and have been doing some work in my own quiet behind-the-scenes way, which should bear fruit. Indications are favourable; but that does not mean any letting up in the opposition campaign, in which (correctly) I am not directly involved, but numberous others are.

Remember: it's well worth the effort, and this time it's for keeps!

Just Another Panic Monday

Well, I think it must be panic stations at Labour party HQ today after all that has been popping up here and there in the big media. The policy-light party – and where they do have a policy it tends to be the wrong one – is now reaching the crunch point.

Let's have a look at just a few of today's offerings.

First, foreign policy. Labour's standing is not helped by their cheerleader and New Statesman senior bod (the frankly ghastly) Mehdi Hasan getting easily and comprehensively slated by Paul Staines. I can see the party distancing itself from Hasan – but that would be both difficult and unhelpful to Labour, so any such move is likely to be very limited, constrained as it would be. It's a very good piece, with some choice comments from readers at its foot.

Choice quotation...

"Why didn’t he tell his readers that Israel was not the first country to attack Osiraq?...Surely he would not have been concealing a piece of information that shows that it wasn’t just the dreaded Jewish state that regarded Iraq’s nuclear programme as a security risk; a devastating revelation that the very regime Hasan is desperate we do not attack today, was the one that set the precedent for using military force to destroy another country’s nuclear programme in the first place. Oh, my. It’s going to be a treat seeing how Mehdi gets out of this one."

Next, staying with Mr Staines in his more familiar guise as Guido Fawkes, in his new weekly column over at The Daily Star we are reminded of Labour star supporter Eddie Izzard's track record of failure with all their "Yes2" campaigns to date. Today he was out campaigning for "Yes2Ken" for the upcoming London mayoral election. That should finish it for Red Ken, then...

The story, also in that column, of Ed Miliband having to stand for a train journey is also strangely satisfying to read.

Choice quotation...

"Another traveller came up to Ed and pityingly told the Labour leader: 'You haven’t a hope. You might as well just give up. You ought to resign now, while you still can with some dignity.' Ed just stood there in an awkward embarrassed silence as the onlooking carriage cringed."

Finally for my short round-up, this one's from a "senior Labour party worker", writing at The Huffington Post – which by the way is hardly a Labour-hostile environment. This tells us one thing we all knew already – that the New Labour project died when Gordon Brown took over from Tony Blair as party leader and Prime Minister – and another that we also probably realised.

That is that Labour itself died last year – not the existence of the party with that name, but standing for what it always had done (or at least what some liked to believe it stood for). This is yet another (as I surmised there would be) in the series of higher-echelon Labour folk speaking out against the way the party is shaped and operates now, specifically under Ed[ward] Miliband. I have covered the first two here in recent weeks: Luke Bozier and Alex Hilton.

Today's HuffPo (as the site is commonly known) piece concentrates on Labour's economic policy, such as it is, and offers a fairly straight and sensible assessment of what Labour is offering compared to the Coalition (though personalised to George Osborne alone, which is inaccurate).

Choice quotation...

"Labour has two choices. They can continue their failed economic policies that would make Britain uncompetitive and a bad place to do business. Or they can accept the new economic reality of less spending..."

None of this, nor a number of other items that have appearance over or since the weekend, is beneficial to Labour's public standing, though if the party leadership were to take real notice of it all they might just decide to think about offering the country something beyond their own (largely hidden) agenda a.k.a. "the project".

It's unlikely to happen under EdMili; and Len McCluskey is (as I wrote here last week) waiting in the wings to take over all four "sections" of the party's operations anyway. He might even find a way to take anything useful to a different party (the SWP being the most likely) and effectively shut down "old" Labour completely. Make no mistake: he can do it!

Time to panic, Labour devotees...

Tweet of the Day – 18 March 2012

From one David Round, in response to Stuart Hill's...

"Rory woke up especially to watch Homeland. He says it's up there with Sopranos and Waybuloo."

He (very sensibly, I thought) tweeted back...

"I was starting to lose faith with Homeland, but if Rory says it's up there with Waybuloo then I may need to reconsider..."

This One's For Sophie!

Local Lib Dem blogger Chris Sams was reading my 'blog when this happened...

Today whilst I was reading @john_m_ward 's blog when baby Sophie suddenly yelled out "Dee-li! where noq-toc?"

So, specially for Sophie, here he is!

With tools, mending something

With Anything Machine

Driving Naracar

At home with his Narabug

Playing Peeka with the other Piplings

Parish Notice – 17 March 2012

I am trying out a few configuration options to see what they do and to consider whether any of them should be kept, or discarded after a try-out period. Therefore if something changes, do not be concerned. It might go back again a day or two later, if I don't think it's worth keeping.

One change I've made, here and elsewhere, is to remove references to Medway's bid for City Status, as that is now all over – until the next time...

I've also checked this 'blog's posting statistics: I'm now up to 3,086 posts here, and 2,677 published comments. That might surprise readers, that there has been an average of a little under one comment for every post – or perhaps it might be easier to visualise as one comment for each of seven-out-of-eight posts (actually 86·7%).

Okay, Guido (for example) gets hundreds of comments to most of his posts; but that is to be expected, and a lot of the comments there are just 'noise'. I'd rather have a higher quality of commenting, but do not aim to attract or encourage commenting at all, as it happens (apart from the occasional request for contributions, which don't tend to produce any results, contrarily!)

Although I trundle along quietly enough here, this 'blog is more widely read and more notice is taken of it than many visitors probably realise. It's how I work best: putting facts out there into the public arena, exploding myths, spreading awareness – that kind of thing.

There is a lot of mis-information being put about by those who are well aware of its falsity, and it is only right and proper that such deception is countered by those of us (and there are quite a few about these days) who are known for "playing it straight". Add a fair degree of breadth of topic, of knowledge and of personal experience, but also add in some lighter material for variety and entertainment, and we have what I hope is a place that is worth visiting on a regular basis.

Osborne, of Necessity

I am pleased with the outcome of the complaint made against Medway Councillor Tristan Osborne (Labour) who twice described Medway Council as "fraudulent". As it is now in the public domain, I can now prove that it was not I who made the complaint, as some folk had apparently surmised.

Remember: my interest was and is entirely with the good name of the council. It was councillor Alan Jarrett who lodged the formal complaint, as in the official documentation (link in next paragraph).

There have been those who wanted a much more severe treatment to be meted out, but in the end the decision was essentially what I had originally suggested when mentioning the possible Code of Conduct breach to the council's Democratic Services office – a firm talking-to by the council's Monitoring Officer. They also required him to publish a statement of clarification on his 'blog, which he has done today.

This I feel is the most appropriate action on this first occasion. If it ever happens again, which would therefore be after the Monitoring Officer has made clear what is and what isn't acceptable under the Code he signed, then I can well imagine we'd be in a different ball game. The message here is that one takes careful note of what the Monitoring Officer says!

Anyway, this matter is hopefully now closed, and we can all return to normality – though I doubt that his brash arrogance will wear off for a while yet. It's all just part of the growing-up process with these young 'uns, I like to tell myself. Sometimes I even believe it...

Harman Flounders on the BBC

Three 'interesting' minutes as Labour's deputy leader struggles with one of their (very few) actual policies, tripped up by Ed Balls' multiple uses of the ubiquitous "Bankers' Bonus Tax" that the BBC kindly (from Harman's viewpoint) limited to just double-counting.

In fact, Balls has committed the same chunk of money more than ten times over, as the Mocking Socialism slogan site reminds us...

A Tweet Treat

If you'd like a little cuteness...

...follow this link for a short compilation of 3rd and Bird scenes, with the theme song as the sound track. Bet you're smiling by the end!

The Bearded Lady

Well, at least Ed[ward] Miliband thought so for a moment, earlier today, as ITV News shows in this short clip (you need to follow the link as I cannot embed the video clip here)...

Embarrassing Ken

Just about everything that "Red" Ken Livingstone has been doing in pursuance of his hoped-for re-election as London's mayor has been ever more acutely embarrassing. His latest copycat ploy of emulating all that encumbent mayor Boris Johnson has already done in terms of campaigning has really turned him into little more than a joke.

After adopting a parallel slogan in the "Better off with" vein, as I mentioned here just a couple of days ago, he's now trying desperately hard to to feel left out. Boris has a so-called Battle 'Bus, so he felt he should have one too – only he hasn't, and the image of what purports to be Ken's equivalent turns out to have been faked.

It's easy enough to spot the fakery, as several commenters here and there have already done. One recognised the "PhotoShop pixels" in the additions, for example (which I think must refer to the way the added text has been anti-aliased). Here's the image...

Indeed, the base image is available on the 'Net, whereupon it becomes glaringly obvious that the Ken-specific bits have been superimposed on the image. Guido, Andrew Gilligan and others have already picked up on this. It's almost as bad as Barack Obama's faked PDF birth certificate...

This feeble and transparent effort isn't so much Ken's Fare Deal as Ken's Fake Deal – and that, as I and others have repeatedly shown, isn't a false claim one can make about the newt-fancier! Now, will any Labour activists in or close to the Capital be honest enough to admit that Ken really isn't up to the task, or will they continue to blindly support him and campaign for him regardless? It'll be a mark of their own character which way they go.

Oh, and here is a real Battle –Bus, which set off on its travels around London earlier today...

Cam's the Man

...unlike Gordon Brown, especially when it comes to visiting US President Barack Obama.

There are hundreds of photographs of the two together during this visit, on-line, and they're all good.

I have saved a few for posterity, and have put here just a couple of examples.

I don't think there can be any remaining doubt regarding just how well these two get on, and (for example) the Prez obviously feels no need to dodge this Prime Minister via, oh, shall we say, the White House kitchens...

Perhaps the best way to appreciate the sheer contrast between the reception that David Cameron has received and Brown's in 2009 is to read this quite short piece at Bloomberg.

Sorry it's the mobile version, but I can't seem to find the desktop version. In this, it makes little material difference anyway.

Hmm, last thought: I wonder how Ed Miliband might be received if he were to visit POTUS, and what the Americans would make of him?

Marlowe Park Medical Practice Reprieve

The Marlowe Park medical practice that was under threat of closure at the end of this month has now received a three-month extension, in order that the controversial legal contract situation can be resolved. It looks as though that now has a much better chance of success, thanks to the direct personal intervention of local MP Mark Reckless.

Marlowe Park Medical Practice, conveniently sited next to the shops in Wells Road, Strood

I notice that local Labour has jumped on the bandwagon with this issue, as they do: I have no problem with their involvement, as they do now have one councillor in that ward (Strood South), provided they weren't trying to manufacture a party political angle as they went round getting signatures for their petition (a standard Labour response to just about anything). There isn't one, actually...

Now it will be up to the two sides to agree a mutually satisfactory arrangement for the future, and Mark will surely be watching and available should any new seemingly intractable issues arise.

UPDATE the same evening: The above attracted a Twitter response from the ubiquitous Cllr Tristan Osborne. What ensued makes for an interesting read. It started here...

"I find it distasteful that you have called Marlowe Park a 'bandwagon' @john_m_ward . Cllr @Isaac_igwe working hard on this"

So I replied...

"As I wrote, I have no problem with Labour's involvement in this issue & look forward to reading what that has been."

The response to that was...

"You can read our involvement in Council and doorstep on our (regularly) updated website and Youtube"

I immediately replied...

"Yup, I'd already done that. So-so..."

That's because it has been better than poor by one stage. "So-so" seemed the most apt assessment of what Labour has done on this issue.

Anyway, I also needed to show why I worded the above post in the way I did, so tweeted this without waiting for a response to the previous tweet...

"However, it is hardly my fault if your party group has earned itself that reputation. You did that between you, not I!"

It's often worth reminding Labour folk that it is their behaviour that earns them their reputation, no-one else's.

Shortly after, a response was winging its way back to me...

"I do not deny there are national issues we pick up. But this campaign is cross-party despite contrary remarks."

Picking up on the cross-party theme, I tweeted back...

"That's the way it should be in such cases, so I'll be interested to see what liaison there was between Strood South cllrs."

...following up with...

"...and as the minority there, it is for yours to offer to assist & work with the dominant representation in the ward."

That was at 1509 hrs this afternoon. Since then – nothing back, although he has posted tweets on other topics during the evening. Once again, when confronted with truths, local Labour have no answer for their own behaviour.

Better Off With...

Well, it's either Boris, who started this "Better off with" idea, or Red Ken who has now copied the idea, as Guido shows in this image...

If current and potential Ken supporters wish to visit the website of his new slogan's name (as one does these days, a trend started by several TV commercials a few years ago) they might be surprised to find just how accurate and spin-free it is(!)

Labour Tearing Itself Apart

Not my words, but coming in from all over, largely caused by Ed Miliband's new Executive Board that is to be people by his own team, the ongoing lack of policy direction and the threat of UNITE (the Union) boss Len McCluskey taking over the de facto running of all four top-level facets of the party.

Even The Guardian is covering this, and provides a useful reading list here.

If we take a closer look at the Dan Hodges column in particular, we can see from that insider's view that it is indeed all falling apart at party HQ with severe concerns about what will happen next.

It's well worth spending five minutes or so going right through the Hodges piece, especially as it fits a lot of pieces of the puzzle in with what I have been indicating here over the months and – in some cases – years.

It's all of a piece, and shows how the next phases in what one might term the Soviet-isation of Britain will go ahead regardless, if not via Labour than by the Unions and their Communist bosses, along with the (even dodgier than Labour) Socialist Workers Party (SWP).

I'm sure the Union chiefs have preferred that party all along, as aiming to achieve the desired results much sooner and with a higher probability of success than the Fabian-slow Labour party; but the SWP is next to nowhere in the nation's political landscape. It is a mere speck (or three) on the UK's political map.

With the financial clout and influence of the Unions, especially the big public sector ones such as McCluskey's own UNITE, the SWP could be brought into much greater prominence as the Unions write-off Labour and re-direct their funding, support and outright promotion to the SWP. Without that support, the Labour party will die, as its members well realise.

That is one possible scenario that could unfold in the next few years. Another could be the formation of (yet another) brand new party that would in reality be nothing more than a political front for the Unions. It seems little short of a certainty that either one or the other of these will now come to pass, unless Labour fix their now almost insurmountable problems wholesale, and fast.

With the usual local elections coming up in less than two months from now, along with the London mayoral election and other crucial events also imminent, Labour no longer has the luxury of time. If  they don't fix it (which actually will now necessitate the removal of Ed Miliband as leader because of what he has just done – he has cut off any hope of surviving what looks set to occur) then McCluskey will no doubt act as Dan Hodges has indicated – and he should know.

So, to any Labour party people reading this: it looks very much as though this is your last chance to save your party. It certainly isn't wise to assume that there is bound to be (or even might be) an as-yet unknown way to save Labour the party from oblivion. Fix it, or lose it!

Not A City

News is just breaking this morning that Medway has not been granted City Status, although no fewer than three other places have.

UPDATE at 1045: This news is now confirmed. Yes, it is of course a distinct disappointment; but life will go on here as before.

Here is a statement from the Leader of Medway Council, which points up the potential benefits that have derived from the bid itself.

I've long thought this City bid was going to be a tricky one to achieve anyway, and despite having the idea of making my own plea direct to the Palace, decided it was perhaps safer to leave it alone.

It appears I was probably right to hold back.

In fact, the whole idea has clearly been to go for one new city in each of England, Scotland and Wales (Chelmsford, Perth and St Asaph respectively) which in itself significantly reduced Medway's chances.

So, for Medway, it's back to business as usual, and we shall never know what might have been. I suspect that there will be those who'll blame the local Liberal Democrats and their negative intervention for the failure of Medway's bid. I shall not be among those, as I do not believe that could have made sufficient difference to what is a decision based primarily on merit, not representations.

We are no worse off now than we were yesterday, just no better; and the total cost to the Council Tax-payers of Medway has (I believe) been the equivalent of just a few pence per capita, so we now need to simply shrug our shoulders and move on...

Hacking – Who Dunnit?

While the main attention has been focussed on Rupert Murdoch and the former News of the World, let us not forget that they weren't the only national newspaper/group to be involved in the practice of 'phone hacking. The political Left, from MP Tom Watson down, has been going on as if the hated (by them) Murdoch empire was either the sole or the biggest offender, but they very clearly were not.

Indeed, they appear to have been a comparatively modest player in that game, according to the Information Commissioner's Office, which Guido has made into a (more convenient) chart...

Note who has the greatest number of instances of hacking – over 1,600 of 'em: yes, the Labour-supporting Trinity Mirror Group. That's eight times as many as Murdoch's people. Do Labour attack them in the way they do Murdoch? No. If cornered, they feel compelled to make some sort of perfunctory acknowledgment of the Mirror Group's involvement, but will always try to avoid facing up to the truth and will divert away from the topic as fast as they can. Hmm, nothing new about that, of course...

Now, none of this is acceptable practice, so no-one should be let off the hook for being a lesser participant than another, but we do need a sense of proportion; so let us remember that it is the Mirror Group who are far worse offenders than the Murdoch lot, with the Mail outfit not all that great a way behind. The only relief for the Left is that the Guardian Media Group has been a relatively minor player in the hacking field.

The Most Astounding Fact

Not only are we in the universe, but the universe is in us too. As Delenn told John Sheridan in Babylon 5, "We are all made of star-stuff"...

A Cheer For Justine Greening

Opponents of the revived idea of a hub airport in or close to the Thames Estuary who also have fully-functioning brains should by now be cheering Justine Greening MP, the Transport Secretary.

One has to understand not only how governments work, but why, in order to correctly interpret what has been going on. Then, it all comes into sharper relief and is obvious why it has been handled the way it has.

Bottom line is that at last, the concept that the previous Labour government created, and left dangling unresolved, will be dealt with definitively and authoritatively, thanks to Ms Greening and the powers that be.

Wisely, the lady has not fallen into the trap of affording too much time to meet with opponents to all of the current plans, so that it will not be possible for pro-airport factions to accuse her of favouring one side and causing the whole thing to be re-run because of accusations of "fixing" or "already decided" (and how many times have we read such accusations from local politicians here in Medway, for proof of this approach!), delaying even more a final outcome.

Justine has had a full and (very!) frank meeting with six North Kent MPs, as Tracey Crouch MP has attested, and with the promise of another such meeting after the review has been completed. Our MPs will already understand the very good reasons for handling this in that manner, even more than I with all my background can do.

So, the correct way is to hold a full, formal review, with nominal and even-handed accessibility to any and all sides (as a whole, not lots of bits of a side) prior to that review, and for that review to put actual propositions to elected members. That is what is happening. The (obvious enough) idea is (a) to leave no avenue for complaint about how it was handled, and (b) to start a (sensible!) programme of dealing with the issues raised, pulling the rug out from under those who have other ideas.

Note that none of this was ever done by Labour, thus leaving scope for the idea of an estuary or similar 'hub' airport to be brought back into the arena. That is the crucial point – not the individuals concerned. It had been left as an unresolved issue, and as anyone can easily see it was bound to be re-addressed sooner or later, probably sooner; and thus it has transpired.

By having this definitive review, and putting into place whatever sensible plan emerges from it, the idea of the estuary (or whatever) airport is killed off for good – for the first time ever. That's it: it is the one and only way to achieve that result; and all the dim-witted or just plain partisan/dishonest folk who are trying to abuse this as a way to attack those who would actually save us from this blight permanently are doing the rest of us an extreme dis-favour.

When the decisions finally emerge from this exercise, I do hope that the people who would have been negativelt affected by the Blair/Darling concept (which is what all of it has been all along) will remember who it was who saved them from that otherwise ongoing blight and uncertainty, by actually doing something about it.

I shall be counting on the local Conservatives, some of whom read this 'blog, to use their local party machine to take that message to the people of Medway as and when the decision of the review has been made and finalised. Note that I am confident that it will go the right way!

They'll also be able to remind residents who alone created this situation in the first place and didn't fix it when they had plenty of opportunity to do so; and who has been threatening to jeopardise the Government's goodwill by trying to make the issue party political in their current purely self-serving campaign. Yes: filthy, dirty Labour, both then and now, that's who!

Tweet of the Day – 12 March 2012

In response to this from oneClive Phillips, tweeting under the pseudonym Buckmyoldfoots (no, I have no idea why either)...

"...if electorate not thick then why did they fall for B-liar;THREE TIMES!"

Martin Willmott replied...

"not thick, misled, afraid of change & gullible"

I think it's a good point, and probably not far off what really attracted the votes that were retained by Blair's "New" Labour during successive elections.

Of course, a large number of votes were lost at every succeeding election, as more and more people realised they'd been 'had' (as we always are with Labour, the biggest con-artists in British politics by a considerable margin).

I have long held the view that the public are indeed gullible, which is why the same methods (along with some new ones from time to time) are repeated by Labour year in, year out: it works on sufficient voters to swing things. Remember: they have access to the best psychologists and public speaking experts around, and have no qualms about being completely dishonest (as has been demonstrated innumerable times), so – as with cheats at sports and competitions – have a distinct advantage over those who try to play it straight.

Inevitably, over the years, lines have been blurred and now most if not all parties stretch the truth a little on occasion, if only to try to level the playing field to at least a modest extent. I am not happy with this situation, but recognise the underlying reasons for it.

Thus the political game is played, with an analogue of Marty McFly protecting his weak and simple-minded father from the Biff Tannen that is Labour. It doesn't always succeed, but it has to be tried with the hope of eventual success. Every now and then, the baddie ends up in the manure (currently it's Ken Livingstone) which has to be a morale booster to the good team.

Who knows what would have happened if Blair had stayed on until and beyond the next election? It's a thought...