Forget the rhetoric and posturing the main issue at the General election will be finance and the recovery. There are essentially two methods of repaying the debt; increased taxation or Public Sector cuts. Neither option is particularly palatable. Taxation will affect the better-off harder, that is if they deign to pay Tax at all, whilst they are largely immune to the Public Sector cutes as they have the wherewithal to use Private Sector alternatives. Conversely for the less well off an increased Tax burden, whilst it would affect their disposable income and would not be welcome, is not as painful or frightening as potential Public Sector cuts.

The issue for most voters is where the balance falls and the two main parties have radically different approaches about the balance. The Tories favour an age of austerity for the Public Service and retention of broadly similar Tax position as now, until they are able to reduce the Tax burden on the well-off; with the addition of a reduction in Inheritance Tax for the wealthiest families. Labour have proposed a 50p temporary Tax band and more gradual and less draconian Public Sectors cuts. The If you find your income in the graphic above and extend a line upwards into the TAX….CUT bar it gives a broad indication of where, based on this narrow comparison your best voting option may lie

The Liberals tread a middle ground but place an emphasis on fairness in Tax which is not reflected by the other two parties. As the Liberals state the current Tax system is inherently unfair with the less well-off paying a larger proportion of their income in Direct taxation than their better-off fellow citizens. For people on the average Wage the percentage paid in Tax is around 20%, if those better-off paid a similar proportion without resorting to Tax dodges we would not be in the trouble we are. So why not set a start point that Income Tax start being liable from the Minimum Wage rate (c£12000); this would immediately take several million, those under £12000, out of the tax system altogether and give them more disposable income which would in turn assist the economy. Basic rate Tax of 20% would then be payable for between the start point and £50000; the enhanced rate of 40% for £50,000 to £100,000 and 50% for £100,000+. Capital Gains Tax should be raised from the current 18% to the appropriate Tax rate. Finally there needs to be a swingeing crackdown on Tax loopholes and dodges. Let`s see if any party has the guts to do anything remotely similar to this.

Chilcott aftermath – the Buck stops there

There has been a great deal of analysis about Grumpy Gordon’s evidence at the Chilcott enquiry. Gordon claimed that the Defence Budget had been increasing in real terms since 1997 and that no Operational Request for equipment had been refused. Since the former Defence chiefs such as Lord Guthrie and Sir Richard Dannatt have accused Grumpy of being “disingenuous “and “dissembling”. The Tories jumped on the bandwagon by claiming that Gordon`s trip to Afghanistan over the weekend was opportunistic and cynical.

So who is right and who is wrong – well like so much in this sorry old world the real debate is who is less wrong. Gordon is right that Defence spending increased since 1987, after the Tory decimation in the 80s it could hardly do any other. Furthermore since 1997 more has been spent on the Front Line and Equipment budgets, The Defence Chiefs are right that they could have wanted and used more, if you left it to them the entire GDP would not be enough.

The role of the Service Chiefs is to further the aims of their particular Service, they will always ask for more equipment for their service than they know that they are likely to get to try to get their particular Service seen a vanguard of Defence. They will lobby for their items at the expense of the other services or the overall effectiveness. This means that the Equipment Budgets are clogged up with “wish list” items and vanity items meaning that decisions have to be made which are to go ahead. But that is the nature of the relationship – they ask for and then advise on priorities and the politicians decide.

The Service Chiefs played their little political games and keep quiet during their careers, not daring to put their heads above the parapet. Once retired and ensconced in the Lords or some little sinecure or consultancy their true Tory colours come out. But there is really no hiding place for them – if they really believe what they are saying now – why didn`t they say so then; why did they fail in their duty of care to the men and women they commanded. We should have moved beyond Lions led by Donkeys by now surely.

As the Tory poll leads sinks slowly in the west the former Cuddly Cameron transformed himself into his alter-ego Desperate David.

Despite feverish Tory, and media, prodding of the Grumpy Gordon non-story the Tory lead continues to fall. So it`s a lurch to the right for the Tories; back to basics. Expect them to throw every dodgy trick in the book for the next couple of months. But don`t expect any details on policy – after all they won`t want to frighten the horses or the servants.

Addressing his Spring Conference Desperate walked and talked at the same time. It just shows that even after an inauspicious start educationally, as Dave the Dunce, wealth can still buy you the ability to teach your son to walk and talk at the same time, go to Eton and get worthless jobs in banking and PR. He also spoke for 40 minutes without notes but if you have nothing valid to say you don`t really need notes – do you?

So what were the Desperate Dave`s themes at the Conference:-

• Act now on debt to get the economy moving – Around 40% of economists agree with him; while 60% prefer the Labour option of deferring the “pain and grief” until the economy is stronger. What he needs to explain is how the debt is to be repaid and what are the implications of the Tory plans.
  
• Get Britain working by boosting enterprise – What does this mean; the Tories seem to believe that every person made redundant can become entrepreneurs and set up their own businesses. If everyone is an entrepreneur where do the consumers come from? Entrepreneurs are also less likely to want to pay their fair share of Tax so where do Tax revenues come from?
  
• Make Britain the most family-friendly country in Europe – Not quite sure what this means; but then again neither does he. I presume it is something to do with his “on-off” plans for tax breaks for married couple based on the principle that people will stay together for financial reasons. Quite how the family is helped by having constant arguments is unclear.
  
• Back the NHS – Once again no details but it is bound to include more pretence of choice and outsourcing.
  
• Raise standards in schools – Allegedly by allowing parents and others to set up their own schools and ultimately make profits, although they won`t quite admit that yet. What this will lead to is more schools some half empty; but costing as much.
  
• Change politics – More hollow rhetoric from the desperate one. And coming from one of the greatest profiteers from the mortgage relief for second home buyers and from one who is hoping to be bank-rolled into power by a self-confessed Tax cheat.
  

Desperate is trying to capitalise on the Broken Britain theme. But if you play that game you can`t pick and choose what you claim is broken – Lord Ashcroft and his ilk, and the people who shield them (like Desperate) are every bit as much a symbol of Broken Britain as the teenage mother and the hooded thug. The main difference seems to be that the yobs get ASBOs and the Tax Cheats get peerages and the chance to buy an election.

Desperate had better get his act together quick – after all as it his evil puppet-mistress knows only too well when it comes to bullying and coups there is nothing as vicious as the Tory Party.

Public vs. Private

There is a lot of rubbish talked about Public and Private in a variety of areas. And this has prompted some interesting mindsets. But what does it really mean.

Let`s take money. Apparently Public money is more highly valued than ordinary or private money and hence it cannot possibly be wasted. And taxpayers money is even more highly prized you would be forgiven for thinking that it is a separate currency. Actually it is all the same – bullshit. These days neither Public nor Private Money actually exists or than as Binary Code and as a confidence factor. If it did exist it would have to change all the time as it is spent and then paid in VAT and Duty. And if it does not exist it cannot be wasted either publicly or privately so whether government spends it or consumers spend it or companies spend must all be the same.

Let`s look at the Public and Privates Sectors. Apparently because we have all spent so much money, which you recall doesn`t really exist on bailing out the Private Sector because they screwed up the Public Sector has to face cuts. Now these will not just affect the Public Sector workers, who have been underpaid and denigrated for years; they will affect the users of the Public Services and also the Private Sector. We have all become very lazy in our thinking about the Public and Private Sectors. Over the past 30 years successive Governments have hived-off, Contractorised, Privatised and PFI`ed most of the Public Sector. The few Public Servants that are left are reduced to making sure the Private Sector suppliers don`t rip us off too much.

But we don`t think when we hear about an IT overspend that it is the fault of the Private Consultants that designed the system and the Private Sector that contracted to install and implement the system – Oh no it the Public Sector gets the blame. The truth is most of the Public Sector is now in Private Hands. When we get told that there are not enough Helicopters or body-armour in Afghanistan we immediately blame the poor old MOD. We do not think of blaming the Private Sector manufacturers who have learnt that it pays them to build in obsolescence and to delay delivery of orders for as long as possible so that they increase costs and rake-in even more money for modifications. BAe runs more of the MOD now than anyone else and yet in continues to bribe its way around the world buying off damaging legal cases and banking massive profits for its shareholders, many of which like Lord Ashcroft then cheat on their Tax and fail to complete the circle.

Look at your local Council – the Bus services are private, and are all but useless – Refuse collection is privatised and in many areas is a once a fortnight event and if you put the wrong colour bin in the wrong spot of the pavement on the wrong day not collected at all – property maintenance has been hived off so that Council buildings look like downtown Beirut. Care of the Elderly and vulnerable has been privatised and massive profits have been made yet the conditions are too often squalid, cramped and extortionate.

So when the Public Sector budgets are cut it is these Companies and their workers that will feel the brunt and the poor old consumer will end up paying more for less yet again – I`ll bet the shareholders won`t lose out though.

So let`s take the Public Sector back – kick out the profiteers and run the services for real people, not shareholders again.

While the media encourages the country to fulminate over the obscene Bonus culture in the Banking system the true scale of the con remains largely hidden.

The Banks screwed up big-time through greed – not individual greed but corporate greed. And guess what they are still at it. Borrowing money at 0.5% and lending it at up to 30% doesn`t require any special talent – controlling commodities isn`t exactly rocket-science either – gambling on currencies when you can control the media and influence the outcome is similarly simple.

But think about it who eventually pays for all these dodgy – yes you`ve guessed it Mr and Mrs Consumer. Every ship tied up offshore waiting for oil prices to increase simply because so many ships are parked offshore is paid for by every motorist and consumer in the land.

So we have bailed out the system by some £758 billion and the Banks are rebuilding their profits by robbing all of us all over again. And what happens when they are solvent again – well Cuddly Cameron and Boy George want to sell off shares at a discount. You get conned once and it could be forgiven get conned twice and you are culpable but allowing yourselves to be conned three times begins to look like you are enjoying it.

The question the great Tory philanthropists really need to answer is if these shares are such good value why should the taxpayer sell them at all; why don`t we keep them and live off the profits. This would also give us the chance to control the Banking system which seems to be uncontrollable. We could ensure that our Bank offers the best Interest Rate for savers this should attract more savers to our Bank restricted the phoney internal market that the Bankers have created.

From Bad to worse

The latest polls suggest that we are staggering into a “hung” Parliament largely driven by apathy and mistrust in the political system. This could be a case of out of the frying pan and into the fire.

In many ways a coalition is the worst, and least democratic, of all outcomes. Shabby deals in smoke-free rooms, to keep up with the times, will see minority interests hold sway with every initiative a compromise. Ask yourself whether the Parties would be able to get along in a Government of National Unity. And, indeed, if the situation is as severe as the Politicians and media would have us believe would such a coalition be a good way ahead?

But there is a more pressing Constitutional issue – the fate of the largest party, or the one best able to cobble together some kind of shabby coalition, could be decided by Nationalist Parties with entirely separate Agendas. It bring into question whether any of the nationalist parties, SNP. Plaid Cymru, Unionist and SDLP should have representatives in the Westminster Assembly when they have assemblies of their own to pursue their separatist Agenda. Why should the SNP have influence over issues in England which are devolved to their Assemblies for their constituents?

The choice is between Grumpy Gordon, Cuddly Cameron or Nowhere Man Nick and whichever of those wins must have a mandate to impose their preferred solution – voter cop-out is not an option. As you may have detected from previous rants my sympathies would lie with Grumpy, although I am less than enamoured by several key flaws in their record – notably the lack of progress in the fairness agenda. It might not be such a bad thing for Cuddly to slither in – Tory excesses could lead to realism that none of this operates for the benefit of you and me. In the last decade politics has been a bit “pink and fluffy”; it was very hard to get worked up about Tory Tony or Grumpy – they seemed almost benign even if you didn`t agree with them. But a dose of Cuddy capitalism might lead to a return of street politics and an increase in real politics rather than the inane tittle-tattle that passes for political commentary these days.

Now where did I leave that banner?

There is a lot of crap being talked about the recession. Talk of international credit ratings; double-dips; W shaped recessions and dragging along the bottom etc. The fact is that it is all about “funny money” and doesn`t really affect most people. But there are some real problems in the “real” economy.

Ordinary people are finding it harder and harder to get credit and when they do the rates being charged are extortionate – why can`t we set a maximum APR of 10% above base-rate rather than the 30% or up to 50% being charged by Credit and Store Cards. Most people have suffered a reduction in their take-home income; this has been partially offset by the low interest rates. But for those who rely on savings incomes or who have low or no mortgages there has been no offset. Both major parties are promising freezes and/or caps on Public Sector Pay and expenditure. This will only reduce the money, and crucially disposable income, in circulation.

People max-ed out their credit over Christmas and are now struggling. What happened in January – food prices increased and house prices rose by 4%The end of the VAT holiday and removal of repossession and other protection measures coupled with further redundancies mean that this is not sustainable.

Brace yourselves for individual rather than corporate financial collapse this year. In 2009 there were 134,142 people declared insolvent in England and Wales and 24000 in Scotland a 26% increase on 2008 figures. What has happened since –and income reduction could lead to a “real money” crisis rather than “funny money” crisis – and how will the politicians deal with that.

Cuts or Tax

The current political battleground is whether in the short-to medium term Tax Increases or Public Sector cuts are the solution to the financial position. Both are fairly blunt weapons that impact differently on different sectors of society which highlights the increasing inequality of our society.

• For those on the Minimum Wage; Tax Increases have minimal impact (as less Tax is paid) whilst Public Sector Cuts are high impact (as there is no alternative to using the Public Services),
  
• For those on Average Income (around £35k) both impacts are less stark the increases in Tax are largely compensated by the retention of a viable Public Sector.
  
• For the higher paid the Tax increase impact is higher, although many will continue to swindle their way out of their obligations, whilst the Public Sector reductions are largely irrelevant as paid-for alternatives are available.
  

   

Little wonder then why Labour prefers the Tax option and the Tories opt for the Cut option Cuddly Cameron has branded the Labour view as a Class War – it is not – it is an Equality War.

If we really are all in it together let`s see comparable subsidy cuts in Public Schools and tax-breaks and hand-outs to the private medical sector every time NHS or Education budgets are reduced.

• Why are Public Schools allowed to pretend to be charities?
  
• Why do I have to go to Specsavers now for my Diabetic Eye-Test now and why are we paying for NHS patients to be treated in private hospitals?
  

Let`s get some fairness in the system where decisions are based on need not greed and where Tax avoidance is not the non-blood sport of choice for the wealthy.

Justice or Witch-hunt

What on earth is going on with the Chilcott enquiry?

I have never supported or considered any war in my lifetime to be justified or legal (I was born in 1948). What does legal mean in this context anyway? All the various conflicts in my lifetime have had more to do with commercial interests and resources than any high moral purpose. So what is so special about the run-up to the Iraq War – sure it was about oil and cosy-ing up with America. I was also never a Tony Blair or New labour fan but to brand Tony Blair as a war criminal is bizarre.

360 degree hindsight is a wonderful gift particularly with rose-tinted glasses. Saddam played a game of Weapons of Mass Destruction brinksmanship for many years but eventually pushed his luck too far. The fact that many security experts believed him was both his triumph and his downfall.

Raking over the coals after 7 years does nobody any good. The media loves it because it fills their media babble-bubble and they have scores to settle after one of their own Mr Gilligan was caught embellishing his own dodgy dossier – but for the rest of us it is an expensive irrelevance that will please nobody.

As the Election approaches all the major Parties and the Capitalist pressure groups vie to out-bastard each other in the austerity agenda. It`s interesting though that they all seem to want Working and Lower Middle Classes to bear the brunt.

It seems that none of them can address the rampant greed of bankers and speculators but they believe that they can impose Pay Freezes, Pay Cuts and even freezing the Minimum Wage.

Cuddly Cameron even believes that the majority of the savings can be made by cutting Public Services. To quote him (and I hate doing this) “They just don`t get it do they?”

If Public Sector cuts are to be the solution this has to be accompanied by equivalent cuts or preferably cessation of all alternative Private Sector enterprises. This would ensure that the full impact of the cuts would be felt by all the population not just those who can`t pay for the alternatives – perhaps then we`ll get some more sense talked.

If Pay freezes and cuts are to be the solution those must also extend to all Bonuses, Profits and Speculation. And by the way let`s have all Capital Gains increased to the appropriate Tax Rate not the 18% currently paid.

Business should operate for the benefit of the Country – not vice-versa. Bankers should operate for the benefit of the Country – not vice-versa. And Parliament should operate for the benefit of the country – not vice-versa. Then we might start believing that we are all in it together.

FORGET THE POSTURING

There is a rank whiff of hypocrisy in the debate about Defence Spending. As a nation we have agreed over decades to maintain Defence Spending as one of our priorities. Yet our increasingly litigious and risk adverse society seems to expect conflict to be risk-free.

We then beat ourselves up over the political choices that led us to engage or not to engage. The Chilcott Enquiry is costing millions but will tell us nothing other than that which we all knew anyway – it was all about Oil and retribution for 911. Saddam played a game of brinkmanship and pushed it a bit too far – he pretended to have WMD for political reasons and we also invaded for political reasons. Few Wars could have been classed as legitimate and we have certainly fought less legitimate Wars in the past – the Falklands for one (once again about Oil and Politics) which included some real war Crimes (anyone remember the Belgrano).

The sad truth is that our Defence Spending is geared to keeping a place at the Top Table, a place we probably don`t merit and can`t afford any more. Yet in Defence, value for Money seems a secondary consideration. The Staff both Military and Civilian are committed and professional but the structures and conventions seem increasingly bizarre in the Modern World.

If we are to have a Strategic Defence Review let`s start asking some really radical questions.

Why do we still operate as separate Forces. Most operations are now Joint; yet the costs of maintaining 4 separate Command structures are barking mad. Why not a single UK Defence Force?

Why do we devote significant resources to Ceremonial duties? Why do we need things like the Changing of the Guard; why do they need to be on horseback? Is there a better way of delivering the service for Tourism reasons at a lower cost.

Why do we distinguish between Officers and Men? Conflict is a team effort so why do we have all the costs of separation during training and maintaining different messing and accommodation standards.

These questions will not be asked or answered and we will continue to puff and posture on the world stage while Defence continues to be salami-sliced and even more lives get risked.

JUST FOR THE HELL OF IT

They were hardly the sharpest knives in the drawer when they mattered; as a Minister Geoff Hoon was known by his senior officials as “Buff” (think about it) and Prat Hewitt had the singular honour, as a Labour Minister, of receiving a slow hand clap, jeering and heckling at a Union conference. These days of course they don`t matter at all having long since been sacked from their respective minisetrial positions.

It must have seemed such a good idea to them after a good curry and several bottles of wine; let`s show them we are still around, cause some trouble and hope to get another sinecure from whoever takes over. It`s only remarkable that the cold light of day didn`t dampen their alcohol-fuelled bravado.

Curiously though their bungled coup may have helped the very person they hoped to mortally wound. Dear Old Gordon has come out of this debacle stronger; firstly he is now firmly ensconced for the duration of the Election campaign. More crucially, even though he knew of the attempted coup just before Question Time, he still managed to knock cuddly, airbrushed Dave all over the pitch. Surely that`s what the country needs isn`t it someone who can see of the prats on his own team and still trounce the bouffant-boys of the opposition.

It does however expose some deeper systemic problems with our political system. The Dismal Duo had planned that the Labour PLP would have a vote of confidence in Dear Old Gordon – what on earth has it got to do with the PLP. We should be the owners of the democratic system not our elected representatives. Failure to recognise this by our elected representatives displays an arrogance and lack of nous that is unforgiveable. And all Parties are guilty of it; they believe that it is acceptable to accept donations and gifts from organisations; corporations and individuals irrespective of the vested interest groups or even whether the donors pay UK Tax at all, or in full (i.e. the same as you and me). They should be our servants not our masters.

Political parties exist for one reason – to control, dilute and sideline the democratic process. When you elect an MP you should expect them to look after the interests of your community not become lobby fodder for Parties and narrow political or vested interest. What we really need is a major shake-up where all MPs are independents; where parties do not exist and the Executive Posts are filled on merit from those elected; where every vote is a real vote without the corruption of whips, pairing and all the other regalia of control that bedevils the current system. Of course it would also mean that MPs would have to be full-time with no outside interests – starting at 09-00 and going through to 17-00 Monday to Friday leaving Saturday for Constituency surgeries etc. None of this Tuesday to Thursday; Directorship in the morning; long lunch then turning up for a couple of hours a week for the main events like Question Time. A real job – you know one like real people have – where if you don`t turn up you don`t get paid. Now that’s a coup worth having

Cuddly Cameron has decided to brazen out the “Class War” claiming that labour is waging the war on all those earning over £20000. As usual the Cuddly One has missed the point entirely the issue has nothing at all to do with the politics of envy – the issue is the politics of equity. The indictment on all parties but in particular Labour is that the distribution of this wealth is less unfair than ever.

Recent statistics show that UK Household wealth is currently around £9 trillion, comprising cash, property and other assets and pensions, This is £204,500 per household.

The same statistics show that the bottom 50% of households hold only 9% of the wealth whilst the top 30% own 62%; the wealthiest 50% of homes owned 91% of household wealth. There are also regional variations with SE household owning £287,000 and Scottish households owning just £150,600.

Other key findings included:-

• households headed by someone with a degree had the highest average wealth of £400,200, compared to the average wealth of £105,100 held by families headed by someone with no qualifications
  
• households headed by the self-employed were the wealthier than those employed at an average of £283,200
  
• 62% of UK households had a savings account, but a quarter of these had £500 or less in them.
  
• 25% of households had negligible, zero or negative financial wealth.
  
• 35% of respondents had never saved any money at all.
  
• 48% of households had some sort of outstanding unsecured borrowing;
  

  52% found making the minimum repayments a burden, and 15% had failed to some repayments. 10% of all households were in arrears for at least one commitment.
  

• 59% of people expected a personal or company pension when they retired but only 40% of men and 32% of women were actively contributing to such a scheme.
  

2009 was the year of the corporate bail-out. But it was all really “funny money”. The Stock Exchange recovered; the Banks prospered and House prices edged upwards – yet somehow we are still in the shite.

Public Sector workers and other low-paid workers are going to pay the price with job losses and pay restraint while the funny money bandwagon rolls on. In reality all this restraint at the bottom will man is that the consumer economy will collapse as people rein-in their spending or Personal debt will continue. Personal debt that will be at an increasingly high price. Whicever way that goes it will be bad for the economy.

One of the parties has to propose a better solution- a solution based on fairness. Labour do not seem to want to – the Tories want to do exactly the opposite (their priorities seem to be repealing the Hunting Ban and cutting Inheritance Tax for the Toffs), The Liberals are talking the talk, as long as it does not affect their supporters or key seats (interesting how the £1m Mansion Tax became the £2m Mansion Tax) but they are never going to be in power anyway.

Why not something entirely radical – people earning up to the Minimum Wage for 40 hours (around £12000) pay no Tax or National Insurance. From that point everybody pays the average Tax and NI levels of about 35% on all Income (including Unearned Income and Capital gains) with no additional allowances. It is fair, transparent and simple. And crucially it can`t be swindled.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing – hindsight through rose-coloured spectacles is even better. Vince Cable is widely feted by the media as the “boy who knew” about the credit crisis, yet it was personal debt that he was challenging not the Mickey Mouse corporate economics of the Banks and other Institutions.

Whilst Politicians from all sides have focussed on the Banks and the macro end of the financial problems; Vince`s analysis remains true. So while Labour and Tory seek to out-bastard each other to show that they will restore the former rosy position or don the sackcloth and ashes and lead us into a new period of austerity the original problem is still bubbling away. Plans include cutting thousands of Public Sector jobs; imposing Pay restraint while trying to get some control over the financial institutions. Tories tend to favour swingeing Public Sector cuts in the knowledge that their supporters probably won`t be forced to use the services; Labour has opted for the “cut waste” model.

Back in the real world, for too long too many people had access to too much credit. Indeed, it almost seemed rude to refuse the daily blandishments to have yet another card or reinvest the notional property profits. But what has the Banks` reaction to the very people who bailed them out when it all went pear-shaped. At a time when the Bank of England Interest Rate is at an all time low the Banks have ramped up the interest charges for everything from Credit Cards to Loans, that is if you can get credit. The Government and business is encouraging us all to continue to be good little consumers and spend above our means to get the economy going again.

Many people must be close to being maxed out on their Cards and are facing job losses, reduced earnings and pay freeze. This increasingly means using agencies that give vampires a good name – for the most vulnerable interest rates in the hundreds or thousands of percent are their only refuge. This will be even less manageable.

So if 2009 was the year of corporate debt – 2010 could be the vindication of The Cable Guy`s real prophecy. More and more will be forced to renege on their debts and seek some form of insolvency which could stifle any chance of a rapid recovery.

The Budget that Should be – but never will be

So it`s the Pre-Budget Report tomorrow and there is much fevered speculation and lobbying going on. There seems little doubt that Labour will fall for the Tory trap and set about the Public Services. Inevitably this will engender a decline in standards of Public Service which will affect the most vulnerable in society disproportionately. They would do better listening to the Liberals` concept of a fairer taxation system.

A good start was made at PMQs last week with Gordon`s attacks on the Torys` barmy Inheritance Tax position. Unfortunately the media have cheapened the point into class warfare rather than the fairness issue. Well they would wouldn`t they – not too many on the minimum wage in that Industry. It really is not the politics of envy – it is the politics of equity. We badly need a New Deal.

We need a fairer Tax system where the greatest burden falls on those best able to pay. We need to take everybody up to the Minimum Wage, currently around £12000, out of the Income Tax system totally and then tax progressively up to 50p for the highest earners with no allowances. Bonuses should all be taxed at 95p in the £, whether in cash, shares or other benefits. We need to tax the Self-Employed on a monthly basis, where they can reclaim annual proven expenses retrospectively. We need to abolish allowances and loopholes that are exploited by those who put greed before need. To encourage the economy we should remove VAT from items with a unit price of between £50 and £1000.

Of course we will do none of that we will carry on subsidising the well off at the expense of the less well off; ensuring that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and providing a less effective safety net for those who can`t afford to go private. And the next lot will be even worse

Just why did the Sun decided to back the Tories rather than Labour in the forthcoming election? And why did they time the announcement to cause maximum damage to Labour? Why have they led a relentless personal attack on Gordon Brown ever since? The answer may have more to do with Murdochian ambition than UK politics. It is not that Gordon and Rupert have fallen out; it seems that Old Man Murdoch is still fairly fond of Gordon. Neither is he convinced by Cuddy Dave, It is understood that Murdoch Senior is not overjoyed by the axing of support for Labour and is not convinced by Cameron. But he has lost interest in the British part of his Empire, concentrating on his American enterprises and his battles with Google. The British operation is being headed by Boy Murdoch, ultra Right-Winger James. The change is clearly Juniors` call.

Boy Murdoch is a great believer in unfettered free-markets, with the role of the state restricted to Policing and Defence, presumably to keep us plebs in order. David Cameron is known to socialise with the Murdoch Juniors` Oxfordshire set and there is a belief that the switch of allegiance may be linked to personal chemistry and vested interest between the two. Cameron staunchly defended former News of the World editor Andy Coulson, now his Press Officer, over the phone-tapping revelations and apparently it was via that conduit that the impetus to swap the Shadow Home Secretary came.

There is also a belief that the Conservatives may be prepared to meet some of the ambitions of News International. Murdoch is trying to engineer a situation where he is able to charge for access to his newspaper and other websites this is being frustrated by the free internet-based BBC news and iPlayer. Murdoch argues that these publicly funded services are restriction his ability to charge. Whilst he may have a high media ownership he does not own the News.

Murdoch is also thought to relish the Tory idea of restricting BBC resources and possibly siphoning off some BBC revenue into other Broadcasting enterprises.

So it is not the principled stance that the rhetoric would have you believe. Whether Press barons can still swing Elections in the days of the Internet is open to debate. Old Man Murdoch likes to be seen to be backing a winner and on this occasion Boy Murdoch may have switched horses to soon – it looks as though it might have already cost Sky coverage of the Test Matches.

He`s Behind You

The rhetoric beforehand was predictable – not worth doing it; no time to legislate Blah Blah Blah! But the Pantomime was priceless. Like a bunch of Pantomime Dames men in tights and stockings, very fetching, and weird uniforms, scampered about getting doors shut in their face and banging on them again with their Rods (Oooh Er missus), Then came the grand procession hundreds of horses and bearskins and rattly old coaches. Tired old Pomp -and not much Circumstance.

The opposing sides from the Commons dutifully shuffled off to hear the speech that they had either written or complained about as being irrelevant read out pretending that they liked each other. It looked like the final scene in a pantomime when all the “turns” come down to take their applause.

What did we get “My Government will…”; “My Government will…” Since when has it been her Government; she hasn`t even got a vote? It`s our Government god help us?

What were all the Bishops doing there? Aren`t we a secular society now?

The 10 minute speech contained 17 main measures. The Lords duly threatened to phillybuster to prevent any of the measures becoming Law. Sounds like Industrial Action to me. Now how do we deal with Industrial Action these days – I know employ 30000 blacklegs (sorry Casual Workers) to pass the Laws for them or change their Terms and Conditions to make them work weekends or reduce their Holidays.

And finally when did we last use Horses in battle? How many Horses does the Military have? What are they for (surely they can`t all be for the roses)? What is the Exchange Rate between Horses and Helicopters or Body Armour?

As Gordon Brown visited flooded Britain David Cameron (a.k.a Captain Cliché) launched a blistering tirade. “He just don`t get it does he”, thundered the Captain, ” After 12 years of New Labour, they still can`t get the weather sorted. It`s all very well shifting the blame onto global warming but he should have been fixing the roof while the sun was shining. Yet no, in the good times, he frittered away the money on improving schools and hospitals. He promised an end to boom and bust; flood and drought and now he is blaming global factors. It is just not good enough”.

“A future Conservative government will privatise the Meteorological Office so that unfettered Private Enterprise can control the weather properly not ineffectively by some faceless bureaucrat.”

“When the Conservatives left office in 1997 we had brought Schools and the NHS to a subsistence level for the poor sods that had to use them and provided suitable tax-breaks to allow those who could afford it to pay for proper healthcare and education. Everyone was happy – the poor knew no better anyway and nobody who really mattered was affected”, he added, “Labour reversed all that with their targets and blanket funding- and who for, do you know that some people using the NHS don`t even own their own house and some even come from Council estates. Now hard-working tax-paying (if they can`t get away with it), home-owners are paying the price.”

“When we come to power”, he promised, “we will cut taxes for the well off and massively cut Public Services; then our kind of people can once again use the tax savings to pay for Private Health-care and Education they deserve ; while the idle and feckless can languish in the squalor they deserve. That`s the kind of Britain I want to see.”

David Cameron will be writing the Conservative Party manifesto shortly – once he has mastered colouring-in.

Floods of Tears Part 2

Britain seems to be turning Italian. The once renowned stiff upper lip seems to have transformed into Mediterranean-style public displays of emotion and weeping and wailing at every opportunity. Now, it is perfectly true that in this sorry old world far too many terrible things occur, that was always the case and unfortunately it seems unlikely that it will always be thus. What made Britain great was the ability to rise above the sentimental morass and just get on with things. Now sure that meant that for all the stiff upper lips on display there was real mental anguish and turmoil going on beneath the surface and that this was not always healthy. But is the current claptrap mumbo-jumbo rhetoric of issues, denial and closure and the rest of pseudo-psychological bullshit that gets parroted at every opportunity any better?

The other growing Italian trait is the cult of the apology. Have we suddenly all become Catholic? Can we really all do as we like as long as we apologise afterwards?

Recently Gordon Brown has apologised for the slave trade and is also about to for the enforced exile of British children to Australia, both despicable actions from our past. But how can apologies from people who played no part in the original sin resolve anything for anybody. Gordon also notoriously managed to say sorry 16 times to a manipulated grieving mother without apparently apologising once. If there is an art to making an apology there is a corresponding art to receiving one as well. Both Gordon and Captain Cliche have also apologised for their photo-opportunism endeavours on Remembrance Day.

Many exhort our Politicians to increasingly wear their hearts on their sleeves and apologise at every turn; in the knowledge that every apology can be manipulated as a sign of weakness. Yet Britons do not really respect the cult of the apology they have a grudging respect for the more bellicose and would be mortified if Boudicca had said “Sorry Centurion did I catch your leg there” or if Maggie had said “Sorry Belgrano I didn`t realise you were steaming away”. So why do we think that we need continual contrition now?

As Einstein said “Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new.”